tv Hearing on Improving DHS Management Operations CSPAN July 30, 2021 5:12pm-7:50pm EDT
the house homeland security held hearing on improving management and operations at the department of homeland security. former officials with the department answered questions about workforce moral, cybersecurity, infrastructure protection and pandemic preparedness. this is just over 2 and half hours. >> the committee on homeland security will come to order. the committee is meeting to hear testimony on securing the homeland to meet today's threats. without objection the chair is authorized to declare the committee and recess at any it point. today we're meeting to discuss how the department of homeland security should refocus its mission to best respond to the
most serious threats facing our nation. this conversation comes at a timely moment as we approach the 20th an verse rip of established in 2003 to prevent and respond to terrorist attacks within the united states. since then the range o 20th anniversary of the must manage has extended well beyond terrorism. today, dhs is task with confronting with the coronavirus to my domestic extremist and it is critical as full threats facing the country and under president trump that focus for immigration and border security extending with the other mission.
with that operational damage carrying out the last administration failed policies. son have embrace the notion that dhs must be dismantled but that is not the answer. instead we need to enhance accountability and transparency to earn america's trust and earlier this month to ensure the department has a strong integrated core to secure the homeland while ensuring accountability and transparency and protection of american civil rights and civil liberty this legislation is a recommendation made by those have closely examined the challenges facing dhs including the center of new american society the atlantic council and the center for
american progress off the organizations identify the need for of increased oversight for law enforcement operations. for example by creating to oversee such operations. additionally seeking a greater role the office of civil rights and civil liberties to strengthen constitutional protections of dhs policy programs and activities. also to recognize improve the morale of the dhs workforce must be a top priority. the dhs reform act authorizes several programs aimed at identifying and addressing the causes of low employee morale. representatives from these organizations i look forward
to discussing in greater detail for transforming dhs. as the department looks to address emerging threats and long-standing challenges the homeland security stands ready to assist but then that fall authorization deal to reflect the oversight finding beyond a few nearly tailored areas to have jurisdiction over parts of dhs and no single committed is involved in working to change that with the house leadership and other committees that jurisdiction is on recommendations of the commission that is yet to be
resolved and that department over the last 15 years it is long past time for it to be addressed and to be successful it needs to have the confidence of the american people in the process of the homeland security enterprise alex forward to the witnesses and members how we can reform dhs to do just that. with that i recognize the ranking member, the gentle man from new york for an opening statement. >> thank you for raising that issue. thank you for holding this timely hearing to discuss reforms for department of homeland security and think our distinguished witnesses to take the time to appear before the committee.
approaching the 20th anniversary of september 11 and this committee spans the crossroad we can either choose to work together to successfully enact we need for changes to benefit this country or we can choose to go about business as usual leaving communities vulnerable 20 years ago congress established homeland security by combining 22 separate federal agencies. the intent was to ensure that the many threats of the american people and to prevent 9/11 from happening to this day homeland security has been successful for many terrorist attacks while consistently to new and evolving threats to the homeland at the next honest to hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for budget cuts to critical missions to protect americans lives every
day i cannot express enough how dangerous i believe this rhetoric to be all there is no doubt the department will continue to evolve the functions that are secured on —-dash critical after 9/11 homeland stood up in haste facing a distressed nation and as a result still faces growing pains to respond to challenges. for examples in its inception there's a common vision of 22 separate agencies largely operating independently with policies and cultures it also struggled to support functions essential i —-dash support functions of acquisitions and it systems all of which are on the gao although they've made
progress are still more the to do homeland security financial system modernization is back on track in key to ensuring the homeland can support of those components efficiently with taxpayer dollars. however homeland security is with other support functions the best position to achieve the critical mission and also has made progress to address new and evolving future threats to the homeland such a cybersecurity. in 2018 homeland security and congress took action by establishing the cybersecurity infrastructure security agency to act as the cybersecurity agency and then the private sector last week i held the brand - - a roundtable to discuss how we can prevent
future attacks from local businesses and government and an overwhelming take away with how much the stakeholders for what it provides now is the time to double down but there is no other option cybersecurity is a preeminent national security to the homeland security threat that we face is dizzying to think of the string of cyberwe've seen over the last several months for campaigns on federal networks and those against the pipeline and food supply and transit systems in critical it service. we mustn't continue the full court press. today homeland security continues to make human capital progress as part of a cyberworkforce also exceeded
200 new like 50 percent calling it the largest cybersecurity and history the department's authority to hire top talent with that legacy mindset to fully support those systems they need sustained robust funding to carry out the mission of revolving threats the secretary has acknowledged they might fully degree but it would be hard pressed to do so with that funding to that and the need to be a 5 billion-dollar agency in the next five years. today the nation faces threats from 9/11 that we need dhs to transform better and homeland security that can identify and mitigate and prevent the new threats from the price from
global power and influence and instability from organized crime in the recent years homeland security operations have been hamstrung by vacancies and turnovers and senior positions in this also must change to prepare for the future security of homeland looking forward of a thorough assessment of what is doing now and if there's something it should be doing bad it isn't and what should we do about that? homeland security review and exercise a strategy by law every four years that dhs is not been able to accomplish since 2147 years ago. unacceptable the entire homeland security leadership needs to commit to this effort the administration to commit to ask the hard questions to
contribute to making homeland security into the department the american people want and need responding to disasters and a steward homeland security plays a vital role to engage in commerce and navigating increasingly complex interconnected worlds homeland security a struggle to earn the trust of the american people integrating the department to sure insurance number left to respond and his paramore on - - paramount for security to the nation. so let's roll up our sleeves and figure out what we need to do to protect the american people better than we do right now. thinking mr. chairman. i yield back.
>> . >> other members of the committee remind me and to the rules opening statements may be submitted for the record and may operate according to the guidelines of the ranking member calling in remote procedures. now we'll common our next witness senior fellow at the center for new americans security entitled reforming the department of homeland security for enhanced oversight and accountability.
director the future of dhs at the atlantic council the deputy assistant secretary for counterterrorism policy in this katrina morgan acting vice president for national security and international policy at the center for american progress to redefine homeland security a new framework dhs to meet today's challenges the director from the institute of cyberand critical infrastructure previously directed president bush and homeland security without objection the full statement will be inserted to
summarize a statement for five minutes. >> chairman thompson members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today on the topic of homeland security for the past two years i read the project for new americans security with a specific emphasis on law enforcement and intelligence and immigration aspects of the work of grateful for the opportunity to share the insights of this project and to work with this committee going forward in connection with this important oversight in legislative responsibility. i'm particularly delighted to be joined by my friends and colleagues all of them have meaningful insights and expertise to share with the committee. as i mentioned in my written testimony the 9/11 counterterrorism and counterintelligence lawyer as a result of that formative
experience i have zero interest in going backwards and undoing 20 years of changes to the laws and institutions that kept the country safe from the scale of september 11 however 2021 is not 2001. the threats the country faces today are not the same. cyberaggression, domestic terrorism, national disaster and gun violence all affect americans on a daily basis we must adapt to current and emerging threats well internal oversight and accountability and in short i don't want to dhs to meet today's threats but the legislative framework organizational capability and expert workforce that is ready to meet tomorrow threats time heartened by the committee's willingness to take on this important work. our institutions are not keeping up a nation was unprepared to a global pandemic killing over 600,000 americans as someone who had a
front row view of the bipartisan action that congress and the federal government took to response of the 9/11 attack inefficiency response in early 2020 is impossible to ignore dhs was created to protect the country from foreign threats it appears to have no meaningful role to mobilize the response to the pandemic across the country is another example of the insufficiency to protect our democracy not those that threaten the constitutional order and personal safety of congress on january 6 although i don't subscribe it was an intelligence failure the homeland security apparatus could've done more with the secret service to have national operations had it been designated and subjected to rigorous planning and
protocol the events were not have reached that level of severity better production of the transfer of power primarily things to those capital police and the metropolitan police department with the capital and members of congress as well as other public officials in this environment of political violence i review those protective measures for improvement with a component of a newly farm select committee on the leadership with the reform act of 2021 my written testimony and then to be reflected in the bill. to pave the way for a better dhs i hope you consider these recommendations to highlight just a few.
and then to have the associate secretary of leadership capacity of the may 2020 report and also other independent reviews of my colleagues today. landed they cannot do their best work of the statutory mandate and with the threat of a prior era updating a statutory mission with that persistent morale issues that i know the committee is interested in. with those considerable law enforcement they were not created to serve as the police force with the states and localities or a domestic intelligence service concepts roundly rejected even after the 9/11 attack and in
testimony thank you very much for the opportunity to testify and work with this committee. >> and now you may summarize your statement for five minutes. >> . >> thank you for the opportunity to testify. it is the third-largest cabinet in the cabinet 200,000 employees and the missions include the most important challenges. many dhs missions need attentions which is 2020 having been a particularly tumultuous year.
but the atlantic council itself and of those individual experts thank you the senior advisory board and acting secretaries and those experts of homeland national security contributing to our findings and recommendations. and then how to support the dhs workforce with the unique organizational challenges. but then to offer my endorsement the dhs reform act of how dhs needs to be reformed to make the department more protected from nonmilitary threats any
comprehensive assessment starts with the need to refocus its mission all reports you have been reading, agree that said the most urgent threat when we released in september 2020 was the pandemic and the greatest long-term threat comes from climate change and dhs should prioritize work in these areas i'm obviously very pleased to see the biden administration is taken both of these challenges with the priority that it deserves. one other important point i need to make is the report calls for dhs to take the overall mission to defend the american people from nonmilitary threats. and includes protecting american democracy from cyberattacks.
protecting critical infrastructure, election security, misuse of social media platforms, grouped together under the umbrella of protecting american democracy. and with the other missions and as you said it keeps adding missions but none of the current missions go away. with the department of defense and men and women in uniform who lead the notions against military threat dod against non- kinetic threats so the bumper sticker version is we fight and win america's wars. dhs needs to think against nonmilitary threats this is what dhs needs to move towards.
and when the trust of the american people how to take on what it does it also needs to modernize the approach to public-private partnerships because that's the way dhs contributes tackling climate change morale is another important challenge. let me asked the court to put up slide number two for the committee to take a look at. one thing we have noted dhs is ranked last in the annual surveys of employee morale since 2010. the data for the september october 2020 dhs is still last with agencies in the federal government. but our analysis shows morale is not a hopeless task but far from it. frank taylor between 2014 and
2017 immigration and customs enforcement at the us secret service between 2017 and 2019 if i can ask the court to show slide three. was citizenship and immigration services fell off a cliff they fell from 90th to 339-2411 the reasons for the drop deserve a hearing of their own dhs had other success stories and the components with their response to the covid-19 pandemic and protecting the 2020 election shows morality and improves because of a combination of good leadership and this
committee's hearing on may 4th what the recommendation to be the first on they need to be prioritize. and it's important now to ensure the necessary funding. >> but the better coordination of policy and resources to establish with that law enforcement activities without micromanaging and dhs needs to integrate civil liberties and
into american safety as well as beyond our borders spirit temperatures and rolling blackouts. >> and the milestones in the largest wildfire in history. >> . >> spirit you have the opportunity to refocus the resources has proven to have been most effective to add real value to americans to study and travel. americans need dhs to recalibrate and with the external threat.
>> and record number of passengers with the opportunity to reimagine but that means to keep america secure the new dhs vision clearly articulated and to facilitate in addition to detecting and securing and preventing and over 20 years recalibrating to a safety and services model all across the united states. and to have a noble mission to keep a safe as a country of welcome. >> with those challenges and opportunities facing the nation working together to
have more value to americans. >> . >> before i close i want to emphasize two things dhs has the potential to meet today's moment and second so we agree on several areas for reform i would encourage this committee to focus on areas where we are speaking in unison to highlight just a few, we agreed dhs is critical to the prosperity of americans and should be reformed rather than miss meant on - - dismantled
rather to keep the nation and secure that dhs needs an elevated role for civil liberties and american and agreed to more oversight and restraint for the law enforcement function. thank you for the opportunity to testify today and i look forward to hearing your questions. >> thank you very much. spent thank you distinguish committee members i would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today progress my colleagues have said the array of threats has evolved substantially over time and then to encounter the threats.
and for the proactive approach to tackle these important reforms so start with context nothing as fancy as my colleagues before me and then to be established as we have made clear so with the largest reorganization since the national security act of 1947. and at the same time dhs has and continues to have and the most pressing is cyberthe system and two double down efforts. but in addition to them. consider the events of the past six months alone in which
we have seen a rash of incidents from solarwinds and the microsoft exchange act. and other ransomware attacks that preceded it including us pipeline and the food supply. they are hitting epidemic proportions targeting entities from schools to businesses. no one and nothing is off limits i was pleased to see the ransomware campaign it's important for the government to speak with one voice and doing everything together dhs must be well structured and well-funded leadership is a vital first step meaningful maturation of the department requires a post to be filled i think the confirmation earlier this week was an important first step.
next we should consider codifying the director to a five-year term elevating the role to ensure continuity across the organization. fortunately congress and dhs have undertaken significant actions in response to cyberattack with the cyberresponse and recovery fund to ensure preparation and funding of the ability to coordinate asset response. dhs must continue to support the principal partners state and local territorial governments and the private sector as cyberhas with the security enterprise it is ultimately about finding meaningful ways to enhance and enable those on the frontlines. this requires people to meet the mission with the cyberworkforce of the caliber and size needed beyond is an urgent priority. the most effective way to get
their of the multi- pronged approach with k-12 and postsecondary initiatives. so to upscaling veterans to recruit a more diverse cybersecurity workforce. to fulfill potential as interagency partner and must be strengthened and the national risk management center should be codified i'm happy to get into that during q&a moreover the current approach to the.gov securities to scattershot we should play more central role the 2021 national defense authorization act hunting for threats and efforts substantially more visibility perhaps the area term greatest impact in the near-term is to finally
translate the nouns into the verbs this is a top list of priorities for us in the cybercommission this year so our real driver with us on the commission and then newly created cyberplanning office should be serving as a center of gravity for public-private coordination and cyber-based activities priorities set by the new national cyberdirector. the commission also recommended a joint collaborative environment be established by law for the purpose of sharing cyberthreat data among federal entities in between us government and private sector a national economic security urgently demand greater visibility across the entirety of the supply chain i'm happy to get
into that at greater length that q&a but finally, the commission proposed the most critical infrastructure systemically important be subject and the idea here is is to impose cyber incident reporting requirements and sticky companies innd return for some liability protection and support from the u.s. intelligence community. happy to see a rash of good activity on the hill and bills around dataor breach notificati and incident reporting. and i would like to commend ranking member katko for his five pillars. i think this will get us a long way toen where we need to be. in closing, the department must beco calibrated to adapt to the cyber imperative which will continue to involve and sisa needs to be given the resources
and accountability to get the job donein especially in relati to our most critical infrastructure. mr. chairman, it's always a privilege to speakmr to this augustan committee, and i look forward to any questions and trying to answer them. so thank you. >> thank you very much. i thankth the witnesses for the testimony. i'll remind each member that he or she will have five minutes to question the witnesses. i'll now recognize myself for such questions. you know, one of the problems we've had, longstanding, with dhs, is the morale of the workforce. all of you have done studies on it. can you suggest to the committee anything you think we might do
to get morale off the bottom? a lot of us are concerned about that. the mission is important, but if your workforce is not where it needs to be in terms of morale, there are some challenges. so ms. cordero, we'll start off with you, if you don't mind. >> sure, thank you, mr. chairman. soi morale has been, as the committee knows, a persistent issue in the department. i do think a couple of things. first,th with respect to the mission, as you know, i recommended that congress update the statutory mission of the t department. i think there are operational witnesses to do tythat. i also think there are morale reasons to do that. right now, we know it's out of
sync with thef day to day activitiess that the workforce engaged in. if the mission of the department as it's laid out in law, as it's mandated by congress, if employees could see their daily work reflecteded in that missio that would be a helpful thing. also think that one of the issues with the department i think is all of us recognize, is that the independent agencies within the department operate very autonomously with less oversight structure and less common culture. with experts various former officials all inin the round tables i've conducted t with experts, there have been various formerhe officials who say the different secretaries tried to do a unitary culture, and then the nextf secretary, it falls off, and it never grows with the program. a joint duty program would be
usefulmo in that respect so we could have individuals as they rise in their g career and rota among the differentes component they would get a better understanding of their colleagues, of the other mission sets of the department. and what we would do is we would start to create a core of future leaders who have a better appreciation for their colleagues, missions, operations, throughout the rest of the department. >> thank you very much. mr. warrick. >>he yes, mr. chairman. we took a look at a number of the specific components that had theav greatest morale problems, and had in mind some of the successes that other components haveve had, because there reall are lessons that can be applied in places in the department. in the case of tsa, addressing the low pay and the workforce issues, where people perceive that promotions are handed out unfairly, andd that good work i notyo recognized and rewarded, something that your committee
and you and others have taken a direct interest in with h the t workforce woact. so pushing that through, i think, will be one of the most important steps that this committee couldld take to help. and obviously, i welcome secretary mayorkas' efforts. we just have to make sure he gets the resources he needs to implement plthat. the problems at customs and border protection, cbp, are going to be a bit more difficult. chief hemagnus, if confirmed by the senate, is going to have to take a number of steps to deal with the legacy of an era in whiche cbp hired a great many people but the perception is that not all of them are up to the level of professionalism that the department really needs to have. and some things that carrie cordero has identifiedd in term of professionzation, i hope, if done right, will increase the pride cbp officers feel about the mission.
>> thank you very much. i'm going to have to try to get to ms. mulligan and mr. cilluffo before my time runs out. ms. mulligan. >> so quickly, i agree that updating the mission and instituting a joint duty type program are excellent suggestions. i think the one thing that i would focus on and emphasize is, the politicization of the department is also a driver here. and one of the ways themi committee can help address that is bye ensuring that there are more career civil servants in leadership positions across the department, because thatha is wt helps, you know, sort of create a buffer and help reduce the sort of political shifts between administrations that end up impacting day to day what you think your mission is and how well you think you are serving
that mission. m >> thank you very much. mr. cilluffo. unmute yourself. >> sorry, mr. chairman. i was saying, i will be brief, which is very rare for me, since i've neverns had an unspoken thought. but bottom line is, i really thought that carrie hit that question out of the park. i agree with everything she said there. the one thing i would add is, the mission by definition, if something bad happens, that's how people are sometimes defining success. so if we can find ways to flip that equation, i think that is critical. i also think when it comes to cyber, i want to double tap a couple of points i raised. one, weit need a more diverse cybersecurityn workforce. we need more t women, more peop of color. the numbers are just staggeringly low. and i think there are weighs
that that can change in terms of morale. and so, bottom line, i know you're running out of time, i wanted to adddd that one point cybersecurity. so thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. the chair recognizes the ranking member. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you all for testifying today. i really wantai to credit what . cordero said. but it has been a major problem we have limited time so i do want to talk [ inaudible ]. a major time. we have limited time so i do want to talk about [ inaudible ]. >> i think we're having some problems.
i'm not able to hear him. we'll come back to the ranking member. the chair recognizes the gentlelady fro texas for five minutes. >> good dmorning, mr. chairman, and good morning to the witnesses. i'm glad to hear one of the witnesses highlight 9/11, since those of us who are senior members of the committee were here and certainly it was the causek for the creation of homeland security. i wanted to ask, asrm we begin look att reform, i think the witness from the atlantic mentioned covid and one other issue but did not mention the actions of january 6, which is domestic terrorism.
whoever wants to answer, do you not believe that issue should be a crucial component of homeland securityoc and reform, should b focused on what kind of response homeland security can offer? because my disappointment hiwas it was a discombobulated, unorganized response. thepl fbi was completely absent particularly the director of the fbi, andty the idea of a nation security or domestic security agency did not seem to be present. if someone wants to take that answer.t' >> it actually is very much one of my top issues, it was an issue in our report that we highlighted, even in september of 2020, needed more time and attention from dhs than it had been getting. all of that was driven home by what happened j on january 6. we've also taken a very detailed look at the events of that day,
and o dhs, while it's not responsible for collecting the dots, it's very much responsible for connecting the dots. and dhs, ina in particular, should have done a much better job of bringing that forcefully if necessary to the attention of leadership and the law enforcement agencies who found themselves unexpectedly on the front line that day. so there was a lot that dhs could have done better and differently.ou >> thank you. my time is very short. you hadd offered some reforms, o you have anyhs reform that woul relatea to a quicker response ad greater presence of dhs on a day like january 6 which we hope never in our life to see again in america, ms. cordero? >> thank you, congresswoman. i think dhs could have had two important roles in mitigating the day of january 6. the first is as a warning role. this pertains to the role of intelligence and analysis.
we actually at the center have a new report out that's specifically on proposals for congress to think about to reform the department of intelligence and analysis r in e department so that that office functions better. right now it's neither livingt'p to its expectations nor is it doing the job that folks expected it ton do. in addition, there is a physical security component. i assess that had january 6 been designated ave national special security event with the secret service as lead under the leadership of s the department, thatuc the physical security itself would have been much improved on january 6. >> my time. is up. are you suggesting that should have been done ahead of time, is that my understanding? >> yes, congresswoman. >> thank you very much. i'm sorry for the time shortage. as it relates to the pandemic, there wass multiple layers of confusion, doctors, first responders using plastic bags to cover egthemselves. when fema became involved,
things began to turn the corner. dodo you have any thoughts abou giving fema's administrator cabinet status, and as well, the problems we w have with the stafford act where fema cannot work directly with local communities? can someone take that point up, please? >>o sure, i'll go ahead and try. i think you're absolutely right that the role that fema has been playing and is likely to play in the future is going to be bigger central than the role that it's played in the past. one of the things that i think is actually a success story of the existing dhs is how far fema has come in terms of developing systems and processes. what i envision long term is a fema that functions almost like a federal quarterback to augment lead departments and agencies and to build kind of institutional capacity that it can be used so that we aren't
constantly relying on our military to aid in nonmilitary and nondefense related emergency response. and if we can build more of that capacity within b fema, i thinkt will be to the good. in terms of whether fema needs to be i a cabinet level agency itself, i actually think a strengthenedco dhs central headquarters component could be effective without a cabinet level role. but i 100% agree that fema's role needs to be larger in a reimagined dhs. to the diverse workforce >> let respond regarding a diverse workforce. we know tsa officers are diverse, but across the board, how valuable is it that we have a diverse workforce with women and minorities? if someone can give a quick answer, mr. chairman, i'll yield back. anyone wants to take up that important subject of diversity?
i know one point was made about cyber, but across the board, we've found it to be very challenging. >> and you're absolutely right, this is one of the things that dhs has struggled in some areas to try to achieve and it does need to be the priority that i think secretary mayorkas and his team are now giving it, to increase diversity in a number important areas. >> the gentlelady's time has expired. the chair recognizes the ranking member. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i apologize for the technical difficulties here. thank you for accommodating me. thank you all for your testimony today. ms. cordero, i appreciate your comments very much on the morale issue. and i think mr. cilluffo's comments on the need for diversity within sisa and the department as a whole. i want to focus my precious time here on sisa. a few years ago, we would have never been able to anticipate
how important sisa is going to be going forward. since my time as ranking member, i've seen we need to boost up sisa's budgetary budget, so [ inaudible ]. so it needs to be a $5 billion agency within the next five years. mr. cilluffo, if congress were able to make such an investment, what could sisa expect in return? >> you have to unmute yourself. >> i'm sorry, mr. chairman. and ranking member katko, i just sang your praises ad nauseam. i did want to thank you in all sincerity for your leadership in recognizing the significance of sisa and for your prioritization and emphasis around cybersecurity. i genuinely believe this is the
crux of the dhs' success going forward, and the country expects nothing less. basically any policy recommendation i think has to meet three different criteria, and that's the marriage of authority, do we have clear lanes in the road, accountability, is there the appropriate oversight, and in sisa's respect it's both at the national cyber director and obviously with this committee in congress, and resources. after all, policy without resources is rhetoric. so i do think that the 5 billion number sounds good to me. i couldn't give you a very empirically based answer to that, but we're going to need more resources. and we expect sisa to do more. we expect sisa to be the quarterback inside the federal government. we expect them to be able to do more across the dot gov network.
and in reality, and i mentioned this in my oral remarks, it's really about the public/private partnership. if we're winning the battles in the beltway, that's great, but at the end of the day it's about enabling and empowering those on our cyber first defenders, and this is where i hope we see the most impact. and i hope congress would hold sisa to account to achieve some of these objectives. >> i agree with you about the need to exchange information regarding malicious attacks in particular. i want to ask you one other thing, that is the homeland security advisory council. you served on it for many years under both democrats and republicans before the current secretary disbanded it. why do you believe it's important to have a homeland security advisory council made up of bipartisan security experts to advise the secretary of homeland security? >> thank you, congressman katko.
i'm certainly not going to make this about me. but at the end of the day, an advisory council needs to be mission driven. and historically it has always been nonpartisan. and i genuinely hope that will continue to be the case. ultimately, it needs to have a diverse set of views, not just in the traditional sense, but those who look at the homeland security enterprise from different perspectives as well. so i think that that is important. and it has had significant impact. so at the end of the day, any council is as good as the secretaries having trust in that and driving on the missions they hold near and dear, and obviously with people they can confide in. but my big takeaway on all this is i hope it remains as nonpartisan as it can be, because otherwise it's going to be a shell. it's not going to be all that it
can be. so thank you, congressman katko. >> thank you. and lastly, real quick, the homeland security advisory council, have you heard any efforts by the secretary to reconstitute it, have there been any signals from him yet? >> since i'm testifying before congress, no, i have not heard anything. since the initial letter went out to the entire council. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman, i yield back, and thank you for your accommodation, sir. >> thank you very much, glad we were able to do it. the chair recognizes the gentleman from rhode island for five minutes, mr. langevin. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey, mr. payne. for five minutes.
unmute yourself, mr. payne. we're still not able to hear you. well, mr. langevin, i see you're back. >> can you hear me? >> we'll go to mr. langevin. >> mr. chairman, do you want me to defer -- whatever you prefer. >> we'll be back to mr. payne shortly. mr. langevin. >> very good. thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank our witnesses for the testimony today.
let me start out with mr. cilluffo, if i could. frank, it's great to see you again, appreciate your service on the commission. i'm proud to have served with you and continue to serve with you as a commissioner there. but unsurprisingly, i agree wholeheartedly with your focus on cybersecurity as the key emerging threat facing the country. yesterday the white house announced it had formed a ransomware task force to address that scourge which i think is important. but can you expound on the role sisa and dhs more broadly should play in protecting the nation from ransomware, particularly in the context of our commission recommendations? >> well, thank you, congressman langevin. [ inaudible ] in terms of all you've done for the commission to advance that recommendation. bottom line here is, in addition
to sisa's critical role, one of the primary recommendations we put forward, the nbaa translated into law, and now has its first national cyber director, is that the office of [ inaudible ], which i think serves as sort of the head coach to be able to final get everyone talking on the same sheet of music, off of the same play books, where offensive, defensive coordinators can work together and we can have full visibility. sisa does play a key role and i think the first area it can have greatest impact and translate a concept into reality is around the jcpo or the joint cyber planning office which can ultimately be the belly button between sisa and for defensive purposes, not taking away from ncijtf and fbi's important mission in law enforcement and scaling opportunities to claw back ransomware, bitcoin and the
like, but sisa does play a big role in being the belly button and center of gravity to be able to interact with our private sector. and so congressman langevin, as you well know, this is a big emphasis for us going forward. if we want to see real progress, it can't just be the alphabet soup, and i don't mean that pejoratively. it can't be inside the beltway sets of issues. it really has to be about how we empower and enable our front line cyber defenders. and the private sector is front and center of all this. they're the primary targets. not many companies went into business thinking they had to defend themselves against foreign intelligence services but that's precisely what we're dealing with today. so how do we square that circle will be priority one, two, and three. sisa plays a big role. i was pleased to see the stop ransomware campaign today because we're starting to see one voice, one team.
>> thank you. you encapsulated it perfectly. that was a very insightful answer, thank you. let me ask you this. i wonder if you could comment also, though, on the human capital challenges dhs is facing, especially with respect to cybersecurity, as we consider dhs reform. what should we be keeping in mind to attract the cyber talent that we need? >> well, mr. -- congressman langevin, obviously the numbers are staggering and frightening, if you think about it in terms of the shortfall, in terms of the skilled cybersecurity workforce. i think first and foremost we need to upskill and reskill and retain some of the best and brightest that we have in place. i think we need to bring in more diversity into the cybersecurity community. women in particular make up less
than 20% of the cybersecurity workforce. that's just unacceptable. we need to redouble those numbers in a big way. and ultimately, i think k-12 is -- once you hit -- and i'm speaking from a university, of course, i'm going to say postsecondary and college education is a priority, and it is, but ultimately we have to get to the next generation when they're a whole lot younger. and cybersecurity needs to be part of the way they do cyber. and ultimately, we're talking about k-12. and i think we have a lot we can learn from some of our allies, notably estonia and israel, in terms of how they are literally bringing in at the kindergarten level cybersecurity into the curricula. so i didn't give you a clean answer on that, but it's all of the above, more of it, and faster. >> sure. couldn't agree more. and focusing on k-12 is
essential, and also diversity. we're stronger when we have very different points of view, backgrounds that we can bring to the table to offer expertise and talent and we have to work harder on the diversity part as well. i know my time has expired. i have other questions that i'll have to submit for the record. but thank you for those and thank you to the rest of the panel, i'm sorry i couldn't get you to for questions. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from mississippi, mr. guest, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. frank, i just want to highlight a few things you testified in your opening statement and also in the report that you provided prior to your testimony. you say in your report that the most prevalent and most pressing matter that we now face is cyber. you say cyber is the area where we must double down and work the hardest to enhance our capabilities. you go on and you talk about some of the more recent attacks that we've seen, both late last
year and this year, the solarwinds, the microsoft exchange. you mentioned the u.s. pipeline which i assume would be colonial pipeline. the food supply, which would be the jbs cyber incursionsincursi. you talk about ransomware, not just targeting these large multinational corporations but they're targeting schools and businesses and hospitals. and then, as you go later into your report you talk a little bit about the deterrence factor, and you say, actually, while resilience supports deterrence, it must not eliminate the need for a broader u.s. strategy to deter our adversaries by imposing real costs and consequences upon them. you go on to mention china and russia where many of these cyber attacks are occurring and for far too long they have been allowed to engage in behavior
that's damaged our national security and our economic security. and so i would like, if you would, if you could take a few moments to talk about this broader u.s. strategy of deterrence. it seems like we're constantly playing defense. and we're not playing offense. we're allowing these cyber attacks to occur in china and russia and other nations abroad. but it seems we're doing very little to engage many of those individuals. and i know that we're talking about sometimes law enforcement challenges being unable to make arrests in foreign countries. but for countries that shield cyberattackers, what more can we do, what should that broader u.s. policy of deterrence be? and i think you may be muted again, very briefly. >> thank you, congressman. yes, i think you framed that exceedingly well, not my words,
but yours. here is the bottom line. sisa has a critical role to play but we're never going to firewall our way out of this problem alone. it would be sort of like you're fielding a football team, only have a front line and not having an offense. you need all of the above. and the reality is, we need to induce changes in bad cyber behavior. to do that we need to start imposing costs and consequences on bad cyber behavior. and to do that, we need to be willing to put some lines in the silicon. when those are crossed, we have to have the political will, a, signal, and b, follow through on our ability to respond. here is -- without getting into anything classified because this is very public, we have got the greatest cyber capability right now. and that is something that shouldn't be lost on the rest of the world. we also, though, need to be willing to deploy and employ
some of these capabilities to ultimately change bad cyber behavior. for way too long, the bad guys have been getting away with murder. this is unacceptable. that said, we need to shore up our defenses. so the last thing we want to do is -- because the initiative still remains with the attacker. our vulnerabilities are extreme. so we have to bring all these pieces together. i'm confident that the creation of a new national cyber director which congress passed last year in the nbaa can help us get to that point. but here is the bottom line. not all hacks are the same, not all hackers are the same. intentions vary, capabilities vary. at the top of the list, peer nations are russia and china. just beneath them, iran, north korea. what they lack in capability they more than make up for with intent. and they have very little
compunction to turn to cyber to achieve their objectives. we've got a witch's brew here to deal of when the bottom line is [ inaudible ] imposing costs, we need to start imposing consequence, we need to follow through and bring all instruments of statecraft, and yes, that includes the military instrument if done appropriately to achieve our cyber objectives. >> let me ask you one followup question and then i'll be out of time. do you think the administration is sending a strong enough message to our adversaries as it relates to cyber attacks and the response that we will take to defend ourselves using some of our offensive capabilities? >> you know, i have long been an advocate that we need to do more. i've been critical of all informations in this particular space. i do think we saw some positive developments in terms of raising this issue directly with
vladimir putin. but the proof is going to be in the pudding. are we going to actually follow through on some of our words and make sure they're not empty? the worst thing we can do is say we take it seriously and not follow through. so i will be cautiously optimistic that we're moving in the right direction. but more is needed. and i don't mean to go on and on and on, but china is the country we really need to be looking at closely over the long haul, and so much more there is needed, and too much to cover in this hearing. but thank you, congressman guest. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey for five minutes, mr. payne. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i apologize for the difficulty before. this question is to ms. cordero, mr. warrick, and ms. mulligan.
the trump administration's abuse of dhs' authority over the last four years hurt the department's reputation and decimated public trust in dhs' actions. as a government agency that depends on regular interaction with state and local communities, dhs is uniquely reliant on its relationships with the public. i would like ms. cordero, mr. warrick, and ms. mulligan to answer the following question. what are the biggest factors that affect the public's trust in dhs and how can the department rebuild that trust? >> thank you very much for the
question, congressman. so one of the reasons that i think dhs in particular is a department that needs this public trust is because it is so operational, and it touches people in a very personal way every single day, whether it's citizens at the airport or whether it's individual trying to enter the country through various means. so it's up close and personal in a way that many other federal bureaucracies are not. it also has an extraordinarily heavy law enforcement component that has grown over time, that has become a very robust part of its operations. therefore it's essential, because of these factors, that it be a department that operates according to the constitution, laws, rules, procedures, and that the public have a good understanding of what those rules are. so one of the set of recommendations that i have put forget in several of the reports
that i've written have been focused on redeveloping and modernizing the operational guidelines that the law enforcement components of the department work through, increasing the transparency, so once we have rules and updated rules about how dhs officers and employees are interacting with the public, put those rules out there so people can see them, they can understand them. right now -- sorry, i'll pause there. thank you. >> thank you. mr. warrick. >> so i agree with everything carrie just said, i won't resummarize it. dhs has extraordinary authorities. and also in areas like cybersecurity, everything we see makes it clear that there has to be even greater trust between dhs and the american people. so our recommendation is that dhs needs to look at everything it does through the lens of, is this going to enhance public trust. that may not make everyone happy but it's going to be necessary because trust needs to be one of
the greatest assets that dhs has going forward. >> thank you. ms. mulligan. >> so i think the reason we're all circling around the issue of dhs' law enforcement role is because that really is the central place where the trust issues reside. in my view, and as we've concluded in our report, it's one of the reasons why we really ought to reconsider whether exclusively investigative law enforcement functions belong in a reimagined dhs. there will always be some room for law enforcement within the department, because it will continue to need to protect, secure, defend, and enforce. the question really for this committee i think is, are those the primary way the department has value to the american people? or is there an expanded role for the view that it connects, communicates, facilitates,
helps, and welcomes people to this country? and, you know, we argue that rebalancing those priorities and bringing them into balance with each other is actually one of the first things we can do to restore trust with the american people. >> thank you. mr. chairman, i was going to try to slide one more question in, but i will yield back. thank you. >> the gentleman yields back, very kindly. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. bishop, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. cordero, i think it's fair to say you and ms. mulligan has been on the same page, also mr. warrick, on the deemphasizing the law enforcement functions of
dhs are a priority, and you mentioned i think terrorism and also immigration enforcement. i have -- i think the clerk has a chart that i've used a couple of times before. let me see if the clerk has that and can put it up real quickly. yeah, everybody is familiar with this chart, i think. i think we're getting ready to see results for june that will show that blue line to have ticked up yet again. and those are southwest border encounters by month. and so what i understood to be a 20-year high, and it has reached sort of a plateau and continuing gradually to increase. you can take that chart down, madam clerk, i just wanted to get everybody on the same page. the orange line that was on that was the 2019 fiscal year.
and in your paper in march about sort of reorienting homeland security department, you suggested that the trump administration's policies on immigration have been unsufficiently, that there had been an increase. i think you were pointing to that 2019 increase in particular. what was notable about it was, the orange line goes up and then it recedes. we're now up at this unusual peak that has continued at a plateau. does that not change your view about whether or not immigration enforcement continues to be an important priority for homeland security? >> congressman, i'm not sure if you were directing that at me or at ms. mulligan. but let me start off and she may have more to add as well. so perhaps let me explain a little bit what i mean when i'm describing drawing down a little
bit in terms of the law enforcement capacity of the department. i understand the concerns about border security and obviously there is a continued challenge at the border with respect to immigration enforcement. so i have not suggested that we draw down on border patrol or the manpower or resourcing for that at all. what i'm suggesting is that we make sure, number one, that the law enforcement components of the department do what their mission is. so for example, when it comes to border patrol, i want to see border patrol agents working on border issues, not being deployed into the interior of the country to do things that run related to border patrol. a second piece that we focused on, that i focused on in my writing, has been on the investigative law enforcement capacity of the department. so this is what we call homeland security investigations, which is a component of i.c.e. that's an area where i do wonder whether there are some
duplicative actions between -- and duplicative activities between that investigative function and perhaps some other law enforcement components of the federal government where i think it would be useful to refocus those efforts. >> thank you. let me inject and sort of redirect. what is the most important and imperative action at this point in time by homeland security that would precipitate an attenuation of that high and plateaued amount of encounters at the southern border, much as was accomplished in the trump administration, and seeing the thing decline from a peak? >> congressman, i appreciate the question. i don't think there's a magic bullet for solving the challenges at the border. i think when we talk about the border issues, what we're really talking about is a wide range of policy issues. we're talking about the foreign policy as it relates to -- >> and i'm seeing if anybody has
a magic bullet. let me see if anybody who is a witness would want to jump in and say, not a magic bullet but something that could precipitously reduce that rate. >> representative bishop, we need to design an immigration system that processes people fairly, justly, and very quickly. if you try to run the supreme court the way we run traffic court, there would be chaos. >> faster, mr. warrick, is that what you're saying? >> justly and in accordance with the law, yes. >> will that attenuate the flow? >> you need to be able to have people's cases heard so they don't have to either wait around for a result or be released awaiting a hearing. we ought to be able to design a system that avoids border crises like you've rightly pointed us to. >> i yield back. thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri, mr. cleaver, for five minutes.
the chair recognizes the gentlelady from new york, ms. clarke, for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i thank our ranking member and our witnesses for your insights today. the center for the new american securities report notes that dhs' cybersecurity mission has grown over time. but the authorities of its cybersecurity entity, the cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency, sisa, have not kept pace. the national defense act of fy 2021 includes several provision to align cisa's authorities including persistent threat-hunting authority and the joint cyber planning office. but our work is hardly done.
ms. cordero, how has congress' failure to equip cisa with the authorities necessary to effectively carry out its cyber mission undermined our national security posture and how can this mismatch between cisa's authorities and responsibilities be best addressed? >> thank you for the question, congresswoman. and i do recognize that this committee and congress does have a renewed attention on cisa and is considering proposals to be able to strengthen it, and so i appreciate this committee's work on that. here is what i think, when i think about what would be a robust cisa that we want to have, it would be a cisa that has the capability, resources, expertise, to warn both with respect to the dot gov and to private and public, private sector partners and other public sector partners. it would have the ability to significantly assist in the remediation of cyber events.
and it would have the capabilities to protect our democratic institutions, for example cisa has demonstrated that it is capable of doing a lot when it comes to public sector partners to protect and strengthen electoral infrastructure. so warn, remediate, protect. those are the things that would make a robust cisa. one of the things that i have recommended in the past with respect to what congress can do, one of the recommendations of the solarium commission was to create a select committee in order to take on cyber issues across the board. in a prior report i wrote with a colleague, we recommended there at least be an interim select committee on cyber so we can take the solarium commission recommendations which congressman langevin and others have participated in, and drive forward those recommendations so that they continue to have an impetus behind them and a legislative and oversight
vehicle in congress to make them happen. >> mr. cilluffo,is there anything you would add or disagree with in that analysis? >> i think ms. cordero is gutsy, bringing up the congressional oversight. but i do think that that is an issue we need to look at. and quite honestly, your committee, the homeland security committee, needs to have the wherewithal and the oversight authorities to do its job across the department. but a couple of things i would raise, i brought up the systemically important critical infrastructure. do i think there's a time for incident reporting and making that required for the most critical of our critical infrastructures. i do think that the joint cyber planning office can get us a little closer to where we want to be on the public/private partnership because that's where the action should be, and ultimately i think can move the needle the furthest. i am a big proponent of the national cyber director.
there's one that i want to bring up that i haven't discussed, nor have i heard from anyone yet today. supply chains are so important here. and we are so dependent from a component perspective, we've got to start bringing, onshoring some of these key technologies and capabilities back to the united states. and while that is an issue across the board, the truth is, we have a whole long way to go, because we don't even have visibility across our supply chains. after each incident, it's like we're starting afresh and anew. >> very well. i would love to talk to you more about that. i want to get in one more question for our panel, and that's multiple administrations have struggled to improve coordination between cisa and other federal agencies and have tried to overcome turf battles to improve our cybersecurity posture. last year's national defense authorization act included language codifying the role of federal agencies that oversee critical information sectors in
establishing the national cyber director. among other things, despite efforts to clarify roles and responsibilities of cisa and other agencies, coordination within the federal government to promote the security and resilience of the nation's critical infrastructure is not where it needs to be. what more do you think congress will need to do to ensure effective strategic interagency collaboration to address cyber threats against critical infrastructure and are there other recommendations, for instance, for the cyber solarium commission, from the cyber solarium commission, that you believe would help foster better collaboration? for the entire panel, i'm sorry. and i know my time is up. just quickly, any thoughts? >> i'll go first. we would certainly agree with what frank is saying about the need to designate critical infrastructure in cyber so that they have certain obligations and get certain benefits. that's one of the most important recommendations that needs to be
adopted. >> and the one last thing i would add is, i do think that one of the issues that -- we can build capacity, and we have absolutely should, in the ways that have already been outlined. but we have to start creating an output out of dhs that's fit for purpose. in other words, dhs is going to need to do a better job, continue improving its ability to understand what the critical infrastructure providers that are outside of government actually need to be informed about and how to inform them in a timely way and with the level of specificity that they can actually act upon. >> very well. >> just one point i want to raise because i think it is important. so cisa of course is at the center of a lot of this activity vis-à-vis our critical infrastructure, owner-operators. it's also the sector risk management agency, what we used to call the ssas, the
sector-specific agencies. cisa can help enable that. i think the new national cyber director, we finally have a head coach, someone who can bring together the offensive coordinator and the defensive coordinator onto the same field with the same playbook. all i ask is that congress enable chris english to be able to do his job as national cyber director. >> i appreciate that. mr. chairman, i yield back and i thank you all for your expertise today. >> thank you. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey for five minutes, mr. van drew. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and ranking member katko. and thank you for having this hearing. and i thank the witnesses for testifying. as you all know, we are truly living in extraordinary times. threats of all sorts, whether cyber, ransom, or physical,
greatly threaten the safety and security of our great nation. in the past six months we have seen ransomware attacks like you've never seen before. water treatment plants [ inaudible ] you name it, it's been attacked. russia, china, iran, and other dangerous adversaries are working to undermine our critical infrastructure which is quite as important now more than ever for congress for work with stakeholders to produce effective solutions. in addition to our cyber vulnerabilities, our border faces serious threats as well. unprecedented numbers of migrants have entered the united states through our southern border and yet the administration has done practically nothing to remedy the situation. immigration and customs enforcement officers and custom and border protection agencies are overworked by anything we could even ever imagine. and they have high, very high rates of burnout.
the witnesses have outlined in their testimonies, it's no secret that the department of homeland security has its shortcomings despite a heightened threat landscape. it is ironic, however, that the department is receiving very small increase in funds at this very critical time. ms. mulligan, in your testimony, you said that dhs should shift towards a more service-driven approach that treats immigrants as an asset to be managed rather than as a crime issue or anything to be enforced. do you believe -- simple question. do you believe in the rule of law? >> of course. >> okay. are you aware that the united states is facing the highest level of migrants at the southwest border in 21 years?
in fy '21, over 900,000 migrants have been encountered along the southwest border. are you aware that under u.s. code section 135, it makes it a crime to unlawfully enter the united states not at a port of entry? it is a crime. are you aware of that? >> i'm aware of persistently high rates of migrants presenting at the southern border, yes, over time. >> and are you aware that it is a crime? >> absolutely. not to present, but to unlawfully enter, is a crime. >> in fy '21 to date, cbp has arrested 6,918 individuals with criminal convictions. how would you ensure that criminals and gang members who are smuggled into the country between ports of entry are
actually caught because of the extreme danger that they present? >> i think it's incredibly important to understand that none of us today have argued for a dismantling or, you know, a radical shift away from any of the protecting, securing, defending or enforcing missions of the department. i think bringing them into balance is what i've certainly testified about. in terms of safety and security at the border, i think it's really important to differentiate between, you know, folks who are trying to enter the country who have the kind of criminal records that you're talking about, and folks who are presenting at the border who don't. and the overwhelming majority do not. now, it is the function of cbp to try to differentiate between those things. but we shouldn't be treating them all the same. >> i understand that. but again, just going back to
the previous statement, how can we consider this an asset to the country? i agree with you, we need new immigration laws. we need to change the system. i believe in legal immigration. or should we just open or borders everywhere or is it just in that area, in the southern border? how do we really approach this? [ inaudible ] a sovereign nation to have borders to protect the people who live in the nation, and then to actually put together a real legal immigration plan. but how can illegal immigration, when in fact, as we know, illegal immigration that we have now, children were being used, children are being abused, children and women are being used as drug mules, they're being sexually attacked, in order to get more people into our country. how can that be a good thing? how can that be right, even for them, when before we had agreements with the northern triangle, we had agreements with mexico in which those folks were held and they were treated
decently there and we were building an actual border in our country, how can that be wrong? countries have borders. every country. mexico does. canada does. every country we know of pretty much that speaks for itself at all has a border. how can we just let this happen? >> thank you for the question. i think that we absolutely should have a border. and i'm -- you know, as a lawyer myself, deeply respectful of the rule of law in this country. but i do think when we're talking about the threats facing the nation and we're prioritizing, you know, without infinite resources, we do need to prioritize a range of threats that are posing in my view significantly heightened risks to american lives and prosperity, things like the pandemic, the cyber issues that we've been discussing. those are threats that are impacting americans' lives and their pocketbooks in ways that far exceed what's happening at the southern border.
>> do you think fentanyl is a threat to america? because the number -- >> the gentleman -- >> -- do you believe that that is a threat? and it's all coming in on the ports of entry. >> excuse me. we will let you answer the question, but the gentleman's time has long expired. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i think fentanyl is absolutely a threat. and look, that is why it is tremendously important to have a department of homeland security that is focused on taking a broader view of what it means to keep the nation secure. one of the things that i find really heartening about the conversation that we're having is that we're breaking out of, you know, focusing exclusively on terrorism as the only mission of the department. and this gets back to what ms. cordero and mr. warrick have said earlier. we have to get to a place where we're defining what it means to keep the nation secure more broadly so that it includes all the issues that you're raising
and so that become part of the core mission of the department. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri, mr. cleaver, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i appreciate all of the witnesses today. i have just a couple of questions that i wanted to try to deal with, if i could. and one of them is -- and i'm sorry if it's already been dealt with, mr. warrick, or anyone, frankly, we've had to increase the number of incidents on u.s. airlines with unruly passengers. if that has already been dealt with, i'll just get a response later from some of my colleagues. but if it has not been addressed, i would appreciate
it, any of you who might want to respond to that, if you can. >> so representative, the issue of security aboard airlines is one that tsa takes very seriously. federal air marshals are trained in this, airline flight crews are trained in how to deal with these situations. i think all of us have been a bit fraught about air travel over the last year. but this is going to be an example of the kind of mission that dhs will always have to undertake, and it's one of the reasons why the law enforcement personnel, the federal air marshals that tsa had, are an essential part of protecting our aviation security system. >> yeah, i guess -- thank you, i appreciate your response. we're having people fighting on
planes, passengers are helping to control this, which is the good news. you know, and people don't want to wear masks because i guess whatever side it is, but they hate the other side more than they love their health. so, you know, it's a big mess. but i guess that's going to happen, like a lot of other things, for the time being. but the center for american progress report calls for dhs to refocus its work based on safety and services model rather than threat oriented model. as i understand it, safety and service does not ignore or reduce or downplay the risks that threaten americans'
security or prosperity. but it does suggest we refocus dhs on work that doesn't duplicate that of other federal agencies. ms. mulligan, can you discuss how this safety and service approach addresses the longstanding challenges and expanding the dhs mission? >> absolutely. you're completely right that the safety and services molds doesn't downgrade or diminish the importance of the protecting and securing and enforcing missions that are sort of central and have been central to dhs since it was created. but as ms. cordero said earlier, dhs is one of the parts of the federal constellation of departments and agencies that most americans come into contact with more regularly than any other federal department. and we rely on them whether we go through airport security,
when we come back from a vacation, when disaster strikes in our hometown and we're relying on federal resources for help in a time of need. and those are missions that in my view are going to become more important in the next 20 years than they have been in the past 20 years. and it argues for a dhs that takes pride in those missions and puts them -- it brings them into balance with the other missions that it's been focusing on for the past 20 years. and so, you know, our vision heading into the future is for a reimagined dhs that moves away from the origin story of 9/11 and focuses on how it can meet america's needs. >> does fema -- and i can't see the clock, mr. chairman, but does fema pull down things? i mean, fema is kind of a different part of this homeland
security portfolio that, you know, our chairman is carrying around. should that be under hud? hud has a community development block grant disaster component. and it seems to me that that may be more appropriate for hud than dhs. >> so i think fema definitely belongs in a reimagined dhs that's focused more on safety and services. if dhs -- if the future vision is primarily, you know, a law enforcement security provision department or agency, then maybe yes, i could see the kind of, you know, move that you're describing. but in my view, there's something inherently integral between what fema provides and what the threats are that are facing the country. and having them integrated within the department of
homeland security makes a lot of sense, as long as those missions are not being diminished as the headquarters level focus is elsewhere. i think, you know, having seen firsthand emergency preparedness and disaster response when i was at the department of justice, i can say that, you know, fema has come a long way since hurricane katrina. what they do, they, in my view, are one of the success stories within the department. when you think about fema and the conversations we've been having earlier in this hearing about cisa and the way that cisa is acting as the nation's threat adviser, there is a threat advisory role that you see over and over again at dhs that it does better than any other part of the federal department -- federal departments or agencies and it needs to lean into those areas where what it's doing is adding unique value that falls between the cracks of where other departments and agencies
are at. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, ranking member. there has never been a more important conversation. having served in the military for two decades, i don't think there's been a time since 9/11 that we've faced the number of threats that we face right now. cyber threats, the rise of great power competition, the crisis that we have at our border, economic threats. they're all over. so what i would like to start with, being a congressman from texas and representing a district that's very much feeling the pain from this crisis is specifically related to the border. mr. warrick, one of your testimonies or questions, you talked about the morale of cbp officers. i can't agree more, it's an at an all-time low. they're asked to protect us and yet the resources they're being given and the policy that's being handed down is anything
but protective of the job that they're doing. so i'm interested to know what dhs' ability to call the situation at our southern border a crisis, including the funding for hiring additional people, you know, what -- what are the additional impacts you see on morale? and mr. warrick, if i may, have you been to the rio grande valley or to the southern border in the last couple of months? >> not in the last couple of months, because obviously it's a lot easier to arrange travel as a member of congress than in the private sector. the challenges that cbp faces actually go back to something thatpredated a number of the policies in the obama administration. there was an effort to change the way pay and overtime was administered. that -- >> if i may, i would like to really just kind of focus on the policies we have right now, and on the morale. >> right.
and so -- >> -- recently at the border and talked to a number of agents right there doing the national security mission. that's what i would like to understand from your perspective. >> oh, yeah, no, i would agree that chris magnus, if he's confirmed by the senate, is going to have a challenge equal to any other major law enforcement organization going through some difficult times. so it's going to take a lot of help and it's going to take support from the congress that should be bipartisan in order to try to address cbp's problems. but they're deep and they go back to the hiring that was done when cbp felt it needed to increase its numbers and then there were problems that have been well-documented by both democrats and republicans in office. >> well, thank you for that. this is a -- we're going to enter an era where law enforcement is going to be -- is going to continue to scratch their heads wondering if the policies from above are going to actually support the mission that they're doing. we have a crisis at the southern
border. the numbers do not lie. and yet nothing is being done to address it. let me ask another question that's completely unrelated to the border. and i would encourage everybody on this panel, we've got to tackle this, there's more drugs, fentanyl was mentioned. it is impacting communities that are not on the border. my community is not on the border in texas. it's going to impact every single one of our communities if not already. in some of your opening statements, it was mentioned that the need of an associate secretary position is being required, somebody who concentrates on law enforcement issues, that it would be a positive step in the reformation effort. i'm very interested in this because it sounds to me a little bit bureaucratic, an additional layer of bureaucratic red tape. what is this position really going to do, what is their jurisdiction going to be? anybody can answer. >> my view is it's going to solve the problems that cbp and i.c.e. and others have that they
need the solutions on but haven't been able to get the support from headquarters and the congress that they need. so i hope it provides that kind of leadership. over to carrie. >> anybody else want to comment on that quickly? >> absolutely, congressman. this is the model of the justice department as well, where there is angeneral had an associate dy attorney general. all it does is it helps the department be managed better, because the deputies in the associate can split up portfolios among the department so that the secretary can have a bird's-eye view and they can focus more on particular components. it's something that as worked in other departments, when i've roundtable this across the administrations, a bipartisan group of experts, everybody agreed that this would be a productive thing for the department. >> thank you for that i'm interested to see that the deputy to the desist and sometimes puts us into this bureaucratic nightmare were clear vision and mission statements are completely
clouded. would i think would be completely helpful at this point for ice would be the priorities because right now they don't know the priorities and can't do the job. mister chairman i thank, you and i yield back. >> chair recognizes the gentle lady from nevada for five minutes. >> thank you very much mister chairman. we've heard a lot this morning about serious problems within the workforce at dhs. we know that employees have low morale. -- and also they are reluctant to leave their regular jobs for temporary position with fema to go out and fight some of these disaster, especially caused by climate change because unlike reservists they don't have job protection guarantees. i'm working on some of these issues with the help of the chairman. for example, earlier this year i introduce the homeland security acquisition
professional career act. it is past the harassed house last april, and passed the senate committee just yesterday. it would target recruitment at hp sees, veterans organizations and minority serving institutions. i hope that our panel, especially mr. core daryl, the two who were formerly employees of the tsa, who could maybe weigh in on this and that will positively help the workforce. another problem that we have heard about, we've heard a lot about the border today, is the lack of the latest technology at dhs. we don't seem to be able to catch up and deal with new and emerging threats, and i'm especially thinking about unmanned aerial systems. we are seeing them more and
more at the border as they come across with illegal drugs and weapons. and i wonder if you know if we are working from dhs, and the department of defense with the development of some kind of countermeasure or some kind of technology to counter these operations to prevent these kinds of occurrences at the border. it seems like the department of defense does a lot of research in this area. we want to be able to reach across in partner and perhaps take advantage of some of that research. >> representative, that does in fact go on the instrument package is the d.o.d. needs and it's actually different from dhs's. but i'm sure a technology brief would be enormously beneficial to show you some of the things that's cbp would like professionals would like to see in future technology.
right this is very important and a far more effective use of taxpayer dollars than some other ideas i have heard. >> and well it seems to be a effective problem is not as effective, is issued him down with a gun, but you can't shoot him down with a missile, then you have collateral damage so, we need some sort of technology to deal with that growing threat. would you all comment on the workforce and how to diversify the bill, how that might be helpful? anybody? >> i certainly support all efforts to diversify the workforce and i think that some of the ideas that you have laid out in the bill are absolutely steps in the right direction. i think part of the problem with workforce morale stems from the political-ization of the department, and when you are down at this or the southern border as we are just
hearing from a different representative and you're talking to folks who are -- part of the problem is not just what they are being asking to do it is how it changes over time and how it is prioritized in deep prioritized. and how leadership is also a critical role. >> well we certainly see the number of people rotate in and out of opposition over the last four years. many of them were not qualified and stayed for only a short period of time. also i think that we rewarded the work that we asked tsa employees to do that might help with morale as well not, just with salaries but with some benefits and bargaining power. >> absolutely agree. >> okay, well we will keep working on and try to get it through, and i thank you mister chairman. i look forward to getting that
technical briefing maybe we can see how we can work on the drone issues as well. >> absolutely. -- chair recognizes the gentle lady from iowa iowa for five minutes. >> thank you mister chair, and we have certainly heard about the threats that are facing our homeland and we've heard about the border, like representative lugar, i have visited the border, and to me every state is a border state. last year we predicted that the pandemic, many people such as myself said veterans and physicians predicted that with our response to the pandemic, there would be an increase in deaths from drug overdoses with increased drug addiction as well as suicide, and just today the day moines register published that 87% of opioid overdose is in iowa this past year as compared to 2016
related to fentanyl. and as we know with the massive numbers of people coming across our border illegally, and cbp having to process those individuals those agents are pulled off the border so that is a tremendous problem that is only worsened during the pandemic. from the pandemic standpoint, in this is for any of the witnesses, during the response to covid-19 this past year it is been painfully apparent that not only the federal government has all the necessary resources -y to respond to a true national emergency or disaster such as the pandemic. we saw that there was failure on the part of the cdc with testing and with the fda as well. every year congress appropriate billions of dollars in preparedness grants to state local emergency managers and public safety partners. and in this last covid bill
unfortunately, there was not increased funding through noncompetitive grounds with our public health grants, with the people or on the front line of treating this pandemic. many say that these grants have become entitle meant grants focused on statement and maintenance, resulting important innovation to meet emerging threats and risk. why does the national response to covid 19 should we overhaul these preparedness grants, to ensure we build capacity at every level of government, and more importantly to measure the return on investment to the nation with the significant investment. any of the witnesses can respond. >> i would agree that there needs to be a complete overhaul of how we prepare for future pandemics. indeed, just as now there is now a january 6th commission i think in some at some point we should think about a commission to investigate about what needs
to be done to protect us from future pandemics. because as many people have said, the response to covid-19 in early 2020 was a national disaster with the number of deaths exceeding that of many of our major wars. we in congress need an effort to deeply understand what we're wrong. i know it is a problem. >> thank you mister, ward i would wholeheartedly agree. i'm on the subs committee of the core of minus task force, and i think our response to this pandemic and future pandemics, in addition to supply chain manufacturing coming back to the united states, the origins of covid-19 which seems to be an issue with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, we need to explore that and use the international community to set standards for disclosure and laboratory safety, especially when your bio level for. just a follow-up in that, do you think states have the
responsibility to maintain a certain level of preparedness for future pandemics or cyberattacks? >> yes, but we can't turn upside down the federal responsibility, that has to be part of the picture. >> thank you very much mister chair, i yield back my time. congresswoman >> congresswoman. thank you very much. the chair recognizes gentlelady from florida for five minutes. >> thank you so much mister chairman, and thank you to all our witnesses for being with us today alone. multiple administrations have struggled to improve coordination, i am particularly interested in a coordination, communication and transparency between sister and other federal agencies that share the responsibility. we've already heard it said that, we've talked about the appointment of the national cyber director.
we've heard it said, let him be able to do his job. but despite efforts to clarify rules and, responsibilities of sister agencies and coordination within government to promote the security and resilience of a nation's critical infrastructure is not where it needs to be. miss mulligan, what more do you think congress needs to do to ensure effective strategic inter agency collaboration to address cyber threats against critical infrastructure? i would hope as we discuss so many issues today on this particular committee that we would not abandon our responsibility, our primary responsibility is the safety in security of our homeland, and all areas of our nation, whether it is an attack on the united states capitol or other areas, and so, miss mulligan if you could please talk about
some of the challenges of coordination and what can congress do to help? >> so, one of the biggest issues is -- i've served in multiple different departments in the federal government from, the department of justice, in the intelligence community, and one of the issues that you see is confusion surrounding who is the lead federal agency. so one of the things that this committee can be extremely helpful in doing and as miss cory daryl discussed earlier would be, looking with fresh eyes and be very clear about where we want dhs to be the lead federal agency in where we wanted to be the support agency. -- is that dhs should have the lead federal agency into really important areas that are central to the question even asked.
one is connecting federal resources and officials with state, local, tribal and territorial officials, and also with the public and private sectors. what we find is often each department and agency on their own trying to make those connections is very confusing for the people who are the recipients of that outrage. if you designate dhs as the league for handling the connecting mission, that's gonna create a lot of clarity and it will empowers dhs to do what it does quite well. this is a great example of this. the other place where i think multiple folks on the panel agree that dhs should have a leisure murderous is around communicating. what i mean by communicating is communicating threat information and prophylactically actions that the public and private sector can take with companies, the
american people being the lead communicator about threat information is really important way for dhs to invest in the resilience that you were just talking about. >> thank you so much miss mulligan. mr. ward, climate change is driving the complex of natural disasters, including storms, floods, droughts and wildfires. of course this place is an additional burden on fema as you can imagine. as these disasters become more complex, there has stayed in effect, becomes more unpredictable and thereby stresses the entire homeland security enterprise. i do believe they are directly related. key please describe the strategy dhs needs to use to address the security implications of climate change? >> it's not dhs's mission representative to lower global temperatures, but it is dhs's mission to make sure that
extreme weather, hurricanes, floods wildfires do not jeopardize american lives and american infrastructure. that means working closely with state and local governments to make sure that codes are up to speck. that they have emergency assistance when they need it, but it's especially important that we design for resilience, that all the things the government does the touches our lives is done with an effort to protect us. so that when one of these disasters occurs, it doesn't just harm people, it doesn't destroy the infrastructure of our country. >> thank you so much mr. ward, mr. chairman i yield back. >> thank you gentlelady, yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia for five minutes, mr. clyde. >> -- there we go thank you, mister chairman. . i want to. follow up for my colleague on
texas is's an excellent conduct. . we talk about morale within dhs dhs hitting the bottom, and i would. certainly agree. it's completely clear that it's when an agency's completely important work doesn't get clear that support from top [inaudible] especially leadership, political leadership, especially political morale suffers leadership morale. so we suffers. can't stop by so we can start by stopping the negative stopping the negative comments about comments about isis in border patrol and [inaudible] about portable, about tpp, cbp and sandra, when etc, when they are just they are just trying trying to do the job to do their job and and follow the follow the law. when law. politicians when purposely degrade them and politicians purposely threatened to defund degrade them them, of course it's going and threatened to to negatively impact defund and, of course it will morale. we should negatively be supporting impact morale. dhs efforts to we should be follow the law supporting dhs by continuing efforts to the construction of the support the border wall, law, which was written into the law by which is continue the congress. but construction of the instead, this border wall which is administration is written into law by countering that congress. but law by instead this in executive ministration is countering order and the result that law by executive is a biden porter order and as crisis. so a result the biden now border to crisis. so mid miss cord era, i cordero, i have a question have a question for you. in for you, in your briefing paper your briefing published paper published by the by the center for center for new american a new american security and called security,
and the department of called the department of homeland security homeland security priorities and priorities and reform reform, you, you suggested and i quote suggested, and i quote,, dhs the border security and dhs border law enforcement security and law activities should enforcement activities correspond to should course want to components, components, authorized authorized returns, missions, and refresh departmental priorities, and refresh departmental driven by priorities drone legitimate safety piloted with security and safety threats and needs. threats in needs. house and senate house and democrats have senate democrats repeatedly have repeatedly called for defunding called for ice and cbp, defending ice yet border agents have, defunding ice intercepted though and see the bee known as pee, but terrorists, gang members, border agents have sexual intercepted known critical, and terrorist and sexual interdicted thousands predators, of pounds of and even weapons illicit drugs and even some weapons. . according to according to data published data published in in june by june by cbp, nationwide drug cbp seizures were up, major drug 18% in may of seizures were up 2021 over 18% over april of april of 2021. 2021. seizures of mid amphetamines seizures of meth amphetamines increased increased 53%, 53%. seizures of seizures of heroin heroin increased increased 7%. 7%. seizures of seizures of fentanyl increased 9%. fentanyl increased in addition, 9%. in addition 7450 pounds of
sentinel 7454 pounds have been seized so of far this festival fentanyl have been fiscal year seized this fiscal year as of the end of me, as of may, far far surpassing the surpassing the 4700 pound 4700 pounds seized in all of seized in all fiscal year fiscal year of 2020. so a question for 2020. so question for miss you, miss cord arrow, yes cordero. yes or or no, no. do you do you agree that agree there is there is a legitimate a legitimate security and security and safety threat safety of the threat at the southwestern border? >> southwestern border? >> thanks for the question, thanks for the question congressman. congressman. i agree that the i agree that the border border presents a current challenge presents for immigration and a current challenge border security for. i think that immigration and border there, in security. i the think that political dialogue in the political surrounding the dialogue border issues, surrounding the border that there has issues that there has been an evolving been a melting of issues of issues between those between those individuals individuals who are who are seeking to seeking to cross the cross the border border for, that that present and present an actual actual security security threat versus threat, versus those individuals those who seek to enter the individuals who seek to border enter the border for for other reasons other reasons, fleeing, fleeing the circumstances the circumstances that they are in, that they are and that in. that is becomes a law a law enforcement issue, enforcement issue. so i think there is i think there is a distinction a distinction between [inaudible]
between -- >> >> no please, please, please. so so yes i'm yes, i'm assuming assuming that that that i have. that you do is a yes. agree there is you do agree there is a legitimate a legitimate security and safety threat at the security and safety threat southwestern border at the southwestern. >> border? i [inaudible] that >> border security border i do agree that border can present security issues security can. i don't present security necessarily issues. i don't agree that every necessarily agree individual crossing the that every border is in the individual crossing the national security border as a national threat security threat. >> [inaudible] . ma'am, i asked >> if there was man, i asked a border threat if there was, and a border threat? so, okay. so now, i ok. now want to i want to transition. i transition, i want to commend want to commend this is or nodding their new their new red site, website, stop stop ransomware.gov, ransomware.gov, i i believe that's believe that a launch today. for launched and i'm very, today. i'm very very thankful that. thankful for that. i think that will do i think that will a lot do a lot for private for private enterprise enterprise. . and now, i've now i've got a couple of got a couple of questions questions here. here, one for one for mr. mr. warwick warrick, and then also, i don't, want to leave delaware leaving this miss mulligan out here mulligan out here. i would like you. i would like you to to answer this question answer this question as well. as well what information do. you think the government, but
law one information to think the enforcement and government in the law the intelligence enforcement, and intelligence community, could more community could more quickly share with the quickly share with the private sector on private sector a regular basis on a regular basis that could help that could help disrupt disrupt ransomware ransomware or or other other cyberattacks? >> cyberattacks. that would be >> that would be information that information people can that people could actually take actually take action on action on,, encouraging encouraging them to make them to make sure they sure they have have basic cyber basic cyber hygiene in place hygiene in place,, making making sure that they sure understand what the minimal they understand with the standards are minimal standards of for being a good citizen and are being irresponsible business a good citizen and owner responsible business. this especially needs to be done owner. the special needs for our small to be done for businesses. that's small businesses. that's a resource intensive a resource activity but our intensive small businesses need the activity for help that they can get from a place like but, needs to get syria. >> okay, thank from a place like sza. >> you, miss this mulligan? >> i think this thank, miss mulligan? >> i think sis is doing a really is doing exceptional a really exceptional job trying job to wrap, trying to wrap its head around that right its head around that now. i think right now. they they've had have had some some notable notable successes successes but i think but i think the the key key building building on west more on what mr. work said warwick is said, is identifying ways for the federal identifying ways for the government to federal government to share share that
that are fit are fit for for purpose, that purpose, that can be can be actions actions by the by the public and public and private private sector, which sector, which isn't isn't always easy always for the federal easy for the government to federal government translate to what it translate but it collects in collects into usable usable information information for for folks who folks who are outside the are outside the government. government. but i but i think think the other the other key key part is part making sure that is making sure what what's sza cissa is is doing, doing, that that there is their clarity clarity about its role as the league for communicating that as the league for that information. part of the information issue that i see part of ian playing out in the federal thing i see government right now playing out in the is lack of government clarity about do right now is who's in the league lack of clarity about who in the fbi or is nearly. as if the fbi others, and or others? making sure that and cissa has making sure they have a leadership role. >> okay, a leadership. errol >> well thank you. i want to thank you. i want to get get mr., did i pronounced it all right -- >> gentleman's. >> the time has gentleman's's expired. chair time has expired. the chair recognizes the recognizes the gentlelady from gentle lady from california california, miss for five minutes. are >> thank you gone, for fragments. >> mister chairman. thank you mister chairman, and let me thank you let me think this start by thanking corner miss cordero up for your for response about your response
about distinguishing the distinguishing a security security threat threat at the border. at the border i wish our. i politicians would wish our focus on the politicians would focus security threat on the security posed threat by posed by domestic terrorism domestic terrorism. and. when you have and when you have politicians politicians degrading degrading capital police and what capitol hill police and what happened at happened at the the capitol, and saying these insurrectionists caspitol and saying and these these rioters were insurrectionists just another and these tourist visit rioters were at the capitol, another tourist visit it's hard to take at the capitol seriously the, it's art to take conversation seriously there sometimes about security threats at the conversation sometimes about border. so let me just security threats at the thank you for border. so let me just your thank you for your response, and response in making that making that distinction for people who distinction for people are fleeing violence to who are fleeing violence what is toward is actually actually a security threat. a security threat we should look and to look at at ourselves, ourselves which is why which is why i'm i am proud proud that that our team our chairman is gonna be is what is going to be leading this leading this after the effort on the january 6th commission. january 6th commission. with that, with that, let me move let me move on to on to my my first question. miss first question, miss carter, let's start with corduroy. let me you. start with you. and since its since inception, the border its inception security -- enforcement and law the enforcement functions enforcement and law of dhs, enforcement functions of customs and border protections,
and immigration, dhs, customs and border protection, customs enforcement, in customs particular, have grown enforcement in particular disproportionately large, have grown and brought in disproportionately large scope. without broad scope the necessary without the necessary oversight. the adjustments must be made in oversight. key enforcements these areas to must be improve made to improve dhs's dhs's safeguards and safeguards accountability in the and accountability in next decade and the next decade me beyond. and discord, on. miss arrows darting with, corduroy, starting with you can you tell us you, can you more about your tell us more about your proposed proposed reforms in the areas reforms in the of border areas of security, border security immigration enforcement, immigration and and law enforcement? >> law enforcement? absolutely, >> and thank you. absolutely and thank you thanks for the question, for the question congresswoman. so congresswoman. i'll take through them quickly because we all ticked through them made a lot of quickly because we have recommendations made a lot. of as i've mentioned, recommendations. updating the mission of the updating department the i, think, is mission really important. is really drought developing the important direction of a digital and modernized operational guidelines -- for the department. i modernizing believe it was really sort guidelines of the law of an enforcement capacity for unintended consequence that the this enormous justice department. this law enforcement agency's been capacity, that concentrated on the really actually is greater in department of homeland terms of man power than even the justice department it and all of security its investigative has
been agencies, has been concentrated in the department of homeland concentrated in security. so when there is the some when there's responsibility of a responsibility of having all that long having all that law enforcement power, there enforcement power needs to be sufficient, there needs to be oversight sufficient structures oversight that exist structures across the that entire department. exist across so creating operational guidelines, the tired apartment releasing them publicly,. creating an oversight council that's headed by the head of operational guidelines and policy in the department, creating -- the associate secretary who can have a greater management portfolio focused on the law enforcement can twos and then looking at things you hear things like like transparency, transparency, training, hiring standards for the law enforcement training higher standards components, and, with the giving them set departments and giving them priorities that set priorities reflect the current that reflect the current threat threat landscape, landscape. all of all of those things those things together together are things that i hope are things that i hope the congress and the that the congress administration will and the take on administration will take on in order in order to to bring this bring this law law enforcement capacity enforcement capacity under appropriate under oversight and appropriate oversight and encounter biloxi accountability. . >> thank you. >> thank you. miss mulligan, is there mr. mulligan, is anything you would like there anything you would to add like to add to to any
any recommendations you may have in this recommendations that you may area have in this area? >>? >> so i think so i that think that i i really sort of align align myself myself with a lot of with many of the recommendations that misquote the recommended recommendations in this arrow has already present it, and i cordero's already presented, just think and i think overall the department overall the is going to department is going to need to rebalance rebalance and and have much have much more clarity more clarity about where we want about where we it to be want to be prioritizing prioritizing, because at, because as this this hearing hearing demonstrates, their demonstrates, there are so own so many many different different fronts fronts in in protecting protecting americans america, security and american security prosperity and prosperity, that we need that we are going to to help get to dhs understand where we understand where we need want to prioritizing prioritize and where we can [inaudible] priorities and [inaudible] . other priorities. >> >> great. great. mr. mr. warwick, do you warwick do you have have anything you want to anything you would like to add, add? or. >> >> no, no, i think i think those are those are excellent excellent comments. there comments. there's obviously is obviously a lot that needs to be there is done and i a lot that needs to be think that good done and i think the leadership in leadership at dhs headquarters needs dhs headquarters to set the right sees these to tone without set the right tone trying to micromanage without trying to or politicize micromanage or what law enforcement and politicize
homeland security does. >> what law enforcement will not security does. thank you. >> thank you. miss mulligan, i want miss more to say i am economists say on a visual a visual learner and learner and i a predated appreciate seeing seeing your video your video in in your your opening opening remarks remarks. i think i think it was it was a great way to kind a great way to of show kind of show what is what's needed needed, and the and the balances as balances as was was put in would put in there. there. can you can you further, in the further in the last last 30 seconds, 30 seconds explain explain your iraq recommendations for recommendations for dhs to focus on the more dhs to focus on the more public public service service orientated orientated model, model, and how and how it would it would fit within fit within the the larger larger role role as the federal incidents response leader? >> as the federal response leader? great, >> thank you for that well thank you for that question. i'm very question. and i'm very glad to hear glad to hear that the that the video video [inaudible] was it's been a labor of useful because it love for us to was a labor of love for try to illustrate us what and we, as we mentioned dhs might reimagine what look like. you know, dhs might look i think the important like. i think the thing to remember important thing to remember about dhs is about dhs that many of the is that many of the missions that we are missions that we are advocating for advocating it to for it to focus additional focus additional intention on attention on our missions the department already has. our missions that department already has. the they are things, the department is regularly department is regularly engaging engaging in in the
facilitation of goods and facilitation of goods and travel travel, you know,, goods and travel goods and travel across across the border borders, is, to regularly communicating regularly involved in threat community information communicating threat information, and and doing doing, you know, -- sort of serving as serving as the the nation's nation's sort of crisis response crisis response to fema. through fema. and what we are what we are arguing is that doing what we are those missions are arguing is that those missions are being de emphasized being the and and emphasized and the deep prioritized, or have for our ties been in the past and have been in the. and past and in a disproportionate amount of disproportionate amount of headquarters focus headquarters focus has is [inaudible] on whatever essentially one are really essentially political political priorities. pry enforcement at the southern priorities. border enforcement at the southern border, and this and this focus on focus on counter-terrorism counter-terrorism that we think is that we think a bit out of is about sync with is a bit out of today's sync with today's threat picture. and so, threat picture. so it it seems seems very very right at this right at this point, point during the nearing the 20 year 20 year anniversary anniversary dhs's of dhs's creation to bring creation to bring its mission its missions and priorities into and priority into better better balance with what balance with what we actually want it we actually want to be doing. and to be doing. so, it's so it is the those [inaudible] first order of questions about what we question what we need from dhs, need from dhs and how that's and then how that is
changing in the last changed in the last 20 years, that we 20 years that we think is perfect for think is this committee to perfect be focused on. >> for this committee thank you so much. my time. >> thank is expired. mister you so much. my time chairman, i yield is expired, mr. back. >> chairman i yield. back the >> gentlelady alicia. chair the chair recognizes that recommends to from new york recognize the gentleman mr. from your, mr. barber enough, moreno for for four minutes. >> thank five minutes. >> you, mister chairman. thank you mister also thank you, the chairman, thank you the ranking ranking member for member for putting this putting this hearing committee together. together. my my first question first question is to mr. cilluffa, and we will see what the other will see what the one have to other witnesses have to say after you say after you have to what you have. today. specifically, i want specifically i want to to know what you know think what you about, much -- would overlap overlap you see between the to see between the office of office of the intelligence intelligence and and analysis analysis and the office of and the operations and office of operations coordination coordination? . how does how is dhs dhs ensuring ensuring that these that these offices are not offices are not duplicative duplicative and are, and outperforming performing worthwhile functions. worthwhile functions do you. do you think they would be better think there will be equipped to well equipped coordinate and to coordinate and information shares inter one integrated information shares unit? one integrated unit? >> >> congress doug arena,
congressman carburetor first [inaudible] go islanders, my team, i probably. think you raise i think you raise a great question there a good great question there. . i'm and i'm a little a little jaded dated in terms of in some of the headquarter terms of some of the functions headquarter functions. . but anywhere but anywhere where you can where you can see, so see, one big takeaway one big, in terms of takeaway in dhs, terms of if they have not dhs they have clearly not clearly delineated and defined delineated the the office of the office of the secretary. so if you were secretary. to compare, say, so if you were to dhs compare with d.o.d., diocese with d.o.d. or or even the department of even the department of state, there's state, there is a much greater a much greater awareness awareness in terms of what in terms of what the office of the the office of the secretary secretary can can drive drive and work on and work on. . and part of that part of that is because is because it's it's a collage a collage, and some, some call the called it the island of islands of [inaudible] i misfit toys. i don't look at it that way. don't look at it that way. it it's a collage of was a collage of 22 really different, 22 really but different but unique unique agencies agencies and and departments. departments. so i do i do think we think we need to be do need to be looking looking for any for any opportunities opportunities where to -- where we can we can streamline streamline, we, and had can enhance sufficiency efficiency, and and most most importantly, importantly coherence coherence. one of the.
one of the things things i am that i'm pushing on pushing on which we, which we haven't discussed haven't discussed on today today, it is a round economic's around economic security and security and dhs's important dhs's important role around the role from the supply chain perspective. supply chain. here, you have an here you have opportunity, given -- every every one of the one of the components, touches this components touches issue in one way or another to one your way or another, streamline that to streamline that, and focus on it. and focus it. long winded's it's a long way of saying way of a long, winded way of saying yes, yes, but but i would need to look i would need to look at it at it a little more a little more closely. >> closely. >> i i appreciate that. appreciate that. i i guess we'll go guess will go to miss core daryl to miss, if you have anything cordero, if you have anything to add? >> to? and >> i to i do, congressman. congressman thank you intelligence and analysis thank you analysis and in particular. under intelligence in particular. our project we earlier this commissioned earlier this year year there is a paper a paper that was written written by by adjunct acting [inaudible] senior fellow christian christian partner. and he took wagner and he took a deep dive a deep dive into irony and pro into basically proposed for congress to different -- a basically models. either go proposed to big, or go small. because congress to different right now, i models, either go big, or emmy is not making anybody go small. happy. it has, right now ian is there's expectations not making anybody happy, it has expectations that that it's authorities don't manage [inaudible] the to assemble expectations we have intelligence for it as far as the information so those stumbling intelligence big information provided warnings. the get go to go big big model
would be model would be resources, more give, it more give it more authority to be able authority to to conduct conduct intelligence intelligence, and a wider analysis across a wider range of range of activities and threats. activities and threats, the the other model other model would be to would be to go go much smaller, much smaller and and have it perform have it perform more like more like i and our, at ian are, the state the state department, department where it really is just services, the secretary and were really is just services other policy members,, the and have that secretary and other policy members. the conflicts is let's a. that sza cissa do their own do their intelligence reporting on cyber threats, and i neb other thing. more tailored to serving the needs of the more tailored to policy serving the needs of the makers. they are policy makers. they are different very different proposals, but theresa proposals but our summit is that congress assessment is that should take congress should take a deeper a deeper look at this look at this and pick one and go, pick with it so that we one and then go with it. help so we help i inf knew move into its move to where it's next year next iteration where duration where it could can be more be more protective. >> productive. >> i appreciate. that'll take a look a appreciate that at that analysis. i'll take a look at that study, that data that you [inaudible] . miss. miss mulligan, or mulligan, or mr. warwick mr. warrick,, anything further anything further? >> yeah, so to add? >> i i first want to thank first want to thank you you, representative representative, for for being the being the first person who has mentioned
the first person who has mentioned the operations coordination office office coordination's which gets no office, contention. and in which gets no attention, fact, it's i, and i think i think, one of, even more than even more than i any, needs to inf needs to be either either go big a kobe or go small type of or go enterprise. small type of enterprise. it runs the it runs the operation operation center that ian center that by any staff. a staffs that's what. that's why, that's why they seem to they seem to have have similar functions. similar function. but i any is the classic but ian is the classic you know, iowan to triple triple three intelligence organization three organization intelligence with special over-ization the authorities and capabilities that ops does not have. special authorities and capabilities and exactly, as. when exactly is carey says, i any exists to serve carey says, i nay exists to not just serve not just the the secretary but secretary but also the state and also the local fusion steak and centers, as local [inaudible] centers, as well as all well as all of the other dhs ditch as personnel the personnel who need need intelligence analysis. intelligence and analysis. >> >> great. i appreciate that. appreciate that. miss and with mulligan, anything to add mulligan, anything to iran? or have we or [inaudible] . >> i beat this horse? -- >> think we're all speaking in i think we are unison here. i mean, all speaking in this really is unison here. a place where this really is you it a place where either needs to either needs to be have the have a bigger bigger
mission mission or it or it needs to be needs to be more tailored more tailored to focus on filling to filling a specific need a specific need that that isn't being met isn't met anywhere else elsewhere in the government in the government. but trying but trying to to straddle both straddle both worlds isn't working worlds isn't and i think it's working, and i an area think that it's an area that bright that's ripe for for a refresh. >> i refresh. >> love when everybody i'm agrees. this is great glad that everyone agrees, this is great. . >> >> congressman, can i at congressman, can i add one minute point? just one more point because it's because it's historically historically relevant. so, relevant? when we when we initially initially stood up stood up the department of the homeland security department of homeland from the white house, security from the there was the white house, but was the intent to marry up the intent to office of marry up the office of intelligence with intelligence with infrastructure protection infrastructure, what was. which is then in pd and now since. now is it cissa. started so, it on started on the different footing a different footing because in between, because in that there was the between that there was the establishment of a national establishment of the counter-terrorism national center which obviously counter-terrorism center played a much bigger, which obviously role played a much bigger, role especially to especially the support some of these missions. so in some [inaudible] function to be able to ways i any support some of these started off admissions. so in some in a very ways ina awkward type of way. started off in just a very awkward kind of for what way, just for what is it's worth.
i worth. and i think now think now is the is the time time where you where you can start can start looking to whether or to look forward not we need to right to whether we should size it start looking to right, draw size it, it, but do it grow it, but do in a way that it in a way that doesn't doesn't compete with the compete with the fbi and fbi and the broader any other agency, because quite [inaudible] agency honestly they do have some of this because frankly the, a lot better honestly, they, or do some of this quite. more narrowly veteran why not focused it and let some of the narrowly focused it components take and make that on some of their unique some of the companies take on subject matter areas their unique subject areas whether. whether it's cbp at it's sea to be on the the border border, or cissa vis-à-vis the latest and, greatest chinese or -- and russian malware. so, sorry, i just [inaudible] . >> i appreciate, that sorry -- >> appreciate and i yield back. donahue back, i'm not a time. thank, thank you for your time. >> you don't. >> thank you. thank. typical new yorker typical new yorker, take more, to take more time time. with, but but we appreciate it. chair we appreciate it. >> recognizes chair another new yorker recognizes another, mr. new yorker, mr. tourists, for torres for five minutes. >> five minutes via mister. chairman, >> he's more congressman gottheimer is senior than i am so i can more senior than i am, defer to him. so i can defer to him. >> oh, when >> are you are you sure, mr. sure trudeau? >>?
>> yes, i'm yeah, happy happy to to. >> do the. >> thank. mr. thompson, mr. thompson is that okay? is that ok? >> >> if it is the. >> vice chair, alarm go over because he is the vice this one, chair, or let him go with this one. go ahead, go ahead mr. gardner. mr. congressman. >> thank >> you, mr. torres. and i thought thank you mister taurus you, mister, and i chairman, you are thought you were gonna call me going to call the aid a new yorker which new yorker, which of course, would of course been would have been deeply insulting deeply assaulted. , but if you thank you didn't compared compare me to mr. garb to me to mr. reno, that would've been bahrain, which would have worse. i been wet. i appreciate you appreciate you organizing organizing this important this report hearing to discuss how and this we can strengthen the hearing and, how we can department of homeland security and confront new and strengthen homeland security, emerging threats and and confront new challenges. as we know, the emerging threats and department was challenges. as you know the established in department 2002, in the was afternoon aftermath of established in terror attacks 2002 in the aftermath on september 11th, of the terrorist as was just mentioned, with attacks, with the necessary focus a necessary focus on countering of countering threats mostly from foreign terrorist groups threats most in foreign terrorist groups. today, nearly two decades later the today, nearly threat landscape looks two decades very different. later, the threat we've seen the let's take the rise of [inaudible] homegrown domestic and homegrown tariff movement, terrorist movement, especially when is premised especially white on other racially or ethnically supremacist, another motivate extremists, which racially or is director wray,
has quest pressed a fight. -- , quote, with the primary source [inaudible] the full incidents. mr. mr. work warwick, again ask you warrick, if a question i can ask you a question, how prepared is today's how prepaid is today's dhs to address dhs to address the serious threats serious threats of of domestic terrorist, and members of violent extremist groups like, the oath keepers, the three percenters, and the proud boys, who were involved in the january 6th attack on the capital? >> it needs to be understood the dhs is very limited and statutory roles in this area. lead investigative agencies as the fbi, and that needs to stay that way. but dhs needs to be able to do through its intelligence and analysis office needs to connect the dots to put together warnings for senior leadership. there needs to be greater clarity on whose job it is to look at social media and be aware of what people are saying. i saw the fbi director kind of fumble that question a little bit and hearing a few weeks ago.
this is something that really needs to have congress clarify whose authority it is to do what's in respect to social media, because there are significant privacy and public challenges in this area. >> that's something he would change the way dhs is structured? >> we have a detailed report that my colleague is put together. i will make sure sent to your staff. basically there needs to be in intelligence and warning officer and director of national intelligence whose job it is it is that nothing escapes notice or nothing is politicized. this is important in domestic terrorism. our report is the think tech report written by the former and new york police intelligence for more than a decade, and it's one of the more scholarly papers in addition to the one that chris back there also put it which is also worth reading. you should talk to those two
authors, because if it's some very interesting things to say. >> without your objection mister chairman, i'd like to put that in the record. >> miss core daryl, could you describe where dhs fits into the national security focus agencies conducting intelligence analysis, and rack compared with the fbi for example? -- >> thank you congressman. so i any intelligence analysis is the component in the department of homeland security that is a part of the intelligence community. so that way it is able to both glean information from its intelligence community affiliation and disseminate and share it with other federal, state and local partners in a way that they can receive that information. at the same time it can also receive information from the state and local network, and
those activities and the department itself, and receive information if it's relevant and -- it provides an important link there. i am a does not do what the fbi does in terms of its investigative authority to disrupt and pursue criminal prosecution of domestic terrorism activities, which oftentimes are prosecuted as other violent crime or weapons related or other types of criminal violations. the department of homeland security never has and it would not be appropriate for it to have that investigative authority that disrupts potential terrorist activity. that reside still with the fbi. so i think the question for inf is, does congress want to expand its ability to conduct more intelligence analysis, or does it want to narrow and not be duplicative of what the fbi
with the intelligence community is doing? i think these different reports of mr. warwick mentioned are important, including the one that we put out, is because inf is at an inflection point right now. >> thank, you i yield back my one second left to the vice chairman. thank you mr. tours for yielding. i yield back mr. chairman. >> thank you very much chair recognizes vice chair, gentleman from new york mr. torres. >> thank you mister chair. it is been said that there is a crisis of public trust in dhs. i'm wondering and this question is specifically for miss mulligan, do you share my concern of the continuing the two 87 program but, expanded exponentially under the trump administration i would only would only serve to perpetuate that crisis in the agency? >> thank you for the question.
i do. >> and the dhs is not effective at policing abuses within its own enforcement officials. what reason is there to think that the chess would be effective at enforcing abuses among state and local law enforcement officials, who've been deputized to -- >> i think that there is an incredibly important set of issues in the question that you have raised, it really gets at the heart of how important it is that we root out extremism within members of the federal and state law enforcement for that matter, who are in a position of trust. it is particularly important in the law enforcement context. i think the numbers that we are seeing in the connections we are seeing, and the indictments out of the january 6th events
are very concerning. and i think that i've actually been pleased to see the department takes immediate action, as well as the secretary of defense because of think we have a problem in our active duty miller terry and our veterans communities. >> i served in new york city council where we had oversight, insight into the subject matter in question. >> there were significant studies done by cbp by democratic and republican administrations that declared the system to be broken.
and then just to be important as we have the commissioner cbp confirmed and to make sure that many of these things are addressed. and the good men and women a the good men and women of cbp know there are a small number of bad apples among them and this has to be addressed. this is going to be one of the greatest challenges that i hope commissioner magnets is able to tackle right away. >> and i know we often speak of the need for an independent justice to pardon and independent attorney general. i don't often hear people speak of the need for an independent dhs or an independent dhs
secretary. it seems to be there is less often exportation of institutional independence when it comes to dhs, even though it is fundamentally a law enforcement agency. is that a fair assessment? [inaudible] how we create the expectation of it by ten. >> secretary, chertoff, and secretary johnson have both spoken out very strongly that dhs needs to be as far as possible nonpartisan, in the spirit that we have our uniform military and our intelligence community being nonpartisan, that same ethic needs to be deeply baked into dhs. secretary napolitano was famous for joking that when she became secretary, she had a partisan bone removed. the point you make to the workforce was this was her expectation, that the department needs to be outside of politics, as much as possible, especially in its law enforcement mission. >> and i'm wondering how much of a dhs's challenges of
function of mismanagement, and how much of it is a function of just the youth of the hst. you know, it's far less institutional memory and agencies that have been around for decades, in some cases centuries, and it's simply going through the growing pains of a new agency. what's the main cause of the dysfunction in dhs? is it simply growing pains, or is it deep in that that? >> i think it's something else. i mean, to me sure, every young department or agency, certainly [inaudible] the scope of size or responsibility the dhs, it's going to have management challenges, and that's why the oversight rules are so important. but the cultural problem that exists at dhs, in my view, stands for its origin story as an agency that's really about countering terrorism and going, you know, protecting america from others and that mission
and origin story has seeped in kind of white people think they are there to do, and what attracts them to it as a in the first place. and what we have now is we've heard throughout the day, is an organization that we need, to be doing a whole lot of other things besides countering terrorism and going after bad guys, protecting, you know, protecting and providing services that americans really depend on, but and yet it has a workforce that is disproportionately drawn to this kind of militarist a military cosplay kind of role that is inherently [inaudible] and one of the things i think that congress can do, that, sorry, gets back to something miss cordero said earlier, is by adjusting its missions there's actually a lot of that flows from that because people need to see what they're actually doing reflected in the
missions of the department and they need to see those missions being elevated and prioritized and praised and incentivized, and it's the if the only incentives are to engage in activity that is sort of hostile to the people that you serve then you are going to have a culture that looks an awful lot like their culture at dhs. my time is expired. thank you mister chair, for the accommodation. >> yes sir, anything for the vice chair. [laughs] well, let me thank our witnesses. all four of you have been excellent. you absolutely have a real grasp of knowledge about the subject matter. one thing i didn't talk about and we will circle back and i mentioned it in my opening statement, the jurisdictional challenges for the department. and responding to some manual
committees and subcommittees. no other agency in government has that reach to respond to, and it makes it very cumbersome. so we plan to continue to work at that. but let me again just thank you for the breadth of the knowledge. we understand cissa and its importance, its important role in part of the new dhs. our challenge, but more than any other, is how do we marry cissa with more mature agencies who don't like the new kid on the block? and the colonial pipeline is a good example of what i'm talking about that i won't go into it. but i do a season eat for some
regulatory review on a lot of what we do in the pipelines and other things because so much of it right now is voluntary. and unless you put some teeth behind the regulation it's not going to be taken very seriously, in my humble opinion. so, we'll be moving forward around that subject and i guess i'm trying to tease you all on your next report that you go back and make an argument for it. but now let me thank you for your testimony, and the members, for the questions. and the members of the committee may have additional questions for the witnesses, and we ask that you respond expeditiously in writing. before adjourning, i ask for anonymous consent to submit a statement for the record from the partnership for public service, analyzing the