service agent mr. hill who threw car thatn the speeding contained the president, the first lady, and used his body to shield her. mission theed secret service has. it is not an easy mission. troubling to all americans that our duly elected president and his family were actually potentially in real jeopardy on the white house grounds itself. i wonder whether you would agree that when you look at every aspect of this, sadly, it represents a comprehensive failure. they add up one by one. i think there was a failure

frankly to take the gonzales threat seriously after the information provided by the virginia state police. we knew he had a history of mental omelettes. we knew that -- mental illness. we knew that he was loaded up with guns. had a map ofhe washington. you indicate that that map was described as just a tourist map looking at places he might go. that might make sense, except for the fact that he was loaded up with ammunition and weapons in his car at the time. utah hasriend from made headlines and made a statement here today that he believes your reaction should be one of maximum force. i guess we should read that to mean that he should be shot on fence,hen he crosses the when he goes over the fence. i am reluctant to join him in that kind of advice to the

secret service because there is a first family at the white house. there are guests in the white house. it is a busy and bustling place, and the idea we are going to have a shootout on the white to begrounds seems to me a last resort, not a first resort, and i'm not sure members of congress ought to be in the business of actually spelling out secret service protocols for you. our not sure that is response validity. having said that, one can still conclude that the reaction of wassecret service on site profoundly inadequate and actually intentionally put the first family in direct jeopardy, physical harm. and i do not sense from you, sense ofpierson, a outrage about that. a sense of mission that you want thisform and correct cascading set of mistakes that

led to potentially a catastrophe for the united states. could you comment? >> i'm sorry you do not get but since for me. i've spent a career in the united states secret service for taking presidents, their families, and the white house complex in addition to our other missions. there is nothing more sacred any secret service agent, uniformed division officer, or administrative technical rational employee than our response validity for mission success. we do not take it lightly. we do it under difficult and challenging conditions. there's not a lot we can do in managing individuals mental illness who do not commit a put themselves in a position where the secret service can take further actions against them. we are limited by the system that we have to work within, the laws of our country. do not doubtn, i

for a minute your sincerity. what i said is i do not sense any sense of outrage about what happened. we are all outrage within the secret service and how this incident came to pass. that is why i have asked for a full we are review. it is obvious, it is obvious that mistakes were made. it is self-evident that mistakes were made. we must identify what the facts are, learn from the facts, assess, and make changes to enhance training. the secret service has a product history of making sure that we go back and look and do after actions after every incident so we can apply better security measures to ensure the protection of those we are bound to protect. >> that is real important, and i think it is really important in this discussion and this hearing that we remember there are real human beings who safety and security is at stake. it just so happens one of those human beings was elected not

once, but twice, by majority of this country to be its president. and that sacred responsibility has to be uppermost in our minds, even if that means that reputations fall, curis get interrupted, demotions occur, or people get fired. and that of his family, is paramount concern, and that is what we need to be concerned about. thank you, mr. chairman. >> we now to a gentleman who served in fairly difficult conditions, both in vietnam and in iraq, and with all due respect, i think he will object your calling working at the white house a difficult environment. the gentleman from michigan is recognize. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you. there we go. thank you. , thank you very much

for your server. the secret service, one of the premier law enforcement agencies an aspiration many years ago, from investigating counterfeiters to protecting the president. you all for your dedicated service to the past. basham, in your introduction , you said, you went from -- wel l, we have an intruder that went into the white house, went 30 yards, was finally apprehended, and we have a hearing about that right now. and you said we would have a hearing as well had we shot him once he jumped the fence, and you are absolutely right. in you onlyained use as much force that is necessary to subdue or fix the

problem, never any more unforced methods, which is a difficult challenge in that of itself, is a not? theave dogs patrolling white house, and you have forgotten about 10 other probably protocols you could have used to subdue that person before they went into the white house, correct? >>. yes >> in the after action review, or any of those considered, and actions could they have taken to stop this intruder, before he entered the white house? >> clearly, as the director has stated, there were mistakes, failures. there were opportunities to take this individual down based upon the reactions of the officers that were in place at the time, and they clearly did not take those actions. that is why the director has -- and the staff has to determine

why they made the decisions or lack of making those decisions and understand what was going through their minds, what was going on in the white house grounds of the time, what was the clutter situation. they need to have the time to do the investigation to determine what circumstances were on the ground. had the opportunity to do in the big east against -- to do an investigation -- they found out that mr. gonzález had guns in his car, had a map to the white house. i would be asking a lot more questions other than just letting him go. i wasn't he brought in for further questioning by the secret service? just the map alone, if the lawyers call that preponderance of evidence, indicating that he had some intent in doing something wrong, illegal, jeopardizing the president of the united states and the white house. why was he not brought in for questioning? >> i believe the director stated

that the individual was interviewed and that the agents made a determination, which is a very difficult determination to make as to whether the individual truly represents a threat to the president of united -- >> are we privy to those questions in that report, mr. chairman? do we have access to that report? >> in an appropriate time, we will make that available. >> unless he is breaking the law, there is no power with the secret service has to taken into custody, and that is the difficulty that they face. with the agree representative that i do not want the secret service's first action on the white house grounds when someone climbs of the fence, 16 times in the last five years, that the secret service's verse reaction is to kill that person.

that is in my mind not acceptable to me nor to the american people. >> but there is an element of -- there is responses that are well within the power of the secret service's first action on the white house grounds when someone protect the intruderto when they jumped the fence, use of dogs, for instance, amas masf secret service agents to take down the individual, but at the same time with it could be a diverse and so there are a lot of things going on, when you have an intruder like that. i just have a -- >> in 1976 there was an individual who came over the fence them apparently was carrying some type of device that appeared to be a weapon, turned out to be a pipe, and they shot him. and there was criticism for that shooting in 1976.

this is a difficult, difficult balance to strike. >> i understand. i am out of time. thank you, mr. chairman. >> protect the we now go to then from pennsylvania. , you served in the secret service for 30 years. under both republican and democratic administrations. and so you know and you have stated publicly that this recent security reach was unacceptable, and whatever other adjectives here today from both sides of the dais, per family in adequate, checking -- shocking, disgraceful, outrageous. is there any one of those adjectives you disagree with? >> no. >> thank you. and there have been some discussion about what we knew about the person leading up to the incident, where he jumped

the fence and crashed the white house. we actually had his medical records, did we not, before he jumped the fence? had received the medical records and they were being reviewed prior to him jumping the fence. knew, weverything we stopped him, he had a carload of high-offensive ammunition and guns, and he had a map of the white house. wasknow, he just about wearing a hat saying i am the most dangerous person who could come to the white house, and yet all of these things happened. and not to put too fine a point there wereierson, numerous layers of security that he was able to flummox.

a surveillance team outside the fence reportedly did not spot mr. gonzales quickly enough to give an early warning. and often stir station in the garden booth as well as a swat team on the north want to not react in time. a dog trained to intercept intruders reportedly was not released. no officer reportedly was stationed outside the front entrance of the white house, and the door was left unlocked. just yesterday press accounts reported that mr. gonzales made it all the way to the east room and that the alarms had been silenced. to me, all of those adjectives apply. this was a stunning, outrageous, disgraceful breach, and i know you cannot discuss the specific details, and we are going to go into executive session so you can be more forthcoming about the tactics and procedures, but i want to start here with

broader questions. the secretsumed that service has a specific protocol or multiple protocols for handling these types of breaches. that?orrect in >> yes, sir >> and without getting to the protocols and provide any buddy at large a roadmap, and you tell us whether they were followed in this that? >> yes, sir case? >> no, they were not. >> and why were they not irson?ed, ms. perison >> i do not know, and that is one of the main issues i hope to resolve to the course of this investigation. well, i think we have said multiple times here that you have been on the job for about a year and a half now, and you are on the job to reestablish the

credibility and the reputation of the secret service as the finest, most formidable protective force on the face of the earth. is that a fair statement? >> yes, sir. >> if someone wants to do us all of us tooves remember that right now you are protecting the most threatened american president in our nation's history. it is kind of a bad time to have something like this happen, pierson? ms. >> it is never acceptable to have somebody preach the white house. whatuld you explain to me you have done since becoming the new director of the secret service to turn this agency around and prevent things like this from happening? >> from the start of my appointment, i have made it perfectly clear to the workforce

my expectations for professionalism and accountability. how that was accomplished by the establishment of a new office of integrity, the establishment of new penalties for a discipline ross that is more transparent and consistent -- process that more transparent and consistent. i have a zero-tolerance level when it comes to misconduct. in addition, trying to develop leaders is critically important. here we have established a log in-service training for the workforce. it is specialized training for our leadership. i have had personal engagement with supervisors and the workforce. when i became director i had supervisoryessional positions that were vacant. i made those promotions. i offered orientation to those new supervisors and have

continued to make sure that there is no doubt that we are going to be held to the highest standard that the american public expects. i do understand when you start to bring change into an organization there is pushed back. we are going to continue to improve. this incident is an operational incident. or side effect of other cultural problems. i looked at this as a strict tactical concern. we have a security procedure that was not followed. one week prior and individual had climbed the fence and was arrested within seconds. why did that same activity not happen on the night of september 19? i agree mistakes were made in the proper protocols were not followed. it is unacceptable. >> my time is up and i look forward to closer questioning in the executive session. i yield back. >> i think the witness and

recognize the demo from florida. you saidor pierson, this was an operational failure. others talk about salary, number of personnel, budgets. this november 19 failure was in no way related to a lack of funding or personnel, is that accurate to say? is accurate to say that the officers on duty that night failed to execute the security protocols that they should have. isbut you are not saying it 100% operational failure? you are not ruling out that this may be a resource issue, correct? >> i believe we need to look at our training protocols and our staffing protocols, so, yes, that would refer back to resourcing. >> and budgets that have been mentioned, the budget request for fiscal year 2014 the agency $822 million.

there's a disconnect here, and i think that -- let me ask you this rating to this. -- relating to this. you have a guy, gonzáles, all the agents know who is is by this time. he had been arrested in virginia. he had with him and white house map. he was able to leap defense cannot, get deep inside the white house. secret service agents stood between him and penetrating that first -- and getting in? were there not enough people there? how many people were there? isthe white house complex secured and the building is defended by the united states uniformed secret service division. >> how many -- >> i can provide you information

in a different setting as to the location numbers of personnel. hearing,ce for this there was a request of the sergeant at arms for people to accompany you to this hearing, and i believe they are probably sitting behind you. how many people have accompanied you to this hearing today, do you know? >> i would believe 12 of my senior management persons. >> we had a request for a team personnel. at least 12, maybe more, are accompanying you here for testimony which is important, but it kind of cuts against this idea that we are at a manpower shortage, especially in some of the numbers that we have been doing. let me ask you this, about the culture of the agency. now, there is a number of instances that have been raised. you have a celebrity crashing the white house dinner a few years back. the 2011 shooting incident, the agency's pours response. you had the 2013 may incidents

at the hotel involving an agent. miami 2014, a car accident involving agents without all suspected. the netherlands, 2014, excessive drinking. some had to be sent home. what got the most obesity is the 2012 incident in columbia -- what got the most coverage is that 2012 incident in colombia. you do not say that the september 19 reach is a result of that culture. how do you assess that health of the culture in the secret service right now? >> since becoming director, we have established an office of integrity. onave made my position known the level of professionalism that is expected, accountability at all levels. i have met personally with every front-line supervisors and provided them had additional

training to ensure that they know how to lead, that they know how to manage them and they know how to work with this dedicated workforce. at the same time, we are providing training for the workforce. we are it at the same time that we are meeting very difficult protective requirements and requirements around the world. i believe we have started to make a pretty significant transition within the organization of recognizing we have made missteps and we need to learn from these incidents and improve. >> and you think the steps you have taken have resulted in discernible improvement in the culture? >> i think these steps along with the continuing to promote and support new management will help us in that process. >> thank you. >> i yield to the gentleman. let me ask a follow-up, because it gets back to this bunch question. under your direction, was there a reduction in the

countersurveillance manpower under your directorship? i under my directorship, established a new permanent division -- >> was there a reduction, yes or no? >> i do not believe there was a reduction. >> the whistleblower seem to indicate that there was a stuttering -- study that there hundred people per countersurveillance, and you made the decision to cut that by 1/3. is that a correct? >> the witness can answer, and the time has expired. will you answer, please? >> yes. i would like to review that study. i know that we have asked for a study in the past that related to countersurveillance and countersurveillance methodologies to be a ploy by the secret service in the con capitalthe national region, and we established a countersurveillance division and staffed it with what are

appropriate resources for this time and will go back and look at the process and see how we need to continue to resource it as appropriate. thank the witness. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i have respect for the numbers of the secret service and cannot believe i am about to begin the fun of questioning is a member of congress, because it should have never gotten this point where i have to ask you these questions. i would like to touch on your aar process. do you conduct aar's? you mentioned you did, but do you? >> yes. findings atnduct all level, for example, following the herd and is shooting incident, -- the herd nandez shooting

incident, maybe the next morning at the next shift change, and then all the way up to the region and director level, would you be a normal course of action? >> yes, it would. >> at the fact-finding sessions, once you discover something that is deficient, and you then change a procedure based on what you learn in the fact-finding session? >> yes, we would. have you changed your procedures for when the white house comes under a shooting incident? if the shooting happened at 9:00 p.m. at night and it was too dark, i am not sure you have access to flashlights and spotlights to check the white house in the evening. it was too dark. do you now have a procedure for checking the entire building, including the third floor, grad night or the next day? is that not part of the new procedures? >> yes, it is, and that night, it is a three-story building, so oftentimes it would require lift

trucks, but we have a better protocol to ensure that proper switch are done across the complex. >> it is the people's house. i think the american public would begrudge a lift truck. do you have that procedure in place. there is a suspected shooting , and three or four days before we find the bulletin the side of the white house, because of the new procedures? >> yes, ma'am, lessons learned. mr. ortiz, the recent breach that just happened to him he was apprehended, and he had this story, was information of that apprehension or that discussion that the agents had with him, was that shared, would have been

shared as part of fact-finding the next day? with pictures of him been shown to the officers coming on shift on the next shift? we stopped this guy, he had an ax and will he stand -- in his waistband, what's up for him. was that ever done? understanding that he was observed by the countersurveillance division, so i am assuming and i would have to get back to the committee that that would be part of the protocol of the division as well as the uniformed vision officers that are frequenting these people to me along the south fence line. >> with that have been shared with all of the officers stationed along the south fence line who might have contact with passersby, this guy has been by a couple times, keep an eye out for him? is that a standard thing that would happen as far as standard for teachers every shift? >> i would assume it is discussed, but i do not know to

what specificity it is physically reported among uniformed division. the information mr. gonzález had appeared on the south fence line, was interviewed, his car was searched and all that was it a written report provided and supplemented. >> what about any results of fact-finding that goes to the lack of communication between agents who were safeguarding the first daughters being on a different frequency as the agents who were responding to the 2011 shooting incident? my understanding is the agent inside the not know because she did not hear traffic, that the theect he does -- that suspected shooting had happen and deny find out about it through a third-party, another agent, it had not been fixed. now are all agents listening to multiple frequencies? >> are protocol would require that all agents are notified regardless of their assignment for that type of incident on a

shooting on the complex habits. i would say that information is now past to our joint operations systems. >> i am very concerned that we are not learning from lessons learned, that these things are happening whether or not the fact-finding sessions are happening. this information is not disseminated in some way, and i would love to in the executive session touch more on how you are fixing and updating your protocols, because this seems pretty standard to me. i yield back. >> thank you, and i will recognize myself. welcome, director >> thank you. a lot of chest beating. i want to give you an opportunity of what took place, and that we can make certain that the white house is safe, the first family is safe, and

these incidents don't happen again. there are basically two things we deal with to do that. one would be your personnel. and the second would be technology. i would believe those two would resolve the problem in the future. since you came in to clean up some of the mess, the problems with performance and morale. i will say, too, you are the first director in 22 years to ever call me personally and ask for some assistance. before this incident took place, she actually called and said i want to improve the quality of our personnel, and she asked for actually two things, which are still pending before this committee, interestingly enough. i just checked. one was to improve the standards for the agents. i know there had been a lack of academy training and not a lot

of folks trained. but you formally headed to h.r. concerned about the agents, is that correct? ok. and then also the ability to hire and fire. saw in the v.a. scandal the hands tied to hire and fire. you agreed to call the service an an exempt service. >> yes, sir. it is referred to as accepted service. >> and that would give you more ability to discipline. i asked the staff the status of those, and it is still pending. there has been some objection from the other side of the aisle even to take them up. so i think you for stepping orward and also recommending that. little things like technology. now you weren't the director in 2011 when the bullets hit the white house, were you? >> no, sir, i was not.

>> you got beat up pretty good on that one. it is kind of interesting that the white house -- and really they discovered some concrete or something that had been chipped out on a balcony that isn't examined. the surface area of the white house is quite a bit, and you would want to examine some of it. that wasn't done at the:50 at night or whatever it was. the fact remains that a window was broken. that concerns me. at my house i have a security system. when i left this morning, i didn't want to disturb my wife arly, but the security alarm sort of notifies you that someone is coming in or going out. i don't have a very sophisticated system. but a window breaking in the white house in 2011, it seems like that should -- and i know ere are two barriers, one is

bullet-proof and the other is original or antique glass. that should have been taken care of. has that been taken care of, do you know? >> i know the windows have been replaced. >> no. i'm talking about security for breaching that? again, a simple thing. if someone opens a window or a window is broken at my house, i have an alarm. have you ever heard of these uys? it is not very costly. you can subscribe, but that can be installed. it is a simple technology device and company, private system that can do that. i don't think we have to spend a lot of money. we have to improve the quality and professionalism, when you are trying to do. you have to be able to hire and fire people and you have to put

technology in place. we don't have to put cement trucks and barriers in front of the white house. do you know when the current 7'6" fence was installed? >> is the 65. >> i don't want to go through some outrageous things. but maybe we could raise that. you have lived in florida. we could even put some vegetation barriers. how about spanish by net. you jump that fence, and you get quite a greeting when you hit the ground. there is a whole host of things we can do cost effectively. i hope you will consider some of them. jumping the fence at the twhouse is not new, is that right? >> that is correct, sir. >> but what has happened is they went beyond the barrier. the other thing is i understand the president and first family were not at the white house when this took place.

sometimes the security personnel and secret service do get refocused to address where the president is, and he has just departed. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> again, welcome to the government reform and over-sight committee. it is good to have you here today. thank you. >> mr. chairman? can i make an inquiry. you made some reference in your remarks that the director had made two requests, and there was some objection from this side. we are not aware of this. >> we told you the two requests that were made. she contacted me, and we contacted staff. we have asked staff to look at it. i asked the staff just now, what is the status of that? they said there -- i said have we moved forward on her request? they said no. i said why? they said because some of the members on the other side of the aisle objected to that.

you can object to it. >> but i don't think anybody has. we are not aware of that. >> but the director has taken steps to improve the performance -- >> we are willing to accept that -- >> the qualifications, and the status of one of the most respected law enforcement services in the world. >> we are appreciative than that, and we don't disagree with that -- >> i have to tell it like it is. >> you are telling it like somebody told you it was. >> well, that is the fact. she testified under oath that she did contact me in that regard. i asked staff, and that is the status of that. >> mr. chairman, yield for a moment. >> yes. >> i want to make something very, very clear. on this side of the aisle, we will do everything in our power to make sure that the secret service has everything it needs. >> there are two items did not >> may i finish, please?

>> go ahead. >> it means to protect the president, the family,s the vice president, his family, and our former presidents. this is extremely important to us, and i don't want anybody to get the impression that we are not a million percent supportive of making sure that the secret service has what it needs legislatively or financialally. >> i thank the gentleman, and i know he will work with us to try to accommodate the request of the director. the gentleman from -- >> would the chairman yield? >> yes. >> perhaps just to clear the record, i think that the entire committee needs to be aware that there have been requests have personnel standings of exempt changed in some cases to make them easier to terminate. that is a debate we can certainly have. i do believe today that although that is something the

committee should consider, and i am certainly supportive of, at this level, people being subject to disciplinary action if they are unable to fulfill their mission easier. i don't believe today that is the basis under which these various failures occurred. i am happy to have a discussion later on the details of the personnel changes. but that was the limit, and again for the director, i did receive that. i did not -- because we can't immediately act on it unilaterally, but i don't believe it has anything to do with the number of failures. it may have something to do with low morale. but if you make people easier to fire, that also sometimes leads to lower morale. >> respectfully stating my point on this, i think the director has taken on the responsibility of improving the performance, and very key to

that is the educational qualifications which chris hassel, and the ability to hire and fire people. i think they are rely van. because when you don't have discipline, you don't have good performance. and when the director doesn't have the tools to accomplish that, then we don't get what we should. ith that, mr. hurst, the gentleman from nevada is recognized. >> i want to thank the chairman and director cummings for holing this important megna. director pierson, let me be frank. i believe you have done a disservice to the president of the united states. not only have you compromised his safety and security. you have compromised the safety and security of his family and the staff of the white house. the pattern of lax security and following basic protocols indicate a culture at the secret service that needs to

change. now while the president may not be in a position to publicly criticize this failure to adequately protect his needs, i will. this president has far too much to worry about both here and around the world. he should not have to also be concerned with his personal safety and security and that of his family. so my question, director, is why should we have confidence in the secret service's ability to protect the president of the united states and the first family when there has been such a pattern of lax security? >> i believe the incident on september is theth is not representative of pattern. there have been others that have attempted to gain access to the property that were immediately arrested.

my biggest concern is that security plan was not properly executed ong the night of the is theth. >> beyond september is theth, which is the most recent incident, the fact that we are from the arning "washington post" that run a story about a 2011 shooting incident, where ortega hernandez fired at the white house. it took four days to realize that bullets hit the resident. a only occurred after housekeeper indicated a broken window. can a broken window be observed from the inside as well as the outside? >> in this case, the location of the broken window, up against the manages facade, it

was not visible from the exterior. >> what about the interior? >> the interior in the private residence of the president and first lady, there were indications that the ballistic glass had a dimple or damage to the ballistic glass. it was not recognized by the house keeping staff until the curtains had been pulled in preparation for the president and first lady's return. >> and so how was it that the , prior ervice personnel to the housekeeper finding that, they did not do the proper assessment, inspection of that location in order to identify that until four days later? >> i will be happy to have a discussion with you in a private session, but the private residence of the president and first lady is their private residence. >> i understand that you are

not able to discuss all of the exact details of some of the security protocols in this open hearing, and i look forward to asking you more detailed step by step questions about the exact protocols that failed, the missteps by individual agents, and the depth and bread this of this review that the investigation of this incident covers. has there been any disciplinary action pursued against any of failed to el who follow proper protocol to date? >> that is pending based on the conclusion of the investigation to determine exactly what the facts are. appropriately enhancements will be made and personnel actions will be taken. >> that is where i tend to differ a little bit. ecause of the pattern of lax

security, not just from the most recent incident, but from prior incidents, someone should be held accountable. the security of the president of the united states is serious , and his family, is serious. we don't need a long lengthy review for someone to be held accountable. so i look forward to getting more facts about this in our executive briefing. but ultimately, director, we need to make sure that people are held accountable. there are men and women in the secret service that do a great job, and they are to be commended for that job. but when an individual fails to do their job properly, they need to be held accountable. >> i agree with that state. people make mistake and need to be held accountable. >> as we near the end of the hearing, we will be going into

executive session upstairs immediately following this. the gentle lady from new mexico is next. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much. i want to do a couple of things. i want to go back to many of the statements that have been made today, and i want to try to fast forward to the situation that we are all dealing with. and then i've got a very specific question about a protocol that i'm hoping not in executive situation you can answer. we are all trying to figure out what we can do in this hearing to understand this incredible breach, but at the same time recognize this is the poem's house, a public building, and to work on those balances. you have heard many members be concerned about the thought that we would have of shoot to

kill first. earlier in this year, i think we had a toddler breach the fence. clear for me at least that that is too far and not to create an environment where we all feel there is a public safety aspect here. but i think in your earlier testimony you said that we have had 60 individuals try to breach the fence this year. that is roughly one a week. >> 16 over five years. six individuals this year. >> in any event, we know that folks, whether it is a mental illness issue or something in addition to that, we know that we have an issue. i also heard you earlier in your testimony talk about part of your career in the secret service, that you were at one point in time working on some of the i.t. issues, is that correct? >> yes, ma'am.

>> i am going to now go back to the 2011 incident, and i am going to read to you what the "washington post" said about that shooting incident. i know that we have said this several times, and it bears repeating. back in the white house, keep people in charge of the safety of the president's family were not initially aware that a shooting occurred because officers guarding the white house grounds communicate on a different radio frequency from the ones used by agents who protect the first family. the agent assigned to sasha learned of the shooting a few minutes later from an officer posted nearby. while communications and radio dispatch in and of themselves may not be narrowly construed as i.t., i construe communications efforts, rticularly in the context of

.nteropreaability have you revolved those issues? >> yes. we have ensured that information is passed, even if others are operating on different radio frequencies, that emergency information is passed to all people who have a need to know. >> so you are communicating on a single -- and that may be an inappropriate statement about how that works. interoperable, all the communications tech next are working together and the alarms? >> the radio systems are operating with common a lot, and that is controlled through our joint operations center. agents and officers are able to operate on particular frequencies based on their work. the alarm systems are becoming

more sfwe greated with our systems, but we are becoming more in the twins phase. >> among all of the other issues, i am struggling with and the ications alarm, and i am really trying to understand that if you are doing this continuous improvement, training, investment, and making sure that this elite protective force is in fact just that, state of the art, effective, elite, how that miscommunication could occur without anyone having any idea? and for me, it is gross neglect. how does that occur? how does that interfere with the protocol established by the secret service? >> i think the concern was when these alarms were put into place, the proximity to other

activities within the white house, could be an interference, such as tour lines or other public events. >> so interference -- and i said i think you need to be able to address the balances of the public visiting, utilizing, meeting at the white house, but it is stunning to me that that would trump your own protocols for making sure that you have alarms whose purpose is to trigger a threat so that you can have an effective global within the secret service, both interior and exterior, a communications plan that would allow you to effectively protocol, but you can't. >> the time is up. two chair members have been

waived on. that will complete the full round. with the indulgence of the ranking member, we are going to have an additional five minutes per side divided by whoever mr. cummings would like to recognize and myself, and then we will go upstairs for the executive session. five minutes a side for the mines a bers, and five side for closing. so roughly 20 minutes from now we will be closing. with that, the gentleman from missouri, mr. long. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director pierson, are your agents charged with guarding the white house and the occupants of the white house, are they allowed to use smartphones while on duty? i am talking about personal smartphones, texting, tweeting, playing games? are they allowed to use personal smartphones while on duty? >> no, they would not be.

>> and that is strictly enforced, you are confident? >> i know that they have access to a blackberry which is part of the tools that we give our officers and agents to receive information. >> that is an official phone to me. that is something they need in their day to day. but i'm talking about personal smartphone usage. you say they are not allowed to do that while on duty guarding the white house and its ok pants? >> it is possible that some employees have a personal cell phone for emergency contact by their family, but they are discouraged from using any kind of technology -- >> they are discouraged from using it. a week before, someone was caught jumping the fence, and a week later, someone was not, correct? >> yes, sir. >> were you at the white house picnic this year? >> no, i was not. >> i'm sure you are familiar

with it. do you know when it was? i will answer that. it was two days before the event. at the white house picnic there were senators, congressmen, republicans and democrats. everybody is invited. we took our families. we get stopped at the street, and we have to show an i.d. members of congress, senators, families. they are checking the books, making sure everything is order to let us go another0 yards, t just down the sidewalk again, and then they check ourism d. again before you can go on to the premises of the white house. so we go into the picnic. several hundred people there, 200, 00 or 400, whatever it was. the president and the first lady are normally there. on the 17th of september this year, the first lady was out of state. the president of the united states was there at that event.

we have had four assassinations in this country. we have had about two dozen attempted, including the shooting of theodore roosevelt and ronald reagan. we heard my friend earlier in her questioning say this president has received approximately three times the number of threats on his life of any other president. i was surprised to hear that. the president of the united states was there that night among 300 people, 400, whatever it was. i shudder to think -- he was behind a roach. those of you old enough to -- he was behind a rope. it looked like a clothes line rope was his protection that evening from 300 to 400 people. i shudder to think if this gentleman had come in hello hours earlier and jumped the fence and had eight or 10 friends with him.

i have picks of people taking selfies with him, holding babies. it is a great gesture from the president. we want to be de la rosa to the president, talk to him, reach out to him. but if you don't take anything else away from this hearing today, take that picture in your mind. you weren't there. but 48 hours earlier we could be having a whole different conversation here today, and that is very, very upsetting to me. i love first responders. i have a great deal of admiration and respect for first responders, police, local police, sheriff, highway patrol, secret service, the f.b.i., the people that protect us. let me ask you another question. are there people with automatic weapons patroling the white house grounds inside or out standing there with their finger on the trigger of an automatic weapon in plain sight that might be a deterrent?

>> we do have a number of tactical assets that are deployed at the white house routinely? >> they in plain sight with a finger on a trigger. like here at the capital. there was a policeman with an automatic weapon, finger on the trigger, very, very observant. we were stopped at a stop sign. i said i wonder if they have an extra threat today because this guy is on point. if i am thinking about jumping the fence whether i have my full mental faculties or not, if i see someone standing there with their finger on the trigger? you think i am not going to think about that twice? you see people with weapons guarding our safety, guarding our lives. but again, i shudder to think what could have happened hello hours earlier if that guy would have wanted to jump the fence that night and run out in the

middle of 300 people, and the president is behind a clothes line rope. i appreciate you being here and your testimony. i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. i would second his point. i have seen senators wait two hours after the salahi incident to get into the white house in the-degree temps. i hope we won't have the kind of craziness that you can take two hours to get into the white house as a member of the house or senate, but somebody can just jump the fence and be inside in a matter of seconds. i think that is what this hearing is all about, and i think the gentleman. we go to the patient gentslelady from texas. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much for your courtesy and to the ranking member, mr. cummings. thank you for your courtesy and thank you for acknowledging that homeland security and this committee has worked together on a number of issues. before i start, i want to put

into the record by reading it, the words expressed by mr. obama, our president just last week as madam director, you made it very clear that at the general assembly, you protected not only the president, but 140 heads of state. the president said the secret service does a great job. i'm grateful for all the sacrifices they make on behalf -- on my behalf and my family's behalf. i wanted to just add that, because the president has confidence. i also want to acknowledge that your storied history equates to the storied history of the secret service starting in 1865, and we recognize that it has continued in that service. i hope this hearing, as my colleagues have said, between republicans and democrats, would alter this headline that i hold up that says the secret service opens the door to

ridicule. i disagree with that and say it opens the door to restructuring and revamping. because i think you have been very honest with us today. and i also hold, as was mentioned, documents i asked if i am able to put into the record. >> without objection. >> a list of assassinated presidents. four dead, too many. and six attempted. that is the basis of our passion. i also want to acknowledge the homeland security i have some specific questions in the classified. procedures for proposing and issuing discipline are insufficient.

united states secret service is always in compliance with federal disciplinary rules. controls are sufficient, or insufficient to alignediscipline is with agency. now, you will probably say that a lot of this has been corrected, and i look forward to those questions. but let me go specifically to my concern. on july 19, the state virginia a man that had any valuable things, and when i saw that, sawed off rifles, a number of items that are not the normal course. even though he is under the second amendment. then on august 25th, our this gentleman. i'm going to say to the american people, since this president is documented, maybe because he is different, maybe because of the policy, that he has had more than others. i'm going to say to the american

someone should have known the gentleman who jumped the fence, maybe his family should have reported him. but i do believe that it was was stopped that he on august 25th with the information and there could not whicheen some basis upon this gentleman could have been orerred to a institution referred to call family members in and to address the question. yes, individuals have, and my question is why was this ontleman that jumped september 19th stopped on august 25th with a background of enormous amount of guns and other threatening items, why into custody?n let's not say the law didn't allow us. he wasn't there a way that could have been held, his family could have been called, the could not have been

called. and i have another question, so i should ask it it out of courtesy to my colleagues. egregious thing that i thought was particularly outrain it wasn the 2011, when either a car back firing or gang fights, which i never heard of the white house, i'm asking you this question on the one that hand on the 19th. most egregious i could ever think is that the individual surveying the white house on failed to stop him. and we have a picture, but you cannot see, six uniformed officers. fitness if there is a problem here, chasing this gentleman, who could not capture him. in this picture could not appear tour him -- could not capture him. so my question is what in the open domain stopped them from he jumped thefore fence, this is on september 19,

from gettingthem him when he jumped over the officersh six or more chasing him, uniformed officers, in the 2011 event you think that its with a gang fight instead of a more serious investigation into the fact that .here were gunfire >> we are looking into why mr. gonzalez was not stopped when he came over the fence. it publicly and i'll continue to work with my work force to understand why he to allowed to make access the mansion, and why he wasn't detained earlier as soon as he jumped the fence. i need to understand why he was therecognized earlier in day and further surveillance put on him, as to further analysis will and why he had returned to the white house. kid not explain those questions today. regard to the shooting back of 11, all i can

advice is that in collaboration with u.s. park police, the metropolitan police department the secret service, that conflicting witness statements time thereht at that was confusion about whether there were shots at the white car. or shots from car to it appears to me that those are also documented in the police reports. the confusion that occurred three years ago, i know that we have learned from that incident. the secret service would react did threeoday than it years ago. >> mr. chairman, let me just the lighty saying, in assan, withre interest and commitment to attacking the united states and maybe the president, i think highlights the serious need for revamping and so key,uring that is where we all are working together for the ultimate good family'sting the first

life. i hope you'll agree with me. >> yes, ma'am. you.ank >> i yield back. >> pursuant to the agreement, willman and ranking member divide 10 minutes equally, five minutes per side, i'll now yield four of those minutes to the gentleman from utah. >> i thank the chairman and hearing.e this director, any time there's a protocol or the security's personal has been jeopardized, or the perimetere security has been breached, is there an ?nternal review >> yes. >> and are you aware, can you youre the committee that are informed any time those things happen? >> i'm expected to be informed, yes. >> is the president of the united states informed?

>> i would assume that the president of the united states informed. i don't know. >> you're the head of the secret service. explain to me why you wouldn't that. >> well, your question was subjective as to whether or not i would know. >> well, who, do you brief the no?ident or >> if your question is when are incidents that involve the president of the united states or the first family and concerns, yes. >> then you do brief the president? >> yes. brief the president if there's been a perimeter breach house?white >> i have confidential conversations with the president. president ifef the he has his own personal security jeopardized? been >> i have confidential

conversations with the president. those would be the topics that we would cover in addition to other things. of the timeentage do you inform the president that has beennal security broached? >> i would say in proximity to incident. >> i asked you what percentage of the time do you inform the personal if his security is in any way, shape or form been breached. >> 100% of the time we would advice the president. >> you would advise the president? >> yes. >> in calendar year 2014, how many times has that happened? not briefed him with incidentt of the one on september 19. >> oh the only time you've president on perimeter security, the president's personal security, first family's security, has 2014.ne time in

>> that's correct. as we wrap upn, here, i think there is a bipartisan call for change, to change. i would like to ask for an independent review. i think there needs to be a top down review of not only security but also the culture. and i want to refer our this, and to whyctor, i don't understand special agent basic classes 2012, there were zero and in there was one much in the uniform division basic classes in 2012 there was one, in 2013 there was one much i don't understand that. i also want to again go back to this inspector general's report, because i think there's a serious problem here much let me read some questions and how the secret service agents themselves responded. if a senior manager en gains in misconduct or illegal activity he or she is held accountable. less than half the respondent

that was true. i can report a suspected violation of any rule of conduct of retaliation, only 55% said that was true. again secret service agents themselves, when asked the service's disciplinary process is fair, only 40.3% said yes. disciplinary actions within the secret service are applied consistently for similar said yes.only 30% disciplinary actions within the secret service are the of severitylevel given the offense, only 36.6. this demands an independent investigation and review team, military, whatever it takes, but they need to look at the management, they need to leadership, the culture and the security. >> i thank the gentleman. report will be included in the supplemental of the hearing. i'm going to reserve that last

to the rankingd member. >> ms. pierson, i just want to up on some of ms. jackson questions. going back to mr. gonzalez, you the secret service did an extensive interview of that right? is that right? >> yes, sir. >> i believe you testified that his medical files, which documented his mental agreed that you could have them. is that what you told us? >> our procedures are in with theion individual, mr. gonzalez, the wouldof the investigation include a confidential release of the medical records, and he yes.ied, the medical files, right are yes it's part of the investigation.

prohibits people with mental illnesses from possessing firearms. the statute is detailed, but the covers those who have been adjudicated as a mental defective, or who have been committed to an institution for mental illness. are you aware of that section? >> yes. report,ding to press gonzalez had mental illness, he militaryently seeing a psychiatrist who diagnosed him with severe mental illness and confirmed the same thing. what steps did the secret service take to prevent this testing --from to possessing firearms after he was july and after the secret service interviewed him? >> he was interviewed by the vat state police, we notified the alcohol, tobacco 'firearms who interviewed mr. gonzalez, who

notified the yet service to have a further discussion with him. so many federal agencies have within contact mr. gonzalez. >> but, so you consulted with atf? >> atf was the initial investigators first responded to police'snia state inquiry of his weapons'. >> when the secret service spoke to the family, didn't they also had a mental illness go needed help? >> the family concurred that he ptsd.ted signs of >> the statute says the anyibition applies on lawful authority has been made a determination that a person as a mental ill niz is a danger to himself or others, don't you think that applies here? would be worth having further investigation in concur interview,ith his yes. >> let me conclude. up, andtion has come every time i step out in the reporters minute, coming up to me asking me do you that director pierson can

situation. and with a i have said is that out him andstill let me tell you why i say that. were talking about internal review a little earlier. to thatn i go back whole culture question. service members don't feel comfortable sharing information, i don't know how youget the information that need to address the kind of concerns that you might have. even have then information. and then it hit me as i was thing,g about this whole if i got secret service members be are more willing to whistle blowers and come before the congress, what that tells me is that they don't trust each

other. there's a trust within an if i'm and correct me wrong on this one, that really needs to have trust within it. would you agree with that? >> yes. we do indeed have confidence and other, that'sh correct. ,. so >> i think she answered in the question.o your i'll refor the time. >> do you believe that there is a lack of trust? >> no. i do believe that employees other.ach >> so then please help me with this. help me with this. you, and i know, i think of intent,e greatest giving us 30 years, and i appreciate it. that, it'sget past hard for me to get past that not beinge of folks

willing, members of the secret ofvice are coming to members this committee, not to me, but to others, telling them things that, and they don't seem to discuss it with you all. ups. higher and it goes back to the agent when she was apparently afraid or thought her.nobody would listen to just tell me how you're going to dole with that. cummings, iember have made a number of changes in our management and leadership team. i'm going to continue to make in our leadership team. we're promoting individuals, time spending a lot of helping to become realers and supervisors. we're holding the work force accountable. we're providing more opportunities for training, for engagementme doing sessions with the work force to find out what are some of the problems. >> you said earlier you had newlership, so you're constantly

bringing in new loweredship, is that right? >> when i took this position we down 70 special agent positions. those positions have now been filled. >> thank you for your testimony, talking withd to you in the classified briefing. gentleman.the i yield one minute to mr. meadows. >> thank you. won to cool back because in testimony you've been very said 550 you've employees. chairman issa asked you that you continued to stay with that. so i went and asked for with a you were requesting this year. and you should have a copy of to your've given that staff right there. you're downat if 550 full-time employees that asking for 61 more. for 500? you not ask

these again are your numbers. in i'm just trying to find all of this, it's all about trust and integrity, and some of just doesn't seem to line up. facts.e >> well, it challenging when you star to talk about operational positions. it challenging from an oversight standpoint to get to youtruth, and we're giving this opportunity. >> thank you, if you would, it is challenging to talk about an fte and a full-time position. the fte represent 50 first in first year they would be hired. part of the challenge we had and part what was i presented to the both from the chair and the ranking member, is north pursue secret service to accepted service legislation. hiring is a challenge for me, hiring process that is cumbersome is more difficult.

requires a robust background investigation, they require a lot of secure clearance. request the fun to do that? >> i requested legislation to able tome and be identify new efficiencies in the hiring process. a vacancy announcement for special agent, receive 45,000 applicationings, the cumbersome processes that i have to come only been ableve year.board 72 this >> so in your scenario, you've got to wait for an act of congress. that didn't make sense. >> well, we are trying to work with the office of personnel management and identify every efficiency that we can to assist us in being able to bring on the knee.nel that we >> so is the president safe today? >> the president is safe today and we're going to continue to our resources to wherever we need, the president, we family, the others protect as well as the white house complex. >> i'm troubled you didn't ask.

back.ield >> as promise we will now recess session.to executive briefly before we do, want to make sure that the director in understands and our other witnesses who worry going it'ssmiss at this time, the considered view of the chair and i believe in concurrence ranking member that an internal investigation by the is notservice sufficient, i repeat, is not provide the kind of confidence back to the american people. so i'll be working with the to send a letter to the secretary of homeland security, asking for a far and more independent investigation of the assets needed and the changes needed to bring back the kind of confidence the american people and the president deserve. stand in recess and will reconvene in a secure location.

[captions copyright national 2014]satellite corp. captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicp.org-- >> on our next "washington journal," author ron kessler discusses recent security breaches at the white house and what the secret service should the firsto protect family. then a report on the 2014 congressional primary season elaine kamarck of the brookings institution. laurie abraham talks about her recent interview with

justice ginsburg. plus your phone calls, facebook comments and tweets. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. .astern, on c-span here are a few of the comments received from our viewers. >> i love c-span, i get up and watch it every morning and then on weekends the whole book for the whoa weekend is terrific. really other thing i watch very little of the major channels, nbc, cbs and those. that yourthink programs have more to do with in everybody's life. so thank you very much. a a just like to leave comment for c-span, particularly the c-span "washington journal" program. quite incredible to me how

ohpan has one knee conservative at volunteer cat or propagandist after another. the "wallt from street journal," it's from foreign policy initiative or of ilk, and there's no counterbalance. >> i just want to say that a fairly good program, program.interesting occasional -- educational. >> continue to let us know what programs about the you're watching. 202-626-3400. e-mail us or send us a tweet. >> nebraska congressman lee terry debated his democratic

challenger state senator brad ashinformation last week. here's a portion of that debate. >> had we left troops on the border with syria, we could have training mission and some support mission on the syria,with theoretically, and in and around train has left the station at this point and i don't see, i really don't see us coming back into iraq with that kind of force now or in the future. >> mr. terry? hindsight agree that is 20-20. that the foreign policy of the president is not the establishment of the government and polling

people their military out too quickly, so they weren't trained when the government started in essence punishing segments of they left to that join isil, all of that, we should have been much more prevent in that, to that from happening. if we would have been more have had isil.ot i do want to say that as i support the president on his strikes. i think that's the right thing to do. we have to do it, it's in our national security interest to do that. but we got to make sure that this government and the military ones, and ithe germans arming the kurds. they're good fighters. i think the boots on the ground iraqiq should remain boots. >> okay. you did recently vote against the syrian rebels. can you explain your position on that? for letting meou do that. i was the only one in our entire delegation, in fact region, that voted against that. that was to arm the free syrian

army and train them. i've seen just too many incidents where we train a group of people and then as we're training them they turn their syria is one. and of those places where it really difficult, that just because fighting assad doesn't mean they're our friend. so i worried that they would turn on the united states when ever they would get the chance and we would have trained them to do. that >> thank you. mr. ashford, do you agree? >> here's what i any about this. for me to know about the vote because i didn't, briefed, i don't know of thate intricacies congressional decision. but what i do believe is, and i this, maybe lee can explain it, how congress afterhave left washington four days coming back from the vacation and had had a moderateraining syrian

rebels without a thorough discussion and debate about that was going to go. and i think those questions need to be asked and i think the to be discussed, what authority do we have in making this move. would say stay in washington, debate at least for a couple days, there is only of congressional meeting after the summer recess. i think it should have been debated at least over the weekend after that vote. >> mr. terry, you get a chance respond. >> and there were several days of discussion and the process forthe president asked congress to make the authority that the president said he continuingthe resolution and we had a deadline because of that continuing answer.on, that's the >> a house panel will hold a hearing on the retired u.s. in ae being detained mexican prison after he was arrested in tiajuana for firearms.hree loaded then house foreign affairs

subcommittee hearing is live at 10:00.ng eastern. campaign 2014 debate coverage continues. tonight at 8:00 on c-span, live the minnesota debate.s at 8:00 eastern, live coverage of the oklahoma governors debate. on thursday at 8:00 p.m. on c-span 2, the nebraska governors debate. saturday night on c-span at eastern, live coverage of the montana u.s. house debate. c-span campaign 2014, more than 100 debates for the control of congress. >> c pan's 2015 student cam

way.tition is under this nationwide competition for middle and high school students prizes totaling $100,000. create a five to seven-minute topic, the on the three branches and you. videos need to include c-span programming, show varying points of view, and must be submitted by swrn 20, 2015. go to student cam.org for more information. camera and get started today. >> earlier this month a man across thefence, ran north lawn and entered the white house before finally being stopped. omar gonzalez, was indicted on federal and local charges tuesday. the head of the secret service, julia pierson, testifies about that incident other security breaches at the white house. this house oversight committee darryl is chaired by issa of california. the you to

house government reform committee. live coverage here on c-span as the director of the secret service is sitting down to testify before the panel about crosstruder was able to the fence of the white house as well as a 2011 shooting at the white house. >> the committee will come to

order. the oversight committee exists to secure two fundamental principles. first, americans have a right to know the money washington takes and them is well spent, second, americans deserve an efficient government that works for them. our duty is to protect these rights. our solemn responsibility is to hold government accountable to tack payers. it is our job to work tirelessly

with citizens of watchdogs to bring general reform to the bureaucracy. this is our mission in today's hearing follows one of the most important parts of the measure. with one point $5 billion spent by the secret service, nearly a oflion spent on protection first family, second family, former presidents and presidential candidates, the united states secret service was always considered to be the elite law enforcement agency made up of men and women who were highly regarded, highly respected and highly trusted. grace --ry has placed great faith and trust in the secret service. the agents of the uniform division are officers and the secret service agents have a

monumental task. that of protecting the nation's presidents past present and future. they do so honorably and not without personal sacrifice. they ensure the safety of the first and second family, yes, and the safety of foreign dignitaries throughout washington and at times, throughout the world. ensure the safety of every men and women who emptied the white house and the company holdings. but a history of misbehavior, security failures has clearly blemished that record. gonzalezber 19, omar jumped the north fence, a ran across the white house lawn, up whiteeps and into the house. he was armed with a three inch serrated knife. he entered through an unlocked

door, past the staircase to the residence and into the east room of the white house. gentlemen, that was the part of my opening statement that was changed last night when the early also reports that in fact he had been apprehended just inside the front door was just inside by revelations that he had been -- penetrated much further into the white house. secret service officers only subdued him after he was clearly well inside the white house. an intruder walked in the front door of the white house, and that is unacceptable. there weree tells us a series of security failures. not an instance of praiseworthy restraint. he reached at least five rings of security on september 19. the white house is supposed to one of america's most secure

facilities, and in fact, one of the world's most secure facilities, so how on earth did it happen? has failure was once again tested the trust of the american people in the secret service, a trust he clearly depend on to protect the president. allowing the paparazzi crazed reality tv star to crash engaging dinner, after prostitutes, after excessive drinking and an agent falling asleep outside his room in the netherlands, and yes, and the event,ling of the 11-11 a gunman who sprayed bullets has

caused over $100,000 in damage. not properly reported in real-time or understood, it is understandable the morale but he it appears to decline in news report. in light of the recent break in him a we have to ask whether the culture at the secret service and possible declining morale have an impact in operation, and those are some of the questions today. the appointment of director pearson wrought nouveau the agency would reclaim the noble but to recent events have so troubled us that in fact we have called the director here to face tough questions. how could mr. gonzales faced the fence -- scaled the fence? the fence to scale often. but how is it that was as ordinarily happen, agents did

not immediately apprehend him? how was he able to sprint 70 yards, almost the entire length of the football field without being intercepted by guards at the fence? guardsn't security stopped him at the fence? what about sniper rifles? why were there no guard stations at the front door of the white house? and yes, how much would it cost to law the front door of the white house? the secret service must show how there is a clear path back to public trust. to today's hearings is to gain answers to the many questions plaguing the secret service. today we will hear from experts on both the agency protocol, foreign and domestic, but most importantly, we will hear from the secret service your herself on her plans to improve the agency's performance.

real danger as we serve abroad, especially those serviced at -- stationed at our embassies. it is a time of great peril. we are engaged in the battle against isis as we speak i'm above that is not limited to foreign soil. americans know the next attempt to take white house may not be wieldinged solo knife veteran with ptsd. it could be a planned attack from terrorist organization. is the system broke down on september 19. as it did when they crashed the state dinner in 2009. ortega oaksen hernandez successfully shot the white house on november 11, 2011. as it did in cartagena when

agents paid for prostitutes and compromise security, as it did in the netherlands in 2014. we cannot further allow this. , the secretntly service relies on two important .cales or fax the skill, the capability to protect the president must be at the highest level because they because 1%eed 99% failure is not an option come up but they also rely on the good faith belief i most people they should not even try, but this is the hardest target on earth. we need to make sure the second isdest target on earth through with reality and in the minds of anyone who might take

on the secret service to get to the president or first family. without a recognized the member for his opening statement. >> thank you. with an obvious premise. no individual should be allowed to feel -- scaled the fence at the white house, sprint across the north lawn, and burst into the residence of the first family with 11. no one. our goal today is also clear, to determine how this happened and make sure it never happens again . this is our watch. this recent incident unfortunately causes many people a ask whether or not there is much broader problem with the secret service. last night the washington post reported omar gonzalez made his way into the east room.

another incident in 2011 about a shooting raises more questions about the competency and culture of this delete agency. most about this report is agents said they were hesitant. agents in this agency said they were hesitant to raise security concerns with their supervisors. gentlemen, something is awfully wrong with that picture. the secret service is supposed to be the most elite, protective force in the world, yet four days went by before they discover the white house had been shot seven times. in 2012 there was the prostitution scandal in columbia

. although it had little to do with tactical protection issues, it seriously damaged the agency's credibility. the secret service must not only carry out its duties with the highest degree of excellence and effectiveness, but it also must a reputation that matches the performance. as the chairman has said, much of what deters people from trying to pierce the protective veil of the secret service is the reputation. that reputation must be one of excellence and effectiveness. today's witness, mrs. georgia pearson was appointed director of the secret service last year to help restore the agency standing. she has had a distinguished 30 year career with the agency. to her credit, she immediately

ordered an internal review and agreed to testify. with respect to the most recent incident, i have key questions share with many people across the country. did the secret service have specific protocols by handling specific perimeter breach? is so, where they followed in this case, and if they work him and do they need to change in light of what happened. followed why?ot and how can we have confidence that it will be followed in the future? i also want to understand what happened drier to the incident? gonzalez was arrested in onginia two months earlier july 19. mr. chairman, i would like to enter into the records an inventory sheet provided to us by the virginia state police.

, whichs the contents included an arsenal of 11 firearms, including sniper rifles and a shot that stalled off shotgun. objection thehout entire report be placed in the record. it also included the content of the car, which included a small arsenal of 11 firearms, including sniper rifles and a sawed-off shotgun. it also included a map of washington, d.c., with a line drawn to the white house. the virginia state police, the bureau of alcohol and tobacco firearms and explosives concluded there was no information in gonzalez history that prohibited him from owning the firearms, get, he was

severely mentally ill in the military psychiatrist reportedly traded him for posttraumatic stress disorder and paranoid schizophrenia. mr. chairman, i hate to even what could have happened been carrying a gun instead of a knife when he burst inside the white house. that possibility is extremely unsettling. today our workspaces to challenges. first, the secret service has not yet completed the internal view. i understand the director will provide us with a status update but the final results are not yet in. second, some of the information is classified so we cannot yet discuss it in public. the very last thing we want to do is give people like gonzalez a roadmap for how to attack the president or other officials protected by the secret service.

the director sent a letter friday not only offering to testify today in the public setting but also to provide all of us with a classified briefing. the chairman has agreed to hold the classified session in a separate room directly after this hearing concludes. let me close on making the final point. is not a democratic issue. this is not a republican issue, this is an american issue. this is also an issue of national security. the vast majority of men and women who served in the secret service are dedicated, experienced public servants who are willing to lay down their lives for their country. congress of a grateful and a grateful nation, i think everyone of them. they have an extremely difficult job. like others in difficult positions, they are required to

make instant life and death decisions in extremely stressful situations. astrid the capitol police shot and killed an unarmed woman with a one-year-old girl in the back seat of her car. some praised their cooked -- othersesponses, criticized but they acted based upon their first-hand experience the capital one another deranged and eventual first through the till two capitol police officers. the secret service has a high profile job, but it is critically important and requires accountability. mr. chairman, i look forward to the testimony. i thank you for bringing us back to the hearing, and i look forward to the questions i have artie raised and others being answered. with that, i yield back.

>> enqueue. i now recognize the gentleman from utah. the subcommittee chairman on national security for his opening statement. thank the chairman and chairman cummings. it is an american issue. i do not want it to be the political football. we are self-critical. the beauty of the nation as we do hold ourselves accountable. i do appreciate you holding this hearing. we have wonderful men and women who serve this nation. they walk away from families and spouses. they do not know what the day will bring them and they do so in a very honorable way, and we thank them for their service and dedication but i have serious concerns about the current leadership, training and heard a call. .- protocol since the current director has taken on the role, it is important to note she was chief

of staff in 2008. so the past several years is not good enough to simply excuse as something she was trying to clean up before because she was chief of staff in 2008. i am concerned about leadership in mixed messages to those who serve. after the fence jumping incident the secret service was very quick to put out a statement that honored the officers and agents for their quote tremendous restraint. lookingnot what we are for. tremendous restraint is not the goal of the objective. it sends a very mixed message. it should be overwhelming force. if one person can hop the fence and run unimpeded all the way through an open door of the white house, do not praise them for tremendous restraint. that is not the goal and not what we looking for. if there were alarms inside the door that were muted or

sidelined, i want to know why that is. who makes that call and decision? i think as some point we need to go back and revisit two thousand 13 inspector general report that says there is not a problem but over 1000 indications of security concern. in the opening statements they would have to be 100% right all of the time. everyone agrees with that. the inspector general's report, pretty damning. concerned about the 2011 incident. thanks all for the washington post report. the best i can tell, as well as the article in " the washington in 2011 wereent eight shots were fired at the white house, no less than five secret service agents reported they thought they heard shots rate -- shots fired. you had someone on twitter report they saw someone shot --

at the white house. blocks away moments later someone crashes a vehicle and an assault rifle is in there in the secret service is on the scene and no one ties them together. i don't understand that. later, the arlington county police detain this person. he had been positively identified based on the vehicle but no one put it into the system to put him on the watch list. carly -- consequently when arlington county police pulled him over they took his picture and let him go. it was only the pennsylvania police five days later that find the person. now he is serving 25 years in jail but could have done a lot more damage. if the director is going to take full responsibility, i think the opening statement should also talk about leadership. as i talked to the whistleblower and others come at they are

concerned about leadership, and training. as i look at the 2015 budget request, page 39 there is a basic total and i want to run through the numbers because it is important. under special agent basic classes there were eight classes. 2010 eight classes. 2000 11 five classes. 2012 milk labs says. 2011 five clases. 2012 no classes. in 2012 there was one class. 2013 one class. look at the budget line appropriation, it did not go down. it was basically the same. training diminish? again, i mentioned protocol.

ms., itroject week invites tax. we want to see overwhelming force. the would-be intruder was not stopped by a dog or person perhaps lethal force is necessary. i want the secret service agents and officers to know at least this member of congress has their back. do not let someone get close to the president, the family, get in the white house ever. if they have to take action that is lethal, i will have their back. at this day and age with 30 bombs in terrorist, we do not know what is owing on underneath that person's clothing. if they want to penetrate that, they need to know they will perhaps be killed. that is the message we should be sending every single time, and that is the kind of secret service that i expect. the service and dedication. we love them and care for them

but we need better leadership and it is not happening. we yield back. >> we now recognize the gentlelady for her opening statement. >> thank you very much. thank you for this hearing. my respect for the secret service goes back to when i was growing up as a child in the district of columbia and continues to this very day. ask recente must for recent anrecedented events call for unprecedented response. first, an increasing number of white house jumpers, including the most recent this month, was able to get deeper into the interior of the white house. in 2011 multiple shots into the living quarters of the first family discovered

only four days later not by secret service investigation but by white house staff. , in thehese failures core mission of the secret service to protect the white house and the first family is an ,nsettling failure to disclose perhaps even understand, what has occurred or to promptly investigate -- together this combination of failure suggest wrongly the time is right for a 21st-century makeover of the secret service. ado not regard this matter as mere question of personnel. i believe it goes far deeper than that. moreover, the stunning events whenoccurred during a time the united states, and by definition, the white house and even the president, are being

targeted by domestic and international terrorists. assessments,threat this president has had three times as many threats as his predecessors. just as troubling have been indications of unwarranted secrecy in the secret service. is not at service secret society. avoidances a willing of needed transparency, that in itself poses a danger to the white house. , when noises were heard that could be gunfire at the white house, others believed is automobile that buyer. gain gunfire -- it the jobre, isn't

of the secret service to presume such a sound is gunfire until an immediate investigation shows it was not? soundfficers close to the have to become whistleblowers have active suppression of information becomes yet another , worseto the white house such failures such that some are , perhaps of danger posing the greatest risk to the white house. troubling in light of such unanswered questions a rush to quick fixes such as suppression of public access to the area around the white house without a thorough

investigation. the white house and lafayette park just like the congress, our first in the area and the public must be allowed to express grievances has -- as they always have been. in light of the seriousness of , thet breaches investigation at the first instance of the department of homeland security should go well be on the details of these events. they are merely the most recent to bottomor a top investigation of secret service operations at the white house. this is not a mere question of personnel. or inng people at the top between will not solve the issue i think we are presented. we must learn whether today's

secret service as structured, for example, could stop five or six men jumping at the same time. intent on harm to the white house and president. not just a demented war vet who even alone might have succeeded. no scenario should be off the table for unneeded 21st-century study of secret service operations in the age of terrorism. has shownearson accomplishments and her 18 months as director. the heroism of the secret the a gone debate.

the white house and intruder was brought down by an agent. presidentte house and have been sprung into a new era of danger. the secret service should welcome an outside investigation to assure the necessary resources and the expert backup and structure for the 21st century is necessary to do its job. >> enqueue. >> members may have seven days to submit opening statements for the record. i now ask for unanimous consent that are calling, the gentlelady from texas comments jackson lee be allowed to participate in the hearing. additionally, unanimous consent that our calling, the gentleman for mr.'s -- missouri be allowed to participate.

we now welcome our panel of witnesses, the honorable julia pearson is the director of the united states secret service. director is the former director of the united states secret service, and currently up partner at command consulting group. is theorable todd keele former assistant secretary for infrastructure protection at the united states department of homeland security and currently a senior advisor to touchtone page, pursuant to the committee rules i when asked that you please all rise and raise your right hand to take the oath. do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about to get will be the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth? please be seated. but the record reflect all witnesses answered in the affirmative. in order to allow a sufficient time for