should act on his own when he doesn't get his way with congress. he said -- you've heard this quote -- i've got a pen and i've got a phone. for example, 2012, congress was not consulted about deferring enforcement action on individuals in the country illegally. the department made its own rules and the program has proven to be a haven for loopholes and mischief. the secretary just announced a renewal of the program and weakened it. for example, the administration gutted the requirement and made the process easier to reapply by eliminating any need to provide evidence. what's alarming is that the department confirmed that it does not routinely check the validity of documents that are presented by applicants. when applications seem to be rubber stamped and lawful status is so easily obtained, it's no wonder there's been a surge of

unaccompanied alien marine minors at our southern borders. the number of minors coming to our country has climbed from 6,000 in 2011 to an expected 145,000 next year. some are calling it a humanitarian crisis. and quite frankly, it is. these, of course, are vulnerable children. they are being guided through deserted areas of adjoining countries with their lives on the line. they are escorted with strangers away from family in some cases, not knowing what lies ahead. there's a massive potential for these children to be abused, and if the administration doesn't do its due diligence to verify the relative or parental relationship when it releases these children, then, of course, those same children could be put in the hands of pimps or traffickers. children are being lured into these dire circumstances, quite

frankly, by false promises. the administration has refused to be serious about immigration reform. it's got a policy of just get to the answer yes. and that's a philosophy that has sent a signal that everyone has a chance of getting immigration benefits even if you have to break the law to get them. the administration's finding ways to get around the rules implementing many of the recommendations in the internal 2010 amnesty memo that was leaked. this is a disaster made by the administration. and only the president can correct it by sending the signals that these people should not be brought here. and that the law is going to be enforced. in other words, the president must take responsibility. unfortunately, the administration does not seem to be prepared. it has failed to propose any solutions that will prevent children from being put in this situation in the future. let me suggest for starters, the

president needs to send a signal that the law will be enforced and that people with unlawful status will be returned to their home country. instead rev viewing deportation policies and suggesting ways to remove fewer people. i would suggest that the president task you, secretary johnson, with finding ways to actually enforce the laws that we have on the books. what is ironic is that the executive branch has taken action on so many controversial matters but refuses to do more to close loopholes and improve national security in several programs. let me give you an example. in january, the first circuit decision in holder versus martinez paved the way for former gang members here illegally to argue that their status as a former gang member entitles them to remain in the united states. this would open the door to violent gang members renouncing their membership in a ruse in order to just stay here.

but the department of jpt didn't appeal the ruling. and i would hope that you, secretary johnson, would give us your opinion on it and maybe even suggest that it be appealed. the new exemption to immigration laws that were announced by the secretary in january are also very concerning. these exceptions would allow foreign nationals who have provided, quote, limited material support to terrorists and terrorist organizations that these people could, in fact, find asylum in the united states. we shouldn't be relaxing our laws to prevent anyone with connection to terrorism to live here. and especially when it's reported that up to 70% of the asylees show signs of fraud. i don't have confidence of our government's ability to effectively carry this out. in addition, the department's management failures in administering chemical facilities, anti-terrorist standard programs intended to

regulate chemical facilities for national security purposes are very well documented. i've done that in previous hearings. although some welcome progress has been made recently. i continue to be concerned that the program is not functioning effectively. the department is far behind in meeting its deadlines. operational practice training created by executive branch regulation provides foreign students to obtain work in their major areas of study during and after completing an academic program here. in 2014, the government accountability office report found extensive and alarming mismanagement of the program. the department doesn't know where thousands of these individuals are working or whether they are working at all. given the risk that foreign students have proposed to our homeland, i consider this a serious matter. so i ask secretary johnson to place a moratorium on the program until he can certify that all participants have been

located. two other issues shortly. one is eb-5 regional investment program. that's, as you know, an employment based immigration program designed to stimulate job creation through foreign capital investment. yet we have been told that this program is being used to facilitate terrorist travel, economic espionage, money laundering and investment fraud. the inspector general said the program cannot manage the eb-5 program effectively. the program needs a complete overhaul and some real attention that the -- from the administration before the vulnerabilities have a devastating effect on the homeland. finally, i want to comment on the use of drones. the use of drone technology holds great promise for securing our borders. the department of homeland security should be as transparent as possible about how it intends to use drones. july 2013 it was reported that a

customs and border protection document connected to its drone program apparently made public through requests suggested that the customs and border protection might arm its drones with nonlethal weapons. that sub agency reported issuing a statement shortly thereafter disclaiming such an interest. but if that's the case, why would the document say that. i yield the floor. >> mr. secretary, your full statement will be placed in the record as though read. before we came in here, though, you mentioned to me, and i think it's a good idea, you wanted to talk about what is happening on the border. so consider your full statement part of the record and please, the floor is yours.

>> thank you, senator. senator grassley, members of this committee. you have my prepared statement. in it, i refer to the various missions of dhs, including the counterterrorism mission, border security, aviation security, cybersecurity, maritime security, response to natural disasters, protection of our national leadership, among other things. in the five minutes i have, i'd like to focus on the problem of children crossing our southwest border, in particular, into south texas and the rio grande valley sector. chairman, as you noted, the numbers are rising from 2011, there were approximately 6,000 that year. this year, there will be multiples of that. this correlates with an overall rise in illegal migration into the rio grande valley sector, principally from what we refer to as third country nationals. those from guatemala, el

salvador and honduras who are approximately three-quarters of that population. to meet this surge, we've had to surge resources that are normally dedicated to things such as border security. i saw this situation vividly myself on may 11th when i visited mcallen station processing center. it happened to be sunday, mother's day. i approached a 10-year-old girl and asked her where's your mother? and she told me, i don't have a mother. i'm looking for my father in the united states. i returned to washington the next day determined to do something about the situation. undeniably, there is a problem of humanitarian proportions in the rio grande valley sector that we must deal with. so here's what we're doing about it. number one, on monday, may 12, i

declared a level 4 condition of readiness within the department of homeland security, which is essentially a determination that the capacity of cbp and i.c.e. to deal with the situation is full. and we need other resources of dhs. i appointed the deputy chief of the border patrol to be the dhs coordinator of that effort for a dhs-wide response to this situation. on june 1st, the president, pursuant to the homeland security act, directed me to establish a unified coordination group to bring to bear the assets of the entire federal government. this includes dhs and all of its components, hhs, the department of defense, doj, gsa and the state department. i have, in turn, appointed the fema administrator craig fugate to serve as the federal accord

nating official for this u.s. governmentwide effort. our goal is to quickly and safely transport the unaccompanied children out of cbp custody into the hands of hhs, supplementing this process all along the way. in a safe and humane manner into ultimately a safe and secure environment that is in the best interest of the child pursuant to the requirements of the law. fema has dedicated 70 people full time to coordinating this effort. we're looking for more space for processing and for detention. the department of defense has loaned us lackland air base in texas to process for hhs to process the kids. we're leasing ft. sill in oklahoma for the same purpose. we've gone to a dod facility in ventura, california, to deal with the processing of the

influx of people into south texas. we've had to go beyond mcallen station. we've had to go to nogales, arizona, as senator flake knows. initially, we were sending family units to nogales for processing there, and then on into the interior, if they are released we a released. we are now sending children, uacs to arizona, as i explained to governor brewer on saturday night. i pledge to deal with this situation as best i can and to manage the situation as best i can. as of now, we're sending uacs, the unaccompanied children, to arizona for processing and then on to hhs. they are not being released into arizona. gsa is looking for other space to lease, to deal with family units, to deal with the children. to deal with the processing of these kids. we brought on more

transportation assets. the coast guard at my direction is loaning air assets to transporting children from dhs to hhs custody and from one hhs facility to another to deal with this situation. i.c.e. is leasing more aircraft. five, we're doing a preliminary screening for health reasons of all those who come into our facilities in south texas. the office of health affairs and the coast guard is lending in that effort. we called upon ngos, volunteer organizations, charity organizations, to assist in this effort. the american red cross, i've had conversations with directly. at our request, they are providing humanitarian needs for this situation. blankets, hygiene kits. i'd like to give a shout out to the texas baptist men who have provided shower trailers in south texas. the department of justice is loaning resources. immigration judges for faster

removal proceedings. in addition to all this, we know we must do something to stem this tide. so we've been in contact. i've done this personally. with ambassadors and other officials of all four countries -- guatemal ael salvador, honduras, mexico to talk about our shared border security interest and faster repatriation. i plan to go to guatemala myself in july to deal with this situation. we have reinitiated our public affairs campaign in spanish and in english, radio, print and tv to talk about the dangers of sending your kids over the border and the dangers of putting your kids into the hands of criminal smuggling organizations. we've surged criminal investigator resources. in hsi and cbp for the prosecution of smugglers, those who smuggle the kids. in may 2014, there were 163 arrests of smugglers along the

southwest border. i've directed a 90-day surge of hsi personal, 60 personnel, to offices in san antonio and houston to work with doj to ramp up our prosecution of the smuggling organizations. in may, i directed a unified campaign plan to deal with the southwest border calling upon all assets of the department of homeland security in a coordinated way to address our border security in the southwest border and to fill the gaps, if necessary, to call upon other departments of our government to assist. i've asked that we consider all lawful options to deal with this situation. if there are options, i want to hear about them. finally, members of this committee in the senate, we need your help. we've asked through omb for an additional $166 million in fy 15

to deal with this situation. i know hhs has also asked for additional funding. i am providing daily reports to my inner agency partners. i'm receiving daily reports on this situation. yesterday we began briefing members of congress and their staffs in conference calls three times a week. i'm told yesterday in our call we had 300 call-ins from up here on the hill to keep you informed. we are -- we can and must address this situation. thank you. >> thank you very much. and i appreciate that because as you know, this is an area we're greatly concerned about. incidentally, i'd like to take a moment to recognize, we have some special guests with us here today. normally we don't do this, but i want the record to show we have in the audience families who have been personally impacted by deportations. and some directly impacted by

cbp use of force. and i appreciate those. yes, please feel free to stand and just record of note that you are here. thank you very much. mr. secretary, it's been a year since the senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill. i mingsed in my opening statement about the work we went through. we were here some nights until 9:00, 10:00 at night. i remember the excitement when we finally passed it out of here. i was out in the west coast and in oregon in a farm community. i went to a church. they had hundreds and hundreds of spanish speaking people who said they had watched every bit of this hear iing.

they had seen because we streamed it and c-span carried it. and they'd watch it at night and on a big screen, the church auditorium. and one of the hundreds of people in this church said to me, do you remember when the gavel came down, the final vote. a number of people in the back of the room stood up and shouted viva leahy. yes, that meant a great deal to me. well, and the whole congregation stood up and repeated that. personally gratifying, but it would be a lot more gratifying if we actually get the bill through. republicans and democrats worked together to get it through the senate. we passed it. we passed it in the senate, but now we need to have real pressure from the administration on the other body. i discouraged right here the press say, well, immigration it dead. well, that's easy to say the job

where you are paid every week, whether it's in the media or anything else, if you are a family looking for immigration reform, it's not easy to hear. so can you tell us why it's so imperative, the house representative take up the bipartisan senate bill and start voting on it? >> senator, it's -- you noted, it's my belief that our current system is broken. and totally unsatisfactory for reasons that i think almost everybody in this room can agree. as i look further and further into the system, i find more and more problems. and we have 11.5 million undocumented in this country who were not going away. they're not going to self-deport. in many states now, they can have driver's licenses.

in the state of california, the supreme court says that an undocumented immigrant can practice law. so i don't think they are going away, and i don't think they're going to self-deport, and i don't think we have the resources to deport 11.5 million undocumented. in fact, i know we don't. and the bill passed by the senate last year by a vote of 68-32, i think addresses the problems we have in a number of respects. border security, added border security, added personnel, added resources, which is something i believe we need very much. particularly on the southwest border. mandatory e-verify and an earned path to citizenship for the 11.5 million who are here. some people would brand that amnesty. i do not. it requires an extensive vetting. it requires accountability. it requires paying penalties and

taxes. and it requires a 13-year wait to get on line behind those who are already on line. so i believe it's an excellent piece of legislation. it's obviously the product of a lot of compromises and very hard work. but i believe that the bill that was passed by the senate last year will go a very long way to adding to our border security and fixing our system. and i am continuing to urge the house of representatives to pass comprehensive reform, whether in one bill or a series of bills, but we really need to act on this. i remain optimistic that we will. >> this country, to its credit, has responded humanitarian crises around the world. whether tsunamis in the pacific, earthquakes in haiti and so on.

we have a humanitarian crisis right here in the united states. i mentioned seeing children at the age when our granchildren, when they go to grade school, they have an adult walking them to school. living in a nice, secure home and all. and yet we see these children holding each other's hands, coming by themselves, whether from el salvador or where else to cross the border. they're risking everything on this journey. some don't make it alive. some have suggested to the administration that the proposed policy is driving the crisis. i don't agree. i think it's the fact that we in the congress haven't broken --

haven't fixed a broken immigration system. i feel very strongly about this. i live in a border state, and i realize it is entirely different than a northern border. i'm an american first and foremost. i think this is the america that brought my grandparents here from italy. i wonder what we're doing. what do you believe is driving this huge rise in these children crossing the border? >> senator, i believe that the situation is motivated primarily by the conditions in the countries that they're leaving. el salvador, honduras, guatemala. violence, poverty, i believe that is principally what is motivating the situation.

i suspect also that the parents are aware that under our current law, once they're in the hands of cbp, they are -- we are required to give them to hhs and hhs is required to do what is in the best interest of the child. i believe that what is motivating this principally is what is going on in the countries they are leaving. >> they're doing what is best for the children, but the facilities they're being detained in, outside observers haven't been able to look at those facilities i understand. ngos and others. i urge you to allow others to go in and look at these facilities or frankly, some of us will come down and look at them. i think it should be done. >> i've been to mcallen once. i'm going back again next week. i'm going to a detention

facility outside chicago day after tomorrow. >> i appreciate that. >> it's something i care about. >> i know you do. but let's make them more open to what is going on. and are you taking steps -- my last question. i referred to the -- what i think is excessive use of force. somebody shot several times a teenager shot several times because he threw a rock. nobody justifies throwing the rock but nobody justifies a death sentence for throwing a rock. are you taking steps to ensure there is proper training and proper action when excessive force is used? >> senator, i know from my days as the senior lawyer for the department of defense that whether it's a law enforcement

entity or a military force, if excessive use of force occurs, it threatens to undermine the entire mission and the credibility of the entire mission. so i have encouraged cbp to be more transparent when it comes to its use of force policies and they have. i have encouraged cbp to more explicitly deal in the use of force policies with rock throwing and situations where the officer is threatened by a vehicle. they have rewritten those policies. i applaud the commissioner's efforts at greater transparency and the personnel changes he is making in internal affairs in cbp. >> we can discuss this further. senator grassley. >> mr. secretary, i'm going to start with the documents from your department that reveal that i.c.e. released about 36,000 convicted criminals awaiting

deportation. 116 of those were convicted of homicide, with a total of 193 homicide convictions among that 116 people. one conviction even included willfully killing a public official with a gun. i.c.e. claims the court decisions required the release of criminals who were convicted of 72% of the homicides. i've asked for evidence to prove that. but that means by its own admission the department voluntarily set free an untold number of murderers. i would like to know how that happened and have you made any effort to relocate them? >> senator, i received a letter from you on monday on this topic which i intend to respond to promptly. i received a number of letters from members of congress on this and we've responded.

you are correct that a number of these are the result of orders from immigration judges. i believe you noted that in your opening remarks. it is also the case that a large number of these releases are after final orders of deportation and we've gone beyond six months of detention. and supreme court precedent requires, with exceptional circumstances, that we release an individual if after six months it does not appear we can repatriate the individual pursuant to a case called zabidas vs. davis 2001. you are also correct, a number of releases are at the discretion of i.c.e. officers, pursuant to conditions of release that are intended to secure their return. now, i've asked for greater clarity on the numbers,

particularly the 116 in fy13 who appear to be released after a homicide conviction, i'd like to understand the situation under which that refers particularly the case you referred to of the killing of a public official with a gun. i'm waiting for an answer on that. i've asked our people to do two things, senator. one, i want to be sure we are construing the supreme court precedent properly. there is an exception in the rule for extraordinary circumstances of national security, public safety. i want to be sure we're not construing that too narrowly. and in the case of a convicted felon convicted of a homicide, i want to understand why that doesn't fit within the exception. i've asked our lawyers to take a close look to see whether we are reading the case properly. i also want to have greater clarity with regard to the approval and review processes for releasing these individuals and possibly elevate the

approval level for releasing a convicted felon pursuant to conditions. so it's something i'm very focused on. i agree with your concerns, and i'll be responding to your letter with greater detail, sir. >> okay. then i'll go to more specifically in this area with regard to the 36,000 criminal aliens released. the administration uses the excuse that many individuals were released according to court order. i would like you to provide me with data on the recalcitrant countries by the end of the week if you would, why they won't take them. when you testified on the house side, you said you were not

aware how many times your department has asked the department of state to use its visa denial authority. so i'd like to have you tell me, if you can right now, if you have any plan to recommend senator kerry deny visa countries that refuse to cooperate. the reason i ask that question is it seems like in the case of guyana when we use that tool, that they accepted 115 out of 116 people that we wanted them to take back. it seemed to me to be quite a tool. >> i'm aware of the case of guyana from 2001. i agree it was effective in that instance. i've asked our staff to take a look at whether we should do more of this. >> well, when you reach a decision with your staff on that point, would you tell us in writing please? >> yes, sir. >> i hope you'll make a quick decision because i think this is something that we need to work on to get these countries to take these people back.

then, also, you brought up the zabida case and i would only suggest to you it probably needs a legislative fix. i don't have a legislative fix to present to me, but would you see that as something that you could look at as a way of narrowing the impact of that case? because i think you are reviewing it. i am glad to hear that you're reviewing it, and there may be wider use than is appropriate. but i think the legislative fix is necessary. >> senator, it's my understanding that the case concerns a construction of the constitution so i don't know whether a legislative fix is appropriate, but i think looking at legislation is worthwhile. when i read the case, i was struck by the fact that there might be room for greater

space in the exception for detaining people who are true threats to public safety. i'm interested in having our lawyers be sure we're interpreting it properly. i'd be willing to think about legislation, sir. >> yeah. this will have to be my last question because i will go over the equal time i have with the chairman. the crisis along the border, this is in regard to unaccompanied children. the crisis along the border involving these minors, i think, and you would probably disagree with this, but can be attributed to the president's policies. you recently said, quote, we have to avoid practices and policies that operate as magnets for further illegal migration end of quote. i understand that there are a variety of reasons people come to this country, family, finding work, obviously wanting a better life. it's clear to me and agents interviewing these children that the surge is partly due to the promises of immigration reform

and administrative amnesty so while i applaud the administration's efforts working together to find food and clothing and shelter for these children, no one has presented a long-term solution. and i take into consideration the contacts you said you have made or are going to make. but if you're releasing tens of thousands of individuals each year, how will anybody in a foreign country think we are serious about enforcing the laws? and by the way, i won't go into detail because i don't have time, but we have a summary of some questionnaires and interviews that were made with about 230 people, and you quickly draw the conclusion from this memorandum from your department that doesn't have an official seal that people are coming here because they think we passed a new law and they want to take advantage of it. >> well, first of all, those apprehended at the border are priorities for removal.

if you are apprehended at the border, a recent arrival, you are a priority for removal. that's one. the legislation that is being contemplated provides for an earned path to citizenship only for those who arrived in this country before the end of 2011 so it would not provide for an earned path to citizenship for someone that came here yesterday. >> that is the propaganda going out. >> that doesn't square with the reality of the legislation. >> well, what we could do if we want to solve the problem is have the house pass the legislation we passed and that would settle it and people would know where we are. i'll turn the gavel over to senator feinstein but i'll leave you in writing two questions. one about the staffing of the northern border especially as it impacts the state of vermont where it's slowing commerce, the lack of staff is really slowing commerce and hurting us.

and also ab-5. i would appreciate it if you or your office could give me a response on that this week. >> we will do so. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. let me begin by saying, congratulations on taking forceful action. i'm really impressed with your initiative. i support everything you've done. i became involved in this issue in 2008 while on television i saw a young chinese girl. i think she was 14. chained before a judge, tears rolling down her face. she was a survivor of one of the container episodes where people came across the pacific in a container. she couldn't speak the language. she had no resources. her parents were dead. i got involved in the issue and

authored the unaccompanied alien child act, which president bush signed. it became the law. then there were some changes made which moved the children into hhs and office of refugee resettlement. but i've never seen anything like this. i was just looking at the statistics, and here's the problem. it's honduras, guatemala, and el salvador. and honduras from '09 to '14, the increase is 1,272%. guatemala, same time, the increase is 930%. and el salvador, it's 707%. unaccompanied aliens under the age of 17 from mexico have actually dropped 28%. so this appears to me to be very

much a central american problem. if you look at where they're coming across, that changes it. of course, the biggest change is in the rio grande -- senator flake's area -- where we have 33,470 minors coming into this country that way. this is a real heart break, and if i were the president of el salvador or guatemala or honduras, i wouldn't stand by and see this happen. you mentioned that you met with their ambassadors. is there not something that those countries are willing to do, "a," to provide some protective ability to the very poor families, some food? because as i understand this, these are parents who can't provide for their children and see their children's best opportunity to live and remain unmolested as taking what must

be a horrendous journey. probably for the most part handled by coyotes. the question i have of you, mr. secretary, what was the response of the ambassadors with whom you spoke? >> well, the response is, all of the right things. but the followup is going to be key. that's why i think sustained engagement with the senior most levels of their governments is key. i called all four ambassadors monday morning after i came back from texas, and they all said the right things and pledged assistance to this. but sustained, continued involvement, they've sent consulate resources to texas to help us repatriate some of these kids. so they've devoted their consulate personnel on the border, but you're right. we have to deal with the

underlying conditions in their countries which is obviously a big undertaking on their part. and we have to engage on this with them because there is no other way. i think a key to this, also, is the mexican/guatemala border which is the choke point. our southwest border is 2,300 miles long. their southern border is 130 miles long, through which almost all of these kids are passing. so with the cooperation of the mexicans and guatemalans, if we can help with greater border security along that border, i think this will go a long way. that is one reason i'm going to guatemala next month. >> i'm going to write a letter and anyone who would like to join me to the presidents of these countries and just give them the statistics and indicate our great interest in this issue.

we can provide -- senator flake has a huge facility in his state in arizona, one is about to open in ventura in california. i have two people there today. we've alerted your staff to take a look at the facility. but i am really concerned. this is the beginning of an epidemic. and unless safety is restored to these home states, and poverty is alleviated to some extent, i see it continuing because it's hopeless for children. i would hope people out there, i see a collar of the catholic church, others would really pay attention to this. i'm certainly willing to be helpful. we can work with the unaccompanied minors act. we can make some changes, i suppose. but it doesn't solve the basic problem. and so i would ask any member that would like to join with me in a letter to the presidents of

these countries and say, what are you prepared to do? i mean, the embarrassment must be enormous. do you have any specific actions that these countries might take? that we could work to convince them to take? >> i'd be happy to work with you on suggestions for such a communication, senator. there are a number of things we are contemplating asking of them, but i'd be happy to work with you on those. >> good. thank you. >> i'd also like to add that we've gotten, i think, some terrific offers of help from faith-based organizations who are concerned about the situation in texas, and that's been a terrific response. >> thank you. senator grassley? >> before senator hatch, i'd like to put in the record that interviews that i spoke about in my last question to the

secretary -- >> no problem. so ordered. thank you. senator hatch? >> well thank you, madam chairman. i appreciate you and all the difficulties in putting these matters together. i still remember resolving the agricultural component of the senate bill in your office under your direction. it was a very good job by you. mr. secretary, i commiserate with you. this is a tough job, and if anybody can do this right, i hope with all my heart that you can. it's also an impossible job in some ways because of the failure to -- the failure of congress to do what really needs to be done here. even then it's going to take a lot of effort on about everybody's part to resolve these problems. i share the concerns raised by senator grassley about the

alarming increase in the number of unaccompanied alien children along the southwest borders. the administration is calling this a humanitarian situation, but in my view, the administration's own unilateral actions and permissive approach to immigration enforcement have created this problem. i'm concerned about it because i think the administration has been irresponsible in this regard. let me just say this. in april, u.s. citizenship and immigration services confirmed for the second year in a row that the h1b visa quota was reached within the first five days. we tried to solve that in the senate bill or at least make strides to solve it. preserving jobs for american workers is important but a recent study by the partnership for a new american economy shows that the h1b visa cap actually hurts u.s. job growth.

our time is limited this morning so i appreciate maybe some brief responses to what questions i am able to ask. i know you agree with me on this b1visa situation. if you don't, we'll have some real talk together. >> senator hatch, before the secretary answers your question, i have a french intelligence delegation waiting, and i'm going to ask senator whitehouse to take over and give him the list. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. let me -- the secure communities program is designed to locate, take custody of and remove criminal aliens. this important program could be rendered useless if local law enforcement agencies fail to

turn aliens over to ic.e. officials. federal immigration regarding detainers is increasing. these are the official notices from i.c.e. that the agency intends to take custody of an individual from a local law enforcement agency. now, that litigation is unraveling the cooperation between i.c.e. and the state and local law enforcement agencies. now, do you believe that i.c.e. detainers should be honored by local law enforcement agencies, and if not, how would you keep the secure community program effective? >> i have a lot of thoughts about secure communities. first of all, immigration detainers themselves go back to decades, when i was a prosecutor 25 years ago we had immigration detainers put on people. so those are not new. the secure communities program is essentially fingerprint sharing between the fbi and the immigration component. that's what it is.

there's a lot of misunderstanding about what secure communities is. i believe that the goal of secure communities is a good one, which is to promote more effective enforcement against those who are threats to public safety, those who are criminals. i believe it is a worthwhile program. however, it's gotten off to a very bad start. it has a very bad name. there are mayors and governors out there signing executive orders, passing laws that limit a state or a city's ability to comply with the detainer. that is an extremely unfortunate situation. they're limiting the ability of our people to do their job. and so i believe, as i've said before, that we need a fresh start on this program. i'm evaluating how to more effectively enforce our immigration laws against those who are threats to public safety. i believe we need clearer

guidance for our people. and with the clearer guidance i intend to take that to the governors and mayors to say, here is who our enforcement priorities are so that you don't have any uncertainty about that anymore. hopefully we'll do a better job cooperating with each other because i believe the principle is a good one, senator. >> thank you. my time is up, mr. chairman, and i appreciate you and the difficult job you have. >> thank you. >> secretary johnson, how are you? >> how are you? >> can we talk about cyber for a minute? >> yes, sir. >> i have two topics on that. one is quite narrow and specific. dhs is the lead federal agency that is responsible for working with state and local governments and state and local law enforcement in a variety of ways, and specifically around protecting their information systems.

and it appears that there's been a little spate of recent cyberattacks on local law enforcement agencies. and across a lot of this country, small, rural police departments don't have a lot of cyber-resources available to them. they don't have even in some cases full-time information officers. it strikes me that both from the point of view of kind of creating embarrassment and upheaval in some of the goals of some cyberhackers or from compromising law enforcement and emergency response, a more serious intent, small police departments make a particularly appealing target.

i wonder where within dhs we can work together on trying to make sure that they have both the resources and the threat awareness and the knowledge that they need to protect themselves say, if crypt olocker takes out the cyberresources of a small department, including current law enforcement records and police department, it could create a very unfortunate situation. first of all i agree with your observation. i also know more and more local mayors and governors are asking me about the issue. governor schneider comes to mind. i know more and more they have cybersecurity advisers devoted to this.

>> which nypd can do? which the boston police department can do, but when you get down to police departments, i think we need to think about how to organize a common resource and have their back in a better way than we presently do. >> my cybersecurity experts, if they were sitting here, could tell you about the ways in which we do work with local law enforcement. i suspect, but i don't know, we may be able to support the development of cybersecurity capability in these governments, but i do agree that it's something that is an emerging threat we need to focus on. >> i look forward to continuing to work with you on this. this hearing isn't the forum for that, but i think it's important. i think there are a lot of mayors and governors around the country who are seeing these a particularly unfortunate target to emerge and particularly

vulnerable one. the second cyber topic has to do with how we structure or cyberenforcement response. i want to first of all commend what you, what the department of justice, what the fbi all do. we are throwing a lot of resources at the problem. we have immense talent being thrown at this problem. we've had some really terrific new steps, specifically by the department of justice against the pla hackers, and against the two big botnets, so there's great stuff that's going on, but i'm not convinced yet that we're doing the thinking we need to be doing about what our cyberenforcement structure needs to look like five years out and ten years out. and we're so engaged in today's

hackers and trying to warn businesses who is coming through the windows and doors at them, that there really isn't in my view a very comprehensive process of what this needs to look like. this is a threat in transition, it's a growing threat. i would like to hear your thoughts on the long-term preparedness, and the review of what our structure should be to address this threat. >> well, first of all, the secret service has tremendous capabilities in the investigation of cybercrime. we do it on a routine basis. the secret service, for example is the lead law enforcement agency when it comes to the target stores episode. i've had conversations with jim komey, who i've known for years, and others in the intelligence community, and also general alexander, who is recently retired, about how we answer this exact question.

and my view is that -- and i know all these people, either from aye ausa days or my d.o.d. period, and in my view, if we can sit down together -- and this is not a complicated conversation between the three of us component heads to say what is our strategy going forward? when does the fbi get involved? when does the secret service get involved? and when does it become a matter for our national security intelligence resources for our government this we can develop a common strategy, and i don't believe it's very hard. i don't believe it's complicated. it's one of items on my agenda. >> i'll follow up with you on that, and our next senator recognizes senator sessions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. while we're having a humanitarian disaster, no doubt about that, and the humanitarian disaster is caused by a legal

disaster. your leadership and the president's leadership has failed to send a clear message throughout the world that you can only come to the united states lawfully. you cannot come unlawfully. in fact, you send a message that conveys just the opposite. it's unbelievable that the top law enforcement officer of our country is doing such a thing. you've got sued by your own officers, or at least your predecessor for not allowing them to following their oath to enforce the law. under your leadership, it seems to be gotten worse, secretary johnson. you and i talked about it. i expressed my concern. i thought maybe it would get better, but actually things have gotten worse, and we are seeing this flood of young people, and it's just tragic. it should not be happening. the first thing a law enforcement officer should seek to do is to create a climate that reduces lawlessness, not encourage it. you don't want to be in a

position of having to arrest more people and deal with more people. you want to not have it happen. it's just amazing to me. i want to push back a little bit for my chairman, talking about excessive force and violence. i wish you would push back a little harder, mr. johnson. but this is the kind of thing that's happening to your border patrol agents every day. they're being attacked with vehicles. they're being shot and they're being pummels with large rocks. one picture in here is 7 inches in a rock that hit an agent. i would offer that for the record. lawlessness begets -- >> without objection. >> lawlessness begets violence. in san diego a number of years ago, 20 or 40r years ago, they built a fence. there was violence and lawlessness and drugs. afterwards both sides of the border are prospering, and the lawlessness had ended at that

time and we've done better. i'll just ask you this -- you didn't say it in your testimony today, and nothing i've seen in your reported statements is a clear message to the world they must not come illegally to america. have you said that any time recently? >> i've told my staff that we need to consider all options to deal with this situation. i rule nothing out that is lawful. i want to know about every option, and i want to consider every option, senator. >> well, here in el salvador newspaper, the headline is "extension of suspension of student deportation." in other words, you extend the suspension of deportation. secretary johnson, it says almost all agree that a child who crosses the border illee with their parents, or in search of a father, or a better life, was not making an adult choice

to break our laws, and should be treated differently from adult violators of the law. >> i still agree with that. >> it goes on to say the administration of president obama has launched the program suspending deportations. here on central american news outlet, the first paragraph says central americans, who illegally cross the border into mexico say they're arriving at their final destination that u.s. immigration officials are allowing central american women and children to freely enter the country. is that correct or not? >> i don't believe that's correct, no. >> this is what the lady said that they interviewed. this is a spanish publication. it was easy to get there. i only had to walk 15 minutes with my daughters, and i turned myself into immigration. but was told that u.s.

immigration -- i was told that u.s. immigration was letting, quote, lots of women with kids into the united states. la prenza in el salvador -- obama announced a unifieded and coordinated response to this program to provide humanitarian relief to children affected, including accommodation, care, medical treatment and transport. but he didn't say, and you've not even said this day right here in this committee, do not come, it's unlawful to come, you cannot come to the country without lawful permission. so i ask you again, are you prepared to say that to the whole world? >> i am prepared to say that a parent should not send a child across our southwest border. >> well, can a parent bring a child with them? >> because it's dangerous. >> because it's dangerous. >> because its illegal and it's

dangerous. >> you've pledged to enforce the law and interdict and send people back? >> i pledge several times, and i do it every day. >> you didn't say it in the opening and you haven't been quoted in the papers -- >> i enforce the law every day, senator. we're according to last year's numbers, deporting people at the rate of 1,000 a day. >> you're familiar with a memo from deputy border chief ronald vitiello, i suppose, on may 30th of this years, your own deputy. it's 50 seconds over now. could i ask for one additional minute, mr. chairman? this is what mr. vitiello -- >> is it a draft or -- all right. >> that was his draft. yeah, you probably altered it or had it altered.

he said -- if the federal government failed to deliver adequate consequences to deter aliens from attempting to interillegally the u.s., the result will be even greater increase in the rate of recidivism and first-time illicit entries. releasing other than mexican family everyone, federal claims and low-threat aliens on their own recognizance, along with facilitating family reunification of unaccompanied aliens children in lieu of repatriation to their country of citizenship serve as incentives for additional individuals to follow the same path. he goes on -- to stem the flow, adequate consequences must be delivered for illegal entry into the united states and for facilitating human smuggling, either as a direct member of an illicit aliens smuggling organization, or as a private facilitator, these consequences

must be delivered both at the border and within the united states. do you agree with that? >> as i said in my opening statement, to deal with the situation in south texas, we've had to surge resources that are normally devoted to other tasks. we are now calling upon the entire federal government to address that situation, so that my border patrol agent can go back to patrolling the border. >> senator? >> thank you very much senator whitehouse, and thank you very much, secretary johnson, on your work, and i was just down in mexico with senator highcamp, and cindy mccain on that very important issue of sex trafficking as well as heroin trafficking, met with the federal police and the attorney general, and we talked about this issue at length. i also have appreciated the efforts that mexico is starting to make, which is very necessary to this, to secure their own southern border, in addition to

the work that's been going on to try to go after the drug cartels and the capture of el chapo. one of the things i certainly learned when i was down in mexico is one way out of the this violence and the things that are going on down there is to have a stronger north american economy, what we're calling a new day in north america, which means more and more regional coordinate between canada, america and mexico. as we compete with countries like china, i think this is a major part of our economic growth to bring more jobs to america. every single day 300,000 people are crossing the u.s./canadian border. every single day two-kay cross-border trade amounts to $2 billion a day. they are our major trading partner. canada, $2 billion a day in trade, three quarters of canada's goods are now sold in the u.s., and in turn canada is the number one buyer of goods

produced in 36 states in this country. yet we have border issues with canada. there are border issues about making it as easy as possible to facilitate the movement of people and goods, with our number one partner, our number one partner in dealing with the ukraine, our number one partner in dealing with security. i know you understand this. one of the things, having just been in canada this weekend with several senators, as well as senator stabenau, we identified some infrastructure issues. over the past two years, authorizations have been received from congress to initiate pilot programs and actually accept private donations to help improve the efficiency of border controllingings. i'm concerned these border controllingings are right now the grants have been given

solely on the southern border, and we have, for instance, the land port of entry in international falls, minnesota, was built in 1993, and deemed in need of replacement by the customs border protection and general services administration. we're interested in this public/private partnership, obviously with the energy and the oil and everything else coming from canada as well as the trade and agriculture trade. we think this is a smart investment. could you talk to me about why these programs are only in place on the southern border, and can you commit to adding northern border sites for these partnerships as soon as possible? >> yes, a big part of my job, notwithstanding everything we've talked about so far in this hearing, is promoting lawful trade and travel particularly in north america. i've had conversations, along with our president, with the

mexican president, with the prime minister of canada at the summit that took place in mexico in february, i believe it was, or march. i've had conversations with minister blainy, minister raitt. it is a big part of this administration's agenda to develop trust the traveler programs. the president signed an executive order on a single path for export/import purposes into our federal agencies, and i've personally visited detroit and port huron. >> they were the windsor bridge issue, which is another problem. >> i have walked on that bridge. >> you're close to getting that resolved. i've seen the backup on the bridge in port huron, and i believe that we need to expand the customs plaza capability,

and i they we need to built a plaza in detroit. i think they're a good and creative way to explore. i'm impressed by the fact that the canadians have stepped up -- >> they have completely stepped up to help pay for that bridge, and really interested in this. they're doing a lot with public/private partnerships with their own infrastructure and are interested in this idea and i really think we can't be putting them a dern it's about facilitation. i have one last question. you probably heard about the current plans for the current uscs field office in blumington, minnesota, to move to a location three miles from the nearest public transportation option. the field offices provide critical services, as you know, immigration services, and i think you heard what happened here. they have apologized, the gsa made a major mistake, they saw a sign for a bus and thought it was a public bus, and there's

really no bus service to that area. they have been helpful in meeting with us, and could you talk about it, as we're looking at legislation to make sure that u.s.cis field offices are accessible for the communities they serve, what your views are on this. we're currently trying to see if there's any way to dial this back. >> i have talked to senator franken about this. i'm aware of the issue with this particular office, and i agree that people should be encountried to go to cis offices for just about every region imaginable. so i agree they need to be accessible one way or another. i -- i will look at this situation. >> again, i appreciate your good work. thank you. >> thank you. senator cornyn. >> thank you. mr. secretary. good morning. good to see you. >> thank you. would you agree with me that the transnational criminal

organizations that traffic human beings into the united states, they don't discriminate between economic migrants and people who they traffic for sex or other illegal purposes. would you agree with that? >> that sounds right. i'm not sure i know the answer to that one. >> that sounds right. >> well, they're in the business to make money? >> they're in the business of making money, yes, sir. >> drugs, gun, people, children, adults, they don't really discriminate. and i think there is this misconception that somehow there is good immigration -- illegal immigration and bad illegal immigration, in the sense that somehow these are separate pipelines, when in fact my impression is, to my knowledge, it is now been taken over essentially by transnational criminal organization, largely

the cartels in mexico. and all of the horrors that you know and that i know and that others know that these un'companied children are subjected to, they are subject to the mercies of these traffickers. so i want to really ask you about two things. you came to my office recently, i appreciate it, after doing some investigation of the detentions along the u.s./mexican border. i appreciate the acknowledgement that you recognize this is a national security issue as well. in fact, 414,000 people were detained at the southwestern border last year from more than 100 different countries. do you agree with that -- those figures? >> yes. as you and i have discussed on the southwest border in the rio

grande valley in particular, we're seeing an increasing nurms better of migrants coming from virtually all over the world, including other count it's an increasingly diverse population. >> i appreciate your acknowledgement of that and your investigation of the facts. let me turn now to the humanitarian crisis of unaccompanied minors. there's been several reference to the internal summary prepared by agents in the field concerning the recent surge. when asked why they chose at this time to migrate, an overwhelming majority said it was to take advantage of a new u.s. law that grants a free pass to unaccompanied children and female adults traveling with minors. it appears the free passes that they're referring to, permisos, are the notice to appear.

in other words, when people are detained they're giving a notice to appear at the court setting. i'm told by border patrol that 90% of them never show back up, but the high percentage of people interviewed said families in the united states said to travel immediately, because they were only issuing the passes until the end of june 2014. so you previously acknowledged that there is no legal way to enter the united states -- there is no free pass under the law. is that right? >> well, there is a legal way to enter the united states. the migration we're talking about here is not legal. >> thank you. you're right. thank you for correcting my statement. i meant, there's no way for these unaexuded minor children to legally enter the united states in the way that the 47,000 that have been detained since october have been doing. >> that is correct, yes.

okay. so i would just suggest to you there is this perception that the executive branch of the federal government is not enforcing the law because of talks about easing deportations or repatriations i think is the nomenclature you used. the perception is there are no consequences to illegally entering the united states. and if that is the perception, the flood of humanity will continue and contribute to this humanitarian crisis that we've been talking about this morning. i would just suggest to you, as you deliberate these matters, and as you consult with consequence and the president, that this is one of the biggest obstacles to immigration reform, because if the perception is both domestically and in other countries that the federal government is not committed to enforcing our own laws, then

this flood will continue an the divide and the distrust will grow even more. so i -- and one final point. so if this entry of 47,000 children who have come unaccompanied, who have been detained since october, if that's not legal under u.s. law, i don't understand the argument that if we just somehow pass the senate immigration bill, that it would have a positive impact on this humanitarian crisis. you're not suggesting that we need to pass some other law that would have prevented this humanitarian crisis, are you, sir? >> first of all, the document you've read from, i've never seen. it's supposedly a draft document. i don't know that i agree with

the assessment there. >> well, there are interviews with 230 of the people detained coming across the border. >> i've never seen the document -- >> will you take a look at it this and tell us whether -- >> enough people have referred to it i'm sure at some point soon i will look at it. i'm not sure i agree that that is the motivator for the children coming into south texas. i think it is primarily the conditions in the countries that they are leaving from. i do believe that if comprehensive immigration reform is passed, the certain -- the uncertainty that may be existing in people's minds about our law gets resolved, and it will be clear to people that the earned path to sit zenship that's being contemplated in the senate bill only applies to people who came here before year end 2011. same thing with daka, it refers

to people who came here in 2007, it doesn't refer to people who came here today or yesterday. so the perception i don't think is correct. i also know that anyone who's apprehended on the border is a priority for removal. >> mr. secretary, this is my last question or statement. i would suggest that, as a person who believes we need to pass a bill to fix our broken immigration laws, that the single biggest impediment to collaboration between congress and the executive branch to get that done, we may not agree about the details, but i think we all agree the need to get to that solution, the biggest impediment is the perception that the president and this administration will not enforce whatever laws that congress were to pass. that is a real problem, and in this instance, it has helped induce this humanitarian crisis

and this flood of unaccompanied children that is very dangerous to them and their families, and created a real crisis. so thank you for your response to my questions. >> before i call upon senator kunz, i would like to ask everyone to be aware of the time limits for questioning, because there are people who are waiting. senator kunz. >> thank you, senator. and thank you secretary, for your service, for your leadership in the department and for your testimony here today. i want to touch on a number of different issues, ag inspections, and cybercrime and a number of issue that is relate to deportation practices. these are issues we have discussed before. i just want to make sure i'm getting an appropriate update. first in deportation proceedings, aliens are not routinely provided what's called the a-file, but instead have to

file foia requests. has dhs begun to routinely a-files to aliens who are facing deportation. >> senator, that's something you and i have discussed previously. i don't know the status of that issue right now, but i can get back to you. >> i've also discussed with you and your predecessor lateral repatriation, a polite way of describing nighttime deportations that often put children and women at risk, put particularly vulnerable people facing deportation into dang lulls locales into very bad circumstances. i think it violates basic human rights and some of our international agreements. i wondered if dhs has implemented providers to ensure the deportations are done in a manner that doesn't jeopardizes the lives of repatry eighted

aliens. >> we are working with the members cal government with this. obvious it involves a matter of logistics, coordination and so forth. we also have a policy going back to 2004 that we not separate families or move vulnerable population at late-night hours, which i believe is a good policy, and i intend to reiterate it. >> thank you. i have heard from the faith community, from advocates that they continue to see significant impacts on vulnerable families due to the policy, it hasn't had an appreciable positive impact. last on the list, courts are not currently on that list, and i've received to me some concerning reports that immigration enforcement which occurs right at or around courthouses deters women from seeking protection from abuse orders or folks who are applies for relief from landlords. i just wondered what steps dhs

has taken to assess the appropriateness of enforcement actions taken at courthouses and ensure they're only taking at exception at circumstances where there's a case-specific justification, rather than in the broader range of case that is deters access to justice, and deer terse some of the important things i referenced proo vention of domestic violence. >> you are correct that court houses have not been on the sensitive list. i know that some months ago i.c.e. determined to put courthouses in a special category deserving of some sort of special treatment. i agree that courthouses are special places in the nature of a church, but i can readily see for reasons of public safety why any law enforcement officer would feel compelled to take action with regard to an individual at a courthouse. i've asked our folks to better development that exception with regard to courthouses. >> thank you, mr. secretary.

we've also talked about customs and border in terms of overtime for inspections that are related to agriculture. the port of wellton and many other ports have folks that would like to pay overtime when whole shiploads of fruit they can get timely inspections. this is a complicated interagency budgetary issue. my understanding is we've made progress that would not alou fee increases for overtime services. is this something that, to your understanding cbp ag inspectors are able to work with the department are and are hopefully we'll make some progress above this very upcoming fruit season? >> i believe so. >> that would be great. cybercrime is an area of primary focus for you and the department. it causes enormous costs and negative impacts on our society

every year. i recommend to you the role that the air national guard can play in terms of providing a qualified workforce that's able to be a resource both for national security purposes ubs and for state and local preparation reasons. i just wondered how the national guard model fits into the department strategy to meet the threat opposed by cybercrime and potential cybersecurity threats. >> the air national guard? >> the 166th network war fare squadron would welcome a visit anytime. >> that's a worth while inquiry. i will look at that, sir. >> thank you, mr. secretary. looking forward to following up with us on all these issues. >> thank you. senator? >> i appreciate you being here and appreciate what you're doing. my questions, as you know, this comes from someone who is supportive of immigration reform, as a member of the gang of eight, i'm proud the

legislation we passed. i hope that similar legislation or some legislation could pass the house, and we can get this is done. i want to follow up on some of the questions by my colleagues on the motivation of people coming. when you look at the numbers, it's just staggering, as you have had said, and has created a humanitarian disaster. when we involve fema, as you mentioned, for something like this, this denotes a disaster. and we ought to be looking at the causes of it. where he know some of the causes, as you explained, the economic situation in these countries, the drug activity with car tells, and unsafety with the gangs certainly leads to it, but to reject out of hand, which you seem to be doing, that the perception the lacks enforcement is not a

motivator in this regard, i think is naive at best, and very destructive at worst. when you look at the numbers, thor from the three countries we talked about. october 14 thousands, november 14,000, december 14,000, january 12,000, february 16,000, so relatively straight, and then comes march, right around the time of the deportation review that was undertaken by the administration. word like this spreads, and word spreads that there will be a review of deportation and then march otm, it stays steady at around 14,000 until march. then march 24,000, april 26,000,

may 38,000. can you just allow a little that it might be -- there might be a perception that lacks enforcement might be some motivator for people to come here? >> i can't control people's perceptions, and i don't have a categorical sense of people's perceptions in central america. i do believe what is principally motivating this migration are, as you noted, the conditions in the central american countries. i also believe that people are aware that when their kids come into this country, unaccompanied, we are required by law to give them to hhs, and hhs is required by law to act in the best interest of the child, which very often means reuniting them with the parent. i think they know that. that's what the law requires you

to do. >> i think they do as well. when you look at the interviews, read the interviews, and see the statements of people saying -- they're waving down helicopters, waving them down, rushing to border patrol agents and saying take me. there is a perception, there is a perception of lacks infex enf, and that i would submit, is one of the motivators, and a big one, why we're having such a massive increase in unaccompanied minors, and people from these countries that we're talking about. i don't think this is a blow to your ego, but what you say on these matters in those countries to these am bass endorse, or to media outlets in guatemala, el calf do recall, or honduras doesn't matter as much as what the president says, and it will

be extremely helpful in my view, to send a letter to the president today pleading with him, make a statement, let people know that those who are coming you now, subject to deportation these other rules that may be reviewed will not apply to people coming now. do you think that that would be a good idea for the president to make such a statement and for us to follow with public relations efforts in these countries? >> well, first of all, nothing anymore is a blow to my ego. i do think a robust public relations campaign in some form a vital. i do agree with that. whether it's the president or efficiency from their own countries or what have you, i do believe that a robust aggressive public relation campaign needs to be part of our strategy.

>> i hope that is the case and i have many questions about what's going on in arizona. you want that you hoped that the border patrol can go back to patrolling the border that's extremely disturbing to those of us in border states, how many agents are being pulled from border patrol to processing unaccompanied minors or others. what percentage of the force is being pulled away from those duties in arizona and texas? >> i don't have an exact percentage. i know we've had to surge resources to process these kids. plainly there are still plenty of people on the border conducting border patrol activities. i believe with the added resources we're getting from other agencies, these folks are able to return full time to their normal responsibilities. >> let me just close by saying, i hope that the president in

tickly and you as well will make such a tame, continue to make such a statement and then launch a public relations effort, letting people know they will not be able to participate in either the policies that the administration has pursued or the legislation that this body, the senate has passed and that the congress will hopefully pass. thank you for your work. >> senator, if i may. one other thing i wanted to add, senator flake, i remember from the qfrs you send me and the confirmation process, the statements of your constituents, the ranchers, so one of the first thing i did, i went to visit in arizona. i think it's fair to say we had a good visit, a good conversation. i wanted to understand their border security concerns. so i went down there, and they're a terrific bunch of people. >> let me say, they appreciate that, they told me that, and i appreciate and my office does

the manner in which you have answered questions. this is a bit of a departure from what we have seen before, and i'm very, very happy to see that and been pleased with your response, and the seriousness with which you take this job. so thank you. >> thank you. thank you, mr. secretary. clearly all of us are concerned about the influx of minors crossing the border, and it's a multifaceted problems with no easy solution, leading to a level 4 condition that you've declared i would encourage you to work with us so we could travel to see some of the facilities. i think that would enible us to better understand and grasp the enormity of this crisis situation.

regarding numerous immigration procedures including deportation of of the 400,000 or so deportation that dms is carrying out each year, do you have data on how many of these are people who are being deported who would receive prosecutorial discretion, exercise of prosecutor discretion based on things such as family ties or community ties? >> there are ways to make that statistical assessment we're in the midst of doing that right now. i think the data in years past could not have been as clear as it could be. i would like to make the data m

coming each year, and correlate the data to the individual priorities in the morton memo, so we all have a clear sense for whether somebody's being removed, who's a priority 1 or priority 2 or priority 3, so i think we can do a better job there. i also think we need clearer guidance. so when you say the morton memo, for example, it's unclear whether you're referring to the march memo or june memo of 2011, or a whole other series of memos. >> there are various iterations of enibling your agents pretty much across the board to exercise prosecutorial discretion, and so i would like to understand of the 400,000 or so deportations who actually are being deported. for example, i get concerned when recent reports indicate that i.c.e. field offices in detroit is placing people with strong family ties without any criminal record into deportation procedures. so it's kind of reminiscent of

what's been coming out regards the veterans administration. it's one thing to have a policy directive, such as the morton memo, but it's another about what is actually going on in the field. i recognize that the morton memo also says that these are guidelines, and that your agents have, you know, can prosecute people who are here illegally, but i think in terms of scarce resources and your establishment of priorities of how we ought to be enforcing our law, it would be good for us to have that kind of breakdown from you. >> well, one of the things that i've learned from my department of defense experience is clear guidance, is indispensable. if you don't issue clear guidance to the field, how it's implemented is not going to look at all like what you intended. so d.o.d., whenever they issue new guidance, they always

socialize, training it to the field down the chain of command and so i've had spent a lot of time talking to our workforce how to better implement policy changes that are issued in washington, and i'm determineded to do a better job in that regard. >> good. >> my understanding is that under the daka program, some 500,000 young people have come forward to participate. i understand that the department is suggesting that applicationants apply for renew all up to four months before the expiration of the two-year term. there is no gap that would superintendent so was your

department expeditiously, and what are -- leads to lapses in the status? >> well, we've been preparing for this for some time now, and one of the things we're doing is we're not requires individuals to some of the all of the same documentation they submitted two years ago unless there's been some new event in their life like a criminal conviction or something. we're not requires individuals to go back and submit the very same paperwork all over again. you're correct wet over $600 applicants two years ago, about 500 applications were granted. that's a large number of people we were able to get through the somebody. so i believe that good work with

continue. half a million, that is a lot of lot of people. thank you very much. it is senator lee. >> thank you, madam chair, and thank you secretary johnson for joins us today. >> nice to meet you.

justice jackson came up with this three-part analysis. the basic analysis is in category one, when the president acts pursuance to authorization by congress his power is said to be at its zenith, in sort of a twilight zone, that can be a little unclear. but also -- or in the absence of a particular congressional prohibition. the president's authority, justice jackson explain is at

its lowest ebb when a president agents inconsistent prohibited by congress. now, using theories of prosecutorial discretion, the morton memoranda that were described earlier, and the daca program have been criticized as an effort to mount a de facto legislative implementation of certain legislative proposals that were considered ash rejected by congress, that congress has not ever adopt ed because as implemented, he effectively i'm told, or are telling agents if an immigrant meets these certain qualifications, if these characterics are present, we don't want you enforcing the

late. to the extent that's the case. assuming hypothetically it can't be the case where would that put us? my recollection is a decision of the supreme court in '79 or '80. >> '81, close. >> yes. what you laid out i have quoted obvious when i was the senior lawyer for the department of defense in the war powers context. president's war powers are at their seinist when he's committing the military pursuant to statutory authorization. and so we apply and construe the aumf a lot. why was the general counsel or department of the defense. i see the morton memo, and i

believe it could be clearer, but el very much believe in the notion of prosecutorial discretion. in my conversations with the ero workforce, we've all agreed that they should be devoting their time and effort and resources that they have to going after enforcing against the worst of the worst. the question is, how do you do that? how do you find the worst of the worse? and where do you draw the line? >> and of course that's why prosecutorial discretion is necessary. you can't expect people to do it all. >> correct. >> normally, as you know, based not only the position you hold now, but position in the deposition of defense, but also your firm -- prosecutorial discretion usually means discretion, and it -- it leaves a significant amount of discretion in the and of the prosecutor to figure out where best to allocate the resources. >> or his boss.

>> right. where you've got a directive, assuming there is such a directive, as i've been told the directive is being carried out in this fashion, where you've got agents on the ground being told, do not enforce the law in this entire category, i think that's a bit different than prosecutorial discretion, isn't it? isn't that a mandate not to enforce the law? >> well, when i was an ausa in the southern district of new york in 1989, '90, '91, we used to make an effort to get to at least 1,000 indictments a year. there would be a big push toward the end to try to get over 1,000. you can't do that very easily if you prosecuted a lot of marijuana cases, but we were not focussed on marijuana. we were focused on the crack epidemic going on in new york city. if we had focused on marijuana cases, we would get to 1,000 indictments by the month of march probably, but that would not be the most effective enforcement of our federal

narcotics laws. so i think that principle translates into the removal enforcement context. and i believe very much that we can and we ought to be able to do that. the question is how and where do you draw the lines? where do you prioritize? and where you don't? i don't think that that necessarily amounts to, and i don't believe it has amounted to simply declaring off-limits large categories of people. >> i understand the point, and i see my time has expired, so i'm going to need to wrap up here. my concern is that when you have a national memorandum with national impacts, and when agencies i'm informed are being told on the ground do not enforce the law where these circumstances are present, that is meaningfully legally constitutionally different than what you described, where an individual office hats only so

many procedurors, so many agencies and so many resources to devote. think maintain some true discretion to decide how, when, whether, to what extent to enforce laws, what circumstances are going to trigger the use of those resources. but, again, what we're talking about here is a national memorandum i'm told is being implemented nationally in a way so stores just write off entire provisions of federal law. to the extent that is happening, that is very troubling and very different from what you described. tang you, mr. chairman. i see my time has expired. >> thank you, senator durbin? >> thank you senator blumenthal. thank you, mr. secretary, for being here. i want to address as issue that i don't know if it's come up during the course of this hearing. there is undoubtedly many reasons they children are crossing the border, sonia

nazario, "los angeles times" writer, won a pulitzer prize for "enrique's journey" that book she believe 75% of children were coming across the border. she was referring to some 48,000 children, as young as 7 years of age crossing our border, over half of them by themselves. the reason they were crossing the border was not on its face obvious. nfc note something said by the president or by congress or politicians or maybe the things that might first come to mind. they were looking for their mothers. looking for their mothers that, i believe has led them to do things that are unimaginable to those of us with children or grandchildren, to think that a child as young as 7 would hop a freight train, and what they found as a result of looking at

this at the university of houston, they found these kids, as they were coming into the united states were cold, hungry, helpless, half of them unaccompanied, hunted like animals, the university of houston's study found most had been robbed, beaten, raped, usually several times, some killed, some maimed by these railroad trains. that to me cannot be overlooked in this conversation. and before we start asking for pronouncements from the president, let es stop and reflect as fathers and grandfathers about these babies and these children who are desperate to find their mothers in america. if this is not a searing indictment of our broken immigration system, and the need for change, i can't think of anything that is. i want to thank senator flake. he and i sat together for many, many months working on a comprehensive immigration bill,

and we gave and took back and forth. and your heart's in the right place, senator, and though we may come at it differently on this issue, i know where you are, because i and i both vote fold that bill. now we've got to pas that bill, but in the meantime some things are happening. when you came to see me on your path to this position, i asked you for two things. i asked you to come to a detention facility and to meet those who were about to be deported from the united states, and you said you would, and friday you're going to. in broadview, illinois, at the detention facility just outside chicago. i welcome you, and i'll be there to greet you on that visit, and you'll meet with some local people and share your thoughts about the current deportation policy. the president has said he wants congress to act on comprehensive immigration reform, and he's basically withholding decisions that can be made by the executive in the hopes that congress will do this before the end of july. in the meantime, i hope you are

in the process of reviewing our deportation policy. what can you say to us today about these deportations? >> first, i look forward to visiting the detention center in chicago. the whole reason i'm going is because you mentioned this to me when we had our first visit together, and i believe very much in the role that i should have reviewing our detention conditions, something i did at d.o.d., something i intend to continue to do. the one we're going to friday is not the first one i've been to. as i mentioned in my opening statements, i've been to mcgown station texas, with my wife, who is sitting right there, to see these children on mother's day. one of the them told me something almost exactly like what you said. i asked you where is your mother? she said i don't have a mother, i'm looking for my father in the united states. i've encountered this in a personal way.

i understand it. the review that i am undertaking is comprehensive. i'm talking to our workforce about our policies, and how they believe we can more effectively implement our policies, and i'm also talking to large groups of people on the outside, across the spectrum on better, more effective, fairer enforcement policies. i believe we can do a better job, and i believe we can have clearer guidance, and better train it to the workforce, so what we intend to be implemented is in fact implemented. that's my over-arching goal, senator. >> i thank you for that, and the statistics that come back that suggest over 40% of those deported have no criminal record, at least that is what -- that was the case a few years ago, those with criminal records, i'm not pleading for. they have -- they have lost their right as far as i'm concerned, to even be considered at this moment.

but those without criminal records and technical immigration violations many times we're breaking up families, families where many american citizens are in that household, children and spouses, and families are being broken up. and i think we're better than that. i had think we keep america safe, we can honor our laws, yet enforce them in a fashion that's truly american, a nation of immigrants that should be proud of its heritage, and i thank you for your public service. >> thank you. >> thank you. senator cruz? >> thank you, mr. chairman, mr. secretary, thank you for being here. thank you for your service. there's no job more important in the administration than protecting our homeland, so i appreciate your service in this very important role. >> i would note as we discuss immigration, i myself am the son of an immigrant from cuba, and a passionate advocate for legal immigration. instead there's no stronger

advocate for legal immigration in the u.s. senate than i am. but at the same time i think much of the discussion of immigration immigration ignores, disregards, the humanitarian crisis that is caused by illegal immigration. as you know, i represent the state of texas and the state of texas immigration is not something abstract that we read about in the newspapers. immigration is something as texans we deal with every day and illegal immigration is as texans we deal with every day. the humanitarian crisis that comes from our failure to secure the borders is staggering. in 2013 the border patrol reported the emergencies and crimes it encountered. and most of the cases were those that came here illegally were the victims so there were 2,346 rescues.

461 assaults and 445 deaths. indeed, last year i received a letter from one of my constituents and brooks county. a veterinarian who has worked with ranchers, texas ranchers, mexican ranchers, his entire life. this veterinarian wrote, quote, i live in a brooks county ranch with my wife. in 2012, 129 bodies of deceased illegal aliens were found our county. on private ranch land. most of those bodies were found within 15 minutes of our front door in any given direction. we believe those bodies represent only 20% to 25% of the actual number of illegal immigrants dying in this area. in one week of last july, i personally rescued 15 people, most were central americans, that were lost and close to dying from dehydration and heat exhaustion.

that same week i found a deceased person that had been laid across a dirt road in order to be found. he was a 31 year owed man from el salvador. this is a humanitarian crisis that we have a legal system in place that is failing to secure the boarder and that is incentivizing people crossing illegally. secondly, we have in particular humanitarian crisis with respect to unaccompanied minors. that's a crisis that's the direct consequence much policies of the obama administration. in 2011, there were roughly 7,000 unaccompanied minors that were apprehended. in 2012 that number rose to 14,000. in 2013, it rose to 24,000. in 2014, your agency is estimating it is going to be as high as 90,000.

in 2015 the administration is estimating it will rise all the way to 145,000. it is important to understand what these numbers represent. these numbers represent children. little boys and little girls that their parents are handing over. not to some noble social worker trying to help them. they are handing over to international global criminal cartels that smuggle human beings in and put these kids among other places on top of fast-moving freight trains. these are criminals who sexually assault and physically assault and who sometimes murder these children. these are little girls that are sometimes being sold into prostitution and sex slavery. mr. secretary, you testified to this committee that the increase is as a result of violence in central america. there is surely violence in

central america. if you look at the statistics, in particular, you can see where they were -- unaccompanied minors in 2011 and 2012, midway through 2012 is where the administration unilaterally brought amnesty to some 800,000 people that had been minors. so-called docket proceedings. you can see shortly after that, the numbers spike dramatically. is it really your testimony that granting amnesty to some 800,000 people who came illegally as children had no effect in causing a dramatic increase in children being handed over to international cartels to be smuggled in here illegally? >> first, it is not amnesty. it is deferred action. second, it applies to people

that came into this country as children prior to june 2007. that's seven years ago. it does not apply to anybody who comes into this country today, tomorrow, or yesterday. the earned path to citizenship contemplated in the senate bill does not apply to anybody who comes into this country today, tomorrow, yesterday. it applies to people that came into the country by year end 2011. i believe, senator, that the primary motivator for the reason -- for this spike in migration, i'm not a sociologist and not an expert, is the situations that senator durbin and others laid out in these countries. >> mr. secretary, my time has expired. with all respect, in my view, that argument is a red herring. that explains why there is an increase in central america because of the problems and challenges those nations are experiencing. but it doesn't explain the unaccompanied minors.

in 2011, 15% of the otms of the mexicans apprehended were unaccompanied minors. 2014 that number has grown to 37%. there is nothing about the violence in central america that would cause people to be handing over their children, little girls, little boys, separately, may have caused more people from central america to come here but not the kids. i will say this in closing. because my time has expired. it has been widely reported that president obama, the administration is contemplating yet another amnesty like two years ago, just a couple of months before the upcoming election. i will say to you and i will urge you to pass on to the president that i think that would be a great mistake. i think it would be contrary to rule of law. i think that granting yet another amnesty, would result in those numbers going even higher and would result in even more little girls and little boys being subjected to violence and horrific dangerous conditions

and it would be a serious mistake for us to go down that road. thank you. >> thank you, senator cruz. senator schumer. >> thank you. thank you, secretary johnson. i'm very glad you are there and you are off to a great start. i wouldn't expect anything less than a new yorker. although i hear senator menendez claims you are a new jerseyan. earlier this year, due to backlogs at uscis, it was take being a year to process the iowan 30 applications. that's where u.s. citizens petition to bring their immediate relatives from foreign countries, spouses, parents, minor children. earlier this year i sent you a letter on this issue and you did

a great job alleviate something of the dialogue. i have several cases in my office where our men and women in uniform had to wait up until a year to be reunited with their relatives. i think that it is unfair that our veterans are getting caught in the backlog. they more than anyone else deserve to be reunited with loved ones and a support system as soon as possible. so the backlogs at uscis tend to increase and did he crease depending on world events. but i think there should never be a time when veterans have to wait more than six months to reunite with your families. would you be willing to commit to creating a special process for making sure the average processing time for i-130 veterans never takes longer than six months? >> senator, i'm you a where of your interest in this issue. i do believe that we should do everything we can to make life easier for our veterans, those that served in uniform. i think we should be -- i think we should pay attention to their situation.

the six months -- i don't know whether that's feasible but i do -- >> can you work towards making it happen? >> i talked to my staff about this issue. i agree that we should work to help -- >> you agree with the congress september of expediting things for our veterans? >> yes, sir. >> good. okay. thank you. next. more parochial issue but one of great importance to the northern -- western portion of my state. the buffalo bills. they are an important -- what do they have to do with you? you will find out in a minute. the buffalo bills, servage important economic engine to the western new york community. but many of their fans are in

canada but do not come to games because the traffic traveled to buffalo through our entry on game days. in other words, normal sunday, not much traffic. but when the bills games -- there is a huge amount of traffic. yet, the staffing levels at the border do not take that into account. we have huge back locks and people stop coming because they miss the game. you have done a great job adding new agents to the ports of entry in western new york. we talked about it. you have acted on it. i thank you for that. the question is now whether with these new agents and resources, can we make it's easier for canadians to attend bills games on the eight sundays of the year in and the games are in buffalo? it would be a huge boost to western new york's economy. specifically can we do things like making sure we have premium staffing on the lanes on -- on the bridge during the three hours before the game on game days? and having created -- having dhs create a setup at the stadium during the bills games so fans