can't jail everybody, end of quote. that prison spending was reducing other doj spending and that we can't afford to have so many people in prison. so question, you served as federal prosecutor for over 25 years. do you stand by your 2010 testimony that mandatory minimum sentences are, quote, an essential law enforcement tool, end of quote, and that they quote, increase deterrence and cooperation by those involved in crime, end of quote? >> senator, i believe that mandatory minimum sentences are an important tool for prosecutors. but i also think that we have an obligation to use that tool as effectively and as efficiently as possible. i'm a career prosecutor, as i've made clear this morning. and i certainly wouldn't support anything that i believe would undermine public safety. but i also know that we have a serious fiscal reality that we are facing now. and that is that our prison population is exploding. and as a result of that,

resources that would go to prosecutors, and federal agents to be able to investigate and prosecute crimes, are being diverted to the bureau of prisons. the bureau of prisons now takes up almost two-thirds of the department's budget. that's really untenable and unsustainable. so i believe that mandatory minimum sentences are an important tool. but we -- but that we need to use that tool effectively. >> senator blumenthal? >> thanks, mr. chairman. at the outset i'd like to ask permission to include in the record a statement from senator patrick leahy, our colleague from vermont, in support of ms. yates' nomination. >> without objection. >> and i'd also like to include a number of letters, i referred to them earlier, from colleagues, law enforcement officials, officials in georgia, in support of that nomination. >> without objection those are included. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

let me just ask you about olc opinions, ms. yates. it's been a tradition common to, i think, most recent administration's that olc opinions generally are not released, is that true? >> that's certainly my understanding, senator, yes. >> thank you. let me ask you about the bureau of prisons and mandatory minimums. my understanding is also that the policies on this issue have gone back and forth. i can remember a time when everybody was against mandatory minimums. then they were adopted by many states. my own feeling is that we really need to do more research and study on what is effective in deterring wrongdoers and law breakers in this area and just use the most effective, cost effective policy and you've rightly cited the costs of incarcerating convicted criminals beyond the point where

it makes any difference to rehabilitation or deterrence. i assume you'd be open to that kind of research and study? >> absolutely, senator. while i believe mandatory minimums have a place in our criminal justice system, i believe that the most current research indicates that it is the certainty of punishment that really has the greatest deterrent effect. not necessarily the length of the sentence. >> and, in particular, you made reference to the very sizable amount of the department's budget that is spent on the bureau of prisons. my understanding is that one of the growing segments of population are actually women prisoners in the system. in fact, in danbury, connecticut, the bureau of prisons is constructing a new facility and i'm hopeful that i can follow up with you on construction of that new minimum facility in danbury, because in

november, 2013, bureau of prisons estimated that the construction of this facility would take 18 months, and the new facility would open in may of 2015. that construction has been delayed. i think in that facility and others around the country, there's a question about whether we're providing the kind of environment that makes for not only fair, but also effective incarceration, and so, i hope that you would be willing to work with me, and consult with me on that issue. >> absolutely, senator. i would look forward to that. >> on another issue, that is important i think to the administration of justice, the department opened a criminal investigation concerning the gm ignition switch and the circumstances surrounding that company's failure to disclose

the defects in the ignition switch which ultimately caused injuries and fatalities. i think the number of fatalities now is approaching 60 according to ken feinberg of the compensation fund. i hope that you will work with me and other members of the committee also in bringing that criminal investigation to a prompt and just conclusion because i think that the decisions to be made by those victims of the gm ignition switch over whether they accept the compensation fund awards will depend on the conclusion of that investigation, certainly deterrence of the kind of alleged wrongdoing that occurred, concealment, and even potentially fraud against the united states government, really depends on an effective conclusion to that investigation and i hope that you'll work with me on that investigation, as well. >> certainly.

and i appreciated your raising this with me when we had an opportunity to talk last week. and if i'm fortunate enough to be confirmed i would look forward to working with you on this issue, as well. >> let me ask you in conclusion on this first round of questions, as a newcomer to your position, not to the department of justice, let me give you the opportunity to talk about where you think your priorities will be, whether it's human trafficking, or organized crime, or national security, or terrorist threats to this country, and where you think that the resources of the department could be and should be enhanced. >> well, thank you, senator. certainly we face a number of challenges at the department of justice. and national security in keeping our country safe from acts of terrorism always is and must be our number one priority. but we have other challenges, as well. certainly, cybersecurity is a

very important issue for us. we are seeing that it impacts really the full spectrum. international security issues, critical infrastructure issues. issues with respect to private industry and our own personal privacy, as well. so cybersecurity is certainly a critically important issue for our department. there's another issue that i think that we also need to focus on now and that is really our relationship with law enforcement. i've been fortunate to be able to work with all levels of law enforcement for the 25 years that i've been a prosecutor. both state and local law enforcement officers and federal agents, and i think strengthening that relationship will be an important priority for us. i hope that i will be able to bring the perspective of the field, and assessing our priorities. because using our resources, in the most effective way possible, is a critically important priority of the department of justice. i think we also need to make sure that we are bringing that focus to our investigative agencies.

it's important that we not be generating stats that actually having an impact on the communities that we serve to make them as safe as possible. one of the things that i would like to do is to work with our law enforcement agencies to ensure that they are focused on making an impact on the safety of the communities rather than just, as i said, generating stats. >> thank you. and part of aiding local law enforcement is determining what kinds of equipment, training, really makes a difference to local law enforcement, and assessing carefully and accurately what will be of greatest assistance to them in dealing with the vast variety of challenges they face. >> that's absolutely right, senator. and, in fact, just last week, i was fortunate to have a meeting with the head of many of the local law enforcement organizations. the purpose of which was not for me to talk, which is sort of a change for a lawyer, but actually to listen to them. and to hear from them their concerns, and their priorities, and how we can work together going forward.

in the most effective way possible. >> thank you very much. my time is expired, mr. chairman. thank you. >> before i call on senator cornyn, i want to go to the agriculture committee for 15 minutes. we've got enough people here to ask questions, so would you take over according to -- till i get back? so it's my understanding, it will be cornyn, and then durbin if he comes back, and then perdue and then lee. is the way i think it works out. >> ms. yates, congratulations on your nomination. >> thank you, senator. >> and certainly have an impressive career. in public service, and have all of the qualifications to prepare you for being the deputy attorney general, and i take seriously the advice and counsel of our colleagues, senator perdue, senator isakson and

their testimonials to your public service and congressman lewis, as well. i guess the biggest problem someone in your position has when they come to washington, d.c. as a prosecutor is the politics. and the ambiguity that seems to exist too often in my view about the role of the chief law enforcement officer of the united states, the attorney general, and i would include high level appointees like you. about where your loyalties lie. and you've been very clear about your dedication of the law, and pursuit of justice, and that's very admirable. but sometimes, here at the highest levels of the department of justice, and this has happened in republican administrations and democratic administrations, because you serve at the pleasure of the president, and you're confirmed by the senate, and you, when

asked a question about the law, sometimes you get a political answer. could you just explain to me your perspective on where your loyalties will lie? given the fact you are appointed by the president, serve at his pleasure, can you tell the president no? >> well, thank you for the question, senator. because i think you have raised obviously a critically important issue, and that is the independence of the department of justice. i can tell you very simply where my loyalties lie, and that is to the people of the united states and to the constitution. that's what i've been doing for the last 25 years. during the time that i was an assistant united states attorney and as u.s. attorney, i actually specialized in public corruption prosecutions. you have to stand up to some powerful people when you bring a public corruption case. and that's what i've been doing the balance of my career. as i said, i've been doing this for a long time and am committed to the department of justice and to the cause of justice, and i'm

not going to give that up in the last two years. according to an unclassified threat assessment from the texas department of public safety, this has to do with cartels that control human smuggling, and drug trafficking, according to this unclassified threat assessment, mexican cartels control most of the human smuggling and human trafficking routes and networks in texas. the nature of the cartel's command and control of human smuggling, and human trafficking networks along the border is varied, including cartel members having direct organizational involvement and responsibility over human smuggling and human trafficking operations. as well as cartel members sanctioning and facilitating the operation of human smuggling and human trafficking organizations closed quote. do you agree that transnational criminal organizations control much of the human trafficking.

in and about the united states? >> well, it was a significant issue for me as a united states attorney and the northern district of georgia. in fact, some accounts indicate that atlanta is the number one city in the country for child sex trafficking. some rank it lower. not sure if we're one or three, but whatever it was, it was too large. we also are at the unfortunate cross roads in atlanta of another issue. that is in atlanta, we are the east coast hub for the mexican cartels. so, i had an opportunity to have to combat those of these. my experience with the cartels have been that they essentially go wherever the money is. and wherever there is a profit to be made and we know that human trafficking now is the second fastest growing illegal enterprise in the world, second only to drug trafficking, so it's not surprising that the cartels would want to be involved in human trafficking as well. >> your answer reflects what i

believe to be the fact. they go where are the money is. people, drugs, weapons, you name it and that ought to cause us a lot of concern. will you make that a priority if confirmed to this office? >> absolutely, senator. this was one of my top priorities when i was u.s. attorney in atlanta and that was ensuring that we weren't just doing the one off drug cases, but rather doing everything we could to actually disrupt and dismantle the mexican cartels and to work our way up as high as we can in the organizational structure of those cartels. >> i hope that the senate gets unstuck on a human trafficking legislation we're on and i'm optimistic that we will eventually, we'll be able to provide additional support to law enforcement and victims to help them heal and return to as normal a life as they can. since i came to the senate, i've been very engaged with my

friend, senator leahy, the ranking member on freedom of information reform and of course, the department of justice has oversight responsibility for implementation of the freedom of information act. according to a recent report in response to a request regarding the first lady's dresses, i don't know why somebody is curious about the first lady's dresses, i guess the question is is who pays for those. the responding agency blacked out the senate's quote, we live in constant fear of upsetting the white house and claimed an exemption which protects personnel and medical files. in 2009, the counsel to the president issued a nonpublicized memorandom ordering all executive departments and agencies to consult with white house counsel's office on any

foia requested documents involving quote, white house equities, closed quote. i'm not quite sure what white house equities are, but you believe it's appropriate for the white house to review foia requests that are not directed to the white house, but directed to executive branch agencies before responding? >> well, thank you for the question, senator, and i think our foia laws are in place to ensure the kind of transparency that is really the bedrock of our democracy and certainly, the department of justice is committed to ensuring that foia laws are followed, not just in the letter, but the spirit. i am not familiar with the request for the first lady's dresses and have not gotten deeply into foia litigation in the eight weeks i've been at main justice now, but i can assure you that going forward, i would be happy to work with you and other members of the committee. >> my question i think it was not who pays for them, i wasn't clear initially.

but i appreciate your commitment to work with us on this. i think there's a lot of work needs to be done at the department. and in the federal government generally about transparency, which you referred to in your opening comments and fidelity to the rule of law when it comes to freedom of information. thank you very much. good luck. >> thank you, senator. >> senator durbin. >> thanks, mr. chairman, and thanks for being here today and coming by my office. let me ask you at the outset about human trafficking and stipulate that i think senator cornyn's bill is is a good bill. we've been mired down on one aspect, hoping we can break through. you have not only dealt in some capacity with the victims of human trafficking and it strikes me that these victims, many are very, very young. that is one of the tragic aspects of this.

and most of them, if not all, are in some state of servitude because of the people controlling their lives, which leads me to a generalized question. by classic definition, the victims who are impregnated would apparently are subject to sexual assault would be victims of statutory rape in most states and involuntary sexual assault by definition in most categories. what we're trying to reach here is a question about how they would be treated if pregnant and whether they would be regarded as victims of rape. could you make any observation on that? >> in the time i've been involved in human trafficking prosecutions, which is much of my career at the u.s. attorney's office, and particularly in the last five years. some of the most meaningful work i've done is an opportunity to spend time with the victims of

these cases and actually, i'm careful oftentimes to try not to call them victims, but rather survivors because that's what they are. their courage is humbling. certainly, i'm not familiar with the details of, excuse me, each state's statutory rape laws, but in my home state of georgia, if you have sex with an underage woman, then she would be certainly, or underage girl, wouldn't be a woman, she would be a victim. but to give you a real legal answer on that, i would really need to have a better understanding of each state's laws. >> understood and fair. and that is, we are kind of tied in to this issue of rape and abortion. when many of us believe that by definition, the victim/survivors would automatically be characterized as rape victims by virtue of age or circumstances of the sexual assault. but any way, fair enough, but i won't hold you to any strict

standard on that. can i ask on this issue that's been raised. senator lee and i are co-sponsoring a bill called the smarter sensing act and we have discussed this. it was probably 1995, maybe earlier, congress established mandatory minimums and for those, we were trying to, with them, we were trying to reduce the rate of crime. we were trying to eliminate the uncertainty in variation in sentencing and generally send out a message to those who committed a crime that there was a price to be paid. the net result of it has been a dramatic increase in the number of individuals incarcerated in our federal system. charged under these mandatory minimum statutes and particularly in the category of nonviolent drug offenses. we've seen a dramatic increase. senator lee and i have

introduced a bill. we do not eliminate any mandatory minimum crime. the maximum penalty on any crime. what we try to provide is some flexibility to the sentencing court when it comes to the low end of a mandatory minimum. for a narrow category of crime. nonviolent drug offenses. and i guess my question to you is the statement raised by chairman grassley. is this going to make it more difficult in your estimation and opinion for the prosecutor to get the cooperation of the defendant or to basically see that justice is served if such a change were made? >> thank you, senator, for that question because this is an issue that i feel very strongly about. i believe that the smarter sentencing act is going to, if passed, make our country much safer and with specifically with respect to the question that you have asked about the ability for prosecutors to be able to obtain cooperation from defendants.

i'm not worried about that either and i can tell you why. in the last year, we have done research on statistics after the passage of the new department policy on the crime initiative. this is where the department is trying use mandatory sentences pp and the way to ensure those sentences are reserved for the defendants who are in most need. now, many of my colleagues and local and line ausas were concerned they wouldn't be able to get cooperation if they didn't have the minimum of a hammer hanging over their head, but statistics indicate that's not the case. because over the last year, the percentage of defendants pleading guilty in drug cases has remained the same. actually, it's gone up half a percentage as it was prior to the time that we instituted smart on crime. likewise, the percentage of drug

defendants who are cooperating in drug cases has remained the same.f5ep and as a prosecutor who was doing this before we had some of these mandatory minimums or the sentencing guidelines, i wasn't surprised because a defendant will always have an incentive to get a lower sentence. so, not only from a gut feeling did i not think that would be the case, the empirical evidence indicates that didn't have a detryment jal impact /* /* /* /* /* /* clr >> i don't want to presume when you said it would make a safer, but you noted earlier the vast expenditure of our federal resources in incarceration and the i think the average on mandatory minimums is about 11-year incarceration and so, without going too far, are you suggesting that those resources could be applied in other ways to make us safer?

>> absolutely. as i've looked at the spending of the department of justice and seeing that the bureau of prisons each and every year takes up a larger and larger percentage of the department of justice budget, that money has to come from somewhere and where it's been coming from is money for agents and prosecutors and also critically importantly money for state and law enforcement assistance for the cop on the street. those are the things that i believe keep our country safe. now, let me say there are some defendants who need those long sentences. there are some who need to be in prison for a very long time. because they are dangerous and our society needs to be protected from them, but i think we need to use those lengthy sentences in a smart way to keep our country safe. >> that's why senator lee and i have not eliminated any mandatory minimums when it comes to the maximum side nor for any crimes. we are trying to narrow this into the category least likely

to be a threat if their sentences were shortened. thank you for your testimony. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, senator durbin, and thank you for your work with me on this smarter sentencing act and your insights into that proposal. which i wholeheartedly support and am honored to be working on with senator durbin and others. first of all, miss yates, i want to congratulate you on your nomination and thank you for coming here to answer questions today~ i also want to thank kelly and quill and comer for joining you and being willing to support you in this effort. as i'm sure you've come to appreciate, the attorney general the deputy attorney general is in many ways, the functional head of the u.s. department of justice. the attorney general ultimately sets department policy about the most important matters, but the

day-to-day responsibility of carrying out those policies and overseeing the department of justice's work falls to the deputy. you and i have met a couple of times now and i've very much enjoyed our conversations. i've appreciated and been impressed with your credentials, your experience, approachable manner for what seems to be a very good judgment on a whole host of issues. i'm sure those qualities serve you well and will continue to do so if you're confirmed. i want to ask you about two areas of concern that we've discussed before. first, the broader responsibility of the department of justice to give competent, credible and independent advice and second, what you would do or have done as deputy to restore the trust and confidence of the congress and of the american

people generally in the work that's carried out by the department. on the first category, the department of justice is of course the u.s. government's legal arm. some might describe it as the federal government's internal law firm. as a member of its senior leadership and as its second highest ranking lawyer in this position, who do you think is your client? is the client the president, is it the attorney general? is it congress? who is the client? >> there's a very clear answer to that, senator, and that is the people of the united states. it's not the president. it's not the congress. it's the people of the united states. >> and so, that requires a degree of independence in a sense, doesn't it? >> it absolutely does, yes, sir. >> okay. i think that's important to remember and you know, lawyers generally always do well to

remember who their client is. and in many cases, deciding who speaks for the client can be a difficult task that becomes especially difficult when dealing with government, especially a large one. to that end, let's talk about the president's executive action on immigration. for a minute. i'm referring here to the executive action announced in november of 2014. now, before the president took that particular executive action, some 22 times prior to that, the president disclaimed any legal authority to regularize the status of individuals, immigrants here unlawfully. then came along an opinion from the office of legal counsel, part of the department of justice, explaining why a combination of maximumly exercised discretion and strained inferences from past practices made it legal for the president of the united states

not only to refuse to carry out the immigration laws against entire broad categories of individuals, but also to affirmatively issue work permits. to individuals that congress had deemed ineligible for work permits. now, i'm going to ask you about that opinion in a minute, but i want to review the landscape for a minute. when miss lynch came before a committee for her confirmation hearing a few weeks ago, she testified that she had found that opinion reasonable and i think made clear enough that she thought it was correct. since then, since that hearing was held a few weeks ago, there is something significant that has changed in that a federal district court in texas, the u.s. district court for the southern district of texas, issued a lengthy opinion in the context of a preliminary injunction rejecting the analysis and imposing an injunction against the president's action.

now, the department, of course, is now fighting that and we all have to wait and see how the fifth circuit resolves that dispute, but i want to ask you, are you familiar more or less with that opinion or at least what it does and in light of the opinion, in light of its findings, its conclusions and analysis, do you think reasonable minds can at least differ as to whether the president's conclusions were lawful? >> well, thank you for raising this issue, senator, and this is obviously an issue on which people have very strongly held views. and i think that's certainly very understandable. and it is an issue on which reasonable people can disagree. the fact of the matter is as you have pointed out, this matter is in the court's now. and as everybody here knows, the texas district court has ruled and the department of justice is

going to abide by that ruling, not just in texas, but across the country. unless and until a higher court reaches a different decision and so, this issue is now in the courts to be resolved and we will observe that ruling, whatever it turns out to be. >> okay. i appreciate hearing from you that this is an issue on which reasonable minds can reach different conclusions. and have you read the office of legal counsel memorandum that i'm describing? >> i have, yes, i'm generally familiar with it, sir. >> and i know you worked in your current position, you weren't serving as the acting deputy general at the time that was issued, but have you since formed your own legal opinion as to whether the legal analysis in that opinion was correct? >> well, as you noted, senator, since mid-january, i've been serving as the acting deputy attorney general of the department of justice and the department of justice is now

currently involved in litigation on precisely this matter. and as the acting deputy attorney general, it's really not appropriate for me to be giving my personal opinion on any matter in which the department is involved which would include this matter as well. the department's position is set forth in the pleadings and i stand by those. >> are there limits? >> yes, senator, there are. >> if a future president decided that he or she would direct all personnel within that presidential administration not to enforce any tax rate above 25%, would that strike you as an appropriate use of prosecutorial discretion? >> i think there are limits, both legal and constitutional to prosecutorial discretion and to the president's authority, but defining and drawing those lines really requires knowing all of the facts and looking at the

law, and examining that and considering that and i wouldn't be much of a lawyer if i gave you a knee jerk reaction to that. >> sure, sure, but there may be occasions if you're confirmed as the deputy attorney general when you might be serving for one reason or another as the acting attorney general and in that capacity, there might be times when you get a call from the white house saying hey, what do you think of where you might be asked to offer up your reaction. i assume your knee jerk reaction would include a healthy amount of skepticism. hey, i can reduce the tax code by executive action by saying no taxes will be collected above 25%. would you agree with that? >> well, certainly, if i were called upon to give me on the spot reaction, i would give a gut reaction as all of us have or do when confirmed with things, but before i would ever give a legal opinion on

anything, i'm a careful lawyer and i would want to look at the law and talk with folks who are experts and i would want to think about the ramifications of it and make sure i was giving a reasoned and considered opinion. >> but that sounds a little different than prosecutorial discretion, that one. >> i think that again, it doesn't sound quite like something i would think was probably a good idea, but before i could give you a legal conclusion on that, i would want to do all of the things i just described. >> thank you very much. i see my time's expired. senator purdue. >> thank you, senator lee. and thank you, miss yates, for being here this morning. i appreciate putting your family through this today, kelly and quinn and comer. i don't know what it was like for kelly and quinn growing up in a house of a top prosecutor, but the fact that they've survived is i would commend them on that. i've watched -- >> they weren't the least bit intimidated, i can tell you that. >> i'm sure. i've watched your career in georgia, being from georgia.

i've watched you go after the human traffickers, the sex offenders, the drug cartels and even the gangs, the mexican gangs we've talked about today. the ms-13 among others, but i also saw you go against white collar criminals and even elected officials, even an ex-mayor in a public corruption case in georgia and i commend you for that. in your comments, you made the comments your loyalties were the people of the u.s. and the u.s. constitution and that the deputy attorney general has to be first and last, independent and not partisan and i would second that. i would also put for the record, my observation that's exactly what you did in your role in georgia and i hope you bring that to this role in the justice department here in washington. i want to talk about the, you mentioned earlier that you would be the coo in effect of the justice department and i think that's right at a deputy attorney general. it's a $27 billion budget.

that would put you among the top probably 100, 150 top commercial organizations in the country if not the world. you've been there about three months. i think we started about the same time and have been drinking from a fire hose, but i'd love your observations about your priorities, now that you've been there and what reforms and changes would you like to make as priorities now as the coo of our justice department? >> thank you for the question and thank you for your kind introduction this morning. you're right. i've been here since mid-january, about the same time you started and i have been drinking from a fire hose, but during this time, i've tried to bring the same management skills that i had as u.s. attorney this atlanta to the department of justice. it's the same thing, but on a much larger scale. obviously. one of the things that i've tried to do there is is to make sure that we are setting goals.

i'm a big believer that you need to have strategic objectives and that's down to each and every component and employee of the department of justice having a strategy and goals they're setting. so that's something we're working on now. what are the things that we're going to proactively push forward in the department? so, as a manager, i'm trying to gather the information there and to be able to set some of those goals going forward the next two years. one of the critically important things that we do at the department of justice is to continually reassess what our great es law enforcement challenges are and to ensure we are devoting our resources to those issues and those challenges, rather than just continuing to do is same old thing we've been doing before, so i'm asking our law enforcement agents as well as our 38 components to go and do a current assessment as to what our challenges are so we can better focus our resources there going forward. i know that being a chief

operating officer and a business person is something you have experience at and so i would welcome any advice from you as to things of ways we can best manage. >> spend less money. let me follow up on, you served as a vice chair of attorney generals advisory committee in your role in georgia for several years if i remember correctly. you were involved in their smart on crime initiative. if i'm correct. can you discuss why you thought smart on crime was necessary and what your role in the design implementation of that was and why it's pertinent today? >> thank you, senator, and as a business person, it's something you could relate to. because smart on crime was really about ensuring that we were using our limited federal resources. our prosecutive resources and resources of federal prison bed space in a way that would keep our country as safe as possible. the smart on crime was designed to identify those defendants

causing the greatest havoc in our communities and to ensure our lengthy prison sentences are reserved for those defendants so we can free up the other resources we so greatly need in the area of prosecutors and in the area of investigators and in being able to provide resources to our state and local officers. having a cop on the street is one of the most important things we can do for public safety. >> let me change gears once again. you testified earlier i think in 2011, the sentencing committee on the issue of release of illegal immigrants who are in the federal criminal justice system. i think you explained the justice department's position that these individuals should be continue to be eligible for supervised release after sentencing. that was a position contrary to the commission's recommendation. can you talk about your position and the one taken by the commission? >> i believe the commission ultimately did go the other way

on that, but i think at the time, the department believed it was really important we maintain supervision in the event we had a defendant for example re-enter and re-enter illegally, that we would be able to use the tools that we need to be able to bring them immediately back into the court system. at that point. >> and one last question. with a minute left and i know this is a long standing question. in your role as deputy, you support the attorney general, obviously and your boss is the president of the united states. and when you disagree with the attorney general who's your boss and you disagree with the president, and you have to command respect from the people inside the department of justice that execute on a daily basis, to make us safer and you said safety and not statistics was your number one goal. help me understand how you'll balance those three issues relative to the ultimate objective you have of making us safer as a country. >> well, senator, throughout my career, i have made it a practice to speak my mind.

i've done that during the time that i was a line assistant. >> can we ask your husband that? >> he might like me to speak a little less to be honest with you. but i've made it a practice to speak my mind and that's something i would continue to do if i'm fortunate enough to be confirmed in this position. you're right. if i'm confirmed, i'm the number two, not the number one person. i would not be the chief policy maker, but the chief operating officer, but i still expect that my view would be solicited and even if it's not, i might give it. >> thank you for your testimony. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> so, it's up to me to decide whether i'm ready or not? >> you have a right to remain silent. >> i'm not ready.

i would actually, i'm doing this just out of respect for senator sessions and i'm completely ready, but i'd rather -- my great respect for him. >> senator franken is always ready and he's very good at timing. you can be sure of that. well, miss yates, you're going into a different world than the united states attorneys offices. i got to tell you, i've observed both over the years and you're going to need all those values you've learned appearing before federal judges every day knowing that you prosecute one person one day and another one the next and you absolutely essential that in both cases, the law was applied fairly. i feel that almost every united states attorney that has any good character understands the

pressure and the burdens to do that. the fbi director is so complimentary of you and came by even though had struggled a bit to make sure we knew that he thought you were exceptional. your background is good background. for this job. and the atlanta office has always been a good office and as the spaulding team with former attorney general griffin bell is a good firm to have been associated with, that's for sure. but it tends to be a political world at the top of the department of justice. and i guess my first question to follow up on is do you understand that in the political world, there will be people calling, demanding, pushing, insisting on things that they do not know? what they're asking for and

could indeed be corrosive of the rule of law, could diminish the respect the department of justice has, could diminish the rule of law in the united states? are you aware of that? >> you're right. i'm not from here. i have only been here for a couple of months. but i can tell you i am committed to the department of justice. i love our department. i care deeply about our mission. and i would do everything in my power to protect the integrity that is the department of justice. >> well, i understand that. and senator lee asked you about this tax situation, where the president i think i heard him say just decides that 35% tax rate's too high, he's going to say we're not going to collect more than 25%.

and you said doesn't sound like something i'd agree with. i'd say that shouldn't take you too long to say no. this isn't right. >> i agree, senator. i think what i was telling you that was my gut reaction to it, but if i'm going to be doing battle with anybody, i want to make sure i have the law and the facts and the precedent behind me to be able to give a reasoned judgment. and if i'm in a discussion where people have different views, i want to make sure i've got what i need to back up my views. >> well, you have to watch out because people will be asking you to do things, you just need to say no about. do you think the attorney general has a responsibility to say no to the president if he asks for something that's improper? a lot of people have defended the lynch nomination, for example, by saying well, he

appoints somebody who's going to execute his views. what's wrong with that? but if the views a president wants to execute are unlawful, should the attorney general or deputy attorney general say no? >> senator, i believe that the attorney general or the deputy attorney general has an obligation to follow the law and the constitution and to give their independent legal advice to the president. >> does the office of legal counsel, which makes many of these opinions that impact policy, does it report through the deputy's office or directly to the attorney general? >> well, when you look at the office of legal counsel reports to the deputy's office, it's important that the office of legal counsel be independent because federal agencies across our government regularly come to the office seeking advice and guidance about what is permissible and what isn't. and it's critically important

that the olc advice be just that and that it not be advocacy. >> well, that's true. and like any ceo, where the law firm, sometimes, the lawyers have to tell the ceos, mr. ceo, don't do that. we'll get us sued. it's going to be in violation of the law. you'll regret it. please. no matter how headstrong they might be, do you feel like that's the duty of the attorney general's office? >> i do. to fairly and impartially evaluate the law and provide the president and administration with impartial legal advice. >> and justice in a fraud case. or any other drug case you might have prosecuted excellently over the years, immigration law is important to be consistently and effectively enforced. should it not? >> i believe that all of our laws should be consistently and

effectively enforced and within the confines of the constitution. >> well, that's a good answer, but they're not. so you're taking over as deputy to the attorney general of the united states of america and we have a just a collapse of integrity in immigration enforcement. and the president's position on executive amnesty just accelerates the collapse of integrity resulting this for example the lowest morale in the department of homeland security officers who enforce the law of any department in the entire government. they've even sued their supervisors because they're being told to not follow their oath, to enforce the law, but to carry out political policies. there's a lawsuit over that. they sued their bosses over that. i think they're correct. i remember john ashcroft,

attorney general for bush, he's been celebrated -- -when he was in the hospital, they tried to get him to sign a document that dealt with terrorism that he thought went too far, he refused to do so. so, i hope that you feel free to say no. in the character of john ashcroft and others who said no to president nixon on certain issues. let me just ask you briefly, this question. i'd like to have a clear answer if i could. do you think that the president's executive action announced on november 20th is legal and constitutional? can you give us a yes or no answer? >> since mid-january, i've been serving as the deputy attorney general of the department of justice. and the department of justice is currently litigating this matter. and so, since i'm the acting deputy attorney general of the department of justice when it's litigating this, it's really not appropriate for me to give you

my personal opinion about this matter or any other matter that the department of justice is litigating. >> only thing i care about is your official position. so, you're defending the president's action in court, isn't that correct? >> the department of justice has is. you're defending the president's action in court. >> the justice department has filed pleadings on that decision and i stand by those pleadings. >> thank you. >> thank you very much mr. chairman and thank you very much, ms. yates. i enjoyed the visit we had and i know one of the things that senator cornyn asked you about that the two of us have been working on together very hard is the trafficking issue and he asked you about some of the border issues and i actually went down there with cindy mccain on this issue of trafficking and had a very good visit about that last year but i thought i would just ask you about what you have done in the northern district of georgia to address trafficking in your former job and how you see it going forward domestically with the department of justice. >> well, as we've talked about

some here this morning human trafficking is one of the most pressing criminal justice issues that we're facing in our department and in our country right now. when i became u.s. attorney five years ago i highlighted human trafficking as being an area that we were going to prioritize resources. we were one of the first offices in the country to form an act team which is essentially a task force of federal agencies and prosecutors as well as state and local prosecutors to go after as aggressively as we possibly could, the traffickers and those a activitying the traffickers with these young women and children. as important and as aggressive as enforcement is, though that s loan is not enough. one of the first thingis did was to hold a human trafficking summit and to ensure that we were first educating our community about what's going on within their very neighborhoods. that's important for a couple of reasons and not just general public education but because it's also important that we

educate people about the signs of human trafficking so that when they see someone that they think will be in that position that they'll alert law enforcement. a third thing that we did was to train law enforcement in georgia about, again, recognizing the signs of human trafficking. it's oftentimes the local street cop who is most likely to encounter the trafficking victim, and they really didn't know what to be looking for and oftentimes they looked at these young women and children as willing prostitutes as opposed to trafficking victims. so we engaged in some very intense training so that they would recognize those signs and in fact just a couple of weeks after our first trainings, a local law enforcement officer pulled over a car on the interstate and there was a man and a teenage girl there that didn't feel quite right to him based on the training that he'd received and he did what he was trained to do and that was to sprit the two of them and when he did he learned from this young girl that she had been

trafficked for two years since she was 14 years old and she had been praying to be rescued. i say that not to pat us on the back and do the training, but rather to highlight how important it is that we do more than just focus on enforcement that we need to educate and train, as well. >> exactly. >> i appreciate that and we're hopeful we'll reach some kind of agreement and be able to help with some funding as well as the safe harbor bill that i'm leading to pass through this committee unanimously a few weeks ago that gives guidance and incentive for the state. the civil rights bill this marks the 50th anniversary and so many people gathered in selma. i know senator sessions was there and another half a century later we've made tremendous progress in ensuring the voting right, but i've been disappointed that we have been able to move forward on the amendments voting act and there

are republicans co-sponsoring in the house. what are your plans to make sure the justice department remains committed to protecting the right to vote? >>ist privileged to be in selma for the anniversary, and i think congressman lewis' presence here earlier today is a powerful reminder of the sacrifices that he and fellow citizens have made to make sure that everyone has the right to vote. i can tell you that if i am confirmed as deputy attorney general, i believe it is my responsibility to do everything i can to safeguard that precious right to vote. indeed, i think it's the responsibility of all citizens to do everything they can to safeguard the right to vote of their fellow citizens. >> thank you. i have questions that i'll put on the record and senator lee and the antitrust subcommittee and the ranking member and we care a lot about that. i think you and i briefly talked about the metal theft issue and i think i'll end with synthetic drugs and something that the chairman and i have worked on along with senator schumer.

they continue to be a big problem across the country and we made headway and we passed bills to reclassify some of the substances that were very helpful, actually in a major case that the u.s. attorney's office successfully won in minnesota, but part of the problem here is that sellers of these drugs have managed to find loopholes in the law. they simply make a minor change to the molecular compound and slap a not for human consumption label on the drug and i've worked with bipartisan support over the past several years to help close those loopholes dealing with these not for consumption labels. it's necessary for law enforcement to be able to successfully prosecute these cases where they're working on a dea and our work is not done, mr. chairman, on these issues and i know senator feinstein is interested, but could you talk about the problem of trying to go after those cases with the not for consumption labels? >> thank you senator, for your work on that and for your

interest on this issue because synthetic drugs are a real danger particularly for our youth. they are incredibly deadly and in fact, this has been a real problem in the state of georgia in an area where we've emphasized the public education as well as prosecution. you're also absolutely right that they just keep changing up the chemical structure and so for federal prosecutions we've had to use the analog statute. the analog statute is very difficult and convoluted. >> that's what we're trying to make changes to. >> it makes it essentially a battle of chemistry experts which you can talk about it as compelling as these cases are, the jury's eyes are glazing over as they're hearing the chemistry. and finding chemical experts and paying for them mp it can become a science class where you have individuals oftentimes teenagers who have died as a result of these drugs and we are very

grateful to you for your leadership on this issue and think that this is both as so many areas are in our criminal justice area. it's a criminal justice issue, but this is a public health issue, as well. >> thank you very much. i appreciate it. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you senator franken? >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> first of all congratulations on your nomination. >> thank you. >> during your short time as acting deputy attorney general you and i have had occasion to speak on a number of occasions and on some issues that i care about. i would like to thank you for taking those concerns to heart and working with my office to see that they're addressed. we also met in my office earlier about the nomination earlier this month that i'm impressed by your grasp of the issues and your commitment to enforcing the law. you and i have spoken twice about the issue of terrorist recruitment.

it's an issue that i and senator klobuchar have been very focused on because we've seen it happening in minnesota for some time starting before i came to office first with al shabab and more recently with isil. i've pressed the fbi director and others publicly on the issue over the years and it's something that i and senator klobuchar will continue to press the doj on. last september we urged the department to make sure it's focusing its resources on countering violent extremism in the united states and places where those efforts are needed most and we were pleased to see that minnesota was chosen as one of those sites for the new doj pilot program on that. we've been in touch with law enforcement as well as the local community of minnesota on an

ongoing basis and i'll continue with senator klobuchar, the implementation of the program and we'll keep pressing the administration to make sure both the state is getting the resources it needs and the affected communities are fully engaged. the real cooperation with the community and the responsiveness of their concern is essential for the program's success. i understand you've been in communication with annie lugar our u.s. attorney there about the need for the program to start as soon as possible. we have some real momentum. when we had the summit at the white house i thought our pilot program showed that it was in motion. will you commit to working with us to make sure that this happens so that we can be sure that our efforts to counter violent extremism are effective and do you have any thoughts on

how to improve or expand upon the pilot program? >> yes. >> thank you for the question, senator, and thank you for meeting with me and giving me an opportunity to talk with you on a couple of occasions now about these issues. >> certainly countering violent extremism has always been important, but even more so now. we've seen a level of sophistication from isil that really demands a comprehensive response and it can't just be a law enforcement response. it has to be a response in coordination with our communities and that's what these pilot programs are designed to do. when you and i had an opportunity to speak minneapolis was at the top of the list about the effectiveness of the program and the comprehensive approach being taken there and partnership between law enforcement and the communities. this is crime pretension and it is the most essential crime prevention that we can be doing and so the department is

absolutely committed to working with you and with all ensuring this that we are doing this as effectively as possible. >> and that we'll get the resources we need without delay so that the momentum that it will continue. >> i was at the same conference as well, and had an opportunity to not just hear from various folks in the different cities who were engaged in this but to feel the energy in the room. there was an urgency about this and i agree that the resources will be critical to being with you, as well. >> thank you. >> i want to talk about mental health in law enforcement. for years, public officials have been concerned about our nations' overflowing prison system and the world population of 25% of its inmates, and i think one of the biggest problems that we've used the

criminal justice system as a well-functioning mental health system and the use of solitary confinement and lack of adequate mental health resources are part of the vicious cycle in our prisons and it's a cycle that especially poor individuals and those that have been unable to afford or access mental health services are likely to get caught up in and with devastating consequences and this is whyi i will be reintroducing my bill on criminal justice and mental health very soon called the comprehensive justice and mental health act and make smart investments in law enforcement training and critical intervention training, treatment and counseling corrections-based programs and mental health and veterans courts. my question is will you work with me on these efforts and what do you think you can do as deputy attorney general to promote a positive approach to

dealing with mental health in our criminal justice system. >> well, thank you, senator. i would look forward to working with you on this. this is one of the most challenging issues that we have in the department of justice now. >> within the last couple of years there's been a push to veterans treatment as an issue that you talked about there. this is something that u.s. attorneys across the country are now exploring and certainly that's something, i believe, as deputy attorney general that i can encourage those types of courts, as well. >> this act would fund veterans treatment courts and mental health courts where the prosecutor and the arresting officer, the defense attorney and the judge all agree that this person does not belong in the criminal justice system. it may be in the case of a drug court, someone who is medicating a mental illness and certainly

our men and women who came back from iraq and afghanistan and have been doing that to a great degree and they deserve to not be put in prison, but to have the option to be diverted into a treatment program. >> yes. i would look forward to working with you on that, senator. >> my time, i'll submit a couple of questions for the record. thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. welcome, miss yates. good to have you here. congratulations on your nomination. i look forward to working with you as a refugee of the department of justice. i know what an absolutely essential role the deputy attorney general, the dag, has in the operations of the department. our chairman, senator grassley and i will be working together

on the reauthorization of the juvenile justice bill and i know that's an important area to the department and we look forward to working with you to enable that bill to move forward and get passed into law and it's been many years since what is effective and what isn't since then. and there are bipartisan effects that we can have through this legislation, and i want to thank the chairman for taking the leadership role in this reauthorization. it's obviously significant when a chairman is willing to do that. so, thank you, sir. we've talked in the hearing quite a bit about sentencing reform. i am obviously very involved with that with senator cornyn on the re-entry side of the

discussion and we hope that our bill is a vehicle that can move forward and perhaps get other elements added into a comprehensive package and the recovery that's less immediately doj's business but we do have it in this and it's a very related issue, put it that way, and i hope that we can get your support in working through any issues that come up in the context of addiction recovery. there was a school of thought for a while that drug use was a moral failing and an evil and that the best way to get after it was to punish it in a whole

variety of ways including creating a whole raft of collateral consequences that ensue if you have a drug conviction. there are hundreds of these laws that have been put all over the place, and i think upon more mature reflection we've seen that treatment works recovery works and when somebody is on a path to recovery you're really not helping them or anybody else by saying you can't work in schools. you can't get a college loan. you can't do this and can't do that or the other. so i hope you'll work with us on that and i would like to hear about your role in moving from a more treatment-based response to addiction and away from a more incarcerated and impugn tiff response. >> thank you for your work on this and for your question. we certainly have seen in states across the country red states and blue states that have taken

more creative approaches to addressing criminal justice and particularly drug use issues. we see in the criminal justice system that drug addiction does fuel many crimes and i look at this as a form of crime prevention, of trying to address an addiction issue to ensure that that person has a path forward and to ensure that others then are not victimized. when they commit crimes that are driven in part, at least by their drug addiction. i would look forward to working with you and others on that matter. >> good. the last topic i wanted to address with you is cybersecurity. cybersecurity has a lot of different elements to it. it has a national security element. obviously, there's considerable capacity for sabotage against the electric grid and other essential elements of our

infrastructure. there is a huge flow of intellectual property that is stolen out of people's computers and i think the vast majority of it probably ends up in china where they have a policy of trying to steal american intellectual property for american reasons so they can compete with us without having to pay to license the technology and there's enormous amounts of financial crime and not just around america but around the world. hugely lucrative for these criminals and then their privacy concerns obviously, when your social security information is being hacked, stolen and sold on a website so that somebody can open up a credit card in your name and that kind of stuff. so i think it's a very big deal, and i think we need to be deliberating what our law

enforcement response to it should look like and i notice that it is basically a subset of the fbi's responsibilities with secret service and other agencies having a piece of it. that does not seem particularly thoughtfully organized. i note that cyber is probably a greater risk to our country now than narcotics trafficking and alcohol, tobacco firearms and explosives and yet we have entire agencies dedicated to those and no agency specifically dedicated to cyber. i note that when the department of justice the cyber responsibility is divided into the criminal division and the national security division, and i note that just about every six months there is a new iteration of a structure with dealing with cyber that emerges from the department. so clearly, we have a work in

progress, but i would like to ask you if you would commit to working with us and with omb. we're bringing omb to these conversations because i know how awkward it is for an executive agency to have a conversation about budget to have the omb keepers present in the room and they get quite cross about that if they're not there. to have a conversation in the out years what should our cyber law enforcement structure look like? i don't think we're there yet. i don't know if you think we're there yet, but i certainly think it's a conversation worth having and i would like to hear your thoughts. >> well. thank you, senator. you have touched on one of the most critical challenges that faces the department of justice and the law enforcement community and the law enforcement intelligence community now. you rightly pointed out that it touches every aspect of our lives and there is certainly great work being done to attempt to coordinate our efforts in the

area, both on the national security side and on the criminal side, but i think that you're right. that we need to step back and try to think about how we can structure ourselves in a way that would be most efficient going forward. this is an area too, and contrast to a lot of other criminal justice challenges that is evolving and changing every day and changing rapidly, and i think it's incumbent upon us not to just keep up on it and try to project where we're going to be five, ten, 20 years from now and to be structured in a way that we will be able to adequately respond. >> thank you chairman, and i look forward to the conversations of omb, doj and the members of this committee to look forward and make sure we're set up properly to deal with this threat. thank you, chairman. >> i have two or three questions and we have a vote at noon and i think both i and senator blumenthal will be able to finish our questioning. i would ask if you would finish up the meeting after i go. is that okay? >> that's fine.

>> okay, but before i ask the questions, just to thank you for your appearance today and members couldn't be here or even in my case elle we'll have some questions for in-writing and people will have a few days to submit those questions and we would like to have those back before you go on your agenda and we'll be able to do that. and the few days i was talking about is the record will stay open for one week. i have a question dealing with bhifl blowers. this may have been something we discussed privately. earlier we held a hearing walking into the regulations that were supposed to protect fbi whistleblowers and the justice department government accountability office have both published reports that many fbi whistleblower cases are on

technicality because the whistle-blower reported wrongdoing to quote, unquote the wrong person. do you think the system is encouraged to protect whistle blowing to the fbi and in regard to the wrong person, why would aren't it be all right to have protected disclosure if made to a direct supervisor? >> thank you, senator. first, let me thank you for the honor of appearing here before you today, and i want to thank you for your work with respect to whistle-blower protections. this is something that's been a priority for you and you've been at this for a very long time and as a u.s. attorney who prosecuted false claims cases for example, i know how important whistle blowers are. they help to root out fraud and corruption and malfeasance and they're critical, and i will tell you in my role as the chief operating officer of the department, i also think that they will play a critical role

for me in helping to identify problems within our own organization so that we can operate as efficiently and fairly as we are charged with doing. i have not yet seen this report. i'm looking forward to reviewing that report and in determining what actions need to be taken that whistle blowers will have the kind of protection that they need to be able to come forward. >> i think you answered my next question just now. >> that's a relief. >> okay because it was about that report. again, i would suggest to you, but your comment whether or not doj regulations should be amended to clearly protect fbi employee disclosures to congress and if you don't think so why? >> senator i've not had an opportunity to look at that specific issue. i can tell you i certainly believe that whistle blowers

need to be protected and that's important to be able to feel comfortable to come forward and if there are revisions to be made i need to look at those and to work with you to make those revisions and i've not had the opportunity to look at that specific provision to be able to give you a reason or knowledgeable answer on that? >> instead of two questions along this line that i was going to finish my line of questioning on this issue, let me suggest to you that the department of justice should make sure that whistle blowers aren't sanctioned for violating gag orders orders, and gag orders are used to thwart oversight of whistle-blower cases and there ought to at least be an exception in any gag order for disclosures to the congress and then my final admonition would

be whether you would review that before you answer my written questions. >> i would certainly be happy to review that report yes senator. >> thank you. this will help you maybe give thorough answers to the questions that i just gave. this would have to be my last issue. in the last two months the inspector general has notified congress that the fbi impeded his access to records four separate times as part of four separate i.g. rewards. the delay is due to the fbi's desire to review the materials first and then obtain permission to disclose from the attorney general or from you in your deputy position. one of the delays involved the i.g.'s review of two fbi whistle-blower complaints. how is it appropriate for the fbi to decide -- pardon me. how is it appropriate for the fbi to decide which documents

they will produce to independent investigators looking into whether the whistle-blower retaliated against the fbi. we're talking about the power of the inspector general. >> thank you senator. i believe the inspector general plays a very critical role at the department of justice. again, in helping us to identify misconduct or malfeasance or waste, fraud and abuse and that was one of the first thingis did when i became acting attorney general. he and i have known each other for a long time. we were public corruption chiefs in the southern district of new york and i in atlanta years ago and have known each other for a long time and i talked with him about this issue that you have described here. my understanding of this issue is an issue that relates to how certain documents that are protected by the grand jury secrecy privilege or are protected pursuant to wiretap

orders are reviewed and produced to the ig. it's my understanding that they've never been withheld but i believe they needed to do a review of those documents and go through a particular process before they could be provided to the inspector general. >> despite the fact they've always been provided i understand, and i get that he needs to get those documents quickly and so for the last few weeks i've been working with folks in the department of justice to try to come up with a procedure that will expedite our ability to be able to provide those documents very quickly to the inspector general. if that is not satisfactory to him we would be happy to work with you and other members of congress on any legislation if it's needed to be able to make sure that we can comply with the law and yet be able to get r r.i.g. the documents that he needs as quickly as possible. [ inaudible ]

>> i think senator blumenthal for finishing the meeting. >> i'm going to finish it right now because i don't have additional questions. i want to thank miss yates and her family and thank you for your public service and your willingness to undertake this very, very important responsibility and for your excellent testimony today. thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman and senator blumenthal, it's been a privilege. thank you. >> meeting is adjourned.

congress is busy today trying to wrap up legislative

work before heading out for a two-week spring recess. the house earlier passed a bipartisan bill known as the doc fix. that changes the medicare payment formula to doctors. member his passed 17 temporary measures before today. the legislation also reauthorizes the children's health insurance program known as c.h.i.p. for two years. yesterday the house approved the 2016 republican budget plan and today the senate continues working on its version of the budget plan with votes on per than 60 amendments possible throughout the day and overnight. they'll also work on that doc fix legislation that the house passed. a reminder that you can watch live coverage of the house on c-span and the senate on c-span2. >> here are some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks. on c-span2's book tv, saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern on

"afterwards," author peter wollison, that it caused the 2008 financial crisis and it could happen again. jeffrey sacks on poverty political corruption and environmental decay. and saturday at 10:30 eastern on c-span3, a discussion on the last major speeches of abraham lincoln and martin luther king, jr. sunday afternoon at 4:00 on "real america," the "meet the press" interview with martin luther king, jr. let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. call us the 202-626-3400. email us at comments@cspan.org or send us a tweet at c-span #comments. >> like us on facebook, follow us on twitter.

next, customs and border protection gil curlkowski. he touched on topics such as modernization efforts and protecting the global supply chain, help facilitate trade safely and border protection along america's northern and southern borders with canada and mexico. >> i'm the senior vice president for national security and emergency preparedness here at the u.s. chamber. we are so glad that you could join us here today and the u.s. chamber is very glad to welcome back, u.s. customs commissioner gil curlkowski on trade. as he begins his second year on cbp, we thought it was the perfect time to address the committee and give an overview of what's coming up. >> the chamber supports protecting national security objectives while promoting economic prosperity. we see ourselves as a partner in

their mission. businesses are linked together through a web of efficient supply chains. u.s. businesses rely on those supply chains to access international consumers as well as compete in the global marketplace. improvements that address cross-border friction smooth the flow of trade and enhance the competitiveness of all of the companies. we at the chamber will continue to advance priorities that continue to improve the global supply chains and this advocacy will improve policy and regulatory reform and pursuing legislation on the hill and promoting, meaningful commitments from the trade partners to advanced global customs modernization. as we move forward with trade promotion authority, we must have trade enforcement act or customs modernization. as you know this legislation takes aggressive action to address checkpoints at our borders, lower the transaction costs of trade and provide needed resources for trade

facilitation customs modernization and the property right. as it enters its second year the chamber will continue to engage dhs and the interagency to ensure the delivery of a commercial meaningful single window that meets the white house's 2016 deadline. as the facilitation agreement advances, the chamber is committed to a public/private partnership that ensures the meaningful implementation and we look forward to working with cbp to modernize customs proceeddures by cutting red tape and bureaucracy in the global borders. with that said, we have a partnership with commissioner curlkowski with his team and we look forward to working together on shared priorities on modernizing the 21st century trade. it is now truly my pleasure to introduce commissioner

curlkowski. he was nominated by president obama and sworn in march 7, 2014, as commissioner, taking the helm of the 60,000 employee agency with a budget of $12.4 billion. as commissioner, he leads the largest federal law enforcement agency and second largest revenue collecting source in the federal government. the commissioner brings nearly four decades of law enforcement and drug policy experience to the office of the commissioner. previously, he served in such distinguished positions as director of the white house office of national drug policy and police commissioner in buffalo, new york, and the majority of his law enforcement career was spent with the st. petersburg police department. he has received numerous awards and recognition for his leadership innovation and community service. thank you for your lifetime of service to our great country. please give a warm welcome to commissioner curlkowski. [ applause ]

good morning, everybody. thank you very much for the very warm welcome. it's always a pleasure to come to the chamber. it's always a great honor the chamber and all of its partners with cbp and on the drug-free workplace serving as drug policy adviser. >> touch. i appreciate the time to be with you today since i've had this job and during my confirmation process had the opportunity to get to know you and get to understand a lot of these issues and talk about them quite a bit, and i'd also like to thank the people that are attending vie at webinar. i'm sure there are people in florida that have nice tans that are busy watching this also. the chamber is absolutely vital

to our nation's economic health and as champions of american business you helped, the chamber helps our industries compete on the global playing field and i believe that another player in this is the united states customs and border protection. we play a critical role in the effort and the success of our mission ensuring border security while facilitating lawful trade and travel is integral to america's global competitiveness. on a typical day and many of you already know these statistics that i wouldn't be a good fit if i didn't repeat some of them to you. the typical day cbp processes more than 1 million people screens more than 70000 truck rail and sea cargo containers at our 328 ports of entry processing $4.4 billion in exports and $6.8 billion in imports. trade and travel facilitation are balanced with the strong

commitment to a seamless border security and it makes our mission difficult, but it also means that we have to have good collaboration and good communication and good partners and that certainly includes every one of you that are here today. last may when i had a chance to speak here at the chamber i barely had two months in office and so some people were wondering how does someone with a law enforcement strong law enforcement background for many, many years how are you going to adapt to this trade and travel issue and how will you make sure that you're paying attention to the economic security along with the border security and how are you going to navigate the incredible complexities of trade. >> after all issues like supply chain security and cargo pre-inspection mutual recognition arrangements and they all have their own special language and in cbp, i think we have the most acronyms and i think we're competing with the

department of defense for the most acronyms. it's a different world, and some might say that it can be for me particularly, it was a bit more opaque than the law enforcement lingo of narcotics and smuggling and some of the crime issues that cbp deals with but in my first year as commissioner i've seen first hand, and i've traveled all over the united states and frankly all over the world. i've gotten to see firsthand how integral our mission is to the nation's economic health and vitality and the safety and security of that global supply chain. in 2014 we cleared $2.5 trillion in imports $1.6 trillion in exports. we process 26 million cargo containers and that was an increase of 4% over 2013 anda everyone in this room and everyone watching clearly knows those increases not only in trade, but those increases in

travel are something that we're certainly seeing in this fiscal year also. seeing that first hand and value at the ports provided a greater understanding of the complexity of the trade process and how they can present some real significant challenges for you, for those of you that are in global business. we enforce laws for 50 federal agencies and we have equities and they all have equities in the trade process. hundreds of different types of forms and many more akroncronyms that are required to import and export goods. the system is and can be time consuming and it can be costly and that's not only for government, but for all of you, as well. that's why cbp has really focused on scream lining and mod earn ize earnizing our process. we're indebted to people who worked and have been longtime colleagues such as algina at cbp and for the work that they did and then to see them transform

or go to work in the private sector is only of great benefit to both parties. cbp has to meet this international trade that has predicted this growth and trade that's predicted in the next few years. i want to share with you some of the progress we've made, and i want to talk with you about some of the things that we've charted for the future. so first of all, it was filling a number of big positions over the course since secretary johnson has been in office not quite two years. it was very clear to him that there were far too many acting positions in the department of homeland security and they made real effort in getting people confirmed through the united states senate and that's also been true for cbp. prior to my confirmation we had a number of acting positions including acting positions within -- as commissioner of customs and border protection and those people did an

outstanding job. i really stand on their shoulders whether allen burrson or tom winkowski or david aguilar, they did an incredible job, but as all of us know in this room, it's helpful to have the good housekeeping seal of the united states senate. so being the first confirmed commissioner in the obama administration, i think, is helpful, but it also gave me the opportunity to remove a number of acting titles away from people. so many of you had a chance to participate and congratulate kevin mclean is no longer the acting commissioner but the acting deputy commissioner. i was happy to appoint the assistant commissioner of the trade and sandra bell is the deputy and todd owen coming from the port of los angeles as the assistant commissioner for field operations and a strock partner with john wagner as the deputy

and mitch denucci with many years of experience in the field with the cargo and conveyance security. all of these people are true experts and innovators in the mission and they're a tremendous asset not only to cbp and the dhs and to the nation's economy and all of you. maria luisa boys who heads it, and the trade ombudsman and the additional staff that i put in place in my office right down the hall to directly connect with me when it comes to issues that are of concern to you and they work with me on a daily basis to make sure that i understand and recognize and live up to the promises that i've made regarding these priorities. >> i'm pleased to announce here today, though, that as we made promotions we create vacancies with that and there is no single area that is more important than making sure that we deliver it

on time and that it operates well and that's in the ace program and steve hillsson is the cbp for the initiative and i hope you can give steve a round ever applause for taking this on. [ applause ]o applause for taking this on. [ applause ]f applause for taking this on. [ applause ] >> steve will coordinate that role and he's the primary point of contact for cbp participation in all of our u.s. government activities relating to the single window and that includes his work with the border interagency executive council and the trade data system board and community stakeholders. we should be paying you more money, obviously. i could go on but actually -- there's a lot. speaking of the single window and the transformation strategy, and the import/export processing system and the environmental

commercial environment. you clearly recognize what a huge shift this is moving from these paper-based and facts and original signatures and a number of questions that perhaps in this day and age aren't as necessary to be asked, but because we had always done it that way, we always continue to do it that way. we've moved to a faster, more modernized and cost effective electronic submissions. >> as we close in on key milestones and i can never give a speech that i can have the key milestones on may 1st and november 1st of this year and 2016, all key dates that you're well aware of cbp continues to develop, test and deploy capabilities that are designed to transform cargo processing. many of you know ace is the core of the executive order that was signed by president obama in 2013. so the december 2016 deadline for the completion of the

automated single window would streamline government. cbp is stream heading this, and it will review agency that respond to cargo movement and speed the cargo process. we're working closely with all of the federal partners including the epa, the food safety and inspection service and many others to ensure that ace is equipped to meet their requirements because we have to be a good steward and we have to be a good partner with them and the window is completed to serve your needs and to simplify international business. an area that i'm really excited about is the ebond area and our cf ojaio cfo jay williamson is here and it's pretty exciting. e-bond processing in ace, one of the most important modernization efforts in ace and it is a tremendous benefit to the cbp and to the filers, customs

importers and et cetera. >> when filers electronically transmit a bond to cbp they get a positive response within 10 to 15 seconds. before, it was four to five days. so you can begin to understand the magnitude of this change and its effect on the supply chain. they've continued to identify this benefit and today more than 90% of the cbp bond market is submitted electronically and that's really exciting news. it's good for us and good for business. >> another key development are our center of excellence and expertise. and the senators are transforming the way we operate by consolidating the industry's processing under the authority of one center. so instead of scattering them throughout hundreds of ports of entry and perhaps getting different answers, these benefit everyone and they improve the ability to identify high-risk

cargo and impor takes. they increase consistency and predictability for the industry and if i've heard one set of watch words over and over from you all for quite some time, it's about the importance of consistency and predictability. you're making your business decisions, your budgets and hiring and on and on and on. you want to make sure that we're going to be in the same position talking and with the same set of talking points and moving in the same direction so that as you make these investments that you're leaving up to it too. we have cbps ten cents as of may 28 are managing their post and specific areas. electronics in los angeles, pharmaceuticals in new york, petroleum, natural gas and minerals and houston and we look forward to having the other virtual centers be able to live

up to the full functionality as well. trusted trader. we're all familiar with trusted trader programs and they've been a key focus of ours for some time and we're unifying our customs trade partnership against terrorism and the importer self-ssment. i've heard repeatedly from people in this room and people that are watching that it's important for us to make sure that if someone goes and an organization goes to the extra effort and the time to be thoroughly vetted to become a member of ctpat that they're actually experiencing those benefits. we needed to and are working hard to do a better job of making sure that those benefits are, one transparent and easily accessible and understood by the people that have gone for the extra trouble. >> whether it's being first in line, whether it's not having cargo held up as long because you've gone through those things to make sure that we understand and the obligations that we have

because you've gone to that extra effort and we appreciate that. the trusted trailer program and those worldwide programs being implemented by other countries and frankly they're being implemented by the other countries with our help and our assistance assistance. our over 800 people overseas and the work we're doing overseas is not just about protecting the united states. it's also about making sure that by pushing those borders out and giving people the information and the help and letting them experience, one, the successes that we've had in implementing these program, but also two, making sure that they understand that in a very open and transparent way we can tell them about things that we've tried or worked on and they vrpt been quite as successful. it saves them time and saves mistakes and frankly it just adds to the trusted relationship when you are not only willing to add, and these are all things

that we've done at cbp and here's what we're able to do to be helpful and here are the mistakes that we've made or things that haven't worked out as well and we can save them time and we can save them effort and that's what makes a trusted partner when it comes to these issues. so we're bringing them together along with us and in designing the program we're communicating with the trade community to build a program of security and compliance requirements that's really a value add for them and for us. cargo security, there are some people here that are just intimately intimately familiar with acas or the air cargo screening program and shows our collaboration with the private sector and other law enforcement agencies really enhances our enforcement in targeting capabilities and of course, as many of us know, acas was launched in the wake of a true terrorist threat. the explosives that were hidden in printer cartridges and printer toner cartridges and

intercepted and expressed mail shipments from yemen that were destined for the united states in 2010. as the national targeting center and cbp and the transportation security jointly target and high risk before it is loaded on a u.s.-bound aircraft. an industry has recognized the value of the program improving national securityin and teg riddy of the supply chain and prevents major business disruption. last year, industry participation and acas grew by 15%. there are now 51 participants. we need to continue to collaborate and work together. the things that i've described here as the centers and the trusted trader acas underscore our commitment of working with stakeholders and to modernize how we do business. coac is something that we are so proud of. the commercial operations, advisory committee is critical.

it comprises a broad array of private sector representatives and each bringing an incredible depth of expertise in customs processes and the global supply chain and other fields that can inform and affect how we operate and the parameters for the single windows were vetted and subjected to care for review and validation both within cbp and the inner agency, as we like to say and also within the broader trade community. coac is a key to that process and it is an invaluable asset to cbp and it is an invaluable asset to me. i want to announce the selection of the new members of coac and some of them are here, but cynthia allen of dhl global forwarding, brenda barnes of the george s. bush and company and hida bra ashgsa hidabray lisa gelsemino, and

alexandra latham of costco and amy magnus of an derringer, and adam adam salerno. michael white international and air transport association and michael young, orient overseas container line and they are going to be joined by eight reappointed members and david barry of swift transportation. scott boyer of kraft foods and brandon freed of air forward association. seuss soona haggar of abbott laboratories, and vincent aicap ella, and julianne parks and kevin parnell of microsoft. what a strong and diverse team, internationally type of business. everything that you want when you're thinking through these really complex issues and the amount of time and effort that they spend and the fact that they have such great support from their organizations and

their companies is really unbelievable, incredibley helpful to us and i look forward to continuing to work with them and the inner agency collaboration agency and we work closely with treasury and tim scud could not be a better partner with us in these areas and we work closely with the border interagency executive counsel and something that deputy secretary may oshgllorca states very seriously and it's a true commitment by the inner agency at the highest level to make sure that people are involved in all of these things brings together the senior leaders that import and export processes throughout the united states government and we have key leadership roles in the group as it examines and makes decisions about risks, how we use information to move cargo collect revenue and force health and safety laws.

all of these discussions are informed by the advice from industry to improve the supply chain process and to reduce barriers for trade and the type of collaboration is critical. for example, during the five years that i served as president obama's drug policy adviser, i had a good, strong wonderful working relationship with the fda. that was over the prescription drug and opioid abuse issues that people are familiar about with the attention and publicity that it's gotten and we had to have that working relationship with the fda and working with dr. hamburg as the fda commissioner, i continued that on when i got the job here at cbp and thanks to that relationship we have a cbp-fda working group that is working together with you all in a way to reduce some of the problems of delayed shipment and transfer of those programs, and i think, dr. hamburg, after six years at

the fda as she retires and then our phone call and discussion the other day, she's made it clear to the staff that the key leadership within fda that these relationships and this partnership should continue. i'm also working very closely with elliott kaye the chairman of the consumer product safety commission. we've met we've talked and discussed on how we can be more helpful to cpsc and how can we help ease some of the burden. we have a lot of people and as we like to say, we have a lot of boots on the ground when it comes to our ports of entry. we can be a huge benefit and value add to these other inner agencies. the more they trust us, the more work we can do with them and the more knowledge and understanding that we have about what they do the better we can be in helping them achieve their legislative priorities and goals and making sure that they live up to their obligations and of course, the more helpful we can be to all of

you. during that first year i met with many of the chamber members. it was made abundantly clear that cbp has to continue to be a leader internationally on global enforcement. in my meetings with the world customs organization at a variety of levels it's been very clear. in my travels around the world it has been made very clear to me by our partners throughout this global environment how hopeful and helpful we can be to them. i think that's tremendously beneficial. you're seeing that move where in many places customs is by far, a single focus on revenue collection and where, by far, now customs is trying to meet that dual obligation. the same obligation that we have and that i think we've dealt with successfully, although we can certainly, and will do more

but i think those are the kind of lessons we're going to bring forward. the world watches cbp closely and we're eager to share our experiences with our foreign counterparts so that we can better align policies. to that end with the world customs organization and their 178-member nations we play a large role. they have considerable interest in our initiatives and our policies and i have sought every opportunity to engage them and to make sure that they know that we are more than willing to be as helpful and to provide as much assistance as possible. but we need a stronger voice frankly, from the united states. we have that expertise. we have that credibility. i couldn't have been more pleased to nominate anna hinojosa hinojosa to be the u.s. delegate to wco's director of compliance and facilitation.

anna brings 28 years of experience at cbt, she worked on the southwest border, she was a port director. she can bring all of that to that international body. we have not had someone like that in one of those directed commissioner positions since director bonner was in office as director of customs. so it is going to be important and i am working very lard and trying to make sure people recognize what a value she will be to wco and to all of the wco members. the security integrity of the global supply chain depends on those international partnerships. mutual recognition arrangements are a critical tool in aligning standards to the international community. these arrangements provide a platform to exchange trusted trader information and to harmonize reciprocal supply chain programs. during the first year as commissioner i got to fine four mras -- sorry.

mexico, israel and singapore. the secretary just signed the agreement and i'll talk about it in a minute with canada. but bringing together these arrangements is important. we only have ten of these by the way, since 2003. you can see we've really tried to speed up that process of getting these in place. a key focus has been strengthening our relationship and partnership with mexico and the 2,000 miles of shared border in the 50 ports of entry we have with them. ongoing engagement building upon the areas identified in the 21st century border initiative, improving and expanding border infrastructure. in some places you can see instead of long lines of people getting into the united states or cargo or produce waiting to get in to the united states, san they have reduced wait times to a much smaller amount. that's because the united states

taxpayers have made an investment in improving that critical infrastructure. we came up with a better facility and we team up with more people and better technology we can really speed things through. it is highly visible in certain places. these are the kind of things including a new agreement for the terminal facility and tijuana airport. i knew after going back -- i've been back about four times to san diego. the first times the complaints about the wait times were there. this time the complaints were from the vendors selling water saying people are moving through it the line too quick. so there's always a complaint. our two countries signed a mutual recognition arrangement in october. this was historic. our bram in our supply chain security

programs each have this mutually recognizable arrangement so that we can have better trust. as we look at designing ports of entry in the future tick harley particularly with mexico and canada, how can this be done in a more efficient way? the northern border in the united states and canada just signed with the secretary and minister blaney an historic new pre-clearance agreement with the 2011 plan. that controls all modes of transportation between u.s. and canada. land, marine, rail and air. inspections required for entry into either country will be able to be handled on foreign soil on the opposite side of the border. it will reduce congestion, delays and increase efficiency and predictability in cross border travel, tourism and transportation. the next step required to implement the new agreement. this is for the united states and canada to now enact legislation. while that legislation was

introduced during the last congress, and i am hopeful that it will be introduced and you will support its passage in this congress. let me just mention before i close a little bit about the future. the change that's going to occur. change is a lot like heaven. kind of everyone wants to get there but no one wants to die. so we're working hard. you know who said that? i got that statement from carly fiorina. so pretty interesting statement. well, what's clear to me in preparing for the future is that we need to reflect the realities of your business and the world that you exist in. the constant evolution of the global supply chain. i recognize that while we have some major efforts already under way, there are some areas that need additional focus and they need more work and they need more work from us. trade enforcement. over and other again i've never heard anyone say that well, you shouldn't be enforcing and

spending as much time on enforcement. but you should do it in a consistent predictable way, and those that are violating our trade laws those that are being required of enforcement that it only helps the businesses that are in fact playing by the rules and that have that level playing field. so we need to do a better job in that. i heard from congressional leaders about the importance of enforcement also. and the critical role that we play in protecting our markets. we have made some strides. for example cbp and immigration and customs enforcement, we have a new director as many of you know sara saldana. she was the united states attorney in dallas so she clearly understands enforcement and prosecution issues. we're trying to do more training with i.c.e. for each of our components, we're trying to understand and work through the processes and operations that we can attack smuggling and the

group in shipments of counterfeit goods. many of these pose serious health and there et cetera to public safety and also harm our national and economic security. in addition trade penalty assessments have increased by 140% from $385 million in fiscal year '11 to over $900 million in fiscal year 2014. but we clearly know that work can be done in that area. i know there are other aspects of the trade enforcement area that could really improve from our transparency. we've gone way out of our way after hearing a number of complaints because you are our eyes and ears. you give us the information and when you make these complaints or you provide us information about things that you believe are wrong and things that we should be following up on we haven't been particularly good in making sure that we're getting back to you about what did we do and how are we laj it. sometimes the cases are complex

they take on a lengthy period of time. but still we need to make sure that we're doing a better job in that area. the enforcement and collection of antidumping and counter counterveiling duties, we're working to increase those enforcement efforts. we have tons and tons of regulations. we need to do a better job of review viewing those regulations and we need to do a better job of making sure that you have input into some of those regulations. i believe that as many of my leadership team really talk about that we can improve and streamline the process, it is a complex discussion it's time consuming. many of you devote a lot of time to it. i couldn't be more pleased with the incredible amounts of time that in the members provide on this. but it is invaluable. we welcome your ideas in this type of discussion braus it can make a difference in years to

come. those are some of efforts i plan on pursuing in the coming year. everything i do as the commissioner over these next several years -- as long as the president keeps -- over the next several years is going to be done to increase our trade and security mission. cbp plays that critical role in protecting our national security safeguarding the supply chain from terrorism, trans national crime and fraud. we carry out and i've had a chance to meet literally thousands and thousands of cbp employees. we carry out that mission in a very dedicated way with a professional staff and we continue to make sure that we're hiring the very best people. we have to be an agile and plexableplex able flexibility organization. sometimes that bumps up against bureaucracy but i believe we can work through these things. and we already have. if you remove supply