sound mind. i can tell you coming from the state of texas where the second amendment is king. i spent a lot of time talking to conservative members of our community, they are in favor of universal background checks. they're in favor of closing the gun show loophole where we can watch people go in there, if you've got the cash, cash is king, you can buy whatever you want. we have a responsibility as policy makers, i would urge this body, is this body that can get it done at the national level, to celebrate the second amendment by ensuring that we take steps to ensure that responsible people are gun owners and not people that will do harm to their fellow americans and quite frankly as it relates to mental health, it might do harm to fellow americans or themselves. we need help, i know the support is out there. i think that the survey show that from the american people and at the end of the day, it's

the will of the people and i hope that this body will put the politics aside and really join the american people and being pragmatic and taking steps to keep the fire arms out of the wrong hands. >> thank you. chair, you had 49 people killed in your county by someone with one of these weapons. but more importantly, that individual was what we call lone wolf, in terms of somebody who we could not really bring a nexus to somebody overseas or something like that. can you, in your law enforcement experience, explain what the challenge is for identifying extremist in communities, whether you're a member of the

klu klux klan, whether you're a member of isil or any other entity and how does that play into your day-to-day law enforcement experience? >> thank you for the question. i can tell you that it is a challenge for us to identify the individuals who cause me harm to our nation, we're only as good as the information that we received so, i believe that we have got to improve our analytical capabilities and sharing intelligence information across the federal state and local authorities. we sometimes see where we operate in silos, all of these issues tend to happen in local communities and what we say to our residences that if you see something suspicious, we want you to tell us about it. and they're often giving

information to us at the local level and we push it to the federal level, but sometimes once it gets there and it is analyzed, it doesn't come back in a systematic way so that we can use that actionable intelligence information and a possible terrorist attack. in some cases, even as it relates to our gun laws, sometimes it doesn't make sense what happens. i'll give you an example, just a couple of days after the pulse nightclub incident in orlando there was a reporter who came to town, international reporter from the uk who was writing a story, and to prove his point how easy it is to acquire an assault weapon in america, he bought one. he went to a local license gun dealer and was able to buy an assault weapon.

he was -- not a u.s. citizen, but at some point had been in our country and had some form of legal status at some point. before he return today the uk he bought an assault weapon that he purchased and said, i don't want it, i can't take it back. the reason i bought it was to prove a point how easy it is and i'm not a u.s. citizen. i have said to people like the director coleman and others, to me that makes no sense because as american citizens if we were in the uk, we couldn't go there and buy an assault weapon, and so why should he have been allowed to buy one in our country. the other thick i see gaping holes as it relates to the mentally ill, we have a national

database that is suppose to have information about some form of mental illness that disqualifies them from buying a firearm. quite frankly the information isn't being put into the database because of this lack of -- lack of, i think, understanding within the mental health community is what constitutes mental illness. so we've gotten to improve there as a country as well. >> thank you. >> chair recognize as the gentleman from new york, mr. king. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank all the witnesses for your testimony, mr. miller, congratulations on a very successful weekend and i know the investigation is on going. but i was actually down on 23rd street the morning after. what you said about the fbi and nypd is you couldn't tell one from the other. i would like to follow up, though, i wouldn't want this to

get caught up in semantics, the ranking member profiling and whatever, it's also good police work, though. i mean you and i are old enough to remember, i'm holding than you, if -- the fbi or the nypd were in the italian american community, not because they didn't trust italian americans they knew that was where the threat was coming from. every bar on the west side of manhattan, fbi undercovers to try to get information. i think as an irish american, i didn't consider that profiling. it was coming from the irish american community, certain elements of it, even though 88, 99%, i think in new york where you have a number of muslim communities and neighborhoods and there are, overwhelming majority are cooperating and supportive. if there is going to be something happening, i don't see how it's considered unconstitutional or bad police work to have undercovers, to have informers, the same it's done when you're tracking down

any other type of crime when it's coming from a particular community organization. >> excuse me. we operate under the guidelines. the guidelines specifically say that we operate on information on behavior on actions, but we do not we do not place undercovers or spas or people in the community to watch people who are engaged in completely constitutional protected activities, whether that's at a restaurant, the house of worship, or a meeting. we're also not lacking for business. i think a representative king and it was very few in congress who know as much about this as you do, given the time that you've spent in this field, that in the 15 years since 9/11 through every suspicious encounter that's been reported,

we have amassed a large number of names, incidents, reports and when they're filed away. >> one is if you snu about this person why didn't they stop. the other is if you have that many contacts with that many people over that period of time the next time something happens it's going to involve somebody you knew, heard about, investigated, bumped or otherwise checked out. that's a good thing that when you're assessing who to look at first and they come up in those records, it gives you a basis to go forward. well, it's also a liability in

that people have somewhat of a misconception about our ability to put someone under surveillance, leave them there, definitely in the new york case these were contacts that happened in 2014 with no thing that happened in between that time and this time. that's not -- not prejudging this, somebody will go through it with a fine-tooth comb, we always do, it's not realistic that somebody comes on the radar, you'll be able to follow them or friends or associated for an extended period of time while you have investigations on burner. >> violate any guideline, assuming a hypothetical here. if there are -- because of the travel, one because of the

assault against family members and his father saying he was a terrorist. for the local police to be told about that so they will be alert to anything else they might here. i'm not saying hounding the guy. i'm saying for the street cop to say, keep your eyes and ears open on this guy in case you hear something about him he'll be at a different level. >> based on my understanding of our guidelines, it wouldn't -- based on my recollection of the attorney general guidelines and the fbi's domestic intelligence operations guide, i don't believe it would either. >> thank you commissioner. i just wanted to get that on the record because i think many of the unfair allegations were made against the nypd over the years for certain organizations and the media. thank you for your outstanding service, appreciate it. >> and i would just point out, for the record, that the independent inspector general of the nypd just completed an audit of ten years of intelligence bureau records and determined

that 100% of the records they evaluated show that there was a proper purpose and basis for the investigation and they were carried out within those guidelines. >> reporters got the surprise for talking about the abuses of nypd even though they've been cleared, i yield back. >> recognize the gentleman from new york, mr. higgins. >> thank you, mr. chairman. firstly, just let me say with respect to the new york city police department, the literature since 9/11 that counter terrorism intelligence is probably the most effective in all the world. it's extraordinary work that's done and counter terrorism, unfortunately, never get credit for what didn't happen. and what you do, every day, is preventing things from, in fact, happening. so it's great, great work and they say the terrorist only have to be lucky once.

counter terrorism officials have to be lucky all the time. but it's also worth noting here that since 9/11, 2001, a period of 15 years, 94 people were killed by islamic terrorist. 157,000 americans have been killed with guns. you're 3,000 times more likely to be killed by an american with a gun than a terrorist. every day in america 90 people die from gun violence. in orlando, 49 people dead, 53 people wounded, deadlyiest attack on u.s. soil since 9/11, one shooter, semiautomatic rifle, semi automatic pistol, legally purchased. one shooter, 49 people dead, 53 people wounded. newtown, connecticut, 26 people

dead, 20 kids between the ages of 6 and 7, first and second graders, dead. most had multiple wounds in them. six adults were also killed, most of whom who were diving in front of the kids to shield them from the shooter. one shooter, legally purchased gu guns, sensible gun safety had been mentioned here has been reject bid this congress, despite the fact that 90% of the american people support sensible gun safety legislation. you know, people often invoke the second amendment to justify the continuation of this hell, but the framers of our constitution establishing the second amendment could never have anticipated this kind of hell. the topic today is stopping the next attack, how to keep our

cities from becoming a battleground. well, they're already a battleground. there's a moral contradiction when you have, adds the ranking member said previously, a terror watch list. these are individuals that are known to be involved in some degree in terrorist activity, yet at the same time they are allowed to purchase guns, semi automatic rifles, semi automatic pistols. the very guns that are found in all of these mass shootings, so you can't with any credibility hold a hearing with a topic stopping the next attack, how to keep our cities from becoming battlegrounds without fundamentally addressing what most people on this panel agree with and, that is, very common

sen sensikal gun safety measures i would ask you to respond. >> i think it expired in the conversation that came out of that for years with no change, was one indicator and sen ccyni people would have said when a member of congress is shot down in public place, that would change, the shooting of gabby giffords went on for three weeks and faded away, that would have ended the discussion in colorado passed a tough gun law and the governor was run out of the state after that, some might have said when they kill our kindergarten children in their schools, that that would be the straw that broke the back, but

we talked about that for a while and nothing happened there either. in some measure when you consider the fact that the greatest loss -- on u.s. soil since 9/11 in the terrorist attack happened at 2:00 in the morning on a place off the main path, an lgbt club on latino night, by a lone wolf gunman, you have to ask yourself, have we figured out who we are and do we want to change. >> i think the witnesses for being here in participation. i also want to commend new york, if you look at what happened for recent investigation and what happened with the london bombings and the spain bombings,

closed-circuit television was critical in the investigation and apprehension of suspects in every case. and i would urge all of your major metropolitan areas to emulate new york and placement of those closed-circuit cameras. i did want to ask y'all, my experience has been that just as was the case here in new york, that local law enforcement really has to have a good relationship with the federal officials for everybody to be successful. what do you see are ways that we can improve communication between state and local officials and the feds that you need to interact with? and do you get a chance to exercise, regularly, with them, if so, why not? >> thank you. congressman, that's a very good

question. we do interact and work extremely well with our federal partners. the communication is a point we've raised for a number of years. many of the conference calls preamble you've heard more already about this incident in the news that we're going to talk about today. you know, most of us, i presume, have a top secret clearance sitting at this table, if not at least secret and there's a need, i think, for real-time information sharing on that capability. that's not in place. years ago i probably -- probably a decade ago i suggested that they create such a platform and encrypted cell phone was created, as such. and i paid for it for my homeland security division chief, myself, low and behold we find out they don't really work. we no longer have device to communicate real time on direct pressing needs. we have to go back to the days of runners. >> you're talking more about

equipment. i'm talking more about personal relationships. do y'all have a chance to interact and develop personal relationship so you know, bob, that the fbi the key guy you need to get in touch with, do you have a chance to do that. >> we do. we have great relationships when i'm talking about the equipment, if there's a timely need for sharing information, there's a lag because, literally, we have to go to the same location to communicate that. i had a meeting in my state and the sheriff from l.a. was there and had something unfolding that was at a secret level and we were looking for coast guard stations to get him into communication, that's a problem. when terrorist can communicate in encrypted platform and we can't. so the relationships are there. i would say that one of the challenges that we face, though, across the country is build a great relationship with our sacs and they move every two years. they come and go very frequently. i know professional development and organizational needs are important, but it is a challenge once you develop a deep

relationship, i think i've been through probably six sacs in my tenure. >> okay. chair. >> the only thing that i would add is i talked about the fact that we have a fusion center in orlando and because of that fusion center, it forces us on a daily basis to work across jurisdictional lines and that is not the case in most cities around america. we only have three in the state of florida and we have a multiple large metropolitan areas. so i do believe that there is a need to increase the number of fusion centers because, again, they work on the prevention side collecting information and data that can be used to prevent an attack. and that's -- this whole conversation today is about preventing an attack. so i believe that that has to be part of the solution. it forces us to work together and it also allows us to gather

better information, actionable intelligence information, that is. >> chief. >> in terms of our -- my relationship in austin, we have a phenomenal relationship with our local sac. >> do you have a chance to exercise with -- >> we have not exercised because funding is an issue. that's why again i hope the 59 passes and we can hopefully do some exercising with them. in terms of information sharing, it's better today than it's always -- than it's ever been, for my region. however, i think that depends a lot on the sac. fortunately, i have a good sac. i've had good sacs. i also push back pretty hard when they're not sharing information. i don't think that's still the case nationwide. it's not even across the country. >> thank you, my time has expired. thank you if what you've done for our country. >> recognize mr. payne. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i would like to thank the witnesses for their testimony this morning. i'd also like to recognize 29 individuals that were injured this week and pray for their speedy recovery and also the two brave officers in new jersey who engaged the culprit officer hammer and officer pedia of the linden police department, which is in my district. >> many gun safety laws are enacted at the state level, so while you might live in a state with strict gun laws, such as mine, your communities might

remain vulnerable because of the lax gun laws in neighboring states. how does this work approach to gun control effect your policy efforts mr. miller, if you could take a stab at that? >> if we have, if not, the toughest gun laws in the nation in new york city, certainly one of them but none of our guns come from new york city. that has been true for many years. we have mandatory minimum sentencing. we have a rigorous process, but most of our guns come from out of state. >> and the ability and the access to these assault weapons in other states, really poses a great potential for acts, such as we've seen over the course of

the last several years. and when i talk about it with my colleagues that feel that there could be a potential infringement on the second amendment rights, you know, getting an understanding of what we end up against in our communities is something that can be horrific as we saw in orlando. and always my argument to people in law enforcement that sometimes did not see the wisdom in trying to get these weapons off of the streets is, you know, what happened in dallas was my

greatest fear that, you know, i would try to tell one day these weapons are going to be turned and used against you. and in dallas we saw that happen. and that is the reason that we fight to try to make sure that these weapons are not available to people that should not have them and, really, i don't think should be available to the public. they're only going to be used against law enforcement and to think that a terrorist would have the upper hand on our law enforcement does not bode well with me. so, can you -- the events of the last weekend, you know, really have put the country on edge, the information we received was

constantly being updated and, you know, the situation was very fluid. i think lessons learned from boston helped us in this situation and it was really incredible to hear how fluid this situation has become through interagencies. can you talk about the federal government and how it shared relevant information with you with respect to the different law information organizations different involved. >> from the moment the explosion happened, i called the police commissioner and i called my fbi counterpart in the time that it took me to drive to the scene, my fbi counterparts were there. we came up with a game plan and we received continuous

information throughout that night with the development of every clue, a phone that led to a subscriber name, a fingerprint that led to an individual, phones that -- devices that were connected from the new jersey case to other devices, people who are connected to devices through physical evidence and there was nothing hidden, nothing held back, nothing to classified, we sat together in the same command post, customs and border protection and dhs played a vital role in helping us understand who was who in their records and contacts. i would say it was a model of cooperation and to respond in part to mr. rogers' question do we exercise together. we train together, the emerging threat with our federal

partners, but we work together every day. we eat together, we drink together. we don't sleep together yet, but that's just because we don't sleep much. >> well, thank you and as i -- as i yield back, chief, thank you for acknowledging the hard work that mr. donovan and i have done in interoperability and communications for all of your departments. i yield back. >> chair recognizes mr. duncan. >> thank you, mr. chairman. gentleman, the four of y'all are in law enforcement, do y'all carry fire arms, not in here, but do you carry a firearm daily? i think i was getting a head shake. >> i do on duty, but a lot of times i don't off duty. >> okay. thank you. the ranking member injected gun control into this because the narrative of the left.

and for the record, he's an added participant in the shooting sports. i've shot competitively against him, he's a great shot. so he exercised his second amendment rights. we're here in these ivory towers of government protected in law enforcement. there's a capital place with the firearm to protect us. if more gun laws were the actions, more restrictive gun rights, gun rights that are effect the south side of chicago would be the safest place on earth, you could leave your doors open, you could walk the streets at night and you could allow your children to play in the front yard, but yet that's not the case. more gun laws are not the answer. there are 357 million americans or 357 million fire arms in americans in the hands of law abiding citizens. the problem we need to look at, and let me tell you about the

law abiding citizens, when seconds count, the police are just minutes away. and they have the ability to draw a firearm to protect themselves, their families, their property, their neighbors, their constitution, if necessary. so we've had gun control injected into this debate. but let me tell you that i think the problem is gun free zones. because restricting where a law abiding citizen can carry fire arms, federal state property prohibited from having firearm, orlando was a bar. mass shooter, gun free zone. columbine, sandy hook, no one had access to firearm, we're counting on law enforcement to be there. law enforcement can't be

everywhere nor do we want you to be there. the second amendment is there for us to protect ourselves and our family, so we've had the no-fly list injected into this. there are 200,000, 80% of which are foreign nationals the other 20% are u.s. citizens, we can look hard at them. when you think about the no-fly list. how in the world do you get on the no-fly list and how do you get off. where is due process to know what the charges are, who is accusing you, have a chance to interview witnesses and defend sthemss, but too many americans are on the no-fly list and they don't even know it until they go try to fly somewhere. that's fifth and sixth amendment due process rights that are guaranteed us. so we're relying on big government to actually take care of us, to find these terrorists. but guess what, they missed it america. they missed it in orlando. that guy was suspected of

terrorism. they missed it in new jersey. dad said, i think my son is involved in terrorism. they investigated for terrorism. dad said yesterday, hello, they missed it in fort hood. he had soldier of allah on his business card. there were signs and signals for him all over. missed in san bernardino because the wife -- there are a lot of questions about how she came into this country. they missed it in boston. the fbi was informed by russia, for all intensive purposes that somebody had been traveling over there and possibly been in contact with terrorist organizations and may have gotten some training and missed it. we had loss of lives. what we continue to do is talk about gun control debate when we need to talk about the second amendment and constitutional rights. the fifth and sixth amendment rights and due process. but yet we'll continue to allow

unfettered immigration from countries. they just granted citizenship to 858 individuals who were removed under identity when during the naturalization process, the digital fingerprint records weren't available. we give them citizenship. we cannot rely on the federal government to continue to try to keep a safe. we've got to revert back, i believe, to the individuals, the law abiding citizens in this country. we've got to look at the gun laws that are out there now, that prohibit law abiding citizens to carry guns. we need to have allow some sort of program in schools so somebody will have access to firearm to protect our children. you know, we'll continue to allow terrorist to come in here. we'll continue to attack the constitutional rights of

americans. we'll continue to have restrictive gun control laws in the state and in an effort in the country. if you look at mr. higgins' statistics and you take out suicides, the numbers go way down. you take out criminal violence related to drugs, that number goes way down. but yet, we'll continue to have this debate. we'll continue to have a sit-in on the halls of -- floor of congress, to shutdown the process over the issue. we'll continue to invite somebody who makes something that looks like a bomb, brought it to school, now it's a clock and we invite him into the white house. the good thing the guy in new jersey didn't say, oh, that's just a clock. mr. chairman, i appreciate this hearing, but we've gotten off track from the get-go talking about violating the second amendment rights of americans. when we won't have a real conversation about the gun free zones, people that are on the

terrorist watch list and how they get off, and no-fly list and how that might be used. if you're on the list and you're a foreign national 80% are, no fly, good-bye. they're identified as terrorists, why are we keeping them in this country. i don't think a single person on the terrorist watch list committed any of these acts of terror we're talking about, if i'm wrong, correct me. gentlemen, i'm going to look at you right now and i'm going to thank you for what you do to keep our citizens safe. law enforcement in this country is under attack, but we have eve got your back, as the chairman said. we appreciate the men and women in blue that are walking that thin blue line. thank you for what you do. it's not an easy job. people in the third congressional district of south carolina appreciate what you do, god bless you and i'll yield back. >> chair now recognizes mr.

richmond from louisiana. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me just start with the people make the assertion all the time that more guns are the answer, guns in schools, guns in churches, guns in movie theaters. we have armed guns in banks and banks get robbed and people get killed every day. to the extent that people think that's the solution, i think you're dead wrong. but as we talk about law enforcement, we talk about having your back. let me tell you what having your back means, we had a committee meeting about combatting terrorist recruitment and about putting disspelling the propaganda that comes from isis or isil. and i simply wanted an amendment that said why don't we target sovereign citizens and they shot me down. >> well let me tell you what sovereign citizens did in the meantime, they shot down three officers in baton rouge, injured

another couple, so when we start talking about having your back, it's making sure that we have the intelligence and we focus on everything. we're smart enough to do two and three things at one time, that is combat lone actors, to infiltrate sales and track them. it's also to see what is the real threat to your officers and deputies on the streets. if you want to talk about your officers and your deputies you have to talk about sovereign citizen that's killed more police officers than anybody else, but this committee doesn't want to talk about it. in fact, this committee went out of its way to ignore the issue. and let me just tell you about baton rouge as we talk about having our law enforcement's back, you had one actor, one sick individual with a lone gun,

he was better armed than the police officers that responded, because his lone gun, the bullets would go through our police officer's vests and our police officer who responded, responded with pistols that wouldn't go through his vest. so the question becomes, are we funding our police departments like we should, are we making an investment in our law enforcement in an extent to help them protect lives? so as still have to talk about the department of homeland security and this committee, combine it with judiciary. we had two unfortunate incident this week again where an african-american male was killed

in an incident involving law enforcement. but we spend more time talking about whether colin kaepernick is standing for the national anthem but we don't want to talk about why he's kneeling. so in this committee we're having this hearing, which is not a new hearing, we have it all the time. in judiciary, the other committee with jurisdiction over something like this, we're talking about impeaching the irs director. at some point we have to be bigger than this. and we have to be focused on issues that we see and no one is diminishing terrorist attacks because i think there's one common goal between everybody and that's to figure out a way to stop them. but when you start titling our hearing with stopping the next attack, how do we keep our cities from becoming a battleground, d'uh, wake up, it's been a battleground.

it's a battleground on a number of fronts. but if we're going to talk about how to fix it, we're going to have to put the resources, so we can share intelligence, we can arm our law enforcement. we have to make sure we have the capabilities to stop an attack before it happens but we also have to realize the magnitude of the incident gets exaggerated if the person has an assault weapon. so i will ask one question and whoever wants to answer it, please have at it. the attack in minnesota where 10 people were injured, tell me what that looks like if instead of a knife he had an ak-47 or an ar-15 with a high capacity magazine. does anyone want to -- >> it looks like a lot of dead americans that were simply

shopping and i won't even respond to mr. duncan because i don't think it's -- needs to be responded here today and i respect this office and this institution, i'll just take the fifth at that. >> let me just ask this last question. do sovereign citizens pose a real threat to your officers that answer traffic stops, serve subpoenas, and just walk around every day? >> i believe sovereign citizens pose one of the most significant threats to civilian law enforcement today. a couple of years ago i had one of my sergeants shot. he survived but shot by an individual who fancied himself as a sovereign. many of these incidents that you have referred to in which there

were lone gunmen, if you delve into their background you'll see that perhaps they, too, subscribe to the sovereign ideology. >> if no one else wants to answer, i'll yield back, thank you, mr. chairman. >> chair now recognizes mr. mcsally from arizona. >> thank you, mr. chairman. as you are doing your jobs and outreach and trying to address this new threat that's metastasizing, and we have individuals being radicalized on the internet to take action into their own hands, one of the things i'd like to focus on is specifically the phenomena of girls and women becoming radicalized, becoming jihadists, trying to travel to iraq and syria. i held a round table with my colleague, kathleen rice, on this phenomena months ago because there's a specific dynamic going on that we haven't seen where we have girls and women not just being victimized and recruited but also being hardened jihadists themselves

and leading some of those efforts. just for numbers, of the 250 americans who have attempted to go to syria, 1 in 6 are women. almost a fifth of them are teenagers but more than a third of the teenagers are girls. so we're seeing this new phenomena. we've seen some cases in the media, three teenaged girls from colorado who were intercepted in germany trying to travel over there. a 19-year-old from minnesota who we found when she was in syria, a mississippi former chief -- cheerleader honor student whose father is a police officer and navy veteran trying to plot to head over to syria with her fiance. this is a new phenomena. do your outreachers in your communities have anything focusing specifically on women and girls that are radicalized or are they just part of the general efforts for outreach? if any of you would like to answer. >> we've watched this very closely. certainly mindful of the number

of travelers we've seen. as you see from the propaganda videos we've kind of collected and put together for the chairman, they're very sophisticated in their pitches, in their outreach. you can't ignore the san bernardino case as an example of radicalization targeting females in the united states, we also have an active prosecution now involving two women in new york city who were planning to use pressure cooker bombs to launch a plot that we interindicted last year in a year and a half long undercover operation so this is something we're very concerned with and part of our discussion with the community, while we kind of struggle with them to come up with what is the counternarrative and who can deliver it. >> anyone else want to. >> in austin, texas, a couple

years ago we had a family, husband, wife, and children with jttf arrested at houston international on their way to syria through turkey. for us the key is not specifically addressing women but addressing young people through educational programs, through economic opportunities. i don't think you too often see people that are educated wanting to blow themselves up. that's the exception, not the rule. so youth programs and educational and economic opportunities is one of the things we do. >> we know isis is using a specific message to recruit girls and women, sheriff, do you have something to share? >> you're correct, and that's clearly a concern on many levels because it brings in a demographic that typically is less likely to be as scrutinized because so many of the bombers, terrorists in the past have been fighting-age males. i worked on a case study in the middle east, a suicide bomber attempt of a female and as they broke it down they analyzed the

psychological reasons why she was put into that position and thought it was her only thing she could do to feel better about herself. and so i guess the disaffected and those vulnerable to a message of this is a higher purpose and you'll be valued if you do this are the ones generically. i think that we need to have more outreach to interdict that message and bring them away from that siren call, if you will. >> great, thank you. my second question, sheriff bouchard, you said you don't have real-time information sharing. this is a concern to me. we've broken down some stove pipes since 9/11 across the federal agencies. we've done some work between federal, state, and local. but i think we have a long way to go. fusion centers are important but some fusion centers aren't as good as others. i had a bill hr 3503 to address improving fusion centers and giving higher access to security clearances to you all and your

teammates so that you have better information out on the front lines. it was passed unanimously in the house, being held up in the senate right now but if you were in charge what would you do to -- i have a little bit of time, sheriff bouchard, break down those stove pipes. some of it is policy, some is clearances, some equipment. what would you do in order to make sure you have all of the information you need? >> well, i think you touched on a lot of the important issues as it relates to how we better communicate but it gets back to the methodology sometimes. and an urgent situation. as you mentioned, i have a top secret clearance but i don't have an instantaneous ability to receive information without actually physically bringing us together and in this day -- in terms of the technology available and we see used by terrorists, it's a bit frustrating to literally have to drive someplace to get actionable information. >> that's insane. and we need to work on that together. and i know i'm out of time. does anyone else have anything

to say on that issue? we can follow up. >> i think it's important that police chiefs have gone through a background investigation and have been licensed peace officer s. they're known entities. they're not any threat to our nation. sadly, the majority of police chiefs don't a top secret clearance if there's an issue for a police chief, we need to look at how we can provide that information for that person who ultimately is responsible for the safety of that community outside of the clearance process. that's food for thought because the truth of the matter is, a lot of police chiefs are in the dark about investigations in their area of responsibility. >> that's something we need to improve, mr. chairman, and i yield back. thank you. >> if i can -- a quick follow-up. i know in boston the boston police commissioner told me he could not even talk to his four police officers on the joint terrorism task force about the investigations. we have made efforts to change

that. there's been talk of an mou to change that. chief, has that changed? >> i don't have a ts clearance. so i will just say this. i'm still the police chief in austin, texas, and whether my people work for the jttf or not, they work for the people of austin and my direction is the day they don't tell me something we need to know, they don't work for the federal government, they work for austin and they're withholding information at their own peril. fortunately, we have a pretty good relationship with our local sac. but it's still an issue and i think the answer is that we not only have a right to know, we have a need to know regardless of the clearance level of that investigation as far as responsibility. >> i couldn't agree more. commissioner miller, is that the state of play in new york? >> in new york we don't have those issues.

i think it's in part because with over a hundred detectives on the joint terrific task force, there's very little information we're not handling ourselves or have access to. however, understanding the discussion that occurred after boston, major city chiefs, intelligence commanders committee, chuck dewitt worked together with partners to draw up to redraw mr. chairman the mou with how a joint terrific task force operates with its local partners in terms of access they're entitled to, clearance levels, computer access and so on. and that is -- that new mou i believe is in effect now. so that should bring improvement to the situation. and i think we can count on major city chiefs to anecdotally check on that to make sure it's being enforced. >> let me pledge my support to help you. i have talked to the fbi about

this mou, i know it's been -- going back and forth but it seems to me any commissioner or police chief that has officers on the task force should -- at least the chief should be briefed on those cases. and you have the street intel. you have the intelligence on the streets. the chair now recognizes mrs. watson coleman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. to each of you let me say, i am profoundly grateful. i can listen to the challenges you're experiencing on so many different levels from so many different areas and how safe we are, relatively speaking. and irknow it is because you are dedicated, you speak to your colleagues wherever you need to and you're smart at what you do, and you are keeping us safe. and i thank you from the bottom of my heart. i also want to recognize the great state of new jersey and

the linden police department was very helpful in addressing the situation that we encountered this weekend working with new york. sometimes my wonderful state gets overlooked, mr. chairman. we're small but we're mighty. the other thing i'd like to say, two things quickly and i have one question. number one is that i can hardly believe more guns anywhere should be the answer to a safer community, society, school, or any other place, that's a ludicrous thought on anybody's part. and number two is i think you all have expressed in some way, shape, or form that the proliferation of illegal guns in the communities are harmful not only to the community but even to your law enforcement and that that is not the direction in which we should continue to go. following up on that, i wanted to highlight something with you, chief acevedo -- see? in today's testimony and at a meeting with the homeland

security advisory subcommittee you stated that right wing extremism is as much of a threat as foreign organizations. i have an article that goes back in 2014 in which you express that as it relates to someone who was part of an association, a self defined associate of some priest hood, some -- >> phineas priesthood, yes. >> phineas priesthood. do you still believe that that is our -- one of our greatest threats coming from right wing extremism? and also do you recognize and feel that extremism even on the left is as much of a great threat? may i have your comments on that. >> thank you. absolutely. i get beat up in my great state. any time you mention right wing anything you get beat up. but extremism whether it's left or right is just that -- extremists.

the sovereign citizen movement in this nation is alive and well. if you look across the landscape you will see police officers that have been shot and killed by members of this movement and the only reason i mentioned that in the homeland security advisory council, to the secretary and this body is that we don't want to be myopic as we look at the threat domain around our country. it's not just from foreign extremists, it's alive and well in our own nation and if you look at the totality of the victims of the threat, those right wing extremists really do, just like left wing extremists with bombs in the '70s and so forth, do pose a significant threat. >> so i believe that this committee has certainly given the attention to the foreign extremists. i'm wondering if from your vantage points are there sufficient resources available to you in support, even in grants and other funding, that

help you with identifying those threats that are posed by both -- by extremists who are not foreign-born extremists and if you would all just give me yes, no, and what you'd like to offer because i only have a few minutes, i would appreciate that also starting with you, mr. miller. >> the grants make no distinction as to domestic terrorism versus foreign so they can be applied equally so it's not an issue for us. >> for us, funding continues to be an issue. we are a city that lost its funding and any funding that we can get -- we're down to a third. unfortunately, we know there are a lot of competing interests and a lot you have to fund but we need help. the militia movement and the sovereign citizen movement is alive and well in our nation and i think it's an absolute threat to the safety of our communities. >> as the commissioner said, the grants and the training relates to any kind of threat.

all hazards was some of the verbiage we worked on many years ago so we apply that standard. when we do our training. >> funding remains an issue for us as well. i believe it's pivotal we continue to work across the silos, if you will, to get information so i'm looking forward to it. and again, in our community we had a homegrown violent extremist who attacked the nightclub there in orlando. >> it's good to know we can use these resources on any of the areas we've talked about. the question then becomes where there are -- there is no problem because you can -- is it applied appropriately. thank you very much, thank you, mr. chairman. >> chair recognizes mr. carter from georgia. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank all of you for being here,

obviously this is extremely important, the work you do is extremely important and i want to preface my remarks, my questions by saying i'm not trying to be adversarial or ask you to be adversarial. i'm just trying to get to the root of the problem or just to improve things. maybe there's not a problem. i'd like to start with you, mr. miller. mr. miller i can only imagine being in the high threat environment that new york city is that you probably deal with a greater number of threats than we truly realize. i suspect that's the case and my question to you is this, and it's about communication. is -- we all understood how incredibly important it is, particularly in this area. particularly between the federal authorities and the local authorities. i just want to ask you, has the department of homeland security supported your mission?

have they done that? especially in regards to emergency communications? >> so the department of homeland security, particularly under secretary johnson, has been the most accessible department of homeland security i've known since 9/11 having done this job in both los angeles when art was in california and new york city so that's in terms of our ability to work with dhs. if we ask them for something, they work hard to get it for us. when you refer to communications, are you talking about the passing of information or actual interoperability? >> i'm talking about everything. >> we get a steady stream of products from dhs and i am fortunate enough -- and it may be because of the size and scope of new york -- to have two dhs intelligence advisors assigned to the nypd to make sure that that feed and flow is early and

often. >> okay, let me put it this way. how can we improve it? i'm always telling my staff we have to get better, we have to get better. how can we make it better? >> i'm unfortunately a satisfied customer. i've got nothing. >> fair enough. >> from that department on that issue. >> fair enough. >> i'll talk about money till the cows come home but on that issue i'm good. and, you know, look, i understand that. and i understand it takes money. but it also takes implementation, communication, so much more and that's where i'm trying to get to here is the communication factor. >> i would suggest one answer to that question which is heather phuong who is the assistant secretary for law enforcement, was a police chief. she understands what we need and how we need it and what we need it for. the hiss history of that, before

heather, had been a long line of people who didn't come from law enforcement, assorted generals and military people and other appointees. i would urge in the future that for the sake of communications that person always be law enforcement. >> good, i think that makes perfect sense. chief acevedo -- i'm sorry. whatever. it's just not a popular name in south georgia, i apologize. nevertheless, chief of the austin, texas, police department over 2500 law enforcement officers and personnel to protect your city. have you ever worked with the federal law enforcement training center? are you familiar with fletc? >> yes, sir, i've actually worked there and actually instructed there. it's a great facility and they offer a lot of support to state, local law enforcement. >> has anyone else had experience with the federal law enforcement training centers? we have one in our district in glencoe, georgia. i've toured it, i've seen the work they do. it's a great facility, a great

opportunity to utilize a resource and i'm wondering if you had that experience. >> we have had the experience and i've completed training there as well as members of my staff. but going back to your question about dhs and perhaps what can be done. >> please. >> the metropolitan and orlando area, when we were on the list to receive asset funding we did so when the secretary had the discretion to select different metropolitan areas to receive funding, he no longer has that discretion. his rank, order, and perhaps it would be good for the secretary to have some discretion, particularly when you have an incident like we had when we're 34th on the list and only the top 29 receive funding, if the secretary has some discretion there to fund

different regions based on what has occurred most recently, i think that would assist in many ways, we are similarly situated as austin in that we once received funding and then it was discontinued. >> right. well, again, let me -- yes, is it okay, mr. chairman? >> i would like to thank you for the question. obviously we've heard a bit about the realtime communications. in new york it's probably different because they're co-located. even though we're part of a fusion center and i have people assigned there, it's not co-located with my headquarters. therefore the realtime communication gap necessitates a drive. but there's communication that hand taken place for years. that's an officer safety issue. even if we're not empowered or asking to be empowered to be in charge of deportation we should

be empowered with information so that deputy knows that person may be an additional threat to him or her on the side of a dark road for reasons they don't know. it goes deeper than that. i've been bringing this same topic up for over a decade. when someone gets booked into the jail, sheriff's nationwide runs the jails, we don't get realtime information in most of those facilities. the status of anybody or information. as it relates to even criminality in this country. when it comes to reimbursement for someone that is and comes from the federal government it's still a phone call to find out unless you're participating in certain programs a phone call to find out if anybody is eligible for reimbursement but they won't even tell you who. >> thank you for your answers, that's exactly what i wanted to hear. that's exactly the kind of things we need to be working on. and to get better.

we always want to get better. thank you for what you do, it's extremely important. we want to help. that's why we had this hearing today, to find out what you just described to us. thank you, mr. chairman, for your indulgence. >> chair recognizes the gentlelady from california who represents san bernardino, ms. torres. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman, and first of all i want to thank all of you for working so hard and diligently to keep our communities safe. i know your job is not easy and i know that you are -- there are critics of the work you do every single day but we appreciate everything you do. for deputy commissioner miller you talked about data from 911 systems in new york and how that is part of the intelligence you have on potential terrorist members of the

community. can you explain what that entails? how is that data collected? does it come through the 911 system? 911 dispatchers are also a part of that communications system? can you talk to us about how that process works? >> so in the nypd, like most police departments, the 911 system feeds into a computer-assisted dispatch system where calls are summarized on a keyboard as they come in and sent to computers and police cars over the police radios and now to these hand held devices. as the calls come in and the call takers take them, they can stack up in a dispatcher's queue as they're received whereas where the officers are receiving them directly they're going direct to this device even before they come over the radio. it's reduced our response time by a full minute and change in certain areas of the city. that's one element. the second element is the ability to harness the power of

this data as it's correlated, which is you get a 911 call of an assault in progress in an apartment, possible domestic violence, when you look at the call on the phone instead of just what you get over the police radio it will tell you who called, what is the callback number. if you tough touch that call back number -- >> critical information about the location and who may live there, if it's a targeted member or someone that has been identified? >> yeah, it's -- it's more about that information than terrorist intelligence. it's a daily tool the police can use. however, in the throes of a terrorist incident it can become vital because now you can push information instantly and pictures and videos to the police. >> how are your 911 dispatchers trained to pull this information out of your callers during the interview process? >> they go through their pects,

police communications technicians, they go through an extensive training process of their own and an extensive vetting process being hired about working under pressure, multitasking and so on. >> and being able to interview potential suspects and potential victims of crime, nosey neighbors that may have intelligence on what is happening next door, someone who may be potentially targeting their neighborhood, correct? >> i think an example is when we were looking for the suspect in this latest bombing, on the floor of the 911 center, every operator working that day was told, we're going out with this picture, you can expect a lot of potential sightings to come in, when you get those calls ask where is the person, what are they wearing right now? are they carrying any packages, parcels, backpacks, bags, that kind of thing and to keep that caller on the line until you

have the rest of the information and then to transfer them to the intelligence operations desk so my detective cans get more. >> thank you so much. the reason why i'm asking you this if you don't know, there has been a push to reclassify 911 dispatchers by the office of management and budget and i think it's a very shortsighted decision not understanding that this is a critical position for first responders and as a former 911 dispatcher this is a very important issue to me. >> the 911 operator dispatcher call taker is the very first line, it's the person who gets to call for help first. >> so now let's talk about the radio system. i'm very concerned about the san bernardino incident. as officers are responding and as the dispatchers are giving them directions on which way to travel and suspect information there was no way for them to switch to an encrypted radio

channel. this is really important because the suspects, had there been more than two people involved, they could have positioned themselves in a place to target the officers as they're responding. what do you think that we need to do in that -- from that perspective? >> well, we're very fortunate in our region that our interoperability is absolutely where it needs to be and we have the ability to move to a unified encrypted channel in central texas. as a matter of fact, with our f-1, formula 1 event in november, dhs is going to come out and look at our operability but the truth of the matter is a lot of jurisdictions don't have that capability. it's something that needs to be worked on. >> they don't have enough capability and there's not enough funding for them to be able to purchase radios and the systems that they need.

i've exceeded my time. thank you. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. katko. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. miller, you may not remember this but i had the pleasure of attending a briefing with chairman mccaul and mr. king about a year ago in new york with you and the chief and some others and i was thoroughly impressed by the professionalism and the ability to get the job done and i want to commend you for that. one of my colleagues on the other side mentioned that you don't often get credit for what you stop but i can assure you that were it not for your great leadership that there would be much more problems in new york city so i applaud your efforts and i hope to continue. one of the things i would like to explore and one of the things i think this committee is uniquely positioned to help you all with is something i hear again and again and that's the lack of information sharing and the lack of breaking down lines of communications on the federal, state, and local level. i've had a bird's eye view of

this for 20 years as a federal organized crime prosecutor first in el paso, then in puerto rico, then in new york state and the syracuse area so everywhere you went, the biggest problem was getting the team to work together and breaking down those barriers. and now it seems like in new york the necessity is the mother of invention and you have to work seamlessly, that's the only way you'll be able to remotely do your job. so i'd like to examine what mr. miller's situation is, which is really the exception to the rule because everywhere else is quite different and mr. demings i think you mentioned that you have to improve our analytical capabilities and you mentioned that there's barriers where you were getting access to ice databases, for example, and those are the types of things i'm concerned with and want to half a hear about. so perhaps, mr. demings, mr. bouchard and mr. acevedo, what is the biggest

problem that you see with respect to information sharing? one of the things i see first and foremost, how long it takes to get a background check done for someone joining the task force which is maddening but what else do you see that we can work on and perhaps mr. miller can comment on ways we can fix it. the mou system seems to be one of them. maybe using the model new york is trying to implement nationwide might be something that could help for us. but i would like to hear from mr. demings first if i may. >> i will say that we enjoy a pretty good relationship with our federal authorities in the metropolitan and orlando area because of what we have in terms of the theme parks, we have federal agents who are embedded within our theme parks so that forces us to communicate i believe there's still room for improvement, however. the situation i talked about earlier in which a law enforcement officer stopped someone on the streets of our

nation when they do a -- typically we're trained to check for -- run a national check to see if the person has any type of warrants or what have you and we run it within our respective states as well but there's nothing that comes back from that national database that tells us whether or not that person that we have encountered is illegal or not. it's something we've suggested, it's a policy within i.c.e. that needs to change, where we want to have access to that realtime information. >> that's something we can look at and my staff i hope is taking notes. yes, they are. good. all right, go ahead. >> i would ask this same question, is it a policy issue, a funding issue or a communication technology issue? the different systems don't communicate and integrate well.

and for years we've been getting well, it could be part of all three. so we've been asking these questions for literally a decade and some folks have said well, we don't want you to have that information about status or immigration because it allows you to profile. understand the only time the database is queried is when we've already stopped an individual and even worse when they're in our jail and we're still not told. so we need that information for situational awareness and the understanding of who we have and who was in our jail and that's not there. >> mr. acevedo? >> the major county sheriffs have been working with dhs now. i've been on the body for nine years trying to get this enterprise up and running. it's still not where it needs to be. quite frankly, we need support for our intelligence commanders. that's 68 intelligence commanders throughout the nation, each one of those organizations -- and that's

just the major city chiefs and then we have how many members from the sheriff's department. we desperately need funding to support at least two meetings a year with these commanders because relationships matter. and we all know that needle in the haystack we're looking for is more than likely going to be found by a state or local county law enforcement officials. and we need to share that information, but it's still not where it needs to be and we need to support that enterprise to continue to build out. we're going to be dead at the rate we're going. and i don't mean by a terrorist attack, i think of old age. so we want to put that on your radar, the cie and intelligence commanders group and finding funding. $2 million seems like a lot of money but in the grand scheme of things that's a drop in the bucket. dhs has the funding but we need you all to yourselves or an appropriations committee to actually order them, to peel off that

money so we can at the state county and local level do what we need to do to keep our community safe. >> thank you. mr. miller, you have a much different posture than your colleagues because of the fact that ground zero is new york city for the terrorist targets. that helps break down barriers. can you share with us the ways in which you've been able to effectively share information with the local agencies that other jurisdictions may struggle with doing? >> we engage in extensive liaison efforts. some programmatic but as chief acevedo said, this is people to people and networking. first we have the shield program which has thousands of members and it's our outreach to the private security, the public/private partnership where we provide them regular briefing materials, constant alerts on breaking events, and training.

second, we have a sentry program that is not on the counterterrorism side but the intelligence side where we have developed a network of partnerships in the surrounding areas from new jersey to nassau, suffolk county, upstate as far as boston, a virtual corridor of northeast partners who we bring together at a major conference once a year and go through a series of presentations and information sharing exercises but we also communicate with regularly. when something happens somewhere, we will pick up the phone, we have a point of contact, same thing in reverse when something happens here and both of those are based on e-mail platforms, cross communications and information we send out. >> before i conclude, mr. chairman, i want to note for the record that i did not engage in the gun debate during my questioning. >> we thank you for that.

i think the title of the hearing was the threat that we face post- 9/11. so the chair recognizes ms. jackson lee from houston, texas. >> thank you very much, again, let us acknowledge the work of all of you as first responders, some of you have had the privilege and opportunity to meet and let me thank you personally for your work. let me put on the record that the united states, dhs, for example, has 240,000 employees that have a range of responsibilities from aviation to border security. i believe there are a million firefighters, 750,000 are volunteers and 18,000 police departments, 556,000 full time employees. to chief acevedo, let me thank you personally, we know the great work you're doing in the state and i want to commend to the major chiefs the legislation we submitted to a number of individuals called the law enforcement trusted integrity act, that's just a note for myself for you to look at it dealing with police/community

relations and even that has something to do with us working together. let me also say that i think the record deserves the clarification and the little 12-year-old in northern texas, if you will, that 12-year-old had a clock and i think what is important in order for us to embrace all of those who are going to help us solve this problem we must understand where to direct our anger and questions. i want to say to the educators who saw something and said something, is that is what we say in the department of homeland security. but what we also want to have occur is that you balance the knowledge that you have as to the individual, the family or, in this instance, a 12-year-old child. so if you knew that you had a bright 12-year-old child, you could have asked that child what

is that and also see something and say something. that's how we solve problems. i'd like to also add into the record the sikh man who found a bombing suspect did what every american would have to do. a sikh, obviously a faith that many americans have could have just as well been in oakland, michigan, a muslim. could have been a store owner so i ask unanimous consent to put this into the record. >> without objection. would the gentlelady yield? commissioner miller has a meeting with the department of homeland security and has to -- >> can i talk quickly? >> if you have a very quick question. because he has to depart. >> thank you, mr. miller.

give us the level of importance that good intelligence is coming from civilians, coming from the muslim community, coming from neighbors and as welcoming from fusion centers or infusion centers and, of course, jttf which is an investigatory arm. the height, what level to do you put the right intelligence at? >> i put it at the top because having the right intelligence, the right partnerships, the right sources, is the difference between having prevented 20 attacks or having had 20 attacks. >> i can congratulate that and i will pursue my other line of questioning with the other gentlemen. please let me put on the record my appreciate for the service of commissioner bratton who i know you had the privilege of working under and we worked with. and thank you for your service. let me go to chief acevedo and the other chiefs that are here. thank you. my focus is to get you the

money. to get you the money you need that you've come here using your time to come up and explain to us what we need not to look backward but to look forward. so first, chief, tell me how effective fusion center is in the state of texas. chief acevedo, i'm sorry. >> thank you for that question and great to see you. our fusion center is key. prior to the fusion center we really didn't have the mechanism by which when we spotted threats or we saw something going on to quickly act on it and i can tell you just last weekend a member of -- former member of congress received a threat and we were able to very quickly track that down because of our fusion center then we were smart enough to leverage our relationship with the state of texas and the department of public safety where we've placed our fusion center at dps headquarters and pay them $1 a year for the next 10 years, thank goodness and as a result we've been able to leverage the relationship, the assets and i -- although we

don't get u.s.e. funding, when we received that funding back i believe in 2008 we entered it knowing we as a community and region were going to commit and were committed to maintaining that fusion center and were doing so at a great cost locally because it's that important to us. >> let me ask mr. bouchard and mr. demings the same question. do we need more resources for the fusion center? fusion centers? because michigan and florida. >> thank you, ma'am. yes, i think nationwide the fusion centers are in need of resources because while all that has been going on, certainly, the country has gone through a recession and that affected the police agencies in terms of their budgets and personnel. i cut 165 positions during the downturn which i still don't have back and yet, you know, i

want to have a commitment to the fusion center but i have to fund 100% of it so i have to pull someone out of our deployment and put them into the fusion center. it would be helpful if there was a way on a combined platform if they're going to be assigned to a federal joint terrorism or joint effort that there should be some funding stream, we believe, it would be helpful to add to the interaction and grow that. >> i agree, chief. >> because a lot of agencies can't afford it and even i find it challenging because we're asked to be on the jttf, we're asked to be on identity theft with the secret service, we're asked to be on the fugitive with the u.s. marshals, asked to be on all these different things. >> allow me to get mr. demings. thank you, i support you in that. mr. demings, my sympathy to you for your community experienced. your experience and what you need in a fusion center to gather the intelligence you need. >> the fusion center plays a pivotal role in our state and as it relates to national security. last year we had 66.1 million visitors who came to orange county, where i'm from, and that was number one in the nation but with our fusion centers, while

the primary focus is on counterterrorism efforts, it also has assisted in allowing us to manage natural disasters and also all crimes and so it is a pivotal tool preventing terror attacks but also preventing crimes from occurring in our community as well. >> mr. chairman, i have one last question. >> it's a brief one, i hope. >> it is, mr. chairman. first of all, i'll make this statement. i think getting guns off the street would help all of you including officers as we move toward dealing with this question of police/community relations but i offer a note about many of us who have a bill to close the gun show loophole and i have one that indicates to report any time guns are sold and you don't have the background check completed and then also i think it's important to take note of the fact that we need to report when guns are transferred without that background check done. guns do kill. let me ask you this question as

to how you draw that information. that's how we keep these dangerous issues from happening. tell me how valuable it is to have relationships with diverse communities, diverse faiths? obviously i'm going say muslims but a variety of people and if you talk about right wing attacks, how valuable it is to have information for you to do your job and have people willing to talk to you to do your job? >> i indicated earlier that we had 66.1 million visitors. well, they come from everywhere, so it is absolutely important for us to have relationships in the broad, diverse communities that we have and so we really focus on that before an incident occurs. we try to have established relationships and we're depending on those relationships to provide the information in advance to assist in preventing an attack. >> thank you, mr. bouchard and

then mr. acevedo. >> i think relationships are key on many levels. we talked all threats all hazards whether it's traditional crime or counterterrorism. you have to have relationships so people feel comfortable to call and tell you they see something odd and maybe it's related to terrorism or a drug house. they have to have that confidence in that relationship. everyone's got their own kinds of platforms to do that. i launched a thing called the sheriff's relations team, srt, and we try to put together community members to be a funnel because sometimes people don't feel comfortable calling police but they may feel comfortable calling people on that team who can then connect to us, and also create platforms that allow anonymous information to flow to us in an uninhibited manner. >> in relationships, they are key. i spoke to this earlier, congresswoman, whether it's the immigration debate or

whatever we have to stop painting people with broad brushes, because it puts up fences and tears down trust and in my community i spent a lot of time speaking in english and spanish to my immigrant community, my muslim community, the austin police department, the only ones that need to fear us are those that would do harm to members of our community. so as we move forward we have to continue to build bridges to all segments of society instead of tearing them down. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. ratcliffe. >> first, i'd like to thank you for the service to our country and all our communities. i know the deputy commissioner miller had to leave and i'm hoping to have the opportunity to commend him and his folks for what is truly remarkable and amazing response to the terrorist events in new york and new jersey this past

week and the incredible speed at which they were able to identify and apprehend the suspect. mr. rahami. i think that probably saved the lives of countless americans and, of course, we're all grateful that officer padilla and investigator hammer are expected to make a full recovery from their injuries sustained during their heroic actions but these events only underscore how everyday members of our law enforcement community, your teams, say good-bye to their loved ones and put their lives on the line to protect their neighbors and now unfortunately you all are being asked to do not just the traditional jobs that we've always asked law enforcement to do, you now have to answer the call when terrorists attack. in that respect, you really are the first line of defense in ensuring our streets don't become battle fields. and it seems to me if we're asking you to go to battle, the least we can do is ensure you get the type of equipment you need to protect your selves and protect

all of us. i will tell you it's not very often i get a chance to talk about a federal program that serves a noble purpose like that and does so effectively, efficiently, and essentially no cost to taxpayers. those types of federal programs are about as rare as a $3 bill. but the 1033 surplus program is exactly that kind of program, and i think you all know that. it's a program that allows the department of defense to transfer certain surplus defense equipment that's already been paid for and in many cases already been used to protect our troops and to repurpose that for state and local law enforcement to use in counter-terrorism, counter-drug activities and emergency situation that is arise in our communities all the time. that was the case, anyway, until unilateral executive actions by president obama, which cut access to that type of critical equipment that agencies like yours depend on.

in fact, many of you had, i assume, to send back some of the equipment that you'd already received from the program, equipment like tracked armored vehicles, the kind law enforcement in my district say have saved lives in crisis situations and which double as rescue vehicles in some circumstances. and because of the president's action here, some of the s.w.a.t. teams that have had the benefit of lifesaving body armor and ballistic helmets won't have that benefit anymore because they can't afford that equipment without this program. so i think the president's actions here are frankly inexcusable. i think he has put the safety of your officers and his politics ahead of the public safety. so in response to all of that, earlier this year i introduced the plus act, protecting lives using surplus equipment act of 2016, which would reverse the president's executive order and restore that program to law

enforcement agencies like all of yours. sheriff, i want to start with you. i notice you mentioned it in your opening statement. i really want to get your perspective on the administration's unilateral decision to strip equipment like this from agencies like yours. i'm interested in the policy, of course, but i'm less interested in the hypothetical and want to know how this is affecting officers like the ones you manage out in the real world. >> thank you and thank you for your leadership on this. we have, i think, pretty much across the board found 1033 extremely helpful in assisting law enforcement. we saw realtime evidence of that in san bernardino, use of armored vehicles and tactical equipment to save lives. a real life example, the day that was playing out we received an order from washington to return our tract vehicle that day. it was loaded on a flatbed and

the intent was to blow it up. and the track vehicles around the country are used not just for dangerous armored situation but also traverse terrain across the country, sand and snow. northern michigan can get 5' of snow. track vehicles only way to get to certain situations. i know san bernardino found themselves with running fugitive hunt that killed a number of people. they had to borrow park's cats to drive through some of the deep snow. a real life example, we had a gunbattle that lasted 12 hours with individual who killed a police officer and barricaded themselves in a house firing fully automatic weapon not just through the windows but through the walls and striking neighbors homes. we used armored vehicles to evacuate the neighbors and obviously protect our deployed deputies around the scene as we continued that running gunbattle all night long. towards the end of that

gunbattle we wanted to insert into the second story. the only way to do that was with an armored vehicle that actually had a ramp to the second story. that armored tract vehicle was recalled by federal government. our region no longer has ability to have ramp to a second story and an armored capability. that was saving lives. it was taken and intended to be destroyed. that's the kind of situation we're facing. just go a step further. most of the real problems are coming from the rulemakers. i said i'm the point person for major county sheriffs of america and i'm in more meetings than i can count. in one meeting 37 people in the room, two of us were fulltime law enforcement. so the people making rules actually was asked the question in one of these meetings what caliber is 223. the people making decisions don't know equipment and tactics used with equipment and they get to decide when and where and how we use that. i think that's the problem. they are writing rules that are rather extensive.

they keep changing them. they have changed them a number of times. not formalized, back dating to october of last year and we don't know what those rules are yet. at one point we had to train our whole agency owned a specific set of training department wide. not people using it authorized to call it out but the whole agency. so much of this is driven by perception. it's incredibly frustrating. they talk about militarized tract vehicles removed because they look too militarized. but you can still get armored vehicles with wheels. that doesn't go to the tactic or terrain. i had to turn in 12 bayonets. they thought we were fixing bay owe nets and charging homes. 12 were used at honor guards at funerals. we had to go and buy them for the honor guard that the federal government recalled. so much recalled by use and not those making decisions.

it's incredibly frustrating. >> thank you, sheriff. based on the answer you just gave me would you agree with me that the president's decision is jeopardizing well-being and your officers. >> i certainly would agree with that statement. i said after san bernardino, the sheriff, a friend of mine, said they came prepared and america is less prepared as we sent back our armored vehicles that same day. >> i'm out of time. chief, i saw you nodding your head in response to that. i want to give you a chance to comment. >> whether it's 1033 or asset forfeiture, we need to deal with individual departments if they abuse or misuse the equipment or the assets and not paint the entire profession and paint the entire profession with a broad brush. you remember the mraps, everybody hates them. the chairman and i had a press conference, we didn't get one for austin because my s.w.a.t.

team was too big for our city configuration. i said when you have floods and we're a state prone to flooding, we need those mraps to rescue people. not a month passed when we had some major flooding in central texas. guess what the pd south of me used, an mrap to rescue kids stuck inside elementary schools that basically flooded all around it. it's not the equipment, it's the way it needs to be used. 1033, asset forfeiture hold departments accountable for misusing equipment and let's not paint the entire profession with a broad brush. >> thank you, chief. i'll yield back. >> thank you. i want to thank witnesses for valuable testimony and witnesses and members for their questions. before i conclude, i want to first of all thank all of you. being in law enforcement for 20 years, i hear what you discuss, i kind of miss it, to be frank. but i want you to get some comfort out of this that your words are not falling on deaf ears. we have heard time and again over the last several months and

other hearings about we need to do a better job sharing information, state, local, and federal agencies on the same page especially with respect to background checks and information sharing. we're mindful that we are in the process of doing things about that. your testimony does help. the fusion center issue really bothered me. i didn't realize there were so many cuts. that's very troubling given the fact last few years now up to over 1,000 isis related investigations in all 50 states. not a time to be paring down but plussing up. we have to give you the equipment you need to make you as safe as possible and make you do as effective a job as you possibly can. we can't do that when we start cutting things. they have to be mindful of that. no matter what happens going forward with the election, we

need to convince the administration you need to be properly supported. not time for cuts but maintaining and plussing it up. need to be safe. need to give you the tools to keep it safe. thank you for the job you do. finding the needle in the haystack every day is a brutal task. i commend you all for the job you do. i wake up every day worried about things going on in the committee, i can't imagine what you go through. i thank you for what you do. members may have questions for the witnesses. we'll ask them to respond in writing. the hearing record will be held open for 10 days. without objection, the hearing stands adjourned. thank you, gentlemen.

[ background noise ]

after the hearing, new york city deputy police commissioner john miller and house homeland security chairman michael mccaul spoke to reporters.

>> you're supposed to drop the mike at the end of the act. >> i'm michael mccaul, chairman of the homeland security committee. with me is commissioner miller of the new york police department. first i want to commend the great work of nypd and its efforts to take down the terrorist that was responsible for the terrorist attacks in both new york and we believe new jersey. it was incredible police work. and the quick apprehension in taking this man off the street. i have actually mr. rahami's journal with me. this came up at the hearing in terms of what persuaded him, what inspired him. he discusses on wanwar alaki, a

the chief isis spokesman and their external operations chief as well. he has since been killed in an air strike. it's clear from this journal that mr. rahami was receiving inspiration from the isis spokesman, mr. adnani. this is a new era of terror. as the commissioner testified, the message coming out of raqqah, syria has changed and evolved from come to syria and join the fight, to now kill where you are. that was the message of the isis spokesman, mr. adnani, was to kill where you are, with whatever it takes, by whatever means necessary. and i think we saw that unfortunately playing out in the streets of new york and new jersey, and in minnesota this last saturday. with the great work of nypd and others, we can hopefully stop that from happening again. with that, commissioner.

>> i think part of the subject of today's hearing was the increasing level of sophistication of the communications and propaganda of these terrorist groups targeting particularly young people across western europe, but especially the united states. the last message that sheik adnani sent out, calling for americans and others to do attacks, also gave specific instructions that they should claim credit if possible during the actual attacks. and we have seen, whether it was the german train stabbing, the murder of the french police officer at his home, and the murder of his wife, or some of the other recent attacks, including orlando, and orlando, the shooter called 911 to pledge his allegiance to isis. in france, the individual went live streaming on his facebook

page to claim responsibility in the name of isis while he was still holed up in the house, having committed the murders. after the germany train bombing, the individual had presupplied isis with a video of his claim of responsibility, holding the knife he was going to use, that he had sent them electronically. we're seeing an increasing lowering of the bar in terms of inexpensive, unsophisticated, yet high impact attacks that they're calling for. and people who are buying into a line of propaganda that promises valor, belonging, empowerment, and i think the recent events in new york city, where we see the emergence of another individual and another attack kind of underscores really what's a morphing and changing threat

picture since 9/11. >> do you believe there were some mistakes like in san bernardino, trying to read the early signs about mr. -- >> in all these incidents there's always a postmortem, if you will, to look back and see what could have been done differently in terms of lessons learned. again, i commend the work of nypd. and the quick response of this investigation was flawless in getting this suspect into custody within a short time. >> does the nypd stand by the statement made on monday that the suspect acted alone? >> the statement on monday was, as far as we know the suspect acted alone. the caveat there is now we have

a suspect in custody. the manhunt part for that known individual is over. and there will be an extensive investigation through the joint terrif terrorism task force, which is now the lead agency based on a complaint filed yesterday, there will be an extensive investigation into connections with any group, associates, family members, friends, anybody else who may have been involved. >> you don't have any update on how long it will be before you begin to say, well, there might have been this, there might have been that? >> i don't understand the question. >> now that you do have him in custody, you've had him in custody for 48 hours. i asked specifically about monday, and i understand the idea that that was what you knew then, but that hasn't changed in any respect 48 hours later. >> i wouldn't answer that question one way or the other. we have amassed a great deal of information in the past 48 hours. but we have to see where that

information takes us. so to be crystal clear on that, we're open to any possibility that he acted alone, that there were other involved, that he could have been inspired by a group, enabled by a group, directed by a group. we're just not there yet. >> the point of your hearing today was about preventing future attacks. to both of you, what's the biggest thing congress can do to help local law enforcement? >> today, very good timing. we have a bill, my bill on the floor to provide additional grant funding from the department of homeland security to train local police departments and fire departments and emergency responders with this new active shooter threat, and also the ied threat and the suicide bomber threat that we're seeing now coming into our communities. as the commissioner stated, this is the new method of choice for

attacks. and it's imperative our police departments be adequately prepared and trained to respond to that sort of attack. i think the bill will be on the floor this evening and will address that.