Immigration and Border Security will come to order without objection, the chair is authorized to declare recesses of the committee at any time. We welcome everyone to detodays hearing on oversight of the United States refugee admission program. And im now recognizing myself for an opening statement. I have long been a supporter of u. S. Refugee admission programs and the important humanitarian mission 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 be free of such tyranny. As a former immigration lawyer, i have seen the u. S. R. A. P. At work first hand. 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, that start out with the best of intention and over the years prove to need updates, the time has come for reform of the program. A few problem s that have come o 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 know during testimony in 2015, the former fbi 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 that 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 regards to prudence. On the issue of fraud in the program, i am pleased that today we have the Government Accountability office here to discuss two reports they issued this past spring. One of which highlights potential fraud in the process. These issues i have mentioned as well as others led me to introduce hr2826, the Refugee ProgramIntegrity Restoration act of 2017. Among other things, the bill sets the annual refugee ceiling at 50,000, making this responsibility from the president and placing it where it should be, with us in congress. The bill also recognizes that states and localities should have a true say in whether or not their communities are able to resettle refugees. Hr2826 contained provisions aimed at helping to detect fraud in the program and thus to reduce National Security concerns. In that vein, i know that this past tuesday marked the end of the 120day travel suspension for refugees pursuant to executive order 131780. I know the relative departments have instituted enhanced vetting procedures for refugee applicants with regards to the interview process, the application process, and three the system checks conducted on applicants. The Previous Administration always stated in response to any securityrelated 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 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. 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. Mr. Trump characterized refugees as bad actors bent on harming americans. The conservative Cato Institute founded the odds of an american being killed in a terrorist attack by a refugee are one in 3. 64 billion. The odds of being struck by lightning are one in 700,000. The truth is this. Its not refugees that undermine the security. Its mr. Trumps radical restrictions that include multiple refugee bands, a refugee ceiling and a failure of the American Leadership in the world. Let me identify two of the many ways in which these policies undermine our safety first by substantially lowering missions these measures project anti muslim sentiment that further fuels isis recruitment. He served under republican and democratic administrations put it this way. Those who stand against Refugee Resettlement say they are protecting the nation. They are not. They are putting the nation at greater risk by reenforcing the islamic state. Donald trumps actions galvanize individuals bent on committing terrorist attacks. Second, those policies damage partnerships with key allies in the fight against terrorism. Michael chertoff, dhs secretary specifically warned of the implications for our iraqi allies. Some 60,000 of them await settlement 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 only a small portion will be settled. President trump discourages them as well as other partners from around the world from helping future anti terror initiatives. It leaves all americans more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Some are so significant that Steven Miller appears to marginalized key u. S. Defense and National Security agencies in order to push through the record low refugee cap. Miller cut out the fbi, Defense Department and joint chiefs of staff, our Core National stake holders. The board even quotes a state Department Official that stated that mr. Miller suppressed evidence that was important to consider that would be to our National Security interests. This gives the troubling appearance that the Trump Administration prioritized the anti refugee agenda over the safety of the American People. I along with all of my democratic colleagues support rigorous vetting measures. I noted we have no higher duty than protecting the American People. They are core to our american identity and values. Past president s of both parties embraced them and contrary to the suggestions numerous studies show they help our economy. It showed over a decade refugees made a contribution to the United States of some 63 billion. Another did find refugees are more likely to become entrepreneurs and create jobs for american workers. Im deeply troubled by the rhetoric and reality. I hope todays hearing will show greater regard for the truth. We how it to how trumps refugee damage our economy and make all of us less safe and i would like to add when refugees enter our country they have Constitutional Rights that must be respected. Im sure we will explore that further in the course of this hearing. I yield back the balance of my time. I would like to welcome bob for his opening statement. Thank you. I very much appreciate your holding this hearing today on this important issue and this outstanding panel of witnesses. The United States has that generous Refugee Program. Millions of people fleeing with safe haven. In 2017 we resettled 84,000 and 994 refugees. While we should continue that th it has become clear that our laws and policies have been abused and that they need reform. The act of 1980 needs the resettlement process in which they set the annual limit and resettles during the next fiscal year. How and when they could adjust to lawful status. The act put in place, a process for federal government to work through nongovernmental agencies. 37 years later members of congress and the American Public are voicing a growing number of concern about how many and the process through which refugees are admitted through the United States. The federal got has done little to respect those concerns. Under the Previous Administration when a state or locality expressed security concerns about resettlement the Administration Simply repeated the sound bite they undergo the most rigorous of any of the United States. That statement ignored the concerns of several Security Officials that if there is no information regarding the databases that are checked then no derogatory information will show up during the check. It ignored the fact that in failed states, there is no reliable information about refugees. We know over 300 individuals being actively investigated for terrorist related activity by the fbi came to the United States as refugees. We know at least two of the ten successful terrorist attacks carried out on u. S. Soil since september 11, 2001 were perpetrated by individuals that entered the United States as refugees. The security concerns if a state or locality expressed concerns about the cost of resettlement or the lack of available Employment Opportunities the Prior Administration did little in response. It was simply their view that the federal government has the right to resettle refugees all across america. While it may be true it is not necessarily the best practice. I know many resettlement organizations do wonderful and necessary work but essentially ignores the pleas across the u. S. And leaving decisions to the Administration Simply feeds opposition to refugee admissions on the whole. I know the Trump Administration has already addressed some of the concerns ive laid out today. For instance i was happy to see that executive order 13780 signed on march 6, 2017 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 could be made and to implement those improvements. I look forward to hearing today how state and health and Human Services are working to improve the entire Refugee Admissions Program so that the program can remain a valuable part of u. S. Immigration policy. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. I would like to welcome mr. Conyers. . Top of the morning witnesses and everyone else here. Over the course of todays hearing there are several factors i want our witnesses and our members to consider. To begin with it is incontrovertible that the United States since its founding has been a nation of immigrants. In recognition of that fact it has provided safe harbor for the persecuted. Past president s, republican and democratic alike have championed Refugee Resettlement. The annual admissions ceiling has averaged 94,000 since the refugee act of 1980 making america the worlds resettlement leader. And 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 Current Administration in swift fashion abandoned americas bipartisan leadership in this arena. Pursuant to executive orders, President Trump issued a series of refugee bans. He then set a fiscal year 2018 ceiling of 45,000, the lowest in modern history in terms 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 justifications for its actions are baseless. For instance the administration argues that the Refugee Program poses a security threat. Needless to say democrats stand committed to rigorous refugee vetting. National Security Experts from both parties agree that it is the absence of robust resettlement that truly undermines americas safety. By slashing refugee admissions, President Trump damages to miki alliances in the ongoing fight against terrorism and strengthens isis recruitment. The administration claims they fail to samgs assimilate and that they drain public resources. Again, however, the facts are otherwise. According to reports an 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 United States over the ten year period. In other words it is not refugees but the president s restriction of their admission that zaps the nations. In some they dont just leave tens of thousands of refugees in limbo and danger. They dont just violate core American Values, they weaken our National Security, damage our economy and our nations core values. All of it really fuels such policies. Tragically the answers to that question appears to be a combination of nativism, fake facts and perhaps even a little bigotry, drawing from arguments made by anti immigrant organizations designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center with hate groups to White Nationalists. The administration has proposed a refugee assimilation test which evokes such measures as the movement fueled 1924 immigration act. Like the act the refugee policies are equally inexcusable. In closing i urge our Witnesses Today to examine these policies unflinchingly to assess how they endanger our values, our economy and National Security. I look forward to your testimony and yield back. Mr. Chairman, may i be granted unanimous consent to place into the record statements from the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society the International Assistance project Refugee Service truth World Services and a letter to acting secretary and director lloyd from over 100 organizations including the california womens law center catholics for choice, the american rabbis and many others. Without objection it will be made part of the record. Today we have a distinguished panel. Written statements will be entered into the record in its entirety. I ask that you summarize your testimony in five minutes or less. To help you stay within that there is timing on your table. When the light switches from green to yellow you will have one minute to conclude your testimony. When the light turns red it signals your five minutes have expired. I would like you to stand and be sworn in. Do you swear that the testimony youre about to give is the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth . Let the record reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. Thank you and please be seated. Mr. Henshaw acted at the u. S. Embassy and several other capacities at the state department. He attended the National War College where he earned the masters of science and has a bachelor of arts in history from the university of massachusetts. Francis sisna the director of u. S. Citizenship and immigration services. Previously he served as a director for immigration policy within the dhs and as the acting director of immigration and Border Security policy. Before serving at the dhs headquarters he worked in the office of chief council as associate council in the adjudications law division. He received his jd from Georgetown University law center. He received a masters degree and bachelors degree in physics and Political Science from the Massachusetts Institute of technology. An interesting combination. Mr. Lloyd worked at knights of columbus, before joining the kn