Transcripts For CSPAN Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson Testimony On DHS Oversight 20150503

Every year the committee invites the Homeland Department of security to brief us on the affairs. To question the administrations policy as well as an opportunity for the department to take responsibility for its actions. It is a pleasure to have secretary johnson here. This is our first opportunity to question him publicly since his exact action on immigration in november. In another is an injunction we can get a good idea of what to expect from the programs based on the way the department has incremented the program. It appears that applications for deferred action are being rubberstamped. Evidenced by the fact that criminals and gang members are receiving special benefits despite supposed policies against it. Take the case of the recipient recipient, accused of murdering four people. Last week the department admitted that he had received dock a despite his gang membership which was known to adjudicators and despite being in department proceedings. Deportment proceedings. It is not clear who made the arrangement to approve the application but we need to get to the bottom of it. We know that the agency terminated 282 daca requests. This appears to be a bigger problem. This tragedy compels the question, what background checks are in place and are they adequate. Does this administration truly have a zerotolerance policy for granting immigration benefits to criminals and gang members as suggested by true the president. The committee will also want to hear from the secretary about the proposed expansion of daca. And why this ministration provided over 100,000 daca work extensions despite assurances the lawyers gave the federal court that it would not implement any aspect of the president s executive action until february 18, 2015. There are questions about how the department will fund the program and whether legal immigrants will suffer. The secretary must also answer as to why this administration is allowing people here illegally to be put on the path to citizenship which is clearly a constitutional responsibility of congress. This path to citizenship they are encouraging applicants to take advantage of. This loophole will set a dangerous precedent that will allow lawbreakers to obtain the benefits of permanent residence and citizenship after showing a total disregard for american law. One thing seems clear. There is little we desire by the administration who swear to uphold the law. The Administration Needs to answer for the release of criminal aliens in the community. In fiscal year 2013, they released from detention that he thousand convicted criminal aliens in removal or seedings after they had been ordered removed. In 2014 the released 30,000 convicted criminal aliens. They had convictions ranging from homicide, Sexual Assault kidnapping to aggravated assault and drunk driving. According to i. C. E. Statistics, 58 of the releases in 2014 were purely discretionary. The remainder were due to court mandates and the ability to retain travel documents. Why did the administration release 60 of the criminals and coat their custody and what are they going to do about it. I expect the secretary to address that today. I expect the secretary to also address the programs rollins with the investment program. Not only are there gaping holes there are serious management problems that were highlighted by the Inspector General. The ig laid out how preferential treatment was granted to those wellconnected. It was clear the secretary does not plan to hold the former director who sits and coat the number two poll accountable for his action. Instead it appears the violations of ethical conduct will go unpunished. All agents or adjudicators are being threatened or reprimanded if they do not follow the president ial policies. I would like to hear secretary johnsons thoughts on how combating an array of National Security issues that the country faces, the rise of isis prevents a significant presents a significant threat to the homeland. They are actively investigating an plot to commit a terror attack inside the United States, perhaps by targeting uniformed personnel in california. The transportation secretary and tsa alerted local Law Enforcement to be on the lookout and to increase security. Earlier this month there were a number of arrests for their involvement with isil. The justice departments also alleged that isis helped to train a man from ohio. The man had traveled to syria, was directed to return to the United States and commit terrorist attack here. Other individuals including a kansas man, two people in new york were allegedly inspired by isis propaganda. And numerous other americans have been arrested on the way to the airport as allegedly attempting to travel to isis. The president has down played the threat posed by isis, but reportedly has billions of dollars, control significant territory, and is accusing innocent men, women, and children across the middle east including americans. Its obviously a threat that requires a serious, sustained response to keep our homeland safe. Another threat i expect the secretary to address is ever increasing risk of cyberattacks whose reports are filled with shocking examples of the federal governments lack of preparedness against the threat. It was reported this past weekend that the president s unclassified email was hacked late 2014, defense secretary carter recently disclosed that earlier this year Russian Hackers accessed an unclassified pentagon computer network. Moreover, the Government Accountability Office Report found that d. H. S. Lacked a strategy for protecting government buildings and Access Control systems from intrusion by hackers. Cybersecurity cant be on the periphery of our National Security strategy any longer. It has to be at the center. There are many issues to discuss today and i thank the secretary for being here and im told that senator leahy cannot come and im willing to call on anybody on that side of the aisle. Go ahead, senator schumer. Senator schumer thank you for choosing me among all the choices. [laughter] i appreciate that very much. I thank you, mr. Chairman. Welcome, secretary johnson. Secretary, its always a pleasure to see you and speak with you about the Critical Issues confronting our nation. As a fellow new yorker im proud of the work you have done since being confirmed. I think most americans join me. You have done a great job and i think can i speak for our friends on both sides of the aisle, youre always available. Youre always candid. You ask the right questions. You give answers so you are a credit to your department and the country and your depth and breadth in counterterrorism and defense issues has served the department very well. And i want to tell you you have a great staff. They hear from me constantly. New yorks the center of terrorist target. New york, we have all of the sandy issues and defense issues, and your staff is fabulous. I thank you for that. We all know that d. H. S. Is tasked with an enormous range of responsibilities from guarding our borders and coastline to administering immigration, responding when disaster strikes, shielding the president , protect our airports, securing the homeland is a huge job. In my state from new york to buffalo, new york city to buffalo, and along the northern border, the departments work directly impacts our economy as well as our security. Whether its the peace bridge in buffalo, the j. F. K. International airport, Hurricane Sandy relief efforts, d. H. S. s work is vital to new yorkers and your dedicated Civil Servants who fill these responsibilities are essential. Unfortunately, we have an appropriations battle where we fought from the beginning of the year. We emphasize time and time again that 90 of d. H. S. Personnel would be declared essential in the event of a Department Wide shutdown. That meant they would have to work without pay unless congress got its act together. It befuddled me how so many people could want to hold up d. H. S. Funding when you have so many vital issues at stake unrelated to immigration, because it was hostage taking at its worse and im glad the department didnt shut down. Im relieved, too, that you were able to keep your hands on the helm during those difficult times. So i want to close by addressing two issues that my dear colleague, senator grassley, as addressed. First is isis and terrorism. There are new terrorist threats, believe me. As a new yorker, who lived through 9 11, knew people who died, i know that. I would say this to my colleagues, with the new threats and the changing threats, we ought to be taking our hat off to the secretary, his people and all the people in the c. I. A. , d. O. D. , n. S. A. Who do an amazing job. Its not an accident that praise god, we have not had a 9 11 like incident in america. In fact, just about every, with the exception of boston, which was unique, just about every major terrorist incident has been thwarted ahead of time as senator grassley talked about. Thats not an accident. That is not an accident. And i think that the men and women who work for you, c. I. A. D. O. D. , n. S. A. And all the other agencies, f. B. I. , deserve a tremendous amount of credit. They are wonderful. They are like our soldiers. They are wonderful Civil Servants i talked to so many of them who are truly dedicated to preventing, god forbid, another terrorist attack on our homeland. So i salute them. And certainly questions should be asked. Lets not forget to give a little praise where praise is due. Second, on immigration. I find it truly befuddling about my colleagues from the other side of the aisle, they cry out against a broken border. The bipartisan immigration bill passed, senator mccain and myself, the gang of eight, does more to tighten up the border than any proposal made by the other side. More than any. We talk about a broken system. But our colleagues are just happy to let the status quo go on. Employers are allowed to hire new illegals. Our bill stopped that with things taken from Jeff Sessions book, everify and things like that. So we get a lot of complaints that the president s moving forward on immigration, but we have no activity, no solutions from the other side of the aisle. Only complaints. Thats not governing. Now they are in the majority they have a responsibility to start governing on this issue instead of just complaining when the administration, because of the paralysis in congress on this issue, not caused by democrats, blocks us from moving forward. I would just say youll hear a lot of those complaints, but let us all bear in mind that this senate, bipartisan, came together on a solution that dealt with border, dealt with illegals crossing the border dealt with all of the issues we faced, had overwhelming support in the country, a majority of republicans supported the bill but because of a hard right few, we have been unable to pass a bill. That should be constantly borne in mind as you will hear the criticisms that you will hear today. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield the floor. The microphone. Not the floor. Senator grassley before i have you go ahead, stay seated, but id like to have you affirm that the testimony you are about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god. If secretary johnson i do, sir. Senator grassley thank you. Proceed. Secretary johnson , thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank the members of the committee for hearing me today. You have my prepared statement. Let me just say a few things in the five minutes that i have. In my view, counterterrorism needs to remain the cornerstone of the department of Homeland Securitys mission. Its the reason we were formed and the reason why i accepted service as the secretary for this department. In my view, the global terrorist threat has evolved to a new phase. It is more complex, it is more decentralized. In many respects it is harder to detect. There are more groups. And we, therefore, need a whole of government approach that includes very much so the department of Homeland Security. We have the phenomenon now of foreign fighters, who leave their home countries go to places like iraq and syria and return. We need to track foreign fighters. We need to track foreign fighters from countries for which we do not require a visa. My staff is developing as a follow on to what we did last summer greater security measures that can be taken with regard to travelers from those countries. We continue to focus on aviation security. I want to build preclearance capability on the front end of a flight to the United States, and we are working daily to do that. A lot of our efforts continue to center around Airport Security. We directed a number of things last week concerning Airport Security. We are engaging state and local Law Enforcement which in my view, given the nature of the homeland threat, which involves the threat of the lone wolf, the independent actor, its much more important that we work with city police departments, commissions, commissioners state Law Enforcement as well. We have our engagements in the community to counter violent extremism. I traveled to places like minneapolis, boston, lang large, chicago, columbus, ohio los angeles, chicago, columbus ohio, to engage Community Leaders counter violent extremism. Im pleased that the congress is active in evaluating and voting on cybersecurity legislation. Its one of my top priorities. Im happy to discuss that further. We are doing a lot to enhance Border Security. We have added resources stemming from last summer. We have prioritized those apprehended at the border. We have developed what i briefed to some of you the southern Border Campaign strategy. Which is a d. H. S. Wide combined effort at Border Security on the southern border. As i reported last week our numbers of apprehensions on the southern border midway through the fiscal year are down considerably from where they were this time last year and even the year before that. Apprehensions are an indication of total attempts to cross the border illegally, and they are down considerably, though i believe that there is more we can and should do. As all of you know, the president and i are interested in reforming our immigration system. We announced a number of executive actions that include deferred action for parents, which is the subject of the litigation in texas, but it includes a number of other things as well. Added Border Security. The southern Border Campaign strategy. Pay reform for Immigration Enforcement personnel. And so forth. We are ending the controversial secure Communities Program which led to a lot of resistance from state and local Law Enforcement, in an effort to get at the criminals who should be removed from our country. I am interested in enhancing Public Safety. Im interested at in getting at the criminals. So we are working with mayors, governors, county commissioners, sheriffs, chiefs, to introduce them to our new Priority Enforcement Program so they will work with us again in an effort to get at the criminals who should be removed from this country. Im sure we will have an opportunity to discuss the eb5 program. There are a number of security enhancements i would like to see for the eb5 program. I wrote a letter to the chairman and the ranking on that yesterday. We are doing a number of things to reform the way we manage the department, to make it a more effective and efficient place. Last but not least, i want to thank the members of the senate for helping us fill the vacancies in our department. Over the last 16 months we have had 12 Senate Confirmed president ial appointments. To the department including myself, our nominee for undersecretary for management, russ, was confirmed two weeks ago. Im very appreciative of the senate for that. And our nominee to be the new t. S. A. Administrator should be announced shortly. Perhaps even today. I thank the committee in advance for your time and attention. And i am interested in building a more effective and Efficient Department of Homeland Security and i appreciate the Supreme Court in doing that. Senator grassley im going to start with a statement on that i dont expect you to respond to but i want you to know how i feel about it. The Inspector General report on mr. Mayorkas and the eb5 program. The Inspector General clearly laid out the evidence against mayorkas. The report explains how he intervened on three political cases each had high profile connections. Despite the outrage, it seems to me you have no intention of doing anything and planning to stick by mr. Mayorkas even though he provided preferential treatment and violated the very rules he wrote about ethical conduct. Its no n wonder that there is a morale its no wonder that there is a morale problem. Employees see leadership getting away with violating the rules. Employees are given clear rules on preferential treatment and how do you adjudicate eb5. Yet when the director himself breaks those rules, there is no recourse and then what are employees to think about that . The only defense that i have seen so far on the preferential treatment is the agency gets pressure from members of congress and from both sides of the aisle. I think that thats comparing apples and oranges. It is no excuse. Members in congress are in a position to effect final decisions like a director. So secretary johnson, i think that it is causes a loss of credibility with many people that work within the department. Its a shame that there has been its been tolerated by you and others in the administration. Thats that statement. Ill go to my first question. I want to ask you about mr. Wranglehernandez, gang member that committed those murders i referred to. According to your april 17 response to me, mr. Wranglehernandezs application should have gone through several layers of review, including by u. S. Citizenship immigration services, background check unit, because of his gang affiliation, the departments headquarter should also have reviewed the case. Thus the adjudicator would only be able to approve such an application after a sign off from washington leadership. There was obviously a lapse, but its unclear who dropped the ball. First question, why was mr. Wranglehernandez approved for deferred action despite his known gang ties . In other words, which office is responsible for approving the daca applicant. And was it the adjudicator background check unit, or uscis headquarters . Microphone. Secretary johnson the answer to the why question is simply he should not have received daca. I believe on balance daca is a good program. I also believe that this case is a tragic case and this individual should not have received daca. I cannot state that in stronger terms. In reaction to that case, as i think you know, we have gone back and we have retrained the entire work force that deals with these cases to make sure that they identify trouble signs such as suspected membership in criminal gangs. If youre a known member of a criminal gang, you should not be receiving daca. You should be considered a priority for removal. We retrained the force and we have done our retrospective review of every daca case, every daca participant to see whether there are any similar to this case. We identified some, and we continue to evaluate this to make sure that we have reduced situations like this to zero in the daca program. Im interested in deporting criminals, sir. And thats one of the reasons why we have engaged in things Like Operation crosscheck, which is interior enforcement. This was an operation conducted several weeks ago where we rounded up some 2,000 priorities for removal. Im interested in getting at the criminals, sir. This case is a tragic case and he should not have received daca. Senator grassley do you know whether it was the adjudicator or the background check unit or the uscis headquarters that made the mistake on hernandez . Secretary johnson i believe that the error occurred, i dont have the facts, i believe the error occurred once he was referred to those who normally conduct the background checks. I dont know the name of that unit, but i believe the error occurred at that point. Senator grassley you just talked about a zero tolerance policy. And i guess it would appear to me that you dont have a zero tolerance policy. You just told me you do have. So i guess in the future, then we would expect things like this not to happen. Secretary johnson in the future i am interested in deporting criminals, including those who have committed crimes who are in the daca program. They are priorities for removal. Senator grassley on april 9 and all this question is is can i have a response by may 1 . On april 9 i wrote you about another individual i think its pronounced jose burquez in the country illegal, an alleged daca recipient, thats been charged with suspicion of Second Degree murder in tempe, arizona. I have yet to receive a response. Could you see i get a response to that . Secretary johnson i will undertake to provide you a proper response, sir. Senator grassley its clear to me that the department no longer seems to have a will to enforce immigration laws. I start with the statistics interior removals. Plummeting from 237,000 fiscal year 2009 to 102,000 fiscal year 2014. Saying that officers were reassigned from the interior to the border, i dont think i guess id say a red herring. It doesnt explain why interior removals had already declined by 44 between 2009 and fiscal 2013, well above the surge. What can the committee expect with regard to removals in the interior . Will they continue to decline, showing a continued disregard for enforcement of the law . Secretary johnson with the resources we have, sir, i am interested in focusing on criminals and recent illegal arrivals at the border. So we prioritized criminals, we prioritized those who came into this country after january 1 2014, and we prioritized those who are apprehended at the border. And so that is one of the reasons why we have a new Priority Enforcement Program where we want to work with Law Enforcement to get at those who are behind bars. Its one of the reasons why we have developed operation crosscheck. Greater interior enforcement against criminals. So im interested in going after the criminals. One of the reasons, i believe, that the removal numbers are down this year, and we are in the middle of the fiscal year, is because lower apprehensions. Theres lower intake. Lower apprehensions as i referred to in my opening remarks. There are fewer people attempting to cross the southern border, and fewer people apprehended. The other reason, frankly, is because of all of the resistance that we were receiving in state and local Law Enforcement to the secure Communities Program. Something like 239 jurisdictions where resisting, cooperating with us in our enforcement activities. So we developed a new program that i believe removes the political and legal controversy with the old program. And i am now personally engaging in conversations with mayors governors about the new program so that we can Work Together again at interior enforcement against criminals, those who represent Public Safety. I also believe, sir, that one of i also believe, sir, that one of the reasons the numbers are not as high as they used to be when it comes to removal is because of the changing character of the migrants. They are increasingly from noncontiguous countries, and the process of a removal of someone from a noncontiguous country is more timeconsuming. We see greater claims for the relief, for asylum, so it is not just as simple as sending somebody back across the border. Senator klobuchar. Senator klobuchar thank you so much, senator grassley, and thank you so much, secretary johnson. We have talked about this in the last week, and youre aware of where six men from the twin cities area were arrested for plotting to travel to the middle east to fight for isis. Our u. S. Attorney there, as you know, is doing a good job, as are the Law Enforcement officers, and one of the reasons we are able to make these cases is the relationships with the somali group, being able to bring these cases, and i think that gets forgotten sometimes. Part of this is the effort that you mentioned you are coming to minnesota. I was with you then, and the idea of fighting extremism and the Pilot Program that is going on in minnesota, and i would hope that this is a longterm priority of the department of Homeland Security, and one of the concerns that we have about the current state of the program is that the Grant Programs that support the extremism initiatives are not sufficiently focused on helping the programs in the pilot cities, and you mentioned the pilot cities, and i was wondering if we can get some more funding, to be so blunt, given that we have shown we are actually having these problems as was recognized. We did just get 100,000 from the justice department, but it is kind of hard to add to Everything Else what we are doing with the prosecution, and that is what were trying to do in the twin cities right now. Secretary johnson senator, i agree that our socalled engagements are fundamental to our counterterrorism efforts which is why i am spending a lot of my personal time doing it myself, so as you know, i came to minneapolis some months ago. I think it is important that we engage communities, Community Leaders, the Islamic Community in this country, and i believe that through the good works of people like u. S. Attorney andy luger, there has been a lot of progress made in Building Trust the between Community Leaders, family members, and Law Enforcement, even federal Law Enforcement, so when i go to these committees myself, i recognize it as an exercise in Building Trust, so they want to talk to me about profiling at the airports or some of their issues with how we enforce our immigration laws, and i want to listen. I want to learn from those experiences, but i always have a ask, as you know, which is everybody up us to guess Homeland Security. It is your public security, your Homeland Security, and help us with Public Safety. Senator klobuchar ok, when the Pilot Programs were set up, they came with some kind of funding that would support the kind of goals of the program, so i think that is very important if we want to show that this works. Second thing on u. S. Customs and Border Protection is, as you know, one of their key enforcement responsibilities is it forcing our trade law including the antidumping and countervailing, and in minnesota, we have had 1100 workers laid off. This is true to my heart. This is where my grandpa worked, where my dad grew up. My grandpa worked 1600 feet in the ground in a mind my whole life. We could do more based on talking to the white house talking to people with various departments, with u. S. Customs to be checking these shipments when they come on our sure if they are filled with illegal steel products, why cant we see it and call it as it is . I think that sends just as strong a message as changing statutes which makes it easier to bring these cases, but i would like to stop these things from getting on our land to begin with if they are not supposed to be there, so can you talk about the efforts going on with that now . Secretary johnson part of our mission is promoting lawful trade and travel and combating customs fraud, Illegal Dumping as you referred to it, and so our cbp personnel as well as Homeland Security investigations are spending a lot of time dealing with fraud in connection with our imports, exports, counterfeit items. I think hsi, in particular, does a pretty good job when it comes to tracking inappropriate, illegal shipments of things, and we are also focused, frankly, on promoting lawful trade and travel, and we have had Record Numbers of imports, inspections last year in that regard. But our efforts need to be focused on the items you referred to, as well. Senator klobuchar right, and we will be pursuing this as we move along in the next month or so, but to me, we would get more bang for the buck if we did a better job enforcing the law when the shipments come in, and it seems to me pretty easy to find a bunch of steel rebar when we are able to find drugs in small containers of things. If you have got a shipment of steel, there has got to be a way to find it and track it, and i think it would be a very smart way of enforcing these laws. The last one, the victims of Domestic Violence and trafficking, i know you are supportive of comprehensive Immigration Reform, and we worked on this as part of the bill that passed the senate, but on the first of the fiscal year, they feel their limit of 10,000 visas. The Vermont Service center is processing new visa applications filed in march 2014 that will not leave the waiting list until fiscal year 2018. What are the ramifications of running out of these victim visas is so early . Secretary johnson well, the ramifications, if demand exceeds supply, obviously, is that the people worthy of the visas do not get them, so i appreciate the efforts that were undertaken in the comprehensive senate bill to address this issue, and i hope we can readdress it at some time. Senator from a policy standpoint, you are supportive and i think it is important for my colleagues to know him as my experience as a prosecutor people would deliberately prey on people and then tell them to shut up after they rate to them, because they were going to report them, and that is why this visa program has been so successful, to get people to come forward who are victims who have documentation issues, so i am hoping that we will be able to resolve this and Going Forward, when we do pass some kind of conference of Immigration Reform bill, but people need to know the nationwide numbers and what is happening, so thank you, mr. Secretary, for your work. Senator thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you, mr. Secretary, for your leadership. Good to have you with us. I comprehensive immigration bill. It was not supported by the people, and over a 10year period, the number of green cards would increase lawfully than 10 Million People get permanent residents, and 30 Million People are getting permanent residents, and asked to the enforcement situation senator grassley offered a bill that said, well, we want to see the border secure for six months before the amnesty occurs, and that was rejected by the democratic majority in the senate. Senator cornyn had a bill to certify and improve the border situation using governors and others create that was rejected, so that is part of the reason we have such a difficult time. Secretary johnson, i believe senator grassley is correct that we see a lack of will in your department, and before you took the office, and from the president , frankly, on down. He mentioned interior enforcement. 40 of the people here unlawfully today came lawfully and refused to leave on time. We have no real ability to deal with that and have not taken steps required by law to deal with that. On the first day the president took office, he stopped work site inspections and basically threatened agents never again to do that. He canceled and effectively ended the 287 g program that welcomes officers to be trained by the federal officers to help them improve their situations and their ability to help. Sanctuary cities continue unabated. They do not even honor your detainers. Why we would not push back against that, utilizing financial incentive, i dont know. Operation streamline, worked in a number of border sectors has been cut back dramatically if not ended. True interior removals are much lower than they have been. The president s push for amnesty is continual discussion of it. His promise of amnesty, and he is actually carrying out executive amnesty after congress refused, has increased immigration unlawfully into the country. We have continued to allow Foreign Countries to refuse to accept back people that we are trying to deport. If they do not accept that, then they should not have other citizens admitted here. Morale in your department is the lowest in the government. Indeed, the even filed a lawsuit against your predecessor because the department was blocking them from carrying out plane law, and deportations are down 41 over three years, 25 over last year. 160,000 criminal aliens are on the streets, and now you have announced a program to fly people from Central American countries who apply for refugee and parole status in those countries to the United States of america. Courtesy of the u. S. Taxpayers. All of this has i believe a loud millions to conclude that if they will be successful. We have to change that fundamentally, and if you do that, i think we can make progress. In fact, i would note you have gotten a good bit more resources, although Border Patrol numbers are beginning to slip again, and fiscal year 2006 before the first big battle over amnesty occurred, there were 12,000 agents. Now they are 21,000 agents although they have declined the last three years, Border Patrol agents. I just cannot say, mr. Secretary, that you have led and the president , and your predecessors have led, it effectively, demonstrating a will to do what the American People want. Which is a lawful system of immigration that serves the national interest, one that we can be proud of. We are not there yet, and you need to do more, and you can do more with the resources we have, and if you need more resources and legal changes, please let us know, and i think congress will respond. Let me ask you this. Some fundamental questions. How many illegal aliens with final orders of removal are currently in the United States and have not been removed . Secretary johnson i do not have the numbers sitting here right now. I am sure it is a large number by your measure and mine, and it is an unacceptable number, but i know there is a huge backlog in our Immigration Enforcement efforts. We need to prioritize those, in my judgment, who are Public Safety threats in this tremendous backlog and those who have come to this country illegally recently, which is why in the new priorities, we have put an emphasis on those who arrived here after january 1 2014, so Going Forward senator and you need to prioritize. I understand that, that that cant in itself become an amnesty. A priority can say huge numbers of people are not going to be deported. What i hear you say, and i think others could hear you saying, if you do not commit a serious crime, you are ok. Youre not going to be deported. Let me ask you this. In fiscal year 2014, 479,000 individuals were apprehended at the southwest border. How many of those currently remain in the United States . Secretary johnson a lot have been removed. A lot were sent back on it expurgated bases last year, but as i said before, a lot of them are from noncontiguous countries, and they have asserted claims. Senator that is a problem. I think we need to pass a law to help make that easier. But how many of those are actually here, having been released on bail, have not been deported, and have gone someplace throughout the country . Do you not have the numbers . Secretary johnson let me say two things. One, when we had the spike last summer in the Rio Grande Valley, we expedited return flights to central america. We reduced the turn around town from Something Like 30 days to Something Like four days, and we searched resources, so we turned them around quicker, and we have kept the resources on the southern border. Senator my time remaining. I think you need to be able to tell us how many of those have actually not been deported but have successfully entered the country through that illegal process. Senator johnson senator, that is a knowable number, i just do not have it sitting here. I can provide it for you. Senator secretary johnson thank you for your leadership at the department of Homeland Security. You have a tough job. Unfortunately, congress has not made any easier for you. My friend says what america wants is a lawful system of immigration. I could not agree with him more. Lawful. Does that suggest that congress should pass a law . Wouldnt that be novel . We did pass a bill, enacted, and the house of representatives refused to call it up or anything since, so if we are going to have a lawful system of immigration, we should have a lawful congress. Stepping in to make it better, i do not know how anyone can argue we are a more secure homeland if we dont know who is living here. And what the president has said is that if you are a young person brought here through no fault of your own and have grown up in this country, we will give you a chance on a temporary, renewable basis to summit yourself to a criminal background check and to live in america without fear of deportation, temporary renewable process, criminal background check. It seems to me that is not only fair but makes our country more secure, and when congress failed to pass a conference of immigration law, the president said with the 10 million or 11 million undocumented in this country, we are better off to know where they are and where they live, that they have submitted themselves to a criminal background check, and that theyre going to pay their taxes when they are here. I think most of america would agree that makes us a more secure nation, but there are just people who loathe this notion, that the president would use his power as an executive, as other president s before him to make this a more secure nation. I have interested in this. There was the dream act 14 years ago, hearings at this committee, called before congress, before immigration past, but, sadly the house of representatives refused to even can did of the issue. A concern of reports that say that more than 11,000 dreamers who applied in a timely manner have lost their status because of delays in processing at your agency, through no fault of their own, so can you tell me what the status is on applications for renewal, mr. Secretary . Secretary johnson yes. As you know, we encourage those participants, if they are renewing, to do that months in advance of when their current authorization expires. You are correct that a number were not issued their Work Authorization in time. I think you are right that the number is about 11,000. Most were renewed timely and were able to get their Work Authorizations on time. I also know from the director of cics that we have set up a hotline, so to speak, for expedited treatment. If someone is facing the laps of their Work Authorization, and they have not gotten a new one in time, and if that process is utilized, we will do our best to try to turn that around in a timely manner, making sure that we appropriately assess the renewal application, but i do know there is an expedited route to getting Work Authorization before it lapses, it and take advantage of it. Senator i thank you for that. As you might imagine, there are numbers trying to encourage the president to create the daca program, and there are thousands who have applied on a temporary, renewable basis and have similar themselves to criminal background checks, and i have met many of them, getting on with their lives and on a path to making a great contribution to this country. It would certainly be helpful with our broken immigration system if congress stepped up its responsibility also and that we did something to enact the law which would make us a more secure nation. When it comes to our border, we not only have invested more resources in protecting the border of the united is with mexico than ever in our history, it is one of the largest federal Law Enforcement agencies that we have in this country, and the comprehensive Immigration Reform, which many on the other side voted against, would have dramatically increased that technology and manpower to protect the border. In your Opening Statement, you talked about a decline in apprehensions at the border. Could you repeat that for the record and suggest what that says about what we are doing at our border . Secretary johnson i think we have invested well, i believe our investment in Border Security over the last 10 to 15 years is showing results. We have more people, more technology on the southern border in particular now than in the history of this nation, and i think that issuing results. In the year 2000, there were 1. 6 million apprehensions on the southern border. That number in recent years has ranged somewhere between 350,000 to, as senator sessions noticed, 479,000 last year. That increase last year was due almost the majority to the spike in the Rio Grande Valley sector. I expect that the number will be down considerably from 479,000 but longerterm, our investment in Border Security is showing good results. I believe that the downturn in the numbers is due to that. I believe it is due to the fact that we have got the word out in america, that there are no coyotes, which were spinning last summer. You can see our Public Awareness campaigns. I believe our Law Enforcement efforts against the smugglers are showing good results, and all of this is in the face of an improving economy in this country. Normally, migration is tied to the economy, and we have an improving economy, so the pull factors are there, but we are seeing a marked decrease in apprehension this fiscal year, and i was looking at the air pril numbers this morning, and the april numbers are pretty much consistent with the march numbers. Senator durbin i only have a few minutes. I want to say that when we are judged by history, the world will point to the military and humanitarian crisis in syria and ask every civilized nation in the world, what did you do, and some countries have made extraordinary sacrifices. Turkey, lebanon, and jordan have accepted huge amounts of refugees. The United States in the last years has accepted 700 from syria. We can do more. We should do more, and i hope there is a way to find ways to safely, safely bring in those refugees who are no threat to the United States but represent a true he military in challenge to our country. Senator thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, thank you for joining us today. Thank you for your service. I would like to address two different topics. I want to start with an issue you raised, which is isis and foreign fighters. To the best of dhss knowledge, about how Many Americans have traveled abroad to join up with isis . Secretary johnson senator, the way we calculate that is there are approximately, and this is the last time i looked, it could be a little higher now, 180 individuals who have left to join the conflict in syria and iraq or attempted to leave. That number, as i said, is probably a little higher by now, but that is the number we have said publicly, and i think that is a fairly accurate number. There is an unknown factor clearly, sir. Senator so in an order of magnitude, 180 is a good approximation. Secretary johnson that is about right. Senator cruz there is an act where an american who travels abroad and joins isis and joins up with a Foreign Terrorist Organization has, in so doing, constructively forfeited his or her american citizenship. There is legislation on the books that provides for other grounds of forfeiting your citizenship, but right now joining a Foreign Terrorist Organization and is not one of them. In your judgment, would it be beneficial to have additional tools to prevent u. S. Citizens from using american passports to come back to this country and potentially wage jihad and attempt to murder american citizens here at home . Secretary johnson senator, i dont know that stripping somebody of their american citizenship is the most effective tool. I do believe that we need to enhance our efforts to interdict those who are attempting to leave the country and prosecute them for Material Support or deny them boarding or deny them boarding on the return flight or in some way investigate and apprehend them before they can get on the flight once they return, and once they have spent a lot of time with our counterterrorism partners overseas and within the department of Homeland Security, better efforts to detect those who are engaging in travel to iraq and syria, including broken travel. We spent a lot of time in dhs and with Law Enforcement doing exactly that. Senator cruz i guess the track record of apprehending people coming back is not what it should be. If i recall correctly, the elder tsarnaev brother who carried out the boston bombing, when he came back to america, his return and his travel was not flat, although it was supposed to be. Is that correct . Secretary johnson very clearly, there were some Lessons Learned from that case, and we have done, i believe, a better job at connecting the dots in reaction to that case. Senator cruz well, lets shift to another topic, which is the enforcement at the border. I am very concerned by the lack of enforcement at the border the lack of enforcement of our immigration laws. I am very concerned on multiple levels. Number one, from a perspective as National Security and dangerous, Illegal Immigrants being able to come into this country, and number two, from the perspective of this administration, not enforcing the law. Now, last week, the Washington Times ran an article, the headline of which was illegal immigrant deportations plummet as amnesty hampers removal efforts, and it described that this year, deportations have fallen by another 25 this year, and, indeed, over all, deportations of those who are here illegally are down 41 from three years ago. And, indeed, the article goes on to say that the drop began almost exactly at the beginning of president obamas illegal amnesty. Mr. Secretary, how do you explain a 41 drop in removals of aliens here illegally . Secretary johnson a couple things, sir. One, the apprehensions are, in fact, lower on the southern border, so the intake is lower this particular fiscal year, and two, secure communities. Secure communities was a Controversial Program that led to the enactment of restrictions, prohibitions on cooperating with our Immigration Enforcement personnel in a number of different state and local municipalities and so forth. Secure communities was becoming so controversial that mayors and governors were passing laws and ordinances that prevent it cooperate with us in our enforcement efforts, and so we have ended the secure committees program, as i mentioned, and put into place a new program that i believe will promote enforcement so that we can get at the criminals, but secure communities, in my judgment, is one of the reasons why we are seeing lower numbers. Senator cruz it would allow the focus of resources on violent criminals. It strikes me there is a problem with that argument the department is not focusing on violent criminals. Indeed, the number of criminal aliens deported from the interior has declined 23 since last year. When it comes to violent criminals, the department is not stepping up its efforts and if you look to 2013, in 2013, the Department Released 36,000 criminal aliens with serious convictions including homicide. 43 for negligent manslaughter. 14 involuntary manslaughter. One conviction for something classified as willful, kill public official gun and that individual was released. In addition to that 15,635 criminal aliens who had been convicted of drunk driving that were released back into the population. 2,691 who had convictions for assault that were released into the population. Why is the department releasing so many criminal aliens . And secondly, can you tell this committee in the 6 1 2 years of the obama administrations tenure just how many criminal aliens had been released, how many murderers, how many rapists, how many people convicted of violent assault had been released into the population . Secretary johnson yes. As you pointed out, senator, in fiscal year 2013 there were about 36,000 individuals convicted of a crime who once in our immigration system were bonded out. That number declined to about 30,000 in fiscal year 2014 but in my judgment that number is still too high. So in reaction to this situation, i directed that we do a number of things differently including elevating the approval for a circumstance where somebody who had been convicted of a crime is released from immigration detention. It is the case that some of these cases are due to releases by Immigration Judges or by the Supreme Court jurisprudence in zavadas vs. Davis. But i do think we could do a better job which is why i directed we elevate the approval for that and we no longer , release people for lack of space. That was an issue in fy 13 especially when we were dealing with sequestration. We had a situation where we released a lot of people because we were concerned we didnt have the space. And i directed that that should not be an excuse for releasing somebody. We should find the space. And so this is a problem i recognize exists, and im interested in promoting Public Safety and thats why i directed these changes, sir. Senator cruz thank you, mr. Secretary. Ill follow up with the written request for the information i asked for. Thank you. Senator franken thank you mr. Chairman, before i begin i think it is important to acknowledge the events taking place in baltimore right now. My heart goes out to freddie to the family of freddie gray and the city of baltimore. I understand the events surrounding the death of mr. Gray are subject to an independent investigation and i believe that a full and thorough accounting of the facts is a necessary first step in helping to restore trust between Police Officers and the community. But as we await for the result of that investigation and as we Work Together to secure justice for mr. Gray and his family, i join mr. Grays family in urging all the protestors or those that do protest do so peacefully. Secretary johnson, cooperation between Law Enforcement officers and the communities they serve remains the focus of National Attention and it seems that everyone agrees that racial and ethnic profiling undermines trust in the authorities, that it causes resentment among targeted groups. I was pleased to see former attorney rather, attorney holder former attorney general holder i got to start saying that now revisit d. O. J. s policies on profiling and extend the ban on profiling to cover gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity. I think this is a step in the right direction but these new guidelines do not apply to the t. S. A. Or customs and Border Protection which are d. H. S. Agencies. These agencies are still permitted to use profiling when screening Airline Passengers and individuals crossing borders. I understand that it is challenging to ensure Public Safety while simultaneously Building Trust with communities who have experienced profiling. Minnesota, as you know, is a large has a Large Community of somali minnesotans, somali americans, for example, and i want to thank you for traveling to minneapolis last year and meeting with members of the Cedar Riverside community to hear their concerns. But i continue to hear from members of the community to report they experience profiling who are singled out for additional screening and questioning at the same minneapolisst. Paul airport so routinely that they prefer to drive to chicago, over 400 miles away, rather than fly out their hometown. Instead of fostering respect and cooperation, i worry that our current practices are nurturing fear and resentment. Id like to know what steps, in your view, d. H. S. Can take to ensure we do a better job of protecting our security while simultaneously respecting the dignities of those that are new to our communities. Secretary johnson thank you for that question, senator. First of all, we looked pretty hard at whether we could sign on to the d. O. J. Nonprofiling policy last year or earlier this year. We found that given our different missions, that policy, which was intended for Law Enforcement, didnt quite fit. As we have as you pointed out, aviation security, Border Security. Senator franken i understand. Secretary Johnson Administration of our immigration laws. There is the general rule we should not engage in racial profiling. That is still the case, that was the case before, thats the case now. Nationality, given the nature of our mission, is taken into account, for example. I have heard, just as you have heard from the Somali Community in minneapolis that because of the profiling that they perceive occurs at the minneapolis airport they prefer to go to chicago. I have heard the exact same thing. I asked t. S. A. To undertake an evaluation and study of that. They have come back to those in the community to address the concerns. I think it frankly continues to be a work in progress but t. S. A. Knows my view that we should not profile at airports. And we should not make it the case that somebody prefer to go to chicago versus minneapolis, their own airport, and weve had, i think, some productive conversations with the community along these lines, but i think it also probably continues to be a work in progress and its something thats on my radar personally. Senator franken thank you for that response. I understand that last night a court issued a decision that needs to be evaluated regarding families in immigration detention facilities, but id like to talk about that issue nonetheless. In the past few years, the department of Homeland Security has significantly increased its use of Family Detention Centers at an annual cost of nearly 2 billion. Family Detention Centers often separate parents from their children and their recent expansions led to complaints of poor conditions, Inadequate Services and physical dangers for those detained. Such allegations would suggest that Family Detention Centers pose longterm developmental challenges for immigrant children and families. What is your view of the current family detention system . Should the use of family detention facilities be expanded or reduced in the future . Secretary johnson before we encountered the situation we had in the Rio Grande Valley last summer, we had among the 34,000 beds for immigration detention only 95 for family units, for members of families. And so in the face of what we were dealing with last summer, which included a lot of families, we expanded our detention space beyond 95 and we opened several new facilities which i believe are important to maintain. I personally visited several of them to ensure myself that the conditions of confinement are appropriate. I know that the very purpose of family unit space is to keep Families Together so that youre not sending the parent in one direction and the child the other. The very purpose of it is to keep the Families Together, as you point out. There is a case or two involving family detention, one in california, one in washington, d. C. , and as recently as yesterday and friday i have and i continue to evaluate whether our current policy is the appropriate one for family units. Im hearing a fair amount about issues with family detention. And so im currently evaluating whether the current policy is the best one. Im pleased that the numbers of family units crossing our border illegally is down considerably from last year, and i want to continue to evaluate it and make sure were getting it right. Because i hear the issues being raised by a number of people. Senator franken thank you. And ill ask further questions for the record. Ill submit them, rather. Senator cornyn good morning secretary johnson. The chairman said you have a very difficult job, and i think thats an understatement, but notwithstanding the difficulties of the job either that you have or that we have, all of us must be held accountable for the way we discharge our responsibilities. Thats what this hearing is about. But its particularly difficult to be effective when the administration continues to sabotage its own efforts by embracing unconstitutional policies like the president s executive action. 22 times the president of the United States said he didnt have the authority to do what he did, and now we have, of course, as you know, an injunction preliminary injunction in place issued by Federal District judge in brownsville. Obviously the stay is on appeal to the fifth circuit, but id like to just refresh your memory and ours, what the court said when it issued the preliminary injunction. So this court finds that dapa, thats the name given to the program, the executive action the court finds that dapa does not simply constitute inadequate enforcement. It is an announced program of nonenforced laws that nonenforcement of the laws that contradicts congress statutory goals. The does not dapa does not adopt mere inadequacy. It is complete abdication. The department of Homeland Security does have discretion in the manner in which it chooses to fulfill the expressed will of congress. It cannot, however, enact a program whereby it not only ignores the dictates of congress, but actively acts to thwart them. The court went on further and said the department of Homeland Security secretary is not just rewriting the laws. Hes creating them from scratch. Finally, judge hannon said the department of Homeland Security does not seek compliance with federal law in any form, but instead establishes a pathway for noncompliance and completely abandons entire sections of this countrys immigration law. Closed quote. I know you disagree with judge hannon and the courts will finally decide the propriety of his judgment and of course this is going to take some time. I would imagine. Given the fact that hes only issued a preliminary injunction and the trial on the merits still remains and this could go back and forth to the United States Supreme Court a couple of times before its over with. But to me beyond the unconstitutional act by the administration in issuing this executive action, i agree with judge hannons characterization that wont surprise you. I think perhaps the larger tragedy is that the president has poisoned the well in congress and destroyed any trust whatsoever between the executive branch and the congress when it comes to fixing our broken immigration system. And i know our friends who are on the gang of eight, senator schumer, senator durbin said they have an answer. If the house will swallow whole hog the gang of eight bill, all the problems would go away. Well, the constitution gives the House Authority to agree or not agree. And one thing i think we should have learned from this whole exercise is a comprehensive Immigration Reform does not work. That is what i have learned in the last 10 years working to try to fix our broken immigration system. So we need to do what we can and where we can and i still have not given up hope that we can do that. But i will say the president s executive action poisoned the well and made the congressional branch, the legislative branch so distrustful of the president s actions that its going to be very, very hard. Much harder than if the president had not undertaken this action. So id like to ask you, do you regret the actions that you and the administration have taken that have gotten us to this point . Secretary johnson no, i do not, senator. I believe that the undocumented population in this country which at least half of which has been here more than 10 years has to be reckoned with. We know theyre here and they are not priorities for removal. I would note in two places judge hannons opinion refers to the fact that secretary has he acknowledges has the authority and the discretion to engage in prosecutorial discretion. Prioritize who we should remove and who we should not. There are millions of people in this country who are not priorities for removal. There are dozens of states that allow them to have drivers licenses. Theres one state that says an undocumented immigrant has a right to practice law. So in my judgment we have to deal with this population. You refer to the fact that the president supposedly poisoned the well. We took the action we took after waiting literally for years for congress to act so senator cornyn so do you think it is an excuse for the president to act unconstitutionally because congress does not act . Secretary johnson i have an opinion from the office of Legal Council that we have the legal discretion to do what we did. Unfortunately judge hannon disagrees but the case is on appeal now. Senator cornyn and my guess is its going to take literally long past the time that president Obama Leaves Office before this matter is finally resolved by the courts. Which means that not only has the president poisoned the well for any meaningful reform of our broken immigration laws during the duration of his presidency but it will also endure beyond his presidency. Id like to ask you in the short time remaining, you have said on numerous occasions we have good results in terms of the number of people being detained at the border. Last year 479,000. Dont you think it is a little premature to be declaring victory when it comes to Border Security . Let me asked you as well, let me ask you as well ive always found it strange that we count success when the number of people actually detained goes down. Because it strikes me that its an equal inference that you may be doing a better job. The truth is you may not be doing as good of job and fewer people are being detained. Yet you believe that that represents a victory and the problems are taken care of. Secretary johnson senator, im very definitely not declaring victory when it comes to Border Security. Virtually every statement i issued like the one last week, i say here are the numbers but were not declaring mission accomplished. And i refer what more we can do to strengthen Border Security. And that is reflected in our f. Y. 2016 budget submission. Senator cornyn mr. Chairman, if i could just close on this. We didnt have the time yet. 57 of the children who were came across in the wave of the humanitarian crisis last year were issued orders of removal in absentia which means they did not show up for their Court Hearings which to me means they basically successfully navigated our broken immigration system and theyre going to stay here, and thats a problem. We still havent fixed and we still need to address. Thank you. Senator blumenthal thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for having this hearing. Thank you for your service to our nation, mr. Secretary. I am very pleased to learn that the department is reevaluating its family detention policy. As you well know, the judges opinion in my view, at least requires it. And also many have objected to family detention policies, including myself. So id like to work with you in devising and implementing better policies. I think that these policies cannot only provide for more humane and productive treatment of young people when they come here, but also continue to have the effect of perhaps providing for fewer people actually crossing the borders. And thats been the result, i think, of some of the conscious decisionmaking and policymaking that policy the department has adopted. So id like to ask you what specific measures and steps you contemplate in revising the family detention policies . Secretary johnson well, the family detention issue is under review in litigation in washington, d. C. There was an injunction issued there with respect to a class of people who had made credible fear claims and the issue in the case is whether somebody can be held as a deterrent to mass migration. And so were looking at that case. We have a pending motion for reconsideration in the case, but im continually evaluating whether such a policy is necessary in the current climate. Theres another case in california right now where the judge has given us 30 days to try to find an appropriate settlement and so im working with the lawyers beginning this week on responding to the judges request. But overall i think its important for people to know that im sensitive to family detention. Ive personally visited artesia, dilly to satisfy myself that what were doing is the appropriate course. I believe that our expanded detention capability in the face of last years situation was the right thing to do and i believe that it had an influence on our overall efforts. And so i think that overall we need to maintain this capability, but i want to i want to continually evaluate and reevaluate the policy. Because i hear the concerns raised by you and others, sir. Senator blumenthal maintaining a capability is expensive, isnt it . Secretary johnson yes. Senator blumenthal and detaining whole families can be a lot less humane and productive than adopting other policies, am i right . Secretary johnson detaining whole families is indeed expensive. It is a notable item in our f. Y. 2016 budget request, and it can be a challenge. And so i believe that the capability is important to our overall Border Security efforts, but i want to make sure we have the policy right. Senator blumenthal let me ask you about access to legal services. Is that the policy of the department is it the policy of the department to permit and enable lawyers to visit those facilities where folks are detained . Secretary johnson yes. Senator blumenthal in terms of providing counsel where private attorneys cant do so, has the department provided that kind of resource . Secretary johnson we do not. In immigration cases of this nature provide counsel if one cannot be provided. We do not guarantee counsel. We do promote access to counsel, and we do a number of things to put people in touch with lawyers locally or those who are interested in representing individuals. And i know we have made improvements in those efforts since we began opening our family detention capability last summer. Senator blumenthal i know it may not be the sole responsibility of the department of Homeland Security, but the processing of visas in Central American countries, the screening of those people who want to come here has begun. Is there anything that can be done to expedite that effort because i think it represents a real hope for stopping the flow of unaccompanied minors and others who are sent to this country and have to be sent back . Secretary johnson a piece of advice i received last summer from the u. S. Conference of catholic bishops is incountry screening. In other words, you cant lock the door and not provide a legal safe pathway at the same time. And so thats what weve done in the three Central American countries. Im disappointed that not more people are utilizing this, and i believe that we need to promote the new program better. I think this is a joint effort by us in this state department and the governments in the Central American countries. But ive been disappointed that not more parents in the u. S. Are utilizing this program to petition to get their kids here. Senator blumenthal and i would agree very wholeheartedly and i was surprised at a hearing that was held here just last thursday, literally, to learn that only a small number of parents so far are taking advantage of this program. In fact, the rules available to them, they are the same rules that would apply if their children were here and i hope the department will make efforts and the state department obviously has a role to spread awareness about this program. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. My time has expired. I thank you, mr. Secretary, for your service and for the service of the many men and women who serve in the department of Homeland Security and the very diverse and difficult task that you have. Thank you. Senator tillis thank you, mr. Chair. Welcome, secretary johnson. Thank you for being here and for your service. I know that senator grassley chair grassley asked questions. So ill go back to the record to see some of the specifics. In your answer you did mention there had been some retraining revising the protocol, reviewing the protocol, revising and retraining so we can avoid future instances of this what on the surface looks like negligent decisionmaking. But the question i had for you i have two questions. One, i believe that mr. Rangelhernandezs deferred status has been decided a month rescinded a month or so ago. My question is, how many instances have been identified in the audit or review that were similar to mr. Hernandezs and what is the current status of that review and the potential that others deferred status will also be rescinded and their disposition after it . Secretary johnson i know there have been a handful of others who have been identified in the same category. I do not know the status of whether they have been rescinded or not, but we can get that information to you, sir. Senator tillis yeah. Id like to get that and if possible on a to the extent that information is available, geographically what were talking about if i have any other instances in North Carolina id like to know about it but im sure the other members would be interested as well in each of their states. I would like that in particularly as we go through this process for those that were granted deferred status. If there is a decision either because theyve come up in the audit to continue to allow them to have the deferred status or that its been rescinded, id like to get the information on both of those. Secretary johnson thank you. Well look at that. Is there any reason why you cant say as i said in my Opening Statement that theres been 282 rescinded . Secretary johnson thank you for refreshing my recollection. I believe that that is the correct number, yes. Senator grassley i believe thats the correct number. Secretary johnson i apologize. Senator tillis does that mean its an exhaustive list and in the opinion of the department theres no longer any need for further review, or are there other cases that are being reviewed that may add to that 280 or so rescinded . Are there more or have we gone back and see 280 or had characteristics similar to mr. Hernandezs that warranted a rescinding their deferred status . Is that done, are we done or are there more to look at . Secretary johnson i believe that the review has been completed. I could be wrong about that but i believe the review has been completed. Senator tillis that would lead to my next question before i get on to the h2b, these couple of questions i have. I asked the same question of representatives that came to us from the uscis. Last week. I think going back and confirming these 280 are it, im looking to im going to ask the same question to you. Can you confidently say that you will not make the same errors that were made with hernandez and that there are not any that should be subject to rescinding, that the cue has been drained the mistake that was made that allowed these folks to get deferred action will not be repeated . Secretary johnson im confident that we have improved our process so that if somebody with suspected criminal gang membership is identified in the process its going to be flagged and given a lot of attention as a result of this case. Senator tillis but it may or may not, in affiliation with gang membership would not constitute for rescinding their status . Secretary johnson no net membership known membership in a gang should constitute a disqualifier. Senator tillis the h2b moving on to the h2b program. Mr. Secretary, i think that the perez vs. Perez case caused a little bit of a problem, kind of a twoweek blip but for some reason adversely affected my state, some others particularly in the seafood industry. I guess the question i have for you really relates to just want to go on the record. I have some things that are North Carolina specific so i dont necessarily want to tie up the Committee Time with a couple of things. One would be, are there potentially unused visas that could potentially solve some of the problem, the negative impact thats occurred in North Carolina . And if the department has any ideas on anything else that we may be able to do to relieve them, it looks like its largely just the result of that twoweek period where visa applications were not submitted, if youre prepared to speak on it id appreciate to be enlightened. Secretary johnson yes, senator. I have received a lot of inquiries from congress on h2b visas from both sides of the aisle. After the courts injunction, we issued on a temporary basis h2b visas. The court and the litigants agreed to a stay of injunction so we can do that. My understanding is that when we did that we quickly exhausted the number, but Going Forward we just issued a new rule jointly by d. H. S. And the department of labor that i believe addresses this issue and addresses the lawsuit so we can continue Going Forward to issue h2b visas. Senator tillis mr. Secretary, that would apply going into next year. Its my understanding we already hit the cap on h2b visas for this year. Are there any things we can do to provide temporary relief until we move into next year. Some have talked about the potential for temporarily increasing the cap or Something Else that may still for some of these seasonal industry still provide some relief, has there been any discussion or anything youd be open to . Secretary johnson well i would be open to a discussion what we can do temporarily to deal with this issue. Im interested in having a more comprehensive discussion with congress about lifting a number of caps on green cards and addressing in a more comprehensive way a number of things in which i think our immigration system needs to be fixed through legislation. And this could very well be one of them. I think Going Forward we have addressed the h2b problem in a pretty aggressive, vigorous way. Senator tillis thank you. Id like to state for the record were going to be calling you all again. Im going to be meeting with some of the Seafood Processors this week. Theyll be coming up from North Carolina. I think its the industry thats primarily been hit by the h2b program. And in North Carolina anyway. Id like to speak with yall about anything we can do to provide temporary relief and hopefully avoid it going in the outyears for the program. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chair. Senator schumer thank you, mr. Chairman, thank you secretary. Mr. Secretary, i was shocked and appalled by the gun smuggling ring that operated out of atlanta, georgia, in which criminals abused loopholes to bring loaded weapons right on to airplanes. I know you shared my outrage when it was revealed by our d. A. In brooklyn. Ken thompson. I applaud you for quickly acting following the incident and ordering a top to bottom review. Can you provide an update in the security of our airports regarding t. S. A. Activities, what changes can we expect, how long will it take . Question one. I have a bunch of questions. Im trying to move through these quickly. How will you ensure that the administrators are held accountable for the security at the nations airports . Secretary johnson good question. Senator, you said you appreciated my candor at these hearings. So i have made a public fact of the Record Number of firearms seized by t. S. A. Last year so at screening points in carryon luggage. You can imagine my reaction when i found out that somebody is bringing loaded weapons in the overhead compartments of commercial airplanes. So i was, to use your words, shocked and appalled, upset and i directed our t. S. A. To work with the Airline Industry and to work with Airport Security authorities to tighten up our system. Our Advisory Committee came back with some recommendations. I have endorsed them. They include random continuous unpredictable screening of airline and Airport Security at the airport at the sterile checkpoints. If an airline or airport employee is going to fly, they have to go through the t. S. A. Checkpoint. Continuous back criminal history background checks, and reducing the number of access points. There were a number of recommendations made that i have embraced. Those are in my judgment the big four. I believe that our nominee for t. S. A. Administrator is an excellent choice and i believe that he will be very focused on aviation Airport Security. I also believe his name will be announced sometime this afternoon. Senator schumer dont let us in on the secret. Ok. Just one question with regard to that quick answer. Wouldnt it make sense that wherever its feasible in some airports, it may not be, that whenever possible these employees go through a screening the way the pilots do and the flight attendants do . Secretary johnson you know, i asked myself that question and i think that a onesizefitsall approach to every airport in this country is not senator schumer i said wherever feasible. Secretary Johnson Atlanta is not marthas vineyard. I think that appropriate balanced way to go is random unpredictable, continuous screening of employees when they show up. The way it works in atlanta is theres a guard house at the parking lot and you show an i. D. And then you drive on through. And i think that some form of continuous random screening of those people is the appropriate way to go. Senator schumer i have two questions on the northern border. One is the peace bridge, an issue we talked about regularly. As you know is my urging customs and Border Protection instituted Pilot Projects. Your predecessor was very active in making that happen. As were you. We were thrilled to hear the results last week. The Pilot Project passed the test with flying colors. The inspection on the canadian side will reduce wait by as much as 70 . 75 . Will you commit to recommending this report to establish permanent inspection at the peace bridge . Thats one question. On the other end of our northern border of five border by plattsburgh, today im asking customs and Border Patrol to start a frenchspeaking program for officers at the quebec border. They process millions of french speaking borders. We love having them here. Because were hampered in french speaking it slows the border down and we get fewer visitors. Will you commit to carefully considering my request for a French Language Program for northern Border Agents similar to the Spanish Program we have on the southern border that jeff flake is familiar with. Secretary johnson last question first, im not aware of the plattsburgh situation and ill look into that, senator. Im sure well have a followup discussion on it. I fully support the commissioners efforts to restore and maintain preinspection on the canadian side of the peace bridge. As you know, infrastructure, building the right infrastructure for this is probably the Biggest Issue and i understand we have a resolution with that issue. Senator schumer theyre willing to put in the 44 million to do it. Secretary johnson money talks yes. And i also believe that privileges and immunities, as you and i have discussed, is crucial. That is something that is important for the agreement to be signed for preclearance with the canadians. Senator schumer the canadians are doing all right given preclearance. Secretary johnson what you discussed and agreed to i fully support, sir. Senator schumer well, merci beaucoup. Senator johnson tres bien. Senator schumer i actually had another question. Senator grassley senators flake, whitehouse and purdue. Senator flake thank you. Tough act to follow. I made my concerns regarding operations streamlined known to the department and to the department of justice. As you are aware, operation streamline has been a very Successful Zero tolerance policy weve had in the southern border, particularly the yuma sector, and most in that sector attribute the success at bringing that portion of the border under control through operation streamline. Yet, the u. S. Attorneys office for arizona has ordered kind of a pullback on that policy. I just toured the border, toured yuma and all along the border couple of weeks ago and theres a lot of concern there that as word filters back that we dont have a zero tolerance policy anymore, that well start to see movement again and theres a lot of concern in those communities along the border that were going to see an uptick. It wont take much, as you know word travels fast as we learned in spades with the unaccompanied minor issue that we had. What can you tell me let me ask you do you believe the program Like Operation streamline is an effective deterrent to Border Crossing . Secretary johnson i certainly believe that Law Enforcement in general is an effective deterrent to illegal Border Crossings. I heard the same thing in arizona about operation streamline. As you know, senator, i visited with a number of your constituents on the border. In my judgment, what matters when it comes to illegal migration on the southern border is that we crack down on the smugglers and with the department of justice we ratcheted up our efforts when it comes to prosecuting the coyotes last summer because of the misinformation that they were putting out and with the department of justice we made considerable headway in the prosecution of the smuggling organizations. I believe that has contributed to our overall efforts on the southern border. I do note that the numbers overall of apprehensions are down considerably on the southern border, including in each of the arizona sectors. So that continues to be a good thing, but i also believe we need to continue our efforts. I think that Law Enforcement in general is an important part of that. Whether that should include prosecuting the Illegal Migrants i think should be made on a casebycase basis. You cant federally prosecute every single illegal migrant for a felony prosecution. I think that those judgments have to be made carefully and they ought to be made wisely because its the use of d. O. J. Resources. Senator flake well, when you talk about going after the smugglers, the effectiveness in that program i would submit and those who are on the border would submit is that it goes after the smugglers because if smugglers lose those who are in their charge for a week of detention thats a big deal. And it makes them rethink, it makes them direct their focus elsewhere. Thats been the history and thats why theres such concern that as word filters down these prosecutions arent going to happen, then were going to lose control again. We cant afford to do that. Are you aware of specifics of the operation streamline changes . Is that what it is, just casebycase basis, no overriding policy of zero tolerance . Secretary johnson i do know from people in arizona they think very highly of operation streamline and they believe that it contributed to overall Border Security in arizona. Thats what they have told me. I have to assume that the u. S. Attorney in arizona is continuing to prosecute in certain cases of illegal entry or illegal reentry but i dont know firsthand what the u. S. Attorneys current policy is there. Senator flake well, i would just note that operation streamline was included in the 20122016 Border Patrol Strategic Plan so its part of your departments plan and i would hope were working closely with the department of justice to make sure that their actions are in line with that plan because like i said in certain sectors its had great effect and we dont want to lose that. Let me turn quickly to an issue senator grassley raised. The socalled quick trip murder detention of mr. Alamorano. This is a man charged with murder. Weve not yet received a response on this. As you know, he was charged he was released. I. C. E. Failed to remove him. They said he was ineligible for bond at 10,000 which he posed. Posted. While out on bond he had two injunctions against him. Four claims of harassment. One woman feared for her life because he pointed a gun at her boyfriend. Three days after the second release of injunction, he was alleged to have committed this murder. Was i. C. E. Aware of these civil injunctions against this man . Secretary johnson i dont know whether officials at i. C. E. Were aware of the civil injunctions, but as i said earlier, senator, that case is definitely a tragedy and that individual should not have received daca. He should not have been in the daca program. As a result of this case, weve retrained the force. Weve done the retroactive review. I dont know the answer senator flake he wasnt in daca. He was swayed for removal and then posted bond. So secretary johnson sorry. Im sorry, senator. I have my cases confused. I thought you were referring to another individual. I dont know the answer to your specific question. Senator flake is there a policy where you work with local Law Enforcement to find out if there are any civil injunctions against individuals like this that are that post bond . That are out . Secretary johnson well, i do know that those in removal proceedings, when theyre being evaluated for release, there ought to be a background check conducted. There ought to be and there should be and i believe there is an evaluation of risk of danger to the community. Just like in the criminal justice system. Senator flake if there is a procedure like that it failed miserably this time. And i would just ask if i. C. E. Had been aware that there are two injunctions against an individual like this, would he have would i. C. E. Taken action against him to remove him . Secretary johnson i dont know the answer to your specific question but well get you that. Senator flake i want to know if there is a policy where theres some communication between local Law Enforcement and i. C. E. With regard to civil injunctions, against individuals like this. Can you make me aware of that and if not advise some kind of remedy for that . Secretary johnson yes. Senator flake thank you. I see my time has expired. Mention one thing quickly, ports of entry staffing. Thats when weve committed to, you know, 2,000 new agents on the border, customs and patrol sorry, customs and Border Protection, in the blue uniforms, officers, we have to make sure theyre hiring and i hear its going more slowly than we thought it should. Is there any plan to speed that up to make sure we have are the staffing, we have better infrastructure now, we have to make sure that Staffing Levels are there . Secretary johnson the answer to your question is yes, we plan to speed it up. Senator grassley senator whitehouse. Senator whitehouse thank you for your work on Immigration Enforcement and express my regret we could not pass the bipartisan Immigration Reform bill through congress entirely that would have i think made your job a lot clearer and simpler and significant responsibility for the immigration mess that were in now lies with congress, not with you and with congress for failing to pass the senates bipartisan bill, which i was a strong supporter of. I would like to talk to you about cybersecurity. The majority leader has announced that hes going to try to have cyberweek here on the senate floor at some point. Theres a lot of activity in the house. We have bipartisan bills that are pending on information sharing between federal agencies and the Big Communications providers. On Agency Public reporting of the cyberthreat to increase Public Awareness, of coordinating National Notification when companies have data breaches. And updating some of the criminal penalties. When we first were working on comprehensive cybersecurity legislation, another main piece of this effort was on the Critical Infrastructure piece. Now what i hear quite widely is that the d. H. S. Led framework process that has pulled together a great number of Critical Infrastructure Industry Sectors is going very well and that as a result of that there is no immediate pressure for legislation in that area. Now, there may not be an immediate need for legislation in that area, but of all the different areas that i mentioned where there will be legislation, protecting our privately owned Critical Infrastructure is probably the most significant National Security element. So im interested in getting your assessment of how that framework process is going and when you think it might be appropriate for congress to begin looking at legislating in that area. I expect that the executive process will yield recommendations as to what should be done next and i dont know what time frame you feel you are on towards that goal. Secretary johnson senator, as you know, the framework process was in lieu of any effort to legislate. I share your assessment, what youre hearing that the framework process has been going well, its been wellreceived in the private sector and it seems to be working pretty well. I also want to applaud those in congress who were active in cybersecurity legislation. Im largely very supportive of the bill that passed the house last week sponsored by chairman mccaul and others. I think that frankly some legislation is better than no legislation and i think that information sharing between the private sector and the government is crucial. Any efforts by the congress to promote an indoors that promote and endorse that is crucial. I also believe that form of immunity, for those that share cyberthreat indicators with the department is crucial and i believe that a National Data breach notification requirement is also very important. And im pleased that we are active legislatively in those areas. In terms of in terms of your precise question, i havent thought about it the way you asked it. I think its a thoughtful question worthy of a thoughtful answer. Let me consult id like to consult my mpbd community and get you a thoughtful answer to that. Senator whitehouse i think there is a bipartisan sense that framework process run by d. H. S. Has been effective, has achieved significant National Security goals and has enjoyed the support and cooperation of the private sector. So all of that is the good news part. The question is, is it enough, and is there a time when really implementing on it will require action from congress and how far out do you see that coming . Because obviously when its as important as the protection of Critical Infrastructure, we want to be able to act pretty rapidly and so being prepared, if its going to be next year theres a lot of conversation that has to take place on this issue. Again, very strong bipartisan support but its not an easy one. And so a preview of coming attractions would be very good. My second question is in the same area, and id like to ask you and maybe even urge you to consider what the structure in the executive branch for addressing our cybersecurity concerns looks like. Theres an awful lot of division and sequestration in the old sense, not the budget sense, of effort within the department of justice. Its divided into two separate sections, criminal and National Security. On the investigative side, its divided between f. B. I. And secret service with other agencies having even smaller pieces. If you look at the data, you have the nccic, which is a very wellregarded facility. F. B. I. Has the ncjitf. The administration announced the cyberthreat intelligence integration center. And from the from our side of the legislative executive divide, this looks a lot like multiplicity and confusion. And when you consider the scope of the cyberthreat, the fact we have an agency like d. E. A. Thats dedicated exclusively to narcotics trafficking and we have an agency like a. T. F. Thats dedicated exclusive to alcohol, tobacco, firearms and bombs, and no specific dedication of a Single Agency to this rapidly emerging and very persistent and dangerous cyberthreat, i just think we have more work to do to set up the administrative structure thats going to allow us to be most effective doing this. Id urge you to consider that and work with o. M. B. And d. O. J. To try to think five years ahead. Every six months there is a new wrinkle in the administrative process for doing this, and some new announcement is being made about some new agency or feature. I think we need a longterm strategy. I do not think we have it. Senator johnson i would share that concern. I know the Defense Department is conducting a review. We do not have to spend a lot of money on that. We can go throughout the entire government. The more we coordinate our efforts to learn how to protect our systems, i think we save money and make america safer. Only the military side they have Cyber Command. They have set up a very coherent administrative structure for taking the cyber issue and making sure that it addresses it in a comprehensive way. If you take that from the military side and try to client try to apply it to Law Enforcement it is scattered. It does not look like we have it right yet. Thank you, chairman. Senator johnson i think it is the first time i have heard anyone refer to clarity of structure. That is good news. Senator, i look at it this way the department of Homeland Security and specifically our end kick is intended to be the primary interface of the federal government with the private sector. Now we have, as your question implies, a number of different Law Enforcement agencies investigating cybercrime, and a number of different agencies including Cyber Command dealing with Cyber Security generally offensively and defensively. I came into the office and looked at all of that, much the same way you did, what i have committed to do with my counterparts, i know them well. I have known mike rogers because used to be my client, i know jack lew once a piece of this to o. We have committed to this because we do not want to turf wars. They do not serve anyones interests, including the american public. I believe we so, i believe that we can and we should and we are working more effectively better. And without the turf battles. A lot of it, frankly, is due to personalities. We have people who know each other and trust each other, we can minimize the confusion and inconsistency. I do recognize there are a lot of agencies involved in Cyber Security. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to state for the record how much i appreciate your forbearance and courtesy regarding the meetings. And your services, i know it is a Difficult Mission you have been given. In the spirit of oversight, i like to ask you a couple of questions. Your predecessor, Janet Napolitano, in 2013, a large part of the legal immigrants in this country came in legally and overstayed their welcome. Can you give us an update area. Johnson i saw a report that, in my judgment, lacked fidelity. I told my people to go back and look part of this issue. Even if it means consulting people on the outside. Let us give our best estimate that these overstays. The work ive seen so far has not been satisfactory, such that i am prepared to give it to the congress or the american public. So, unfortunately, and i know this is taken some time, it continues to be a work in progress. I do want to get to the right answer. I appreciate that. Can you give us a sense when we might see that. I ask that same question to my people routinely. And im told that we are getting closer. I will take that to be months, not years. Is it reasonable . Thank you. Getting back to that issue in texas, regarding the amnesty issue. There is a conflict between the injunction the judge put on it and the actions of the dhs mainly the comments of the president. Can you comment that, given the president seemed to be interested in being prepared there were some 100,000 renewals done in the first three weeks that upset the judge. He made a comment that the president responded, can you give us some clarity about what the dhs is doing now in relation to that case and being prepared to the outcome. In reaction to the injunction, which is not been stayed, we shut down the implementation of dopa and expanded doca. We did that very soon after the injunction became known to us. We were in compliance with the court order. And the things that we were trying to put in place, what we were trying to put in place, will either be discontinued or they will be diverted for some other use that we have principally, we were complying with the injunction. So, there is no ongoing preparation for what you are planning to do originally . Johnson the implication of the program which have begun after november 20, we had to suspend. Let me go back to the gang member issue. I just want to ask about a recent decision in the Fourth Circuit, which involved gang members under the nia. I am sure that gang membership may constitute a protected characteristic that can entitle an individual to asylum if you are an ms13 member, you might be in danger in your home country. You can then not go back to your home country. We can be set up for significant fraud there. How do you interpret that ruling by the Fourth Circuit . Has it changed any procedures . Johnson i have to confess i am not familiar with that decision. If you dont mind, let me take thatt question for the record. I would appreciate that. Can you give us an idea going about how many people you estimate going across our southern border . I know there is no accurate number. Is there an attempt, i know we have this big number of Illegal Immigrants. We had the study going on for the set overstays. But in terms of people coming in a legally, what are we doing in dhs to quantify that. To make sure we have the resources. Johnson we have apprehensions which is an indicator regarding total attempts to cross the border. Last week, i talked about apprehensions. There is an attempt also to measure what the Border Patrol cause turn backs and getaways. That number is one that i think we can do a better job of trying to quantify, so that we get to total attempts to cross the border. Im interested in getting to that number. Ive consulted with experts in my own people about arriving at a way to measure total attempts. There are various ideas out there, some of which are published by the council of foreign relations. Surveys of people south of the border and what their behavior might be. And so, i am interested in more transparency on this more clarity when it comes to total attempts to cross the border. It is not an easy exercise. And there is a certain unknown factor when it comes to people who evade capture, evade apprehension. So, i am interested in getting to a better, clear measurement of that. In the absence of that, total apprehensions, i take as an indicator of total attempts across the border. I appreciate your quotes. I appreciate the quantitative report. When you get that information, will you share it with us . We will put that in the written record, as well. Again, thank you for your service. Thank you. There is a quote from the Washington Times, talking about the house hearing on this question. A border agent while testifying actually it was a Homeland Security panel. Senator johnsons groups. Aliens attempt to infiltrate the United States from mexico border, they are not apprehended. Ask any line agent in the field, and he or she will tell you that, at best, we get a fraction getting to cross. This number is even lower for drug smugglers, who are adapted at not getting caught. Agencies that illegally report groups larger than 30 face retribution. Agents will be assigned to a fixed position in a lowvolume area as punishment. Needless to say, agents got the message. And they stay below this 20 person threshold, no matter the actual size of the group. Mr. Johnson, you are the head person on this institute, have you investigated discharge . About agents being told not to report more than 20 if they see more than 20 . Johnson i have heard that allegation. Ive heard of that charge, i have looked into it. I dont have a specific answer to that suggestion. I will say this, senator, i think that 6 out of 10 is too high an estimate. I base that on my conversations with experts. I will tell you this, sir, i spend a lot of time on the southern border with our men and women in uniform because i want to hear directly from them. What they say is happening on the southern border. I am not interested in intermediaries. Is that the head of the i. C. E. Association . How may times . Johnson at least once. I invited him to come in, and was probably another time as well. Have you met with him . Johnson i do not recall the name. These are the top people. You have the lowest row in the government in your agency. And the reason is they know you are not serious about supporting them in the mission they have been given. They filed a lawsuit against secretary Janet Napolitano. So, look, we have a problem. I would like to have a nice conversation here. But this administration has systematically seeked not to see the laws in force. And want to ameliorate those coming into the country. He also said this in his testimony. I want to be crystal clear, the border is not secure. How can this enormous gap exist . What you hear in washington and what our agents know to be the truth in the field. Frankly, it is how you manipulate statistics. I think the statistics are related. You say we have more removals, but you started counting before you started took office. They were never being considered that before as far as i know you have not had an increase in removals you had a significant decline. I think that ewing knowledge have you not, that that counting is a new system of accounting that counts the apprehensions at the border as removals . You emitted that, or knowledge that to the house member and a House Committee meeting . Johnson i am not sure what youre referring to, sir. Im quoting pulvers culbertson, the arrest would not have been accounted in prior ministrations. R administrations. Johnson i have learned from 30 years of prosecuting witnesses i want to see the numbers. Isnt it a new thing in recent years to start counting both . Or you dont know . Johnson you are theyou are the secretary, you should know. I have a chart here that shows the actual removals on the i. C. E. Chart. Numbers that increases the numbers. It is about 300,000, only 100,000 are what would be classically called removals previously. Johnson married you something . Ay i read you something . This is from november 20, if you will bear with me for the second. When you were in office. Johnson i have heard the suggestion of double counting. That should not happen. One of my directives from november 20, i am giving them the capability to report to the secretary data reflecting the numbers of those reflecting or otherwise repatriating and to report that data in accordance with the priorities. I want our components to operate, i intend for this data to be part of dhs and be available to the public annually. I appreciate that. But let me tell you, you can count that as double counting. I used to only count what we get from the interior. Now the count that, plus the Border Patrol. Without those additional numbers, they dont show the improvement the department has been mclaren. With regards to streamlines, this is really important, mr. Secretary. The secretary of Homeland Security, genital Janet Napolitano, they are prosecuted for t misdemeanors. They have a conviction on the record. That was the thought that it might deter more people from coming. It was the right thing to do since it violates law. After this was done, the department prosecuted nearly 70 . What we see both statistically and anecdotally is that when people who cross the border illegally are brought to face the reality that they are committing a crime, even if it is just a misdemeanor, that has a huge impact on their willingness to try again. And on the willingness of others to break the law of coming across the borders. In the fiscal year of 2007 apprehension rates dropped nearly 70 . After operation streamline. Recently, the president orf Border Patrol union said that the operation streamline is one of the last strongholds we have as a to turn. So, have you talked to initiate these kind of prosecutions . You have to defend your agents these are crimes. I think you demand the department of justice prosecute them. Johnson senator, i speak to the department of justice all the time about how we are enforcing the laws. I do know that our apprehension laws are down in arizona and texas. In my view, that is a good thing. I think it is a result of a number of different efforts, including Law Enforcement. Our resources on the southern border, the good health we have received on the Central American side. Our apprehension numbers are down. Why dont you continue this program that everyone has bragged on so consistently . It is having a real impact, as much as a 50 reduction in attempts. Why dont you do that . Is there a reason why you dont want to do that . It used to be done. Johnson i do not know that prosecutors in every mom with a young child crossing the border or a federal crime is the way to go. I do believe that the more effective way to go is to focus on the smugglers, focus on the coyotes who are bringing these people across. Nobody freelances. I want to get the source. And that is what we are doing. Secretary said it dropped 70 . Even secretary Janet Napolitano has bragged on the program, the predecessor said the same. That it would be one of the most effective thing that has ever been done on the border. And you have allowed it to stop. I guess you could blame attorney general holder. But if you not complained about it, i will yield you. Maybe the secretary could respond if you wanted to. I dont mean to cut you off. Johnson my point is that we work with the department of justice on the most efficient way to enforce the laws. What we determined to do last summer was go after the smugglers. Everybody who crosses is paying the smugglers thousands of dollars per person. They are not freelance. We determined to go after the e coyotes, and that is made a difference. I have no doubt. I dont know why you is a long. Secretary. Thank you for your service and your testimony today. Let me first start with Cyber Security, as legislation is being considered on the administration. They have issued a statement of policy supporting the goals of the legislation, but warning that more needs to be done to protect the privacy of americans. So that the current bill does not become a foreign intelligence bill. Can you expand on that . And talk about how you view the Homeland Security departments role. I have no doubt. I dont know why you is a long. You waited so long. Thank you for your service and your testimony today. Let me first start with Cyber Security, as legislation is being considered on the administration. They have issued a statement of policy supporting the goals of the legislation, but warning that more needs to be done to protect the privacy of americans. So that the current bill does not become a foreign intelligence bill. Can you expand on that . And talk about how you view the Homeland Security departments role. Secretary johnson through the proper screening of piaa. Personally identifying information . Johnson yes, i dont normally use acronyms. We are developing systems now that can screen out the personal identifiers, while getting the information our partners need. I also know that cyber threat indicators, which is what we are most interested in, rarely have what we would consider personal identifiers in them. But if they do, they should be screened out. We are working on getting up to speed and limiting the dissemination of personal and fires from the personal identifiers from the agencies that should not get them. Does the agency currently have the resources to do both of those . To screen out all of the information and share appropriately . Johnson we are on the subject now to promote exactly that and get us in a better place. That encouraging. Privacy is a critical component. We discussed three components regarding due process. You recognize the legitimate concerns regarding the enforcement in courthouses. At or near a courthouse undermines and impedes. The message of going to court is dangerous, because it can lead to deportation. As a department clarified . Johnson yes, we have a policy. I confess, i have not looked at it for a while. I know that a courthouse is considered to be i dont have the words exactly right. It is a special place, there are and there should be exceptions for genuine Public Safety threats. But we do know policy. We do have a policy. I will appreciate some followup if we could. We also discussed nighttime and lateral repatriation. You said you knowledge of policy since 2004 has been again to be the needless separation of families. There are and there should be exceptions for genuine Public Safety threats. But we do know policy. We do have a policy. I will appreciate some followup if we could. We also discussed nighttime and lateral repatriation. You said you knowledge of policy since 2004 has been again to be the needless separation of families. I wanted to see if u. S. Ceased you had ceased that. Johnson we now have a Steering Committee in place between the u. S. And Mexican Governments to better coordinate repatriations to designated places at designated hours. We do not have a policy of separating families, i dont think that is a good idea. I want to discourage that. That is not part of our policy. Could i envision an exception for security . Yes. Last year, we have moved away from night repatriations, and we are working with the Mexican Government at identifying when we return people just be working with them in a more controlled way. Thank you. The third area, a general topic we discussed previously, providing the aid files so they do not have to spend time going through the fouryear process. I didnt know if dhs had provided that exchange. In the interest of justice, with that increase the time or cost. Johnson i do know we now have a policy on that. We also have a policy concerning congressional request for aid files. Sitting here, maybe the cause because let me get you that for the record. Please do. I appreciate the follow up and some clarity regarding what the Department Needs to follow the appropriate process here. Let me move to the United States versus texas, executive action. I like to get your response. Johnson that when i have not forgotten about. The texas judge blocking discretion to enforce our law more sensibly and efficiently, your directives would have closed the adjudication on merit. To the judge actually foreclose on your discretion . Johnson as i noted earlier in at least two places, the judge said in his opinion that the discretion of the secretary to decide how to doevotes resources should be an question. He did say that. As part of, and the district judge seems to feel, seems to believe that the policy is an acrosstheboard, hands off for a lot of people. The way the new policy is written, i wrote it, is to be a casebycase assessment of whether someone represents a threat to Public Safety, Border Security, National Security. In fact, there is written into the policy something that did not exist in the old policy. The doca policy. Among the criteria for consideration by examining officer is, in addition to as a person been in the country five years, do they have a child, does the applicant resent any other factors indiscretion that makes them inappropriate. So, i want to encourage a casebycase assessment of each applicant to see whether or not they are appropriate for prosecutorial discretion. And i know there is disagreement in congress on this committee about the appropriateness of deferred action. I think back to when i was a prosecutor. We entered into agreements with individuals based on a casebycase assessment. And so, i think this is an extension of that. Is it a large extension . Yes. But it is intended to be a casebycase judgment. That is part of the Inherent Authority of the executive branch of the enforcement of the laws. The court ruled that the government would not assume any harm or delay through the impact of the temporary delay in your efforts. I would be interested in your answer as to what impact is is having on the government individuals, those who qualify for deferred action . Any observations you care to make . Johnson i know that there is a tremendous level of disappointment in the community. There was a lot of enthusiasm for the new program and the community. I saw myself, personally. In places like chicago, los angeles and so the injunction requires us to shut down all of our delimitation efforts. Which we have done. And i believe that this. Period could have a Lasting Impact on the success of the program. Because the community is confused, there is anxiety with Going Forward with litigation. I think it has created significant setbacks to the overall success of the program. And as long as the injunction is in place, a huge uncertainty overhanging cis ability to function. The state application is, lest my look, pending with the fifth circuit. Fifth circuit. Law enforcement is critical to keep our community safe. I just wondered if you thought there were any areas where you believe that dhs assistant and support to local enforcement was deserving of our particular attention . I want to thank the chairman for his and goldman. Johnson i think one operation given how the global threat is evolving, is more more important. The threat of the independent actor, the socalled lone wolf who is not someone who our Intelligence Community will identify overseas is it is crucial that the threats to our country that we issue almost on a weekly basis now, joint intelligence bulletins to local Law Enforcement. We issued a significant one last week. I was just with the commissioner peace in the city of boston yesterday, talking about this exact issue. It has to be the wave of the future. Appreciate your attention. Thank you for the chairmans forbearance. The 9 11 commission issued a number of recommendations after that terrible day when they do their report. One of them is that we have a biometric entry. Exit system. It is not affect today. Whether you do it with an ipad or iphone, it is very practical. A person coming in to an airport, they have a visa for a certain number of days, and when the exit, they should block out. So the exit visa has never been done. In the 9 11 Commission Said no way can you have control over the visas if you do not do that. Which is plainly true. So we have discussed it for years. It is a requirement of law, and it can be done. When can we expect it to be done, mr. Secretary . Johnson as im sure you know, we have biometric entry now for large classes of travelers. I would like to see us have biometric exits, because i agree with you. It promotes security. It is a good thing to have, i know it is a 9 11 commission recommendation. It also involves a huge commission in terms of resource. The 9 11 followup report criticized the government. One of the most severe criticism was not in what they recommended a decade ago. Have you asked the congress for any money . Have you laid out a plan for what it would take to have an exit system . Johnson i believe that we have, at some point. I would hope you would send that. I deftly think so that we should do that. Im glad you would agree. With regard to the sanctuary city problem. We have major cities refusing to honor federal detainers on people who are in the country unlawfully. Just saying we do not have any desire whatsoever to support the government in having an effective immigration system. In fact, we are going to sabotage it. Do you think, would you support legislation to clarify that. To make it mandatory . Johnson i do not believe that a federal requirement that the local sheriff or police chief respond affirmatively to a detainer from the federal government is the appropriate way to go. I do agree with the spirit of your question. And that is why we have undertaken a very aggressive effort to work with los angeles, chicago, philadelphia, new york, San Francisco where i was last week. The state of california, where i was last week, on this issue. One of the reasons i think we are having difficulty getting at the criminals is because a lot of jurisdictions are putting barriers on their ability to operate. I think it is an unbelievable affront to law. It is an assertion they are going to sabotage Law Enforcement in their cities. Not only do they have a different view of, they are going to sabotage the law. And now, your i. C. E. Director, when asked about the same question i asked you if they should not be made mandatory . In the cities, she replied thank you, amen, yes. After that, she was apparently counseled and issued a retraction. Was that your discussion . Did you direct that she should back off . Johnson no, i would not characterize it that way. She did issue a written correction at stake. Which i believe accurately and honestly reflect your own views. I know her well enough to know i will not get her to Say Something she does not believe. She works for you. Johnson yes. And agents are saying they do what you tell them to do, even if it is in violation of the law. So, what about this problem of countries that will not accept repatriation or return of these people detained illegally . His basic view, which i think you have the power to do now would be mandatory. If a country does not take back people who enter the United States unlawfully, they dont get to have any more admissions. That would send a message. And that will end it. So we have been dealing with our number one problem. Johnson that was my exact conversation with the chinese three weeks ago. I know you made some progress. But the memorandum understanding with china seems to do little to actually fix this problem. It only provides to individuals from the congress to assist with repatriation efforts that involve tens of thousands of chinese national. Section 243d permits you to notify the secretary state china, or others, to stop granting visas to citizens and nationals of such countries. Have you made any notification to any country that you intend to execute such a plan . If they do not accept that the individuals who are to be deported . Johnson well, i do believe that we in the state department need to get with these countries and point out to them that they are slow in taking back the people we need to repatriate to them. We have undertaken the campaign to do that. We should not suspend immigration or travel from any of these countries because of this particular issue. I think that is probably not the best way to go. I have had some very blunt conversations with my chinese counterparts above is exact issue, when i was there in beijing. Forgive me, if i do not think you are going to have a big progress with china. I hope i am wrong. It is been going on for a decade or more, and people sit in your chair and say they need to use the powers they have. All you have to do is tell china, if you want further immigration to america, you the take back these individuals. It is going to cost us a lot of money. They have to be taken care of, their medical needs, or we release them on bail and they will disappear into country and no one is able to find them or deport them. It is just an unacceptable thing. It is part of International Immigration policy that if an individual from a country comes to the United States unlawfully, they should be able to be deported. With regard to the 287g program, it trains Law Enforcement to determine whether an individual they come up against in the prison system, that is what alabama did, you do it in a legal and constitutional way. To be cooperative with the federal government area it was a good program. I touted it as a big success. But they removed this language from their website. Since january 2006, the program is edited with identifying potentially removable organizations in jails. To help enforce immigration law. But left october, an i. C. E. Spokesman said that the program expanded the enforcement and action against criminal aliens and those who fall within the civil Immigration Enforcement priorities. Making it the fourth multiplier to enhance the safety and participating jurisdictions by defined potentially dangerous aliens and not be released into their communities. By the way, there was just a news report from madison county, an illegal alien had been convicted of murdering a police officer. He was on the ground, helpless and pleading, and he committed suicide in prison. I would just say, if we want to reduce those kinds of incidents from happening, we have to use the tools that we have. This administration systematically dismantle the 28 7g program. Largely because the amnesty advocates oppose it. They do not like it. We have far too much action on behalf of this president and the secretary of Homeland Security responding to advocates for illegal immigration rather than serving the lawful interest of the United States. It just is. So, today, only 35 programs our existing that is less than half of what was. They should have been expanded. Tell me, do you believe it is a good program . Should be expanded, or do you want to see it with her on the er on the vine . Johnson i believe 287g is a good program. The biggest problem we have is our ability to work with local Law Enforcement in moving criminal aliens was the jurisdiction issue. 239 jurisdictions were refusing to work with us, or imposing limitations. That is a problem. So, we ended the secure Communities Program and we replaced it with the program that i believe resolves the political and legal controversies. And it takes two to dance. I am now out there meeting with sheriffs, police chiefs, governors, mayors, to introduce a new program that they will work with us again on immigration. I just talked to some sheriffs, and they are very willing to help. They are interested in federal Homeland Security. Even though some cities may refuse, others, no doubt, would be willing to dissipate. To participate. And sheriffs departments would. The whole tenor of this, if anyone understands what is happening, it indicates that you are not demonstrating a will to see the law being enforced. You will do that effectively wilson the clearl send a clear message and utilize the tools that you have we will have a dramatic decrease these overstays. At very little cost. Once the message gets out that youre not going to be able to come to the United States unlawfully, fewer and fewer people will attempt to come. You are having a reduction in appears at the border. We dont know how much . This agent says her everyone apprehended more than that gets by. Particularly the drug smugglers. But we are going to have another surge according to your own agents this summer, from central america, it appears. I would like to i dont think im being unfair. I have watched this for a long time. I dont think im being unfair. This president has been focused on reducing the activities and lawful jurisdiction of your agents. I think we should be stronger on secure communities. You are right, that is a good program. It is almost a mean like they do not understand it. Or they refuse to participate in it. To take a fingerprint from someone who is unlawfully in the country, maybe you would identify someone who has a particularly violent history. Maybe you would identify where they are, if they arrested ag ain. I support you on that. I think you should not back down on it. It is a very reasonable thing. I will let you wrap up, and the record will remain open for one week for additional questions. Johnson thank you, senator. I do want to Say Something in conclusion. I have discovered that as the leader of and its organization one of the ways to ensure that we keep up moreale the other week, there was a subcommittee on the house side that wanted to have another hearing on low morale within dhs. They called when my people, and they got a visit from me. I said, please stop telling mine workforce you have low moreale. Low morale. There are a lot of good people in dhs i have seen it myself. They work overtime for Public Safety, Border Security. I visited with a woman in new orleans who was almost killed by deranged man who was shot in the arm and came to work the next day. That is a level of her dedication and our department. We are on an Aggressive Campaign to improve the experience of people in my workforce. More transparency in hiring, mentoring experiences, im thanking people for the work. We brought back our wa awards ceremony. But those who keep telling my workforce you have low moreale are not helping. I want to improve things, i want to make it more efficient. I know you share that view senator. I want an Aggressive Campaign to improve how our workforce thinks about their very important mission. And im hoping i get the support of congress. One of the things is pay reform. I need congresshealth. Congresss help. We need a pay raise. We are capped at gs9. We want to do more of that. Im looking for the support of congress on that. Look, it was before your time. I raised the question with Janet Napolitano over a series of years. I asked her, for example, has she even met with chris crane the head of the association. She had never met with him. I asked her every time, she refused to meet with him. That problem has not pay. The problem is they are not being supported. If they actually enforce the law, there are told by their supervisors not to do so. You have this officer under oath before committee recently in the senate saying they told him not to report groups of 20 or more people. That is the kind of stuff ive been hearing for years. Before you came. I suggest you need to be listening to the agents and get on their side, and try to help them fulfill their legal obligation and your obligation. Instead, we are being led by president who is unlawfully giving amnesty to people who entered the country by the millions. Illegally. That is where we are. So, thank you for i will let you reply. Johnson i have met with chris crane and the people he represents. I consider that to be a fundamental part of my job. I indicated when you came it was good to be a difficult job. You are not going to be allowed to do it youre supposed to do. If you take this job, this president does not want to see the immigration laws in force. That is what has happened. The officers know it. Everybody realizes that you are not moving aggressively to help them in the immigration, as a result, we have is difficult problem out there. Youre a good man. You have good abilities. And i do believe you care about your officers, and you are right. We have a lot of fine, talented people. It is just a level of frustration out there that i hope you will spend some time listening to, and see if you cannot respond to. Thank you, very much. We will dismiss. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] during this later this morning when washington journal examines a number of topics. Nicole austin hillary will discuss the crime bill. Then the situation with guantanamo. Later Meredith Mcgehee joins us to talk about 2016 elections. Washington journal live today and everyday starting at 7 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan. Tonight on cspans q a, Walter Pincus on the situation in the middle east and his opinion on the 2003 invasion of iraq. Pincus i think one of the things about the Bush Administration and paul wolf of its wolfowitz who never claim to be an expert on iraq and history has proven that look at things from our own point of view. And get deceived by it. And even go back to vietnam was a great example of the first time we sort of fidid it openly but we have a history of trying to think of the people are like us. And the world is different. And particularly in the middle east its a totally different culture. Tonight at 8 00 eastern and pacific on cspans q a. The new congressional directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress with color photos of every senator in house member, plus bio and twitter handles. Also district maps, a foldout map of capitol hill, and a look at congressional committees, the cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. Order your copy today. Its 13. 95 to the cspan online store at cspan. Org. Deputy Homeland Security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas testified before the house Homeland Security Committee Thursday to answer questions of political favoritism. The questions come from an Inspector Generals report that alleges mayorkas gave special access through a visa program known as eb5. The Program Allows foreign nationals to get a visa if they invest 500,000 to a 1 million if they invest in a project that gives jobs to american citizens. This hearing is just over two hours