correct that i'm supportive and i think my ranking member is also. in fact i think most of the members on our subcommittee, nonproliferation is a very important issue. the question is, can the committee or can the department spend $25 million more and what will we get for that? and i want to work with you to make sure that we're doing the right thing and the intelligent thing in both arenas. so i appreciate the attitude that the gentleman is displaying in this and i know there are a couple of individuals who would like to speak for a moment so i'd yield to the gentleman from south carolina for a minute and a half. mr. wilson: thank you for your leadership in bringing this bill before us today and i appreciate the congressman from nebraska and his interest in the global threat, reduction initiative. it's very worthy. but i want to point out i'm very grateful that the m.o.x.

facility is loathed in a district that i represent and it is part of the savannah river site and i represent a portion of the site and so does jim clyburn. this is really bipartisan support of the m.o.x. facility. this facility is really crucial for environmental cleanup and very crucial to fulfill the nuclear nonproliferation agreement that we have with the russian federation. the site and it's over 60% completed. $3.9 billion has been spent. the site has such a positive impact by reducing what is already there, 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium and made into green fuel. this is for nuclear production for our country. additionally, it will fulfill the agreement that we have with the russian federation to do

with weapons-grade plutonium and will encourage them to do the same. this is proven technology. there has been a facility built in france already that has work.ed -- that this will and other things, we have asked nor a study that it's very clear that the most efficient and most beneficial to the american people and national security is to complete the m.o.x. facility. i yield my time. mr. simpson: how much time do i have remaining? the chair: 2 1/2 minutes. mr. kingston: i join the chairman in opposition to this and i appreciate mr. fortenberry withdrawing because of what has been said. this project is about 70% complete and been supported by three different administrations authorized by congress and is written into an international

nonproliferation agreement. 4.7 billion has been spent and this is money that has already been invested. and whenever we stop or put it on a cold start, as this administration or cold stand-by this administration has done, it ends up costing more money for the project. best thing to do is to complete this and send that signal internationally, but also to keep those jobs locally, which is so important for the augusta, south carolina area. i believe as we as members of congress want to be possible stewards ofer tax dollars, defeat this amendment should it be offered but more importantly get this thing completed and i thank the chairman for his leadership and i appreciate you letting me speak. mr. simpson: let me thank the gentleman from nebraska for both

his consideration of this and his passion in this arena which may be the most important thing this committee does. i appreciate working with him and look forward to working with you to address this as we answer these questions as rapidly as we can. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. gentleman's recognized. mr. fortenberry: thank you for your understanding of the importance of this debate. i ran a simple calculation. if we are going to consider this an important jobs bill. and it's a hefty price for a jobs bill saying we pleethed 60% of it at $4 billion. any road will do. i'm worried about that. maybe it becomes viable. maybe it still maintains a status in terms of our nuclear proliferation regime, but maybe not. we have got to get to this answer and we don't want to

waste more money. we need to reduce the probability of fissile materials. ms. kaptur: i thank the gentleman for his -- the chair: gentleman's time has expired. ms. kaptur: i appreciate what you have proposed on nonproliferation, very underfunded in the accounts, in my opinion, and we look forward to working with you. the chair: the time has expired. without objection, the amendment is withdrawn. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 29, line 15, billion.ctors $1 fice of the administrator, $386,863,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016.

environmental and other defense ,000,000. , $4,108 power marketing administration, power administration fund, expenditures from the power administration fund are approved for the black canyon trout hatcherry and for other expenses not to exceed $5,000. operation and maintenance, southeastern power $7,222,000.on operation and maintainance, $46,240,000. construction rehabilitation, operation and maintainance, western area power $304,202,000. perating and maintenance fund,

$4,727,000. federal energy regulatory commission, salaries and xpenses, $304,389,000. general provisions, department of energy, section 301, no appropriation for the department of energy shall be used to initiate any program if the rogram has not been -- the chair: the clerk will suspend. the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: page 40, line 8, insert the number of proposals where applications submitted for the award, documentation of the basis for selection of award recipient after the award. mr. lankford: i move -- mr. simpson: i reserve a point of order. the chair: the gentleman from oklahoma and a member opposed will each control five minutes. mr. lankford: i'm pleased the

appropriators and this chairman has included the requirement that discretionary grants must be disclosed to the house and senate in a timely manner and must include information about where those funds are going. this is a very positive step forward with greater transparency and greater availability for this body to have oversight. this amendment i'm offering per effects information about those grants. in addition to the money where it would go, it is critical we know how many entities competed for these awards and how the winner was selected so we know the full transparency of the program itself. it provides millions of dollars to granteys and important that congress has their and fulfills their responsibility of oversight. it will allow for critical independent assessments of how money and spends its

will go a long way to give congress data of how the department of energy. i applaud the committee for acknowledging how important disclosure is and i hope this is a positive sign of how well's handle oversight for all agencies and for all grants. i urge my colleagues to support this. with that, i yield back. mr. simpson: mr. chairman, i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. simpson: i appreciate the gentleman's intent and i will be happy to work forward with him but i must insist upon my point of order. it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation on an appropriations bill and the rule states in perpt part an amendment to a germ appropriation bill shall not be in order of changing existing law. the amendment inserts additional legislative language and is not

merl perfecting. ask for a ruling. the chair: the chair will rule. gentleman from idaho makes a point of order that the amendment proposes to change existing law in violation of rule 2, and legislative language is permitted to remain in a general appropriations bill or year main amendment and not adding further legislation is in order. but an amendment affecting further legislation is not in order. the chair finds that the section of the bill contains legislative language prescribing notification. the amendment offered by the gentleman from oklahoma seeks to expand that notification to include the number of proposals, applications submitted for the award, as such the amendment does not nearly perfect the legislative language. it is in violation of clause 2, rule 21. the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in

order. mr. simpson: i ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the beil through page 51 be considered as read. the chair: is there objection? hearing none? is there any amendments to that section of the bill. for what purpose does the gentleman from from ohio seek recognition? the clerk will read. the clerk: page 51, line three, delta regional authority, salaries and expenses, $12 million. denali commission, $10 million. mr. chabot: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. chabot of ohio, page 51, line 14, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $10 million. after the dollar amount insert

increased by $10 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 641, the gentleman from ohio and a member opposed each will control five minutes. mr. chabot: my amendment eliminates funding for its denali regional commission and uses it to pay down our national debt. it oice a small amount to our national debt but it is a step in the right direction. the commission is one of seven regional commissions that help direct federal funds to state and local projects. however, unlike the other commissions, it serves only one state, alaska, making it a little more than unnecessary middle man and many people would argue including myself ment american taxpayers would be better served if federal funds were distributed directly to the state of alaska or to alaskan

communities. state and local governments are more equipped to address the needs of local communities. i'm not the only one calling to the end of the experiment. last october, in his report to his congress, former inspector general mike marsh recommended that congress recommend eliminate its funding. on friday, september 27, 2013, the "washington post" ran a front-page article, this one here, entitled, fire me, in which mike marsh, the inspector general requested he be fired. and he was quoted as saying, i have concluded that my agency is a congressional experiment that has president worked. out in practice. i recommend that congress put its money elsewhere, unquote and

that is the inspector general for the denali commission. and there has been a recommendation for the elimination of this commission. as the report details the projects funded by the commission are wasteful and shortsided, for example, the commission has spent millions on micro settlements. they spent $200 million to build facilities in 81 locations with a population of less than 250 people. these 81 locations have a total population less than 10,000 people. at 10,000 people, the commission spent $57,000 per household, think of that, $57,000. independent agencies have questioned the need for the commission. agencies from the c.b.o. to the white house have found 29 other programs that are capable of fulfilling the commission's

mandate. the republican study committee, citizens against government waste, heritage, cato, american conservative union, national taxpayers union and even president obama have targeted the commission for elimination. it's time that we heed these recommendations and eliminate funding for this commission once and for all. to do otherwise would be imprudent and wasteful particularly when faced with a $17.5 trillion debt. . . mr. simpson: mr. chairman, this amendment would eliminate the denali commission which is funded at last year's level of $10 million in this bill. the denali commission provides infrastructure and economic development activities for some of the country's most rural and distressed communities. regardless of whether it is one state or region. the fact is, the state is probably larger than any one of the regions that the other

commissions deal with. in a time of economic instability, communities can scarce afford to lose the millions of dollars in private investments leveraged by the commission annually. the elimination of this commission would deny these communities infrastructure and development projects and i encourage my colleagues to vote against this amendment and i would yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: i thank the gentleman for yielding to me. all do respect to -- all due respect to the gentleman who offered this amendment, yes, we're all one state but you took all the land from the tip of maine to the tip of florida to the mississippi river over, that's the part of alaska. that's a big state, not a little state like ohio. this commission has worked and i have to say one thing. it's being referred to as the i.g. report by mr. marshall. totally incompetent. it's been unfounded, his finding was unfounded.

in fact, we can't find him. we'd like to find out where he is. he no longer exists. what he said about this commission is totally inaccurate. it has worked. it will work. and we are a rural area. what it has done, it has taken and provided, number one thing when it was created, was to move the fuel tanks away from the waters that the e.p.a. said they couldn't be close to. these communities could not do that. and the process of the federal government and the other agencies were taking too long. so we moved these fuel tanks across. and yes it was used for clinics and, yes, it's been used for sewer and water. 44 of our villages don't have water yet. don't have sewage. they carry honey buckets. why they call them that i have no idea. but i will say, this is what this commission's been, to take and provide the proper thing for, just as your constituents use every day and take it for granted. this commission has worked. we want to keep the money and i want to thank the chairman for

understanding this. because this amendment's been offered time and time again. as he said, this is a very small amount of money. that's not what i'm arguing. it's money well spent. if we don't spend it on this type of thing, the cutoff of the middleman, they keep saying they're other agencies, this is not true. those agencies do not function. most of our government to date doesn't function because there's too many layers and nothing gets to the constituent. nothing gets to the -- solving the problems. so i'm suggesting, and we've done some work on this i ask for a joo investigation. i did -- g.a.o. investigation. i did. to find out if this has occurred. it's not been reported back to us yeltsin. it will be. and in fact -- yet. it will be. and it will show that the i.g.'s report is false and that's one thing i'm looking forward to. i urge my colleagues to reject this amendment. it's time we accepted fact this system works as the other commissions do for those communities that are less fortunate and those are communities most people live in this body. i come from a rural state. i want to serve the rural state

and i'm sure this commission does also. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. simpson: i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from ohio is . cognized >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to yield to the gentleman from oklahoma the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. lankford: mr. chairman, i would say this is not about alaska. alaska's a tremendous state that i've personally visited and i had the opportunity to live there -- i haven't had an opportunity to live there like my colleague has. this isn't about alaska. this is about duplication and government efficiency and how we deliver services to these agencies. in 2004, president bush's office of management and budget wrote that the commission's activities were duplicative of other federal programs that address the same needs and provide the same types of assistance. in 2009, president obama's o.m.b. referred to the denali commission as duplicative, redundant, unnecessary and stated there was no evidence that the commission's job training programs improve employment outcomes for participants. the g.a.o. found that the denali's commissions --

commission's ac tifflets to be duplicative of -- activities to be duplicative of other programs. it failed to find any evidence they've achieved success in these areas in large part because of the overlap of the commission's ac tifflets and other federal programs. and in october, 2013, a report to congress, the office of inspector general said the denali commission was a middleman. it was an experiment that had run its course and argued these funds could be appropriated and be put to better use. put the funds toward alaska. put them actually into direct grants rather than a program that is a middleman around it. there are ways to be able to determine this but we as a nation have to find ways to be able to eliminate duplication and this is one of those moments. are we going to listen to the inspector general, congressional budget office, g.a.o., two different presidents, office of management and budget, or will we ignore all of those? with that i encourage us to deal with a transition for this, continue to address the

needs of rural alaska but find a more efficient delivery system to do that. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, not -- the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. the gentleman from ohio. mr. chabot: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 52, line 1, northern border regional commission, $3 million. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. fattah of pennsylvania. mr. fattah: i seek the opportunity to waive the further reading of the amendment. the chair: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 641, the gentleman from pennsylvania and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. fattah: let me first thank

you and thank the chairman and the ranking member who have done an extraordinary amount of work developing this bill. everything from the nonproliferation work and the security and modernization of our nuclear weapons enterprise, the renewable and nuclear support programs, the energy labs and their support of the science mission at d.o.e., and i know the committee's worked very hard. i rise tonight to offer an amendment which at the conclusion of my remarks i will withdraw. but i wanted to take this opportunity to say a number of things. one is that i've traveled with the chairman and other members of the committee over these many years to many of our national energy lands -- labs. in particular, a focus on the nuclear weapons enterprise. but i rise today in support of and wanting to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their support for the energy efficiency buildings hub

in philadelphia. the administration had asked for an appropriations -- the committee and its work has decided to go well beyond that and i want to thank the chairman publicly. even though it's in fill kelfia, i don't rise had -- philadelphia, i don't rise in a parochial sense. i thank you for your work in other labs. the pittsburgh lab is where the work that was done that has enabled us to tap the shale. these labs are so vitally important. the science that's done there has increased our country's capacity in terms of energy and i thank the chairman, i thank the ranking member and at this time i would like to withdraw this amendment and allow the committee to continue with its work. thank you. the chair: without objection, the amendment is withdrawn. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 52, line 9, southeast crescent regional commission, $250,000. nuclear regulatory commission

salaries and expenses, $1,052,433,000. office of inspector general, $12,071,000. to remain available until september 30, 2016. nuclear waste tech review -- technical review board salary and expenses, $3,400,000. general provisions, independent agencies, section 401. the chairman of the nuclear regulatory commission shall notify the other members of the commission, the committees on appropriations of the house and senate, the committee on energy and commerce of the house, and the committee on environmental and public works of the senate not later than one day after the chairman begins performing functions under the authority of section 3 of reorganization plan number 1 of 1980. section 402, the nuclear regulatory commission shall comply with the july 5, 2011, version of chapter 6 of its internal commission procedures whether responding to requests.

title 5, general provisions, including transfers of funds. section 501, none of the funds may be used to influence congressional action on any matters pending before congress. section 502, none of the funds may be used to enter into a contract with any corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation unless the agency has considered suspension of the corporation. section 503, none of the funds may be used to enter into a contract with any corporation that has any unpaid federal tax liability that has been assessed, unless the agency has considered suspension of the corporation. section 504, none of the funds made available in title 3 of this act may be transferred to -- to any department except to a transfer made by the transfer authority provided. section 505, none of the funds may be used in contra invention of executive order number 12898

of february 11, 1994. section 506, none of the funds may be used to conduct closure f functions or support activities associated with the yucca mountain geological repository license application. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentlelady from nevada seek recognition? ms. titus: i wish to call up amendment, number 14. i have it at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 14 printed in the congressional record offered by ms. titus of nevada. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 641, the gentlelady from nevada and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from nevada. ms. titus: thank you, mr. chairman. we all know the history of the misguided yucca mountain project so there's no need to repeat it again. this simple amendment that i'm going to offer would strike language included in the bill which prohibits the d.o.e. from closing yucca mountain. now, we heard earlier this

evening from an esteemed colleague on this floor that he cares deeply about nevada and went on to say that if the latest court-mandated study determines yucca mountain is not safe for one million years, he will indeed lead the charge to move on to another solution. in fact, he called on the chairman of the committee to join him in that pledge. while i thank him for that, but i ask you, mr. chairman, how can that be possible if the provision prohibiting closure of yucca mountain is left in the bill? is this offer not a sincere one? is this yet another empty promise to the people of nevada? indeed, if this amendment is not adopted, and instead the dfment o.e. is prohibit -- the d.o.e. is prohibited from ever closing yucca mountain, how can we believe anything that is being said or done in relation to this proposed dump site? i tell you, mr. chairman,

nevada is not a waste land. and i urge pass and of this amendment that would strike that language, prohibiting the d.o.e. from ever closing yucca mountain, regardless of whether it's found to be safe or not. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho seek recognition? mr. simpson: claim time in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. simpson: i would say that i rise to oppose this amendment. interesting argument that the gentlelady made. the house has repeatedly had overwhelming votes in support of continuing the yucca mountain repository. the language in this amendment would -- that would -- the language that would be stricken by this amendment, we have been carrying for years as a way to keep the will of the house and the american people alive. in fact, the votes supporting yucca mountain in this house have been overwhelming. each time that we voted on it. i would remind the gentlelady that this doesn't mean that yucca mountain can never be closed. the gentleman from illinois's

comments still would be -- illinois' comments still would be true. an appropriation bill is a one-year appropriation bill. that's why we carry this language in each appropriation bill. we need to wait for the safety study committee -- the safety review by the n.r.c. to get done to decide what we're going to do moving forward. instead of the political decisions that have been made on yucca mountain in the past. and it has been a political decision. i think even the gentlelady would admit that. i would urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment and i would yield to the gentleman from illinois. the remainder of my time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shimkus: thank you. i want to thank the committee for again doing fine work. the amendment talks about none of the funds can be used for the n.r.c.'s work. the nuclear regulatory commission is the independent agency to ensure the safety of the nuclear power industry and the disposition of this waste. in attacking this and pulling this money out, it is the last attempt to say, we're not going

o allow the scientific basis n.r. commission, most appointed by a democratic administration, to do their work. we know what they're going to come out with, they're going to say it's safe for a million years. and of course people need to go isit the great state of nevada or however -- people say illinois, they say illinois. i would just tell you this. it's a great state. i've been there. there will be a time when we need to move forward and i'm pledging, along with the chairman, to do what's right by your state. yucca mountain is a small portion of the nuclear waste test site. you have d.o.e. land and bureau of land management land and it is bigger than most states and people don't understand that until they go out there. seven of your 17 counties, at

least support what has been raised by the chairman, support the nuclear regulatory commission coming to a final conclusion, and you all know that, because they have passed county resolutions. to say everyone in the state is opposed from what many folks in the state of nevada say, let the n.r.c. do its work and we have resolutions from the seven of the 17 counties that support that. we will get through this. we voted numerous times in this chamber. last year, 335-81. 337-87. the house as a body representing members from across this great nation have spoken in support in supporting federal law. and you have the right to come down here and try to stop the implementation of law and i understand that and i respect that, but you know, there will

be a time when we continue to pledge, as this policy moves forward, that we'll do everything to do what's right for your state and moving and storing and ensuring safety for this as the national policy over land enacted by the federal statute in 1982, along the amendments in 1987. i know i have a lot of support on your side. and we need to get closure to this. so that we can continue to have a really an energy policy that's diversified. we move on this climate agenda. how do you move on it without climate agenda? large major generating facilities. how do we deal with the world is a waste, hanford

legacy site. do you know where it should go if the n.r.c. concludes it should be safe, in a desert, 90 miles northeast of las vegas. again, i'm not trying to be a jerk. i know it's tough. 30 years, $15 billion. we can't walk away from that as an investment of this country. if we do, we are not being good public stewards of the taxpayer funds and the ratepayers which is about 32 states in this union. 32 states have put in mu money to the nuclear waste fund on the promise that the federal government would have a site and your amendment would say, no, we are going to walk away. respectfully, i would ask for defeat of the titus amendment.

and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from nevada. ms. titus: with all due respect to my colleague, he is addressing the previous amendment. this amendment deletes language from the bill. and i would remind him of the bipartisan bill that is in the senate that would provide a solution for our nuclear waste problem which is consent-based, bipartisan and consent-based. this policy has been a waste of time and money and indeed it is bad politics, not good science. i yield the balance of my time to mr. horsford. mr. horsford: thank you to the gentlelady for yielding and i commend you for your tireless efforts in fighting this dangerous storage of yucca mountain nuclear waste at yucca mountain, from your days as a leader as a state legislator and

your unwavering commitment, on behalf of the majority will of the people of nevada, who are opposed to dangerous storage of nuclear waste in our state. from our governor, republican governor, our u.s. senator, republican member, u.s. senator dean heller and majority leader, harry reid, this is a state issue. the state is opposed to the storage of nuclear waste at yucca mountain. there are local counties that have different positions but the state's position has been clear for decades that we do not want dangerous nuclear waste stored in our state. ultimately this threatens our state's health and safety. it hurts our safe economy, not just gaming, but other areas and with one accident, it could devastate southern nevada. the stakes are too high for our state to gamble with.

and while this is 90 miles away from las vegas, we have 40 million visitors that come to our community, two million people that live there in southern nevada. but we are a state that relies on tourism. and that industry would be destroyed by any complication with nuclear waste. people come to vegas with a bright light, not for radioactive glow. our state leaders will continue to fight together, republican and democrats in nevada to make sure that yucca mountain remains scrapped, as it should be. i want to thank my colleague, the representative from district 1, for her tireless leadership on this issue. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment that protects the majority will of the people of nevada, who have consistently opposed the storage of dangerous nuclear waste. and to my colleague from

illinois, i think if you would take the time to visit our community, talk to the small business owners, to the parents who are concerned about the transportation of what this would mean on our highways and roads, the threat that it could have to our schools and to our local business ises, then maybe you would understand why there is near unanimous agreement that ucca mountain is not right for nevada. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from nevada. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. the gentlelady from nevada. ms. titus: i would request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from nevada will be postponed. the clerk: page 59, line 15,

spending reduction act, section 507, the amount by which the applicable allocation of new budget authority made by the committee on appropriations is zero dollars. the chair: fromme the gentleman from idaho seek recognition? mr. simpson: i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee do now rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 4923, directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house of the state of the

union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 4923 and has come to no resolution thereon. the gentleman is recognized. >> i move the -- excuse me, i move that the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the uestion is on -- the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states, i am pleased to transmit the 2014, national drug control strategy, 21st century approach to drug policy that is built or decades of research that addiction is a disease of the brain and people can recover. the pages that follow lay out an evidence-based plan for real drug policy reform, spanning the spectrum of early intervention, treatment, recovery, support, criminal justice, law enforcement and international

cooperation. illicit drug use and its consequences, a building for our country, a country and illicit drug use is associated with lower academic performance among our young people and contributes to crime and dangers on our nation's roadway s and drug use jeopardizes the progress that we ve and costing our economy costing of billions of dollars. despite progress, this gives us good reason to move forward with confidence. we cannot effectively build on this progress without collaboration across all sectors of our society. i look to joining with groups, health care providers, law enforcement agencies, state and local governments and our international partners to continue this important work in 2014. and i thank the congress for our efforts to build a healthier,

safer and more prosperous country, signed barack obama, the white house. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the committees on agriculture, armed services, education and work force. financial services, foreign affairs, ways and means, and natural resources and permanent select committee on intelligence. the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence equested for ms. eddie bernice johnson for today. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho rise? mr. simpson: i move the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. accordin

seventh of 12 bills for 2013. what departments and agencies does it cover? >> the energy department. engineer's.ps of

major dams as well as sports, dredging, that kind of things. some smaller agencies. the nuclear regulatory mission. -- commission. >> how different is that from what the white house requested? issued a vetoouse threat against the bill. you are writing about that. ist does the white house -- the white house concerned about? riders.olicy writers -- forhouse cut provisions energy efficiency and renewable energy. and increased spending for fossil research. some people are surprised we are doing research on fossils. there is a 5% increase to coaler hydro fracking,

technologies. that is one of the main objections of the white house. the second are provisions which ourd effect the way relations with russia, because of issues going on with the ukraine, the house attempted to block all aid with russia. some of that has to do with nonproliferation. the idea is to continue the nonproliferation efforts even as tensions are heightened. there's also a holocene rider -- affect ader that would jurisdiction of what falls under the epa and army corps. theepublicans have tweeted, bill addresses concerns about russia's recent activities in eastern europe. in another issue, what is the provision we are hearing about

that would allow firearms to be landsd in arms -- overseen by the corps of engineers? >> there was an attempt at the committee level to allow that. that is something that has been debated in the past three the argument being there is already hunting that is allowed. we may seeething again at this level. >> a couple of concerns on the clean water act. epa, farmers raising legitimate concerns on the water rule. andy tweet from the appropriations committee, this time from the democrats. saying, oppose the writer thing. -- the rider. what would the 2015 spending bill on energy and water say? >> there are two different riders. one relates to mountaintop mining. the second is related to an

attempt this spring, epa and a intentneers issued to redefine navigable waters under the clean water act. cause roding to overreach that all the sudden the epa is going to be regulating the ditch and some former's field. -- farmer's field. the administration says this is necessary to clarify some ambiguities. >> how many amendments will get debate? are there one or two we should look for? >> there are 10 or 15 amendments. there is talk of more. it is an open rule. at some point, they will limit the debate. our key amendments which would try to undo elements the in this ration opposes.

several brought by representative will cassity who is in a tight race against mary in the senate. he is trying to get everything he can to benefit louisiana. he had an interesting amendment rgyt would bar ag -- ene department consideration of greenhouse yes omissions as they consider the provide natural gas liquefiedmits -- natural gas expert permits. also an attempt to move $55 million from nuclear security into submarine nuclear reactor research. which is considered to be possibly underfunded. there were concerns that nuclear research for submarines is critically underfunded. theovering the debate on

energy and water spending bill. follow his reporting that cq.com cq.com. tonight, president obama talks to reporters after discussing border issues with rick perry of texas. then a hearing on efforts to protect of the border and stop the influx of unaccompanied children. later, a discussion on how funds requested by the white house would be used for issues at the border. president obama met with texas governor rick perry and community leaders to discuss the influx of unaccompanied americarom central crossing the border. following that meeting, he spoke to reporters. this is 25 minutes. >> hello, everybody.

just had a good meeting with governor perry. local officials and state leaders. steps we havethe taken and that we need to take to address the humanitarian situation on the border. i want to thank everybody who has been involved for taking the time to talk to me. the surge of immigrants is arriving at one side of the border. the rio grande number. the issue is not that they are vading our efforts. we are detaining them in large numbers.

we need to care for unaccompanied children with the care and capacity they deserve. we intend to do the right thing by these children. parents need to know this is a dangerous situation. their children will be able to stay. i have asked current across central america not to put their children in harms way in this fashion. agentsow there are more in surveillance resources on the ground that an -- than at any time in our history. we deport 400,000 migrants each year. clear thisame migration was different than in past years, i directed fema to coordinate our response at the border. members of my cabinet and staff have made trips to facilities there. we are addressing the root of the problem.

president biden and meet withkerry to central american leaders as well as working with international partners to go after smugglers that are putting children's lives at risk. mexico announced a series of steps they are going to take on their southern border to help stem the tide of these unaccompanied children. last week, i sent a letter to congress asking them to increase in a piece on smugglers -- and give us penalty -- and give us flex ability to move migrants to the system faster. i asked congress to fund these efforts. about half of the resources would go to security, enforcement, and expedited removal of people who do not qualify for a humanitarian claim. about half would go to make sure we are treating children humanely. we would also make investments to further tackle the root problems in central america. right now,s --

congress has the capacity to work with us and state officials, local officials, and and non-forgroups profits were helping to care for these kids. congress has the ability to work with all the parties to directly address the situation. they have said they want to see a solution. the supplemental offers them the capacity to vote immediately to get it done. in the long run, the best way to truly address the problem is for the house to pass legislation fixing our broken immigration system, which would've include thousands of border patrol agents. something everybody down here indicates is a priority. passed a commonsense bipartisan bill more than one

year ago. it would have the strength and the border and add 20,000 border patrol agents. our backlogged immigration courts. put us in a stronger position to deal with this surge. and in fact prevented. -- prevent it. but me indicating the nature of the conversation i had with governor perry. governor perry suggested for specific -- four specific areas of concern. he was concerned about how many patrol agents were directly at the border. he was concerned that some of the positioning of border patrol agent was too far from the border to be effective in deterring folks from coming in as opposed to apprehending them. him that what he said sound like -- sounded like it made sense. supplemental,he

we would have the resources to carry out some of the very things he has requested. on a broader policy level, he indicated concerned that right now kids who come to the border from mexico are immediately but because it is noncontiguous, folks from central america have to go through a much lengthier process. i indicated to him that what we are looking at is some flexibility in terms of being able to preserve the due process rights of individuals who come in but also make sure we are sending a strong signal that they can't suddenly show up at the border and automatically assume they will be absorbed. he also expressed concerns about how the immigration judicial system works. how the administration of -- administrative processing works. people who appear are essentially released with a court date that might be six months out or nine months out.

a sizable number, not surprisingly, do not show up. i indicated if we had more judges, more capacity, we could shrink those we times. -- wait times. predates my administration. this practice predates my administration and has been going on for some time. it has to do with the fact that there's not enough capacity in terms of detention facilities in judges, attorneys, space, order to process the things more quickly and expeditiously. there is nothing the governor would like to see that i have a philosophical objection to. i have asked jeh johnson to contact his head of health and human services when he comes sixth6 time -- for the

time to court date and make sure some of the suggestions are technically resource of what -- technically feasible and what sort of resources are needed. i emphasized the problem is not a major disagreement around the issues that could be helpful in dealing with the problem. is, is congress prepared to act to put the resources in place to get this done? another way of putting it, and i said this directly to the governor, our folks more interested in politics or solving the problem? if they are interested in solving the problem, then this can be solved. if the preferences for politics, it will not be sold. talk tohe governor to the texas delegation, which is at the heart of the republican caucus, both in the house and

has influenced in the senate. is in texas delegation favor of the supplemental, which by the way does not include some things many of them object to around the dealing with undocumented workers who have been in this country for some time, this is just a very narrow issue. a supplemental in terms of dealing with the particular problem we have now. if the texas delegation is prepared to move come of this thing can get done next week. we can have more border true troll -- patrol agents on the border. we can shorten the time tables for processing these children or adults with children as the governor thinks is important. we can make sure that some of the public health issues that were raised in the meeting i just had are addressed so we have enough folks vaccinating, checking on the health status of

the children, making sure not only they are safe but our communities are safe. that the governor thinks are important to do would be easier to do if we had the supplemental. it gives us the resources to do them. the only question is, why wouldn't the texas delegation or the other republicans were concerned about this not want to put it on a fast-track and get it on my desk? so we can start getting to work? has some the governor influence. that might be helpful, to call on them to pass the supplemental right away. the final point i will make as i want to thank some of the faith-based groups i met with. s, well as mailers, -- mayor commissioners, local officials. dallas has been compassionate and looking at some sites, some fertility's -- in looking at some sites, some facilities,

where they can accommodate these children. churches are prepared not just to make donations but send volunteers to help construct some of these facilities. they are willing to volunteer? -- i told him thank you. if confirmed what we all know. the american people are a compassionate people. when we see a child in need, we want to care for him. think we all agreed on is the best thing we can do is make sure the children are able to live in their own countries safely. that is why it is going to be important, even as we solve the short term problem, for us to direct attention and resources and assistance, as we are doing

but not a high enough level, back in honduras and guatemala and el salvador. so parents don't think that somehow it is safer for their children to send them thousands of miles just so they don't get harmed. with that, i will take a couple of questions. with their calls for you to visit -- there were calls to visit the border. can you explain why you did not do that? do you think that was more about politics than anything else? >> jeh johnson has visited five times. he is going for a sixth this week. he comes back and reports to me extensively on everything taking place. there is nothing that is taking place down there that i am not

intimately aware of in briefed on -- and a briefed on. this is a problem. i'm not interested in photo ops. i am interested in solving a problem. those who say i should visit the border, when you ask them what we should be doing, they are giving suggestions that are embodied in legislation i have already sent congress. it is not as if they are making suggestions that were not -- we are not listening to. the suggestions of those who work at the border who visit the border are incorporated in legislation we are prepared to sign the minute it hits my desk. there is a simple question here. congress just needs to pass the supplemental. there is a larger issue that i

recognize it involves a little politics. why are we not passing copperheads of immigration reform? an additionalt 20,000 border patrol agents and give us additional authority to deal with some of these problems. that should have been done a year ago or two years ago. it has gotten caught up in politics. i understand that. one of the suggestions i had for governor perry was it would be useful for my republican friends to rediscover the concept of negotiation. and compromise. the governor's one concerned he mentioned to me was setting aside the supplemental, i should go ahead and authorize having national guard troops search at the border right away -- surge at the border right away. i told him we were happy to consider how we could deploy

national guard. temporarys a solution. that is not a permanent solution. why wouldn't we go ahead and pass the permanent solution, or at least a longer-term solution? if the texas delegation says forced to pass the supplemental, we want to include it a commitment for some national guard early, i would be happy to consider it. this should not be hard. to at least get the supplemental done. the question is, are we more in student politics of or are we more interested in solving the problem? if we are interested in solving the problem, there are some -- is some broad consensus around a number of the issues. there may be some controversies and differences between democrats and republicans on some issues. stuff,a bunch of the

there is consensus. let's get that done. let's do the work. has the governor given an itication that he would -- sounds like you are concerned the supplemental will fall victim to partisan politics. >> it is fair to say these days, everybody is concerned about everything falling victim to partisan politics. bill declaringa apple pie american, it might fall victim to partisan politics. on the other hand, this is an my republican friends have said it is urgent and we need to fix it. case, let's go ahead and fix it. as i indicated to governor perry, he said maybe you have to go ahead and act.

might convince republicans they should go ahead and pass the supplemental. i had to remind him, i am getting sued by mr. boehner for going ahead and acting instead of going through congress. here is a good test case. this is something you say is important, as i do. an area you have prioritized, as i have. don't wait for me to take executive action when you have the capacity right now to go ahead and get something done. i will sign that bill tomorrow. we will do what we can administratively. this gives of the tools -- gives us the tools to do many of the things republicans are seeking. repeatsame time, i will if we got a comprehensive build done, it doesn't

to solve the problem for a year. it potentially solves it for 20 years. i would urge those who have failed to act on the encumbrance of bill to take another look. >> doesn't some like he made any promises. >> i didn't get any promises, but it was a constructive conversation. it was a good exchange of ideas. he did have some specific suggestions in terms of how we align border agents that i have asked jeh johnson to take a look at. i think there may be ways in which we can use the resources we already have more effectively. i think it is important we make federalhave a strong state collaboration. i will take two more questions. >> governor perry put out a statement shortly before you spoke. does that statement indicate he inv st as in, mice --

terested economize? >> the only disagreement i had with governor perry was he wanted me to do it without congress having to do anything. we will do what we can administratively. forul question, not just the governor but john boehner and mitch mcconnell and members of the texas delegation, is why will you not go ahead and give us resources to solve the problem you say is urgent? >> there have been a number of theublicans that say b executive orders you sign were to blame. it was an invitation. the children are taken up. what do you say to that? >> if you look at the pattern of immigration into our country, we are at a significantly lower level in terms of overall immigration flow, even legal

immigration flow, then we were when i took office. the challenge we have that has caused a spike is the significant security challenges in these central american countries themselves. the fact that you have smugglers who are recognizing they can make money by transporting these folks, often in dangerous circumstances, to the border. taking advantage of the compassion of the american people. recognizing we are not going to childrenave abandoned were left at our doorstep. we have to care for them and provide them some basic safety and security well we determine -- while we determine where we

can send them. one of the most important things we are going to have to recognize -- this is not going to be a short-term problem, this is a long-term problem -- we have countries that are close to us in which the life chances of children are far worse than they are here. parents who are frightened or misinformed about what is possible are willing to take extraordinary risks on behalf of their kids. the more we can do to help these countries if their acts together -- get their acts together, the less likely we are to have a problem at the borders.

the fact is comprehensive immigration reform would allow us to relocate resources precisely because all the budget of dhs, instead of us chasing after families that may have been living here 5-10 years and have kids who are u.s. citizens and are law-abiding save for the fact they did not come here legally, they have to earn citizenship, paying taxes, learning english, paying a fine, going to the back of the line, but they are no longer an enforcement priority. that frees up a huge amount of resources to do the kinds of things that many republicans are calling for us to do. we have tried to do within the resource limitations we have. think you're ready. -- thank you everybody.

>> texas senator issued the following statement in response to president obama's remarks. it reads, -- >> on the next washington journal, a discussion of education under the obama administration. call for the resignation of education secretary arne duncan. then a congressman of texas talks about president obama's request for 2.7 billion dollars to address the situation at the border. washington journal is live every morning on c-span. you can join the conversation on

facebook and twitter. senatesday, the appropriations committee holds a hearing on president obama's request for emergency funds to deal with the flood of migrant children at the border. you can see the hearing live starting at 2:30 p.m. on c-span three. >> now you can keep on touch -- in touch with c-span radio on audio now. hear.o recap of thea events at 5:00 p.m. eastern on washington today. you can also hear audio of the network look affairs programs. c-span radio on audio now.. long-distance or phoned her injures -- phone charges may apply. >> now a hearing on security

issues at the us-mexico border and the influx of unaccompanied children from central america. officials from several agencies testified before the homeland security committee. 2:45 hours.urs: -- >> let me begin today by calling us to order. joiningur witnesses for us to discuss the current humanitarian challenge that is playing out along our southern border with mexico. unaccompanied children as young as four years old arriving in record numbers every day. to try to putt things into context.

over the past decade, we have made significant progress in securing our borders. since 2003, we have spent a quarter trillion dollars to enforce immigration laws. doubling the size of the petrone or best border patrol. we have built fencing and deployed force multipliers sense as cameras, radars, drones, and other aircraft. borderears ago, the patrol apprehended more than a million people. some got through, most did not. while the most recent recession played a role in a drop of attempt to cross the border, investments have also played a part. migration is still at historic lows, but we are facing a surge from central america. a large surge, as we know, in undocumented

immigration from the central american countries, including unprecedented numbers of unaccompanied children and families showing up at our borders. some are saying that the current situation shows that our borders are not secure. i don't believe this is true. let me be clear. these children and their families are not slipping past our borders undetected. they are being apprehended in large numbers by the border patrol, almost as soon as they touch the u.s., often turning themselves in voluntarily. people from central america, unlike mexico, must be flown back to their countries. this is a costly process that can take months and sometimes even years. this process is even more complicated for unaccompanied children and families, because our laws, appropriately, require different treatment for these groups. children must be handed over to the department of health and human services and families must be detained in special facilities that include educational opportunity for children. our border security system has been overwhelmed by the sheer number of these children and

families. the administration and secretary johnson have responded to the situation with what i describe as an all hands on deck approach. the federal emergency management administration is coordinating with the department of homeland security wide response to the problem. the department of defense has provided space in some of its military installations to house unaccompanied minors until health and human services can find a placement for them. and we surged immigration judges and other personnel to the border to help process these individuals. finally, just yesterday, the administration proposed some $3.7 billion in emergency funding to deal with this situation. and while we're still trying to drill down on it and understand fully what it calls for, we do know that the department of homeland security will receive $1.5 billion to detain and deport more families, build some temporary additional detention facilities for the border

patrol, and enhance investigations into human smuggling networks. these resources are urgently needed. i'm concerned, however, that while we continue to focus a great deal of attention on the symptoms of the problems along the border, we also continue to focus too little attention in addressing the underlying causes. as i mentioned earlier, we spent nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars securing our borders since 2003. at the same time, only a small fraction of this amount has been invested in addressing the root causes in central america that are encouraging young people and their families to risk life and limb and make the long and dangerous trek to south texas. seeking a better life in the united states is nothing new. most of us here today are here because someone in our family a generation or more ago decided to come here to take advantage of what america has to offer. but for some of those central americans, especially, the children and parents, who often send them on their journeys, the decision can be a desperate one.

life in parts of guatemala, el salvador, and honduras is more than difficult today. it can be deadly. i've seen it firsthand, even this year. violence has been steadily increasing in the region, with homicide rates in all three countries among the highest in the entire world. kidnapping and extortion are endemic. meanwhile, these countries have stagnant economies to create too few jobs and opportunities for their citizens. faced with this violence and lack of hope at home, people from the region are voting with their feet and risking their lives and a nearly 1,500 mile journey to the united states. i believe that the u.s., along with mexico, along with colombia, and along with many others, need to do a better job of helping central american countries help themselves. how? in a large part, by helping them create a more nurturing environment for job creation. restore the rule of law. lower energy costs. improve workforce skills and access to capital. and improve the prospects for the young people so that more of

them are willing, even eager, to stay home and help build their country up. i'm dismayed to hear some of our colleagues suggest that the answer is to cut off funding for these countries. and while i'm a strong advocate of tough love, i believe in tough love, it strikes me as an extremely shortsighted step to take and one that will likely do more harm than good in the long run. colombia would be a failed nation today instead of one with a vibrant economy that's become a strong ally of hours. do our neighbors and their leaders in central america need to do more to provide a broader future for their own citizens? you bet they do. but this is not the time to abandon them. do we really think that making things worse in this country is going to somehow improve the situation on our borders? i don't think so. i'm encouraged that the administration has included $300 million in its emergency supplemental request for the

state department, some of which will be used to deal with the root causes of south american migration. but these funds should be seen as a down payment. this cannot be one and done. if we're serious about improving conditions in this region, we need to do more, and frankly, so will others. and i would emphasize this. this is a shared responsibility. this shouldn't be all on america's shoulders. this is a shared responsibility and it includes the mexicans and colombians and other countries in latin america. it includes development banks and so far. but keep in mind, plan colombia took more than a decade to bear fruit. i think we face a similar commitment here today. hopefully not that long, but a similar commitment. and in making that commitment will not only prove ourselves good neighbors, but ensure that we won't continue to face an expensive humanitarian crisis at our borders a decade from now. addressing the factors that are pushing people out of central america is important, but we also need to address the factors that are pulling them here in the first place. some are saying that the current surge in migration from central america is somehow tied to the actions that president obama has

taken, to help undocumented immigrants, who are brought here as children, years ago, come out of the shadows and live without fear. many of those making this argument are the same people who oppose immigration reform and have rejected our bipartisan senate efforts to update the outdated immigration laws that often drive people to try and enter our country illegally. from what i have seen and heard, the biggest factor that pulls people to come here is the desire to have a better life. a job in the united states. but a broken immigration systems don't do enough to provide legal avenues for workers we want and need, nor does it provide the most effective tools to ensure the providers don't exploit undocumented workers. the senate passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill more than a year ago. i would be the first to say, it is not perfect. other parts, would i like to change? you bet i would. and i'm sure others feel the same way. it would tackle some of the root causes that are pulling these migrants to come here and live

and work by providing them legal avenues to do so and return to their own countries. it also further increases the security of our borders and enforce our immigration and workforce laws in the interior of the country. lastly, congressional budget office concluded that the immigration reform bill passed by the senate would increase our country's gdp, increase our country's gdp, but i think, anywhere from 3 to 5%. and increase our budget deficit by almost $1 trillion. $1 trillion over the next 20 years. and yet just last week, we learned that our friends in the house of representatives the not to debate immigration reform this year. i believe this is a mistake. i truly hope they'll reconsider this decision. with that having been said, let me turn to my friend, dr. coburn, and then we'll hear from our witnesses. >> i would ask unanimous consent that my remarks be -- >> without objection. >> submitted. i would welcome each of you here. i'll make some observations, as i've studied this. number one is that we've known about this problem escalating since january and yet there was

no mention of it or any request for it in the president's budget. number two is the best way to stop the flow is to send them back. i understand our 2008 law, in terms of the trafficking law, prohibits us to do that at this time in a timely manner, but, in fact, if we want to stop this flow. number three, the root cause of this can be mediated somewhat by our ally, the mexican government. and whether or not we've done everything we can do in that regard to utilize their help in this problem remains to be seen. i want to welcome each and every one of you being here. and i submitted your questions ahead of time so we can get complete answers for the record. >> thank you, dr. coburn. i want to provide brief introductions for our witnesses and listen to you and we'll have a good conversation.

our first witness is no stranger here, craig fugate. william craig fugate. and mr. few grait is the administrator of the federal emergency management industry. mr. fugate has helped coordinate emergency management efforts between all levels of government. external partners in the private and community sectors prior to joining fema, mr. fugate served as the director of florida division of emergency management. craig, nice to see you. thanks for joining us and for your service. second witness today is gale kerlikowske. in this position, he oversees this nation's dual mission of protecting national and security objectives while promoting economic security. as commissioner, he runs the largest federal law enforcement agency and the second largest revenue collecting source in the federal government. prior to joining cbp, mr. kerlikowske was the director of white house office of national drug control policy, and as i recall, he's been the police

chief in a place or two, maybe in buffalo and seattle, if i'm not mistaken. our next witness is thomas minh minkowski. the through the criminal and civil enforcement of approximately 400 federal laws governing border control, customs, trade, and immigration. and most recently, he served as the acting commissioner prior to the appointment of mr. kerlikowske. next we have mark greenberg. mark is an acting assistant secretary for the administration for children and families at the department of health and human services. prior to this, he directed the georgetown university center of public policy. during his career, he's, frequently provided technical assistance to state and local government regarding poverty reduction strategyings.

mr. greenberg also serves as both the principle deputy, assistant secretary, and the acting commissioner for the administration of children, youth, and families. and our next witness is francisco palmiery, the deputy assistant secretary for the caribbean and for the department of state. mr. palmieri has served and has led the latin america and caribbean program officers where he sponsored over $800 million in programs, including the caribbean and mexican operations in 19 narcotics affairs offices throughout the western hemisphere. he serves as deputy executive secretary in the department of state's executive secretary. final witness is juan osuna.

mr. osuna serves has director of the executive office for immigration review at the department of justice, leading up to his appointment as direct, mr. osuna served as a deputy attorney general working as indian country matters and pardons and commutations. prior to this year, we saw sifl immigration related litigation in the federal courts as deputy assistant attorney general in the civil division office of immigration and litigation. hes also teaches immigration policy at george mason university of law in arlington, virginia. we're delighted that you're here. thank you all for your presence, for your preparation, for your testimony, and, craig, why don't you lead us off? >> thank you, mr. chairman, senator coburn and other senators the timeline fema is involved actually started about mid-may.

we were as part of the department in meetings where the secretary had -- >> craig, could you bring the mic a little closer? >> yes. >> about mid-may, the secretary had elevated the response based upon the number of children that were being held. at that time, fema offered what assistance we could. we weren't sure if this was commodities or technical assistance. the initial assistance we provided was mainly advisory and technical assistance in helping identify some resources within the faith-based community for some immediate needs. towards the end of may, about may 30th, there was a deputies meeting at the white house with the national security council on this issue that we participated in, as fema. we were asked what else we could do. based upon authorities that fema had received in the post-katrina emergency management format, as the principal adviser to the administration on emergency management issues, we felt that

there would be some additional resources or assistance we could provide. based upon that, we were asked by the president, through the secretary, to coordinate and again, i want to be very clear about this, a very narrow focus on supporting two lead agencies, custom and border protection, and the agency for children and families, officer refugee resettlement, focused on the humanitarian issues surrounding the children that were being held in detention because there was not enough capacity to place them in beds. so our focus has been using the framework through interagency agreements to formulate across the federal agencies existing authorities and existing funding to meet the needs of the humanitarian aspect of these children that were for being days held in detention cells, working across the interagency with everybody from gsa, department of defense, within our own department of homeland security, coast guard, and others for transportation resources. and again, the focus of our

assignment has been on what we could do to either bring additional services in the field at the level that cbp had, or assisting children and families to getting more capacity to house children and process children. so through the interagency and the national response framework, that's been our role. we have not used our authorities under the stafford act, nor have we used any disaster funds in that matter. we've used existing funding that we've had. most of the additional assistance that fema's provided has been done through interagency agreements. that's built in when we respond to disasters that's not stafford act. similar to what we did in haiti, when under direction from usid, fema provided additional assistance in haiti. we did that through interagency agreements, where the fund transfers were done, so that we were performing work under

existing funding to agencies that we were authorized to do. since thime, we've added about 3,000 additional beds for children and families. numbers have come down, but we still face the problem of too many children that were in detention for more than 24 hours. too many children that are still in the custody of cdp for more than 72 hours before they're placed. and although we've made progress, that progress is disrupted when we see sudden influxes of children coming in faster than we can discharge them and we back up. the last week, we've seen our numbers drop, but we have not been, what i would say, successful yet in ensuring that no child is in a detention facility for more than 24 hours and no child is in cdp custody for more than 2 hours. we work diligent ly to make sur we're placing all of the

youngest children. there was a massive effort to make sure that children under 5 were placed, and then children under 12, to get those children to an appropriate level of care. but the children continue to come across the border. it's a very fluid situation. again, we will continue our role until such time as the system is stable and children are being placed in a timely manner and we will then, at that point, consider our part of this completed. mr. chairman? >> mr. chairman, thanks, mr. fugate. and gil, please proceed. gil kerlikowske. >> yes, sir. chairman carper, ranking chairman coburn, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before and discuss the role that the united states border and custom protection is doing to address this issue of influx of unaccompanied children. the rio grande valley of texas has experienced a significant increase in illegal entrance, including increased numbers of unaccompanied children and family units.

most of these are from el salvador, guatemala, and honduras. i was confirmed for the position on march 7th and less than two weeks later, i was in the rio grande valley in mckown, texas, to see this for myself and look at the challenge that men and women of customs and border protection were facing. i've since made two return visits and i'm completely focused on though make sure we do everything we can to address this increased flow of children acrossing the border. the recent dramatic increase is difficult and distressing on a lot of levels. and today at this fiscal year, the number of unaccompanied children encountered by cdp is over 57,000. it's more than doubled compared to the previous year, and as of july 1st, there were just over 2,600 unaccompanied children in our custody. we're working closely with our counterparts to surge every available resource, personnel, facilities, equipment supplies, to quickly, safely, and humanely

process these children in accordance with the 2008 trafficking victims protection reauthorization act, and to support the transfer of the custody to the department of health and human services. we're also surging resources to maintain border security operations. in addition, 115 border patrol agents were recently added to the south texas area and secretary johnson has also just added an additional 150 agents on top of that. unaccompanied children are an incredibly vulnerable population. and while they're in our custody, they're provided shelter and medical assistance and basic necessities. these may be adequate for a short-term stay, but cbp's facilities are clearly not designed, nor were services put in place to accommodate such large volumes for an extended period of time. we're working with i.c.e. and health and human services and fema and others and the federal partner to ease these conditions

through the utilization of alternate facilities, the nogales placement center in arizona and a facility recently secured by the gsa for customs and border protection to use in mcalan to process and trailer hold children that are awaiting transfer to health and human services custody. the border patrol has established medical units at our busiest border stations. we're conducting public health screenings. we have the assistance of the united states coast guard corpsman and the public health services, so that all of these adult and child detainees can receive medical care. fema has provided hygiene items, shower services, and many other things. services that have improved the care for these detainees in the past several months. assistance from nongovernmental and charity organizations have had a big impact on the government-wide effort to accommodate these children. i could not say enough about them. the additional support has provided relief to these law enforcement agents and officers,

who have been taking care of these kids. you know, i've been down there and witnessed firsthand these employees going above and beyond their regular duties. they're absolutely committed to making sure these children are treated in the most respectful and humane wait and heartfelt way possible under really difficult circumstances. we're working around the clock to address this issue. i appreciate the opportunity to be here and i would certainly invite all of you to tour and to visit these facilities and to see some of this firsthand and i know that some of you already have. thank you. >> thank you, mr. kerlikowske. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify today about u.s. immigration and customs enforcement role in addressing the rise in apprehensions along the southwest border, namely the rio grande valley, and our response.

mr. chairman, i would like to thank you for your support and for taking the time this spring to visit mexico, guatemala, and el salvador in order to better understand the underlying causes of this search. thank you very much. through the whole government, we are determined to address the situation in a matter that is comprehensive, coordinated, and humane. on may 12th, secretary johnson declared a level 4 condition of readiness, which was the first step to bring the full interagency resources to bear. on june 1st, president obama, prudent to the homeland security act, directed secretary johnson to establish a unified coordination group. craig talked about that. this group includes dhs and all of its components, the department of health and human services, defense, justice, and state and the general services administration. when cbp encounters a child attempting to enter the united states, cbp begins the interview process to determine the child's

status, review available documentation, and determine if the child is accompanied by a parent or a legal garden. under the trafficking victims protection reauthorization act of 2008, or tbpra, an unaccompanied child who is a national of canada or mexico, may be permitted to withdraw his or her application for a mission and be repatrioted immediately. however, this is not true for the vast majority of children accounted in the rio grande valley, because almost all of them are marbles of honduras, guatemala, and el salvador, and according to tvpra are required to be processed by receiving a notice to appear in order to see an immigration judge. upon determining that an unaccompanied child does not have the ourpgsd tvpra to withdraw his or her application for a mission, cvp notifies i.c.e. and the department of human services offices of refugee resettlement.

once hhs notifies i.c.e., a shelter bed is available pursuant to requirements of a law. it is i.c.e.'s responsibility to transport the child to an oor shelter facility. i.c.e. transports unaccompanied children villa ground, commercial, air, and i.c.e. charter flights. in order to speed up the safe transportation of unaccompanied minors to oor shelters, i.c.e. has leeds additional charter planes and is working closely with the houston airport authority to have i.c.e. escorting officers fly to houston, rather than making the trip to the rio grande valley, where both inbound and outbound flights are limited. i.c.e. is also using reverse escorting for unaccompanied children, where i.c.e. enforcement removal officers from other parts of the country are assisting in transporting the transportation needs in the rio grande valley, thus allowing for more escorting capabilities. all 24 of i.c.e. ero field officers have primary and backup juvenile coordinators, each of

who receive annual specialized training with respect to the unique vulnerabilities of children. in addition, i.c.e. has detailed around 200 officers to the rio grande valley to assist with the increased children and transportation needs. in addition, i.c.e. has surged investigative resources for the prosecution of those who smuggle the children. on may 2014, there were 163 arrests of smugglers along the southwest border. the secretary has directed a 90-day surge of i.c.e. homeland security investigation special agents, 06 personnel, to offices in san antonio and houston that will work with the department of justice to ramp up the prosecutions of smuggling organizations. i.c.e. is also building additional detention capability for adults who cross the border illegally in the rgb with their children. recently, we have established a temporary facility for adults with children in arch tina, new mexico, and you're welcome

anytime to visit. the establishment of this temporary facility will help cvp process those encountered at the border and allow i.c.e. to increase its capacity to house and expedite the removal or deal with the chirp in a matter that complies with federal law. finally, we have worked with the government of honduras, el salvador, and gout mallla to repatriate the adults quicker, which has resulted in a quick process of travel documents moving to three days. within the last several months, we have therefore reduced the expedited removal time of this population for those adults who fall outside the expedited removal process, the repatriation period has also dropped and we are sending them back much quicker than we ever have done before. so with that, mr. chairman, i conclude my opening statement and look forward to answering your questions. thank you. >> thank you, sir, for your testimony. and mr. greenberg, you're recognized at this time. please proceed. >> thank you. chairman carper, ranking member

coburn, members of the committee, thank you for committing me to talk to you about hhs' responsibilities the in relation to unaccompanied children. today i want to talk about the steps to care for the chirp when they're referred to us. our responsibilities to identify appropriate sponsors, with which the children can live, while they're awaiting and enduring immigration proceed skpgs the challenges we're facing as a result of the increased numbers of unaccompanied children. under the law, when an unaccompanied child is in cvp custody, they refer the child to us. we fund shelters through grants to nonprofit organizations, a number of which are faith-based service providers. when a child arrives at a shelter, the child is provided with a complete medical exam within 48 hours, conducted by a doctor or a nurse practitioner. all children receive vaccinations and screening nor tuberculosis. soon after the child comes to us, shelter staff conduct an initial interview with the child. the interviews are used as a first round of screening to

determine if the child may be a victim of abuse, the victim of a crime or a trafficking victim and to determine if the child has any immediate mental health needs. these screenings determine whether the child need specialized services, a home study, prior to release to a sponsor, and whether the child is a potential victim of trafficking. children in our shelters receive medical, dental, and mental health services, education services, opportunities for physical activities, a legal rights presentation, access to legal services, access to religious services, case management, and clinical counseling. while children are in our shelter, we then seek to place them with appropriate sponsors. under the law, we have a responsibility to place children in the least restrictive setting that's in the best interest of the child. today in fiscal 2014, about 95% of children who have left our shelters were released to a parent or relative or a

nonrelative sponsor. if there is no appropriate sponsor, the child stays in our shelters until they turn 18, at which point they're remanded to dhs custody, or in some cases, the child may be repatriated, or may qualify for immigration relief. before we release a child to a sponsor, we verify the sponsor's identity and relationship, if any, to the child. we -- the staff conduct an assessment of the child's past and present family relationships and the relationship to any nonrelative potential sponsor. there is a background check, including a public records check for a criminal history, interviews with the child to discover any criminal or domestic violence concerns, a written assessment of the child and the sponsor, that is completed by case managers and clinicians. a fingerprint check is required if any concerns are raised, including if there are concerns about the child's safety or if the sponsor is not the parent or

legal guardian. as part of the process, hhs notifies potential sponsors that they have a responsibility to ensure that the child appears at all appointments and court proceedings relating to their immigration case. that the sponsor has a responsibility to cooperate if there's a removal order. hhs also informs sponsors of the responsibility to notify dhs and the department of justice of any change of address and hhs also notifies dhs of the name, address, phone number, and relationship of the child to the sponsor, prior to the release of the sponsor and notified after the release is taken place. so, for us in recent months, the number of children arriving has increased markedly, straining our ability to place children in shelters, in timely fashion. we're actively working with our colleagues at dhs, department of justice, and other federal agencies through the

coordination efforts from the department of defense at joint base san antonio lackland, ventura naval station, ft. sill in oklahoma. we're continuing in our efforts to identify both public and private facilities. it is a complex situation with a number of challenges. we welcome working with the committee and congress in efforts to address it. thank you, and i'll be happy to

answer questions. >> thank you, mr. greenberg. and miss palmieri, you're welcome and we welcome your testimony. >> i'm pleased to be here to discuss the department of state's response to the sharp rise in the number of unaccompanied children arriving at our border, with a direct link between this activity and dire economic and social conditions in the region. and what we're doing to further the national security interests of the united states. i appreciate your interests and look forward to working with you on this important issue. the administration is deeply concerned by the substantial increase in the number of children from central america, who are leaving their countries and attempting unauthorized immigration to the united states. the department of state is implementing a five-part strategy. we are working on a common approach to the problem, with the source countries of el salvador, guatemala, and

honduras and with mexico in its role as a transit country. we are creating an updated public messaging campaign to discourage families from sending their sons and daughters on this dangerous journey. we are helping el salvador, guatemala, and honduras expand their repatriation and resb reintegration effort. we're working with them to interrupt the well-known smuggling routes used in southern mexico. and finally, we're leading a new effort tor address the underlying causes of this migrati migration, especially the security concerns. we know that these children are primarily arriving from el salvador, guatemala, and honduras. central america faces daunting economic governance and security challenges, which impact the citizen s of the region and the choices they make. our vision for central america is a secure, well-governed

region that creates opportunities for its people within its woerdborders. this is the only path to diminish the factors driving high immigration flows. the political, economic, and social conditions in el salvador, guatemala, and honduras are challenging. with extreme violence, endemic poverty, and weak public institutions. all combining to create an environment that many people want to abandon. aggressive smugglers seek to exploit the situation. my colleagues from the department of homeland security, justice, and health and human services are described the scope of the enormous challenges they have faced in processing unaccompanied children, adults with children, and adults arriving at the border. they are working tirelessly to protect our borders, enforce our laws, and meet the pressing humanitarian needs of migrants, especially the children. this effort not only serves to

enforce u.s. laws, but is also the right thing to do to help these vulnerable children. our diplomatic engagement in support of this effort has been sustained and intense. last month, vice president biden traveled to guatemala and met with the leaders to establish that we all must take steps to stem the flow of undocumented migrants. in panama, on july 1st, secretary kerry obtained an agreement on greater collaboration from the three governments. and on july 3rd, all three nations' foreign ministers traveled to washington to meet with nine different u.s. government entities at the department of state. at our request, all three countries have increased consulate staffing levels at the u.s./mexico border to expedite processing of unaccompanied children. the president spoke to mexican president enrique penneto in june about mexican efforts to improve the security at its

southern border. we are working with mexico to accelerate its southern border strategy that will increase mexican inspection and intradiction capacities and reduce human smuggling across mexico's borders. as part of the broader interagency effort, we are also working to increase immediately the migrant repatriation capacity for el salvador, guatemala, and honduras, so that these governments can accept more migrants from the united states each week. finally, the department continues to focus on a longer term approach to address the systemic issues central american countries face, and that are creating the push factors behind this phenomenon. we're applying a more balanced regional approach to integrate prosperity, security, and governance assistance in order to reduce the root causes that are driving migrants to the united states.

however, we must be realistic. in order to achieve the substantiative change in america, that truly will stem migration flows, all the governments must demonstrate the political will and necessary commitment. as chairman carpenter noted, it must be a shared responsibility. we will continue to work closely with congress on a comprehensive, whole of government approach, that provides the necessary resources to meet this migration challenge. thank you and i look forward to answering your questions. >> mr. palmieri, thank you so much. and mr. osuna, welcome and please proceed. >> good morning, mr. chairman, senator coburn and other committee members. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today about the justice department's executive office for immigration review. our agency is responsible for conducting civil immigration removal proceedings throughout our immigration reports throughout the country and our appellate level, the board of immigration appeals. our case does follow immigration enforcement patterns along the border and in the interior of the country.

every individual that the department of homeland security formally charges with rebeing removable from the u.s. results in another case for our immigration courts. with nearly 375,000 matters pending at the end of the june, we are facing the largest case load that the agency has ever seen. overall, we have 243 immigration judges and 59 immigration courts around the country. many of our courts are located at or near the southern border, including in san diego, el paso, and texas. many of our courts are also located within i.c.e. detention centers, for efficiency reasons, including the border locations of la mesa, california, and port isabel, texas. the highest priority cases have been those involving detaineed aliens, and the agency is focused on the timely and efficient adjudication of such cases. the current situation along the border is prompting us to reset

our priorities across the entire immigration court system, not just courts and near the border, but across the entire system, as along with our federal partners, we respond to the president's request or directive to focus additional resources on the cases of recent border crossers. from now on, the following four types of cases will be a priority for the entire immigration court system. unaccompanied children, detained cases involving adults who arrive with children, adults who arrive with children who are not detained because of lack of detention space, and regular detained cases. this means that these cases will go to the front of the line for adjudication, and immigration judges will be assigned to make sure these cases are heard promptly and ahead of all others. while in most cases there are already sufficient number of immigration judges assigned to hear regular detain ed cases, w will be assigning a significant

number of judges to bring to a priority the other cases i mentioned, unaccompanied children and adults who arrive with children in recent weeks. this change has consequences for the broader immigration court case load, cases not considered a priority will take longer to adjudica adjudicate. however, given the seriousness of the situation along the border, it is the appropriate response by our agency, a part of the all hands on deck response that you mentioned, mr. chairman. the utmost priority for every case, however, will remain that every fact is considered and every application of law is correct and that people appearing before our immigration judges receive due process of law. we will do these cases quickly, but we will do them right. in order to continue to meet the timely adjudication of cases, with the judges and staff that we need to process cases effectively and efficiently. in 2010, the department and our agency placed a great deal of emphasis on the hiring of new judges, and this was met be significant success, as we were

able to ramp up pretty quickly. however, the effects of funding constraints over the last few years resulted in a hiring freeze in 2011 and that has had a worsening impact on eor's operations, increasing the number of cases pending and extending court dockets further into the future. earlier this year, the fy '14 appropriations act, and we are in the process of hiring more than 30 new immigration judges, that will be coming on board over the next few months, and those judges also, if necessary, will be assigned to prioritize the cases of recent border crossers. in march, the president sent his fifth fy '15 request to coke, for additional funding, and the president's request, once again, includes good funding for eor, that will enable us to hire more than 30 additional judges if that is approved. and finally, i would like to highlight the president's request yesterday for supplemental funding that was

transit mi transmitted that includes funding for additional judge teams and additional efficiencies that will make these cases move through the court system more efficiently. and i ask for your support for that request as well. mr. chairman, senator coburn, despite the large case load that we face, we continue to meet every challenge presented. and this situation at the border is no different. with your support, we will contribute to the government in wide response that is called for. thank you for your interest and i look forward to answering any questions that you might have. >> thank you for your excellent testimony. thanks to all of you. i want to start off by going back in time a little bit, but i want to talk about two guiding principles for me. all of us have our guiding principles that come from different experiences, different places, our parents, our faith. one of my guiding principles came from southeast asia. but i remember going into the makeshift office of my commanding officer in the navy, my squadron. and he had a cartoon blown up

and mounted on his wall behind his desk. and it was a cartoon of a one person, a guy looking pretty disheveled, and on a very small island with one tree, and being surrounded by alligators who were trying to get him. and the caption under the cartoon was, "it's hard to remember that your job was to drain the swamp when you're up to your eyeballs in alligators." he used a different word than "eyeballs," but one of my guiding principles is don't just address the symptoms of problems, but let's go to the underlying causes. we need to address the symptoms and there's a lot more we need to do and be your partner in doing that. we also need to make sure that we're addressing the underlying causes. the other thing that's been helpful to me in my life is to try to figure out how to deal with a problem or a crisis, to ask the question, what's working? someplace else.

figure that out and do more of that. find out what works, do more of that. and if you look at -- and i've been -- john mccain was good enough to bring me down to arizona more than a year ago to visit the border of mexico and his state. i've been from the pacific ocean to the gulf coast and we've seen a dramatic change in one, just the people that are coming across. and we've seen a dramatic change in weather coming across. it's kind of moved from west to east. and we -- there was a time when most of what the folks -- they were mexicans. a lot of them. and we still have mexicans who try to get into our country illegally, as you know, but not nearly as many as before. in fact, i'm told that the net migration may be going the other way. back from our country into mexico these days. and the first question i want to ask in terms of finding out what works and do more of this. why this shift in mexican migration? to almost maybe an

out-migration. why has this occurred and what can we learn from that? >> we've seen those changes that have been very dramatic. by the way, i think every c.o. must have had that same cartoon. but we've seen those changes, and i think because of the work that i did for the president on the drug policy issues, the safety and security that has increased within the government of mexico, the fact that economic opportunities are better now within mexico, and we know that in the three central american countries that we've been talking about, neither of those economic opportunity nor safety and security have been something to write home about. >> others, please? mr. kerlikowske? >> thank you for that question. i agree with what the commissioner has said and i think you just have a whole different dynamic when you look