things would be covered as well we pointed out in our briefs. finally, i would say to the court, let's not forget that civil proceedings are covered here and we would submit civil evidentiary proceedings. the government is suggesting that the court should unleash a 20 year obstruction maximum obstruction statute on civil litigation in federal courts. i do submit that is what we would submit that that is a very serious tool to put in the hands of prosecutors. we urge the court reversed the dc circuit. >> thank you, counsel, the case is submitted. >> the honorable court is now adjourned until tomorrow at 10:00. >> the homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas is testifying before the committee

of the budget request for the homeland security department. we joined this in progress. >> trump said, i said, no, they are not humans. they are animals and this is dehumanizing rhetoric and wrong and unacceptable. mr. secretary, does this type of rhetoric fuel violence here in the united states? >> congressman, i will refrain from opining on the words of a particular candidate given the hatch at -- hatch act restrictions. >> we know that president trump has said he would immediately launch the largest deportation operation in american history. i want to note and talk about something that donald trump has tried to characterize as we talk about migrants. he and one of his main lieutenants as promised a large skill rate and suggested using troops even sending them from

republican led states and the neighboring states led by democrats. what we do see now in texas is a real risk there and certainly if you see national guards being used this way in the future, can you give your opinion about national guards being used in texas? >> i am sorry. can you repeat that? >> do you think there are additional risks we could see the national guard being used in a way that could be dangerous? >> the deployment of national guard can be an effective force multiplier when coordinated with federal authorities specifically the united states border patrol when it isn't. it could present a risk when it isn't in our efforts to secure the border. >> i think we showed that. i want to note something about the way the incumbent president

use migration and the world and i think it's important to point out. we do know that in 2016 donald trump launched his campaign by pointing out that mexicans are essentially murderers and rapists and in 2019 they said that immigrants from african countries, he didn't want any migrants from what he called countries and that's his word not mine and he said bring more people from countries like norway because they are nicer to us and he has tried over and over again to do that.

>> some of the threats they are dealing with, this transnational criminal organization they put on these

gangs and they are growing in influence and growing in criminal activity throughout the country. i believe there are significant threats to our homeland and not just regional and not just miami or new york. it is all over the place. my question is specifically on hsi. what is homeland security investigations doing to tackle tda? >> homeland security investigations and our sister agencies in the federal government have an unprecedented attack and not only transnational organizations but domestic and i can provide you with details subsequent to this hearing with respect to our efforts against that specific gang. >> i do appreciate that and are they part of the transnational antigang task force? >> i believe it is. >> this is something i believe is important that we use every leverage her every lover of

government tools both at the federal, state, and local level to go after these criminals and am talking about hardened criminals, bad actors in our communities and how do we find them or prevent them from committing crimes and being part of that i think that hsi will be on the forefront and i will talk -- i represent a large part of west texas and if oil and gas is a large part of that, i was on a recent swing through west texas where they see a rise in the amount of oil theft and i bring this up because some of this is tied to this open border crisis and some of these actors are not american citizens. what do you do with someone and you pull somebody over and they are not a you a citizen and clearly this is where homeland security should have a role to play so once again do you know if they are part of this basin oilfield task force? >> i don't know the answer to

that. >> i think it would be important that if they aren't they look into this and once again this is an interconnection where how do you use every lever and tool. part of that is if you pull somebody over and they are to you as citizen, homeland security has a role to play to determine who is this person? why are they here illegally? what you do with them? what i see now in some cases is local law enforcement will release them and there is nobody to turn them over and you can see this train wreck coming a mile away where we have apprehended somebody and once again i am not talking about all people but a bad actor that would've been apprehended or a low-level crime or another crime and all of a sudden the year or month later they commit a serious crime and i want to get ahead of that and i believe it will be a big part of working with the fbi and these local and state taskforces in order to get that done and i ask you

bring that to your attention. energy is a large critical infrastructure an important we do protect that. i do see this grow. when i went through this a year ago, there were three counties that brought it up and i just talked to every county in every sheriff bringing it up and i see this the rat grow and expand. my last question is on the increase in chinese nationals that we see and the numbers are astronomical. specifically in california and some of those areas. what can we do? is there anything in particular we can do to have a direct conversation with china to get this to stop? it is clearly an issue and one that is rising that china is a difficult actor to deal with and is there anything that congress can do in order to prevent china from

sending its people over? >> i would consider what legislative action would be warranted. i can assure you that i share your concern with respect to the issue and have engaged with my counterpart from the people's republic of china. we have, in fact, made strides with the removal of chinese nationals who don't qualify for relief in the united states. >> i think there needs to be more and it has to be more public and there needs to be more highlighting that if you come here illegally we will send you back and with that i will yield back and i do appreciate it. >> the gentleman yields. >> i now recognize the gentleman from new york for five minutes. >> thank you. mr. secretary, i want to remind

my colleagues that you have lived the great american success story. you are a political refugee born in cuba and came to the united states of america, graduated from law school and became a prosecutor for nine years as an assistant united states attorney, appointed as the youngest u.s. attorney in the nation and director of the u.s. citizenship program and deputies security secretary of the homeland security and you received this position as secretary and i thank you for your public service to our country. i am new to congress and i just got elected in february. i was watching what was going on down here and you kind of tune it out a bit, all the back- and-forth. one of the things i talk about in my campaign and i want to highlight is every problem we face in our country is complicated. nothing is simple. you can't solve complicated problems in an environment of fear and anger were everybody is yelling and screaming at each other. it is impossible. you can't get into the meat and bones to do the work necessary. i was excited by this bipartisan compromise you

worked on with senators langford, murphy and senator sinema which didn't have everything in it that i wanted to, but it was a compromise. but say my colleagues didn't get everything they wanted and let's say trump is elected and let's say they get the majority of congress and the senate and under no circumstances will they get enough votes in the senate to actually pass a bill and we will have to do something bipartisan any and -- under any circumstances. you can't get a bipartisan bill unless people work together. it is great that we have more money for the customs border patrol agents to bring it up to 22,000 and this post 2024 appropriation and we got more detention beds, but under the senate bill we would've gotten more officers as well. we would have gotten more detention beds and money for the wall or money for

technology or money for a bunch of other things and it would have been serious policy changes. i want to use the last half of my time to ask you. the thing i am most interested in, and excited about, is this idea that we have to reduce the time it takes to adjudicate assignment cases. it seems like that is the most important thing we have to do. right now we do have all these people and everybody is freaking out with this crisis of people coming over the border but it could search again before now in summer. but if people have to wait five years or six years or seven years or eight years and they get a work permit in the meanwhile, that encourages people to come but if we can cut down that period and i heard 90 days to six months but if we can cut down that period to adjudicate these asylum cases of which 80% of the people will be denied asylum,

and many of whom will be deported immediately, it discourages other people from paying the coyotes and coming to do this. explain how we reduce the time that it takes? what will it take from this body to reduce the time it takes to adjudicate the asylum cases from what is now years down to a matter of months? >> congressman, you are correct that reducing that time would change the risk calculus of impending migrants and deter them from taking the dangerous journey and spending their life savings in the hands of smugglers and the senate bipartisan legislation would have delivered on that but with changes to the system, policy changes to the system, as well as ample resources for us to implement those affixes. >> can you tell us some of the policy changes that would happen that would make this process happen more quickly? x everybody when they get

adjudicated, 70% or 80% get denied and they aren't eligible to be here so if we could speed that up we would stop this from happening. what are the changes? >> among the compromises included was raising the credible fear standard, shrinking the disparity between the initial threshold screening standard and the ultimate merits and it resourced our system with 4300 asylum officers to adjudicate those specifically. >> i am saddened to hear about some of the things that is being hurled about and it is upsetting and we have serious business and these are serious and we don't want people creating crimes and breaking the law that we have to work together to solve it. >> i recognize the gentleman from new york for five minutes. >> do we have a problem at the

southern border? >> we do have a significant challenge, yes we do. >> you previously characterized it is in a crisis but you want to change that today? >> i said repeatedly it is a crisis and i never minimize the severity of the challenge at the border regardless of the words we use. >> i appreciate the evolution. with 200,000 deaths from fentanyl and migrant crises in multiple cities including new york city, how grave is the crisis on the southern border? >> congressman, the situation is grave and it requires solutions. i do strongly support and urge congress to pass the senate's bipartisan -- >> we will get into that in a moment. my colleague from the other side of the aisle from a county to the west mentioned how some solutions are complicated and they do offer on this there are simple solutions which ought to

be implemented. i find it disingenuous that many folks from the other side of the aisle often point to budgetary reasons as to why we can't have a secure border. i do want to talk about non- budgetary reasons including president biden's policy choices and specifically his executive orders that he has issued or rescinded. i think the clerk has a copy of 64 different executive orders that president biden has issued that have rolled back trump era border policies that many agree have been successful or implemented some that major job more difficult and in the entirety of the four years in the trump administration there were 2.4 million encounters on the southwest border. and in the first 40 months of the biden administration, there were 7.6 million encounters of the southwest border. so comparatively speaking, 200%

more and in 20% less of a time. should the department of homeland security endeavor to have less alien encounters at the southwest border? >> in between the points of entry we are driving to reduce the number of encounters. indeed we are. >> it is a goal to have fewer encounters? >> yes. >> does that lead to less noncitizens being paroled into the country? >> yes. >> if there are less noncitizens paroled, will there be less migrant crises like the one in new york? >> the source of the challenge in new york city is varied and one source of that is a public official's decision to deliberately not communicate. >> i reclaim my time. the question was does less encounters at the border lead to less crises and i would offer that the answer is yes and you had different opinion.

the focuses remain in mexico policy which was when president biden announced he was rescinding that and what do you think went through the mind of a migrant from central or south america, many of whom come for economic reasons and what you think went through the mind of that migrant who knows now if he or she made it to the southern border that they would be granted entry and more likely for that to happen. >> i do believe that the remain in mexico policy throughout its duration, i believe, and i will verify this, approximately 70,000 migrants went through it in the two years it was in operation. i think you are overemphasizing. >> why do it and why repeal

remain in mexico? what is the value to border security by repealing the policy? >> it wasn't an effective policy. it was causing a tremendous amount of human tragedy south of our border. because it was bad policy, it was rescinded. >> your testimony is the 200% increase of migrant encounters at the southwest border and 20% less time because of covid? >> no. i haven't testified to that. the situation and the reasons for it are varied and the fact of the matter is the world is experiencing the greatest displacement of people since world war ii in our hemisphere. we are not spared that reality. >> i will reclaim my time. resident biden should go back to the successful policies of the trump era and the only bill that has passed either chamber in this town and i yelled back. >> i now recognize the gentlelady from texas for five

minutes. >> i do appreciate your presence here today and as i do millions of americans and members of this committee who are here seriously to do the work of the american people. first of all, let me speak the obvious since my colleagues want to attribute more money, more money, the democrats and i am very proud of my legislation hr 3208 which has passed this committee, cyber workforce -- legislation that has been drafted, which the committee favorably reported and in july it appears. also it addresses the question that he was speaking about about your workforce issue if we would pass a number of legislative initiatives and we may move you along further.

this bill in particular talks about cyber workforce which is one of my most serious issues and let's train them and give them internships or access and let's put them to work and i think if we did that, you would have at least a portion of the battle where you would have the staff that would begin working at homeland security and it is a place i have heard people are industry -- interested in working to defend the nation so let's see if we can do something. i do want to address the question of dealing with the articles of impeachment, willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law. it is always difficult to ask somebody to detail their own feelings and frailties and he you believe that you have

failed to comply with the law? where would you do better and complying with the law on behalf of the american people? >> i have been in public service 22 years and i have taken the oath i think five times and i have adhered to the oath to which i have sworn and i have abided by it each and every step of the way. >> when the question is asked over and over again and this is for the american people for those still tuning in weather the southern border is secure, they need that answer so i would ask the question is somebody who believes that you do the best with what you have and you work hard and we owe the american people the duty of a secure border, what more would you do if that was the question or you need to do more

and what would you do to secure the american border if you felt that was necessary and you wanted to tell the american people this is what i needed? >> we are dealing with a fundamentally broken immigration system which is the on the mental problem and i would encourage congress to pass a bipartisan senate legislation that brings tremendously advancing reform to the broken immigration system and also resource our department to execute those reforms advantageously. >> it seems a simple proposition to me and throughout the entire questioning that i have decided to sit and listen and i have heard no offering of a resolution by my friends on the other side of the aisle and there is absolutely nothing to answer these second article of impeachment the breach of public trust which we do know that the sole power of

impeachment and they should be removed for that impeachment of trust than what is the breach and what is your belief is a brief of trust? >> i am not aware of any and let me assure you that i don't spend time on the impeachment proceedings but focus my attention exclusively on the work of the department of homeland security. >> we do know and that is an answer i wish some of our colleagues maybe some could listen, we do know that iran is a major proponent of terrorism and they decided to exercise the definition by bombarding israel with 300 of the missiles they decided to use, the drones they decided to use against an ally for this horrible attack. what then would you give us an

answer? did we the united states to generate an attack on israel? was that are doing? >> no. >> are we prepared to be supportive in helping to defend our homeland? >> we most certainly are. we do that every day with the extraordinary work of 268,000 men and women in our department. >> you have not seen anybody stand up and resign and say i am frightened or i don't want to do this worker protect the homeland? have you seen that? >> i haven't. people risk their lives every day on behalf of our country, both in the department and other departments and of course in our branches of the military. >> the time has expired. >> the ladies time has expired and we insist on the five minutes. >> she is not recognize. i now recognize the gentleman

>> open border policies have hosted illegal aliens from the middle east and west africa known for hot heads of terrorism and clearly this administration's policies have emboldened countries such as iran like what we saw over the weekend with attacks on israel. can you tell me confidently that this committee -- or this committee that no former iranian revolutionary guard, core members or members of islamic terrorist organizations have been granted parole into the united states? >> let me assure you that an individual who poses a threat to the national security is a priority for detention. and removal. >> what about anybody from the people's liberation army from the chinese communist party. >> i want to switch from americans on free speech and four months ago, the assistant

secretary for dhs testified that the oversight senate committee said, countering disinformation that threatens the homeland and providing the public with accurate information in response are critical to fulfilling the congressionally mandated missions. secretary, do you believe congress has given dhs the authority to use censorship to counter disinformation? >> we don't censor free speech and we abide by the first amendment. >> this found that and i quote again likely significantly encouraged the social media platforms and content moderation decisions and thereby violated the first amendment and do you know or did you know your agency was pressuring social media platforms to central americans? >> we don't censor speech or

pressure platforms to do so. i believe the trial court's ruling was reversed in part by the appellate court and i can't speak for the because i believe the legation continues. >> documents recently obtained from the freedom of information act shows they argued the agency has the authority to regulate misinformation and disinformation. however the content of these documents has been redacted. i have questioned members regarding this and wasn't satisfied with their response so i will ask you what congressional authority do they have in this space? >> i will give you some real- life examples of the work we do. i am sure you will support it when human smuggling organizations spread disinformation with respect to

the policies of the department of homeland security we did publish accurate information with respect to her policies. when criminal organizations domestically in the wake of a natural disaster spread disinformation to victims of that natural disaster and to deceive them and fall prey to those criminal organizations, we provide accurate information with respect to what fema does and doesn't do and when a foreign adversary spread disinformation with respect to the processes of our elections, for example, if you don't make it to the voting booth on time, don't worry because you can vote on wednesday, we actually communicate accurate information with respect to the election process and coordination with state and local officials and that is the type of work we do and i know you endorsed that work wholeheartedly given the fact it is about enforcing the law and making sure that people

don't fall prey to criminals who don't seek to enforce the law. >> mr. secretary, is dhs able to touch each individual that the nefarious actors are touching? and i do respect what you just said but my concern is and i hope this is happening but is dhs able to reach out to all the bodies that the nefarious actors are engaging with with the right information to impose a negative information? >> we do seek to disseminate the accurate information as broadly as possible. >> is that on the site or in the social media platforms? >> we have webpages that disseminate and broadcast that and we use of force multipliers in our state local tribal territorial partners and state and local law enforcement, et

cetera. >> that is fine. the gentleman's time has expired and i now recognize the gentleman from california and ranking member on the subcommittee of cyber security and infrastructure. >> welcome back and thank you and the men and women that your department for what they are doing during this especially vulnerable time for the homeland and i know it's probably not comfortable for you to have any of us reference the impeachment that speaker johnson brought to the floor, but i want to get some dates right. was it february 13 when speaker johnson was finally able to get the votes to impeach you? was that the date? >> i don't recall the date. >> it was february 13. by the way it was a second serve impeachment. the first one was a fault and they couldn't get the votes and in pickleball you would have

only gotten one serve and with it and it was tennis and i got a second serve and barely were able to do it. today it is april 16. so i am not great at math but that is two months and have the impeachment articles, as we sit here today been sent over to the senate for a trial yet? are you aware? >> i don't know whether something has occurred while i have been testifying before this committee. >> i bring it up because we were told this is this urgency and crisis at the border and we have to do this now and bring one of our colleagues suffering and going through cancer treatments that we are all rooting for and bring him out of those treatment so he could come and be a pivotal vote so we could get you impeached and get you out of the senate and it's been two months and still not over so i don't think this is the urgency we are told and it seems like it was more the former president wanted us to do that so speaker johnson did that and we seem to go where ever the former president wants

us to go whether it is on border policy or on funding ukraine and not really america first agenda but it is me me me when it comes to the former president and these guys kind of get dragged along and that is why the articles, as we sit here today, have not been sent over yet. i do want to talk about disinformation. does russia or china or iran or venezuela have a right to free speech in our elections as you see it? americans have a right to speak freely about elections but do you see our adversaries as having a right to pollute our public forum when it comes to speech? >> congressman, one of the threat streams attacking the integrity of our elections is disinformation from adverse

nationstates including the people's republic of china, russia, iran and north korea. >> i also find it interesting and my colleagues, some of them don't like you are going after disinformation. but one of our very labeled staff members just provided me with a july 11 2018 transcript in this room. when the former president, donald trump was president, and you have a number of republican members who are arguing that it is actually disinformation, that is the problem. you have multiple republican members saying that disinformation is the foreign adversaries tool of choice as mr. rogers at the time said and mr. perry until january 6 he also goes into identifying

foreign disinformation as being the problem. again, what we want the department to do isn't to choose sides politically because we know our adversaries first and foremost want chaos so they can go to their authoritative -- authoritarian states and say this is why democracy doesn't work and they undermine america. but would you say that when you look at disinformation and when you see disinformation, that it doesn't have a straight line as far as been a fading -- benefiting one side or the other but they just want chaos? >> adverse nationstates seek to attack our nation, our democracy of this country. and we battle there efforts every day. >> again, mr. secretary, thank you for what you do and we are

grateful for your being in the chair you are and it isn't an easy place to sit. i am confident there will be a swift acquittal, if it ever gets sent over to the senate and i do yield back. >> i do not recognize the gentleman from new york. >> thank you for being here this morning this morning and this afternoon. have you read h.r. 2? >> it has been a while, but i did review the legislation. >> were there any parts that you agreed with? >> i would have to review it again. >> it was the most comprehensive border security bill that has been passed out of the house of representatives and decades and you are the secretary of homeland security and you are not certain or sure of any of the items and that legislation that you would agree with? >> let me assure you that i do

support the senate's bipartisan legislation. >> i am not asking about that but h.r. 2. this is the only piece of border security legislation that has been passed through the house of representatives and we continue to talk about this bipartisan legislation and this magical legislation that has yet to make it out of the senate that doesn't have the support to make it out but we still have the administration and the secretary of homeland security telling us we should support legislation that can't get past. you don't remember any parts of h.r. 2 you support? >> i could share with you some of the grave infirmities. >> i am asking for parts you support. my point is back in may house republicans out of this committee they pass the secure the border act and we send it over to the senate and that should have begun the negotiation. that should have been the starting point to secure our border. i heard colleagues on the other side of the aisle say that people in america are freaking

out and there is chaos and, yes, people are freaking out and, yes, there is chaos because joe biden and the homeland security has left our borders lying open. that is why people are freaking out. there is a solution. it was h.r. 2. do i agree with everything and there? absolutely not. and i assume you don't agree with a lot of things and there either. democrats didn't agree with things in their? but it is the only piece of legislation that we actually have and it is the perfect starting point. so my colleagues on the other side talking about this magical piece of legislation, we have it, h.r. 2 and let's start there. i will take it back home. time after time the committee has listened to the devastating impact the border crisis has had and of course because of the policies that have been implemented by you and president biden.

you have helped make every state a border state and every county a border county and every city a border city. this includes my home in new york. a democratic mayor, whom i don't agree with on everything, but i do agree with him on this. he said, this issue will the story new york city. i am proud to have served on the nypd's city detective. it has been absolutely devastating to see the horrific challenges that law enforcement are faced with throughout the country. just recently, we saw nypd cops attacked by illegal migrants who just got done robbing a target. months ago we saw officers a brutally attacked in midtown manhattan and they were our guests at the state of the union. we saw in the bronx recently where there was a 911 call made for a person with a gun and when cops made their way into this home in the bronx and it

was illegal migrants who had squatted there illegally and had illegal guns and illegal narcotics. days after, in my district there were two migrants who committed larceny in a store and arrested by the police department. guess what the address was they gave? that home in the bronx where the guns and narcotics were found. i will ask you. can you tell me at what part of this budget request would better support law enforcement? >> quite a number of parts and the additional personnel request and the funding for additional law enforcement personnel in the department of homeland security. >> do you know there was money and there for additional law enforcement? >> in addition, the funding that we are seeking to

distribute to state and local law enforcement through the homeland security grant program, the urban area security initiative and other programs. >> so everything you just mentioned was part of h.r. 2? so it seems like you do know what you agreed with annette legislation. to my point, that is exactly where we should start. i do urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work on this as americans and h.r. 2 with her starting point. i do yield back. >> i recognize ms. clark. >> thank you for your dedication and fidelity to our nation. it is inspiring and not withstanding all the challenges that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle present to you. at the end of the day, you have kept the homeland safe during

your tenure and we are grateful for that. i do want to respond to a false allegation raised by some of my republican colleagues about noncitizens voting in federal elections. first of all, federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections, and there is zero evidence that there are significant violations of that. republicans efforts to make it harder to vote will disenfranchise low income and minority voters and will do nothing to make our elections more secure but instead we should focus on the real threats to our election security which includes foreign interference efforts, which i know secretary mayorkas is committed to addressing. additionally, i am deeply disturbed by congresswoman greene's attack originally known as an organization supporting refugees for over 140 years. baseless conspiracy theories

about this fueled the anti- semitic murder of 11 individuals at the tree of life synagogue in pittsburgh. it is disgraceful to see this same kind of misinformation repeated in this committee. i did want that on the record. mr. secretary, last month they issued a notice of proposed rulemaking for mandatory cyber reporting and i congratulated the department on this important milestone and now that the npr in the south, dhs must redouble efforts to harmonize incident report rules across government. the department reporting counsel will play a critical role and secretary mayorkas issued a report containing recommendations regarding the harmonization cyber incident reporting and what actions has

been taken since it was released to promote harmonization, and what more can they be doing to promote harmonization? >> thank you for your questions. we are working with federal departments and agencies across the administration to execute on the imperative of harmonizing are reporting rules and not only that, but we are working with international partners so harmonization not be restricted to the domestic environment but the international arena as well. >> that is good news. as part of the infrastructure and jobs act congress invested $1 million in grants to tribal and territorial governments in strengthening their cyber defenses based on bipartisan legislation and i authored it with my colleagues on this committee. unfortunately, this expires in 2025, which could mean state and local governments cut their

spending even as they continue to face serious cyber security threats including from foreign adversaries like china and russia and it is my hope they will work to extend the program so we can build our investment. secretary, you agree that state and local governments will continue to meet federal support as they defend their intrusions, and do you commit to working with me on this committee to reauthorize the state of local support -- cyber security grant programs? >> i do and i will. >> wonderful. just another note of concern with the nation of haiti. you should've received a letter or have been copied on the letter regarding the concern about individuals being returned at this stage who would be in harms way and the myriad of challenges that the nation continues to face in this moment.

i do look forward to speaking with you further about this and it is a major concern for many constituencies and families across this nation of haitian descent. >> does the gentle you -- gentlelady yield? >> yes. >> i wanted to talk about ensuring we get fixed what is broken, mr. secretary. sometimes we have equipment, technology that isn't working correctly and i wanted to consent that an ineffective planning and oversight practice underscoring the need for improved contract management and will you continue to access getting that improved so we can work with it? >> the time has expired.

>> i think you for yielding. >> i want to continue and specifically the chemical facility anti-terrorism standards program and this program, can you describe for us how your budget or bites continued support. >> i will have to remind myself of the specific funding for that program and that is very important and it has been a tremendous peril and we support continuation of this but it enables us to make sure that high risk chemical facilities are as secure as they need to be. >> would you agree a continuation of that program is

an important part of the mission to protect critical infrastructure? >> i would. >> would you also encourage our friends in the senate to take up the bill passed by the house and currently there awaiting their consideration and action? >> i do look forward to reviewing that bill again, but we do indeed consider that program to be very important. >> i would like to then return to the subject of sisera and its role of infrastructure in its efforts to help efforts with infrastructure specifically there could you describe what cisa does to help protect ? >> one of the things we do is provide training with respect to the threat to be able to identify the threat and we share best practices.

we have marked election security is one of the six priority areas and in some of our homeland security grant programs to make sure that state and local jurisdictions the votes needed resources to a fundamental need of our country and that is to safeguard the integrity of our election processes. >> moving to the question of breaches and cyber attacks, what effort is cisa making to bolster its own internal cyber security? i know they were victim to attack but can you describe to us the efforts internal to cisa to cyber security? >> that is a priority for the department as a whole, and our chief information officer and that team is consistently working day in and day out to

enhance our security and, in addition, they work to enhance cyber security of the federal civilian domain. it issues binding operational directives and based on what it learns from particular incidents to make sure that agencies and departments are patching or protecting himself against detective vulnerabilities and this is a significant mission area of ours. the cyber security threat vector is not unfortunately diminishing. >> related hsi, i want to go back to that subject, which you addressed earlier as it related to some gang activities. but specifically within your budget, i want to discuss hsi and operations related to exploitation and trafficking. your budget calls for additional funding there to help hsi investigators combat

human trafficking? >> yes. >> can you explain the types of activities they take specifically to the exploitation and trafficking of children? >> i named crimes of exploitation is one of the six mission priorities for the first time in the department's history. tomorrow, i will be with hsi in new york city launching a new campaign against online sexual child exploitation and abuse. it is a scourge not only nationwide but global in nature with more than 36 million tips presented to enforcement authorities across the world and domestically more than 63,000 of them reflected an imminent or grave threat. the extent of this crime can't be overstated. the work of hsi in combating it is heroic both in disseminating education and awareness and

investigating the crimes and in rescuing victims and holding perpetrators accountable. >> thank you. i do yield back. >> i now recognize the gentleman from texas for five minutes. >> good afternoon. my colleague has initiated a conversation i wanted to have with you and having discussions with hsi and other agencies, one of the biggest issues they are confronted with is their ability to navigate aggregated data over criminals moving individuals into this sex trafficking space. are you comfortable with the amount of money you are asking for because there are different entities and and my concern is

the right hand isn't talking to the left. we need to expand the ability for our agents to process the data and in the budget proposal there is only $5 million for a new ai office and are you happy with that number? >> congressman, we are pleased with receiving additional funding when comes to crimes of exploitation. i must tell you that if i did have a wish list, the amount of money would be greater in the amount of personnel we could dedicate to this would be greater. this scourge and heinous crime is of extraordinary breadth and depths of depravity and we work every day. it is remarkable what our personnel do to combat this with state and local partners as well as international partners and it's one of the top issues raised when i am engaging in the international arena with our partners as well as our european union colleagues.

>> i hate to speak for the body itself but i think we are hungry to have a good appetite for the expansiveness of ai in this space and this is where i will tell you to be hyper- aggressive in order to save these women and children in this problem. >> congressman -- >> that is the third time you have done that to me and i don't even know where to go with that. i was hoping we wouldn't have to do it but we going to the pronouns and stuff. >> three strikes and i my out -- am out. i will share with you that we are harnessing ai to advance the mission in the fight of online sexual exploitation but at the same time it presents a risk because the perpetrators use it to advance their depraved criminality and, so, this is something we are harnessing for good and

fighting against. >> that is where i was going earlier and do we have a chance to touch the individuals and i am hoping we do and i hope it's a very aggressive problem set and i will roll right on you immigration. i never even saw the senate bill so a little latitude. i think you are the 14th homeland secretary? >> i am the seventh confirmed. >> i don't know where i got 14 and i think it was wikipedia. were ever. deputy secretary hunter was in front of the subcommittee a few weeks ago and we were talking immigration issues and policy and i asked or requested because in your opening statement you said congress hasn't reformed immigration since the 90s. it is our job to pass legislation but the subject

matter experts live underneath your umbrella and are you a subject matter expert in immigration? >> i certainly am admiring of those who know more than i. >> might ask was and we were in agreement it seems that the front line operators are the best to address the immigration issue and where the blockade is and has that ever been written from the department and sent up to congress? because i have never seen that. i am asking you if you have done that in your tenure as secretary? >> have i myself submitted a policy recommendation? >> no. rewritten the policy that is held up that you can't even read and it's the absolute problem. has the homeland security department said here is a problem that congress can't get anything done for the last 20 something years and we will write it for you, submitted and this is the best course of

action? has homeland security did that? >> there are two powerful examples and on his first day in office president biden presented legislation to congress and secondly i had the privilege and honor of sitting beside the bipartisan group of senators who worked out a compromise that i urge congress to pass. >> the gentleman's time is expired and i recognize the gentleman from alabama for five minutes of testimony. >> secretary, thank you for being here to speak on the fy 2025 budget request and the budget request reflects the administration's priorities, correct? >> it does. >> i want to talk about the threats to homeland and dhs that we see according to your budget request. i was pleased last year that you acknowledge the threat that unmanned aircraft systems pose at the southern border saying in part that drones are being

used and in a myriad of ways in a number of different ways to create a public safety risk. you and i agree on this that the cartels use the drones at the border and it is alarming and from using them to track the movement of border patrol agents to providing overwatch for human smuggling to transporting narcotics and even outfitting them with explosive payloads while for each drone that bp flies, the mexican cartel flies 17 based on the last information i got. this issue hasn't improved since last year. last month and a senate hearing, the norad commander general testified the number of drone incursions alarmed him saying he has "talk to cbp responsible for incursions at the border and they put the number of incursions at

thousands." he went on to say that he sees the potential of a threat posed by drones to the national defense is only growing. is counting the illicit use of drones at the border a priority for dhs and cbp? >> it certainly is. >> it is very concerning and confusing to me. this is your budget request for cbp counter program and you see it behind me. zero. not one penny. not one penny of this is unbelievable and as the use of drones but bad actors at the border evolves and continues to bring a threat to the homeland, it is unconscionable that you wouldn't request a single penny for cbp to counter its mission or carry out its mission but you requested is zero and thousands of flights into u.s.

airspace by mexican cartel -- we do have the ability to block, drop or intercept drones and moving on i want to revisit the i.c.e. detention that issue that my colleagues have mentioned as aliens continue to pour across the border your fy 2025 budget request funding for just 34,000 i.c.e. beds and barely half of the 60,000 requested by the trump administration in fy 21 and in may 2020 when you testified in the subcommittee hearing that you are concerned about the overuse of detention and is it safe to presume that this is why you want to cut bed space and release illegal aliens on the streets of america? >> it isn't my desire to cut detention beds. i should say returning the counter you af authorities, we

are seeking to harness artificial intelligence to amplify the strength of our counter you af capabilities. >> i will tell you this here on the ua s we have the to elegy and in my community where we live in huntsville, alabama re- can block them or drop them or intercept them and it's being used in ukraine and israel but the only thing is you have to request it to make sure it happened so i promise you that i hope we come to reason because when they are coming in and setting down and dropping down drugs and being stuffed full of cash going back to the cartel, it's unacceptable and i take you to your word that you will do something about it. if congress is willing to fund more i.c.e. bed space or near trump level eras, would this be a solution to detaining more illegal aliens? >> the greater the detention capacity, the greater our ability to detain more people and the bipartisan senate

legislation funded 50,000 detention beds and that is a powerful example. >> at the beginning of 2022 you testified that congress -- to congress that you had operational control of the border and in the following hearings you backtracked and altered the definition of operational control. in 2024, at a hearing last week, you testified we have a crisis at the southern border and are you finally admitting to what the american people have known to be true that your policies don't work? >> the gentleman's time is expired and i recognize the gentleman from oklahoma. >> i think the chairman and, secretary i am concerned about real id compliant so i will shift the narrative to discuss that which will be part of budget implementation and real id and they say about under 2025 will be compliant and it

was designed for the identity of travelers post 9/11 to protect are you a citizenry which is how it was sold when it was passed years ago and under your leadership, the department is going to start implementing this, this transportation security administration, tsa will be prohibited from accepting drivers licenses and id cards that don't meet certain standards and you say you continue to work with states to meet the requirements. here is where i take this. i heard from two illinois state lawmakers that illegals and their state and they have verification they can get real id compliant driver's licenses and i want to reiterate. in illinois, illegal aliens can get real id licenses by checking the box on employment authorization document which is one of the subsets on the state website required by the state of illinois is an option and it can be obtained by this illegal

but it comes under the parole, which is in something implemented by you in this administration. so with this document box, it can be checked and in my opinion i think most americans would say it undermines real id compliance given the lack of background checks that go into knowing who these people are and there is a lack of information and you can do some of this and background checks in terms of the ability to understand who these people are. we don't. is real id compromised? i believe it is. i believe it is a glaring fault in the system so we will go into a quick question. should illegal aliens get real id driver's licenses? >> i look forward to following up with you on the integrity of that as it is envisioned and we are facing it in and it's been a program. >> yes or no? should real id, should illegal aliens have the option in your opinion to get real id

compliant driver's licenses? >> i look forward to following up with you. >> i wish you had a no on that.'s question. should illegal aliens vote? should they be able to vote in this country? >> it is my understanding that illegal aliens can't vote in federal elections? >> are they allowed to vote? the answer is yes in new york and illinois they are allowed to vote so whether it is federal or not, question is should they be allowed to vote? >> that policy issue is outside homeland security. >> i need to move on for time. you have continued the entire hemisphere is gripped with the level of migration that is unprecedented in recent history. you said that today in your opening statement. i think this avoids accountability for the invasion of the southern border and i think it shifts the blame on random events. and if that narrative is to be

understood or followed, what are those events? i am looking around the world and i said in south america was there a hurricane or sternotomy i wasn't aware of? the answer is no. ultimately, for those who have the context of the wizard of oz, it is like the wizard at the microphone saying disregard the man as the curtain is being pulled back a little dog toto but disregard the man pulling levers and spinning wheels and i think the american people have this figured out. the migration is because it has been an advertisement under this administration to come into this country and i come from this sooner state and oklahoma and history designates legal land run occurred in the 1880s and this wasn't for illegals but legal citizens and history remembers this time i believe in the past three years as bidens land run for illegals paid for by you as taxpayers and we are being asked to give

their treasure and children's treasure of the future for this and they say it cost us $4000 for every illegal immigrant and a gold rush to transport illegals to the city of their choice, free emergency healthcare. once these people have a child it is cash payments in the form of earned income tax credits with food stamps once they have a child in food stamps once they have a child again on medicaid on top of that. so here is where i am going with this. does your budget proposed and this one does especially we deem is the slush fund, does it allow for dollars to go into countries as far south as panama for nongovernment organizations people coming to our country and telling military age men to go north? >> the gentleman's time is expired. i recognize mr. crane from arizona for five minutes. >> thank you.

it is interesting because i hear my colleagues on the other side consistently talking about how we can't agree on anything over here on the republican side of the aisle. there is some truth to that and there has definitely been some debates and arguments within our own party, but one thing we can agree upon is you are doing a horrible job, sir and you need to be impeached. that is pretty wild seeing how we are come together, look at the data, hear the stories back in the district, listen to the family members that have been destroyed because of your complete of duty and we all agreed that you needed to be impeached. >> secretary alejandro mayorkas, did you swear an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the united states? >> yes i did. >> yeah, how many times have you done that? >> i certainly can identify

five. >> okay, thank you. are you aware of article 4, section 4. >> it may be more than five instances, i just want to be clear. >> okay, great. article 4, section 4. >> okay, since you are not going to answer, it's called the invasion clause. you know with the invasion cause says? >> the federal government will protect and defend each state from invasion. okay? since you do not seem to be getting it, i had our staff bring up this graph. this is you, this is the last administration. you, last administration. that looks like an invasion on a graph. we have heard from the people who have sat here and testified in these chambers about their family members being and murdered by people who were not supposed to be here.

your administration allowed to be here and didn't keep track of, did not deport, did not detain. tell me how you not allowed in invasion in this country. >> i am incredibly proud to support the men and women of homeland security who enforce the laws of the united states every single date. many of whom risk their lives to secure our borders. >> said despite your horrific leadership coming if they do. i am proud to know many of them as well. they are great people. we all know that -- we all know what the morale is like in the border patrol right now and it is horrible. i hear from order control agents every day. again, sir, my question is how will you not violated your oath to protect and defend the constitution of the united states, specifically article 4, section 4, which says that you as homeland security will protect each state from invasion. you, last administration. how can you make that argument?

>> i work every day, quite probably, to advance the security of the border. >> you may be working every day but it seems as if you are working for the other side of the aisle. it seems as if you are working for our enemies and that is exactly what the american people see. that is exactly why they supported us impeaching you and that is exactly why you had so many members of this conference that is often divided, come together to impeach you, sir. let me ask you this question, alejandro mayorkas . >> congressman, you can launch whatever deplorable actions. >> do you think our adversaries are stupid, sir? >> are adversaries are very incapability. we address the defense of the united states and the interest of the united states accordingly. >> know you are not. you are not doing that.

there is a matter of fact, do you think it is possible that maybe some of our adversaries, the most dangerous ones like the chinese, north koreans, iranians, russians, et cetera, might singe their soldiers because our border is wide open through the southern border without a uniform? without firearms? with instructions to wreak havoc in this country want they are here. once you have allowed them to be here. you think that is possible, secretary alejandro mayorkas? >> over the 11 months, we have removed and returned 630,000 people . more than any fiscal year since 2013. >> you are bragging about how much you return but you do not want to brag about how many you have let in, do you? >> individuals who arrive and lame asylum are placed in immigration enforcement proceedings. if they do not qualify for relief under our laws, we seek to remove them and enforcing our laws. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i yield back. >> the members of the committee may have some additional questions for you, secretary alejandro mayorkas. we would ask that you would respond to those in writing . i think there were several at the time that kind of fell. i will let those members send those to you for you to follow up on. committee rule 7d, the record will be held open for 10 days. i think the ranking member has a unanimous consent request and a closing statement. i will let you do this together, mr. ranking member. >> okay, thank you. unanimous consent that portions of the july 18, 2018 hearing transcript refer be inserted in the record. >> i so ordered. >> record recognized for your closing response. >> thank you very much. i would like to thank secretary mayorkas for agreeing to testify for this midi committee.

attacks against him. mr. secretary, you have done what i consider a good job at defending this administration, given the constraints that you had to operate from in terms of resources. the secretary's willingness to appear in support over the department needs demonstrate his character as a truly dedicated public server. i am not sure i can say the same for colleagues on the other side of the aisle who prefer ranting while refusing to provide authority and resources department needs. you cannot have it both ways. you cannot look the employees in the face and claim you support them when you refuse to put your vote where your mouth is. this is exactly what my republican colleagues have done.

it is appalling. dhs only receive funding for fiscal year 2024 do to overwhelming democratic support just like in 2023. republicans try to claim that it is you that is undermining border security. this hypocrisy is astounding. the hearing which was supposed to be about the dhs budget has become yet another hearing. i did not hear one republican colleague raise concerns about whether fema will have the funding needed to respond to an increasing number of national disasters, nor did they engage with dhs's work to defend against legitimate threats to our 2024 election. instead, choosing to waste time

with unfounded allegations. nor did they want to discuss how the department is responding to domestic terrorist attacks that have left american communities scared and outraged. tasked with handling all of these issues in more, yet, my republican colleagues seem more than doing the hard work of government. this is simply not the way to get things done. it takes complete and utter compromise like we saw in the senate where they drafted a bipartisan bill that would have been tough to set we've ever had. the fact that mega republicans rejected the proposal out of hand and pursued a baseless and unconstitutional impeachment against you, mr. secretary, tells the american people all

they need to know. the leader of the republican party, donald trump, brad about killing this legislation because it would have helped president biden. republicans in the house and senate have said they will not pass this legislation to improve border security. republicans are saying the quiet part out loud. they will not support the department. it benefits them politically. to engage with his political and advocate the needs of the department. the other thing i want to mention is we didn't get to talk about.

a new frontier that we had to be front and center to defend on our system so i look forward . the work that you and dhs employees do is critical and i want to but this committees value by some members of this committee. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. thank you again, mr. secretary. >> closing statement, before i start, i would like to clarify a couple things have been addressed in today's hearing and i will be brief, mr. secretary. the fact that immigration laws have not been updated does not mean we get to follow the immigration laws. i would agree with you. we definitely need to upgrade

some immigration laws. those do not occur in this committee. it actually happens over and judiciary. i appreciate the continual mention that needs to be addressed but it doesn't allow a variance of any kind in loss of argument been passed by the body. it does not excuse violation in the law. i would also like to clarify something that is and quite frankly dishonest, disingenuous, suggest that someone or a group on the side of the aisle or that side of the aisle votes one way or another on a budget, not for spending money to increase border security. for example, if you vote against the budget, it decreases customs and border patrol and then you turn around and vote. it is dishonest to say that

that side who voted that way voted to cut spending to customs and border patrol. we have heard that multiple times today. that is flat dishonesty. that is all you have to say to do support or defend the actions of the border, that tells everybody the truth about what is really going on. another point i would like to clarify. someone made a comment that the impeachment hearings were two hearings. it was a 10 month, five phase investigation of oversight subpoenas that were never complied with. this notion that there were two hearings is false. about legislation on addressing border security, the process is pretty simple in the constitution and the rules of the committee and house and senate passed the bill, send it to the senate. they could amend it, because a conference committee. we do that every year.

if the leadership of the senate really wanted to do something, they would pick the bill up that was sent over a year ago. in terms of the budget discussion today, a i and all this other stuff, multiple members talked about this. i want to try clarify because you just do not get to say this happened, this happened. some kind of jedi mind trick until the american people that the people on this side didn't talk about human trafficking. cybersecurity. somewhat infuriating that people think they can say something that is not true and anybody is going to believe it. i want to correct the record on that. i have to be candid. your 2025 budget request, i think undermines our countries ability to handle national security. i think this idea of cutting customs and border control that you guys get to decide on your own to use his really contrary

to the founding principles of us doing a budget, sending it to you guys. that is what our founders envisioned. it is against the foundation. that is why things like that are not supported in this budget or other budgets that do get voted on and authorizations. underfunding customs and border protection's. i think it's just going to result in migrants across the border. when we catch and release and do those kinds of things, it's a motivation. people become it is an incentive to come. it is important for us to not seek cuts to those. we know a lot of the dollars are going to do nothing but continue the policies that it's been doing which is ushering more people in. an interesting number to me, if you look at the curve on got a

ways, as you pull people off the border process, the known got a ways number flat lines or decreases a little bit because they are not out there to see the known got a ways. they are not out on the border. they are processing people. i inc. the unknown number increases massively. that is speculation on my part. it is good common sense. that is a number we have no clue how big that number is but we brought in this committee many times and have shown the videos from ranchers where folks are wearing camouflage. you have seen that of been piled up in arizona inside the border, and the backpacks which we know are full of fentanyl. during your secretary, a number of cost in the country, too many of whom have connections

to transnational criminal organizations. you are from california originally. very good reporting on how the honduran cartels have links to games gangs in san francisco and created this nexus is shocking. it all happen on your watch. most recently, it has been mentioned here. an illegal alien murdered a college student in raleigh paroled by your department into the country. it left a trial of crime in his path. she is just one of thousands of americans have been murdered or otherwise victimized. the most gutwrenching part of her murder is that it could have been prevented if you and your administration had chosen to enforce the laws in the books. that woman is dead simply because the laws were not followed. mr. secretary, the number of known i have talked about

already, the number has trailed off because we are not to look anymore. i do not want to imagine that undetected number is -- it scares me to death. it seems director talked about that when he was testifying. you claim that your budget will address the issues we face in our border but if we look at the numbers, the math does not add up. to hire only 350 new border patrol agents. i do not think that number is enough and that is why all the authorizations we send over have been significantly higher, despite what is being said here today. >> senate ask you how you will reach your hiring goals, you cannot give an answer. the truth is is that it's at an

all-time low. the working conditions. these are your policies that have created that. >> we been committed to writing strong oversight and most importantly, the actions that you have taken as a leader. we have investigated those policies, we have investigated those. we look forward and we hope that we can work together on those issues that i mentioned. cybersecurity, ports, vulnerability of our supply chain. a lot of those areas we do agree on. where there is overlap, where we do agree, they are moving those things forward as quickly as we can. i look forward to doing that with you. this committee is focused on our workforce and i got a bill that i personally am leading help put together. we will get a copy of it too. make sure she gets eyes on it. we will want your help on that and i think you will like to

together. that ends my comments for the day and i thank you for coming. i understand the emotions of being here today. without objection, the committee does stand.

c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including cox.

>> today, the senate is expected to receive articles of impeachment against homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas . in the first step towards an impeachment trial, the secretary is accused of failing to comply with the law and breach of public trust for his handling of the southern border. we will have live coverage as in the afternoon on c-span 2. you can also watch on the free c-span app or online at c- span.org . >> c-span has completed from the halls