arrest rate for rape kits increased from 40% to 70%. the overwhelming scourge of backlog kits will require nothing less than a national commitment, mr. speaker, including a dedicated response from the united states congress. i am pleased that the bill before us tonight fulfills the request for funding for a new grant program to inventory and test rape kits, develop units to pursue new investigative leads and offer support to victims during the process. the new investment through this bipartisan bill is an important first step. however, through simple addition we can tally pending costs. thank you so much for your indulgence, mr. speaker, i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the -- for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise?

mr. wolf: i rise in opposition to the motion to recommit. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: thank you, mr. chairman. we have now spent more than 15 hours debating and amending this bipartisan bill and i appreciate mr. fattah's help in it that sufficiently and responsibly funds federal programs that provide for safety and economic well being this legislation ensures that our laws are enforced, that our businesses have the tools needed to succeed, and that uncertainty doesn't hinder progress. this bill already provides targeted increases for counterterrorism and cybersecurity, fights the scourge of drug abuse and bolsters american scientific innovation and manufacturing. this is almost -- also a landmark bill for reducing violence against women. it strengthens services for victims of domestic violence,

sexual assault, and stalking by funding above the current level and above the president's request for these programs. in addition, it increases funding for victim assistance programs that will address human trafficking. after amendments, the bill includes $41 million for the community response teams to address the sexual assault kit backlog program. above $6 million, 17% the president's request. he bill also includes $125 million for core d.n.a. programs including the debbie smith program. this is $25 million above the president's request. moreover we do all this while staying within our allocation for this bill, $400 million less than last year, making

commonsense reductions and eliminating waste wherever possible makes a more efficient government that won't create undue doubt about the fiscal future of the nation. the bill has had bipartisan support throughout the process and i believe it deserves bipartisan support today. i urge my colleagues to reject this notion recommit and pass h.r. 4660 tonight. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion to recommit. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. the motion is not agreed to. ms. moore: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute -- pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20 the five-minute vote on the

motion to recommit will be followed by a five-minute vote on the passage of the bill. s that five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 185rk the nays are 220, present

voting two, the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of the bill. the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: the yea the are 321. the nays are 87. the bill is passed. without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. request for one minutes. for what purpose does the entleman from california rise? the gentleman is recognized for

one minute. the house will come to order. the house will come to order. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lamalfa: at a time in the west especially in california of a see career drought, we need to take immediate action to address issues of water storage and building supply to california and the west needs for our future, for agriculture, for the great needs we have that have been neglected for so many years. we haven't built any significant storage in california for at least four years and it's high time that in this time of drought we seize this opportunity to move forward with the bipartisan legislation such as the one i'm carrying, h.r. 4300, whatever it will take to add to our water supply in the state and for our western states. i ask for the congress, senate o come together and get behind

to build water storage in the west. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mrs. capito for today and the balance of the week. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from california rise? mr. lamalfa: i motion we adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the aye vs. t the motion is adopted, accordingly the house

this is asaid, two-year bill because they did not complete the fy 2014 bill. many of the interesting things we like to talk about are in the classified section of the bill but there are a few things that we can glean from it. it beefs up some contractor protections in the wake of the snowden leaks. on syrians porting chemical weapons stock piles and to getfforts to try

around reporting requirements by the u.n.. it also requires the director of national intelligence to conduct of thessification review documents. as you may know, there were a trove of documents seized from the pakistan compound where osama bin laden was killed. >> on that point, your article in cq roll call, intel bill declassifyingw of bin laden documents. what is the reasoning behind that? what do they want to find out? it's not entirely clear. i have not had a chance to speak to any member directly about it. the committee report does say that basically the american people would benefit from what we seized at that compound, what the u.s. seized at that compound.

the committee basically asserts in this report that it would qaeda underh in al bin laden ruled under the last decade. contradict assertions from the white house. al qaeda is on the run. like i said, i have not had a chance to ask some of the members of the committee about that. it also requires dni to explain what portions of those documents have not been declassified. they said that they want to declassified with the intent of protecting sources and methods. >> the rules committee and this tweet --

>> jim mcgovern and a few others jim rogers and rippers burger some difficult questioning about the nsa programs. as you know, the nsa bill was passed last week making the ostensiblyrization easier politically. they did not know boehner -- more about the extent of these programs. and that any the months after eaks, theyn l stated they did not think

anything illegal happened and that that it was a perception problem. they said that again today. >> you also reported on the issue of the drums and the proposed amendment i adam schiff. here's the tweet. what was the fate of that amendment in committee? not mademendment was in order. i'm honestly not sure now as to why. i cannot really speculate. it would have required regular reporting about the casualties in those drone strikes. there were of the requirements as well that were like the joe pitts amendment that would require something along similar lines. as i think you indicated, the

rule might the as notable for the amendments that were not made in order and will not be voted on along with the ones that will. conor o'brien the common defense reporter for cq roll call. you can follow him almost minute by minute on twitter. we thank you for the up date. >> several members of commerce, --congress, republicans and democrats alike, have called for secretary of the v.a. eric shinseki to resign. on facebook, we are asking if you think eric shinseki should design. here are some of the comments so far --

white house jay carney was asked for his support of eric shinseki. >> john carl. very simple yes or no question. does the president have confidence in eric shinseki? from theressed this podium -- >> he did not address that. >> he believes and he is confident that secretary shinseki has served admirably and heroically as a soldier, a general, and he has accomplish some very important things as the secretary of veterans affairs. i listed what they include extending education benefits, reducing veteran homelessness, reducing the size of the backlog for disability claims while expanding the vastly the number

of veterans who can make the claim. >> does the president right now secretarydence in shinseki? it's a very simple yes or no question. >> i would point you to what the president said -- i understand the wordplay here. i think what's more important -- issues that you are looking to when it comes to the revelations that have come to phoenix and other health centers, the president was deeply troubled by what we

saw from the interim report from the inspector general. awaits the preliminary report from the internal audit conducting with the experience of roughly 200 individuals. made clear to secretary shinseki last weekend made clear as a general principle to everyone who serves this administration and the country and he believes in accountability but he also inieves, first and foremost, this issue and making sure that we keep our eye on the ball which is making sure our veterans are taken care of and the focus is on them. when there has been a failure to do that in a timely manner, we need to take action to fix that problem and focus principally on that. the accountability track, if you will, that is why there are inquiries ongoing. as the president said from the

podium last week him he did not want any delay to address the identified problems and the need to get benefits and care to our veterans. >> house republicans held a press conference to talk about problems in the department and the obama administration's record on veterans issues. this 20 minute event begins with eric cantor. >> i believe it goes without saying that there is an accountability problem in the department of veterans affairs. there is a damning indictment on just one facility within the department of veterans affairs that the office of the inspector general has also said they believe that this is a systemic problem throughout the countries v.a. health care facilities.

and so the house is about trying to make a difference and help the v.a. help themselves. we've had problems time and time again where it appears that it's much easier to get a bonus at the v.a. than it is to be disciplined or fired. several of us sponsored a bill, hr 4031, that passed in the house with broad bipartisan support last week that's very simple. three hundred 30,000 employees at the department of veterans affairs, this would give the secretary the ability to discipline up to firing but also by demoting senior executive level individuals which are less than about 450. the secretary says he has the tools to do the job. he has not used those tools.

we are going to give him more tools in order to do what is necessary to get the veterans the care, the benefits, and the honor that they have earned. >> good afternoon. i know there has been a lot of attention as to whether i or any of my colleagues tank secretary shinseki should resign. clear that the v.a. has not performed up to anyone's standards under his stewardship. we must remember that this is about more than one man. this is about millions of veterans and they deserve more accountability than one resignation. that the v.a. has ill-served our nation's veterans for some time and that this poor

treatment became even more alarming and more tragic lately. accountability for this starts at the very top. in theappointed leaders cabinets and agencies ultimately report president obama. it's time the president specifically addresses what he plans to do to fix this problem now. on monday, i visited mcguire v.a. center in richmond. there are many dedicated her son now providing care that's needed but as i spoke to our great veterans in need of treatment, bewas clear that more must done to ensure that all v.a. hospitals across the country are performing at the highest level our nation demands. whether it is one resignation or 100 resignations that are necessary, we cannot keep waiting for actions. last week, senate democrats two-page vote on a

bill to help deliver accountability. where is the urgency? will continue to act swiftly on the half of the men and women who serve this nation with distinction and honor. we owe them that. >> i would like to start out today by sharing a story of a two brothers from eastern washington who both served in iraq. i had the chance to talk to their mom on memorial day. she shared with me that when they returned with multiple health problems, severe ptsd, they had been forever changed. v.a.et, as we approach the and try to get the help that v.a.need, too often the has not been there and in one case they took action that actually made it more difficult for them.

they locked them in a room for several hours without the help and assistance that they needed. this is unacceptable. storyten, this is a repeated over and over all across the country. i has been served in the navy and retired. we need to modernize the structure and we need to change the culture of the v.a.. veterans0% of the coming home right now have some kind of service related disability whether it is ptsd, term addict brain injury, and they deserve the treatment they were promised when they joined the military. too often that's not the case. let's increase accountability among the leaders and protect the brave men and women who have, for so long, protected us.

we are listening. we will continue fighting for them and we are asking for them stories.their we want to hear from veterans all across the country so that we can address their challenges head-on. thent to join in commending chair for his tremendous leadership. i join my colleagues and my local veterans and asking for the senate to take swift action on the v.a. accountability act for those two brothers in eastern washington and for the millions of heroes like them. we will not stop fighting until they are fixed. >> i'm from pennsylvania 12 in western pennsylvania. he was one of six who died of at theaires contracted va hospital. he was a world war ii veteran who survived guam and okinawa but not the v.a.

died as aort said six result of systemic failures at the v.a.. it was issued more than a year ago. those responsible were given bonuses that the v.a. has yet to discipline anyone for these deaths. culture must develop a of accountability to better serve our veterans. the house has passed bipartisan legislation to address this. the senate should pass it. secretary shinseki should use it to clean up the mess. obligation tomn stand with our veterans. it is the principle of solidarity. they stood for us. we stand for them. put on thed women uniform to guard our country, we bear a responsibility for every service connected disability. whatever the injury whether blindness, the loss of a lamb,

traumatic brain injury, posttraumatic stress, no veteran should feel as though he or she is alone. they defended us. we shall defend them. >> i'm duncan hunter from san diego. let me take off my congress had here and put on my u.s. marine corps hat. surgeries for my time overseas. to privateally went health care. i chose to not go to the v.a. because the v.a. does not work. i knew that five years ago. --ad my shoulder fusion shoulder surgery and neck fusion done in private health care. for those who joined at a time when the u.s. is at war, we know the enemy intends to kill us.

we intende it home, to go back to our jobs, our we trust the v.a. to provide for us and give us the care and attention that is needed. that, -- and i emphasize expect the v.a. to fail in their duty. no one expects the v.a. to threaten the same safety and military sohat our dutifully defends. it's quite simple. v.a. and our the veterans, the trust between the the and me, the v.a. and men that i served with and four is broken. it's broken and needs to be fixed. we have the first up to fix it with the bill that jeff miller brought forward. we will work as hard as we can to do that. thank you. >> i'm from arizona fifth congressional district, right in the epicenter of this great tragedy, this debacle. last week, i held in my office a

meeting with about 100 did the. i heard horror story after horror story. one guy talk to me about how the intervention of our office saved his eyesight. then i said to the crowd numerous times that we have had to intervene, hundreds of times, since i've been back in office. we've had to intervene for veterans because they were either turned down, denied, or postponed by the v.a. in phoenix. not take the congressman getting involved for a veteran to be able to get an appointment. we got a standing ovation on that one because they all believe that is where things should be. this is beyond a tragedy. management and accountability act, which is a no-brainer, i call on harry reid to use some of his leadership to get that moving. the fact is that these are the

most important people i believe we represent. they go out and they give their all to protect our country and we've let them down. system, those the people that violated that sacred trust, if they indeed did maintain secret lists, besides getting fired they should go to jail. we should do everything we can to make sure that there are criminal sanctions if these things happened. should shinseki resign? i believe absolutely. put administration needs to up or shut up when it comes to defending our veterans. who'ss another veteran been in a mexican prison for two months who is in tijuana languishing. it's time for this administration to stand up and get him out. he is an american hero and we need to stand there for them like they stood for us. thank you.

>> i'm the legislative director for the american legion. we have long been a supporter of accountability at the department of veterans affairs. we supported this bill when it was introduced months before we heard about the scandals but with them uncovering now, the american legion is resolute more than now. we represent more than 2.5 million and with families, that's 3.5 million members who do not understand why the secretary of veteran affairs does not have the authority to manage his department as he needs to. if he needs to remove someone, demote someone, he does not have that authority and we need to make sure that he does. thank you. >> i'm the chief of staff for iraq enough and a standard veterans of america. iraq and afghanistan veterans. these problems have been going

on for years if not decades. this is not just about scapegoating. this is clearly systemic. on behalf of our members and supporters, many of them have served in iraq and afghanistan, we urge the congress to pass the v.a. accountability act and the president to sign it immediately into law. we applaud chairman miller for his important work on this issue. >> good afternoon. thank you, chairman miller, for your leadership on this issue and has leadership saving the way on this important piece of legislation. i'm senior policy analyst at concerned veterans of america and an air force veteran. among the millions of veterans that are waiting and waiting for the care we need. just like the sales manager i met yesterday, an army vet who served for 12 years waiting five months to be seen in a maryland v.a. clinic. this is straightforward.

it's a good first step towards reform. given the secretary the tools he needs to get that are results emma this is essential as veterans affairs problems are .ddressed additionally, it is a good measure for v.a. employees who work hard and do the right thing that they deserve leadership at every level that embodies the core values of integrity, commitment, advocacy, respect, excellence. we urge the leadership of the senate to act swiftly on the management accountability act and bring it to a vote next week when they return. inc. you. -- thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm from america's veterans. each day in the news there is a constant drone calling for the

head of eric shinseki. cutting off the head of the problem is not the answer. can chop off one head after another only to find that two more grow back in its place. this insanity of doing things the same way and expecting a different outcome is historically how the v.a. has operated. now is the time to slay the hydra by effectively changing the culture. in light of the testimony i witnessed last night, we believe the secretary should begin ofediately with the removal some official starting with hospital directors and visitor directors who were present in 2010 when the memo came out and are still in those positions now. they disregarded the director of the central office about this very problem and they need be held accountable. over a year ago, we recognize the need for accountability and we recommend that the secretary to fire the power

nonperformers. everyone was astounded to find out that they could not do that. we applaud chairman miller's bill and we ask for senator reid and the senate to speed up this and get some v.a. accountability on the senate side also. amvets hasa that recommended are on how to improve the v.a. and several of , for one example, to increase the number of patients that v.a. doctors see. it's one doctor to about 12 or 1300 patients where primary care physicians see 1 to 4200. you could double or triple the panel of patients that they see and almost reduce the backlog right there at the waitlist patients.

after i heard the testimony last over, they have on staff 700 attorneys and i think a good place to start would need of thenrid of about 699 and higher doctors in their place. thank you. >> questions? yes sir? >> with the boston globe. lots of talk about accountability here. can you talk about the congressional role in this? not just today but in the last few years. these problem has been known for many years. i'm wondering if you can talk about the house role in congress at large. doesn't congress take some of the blame here for not being addressed and not being more forceful in making sure these

were not addressed? fax if you witnessed the testimony last night, you would see like congress has a difficult time holding the department of veterans affairs accountable. we have over 100 10 written requests for information that includes thousands of information, some relating to patient care and timeliness of access. they will not respond to us. to the point i had to put up on trials andbsite that transparency that basically i was hoping would shame them into doing what they needed to do. it makes no difference. i write a letter to the secretary every week and tell him exactly what we need, yet we continue to get stonewalled at every turn. let's go back and talk about oversight. you want to make a comparison between the house and the senate? 70 hearings inad the 113th congress about v.a. of themof that, over 40

were oversight hearings. from those hearings and from my interaction with other members we have written letters, requested oig reports. kevin mccarthy talked about one today, well over a year ago, that was about wait times. once the oig came back with the report, we jointly wrote a letter to the secretary and asked if they had put the recommendations in place. the secretary says yes, they've done it. well, no they haven't. if the department will not be truthful to us as the congressional ban constitutional body charged with the oversight, i can only imagine what they will tell a veteran when they are trying to seek care. >> do you think someone can come in at this point and actually

fix the problem? or is this just a response to the failed leadership you have talked about? larger than one individual, much larger than secretary shinseki. there has been no leadership from the white house as it relates to this crisis, no urgency. the president could have come out immediately and said we were opening for private care to all veterans who have not been able to get an appointment in a timely fashion. yet only this administration would celebrate the fact that they forced somebody who was already going to retire to resign, which is typical in the department of veterans affairs. only this administration wouldn't act celebrate the fact that they were going to allow veterans to use non-v.a. care when they have had that ability for over a decade. leadership is important that the top, but i'm telling you that there is a bureaucracy that does not care who bleeds. they know they will be

thereafter the president. they will be there after the secretary leaves. you know what? it matters. it sends a clear signal. part of the problem at the v.a. is they do that very same thing. we cannot get rid of this person because -- luck. if they cannot do the job, they've got to go. >> speaker banner has been repeatedly asked about general nseki's resignation as he does not want this to distract from the real issue. then you will have a fight over confirmation of his successor. do you share those concerns? you are also calling for a lot of other senior officials to be fired. it seems like it would leave a vacuum at the top of that department at a critical time.

>> it's already there. that vacuum goes all the way up to the white house. ,f we don't do something today something substantive, not just another reporter another hearing . we have an opportunity now to transform the way the v.a. does business in a way that brings it from a world war ii mentality into a 21st-century mentality. yes, i'm very concerned that of secretary shinseki were to leave someone wants to give the new person an opportunity and a honeymoon -- they will not. this congress will continue their oversight and make sure that the v.a. does what they are supposed to do. if they won't tell us what we need to hear, we will do what's necessary. if that's by subpoena, i have tried not to make this a partisan issue. the democrats have voted unanimously on every step we've taken so far in the house. i would rather not rake that

relationship and not give people the ammunition to call what we're doing political because it's not political. thank you very much, everybody. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] "washingtonxt journal," the department of veterans affairs and calls for secretary eric shinseki's resignation with representative florida andfrom sheila jackson-lee from texas. the results of the latest agriculture census with hubert hamer from the usda and don charles from npr. atshington journal" everyday 7:00 a.m. here on c-span. we were waiting to have his open-heart surgery.

he had been diagnosed with congenital heart effect. part of the waiting for the surgeon to come back from overseas was being in that hospital and realizing all these other families are there and you are kind of in the trenches with them. maggie's family, she had been through nine surgeries in nine months, various different problems. as daunting as our situation was , we were really feeling for them. we were in the waiting room every day and walked past maggie's bed on the way to paul's bassinet. the day of the surgery we came in and maggie's family was not there. she had passed away the night before. it was really, really hard to imagine that family had spent so much time waiting for her to get out of the hot early and she did not make it. day,nt in the surgery that

his first open-heart surgery of three, eight hours, and as we are sitting in the cardiac intensive care unit watching through a clear plastic bandage, -- whichheart eating was a moment in and of itself -- the nurse comes over and says i have a phone call. they brought me the phone and it was maggie's mom checking on paul's surgery. the strength, the grace, the fortitude it took for a mother who has lost her child the night and check on our iild, i think, was a moment will always remember. >> fox news channel anchor bret book "special heart " sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's "q and a." >> what's been the result when

you have this classic economic problem with the retransmission for video? you have companies doing this game of chicken where they cut off service to customers. they starting to block traffic on their internet service for customers and the ultimate result is programming costs spiral up and up. you wonder why your cable bill keeps going up, one big reason is the resolution of these disputes over retransmission where the fcc is really hamstrung by the rules and the way it's interpreted the congressional mandate to get involved here. the easy result is these parties eventually agree to a deal that raises prices and gives consumers channels they don't actually want. that's what i'm afraid of. to say that interconnection happens in a private way is great. there definitely should be room for private deals, but if we get to that point, i think it would

be a real tragic outcome. >> this weekend, the impact of an open internet from the progressive policy and to. on c-span 2 book tv, in-depth with amity shlaes. real america featuring u.s. government films made during world war ii by academy award-winning director frank cap ra sunday afternoon at 4:00 p.m. >> homeland security secretary jeh johnson talked about deportation and immigration leading to record high numbers this year. thewhite house has relayed release of a review of policy until late summer when administration officials say they want to give congress a chance to act on immigration reform before the august recess. congressman bob goodlatte chairs this hearing.

>> the judiciary com >> without objection, we will declare recess at any time. we welcome welcome everyone to e oversight hearing, and i will begin by recognizing myself for an opening statement. i want to extend our welcome to secretary johnson for testifying before us today for the first time. the obama administration has taken unprecedented and, most likely, unconstitutional steps in order to shut down the enforcement of our immigration laws for millions of unlawful and criminal aliens not considered high enough, quote, priorities, end quote. the dhs does this under the guise of prosecutorial discretion. the beneficiaries include many thousands of aliens who have been arrested by state and local law enforcement who are convicted criminals who have been put in removal proceedings

and who dhs simply has let back onto our streets. in addition to simply not pursuing remove bl aliens, the dhs has granted, has been granting hundreds of thousands of them administrative legalization and work authorization. the department of homeland security does this under many guises, invoking doctrines we soar thetic names such as "deferred action" and "parole in place." the net effect of these policies has been described by former i.c.e. acting director john sandwig, quote, if you are a run of the mill immigrant here illegally, your odds of getting decan ported are close -- deported are close to zero, end quote. i.c.e. has been claiming to have removed record numbers of unlawful or criminal aliens from the united states. of course, to the extent these numbers are valid, they would have simply reflected the vast increase in enforcement resources proked by congress in recent -- provided by congress

in recent years. i.c.e.'s budget has increased from $3 billion in 2005 to $5.8 billion in 2013. however, i.c.e.'s removal numbers simply rely on smoke and mirrors. in fact, almost two-thirds of the removals claimed by i.c.e. in 2013 involved aliens apprehended by the border patrol along the border or intercepted by inspectors at ports of entry. when we look at the number of true i.c.e. removals of aliens residing in the united states, we see that they have fallen 43% from 2008 to 2013. even president obama has admitted that i.c.e.'s record removals are deceptive. removals are down so dramatically because the obama administration is twisting the concept of prosecutorial discretion beyond all constitutional reck -- recognition, all in an unprecedented effort to create immigration ebb forcement-free

zones. despite the administration's message to prioritize removal of serious criminal aliens, dhs is releasing thousands of such aliens onto our streets. the judiciary committee discovered through subpoena that between october 2008 and july 2011 the department of homeland security declined to seek removal for almost 160,000 aliens who had been arrested by state and local law enforcement officers. after these aliens were then released into our communities, about 17% were rearrested on criminal charges within only three years' time. the crimes charged include nearly 8,500 duis, over 6,000 drug violations and more than 4,000 major criminal offenses including murder, assault, battery, rape and kidnapping. in one of the most horrific cases, an unlawful alien dhs decided not to pursue after being arrested for attempted

grand theft, was later arrested on suspicion of killing a man, chasing those who had robbed his 68-year-old grandfather. these crimes never would have been committed had dhs pursued these alien for removal. unfortunately, one of this has shamed the dhs into changing its irresponsible practices. the center for immigration studies recently obtained, excuse me, i.c.e. documents revealing that in 2013 i.c.e. declined to pursue removal thousands of times against convicted criminals it had encountered. and i.c.e. also discovered that in 2013 i.c.e. released from detention over 36,000 convicted criminal aliens that it had actually put in removal proceedings. i have asked dhs for identifying information on these released criminal aliens so that we may determine what new crimes they have gone on to commit. i hope and expect that secretary

johnson will fully cooperate in providing this vital information to the chief and the more than people. to the committee and the american people. the end result of dhs' practices is that the american people have lost all confidence in this administration's willingness to enforce our current immigration laws or use any enhanced enforcement tools that congress may give it. this, in turn, has made it exceedingly difficult for congress to fix our broken immigration system. unfortunately, we can only expect dhs' efforts to evade its immigration law enforcement responsibilities to escalate. president obama has asked secretary johnson to perform an inventory of the department's current enforcement practices to see how it can conduct them more humanely. these are simply code words for further ratcheting down enforcement of our immigration laws. we do not though yet how far secretary johnson will go. persons within and without the administration have pressured

him to no longer seek to remove previously-deported aliens who have illegally reentered the united states or aliens who have absconded from their removal proceedings and become fumingtives. some have demanded that dhs grant administrative legalization to parents who endanger their children's lives by bringing them here illegally in perilous journeys. others have gone so far as to demand administrative legalization for the entire universe of millions of unlawful ail yeps who would receive a special pathway to citizenship under the senate's massive comprehensive immigration bill. secretary johnson is not responsible for the dangerous and irresponsible decisions made by dhs before he was sworn in last december. we can only hope that he will bring back a level of adult responsibility to the enforcement of our immigration laws. but his recent comments that he is considering scaling back one of the dhs' most successful programs to identify and remove dangerous aliens' secure

commitments caused me grave concern for the future of immigration enforcement. i look forward to the testimony of secretary johnson today. it's now my pleasure to recognize the ranking member of the committee, the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers, for his opening statement. >> thank you, chairman goodlatte and members of the committee. we all join in welcoming you, ec tear johnson -- sec tear johnson, to the house judiciary committee. as secretary and long before you had a distinguished career both in public service and in the private sector. but the thing that a i like most about -- that i like most about it is that you're a morehouse college graduate, and that has a special resonance for many in the congress and in our communities.

before your appointment to the department of homeland security, secretary johnson served as general counsel of the department of defense where he oversaw many critical reforms including ending the discriminatory policy don't ask, don't tell. given this background, i in this think of no person -- i can think of no person better equipped to lead the department of homeland security and carry out the president's directive to review our immigration policies to insure that we're carrying them out in the most humane way possible. yesterday the president of the united states announced a delay to this review to provide my house colleagues the room they need to pass legislative

reforms. whether through the senate bill or several house bills. and i am committed to work with him to achieve needed reforms of our system. most of us agree that the system is broken and that only congress can permanently fix it. so the secretary's testimony and opinions here today will be very important to us all. we should get started on that process right away, before the window for reform closes. every day that passes without a vote in the house is a day that thousands of families are torn or apart -- are torn apart, that businesses are deprived of critical skills and that brilliant entrepreneurs and investors are forced to take their resources and talents elsewhere. every day that passes is also a day in which we fail to

jump-start our own economy. the congressional budget office has concluded that the house and senate immigration reform bills, s. 744 and h.r. 15, would decrease the budget deficit by $900 billion over a 20-year period. so i stand committed to work with my colleagues for legislative reform. but if my colleagues won't act to fix a system that most agree needs it badly, then i if pulley support the president -- then i fully support the president doing what he can under the current law to improve that system. i agree with the president's call to make our immigration system reflect american values. people who commit serious crimes impose a danger -- and pose a danger to the public should be

our highest priorities for removal. those with strong ties to this country, the spouses of citizens and permanent residents, the parents of citizens and dreamers, and those who have worked productively in the united states for many years should not be. we know the administration has the authority to set enforcement priorities. and it also has the authority to set detailed guidelines to insure that those priorities are carried out by deportation offices, trial attorneys and other enforcement personnel. this authority has been specifically recognized by my colleagues on both sides of the aisle of this committee, including a letter sent by current members to the clinton administration urging it to issue guidelines on

prosecutorial discretion. so far we've heard hardly more than excuses for not doing immigration reform. the senate bill has too many pages. the house wants to take its time and do reform step by the step. we must secure the border before we can discuss anything else. well, i think the newest excuse for not working to reform the system is that the republicans cannot trust the president to enforce the law. put aside the fact that this administration has set records with respect to enforcement spending, detentions, prosecutions and removals but can't trust the president excuse strikes melú'5,@li1 as an extrd complaint from a legislative body. what's the point of passing any

bill if we have that kind of an impasse? how many other issues of national importance do my colleagues think congress should ignore until they have someone else that they might prefer in the white house? it's time to cut out the excuses and get to work doing the people's business. americans agree the system's broke, and they strongly support comprehensive immigration reform. and so it's our duty to stop passing the buck and get to work. mr. chairman, i thank you for the time, and i yield back. >> thank you, mr. conyers. and without objection, all other members' opening statements will be made a part of the record. we thank our only witness, the secretary, for joining us today. secretary johnson, if you would, please, rise, i'll begin by swearing you in.

do you swear that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> i do. >> thank you. let the record reflect that the secretary responded in the affirmative, and it's now my pleasure to introduce him. jeh charles johnson was sworn in on december 23, 2013, as the fourth secretary of homeland security. prior to joining dhs, secretary johnson served as general counsel for the department of defense where he was part of the senior management team and led the more than 10,000 military and civilian lawyers across the department. secretary johnson was general counsel of the department of the air force from 1998-2001, and he served as an assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york from 1989-1991. in private law practice, secretary johnson was a partner with the new york city-based law firm of paul, weiss, rivkin,

wharton and garrison. secretary johnson graduated from morehouse college in 1979 and received his law degree from columbia law school in 1982. the secretary reminded me this morning that he has a connection to this committee as well that many members will find of interest. in the early 1990s, he worked briefly for then-house republican ranking member of the judiciary committee, ham fish of new york. >> it was actually the 1970s, congressman. >> well -- >> i don't want to date myself. >> oh, way before my time. [laughter] so i thank you for that information as well as the information that many members of the committee may find of interest that there are 10,000 military and civilian lawyers in the department of defense. whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, we'll leave for a future discussion. in any event, we look forward to

your testimony. your written statement will be entered into the record in its entirety, and we ask that you summarize your testimony within five minutes. to help you stay within that time, when the light switches from green to yellow, you'll have one minute to conclude your testimony, and we welcome you to the committee. >> thank you, chairman. you do have my prepared written statement. let me just summarize a couple of things within my five minutes. first, thank you for inviting me. i look toward to our discussion -- forward to our discussion this morning and this afternoon. i begin by pointing out that as the leader of the department of homeland security, i recognize that our most valuable asset is our men and women, and i have pledged numerous times to support them in good times and in bad times. my first full week on the job i went to south texas to attend the funeral of cvp officer daryl

winehouse who died this the line of duty in south texas. yesterday we lost another one, border patrol agent alexander gianini, age 24, who died in the line of duty in what appeared to be a one-car accident in arizona. and i'm sure that the members of this committee join me in mourning his loss and expressing con doll lendses to his family -- condolences to his family. thank you for the opportunity to be here. as i mentioned, i know a number of members of in this committee from other contexts, from the house armed services committee, from private life, and it's good to see you. let me begin by saying that in my judgment, counterterrorism must remain and should continue to remain the cornerstone of the mission of the department of

homeland security. as the president mentioned yesterday at west point, core al-qaeda has been largely decimated, but in the last several years we've seen the rise of al-qaeda affiliates, al-qaeda adherents and other al-qaeda-like organizations around the world. we have to be vigilant in regard to those organizations. we're concerned, i'm concerned about the so-called lone wolf who would attack us in this country, domestic-based, independent actors who commit or attempt to commit terrorist acts as evidenced last year by the boston marathon bombing. we in the department of homeland security need to be vigilant against all these potential threats, and i believe we are. i believe it is also particularly important given the decentralized and diffuse nape

of the -- nature of the terrorist threat that the homeland faces, that we spend a lot of time and effort working closely with state and local law enforcement, frist responders -- first responders through training, through working together and jttfs and so forth, preparedness grants. we have an initiative that i am personally involved in and particularly interested in, countering violent extremism at home through engagements in local communities. i believe it is important where possible that we push out our homeland security beyond our borders where we can do to consistent with agreements with other governments. i believe it is important that we establish in as many places as feasible preclearance capabilities in overseas airports that are last points of departure. in terms of border security, we've devoted an unprecedented amount of resources thanks to

the support of this congress. to that effort, over the last number of years ap rehencings finish apprehensions have gone down, but we have seen a rise recently in apprehensions, particularly in the rio grande valley sector in south texas. we're seeing a rise that we have to address and we must address, and i'm developing a plan to address. in particular with regard to illegal migration by those other than mexicans coming from central america and unaccompanied children. the problem of unaccompanied children is one that i am very familiar with having personally visited mcallen station, texas, several weekends ago to see the problem myself. aye directed a number of -- i've directed a number of actions in response to that situation which i'd be happy to discuss further with members of the committee. we're developing a campaign plan for the southwest border which represents a whole-of-dhs

approach. you are correct, chairman, that i am engaged in a review of reforms to our enforcement priorities, and the president has asked me to wait for reasons that i agree before announcing those reforms to give the house of representatives the opportunity in this summer to act -- this summer to act on comprehensive immigration reform. it is something that i very much support and believe in for a number of reasons including added border security, mandatory e-verify, enhanced criminal penalties for those who would hire undocumented as well as the earned path to citizenship. and both the president and i urge the house of representatives to act. we're doing a number of other things which i'd be happy to discuss in more detail in the department to enhance morale, to enhance our process for budget deliberations and our acquisition process, and we are making great progress in filling

the numerous senior-level vacancies, including myself. since december the senate has confirmed seven appointments for senior leadership positions in dhs. i believe it's critical to the morale and good work of the agency that we have a new energy, new leadership in the department, and we're making good progress there. thank you, chairman, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, secretary johnson. we'll now proceed under the five minute rule with questions, and i'll begin by recognizing myself. secretary johnson, i appreciate the president's recognition of the importance of doing immigration reform. i and, i think, most members of congress believe we need to do immigration reform as well. but it needs to be recognized by the president and by you and others in the administration that when the president says that he's going to set a time limit and then consider taking

actions himself which many of us read to be the president genre meeting i have a pen and a cell phone, and if you don't act, i will, that that makes doing immigration reform harder, not easier. because those who may like what the president decides to do administratively have less reason to negotiate the hard decisions to be made about how to enforce our immigration laws in the future. and those who do not agree with the president's position on immigration reform say why should we negotiate if we can't the president to enforce the laws as they exist? so i just expressed to you my ongoing concern that the president is being helpful to the process when he works with the congress and suggests that he want withs to accomplish immigration reform -- he wants to accomplish immigration reform, but he hurts the efforts when he says if you don't do it, and the suggestion is further if you don't do it my way, i'll act

unilaterally when many of us believe the united states constitution does not give him the authority to do that. but let me turn my questions to another subject, and that is there are now 858,779 non-detained aliens with final orders of removal who have not been removed. the vast majority of these aliens have simply ab continued and become -- absconded and become fugitives in the u.s. is it, it is, to me, crystal clear -- is it to you? -- that if we do not detain aliens in removal proceedings, many will simply become fugitive asks not be required to leave the country? >> chairman, you are correct that there are a large number of undocumented in the country who are fugitives who have absconded after final orders of removal. i've looked at the same numbers. one of the things that -- >> let me get into the details here. it's recently been revealed that in 2013 dhs released from

detention over 36,000 criminal aliens in removal proceedings or after they had been ordered removed. aliens with convictions ranging from homicide to sexual assault to kidnapping to aggravated assault to drunk driving. dhs stated in response that many of these aliens were released as a discretionary matter after career law enforcement officers made a judgment regarding the priority of holding the individual given i.c.e.'s resources and prioritizing for national security reasons. isn't it true that i.c.e. attorneys decide whether to offer bond and set the amount of the bond? so isn't it also true that the dhs could have detained most of these criminal aliens but simply chose not to? >> chairman, i myself would like a deeper understanding of this issue. i have your letter on the subject. we responded yesterday, i don't know whether you've received the response yet, sir. but my understanding so far is that a number of those released

in fy-13 were as the result of an order there an immigration judge -- from an immigration judge or by an immigration officer acting pursuant to, consistent with supreme court precedent and other law. certainly, there's an amount of judgment that goes into that, so if someone's released, they're released pursuant to conditions that are intended to guarantee their return. but i look at the same list you've seen, and i've seen some pretty serious criminal convictions on those, on that list including homicide and other things. and so i want a deeper understanding of this issue myself to make sure that we're doing everything we should be doing to insure public safety in this process. >> and you note the homicides. for example, it was stated by the department that mandatory releases -- because of court decisions -- account for 72% of

those homicides. and, obviously, the congress needs to address that. some of those mandatory releases were because of being held for a length of time the courts if felt were inappropriate, and we need to make sure that is addressed so that they are removed from the united states after they have served their sentences for homicide. but that still leaves 28% of the murderers, a substantial number of people, who the dhs simply voluntarily release. so i hope that you will look into what is happening there and try to help us understand how this can be fixed. ..

just to give you some sense of it, in very large jurisdiction of the united states, the rate of recidivism for criminal offenders can be as high as 50% or more. when i.c.e. can come in and remove offenders from a given community so that they can't reoffend, guess what? we take the recidivism rate to zero. so, for example, if you 100 criminal offenders, get them out, that is 50 crimes that will not happen over the next three years as a result of our enforcement efforts. do you agree with former director morton as to the power of security working in the? >> well, i don't believe we should scrap secure communities. i believe given the reality where we all with this program in this country that we need a fresh start. we have mayors and governors signing executive orders and passing laws that limit our

ability to effectively carry out this program. i think the goal of the program is a very worthy one that needs to continue. so as part of the overall effort i'm embarked in right now i want a fresh start to this program and what a fresh conversation with mayors and governors around the country to make this program work more effectively. we've got limitations erected on our ability to set this program. i think it's an important program, but it's gotten off to bed messaging, misunderstanding in state and local communities about exactly what it is. some people think it's a surveillance program, but you're right, it's sharing fingerprints between one federal agency and another. and i think with clear guidance and clear understanding by mayors and governors, what our priorities are we can go a long way to improving the administration of this program.

>> not administering the program is also a missed opportunity to address the problem with the release of criminal aliens back into our society. because when state and local law enforcement go to the trouble of identifying people and sharing that information, and giving dhs more information about who should be removed and then they don't see them removed as is the case in 85% of the aliens identified through secure communities in 2013, not being deported i think that has a little -- a lot of mistrust in the system. we encourage you to improve that system and utilize it to a greater extent. my time has expired, and i know please recognize the job but for michigan, mr. kind is, for minutes. >> thank you, chairman goodlatte. -- mr. conyers. we appreciate your testimony here today, secretary johnson. my concern is about the large numbers of people who are being

deported this year who have committed very little violation except those related to their undocumented status, people have lived here for years, some for decades, many of whom were brought as children, jobs and families, including u.s. citizen sponsors and children or other close family who have legal status. they're only a fence arises from not being here lawfully. they can't get licenses. they can't drive. they can't work. so they use frequently a fake social security card, and so on. let me ask you, as you complete your review of enforcement practices, will you take a close, hard look at who is being

targeted to make sure these people who have only immigration status violations are not made priority? >> yes. the concept of prosecutorial discretion is one that's been around for a long time in the criminal justice context and in this context. i think with the resources we have from congress we have to continually reevaluate how best to prioritize who we enforce the laws against. so that would be part of my objective. >> thank you. now, what factors do you think that the customs and border patrol, and customs and border protection and i.c.e. should consider before referring some of these cases for prosecution?

i think that's an important consideration that comes from your experience and your analysis and position that you hold now. >> i think that the priorities in general should be threats to national security, public safety and border security. and so i want our men and women to focus on those priorities, at the various points in the system. i do believe that after the border, at the border, the priorities have to be a little different for the sake of border security, border integrity. i don't expect our border patrol agents, for example, to try to prioritize as they see people literally crossing the rio grande and stepping onto the shore. i think we have to maintain order security, and we have to avoid practices and policies

that operate as magnets for further illegal migration. but i do believe that our people should be encouraged to focus on, first, border security, public safety, national security. >> thank you. i understand that much of the spike in immigration prosecution is related to customs and border protection's consequence delivery system, which promises to assign some form of law enforcement consequence to nearly every person apprehended at the border. these prosecutions come at significant expense, and by contrast, the department, your

department, could accentuate a voluntary reform or formal removal for many of these people have little or no cost in decided whether this is a good use of federal resources. do you think it's important for cbp data and methodology on recidivism to be made public, making the data and methodology public and ensuring that it be received close scrutiny might help to either increase confidence in our current approach, or lead to other improvements? what is your the? >> let me answer that two ways. first of all i think that we should be careful to disincentivize illegal migration, as i suggested a moment ago. i also support greater

transparency in our policies, whether it's use of force at the border, and we've made some quick progress there, in making those policies more transparent. or other aspects of government policy. and i'd have been an advocate for that in this department and when it comes to our counterterrorism activities by the department of defense when i was general counsel. >> my time has expired. i thank you for your responses. >> thank you. >> the chair thanks the children and recognizes the gentleman from alabama for five minutes. >> thank you. secretary johnson, first i want to thank the department of homeland security for their support for the national computer forensic institute. it has solved many crimes. it was initially designed for financial crimes but they've actually solve hundreds of pedophile cases, and child predator cases and trained law

enforcement agents and judges all over the nation, so i thank you for that. the department of homeland security is in a partnership with drug enforcement agency and i.c.e. to combat, and local agencies to combat what i would call an academic -- epidemic a synthetic drug abuse. a major project synergy, actually seized millions of dollars i think over 200 arrests. there's two things that really alarming about this. one is that the targeted age, most of the users of these synthetic drugs are between the ages of 14-25. at least one survey recently says one in nine high school students is using synthetic drugs. and then the results which range, and i've a photograph which i'm going to share

privately with you, but it's a picture of two young people who were actually, died of an overdose from trenton and the drugs were actually found of their on the scene. we've had those cases all over the united states. the second is it's not on that, it's causing long-term psychotic depression or psychological damage to our young people. but the most alarming thing, and i want you to make a comment on this first, is my understanding from that operation that the great majority of these funds are being made, and we're talking millions and millions of dollars, were being sent to terrorist organizations in yemen and lebanon. so i would ask you first of all, we're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars of sale of synthetic drugs here in the united states being used to fund terrorism, our enemies.

and, of course, do you believe that synthetic drugs proceeds are funding terrorists and is this a national security issue? that would be my first question. >> sir, i agree with you. i recently attended a briefing on transnational criminal organizations that are engaged in billions of illegal narcotic activities, and we're beginning to see a connection between these organizations and terrorist organizations, where one is supporting the other. so i agree very much with that observation. and i agree very much with the national security concern that we should all have in this regard. within the department of homeland security, hsi, like a good very involved as you pointed out with the dea immediately with the problems of

synthetic drugs. hsi in my observation is a terrific aggressive law enforcement organization, and i had a good deal of confidence in their ability to address this issue. i appreciate your interest in this. >> you know, from what i've read and learned from talking to dea and other agencies, the actual majority of this funds derived from the profits are going to the middle east. have you found out to be the case? are you aware of that? >> i share that observation. >> thank you. >> when it was a the oversight subcommittee, we had hearings on, we focused on cocaine from colombia, i think synthetic drugs, which you don't hear a lot of talk about, should be getting the same attention today. and i'm not sure the american people realize just how serious this type of drug use is. would you like to comment on

that? >> it's a growing epidemic, sir, and when i was a prosecutor 25 years ago, it was crack cocaine. now we are seeing other illegal narcotics that are causing a lot of destruction in arctic in our community. i think that he partnered -- the department of homeland to get has a role in addressing this through hsi, cbp, other organizations within the department. i think we have a role and i think we need to make an investment in it so i agree with your assessment and i share your concern. >> thank you. the last thing i've learned is almost all of these synthetic drugs, the material is being produced in china. and then shipped to the united states were actually $1000 worth can be turned into $250,000 on the streets. the state of alabama, and i'm

very proud of our legislature, they recently passed a law which is, it's senate bill 333, which tries to stay one step ahead of the drug producers. but that law does, what happens is the drug producers and the people marketing these will change the content just a little to stay ahead of the law, the universal laws, say it has to be a certain material and it has to be a combination. that's all they do is tweak that drug. and i've actually been told when they do is they all bought a certain combination, they will actually get on the phone and tell the folks china, change that formula. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> thank you. >> respond if you have a response. >> i share the congressman's concern. >> thank you. thathe chair recognizes the gentleman from new york for five minutes. >> thank the chair, and want to join in welcoming secretary

johnson, especially a graduate of columbia law school in my district. mr. secretary, as you know, congress passed a number of years ago the 9/11 commission implementation bill mandated all maritime cargo must be scanned. support -- before it is loaded on ships bound to the united states. when we wrote the law, we recognize 100% scanning would be difficult to achieve overnight which is why we give dhs flexibility. five years to comply that allow for extension of the deadline in certain cases. we assume 100% scanning would be phased in. to depart would make an honest effort to comply with the law. can you tell us what the department is doing to make progress on container scanning? d. commit to work with us in good faith and develop a plan for implementing the law? >> yes. as you and i have discussed, congressman, i am very much aware of the 2007 law. it was first brought to my attention in the senate confirmation process, and my

general view is is to do it enacted law i congress that mandates -- duly enacted -- i got to make a good-faith effort to try to comply. now, as you know, this particular law is a very large unfunded mandate, and so when i got into office i took a careful look at it. i've been to ports. i've looked at the logistics to try to set up a 100% scanning regime at overseas ports, and it's going to be frank, a very, very large project. and i've asked my folks, first of all, what's in our best national security interest? second, as long as the law is on the books, we've got to make a good-faith effort to try to comply with it. so i've had the conversation with senator markey, you, and others about how i'm exercise my

authority under the law to waive application of the law so that the next two years, but in the same letter which i think you've seen i've also talked about some of the steps we will take for a plan to try to get us there. including raising the percentage of cargo that is a scanned to move in the right direction on this. and demonstrate we are making our best efforts to try to comply. it's set forth in the letter which i think you've seen. >> yes, i have. i want to thank you for your willingness to work with us and i know that homeland security ranking member thompson has been a champion in this area. i'm sure we will discuss in greater detail how we can develop a mutually agreeable path forward. i'd like to also say that it is obviously the policy of the administration that we should close the detention facility -- facility guantánamo. we been told that the presence

of the facility under actions there have fueled terrorist sentiments that a been used to recruit terrorists seek to do us harm. can you tell the committee if you believe that keeping guantánamo open is a threat to our national security? isn't fomenting recruitment of terrorists abroad and so forth? >> thank you for bringing me back to my last job. yes, i believe that the existence of guantánamo as a detention facility represents an issue of national security. it has been a recruiting tool by al-qaeda but i also believe that the guard force there is remarkablremarkabl y professional. it's a very well-run facility, but it's also hugely expensive, and there's going to come a point where we may already be at that point, where it is no longer making sense from a

taxpayer point of view to maintain, maintain such a hugely expensive multimillion dollar facility for what are today up with something like less than 160 detainees. and so i know the president is committed to closing the facility, and i think that that for a number of reasons is a worthwhile objective. >> thank you. my last question is back to immigration. in recent months we've heard reports that immigration and customs enforcement officers conducting routine immigration enforcement efforts at courthouses around the country. people have been apprehensive i i.c.e. when they went to the courthouse to the traffic ticket or obtained a protective order but a protective order gault case apers was opting when he appeared in court to get married. these enforcement actions will make immigrants afraid to appear for criminal gangs, to exercise their first amendment rights, to seek protective orders in connection with incidents of domestic violence, and conduct

other important business. i.c.e. has a policy. do you agree or not at courthouses are essential for the protection of constitutional rights only if you have access to the courthouse should be added to the list of sensitive locations for i.c.e. appropriate discretion? >> i received the letter on this, and i was a little surprised to find out that a courthouses are not on the list of what we consider to be sensitive locations, though there is a separate policy dealing with courthouses that i.c.e. has. my view is that as you articulated, courthouses our special. we ought to have a special policy with regard to courthouses. however, i can see certain

circumstances where somebody really dangerous shows up at a courthouse, where i.c.e. or law enforcement in general needs to apprehend that person. just can't afford to let him go. >> that would be the same if a bad person appeared in a hospital. >> i can foresee exigent circumstances where somebody was truly dangerous, who is a fugitive or otherwise should be arrested on the spot, and i would support that. but this is an issue that i intend to look at more closely. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. forbes, for five minutes. >> mr. secretary, thank you for being here. we appreciate your appearance today. also i appreciate your friendship, your service and the department of defense and your

service in your current position. i was not surprised when i read on your confirmation hearing that you pledge transparency and candor with congress. if that transparency and candor that we appreciate and we ask today. we've had testimony before this committee that violent criminal gangs are major problems in the united states and some of those gangs such as ms-13, one of the most violent, speedy i'm sorry? >> ms-13, one of the most violent criminal gangs, as many as two-thirds of their members were here illegally. last year and i.c.e. begin releasing convicted criminals i asked director morten how many of those released were members of violent criminal gangs? i think the commute was shot that he didn't have a clue. based on your letter that you submitted i think yesterday, to the committee we now know that 36,000, in excess of 36,000 criminals have been released. and the question i would have or

you today is of the 36,000 released, do you have any clue how many were members of violent criminal gangs? >> that, if you're referring to the letter i think you're referring to is a letter signed by the deputy secretary yesterday, and i believe that there is an attachment to the letter that has a numerical breakdown by category of the criminal convictions. and it may -- >> it says nothing about whether their members of violent criminal gangs. so my question is, one, do you know of any records that you have of how many of those members release were members of violent criminal gangs? >> if we have it i would be happy -- >> you don't know if any did a? >> sitting here right now i don't know whether it's broken down. >> do you know whether we even ask individuals who are detained if they are members of a gang, violent criminal gangs? >> i suspect we do in the immigration enforcement process,

but -- >> i would suggest you have no record of it, and if you do if you would correct me on that. the second, third question is, isn't it true that individuals can receive asylum or withholding of removal if they simply claim that they've renounced their membership in a gang? >> i'm not sure about that. >> and let me ask you this -- >> i know there is asylum process. >> did you conduct a town hall meeting at dhs office in fairfax, virginia, on april 23, 2014, with i.c.e. agents and officers present? >> yes, sir i did. >> did they voiced strong concerns do that gang members, other public safety threats and criminals are being released due to new administration, dhs policies such as john morton's arrest priorities memorandum? >> we talked about a lot of things. >> did they express concern about what i just outlined to you? >> i recall discussions about

pay -- >> that's not my question. and i will have a certain amount of time to did they or did they not expressed strong concerns do you that gang members and public safety threats and criminals were being released based upon the administration's policy? >> i don't recall that statement in that way, but -- i'm not doubting they did if somebody says -- >> does the following question, these officers and agents tell you that the administration policies have tied their hands preventing them from keeping many dangerous criminals off the streets and that in their opinion as boots on the ground officers in the field, the new policies are a failure? >> i don't recall it that way. i do recall a recognition that we should be going after the worst of the worst in our enforcement priorities. >> so you have no recollection that these agents expressed these concerns to you? >> that's not what i said. >> do you have a recollection of that?

>> i recall a general discussion about our enforcement priorities, and i recall that we all agreed -- >> mr. secretary, i understand what you're talking about. my question is, did you or did you not, or do you or do you not recall them expressing strong concerns about the issues i just raced to you? >> not exactly in the terms you stated it. >> okay. but pretty close to those turns? >> in general terms we had a discussion about our enforcement priorities. that is absolutely correct. >> mr. johnson, things are not answered that question. it certainly is a violation of what you put you going to do in transparency and -- >> i gave you my best recollection. >> i would think that would be a strong thing that you would remember if it was expressed that way, and was expressed that way as understand it. next question and final question i have for you is, we now know based on a gao report that dhs has purchased 84 million rounds of ammunition, totaling

$19 million. can you tell us and give us a report back as to what that ammunition is used for and what caliber of bullets are being used for? >> sitting here right now i can't give you that information but i would be happy to provide that. >> and just for the record the information i gave came from the union who was present at that particular hearing with you. they stated that that's what they express. and with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> the chair thanks the gentleman. recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you, mr. secretary. mr. secretary, in aftermath of the typhoon in the philippines, many members of congress and many people in the filipino community push for temporary protection status. can give me an update on what the tbs, status of the tbs for those in the philippines is to be? >> it's under review and i believe we are close to the finish line on that review.

>> good. keep pushing. i understand under the prism rape elimination act that regulations in homeland security are going into effect at the time. are you full actively trying to renegotiate private contracts to make sure that the new regulation apply to contractors as well as the government facilities? >> i've checked on the status of that and i believe that we are. >> can you say something about the use of solitary confinement in government facilities and private facilities? >> well, an immigration facility is not like a prism. i can imagine circumstances in any detention facility where somebody needs to be separated and placed in some form of solitary confinement for reasons

of safety, force protection or other circumstance. so i wouldn't rule it out necessary but i do recognize that an immigration detention facility is different in nature from a prison where convicted criminals are being housed. >> changing subjects to "fast and furious." it's my understanding that this process started during the bush administration, that the attorney general joined that administration, was aware of it and continued into the obama administration. but when attorney general holder found out about it, he put an end to it. to the best of your knowledge has anybody in your department now facilitating the trafficking of firearms with terrorists and drug dealers a? >> not to my, not to my knowledge, sir. >> think you. -- thank you. in terms of airport screening, there's a program, spot

screening passengers by observation techniques. all of you familiar with this program? >> yes, i believe i am. >> can you explain how this can be done without ethnic profiling or how it can be done effectively? >> i think that behavioral screeners at airports, it's a pretty sophisticated methodolo methodology. i've had one or two briefings on it, and i've had the same questions and concerns. i'm satisfied that, whether it is airport security or other activities of the department of homeland security, that there are ways to do what we need to

do to screen for aviation security threats, other threats, without engaging in sort of any racial profiling. now, immigration enforcement border security is different from law enforcement in general. it's different from stop and frisk in general. we do in various contexts take account of the nationality of people in the administration and enforcement of our immigration laws. and so there's a distinction there. but i do believe that we should not be engaging in racial profiling per se. >> thank you. could you say a word about the process for reviewing incidents of use of deadly force by border patrol officers, and whether or not that review process is adequate? >> yes. this issue has been one that i

focused on in my five months in office. as i suggested earlier, i think that transparency in our policies goes a long way to removing a lot of the controversy that may exist about a policy. and so a couple of months ago i encouraged cbp to make their use of force policy public, and the same with other components of the dhs, and they've done that. i've also -- i also encourage the chief of the border patrol to think about incorporating expressly into the policies issues about rockthrowing, issues about when an agent feels threatened by a vehicle, and he did that. and i believe that we now have a use of force policy that takes account of those things, which have been controversial in the past, but also preserves the agents ability to defend

themselves if his life is truly threatened, or he's in harm's way. i think we're in a better place than we were before. >> and is the review process adequate? when there is a use of deadly force, you review each case, is that right? >> yes. >> and is that review process adequate? i understand in no case has anyone been sanctioned for inappropriate use of deadly force. >> i believe our officers should be held accountable for misconduct. i believe in that generally, yes, sir. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my time has expired. >> the chair thanks the gentleman and recognizes the gentleman from iowa for five minutes spent thank you, mr. chairman. i thank you for holding this ring today and i think the secretary for appearing and his testimony. as i'm listening to the testimony here, i happened to hear in an exchange earlier that

you developed a plan to address the otm and the unaccompanied children and pets become a significant album on the southern border, especially the southern tip of texas to have a heard that correctly? >> yes. >> and could you describe this plan to this committee? >> sure. a couple of things, and it's doesn't work in progress. we are building on this because it's a growing problem and we need to take steps to address it. and open to additional steps. in fact, when i go back to my office, when i have a meeting on this very subject to look at all the options on the table, but what we've done so far, i declared what's called a level 4 state of readiness, which means we need to draw upon resources and assets of other departments to help us out, and i've appointed within cbp a federal coordinator for this effort. number two, i have personally

contacted the secretary of hhs to highlight this as a problem that together we need to address. and she recognizes her obligations under the law to take these kids as soon as we identify them as unaccompanied children spent just for the information of this commit is this the plan the president has asked you to withhold until such time as we get through the august break a? >> no. this is something totally different. >> could you describe the plan the president has asked you to withhold until we get to the august break? i think this committee is interested in what it is, the sort of thing hanging overhead we would be interested in knowing what that is spent what i'm doing, what i'm in the middle of redoing right now is our enforcement priorities. that is what the president asked me to review in march. i actually had begun thinking about that before. he made public his request and i'm still in the midst of the review, but he has asked me to hold on the announcement of that until the end of the summer. >> if i ask you to push out what

that might materialize to be as you know it today, your answer to me would be you don't want to answer that question? >> i'm not in a position to answer it right now. my review is not complete. if i did an interview would be a premature answer. >> i take it that this is some type of derivation of the daca plan. that's a we anticipate here. this committee on this site at least understand their specific federal law that the president has ordered i.c.e. not to follow, and there's a lawsuit that's out there now that's working its way through the courts, the case of crane versus napolitano, and that addresses the separation of powers issue and posture toward discretion but i would ask you, does your policy that you're enacting a, the daca policy which are referred to as deferred action for criminal aliens, does that create groups or classes people as a result of the directive

that we refer to as the morten memos, or doctor? >> daca, as i understand, daca was enacted two years ago. something like 600,000 people have enrolled in the program. it is up for renewal later this year. i anticipate that it will be renewed. there will be some -- >> does it create groups or classes of people? >> i'm not sure i understand your question spent by the definition of the directives, is the result of that, that the definitions created groups or classes of people, rather than as i saw sometimes referenced in that document delivered by janet napolitano and she said it seven times or reference to on an individual basis only prosecutorial discretion on an individual basis only. i'm asserting to the degree to groups or classes of people and asking you whether you agree or disagree. >> i now rs