Procedures and National Security. Members of the house judiciary subcommittee on oversight heard from representatives from several government agencies, including the acting assistant secretary for population, refugees and migration, simon henshaw. The hearing ran about an hour nd a half. The subcommittee on immigration and Border Security will come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorize to declare recesses at any time. We welcome everyone to todays hearing on oversight of the United States refugee Admission Program, and now i recognize myself for an opening statement. Mr. Labrador i have long been a supporter of u. S. Refugee Admission Program and the important humanitarian mission that it serves. The United States and the peace and democracy under which we live should give hope to those around the world who face persecution by their government, that their home countries can at some point also be free of such tyranny. As a former immigration lawyer i have seen the u. S. I. R. P. At work firsthand. I have seen those who have been able to avail themselves of it, come to this country and thrive. But just like with many government programs, the start out with the best of intention and over the years prove to need updates, the time has come to reform of the program. A few problems ive come to light in recent years include fraud, unchecked executive authority and threats to our National Security. The House Judiciary Committee has highlighted some of these deficiencies over the last few years. For instance, we all know that during testimony in 2015, the former f. B. I. Director made troubling statements about the inability of Law Enforcement officials to properly vet applicants for refugee status. And former Administration Officials acknowledged in testimony to this committee that state and local consultation throughout the Refugee Resettlement process has not been as robust as needed in all cases. In fact, i have been approached by colleagues regarding this issue. Theyre concerned about the views of the state and localities they represent were ignored by an administration that simply wanted to resettle as many refugees as possible without regard to prudence. On the issue of fraud in the program, i am pleased that today we have the Government Accountability office here to discuss the report they issued this past spring one of which highlights potential fraud in the process. These issues i have mentioned as well as others leave led me to introduce h. R. 2826, the Refugee ProgramIntegrity Restoration act of 2017. Among other things, the bill sets the annual refugee ceiling at 50,000, taking this responsibility from the president and placing it where it should be with us in congress. The bill also recognizes the states and localities should have a true say in whether or not their communities are able to resettle refugees. And h. R. 2826 contains provisions aimed at helping to detect fraud in the program and thus to reduce National Security concerns. In that vain, i know that this past tuesday marked the end of the 120day travel suspension for refugees pursuant to executive order 13780, and i know that the relevant departments have instituted enhanced screening and vetting procedures for refugee applicants with regard to one, the application process, two, the interview and adjudication process and, three, the system checks conducted on applicants. The Previous Administration always stated in response to any security related questions about the Refugee Program that certain refugees were the most vetted foreign nationals who enter the United States. But even if true, i never understood why the administration thought that simply because they were the most vetted that the vetting was sufficient. It seems that within months of taking over, the new administration has identified several areas in which vetting could be improved. I appreciate the attention to security concerns and the steps they have taken. I look forward to the testimony of the witnesses here today. And i yield back the balance of my time. I now recognize our Ranking Member, ms. Lofgren of california, for her opening statement. Ms. Lofgren like all members of congress, my highest priority is protecting our National Security. And todays hearing presents an opportunity to examine a threat to that security, President Trumps antirefugee agenda. Mr. Trump has characterized immigrants generally and refugees in particular as bad actors bent on harming americans. The conservative Cato Institute found that the odds of an american being killed in a terrorist attack by a refugee are one in 3. 64 billion. By comparison, odds of being struck by lightning are one in 1 700,000. The truth is refugees dont undermines our National Security, its President Trumps radical restrictions on their admission. Those include multiple refugee bans, a record low of refugee ceiling imposed at a time of record high global displacement. Let me identify two of the many ways in which these policies undermine our safety. First, by substantially lowering muslim refugee admissions, these measures project antimuslim sentiment that further fuels isis recruitment. Ryan crocker, a former ambassador to iraq and afghanistan, who served under republican and democratic administrations put it this way. Those who stand against Refugee Resettlement say theyre protecting the nation. Theyre not. Theyre putting the nation at greater risk by reinforcing the Islamic State narrative. In other words, Donald Trumps actions galvanize individuals bent on committing terrorist attacks against americans. Second, those policies damage partnerships with key allies in the fight against terrorism. Michael chertoff, d. H. S. Secretary under george w. Bush, specifically warned of the implications for our yirkey allies. Some iraqi allies. Some 60,000 wait for resettlement in america. Many of their lives are at risk because of their assistance to the American Military and state department. Yet, the record low fiscal year 2018 refugee ceiling means that only a small portion of them will be resettled. By turning his back on these allies, President Trump discourages them as well as other partners around the world from helping the United States in future antiterror initiatives. This puts all americans more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Puts National Security consequences are so significant that white house aide Steven Miller has deliberate tiffly marginalized National Security agencies in order to push through the record low refugee cap, according to a report, miller cut out the National Counterterrorism center, f. B. I. , Defense Department and joint chiefs of staff, core National Security stakeholders from discussions about reducing Refugee Resettlement. Before it state Department Official said mr. Miller, quote, suppressed evidence that was important to consider in determining a refugee number that would be beneficial to our National Security interest. This gives the troubling appearance that the Trump Administration prioritizes its antirefugee agenda over the safety of the American People. Of course, i, along with all of my democratic colleagues, support rigorous refugee vetting measures. As i noted, we have no higher duty than protecting the American People, but let us hope this administration will not use claims of National Security, reviews of refugee vetting procedures as cover for implementing a back door muslim ban. After all, numerous federal courts challenged the administrations claim that its previous bans squarely against objectives. Refugees are a core to our american identity and values. Thats why past president s of both parties embraced them, and contrary to this administrations suggestions, numerous studies prove they enhance our security. Health and Human Services itself produced one of those studies only for the administration to reportedly suppress it. It showed over a decade refugees made a net positive Economic Contribution to the United States of some 63 billion. Another study found refugees are significantly more likely than native born americans to become entrepreneurs, and thereby create jobs for american workers. In my own district, refugees have immeasureably enriched our community. Im deeply troubled by the disconnect between the administrations rhetoric and reality, and i hope todays hearing will show greater regard for the truth. We owe it to the American People to eliminate how mr. Trumps antirefugee policies violate our values, damage our economy, make all of us less safe. Id also like to add when asylees enter our country, they have Constitutional Rights that need to be respected. Im sure we will explore that further in the course of this hearing, and i yield back the balance of my time. Mr. Labrador thank you, ms. Lofgren. I would now like to recognize the full committee chairman, mr. Bob goodlatte of virginia for his opening statement. Mr. Goodlatte thank you, mr. Chairman. I very much appreciate you holding this hearing today on this very important issue and with this outstanding panel of witnesses. The United States has a generous Refugee Program. Has provided millions of people fleeing persecution with safe haven in f. Y. 2016, we resettled 84,994 refugees. In last fiscal year we resettled 53,716 refugees. And while we should continue that great tradition, it has become clear that our refugee laws and policies have been abused and that they need reform. The refugee act of 1980 created our current Refugee Resettlement process in which the president sets the annual limit for the number of refugees the United States can resettle during the next fiscal year. And the act set forth who could be considered admirable as a refugee and how ed a missible as a refugee and how they can adjust to lawful permanent resident status. The act put in place a process for the federal government to work through nongovernmental agencies to resettle refugees. 37 years later, members of congress and the American Public are voicing a growing number of concerns about how many and the process through which refugees are admitted to the United States as well as what happens once they are admitted. But the federal government has done little to respect those concerns. Under the Previous Administration, when a state or locality expressed security concerns about Refugee Resettlement, the Administration Simply repeated the sound byte that refugees undergo the most rigorous background checks to any immigrant to the United States. That statement ignored the concerns of several security officials. If there is no information regarding a potential refugee in the databases that are checked, then no derogatory information will show up during the check. And it ignored the fact that in many states from which refugees are admitted, failed states, there is no reliable information about refugees. We know that over 300 individuals being actively investigated for terroristrelated activity by the f. B. I. Came to the United States as refugees. And we know at least two of the 10 successful terrorist attacks carried out on u. S. Soil since september 11, 2001, were purpose treated by individuals who entered the United States as refugees. In addition, to security concerns, if a state or locality expressed concerns about the cost of Refugee Resettlement or the lack of available employment opportunities, the Prior Administration did little in response. It was simply their view that, quote, the federal government has the right to resettle refugees all across america, end quote. And while that may be true, it is not necessarily the best practice. I know that many resettlement organizations do wonderful and necessary work, but essentially ignoring the pleas of communities across the u. S. And leaving Refugee Resettlement decisions to the administration, simply feeds opposition to refugee admissions on the whole. I know that the Trump Administration has already addressed some of the concerns i have laid out today. For instance, i was happy to see that executive order 137080 signed on march 6, 2016, recognized the problem with lack of state and local consultation prior to resettlement and asked the secretary of state to devise a plan to promote state and local involvement in resettlement decisions. And of course, the same executive order required a review of refugee processing to determine what improvements could be made to the process and then to implement those improvements. So i look forward to hearing today how the departments of Homeland Security, state and health and Human Services are working together to improve the entire u. S. Refugee Admissions Program from referral to postresettlement so the program can remain a viable part of u. S. Immigration policy. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield back. Mr. Labrador thank you, mr. Chairman. Id now like to recognize the full Committee Ranking member, mr. Conyers of michigan, for his opening statement. Mr. Conyers thank you, mr. Chairman. Top of the morning, witnesses, and everyone else here. Over the course of todays hearing on the United States refugee Admissions Program, there are several factors that i want our witnesses and our members to consider. Begin with, it is incontrovertible that the United States, since its founding, has been a nation of immigrants. And in recognition of that fact, and of the undeniable value that immigrants contribute to our collective wellbeing, it has provided safe harbor for the persecuted. Ue to these values, past respects republican and democratic alike have championed robust Refugee Resettlement. The annual refugee ceiling averaged 94,000 since the refugee act of 1980 making america the worlds resettlement leader. In just one year ago, the cap was increased to 110,000 in response to the global humanitarian crisis fueled by wars and unstable political environments. Unfortunately the administration swift fashion abandoned americas bipartisan leadership in this arena. Pursuant to executive orders, President Trump issued a series of refugee bans. Set a fiscal year 2018 ceiling of 45,000, the lowest in modern history. Terms of per capita Refugee Resettlement, that ranks the United States behind eight other nations. Under any circumstances, these actions would fly in the face of our countrys values, but coming at a time when worldwide refugee levels have soared to the highest in history, this cap to me is unconscionable. And worst yet, the administrations purported justification for its actions are baseless because the administration argues that the Refugee Program poses a security threat. Needless to say democrats stand committed to rigorous refugee vetting. But National Security experts from both parties agree that it is the absence of robust resettlement that truly undermines americas safety. By slashing refugee numbers, President Trump damages key alliances in the ongoing fight against terrorism and strengthens isis recruitment. The administration also claims that refugees fail to assimilate and that they drain public resources. Gain, however, the facts are otherwise. According to reports and internal study by the department of health and Human Services suppressed by the administration shows that refugees contributed a net positive 63 billion to the Uni