Transcripts For CSPAN House Homeland Security Committee Hearing On Facial Recognition Other... 20240713

I now recognize myself for an opening statement. The parent of homeless security is beating to examine the Homeland Securitys use of facial wreck mission and other Biometric Technologies. Government use of biometrics is not entirely new area fingerprints have been used as an identification tool for many decades. Dna andometrics include palm prints. In recent years facial recognition has become the new chosen form of Biometric Technology, as facial Recognition Technology has advanced it is used by the government its use by the government in the private sector has also increased. Dhs is collect ding and storing different kinds of biometric information and using this information for multiple purposes. Cpv and tsa are using biometrics confirm the identities of travelers. Opposed to Biometric Technology and recognized it can be valuable to Homeland Security. However, it proliferation a phrases across dhs questions about privacy, security, transparency and accuracy. People deserve an answer before the government rushes to biometrics further. The Committee Held around tables with stakeholders about the department of Homeland Security s increasing use of Biometric Technology. Stakeholders have sufficient concerns that the data dhs is and whether the the permit is safeguarding our rights appropriately. They have good reason to be concerned. Standards, americans may not know when and where and why the department is cooking there biometrics. People may not know they have a right to opt out, or how to do so. Worse yet they may not know the Biometric Technology is in use, as it is the case under the secret Services Pilot program. Also recent reports indicate ice has been scanning through millions of americans drivers license photos without their consent. These reports are a stark reminder that Biometric Technologies should only be used for authorized purposes in a fully transparent manner. Security is another important concern. Frankly the federal government doesnt have a great track record of securing americas personal data and biometric and beingn particularly insensitive. Unfortunately this year a subcontractor experienced a significant data breach, raisingg images important questions about data security. Americans want to know if the government collect their biometric data, they are going to keep it secure from hackers and other bad actors. Certain the accuracy of Biometric Technology is in question. Despite advancement in recent years. Studies have found facial Recognition Systems in accurater are not as for women and darker skinned individuals. Last july the American Civil Liberties union conducted a test using amazons facial. Ecognition aclu built a database of 25,000 publicly available arrest photos. , aclu searchedon a database using pictures of every current member of congress. That software incorrectly matched 20 members 28 members with individuals who had criminal records. Also the misidentified members included both democrat and republican, men and women, and a. Ide range of ages nearly 40 of the false matches were people of color. Circuitt fair to expect expect certain people in our society to shoulder a disproportionate wording of the technology shortcoming. Before the government employs these technologies further, they must be scrutinized and the American Public needs to be given a chance to weigh in. Biometrics and facial Recognition Technology may be a facilitation tool. It has the potential to be misused. , especially if it falls into the wrong hands. Will hear from federal witnesses on this important topic. Im pleased we have the trance. And securityation admin attrition and the National Institute of standards and technology. They represent a few of the agencies involved in the governments increasing use of Biometric Technology. I look forward to hearing from them about how they are using Biometric Technology currently. And what they are doing to address these concerns. It is our job to ensure they protect the rights of the American People before they move forward. I expect a good conversation toward the end today. I ask unanimous consent to enter the following news articles and letters into the hearings record. A june 10 Washington Post were photos of travelers were taken in a data breach. A july 7 Washington Post article , state drivers license photos are a gold mine of of facial Recognition Service facial Recognition Services. And a correlation of privacy and Civil Liberties group, many of were in our meetings and briefings last month. Without objection, so ordered. The chair now recognizing the Ranking Member of the full committee, the gentleman from alabama for an opening statement. Biometric technology has the potential to improve security. Each of these methods present unique privacy considerations also clear security risks. Not only does federal law dhs to use biometrics to identify, it requires entry and exit data for all Foreign Nationals. This requirement has been longstanding bipartisan mandate. Recent Technological Advancements have finally made it possible. Dhss primary focus is facial recognition at check points where travelers are already providing ids to government employees. Agents can review several hundred ids in a single shift. As a result fatigue and human error allow people to fake with fake ideas to slip into our country every day. Automating this process with Biometric Technology will improve security. Cvp and tsa have done their homework and are working to build accurate and secure systems. Dhs should continue to collaborate with experts at nist to ensure theyre using accurate algorithms to power these systems. Biometric systems advanced mission beyond transportation security. I. C. E. Recently conducted a rapid dna Pilot Program to verify family ties on the southwest border. A 90 minute test can replace hours of interviews and document review. This short pilot found a disturbing number of cases where men who claimed to be the biological parent of a child quickly changed their story when asked to submit dna. The technology does not store dna in a central database and each machine can be purged daily. Amid the humanitarian crisis on our border, we should be looking at things like rapid dna to protect children from abuse by smugglers who rent them as a ticket into our country. We should be using biometrics to enforce immigration laws. I. C. E. And fbis use of dmv photos to identify criminals. I do not believe that anyone has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a government id photo, period. Police have longrelied on photo books and manual photo reviews to identify suspects known as fugitives. Recognition technologies can improve Law Enforcement by ridding the process of human error. Technology cannot and should not replace the officers final judgment, but it can speed up the Identity Verification for millions of people every year. Halting all government Biometric Programs as some colleagues suggest is an easy way to avoid hard questions. Taking the easy way out of this issue will not increase the gap between technology and our ability to understand it. Dhs should continue to consult with experts at nist to develop standards. Dhs leadership should ensure that this biometric databases are secure and have clear privacy guidelines and congress should continue to educate itself as we are today about the way we can employ this technology responsibly. And i thank you mr. Chairman. I yield back. Thank you. Other members of the committee are reminded that under the committee rules, Opening Statements may be submitted for the record. I now welcome our panel of witnesses. Our first witness is mr. John wagner, deputy executive assistant commissioner at the u. S. Customers and Border Protection. Next we have mr. Austin gold, assistant administrator for requirements and capabilities analysis at the transportation security administration. Next we have mr. Joseph r. Petro. Finally we have dr. Charles row main, the director of the Information Technology laboratory at the commerce departments National Institute of standards and technology. I look forward hearing from you all today. Without objections, the witnesss full statement will be inserted into the record. I now ask each witness to summarize his statement for five minutes beginning with mr. Wagner. Chairman thompson, Ranking Member rogers, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on behalf of u. S. Customs and Border Protection. I would like to begin with a few excerpts from the 9 11 commission report. When people travel internationally, they move through portals, may seek for a passport, may apply for visa, may stop at ticket gates at airports and sea ports. They pass through arrival points. They may transit to another gate to get to another plane. Each chance is a screening. The job of protection is shared among the many defined check points. By taking advantage of them all, we need not depend on anyone in the system to do the whole job. The challenge is to see common problem across agencies and functions and develop a conceptual framework and architecture for effective screening system throughout government and indeed in private enterprise agencies and firms at those portals balance Civil Liberties. These problems should be addressed systemically, not in an ad hoc fragmented way. These are excepts from the 9 11 commission report. Before cvp presented our current strategy, airlines, airports, and Government Agencies including dhs were developing their own independent biometric schemes, in other words what the 9 11 commission warned against doing, an ad hoc fragmented approach. Cvp has developed a plan that includes other authorities and responsibilities in the mission set beyond just the biometric entry exit mandate for Foreign Nationals. We have the solution to encompass the travel spectrum. We need a solution that would comport with the biometric plans of airports, airlines, and cruiselines. Why . Because we dont have a Transportation System that allows the easy segmentation of only foreign visitors on international departures. Previous dhs efforts failed for ten years because they tried to create a stand alone stove piped unintegrated process. As we all know, those plans were cost prohibitive, would create massive congestion, and there was significant opposition from the airlines and the travel industry. As a result cvp developed a service that goes on today when a traveler presents a passport to establish identity. Cbp is only comparing the photos taken previously provided to the u. S. Government for the purposes of International Travel. This is not a surveillance program. Since airlines and cruiselines are already required by statute to provide the biographic information, cbp assembles a small gallery of photos. These photos are from passports, visas, and Previous International arrivals. A photo is taken and searched and validating the biographic data that is vetted for Law Enforcement concerns and corresponding to the traveller we president exam it to. We do not run it against any other database oris sources of information if it matches the prestaged gallery photo. If a traveler matches the u. S. Passport a new photo is taken. Theres no need to keep it. U. S. Citizens are not part of the entry exit system. Recognizes there are concerns raised over inclusion of u. S. Citizens, cbp has responsibilities to determine citizenship and identity of all people traveling internationally. This is a u. S. Government responsibility. Its also unlawful for a u. S. Citizen to travel internationally without a u. S. Passport. U. S. Citizenship is determined by comparing the traveller against the passport. Were automating and using a computer algorithm to enhance the facial recognition existing process. We had two travellers presenting u. S. Passports claiming to be u. S. Citizens. However it was found they were Foreign Nationals and impostures to the documents. Cbp developed a standard set of business requirements. They clearly stipulate they cannot keep the photos. Going back to the ad hoc approach mentioned earlier, our partners voluntarily agreed to the requirements. This makes a single consistent transparent approach to the use of the technology for the International Travel. Cbp is pound by requirements in the Government Act and Homeland Security act. Were signing on to the same requirements. We do recognize we can improve the publics understanding of the requirements and the opt out prosituation visions. Rule making has commenced to put updates into the federal regulations currently circulated within the government. Were solving a very difficult challenge, biometric exit. Were solving it by focusing on improving the travel experience. Airlines and cruiselines have reported reduced boarding times and increased Passenger Satisfaction using this system. This system will allow us to build a world class travel the system in the u. S. This will be the envy of the world as we try to keep pace with the record breaking growth in International Travel. Tax for the opportunity to be here today. And i look forward to your questions. Thank you your testimony. I somehow recognize mr. Gold to summarize his statement for five minutes. Good morning. Thank you for inviting me before you today to discuss the future of biometric identification at the trapgs security trags. I am austin gold, the assistant administrator for analysis at tas. I would like to thank the committee for working with tsa as we work with the Transportation Systems and particularly for your support of our officers in the field. The aviation and transportation security act of 2001 established tsa and the requirement to screen all passengers who were boarding aircraft. This screening requirement includes passenger Identity Verification. The act specifically recognizing the biometrics for this purpose. Recognizing the need to positively identify passengers are becoming increasingly prevalent and sophisticated, tsa sought new processes and technologies to improve performance. Biometrics represents such technology. In 2018, tsa released a biometrics road map which identifies the steps that the agency is taking to test and potentially expand biometric identification capability. The road map has four major goals, partner with customs and Border Protection on biometrics for International Travellers, potentially expand biometrics to additional domestic travelers, and develop the infrastructure to support the biometric efforts. Consistent with the buy metrics road maps, verifying passenger identity at certain airports. These pilots are of limited scope and duration and being used to evaluate Biometric Technology for use. These have been in conjunction with customs and border ex pr, supported with assessments, and passengers have the opportunity to not participate. In these cases the standard manual identification process is used. Last month they observed the client under way in term fall f in atlanta for international passengers. The cam only captured image after the officer activated it. Tsa collected data in atlanta that demonstrated over 99 of travelers chose to use biometric identification. From feedback we have applied sign aj in spanish and english to be sure everyone knows what is being played out. Tsa is committed to addressing accuracy, privacy, and Cyber Security concerns associated with biometric capture and matching. In that regard and pursuant to 1919 of the tsa modernization act, dhs will submit report that includes assessments by tsa and cbp that were developed the science and Technology Direct rat. The report will address accuracy and error rates. We will schedule a meeting with privacy groups later this summer to ensure they understand tsas limited use of biometric identification, have the opportunity to address any concerns, and as follow on to participation in tsas earlier biometrics day. Tsa continues to build upon the success of past pilots by conducting additional ones at select locations for limits durations to refine requirements for biometrics use. These pilots will continue to be supported by privacy impact assessments, clearly identified through bilingual airport sign signage. Biometrics represents unique opportunity for tsa. This can increase through point at the check point and enhance the passengers experience. The ability to increase throughput will be essential as passenger volumes continue to grow at approximately 4 annually. We experienced our busiest travel day ever last sunday when we screened approximately 2. 8 million passengers and crew. To close, tsa is systematically assessing biometrics for use. It will enhance Aviation Security while also increasing passenger throughput and making air travel more enjoyable. The system will only be used for passenger identification and to direct the the passenger to the appropriate level of screening automating what is currently a manual process. It will not be used for Law Enforcement purposes. And as always, passengers have the opportunity to not participate. Thank you for the opportunity to address the important issue before the committee and i look forward to answering your questions. Thank you for your testimony. I now recognize mr. Depetro to summarize his testimony. Im chief technology of the United States secret service. I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and to discuss the secret services use of biometrics in performance of our integrative mission. As previously conveyed to staff, the secret service has significant concerns about testifying in open hearing about how we use facial recognition. Therefore my testimony today on that issue will focus on the Pilot Program we are conducting at the white house complex. The secret service closely guards means and methods as to how we execute our protective mission. We are aware that our adversaries are watching and probing us and can exploit information discussed in this open environment to be used against us. It would not be wise or prudent to discuss in a public setting certain protocols used to carry out or protective mission. However, we would welcome the opportunity to provide information in a closed briefing. Biometric tools are used on a regular basis by the secret service to investigate, locate, and sometimes arrest individuals who have committed crimes to include offenses related to threats against secret service prek tees. We understand the rapid expansion creates a new to balance capabilities with the need to preserve the you publics expectation of privacy and the secret service is committed to ensuring a balance that protects the rights to all individuals. Respect to fingerprints and palm prints, the secret service has a long Standing Program that plays integral part in our personal security processes. Our ability to process, store, search, and retrieve fingerprint and palm print images is an operational necessity. During the course of investigations involving fingerprint and palm print evidence, we use regional and databases to search for known searches. Dna is one of the most effective identification tools available to Law Enforcement today. Advances related to Dna Technology are rapid and the secret Service Remains dedicated to utilizing new applications to enhance the mission. The secret service collects dna samples along with the subjects fingerprints. Samples are sent to the fbi and dna testing search and storage in the national dna database. With respect to facial Recognition Technology, the secret service recognizes that this technology has the potential to be a powerful tool that may assist in preventing attacks. In 2014, former secretary of Homeland Security johnson established independent protective Mission Panel to conduct assessment of security at the white house complex. Among other important recommendations, the panel stated Technology Systems used on the complex must always remain on the cutting edge. And the secret service must invest in Technology Including becoming a driver of research and development that may assist in its mission. In furtherance of these recommendations, the secret service is working on a facial recognition pilot. The goal is to determine whether technology could be effectively deployed to enhance or protect the mission. While the pilot started in december of 2018 and is scheduled to be completed by the end of august 2019, the secret Service Began contemplating this pilot so far back as august 2014. The participants in the pilot are secret Service Employees who volunteered to take part in the effort. Designated white house cameras that are part of the video Management System captured volunteers as they moved through various locations around the white house complex. Software running on a server dedicated to the pilot and on a closed network not connected to the internet seeks to match the image of the volunteers to the images in the screens. Facial images are stored when ma ched to a volunteer. At the conclusion of the pilot, all images will be purged. The secret services commitment to maintaining First Amendment protections and desire to address personal privacy considerations are central factors behind any future implementation of facial Recognition Technology. The secret service will not adopt new technologies unless theyve been thoroughly vetted to ensure that sufficient privacy protections and data safeguards are in place. In closing, the protection of our nations leaders is paramount to this agency and to the nation. The partnerships represented here today both in congress and dhs are critical to the success of secret service operations. I thank you for the opportunity to testify concerning the agent agencys use of the evolving technology and look forward to working with you as we move forward. This concludes my testimony. I welcome your questions. Thank you for your system. I now recognize doctor row main. Thank you for your time. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss nists role in biometric standards and testing for facial Recognition Technology. In the area of biometrics nist has been working with public and private sectors since the 1960s. Nists work improving the accuracy, quality, usability, interoperability, and consistency of identity Management Systems and ensures that United States interests are represented in the internationalal arena. Nist research has provided state of the art benchmarks that depend on biometrics recommendations. Nist leads standard activities in biometrics such as facial Recognition Technology but also in cryptography, electronic credentialing, software and systems reliability, and security conformance testing. All essential to accelerate the deployment of information and Communication Systems that are interoperable, reliable, secure, and usable. Nists biometric evaluations advance the technology by identifying and reporting gaps and limitations of current biometric recognition technologies. Nist evaluations advanced measurement science for providing basis for what and how to measure. Nist evaluations consistent based standards for scientifically sound fit for purpose standards. Since 2000, nists Face Recognition Vendor Testing Program or frvt has assessed capabilities of facial recognition algorithms for one to many identification and one to one verification. Nist expapded its facial recognition evaluations in 2017. Nist broadened the scope of its work in this area to understand the upper limits of human capabilities to recognize faces and how these capabilities fit into facial recognition applications. Historically and currently, nist Biometrics Research has assisted the department of Homeland Security. Nist research was used by dhs in its transition from two to ten prints for the former u. S. Visit program. Currently nist is collaborating with dhs obim on face quality standards and dhs on customs and Border Patrol on the evaluation of the travel service. Analyze performance impacts due to image quality and traveller demographics and provide guidance and data that allows cbp to set a threshold given cbp security goals for large scale face recognition of travellers. Nists Face Recognition Vendor Testing Program was established in 20 o0 to provide independent evaluations of both prototype and commercially available facial recognition algorithms. Significant progress has been made in algorithm improvements since the program was created. Nist is researching how to measure the accuracy of forensic examiners. The study measures Face Identification accuracy for an International Group of forensic examiners. The findings published in the proceedings of the National Academy of sciences showed that examiners and other human face specialists including forensically trained and untrained were more accurate on the channelling test. It also presented data comparing state of the art facial recognition algorithms with the best human face identifiers. Optimal Face Identification was achoef a achieved only when humans and machines collaborated. As with all areas, face recognition, Standards Development can increase productivity and efficiency in government and industry, expand innovation and competition, broaden opportunities for international trade, conserve resources, provide consumer benefit and choice, improve the environment, and promote health and safety. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on nists activities in facial recognition. And i would be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you very much for your testimony. I now recognize myself for five minutes of questioning. Mr. Wagner, you talked a little bit about the biometric entry and exit system. And those of us who have been around, we historically supported that system. But in the beginning, we talked about that system would be only used for foreigners and based on what i heard you talk about today, youve expanded that to taking in american citizens. Can you explain the reasoning for that . Yes. U. S. Citizens are clearly outside the scope of the biometric entry exit tracking. The technology were using for the entry exit program, were also using to validate the identity of the u. S. Citizen. Someone has to do that. Someone has to determine who is in scope or out of scope. And someone has to validate that u. S. Citizen is the person presenting that u. S. Passport. So, once we take the picture and match it against the passport photo which is what goes on right now, just in a manual review we use the algorithm to help make that decision. And then the photo is discarded after that because theres no need for us to save it. Well, what im trying to get at is this was a policy that cbp more or less expanded even though Congress Gave you the authority to look at foreigners. Well, it helps us and the airlines determine whos in scope for biometric exit and whos out. Someone has to make that determination at the boarding area. It would be unfair to ask the airline to be able to do that to determine who is in scope or out of scope. You kind of see what im saying though. Did cbp come back and say to congress were looking at expanding this authority, but we need congressional approval . We dont see this as expanding the biometric entry exit authority. We see this as using the authorities we have to determine the citizenship of an individual entering or departing the u. S. If were looking for a u. S. Citizen departing the u. S. Right now because they have a warrant for their arrest, stop travellers in the jetway and check their passport. Its using authorities. I understand why youre doing it. What im getting at is part of this hearing is to make sure that we as members of Congress Give you the authority you need to do your job. But part of what im hearing is youve kind of taken your own initiative to do some things beyond the scope of authority that Congress Gave you. So, what i would like for you to do is provide the committee with the written policy by which youre doing this. Yes, absolutely. Thank you. Dr. Ramine im going to try to get it right youve been advising dhs a lot on tom f some on some of these things. Have you looked at this expansion of Authority Without congressional intent with dhs . No, sir. That would be outside of nists Mission Space which is Technical Evaluation and standards of the algorithms. All right. Have you looked at the collection of data at how the Data Management is controlled once its collected . No, sir. Mr. Wagner, im back to you then. Explain to the committee this collection of data that you said this policy gives you. What do you do with it . So, when the picture is taken and provided comes into cbp and we match it against one of our prestaged gallery photos thats comprised of passports and visas in previous arrivals. If its a Foreign National subject to the biometric entry exit mandate, that photograph will be sent over to dhs to be stored in ident which is the repository. If its a u. S. Citizen and that photo matches a u. S. Passport or a permanent resident, that photograph would be held for 12 hours and then deleted or purged from the systems. The only reason we hold it for that short period of time is in case the system crashes and we have to restore everything. Okay. Are you aware of recent subcontractor breach of data. Yes. Beg your pardon . Yes. So, how is that inconsistent with what you just explained to us . What we were doing with that subcontractor is we were testing their camera on the u. S. mexico land boarder in a standalone pilot system. So, it wasnt integrated into the main cbp network. And we were testing the taking of the photographs and the license plates and the ability to take a picture of a person in a vehicle and whether that would be matchable. In this case, as far as i understand the contractor physically removed those photographs from the camera itself and put it on to their own network which was then breached. The cbp network was not hacked. The contractor and what we see is what i believe is they removed that in violation of the contract. And thats why our relationship has been severed with them and were conducting investigation. So, you see my concern about how we control the data we collect . Absolutely. Thank you. Yield to the Ranking Member. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Wagner, i want to pick up on what the chairman was talking about. My understanding of your response a few moments ago is that its your belief that you have the existing Statutory Authority to do what youre doing. Youre just exercising new technology in that process . Is that accurate representation of what your answer was . Yes. Thank you. Dr. Romine, this is evolving technology. Can you tell us what have been the big changes if any when it comes to the use of facial recognition and biometrics in general. Certainly. Thank you. The advances have been dramatic according to our testing the accuracy and capabilities of the newer systems that weve seen in the last few years. What would be some examples of newer systems . The advent of con vo lushal networks to do learning. Is that ai . Its Machine Learning and artificial intelligence, yes, sir. What else . So, these are dramatically improved over previous technologies that relied specifically on particular characteristics of faces, for example. With suitable training, these systems have dramatically improved the accuracy for the best facial Recognition Systems. Now, i want to be clear. The testing that weve done, theres still a very wide range of performance in the testing that weve done and the algorithms that weve tested. But the best ones and we have no direct knowledge of the Convolutional Networks because these are submitted to us as black boxes and we dont examine that. But in conversations with vendors who have submitted testing, thats the understanding that we have is that that new Machine Learning capability that deep Neural Networks has been the significant advance. Has this development or advancement in the area of Machine Learning alleviated in any way the concerns the chairman expressed about facial recognition being list accurate when it comes to females or darker skinned individuals . We see because of the significant increases in the accuracy across the board, the effect of those demographic effects is diminishing. We have a report were doing an analysis now, a comprehensive analysis of demographic effects under the testing evidence with just just done. That should be out this fall. When you have the test results, do you share those with the public, the Business Community . We do, sir. Great. We do that through public reporting and dissemination with email and other interested parties. Do you publish those guidelines for the public consumption as well . We do. I have a letter here for the use of biometrics facial recognition and i would like to offer it for the record. Without objection. With that, i yield back. Thank you. Thank you. Just so were clear, the report you referenced is not out . Thats correct, sir. It should be out this fall. So, the data right now is that women and darkskinned people are miss identified more than anybody else. There are demographic effects that effect age, so significant changes in age over time. Age, race, and sex. There are demographic effects quantifying those in a statistically valid manner is what were currently doing. So, is that women and dark skinned people . Yes. Okay. Thank you. Just trying to thank you. Chair recognizes mr. Correa for five minutes. Thank you mr. Chairman for bringing up this most important issue. This technology is very interesting because compared to fingerprints dna, you give it without essentially giving permission. You walked in a court or some camera picks up your information and it is used without your authority or permission in ways that we dont know about. Doctor, you talked about false positives based on ethnicity, other factors that are still that technology has not gotten to the point where it can account for these factors. Mr. Wagner, i have a question for you which is under the tsa modernization act of last year, it requires a public report on the deployment of Biometric Technologies, tsas assessment of private accurate. That report is now late. It is drafted. Its just circulating for final report and signature. So, any time now. Any time. Okay. Them if you will that be something that will be compared to dr. Rowe mains report that will be coming out very coop. Moving forward, well look at scientific reports we can to ensure biometric data performing accurately. Let me ask you, mr. Wagner, let me ask you, mr. Wagner, right now the way facial recognition is being used by your department, is this affecting or unduly burdening foreign travelers, race, gender e nationality . No, we are not seeing in review of our data, we are not seeing any significant error rates that are attributable to a specific demographic. Thats why weve also partnered with nist to come in and review our data and help us look at it and make sure. So, statistically you do have mr. Gold that is reviewing the day or who is reviewing the data for you to reach your conclusion that its not adversely affecting commerce, tourism im from the state of california where commerce tourism is a big part of our economy. I just want to make sure were not having a lot of false negatives. This is having a beneficial effect on that because its allowing airlines and cruiselines to board and unboard people quicker. Excellent. Just want to make sure we see that in the report. Passenger experience is being reviewed by that. Were reviewing internally data and were not seeing noticeable discrepancies in that. Weve partnered with nist and will be examining our data closely to make sure that were not unduly hurting people of a specific demographic. Im glad to hear youre enthusiastic that positive answer that its not a burdening unduly. Absolutely. Ronald reagan said weve got to trust but got to verify too. Absolutely. Im looking forward to seeing your data on. That in terms of the data once youre using it, what system do you have to audit to make sure that data is purged in a timely manner . You just mentioned one of your subcontractors had a breach. That information is somewhere out there. You said that is a reason you terminated that contract yet to me when that information gets out there, terminating a contract is not enough of a deterrent to making sure that those kinds of breeches, nathat data is actually purged in a timely manner. Are you doing anything to make sure we tighten up that part of the system. Yes. The subcontractor may face subsequent action depending on the results criminal civil . Potentially. Both . Potentially depending on what the investigation and the office of responsibilities investigating this, depending on the circumstances of how the data was taken and the intentions and why, and how it was used. There potentially could be criminal actions. When we have those data breaches, who do you report those to and under what time do you actually take this and say hey, this purge or this breach happened . Well, theyre supposed to report it to us almost immediately. We do report it to congress if it meets a certain threshold. And then internally we what threshold would that be . I dont know offhand. Would like to look at that a little closer because small breach versus large breach, is that your threshold . Size of the breach . Whats your threshold . I believe its 100,000, but ill have to i will get back to you on that. Chairman, im out of time but i think its very important that these kinds of breaches be reported immediately to congress. I agree. Mr. Chairman, im out of time, so i yield. Thank you very much. Chair recognizes gentleman from texas for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. You know, we all want to protect Civil Liberties and privacy. When somebodys in the Public Domain as i understood in law school, theres no expectation of privacy. This technology in my judgment has really protected the nation from drug smugglers, gang members, and potential terrorists. Biometrical, the last congress. It passed on the house for 272119. Now its being held up. Id like to examine what the not authorizing this program would have. You tell me what successes the bit map program has had, particularly when it coming fromividuals other parts of the world that are known theyre basically special interest special interest aliens or suspected terrorists coming uposs into this hemisphere, through latin america into the United States of america . So the bit map program, its administered by i. C. E. Program they work with their foreign counterparts to utilize Fingerprint Technology to take fre fingerprints of exay those populations you just mentioned, making their way on u. S. Rough mexico to the so if they show up in one of the countries,merican the foreign authorities will use the bit map program to collect passport information and their fingerprints. When that person ultimately shows up at our southwest border, and has mysteriously passport, were able to take their fingerprints and match it back up with that previous encounter in Central America to sufficiently identify the passporton is, they had at that time. Isnt it true that, through journey, that while the names and identities may change sure. Their biometrics do not change . Correct. Best way tos the identify who this person really is . Correct. Can you, in this setting, and if thats possible, give us some indication of the numbers of special interest that have been stopped in this program . And also, known or suspected terrorists. Id have to get back to you on that. I dont have any today. It . Ow significant is its significant. Its an absolute vulnerability know,as weve seen, you terrorists can exploit. Its a vulnerability we need to address. Dr. Romine, i guess, from what im hearing from you, we want to get this wrong. I think miss watsoncoleman was talking about herself being possibly in this pool of candidates that could get somehow mischaracterized. Tell us, where are we right now with this technology . How accurate is it . How accurate . Oh. Very best algorithms that recentlyted the most have false negative rates that are extremely low. The accuracy can range into best algorithms, in a one to many match, can the 99. 7 range. So 99. 7 accuracy . Accuracy. Thats pretty good. Beg your pardon . Thats a pretty good number. From a scientific standpoint, number. T the the judgment on what is a pretty good number is up to the policy makers. Its a high number for me. Very high. Youre a scientist. Im not. But sounds pretty high to me. I think its always a balance in committee, when we deal with security issues, we deal and civilcy liberties, we always have to balance these as americans. Important thats we balance those factors. But i want to throw the baby theuldnt want to throw baby out with the bath water. I think the bit map program has been extremely successful. Of bad actors from coming into the United States. And mr. Chairman, ranking hope this committee that we could still advance that billrization and that through this congress, because i do think its important to people. The american its one of the most important responsibilities that we have as congress. With that, i yield back. Thank you very much. The chair recognizes the gentle lady from new mexico for five minutes. Thank you, chairman. Month, the c. P. Announced the as a images of drivers were compromised. I represent multiple border where you cross back and forth into mexico for jobs, shopping, tourism, medicine. I also, within the interior of bordertrict, there are checkpoints. Pictures of peoples faces. We want to be able to make sure the citizens data is secure. Into thee audits subcontractor system prior to the hack . Im not aware of that. Ill have to check in can you please . To us on that, did these private subcontractors have the authority to store citizens data . They did not have the authority to have the pictures taken by the camera, from what i understand. So not even to store it. They did not have the authority take any pictures of faces . They had the authority to take them. Authorityot have the to take it off the camera and put it onto their own network, which is apparently what happened. Ok. C. B. P. T protocols does have in place to oversee a dataact and subcontractor security practices . I mean, they go through background checks. Vetted. Theyre cleared. Use of the d on or the systems that theyre going to work on. As far as having the audit controls on this was a standalone pilot, outside our normal network. Did not have the same level of controls and audit capabilities on that, because it standalone closed system. Into are things being put place now on all those systems to make sure you cant connect a portable media drive on that and extract information. Main network has these protocols on them but we didnt have them on this type of system. Are inyou say those place now . Youve corrected the problem . Theyre being put into place. Let usyou follow up and know when they are in place . Absolutely, yes. Thats something of deep concern. You. With all Pilot Programs, because i remember going through the being checkpoints and told, you know, this is a pilot. So dont worry about it yet. Its just a pilot. Thats actually why when we need to make sure that were operating it correctly. Agree. I want to switch now to authorization. Mr. Wagner, its my understanding that it is a law aat congress is enacting, biometric entryexit limit Data Collection to Foreign Nationals. Is that correct . Yes. And under what short is c. B. P. Collecting biometric information on u. S. Citizens as part of the entryexit system . Using the information 8usc1357b, which allows us to consider any information to aidence pertaining person crossing the border. And establishing their u. S. Citizenship. So generally a person will present a u. S. Passport to us. We can look at it. We can manually review it. We can ask questions how they obtained it. Going to switch direction. I apologize. I know some of that was already covered. Switch to the federal agencies that are scanning u. S. Citizens drivers license. And i. C. E. Is one of those thats been identified as potentially scanning through these databases. For what purpose are your components currently attempting to or successfully accessing state drivers license databases in any way . So for the Biometric Program discussing, were not using drivers license information. Licensee drivers information from the state that have entered into agreements us, where their drivers license also substitutes for a passport to cross the border. I think we have about five u. S. And maybe four canadian provinces that entered into written agreements with us to citizenship of the drivers license holder on the cross theo they can border without having to go get a passport that serves in lieu of the passport. Does the d. M. V. In those states require probable cause or warrants to access that information . When that person crosses the border, our agreement allows us that this ish them a valid license and to retrieve the photo from that so we can see who it belongs to. We also have other law access through with biographical drivers license data that we also might use in a Law Enforcement context common for Law Enforcement agencies to access. You. Ank the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new york. Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for being here today. Prosecutor for 20 years, routinely dealing with matters of violent crime, some of the tools in the toolbox that i had were free fingerprints at first and later d. N. A. Both came online, at first, there were concerns about how they were to be used. Think theyre becoming more mainstream. And i hope and pray that its faciale with recognition. But all three have the capability not only of helping to solve crimes but also making sure that crimes arent committed. But even something we dont enough ist exonerating people who are falsely accused. The d. N. A. System has done for people falsely accused in prisons. Breath ofa remarkable fresh air. So my concern is not with the it. Cacy of using my concern is that we get it right. Like weve done with fingerprints and like i think with d. N. A. So my questions focus on the accuracy and the things you need make it better. My colleagues have asked Great Questions about the use of it use andextent of the were going to have to have more discussions about that. The very concerned about accuracy. That was a big thing with d. N. A. , starting out, and now d. N. A. , the accuracy and the amazing. S its almost its a positive almost all the time. Are there yetwe with facial recognition. Id like to get there. Ask mr. Romine a couple of questions. You talk about the fact that youre charged with examining the gaps and limitations of certain things, including facial recognition. What do you see as the gaps and limitations of it right now . Principle gaps and limitations we see involve a couple of things. Image quality. Its still true, garbage in, garbage out for software systems. Hugeo image quality has a impact. Have a as i said, ill report on demographics. And there are certain issues with demographic effects. Thats particularly true when youre trying to identify you have an reference image thats maybe 10, 20 years earlier than the person to identify. Rying that can be a very big challenge. Similarly, if someone has been injured or theres some obscuring of the face for other can have aat challenge. Are taken, noncooperatively, and i dont uncooperative. I mean where someone is not standing still, looking at a with the intent of registering an image. If youre taking an image windshield, for example, or if youre taking on image of someone who is walking facing a camera, those on have a Significant Impact the accuracy and the ability of these systems to do identification. What can we do to improve that portion of it . The industry continues to advances. Emergence of a Convolutional Neural Network as in this space. We dont know what we dont know coming down the pike but i think there continue to be improvements that we see in our testing over time. Is making great strides. Im not you mentioned also in response to a one of myrom colleagues that the demographic effects of facial Recognition Software are diminishing. Could you expound what you mean by that . Its 99. 7 accurate but 99. 7 accuratenot for certain segments, for example, darker female. I want to know what youre doing to make that better and how we can make it stronger. Thats correct. Nsts perspective, what we do to make things better is provide an evaluation doinglity, so were not any training. Understood. And development. Say thati would anytime the overall performance system improves as democratically as facial recognition as improved over the five to six years, the effect ofn, the differences in demographics shrinks as well. And the report later, once we finished our analysis, the report that comes out in the will that i mean, youll admit that certain demographics have a disproportionate error rate. And so youre saying its improving. Has it improved . We havent finished the im not able to answer that question currently. The report will come out in the fall. Will say that the it is we will ever achieve a point where every single demographic is identical across the board, whether thats age, race or sex. To know just exactly how much the difference is. And this report will detail when it comes out in the fall . Yes, sir. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman. We all look forward to the report. Indeed. I assure you. Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from illinois. Thank you. I represent illinoiss 14th district where we drive about an to a major to get airport in chicago. Our community is always interested in learning more technologies that can potentially increase security in airports. However, before implementing any new technologies, its really important, crucial to make sure that theyre proven to be effective, reliable and fair. So can you please run through t. S. A. Isn which currently employing biometric screening at checkpoints . Yes, maam. Currently were only using Biometrics Technology in the international terminal, terminal f in atlanta. Thats on a pilot basis. Approach to biometrics every plem taition at t. S. A. Implementation at t. S. A. Is extremely deliberative. We want to understand how the how it canworks, improve and how it can improve the passenger experience. Discussion onthe image quality that happened before, were in a fortunate that we reallyin control the environment in our checkpoints so we can ensure optimal lighting, optimal distance from the camera so we get the highest Quality Images possible for biometric matching. For the pilot in atlanta, were c. B. P. , usingh their system and we see extremely high match rates there. Well look to, pilot one to one matching where a traveler will provide a credential. That credential will be assessed our cat machine. Match rate return a on whether or not the face thats been captured matches the thatembedded in credential. In that scenario, no information even leaves the checkpoint and retained on the camera. Thats some of the things were looking at. I believe when were through these pilotsw, that were doing for biometric development, we will see that we cannot only improve passenger security but also make it a much for theitive experience traveling public by reducing wait times. And airlinesrports using the Screening Technology beyond the t. S. A. Checkpoints if usese aware and what other are planned for the future . Right now i can comment on really what were doing in atlanta with Delta Airlines. Airlinesa, the delta kiosk uses biometric identification when the checks in, should they choose to do so, to make sure that that person is actually the ticketed on that particular flight. T. S. A. Has oversight of the bag ensure that passengers are positively matched to bags in the International Travel. And so Delta Airlines has a Security Program amendment that to useranted them Biometric Technology to do that matching at the bag drop. It at our checkpoint in atlanta. Then its, of course, used at exit point, at the gate. Ok. And so thats the only specific airport orith an airline that t. S. A. Has to govern the use of biometrics . Right now the Security Program amendment that weve granted delta for the limited use only in atlanta is the only formal agreement weve entered airlines. The and so does t. S. A. Have any airport andoving airline uses of Biometric Technology . We have roles in approving the use of Biometric Technology where t. S. A. Has equities. Back to sayld go that would be the checkpoint and bag drop. To usen airline wanted biometrics at the bag drop to positively match that traveler have tobag, they would request a Security Program amendment and we would have to issue it. Ok. The use of biometric data , illinoisansexpand understandably have a lot of how sensitivet personal data is used and stored. Id like to open this question up to the panel. Do your what circumstances do your components citizens . Ta on u. S. Were temporarily holding it validate that it corresponds to the passport that person is presenting. Its purged after 12 hours from our system. Perspective,. A. Were leveraging photographs tot travelers have provided facility travel like passport photographs. At the capture the image checkpoint, it is not retained in the camera. Encrypted,essage is we only get back a match result. Ok. Secret service collect fingerprints, palm prints, mug other identifying information on individuals who we arrest as part of our investigations. But not a part of regular screening. You dont retain the data that collect as part of the regular screening . Thats correct. You dont store it . No. The regular screening, we use metal detectors, things like that. Fingerprints. We do not use fingerprints at the white house. We dont scan for that. Great. Yes, sir. The data that we have is sequestered in servers that are airgapped. Theyre not connected to the internet. In a locked door that im the andctor of the laboratory im not permitted to go into that room without being escorted. Controlled. Tightly thank you so much. I yield back. Thank you. The chair recognizes the from north carolina, mr. Walker. 99. 7 . Thats pretty good. I do have a question for you, dr. Romine. You ensure and i think ms. Underwood was approaching do you ensure that the biometric Data Collected is secured . Unpack it. Is the biometric identifier directed to other sensitive or private information about the person . Data that we have on facial recognition is not identifying information. To doublecheck the exact features there. But im us andyou do that for report back . So youre saying that the that youve collected is secured. The information were collecting we dont collect information. We obtain it from our partners for the purposes of evaluation only. Ad we secure that its in secure server. Lets use the word retain instead of collect. Ever had a breach on the information youve obtained . No. Questions for the panel. To about 10, 15 seconds would be good. Can you elaborate more on these that have been successful specifically on the facialat identify recognition and any other Biometric Technologies, if you elaborate either on the success of them or adding extraditingefits or travel for passengers . Well start with mr. Wagner. Sure. Ability to the validate a persons biographical identity within two to three having tothout actually handle the physical passport. Person we did our National Security checks against, on International Flights, corresponds to the person in front of us. Mr. Gould . Sure. With our pilot in atlanta, we do Data Collection on the number of choosing not to provide biometric identification at our checkpoint and it was less than 1 . People seem to enjoy it. The traveling public moves checkpoint very rapidly. The best part, we enhance verification, thereby enhancing security. Someght now were piloting technology. But were in the middle of that test right now, so we havent compiled the data. Will finish up at the end of august. Then well have a chance to go the data. D review then well be able to draw conclusions but at this point, were still in the middle of the test. Dr. Romine . Anything there . No, sir. Based on the successes, specifically mr. Wagner, mr. Gould, where do you see the use of Biometric Technologies in your specific agency even beyond a complete role of the Pilot Programs . Mr. Wagner . It will significantly arrivals and departures on International Travel in all our different environments, air, land and sea. And really build a very convenient, efficient but yet secure process for us to do that. Mr. Gould . Sure. So for us, well build on the of our International Partnership with c. B. P. That otherdoing in atlanta to International Travel locations. Well look to use the c. B. P. Trusted travel population to do one to fewer, one to many matching for purposes at our checkpoints. Then really the next step that were looking at is that one to that i mentioned before where a traveler can approach the checkpoint, provide the cattial, have machine credential, Authentication Technology machine, assess the image and match it to a photograph thats there. Ight mr. Dipietro, do you ever share your information with local or state governments . Information with respect to fingerprints . Information that you collect. And ask thisp question, because i think ive in. Time to get it ms. Underwood asked a couple questions. There seemed to be just a touch of hesitancy. The data that you collect, is it ever collected without subjects aware . No, sir. So the information you do ever share that with state or local . Id have to check with our lab director on that and get you. To are you familiar with any circumstances that you have in the past . Services secret chief technology officer. I work more on the engineering and technical side. Id have to get with your Forensic Services department to answer that. Thank you. Back, mr. Chairman. Just let me comment in a setting, we are gonna ask that question again, of the Data Collected that people dont i think there is information being collected in the white house. The is different from answer. But we plan to have a classified briefing on that issue. Recognizes the gentlelady from new york for minutes, ms. Clark. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Some would say lets not make, it comes to National Security, lets not make the good. T the enemy of the but unfortunately, the good is not good enough when bias is into the algorithms that create false positives. The stakes are far too high for costly,als and too particularly for women and people of color. Scale deployment of facial Recognition Technology will have profound implications. We must look before we leap. Imperative that congress impose safeguards. And ensure algorithms do not into widespread use. As a new yorker, one who lives away from ground zero, National Security is crucially important. Firsthand. That but facial recognition routinely that misidentifies women and people of color dont make us safer. Us less safe. Using this technology to help i. C. E. For get immigrants for deportation doesnt protect us from terrorism. Hardworkings families. Around when c. B. P. Uses these technologies on u. S. Citizens abroad without providing a transparent optout potentially unlawful. Weve seen what happens when widely deployed before congress can deploy meaningful safeguards. Lets not make the same mistake with facial Recognition Technology. Au have a contractor that has breach. We know were seeing more use of video. That nfnghts get information gee adversary overseas and they want to create a disruption in our nation. All you have to do is take that information, create a video from it, and bam. Into a really bad situation. I dont know if were looking at interconnectedness of all of these technologies, particularly because theyre all evolving. And im very concerned about the of specificity that we have at this stage. So my question is about accuracy, mr. Wagner. C. B. P. Boasts that the facial algorithm it uses is able to make a match of 98 or of the time. But that statistic does not instances where facial Recognition Technology is unable highquality image due to human error, poor environmentalher factors. Recent testing by the director capturen that when data factors are included, the rate increases to around 10 . The findings . No. Ok. And why does c. B. P. Insist on tracking a bogus statistic that ignores passengers who cannot be photographed well enough by the system to be matched . Well, what were accounting for is, if we take a photograph quality,of sufficient are we able to match it. If . Correct. And then we know we need to address the camera itself and the lighting conditions to make capturing 100 e of those photographs that we can 99 . Match at the 98 to two separate statistics. Theyre both valuable to us. And theres also the falsepositive, the cost of the falsepositive, that individual that is detained, for whatever theres acause falsepositive. The cost of that persons health, the cost of that wellbeing. Perhaps theres a commerce concern involved. The lack ofd about accuracy. Im very concerned about match then doesnt photo, in this case. They present their passport as theyre doing today. Excuse me . If a person doesnt match a photograph, they simply present passport when youre trying to match them and they dont match, what that individual . They present their boarding pass and passport and its point. Y reviewed at that just as happens today. And those people arent way . Ned in any theyre not asked to step aside . Theyre not asked the process delay that person . No. They just show their passport. Ok. I hope thats the case. Will c. B. P. Commit to tracking a statistic that captures the usefulness and accuracy of the full facial includingn process, the rate at which the person fails to aperture a quality image . Rates. O track those we track what we call the gallery completion rate. Gonna have a 100 , because not Everybody Needs a passport to travel. The images that are not high quality . Those that fail to meet your standard . Right. We want to build it so that the camera will take a highquality photograph. Know thats what you want to do. But will you be keeping the statistics on what doesnt . We are, correct. Very well. I yield back, mr. Chairman. The chair recognizes the Ranking Member. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Clarify with the secret service. The information that youve collected in this Pilot Program you talked about earlier, is it my understanding that everybody thats in that are the secret service and they volunteered to be in it . Thats correct. If i can explain how were doing the pilot, that might help. Also, when did the pilot start . So we published it back in november. It began in december. Its gonna run through august. We did that on purpose. We wanted it to go from the winter into the summer, because the different items people wear, so that we had a good amount of time where we were it. Ssing maybe if i just explain a little working,w the pilot is that might help explain this for you. As you indicated, the in the pilot are secret Service Employees who volunteered to take part in this effort. The facial images are stored, when an associated match is an on an individual. Pilot,conclusion of the all that information will be deleted. Currente using our perjury tv system current tv system we have at the white house. Imagine youve got a similar system on capitol hill surveillance. Or were using those video feeds there. And were trying to match the individuals that are in the pilot, the volunteers, to the people who were seeing in those cameras. Match, there is no record. If there is a match, then there is a record. Be retained till the end of the pilot. Then that information will be deleted at the conclusion of the pilot. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Ms. Kakkos question was if you were collecting caption data and you said no. And my question is whether its a personteer or walking the street, you are collecting data . That is correct. Thats right. Recognizes the gentleman from louisiana, mr. Higgins. Mr. Chairman. Director romine, would you biotech, Biometric Technology and facial Recognition Technology as to work with trained agents, working together . Is this what nst is working towards . Were agnostic as to whether that is the use case or not. Testing has verified that in the case of facial recognition, the best algorithms human facet recognizers, the trained face recognizers thatank you for pointing out in your testimony. Research, in an effort to fren forensiccuracy of phrenic examiners, including trained facial reviewers, your statement stated faciale state of the art recognition algorithms with the best human face identifiers, the machines performed in the range of the best performing humans thats correct. Who are professional face examiners. But you went on to state that optimal Face Identification was achieved only when humans and collaborated. Is that an accurate assessment . Correct. S commissioner ask wagner, is there ever an arrest made or denial to travel based solely on facial Recognition Technology . No. Thank you. Facial Recognition Technology gets lets call it a hit. Based onobability algorithms that a particular traveler is a person of interest. And then an agent looks into the documentation further and has personal interaction with that individual, which either clears for travel or prompts further and deeper investigation. Is that correct . Yes, thats correct. So just to clarify for america watching, this being used to enhance the efficiency and the which the trained agents can move travelers through screening points; is correct . Yes. Thank you for clarifying that. Is the general consensus amongst airlines that this technology is a good idea, its working well . Yes. Believe so, thank you for clarifying that. Into your data breach. Its a concern for all of us, of which side of the aisle were on. That breach . Did they selfreport or was it discovered . Discovered . My first two questions about that. Who reported it . Contractor or did you all discover it . I believe we asked them about it. And how much time went by . Time. Ignificant amount of i need to verify this. But my recollection seems to be them and if any of our data was included in it. They came back and said yes. Not to put you on the spot here, my brother, but im going to. When you say an amount of time, amount ofignificant time, are you talking days, weeks, months . I have that answer. And i will for that come back to you. Ok. That, becausenow the contract was referred to as terminated, and we know like very much to what the course of events were what was the time line here with this contractor, from the time the breach till the time it was discovered and inquired about and reported and verified. And then how much time before terminated. T was and i believe id like to know and perhaps my colleagues to know if that antractor is still on contracting list. If that contract was terminated with that contractor, but are they still out there bidding on other contracts . I believe wed like to know that. Commissioner wagner, you have a job to do. You gentlemen, thank for your service, all of you. Members ofant to the this committee to get things right. Many ports of entry, the land ports, face unique challenges implementing the biometric entryexit system. Can you just share with us my final question what are the primary challenges and how can we help . Primary challenge was finding a way to implement this into a travel system that wasnt to support the, say, collection of biometrics on only a segment of the traveling public. You know, unlike europe and say places and asia and other places, we dont have controls. Weve never restricted departures like that. So International Flights domestic flights. Then with each individual fight, youve got u. S. Citizens, andanent residents visitors. How do you sift and sort and differentiate between who is in thee or out of scope of biometric exit requirement . What technology do you use to collect that biometric . Do you ensure a way thats not going to create gridlock at the airports or sea or land port when we get to it on how to do that . And thats exactly what youre working through right now . So we found a way using the facial recognition to compare against data theyve already provided, in a convenient and quick and accurate way, that we travelers using different authorities and help the Airlines Board the planes faster. Commissioner, thank you for that. My time has expired. Chair recognizes the gentlelady from new jersey for five minutes. Ms. Watsoncoleman. You, mr. Chairman. Thank you, gentlemen, for your testimony. It is a really important issue us. We want to be safe and secure but we also want to recognize privacy privacy is our and we have guarantees under the constitution and that were not way infringing upon that. Mr. Wagner, id like to ask you a question. I understand the department has sent an interim final report to would expand c. B. P. s collection of biometric data, something weve obviously expressed tremendous interest in. The committee is eager to learn whatch as possible about you intend with this rule and why you havent pursued a more transparent and deliberative process. What does this interim final entail . How does it address c. B. P. s collection of biometric data on u. S. Citizens . And why did you choose this closed process rather than providing notice and allowing Public Comment . Oftheres several pieces rule makings under way. There is an interim final rule and isdrafted circulating through the government for comment. Proposedlso notice of rule makings on other parts of what wed like to propose to do. Evaluating all of those right now, based on a lot of the comments weve received back from within the government. And we may take a different route. Placeare regulations in already, though, concerning biometric exit that have been in place. That were utilizing today. Impact the privacy assessments, weve explained in greater detail than would be in probably, how to program operates and what exactly happens with it. Publicly available. Are you having conversations with stakeholders . Absolutely. Personally done meetings with two different meetings, coast coast and west with the privacy community and all the privacy representatives. Of ouralking with all travel and tourism stakeholders. Thats vehement support behind travel and tourism arena. And, of course, were talking with the airlines and airports and our government partners as well. Why is it im asking you this question about why the committee itsnt have the information needs if these discussions have realm . The public why am i asking you about this process . Fitspart of this process this question about why youve chosen to do it in a more closed way as opposed to a more transparent way . Or am i just misunderstanding misstating . Well well yourat part of consideration, your rule making to ombs, your request of publicthis sort hearing . As im not sure i question. The well, according to the given,tion that i was the department has sent an report to omb. And this interim report has to expanding your collection of biometric data. And that the process that you are using to in dealing omb has been a closed process. What does that mean . Certain provisions that would be in the interim omb were tohat if approve it, we could publish that in the federal register. Can still accept comments, i believe, on that, but the rule goes into effect. Really, that what is the problem with open process more now were doing that too for the other provisions. About thehat provisions im specifically asking about the provisions that youre not doing it on. And what is the reason for that . Im , im all right. Ofyou have a number proposals. Rulemaking proposals, right . Correct. This, the Department Final an interim final rule to omb. This particular rule, it ofls with the expansion c. B. P. s collection of biometric data. Ive beentanding that given is that the process that engaging in is a closed process. Dont have the committee doesnt have the benefit of what is being what youre asking for. Instead, youve used another process that forecloses that opportunity. Why would you choose to do that . What is it that youre asking cant share in the asking . Is there not such a thing and were just completely uninformed . No. Just a different portions of the rulemaking process and before the rule is even it would be premature to talk about whats in it or whats not in it, because that is going to change. Based on the feedback and our discussions with omb, it is going to change. On otheru do that rulemaking requests but not on this specific area . We will be publishing a notice of proposed rule making fallanything that would within those parameters. Its somewhat frustrating. The point is, at this point, the public has no input in this process. As we understand. Yeah. Rule making process. Normally the notice for rule making, you right. You push it out and receive comment. Proposedl do notice of rule makings to solicit that feedback. You will . We will. Ok. After the fact. Ok. May i just have 30 seconds . Used you so generously about i will give you an additional 30 seconds. Curious about the secret Service Pilot project. And i wanted to understand i usingtand that youre this Pilot Project now with volunteer Service Agents so that theyre walking, you collect that information with the matches that works. You incidentally collecting other information on people who are not part of this voluntary effort . And if so, what are you doing with those sort of pictures that capture . So, maam, the cameras that were using as part of this pilot are part of the white Management System. Thats the tv system that records videos from all the cameras around the complex. We retain that data for 30 days as parts of the cc tv process. As were going through and identifying those volunteers that are in there, that record saved. And we save that and were gonna evaluate that till the end of the process. But you did have the opportunity to review other faces as youre capturing that vicinity, tourists, demonstrators, whatever . Like aould be falsepositive, somebody who wasnt in our pilot but we was it were not concerned about what happens and we will have a classified briefing. You. Ank and well have a lot of those questions responded to. Thank you for the extension and thank you very much for your the chair recognizes the gentlelady from arizona, ms. Lesko, for five minutes in first if you dont mind, id like to yield a few seconds to colleague, mr. Higgins. Five minutes. Unanimousirman, i ask concept to enter into the record support ofrticles in Biometric Technology. The first is from the new york commissioner and the second is from managing director sherrtoff group. Without objection. The gentlelady is recognized for additional time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Tooo ask unanimous consent enter into the record three letters expressing support for the effective and responsible biometrics by t. S. A. And c. B. P. These letters are from airlines for america. The International Air transport association. And the Global Business travel association. Without objections. Ok. Thank you. Mr. Chairmanons, and members, are for mr. Gould. And my first question, mr. Gould, is the Pilot Program deltaou have working with down in atlanta, where do you from . E photos is it opt in . Do you get the database of passports from c. B. P. . Thats my first question. Yes, maam. C. B. P. s tbs matching service for that. State accesses the Department Photos for the back end matching. Optinn it is an program. Passengers have the opportunity to choose whether to present usingric identification, the facial capture, or to present a credential. And we see a very high rate of choosing to provide the facial image. Ok. And so just so that i do you ask where them if they want their photo taken . Are signsthere throughout the checkpoint area thissay, we are piloting technology, and that should you choose not to participate, the officer know. As you approach the tdc, the travel document checker position, theres an officer there. And the officer will say, you to provideu choose biometric identification . In which case, if the passenger yes, theyre directed to stand in a specific location for that facial capture. Interaction with the officer at that point. Thank you. Thats very informative. Is, due to iion guess the success of c. B. P. s biometrics, and i think this is, you know this happen. Gy is going to i do agree with other members that we need to make sure that and security in it, of course. Of are you going to use any the is t. S. A. Planning on looking at how they can work, i guess, with c. B. P. And their success, in order to implement it in more airports . Yes, absolutely, maam. Thats the reason were doing to pilot in atlanta, is to interactionhat between us and the c. B. P. , tbs thatm and what benefit system brings to the t. S. A. Checkpoint, the identification process. Ion good. Im glad that youre working on it and hopefully we can get a fairly fast turnaround. Interestedwould be in seeing what youre doing down there in atlanta myself. Yes, maam. Youlso, mr. Gould, are planning on using this, or have you thought of using Biometric Technology or do you, for the employees, the airport employees . Yes, maam. We are considering using biometric identification processes for employees as well. Thank you. Thathe reason that i ask is because from some of our briefings, hearings, i think, been concerned about insider type threats. Happened up in what was it, the washington airport . I cant remember, where an took a plane and seattle. Yeah, seattle, washington. With baggage handlers, those type of things. It seems to me that it would be we use biometric screening for the employees themselves. Yes, maam. That is certainly something well be looking at. All right. Thank you. And i yield back my time. Thank you. Thank you. Well now recognize the gentlelady from texas for five minutes of questioning. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Askingto start off by unanimous consent to put into therecord an op ed by houston chronicle, real abuses squalororder, conditions for migrants, ask unanimous consent. Objection. Ask unanimous consent for the acting secretary of defense, border conditions. Without objection. Unanimous consent to put into the record the i. G. Dated july 2,cord 2019. Without objection. And i ask to put into the record two articles, ill put them in the found in the New York Times and in the chronicle. New york times well, excuse me. New york times, i. C. E. Uses facial recognition to mine state and then anense, article that says feds scan forers license photos facial recognition, gold mine, and thats monday, july 8. And the other is july 7. Ask unanimous consent. Objection. Let me thank you for your service to the nation. Ive had the privilege of committee for aquestion very, very long time. Ill get to the united lying hearing, but let me be very clear that i have to great ire and dismay for the behavior of individuals border and the refusal of the department of Homeland Security to cooperate with of congress. Indicate that the 4. 6 billion dollars that was and the whining that went on for a period of blame congress was a misrepresentation to the werican people, because understand that the program droprs can happen at the of a hat. The reason i say that is, as i go into my questioning regarding the facial recognition, unless the answer changed from the time theresre, i understand no statutory legislation or thating thats giving you authority. I just quickly want to say that we will not be able to tolerate we respect you as servants of the nation. That veryrtunate destructive policies of this veryistration have tainted fine american servants of the people. And thats whats happened, you dont have toothpaste and a toothbrush and truckload of that material, nonprofits like the that i met atence the border station one and also help, begging to be of and youre telling the American People theres no one helping you, i think its a sad commentary. So i just want to make sure dismay that of my we will not be tolerating it. Mismanagement will not be tolerated and the accusationings against members will not be tolerated. If Vice President spence can go in and look after its cleaned then members span, who have oversight responsibility should be able to go in and look. Understood. Id appreciate it if youd report that back to the secretary. I will. Thank you. Frome say to the gentleman transportation security administration, im interested theou looking into treatment of crystal lynette chereef mohamed hoteff, around april 14, in the atlanta airport. Mr. Wagner. With this is horrific, the information regarding the use of and my earlier information was that you know that people of and women so i get it twice are unfortunately most. Ed the in the article, it says agents with the f. B. I. And i. C. E. Have the state drivers license databases recognition into a gold mine, scanning through hundreds of millions of american photos, without their knowledge or consent. Addition, it says that the state Department Motor vehicle databases into the bedrock of unprecedented surveillance and infrastructure. Thent to submit into record, mr. Chairman, an article by amazon that says amazon facial amazon facial confusedon mistakenly 28 congressmen with known criminals. I will not put the Congress Persons name into the record but i think most of us would like not to be known as known criminal. No objection. My question for both of you, the two gentlemen from t. S. A. And from c. B. P. , how are you doing this . With the protections of due process and notice, without the notice of the American People that the process even exists . Haveframework is there to the firewalls that youre not orning Congress People children into convicted criminals . Thosel, were not seeing same error rates that are that can be attributed to demographics in how were doing this. And how were doing this cannot be compared to previous studies this. There are different control factors in place. You know, theres different taking a person that is standing in front o of a camera we can take a clear picture and were comparing it base lineclear set of photos from their passports or visas where they were also front of aill in camera to capture a clear picture. Thats why we have such accurate rates. Previous studies didnt quite take the same control factors into place. This is not us taking an image person and randomly running it against a gallery set of indistinguishable, say, quality photographs and lowering down rate as to what constitutes a match to make it match someone that its not. Mean, you can do the same thing with fingerprints. If you only how do you secure that data . When the photo is taken at is encrypted,t transmitted to c. B. P. And to our cloud space. Then templatized, turned into a mathematical formula. No Biographical Data associated with that. Its matched up against our of templattized photos. When theres a match, a message back to the camera with just yes or no and that unique identifier. Tolet me move quickly mr. Gould. Let me thank p. S. A. For their for their. S. A. Frontline service of protecting america. To howe question as youre utilizing and protecting thisata and avoiding intrusion were using cbps tvs system. With respect to the accuracy in the matching, the one thing i would like to add is the technology is evolving so quickly and improving so quickly, we will continue to assess at every step for any additional pilots or when we consider employing this on a wider scale, well assess the best way to get quality image capture and be sure to employ the highest quality algorithms to ensure the highest match rate. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I yield pack. Back. Thank you very much. The chair recognizes mr. Green. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank the Ranking Member, thank the witnesses for appearing. My questions have to do with the surveillance. And my first question is, are all people who are traversing areas within an airport under some degree of suspicion . Who would like to answer, please . Well, i would say that when a persons traversing an airport, theyre not necessarily under suspicion. Airports utilize security cameras, closed Circuit Television for security reasons. With respect to tsa, the only reason we use cameras and capture images is solely for the purpose of identification. If i could just add please. What were doing is absolutely not a surveillance program. A picture of an individual is taken with their complete knowledge because theyre standing in front of a camera at a time and place where they have to present a physical id to move forward. Were just replacing the evaluation and scrutiny of the physical id with a computer algorithm. Should i assume that person who is enter the airport and who are not within the secured area will not be subject of this technology . Not by tsa, sir. It solely occurs at the bag drop or the checkpoint. Or time and place where you have to present an identification to identity to go through whatever process that is. In houston, the bag drop occurs outside of the building, before you enter the building, you drive up in your car. You have friends and neighbors with you perhaps and you go over to an agent and that person receives your bag and gives you a ticket. So would it occur in this area . The only place the biometric occurs at the bag drop is in atlanta. Time is of the essence. Were talking about expanding, are we not . Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Heres my concern. Ill go to the point and be as pithy as i can. One can only imagine what mr. J. Edgar hoover would have done with this technology. It was mr. Hoover who surveilled dr. King. They went so far as encouraging him to take his life. One can only imagine. Now, im not placing you under the eye of suspicion. But its my job to make sure this technology is not abused. I take my job seriously and i need to do my job. My concerns are do you alert people to advise them theyre being surveilled . I wouldnt characterize it as surveillance. The way the alert happens, when you approach the backdrop, they they ask if you would like to use biometric identification. If you thought this was a form of surveillance, would you alert the people . We dont do surveillance. You dont do it excuse me. If you thought, would you recommend, if we were of the opinion that this is surveillance, what do you think we should do . Should we indicate that person should be noticed that theyre being surveilled . We provide notice before the image is captured. Its purely with the consent of the traveler. What about consent of the person who happens to be with the traveler, just a friend . We solely captures the picture of the person. It solely captures that image. But we are considering expansion. My concern is suspicionless surveillance. Surveilling persons not under suspicion, perhaps by accident. Final question because time is running out. Will there be any means by which persons engaged in litigation can acquire access to this intelligence that you have preserved for some length of time, meaning the photographs . Would there be any means by which persons who are engaged in litigation can acquire it . Sir, the photographs we match against are in the cbtvs system. They are passport photographs. The images captured are not in the camera in any respect. We get a matchno match return, if that answers your question. It really does not. What im trying to get to is this. If persons are engaged in some form of litigation, one can only imagine what that might be, would they be able to acquire a photo to show a person is at a given location . On a given occasion. I understand, sir. That photo is not retained at all by tsa. It is retained. It is encrypted, transferred to cpt and a match rate is return. It is a u. S. Citizen, the photo is deleted after 12 hours, if its a Foreign National at the baggage drop the photo would also be deleted. What we would save for a Foreign National their departure to serve as a biometric exit of their departure. Thank you. I assure you i want us to secure our airports and points of entry but also concerned about suspicionless surveillance. Thank you. Thank you. Gentleman, mr. Guest, youre recognized for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Wagner and other guests, thank you for being here today. At least three of our witnesses, your departments fall under Homeland Security. Your website is the department of Homeland Security has a Vital Mission to secure the many manytinon from the threats we face and employees and security to Cyber Response to analysts to security inspectors. Our goal is clear, keeping america safe. In addition to agencies represented here today, Homeland Security includes cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency. The United States citizen and immigration services. The United States coast guard, United States immigration and customs enforcement. It includes fema as well as customs and Border Protection, secret service and fema. And tsa. I believe if these agencies were abolished our country would be substantially less safe. My question, beginning with you mr. Wagner, can you tell me what impact it would have on the people of america the security and agencies you serve if these agencies were abolished by congress . There would be no one to process people coming and going across the border, either u. S. Citizens or visitors, no one to process commercial cargo, to look for harmful goods or products coming in. There would be no one to collect taxes due on those duties. Cbp collects over 40 billion a treasury the u. S. Through duties, taxes and fees. Thered be no one to do that. Would you agree with me the different enforcement capacities of the department of Homeland Security polices, did it run a gamut of Different Things . We just talked about everything from the secret service, which provides protection for our dignitaries, tsa, air travel, coast guard, border enforcement, that those are very important functions of our government to make sure those agencies are funded. Would you agree with that . Yes. The origins go back to 1789 in the very beginning of the country. Mr. Gould, would you care to expound on that at all . I agree with what mr. Wagner said. If tsa were not there, the security of Transportation Systems, not solely air travel would be in some degree of jeopardy. Congressman as you indicated, we protect the president , Vice President and others and we also have criminal investigations. That is critical work were doing. Would each of you agree it would be irresponsible to talk about abolishing these agencies that perform such important tasks on behalf of the American People. Yes. Yes, sir. I would agree with that. No further questions. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you. I know i was late to the hearing today. Maybe it happened before i got here. I dont really remember hearing anyone mention that institutions should be abolished, just for the record. The gentleman from kansas city, mr. Cleaver. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Do you know james wilson . Do you know who he is . Probably one of the most important figures we dont know much about. He signed the declaration of independence and eventually became a member, one of the first six members of the supreme court. He said the Congress Shall form the grand inquisition of the executive branch. And i think that my childrens children, even their children will study this era and say, thats when it got started. Im concerned. I was in the executive branch municipality mayor of kansas city, and i know theres a you guys are busy, especially right now. A group of my colleagues and i found a letter and sent it to mr. Wagner almost 30 days ago. We havent gotten an answer. I didnt know if this was part of the plan to ignore congress or if youre just consumed. Im not stupid so i know you dont have nobody should expect you to write a personal letter to everybody who writes you a letter, even members of congress. If you dont have enough staff, we need to know. Because until it completely collapses we are still supposed to provide oversight, and im not trying to be hostile. Im not sure i can do a good job being hostile but i certainly can do a good job being frustrated. I appreciate your work and what you do. But i just i have to say that it is frustrating listening, seeing whats going on, refusal after refusal to allow congress to do its oversight. I hope that if im around by the when my voice is important to say im not going to support nonresponsiveness to congress, that i get that opportunity to say it, even if my daddy is in the white house. Now, having said some of the questions that my colleagues and i asked because we thought they were important, i will ask a couple of them. Time is running out. Is there any Statutory Authority that would allow the whole process of facial recognition, or is that just an internal move . Anybody. There are several pieces of Statutory Authority that authorize us to do and run this program. Theres several pieces of legislation from congress requiring a biometric based entry exit system from certain Foreign Nationals. Theres other statutes that authorize us to determine identity and citizenship including u. S. Citizens. There has to be a way for us to make that determination that a person is a u. S. Citizen and there are statutes that authorize us to consider evidence presented by that person, to make that determination. And then if its not to the examining officers satisfaction, regulations stipulate that person would be considered and inspected as an alien. 02 05 38 thank you. Mr. Gould. Sir, from a tsa perspective, aviation and transportation security act requires we screen all passengers and crew boarding an aircraft and identify them. The act mentions exploring the use of biometrics for that purpose. Thats the authority were operating under. Ok. It wasnt a trick question, i just wanted to know. No, i understand, sir. Last week, i participated in a demonstration in front of the treasury department, along with a number of other individuals, for the refusal to put a congressionally approved likeness of an africanamerican woman on the dollar. Thats another whole issue. I was at the demonstration. Should i and the other folk that got off that bus demonstrate expect thatrate, we were somehow surveilled and put in the category of subjects of interest . Since that is what apparently takes place on the grounds of the white house . I dont want to suggest im as important as the president or Patrick Mahomes or somebody, but should i expect that . Congressman, we do have cctv, Video Surveillance system around the white house. In and around the white house. There is a pia published alerting people that. In addition to the cameras we have many are overt on pennsylvania avenue and buildings adjacent to the white house there. What about other federal departments . I cant speak to what other federal departments are doing, congressman. Thank you. I like your tie. Thank you very much. I like yours, too. I yield back, mr. Chair. Thank you, sir. We recognize the gentle lady from florida, mrs. Demings. Thank you, sir and thank you to the witnesses today. Record, sayfor the that i respect the jobs that you have to do. I understand how tough they are. I think all of our jobs have gotten tougher in recent years. Im not sure why my colleague felt the need to talk about abolishing your agencies. I know no one on this committee on either side of the aisle has ever proposed such an idea. We are the committee on Homeland Security and we are here to make sure that you have the tools and resources to effectively do your jobs. But i know it gets a little tougher when sometimes you receive unjust and improper orders and do not have the resources to effectively do your job. Earlier, i heard one of my colleagues talk about the reason for Biometric Technologies involves speed and efficiency. I was assigned to the orlando International Airport as a Police Commander on the worst day in aviation history on 9 11. I know that the number one responsibility for you is the safety of the traveling public, and if you can ensure that and increase those odds and do it in an efficient and faster way, then thats icing on the cake. But what sets us apart, as we work to keep our nation safe, what sets us apart in this country, is that we can enforce the laws and write the laws but also protect an individuals civil rights. Thats what sets us apart, and i will not violating civil rights or the perception of violating civil rights is an issue we cannot ignore and we have to deal with. Look when we are able to deploy , new technology, thats a great and wonderful thing. I remember how exciting that was. But its our job on the committee and your job as the head of your agencies to make sure that we can do it all. I believe in this nation we can. I know we have talked about every different thing that we possibly could. We do thank you for your endurance. I just want to go back just a minute to testing for accuracy and any biases. Could you tell me who sets the minimum standards for this particular program, like, who decides what testing is done for accuracy or bias is conducted before deploying the technology . How do you get to that baseline and say this technology, weve done the testing, spoken to the stakeholders, rear r were ready for primetime now, understanding as you said earlier were going back and checking up. Who sets the original standards for deployment . Whats acceptable and unacceptable. Mr. Wagner, start with you. We would do that internally. We determine what constituents a match to nonmatch to a photo and do it with our science and technology department. We do it in consultation with nist and experts from the industry and vendors of this equipment. We have partnered with nist and starting this summer and fall, will be deeply analyzing our data to make sure were not seeing those error rates that are attributable to a certain demographic. Were not seeing it from our internal review of it and we want to bring experts in. Youre saying theres a perception there is an increased error rate among people of color or have we seen some data although not significant to show that . I think the studies that have shown there were these biases in it had different control factors than how were using this program. No one has really studied the way were implementing this, using those same control factors on how were doing it. And i would expect them to get the similar results were seeing. 02 12 40 can you from a tsa perspective, we work very closely with the dsa and science director as well. They inform our test plans how we collect data and biometric pilots and how theyre working, then they analyze that data on their behalf. We rely on them for semi independent and very accurate assessments of our capability. Like cbp, we rely on our friends at nist to set the standards and how the algorithms are actually working. Mr. Chairman, if i could just, when you decide we are ready for deployment, this technology, based on testing weve done, is ready for primetime, who makes that decision . Is it a collective effort between the different people that you work with or did you decide that individually, based on the feedback that you received . We would decide that for our agency because its our responsibility, the officers determination, you match your passport. I use a tool or algorithm to help me make that decision, at the end of the day, its still my judgment to do that. We would evaluate this to say, is this helpful to the officer making this determination this document corresponds to that person. Ok. One thing i would add to your original point, for us, the main reason to do this is increase better Identity Verification. And security enhancements associated with that, getting people through the checkpoint more quickly, like you said, is icing on the cake. Better security through using this technology is key to us. If the algorithms and match rates are not acceptable, if we are not enhancing security we , wont deploy it. Send it back to the tsa. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, gentle lady. Due to the time, i will dispense with my questions, but just like to say that obviously based on the questioning from the members of congress, you can get a feeling on where we are concerned about issues around privacy, around equality and making sure the American People and the traveling public is safe. And so we need to continue to evolve. We know that Homeland Security has been an evolving, living, breathing entity that continues to have to see and recognize issues, try to curtail them and rectify matters that are important to the American People. So, id just like to say, thank you for your service, tsa, cpb, your jobs, all of you actually, secret service, are doing a yeomans job for this nation and we appreciate your service and your time here today. So thank you. With that, the hearing is adjourned. [gavel] ended]hearing the house returns tuesday. The senate will vote on Energy Secretary nominee dan brouillette, currently the deputy secretary. If confirmed he would replace rick perry. The senate will continue work on judicial emanations. Follow live Senate Coverage on cspan two and the house on cspan. Congress has until december 20 budgett 12 bills for the to avoid a government shutdown. On apartheid and what i would say is very unfair personalized reporting of these fellows. Knownk that you ought to that opinion because youre going to be disappointed in me down the road if i did not tell you that. I am telling you frankly that i think your industry is rocking all of us. That is heavyhanded. You can imagine what it was like for the journalist the next day. I imagine he was not going to call on the journalist to the next day who offended him in the press conference. That they are wrecking the country, very disturbing, very disturbing. We are hearing that today, that the press is the enemy of the American People, according to president trump. The press is not the enemy and of the American People. The press is out there doing the work of the American People. ,nnouncer sunday night on q a the museums Vice President of content and exhibit develop meant talks about the tension between american president s and the press. Watch sees q a sunday night at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. Watch cspans q a. Announcer the white house did not release a weekly address from the president. A cog smit from illinois delivered the democratic address highlighting the United States role in Climate Change and his plans to represent the u. S. At the upcoming Climate Conference in madrid. Rep. Casten