Away from the criminal justice system. I do have concerns based on the data we share here in terms of marijuana use, what the implications of both street realization and legalization mean for the people of the United States. I been doing Public Health work for a long time, there is a disproportionate help impact. Support those that is when it comes to children. Mr. Kelly, we will give you some latitude to make that less comment. I want to bring your record, i but the would certainly invite you i spoke to the director coming down here that this is a prevalent issue, i would invite you that he would be will to speak you anytime if you wish. I also have with me a threat assessment that was done in this very area and a number of recommendations which i would be glad to share with you that was washingtony the Baltimore Heider and they are looking working very closely with the chief of police who sits on the board to address these very issues. Of like to thank all of you for your testimony, your intelligence, it has been a very insightful hearing. Itemse a number of to do for the director to get back. It is critical because as we look for reauthorization as we get back into a normal budgeting process, a normal appropriations process, some of these have been appropriated without reauthorizing as you know. Are growing fewer in number, so it is more critical that we look at reauthorization, but look at meaningful budget numbers. I am extremely troubled base material testimony today that your request is to cut a program. If its not working, cut it all out, but that is not what i heard from you, yet we are taking a program what my local officers say works, is a critical tool, and we are wanting to somehow give greater flexibility. It appears we want to shift the money into prevention and treatment and do away with heide. You will meet great resistance in a bipartisan way if that is truly the direction and i dont want to put words in your mouth. You were very eloquent. I want to say thank you for your time. I think we can make Good Progress here working through. If there is no further business without objection, subcommittee stands adjourned. Next, a hearing on russias violation of a 1987 to fear treaty. Live at 7 00, your calls and comments on washington journal. On newsmakers, virginia congressman Judiciary Committee air comments on gun violence and some of the issues before his committee, including immigration and sentencing reform legislation. Of 5akers, today at 10 a. M. And 6 00 p. M. On cspan at the clock a. M. , and 6 00 p. M. A. M. , and at 10 00 6 00 p. M. On cspan. We ask for the history and literary culture of monterey, california, it served as inspiration for author, john steinbeck. The capital of all the, california under both spain and mexico before coming part of the u. S. After the mexicanamerican war. The nationale tour steinbeck center. Next, some of warner, author of howards really words, aviation firsts, then we join stephen for lumbee, author of the death and life of monterey bay of revival as he shows us the bay and talk about talks about its recovery from a polluted body of water to one that is teaming with sea life, today. 80 years ago, this is a place you would not want to be standing doing anything. The water was polluted, the air was fouled. The seals were gone, the otters were gone. The sardines eventually were all taken. All of that was happening 80 years ago. The difference is that monterey bay got better. American history tv, we will visit the customhouse and learn about the importance this Historic Building had to trading and california and mexico. Next, we go to the Carmel Mission or if youre about the mission, founded by rinses can priest other an evoke this era. Primarily to bring the catholics safe to the people. Californias First Constitutional Convention was held in 18 he nine, historian Dennis Copeland chairs significance of this historic call, along with items related to mention to the convention. We have original documents from the Constitutional Convention on display, and this is the registration sheet for all of the delegates. It is a great source of information. This lists every delegate, where they are from, what state or country. Edited how old they are, and which district of california they are from. What cspans cities to her on cspan3. The cspan cities to her, working with our cable abilities affiliates and visiting cities across the country. 0 the Obama Administration has achieved accused the russian government of violating in an and seven treaty which eliminates intermediate range Nuclear Missiles as well as ground launched ballistic and Cruise Missiles. Russia has denied the allegation. Testifying before this joint house subcommittee are officials from the state and defense departments. It is an hour and 20 minutes. On russian arms control cheating, violating that treaty and the ministrations response one year later. Testifying today are the following witnesses. Thele rose got miller honorable rose gottemoeller. This is an update to last years hearing with these witnesses and we are eager to learn what the administration has been doing since we met in sessions on this topic last december. Congress has not been sitting idle. A direction of the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chief of staff again the research and develop a military responses Response Options to russias violations. Inf is not the only treaty in our agreement that russia is violating. We learned during last years hearing that on eight of 12 treaties, and agreements, russia is not in alignment or in outright violation. Inf has earned a lot of attention, the open skies treaty. We are less concerned about chemical or biological weapons that can be used against the u. S. Than intermediaterange missiles that cannot. This hearing is also the first opportunity for many members to ask the administration about the recent russian disclosure of a Nuclear Powered warhead that occurred during a review of their Nuclear Forces that included its president. According to the russian translations of what was disclosed, this weapon would provide them with a new thebility to damage important components of the adversaries economy and coastal area and inflicting acceptable damage to the countries countrys territory by creating areas of white radioactive widemination of radioactive contamination. What does that say about a weapon a country that feels Nuclear Weapons are such an important part of their military . What does it say about a country that would invest resources in such a weapon . The only time the president talks about Nuclear Weapons is when he wants to rose reducing them propose reducing them. The world is paying attention. We have a lot to talk about today and im looking forward to learning what the administration has been up to in the last year. With that, i would like to turn things over to the chairman for his opening statement. Last year, we held a hearing on this same topic in december. It seems like it is groundhog day, here we are again and will agree that russia violated the treaty, but we are still talking about what the appropriate response should be. Russia is not someone that is our friend or outline. We cannot take them for their word. They invaded a sovereign country, georgia. Ive seen their tanks on the hills. Seven years later, they still occupy a third of that nation. Last year, Vladimir Putin was at it again. Russia is conducting strikes in syria to prop up a dictator that has murdered thousands of syrians. Time we recognize them for what they are doing, a are being aggressive. It is no surprise that they are breaking its word when it comes to assigned arms control treaties. Between the treaty United States, which places limits on ground launched ballistic and is missiles which with ranges between 2500 and 5500 kilometers. We have held up our bargain and the russians have not. Reports, itss appears they have tested a Ground Launched Cruise Missile. There responded this is a seabased missile, that is nonsense. The administration seems to have known about the violations back in 2008 at took three years for them to report concerns about it to congress. This year, the state department repeated its findings that the russians are in violation of this treaty. Have made several attempts appeals about this issue, candidly, the responses weve been get weve been getting back is lead me to believe we are not taking the issue as seriously as we should. We have so far made no substantial progress in bringing the russians back into compliance after seven years, there have been no consequences for the violation of the treaty. We told the russians our concerns and their response, they debt they deny they are violating the treaty. What i like to know is what i asked last year, what are our next steps, how do we convince them we mean business if we do . What is the administration going to do to hold the russians accountable . There are some who want to go easy on the russians in that they want to ignore the situation. I dont believe that is an appropriate response. I look forward to what the benesses have to say, to upfront, candid, blunt about what is the strategy, what are we doing, what is the United States and our allies doing . Rogue nations are developing similar weapons that we and the russians have supposedly agreed not to develop, that would be iran and pakistan. What is the United States response going to be . I yield back. Recognize the Ranking Member of the subcommittee for any statement you may have. I that we would like to welcome our colleagues from the Foreign Affairs committee and hope they will treat us kindly when it comes to spent sequential referrals. Else a hope that our friends from Foreign Affairs can join us in the classified section to follow this hearing. It would be good if the public portion were kept as short as possible so we can learn as much as possible in the classified section. Everybody knows that wimer. And does not conduct his himness in public, why give an advantage by displaying our deliberations . Two very distinguished Public Service before us today, i look forward to hearing the testimony. Colleagues will keep in mind that International Relations are not black and white, particularly when it comes to russia. We depend on quite heavily for u. S. Assured access to space. Thingmazing in throughout the perils of the cold war, weve always had a reliable supply of those rockets. Nothing or nothing is black or white. Nobody is defending Vladimir Putin. We are outraged by their taking over of crimea. Meat ofportant that the this hearing be held in the classified section. I look forward to seeing all my colleagues upstairs in a few minutes. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you for conducting this hearing. I would also like to thank our two witnesses for being here to discuss inter intermediate range Nuclear Forces treaty, but in this hearing and later run in the classified briefings follow briefing to follow. I know there is a limit to what you can say in disclosed disclosed in this disclose in this session, but i think its important for the public to know, but not necessarily details that will advantage the russians. 28 years after the inf treaty was signed, it remains one of the most important Nuclear Treaties that the u. S. Has ever signed with russia. State department and numerous observers have stated that russias developed, produced and flight tested a Ground Launched Cruise Missile in violation of the inf treaty. A russian violation of the treaty, with the violation of any treaty, would be a serious matter. A look forward to further details regarding the russian weapons system at issue and a discussion of what is the point that would mean for russia in terms of its military strategy and how it would impact the security in europe and in asia. If russia has found noncompliant with a treaty, the u. S. In conjunction with our allies, should use the tools at our disposal to pressure the russians into ending these offending activities. While the question of noncompliance by russia must squarely in seriously be dealt with, it is critical the u. S. For the time being continue to observe the treaty. Would only allow russia to legally pursue testing and violation of the treating of the treaty. I look forward to the panel this afternoon. With that, i yield back. Recognizes thew secretary for five minutes. Sec. Gottemoeller thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you for hosting this hearing and having me here today. The subject is one which i previously briefed this same committee, including last year around this time as was already indicated. To permit time for a good discussion with your permission, i would like to abbreviate my remarks and submit medical testimony for the record. Without objection. Sec. Gottemoeller let me begin by saying the u. S. Is not under anundertake arms control as end that unto itself, nor do we look at disarmament in isolation from the terrorism and the general strategic environment, including the changing security environment in europe. Arms control and deterrence helped to create the conditions for a more honorable and protectable form of strategic stability. Frameworks are one available and important instrument in our foreignpolicy toolkit to advance global stability and the security of the United States, our allies and partners. This has been true for over four decades for both republican and democratic administrations for a wide variety of nuclear conventional safety we have worked closely with our allies to develop the arms control framework we have today, and we continue to seek enormous value in these agreements. Over the last three decades, there have been compliance in instrumentation issues with the soviets, then the russians on a variety of agreements. Former officials of both republican and democratic administrations and their colleagues in congress for or to grapple with many of the same problems we face today. How do we resolve violations denials . D by blatant how we work with allies and partners on the challenges to ensure a unified and proportionate response . These are not easy questions to answer. The Administration Takes compliance with all arms control agreements very seriously. Worked hardson, we to produce a Compliance Report in july of 2010. Congress delivered to after a fiveyear lapse and has produced one every year sense as required by statute. The focus of todays hearing is russias violation of the inf treaty, so i would like my remaining remarks on that topic. Of ouronse to some opening comments, i wanted to say that we had no information or indication in 2008 that the Russian Federation was violating the treating the treaty. That information surfaced in 2011. I wanted to put that out at the beginning. Year, the u. S. Repeated its determination that russia is in violation of it inf treaty obligations. Since 2013, we of rates of serious concerns regarding conduct we ultimately determined to be a violation of the i and inf treaty and upheld senior and technical level bilateral discussions with the aim of returning russia to verifiable compliance. Throughout the course of this year, we have raised this issue with russian officials on repeated occasions and at various levels in various departments within the russian government in order to resolve u. S. Concerns. We have made very clear that this is not a technicality, a oneoff exempt or a case of mistaken identity. The notion ofed this being a sea launched Cruise Missile. We have devoted a great deal of attention in 2015 to consulting with our allies and partners in the interest of pursuing a coordinated response to the russian violation. Our allies have made clear their interest in preserving the inf treaty and their continued wished that the u. S. Remain in the treaty and seek to bring the Russian Federation back into compliance. Russia continues to be unwilling to a delicate violation, or address our concerns. We have shared more than enough information with russian officials for them to look through their own records and identify the relevant program. And counters accusations clearly attempt to deflect attention from their own violation. To worke, we continue closely with allies on a series of diplomatic, economic and military measures to protect the interests of the u. S. And around wise. I know my colleague will want to say more about the military aspect. I assure you that the Obama Administration is committed to bringing russia back into compliance. While diplomacy has yet to lead to russia returning to compliance, how are of russias violation and reaffirmation of two new u. S. Commitment to the treaty as imposed significant costs on russia. Its Covert Program has been exposed and moscow is not free to pursue this effort unconstrained, as this would confirm that russia has been violating an agreement that has been a key instrument of stability and security for nearly three decades. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you. Chairman rogers, members of the committee, i appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today. Ill not labor the point youre that you already know, the Russian Federation is in violation of its obligations under the inf treaty. Since making this determination, our objective has been to preserve the viability of the treaty by convincing rush to come back into compliance. We believe it is in our National Security interest and our allys i