>> saturdays, the c-span radio is airing more of the nixon tapes from the collection of secretly recorded telephone conversations from 1971 until 1973. this saturday at 6:00, hear conversations with deputy >> this is very significant, this expos day of the most highly classified documents of the war. i did not read the story. do you mean that was leaked out? >> there was a whole study that was done before mcnamara at ending carry-on by clifford. this is a devastating security breach. >> listed at 90.1 fm. >> not a hearing on the future

of the federal reserve, a subcommittee chaired by ron paul, it looks as several proposals. this is a little less than an hour and a half. >> this hearing will come to order. without objection, all opening statements will be made part of the record. they may have additional questions which they may submit in writing. without objection, this will remain open for 30 days for them to submit questions and to paes their responses in the weicker -- and to place their responses in the record. i asked that they asked to be

recognized to get statements. i now recognize myself for five minutes for an opening statement. i want to thank our colleagues for being here today. they will be recognized shortly. as many people know, this is something i have been interested in for a long time. with regard to a healthy economy. today be will be discussing the various proposals to address some of the shortcomings of the monetary system. what has happened in these last five years is that it has been recognized by many that monetary policy has a lot to do with the creation of some of our problems and their shortcomings when it comes to these problems.

the federal reserve has been around for 100 years. it has gone and generally under the radar, and not too many people talk precisely because it was always said that it should not be interfered with by 80 executive branch or the legislative branch. lately there has been more concerned. lacher we were able to get some transparency to the fed. -- last year we are able to get some transparency to the fed. we still have more to do on that. it is very clear how we decide what constitutional money is. i do not think many people reject the idea that the congress does have responsibility of oversight and figuring out exactly how to

handle that. but the crisis that came about, this is the reason that we had strong support in the last session. more information has come out because of the lawsuits. the way i see the monetary policy is most people realize how big the economy is. generally they do not talk about the other half of their equation. that is the monetary issue. it is one half of all the transactions. to duck the issue, i think it has been a mistake. i believe over these many decades if we had good times,

they have the credit. something had to be done. they would get the credit out of the slump. i think that has changed. they say how global it is. one of the consequences has been this excess of debt. then the bailing out that occurred. for this reason so many people want to know a lot more about what is going on. a lot has been done about

particular policies. one thing we should not forget about is the nature of money. if we are trying to describe how managing monetary system, it seems to be most difficult that you have to be able to define money and the dollar. that has that been done for a long time. a note being precise and then you have to have management that does not work, and then we think we need more regulations and everything will work out smoothly. i have a lot of reservations. i have a lot of some stability and prices.

the prices are rather stable. they ignore that this is going up significantly. the price of energy goes up. the price of education goes up. even when the cpi and ppi may be revealing comment there is a lot for the value of money. we have been in a decade where real wages have not been able to catch up. that is the bottom line. keeping up with the cost of living and real wages, i am very pleased to discuss what i consider an important issue. i like to yield to the prime minister. >> thank you. >> thank you for holding this on

an improving the federal reserve system. one piece is to abolish the federal reserve sponsored by our chair then and another one will make the federal reserve an arm of the treasury. the other deals would make various changes either to the mandate or to the federal market committee's governance. as ranking member, i want to focus on the federal reserve dual mandate of maintaining stable prices. the growth act of 1970 a, better known as the humphrey-hawkins act, says benchmarks, growth,

and price stability, and the balance of trade. to monitor progress, it mandated that the board of governors at the federal reserve presents semiannual reports to congress on the state of the u.s. economy. the humphrey-hawkins charges charges a dual mandate both maintaining stable prices and full employment. currently the unemployment rate is 8.1%. since president obama took office in january of 09, the unemployment rate has gone from 7.8% to around 10% as the impact of financial crisis spreads. i do believe the u.s. economy is

heading in the right direction. as of march, at the consumer price index was 2.7 and%. over the past year a decline of 2.9 term. during the same time, energy has risen 4.6%. the food index has increased 3.3%. both increases are smaller than last month. the index for all items means less food and energy, which was 2.0% in february. all of these factors play a very important role in getting america back to economic growth

and prosperity. i look forward to the witness's testimony. i will yield back. >> thank you. i yield five minutes to dr. heyward. >> thank you. it is with great pleasure that i anticipate the testimony. we have a great challenge before us. a central bank, the federal reserve has cherished the independence and in implementing monetary goals. we have the power to coin money. there is a dynamic tension between the independent of the fed and the accountability to us. it is going to be very

interesting to see your proposals as to how we make that balance. in specific regard to the door mandate, chairman bernanke has said many times that he does not perceive an inherent conflict in the dole mandates. serving the goal of price stability works favorably toward having an economy that will work and enhance the employment projects. we see his warning regarding our fiscal policy having implications for monetary policy is that it cannot overcome forever and ever by

accommodation. we see that his warning seem to be borne out and that several years have not resulted in the kind of enhancements that we would like to see. i look forward to your testimony. thank you for all the work you have done. >> i think the lady. >> i would like to ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from minnesota be allowed to speak. >> if the gentleman would like to make and aan opening statement, he can do so. >> thank you. thank you for addressing this important topic. i do not have as much as i do have some questions.

my question is, and the dual mandate isn't the problem. to the degree it had challenges, have they been responsible? if not, why are we by the focus? i'm wondering if anyone can point to an instance when the dual mandate requirement required the fed to downplay their preferred anti-inflation approach. the dual mandate has been working. if not, i would be curious to know when it is because of plot monetary policy. how how we've been doing with the dual mandate? have we really been pursuing both to the degree the statute

will call for? has unemployment gotten the short trip that i am concerned we live in a time when when we and getting used to and a unemployment rate of 10%. this is an outrage. our country needs to do more to pursue both prongs of the dough mandate. i am concerned that unemployment has not been getting its full do. these are some questions i have, some concerns of like to see addressed. i am grateful to be allowed to be on the committee today. i hope we can explore these important topics. thank you. >> i think the gentlemen. i yield the time to arizona for an opening statement. >> i will try to do this quickly. this has been an area of great

interest. one of the ones you're trying to get your head around is with what the fed does in regard to monetary policy. has it allowed those in congress have the fiscal policy? in many ways is it an institution in its action that allows us to get away but that? even though this is a one off, and the discussion the fed is heading toward $2.90 trillion. what is the plan? when did they move back to the normalization of the portfolio of? what is the potential cascade of faeffects? >> i want to move to our first

panel. i went to first introduced kevin brady from texas as a republican congressman. he is representing the eighth district. he is the sponsor of the sound dollar act and the vice president of the joint economic committee. barney frank is a 16th term democratic congressman. he is the sponsor of hr342a. i will now recognize congressmen brady. greg thank you. i would like to it the knowledge the work he has done on the subcommittee. long-term member. he is bringing sound dollar to the public debate.

americans understand the monetary policy that devalues sour on currency. we agree on preserving the value of the dollar, economic growth and prosperity, and the government must not be allowed to monetize the debt. the financial system should serve all americans. to thank you for your commitment to bring these issues to the forefront of the public debate. i am pleased to testify on behalf of the sound dollar act. i want to thank the members who have co-sponsored this legislation. the problem today is that according to some, the 1800's as the bridges century. the 1900's was the american

century and the 21st may well be china's century. not so fast. for america to continue its pre- eminence, it is important that we get the role of the federal reserve right. the federal reserve and veered from the policies and adopted an intervention to help the housing bubble. in lead to a global economic crisis. this intervention justifies that by the employment half of the mandate continues today. the intervention policies are felt by the single mom who goes to the grocery store in find her paycheck does not go as far as inflation is dropping the value of for dollar. she finds the same thing as she

fills her gas pump. it is also fell by the unemployed. the uncertainty is discouraging business investment in building equipment and software. if you look at the fact that government spending is where it was before the recession. business investment is not. the fed has played a role in that. for america to remain the must give angress mandate for price stability, and sure it is in a panic from political pressure and held accountable for its own. they're focusing on a sound dollar. it implies the fed will ignore this. they are wrong. americans can only maximize our real output with long-term price stability. protecting the power of the

dollar over time. it provides the strongest foundation for economic growth. critics react as if it is a shocking proposal. this is not a fundamental part of our constitutional fabric. while it may be pitifully -- politically appealing, and this is something they cannot do. ben bernanke has testified that in the long run the only thing the fed can control is inflation. low inflation is the best thing we can do for growth. the maximum level of employment is largely determined by non- monetary factors.

using this to speed the growth may harm the economy in the long run. let me skip to the end. among the other provisions, the grant a vote because as important as new york in washington is, there is much more to america as the economy. they should better reflect our geographic diversity. we speed the release of the transcripts to create more information in transparency. we make sure the bureau is accountable for hard-working americans by funding the same way that other agencies do. i have concluded my full testimony for the record. >> mr. frank is recognized. >> i appreciate your acknowledgement of the work we did together.

one of your colleagues was a pioneer in forcing the reserve to be opened. he made the information he claimed did not exist. one thing that ought to be noted, in every instance, the work we did as the information has increase, it has been beneficial. there has been no negative attacks. -- effects. it does dispel the notion that there are nefarious things going on. we have a lot of information out. there'll be no transaction. this was reflected well on what they have done. i filed legislation to remove

the regional presidents from the voting power that they have. this would have a problem of diminishing geographic representation. i cannot think of another element in american government where there is formal buying power to the representatives that is in question. i do not think the american people are aware of the undemocratic nature of this.

to have been setting the policy seems to be mistaken. you we get to appointments without diminishing geographic diversity. that is what we have done. i do feel compelled to come to the defense of the bush administration. the single most important appointment was chairman bernanke. he has been his adviser and then he became head of the fed. i think people have been unfairly critical of mr. bernanke. he has been reconfirmed by the senate. there have been predictions borne out. these are problems we have from the financial crisis. inflation is not at the point sort it has become a serious problem for people. the loans that they have made have actually made money for the federal government.

they have not cause problems in terms of any conflict of interest. we did make some changes. we repealed the part of the law but said that the fed could give money whenever they thought it was important to do so. the best example of that was aig. we still have money. we have a place that was some other ways to go. errork it'll be a grave to appealed the dual mandate. in the long run monetary policy means what people said. as we know, it does not mean that that is the only one. there are times when a balance is necessary. i can make a procedural point. i would be consent to see this

put aside. we have a bill that my colleague has put forward. i will agree with him when he said the dual mandate is not in the constitution. i agree. neither is the federal reserve. alexander hamilton tried to put in there and got beat out. there are a very big differences. partisan differences can be carried too far. they're also at the heart of democracy. it is legitimate to have different groups with different views. many things unemployment is a serious problem that deserves being addressed explicitly. i would urge you, let's take the bill and put it out there. let's have a committee markup. let the debate that one before the election.

the american people can take away concern after the election. >> thank you. i think both members for their opening statement. i ask consent to include written statements for the sponsor of legislation. i will now yield myself by minutes for questions. the first is for congressman brady. i love the title of your bill, and the sound dollar. that is something i think is so important. it seems to get a sound dollar we need to have something we can define. the deal have a definition in order to give us an idea what our goals are? how do we define the unit of account? it was defined for a good many

years. until 1971 it always had a precise definition. do you have a definition for a sound dollar? >> right now the fed has defined a two% inflation. it seems reasonable over time. the truth is that we want a role space inflation target. we what the fed to stop policies and intervention and to focus on things within the lines of both inflation and deflation. that is the strongest foundation for economic growth. this is not an either or. the fed cannot do a good job by job creation as the chairmen and their members agree. over time, preserving the

purchasing power it does create the opportunity for strong job increase. there is not an explicit target itself. >> you sign the dollar by achieving a price level or price stability. >> we choose a sound dollar appeared quite there are many free-market economists you do not concentrate on that. they want a flexible pricing level. some said there is no inflation because prices were stable there are distortions in the market.

their lead to the 1930's. the concentrate on prices. rather than looking at the total picture, if you did mention about not monetizing debt. how would you adjust to the fact that the price level does not give you the information? a lot of prices going down like an electronics. how would adjust for that task i have long ago learned to never discussed fed history with you. looking a little closer, what we saw in 1970 is a great lesson. we were told we cannot have high unemployment and high and

inflation at the same time. it actually treated very volatile economies with very deep and frequent recessions. when the fed focus back on a single mandate of price stability in 1979, at that change. shallowbeen had a very sallo recession. we saw the balance of that. in 2000 we saw the fed keep interest rates low for too long. it's helped inflate a credit housing bubble. within the sound of dollar act, not only do we focus on rules based inflation targets, but

required the fed to monitor and report back on these potential asset bubbles to monitor the new price of gold and other commodities and bonds. we do not force them to act on that. that circumstance will vary. we want to ensure that not only the price index of goods and services but the potential asset bubbles be reported to you and i into the public as well. >> i am out of time. i think there is going to be a second round. of the i can get my question asked. >> thank you so much. let me ask both witnesses, currently the unemployment rate

is 8.1%. what can the federal reserve and congress do to put americans back to work? >> i do. i think the fed is trying to do too much. they are trying to make up for some failed economic policies from the white house. i also believe they are like the doctors and gives you a feel every five minutes and asked how you're feeling? take another one. they are creating uncertainty. i believe the more the fed does the more responsibility congress is taking. bidding their right tax policy and balance regulation, ensuring the right spending levels and entitlement reforms that actually creates that

uncertainty. i believe congress is doing more. in the long term, that slows the recovery. >> don't you think that congress could be doing something now as far as passing the transportation bill which would be a job a starter deck/ ? >> it is important to get our policy right. that would be helpful. at the taking of this discussion of higher taxes, the health-care plan in mind you is a real deterrent for job creation. there is a lot of thing congress can do there is a reason the fed said in the interim not setting an employment target. in the end we cannot control its. guides what you think the

federal reserve and congress is doing to america? >> i think they have been very helpful. i think the greatest bill would prohibit this. we would be worse off. i think the intervention has been helpful. it is been helpful in providing the funding that has helped our economy. secondly, there's a difference between the policies. it would work in the european central bank. it has been helpful and avoiding the serious downturn in europe. i think the federal reserve is great. >> with the european central bank? >> they have been very helpful. to have done the federal reserve, it would have been a very grave error. as far as congress, we have a

major economy. the unemployment rate is higher than what had been if we had not forced state and local governments to fire 600,000 firefighters. many are financed by the property tax. property values went down. it is important for us to reduce the deficit long term. my colleagues thinks the present was to get out to quickly. i think he was to stay there. i think there is a great deal of room for reduction. i think we should be, and will be fighting about this. to cut the military that they cut our medicare and medicaid? i would be for an increase in

stimulus. the give money to the states and they will hire some people. as for taxes, i heard the argument that higher taxes will kill the economy. in the years afterward, we have a very good economy. i do not have to claim that the higher taxes a marginal rate increases are unfair and small amount. the talk about people making more than a million dollars a year for every thousand dollars, it is inconceivable to me that and no negative effect. >> thank you so much. >> ideal time in its suit him from arizona.

>> would you like me to yield ?his t >> thank you very much. >> i would rather be grilled by him than yourself. >> i say this one for the ranking member. >> the big argument is still mandate. i am pretty much a skeptic on what we get from the fed. i think they generally can find an excuse to do what ever. i know this will go on for a while. i am not hopeful that will solve the problem. i think they are rather independent than what they do.

i wanted to ask you a question. the appointees, whether they are approved by the senate are not, a lot of people that i talk to are interested. they are concerned that this is not a government operation. they do not like the private. it you think he fully answer that? to partially answered by saying people have to be approved? does this become less private and lessen mr.? crack>> i will not say sinister. i do not think the people when they pick a president, that is not sinister. it has an obvious bias. i diminished this by not having them vote. there's another thing we can do.

we'll have a couple of other things on your mind. there was a proposal to subject the consumer financial protection bureau. it would seem to be another step that could be taken. i am not for and myself. i would think consistency would say why not do the federal reserve including the original entities. i think if he said there was an alternative, it would have the senate confirmed. that might be worse. i diminish the private sector. except for people who are concerned about it more than me. >> i do not want to use all of this time. i yield back my time.

>> seized a sorry he was not here. -- he is a sorry he is not here. one thing i'm trying to get my head around, would still mandates, does it ultimately, here we are chasing inflation. through the back door does that also allow us to avoid tough decisions? i do not see how it does. i reject the notion that we should be blaming the fed. i do not think we are avoiding those. we have very different views about to do it. some people want to raise this on the wealthy. others wanted to others.

i do not see the fact that there is a responsibility somewhere else allowing us to avoid anything. >> i did say one truism. that is it is our response ability. i find that we tried to push it off to regulators. you do the board. we have this plausible deniability. >> i think that is a case with regard to military activity. it has not been so much executive overreach as congressional ducking. i am going to agree with you on that. >> there are not doing a good

job. the weakest recovery since the great depression, the lowest number of workers in the workforce, despite the stimulus it is close to the class for come hours -- cash for clunkers. at the end of the day it is our responsibility. >> thank you for yielding back. >> i think the gentleman. i get five minutes to maloney.mawoman >> i would like to ask mr. brady to respond to a statement from the argued that the federal reserve's actions in the area of monetary policy during the economic crises were more

powerful and effective than anything that congress did escalate through the stimulus. i would argue that the pursuit of a dual mandate contributed to avoid being in all out of economic collapse and helped fuel our economy. i specifically but like to ask my colleagues, can you cite any example of how the demand day in any way hinders their recovery? most believe that it was helpful and recovery. >> i think there are a couple issues. the actions in the mid-2000's, keeping the interest rates too long help bring about crisis that they later intervenes. >> that happened during greenspan. >> often the fed as it is today is over the decades >> we are discussing it.

we're looking at the recovery, the actions that took place by bernanke and others. you're saying the interest rates were too low. with keeping it high to avoid inflation have been a sensible policy during the crisis when we were looking for recovery? that is the time that we were looking at, how they still mandate responded to the crisis. i would argue that it is helpful. >> i wanted to give you a yes. >> 0 yes? >> they helped fill this -- they helped fuel the. into calm the waters. it stopped there. look at the economic recovery since. it is identifying this as a way

to not only intervene in the housing market that continued to intervene relevant to allow exiting that market to allocate credit around the united states, a trading this uncertainty on what the fed will do next. does this help heal the financial crisis tax or the helpful during it? yes. to sets congress's role the fiscal policy and trade the business climate is a recovery can occur. >> if the fed had been constrained because they did not have the dual mandate it is in the recovery. would it be what we are experiencing now? they were able to keep it a look

at inflation, they would have been raising interest rates. the lord i2009 they were constrn inflation, then they would not have been lowering the race. having the still mandate, most are arguing that it gave them the flexibility to act quickly to the marketplace. >> i like to respond. >> i want to talk about the comment about the fed's role in inflating things during the greenspan to years. i 3 by keeping interest rates but by explicitly agreed using to follow the mandate.

many of us did believe that loans were being made imprudently to people who cannot pay them back. i think this would have been a mistake to inflate the economy as a whole. it was an option to use the authority the fed had to ban loans to people who cannot refuse them. in that period, some of us tried to i think it was three fuzing yorefusing this. >> i now recognize him for his

five minutes. >> thank you. thank you for your efforts on the sound dollar act. i like some of the things you have in there. i am curious. do you believe we need the federal reserve as the lender of last resort? do we need some entity that can be the entity that puts the figure in the dike when something starts to happen? >> the answer is yes. in some regards, under a single mandate where focus on the power of the dollar. could the fed intervened? yes. there would still be the lender of last resort. would provide liquidity.

they would still be under a single mandate. is a very unusual situation. what they will not be allowed to do would be to continue to intervene party on the financial crisis. it does contributing to the uncertainty today. >> it would seem that there ability to impact our economy is exaggerated on both ends. it seems to me that they could nibble around the edges but if they had the ability to control unemployment, of we would not have this situation. as long as you have an economy that is rolling along very stable, if they can we get around. i like your approach.

can you explain about why you put it in here and what you want to try to accomplish? >> is this dealing with the special drawing right? >> yes. >> we have done this from a historical one and the other half more recent. unfortunately, what has happened is both republican and democrat administrations had used this to circumvent the power of congress.

these may have been at the appropriate efforts. these decisions should have been made by congress. be applied this to reduce the deficit. we return this to retain our constitutional role to act. >> you're trying to rein them in and go back to the mission of what originally should have been and get more in line with what most people out the fed -- most people think the fed's mission should be. why do you believe important to

have all the members to be appointees? why do think that is important? >> the biggest power the federal reserve has came from the early 1930's. we repeal that. they can no longer do what they did to a d on an entity by entity basis. we should have people reject i cannot think of day comparable -- i cannot think of a comparable one where the entity picks its own people. >> you are assuming this is a government entity.

it has a lot of private implications. >> independence, you get it was 7 year and 14 year terms. when you're talking about interest rates, that is a function. i specifically say they should not be boating to the market -- voting to the market committee. greg thank you. i knelt recognize mr. -- i now recognize mr. ellison for five minutes. >> could you describe and

elaborate on what benefit ec from insuring greater epresentation of -- uyou see from insuring people a greater representation? >> i believe in the electorate making the decisions. there is nothing comparable. today had some vacancies on the board of governors. pap the votes are cast by people. we did a check of who were the members of the boards. it is a co-system. the board members are expected with braid input from the president's. -- expected with input from the president. i am not talking about what they do in their regions or economic

activity. they should not vote on monetary policy. i do not understand what the rationale is for letting private sector people with the financial industry's be the predominant influence in votes and one of the policies. that has been the premise of what we have talked about. >> i have some information that suggests that on the board it is by a professional. >> one person from labor. you have for academics. you have 41 people from banks and 47 from other corporations. >> that is a mistake. it is not the bakers are bad bankers are bad people. it is letting the profession govern its cell. that is a mistake -- itself.

that is a mistake. there ought to be a broader representation in voting on monetary policy, not what is done in terms of regional economic activity. i understand people what some geographic diversity. we should do that. it is very surprising to me that we do not do that for any other agency. we do not say that votes on labor policy are set by boards were unions are the predominant influence. they are subject to senate confirmation. half the votes do not come from groups that are dominated by labor unions. >> i have a little time left.

on this issue of more diversity , it seems like there has been some lack of ethnic and racial diversity. do you think including more voices from consumers from urban and rural areas, people who dealt with hard hit neighbors -- what i think that would be good on the boards. i would not want them boating on the federal government policies. i do not think private citizens should pick other private citizens with no interventions from anyone. there is no confirmation by the senate. it is anomalous for people who believe in democratic self governance.

even with that, i would not want them. they tend to be self selected. i would not want them to set important to national policy. some people think it has been too loose. i do not understand the justification for that. i would say to the chairman, he was not here when we were voting on it, you also have this situation if they said bichat object to appropriation. i think you've you had all of them, it would be ok. others might say you should be subjected to the appropriations process. in any case, i cannot think of a comparable situation where the people in the industry most affected by public policy get to pick a number of the official policy makers with no intervention by anybody elected

to anything. >> i recognize the gentleman from new jersey. >> i will rundown a a series of questions. mr. brady, i am not sure i heard the answer, of a sound dollar. hit a 2%? if we >> it does not set an explicit target. >> is that something that should be clarified? >> i am open to that. i would like congress to accept that type of thing. -- set that type of thing. >> does the ranking member have a comment? >> no. i am concerned about how you would do that statutory lead.

we are in a world where the dollar has a domestic and international role, especially since we're confronting competitors in the world, china, who use the currency. i would not disable ourselves from dealing with that aspect. >> if it did pass legislation, how would we know they are meeting the standard if we did not set a standard? >> that is a good question. it is why we should not pass the vote. >> now the rest of the story. >> i think sending a mandate, whether we set the target or not, i am open to holding them accountable to that. one point i would like to make, and going forward, it is a

terrible mistake to require all the bank presidents to be appointed and confirmed by the senate. it will further politicize the phaedra reserve board, including leading to vacancies -- federal reserve board, including leading to vacancies. i think it will be a less independence because our regional president has an independent staff so they can on their own economic policy. the board of governors approves these regional reserve and banb. we are ready have accountability. >> i wonder what our role is under your scenarios. he says it would go through presidential appointment.

i can also see, we in congress, as far as monetary policy, we are left out except to hear the chairman come to testify on occasion. >> i assume that is what you wanted when you voted not to subject them to the appropriations re -- >> you voted against the appropriations process that would have dealt with the idea you're talking about. >> i am open to it. >> i think there is going to be openness for a long time. >> we are trying to do things different than last session where we moved hundreds of pages at a time. reclaiming my time, ranking member, you raised another question with regard to the

process, the constitutionality of it. he made a good point that it would make him more constitutional if we had it be more of the public sector. where is the constitutionality for either one of the proposals? >> the suggestion that we rushed things through two years ago, we had dozens of role calls, a lot of meetings. i gather you have some concerns about your vote -- >> i am concerned about legislation dropped in at 3:00 in the morning. that is not the debate we're having here. >> i am understand you do not want to talk about your vote. to the constitutionality -- >> i want to discuss what we are

discussing here and not the past. >> i will answer your question. what is says in the constitution, they should be appointed to the president subject to confirmation by the senate. i think voting on monetary policy is an important policy and should be executed by public office. >> for the last word, do you care to chime in? >> we have a contract in that out through the federal reserve paint with a mandate to. now, at a more modeled mandate. -- a more muddled mandate. we do not want the day where congress is setting monetary policy. america is an out liar. of the 47 central banks around the world, only two have a muddled mandate.

the others have set a price stability as the primary mandate. >> may i have one sentence? i thought my american colleagues were in favor of american exceptionally ism. >> i wish we would have dealt with that on fannie and freddie. >> if the gentleman will yield, the republicans have been in 2011.sinc 2e what have you done? >> this will conclude the first panel. i want to thank our colleagues for a lively discussion. thank you for being here. now we will have the second panel be seated.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> c-span is a guide to the 112th congress. you'll find contact information for each member of the house and senate as well as maps and assignments. you'll also learn more about members of the cabinet. supreme court justices, and the nation's governors. you can get a copy for $12.95 online at c-span.org/shop. >> in a few moments, the head of the border patrol testifies about border security. candidasll hear from from indiana. this comes as richard lugar was defeated by the state treasurer. more from a hearing on the

federal reserve. >> on "washington journal, "we will be joined by huelskamp. paul krugman will take your questions about his book. also harbors magazine contributed editor will discuss public housing. "washington journal" is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> this week, the ceremony and pageantry of the state opening of parliament. until recently, the opening was held toward the end of the year. with changes to their elections, it has been moved to the spring.

wednesday, queen elizabeth will outline the government's priority for the upcoming year. coverage starts at 5:30 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> the head of the u.s. border patrol says there is a strategy to focus resources to keep the border secure. michael fischer told congress that the plan will target remote areas and repeat offenders. this is an hour and a half. our border patrol plan. we have a great lineup of witnesses today. before we begin talking about our border, i think it is

appropriate for the committee to acknowledge the extraordinary professionalism and work that happened with the fbi and cia in regards to foiling the recent bombing plot in yemen. i was sitting one -- would say one thing, the war iter is not over. -- on terror is not over. i think americans can be comforted by the fact that we have such a high vigilance and a summit professional people in all of our agencies. we will hear from a number of alf them. they are working the state to protect us against the enemies of freedom. one of the things that is incumbent on us is to make sure that we provide these individuals with the tools they need, the resources, the training they need to be able to stop a plot such as the --

such as we saw. being from the detroit area, ready christmas day bomber almost blew up 300 folks from my hometown, we always need to be vigilant. on behalf of the committee, the entire committee, i think we are very thankful that this plot was stopped. today our subcommittee is going to be talking about the border patrol's new strategic plan. our panelists are michael fisher and rebecca gambler and marc rosenblum, from the congressional research service. we welcome them all. i will make formal introductions after the opening statements. --ng the illuminat

enumerated powers to congress ensures that we secure nation's borders. how we determine that or measure that and what a secure border looks like has been the subject of much of this work during this congress. the u.s. border patrol released an updated five years plan, the first strategy since 2004. this is intended to mark a shift in focus from being resource base, to risk-based. principal themes for the new plan our information, and rapid response, of which are important aspects to consider as we work to secure our border. the border patrol has to make the best use of the resources the congress provides and respond quickly if conditions change, which they always are evolving. i want to say that i am

encouraged of the border patrol decided to reflect the reality we face on the border today. i am concerned that the 2012-26 strategy lacks a way to measure our efforts on the border. we will explore that today. the new strategy is absent in an emphasis of proven techniques such as defense, making use of interior checkpoints to deny migration, it is not mentioned in this new strategic plan. i am sure there will be a question on why that was not included. operations and patrolling using the best intelligence to inform how and where agents patrol. the new strategy focuses on information to better secure our borders. intelligence is an imperfect will. randomness should be incorporated to keep the drug cartels from finding holes in our defenses or tracking our patterns.

the most important question is, how do we know if it is working? how can we measure it? the previous strategy was predicated on the concept of gaining in maintaining miles of operational control. that became the de facto term that indicated how much of the border to border patrol could effectively control. it is clear that the department of home unsecured is backing away from the use of that turer. in 2010, the department stopped reporting to congress the miles under operational control. we have not been supplied with an alternative measure to replace this matrix. performance measures such as the number of apprehensions are not adequate to measure border patrol, security progress. as i have said, we are open to a

new, more robust standard. if this supplements operational control and is better described. when we hear terms like the border is more secure than ever, how do you measure that? that is what we're looking for. conditions along the border continue to evolve. we need to understand progress. the border is a much different place now than it was in 2004. congress has invested and doubled the size of the patrol, building hundreds of miles of offense, utilizing new technology like uav's that we have had many hearings about. however, all of these elements are also prevalent in the 2004 strategy. i would be interested to see what is different or new in the 2012 plan. as mentioned, the department is working on something called the

border condition index. it is supposed to be an objective measure to inform our efforts. we have heard some reports that the anticipated new standard is running into some delays, maybe it is not workable. we will be eager to hear how bad is happening. using apprehension as a member of progress tells and a complete story. there are a number of reasons why migration across our border is down, certainly our efforts are one of the components. the economy has been weakened, drug cartels are trying to cross the border. changing demographics. all of these things play a role in the reduced number of illegal aliens who are crossing the border. i say that by not taking away from the work at the border patrol has done.

our enhanced enforcement efforts such as prosecution for multiple crossers have made a tremendous difference. at the same time, we cannot be complacent as the number of aliens crossing in rio grande have increased, bucking the national trend. we have called on homeland's security to produce a strategy to secure the border and inform us of the resources needed to make that a reality. i would hope that the implementation plan will indicate what a secure border looks like and provide a path to get there. i also want to mention that it is the anniversary of the founding of the u.s. border patrol. that is going to be later this month. the men and women in green have served our nation in an extraordinary, remarkable, and professional well executed

right. on behalf of this committee, i want to commend all of the men and women for the work they have done over the last decade, 87 years and since 9/11 and we have started to focus on our border in a much more intense way, they have done an extraordinarily professional job for all of us. i look forward to hearing from the witnesses on how this change will move the ball forward to make for a more secure border. at this time i would recognize the gentleman from texas. >> thank you for having this meeting. i am glad we're here to examine the strategic plan. i have believed that border security is an element of homeland security and after the terrorist attacks of september congress provided the

resources necessary to secure that. we learn a lot from september 11 and we want to make sure that we secure our land, air, a maritime borders and make sure that is a top priority for all of us. as a result, the number of agents has more than doubled. as of last month, there were 21,000 border patrol agents. there was a graduating class of 1000. congratulation on that. additional resources allow for expanded infrastructure such as mobile surveillance units. the u.s. border patrol refocused its response to 9/11 while remaining committed to its traditional duties of preventing the illicit trafficking of people and contraband between our ports of entry. the border patrol released its first strategic plan in march of 2004.

that provided the framework for the ongoing acquisition and deployment of technology and infrastructure resources along the border. the border patrol has continued to grow and has only recently begun to level off. this is appropriate for the agency to set forth a new plan to assure the new border patrol is as effective as possible. in order to utilize border patrol, the agency has developed a risk-based strategy which is something that we are interested because we want to see if you put x amount of dollars into an agency, what are the results? working with all of the folks, we want to try to find the right results. it can be difficult but we

appreciate that what you're doing to make sure that we focus on results. the new plan is focused on identifying high-risk areas and targeting the response to meet those threats. cooperation is key to the 20 top strategy as it would serve as a died in the overall effort to ensure progress continues on our borders. the strategy also builds on a relationship with mexico and canada as it relates to porter management and security. i am hopeful that the discussion will help us gain a better perspective not only of where border patrol is but also on the future direction of the agency. i am also interested in finding out how border patrol will continue to build on the relationship with state and local counterparts. you and i have talked about the importance of making sure they are all working.

we cannot do it by ourselves. we appreciate all of the work you are doing in that effort. given the importance of providing not adjusted tools necessary but also plans to get us there. i am also interested about how our witnesses can believe we can get to that point. i want to thank the chairman eting. for having this mete we got to see the work that is being done not only in the ports of entry but also on the boats. thank you for the work you are doing in providing that type of work down there. i want to thank all of the witnesses for joining us here today. i yield back. >> we heard excellent reports

about your field hearing. i thought that was an excellent effort and i appreciate your service to do such a thing. the chair recognizes the ranking member, the gentleman from mississippi. >> i welcome our witnesses here. some i have seen in the past. i am looking forward to your testimony. i am encouraged to develop a comprehensive strategy for securing america's borders. it is my hope that the department will do so. i am pleased that the u.s. border patrol has developed a new plan to guide the agency over the next few years, four

years. with the support of congress, the border patrol has experienced unprecedented growth in terms of personnel and resources. the ranking member of the subcommittee has already indicated the normal of agents has more than doubled over the last decade. over 21,000 today. dhs has also added hundreds of miles of fencing in their ears rs that time, -- and barrie in that time. they have deployed additional equipment including surveillance systems, cameras, and uav's. given these changes, it seems appropriate for the border patrol to set forth a new strategy based on current realities. the border patrol's strategic

plan is a relatively brief document compared to the depth before the law-enforcement agency. i look forward to hearing more details about the strategic plan and how it will be implemented in the near term and in the coming years. i have some initial thoughts on the plan. one of the concerns expressed on the rapid growth of the border patrol was the need to ensure proper training and supervision of less experienced agents. i was pleased to see that the plan gives consideration to supporting the men and women of the border patrol and insuring that -- it also discusses the border condition index, which is the border patrol -- which is

being developed to replace operational control as a metric for managing border security. we are told that the new bci will capture a more comprehensive picture of conditions including public safety and quality of life. it is my hope that it will offer a better indicator of the situation along the border and is not just in case of finding a new ruler when you do not like the first measurement. i look forward to hearing more details at this hearing once the new system is implemented. thank you to the witnesses for joining us today. >> other members of the committee are reminded that opening statements might be submitted for the record. michael fisher was named the chief supporter patrol may, 2010. he started his duty along the

southwest border in 1987 in arizona. he completed the selection process for the tactical unit in 1990 and was selected as a field supervisor. he served as the deputy chief patrol agent in detroit and as an assistant agent in tucson, arizona. rebecca gambler is a director in the u.s. accountability office of homeland's security. she leads the work of border security and immigration issues. and hased in 20102, worked on a range of issues. marc rosenblum is a specialist in immigration policy at the congressional research center and is a professor of political secience in new orleans. he is the co-editor of the oxford handbook of international migration. he has also published over 40

articles, book chapters, and policy breeze on immigration and u.s.-latin american relations. the chair recognizes chief fisher for his testimony. >> distinguished members of the subcommittee, it is a privilege and then honored to appear before you today to discuss the work that customs and border protection dozen securing america's borders. in 28, 2012 will mark the 80th birthday of the patrol. as this day approaches, i am reminded how the author defined the term "writing of the brand" as a loyalty to the brand. since the days of the mo anddern -- modern watchmen, the have done no less to protect our borders.

"if a man did not like a rancher the way they conducted their affairs, and he was free to quit. if he stayed on, he gave loyalty and expected a." for 88 years, the men and women of the patrol have stayed on, giving their loyalty to their mission and the nation. since 1924, the border patrol has responded to an ever changing nation as it recognize the need to curb the influx of people in contraband entering its borders. as a nation evolve, so did the job. during the prohibition era, inspectors pursuit liquor smugglers in arizona. as world war two rich, inspectors scanned the atlantic horizon for submarines off the coast of florida. the cold war found personnel on board domestic airline flights serving as u.s. air marshals. during the civil rights movement, the border patrol to join u.s. marshals to enforce

federal law by protecting james as he registered at university of mississippi's first african american student. in the wake of hurricane katrina, agents responded to help victims and restore order. during the reconstruction of iraq and afghanistan, agents brought security and support. whether dealing with illegal immigration or facing the threat of international terrorism, agencies have done their job with vigilance, integrity, and pride. the threats have changed over the years but the basic mission remains unaltered. defending and protecting our nation's borders is our brand, as important today as it was in the past. this month, as we take devotion from our past to carry out our task of securing the borders, it is fitting and proper i am here to discuss the future for the 2012-2016 plan. the border is a difference in

varmint today than when i began my career. i have witnessed the evolution of the border over the past 25 years, in terms of additional resources as well as the change in the adversary's tactics. the plan builds on the foundation of the 2004 national strategy. it focused on getting the four organized and resourced through intelligence and infrastructure. in most programs and initiatives that apply information, integration, and rapid response to develop and deploy better techniques and procedures to achieve our strategic objectives. the principal theme of our strategy is to use information, integration, in response to meet all threats. this is essential as we continue to build upon an approach that puts the greatest capabilities in place for combat.

first, information provides awareness and intelligence developed by blending things such as reconnaissance, community engagement, tracking, and technology to enable agents to get ahead of the threat. second, integration to notes our comprehensive planning and execution of security operations that leverages partnerships to ensure we bring all available capabilities and tools to bear in addressing threat. and through a rapid response, capabilities to meet and mitigated the risks we confront. representative response means the border patrol and its partners can quickly respond to dynamic threats. related any hasn't intricate planning goals. one is to secure america's borders. we work to achieve this by preventing terrorist and weapons from entering the united states, a managing risk, disrupting and

degrading transnational criminal organizations, including an approach and increasing an engagement. the current risk environment is characterized by a variety of threats. the border patrol must harness information and intelligence to ensure that operations are targeted against potential threats. the ability to prevent and disrupt such threats is enhanced through information sharing, planning, and execution with our domestic and foreign partners. likewise, developing and applying the best information is critical to assessing and managing risk. capabilities must continue to adapt to ensure that resources are being used effectively and efficiently. the border patrol the employes a strategy which uses of various techniques to gather situational awareness. it allows the border patrol to

continue focusing other capabilities on areas where the highest risks exist to ensure that any threat is identified quickly. in addition to that, we must continue develop mobile response to the ability to redeploy to debilities to the highest risk areas. through targeted enforcement and the expansion of programs, the border patrol will increase the ability to disrupt transnational criminal organizations along our borders. our delivery system is an example of been able to provide strategies that died management and agents through a standardized process designed to evaluate each subject and identified the consequence. in order to maximize and forssmann benefits, we must move beyond collaboration -- enforcement benefits, we must move beyond collaboration.

we must ensure we are working together in an integrated way. the border patrol will continue to educate the public, border activities and issues to leverage assistance of our communities. engagement by the border patrol and the public can assist in reducing violence an. we must refine the capabilities and techniques. the border patrol will achieve this by strengthening our investment in people, supporting our employees, supporting our integrity, improving our processing and enhancing our efficiencies. we must strengthen our people and capabilities to improve education, training, and support. we must reinforce the support initiatives and programs that continue to provide ways for employees to remain resilient in the performance of their day-to- day duties. we must address threats and

remain vigilant to combat corruption, in sure route and our mission on a compromise. -- in short morale -- ensure morale and our mission is not compromise. d. this will allow us to link force to the tactics of our adversaries. it is our responsibility to ensure that leaders and support personnel are goods stores of the american tax dollars. as we progress toward maturity, an essential element will be the development and refinement of comprehensive, demanding, and results-german performance measures. the strategic plan marks an important part in the development of u.s. border patrol and establishes an approach that is tailored to meet the challenges of security

and 21st century border against a number of threats. ultimately, leveraging all available actions and techniques, and encompassed within our plan, to strengthen the control internee -- internally and national security to the use of information, integration, and rapid response. thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i look forward to working with u.s. we devised this plan. i welcome your questions. >> at this time we would recognize ms. gambler. >> i appreciate the invitation to testify at today's hearing to discuss work on border security programs and performance measurements which could inform efforts as we transition to a new strategic plan. the border patrol is the federal

agency with responsibility for securing u.s. borders between ports of entry. from 2004 through 2011, the number of agents nearly doubled from 10,800 to nearly 21,500. the department of all land security has reported that about four $0.4 billion has been invested in border technology and infrastructure. the border patrol is issuing a new plan to guide efforts. this plan will involve the use of the risk-based approach based on the three elements of information, integration, and rapid response. i would like to focus my remarks on key areas related to the border patrol strategies. i would like to highlight our work related to the implementation of the 2004 strategy. i would like to highlight our

work reviewing performance measures and indicators for border security. with regard to my first point, our work has shown that the border patrol and the department of homeland security has made progress in developing and deploying capabilities related to the three elements of the new plan. the border patrol and the department have to provide information and situational awareness for securing the border. coordinate with partners and provide a mobile response. their apartment has deployed various technology assistance to increase situational awareness among the southwest border. the border patrol and its partners have established task forces for coordinating activities along the northern border. while these are positive developments, our work has identified challenges facing the border patrol and the department of all my insecurity in implementing the strategy, a

consideration -- homeland security in implementing the strategy. for example, we have reported on the need for the department to toter assess the benefits an help provide situational awareness. we have also reported on the need for the department to help identify and reduce any potential duplication of effort. turning to the issue of performance, the department of homeland's security's goal was used in conjunction with the border patrol in 2004 strategy. it was defined as the number of border miles were the patrol have the ability to detect and introject cross border illegal activity. the apartment last reported its progress in achieving control of the borders in 2010. at that time, the department

reported achieving control for 1,100 miles, 13% of more than a thousand miles across u.s. borders. on the southwest border, and operational control of 873 miles, 44% of the 2,000 miles of the u.s. border with mexico. the department of homeless insecurity and border patrol have several up for us to develop new measures for assessing border security programs. until these are completed, the department is using interim measures on the southwest border. these provide useful information but in opposition the department's report on how effective its efforts are. in closing, as the board transition to a new plan, it will be critical for them department to provide direction

and oversight of the implementation. it will also be important to continue to develop measures to link to missions, include targets, and produce results. this concludes my oral statement. >> thank you for that testimony. the chair recognizes doctor rosenblum. >> i am honored to present testimony today on behalf of the congressional research service. first, the u.s. border is a different place than it was in the mid-1990s when the current strategy was developed. the changes at the mortar have costs. these observations of lead to the new strategy comes at an appropriate time and raises important questions.

in some ways we are at a critical juncture with defining borders security and understanding risks and threats to the united states. let me begin with the change at the border. the current strategy is prevention through deterrence, the idea that the concentration of personnel and surveillance technology will discourage unauthorized aliens from entering the united states. a new strategy that continue to emphasize investments on the border and also focused on the intelligence to assess risk and target to enforcement. this includes potential terrorists. at the same time, dhs announced a national program emphasizing personnel, surveillance technology, as well as new removal practices. my written testimony includes several data points that showed that these plants have been

implemented. when example is the growth in personnel, faster growth in the 1990's and faster in the most recent decade. concentrated primarily on the south west border. there is an increasing body of evidence suggesting these investments have begun to pay off. apprehension of unauthorized migrants are at their lowest level in 40 years. my written testimony includes indicators that suggest a legal migration. several factors have contributed to this trend, including the u.s. economic downturn, crime in northern mexico, the strong economic recovery since 2010, demographic changes in mexico. u.s. enforcement efforts are an important contributing factor behind illegal immigration. this figure is one of the causal dynamics.

it shows to measures of the fees migrants pay. there were flat during the 1980's, and then rose sharply in the early 1990's. the figure suggests it was easy to cross the border during the 1980's but became more difficult in the 1980's. these gains have intel costs. one way to think about it is in terms of appropriations. my written testimony also identifies a number of unidentified consequences and indirect costs of border enforcement on crime, mortality, the environment, communities and u.s. foreign relations. border enforcement also entails opportunity costs, competing with other priorities and with priorities outside of dhs.

this figure compares figures to resources for inspections and enforcement. funding for enforcement has more than doubled since 2004 while funding at the ports has increased by less than a third. full-time employment has increased 99%. we often think of border security in terms of how many unauthorized migrants make it through the desert but this highlights the the border patrol to risk management. four types of threats may be important to consider. whether the mass destruction, drugs and other contraband, potential terrorists and regular unauthorized migrants. they have different risk profiles. most agree that wmb are a los

right. regular immigration is a higher probability threat. illegal drugs fall somewhere in between. the southwest border between ports of entry is a point of vulnerability winter sport -- with respect to drugs and other contraband. both are considered most likely to be smuggled into the united states through a port of entry rather than carry across the border. the southwest border also may not be the greatest point of vulnerability with respect to terrorists who maybe trying to go through a port or from canada or at a coastal border. the new strategy offers a moment to think about the bottom line goals for security. water the most serious threats? where are the greatest points of

vulnerability? what additional policies may reduce risks? thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> i want to thank the witnesses for being here today, particularly you, chief, who is the only person in uniform. we are all here and telling you are critical way of looking at all of this. i appreciated you articulating a long and distinguished history of the cbp. you know, i was also taking notes as you were talking and i have been looking at your new strategic plan. as you mentioned, information integration and rapid response and over $4 billion to

congress, an american taxpayers have invested in technology. with all of the technology we need to utilize for all of our borders, sometimes there is no second for human intelligence. as i mentioned, much of the human bomb plot was a human intelligence community, a counterintelligence, counter- terrorism. the same thing applies for border security in many ways. it seems to me a good way to get that kind of intelligence, you mention it in the strategic plan when you talk about increasing community engagement, these kinds of things, with all of the various stakeholders at all of our borders. we have often said they are a force multiplier. i think you can get a lot more

intel from local law- enforcement and sharing that information, whether it is at the southern border, and our coastal borders, what have you. one thing about the street, the st. talks. -- street talks. you're there to develop a threat assessment based on that and tell. also, are was -- of course i am from detroit -- are was on the canadian side of the blue water bridge looking at what their counterparts were doing. i had one of your officers with me. what did they have? dogs. with all of this technology, they were sniffing everything that went through, people, drugs, and their ability is not something high-tech. particularly when you how all of these military dogs coming back.

i know we talk about how that can be a layer of your strategic approach to border security. i mention that because when we talk about defense in depth, looking at ports of entry, making the utilization of checkpoints, a big part of what you were doing was going into the bus terminal, a transportation hubs, sometimes just a random approach. are you still doing that? i am not sure if your continuing to do that. what is your thought about community engagement for intelligence gathering? i think it is as critical as even uav's or anything else. >> we are still doing checkpoints although we are moving away from the term defense in depth.

because that implied a first and fundamental imperative, terrain denial. whether they were tactical or permanent. we will continue and that is what we have passed the field seats to take a look at. just because it is not necessarily written, the strategy is a broad framework of how we want to have the organization start thinking. there will be things that we will continue to do and if it makes sense to continue on that path, we will do that. some of our terminology is also going to change. community engagement is going to be critical to understand the change toward community engagement. as you articulate it, we have 21,000 border patrol agents. we also have that many

intelligence collectors. we will have to train them to recognize that every individual they encounter is a potential source of information. we also do not want to discount open source information. people that live in the border communities have a lot of the information that will not be able to share that with us. that was some of the lessons learned. shifting their thinking in terms of their strategy and how they're going to confront the threats they were seeing overseas. it the same approach we're taking in recognizing we have to make sure that, give us a call if you'd see something suspicious. explain to them what is suspicious and why it is important they respond and provide that level of information. it is a strategic shift in terms of expectations of the

communities we serve. >> i appreciate you saying that. in the northern sector, this is a pilot program, i am not sure if you have plans to replicate it, in michigan you have all of the stakeholders. the mention the dod, but it was the 9/11 recommendation. the need to know, the need to share among the various agencies. in the case where you have the coast guard, the royal mounted, the state police, the county, all of the marines, the local cities and villages, all of this information is being analyzed by state of the art to data. you are using the computers that

can assess the threat. whether it is the northern tier or what have you, that is something the department needs to think about replicating. it has had a great success in that area. i know my time is running over. what is new in this plan? i am looking at it. i agree with everything here but there was not something that grabs me as being new. is there anything new in here that you highlight as a component of this new plan? >> i will give you an example, two. one is the change detection capability and the other talks about optimizing capability. when were not able to do that eight years ago because we did not have the resources or the technology that allowed us to

look into areas like the northern border or some of the remote areas along the border because we were not able to get into those areas. the torain did not lend itself to patrols in that area. with the assistance we have had, it gives us the ability to use things like synthetic greater to go out and fly among the border to confirm or deny any changes in the environment or any entries. that allows us to use technology to be able to understand where those threats are going to be evolving. those phrases, although they are somewhat new, and takes on new meaning when you look at implementation. >> to any of the witnesses have any comment in what is new in the plan? you agree to what the chief is pointing out? or is there something else that

caught your eye? >> from our perspective, some of the same elements are in the 2012 strategy as the 2004 strategy. i think there is a different level of emphasis on some of the capabilities, thinking through how all those might be implemented. i think it is a difference in emphasis to some extent. >> i would agree that the evolution when you look at the prevention to deterrence a described in the 1990's, there is a clear trend of the border patrol describing having adequate resources put in place at the border and thinking about how to deploy them and use them flexibly. >> first of all, doctor, let me say thank you for the reports she gave us. members, if you have not seen

the congressional research report dated january 6 of this year, border security, immigration enforcement between ports of entry, i would ask one of the charts about pricing, i appreciate the work you have done. let me ask you about some of the changes. do you know if a border patrol, have they appointed a performance improvement officer already? if you know. >> i am not certain. >> to you know if they have started working according to their priority goals? have they set up their priority goals? >> there are certain things they're supposed to be doing and

they have done that already. >> i am not certain about that, either. i have not seen all of those reports. >> chief fisher, do you know who your performance improvement officer is? or is that under homeland?

.

>> they generate reserves in the banking system. creating credit on the basis of these reserves. channelling this credit into particular lines of activity with the bubble has arrived. this is the process by which the asset price bubbles are generated in the economy. we cannot always tell exactly what lines that we generated inches by looking at the fed's bounced sheet. >> many years ago i ran into walking down the street, you're very kind with me. you spent 10 or 15 minutes just talking with me.

i've always been very appreciative of your time. >> thank you. glad you have that memory. abouif we start to move towardse

normalized interest rates, have we created so much paper that artificial rates creep a cascade? >> i do not think it has to. -- it is always easier for the fed to be less accommodative and more. >> i think it would be very hard for the federal reserve to raise interest rates rapidly. i do not think it is likely to do so.

the markets might sell off u.s. bonds are rapidly without that being controllable by monetary policy. i think that is also unlikely under present conditions. which markets have shown us are that people want to hold u.s. bonds. we are the largest most completely reliable market in the world for a safe, liquid assets. >> how much more capacity? $4 trillion? $5 trillion? how big does this bouts she did get? >> that is an interesting question. i do not have an answer. >> thank you for yielding. >> thank you very much. we're going to have a brief

second round. .'ve been questioned i do not want to get in on the -- i have a question. a lot of us put a lot of blame on monetary policy and federal reserve and excessive debt. we're not going to resolve that today. do you consider the world financial situation to be a mess? or is it something that will be taken care of soon and there's not that much to worry about? >> i am very worried about europe. i think the austerity policies are the wrong policies at the moment. they will make the situation worse. that is bad for us. the long-run that situation in

europe is serious. at the moment, i would focus attention on getting out of the recession. for us, i think we have to get out of this recession, too. we have to get this debt under control. >> could you follow up? give me your assessment? >> i think it is a huge crisis, both in europe and in the u.s. with tremendous consequences. not only the crisis itself, but in my view, the response to the crisis. the hugely accommodative policy. they have taken a bad situation and made the situation much worse. we need -- we have not seen substantial rises in the overall price level since 2008. if you look at the money in the system, there is simply no

theoretical model which i am aware in which those kinds of actions and do not have a very serious, long run consequences on price inflation. i think we have not seen the worst of the results do. >> thank you. i yield. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to start with a panel-wide question. perhaps you can briefly tried to answer. -- try to answer. do you think the federal reserve's monetary policy execution would be more effective if it set explicit inflation targets and were held accountable to those targets. >> not really.

i think when the fed engages in any kind of expansionary monetary policy, they always generate the same bill affect in the economy. it leads to a pattern of bad investments. even when the keep overall price levels stable. these lines of bad investments, the sort of things we saw in the also invery similarly the 1980's, even if there were stable price level targets that the fed could hit, there would still generate financial instability. >> your opinion? >> posing the problem as a

trade-off is a sort of a false dichotomy. something that representative paul mentioned in the first round was the idea of increased productivity resulting in decreases in prices as of course we see in many industries. there is no reason we should expect or desire stable price levels of 2% per year or whatever. in a growing economy, we might easily expect the price levels to fall. that is what happened in the 19th century of the u.s., which was the period of the strongest sustained economic growth in history. there is no reason for policy to try to prevent that. >> thank you.

>> well, we are have an inflation target, 2%. it seems to me that is not enough. that is what people talk about the dual mandate. that is why i am talking about returning to reporting the strategy of the fed. i think you need more than that to get out of this terrible situation. >> thank you. >> i think explicit targets can be useful. in the law there was an interim target of 4% unemployment and inflation to be achieved. it actually happened. the difficulty, i think, in setting too ambitious a target for real accountability, if you're going to set targets, it should be on an interactive basis. something where you could come back and say, look, how did you

do in relation to those targets and what did you learn? that would make a useful contribution, it seems to me. >> i would agree with that. i think the 2% target is about right. 2% is about right as long as you do not take it too seriously. there might be reasons to deviate in one direction or another. >> thank you, i yield back. >> i recognize the gentleman from arizona with a follow. >> thank you. how big can the balance sheet debt? >> i already think it is too big. >> can you pull the mike closer, please? >> i think quantitative easing, qe1 and qe2 are inappropriate. if they had done it during the

panic. , it would already be back to normal. -- during the panic period, it would already be back to normal. right now, we are already running the risk of a bubble because of a commitment to hold rates so low for so long. when you talk about baubles and we talked of the fed oppose the effort -- when you talk about bubbles and the fed effort to oppose bubbles, we already have bubbles. let's not forget the fact that the fed itself can and in the past has caused bubbles. >> i agree strongly that the fed is the cause of bubbles and the fed needs additional tools to be

about to pop bottles when they emerge. that is taking the wrong view of the nature. as for your question about the balance sheets, it is not just the overall size of the balance sheet that matters. the balance sheet in my concern as a micro economist and looking at quantitative easing is not so much an effect on the fed's overall balance sheets, but on industries. the winner picking up restructuring that are needed to get the economy back on the right track is just as important as looking at the right balance sheet. >> do you have a comment on how big the balance sheet can get? does the mix or the size create a distorted affecting the allocation of capital? >> i do not have a clear view on

how big the balance sheet might get. i do think as one looks decomposition, one has to evaluate the quality of the assets. that is a process which has ramifications for the financial structure going forward. there comes a point when you do need to address those questions. >> thank you. >> i would at one of thing. i think most of us would agree, how is the fed going to unwind the balance sheet? not how big is it going to get. what would be the process that they take these assets off their books and what with the repercussions be in the markets when they began this seriously? >> there goes the bubble concern. what do i know?

you have also been outspoken on this call policy. that has always been appreciative. we have some great difficulties. has of the fact that the fed has been able to grow its balance sheets to such extraordinary levels, in many ways, has that been a way to help congress avoid fiscal policy? >> i do not think so. the fed's buying of bonds is a small part of the whole world fighting bonds as was said. counter to reality, the world believes we are a safe investment. >> have a -- has of the fed

represented close to half? >> i cannot know what the figure is. -- i do not know with the figure is. but right now, we cannot have a rapid reduction in our national borrowing because it would derail the recovery. i do not think the fed has much of a choice. i would be cautious of redoing the balance sheet much further. right now, i think we need a double kind of fiscal policy. it should not be too severe in the short run. we've got to get the long run that under control. >> i recognize mr. green from texas.

>> i thank you the witnesses for been here. i am one of the witnesses who signed the letter for such a hearing. i thank you for honoring the request. let's start with something very basic. the bills that we have ranged from tweaking to abolishing of the fed. i am curious, how many of you are of the opinion is to be abolished? two persons think we should abolish the fed. if you could, please give me a quick summary of why you think the fed should be abolished and then i would like to hear from your colleagues white you think we should maintain it. quickly -- from your colleagues why you think we should maintain

it. >> the fed should be abolished because it can bring in no benefit to society at large. >> in your opinion, the fed will make bad decisions every time? there will be no good decisions made? it cannot have a positive impact? >> i would say there is no other instance where the government has complete monica -- monopolized the production of something on the market. >> i will accept that as your answer. >> we did talk about the federal reserve system more generally. in my written testimony, i give some reasons why the institution of central breaking -- of central banking is not only an needed, but harmful. >> f in your opinion, there should not be a central bank? chrysler got have a central

automobile manufacturer or central theory. >> have you juxtapose that where other countries in the world have central banks? >> its founding is not the majority view among policy makers. that hardly makes it incorrect. >> i think that is a fair statement. >> i think we should reform the fed. evidence in the last two years is that the policy is not working. i look back in history and see the 1980's when things worked pretty well. it was not intervening like it is doing now. it had a more steady-as-you-go policy. that is a more systematic policy. i think some of the reforms -- >> i think on the whole having

a central bank was a modest, it useful structure. i am conscious of taking radical steps and that is little going on in the world that needs stabilizing. >> i feel strongly that we need a strong and independent central bank. the evidence of the 19th century is not as encouraging as some would think. the idea that the world's greatest economy could make do without a central bank, without a monetary policy seems to me quite bizarre. >> thank you. let me go back now in reverse order.

the question is, would we be at a disadvantage if we had no central bank and other economic powers have central banks? >> i think we would be. >> would the dollar as you know it have an impact -- would have an impact on the dollar? >> i think it would clearly have an impact. it would make u.s. treasury bonds much riskier. >> i am going to go quickly. >> i do not recommend abolishing the fed, i recommend reforming it. >> would we be at a disadvantage if we had no central bank and other countries did? >> it depends how reform would

be implemented. right now people are fleeing from the daughter -- from the dollar and heading towards hard assets. >> if the dollar was backed by gold, i do not see how that the harm us. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i now recognize the gentleman from new york. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it strikes me that the size of the fed's bounce she is going to be largely determined given the structure of our representative democracy, by the will of the american people to take in hand what we have created for ourselves at this juncture in our history. really, it will take a lot of

political will for us really to -- unless there is some significant change in the role or structure of the fed. i think so much will lie in how we manage our federal budget going forward. >> i strongly agree with that. i served on the commission. there have been other groups that have all come to the conclusion that we really need to get our fiscal house in order so that the debt is not rising faster than our economy can grow. that will take hard decisions, but we have to do it. >> thank you for your service. it is much appreciated. >> of course, i agree. this is a tremendous political challenge. whether it is a major crisis to bring forth the political will

to make the necessary changes, i do not know. i would hope this body and others would be able to push things in the right direction without waiting for the bottom to fall out. >> do you think what we are doing in europe we should take -- the foreign -- if we did not do something? >> given with the fed has done in the wake of the crisis to bail out the banking system. again, it is going to take strong action against some of the political interests that exist here to turn things around before there is a crisis and we have to do something. >> your thoughts? >> fiscal policy is certainly a mess right now. it has to be fixed or it will be like europe. please to not forget about monetary policy.

it is difficult, people tune out, but it is essential to get right. i do not quantitative easing to be the new monetary policy. we didn't even know that a fact. we do not know how large should be. it is very dangerous. i think it will take some oversight exercise by congress to prevent that. >> in view of what you said regarding the fed oppose the purchase of treasuries, is there a crowding out a fact that we might also be witnessing? >> eventually, of course. the figure is 77%. 77% of that was the fed appeared that is a gigantic amount. i believe there is crowding out about that. >> our federal budget concerns and the federal investments are

crowding out. >> because of the deficits and the borrowing, even in a weak economy, i believe it occurs. >> we are also artificially, if you will, in a sense because of what the fed is doing, we are artificially making the picture for treasuries a bit rosier than we would be. >> what the fed is doing now, with respect to the oversight balance sheet and dictating with the short-term interest rate will be, it does not set it in the market. because of the interest rates would be on reserves. the fed has replaced the entire money market with itself. we just do not know the implications of that. the sooner we get back to normal with the supply and demand for money is determining , andinterest rate

reporting to congress a strategy, the better off we will be. >> it is not a central bank. it becomes a uber bank in a sense. thank you, all. thank you, chairman. >> i want to thank the panel for your time and your testimony. i found it interesting. even though we cannot agree with the cause, it seems like there's a consensus that we have a problem that we have to deal with. it is not just the nine states. his worldwide. my guess is that we will not only look at the management of a central bank, or whether or not we need one, but ultimately we will need to talk about the nature of money, the definition of money, because it is hard to manage something you cannot define. once again, thank you for coming today. [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] c-span's congressional directory is a complete guide to the congress. you'll find contact information for each member of the house and senate. you also learn more about members of the president's can't -- cabinet, supreme court justices, and governors. you can get a copy for $12.95 plus shipping and handling. order online c-span.org/shop. >> in a few moments, the head of

border control testifies on capitol hill. the house armed services committee will mark the defense authorization bill today. concede that live on c-span3 at 10:00 a.m. eastern. >> saturdays this month, c-span rear is airing more of the nixon tapes from the collection of secretly recorded telephone conversations. this saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern, here conversations with deputy national security adviser. >> it is very significant, this new york times expos a of the most highly classified documents of the war. i did not read the story. but that was leaked out of the pentagon.

>> there is a whole study that was done for magnum there and then carry on after mcnamara left. this is a devastating security breach. >> in washington, d.c. listen onding 90.1 fm. >> the head of the u.s. border patrol says there is a new strategy to focus intelligence and resources to keep the border secure. he told members of congress said it would target remote areas and repeat offenders. this is an hour and a half. >> the committee on homeland's security. in the subcommittee today, examining our border patrol plan.

we have a great lineup of witnesses today. before we begin talking about our border, i think it is appropriate for the committee to acknowledge the extraordinary professionalism and work that happened with the fbi and cia in regards to foiling the recent bombing plot in yemen. i was sitting one -- would say one thing, the war iter is not over. -- on terror is not over. i think americans can be comforted by the fact that we have such a high vigilance and a summit professional people in all of our agencies. we will hear from a number of them. they are working the state to protect us against the enemies of freedom. one of the things that is incumbent on us is to make sure

that we provide these individuals with the tools they need, the resources, the training they need to be able to stop a plot such as the -- such as we saw. being from the detroit area, ready christmas day bomber almost blew up 300 folks from my hometown, we always need to be vigilant. on behalf of the committee, the entire committee, i think we are very thankful that this plot was stopped. today our subcommittee is going to be talking about the border patrol's new strategic plan. our panelists are michael fisher and rebecca gambler and marc rosenblum, from the congressional research service. we welcome them all.

i will make formal introductions after the opening statements. along the illuminat -- enumerated powers to congress ensures that we secure nation's borders. how we determine that or measure that and what a secure border looks like has been the subject of much of this work during this congress. the u.s. border patrol released an updated five years plan, the first strategy since 2004. this is intended to mark a shift in focus from being resource base, to risk-based. principal themes for the new plan our information, and rapid response, of which are important aspects to consider as we work to secure our border. the border patrol has to make the best use of the resources

the congress provides and respond quickly if conditions change, which they always are evolving. i want to say that i am encouraged of the border patrol decided to reflect the reality we face on the border today. i am concerned that the 2012-26 strategy lacks a way to measure our efforts on the border. we will explore that today. the new strategy is absent in an emphasis of proven techniques such as defense, making use of interior checkpoints to deny migration, it is not mentioned in this new strategic plan. i am sure there will be a question on why that was not included. operations and patrolling using the best intelligence to inform how and where agents patrol.

the new strategy focuses on information to better secure our borders. intelligence is an imperfect will. randomness should be incorporated to keep the drug cartels from finding holes in our defenses or tracking our patterns. the most important question is, how do we know if it is working? how can we measure it? the previous strategy was predicated on the concept of gaining in maintaining miles of operational control. that became the de facto term that indicated how much of the border to border patrol could effectively control. it is clear that the department of home unsecured is backing away from the use of that term. in 2010, the department stopped reporting to congress the miles

under operational control. we have not been supplied with an alternative measure to replace this matrix. performance measures such as the number of apprehensions are not adequate to measure border patrol, security progress. as i have said, we are open to a new, more robust standard. if this supplements operational control and is better described. when we hear terms like the border is more secure than ever, how do you measure that? that is what we're looking for. conditions along the border continue to evolve. we need to understand progress. the border is a much different place now than it was in 2004. congress has invested and doubled the size of the patrol, building hundreds of miles of offense, utilizing new technology like uav's that we have had many hearings about. however, all of these elements

are also prevalent in the 2004 strategy. i would be interested to see what is different or new in the 2012 plan. as mentioned, the department is working on something called the border condition index. it is supposed to be an objective measure to inform our efforts. we have heard some reports that the anticipated new standard is running into some delays, maybe it is not workable. we will be eager to hear how bad is happening. using apprehension as a member of progress tells and a complete story. there are a number of reasons why migration across our border is down, certainly our efforts are one of the components. the economy has been weakened, drug cartels are trying to cross the border. changing demographics. all of these things play a role in the reduced number of illegal aliens who are crossing

the border. i say that by not taking away from the work at the border patrol has done. our enhanced enforcement efforts such as prosecution for multiple crossers have made a tremendous difference. at the same time, we cannot be complacent as the number of aliens crossing in rio grande have increased, bucking the national trend. we have called on homeland's security to produce a strategy to secure the border and inform us of the resources needed to make that a reality. i would hope that the implementation plan will indicate what a secure border looks like and provide a path to get there. i also want to mention that it is the anniversary of the founding of the u.s. border patrol. that is going to be later this

month. the men and women in green have served our nation in an extraordinary, remarkable, and professional well executed right. on behalf of this committee, i want to commend all of the men and women for the work they have done over the last decade, 87 years and since 9/11 and we have started to focus on our border in a much more intense way, they have done an extraordinarily professional job for all of us. i look forward to hearing from the witnesses on how this change will move the ball forward to make for a more secure border. at this time i would recognize the gentleman from texas. >> thank you for having this meeting. i am glad we're here to examine the strategic plan. i have believed that border security is an element of homeland security and after the

terrorist attacks of september 2001, congress provided the resources necessary to secure that. we learn a lot from september 11 and we want to make sure that we secure our land, air, a maritime borders and make sure that is a top priority for all of us. as a result, the number of agents has more than doubled. as of last month, there were 21,000 border patrol agents. there was a graduating class of 1000. congratulation on that. additional resources allow for expanded infrastructure such as mobile surveillance units. the u.s. border patrol refocused its response to 9/11 while remaining committed to its traditional duties of preventing the illicit trafficking of people and contraband between

our ports of entry. the border patrol released its first strategic plan in march of 2004. that provided the framework for the ongoing acquisition and deployment of technology and infrastructure resources along the border. the border patrol has continued to grow and has only recently begun to level off. this is appropriate for the agency to set forth a new plan to assure the new border patrol is as effective as possible. in order to utilize border patrol, the agency has developed a risk-based strategy which is something that we are interested because we want to see if you put x amount of dollars into an agency, what are the results? working with all of the folks,

we want to try to find the right results. it can be difficult but we appreciate that what you're doing to make sure that we focus on results. the new plan is focused on identifying high-risk areas and targeting the response to meet those threats. cooperation is key to the 20 top strategy as it would serve as a died in the overall effort to ensure progress continues on our borders. the strategy also builds on a relationship with mexico and canada as it relates to porter management and security. i am hopeful that the discussion will help us gain a better perspective not only of where border patrol is but also on the future direction of the agency. i am also interested in finding

out how border patrol will continue to build on the relationship with state and local counterparts. you and i have talked about the importance of making sure they are all working. we cannot do it by ourselves. we appreciate all of the work you are doing in that effort. given the importance of providing not adjusted tools necessary but also plans to get us there. i am also interested about how our witnesses can believe we can get to that point. i want to thank the chairman miller for having this meeting. we got to see the work that is being done not only in the ports of entry but also on the boats.

thank you for the work you are doing in providing that type of work down there. i want to thank all of the witnesses for joining us here today. i yield back. >> we heard excellent reports about your field hearing. i thought that was an excellent effort and i appreciate your service to do such a thing. the chair recognizes the ranking member, the gentleman from mississippi. >> i welcome our witnesses here. some i have seen in the past. i am looking forward to your testimony. i am encouraged to develop a comprehensive strategy for securing america's borders. it is my hope that the department will do so. i am pleased that the u.s. border patrol has developed a

new plan to guide the agency over the next few years, four years. with the support of congress, the border patrol has experienced unprecedented growth in terms of personnel and resources. the ranking member of the subcommittee has already indicated the normal of agents has more than doubled over the last decade. over 21,000 today. dhs has also added hundreds of miles of fencing in their ears in that time, -- and barriers in that time. they have deployed additional equipment including surveillance systems, cameras, and uav's. given these changes, it seems appropriate for the border

patrol to set forth a new strategy based on current realities. the border patrol's strategic plan is a relatively brief document compared to the depth before the law-enforcement agency. i look forward to hearing more details about the strategic plan and how it will be implemented in the near term and in the coming years. i have some initial thoughts on the plan. one of the concerns expressed on the rapid growth of the border patrol was the need to ensure proper training and supervision of less experienced agents. i was pleased to see that the plan gives consideration to supporting the men and women of the border patrol and insuring that -- it also discusses the

border condition index, which is the border patrol -- which is being developed to replace operational control as a metric for managing border security. we are told that the new bci will capture a more comprehensive picture of conditions including public safety and quality of life. it is my hope that it will offer a better indicator of the situation along the border and is not just in case of finding a new ruler when you do not like the first measurement. i look forward to hearing more details at this hearing once the new system is implemented. thank you to the witnesses for joining us today.

>> other members of the committee are reminded that opening statements might be submitted for the record. michael fisher was named the chief supporter patrol may, 2010. he started his duty along the southwest border in 1987 in arizona. he completed the selection process for the tactical unit in 1990 and was selected as a field supervisor. he served as the deputy chief patrol agent in detroit and as an assistant agent in tucson, arizona. rebecca gambler is a director in the u.s. accountability office of homeland's security. she leads the work of border security and immigration issues. she joined in 2002, and has worked on a range of issues. marc rosenblum is a specialist in immigration policy at the congressional research center and is a professor of political science in new orleans.

he is the co-editor of the oxford handbook of international migration. he has also published over 40 articles, book chapters, and policy breeze on immigration and u.s.-latin american relations. the chair recognizes chief fisher for his testimony. >> distinguished members of the subcommittee, it is a privilege and then honored to appear before you today to discuss the work that customs and border protection dozen securing america's borders. in 28, 2012 will mark the 80th birthday of the patrol. as this day approaches, i am reminded how the author defined the term "writing of the brand" as a loyalty to the brand. since the days of the mo anddern -- modern watchmen, the

have done no less to protect our borders. "if a man did not like a rancher the way they conducted their affairs, and he was free to quit. if he stayed on, he gave loyalty and expected a." for 88 years, the men and women of the patrol have stayed on, giving their loyalty to their mission and the nation. since 1924, the border patrol has responded to an ever changing nation as it recognize the need to curb the influx of people in contraband entering its borders. as a nation evolve, so did the job. during the prohibition era, inspectors pursuit liquor smugglers in arizona. as world war two rich, inspectors scanned the atlantic horizon for submarines off the coast of florida.

the cold war found personnel on board domestic airline flights serving as u.s. air marshals. during the civil rights movement, the border patrol to join u.s. marshals to enforce federal law by protecting james as he registered at university of mississippi's first african american student. in the wake of hurricane katrina, agents responded to help victims and restore order. during the reconstruction of iraq and afghanistan, agents brought security and support. whether dealing with illegal immigration or facing the threat of international terrorism, agencies have done their job with vigilance, integrity, and pride. the threats have changed over the years but the basic mission remains unaltered. defending and protecting our nation's borders is our brand, as important today as it was in the past. this month, as we take devotion

from our past to carry out our task of securing the borders, it is fitting and proper i am here to discuss the future for the 2012-2016 plan. the border is a difference in varmint today than when i began my career. i have witnessed the evolution of the border over the past 25 years, in terms of additional resources as well as the change in the adversary's tactics. the plan builds on the foundation of the 2004 national strategy. it focused on getting the four organized and resourced through intelligence and infrastructure. our 2012 plans in most programs and initiatives that apply information, integration, and rapid response to develop and deploy better techniques and procedures to achieve our strategic objectives. the principal theme of our strategy is to use information, integration, in response to meet all threats.

this is essential as we continue to build upon an approach that puts the greatest capabilities in place for combat. first, information provides awareness and intelligence developed by blending things such as reconnaissance, community engagement, tracking, and technology to enable agents to get ahead of the threat. second, integration to notes our comprehensive planning and execution of security operations that leverages partnerships to ensure we bring all available capabilities and tools to bear in addressing threat. and through a rapid response, capabilities to meet and mitigated the risks we confront. representative response means the border patrol and its partners can quickly respond to dynamic threats. an strategy hasn't related

intricate planning goals. one is to secure america's borders. we work to achieve this by preventing terrorist and weapons from entering the united states, a managing risk, disrupting and degrading transnational criminal organizations, including an approach and increasing an engagement. the current risk environment is characterized by a variety of threats. the border patrol must harness information and intelligence to ensure that operations are targeted against potential threats. the ability to prevent and disrupt such threats is enhanced through information

sharing, planning, and execution with our domestic and foreign partners. likewise, developing and applying the best information is critical to assessing and managing risk. capabilities must continue to adapt to ensure that resources are being used effectively and efficiently. the border patrol the employes a strategy which uses of various techniques to gather situational awareness. it allows the border patrol to continue focusing other capabilities on areas where the highest risks exist to ensure that any threat is identified quickly. in addition to that, we must continue develop mobile response to the ability to redeploy to debilities to the highest risk areas. through targeted enforcement and the expansion of programs, the border patrol will increase the ability to disrupt transnational criminal organizations along our borders. our delivery system is an example of been able to provide strategies that died management and agents through a standardized process designed to evaluate each subject and identified the consequence.

in order to maximize and forssmann benefits, we must move beyond collaboration -- enforcement benefits, we must move beyond collaboration. we must ensure we are working together in an integrated way. the border patrol will continue to educate the public, border activities and issues to leverage assistance of our communities. engagement by the border patrol and the public can assist in reducing violence. we must refine the capabilities and techniques. the border patrol will achieve this by strengthening our investment in people, supporting our employees, supporting our integrity, improving our processing and enhancing our efficiencies. we must strengthen our people and capabilities to improve education, training, and support. we must reinforce the support initiatives and programs that

continue to provide ways for employees to remain resilient in the performance of their day-to- day duties. we must address threats and remain vigilant to combat corruption, in sure route and our mission on a compromise. -- in short morale -- ensure morale and our mission is not compromised. this will allow us to link force to the tactics of our adversaries. it is our responsibility to ensure that leaders and support personnel are goods stores of the american tax dollars. as we progress toward maturity, an essential element will be the development and refinement of comprehensive, demanding, and results-german performance measures.

the strategic plan marks an important part in the development of u.s. border patrol and establishes an approach that is tailored to meet the challenges of security and 21st century border against a number of threats. ultimately, leveraging all available actions and techniques, and encompassed within our plan, to strengthen the control internee -- internally and national security to the use of information, integration, and rapid response. thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i look forward to working with u.s. we devised this plan. i welcome your questions. >> at this time we would recognize ms. gambler. >> i appreciate the invitation to testify at today's hearing to discuss work on border security programs and performance measurements which

could inform efforts as we transition to a new strategic plan. the border patrol is the federal agency with responsibility for securing u.s. borders between ports of entry. from 2004 through 2011, the number of agents nearly doubled from 10,800 to nearly 21,500. the department of all land security has reported that about four $0.4 billion has been invested in border technology and infrastructure. the border patrol is issuing a new plan to guide efforts. this plan will involve the use of the risk-based approach based on the three elements of information, integration, and rapid response. i would like to focus my remarks on key areas related to the border patrol strategies. i would like to highlight our work related to the

implementation of the 2004 strategy. i would like to highlight our work reviewing performance measures and indicators for border security. with regard to my first point, our work has shown that the border patrol and the department of homeland security has made progress in developing and deploying capabilities related to the three elements of the new plan. the border patrol and the department have to provide information and situational awareness for securing the border. coordinate with partners and provide a mobile response. their apartment has deployed various technology assistance to increase situational awareness among the southwest border. the border patrol and its partners have established task forces for coordinating activities along the northern border. border. while these are positive