```

[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                     A REVIEW OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET 
                      REQUEST FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOME-
                      LAND SECURITY

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                             APRIL 16, 2024

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-59

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
                                     

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                     
        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                               __________
                               

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
57-752 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                   
 
                     COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

                 Mark E. Green, MD, Tennessee, Chairman
Michael T. McCaul, Texas             Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi, 
Clay Higgins, Louisiana                  Ranking Member
Michael Guest, Mississippi           Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Dan Bishop, North Carolina           Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey
Carlos A. Gimenez, Florida           Eric Swalwell, California
August Pfluger, Texas                J. Luis Correa, California
Andrew R. Garbarino, New York        Troy A. Carter, Louisiana
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia      Shri Thanedar, Michigan
Tony Gonzales, Texas                 Seth Magaziner, Rhode Island
Nick LaLota, New York                Glenn Ivey, Maryland
Mike Ezell, Mississippi              Daniel S. Goldman, New York
Anthony D'Esposito, New York         Robert Garcia, California
Laurel M. Lee, Florida               Delia C. Ramirez, Illinois
Morgan Luttrell, Texas               Robert Menendez, New Jersey
Dale W. Strong, Alabama              Thomas R. Suozzi, New York
Josh Brecheen, Oklahoma              Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Elijah Crane, Arizona
                      Stephen Siao, Staff Director
                  Hope Goins, Minority Staff Director
                       Sean Corcoran, Chief Clerk
                            
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                               Statements

Honorable Mark E. Green, a Representative in Congress From the 
  State of Tennessee, and Chairman, Committee on Homeland 
  Security:
  Oral Statement.................................................     1
  Prepared Statement.............................................     3
Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on 
  Homeland Security:
  Oral Statement.................................................     5
  Prepared Statement.............................................     7
Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of Texas:
  Prepared Statement.............................................     9
Honorable Delia C. Ramirez, a Representative in Congress From the 
  State of Illinois:
  Prepared Statement.............................................    14

                                Witness

Mr. Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary, Department of Homeland 
  Security:
  Oral Statement.................................................    15
  Prepared Statement.............................................    17

                             For the Record

Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on 
  Homeland Security:
  Article, Forbes, Feb 6, 2024...................................     5
  Excerpt, Hearing Transcript, July 18, 2018.....................   135
Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of Texas:
  Report, Government Accountability Office, July 2014............    64

                               Appendix I

Questions From Chairman Mark E. Green, M.D. for Honorable 
  Alejandro Mayorkas.............................................   147
Questions From Honorable Delia C. Ramirez for Honorable Alejandro 
  Mayorkas.......................................................   156

                              Appendix II

Honorable Dan Bishop, a Representative in Congress From the State 
  of North Carolina:
  Report, House Judiciary Committee, April 16, 2024..............   159
Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress From 
  the State of Texas:
  Article, Vox, October 31, 2023.................................   178

 
 A REVIEW OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF 
                           HOMELAND SECURITY

                              ----------                              

                        Tuesday, April 16, 2024

             U.S. House of Representatives,
                    Committee on Homeland Security,
                                            Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m., in 
room 310, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Mark Green 
[Chairman of the committee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Green, McCaul, Higgins, Guest, 
Bishop, Gimenez, Pfluger, Garbarino, Greene, Gonzales, LaLota, 
Ezell, D'Esposito, Lee, Luttrell, Strong, Brecheen, Crane, 
Thompson, Jackson Lee, Swalwell, Correa, Carter, Thanedar, 
Magaziner, Ivey, Goldman, Garcia, Ramirez, Menendez, Suozzi, 
and Clarke.
    Chairman Green. The committee will come to order. Without 
objection, the committee may recess at any point.
    Good morning, Secretary Mayorkas, and thank you for joining 
the committee to discuss the budget that you and President 
Biden have put forward for the Department of Homeland Security.
    On March 1, the Department celebrated its 21st anniversary, 
and I want to thank all the public servants throughout DHS who 
dedicate their lives to securing the homeland. This work is 
vital to our Nation's safety and security.
    Mr. Secretary, when you took the oath of office you swore 
to ``support and defend the Constitution of the United States 
against all enemies, foreign and domestic, well and faithfully 
discharge the duties of the Office.'' The Immigration and 
Nationality Act further makes clear that you have a ``duty to 
control and guard the boundaries and borders of the United 
States.''
    During your 3 years as Secretary, you have failed to 
fulfill this oath. You refuse to comply with the laws passed by 
Congress and you have breached the public trust. You 
facilitated and encouraged record levels of illegal immigration 
since your first day in office and we have all witnessed the 
devastating results of your open borders agenda.
    I have shared this before but I feel it is necessary to 
repeat it. You abolished working policies and following the 
statements of your boss on his campaign trail promises to 
improperly grant asylum to anyone who came. As a result, people 
from all over the world tested the system. They came and were 
released. They phoned home and the mass waves began. With this 
increased demand the cartels took advantage, regulated that 
flow to overwhelm the crossing sites at our border.
    You responded by removing the Border Patrol agents from the 
border, marshals from the air, Customs agents from airports to 
process and release these record numbers of people, and issued 
guidance to DHS law enforcement to violate laws passed by this 
coequal branch of Government, Congress, on detection and 
removal.
    With the border wide open and Border Patrol occupied 
processing the mass waves of people, the cartels have poured 
drugs, criminals, and trafficked humans into this country. This 
has led to the deaths of thousands, the loss of billions of 
dollars, and created the crisis that you just finally 
acknowledged as such in recent testimony.
    Even your counterpart, the FBI Director Christopher Wray 
has said there is no way to ensure Hamas and other terrorists 
are not a part of the roughly 2 million got-aways who have 
entered our country uncaught on your watch. The massive 
increase in Chinese nationals, 53,000 and counting, in 2023 
adds to the threats we now face at home because you chose not 
to enforce the law.
    Your refusal to follow those laws is contemptable. Your 
disregard of the requests from this coequal branch of 
Government in pursuit of our Constitutional duty to conduct 
oversight, your false statements to this body and the American 
people, and your issuance of guidance to the employees of DHS 
telling them to violate laws passed by Congress shows a 
disregard for the Constitution you swore an oath to uphold.
    However, instead of acknowledging those failures and 
pledging to change course, your actions and directives remain 
unchanged. You have doubled down.
    This budget request reflects this obstinance. It fails to 
take seriously the crises threatening our national security 
interests, especially our wide-open borders. For example, you 
request a $1.45 billion cut in top-line spending for CBP's 
budget from what Congress enacted last year that includes a 
$245 million cut in funding for CBP's border security 
operations budget.
    Instead, as you did in last year's budget you proposed a 
$4.7 billion slush fund called the Southwest Border Contingency 
Fund, which ironically would not be used to actual secure the 
border, but simply help you process and release more illegals, 
aliens quickly into the interior.
    Might I remind you that our Founders wanted the Executive 
branch--if the Founders wanted the Executive branch to just get 
a slush fund it would never have detailed the funding duties of 
this body in the division of power.
    Again, that is treading on the Constitution. This fund 
won't solve the humanitarian crisis that you have created. It 
would facilitate it while trying to hide the truth from the 
American people.
    Your budget proposal only provides for 350 new Border 
Patrol agents. The Secure Border Act passed by this House in 
2023 provided enough funding for 8 times that number. Your 
budget only requests funding for 34,000 ICE beds and by 
comparison in fiscal year 2021, the previous administration 
requested 60,000 ICE beds at a time when illegal crossings were 
at their lowest in decades.
    Your targets for removals of illegal aliens are abysmal. In 
2020, amid the COVID-19 pandemic, ICE removed 185,884 illegal 
aliens, while in fiscal year 2019, ICE removals exceeded 
267,000. Last year, despite more than 3.2 million inadmissible 
encounters at our border, you only accomplished around 143,000 
removals and in this budget you are only targeting 125,000. At 
that rate it would take 16 years to remove just the roughly 2 
million got-aways on your watch to say nothing of the more than 
9 million encounters many of whom have also been released.
    Meanwhile, the Chinese Communist Party continues to carry 
out multiple-faceted, covert espionage and influence missions 
against the United States. Beijing has shown that if we give an 
inch, they will take a mile. Mr. Secretary, you have given them 
all 1,951 miles of our Southern Border.
    While we are deeply appalled by your handling of the border 
security and immigration issues, this committee does look to 
work with the Department on key issues. This past February, the 
administration issued an Executive Order providing for more 
stringent cybersecurity at our ports as well as an emphasis on 
supply chain security. We support these initiatives.
    Your proposal also recognizes that our cyber work force is 
vital to the protection to our homeland. Strengthening our 
cyber work force pipeline will be one of the top priorities for 
the remainder of this year. It is imperative that the 419 full-
time employees you request for cybersecurity and infrastructure 
security agency are utilized effectively. To that end we must 
ensure CISA's authorities and resources align with its mission.
    Secretary Mayorkas, the world is only growing more 
dangerous. Our adversaries in China, Russia, Iran, and 
elsewhere are expanding their capabilities and seeking to 
undermine our interests even within our homeland. While parts 
of this budget request to deal with some of those threats, the 
request as a whole fails to meet the important time we have.
    [The statement of Chairman Green follows:]
                Statement of Chairman Mark E. Green, MD
                             April 16, 2024
    Good morning, Secretary Mayorkas, and thank you for joining the 
committee to discuss the budget you and President Biden have put 
forward for the Department of Homeland Security.
    On March 1, the Department celebrated its 21st anniversary. I want 
to thank all the public servants throughout DHS who dedicate their 
lives to securing the homeland. This work is vital to our Nation's 
safety and security.
    Mr. Secretary, when you took the oath of office, you swore to, 
``support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all 
enemies, foreign and domestic,'', ``well and faithfully discharge the 
duties of the office'', you were assuming. The Immigration and 
Nationality Act further makes clear that you have a, ``duty to control 
and guard the boundaries and borders of the United States''.
    During your 3 years as Secretary, you have failed to fulfill this 
oath. You have refused to comply with the laws passed by Congress and 
you have breached the public trust.
    You have facilitated and encouraged record levels of illegal 
immigration since your first day in office--and we have all witnessed 
the devastating results of your open-borders agenda.
    I've shared this before, but I feel it's necessary to repeat it. 
You abolished working policies, and following the statements of your 
boss on his campaign trial--promises to improperly grant asylum to 
anyone who came. As a result, people from all over the world tested the 
system, came and were released, phoned home, and the mass waves began. 
With this increased demand, the cartels took advantage, regulated that 
flow to overwhelm the crossing sites at our border. You responded by 
removing the Border Patrol agents from the border to process and 
release these record numbers of people, and issued guidance to DHS law 
enforcement to violate laws passed by this coequal branch of 
Government, Congress, on detention and removal. With the border wide 
open, and Border Patrol occupied processing the mass waves of people, 
the cartels have poured drugs, criminals, and trafficked humans into 
this country. This has led to the deaths of thousands, the loss of 
billions of dollars, and created the crisis you just finally 
acknowledged as such in recent testimony.
    Even your counterpart, FBI Director Christopher Wray, has said 
there is no way to ensure Hamas and other terrorists are not a part of 
the roughly 2 million got-aways who have entered our country uncaught 
on your watch. And the massive increase in Chinese nationals, 53,000 
encountered in 2023, adds to the threats we now face at home because 
you chose to not enforce the law.
    Your refusal to follow those laws is contemptible. Your disregard 
of the requests from this coequal branch of Government in pursuit of 
our Constitutional duty to conduct oversight, your false statements to 
this body and the American people, and your issuance of guidance to the 
employees of DHS telling them to violate laws passed by Congress, shows 
a disregard for the Constitution you swore an oath to uphold.
    However, instead of acknowledging those failures and pledging to 
change course, your actions and directives remain unchanged. You've 
doubled down.
    This budget request reflects that obstinance. It fails to take 
seriously the crises threatening our national security interests, 
especially our wide-open borders.
    For example, you request a $1.45 billion cut in topline spending 
for CBP's budget from what Congress enacted last year. That includes a 
$245 million cut in funding for CBP's Border Security Operations 
budget.
    Instead, as you did in last year's budget, you proposed a $4.7 
billion slush fund, called the ``Southwest Border Contingency Fund,'' 
which ironically would not be used to actually secure the border, but 
simply help you process and release more illegal aliens quickly into 
the interior. Might I remind you, if the Founders wanted the Executive 
branch to just get slush funds, they would never have detailed the 
funding duties of this body in the division of power. Again, you tread 
on the Constitution.
    This fund won't solve the humanitarian crisis you created--it would 
facilitate it while trying to hide the truth from the American people.
    Your budget proposal only provides for 350 new Border Patrol 
agents. The Secure the Border Act, passed by the House in 2023, 
provided enough funding for over 8 times this number.
    Your budget only requests funding for 34,000 ICE beds. By 
comparison, in fiscal year 2021, the Trump administration requested 
60,000 ICE beds--at a time when illegal crossings were at their lowest 
in decades!
    Your targets for removals of illegal aliens are abysmal. In fiscal 
year 2020, amid the COVID-19 pandemic, ICE removed 185,884 illegal 
aliens, while in fiscal year 2019, ICE removals exceeded 267,000. Last 
year, despite more than 3.2 million inadmissible encounters at our 
borders, you only accomplished around 143,000 removals. And in this 
budget, you're only targeting 125,000.
    At that rate, it would take 16 years to remove just the roughly 2 
million got-aways on your watch--to say nothing of the more than 9 
million encounters, many of whom have also been released.
    Meanwhile, the Chinese Communist Party continues to carry out 
multifaceted covert espionage and influence missions against the United 
States. Beijing has shown that if we give an inch, they will take a 
mile, and Mr. Secretary, you have given them all 1,951 miles of our 
Southwest Border.
    While we are deeply appalled by your handling of border security 
and immigration issues, this committee does look to work with the 
Department on other key issues. This past February, the administration 
issued an Executive Order providing for more stringent cybersecurity at 
our ports, as well as an emphasis on supply chain security. We support 
these initiatives. Your proposal also recognizes that our cyber 
workforce is vital to the protection of our homeland. Strengthening our 
cyber workforce pipeline will be one of our top priorities this year, 
and it is imperative that the 419 full-time employees you requested for 
the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency are utilized 
effectively. To that end, we must ensure CISA's authorities and 
resources align with its mission.
    Secretary Mayorkas, the world is only growing more dangerous. Our 
adversaries in China, Russia, Iran, and elsewhere are expanding their 
capabilities and seeking to undermine our interests, even within our 
homeland. While parts of this budget request deal with some of those 
threats, this request as a whole utterly fails to meet the moment.

    Chairman Green. I now recognize the Ranking Member, the 
gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Thompson for his opening 
statement.
    Mr. Thompson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good 
morning.
    I want to begin by thanking Secretary Mayorkas for being 
here today. Mr. Secretary, your testimony before the committee 
despite the unfounded extreme MAGA attacks against you speaks 
to your character, integrity, and commitment to the Department 
of Homeland Security, its mission, and its people.
    In what seems like a split screen today, this morning the 
committee is holding its annual hearing on a Department of 
Homeland Security's budget request. This afternoon Republican 
Members will deliver to the Senate their baseless Articles of 
Impeachment in perhaps the most politicized, partisan stunt 
this committee has ever engaged in.
    From the moment the Secretary took office in February 2021, 
Members of the other side of the aisle have unfairly targeted 
him for their own political gain. Chairman Green promised 
donors at a campaign event that he would bring an impeachment 
case against Secretary Mayorkas. He told his contributors to 
get the popcorn and promised it is going to be fun.
    According to an internal Republican memo, Republicans had 
already scheduled a committee vote to impeach the Secretary 
prior to holding a hearing. This entire thing was a sham from 
the start. After two hastily-thrown-together so-called 
impeachment hearings that provided not even a shred of evidence 
of an impeachable offense, Republicans short-circuited their 
own marker and refused to let Democrats offer amendments in 
their rush to the House floor.
    In advance of the vote, the Secretary, who is Jewish and 
whose mother survived the Holocaust, was referred to using 
language the American Jewish Committee has included in its 
glossary of anti-Semitic terms.
    Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the 
record an article describing this incident.
    Chairman Green. So, ordered.
    [The information follows:]
    ``Vile'': White House Slams GOP Rep. Green For Calling DHS Sec. 
                         Mayorkas A ``Reptile''
Sara Dorn, Forbes Staff
Feb 6, 2024, 01:14pm EST
TOPLINE
    The White House suggested Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) used an 
antisemitic term Tuesday when he called Department of Homeland Security 
Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas a ``reptile'' in a tense GOP meeting to 
discuss the impeachment push--as last-minute Republican opposition 
threatens to torpedo the effort.
KEY FACTS
   Green referred to Mayorkas, who is Jewish, as a ``reptile 
        with no balls'' because he has not resigned, Politico reported, 
        citing two Republicans who were in attendance.
   White House Spokesperson Ian Sams called Green's comment 
        ``vile,'' and noted it is included in the American Jewish 
        Committee's ``glossary of antisemitic terms,'' he said in a 
        statement.
   The glossary states that antisemitism includes 
        ``illustrations and images that depict Jews as vermin, 
        tentacled creatures, reptilian men, and other `subhuman' 
        monsters,'' rhetoric that was used in Nazi propaganda to 
        dehumanize Jews.
   Green, who is leading the impeachment push against Mayorkas 
        that the House was set to vote on Tuesday, made the statements 
        as the effort is on the brink of failing amid growing GOP 
        opposition.
   A spokesperson for Green acknowledged that he used the term 
        and compared Mayorkas to former President Nixon for refusing to 
        resign, denying that the term was used in reference to anything 
        other than an attempt to avoid accountability.
TANGENT
    Republicans can afford to lose just three votes under their slim 
majority in the House, assuming all Democrats vote ``no.'' At least two 
GOP members, Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) and Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), 
have said they will vote against the resolution, citing a lack of 
sufficient evidence to merit impeachment, while Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-
Wis.) declined to tell Politico how he would vote, and at least four 
others, Reps. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), 
David Joyce (R-Ohio) and Maria Salazar (R-Fla.), reportedly remain 
undecided.
KEY BACKGROUND
    House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) stood by his plans to bring the 
legislation to the floor for a vote Tuesday, despite the opposition, 
telling reporters ``there is no other measure for Congress to take but 
this one.'' The resolution calls for impeaching Mayorkas under systemic 
refusal to comply with the law and breach of public trust, accusing him 
of failing to maintain ``operational control'' of the border, lying to 
Congress about the state of border security and executing a ``catch and 
release scheme,'' among other allegations. The impeachment effort comes 
as immigration has become a top issue in the 2024 Presidential 
election, with former President Donald Trump and his allies seeking to 
pin the unprecedented surge in migrant crossings on President Joe 
Biden.
    The resolution is likely doomed in the Democrat-controlled Senate, 
which is responsible for conducting impeachment trials.
WHAT TO WATCH FOR
    The Senate could hold a procedural vote as soon as Wednesday on the 
bipartisan border legislation unveiled Sunday, which would require the 
president to implement stricter asylum requirements if border crossings 
exceeded a certain threshold, speed up the asylum process, offer 
additional visas and allocate more money for anti-fentanyl enforcement, 
among other measures. It's unclear if it has the 60 votes needed in the 
Senate to break the filibuster, as some Republican opponents of the 
legislation are pushing for a return to Trump-era policies, while some 
progressives have said the bill is too restrictive. Biden has pushed 
for its passage, calling it the ``toughest and fairest'' immigration 
legislation in decades. House Republican leaders have declared the 
legislation as ``dead-on-arrival,'' arguing it fails to re-implement 
Trump-era policies, including Title 42, which allowed border agents to 
turn away migrants under the Covid-19 public health emergency, and 
``Remain in Mexico,'' which required migrants to await asylum hearings 
in Mexico. Trump has also pushed Republicans to reject the legislation, 
casting it as a ``gift'' to Democrats in an election year.

    Mr. Thompson. The impeachment vote failed in another 
embarrassing miscalculation of House Republican leadership. On 
a second try Republicans limped their sham impeachment articles 
across the finish line. Over 2 months later, Republicans are 
still transmitting the impeachment articles to the Senate, 
having waited until they thought the timing was political 
advantageous.
    So much for the claims of urgency about the border. They 
waited. They wanted to have a dog-and-pony show marched into 
the Senate showing again what deeply unserious people they are. 
The Senate should dismiss the baseless impeachment articles 
without delay.
    To make matters worse, in their zeal to impeach Secretary 
Mayorkas, Republicans have shirked their responsibility to 
conduct meaningful oversight of DHS and advance its many 
critical missions. Republicans have not yet held a single full 
committee oversight hearing on cybersecurity, domestic 
terrorism, aviation security, disaster preparedness and 
response, or election security this Congress, shocking for a 
committee born out of 9/11 attacks, which once had a reputation 
for rising above the partisan politics to help secure the 
homeland on behalf of the American People.
    The committee's legislative work has suffered, too. By this 
time last Congress, the committee had reported 49 measures and 
that was during a global pandemic. This Congress, by contrast, 
the full committee has reported fewer than half that number.
    This is what happens when Republicans make someone who 
espouses political violence, pushes anti-Semitic tropes, and 
want to defund the FBI the de facto leader of their party. This 
is what happens when Republicans prioritize the whims of 
extreme MAGA members over politics that serve the American 
people.
    It is chaos and dysfunction by design. If you don't believe 
me, just look at how long it took us to elect a Speaker. We did 
nothing but vote after vote after vote. To add insult to 
injury, Democrats were accused of slowing things down and we 
are the Minority party, we are not in charge.
    If Republicans are looking for someone to hold accountable 
they should start looking in the mirror. Through it all, 
Secretary Mayorkas has remained steadfast. He continues to do 
his job across the Department's many critical Homeland Security 
missions, including border security and immigration 
enforcement. He has used the full range of authorities at his 
disposal and stretched the resources provided by Congress to 
secure the border.
    Under his leadership the Department has removed record 
levels of migrants, detained more people than Congress had 
provided funding for, and prevented unprecedented amounts of 
fentanyl from entering our communities.
    Republicans talk a lot about supporting border security, 
but, you know, talk is cheap. If Republicans were serious about 
improving conditions along the border, they would provide the 
Department the funding necessary to do so. Instead, the 
majority of committee Republicans, a dozen in fact, including 
the Chairman, voted no on providing DHS the funds it needs to 
secure the border.
    Republicans have also refused to consider the border 
security's supplemental funding the Department requested months 
ago, starving DHS and its front-line personnel of the money 
they need to carry out their duties.
    Americans aren't fooled by these Republican political 
games. They understand that where you invest your resources 
speaks to what you really value. If Republicans valued border 
security like they claim, they would pay for it.
    I want to hear Secretary Mayorkas today about the 
administration's budget request for the Department of Homeland 
Security. I want to ask how we can support the Department, its 
mission, and its 260,000 dedicated personnel. That is our 
responsibility and it is one I know our Democratic Members take 
seriously.
    Mr. Chairman, this committee can do better. It has done 
better under leadership from Chairmen of both parties. I look 
forward to returning to better days on this committee.
    Mr. Chair, I yield back.
    [The statement of Ranking Member Thompson follows:]
             Statement of Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson
                             April 16, 2024
    I want to begin by thanking Secretary Mayorkas for being here 
today. Your testimony before the committee--despite the unfounded 
extreme MAGA attacks against you--speaks to your character, integrity, 
and commitment to the Department of Homeland Security, its mission, and 
its people.
    In what seems like a split-screen day, this morning the committee 
is holding its annual hearing on the Department of Homeland Security's 
budget request. Then this afternoon, Republican Members will deliver to 
the Senate their baseless articles of impeachment--in perhaps the most 
politicized, partisan stunt this committee has ever engaged in.
    From the moment the Secretary took office in February 2021, Members 
on the other side of the aisle have unfairly targeted him for their own 
political gain. Chairman Green promised donors at a campaign event that 
he would bring an impeachment case against Secretary Mayorkas. He told 
his contributors to ``get the popcorn'' and promised ``it's going to be 
fun.''
    According to an internal Republican memo, Republicans had already 
scheduled a committee vote to impeach the Secretary prior to holding a 
hearing. This entire thing was a sham from the start.
    After two hastily-thrown-together so-called ``impeachment 
hearings'' that provided not even a shred of evidence of an impeachable 
offense, Republicans short-circuited their own mark-up and refused to 
let Democrats offer amendments in their rush to the House floor.
    In advance of the vote, the Secretary, who is Jewish and whose 
mother survived the Holocaust, was referred to using language the 
American Jewish Committee has included in its glossary of antisemitic 
terms. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the record an 
article describing this incident. The impeachment vote failed, in 
another embarrassing miscalculation for House Republican leadership. On 
a second try, Republicans limped their sham impeachment articles across 
the finish line.
    Over 2 months later, Republicans are transmitting the impeachment 
articles to the Senate, having waited until they thought the timing was 
politically advantageous. So much for their claims of urgency about the 
border. They wanted to have a dog-and-pony show marching to the Senate, 
showing yet again what deeply unserious people they are.
    The Senate should dismiss the baseless impeachment articles without 
delay.
    To make matters worse, in their zeal to impeach Secretary Mayorkas, 
Republicans have shirked their responsibility to conduct meaningful 
oversight of DHS and advance its many critical missions. Republicans 
have not held a single full committee oversight hearing on 
cybersecurity, domestic terrorism, aviation security, disaster 
preparedness and response, or election security this Congress.
    Shocking for a committee borne out the 9/11 attacks, which once had 
a reputation for rising above partisan politics to help secure the 
homeland on behalf of the American people.
    The committee's legislative work has suffered too. By this time 
last Congress, the committee had reported 49 measures--and that was 
during a global pandemic. This Congress, by contrast, the full 
committee has reported fewer than half that number.
    This is what happens when Republicans make someone who espouses 
political violence, pushes antisemitic tropes, and wants to defund the 
FBI the de facto leader of their party. This is what happens when 
Republicans prioritize the whims of extreme MAGA members over policies 
that serve the American people. It is chaos and dysfunction by design.
    If Republicans are looking for someone to hold accountable, they 
should start by looking in the mirror.
    Through it all, Secretary Mayorkas has remained steadfast. He 
continues to do his job across the Department's many critical homeland 
security missions, including border security and immigration 
enforcement. He has used the full range of authorities at his disposal 
and stretched the resources provided by Congress to secure the border.
    Under his leadership, the Department has removed record levels of 
migrants, detained more people than Congress has provided funding for, 
and prevented unprecedented amounts of fentanyl from entering our 
communities.
    Republicans talk a lot about supporting border security, but talk 
is cheap. If Republicans were serious about improving conditions along 
the border, they would provide the Department the funding necessary to 
do so.
    Instead, the majority of committee Republicans--a dozen, in fact, 
including the Chairman--voted no on providing DHS the funds it needs to 
secure the border. Republicans have also refused to consider the border 
security supplemental funding the Department requested months ago, 
starving DHS and its front-line personnel of the money they need to 
carry out their duties.
    Americans aren't fooled by these Republican political games. They 
understand that where you invest your resources speaks to what you 
really value. And if Republicans valued border security like they 
claim, they would pay for it.
    I want to hear from Secretary Mayorkas today about the 
administration's budget request for the Department of Homeland 
Security. I want to ask you how we can support the Department, its 
mission, and its 260,000 dedicated personnel. That is our 
responsibility, and it is one I know our Democratic Members take 
seriously.
    Mr. Chairman, this committee can do better. It has done better, 
under leadership from Chairmen of both parties. I look forward to 
returning to better days on this committee.

    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields. Other Members of the 
committee are reminded that opening statements may be submitted 
to the record.
    [The statements of Hon. Jackson Lee and Hon. Ramirez 
follow:]
                  Statement of Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee
                        Tuesday, April 16, 2024
    Chairman Green and Ranking Member Thompson, thank you for this 
opportunity for the committee to receive testimony from the Secretary 
of Homeland Security on ``A Review of the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget 
Request for the Department of Homeland Security.''
    I offer my sincere and heartfelt apology to Secretary Mayorkas for 
the treatment he has received from this committee's Republican 
Majority.
    A politically-motivated impeachment was and will continue to be a 
stain on the record of this committee.
    I thank Secretary Mayorkas for his presence today and extend to him 
my commitment to work with him on meeting the needs of the agency for 
fiscal year 2025.
    The Iranian regime is the world's leading state sponsor of 
terrorism.
    Iran has a long history of backing Hamas attacks on Israel.
    This weekend Iran retaliated for Israels killing of senior 
officials in Syria which leaves the world on the edge of a cliff.
    During my time in office, I have seen the United States at war with 
too few moments that we have been at peace.
    After 20 years in Afghanistan and Iraq it is clear why our 
partnership with Israel has been beneficial to stability and people in 
that region.
    Now the United States is struggling to bring claim and reason to a 
period of unrivaled chaos and violence.
    Israel's attack in Syria killed top Iranian commanders and is the 
sole reason that Iran has launched direct attacks against Israel, but 
this is not the start of the conflict it is the latest and most 
dangerous escalation.
    On October 7, 2023, Hamas's violent attack against civilians caused 
the bloodiest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, killing 
nearly 1,400 Israelis.
    Members of this committee must focus on international terrorism 
threats, including the threats to the homeland resulting from actions 
taken by Iran to stoke and sustain terrorism across the region and the 
globe.
    The elements that created Hamas needed hate and fear to grow in 
numbers and resources to carry out attacks.
    The United States is not free of people who seek violence as a tool 
to oppose people who are perceived as different.
    In this country we must be vigilant against white supremacist 
groups and hate in the form of violent words and acts that target 
fellow citizens because they have a different skin color or worship 
differently.
    In 2022, Anti-defamation League (ADL) tabulated 3,697 antisemitic 
incidents throughout the United States.
    This is a 36 percent increase from the 2,717 incidents tabulated in 
2021 and the highest number on record since ADL began tracking 
antisemitic incidents in 1979.
    The path forward has two clear forks in the road--one leads to a 
restoration of peaceful coexistence and one toward unchecked bloodshed.
    I do recall the war following the attacks of September 11, 2001, it 
should have been a police action to apprehend the masterminds behind 
the attack.
    On September 18, 2001, 7 days following the September 11 attacks, 
letters containing weaponized anthrax were placed in the U.S. mail.
    On October 15, 2001, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) 
informed reporters that anthrax was found in his Senate offices.
    By October 30, 2001, there were 15 known cases of anthrax poisoning 
linked to the U.S. mail.
    The letters laced with anthrax had a message: ``You cannot stop us. 
We have the anthrax. You die now. Are you afraid? Death to America, 
Death to Israel, Allah is Great.''
    The source of the anthrax attacks was linked to the U.S. Army's 
Fort Detrick bio-medical research laboratory.
    I come to this hearing with two perspectives: the world is a less 
safe place when people cease to see each other as human beings; and the 
United States is best served by representatives who use reason and not 
emotion to advance national defense and foreign policy.
    As a student of the post-September 11, 2001, debate in deploying 
troops, the decision to pursue al-Qaeda in Afghanistan when we knew 
they were the source of the attack it was quickly overcome by emotion 
which lead the Nation down a path of war that did not end until the 
Biden administration.
    As a Member of Congress and a senior Member of the Committees on 
Homeland Security and the Judiciary, both of which deal with national 
security issues, I have long been committed and engaged in efforts to 
develop policies that anticipate and respond to new and emerging 
challenges to the security of our Nation and the peace and safety of 
the world.
    I will never forget September 11, 2001, when 2,977 men, women, and 
children were murdered by 19 hijackers--15 of whom were Saudi 
nationals, who took control of commercial aircraft and used them as 
missiles.
    I stood on the East Front steps of the Capitol on September 11, 
2001, along with 150 Members of the House of Representatives and sang 
``God Bless America.''
    September 11, 2001, remains a tragedy that defines our Nation's 
history, but the final chapter will be written by those who are charged 
with keeping our Nation and its people safe while preserving the way of 
life that terrorists sought to change.
    I visited the site of the World Trade Center Towers in the 
aftermath of the attacks and grieved over the deaths of so many of our 
men, women, and children.
    I was heartbroken, along with the Nation, over the lives lost at 
the Pentagon, the World Trade Center, and in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
    Following the attacks rhetoric started to shift toward Iraq having 
some connection to the attack and later to accusations that that 
country was actively pursuing nuclear ambitions.
    Later, charges were made that Iraq had deceived U.N. inspectors and 
had continued to develop nuclear capability.
    It was charged that they had acquired weapons-grade yellowcake 
uranium from Niger; and had secret sites building a bomb or bomb-making 
capability.
    These accusations were based on forged documents promoted in the 
President's State of the Union address in January 2003, 2 months before 
the start of the war.
    This did not deter the United States from declaring an unprovoked 
war against Iraq that is estimated to have led to the deaths of over 
100,000 civilians.
    Since September 11, 2001, it has been a priority of this Nation to 
prevent terrorists, or those who would do Americans harm, from boarding 
flights whether they are domestic or international.
    Over the last 22 years, since enactment of the Homeland Security 
Act, the mission of the Department of Homeland Security has expanded to 
include cyber defense of civilian agency and private-sector networks; 
protecting critical infrastructure in the form of the Nation's electric 
grid, water delivery systems, transportation networks and Federal 
election systems; and, most recently, fighting the international reach 
of white nationalism, white supremacy, and violent acts targeting 
religious minorities living within the United States.
    The struggle against violent extremism began on September 11, 2001, 
but it has extended to this day because of the continued attacks 
against religious freedom, diversity, equal rights for women, and other 
core principles that are foundational to our Nation's expression of a 
democratic republic.
    To succeed in the fight against violent extremism, our Nation's 
leadership--in the Congress and the Executive branch--must work 
together.
    I am supportive of efforts to employ effective approaches to 
interdicting, disrupting, and dismantling terrorist networks.
    The Obama administration focused on how best to use our Nation's 
soft power and military power for minimizing, eliminating, and 
containing terrorists' threats in the region, with a full understanding 
that over-aggressive actions militarily can pull our country into a 
precipitous military struggle that would be open-ended.
    We must support our strategic partners like Israel, but we must 
also hold them accountable for adhering to international standards for 
conduct when engaged in wars.
    Over 200 hundred aid workers have been killed, which is exemplified 
by the deaths of World Food Kitchen volunteers that shocked the world 
and further eroded Israel's status as a democracy that uphold 
international norms.
                               conclusion
    We must remember that after the battles are all fought and decided 
that the underlying causes for so many willing souls to commit 
themselves to kill and die for religious beliefs that make any military 
only approach to solving the Iran problem not feasible.
    The battle against extremism across the globe and within the United 
States has entered a new phase.
    The demons of racism, intolerance, and racial supremacy are active 
in engaging people in a hidden struggle in opposition to the diversity 
that is our Nation's best hope for a prosperous future.
    I am a firm supporter of getting to the source of problems that 
come from the complexity of our interconnected world.
    Our Nation needs our best efforts on the behalf of peace and 
security abroad to assure that we have peace and security at home.
    The larger threat to the United States from Iran will be cyber 
threats.
    We must be prepared to defend and expand protection of cyber assets 
both public and private.
    Homeland security and national defense are not and should not be 
made into political issues.
                    history of middle east failures
    Members of this committee and the witnesses before us today 
understand that the fight against violent extremism is far from over 
and the actions by this administration and this Congress can make a 
difference.
    Past misdeeds by the Trump administration in the region have led us 
to the heightened insecurity that exists today.
    Part of the struggle for peace we face today is a direct 
consequence of invading Iraq without provocation or reason.
    Paraphrasing Secretary of State Colin Powell's advice to President 
George W. Bush: ``if we break it--we will own it.''
    He was warning President Bush about the folly of entering a war of 
choice with Iraq and the complexities of that region of the world that 
could spiral out of control.
    I can offer a similar warning to this Congress.
    We must repair the special relationship that the United States had 
with the Kurdish people when they joined the fight to defeat ISIS.
    Our work as Members of this committee has for well over a decade, 
focused on potential links between international terror groups and 
persons residing within the United States.
    Today, our focus remains the same, but the domestic targets of 
international terror have expanded to include members of white 
nationalist groups, neo-Nazi, and white supremist adherents.
                        ai and the path forward
    Members of this committee must put aside partisan bias to work with 
DHS and support the role of CISA in implement their responsibilities 
under President Biden's recent AI Executive Order 14110, on Safe, 
Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence.
    The United States is far behind the rest of the world in developing 
a regulatory framework for AI.
    I will be introducing several bills on the topic to outline 
critical areas that need attention.
   Civil agencies' capacity to test, train, and adopt AI 
        applications;
   A bill to establish a national dialog to ensure that 
        democratic values, norms, and legal frameworks are maintained 
        in the adoption of AI for Federal civilian agency use;
   A Watermarking System to identify AI used by civilian 
        agencies.
    Executive Order 14110 represents a comprehensive effort by the 
Biden administration to maintain U.S. dominance in innovation while 
ensuring artificial intelligence (AI) reflects U.S. values, including 
prioritization of safety and security and respect for civil rights, 
civil liberties, and privacy.
    DHS and CISA have expertise and capabilities that can facilitate 
the responsible development and deployment of AI across Federal 
networks and critical infrastructure to ensure its stakeholders can 
harness the potential of AI while mitigating the potential risks.
    The Executive Order outlines that where practicable, AI security 
policy should be aligned with existing efforts to strengthen the 
security of technology, such as secure-by-design.
    Given the momentum associated with AI policy, such alignment could 
help to further accelerate the implementation of such security 
principles to broader sets of technology while streamlining DHS/CISA 
guidance.
    DHS's and CISA's responsibilities under the E.O. fall primarily 
into two categories: (1) ensuring the safety and security of AI; and 
(2) promoting innovation and competition, particularly with respect to 
attracting AI talent and protecting AI research and development from 
intellectual property theft.
    The Federal Executive branch is comprised of civilian Federal 
agencies that provide the full scope of benefits and services to 
residents of the States and territories as well as support of domestic 
law enforcement and homeland security needs.
    The Federal Executive branch is also charged with providing 
rigorous oversight of a full scope of goods and services to ensure the 
health and safety of the American people.
    Much of the regulatory strength of the Federal Government was built 
in the early- to mid-20th Century, when notable events brought experts, 
Government oversight, industry leaders, as well as labor and consumer 
advocates together to demand safer cars, food, drinking water, safer 
construction for schools, homes, and multifamily dwellings, as well as 
safe processes that governed automotive, rail, aviation, and shipping 
to reduce hazards and accidents.
    Each of the steps taken to put demands on industries to make 
products save were often proceeded by a calamity.
    For example, in the early 1900's, foodborne diseases such as 
botulism, tuberculosis, were typhoid fever, at the highest incidence 
recorded and prevalence while also being the leading cause of 
increasing mortality rates all over the world.
    By 1906, the U.S. Congress responded with passage of the Pure Food 
and Drugs Act, that prohibited interstate commerce in adulterated and 
misbranded food and drugs.
    Following the experiences of World War II that brought to light the 
suffering that could be caused by the spread of disease associated with 
breakdowns in social order that impacted routine access to clean water 
and uncontaminated food supplies, many more laws were passed.
    In the early 1900's the frequency of automobile accidents prompted 
manufacturers to incrementally improve vehicles by adding windshield 
wipers, headlights, enclosed spaces for drivers and passengers.
    However, it was not until Ralph Nader's book ``Unsafe at Any 
Speed,'' shocked the American public and brought unprecedented 
attention to automobile safety.
    On the same path of Nader's work was that of Najeeb Halaby, the 
chief of the independent Federal Aviation Agency who convinced 
President Lyndon Johnson to create a Federal Transportation Department 
to merge aviation and rail safety into a single agency focused on 
transportation, which would also include automobile safety.
    The development of computing technology did not follow a path that 
took it toward safety and improvements.
    This lack of government or judicial oversight created a culture of 
normalized brokenness that exists to this day.
    Errors and problems with computing devices or applications are 
often fixed by turning a device off and on again and this is accepted 
as normal, while it would never be allowed in other serious areas of 
engineering such as for cars, planes, trains, or elevators.
    The challenge is almost inconceivable--how do we fix the 
underpinning of computing software for all applications and devices so 
that we can have a baseline of trust for the work being done for AI?
    AI's goal is to replace many tasks performed by humans with 
machines, but the consequences for human error and computing error are 
not the same.
    Human errors are costly and borne by the person or the company they 
represent, while a computer error is borne by the purchaser not the 
manufacturer.
    This situation in an AI world would create incentives to replace 
people with machines that are not held to the same standards of care as 
people.
    AI is generally understood to mean computerized systems that 
operate in ways commonly thought to require intelligence.
    While precise definitions vary, President Biden's recent Executive 
Order 14110 defined AI as ``a machine-based system that can, for a 
given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, 
recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments.
    ``Artificial intelligence systems use machine- and human-based 
inputs to perceive real and virtual environments; abstract such 
perceptions into models through analysis in an automated manner; and 
use model inference to formulate options for information or action.''
    This makes the assumption that AI's human-based inputs function as 
intended free from errors or omissions.
    AI offers a wide range of potential applications across different 
sectors.
    In cybersecurity, AI has largely worked to the advantage of network 
defenders.
    For example, conventional cybersecurity tools defend against known 
matches to malicious code, so hackers must modify small portions of 
that code to circumvent the defense.
    AI-enabled tools, on the other hand, can be trained to detect 
anomalies in network activity, thus presenting a more comprehensive and 
dynamic barrier to attack.
    In the aftermath of the 2020 Solar Winds cyber campaign, Federal 
agencies and the private sector have expedited implementation of 
Endpoint Detection and Response systems that utilize AI to detect 
anomalous network activity.
    However, AI has and will continue to be used in myriad ways that 
undermine national security, individual privacy, or introduce new and 
novel attack vectors.
    Rapid advances in generative AI, as highlighted by the release of 
ChatGPT in November 2022, have increased concerns about how more 
advanced versions of AI may increase security risks.
    Generative AI ``means the class of AI models that emulate the 
structure and characteristics of input data in order to generate 
derived synthetic content.''
    This can include images, videos, audio, text, and other digital 
content.
    There will be no one definition of AI or one method that defines 
what it is or what it will mean.
    The efforts behind AI are focused on may not be able to plan for 
all possible outcomes, but one that may make this conversation much 
more challenging is the creation of machines that can write their own 
computing code or algorithms without human intervention will quickly 
lead to code that is only understood by AI.
    Shortly after President Biden signed the EO, CISA released its 
2023-2024 Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence, which describes the five 
lines of effort the agency will undertake under the Executive Order:
   Responsibly Use AI to Support [CISA's] Mission;
   Assure AI Systems;
   Protect Critical Infrastructure from Malicious Use of AI;
   Collaborate with and Communicate on Key AI Efforts with the 
        Interagency, International Partners, and the Public; and
   Expand AI Expertise in our Workforce.
    CISA's Roadmap works to leverage existing programs and policies to 
address AI security issues where possible while developing new policies 
and work streams where gaps in policies exist.
    Some of the more specific objectives CISA seeks to implement under 
its Roadmap include developing a strategy to adopt the next generation 
of AI-enabled technologies; generating best practices on the 
development and use of secure AI systems; engaging with international 
partners on global AI security; and recruiting staff with AI expertise.
    In line with CISA's commitment to international cooperation on AI 
policy and its goal of providing guidance on best practices for the 
private sector, last month, CISA and the United Kingdom's National 
Cyber Security Centre jointly released Guidelines for Secure AI System 
Development in collaboration with agencies from 16 other countries.
    The guidelines focused on securing all aspects of the AI 
development life cycle, including secure design, secure development, 
secure deployment, and secure operation and maintenance.
    The publication aligns with CISA's broader focus on encouraging 
software developers to follow secure-by-design principles that ensure 
security is built into the technology product development process.
    As DHS increases its use of AI across its components and missions, 
in April of this year, Secretary Mayorkas established the DHS AI Task 
Force, which seeks to drive the use of AI across DHS while protecting 
civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy.
    The task force is chaired by the Department's chief AI officer and 
the under secretary for science and technology, with the officer for 
civil rights and civil liberties serving as vice chair.
    Its initial focus areas will be on the use of AI in combating 
fentanyl trafficking, strengthening supply chain security, countering 
child exploitation, and protecting critical infrastructure.
    AI offers a wide range of applications that will have significant 
security implications.
    DHS and CISA must seek to utilize AI to strengthen their ability to 
defend the homeland from cyber and other threats, defend against 
increased security risks posed by AI to critical infrastructure, and 
support secure and safe AI development across the Federal Government 
and private sector. Incorporating AI policy into existing security 
frameworks will ensure that AI security efforts align with broader 
Government policies and enhances efforts to build out stronger 
security.
                  threats posed by biological weapons
    I would offer that we must keep an open mind and vigilant stance 
when considering threats posed by biologics.
    Over the past 100 years, more than 500 million people died of 
infectious diseases.
    A percentage of these deaths were due to the deliberate release of 
pathogens or toxins, mostly by the Japanese during their attacks on 
China during the Second World War.
    There are also naturally occurring threats like COVID-19.
    There are two international treaties that outlawed biological 
weapons, but they have failed to stop countries from conducting 
offensive bio-weapons research and large-scale production of biological 
weapons.
    There are legitimate fears that modified pathogens could constitute 
devastating agents for biological warfare that may target people, 
agriculture, or animals with disastrous consequences.
    The ability of the United States to remain actively engaged in 
policing this area of national defense is strengthened by sound trade 
agreements and NATO policies that place the United States strengthen 
ties between military and economic allies.
    We must do all that we can to support the work of men and women on 
the front lines of defending our Nation and our standing in the world
    I thank today's witnesses and look forward to their testimony.
    Thank you.
                                 ______
                                 
                   Statement of Hon. Delia C. Ramirez
                             April 16, 2024
    Thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member for holding today's hearing. 
I also want to thank our witness, Secretary Mayorkas, for joining us 
today.
    For a whole year, I have heard my colleagues on the other side 
claim they want an orderly ``legal'' immigration system. Yet, over and 
over again, they have failed to support policies that would do so. 
Instead, they have wasted Congressional resources and time on a sham 
impeachment, do-nothing resolutions, and the persecution of asylum 
seekers.
    Contrary to Republicans' claims of wanting ``immigration the legal 
way,'' this Congress under Republican leadership provided USCIS, the 
agency that administers our Nation's immigration system, with only 33 
percent of the funding amount DHS determined it needed for fiscal year 
2024. Despite facing insufficient resources, USCIS reduced case 
backlogs for the first time in over a decade and found ways to continue 
providing needed benefits and documents, including by recently 
increasing the automatic extension period for certain employment 
authorization documents. But there is still so much more work to do.
    I appreciate DHS providing additional funding for the Shelter and 
Services Program (SSP) last week, which included $19 million for 
Illinois. However, this is not enough. Last year, I joined my 
colleagues in Congress, along with State and city governments that have 
been supporting large numbers of new arrivals, to call for no less than 
$5 billion for SSP, acknowledging the need is much greater--more like 
$10 billion. Immigrant-serving organizations have called for a similar 
amount.
    In addition to more SSP funding, States and cities have continued 
calling for effective intergovernmental coordination on the reception, 
transportation, and related services of families and individuals 
released by DHS.
    The third piece of the President's fiscal year 2025 budget request 
for DHS I want to call attention to now, is the $2 billion to sustain 
34,000 ICE immigration detention beds and $360 million for ICE's non-
community-based alternatives to detention models that require intensive 
supervision and surveillance versus $15 million for the Case Management 
Pilot Program. The Case Management Pilot Program is DHS's community-
based case management approach to an alternative to detention focused 
on facilitating program participants' ability to meaningfully 
participate in their immigration proceedings while having their needs 
met. It is managed by a national board chaired by the DHS officer for 
civil rights and civil liberties.
    Research shows community-based case management alternatives to 
detention are far more cost-effective, costing less than $50 a day per 
person versus $164 per ICE detention bed. They are extremely effective, 
as more than 95 percent of participants comply with immigration 
requirements, and they are far less retraumatizing than other 
alternatives to detention that function as non-physical prisons and, of 
course, far more humane than detention.
    I would urge you to redirect considerable resources into smart 
approaches that help our immigration system efficiently function rather 
than perpetuate harm and chaos.

    Chairman Green. We are pleased to have Secretary Mayorkas 
here and I would ask the Secretary to please rise and raise his 
right hand.
    [Witness sworn.]
    Chairman Green. Let the record reflect that the Secretary 
has answered in the affirmative. Thank you, sir. You may be 
seated.
    I would now like to formally introduce our witness. 
Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is the seventh Secretary of 
Homeland Security, a role in which he has served since February 
2, 2021. Prior to his appointment he served as the deputy 
secretary of DHS and the director of USCIS.
    I thank you for being here today, sir. The witness' full 
statement will appear in the record. I now recognize Secretary 
Mayorkas for 5 minutes to summarize his opening statement.

 STATEMENT OF ALEJANDRO N. MAYORKAS, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF 
                       HOMELAND SECURITY

    Secretary Mayorkas. Chairman Green, Ranking Member 
Thompson, distinguished Members of the committee, every day the 
268,000 men and women of the Department of Homeland Security 
carry out our mission to protect the safety and security of the 
American people. They protect our shores, harbors, skies, cyber 
space, borders, and leaders.
    They stop fentanyl and other deadly drugs from entering our 
country. They lead the response to maritime emergency. As we 
speak they are engaged in the response to the tragic Francis 
Scott Key bridge collapse in Baltimore. They help communities 
recover and rebuild after a natural disaster. They combat the 
scourges of human trafficking, forced labor, and on-line child 
sexual exploitation and so much more. All this despite a 
perennially insufficient budget.
    The dedicated public servants of DHS deserve full support 
and the American people deserve the results a fully-resourced 
DHS can deliver. The funding opportunities outlined in the 
President's fiscal year 2025 budget for DHS are critical to 
meeting both goals. I welcome the opportunity to discuss this 
proposed budget and highlight some of its key proposals with 
you today.
    When our Department was founded in the wake of 9/11 the 
threat of foreign terrorism against high-visibility targets was 
our primary concern. That foreign threat persists, but we now 
also confront the terrorism-related threat of radicalized lone 
offenders in small groups already resident here in the United 
States.
    This budget provides for an $80 million increase to our 
Department's nonprofit security grant program and additional 
funds for targeted violence and terrorism prevent grants so 
that DHS can better help communities prevent tragedies from 
occurring.
    As lone actors in nation-states increasingly target our 
critical infrastructure and our data, the President's budget 
provides CISA with needed funding to improve our cybersecurity 
and resiliency. Fentanyl is wreaking tragedy in communities 
across the country. DHS has interdicted more illicit fentanyl 
and arrested more individuals from fentanyl-related crimes in 
the last 2 fiscal years than in the previous 5 combined.
    The President's budget includes critical funding to advance 
our strategy including funds for nonintrusive inspection 
technology and targeted operations.
    During the time when the world, including our hemisphere, 
is experiencing the greatest displacement of people since World 
War II, DHS has toughened our border enforcement and is 
maximizing our available resources and authorities. In the last 
11 months we have removed or returned more than 630,000 
individuals who did not have a legal basis to stay, more than 
in every full fiscal year since 2013.
    The President's budget would further expand these efforts. 
It provides funding for hiring law enforcement personnel and 
bolstering refugee processing.
    Our immigration system, however, is fundamentally broken. 
Only Congress can fix it. Congress had not updated our 
immigration enforcement laws since 1996, 28 years ago, and only 
Congress can deliver on our need for more Border Patrol agents, 
asylum officers, and immigration judges, facilities, and 
technology.
    Our administration worked closely with a bipartisan group 
of Senators to reach agreement on a national security 
supplemental package, one that would make the system changes 
that are badly needed and give DHS the tools and resources 
needed to meet today's border security challenges. We remain 
ready to work with you to pass this tough, fair, bipartisan 
agreement.
    Finally, extreme weather continues to devastate 
communities. Last year FEMA responded to more than 100 
disasters. Our budget provides $22.7 billion to assist 
community leaders and help survivors in the aftermath of major 
disasters. Additional funds to invest in resilient strategies 
that will save lives and taxpayer money in the decades to come.
    Essential to our success across all mission sets is our 
Department's ability to recruit and retain a world-class work 
force.
    In addition to the front-line border work force I 
mentioned, the President's budget includes $1.5 billion to 
maintain our commitment to fairly compensate the DSA work 
force. The recently-passed 2024 budget, though welcome and 
helpful to many of our operations, was enacted too late to 
implement an appreciable hiring surge. It reduced by 20 percent 
much-needed support for cities dealing with migrant-related 
challenges and it cut critical research and development 
funding.
    I am eager to work with you to address these and other 
shortfalls in the weeks ahead as I am eager to deliver the 
sustained funding, resources, and support that the 
extraordinarily talented and dedicated public servants of DHS 
need and deserve.
    [The prepared statement of Secretary Mayorkas follows:]
            Prepared Statement of Hon. Alejandro N. Mayorkas
                             April 16, 2024
                              introduction
    Chair Green, Ranking Member Thompson, and distinguished Members of 
the committee: I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to 
discuss the Department of Homeland Security's Fiscal Year 2025 
President's Budget.
    Since its inception, the Department has continuously evolved to 
achieve its mission. It has done so in an increasingly dynamic threat 
landscape through new programs and capabilities, cross-component 
collaboration, and unflinching dedication. Today, we are the third-
largest department in the Federal Government with a 268,000-member 
workforce. Every day, our personnel interact with the U.S. public more 
than any other Federal agency as we ensure the safety and security of 
all Americans, promote lawful trade and travel, protect our critical 
infrastructure, develop resilience to man-made and natural disasters, 
respond when disaster strikes, advance the security of cyber space and 
modernize information technology, combat human trafficking and on-line 
child sexual exploitation, protect communities from illicit drugs and 
weapons, safeguard our borders, defend U.S. interests in the Arctic and 
the Indo-Pacific, guard our Federal buildings, and much more.
    The fiscal year 2025 President's budget for the Department totals 
$107.9 billion, providing the resources needed to keep our Nation safe, 
strong, and prosperous. This funding supports the Department's ever-
evolving mission set and aligns with key Presidential priorities. The 
budget continues investments to advance our mission to combat 
terrorism, to secure our borders and enforce immigration law, to 
counter threats of fentanyl and other illicit drugs, to promote a 
humane and efficient system of refugee processing, and to address 
personnel needs. The budget supports Indo-Pacific engagement and 
readiness operations. It supports investing in and building a resilient 
Nation, laying a foundation for the responsible use of Artificial 
Intelligence (AI), and bolstering cyber defenses and national 
resilience. This testimony highlights fiscal year 2025 investments 
which ensure the Department has the resources it needs to enforce our 
laws and keep the American people, our homeland, and our values secure.
    Of the $107.9 billion requested in fiscal year 2025, $62.2 billion 
is discretionary budget authority, and $22.7 billion is for the 
Disaster Relief Fund to enable response and recovery efforts during 
major disasters and emergencies and to build resilience to natural 
hazards. A TSA legislative proposal related to fees, if enacted, would 
decrease net discretionary appropriations by $1.6 billion by directing 
more offsetting collections directly to TSA. The budget also includes a 
proposed $4.7 billion Southwest Border Contingency Fund to respond to 
changing conditions on the Southwest Border.
    The budget includes, and reiterates the need for, the 
administration's border and disaster supplemental requests transmitted 
to Congress in October, which total $17.9 billion for DHS. 
Additionally, DHS urges Congress to pass the Senate's bipartisan border 
security supplemental in order to provide vital funding and authorities 
in the Department's efforts to secure the Southwest Border, build 
capacity to enforcement immigration law, and counter trafficking in 
fentanyl.
    I am eager to work with Congress to deliver for the American people 
and the men and women who protect our homeland.
                advance our mission to combat terrorism
    The President's budget supports the Department's continued efforts 
to combat terrorism, both domestically and abroad. The fiscal year 2025 
budget fully funds the DHS Special Events Program, a critical program 
that gathers information on more than 57,000 special events, to 
identify and assess terrorism risk to high-profile events across the 
Nation and facilitates the risk rating of special events using the 
Special Events Assessment Rating (SEAR) methodology.
    The President's budget provides $418.0 million to support the 
Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office (CWMD), increasing our 
security against chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) 
terrorist threats. Funding of $181.4 million provided to CWMD in the 
President's budget are dedicated to support State, local, Tribal, and 
territorial (SLTT) partners by building personnel and technical 
capabilities and increasing knowledge regarding CBRN threats and 
incidents.
    Continuing to invest in innovative solutions is vital in countering 
weapons of mass destruction and to the Department's front-line 
personnel who rely on such technologies, including United States Coast 
Guard (USCG) Special Mission Units. The President's budget provides 
$138.3 million to ensure CWMD possesses the resources needed for 
research, acquisition, development, test, and evaluation of next 
generation technology to bolster environmental biodetection and 
chemical defense programs.
    The budget includes an $80 million increase for the Nonprofit 
Security Grant Program (NSGP), which provides target hardening and 
other physical security enhancements for nonprofit organizations at 
high risk of terrorist attack, including places of worship. The NSGP is 
designed to integrate nonprofit preparedness activities with broader 
State and local preparedness efforts. It is also designed to promote 
coordination and collaboration in emergency preparedness activities 
among public and private community representatives, as well as State 
and local government agencies. Additionally, the budget includes $18 
million for the Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention Grants to 
support activities to prevent the recruitment or radicalization of 
individuals to violence by interrupting those efforts, building 
community-level resilience, and identifying the early signs of 
radicalization to violence and providing appropriate interventions 
through civic and public health organizations, law enforcement, or 
other entities.
   securing the border and facilitating lawful trade and immigration
    Countries throughout the Western Hemisphere and across the world 
continue to face unprecedented levels of migration inflamed by 
violence, food insecurity, corruption, dire economic conditions, and 
the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Failing authoritarian 
regimes in Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua, and an on-going humanitarian 
and security crisis in Haiti and Ecuador, have driven millions from 
their homes. Several countries' uncooperative governments severely 
restrict our ability to return their nationals. Migrants from the 
Middle East, Central Asia, Africa, and Asia are using pathways through 
Central and South America to reach the United States. Migratory 
movements are often leveraged by human smuggling organizations that 
exploit migrants for profit as part of a billion-dollar criminal 
enterprise.
    U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and 
Customs Enforcement (ICE) work together to secure America's borders and 
enforce our Nation's immigration laws. CBP is responsible for securing 
our Nation's borders to protect against terrorist threats, combat and 
deter transnational crime, and facilitate lawful travel, trade, and 
immigration. ICE protects our Nation through criminal investigations 
and enforcing immigration laws to preserve national security and public 
safety and stands at the forefront of our Nation's efforts to 
strengthen border security, counter fentanyl, and prevent the illegal 
movement of people and goods. The fiscal year 2025 budget includes 
$25.9 billion for CBP and ICE to continue these vital functions and 
significant investment in personnel and technology to carry out these 
critical mission sets.
    The requested CBP funding includes an increase of $210.3 million 
that would support the hiring of an additional 350 Border Patrol 
agents, an additional 310 Border Patrol Processing Coordinators, 150 
CBP officers, and 411 Operational and Mission Support Personnel. 
Additional field agents and support staff will bolster situational 
awareness, respond to enhanced levels of migration, and advance the 
enforcement mission. It supplements CBP's efforts to reduce reliance on 
the Department of Defense by including $39.8 million to sustain 
Integrated Surveillance Towers along the Southwest Border. The budget 
also provides $26.2 million for research and development efforts in 
critical operational capabilities such as Counter-Unmanned Aircraft.
    Requested ICE funding includes $2 billion to sustain 34,000 ICE 
Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) immigration detention beds. 
The Southwest Border Contingency Fund will resource additional 
detention beds if conditions require increased capacity.
    The request of $2.5 billion for ICE Homeland Security 
Investigations (HSI) would fund additional personnel and technology 
enhancements for investigative capacities, including a $21 million 
increase for child exploitation investigations, a vital national asset 
in the global fight against transnational criminal threats. These 
investigations helped inform a forthcoming national public awareness 
campaign. Children, teens, parents, trusted adults, and policy makers 
will be educated and empowered to prevent and combat on-line child 
sexual exploitation and abuse; learn how to report on-line enticement 
and victimization; and obtain response and support resources for 
victims and survivors of on-line child sexual exploitation. We look 
forward to launching this campaign with our partners this month.
    Working within a broken immigration system and in the face of 
enormous challenges and consistently insufficient funding, DHS 
faithfully enforces the law to secure our borders. We are removing and 
returning record numbers of migrants who are unable to establish a 
legal basis to remain in the United States. Since mid-May 2023, we 
removed or returned more than 630,000 individuals, the vast majority of 
whom crossed the Southwest Border, including nearly 100,000 individuals 
in family units. Total removals and returns in the last 11 months 
exceed removals and returns in every full fiscal year since 2013.
                          countering fentanyl
    Fentanyl is one of the deadliest drugs our country has ever faced. 
It is 50 times stronger than heroin and remarkably cheap and easy to 
produce. The profit potential and potency of small doses of fentanyl 
complicate efforts for law enforcement personnel cracking down on 
smuggling operations. CBP and ICE are working together with Federal, 
State, and local partners to successfully combat transnational criminal 
organizations and counter their trafficking in fentanyl and other 
controlled substances. The Department has stopped more illicit fentanyl 
and arrested more individuals for fentanyl-related crimes in the last 2 
fiscal years than in the previous 5 years combined.
    The Department's fiscal year 2025 budget includes critical 
investments in the fight against fentanyl. Through investments in Non-
Intrusive Inspection technology and targeted operations such as 
Operations Artemis, Rolling Wave, and Argus, CBP and ICE HSI increased 
the interdiction of fentanyl, fentanyl precursors, and collateral 
contraband, in particular the pill presses used to manufacture 
fentanyl. The administration is also prepared to send to Congress a 
legislative proposal to cement the Unity Agenda Strategy to combat the 
fentanyl epidemic.
     supporting refugee processing and a fair, orderly, and humane 
                           immigration system
    The Biden-Harris administration is committed to safeguarding the 
integrity of our Nation's immigration system by efficiently and fairly 
adjudicating requests for immigration benefits. U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) provides safe, lawful pathways for 
migration. The fiscal year 2025 budget includes $265 million for USCIS 
to bolster refugee processing in support of the administration's goal 
to welcome up to 125,000 refugees from across the world, including up 
to 50,000 from the Western Hemisphere; expand the E-Verify Program; and 
support the Citizenship and Integration Grant Program.
        investing in cybersecurity and emergency communications
    The Department's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency 
(CISA) serves as both America's cyber defense agency and as the 
national coordinator for critical infrastructure security and 
resilience.
    President Biden signed the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical 
Infrastructure Act of 2022 (CIRCIA) into law in March 2022. To meet 
CIRCIA's requirements, CISA must add new staff, update existing 
programs, and implement new processes and technologies. The fiscal year 
2025 budget includes critical resources to facilitate CISA's ability to 
receive, analyze, and share reports required under CIRCIA once 
regulatory reporting requirements become effective. The budget includes 
$115.9 million to help ensure CISA has sufficient funds for staffing, 
operations, and technology to successfully implement CIRCIA.
    The fiscal year 2025 budget also includes $394.1 million to support 
the Joint Collaborative Environment, which enables CISA to fulfill its 
mission of centralizing and synthesizing cyber threat and vulnerability 
data across Federal, SLTT, and private-sector stakeholders, and rapidly 
work with these stakeholders to reduce associated risk.
    Additionally, the budget includes $469.8 million for Continuous 
Diagnostics and Mitigation to complete mobile asset deployments, 
continue cloud asset deployments to fill capability gaps, and align to 
agency zero-trust use cases. Funding also sustains existing Endpoint 
Detection and Response investments and incorporates sensors to increase 
operational visibility within the Network Security Management 
capability.
    The Federal Government continues to leverage TSA's unique 
authorities--including the ability to issue Security Directives and 
Emergency Amendments within hours of receiving information about a 
threat--to address cyber threats. Cyber threats grew dramatically over 
the past decade and that growth shows no sign of slowing down. 
Accordingly, the fiscal year 2025 budget includes an increase of $15 
million to conduct critical mission support functions to reduce cyber 
threats to American critical infrastructure in both near- and mid-
terms, and in support of both the surface and aviation sectors.
        responsibly deploying artificial intelligence technology
    At the Department of Homeland Security, we embrace the 
responsibility to ensure that AI is developed and adopted in a way that 
realizes its full potential while protecting the public from any harm 
its irresponsible or adversarial use might cause. The fiscal year 2025 
budget enables the Department to responsibly leverage AI and machine 
learning to advance our homeland security missions while protecting 
individuals' privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties. Funding 
incudes $5.0 million for a new AI office, led by the chief AI officer, 
within the Office of the Chief Information Officer. The AI office will 
be responsible for setting priorities, directing policies, and 
oversight of the responsible use of AI across DHS.
    DHS will continue to deploy AI tools across strategic areas of the 
homeland security enterprise, including efforts to counter fentanyl, 
combat child sexual exploitation and abuses, deliver immigration 
services, secure travel, fortify our critical infrastructure, and 
enhance our cybersecurity. Consistent with President Biden's Executive 
Order, DHS will also direct funds to manage AI in critical 
infrastructure and cyber space, promote the adoption of global AI 
safety standards, reduce the risk that AI can be used to create weapons 
of mass destruction and other related threats, combat AI-related 
intellectual property theft, and help the United States attract and 
retain skilled talent.
    The fiscal year 2025 budget provides additional AI funds for talent 
recruitment programs that will benefit DHS missions, including the DHS 
AI Corps that launched in February to hire 50 AI experts in the 
Department. The effort has already received over 3,000 applications. 
Funds will also support training programs to build AI literacy across 
the Department's workforce and secure AI systems in critical 
infrastructure. The funds will also support existing ICE, CBP, and 
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) programs ensuring investment 
and expansion in line with Executive Order 14110, Safe, Secure, and 
Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence.
    In March 2024, we introduced the DHS AI Roadmap, which outlines the 
Department's AI initiatives and the technology's potential across the 
homeland security enterprise. It is the most detailed AI plan put 
forward by a Federal agency to date, directing our efforts to fully 
realize AI's potential to protect the American people and our homeland, 
while steadfastly protecting privacy, civil rights, and civil 
liberties.
    Our roadmap for the coming year includes exploring new AI 
applications and pursuing a whole-of-Government strategy for ensuring 
the safe, secure, and trustworthy development and use of AI. We are 
seeking to engage partners across Government, the private sector, and 
academia to bolster our Nation's security.
                investing in a disaster-resilient nation
    FEMA strengthens the Nation's ability to prepare for and respond to 
disasters of all types and magnitudes via partnerships with SLTT 
governments and the delivery of assistance to disaster survivors. In 
January, DHS announced historic changes to FEMA's Individual Assistance 
Program that ensure survivors will be provided with faster and easier 
access to resources they need immediately after a disaster. Last month, 
these changes went into effect and they will transform how we interact 
with survivors and empower individuals and communities in all future 
disasters.
    The budget includes increased funding for programs and activities 
that support FEMA's goals to lead whole-of-community efforts in 
resilience and promote and sustain a prepared Nation. The fiscal year 
2025 budget provides a major disaster allocation totaling $22.7 billion 
for FEMA to assist SLTT partners and individuals affected by major 
disasters and emergencies. This funding will support FEMA's continued 
recovery efforts from the devastating Maui fire, Hurricanes Maria, 
Fiona, and Ian, and other major disaster activity. In Maui our teams 
are on the ground delivering assistance in Lahaina and across Maui. As 
the roads are cleared and debris removed, as a temporary elementary 
school has opened, and as survivors begin to rebuild their homes, FEMA 
will continue to be there on the long road to recovery. The funding 
Congress provides directly impacts our ability to ensure survivors have 
the assistance they need to return to Lahaina and their community. The 
budget provides approximately $3.2 billion in FEMA grants bolstering 
SLTT community partnerships to improve the Nation's disaster resilience 
and preparedness strategies and includes the previously-mentioned $385 
million for the NSGP.
       increasing coast guard presence in the indo-pacific region
    The U.S. Coast Guard is a vital part of the administration's 
national security vision. Increasing USCG's presence in the Indo-
Pacific region is critical to that vision, the investments detailed 
below will enable a stable, free, and open region, and solidify the 
United States as a trusted partner in the region.
    The fiscal year 2025 budget provides $12.3 billion in net 
discretionary funding to sustain current readiness, resilience, and 
capabilities while building the Coast Guard of the future. The budget 
expands efforts for the Coast Guard's two highest acquisition 
priorities, the Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) and Fast Response Cutter 
(FRC). The OPC replaces the Coast Guard's fleet of Medium Endurance 
Cutters that conduct missions on the high seas and coastal approaches 
while FRC funding expands the program of record and construction of two 
FRCs in support of the Nation's Indo-Pacific Strategy. Of the $263 
million provided to USCG, $200 million will increase the FRC fleet from 
65 to 67 boats, which are well-equipped to engage with partner nations 
throughout the region.
    The budget also provides funding to support training, partnerships, 
and meaningful engagement in the Indo-Pacific region. For example, it 
includes funds for an Indo-Pacific based Coast Guard Marine 
Transportation System (MTS) Assessment Team that will drive regional 
economic prosperity by performing vital Ports and Waterways Safety 
Assessments, Port Access Route Studies, and Waterways Analysis and 
Management System Studies. Additionally, the budget also funds a 
Maritime Engagement Team focused on bolstering partner-nation capacity, 
and regional maritime advisors, liaison officers, attaches, legal 
support, and foreign engagement personnel that will support the U.S. 
presence and our interests in the region.
  the 2024 presidential campaign and national special security events
    The U.S. Secret Service (USSS) protects the President, the Vice 
President, their immediate families, visiting heads of state, other 
designated individuals, and the White House Complex, the Vice 
President's residence, foreign diplomatic missions, and other 
designated buildings. Additionally, the USSS coordinates security at 
National Special Security Events, such as the State of the Union 
Address, the United Nations General Assembly, and international summits 
hosted in the United States, such as the upcoming NATO Summit. The 
Service also protects the Nation's financial infrastructure by 
investigating counterfeiting, identity theft, computer fraud, and other 
financial security crimes.
    This year, the USSS will increase protective details, travel, and 
overtime related to the Presidential Campaign. The fiscal year 2025 
budget includes $70 million to ensure the 2024 Presidential Campaign is 
adequately resourced for the protection of major candidates, designated 
nominees, their spouses, and nominating conventions. This funding 
supports enhanced protection, security, travel, and overtime for the 
2024 Presidential Campaign and includes resources to train USSS 
personnel and other Federal partner agencies.
    The President's budget includes $16.0 million to support planning 
and prepositioning of assets needed for the protection of the 2026 FIFA 
World Cup and $19 million for other NSSEs.
               modernizing tsa pay and workforce policies
    Every day, TSA personnel help millions of travelers reach their 
destinations safely, fulfilling one of our Department's core missions 
since our founding in the wake of the September 11 attacks. The TSA 
workforce deserves to be fairly compensated at rates comparable with 
their peers on the General Schedule pay scale. The fiscal year 2025 
budget includes an additional $1.5 billion to continue the fiscal year 
2023 initiative to increase TSA pay levels, making TSA pay comparable 
to Federal Government employees in similar positions and enhancing 
recruitment and retention efforts.
    The budget resources TSA passenger volume growth expectations in 
fiscal year 2025 to follow the historical growth rate of 4.5 percent 
averaged over the 2014-2019 period, which equates to an average 3.1 
million daily passengers in 2025. Increased volume equates to greater 
risks to passenger safety. To mitigate this risk the President's budget 
includes $174 million to adequately staff check points to meet the 
demands of the increased passenger volume while maintaining minimal 
wait times for passengers.
                               conclusion
    The Department was founded to confront a threat environment that 
has proven to be increasingly dynamic and diverse. The fiscal year 2025 
President's budget builds on our successes to meet the ever-changing 
threat landscape we face and prepares the Department to meet the 
threats of tomorrow.
    It is the privilege of my life to represent and serve alongside the 
DHS workforce--a workforce that has time and again demonstrated 
exceptional skill and steadfast commitment to keeping the homeland safe 
and secure.
    I am grateful to this committee for your continued support and the 
opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to working 
together and to answering your questions.

    Chairman Green. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Members will be 
recognized by order of seniority for their 5 minutes of 
questioning. I would like to say the Secretary has, I think, a 
hard out today and that hard out is going to come up must 
faster than we would want or desire. I understand he has got a 
busy schedule.
    Typically, my policy is to let people go beyond the 5 
minutes if they are making a question and continuing a train of 
thought. Unfortunately, today we are not going to be able to 
allow that and I hate that. But as I have applied the rule 
evenly to both sides I will now apply for today's hearing the 5 
minutes with the gavel for both sides of the aisle.
    So, it is 5 minutes and 5 minutes only because we want to 
allow everyone here to get an opportunity to ask questions of 
the Secretary. I would like to ask the staffs on both sides if 
they would communicate this change for today to the individuals 
who aren't present right now. I now recognize myself for 5 
minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Secretary, you have issued guidance that directed DHS 
personnel to essentially disregard the INA ``shall detain'' 
language meaning, you know, disregard laws passed by Congress. 
You have created pathways for tens of thousands of migrants 
from very specific countries to enter the United States 
directly without any law passed by Congress and in violation of 
the INA.
    The Solicitor General, in arguments before the Supreme 
Court, arguing on your and your boss' behalf, as well as 
yourself in testimony to Congress, have said you have had 
prosecutorial discretion, I think is the term that keeps 
getting used, to disregard those laws when the resources are 
overwhelmed. That has essentially been the argument that, you 
know, ``shall detain'' language could not be adhered to because 
the resources were overwhelmed. Is that generally correct?
    Secretary Mayorkas. No, it is not, Mr. Chairman. Let me 
assure you that we enforce the laws that Congress has passed 
and that is the direction that I have given to the work force 
throughout my tenure.
    Chairman Green. Well, during the hearing or the court trial 
Texas v. the United States, the Solicitor General made it very 
clear that the reason the policies that you have written have 
been written the way they have been written is because there is 
some form of discretion allowed to make the choice that we are 
not going to, you know, follow the ``shall detain'' and we can 
get thousands and thousands of examples of where that didn't 
happen.
    We have a memorandum from you that basically says just 
because it says this doesn't mean you have--that is a reason to 
not or to detain someone. I want to ask this question, do you 
know how many ICE detention beds were empty on average during 
your tenure?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chairman, let me be very clear that 
we maximum the use of detention beds that are available. 
Sometimes we are curtailed by using detention beds by reason 
of----
    Chairman Green. You----
    Secretary Mayorkas. If I may, Mr. Chairman. By orders----
    Chairman Green. But do you know the number? I just want to 
know the number.
    Secretary Mayorkas. By orders of court, for example certain 
restrictions were used in terms of space and availability of 
beds by reason of the COVID-19 pandemic.
    Chairman Green. Well, let me just share what has been put 
out in documents from your Department. In each year of your 
tenure that--here have been, I would submit, thousands--well, 
they are thousands of beds available per day.
    Roughly 9,000 on average in fiscal year 2022, 3,000 a day 
in fiscal year 2023, meaning while you assert that shall detain 
is what you want to do, what you agree the law says, we are 
leaving thousands of beds empty ever day. This is not counting 
the various--I think it is in California, starts with an A, I 
can't think of the name of the facility where the courts have 
ordered you not to use those beds. We are not including those 
in these counts.
    It is thousands, at least 3,000 a day empty, and yet the 
arguments before the Supreme Court and in your testimonies 
before here to Congress have been that the resources are 
overwhelmed and, therefore, we have to just catch and release 
these people into the country. I mean in your opening statement 
you said, we need more resources.
    It is interesting, though, in that claim for more resources 
so that we can adhere to the laws you are actually in this 
budget decreasing the requested ICE detention beds. That seems 
to me to be illogical, if the reason we can't enforce the laws 
as they are written on the books is because we don't have 
enough resources, there are thousands of empty beds, and we are 
going to ask for less beds in this budget. I mean that doesn't 
make any sense to me.
    I would submit to you that it speaks to somewhat of an 
intent to not adhere to that ``shall detain''. But, you know, 
that is my perception on this.
    Let me ask you this question: Just recently in your last 
trip here you actually admitted that there was a crisis at the 
Southwest Border. What changed?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chairman, nothing changed. I have 
recognized the enormous challenge that the Southern Border 
presents ever since I began my tenure and actually well before 
that then when I served as the deputy secretary----
    Chairman Green. Wait, let me ask this question then. When 
you came to Congress and said there was no crisis at the 
Southern Border in your first few trips here, no crisis, there 
is no--secure the border, secure. Nothing changed between then 
and now you are saying it is a crisis?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chairman, I have never minimized 
the challenge that the Southern Border presents. I didn't 
minimize it when I served as a Federal prosecutor for 12 years 
from 1989 through 2001.
    Chairman Green. I am going to gavel myself since I have 5 
seconds left. I now recognize the Ranking Member for his 5 
minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Thompson. Thank you very much. Again welcome, Mr. 
Secretary. Mr. Secretary, Republicans have wasted little time 
playing political games with our Southern Border while 
rejecting any serious solution and voting against border 
security funding.
    If you are for it, you should support resources. If you are 
against it, I assume you vote against it because you are not 
for it. So, I don't know why it happens, but Democrats 
historically have supported robust funding for DHS. Is DHS a 
perfect agency? Of course not. None of our--we strive for 
perfection but we understand resources are absolutely 
important.
    Republicans have tried to starve DHS personnel of the 
resources needed to do their job. The Chairman said not another 
dime for DHS. When it comes time to fund the Department I guess 
addressing the surge in migration and stopping fentanyl and 
human trafficking isn't worth 10 cents to the Republicans 
charged with overseeing DHS.
    Republicans have ignored or voted against every opportunity 
to provide necessary resources to DHS. They voted no on the 
2023 omnibus. They refused to consider the President's 
supplemental request and they called the bipartisan Senate 
border bill dead on arrival within minutes of the text being 
released.
    Disturbingly, just a few weeks ago two-thirds of the 
Republicans on this committee voted against funding DHS and 
border security. Republicans have taken their marching orders 
from Donald Trump and he wants chaos at the border to help his 
chances in this election. They want a show, not solutions.
    Democrats are united in finding solutions and providing the 
agents and officers of DHS with the resources needed to do so 
safely and effectively.
    Mr. Secretary, can you describe how the additional 
resources in the President's emergency supplemental or the 
bipartisan Senate border bill would help the Department address 
the issues at the Southern Border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Ranking Member Thompson, the 
President's supplemental would provide us with vital resources 
needed to hire additional personnel across the spectrum of our 
work force that enforce the Southern Border and do so much 
more.
    The bipartisan Senate legislation would not only resource 
our Department as we are needed to address a broken immigration 
system but also, and very importantly, actually change the law 
and authorize us to use tools that have long been needed to 
address that broken immigration system. It would take a multi-
year asylum process and reduce it to as little as 90 days or 
even less. That is a game-changer in terms of deterring illegal 
migration to our border.
    Mr. Thompson. Thank you. Let us go to election security. We 
have elections coming up this November and, as you know, DHS is 
responsible for securing critical infrastructure, including our 
elections. Not only Russia attempts to interfere with the 2016 
elections, officials from across the Trump administration 
worked to counter efforts to undermine the confidence in the 
election outcomes.
    Unfortunately, after inciting a riot at the Capitol because 
he wasn't reelected, Donald Trump spent 4 years making 
legitimate election security work so politically toxic that I 
am worried that the Federal Government is reluctant to support 
election officials and other stakeholders the way it should hit 
it this November.
    Last week's baseless claim about voter fraud by the former 
President and Speaker would only make the work of election 
officials harder. Mr. Secretary, secretaries of state, local 
election officials, and other stakeholders relied on DHS's 
support to administer secure elections in 2020. Can you assure 
us that DHS will bring the full range of its resources to 
support the 2024 elections?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, I can, Ranking Member Thompson.
    Mr. Thompson. Yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired. I now 
recognize the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and 
former Chairman of this committee, Mr. McCaul, for his 5 
minutes of questioning.
    Mr. McCaul. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. Mr. 
Secretary, you took an oath to protect the country from enemies 
both foreign and domestic. I believe in many respects you 
violated that oath.
    Let me start with the Immigration Nationality Act. It 
states that, ``The government shall take into custody any alien 
that has committed an aggravated felony. Those are dangerous, 
violent criminals.'' As you know, you are an attorney, as am I, 
``shall'' is mandatory language. It doesn't say maybe. It 
doesn't say, well, whatever you think at the time. It says 
``shall''.
    Those are words by the Congress, mandatory language means 
you shall detail. Yet in September 2021, your memo to your 
Border Patrol agents titled, ``Guidance for Enforcement of 
Civil Immigration Law,'' you instructed your Border Patrol 
officers not to take prior criminal conduct into account when 
taking enforcement action.
    Whether you say whether a noncitizen poses a current threat 
to public safety is not to be determined according to bright 
lines or categories. Our personnel should not rely on the fact 
of a conviction or the result of a database search alone. In 
other words, you directed your own agents on the ground, on the 
border to defy the laws of Congress, to release violent 
criminals into our countries and you know what aggravated felon 
means under the statute, but for those who don't, it means it 
includes murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and drug traffickers 
and God knows how many have been released into this country due 
to this policy that you issued in September 2021.
    My State took this up on appeal to the Supreme Court where 
Justice Kavanaugh asked whether impeachment would be warranted 
for an official who defied the laws passed by Congress. 
President Biden's own Solicitor General replied that such steps 
would be warranted, ``in the face of a dramatic abdication of a 
statutory responsibility by the executive.''
    In my view you have defied the law, you defied 
Congressional intent and the best interest of the American 
people and you made this country, sir, a far more dangerous 
place, not to mention the hundreds of those in the terror watch 
list who have gotten into this country. How do you respond?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chairman, I have 3 points to make. 
No. 1, you mischaracterized the enforcement guidelines that I 
published.
    Mr. McCaul. I read directly from them, sir.
    Secretary Mayorkas. Second, we have removed more aggravated 
felons each month than the prior administration did. Third, my 
enforcement guidelines mirror to a great extent and in the 
quoted language prior enforcement guidelines that other 
administrations have issued. The fact of the matter is that we 
enforce the law. We deem public security----
    Mr. McCaul. All right. I am going to reclaim my time on 
that. You are saying you enforce the law when you told your 
agents don't take into account prior criminal conduct. 
Aggravated felons, do not take into account the fact they maybe 
have a murder conviction or a rapist conviction or--well, that 
is what is under the statute, sir.
    You told them, don't take that into account. You can say 
you have the best record ever as a Secretary of Homeland. You 
can say that but nobody believes it. I have got to tell you, 
back home in my State of Texas very, very upset.
    I want to close with 1833's Supreme Court Justice Story 
said, ``Where a lord admiral has neglected to safeguard the 
seas, that shall be deemed an impeachable offense.'' I believe 
that is exactly the case here. You have neglected not just the 
seas, but the air, land, and the seas, and you have destroyed 
the fabric of this Nation.
    My last question to you is, how many persons on the terror 
watch list have gotten into this country?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Mr. Chairman, I'd be pleased to provide 
you with data subsequent to this hearing.
    Mr. McCaul. Will you provide the names and backgrounds?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Let me assure you that the security of 
the American people is highest priority.
    Mr. McCaul. Will you provide the names and the backgrounds 
of any of the persons?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I would be pleased to provide you with 
whatever information you need in the appropriate setting.
    Mr. McCaul. A bit of a non-answer but I will take that. 
Thank you.
    Chairman Green. The Chairman yields. I now recognize Mr. 
Correa, the gentleman from California and the Ranking Member of 
the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement for his 5 
minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, welcome 
today. My first question is, you did take an oath to protect 
our country? Have you upheld that oath?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I have, Congressman. That is, I believe 
the fifth time I have taken the oath of office in my public 
service career.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you. I am the Ranking Member of the 
Subcommittee for Border Security and Enforcement. I have made 
it my mission to understand, learn the needs of the personnel 
at the border, both of our borders, all of our borders. Been at 
our Southern Border numerous times, spoken with your men and 
women in green and blue uniforms.
    It is clear that today we are facing challenges at home and 
abroad like we have never faced before. We just returned, my 
colleagues and I, from a trip to Africa. A common issue across 
many countries we visited was refugees. Egypt today, according 
to the president, is hosting 10 million refugees, just one 
country alone.
    Here we are talking about our budget, the budget for the 
personnel you need, a budget for the resources you need, 
Department of Homeland Security to protect our great country. 
Yet I watch my colleagues on the other side of the aisle block 
the President's emergency supplemental request and to even 
refuse to consider the Senate's bipartisan border bill. In the 
last few months, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
have repeatedly threatened to shut down Government over the 
Homeland Security budget.
    Secretary Mayorkas, can you please explain to us in plain 
terms what my colleagues on the other side, their refusal to 
pass emergency supplemental requests, how does that put our 
country's national security in danger?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, with the additional 
resources we would be provided in the President's supplemental 
budget request we would be able to advance significantly the 
security of the border. We would have additional equipment, 
additional technology, additional personnel in every facet of 
border security.
    Mr. Correa. You talk about additional personnel. Do we have 
a shortage of personnel right now at our borders?
    Secretary Mayorkas. We do, Congressman. We need additional 
Office of Field Operations personnel to man our ports of entry. 
We need additional Border Patrol agents----
    Mr. Correa. Let us talk about that. Our ports of entry, 
that is where most of the fentanyl coming through this country 
enters through ports of entry. San Ysidro itself accounts for 
about 70 percent of all fentanyl coming into our country. Yet 
you are telling me we are short of personnel in these critical 
junctures? Is that what you are telling me, sir?
    Secretary Mayorkas. We are. We need additional field 
personnel to equip those ports of entry with a staff that we 
need to enforce our laws.
    Mr. Correa. So, Secretary, let me go back and re-ask a 
question that you did not finish answering that was asked by my 
colleagues which is, the thousands of empty beds, how do you 
explain that?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, you know, recently we've 
been over capacity in our ICE detention facilities. There are 
court cases that impose restrictions on our ability to use the 
beds that we have been funded.
    Mr. Correa. So, if the laws were to change, maybe some of 
those court cases would not apply, could that be the case?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I would want to get back to you on 
that, Congressman. I will share with you that the President's--
I'm sorry, forgive me, the bipartisan Senate legislation would 
have funded the Department of Homeland Security with 50,000 
detention beds, far more than we are resourced this year and 
even more so than we were resourced last year.
    Mr. Correa. So, how would that affect the situation that my 
colleagues on either side of the aisle are talking about, all 
these individuals that could be essentially held at these empty 
beds so to speak, adding to these empty beds, they talk about 
all these people being released, would they be held at these 
beds?
    Secretary Mayorkas. As everyone recognizes, the more 
detention beds that we are funded for, the more individuals 
that we would be able to detain. The Supreme Court has quite 
clearly recognized the fact that detention bed capacity for 
which we have been funded is inadequate to comply to the letter 
of the law.
    Mr. Correa. Yes, and beyond that, the bigger picture here 
is processing individuals at our borders that may or may not be 
eligible for asylum, we are critical shorts in those resources 
there. I do hope as we move forward we can address that issue.
    I am out of time. Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize the gentleman, Mr. Higgins from Louisiana, 
the Chair of the Subcommittee on Border Security and 
Enforcement for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Over the past year I 
have found that many Members of Congress fail to grasp the 
Founders' true meaning regarding the constitutional writ of 
impeachment proceedings. Impeachment is not a criminal 
proceeding. It may include violations of written law but it was 
never intended to be bound by specific criminal violations of 
statute.
    In many ways impeachment proceedings are intended to be 
guided by principles of conduct that are far more deeply etched 
upon human history than any written law could ever be. 
Embezzlement of money by an employee is a criminal act and is a 
betrayal of trust. But betrayal of trust is not a statute.
    The House Committee on Homeland Security advanced Articles 
of Impeachment against Department of Homeland Security 
Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. He has been impeached by the 
people's house. These articles do not impugn the Secretary's 
character nor list dissenting views on how to handle the crisis 
at our border.
    Instead, the impeachment articles against Secretary 
Mayorkas carry the charge of high crimes and misdemeanors. It 
is important that all Americans recognize the true meaning of 
high crimes and misdemeanors. While some of my colleagues have 
claimed that this charge is confined to specific violations of 
criminal statute, let us not fail to recognize the Founders' 
original intent and well-documented debate regarding the origin 
and meaning of this term.
    Article II, Section 4 of our Constitution reads, ``The 
President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United 
States shall be removed from office on impeachment for and 
conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and 
misdemeanors.''
    Our Founding Fathers used this phrase, ``high crimes and 
misdemeanors,'' having 400 years of British Parliament 
historical precedent, which did not limit itself to direct 
criminal misconduct, but, more importantly, encompassed a 
neglect of duty and abuse of power. This is not funny, Mr. 
Secretary.
    Literally, demeaning the office in high authority that had 
been entrusted, enshrining this phrase in the Constitution, the 
Founding Fathers put explicit trust in Congress to determine 
what constitutes an impeachable offense and what is encompassed 
in high crimes and misdemeanors.
    Impeachment was never intended to be a criminal proceeding 
but instead a review by the American people of a rogue 
executive and a mechanism for accountability when all else as 
failed. Secretary Mayorkas has not only betrayed the trust of 
the American people, his service as Secretary has left a scar 
on our Nation's soul that may never be removed.
    The Articles of Impeachment brought against Secretary 
Mayorkas passed the House and have now been delivered this 
afternoon to the Senate. It is vital the Senate upholds its 
Constitutional obligation to hold a fair impeachment trial.
    The American people deserve accountability for the gross 
misconduct of the Secretary's handling of our borders. It is 
incumbent upon Members of Congress to enforce the authority 
outlined by the Founding Fathers for impeachment.
    Under Secretary Mayorkas, America has suffered. Over 
300,000 Americans have died from cartel drug poisoning. Our 
communities are crushed under the weight of 12 million illegal 
aliens in the span of 3 years and crime has reached 
unprecedented levels within American communities across the 
country.
    Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas' arrogant disregard for the 
security and sanctity of the American people has brought 
Congress to this point. He has brought unspeakable pain upon 
the Nation. His service as Secretary will forever be shrouded 
in shameful failure and generational trauma.
    Alejandro Mayoras has been impeached by the House. He must 
now be tried by the Senate and removed from office.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields. I now recognize Mr. 
Carter, the gentleman from Louisiana and the Ranking Member on 
the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Law Enforcement 
Intelligence, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 
Thompson. Thank you, Secretary Mayorkas, for joining us today. 
As we review our fiscal year 2025 budget request, President 
Biden's fiscal year 2025 budget request for DHS reflects 
Democrats' commitment to put politics aside and work in good 
faith to address security challenges facing our Nation.
    Today's review is important so we can continue to find 
solutions, not politics. Solutions that we as Americans should 
want. We often have different approaches but what we see here 
in the impeachment is nothing more than a witch hunt and an 
opportunity to cloud the issue as evidenced by the fact that 
the Senate has a measure that would bring us to a measure of 
success, to move the ball forward.
    But my colleagues in the House because of a directive by 
the former President ``to not give President Biden a victory,'' 
our jobs are not to give Presidents victories. Our jobs are to 
give the American people victories. Our jobs are to fight to 
make sure that we have a secure border. Our jobs are here to 
make sure that we see things through a lens not as Republicans 
or Democrats but as Americans and to do what is right. 
Unfortunately, that has not and is not happening.
    I will go on record as predicting that the U.S. Senate will 
not even take up these Articles of Impeachment. Why? Because 
they are meritless, because they are baseless, and because they 
are purely political in nature and they are not rooted in the 
fairness, justice, or the American way.
    So, I am going to pivot a little bit if we might because I 
have--we have talked about this quite a bit, so I am going to 
pivot to flood insurance.
    Mr. Secretary, the last time you were here before this 
committee I relayed my concerns about FEMA's Risk Rating 2.0, 
and that it will leave many in my district, especially in low- 
and moderate-income communities priced out of their homes by 
premium increases.
    You stated that you were reviewing and need to continue to 
review Risk Rating 2.0 given the concerns that have been 
expressed. Since then, I have only seen flood insurance prices 
get worse. Given the urgency of the situation and the impact on 
vulnerable communities can you provide the committee with an 
update on how the Department is taking steps to help 
communities that are struggling with FEMA's Risk Rating 2.0?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I will follow up with you 
and provide you an update on Flood Insurance 2.0. I can assure 
you that we are taking extraordinary measures through FEMA to 
reach otherwise disenfranchised populations.
    We have issued guidance and changed our policies to make 
sure that minority and underserved communities have greater 
access to our grant programs, to individual assistance, and to 
other resources that FEMA provides in the wake of natural 
disasters and to strengthen and protect communities. I will 
provide you with an update with respect to Flood Insurance 2.0, 
specifically.
    Mr. Carter. One of the things that we have repeatedly asked 
for both in this committee as well as in Transportation 
Infrastructure for which I also serve and in individual 
meetings in my office and in the office of the FEMA 
administrator is the formula, what algorithm, what formula is 
used to derive these rates?
    We have consistently said that it is some algorithm but we 
have yet to be shared what that is. What does it look like? How 
do we explain to the people in our districts how these rates 
are developed when we get a vague answer to that?
    Mr. Secretary, I would greatly appreciate if you can drill 
down and share with the American people what this formula is, 
how it is derived, and, more importantly, how we can adjust it 
to make sure that people are not being forced to make a 
decision about being able to live in the home that they have 
now paid for and they can no longer afford to insure because 
the rates are higher than the note was when they had a 
mortgage. This is untenable. I would ask that you would look 
into that and share some meaningful answers, sir.
    Secretary Mayorkas. I will do so, Congressman.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, my time is up.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Guest, the gentleman from Mississippi 
and the Vice Chair of the Committee on Homeland Security, for 
his 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Guest. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I want 
to point out what I highlighted last week when you testified. 
You came in in your opening statement and you talk about your 
budget being insufficient. You seek to place the blame on 
Congress that we are not giving you the resources and your 
Department the resources that you need. But last year in the 
fiscal year 2024 budget which we just passed, Congress 
appropriated you $61.8 billion in discretionary spending, which 
was more than you asked for.
    So, Congress has given you more money than you are asking 
for, but you are repeatedly coming in to these hearings and you 
are trying to say that you don't have the financial resources 
that you need to carry out the job. Chairman Green mentioned 
the detention beds, the detention beds which you and I talked 
about last week are incredibly troubling in the fact that you 
come in and you, once again, you ask for less detention beds, 
significantly less detention beds than we funded in the fiscal 
year 2024 budget.
    You told me in that hearing last week that you agreed with 
the Senate 50,000 detention beds, but yet you come in and you 
ask Congress only to fund 34,000 when we currently are funding 
41,500. You continue to seek to place the blame on us.
    I am reading from the physical report 2023, ICE's annual 
report. In that annual report, Mr. Secretary, a report which is 
issued by your agency, on page 17 it says, ``Congressional 
funding for ERO detention beds have remained relatively static 
for several years and the detained population was limited as a 
result.''
    In answering a question from Mr. Correa, you talk about the 
fact that the court says that there has been inadequate funding 
for detention beds, and so how do you come in here and you ask 
for less detention beds, but yet every time you testify, you 
try to place the blame back on Congress? Because we are 
actually funding more detention beds every year than you are 
asking for, and at a time in which we see a record surge of 
immigrants coming across the border, at a time in which you 
have at least now finally admitted that there is a crisis on 
the border.
    But we are seeing reports every day in the media about 
violent crimes committed by immigrants who are not in custody, 
who are not detained but released into the interior, and yet 
you come in here and as a key part of your budget you are 
asking for substantially less detention beds. I find that 
especially troubling, Mr. Secretary, as I look at this, 
continue to look at the report that was provided by ICE in 
which I see according to the fiscal year 2023 year-end report 
that the not-detained docket--the docket that shows the number 
of not-detained individuals who you have allowed in the 
country, has now reached over 6.2 million people, 6.2 million.
    I spoke just yesterday with the ICE director, Director 
Lechleitner, and in my conversation with him I brought up the 
fact of what was in this report. He told me, Mr. Secretary, 
that that number is now over 7 million, that that report is 
old, that that number is more than 7 million. Axios reported 
just several weeks ago that by the end of this physical year, 
fiscal year 2024, October 1, that that number is expected to 
grow to 8 million.
    So, we see this record number of immigration, the record 
number of people that you as the Secretary are allowing to come 
into the country, but yet we are seeing you do nothing to ask 
for more detention beds. I find that troubling and I have to 
believe that I am not the only Member of this committee that 
finds it troubling that we are not asking for a sufficient 
number of detention beds.
    Mr. Secretary, I also had the opportunity to ask you last 
week when you testified before the Appropriations Committee 
about this news article, a new article reported by FOX News. I 
have provided you some of the content when we met last week but 
I wanted to show this to you. This is from an article dated 
January 8, 2024.
    It says, ``Mayorkas tells Border Patrol Agency that above 
85 percent of illegal immigrants have been released into the 
United States.'' It goes on there in the first paragraph, it 
says, ``Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on 
Monday admitted to Border Patrol agency that the current rate 
of release for illegal immigrants apprehended at the Southwest 
Border is above 85 percent.''
    It says, ``Mayorkas made these statements when meeting 
privately with agents and that there were sources in the room 
who heard that.'' It goes on to say that there were at least 3 
agents who verified to FOX News that you made that statement.
    So, Mr. Secretary, did you make the statement that it was 
reported on January 8, 2024?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, as I mentioned to you last 
week, I do not recall that exchange in an internal meeting with 
the work force. Let me assure you that the security at the 
Southern Border is our highest priority.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize Mr. Thanedar, the gentleman from Michigan 
and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Transportation and 
Maritime Security, for his 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Thanedar. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Secretary, clearly 
you have a tough job. You are faced with a world-wide migration 
challenge, a deeply broken immigration system, and limited 
resources to address the challenges. Unfortunately, my 
Republican colleagues don't seem to want to help to fix that 
problem.
    I admire your efforts to expand parole program for migrants 
in countries facing extreme conditions, like Haiti and Cuba, as 
well as to restore familiar reunification problems for families 
facing wide-spread violence in Central America.
    America is a nation of immigrants, as you know, and yet we 
have a broken immigration system. In 1979, growing up in 
poverty I was fortunate to have gotten admission into a Ph.D. 
program in the United States to study. That would have changed 
my life.
    I went to the American Embassy in Mumbai, got there at 5 
a.m. in the morning, stood in line only to be denied my student 
visa. The Embassy continued to deny it for 4 more times, and 
the fifth time the visa got approved only because the denying 
officer was on vacation to the United States.
    In our H-1B visas is an issue, our immigration country 
quotas is creating such a stressful environment for families, 
companies, technology companies that are unable to find a 
skilled work force, countries like Canada and Australia are 
taking away some of our skilled work force because of our 
broken immigration system.
    I want to see an orderly immigration process that benefits 
the United States, that benefits our economy, and helps create 
American jobs. How do you think Congress can help you to 
achieve that?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the President on his very 
first day in office presented Congress with a comprehensive 
legislative package to fix what everyone agrees is our broken 
immigration system, to advance that piece of legislation and to 
advance the Senate's bipartisan legislation would transform our 
broken immigration system and reform it. It hasn't been 
reformed since 1996. It is long outdated and long broken.
    Mr. Thanedar. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and I want to give 
you an opportunity to respond to Congressman Guest's questions. 
I think you may not have adequate time to respond if you so 
choose to do.
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we support the funding of 
41,500 beds. We support the funding of 50,000 detention beds 
that the Senate's bipartisan legislation provided. It is most 
regrettable that that bipartisan legislation has not advanced. 
We urge Congress to advance it. It would advance our border 
security immeasurably.
    Mr. Thanedar. I, Mr. Chairman, I yield my time to the 
gentleman from New York.
    Mr. Goldman. Thank you, Mr. Thanedar. We just have a few 
seconds, Mr. Secretary. But I wanted to follow up on what 
Chairman McCaul was talking about because he is citing the INA 
``shall detain'' language in a memo that you issued in 
September 2021. I want to give you an opportunity to explain 
what it says in that memo because even in the quote that he 
read, he said that aggravated felonies shall not be the only 
consideration when deciding whether or not to seek detention.
    So, can you explain what your guidance was in the face of 
the reality that there are insufficient beds to comply with the 
letter of the law?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the direction to law 
enforcement agents was to use their discretion, their 
experience to determine who presents the greatest public safety 
treat and to detain those individuals, period.
    Chairman Green. OK. The gentleman's time has expired. 
Someone else can yield, of course, if they would like.
    I now recognize, Mr. Bishop, the gentleman from North 
Carolina and the Chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight, for 5 
minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Mayorkas, 
you have frequently testified about the actions and efforts of 
DHS over the course of the time you have been Secretary. Let me 
just ask you about the results of your more than 3 years in of 
tenure. Do you consider the results of your administration of 
the Department of Homeland Security to be a success?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I am incredibly proud of the work of 
the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security, 
Congressman. They risk their lives----
    Mr. Bishop. Right. Do you consider it to be a success?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I am incredibly proud of everything 
they do.
    Mr. Bishop. Yes. Do you consider it to be a success?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I consider them to be a tremendous 
success in advancing the safety and security of the American 
people with the----
    Mr. Bishop. Do you consider your administration of the 
Department of Homeland Security to be a success?
    Secretary Mayorkas. With the resources and authorities they 
have, they have done an extraordinary job.
    Mr. Bishop. In November 2022, I asked you whether you 
continue to maintain that the border is secure. You said, yes, 
and it is getting more secure every day. Do you still say so?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, with the resources and the 
authorities that we have been provided, it is as secure as we 
can make it.
    Mr. Bishop. Under your orders, Department of Homeland 
Security paroled Venezuelan Jose Ibarra into the United States. 
He, of course, went on to a variety of crimes culminating in 
beating a young woman to death in Georgia. The relevant statute 
grants you authority to parole aliens into the United States, 
``only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons 
or significant public benefit.'' Which was it in Mr. Ibarra's 
case, humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit, that 
you paroled him into the United States?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we abide by the law, we 
apply our parole processes in obeyance of the law. The public 
safety of the American people is highest priority and I would 
be pleased to share case details with you on any case of 
concern to you subsequent to this hearing. I don't have the 
case details with me today.
    Mr. Bishop. Well, I am not really asking for detail. I am 
only asking for one simple fact, which is was it urgent 
humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit that under 
your orders Mr. Ibarra was paroled into the United States?
    Secretary Mayorkas. My answer remains the same, 
Congressman.
    Mr. Bishop. You mean you would have to review something? 
You would have to review something before you could provide 
case details or you just can't say it in this forum?
    Secretary Mayorkas. The former.
    Mr. Bishop. So, no, you don't know?
    Secretary Mayorkas. As I said, I do not have the details 
with respect to that individual's case and I would be pleased 
to provide them to you, Congressman.
    Mr. Bishop. Mr. Secretary, news reports--or the Heritage 
Foundation oversight project has released this document that is 
allegedly a flyer distributed at a nongovernment organization 
in Mexico called the Resource Center Matamoros, which 
apparently--which is said to read in part, if translated, 
reminder to vote for President Biden when you are in the United 
States. We need another 4 years of his term to stay open.
    I note by the--I understand this RCM has denied that this 
is authentic. But of course, there are other competing reports 
about it. But let me ask you this, what actions is the 
Department of Homeland Security taking to ensure that 
especially given the millions of illegal entries, including 2 
million got-aways, that noncitizens are being prevented from 
registering and voting unlawfully?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, individuals who are not 
citizens of the United States cannot vote in Federal elections. 
That's----
    Mr. Bishop. That is not what I asked. I asked what actions 
DHS is taking to ensure that that doesn't occur?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Well, two things. No. 1, I believe that 
it is State and local election officials that monitor the 
eligibility of individuals. We do not oversee the election 
enrollment process. What we do is enforce our borders and, in 
fact----
    Mr. Bishop. So, said shorter, nothing?
    Secretary Mayorkas. In fact----
    Mr. Bishop. How can Congress and the American people have 
confidence that the outcome of close elections will not turn on 
the votes of noncitizens who have registered and voted 
unlawfully?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, election security is one 
of our priorities. In the distribution of Federal grant funds 
to State and local jurisdictions we have made election security 
a priority and we have mandated----
    Mr. Bishop. I will reclaim my time. Last point. I am just 
curious, following up Mr. Guest, you asked for less detention 
beds and you explained that you did that based on the level of 
detention beds that would be needed under the Senate 
``bipartisan bill.'' How is that bill bipartisan other than it 
is supported by James Lankford? Is there another Republican in 
the Senate or the House that supported that bill?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we continue to support the 
bipartisan legislation that a group of Senators worked on for 
months and----
    Mr. Bishop. My time has expired, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize Mr. Magaziner, the gentleman from Rhode 
Island and the Ranking Member on the Subcommittee on 
Counterterrorism and Law Enforcement and Intelligence, for his 
5 minutes of questions.
    Mr. Magaziner. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Mr. 
Secretary, for being here.
    Our country faces a range of security threats from foreign 
terrorist organizations, domestic extremists, cartels, 
organized crime, and natural disasters just to name a few. 
While you have been diligently doing your job along with your 
colleagues at the Department to protect the American people in 
the face of these challenges, our Republican colleagues in the 
House have instead been playing politics culminating with the 
political impeachment that had no legal basis.
    I am sorry that some of our colleagues have chosen to make 
you the target of political attacks instead of getting you the 
tools that you need to do your job to keep people safe. I want 
you to know that many of us are still willing to put politics 
aside and work with you and work with each other on a 
bipartisan basis to protect the homeland.
    The President's fiscal year 2025 budget requests $62 
billion for the Department, including hundreds of millions more 
for staffing and technology to secure the Southern Border. It 
also proposes $4.7 billion for a Southwest Border contingency 
fund to provide resources to the Department when migration 
along the Southwest Border warrants additional capacity. This 
is the right thing to do and I hope that our Republican 
colleagues will support this funding, unlike last year when 
they delayed action on the President's supplemental funding 
request for the border for months while they wasted time with 
impeachment.
    It is inexcusable that our Republican colleagues did not 
pass the final fiscal year 2024 funding for the Department for 
nearly 6 months, forcing the Department to work under multiple 
CRs, reducing operations, and overstraining the work force of 
the Department. I hope that fiscal year 2025 will be different.
    Funding the Department of Homeland Security is also 
critical because our Nation faces an increased threat from the 
rise of domestic violent extremists. Now, we heard from you, 
Mr. Secretary, and from FBI Director Wray last November during 
the world-wide threats hearing that the top domestic terrorism 
threat we face continues to be from racially- and ethnically-
motivated and anti-Government-motivated violent extremists.
    Some of these are organized groups, like the group that 
engaged in the plot the Governor of Michigan and some of the 
groups who stormed the Capitol on January 6th in a violent 
attempt to overturn a legal and lawful election. Others are 
lone actors, like the individual who attacked Paul Pelosi. Many 
of these individuals are shamefully inspired by and scapegoated 
by Members of this Congress and by former President Trump.
    But the Government Accountability Office has shown that 
domestic terrorism-related cases has increased dramatically in 
recent years. So, with this alarming fact in mind, I would like 
to turn to you, Mr. Secretary. Can you tell us, what is the 
Department of Homeland Security seeing with respect to the 
threat from domestic violent extremists, particularly as we 
grow closer to the election, and what steps are the Department 
taking to address any potential threats to government bodies, 
officials, and the public at large?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are, as Director Wray 
and I have expressed previously, in a heightened threat 
environment. Indeed, individuals draw to violence because of 
ideologies of hate, false narratives, anti-Government 
sentiments are a significant concern of ours. We do a number of 
things. We disseminate information and analysis to a State, 
local, Tribal, and territorial law enforcement, and other 
officials. We distribute grant funds. We are grateful for 
Congress' support of those grant funds. We need those funds to 
increase to enable local communities to protect and guard 
themselves.
    As I mentioned in my opening statement, we have a very 
important targeted violence and terrorism prevention grant 
program that enabled communities to employ best practice in the 
identification of an individual who may be drawn to violence 
and intervene before a tragedy occurs. Those are some examples.
    Mr. Magaziner. Well, I thank you, Mr. Secretary, for that 
and for in particular the support of State and local 
enforcement agencies. As we saw on January 6th, it is often law 
enforcement in uniform who are, you know, on the receiving end 
of these assaults and this violence and we need to do 
everything we can to support them against this threat.
    So, I thank you very much and I am out of time, so I yield 
back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Gimenez, the gentleman from Florida and 
the Chair of Transportation and Maritime Security Subcommittee, 
for his 5 minutes.
    Mr. Gimenez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I find it amazing 
that our Democratic colleagues from across the aisle are always 
throwing money at the issue. Always it is money, money, money, 
money, except that the real culprit here has been over 64 
actions taken by the Executive branch that actually caused the 
problem at the border.
    Not once have I ever heard any of my Democratic colleagues 
ask for why did the--why don't we start constructing the wall 
again? Why don't we reinstitute Remain in Mexico policy, which 
actually will take care of about 70 percent of the problem that 
we have had?
    Mr. Mayorkas, I believe in fiscal year 2021 we had a record 
number of encounters at the border and I think only surpassed 
by fiscal year 2022 when we had another record encounter at the 
border and then surpassed again in 2023 when we had another 
record for encounters at the border. Do you expect another 
record in 2024?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I strongly encourage 
Congress to pass the Senate's bipartisan legislation which 
would make a significant difference and advance our security 
interests at the Southern Border and the Northern Border.
    Mr. Gimenez. Have you ever asked the President to 
reconsider some of his 64 actions that have led to the crisis 
that we have right now at the border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are facing the largest 
displacement of people around the world, including in our 
hemisphere.
    Mr. Gimenez. Have you ever asked the President of the 
United States to reconsider any of the 64 Executive actions 
that he has taken to address the crisis at the border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I am not familiar with the 
64 to which you refer and I assure you that they are not the 
cause of the largest displacement of people in the world, 
including in our hemisphere and to include, of course a number 
of people, a significant number of people fleeing the 
authoritarian regime in Cuba, which both you and I have 
personally experienced.
    Mr. Gimenez. I think that authoritarian regime has been in 
place for about 60 years and so it doesn't make sense to me 
that somehow now, OK, they are all fleeing the authoritarian 
regime in Cuba. You and I both left that authoritarian regime a 
long time ago.
    So, again, are you familiar with the President's Executive 
Order to stop the construction of the wall on the Southern 
Border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I most certainly am.
    Mr. Gimenez. Did you--have you advised him to, maybe it is 
a good idea to start construction again on the southern wall 
and the wall on the Southern Border to stop the flow of illegal 
immigration?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I do not believe it is. I 
believe----
    Mr. Gimenez. OK. Thank you. I mean I only have a certain 
time. So, thank you. You said no.
    Have you ever talked to the President about reinstituting 
Remain in Mexico policy which many experts have said probably 
will take care of 70 percent of the problem? Have you ever 
talked to him about that?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the Remain in Mexico 
program was implemented in January 2019, I believe. I believe 
in 2019, the number of encounters at Southern Border exceeded 
those in 2018 by almost 100 percent, if I have my data correct.
    Mr. Gimenez. Yes, but the number of encounters in 2020 were 
far less than the number of encounters in 2021. Would you say 
that is correct?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, if you will recall what 
occurred in 2020, two points. No. 1, the COVID-19 pandemic; No. 
2, Remain in Mexico, in order to implement it you rely upon the 
sovereign nation of Mexico's agreement. Mexico has 
unequivocally stated it will not support any implementation of 
Remain in Mexico, the success of which is quite dubious.
    Mr. Gimenez. Interesting point. The only reason that they 
will not support a--they did support the Remain in Mexico 
policy and then you unilaterally withdrew it. It was not 
because of Mexico asking you if you would stop it. You just did 
it. All right.
    So, I only have about 56 seconds left. We are currently 
witnessing total chaos and disorder in Haiti. The United States 
has already begun to evacuate citizens and it is collaborating 
with regional partners to address the violence. Is the United 
States patrolling or admitting Haitians into the State of 
Florida and elsewhere that have not received a viable 
background check?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we screen and vet 
individuals before paroling them into the United States.
    Mr. Gimenez. Thank you and I yield my time back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields. I know in the past, 
Mr. Secretary, we have pressed on and never given you a chance 
for a break. I want to offer if you need a break or we can 
press on.
    Secretary Mayorkas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'm 
prepared to press on.
    Chairman Green. OK.
    Secretary Mayorkas. I may revisit that at some point with 
your indulgence.
    Chairman Green. Absolutely. I just know last time we had 
you in here, I think you went 4 hours straight and never got a 
break and I felt bad about that. So, just I wanted to offer.
    I now recognize the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee, 
for her 5 minutes of questions. OK. I am sorry. All right, we 
will go with Mr. Ivey and the gentleman from Maryland----
    Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Green. Fire away for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Ivey. Appreciate it. Mr. Mayorkas, thank you for being 
here today and for the work that you do. You know, I have been 
listening to my colleagues on the other side talk about 
treading on the Constitution and a scar on our Nation's soul, 
but it seems to me that the impeachment proceeding that was 
moved forward out of this committee was the true scar on the 
Constitution and really did tread on the Constitution.
    It is interesting to me if we go back, I want to say the 
fix was in almost before you got into the job. There was an 
Article of Impeachment filed in August 2021. I am not even sure 
you had finished unpacking entirely yet. But there was already 
a movement to remove you from office.
    Then we had the Chairman, as the Ranking Member mentioned 
earlier, speaking to a group of donors and talking about this 
is going to be fun, that referencing the impeachment of you, 
and get the popcorn. That was almost a year ago.
    Then we came to the actual hearings that were held here. I 
think there were two. I had a little experience dealing with 
impeachment proceedings in the House previously, back in the 
1980's when I worked on the Judiciary Committee staff.
    We didn't remove anybody from office with two hearings. In 
fact, we gave people due process. They had a chance to present 
evidence and the like. It was taken in a much more serious 
manner than this was and then I have got to say, you know, we 
heard another one of my colleagues sort-of try to reconstitute 
what the standard is for impeachment.
    You know, the language is pretty plain on its face, treason 
and bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors. There has 
been an effort to try and recalibrate that because there is no 
evidence of you committing treason, bribery, or other high 
crimes and misdemeanors. So, they lowered the bar.
    I want to read something briefly from one of your 
predecessors, Mike Chertoff, who was the Homeland Security 
Secretary under the Bush administration. He said in referencing 
this the effort to impeach you, he wrote this back in January, 
``I can say with confidence that for all of the investigating 
the House Committee on Homeland Security has done, they have 
failed to put forth evidence that meets the bar. That is why 
Republicans aren't seeking to hold Mr. Mayorkas to the 
Constitution's high crimes and misdemeanor standard for 
impeachment. They make the unsupported argument that he is 
derelict in his duty.''
    Then with respect to that issue, the issue of trying to get 
something done instead of continuing on with the theatrics of 
impeachment former Secretary Chertoff says, ``I don't agree 
with every policy decision the Biden administration has made. 
There are aspects of immigration strategy that are worthy of 
debate, but House Republicans are ducking difficult policy work 
and hard-fought compromise. Impeachment is a diversion from 
fixing our broken immigration laws and giving DHS the resources 
needed to secure the border.''
    Here today we've discussed the bipartisan Senate bill that 
while we were moving forward with the effort to try and put 
together an impeachment proceeding against you, at least my 
Republican colleagues, you were working in the Senate along 
with Senator Lankford and others to try and put together an 
actual bipartisan bill to address the problems at the border. 
That came forward.
    It was killed by House Republicans when former President 
Trump gave the word that he didn't want it to move forward and 
we haven't had any work done on trying to find a bipartisan 
effort to address these concerns since that day.
    So, we got a lot of statements being made in here today 
about the problems at the border and the budgets and issues 
along those lines and you have already addressed some of the 
budgetary issues, but I do want to say this, you know, I think 
it is critical for the Senate.
    They are going to--after we are done with this, these 
theatrics will be over and they will march the Articles of 
Impeachment over to the Senate and ask the Senate to remove you 
from office after a trial. But I think the Senate has already 
made it clear that that is not going to happen and it 
shouldn't.
    In fact, there shouldn't even been a trial over there 
because this is such an adulterated process here and it is such 
a scar on the history of the Constitution. It is the first time 
in 150-plus years where there has been an effort to remove a 
Cabinet member that has gone this far.
    For good reason, the Senate should throw it out and make a 
statement that this is not the kind of impeachment proceedings 
that we expect from the House of Representatives. It certainly 
isn't what I expected when I got here. I saw different when I 
worked here 1980's. I saw how it was supposed to be done. This 
is not how it was supposed to be done.
    I did want to conclude on this note. Just a couple of 
Members on the House Republican caucus, I don't want too broad 
a brush, but Ken Buck of Colorado, this isn't just an 
impeachment.
    Mr. Guest. The gentleman's time has expired. I'm sorry, Mr. 
Ivey. I know the Chairman has wanted to keep us on a tight 
schedule.
    Mr. Ivey. Thank you, Mr. Guest. I appreciate it. Thank you, 
Mr. Mayorkas.
    Mr. Guest. At this time I recognize the gentleman from the 
great State of Texas, August Pfluger, for 5 minutes of 
questioning.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary, is the 
border secure?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, as I have articulated 
earlier in this hearing----
    Mr. Pfluger. Just a yes or no is fine. Is the border 
secure, Mr. Secretary, today?
    Secretary Mayorkas. With the authorities and the funding 
that we have, it is as secure as it can be.
    Mr. Pfluger. Well, we all know this is not a budget issue. 
It is a policy issue. Is a terrorist attack inside the United 
States of America imminent?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Let me assure you, Congressman, that 
the safety and security of the American people is our highest 
priority.
    Mr. Pfluger. Is it imminent?
    Secretary Mayorkas. The same answer, Congressman.
    Mr. Pfluger. Is a terror attack on the homeland of the 
United States of America imminent today?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Let me assure that you that we remain 
vigilant----
    Mr. Pfluger. Do you brief the President? Have you briefed 
the President that a terror attack on the United States of 
America is imminent?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, let me assure you that the 
safety and security of the American people is our highest----
    Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Secretary, are you the principal advisor 
on matters of Homeland Security to the President of the United 
States?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I am one of them, Congressman.
    Mr. Pfluger. Have you briefed the President that there are 
known or suspected terrorists still at large inside of the 
United States?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, let me assure you, as I 
have previously, that the safety and security of the American 
people----
    Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Secretary, I am----
    Secretary Mayorkas [continuing]. Is our highest priority.
    Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. Going to--I would like to remind 
you that you are under oath. Have you briefed the President of 
the United States that there are people who match the terror 
watch list that are still at large inside our country?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I repeat my answer.
    Mr. Pfluger. Is that a no?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman----
    Mr. Pfluger. Have you not briefed the President?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I have briefed the 
President----
    Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Secretary, let me ask you a question about 
your previous testifying in November and I asked you then, I 
said is every single person who matches the terror watch list, 
have they been apprehended, and you did not give me an answer.
    I will ask you again, those that have matched the terror 
watch list, that have attempted to or have entered this country 
illegally, are they detained, 100 percent of them?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, let me assure you once 
again that individuals that pose a threat to our national 
security or the safety of the American people are the highest 
priority for detection and we execute----
    Mr. Pfluger. Are they all detained?
    Secretary Mayorkas. And we execute on that.
    Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Secretary, are they all detained?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman?
    Mr. Pfluger. Because Christopher Wray sat right next to 
you. He had the courage to answer this question and he said no. 
So, do you agree with Christopher Wray in his testimony in 
November 2023 that not every single person who matched the 
terror watch list has been detained? Do you agree with that, 
his testimony?
    Secretary Mayorkas. If you are referring to the terrorist 
screen data set, the TSDS, we make public safety and national 
security determinations and----
    Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Secretary, I think it is----
    Secretary Mayorkas [continuing]. We do take----
    Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. Very important that you answer 
this question. The American public deserves to know the answer. 
Are there people who have matched the terror screening 
database, the terror watch list, any acronym that you choose to 
use, still at large and not apprehended and not detained in 
this country as of today?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, if we determine that an 
individual on the terror screen data set is a threat to 
national security or public safety they are a priority for 
detention and----
    Mr. Pfluger. I understand they are a priority, but that 
doesn't mean they are detained. So, are you going to testify 
honestly under oath today? I would like to remind you you are 
under oath while you are testifying today. Are there people 
still at large that match the terror watch list?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, if an individual is on the 
terror screening data set and they pose a threat to national 
security or public safety they are a priority for detention.
    Mr. Pfluger. Is our country at risk of a terror attack?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are in a heightened 
threatened environment as Director Wray----
    Mr. Pfluger. Is that a yes?
    Secretary Mayorkas. We are in a heightened threat 
environment as Director Wray and I have both testified. It is 
therefore why the personnel at the Department of Homeland 
Security----
    Mr. Pfluger. Have you briefed the President of the United 
States on that heightened threat?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I have briefed the 
President, as have others, on the threat landscape that the 
United States is facing and that is driving the vigilance of 
268,000 men and women in the Department of Homeland Security.
    Mr. Pfluger. Mr. Secretary, you said earlier to my 
colleague, Mr. Bishop, you would be willing to share the 
details on any case, however you have not. We have been 
repeatedly asking for those details, specifically asking for 
details on the terror watch list and yet your Department has 
not done that. Will you brief us in the next 7 days on the 
actual metrics and details for the terror screening database 
and who those people are? Will you brief us in an un-Classified 
setting who those people are----
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman?
    Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. In 7 days?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I would be pleased to 
follow up with you in the appropriate setting.
    Mr. Pfluger. I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Goldman from the State of New 
York for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Goldman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Mayorkas, 
thank you for being here once again to endure the completely 
uncalled-for, unwarranted personal attacks from my Republican 
colleagues.
    I want to get into some of what they have been saying 
because it is truly shocking that we are where we are. On the 
one hand, my colleague from Florida says that all Democrats 
want to do is throw money at the problem. Mr. Pfluger just said 
this is a policy issue. It is not a money issue. OK.
    Is the Senate bipartisan bill that you worked on along with 
the second-most conservative Republican Senator in the Senate, 
an Independent, and a Democrat that was endorsed by Senate 
Republican leadership a policy bill or an appropriations bill?
    Secretary Mayorkas. It is both. Congressman, it is both an 
appropriation bill and an immigration reform bill in fixing 
what everyone agree is a broken system. It would provide us 
with new legal authorities that are much needed and would 
really advance the security of the border.
    Mr. Goldman. One of those critical revisions is in the 
asylum process. I know this is not under your purview but do 
you have any sense of how many asylum applicants ultimately are 
granted asylum in this country?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it of course depends on 
the demographics, but as a general rule I believe it is 
approximately 20, 25 percent ultimately receive asylum, but I 
would want to verify that statistic and I probably shouldn't 
share it given my----
    Mr. Goldman. It takes--understood. There are different 
numbers but it takes at least 5 years and perhaps as many as 10 
years for a case to be completely adjudicated. Is that right?
    Secretary Mayorkas. It takes many years until a case is 
finally adjudicated.
    Mr. Goldman. So, let us just say, hypothetically, that we 
had an asylum processing system that could process any 
applications within 90 days, 6 months. Am I correct that that 
means that 75 to 80 percent of the people who apply for asylum 
would not get asylum and would be returned to their own 
country?
    Secretary Mayorkas. That would enable us to remove people 
far more quickly, you are correct, and that would make a sea 
change of a difference in our ability to enforce the Southern 
Border of the United States.
    Mr. Goldman. Is it your view that if that were the case 
that there would not be an incentive for anyone who knows that 
he or she may not qualify for asylum to come to this country 
knowing that that person would be able to make an application 
to get a work authorization and stay here for at least 5 years 
to work. Is that correct?
    Secretary Mayorkas. That is Congressman.
    Mr. Goldman. That, of course, creates a tremendous 
incentive for people to come across the border. The problem is 
not our credible fear standard, the problem is not the policy 
of asylum. The problem is that we don't have the resources to 
process asylum applications as expeditiously as is necessary.
    So, no one over here is talking about throwing money at the 
problem. We are talking about solving the problem. In the 
Senate, they tried to solve the problem. They tried not just 
with appropriations but with a policy bill.
    Unfortunately, the Republicans have put politics over our 
border security. They want chaos in order to win an election 
rather than to solve the problems. You don't have to take my 
word for it. Let us quote Donald Trump who said that he 
sabotaged the bipartisan deal to secure the border because, 
``It made it much better for the opposing side.'' That he has 
stated that he ``killed'' the deal.
    Senator Lankford himself said that a top Republican told me 
that if I try to move a bill that solves the border crisis 
during this election year he will do whatever he can to destroy 
me. He said, I do not want you to solve this during the 
Presidential election.
    There was a policy bill. There was a policy change that 
would have significantly addressed the problems at the border 
and instead, you all on the other side of the aisle sabotaged 
it where you baselessly impeached the Secretary who is trying 
to solve our problems at the Southern Border because you want 
to win it. You want to win in November.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Goldman. You don't want to solve the problem.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize Mr. Garbarino, the gentleman from New York 
for--the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, for 5 
minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Garbarino. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will remind my 
colleague that the only bill that has passed before the House 
is that addressed the border crisis was the one we passed here 
H.R. 2. Nothing actually passed the Senate.
    So, I mean, we have acted. The Senate has not. If they, you 
know, if they want to send us a bill, let them. They haven't 
been able to.
    Secretary, I want to ask a question about the Nonprofit 
Security Grant Program. Antisemitism is on the rise here when 
this has been exacerbated by the horrendous acts of the terror 
in Israel on October 7 and the war that has followed. This 
program protects a lot of Americans. It has been essential for 
securing places of worship and providing safe places for Jewish 
Americans to practice their religion as is their Constitutional 
right.
    The current request is for fiscal year 2025, $385 million. 
Seen what we have seen and knowing what you know the risk on 
the ground, especially to these Jewish Americans, is $385 
million enough?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, you know, we make 
tradeoffs under the Fiscal Responsibility Act, but we certainly 
believe that the Nonprofit Security Grant Program is in dire 
need of additional funding for precisely the reason you 
express. We are indeed in a heightened threat environment, 
antisemitism, and violence born of it continues to be on the 
rise as do other violent acts born of hate.
    Mr. Garbarino. So, we think $385 million is enough to 
protect the Americans at these facilities?
    Secretary Mayorkas. We believe it is a significant advance 
in the protection of our communities across the country.
    Mr. Garbarino. Thank you. I want to move now to cyber work 
force. GAO came out with a report which was kind-of startling. 
CISA has for the entire defense in action on OT, operational 
technology, for all of our critical infrastructure that sits 
overseas, they have a response team I think of 11 people: 5 
employees--or 4 employees and 7 contractors. That is grossly 
under--that is definitely below the need of what we actually 
need. What is the current cyber work force gap at the 
Department of Homeland Security right now?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I'll have to get back to 
you on the specific number but let me express my deep gratitude 
on the part of CISA and our Department for your support of our 
cybersecurity mission and all that we are seeking to do.
    Mr. Garbarino. I appreciate that and I do think CISA does a 
great job, but when you see that what--they only have 11 
employees that cover OT. You know they have a great use of the 
cyber talent management system but we are repeatedly seeing 
cyber attack, after cyber attack, after cyber attack. America 
is starting to ask me what are we doing?
    There is a work force problem. There is a work force 
shortage. Eleven employees for just overseas OT. That is not 
good. That is not good enough. I understand the request this 
year for CISA is just a little over $3 billion to fully fund 
the entire agency. There needs to be more focus. I have spoken 
to Director Easterly about this, but you oversee the agency. 
There needs to be more of a focus on cybersecurity.
    I also have to say I see that CISA just released its notice 
of proposed rulemaking for the CIRCIA rule, the budget requests 

$115-, almost $116 million for its implementation, including 
staff and technology. I have been in support of the CIRCIA 
rule. I think it is--it could do great things for our defense, 
cyber defense.
    But now when you have competing rules like the SEC 
legislation which you yourself has said is duplicative, I don't 
know if there is a need for CIRCIA any more because nobody is 
stopping the SEC from doing what they are doing and it is 
causing a huge problem. CISA should oversee this--it under the 
Department of Homeland Security.
    I think I would like to see more from the agency, yourself 
included, by pushing back on these duplicative rules, the SEC 
rule and others that are proposed. The SEC current cyber 
reporting bill that SEC put out is just 1 of I think 5 that the 
Chairman Gensler has proposed.
    There is actually a report out there that the bad actors 
are using the SEC rule as a way to hack more people. This is 
something that the administration is doing under the SEC. You 
have said it before this rule is duplicative. I think you need 
to--we have been saying it is bad. I think you need to go back 
and tell the President that this rule has to stop.
    My time is expired.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time is expired. I 
understand, Mr. Menendez, you want to go next and Mr. Garcia 
you are going to hold? OK.
    So, I now recognize the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. 
Menendez, for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Menendez. Thank you, Chairman. Mr. Secretary, thank you 
as always for being here. We appreciate your willingness to 
engage with us both in this setting and in individual offices 
and conversations. I just feel it is important to address some 
of the things that have been said here by our Republican 
colleagues because they should not stand uncorrected.
    First, it has been said by Chairman McCaul that you 
violated your oath. I wholeheartedly disagree with that. 
Chairman McCaul said you have made this country much more 
dangerous. I disagree with that.
    You and everyone at DHS works every single day to keep this 
country and all of us protected. So, thank you and to all the 
dedicated public servants who serve alongside of you for your 
work.
    Chairman McCaul had also said that you destroyed the fabric 
of this country. I wholeheartedly disagree with that. Thank you 
again for your service to this country.
    Mr. Bishop said and questioned the success of your 
administration. I want to refer back to what former Homeland 
Security Secretary Chertoff said about the sham impeachment 
hearings that we have had here, that House Republicans are 
ducking difficult policy work and hard-fought compromise. 
Impeachment is a diversion from fixing our broken immigration 
laws and giving DHS the resources needed to secure the border.
    That is the conversation that we should be having today. 
So, if we are going to judge success, I would commend the work 
that you and your colleagues have done, but I would question 
the success of this committee and our oversight jurisdiction 
and our failure to live up to our mandate.
    I have two quick questions. We had discussed the Remain in 
Mexico policy. You had said that that requires the cooperation 
of Mexico. We have also heard about building a wall. Former 
President Trump said that Mexico would pay for that wall. Has 
Mexico agreed to pay for building of the wall?
    Secretary Mayorkas. No, it has not, Congressman.
    Mr. Menendez. Thank you for clarifying that point. Before I 
move on to the substantive questions that you came here to 
discuss, as you have had to I imagine spend an immense amount 
of time and resources as the agency has had to preparing for 
that impeachment proceeding that came through this committee 
and I am proud to see you still standing and you will continue 
to keep standing.
    Just a reminder that Republicans have been more successful 
at removing their own Members from positions, like former 
Speaker McCarthy and now the process that seems to be under way 
for removing Speaker Johnson. So, you keep hanging in there 
while they keep removing their own Members from positions of 
leadership.
    I want to go into fentanyl, which is an issue that is of 
grave concern to many of us. I want to talk about your work 
combating fentanyl in our country. The Department of Homeland 
Security is on the front lines executing President Biden's plan 
and I want to commend you and the dedicated public servants at 
DHS who stop more fentanyl and have arrested more drug 
traffickers in the last 2 fiscal years than the previous 5 
combined.
    The President requested the emergency supplemental funds 
for DHS in October of last year. It is now April and my 
Republican colleagues have refused to even consider providing 
these funds that will help combat drug trafficking.
    Mr. Secretary, how will the supplemental funding requested 
by the administration support your on-going efforts to combat 
fentanyl?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the supplemental request 
would provide two very important streams of funding at least. 
One is for personnel, more investigators, more support staff 
for those investigators, their ability to not only investigate 
and apprehend traffickers and work both domestically and 
internationally, but also to resource much-needed technology, 
specifically the nonintrusive inspection technology which is so 
remarkably effective at our ports of entry, which are the 
primary avenues through which smugglers seek to move fentanyl 
into our country.
    Mr. Menendez. Absolutely. Democrats look forward to getting 
you those resources so you can continue that important work. 
The Department has done a commendable job stopping fentanyl 
from entering our country. It is worth emphasizing again that 
DHS has stopped more fentanyl and arrested more drug 
traffickers in the last 2 fiscal years than the previous 5 
combined as I previously mentioned.
    Mr. Secretary, how does that administration's budget 
request for fiscal year 2025 build on the successes of the last 
2 years?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it continues to fund our 
personnel so that we can continue not only to implement the 
strategic operations that we have under way but also to build 
on those operations and develop new ones, deploy personnel to 
different countries that are source countries and plus-up our 
transnational criminal investigative units where our 
investigators work with international partners to interdict not 
only precursor chemicals, but also the equipment used to 
manufacture fentanyl and the finished product itself.
    Mr. Menendez. Thank you. I appreciate again all your 
service to our country.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Ms. Greene, the gentlelady from Georgia, 
for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Ms. Greene. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mayorkas, we do 
not have a country without a secure border and we cannot have a 
safe country, we cannot protect our own democracy without 
protecting our elections. That is a fact.
    The open border is the No. 1 issue across America in poll 
after poll and that is exactly why this committee impeached 
you.
    Mr. Secretary, the oversight project released a bombshell 
report last night on your connection to the dark money NGO 
industrial complex of illegal immigration. I know you saw this 
from one of my colleagues just earlier. They found flyers 
through the Resource Center Matamoros refugee camp in Mexico 
telling illegal aliens, reminder to vote for President Biden 
when you are in the United States so we need another 4 years of 
his term to stay open.
    Eyewitnesses saw the flyers also being handed out to 
migrants who were using RCM for assistance in coming to the 
United States. In an audio recording the founder of RCM Gaby 
Zavala--by the way we maybe should subpoena her to the 
committee--agreed that they need to help as many people as 
possible before President Trump gets reelected.
    RCM is an operation that houses functions for the Hebrew 
Immigrant Aid Society which helps migrants enter the United 
States, and you are familiar with their work. We know that you 
served as a former board member of this group that funds 
illegal immigration. They are very proud of you, Mr. Secretary. 
They congratulated you on your nomination.
    You worked as a board member of an NGO that is working in 
conjunction with other NGO's which are not only financing the 
invasion of the country but also telling illegal aliens to vote 
in the United States elections. They are telling illegal 
aliens, not citizens to come vote for Joe Biden. That is your 
boss.
    This is corruption at the deepest level. As a matter of 
fact, I would call it treason. It is treason because these 
people have declared war on our citizens by raping our women, 
our children, and murdering people, like Laken Riley. You are 
familiar with her, right?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, our heart breaks for----
    Ms. Greene. Are you familiar with Laken Riley?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I am familiar with the case and----
    Ms. Greene. You should have deported her so that she could 
be alive today. Her parents would have appreciated that. Also, 
Kayla Hamilton, who was brutally raped and murdered by a cartel 
member. Her mother came and spoke to us. But you didn't deport 
him either. You let him in the country.
    You, Mr. Secretary, have allowed over 10 million illegals, 
probably higher than that, it could be closer to 15 million, we 
don't know, to invade our country. You have allowed the cartels 
to make billions and billions. As a matter of fact, you are 
probably the best business partner they could ever have. They 
make all this money in human trafficking and drug trafficking 
at our border.
    You have allowed approximately 300 Americans to be murdered 
every single day from fentanyl that comes across our border and 
now you are aiding NGO's to steal our elections through your 
budget.
    I demand proof of citizenship in our elections and that is 
something every single Member of Congress should care about. We 
don't need illegal aliens voting in our elections. We are 
supposed to be here talking about your budget, but we are 
talking about how money is being used to make sure people come 
into our country are able to get a Social Security number in 
which they can register to vote.
    On that note, Mr. Mayorkas, I demand that Chuck Schumer 
holds your impeachment trial in the Senate because that is 
exactly what we should be focused on right now.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time.
    Chairman Green. The gentlelady yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Garcia, the gentleman from California, 
for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. 
Secretary, for being here. I am sorry you had to listen to a 
lot of misinformation right now and throughout this hearing.
    I also, just for the record, you are here, you are doing a 
very difficult job, even though some folks are trying to remove 
you from office. We know that is not going to happen. The 
impeachment sham against you is dead on arrival in the Senate. 
So, I look forward to you continuing to do a very difficult job 
for the country and for the administration.
    Now, I want to just note, since you last testified we know 
that Donald Trump has also become the presumptive nominee of 
his party. Immigrants like you and me remember and understand 
and know his dangerous rhetoric and the way he talks about 
immigrants like us.
    But I want to go back to his 2016 words. I think it is 
important to put those back into the record. ``When Mexico 
sends its people, they are not sending their best. They are not 
sending you. They are not sending you. They are sending people 
that have lots of problems and they are bringing those problems 
with us. They are bringing drugs. They are bringing crime. They 
are rapists.''
    Now, it is interesting because you and I both know that 
noncitizens are 60 percent less likely to actual commit crimes 
than citizens. So, he is just using this xenophobic rhetoric to 
demonize migrants that are trying in many cases searching for a 
better life and running away from extreme violent conditions in 
their home countries.
    This rhetoric we know has continued. Trump calls immigrants 
who enter the country often times ``animals''. He just did this 
so recently. He said and I quote, this is a quote, ``Democrats 
say, please don't call them animals. They're humans.'' Trump 
said, ``I said, no, they're not humans. They're animals.''
    This is dehumanizing rhetoric and it is wrong and not 
acceptable. Now, Mr. Secretary, does this type of rhetoric fuel 
violence here in the United States?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I am going to refrain from 
opining on the words of a particular candidate given the Hatch 
Act restrictions.
    Mr. Garcia. No, I appreciate that. But I will say, though, 
is his rhetoric is wrong and disturbing and his policies are 
actually worse. We know that President Trump has said he would 
immediately launch the largest domestic deportation operation 
in American history.
    I want to know--note and talk a little bit about something 
that Donald Trump has also tried to characterize as we talk 
about migrants. He and his--one of his main lieutenants, 
Stephen Miller, has promised large-scale raids and actually has 
suggested using National Guard troops, even sending National 
Guard troops from Republican-led States into neighboring States 
led by Democrats.
    We are seeing now in Texas there is real risk there and, 
certainly, if we see National Guards being used to this way in 
the future. Could you give your opinion about the National 
Guards being used in Texas?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I'm sorry, can you repeat the precise 
question?
    Mr. Garcia. Based on what we are seeing now in Texas, do 
you think there is risk, additional risk, that we could see 
National Guard being used in a way that could be dangerous at 
the border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the deployment of National 
Guard can be an effective force multiplier when it is 
coordinated with Federal authorities specifically the United 
States Border Patrol. When it is not, it presents a risk to our 
efforts to secure the border.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and I think we just 
saw that recently play out in a very dangerous and disturbing 
way.
    Now, I also want to note something about the way the 
incumbent President views migration and the way he views the 
world. I think it is important to point out. We know that in 
2016 Donald Trump launched his campaign by pointing out that 
Mexicans are essentially rapists and murderers. We have seen 
that already.
    In 2018, he told Members of Congress in the Oval Office 
when they discussed protecting immigrants from African 
countries that he didn't want any migrants from what he called 
``shithole countries,'' and that is his quote, not mine. Trump 
then suggested the United States should instead bring more 
people from countries such as Norway because apparently they 
are nice immigrants. Let's not forget that he tried over and 
over again to ban Muslims coming from this country as well. All 
the while he continues to espouse extremism and violence by 
claiming falsely that he won the 2020 election.
    Now Trump continues with his view of the world to attack a 
legal immigration system that actually works. We noticed that 
visas fell every year during Trump's administration. There was 
a hiring freeze of the U.S. Citizenship and Custom Immigration 
Services and his administration has used every possible way of 
disqualifying and denying visa.
    Mr. Secretary, can you tell us how policies like denying 
visas actually undermines our situation at the border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, individuals who qualify 
for visas significantly contribute to the well-being and 
advancement of this country and that is quite evident 
especially in the economy arena. We've seen that with skilled 
workers, nonskilled seasonal workers, agricultural workers, and 
many other avenues. We are enriched by them.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you, sir. I think I am out of time here 
so I will yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Gonzales, the gentleman from Texas, for 
5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Gonzales. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, 
Secretary, for being here today. I don't want to talk about 
you. I want to talk about the men and women that serve under 
you and particularly some of the threats that they are dealing 
with.
    This transnational criminal organization, TDA, Tren de 
Aragua, these Venezuelan gangs, they are growing in influence, 
they are growing in criminal activity through out the country 
and I believe they are a significant threat to our homeland. It 
is not just regional. It is not just Miami. It is not just New 
York. It is all over the place. So, my question is specifically 
on HSI. What is Homeland Security Investigations doing to 
tackle TDA?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, Homeland Security 
Investigations and our sister agencies in the Federal 
Government have an unprecedented attack against not only 
transnational criminal organizations but domestic operations 
here as well. I can provide you with details subsequent to this 
hearing with respect to our efforts against that specific gang.
    Mr. Gonzales. I would appreciate that. Is HSI part of FBI's 
Transnational Anti-Gang Task Force?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I believe it is.
    Mr. Gonzales. This is something that I think that is 
important that we use every leverage, every lever of government 
tools both at the Federal, State, and local level to go after 
these criminals. I am talking about hardened criminals, bad 
actors that are in our communities. How do we find them? How do 
we prevent them from committing crimes? Being part of that I 
think HSI is going to be on the forefront of a lot of that.
    I am going to talk about I represent a large part of west 
Texas and oil and gas is a big part of that and I was on recent 
swing through west Texas where they are seeing a rising amount 
of oil theft, and I bring this up because some of this is 
tied--a lot of this is tied to this open border crisis.
    Some of these actors are not American citizens. There is 
this--what do you do with someone? You pull someone over. They 
are not a U.S. citizen, clearly this is where Homeland Security 
should have a role to play in this.
    So, once again, do you know if HSI is part of the Permian 
Basin oil field theft task force?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I'll have to find out. I 
do not know the answer to that specific question.
    Mr. Gonzales. I think it would be important. If they are 
not that they look into this. Once again, this is an 
interconnection where it is, you know, how do you use every 
lever and every tool and part of that if you pull someone over 
and they are not a U.S. citizen, Homeland Security has a role 
to play in that, to determine, who is this person, right? Why 
are they here illegally? What do you do with them? What I am 
seeing now is in some cases the local law enforcement will just 
release them. There is no one to turn them over to. You can see 
this train wreck coming a mile away where we have apprehended 
someone that, once again, I am not talking about all people. I 
am talking about a bad actor that would have been apprehended 
committing a let us say low-level crime or another crime and 
all of a sudden a year later, a month later they commit a 
serious crime.
    I want to get ahead of that and I believe HSI is going to 
be a big part of working with the FBI and these local and State 
task forces in order to get that done. I would ask that you 
bring that to your attention because energy is a large--it is 
critical infrastructure and it is important that we protect 
that.
    I am seeing this grow. I mean when I went through the swing 
a year ago there were three counties that brought it up. I just 
got down with this thing, every county brought it up, every 
sheriff I am talking to is bringing it up and I am seeing the 
threat grow. I am seeing it expand.
    My last question is on the increase in Chinese nationals 
that we see. I mean the numbers are astronomical, specifically 
in California and some of those areas. What can we do? Is there 
anything in particular that we can do to have a direct 
conversation with China to get this to stop?
    Clearly, this is an issue and it is a rising issue. China 
is a difficult actor to deal with. Is there anything in 
particular that Congress can do in order to prevent China from 
sending its people over?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I'd like to consider what 
legislative action would be warranted but I can assure you that 
I share your concern with respect to the issue and have engaged 
with my counterpart from the People's Republic of China. We 
have, in fact, made strides in the removal of Chinese nationals 
who do not qualify for relief in the United States.
    Mr. Gonzales. I think there needs to be----
    Secretary Mayorkas. I share your concern.
    Mr. Gonzales. I think there needs to be more of that and I 
think it needs to be more public. There needs to be more 
highlighting of the fact that if you come here illegally from 
China we are going to send you back.
    With that I am going to yield back, Chairman, and I 
appreciate it.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Mr. Suozzi, the gentleman from New York, 
for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Suozzi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I just 
want to remind my colleagues that you have lived a great 
American success story. You were a political refugee born in 
Havana, Cuba, came to the United States of America, graduated 
from law school, became a prosecutor for 9 years as an 
assistant United States attorney.
    You were appointed as the youngest U.S. attorney in the 
Nation. You were the director of the U.S. citizenship program, 
and deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland 
Security. Now you have achieved this position as Secretary and 
I want to thank you for your public service to our country.
    I am new to Congress. I just got elected in February and I 
was watching what was going on down here and it is like, you 
know, you kind-of tune it out a little bit, all the back and 
forth.
    One of the things that I have talked about in my campaign 
and certainly want to highlight here is that every problem we 
face in our country is complicated. Nothing is simple and you 
cannot solve complicated problems in an environment of fear and 
anger where everybody is just yelling and screaming at each 
other. It is impossible. You can never get to the meat and 
bones of doing the work that is necessary.
    That is why I was excited by the Senate bill, the 
bipartisan compromise that you worked on along with Senators 
Lankford and Murphy and Sinema, which didn't have everything I 
wanted in it. But it was a compromise.
    My colleagues, you know, let us say they get everything 
they want. Let us say Trump is elected. Let us say they get the 
Majority of the Congress. Let us say they get the Majority of 
the Senate. I hope those things don't happen, but let us say it 
all happens. Under no circumstances will they get enough votes 
in the Senate to actually pass a bill. We will have to do 
something bipartisan under any circumstances. You can't get a 
bipartisan bill under any circumstances unless people work 
together.
    So, it is great that we got more money for the Customs and 
Border Patrol agents to bring it up to 22,000 in this most, 
2024 appropriation. We got more detention beds. But under the 
Senate bill we would have gotten more Customs and Border Patrol 
officers as well and we would have gotten more detention beds 
and we would have gotten money for the wall and we would have 
gotten money for technology and we would have gotten money for 
a whole bunch of other things and there would have been some 
serious policy changes.
    So, I just want to use my last half of my time to ask you, 
the thing I am most interested in and excited about is this 
idea that we have to reduce the time it takes to adjudicate 
asylum cases. It seems like that is the most important thing we 
have to do because right now we have got all these people, you 
know, there is a crisis, everybody is freaking out, so many 
people coming over the border. It seems like it is calmer now, 
but there will be a surge again I am sure between now and the 
summer.
    But if people have to wait 5, 6, 7, 8 years and they get a 
work permit in the meanwhile, then that is going to encourage 
more people to come. If we could cut down that period, as you 
said earlier, I think you said 90 days. I have heard 6 months 
from other people, if we could cut down that period to 
adjudicate these asylum cases of which 80 percent of the people 
will be denied asylum and many of whom will be then deported 
immediately it will discourage other people from paying the 
coyotes and coming over to do this stuff.
    So, could you explain to me how we can reduce the time that 
it takes? What is it going to take from this body to reduce the 
time it takes to adjudicate the asylum cases from what is now 
years down to a matter of months?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, you are correct that 
reducing that time would change the risk calculus of intending 
migrants and detour them from taking the dangerous journey and 
spending their life savings in the hands of smugglers.
    The Senate bipartisan legislation would have delivered on 
that with the changes to the system, policy changes to the 
system as well as ample resources for us to implement those 
fixes.
    Mr. Suozzi. Could you tell us some of the policy changes 
that would happen that would make the asylum process--we have 
another 45 seconds--would make the asylum process happen more 
quickly so these can be--because what everybody when they get 
adjudicates, 80, 70, 80 percent get denied and then they are 
not eligible to be here. So, if we could speed that up we would 
stop this from happening. What are the policy changes?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Among the compromises that the Senate 
bipartisan legislation included was raising the credible fear 
standard, shrinking the disparity between that in initial 
threshold screening standard and the ultimate merits standard. 
It also resourced, Congressman, our system with 4,300 asylum 
officers to adjudicate those cases much more swiftly.
    Mr. Suozzi. Well, I want--I want to thank you again for 
your public service. You know, I am saddened when I hear some 
of the stuff that is being hurled about by different people. It 
is upsetting. It is not productive. We have serious business to 
do. These are serious problems and we don't want people 
creating crimes and breaking the law. But we have got to work 
together to solve it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize Mr. LaLota, the gentleman from New York, 
for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. LaLota. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, do we 
have a problem at the Southern Border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. We certainly have a very significant 
challenge, yes, we do.
    Mr. LaLota. Previously you have characterized that as not a 
crisis. Are you willing to say today that there is a crisis at 
the Southern Border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I have said now repeatedly 
it is a crisis and I have never minimized the severity of the 
challenge at the border regardless of the words that are used.
    Mr. LaLota. Appreciate the evolution on that. With the 
200,000 fentanyl deaths, 1.7 million noncitizens being paroled 
into the country, and migrant crises in multiple cities 
including New York City. How grave is the crisis at the 
Southern Border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the situation is grave. It 
requires solutions and I strongly support and urge Congress to 
pass the Senate's bipartisan----
    Mr. LaLota. We are going to get into that in a moment, Mr. 
Secretary. My colleague from the other side of the aisle from 
the county to my west mentioned how some solutions are 
complicated. I would offer on this there are some simple 
solutions which ought to be implemented, and I find it 
disingenuous that many folks from the other side of the aisle 
often point to budgetary reasons as why we can't have a secure 
border.
    So, I want to talk about some nonbudgetary reasons, 
including President Biden's policy choices, specifically his 
Executive Orders that he has either issued or rescinded. I 
think the clerk may have a copy of 64 different--we will get 
you one, Mr. Secretary--64 different Executive Orders that 
President Biden has issued that have either rolled back Trump-
era border policies that many agree have been successful or 
implemented some that have made your job more difficult.
    In the entirety of the 4 years in the Trump administration 
there were 2.4 million encounters on the Southwest Border. In 
the first 40 months of the Biden administration there were 7.6 
million encounters at the Southwest Border. So, comparatively 
speaking, 200 percent more in 20 percent less of a time.
    Should the Department of Homeland Security endeavor to have 
less alien encounters at the Southwest Border?
    Secretary Mayorkas. In between the ports of entry we are 
driving to reduce the number of encounters, yes, indeed we are.
    Mr. LaLota. So, it is a goal of yours to have less 
encounters?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
    Mr. LaLota. Great. Do less encounters lead to less 
noncitizens being paroled into the country?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, Congressman.
    Mr. LaLota. Great. If there are less noncitizens paroled 
into the country will there be less migrant crises like the 
ones in New York?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the source of the 
challenge in New York City is varied. One source of that is a 
public official's decision to deliberately not communicate----
    Mr. LaLota. I reclaim my time, Mr. Secretary. The question 
was does less encounters at the borders lead to less migrant 
crises? I am going to suppose, I am going to offer that the 
answer to the question is yes. You may have a different 
opinion.
    The focus I would like to have on the Remain in Mexico 
policy, which was when President Biden announced that he was 
rescinding the Remain in Mexico policy, what do you think went 
through the mind of a migrant from Central or South America, 
many of whom come here for economic reasons? What do you think 
went through the mind of that migrant who now know that if he 
or she made it to the Southern Border that they would be 
granted entry, more likely to be granted entry into the county?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I believe--I believe that 
the Remain in Mexico policy throughout its duration, I believe 
and I'll verify, this approximately 70,000 migrants ran through 
it in the 2 years it was in operation. So, I do not--I think 
that you are overemphasizing----
    Mr. LaLota. Let me ask you a different question about 
Remain in Mexico. Why do it? Why repeal Remain in Mexico? What 
is the value to border security by repealing the policy?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it was not an effective 
policy. It was causing a tremendous amount of human tragedy 
south of our border and because it was bad policy, it was 
rescinded.
    Mr. LaLota. So, your testimony is the increase, the 200 
percent increase, of migrant encounters at the Southwest Border 
in 20 percent less time is because of COVID?
    Secretary Mayorkas. No, Congressman, I have not testified 
to that. The situation and the reasons for it are quite varied.
    The fact of the matter is that the world is experiencing 
the greatest displacement of people since World War II and our 
hemisphere is not spared that reality. And----
    Mr. LaLota. I am going to reclaim my time.
    Mr. Chairman, President Biden should go back to the 
successful Trump-era border policies. The Senate should take up 
H.R. 2, the only bill that has passed either chamber in this 
town.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Sheila 
Jackson Lee, for 5 minutes of testimony--or questions.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Secretary, I appreciate your presence here 
today, as do millions of Americans and Members of this 
committee who are here seriously to do the work of the American 
people.
    Let me, first of all, speak the obvious since my colleagues 
want to attribute more money, more money to Democrats. I am 
very proud of my legislation, H.R. 3208, which has passed this 
committee, cyber work force legislation that has been drafted, 
which the committee favorably reported in July, it appears and 
would also address the question that Mr. Garbarino was speaking 
about, he has imparted, about your work force issue.
    If we would pass a number of legislative initiatives we 
might move you along further. This bill in particular talks 
about cyber work force, which is one of my very serious issues.
    Let us train them. Let us give them internships or access 
and let us put them to work. I think if we did that, you would 
have at least a portion of the battle where you would have a 
staff that could begin working at Homeland Security. It is a 
place that I have heard people are interested in working 
primarily to defend their Nation. So, let us see if we can do 
something constructive in this committee.
    But I do want to address the question of dealing with the 
Articles of Impeachment, willful and systemic refusal to comply 
with the law. It is always difficult to ask someone to detail 
their own failings, frailties. Do you believe, Mr. Secretary, 
that you have failed to comply with the law? Where would you do 
better in complying with the law on behalf of the American 
people?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I've been in public 
service I think about 22 years. I've taken the oath I think 5 
times, maybe 6. I've adhered to the oath to which I have sworn 
and I have abided by the law each and every step of the way.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. When the question was asked over and over 
again, and this is for the American people, if you are still 
tuning in about whether the Southern Border is secure, they 
need that answer. So, I would ask the question as someone who 
believes that you do the best with what you have and you work 
hard and that we owe the American people the duty of a secure 
border, what more would you do if that was the question and the 
answer was that we need to do more? What more would you do to 
secure the American border if you felt that was necessary and 
that you wanted to tell the American people, this is what I 
needed to have?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, we are dealing with a 
fundamentally broken immigration system, that is our 
fundamental problem. I would encourage Congress to pass a 
bipartisan Senate legislation that would bring tremendously 
advancing reform to the broken immigration system and it would 
also resource our Department to execute those reforms 
advantageously.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. It seems a simple proposition to me. 
Throughout the entire questioning that I have decided to sit 
and listen I have heard no offering of a resolution by my 
friends on the other side of the aisle. There is absolutely 
nothing to answer to the second Article of Impeachment, breach 
of public trust, and that is that we know that Congress has the 
sole power of impeachment and that you shall be removed for the 
breaching of trust, then what is that breach? What is your 
belief is a breach of trust?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I'm not aware of any and 
let me assure you that I do not spend time on the impeachment 
proceedings. I focus my attention exclusively on the work of 
the Department of Homeland Security.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. We do know that, and that is an answer 
that I wish some of our colleagues who decided to not be here 
for that to be able to listen.
    We do know that Iran, for example, is a major proponent of 
terrorism. They decided to exercise that definition by 
bombarding Israel with 300 of the missiles that they decided to 
use, the drones that they decided to use against an ally for 
this horrible attack.
    What then would you give as an answer? Did we the United 
States generate an attack on Israel? Was that our doing?
    Secretary Mayorkas. No, it was not, Congresswoman.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Are we prepared to be supportive in 
helping to defend our homeland?
    Secretary Mayorkas. We most certainly are, Congresswoman. 
We do that every single day through the extraordinary work of 
268,000 men and women in our Department.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. You haven't seen anybody stand up and 
resign and say, I am frightened. I don't want to do this work. 
I don't want to protect the homeland. Have you seen that occur 
today?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I have not and people risk their lives 
every single day on behalf of our country, both in the 
Department and other departments and, of course, in our 
branches of the military.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Well, let me just yield, Mr. Chairman, and 
just say that----
    Chairman Green. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    I now----
    Ms. Jackson Lee [continuing]. I see no--I see no reason----
    Chairman Green. The gentlelady's time has expired and we're 
having to----
    Ms. Jackson Lee [continuing]. For the gentleman to be 
impeached.
    Chairman Green [continuing]. Five minutes because of the--
--
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I know he would want me to say that----
    Chairman Green [continuing]. Time remaining.
    Ms. Jackson Lee [continuing]. Mr. Chairman. I see no 
reason----
    Chairman Green. The gentlelady is not recognized.
    Ms. Jackson Lee [continuing]. For the gentleman to be 
impeached.
    Chairman Green. The gentlelady is not recognized.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I see no reason for the gentleman to be 
impeached.
    Chairman Green. I now recognize Mr. Ezell----
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank----
    Chairman Green [continuing]. The gentleman from 
Mississippi.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the Chairman. There is no reason 
for him to be impeached.
    Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
    Mr. Ezell. Secretary Mayorkas, your open border policies 
have granted parole to a host of illegal aliens from regions in 
the Middle East and West Africa that are known for hot bed for 
terrorism. Clear to this administration's policies have 
emboldened countries such as Iran, like what we saw over the 
weekend with their attacks on Israel.
    Can you tell me confidently to this committee that no 
current or former Iranian Revolutionary Guard court members or 
members of Islamic terrorist organizations have been granted 
parole into the United States?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, let me assure you that an 
individual who poses a threat to our national security is a 
priority for detection and removal.
    Mr. Ezell. What about anyone from the People's Liberation 
Army of the Chinese Communist Party?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Same answer, Congressman.
    Mr. Ezell. Mr. Secretary, I want to switch DHS's violation 
for Americans on free speech. Four months ago, the assistant 
secretary of cyber for DHS testified that the oversight 
subcommittee that, I quote, ``Countering disinformation that 
threatens the homeland and providing the public with accurate 
information in response are critical to fulfilling DHS 
Congressionally-mandated missions.''
    Secretary Mayorkas, do you believe Congress has given DHS 
the authority to use censorship to counter disinformation?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we do not censor free 
speech. We abide by the First Amendment.
    Mr. Ezell. Secretary Mayorkas, the Fifth Circuit Court of 
Appeals in Missouri v. Biden found that CISA, and I quote 
again, ``Likely significantly encouraged the social media 
platform's content moderation decisions and thereby violated 
the First Amendment.''
    Did you know your agency was pressuring social media 
platforms to censor Americans?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, no, we do not censor 
speech, we do not pressure platforms to do so, and I believe 
the trial court's ruling was reversed in part by the Appellate 
Court. I cannot speak further because I believe the litigation 
continues.
    Mr. Ezell. Documents recently obtained through the Freedom 
of Information Act, FOIA, showed that DHS argued the agency has 
the authority to regulate misinformation, disinformation, and 
malinformation. However, the content of these documents has 
been redacted.
    I have questioned members of CISA regarding this and was 
not satisfied with their response. So, I will ask you, what 
Congressional authorities does DHS has in MDM space?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Well, let me give you--some are real-
life examples of the work that we do, Congressman, because I am 
sure you will support it. When human smuggling organizations 
spread disinformation with respect to the policies of the 
Department of Homeland Security, we publish accurate 
information with respect to our policies.
    When criminal organizations domestically in the wake of a 
natural disaster spread disinformation to victims of that 
natural disaster to deceive them to fall prey to those criminal 
organization, we provide accurate information with respect to 
what FEMA does and does not do.
    When a foreign adversary spreads disinformation with 
respect to the processes of our elections, for example, if you 
don't make it to the voting booth on time on Tuesday, don't 
worry, you can vote on Wednesday, we actually communicate 
accurate information with respect to the election process in 
coordination with State and local officials.
    That is the type of work that we do and I know that you 
endorse that work wholeheartedly given the fact that it is 
about enforcing the law and making sure that people do not fall 
prey to criminals who do not seek to enforce the law.
    Chairman Green. Would the gentleman yield for a second?
    Mr. Ezell. Yes.
    Chairman Green. Mr. Secretary, are we--is DHS able to touch 
each individual that the nefarious actors are touching? Now, 
and I respect that what you just told us, but my concern is--
and I hope this is happening, but is DHS able to reach out to 
all the bodies that the nefarious actors are engaging with with 
the right information to oppose the negative information?
    Secretary Mayorkas. We seek to disseminate the accurate 
information as broadly as possible.
    Chairman Green. Does that live on the site, the DHS site, 
or is it in the social media platforms?
    Secretary Mayorkas. We have web pages that disseminate and 
broadcast that and we also use force multipliers, our State, 
local, Tribal, and territorial partners, State, and local law 
enforcement, et cetera, Congressman.
    Mr. Ezell. That is fine.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time is expired.
    I now recognize Mr. Swalwell, the gentleman from California 
and the Ranking Member on the Subcommittee of Cybersecurity and 
Infrastructure.
    Mr. Swalwell. Mr. Secretary, welcome back and thank you and 
the men and women at your Department for what they are doing 
during this especially vulnerable time for the homeland. I know 
it is probably not comfortable for you, you know, to have any 
of us reference the impeachment that Speaker Johnson brought to 
the floor. But I just want to get some dates right. Was it 
February 13 when Speaker Johnson was finally able to get the 
votes to impeach you, was that the date?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I don't--I don't recall the date.
    Mr. Swalwell. I think it was February 13. By the way, it 
was kind-of a second-serve impeachment if we are using like a 
tennis analogy. The first one was a fault, they couldn't get 
the votes.
    In pickleball you would have only gotten one serve and that 
would have been it, but if it was tennis they got a second 
serve and barely were able to do it. Today, it is April 16, so, 
you know, I am not great a math, but I think that is 2 months. 
Have the impeachment articles as we sit here today been sent 
over to the Senate for a trial? Are you aware?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I don't know whether something has 
occurred while I have been testifying before this committee, 
Congressman.
    Mr. Swalwell. I only bring that up because, again, like we 
were told there is this urgency, there is this crisis at the 
border. We have got to do this now. We have got to, you know, 
bring one of our, you know, colleagues who keeps suffering and 
going through cancer treatments that we are all rooting for, we 
have got to bring him out of those treatments so he can come 
and be the pivotal vote so that we can get you impeached and 
sent over to the Senate.
    It has been 2 months, 2 months, and it still is not over at 
the Senate. So, I don't think it is the urgency that we were 
told. It seems like it was more the former President wanted us 
to do this and so Speaker Johnson did it.
    We seem to go wherever the former President wants us to go, 
if that is on border policy, if that is on funding Ukraine, it 
is not really an America First agenda. It's a me, me, me first 
when it comes to the former President and then these guys get 
kind-of dragged along, and that is why the articles, as we sit 
here today, have still not been sent over.
    But I want to talk a little bit about disinformation. Does 
Russia or China or Iran or Venezuela have a right to free 
speech in our elections as you see it?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I am not sure I understand your 
question, but----
    Mr. Swalwell. Well, Americans have a right on social media 
platforms to speak freely about our elections, but do you see 
our adversaries as having a right to pollute our public forum 
when it comes to speech?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, one of our--one of the 
threat streams attacking the integrity of our elections is 
disinformation from adverse nation-states, that includes the 
People's Republic of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea.
    Mr. Swalwell. I also find interesting, you know, my 
colleagues, some of them don't like that you are going after 
disinformation, but one of our very able staffers just provided 
me with a July 11, 2018, transcript in this room when the 
former President Donald Trump was President and you have a 
number of Republican Members who are arguing that it is 
actually disinformation. That is the problem. You have multiple 
Republican Members saying that disinformation is our foreign 
adversary's tool of choice, as Mr. Rogers on this committee at 
the time said.
    Mr. Perry, we know Mr. Perry from January 6, he also goes 
into identifying foreign disinformation as being the problem. 
So, again, what we want the Department to do is not to choose 
sides politically because we know that our adversaries, first 
and foremost, they just want chaos so that they can go to their 
authoritative--their authoritarian states and say this is why 
democracy doesn't work. Look what is going on in America. They 
are undermining it.
    But would you say that, when you look at disinformation and 
when you see disinformation, that it doesn't have a straight 
line as far as benefiting one party or the other? That our 
adversaries really more than anything just want chaos in 
America?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Adverse nation-states seek to attack 
our Nation, our democracy, this country. We battle their 
efforts every single day.
    Mr. Swalwell. Well, again, Mr. Secretary, thank you for 
what you do. We are grateful that you are in the chair that you 
are in. It is not an easy to place to sit and I am confident 
that there will be a swift acquittal if it ever gets sent over 
to the Senate.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    I now recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. 
D'Esposito, for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Secretary, 
thank you for being here this morning, and now this afternoon. 
Have you read H.R. 2?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it has been a while since 
I have, but I certainly reviewed the legislation.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Were there any parts of H.R. 2 that you 
agreed with?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I'd have to review it 
again.
    Mr. D'Esposito. It was the most comprehensive border 
security bill that has been passed out of the House of 
Representatives in decades. You are the Secretary of Homeland 
Security. You are not certain or sure of any of the items in 
that legislation that you would agree with?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, let me assure you that I 
support the Senate's bipartisan legislation.
    Mr. D'Esposito. I am not asking about the Senate's 
bipartisan legislation. I am asking about H.R. 2, the only 
piece of border security legislation that has been passed 
through the House of Representatives.
    We continue to talk about this bipartisan legislation, this 
magical legislation that has yet to make it out of the Senate, 
that doesn't have the support to make it out of that, but we 
still have the administration, the Secretary of Homeland 
Security telling us that we should support legislation that 
can't get passed. You don't remember any parts of H.R. 2 that 
you support?
    Secretary Mayorkas. That is, Congressman, I can share with 
you some of the grave infirmities of H.R. 2.
    Mr. D'Esposito. OK. I am asking for the parts that you 
support because my point is, is that back in May, House 
Republicans out of this committee passed H.R. 2, the Secure the 
Border Act. We sent it over to the Senate. That should have 
begun the negotiation. That should have been the starting point 
to secure our border.
    I have heard colleagues on the other side of the aisle say 
that people in America are ``freaking out that there is 
chaos.'' Yes, people are freaking out. Yes, there is chaos 
because Joe Biden and the Homeland Security has left our 
borders wide open. That is why people are freaking out. There 
is a solution. It was H.R. 2.
    Do I agree with everything in there? Absolutely not. I 
would assume you don't agree with a lot of things in there 
either. Democrats didn't agree with things in there, but you 
know what it was? It is the only piece of legislation that we 
actually have. It is the perfect starting point. So, to my 
colleagues on the other side who are talking about this magical 
piece of legislation, we have it. It is H.R. 2. So, let us 
start there.
    Now, I am going to take it back home. So, time after time 
this committee has listened to the devastating impact that the 
border crisis has of course because of the policies that have 
been implemented by you and President Biden. You have helped 
make every State a border State, every county a border county, 
and every city a border city, including my home in New York.
    Now, a Democrat Mayor, who I don't agree with on 
everything, but I agree with him on this, he said that, ``This 
issue will destroy New York City.'' Now, I am proud to have 
served in the NYPD as a detective and it has been absolutely 
devastating to see the horrific challenges that law enforcement 
are faced with throughout this country. I mean just recently we 
saw NYPD cops who were attacked by an illegal migrant who just 
got done robbing a Target.
    Months ago, we saw NYPD officers brutally attacked in 
midtown Manhattan, they actually were our guests at the State 
of the Union, by illegal migrants. We saw it in the Bronx 
recently where there was a 9-1-1 call made for a person with a 
gun. When cops made their way into this home into the Bronx, it 
was illegal migrants who had squatted there illegally and had 
illegal guns and illegal narcotics.
    Then just days after in my district, in Roosevelt Field 
Mall there were two migrants who committed larceny in a store, 
were arrested by the Nassau County Police Department and guess 
what the address was that they gave? That home in the Bronx 
where the guns and the narcotics were found. So, I am going to 
ask you, can you tell me at what part of this budget request 
would better support law enforcement?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Oh, Congressman, quite a number of 
parts. The additional personnel request, the funding for 
additional law enforcement personnel in the Department Homeland 
Security.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Do you know that in H.R. 2 that there was 
money in there for additional law enforcement?
    Secretary Mayorkas. In addition, Congressman, the grant 
funds that we are seeking to distribute to State and local law 
enforcement through the Homeland Security grant program, the 
Urban Area Security Initiative, and other programs.
    Mr. D'Esposito. So, everything that you just mentioned was 
part of H.R. 2. So, it seems like you do know what you agree 
with in that legislation and, to my point, that is exactly 
where we should start. So, I urge my colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle, let us work on this as Americans. H.R. 2 is 
our starting point.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time----
    Mr. D'Esposito. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize Ms. Clarke from New York for her 5 minutes.
    Ms. Clarke. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to 
thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your hard work, your dedication, 
and your fidelity to our Nation. It is inspiring.
    Notwithstanding all of the challenges that my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle present to you. At the end of the 
day, you have kept the homeland safe during your tenure and we 
are grateful for that. I want to respond to a false allegation 
raised by some of my Republican colleagues about noncitizens 
voting in Federal elections.
    First of all, Federal law already prohibits noncitizens 
from voting in Federal elections and there is absolutely zero 
evidence that there is significant violations of that law. 
Republicans efforts to make it harder to vote will 
disenfranchise low-income and minority voters and will do 
nothing to make our elections more secure.
    Instead, we should focus on the real threats to our 
election security, which include foreign interference efforts, 
which I know Secretary Mayorkas is committed to addressing. 
Additionally, I am deeply disturbed by Congresswoman Greene's 
attacks on HIAS, originally known as the Hebrew Immigrant Aids 
Society, an organization that has been supporting refugees for 
over 140 years.
    Baseless conspiracy theories about HIAS fueled the 
antisemitic murder of 11 individuals at the Tree of Life 
Synagogue in Pittsburgh. It is disgraceful to see the same kind 
of misinformation repeated in this committee. So, I wanted that 
on the record.
    Mr. Secretary, last month CISA issued the Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking for mandatory cyber incident reporting and 
I congratulate the Department on this important milestone.
    Now that the MPRM is out, DHS must redouble its efforts to 
harmonize incident report rules across Government. The 
Department's Cyber Incident Reporting Council, sir, will play a 
critical role in that process. Secretary Mayorkas, sir, issued 
a report containing recommendations regarding the harmonization 
Cyber Incident Reporting rules last September.
    What actions has the CIRCIA taken since the report was 
released to promote harmonization? What more can the CIRCIA be 
doing to promote harmonization?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Thank you very much, Congresswoman, for 
your question. We are working with Federal departments and 
agencies across the administration to execute on the imperative 
of harmonizing our reporting rules. Not only that, 
Congresswoman, we are working with our international partners 
so that harmonization would not be restricted to the domestic 
environment but the international arena as well.
    Ms. Clarke. That is good news. As part of the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Congress provided $1 
billion in grants to State, local, Tribal, and territorial 
governments to strengthen their cyber defenses. This program is 
based on bipartisan legislation I authored with my colleagues 
on this committee.
    Unfortunately, this funding expires in fiscal year 2025, 
which could mean State and local governments cut their 
cybersecurity spending even as they continue to face serious 
cybersecurity threats, including from foreign adversaries like 
China and Russia.
    It is my hope that this committee will work together to 
extend the vital program so we can build our initial 
investment. Secretary Mayorkas, do you agree with me that State 
and local governments will continue to need Federal support as 
they defend their cyber intrusions? Will you commit to working 
with me and this committee to reauthorize the State and Local 
Cybersecurity Grant Program?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I do and I will, Congresswoman.
    Ms. Clarke. Wonderful. Mr. Secretary, just one other note 
of concern and that is with the nation of Haiti. You should 
have received a letter or have been CC'd on a letter regarding 
the concern about individuals being returned at this stage who 
could be sent into harm's way, into famine, into the myriad of 
challenges that nation continues to face in this moment. I look 
forward to speaking with you further about this. It is a major 
concern for many constituencies, many families across this 
Nation of Haitian descent.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Would the gentlelady yield?
    Ms. Clarke. Yes, sure. Yes, I will yield.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you so very much. I wanted to follow 
your line of questioning very quickly, which is a very 
important line of questioning and that is to ensure that we get 
fixed, Mr. Secretary, what is broken. Sometimes we have 
equipment, technology that is not working correctly.
    I would like to submit into the record and ask unanimous 
consent ``Healthcare.gov: Ineffective Planning and Oversight 
Practices Underscore the Need for Improved Contract 
Management.'' Will you continue to access getting out 
equipment, refunded or improved, so that we can work with the 
equipment that will help you do the job?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Yes.
    Chairman Green. So, ordered and it is entered into the 
record, and the gentlelady's time has expired.
    [The information follows:]

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you. I thank you for yielding.
    Chairman Green. Absolutely.
    I now recognize the gentlelady Ms. Lee from Florida for 5 
minutes of questioning.
    Ms. Lee. Secretary Mayorkas, I would like to continue the 
discussion about the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security 
Agency and specifically the Chemical Facilities Antiterrorism 
Standards program that is overseen by CISA. The CFAS program, 
would you please describe for us how your budget provides 
continued support for the CFAS program?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I will have to remind 
myself of these specific funding for that program. That funding 
is very important and of course it has been in tremendous peril 
recently. We strongly support the continuation of the CFAS 
program. It enables us to ensure that high-risk chemical 
facilities are as secure as they need to be.
    Ms. Lee. And would you agree that a continuation of that 
program is an important part of the mission to protect critical 
infrastructure?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I would, Congresswoman.
    Ms. Lee. Would you also encourage our friends and partners 
over in the Senate to take up the bill that was passed by the 
House and is currently there awaiting their consideration and 
action?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I look forward to 
reviewing that bill again but we do indeed consider the CFAS 
program to be very important.
    Ms. Lee. I would like to then return to the subject of CISA 
and its role in elections infrastructure and its efforts of 
help State and local election officials protect elections 
infrastructure. Specifically, there, could you describe what 
CISA does to help State and local elections officials defend 
against threats from foreign adversaries and domestic 
adversaries to that infrastructure?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, one of the things we do 
is provide training with respect to the threat, to be able to 
identify the threat. We share best practices. We have marked 
election security as one of the 6 priority areas in some of our 
Homeland Security grant programs to ensure that State and local 
jurisdictions devote needed resources to a fundamental need of 
our country and that is to safeguard the integrity of our 
election processes.
    Ms. Lee. Moving to the question of breaches and cyber 
attacks, what effort is CISA making to bolster its own internal 
cybersecurity? I know they were victim to a recent cyber 
attack. Can you describe for us the efforts internal to CISA on 
cybersecurity?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, so that is a priority 
for the Department as a whole. Our chief information officer 
and that team is consistently working day-in and day-out to 
enhance our security.
    In addition, CISA works to enhance the cybersecurity of the 
Federal civilian domain. It issues binding operational 
directives based on what it learns from particular incidents to 
ensure that agencies and departments are patching or protecting 
themselves against detected vulnerabilities.
    This is a very significant mission area of ours. The 
cybersecurity threat factor is not, unfortunately, diminishing.
    Ms. Lee. Related to HSI, I would like to go back to that 
subject which you addressed earlier as it related to some 
transnational gang activities. But specifically, within your 
budget I would like to discuss HSI and its operations related 
to child exploitation and human trafficking. Your budget calls 
for additional funding there to help HSI investigators to 
combat human trafficking. Does it now?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, it does.
    Ms. Lee. Would you explain for us the types of activities 
and role that HSI takes specifically as it relates to the 
exploitation and trafficking of children?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman, I named crimes of 
exploitation 1 of our 6 mission priorities for the first time 
in the Department's history.
    Tomorrow I will be with HSI, Homeland Security 
Investigations, in New York City, launching a new campaign 
against on-line child sexual exploitation and abuse. This is a 
scourge that is not only Nation-wide but it's global in nature. 
More than 36 million tips were presented to enforcement 
authorities across the world, domestically more than 63,000 of 
them reflected in imminent or grave threat. The extent of this 
crime cannot be overstated.
    The work of HSI in combating it is heroic both in 
disseminating, education, and awareness, in investigating the 
crimes, in rescuing victims, and holding perpetrators 
accountable.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentlelady yields.
    I now recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Luttrell, for 
5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Luttrell. Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary. My colleague 
has just kind-of initiated the conversation that I wanted to 
have with you as well. You're having discussions with HSI, 
HIDTA, DPS. Out of the State of Texas one of the biggest issues 
that they are confronted with is their ability to navigate 
aggregated data on the criminals that are moving the 
individuals into sex trafficking space.
    Are you comfortable with the amount of money that you are 
asking for in the cyber risk, cyber threat domain, and 
artificial intelligence and machine learning space? Because 
they are two different entities that need to work very well 
together. My concern is that the right hand is not talking to 
the left. We need to expand the ability for our agents to 
process the data and in the budget proposal there is only $5 
million for the new AI office. Are you happy with that number?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, we are pleased with 
receiving additional funding when it comes to crimes of 
exploitation. I must tell you that if I had a wish list the 
amount of money would be greater, the amount of personnel that 
we could dedicate to this would be greater.
    This scourge, this heinous crime is of extraordinary 
breadth and depth of depravity and we work every day. It is 
remarkable what our personnel do to combat this with our State 
and local partners as well as our international partners.
    This is one of the top issues that is raised when I am 
engaging in the international arena with our Five Eyes partners 
as well as our European colleagues.
    Mr. Luttrell. I hate to speak for the body itself, but I 
think we are really hungry and have a good appetite for the 
expansiveness of AI in this space. This is where I am going to 
tell you to be hyperaggressive in order to save these women and 
children that are in this problem set.
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congresswoman--Congressman.
    Mr. Luttrell. Damn, that is the third time you have done 
that to me.
    Secretary Mayorkas. I know.
    Mr. Luttrell. I don't even know where to go with that. I 
was hoping you weren't going to do that.
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman?
    Mr. Luttrell. I mean, we can go into the pronouns and all 
that stuff just----
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, three strikes and I'm out. 
I understand that.
    Let me share with you that we are indeed harnessing AI to 
advance the mission in the fight against on-line child sexual 
exploitation. At the same time AI presents a risk because the 
perpetrators use it to advance their depraved criminality. So, 
Congressman, this is something that we are harnessing for good 
and fighting against bad.
    Mr. Luttrell. That is where I was going earlier, when do we 
have the ability to touch the individuals that are being 
touched by the bad actors? I am hoping we do and I know that is 
a very aggressive problem set.
    I am going to roll right on to immigration and the Senate 
bill, I never even saw it. So, just give me a little latitude 
on this one. I think you are the 14th Homeland Secretary if I 
counted that. Is that correct? You are number 14?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I am the 7th confirmed.
    Mr. Luttrell. Seventh confirmed. OK. I don't know where I 
got 14. I thought it was in Wikipedia. Whatever. OK. Mr. 
Hunter, this Deputy Secretary Hunter, who was in front of the 
Border Security Subcommittee a few weeks ago and we were 
talking immigration issues, immigration policy, and I had 
asked, task requested because in your opening statement you 
said Congress has not reformed immigration since the 1990's.
    Well, it is our job to pass legislation, but the subject-
matter experts of immigration live underneath your umbrella. I 
consider you--are you subject-matter expert in immigration, 
sir?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I am, I certainly am admiring of those 
who know much more than I.
    Mr. Luttrell. My ask was--and I was--Mr. Suozzi and Mrs. 
Ramirez were in agreements with this, it would seem that the 
front-line operators are the best to address the immigration 
issue and where the blockade is, where the choke point is.
    Has a policy ever been written from the Department and sent 
up to Congress? Because I have never seen one. So, I am asking 
you, have you done that in your tenure as Secretary?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Have I, myself submitted policy 
recommendations?
    Mr. Luttrell. No. Rewritten the policy that Mr. Garcia 
holds up frequently in our hearing that you can't even read. It 
is the absolute problem. Has the Homeland Security Department 
itself said, you know what, here is the problem set? Congress 
can't get anything done for the last 20-something years. We are 
going to write it for you, submit. This is the best course of 
action. Has Homeland Security done that?
    Secretary Mayorkas. There are two powerful examples. No. 1, 
on his first day in office, President Biden presented 
legislation to Congress. Second, I had the privilege and the 
honor of sitting beside the bipartisan group of Senators who 
worked out a compromise that I urge Congress to pass.
    Mr. Luttrell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Strong, for 
5 minutes of testimony--excuse me--questioning.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you. Secretary Mayorkas, thank you for 
being here to speak on the fiscal year 2025 Presidential budget 
request. The President's budget request reflects the 
administration's priorities, correct?
    Secretary Mayorkas. It does, Congressman.
    Mr. Strong. I would like to talk about the threats to 
homeland and DHS that we see according to your budget request. 
I was pleased last year that you acknowledged the threat that 
unmanned aircraft systems poised at our Southern Border saying 
in part, and I quote, ``Drones are being used in a myriad of 
ways, a number of different ways to create a public safety 
risk.''
    You and I agree on this point. The cartels use the drones 
at the border is alarming, from using them to track the 
movement of Border Patrol agents, to providing overwatch for 
human smuggling, to transporting narcotics, and even outfitting 
them with explosive payloads.
    For each drone that the CBP flies, the Mexican cartel flies 
17 based on the last information I got. This issue hasn't 
improved since last year. In fact, last month in a Senate 
hearing, NORAD commander General Guillot testified that the 
number of drone incursions alarmed him, saying that he has 
``talked to CBP,'' who are responsible for UAS incursions at 
the border, and they put the number of incursions at thousands. 
He went on to say that he sees the potential of a threat posed 
by drones to the national defense as only growing.
    Secretary, is counting the illicit use of drones at the 
border a priority for DHS and CBP?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it certainly is.
    Mr. Strong. It is very concerning and very confusing to me, 
this is your budget request for CBP's counter-UAS program. You 
see it right behind me. Zero, not one penny, not one penny and 
the threat is unbelievable.
    As the use of drones by bad actors at our border evolves 
and continues to bring a threat to our homeland, it is 
unconscionable that you wouldn't request a single penny for CBP 
to carry out its counter-UAS mission. You requested zero. 
Thousands of UAV flights into U.S. airspace by Mexican cartel 
have the--you know, we have got the ability to block, drop, or 
intercept these drones.
    Moving on. I want to revisit the ICE detention bed issue 
that my colleagues have mentioned today. As illegal aliens 
continue to pour across the Southern Border, your fiscal year 
2025 budget request funding for just 34,000 ICE beds, barely 
half of the 60,000 beds requested by the Trump administration 
in fiscal year 2021.
    In May 2021, you testified in a House subcommittee hearing 
that you are ``concerned about the overuse of detention.'' Is 
it safe to presume that this is why you want to cut bed space 
and release illegal aliens on the streets of America?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, it is not my desire to cut 
detention beds.
    I should say returning to the counter-UAS authorities, we 
are seeking to harness artificial intelligence to amplify the 
strength of our counter-UAS capabilities.
    Mr. Strong. Well, I'll tell you, this right here on the 
UAS, we have the technology. As a matter of fact, in my 
community where I live in Huntsville, Alabama, where we could 
block them, drop them, or intercept them. It is being used in 
the Ukraine. It is being used in Israel. The only thing is that 
capability, you have got to request it to make sure that it 
happens.
    So, I promise you, I hope that we can come to a reason 
because when those UAVs are coming into America, setting down, 
dropping fentanyl, being stuffed full of cash, and flying back 
to the Mexican cartel, it is totally unacceptable, and I take 
you for your word that you are going to do something about it.
    If Congress is willing to fund even more ICE bed space or 
near Trump-era levels would this be a solution to detaining 
more illegal aliens?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, the greater the detention 
capacity, the greater our ability to detain more people. The 
bipartisan Senate legislation funded 50,000 detention beds and 
that's a powerful example.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Mr. Secretary, at the 
beginning of 2022, you testified the Congress that you had 
operational control of the border. Then the following hearings 
you backtracked to alter the definition of operational control.
    Now, in 2024, in a hearing last week, you testified that we 
have a crisis at the Southern Border. Are you finally admitting 
to what the American people have known to be true that your 
border policies don't work?
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Brecheen, 
for 5 minutes of questioning.
    Mr. Brecheen. I thank the Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I am 
really concerned about REAL ID compliance. I want to shift the 
narrative to discuss that, which would be a part of the budget 
implementation.
    REAL ID, you know, under your administration says by 2025 
there will be compliance. It was designed, supposed to build 
confidence in the identity of travelers post-9/11 to protect 
our U.S. citizenry. That is how it was sold when it was past 
years ago.
    Under your leadership the Department is going to start 
implementing this, the Transportation Security Administration, 
TSA, will be prohibited from accepting driver's license and 
identification cards that don't meet certain standards, Federal 
standards.
    You said that you are continuing to work closely with U.S. 
States to meet the REAL ID requirements and so here is where I 
am going to take this. I have heard from two Illinois State 
lawmakers that illegals in their States, they have got 
verification, are now able to obtain REAL ID-compliant driver's 
license.
    I want to reiterate that in Illinois, illegal aliens now 
can get ID-compliant driver's license with--by checking the box 
on ``employment authorization document,'' which is one of the 
subsets on the State website that is required by the State of 
Illinois as an option. It can be obtained by this illegal but 
it comes under the parole, which has been something that has 
been implemented by you and this administration.
    So, with that parole, this employment authorization 
document box can be checked.
    This, in my opinion, and I think most Americans would say 
this totally undermines REAL ID compliance given the lack of 
background checks that goes into knowing who these people are. 
There is a real lack of information. Yes, you can do some 
INTERPOL. Yes, you can do some background checks. But you have 
in terms of the United States' ability to understand who these 
people really are, we don't.
    Is REAL ID compromised? I believe it is and I think this is 
a glaring fault in the system, and so I am going to go to a 
quick question to you, yes or no. Should illegal aliens get 
REAL ID driver's license?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I look forward to 
following up with you on the integrity of the REAL ID program 
as it is envisioned and we are phasing in. That has been a 
program----
    Mr. Brecheen. Because I've got limited time, Mr. Secretary, 
yes or no, should REAL ID--should illegal aliens have the 
option, in your opinion, to get REAL ID-compliant driver's 
licenses? Yes or no.
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I look forward to 
following up with you on----
    Mr. Brecheen. OK. I wish you had a no on that.
    The next question. Should illegal aliens vote as in 
Illinois and New York we know that they are voting? Should 
illegal aliens be allowed to vote in this country, yes or no?
    Secretary Mayorkas. It is my understanding that illegal 
aliens cannot vote in Federal elections.
    Mr. Brecheen. OK. But are they allowed to vote? The answer 
is yes, in New York and in Illinois they are allowed to vote. 
So whether it is Federal elections or--that is not my question 
to you a while ago. I would love your answer. Should they be 
allowed to vote?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, that policy issue is 
outside the remit of the Department of Homeland Security.
    Mr. Brecheen. OK.
    Secretary Mayorkas. It is our obligation----
    Mr. Brecheen. I need to move on for time, I am sorry.
    Mr. Secretary, you have contended that ``the entire 
hemisphere is gripped with a level of migration that is 
unprecedented in recent history.'' You said that more or less 
today in your opening statement.
    I think that this avoids accountability for the invasion of 
our Southern Border. I think it shifts the blame on random 
events. But if that narrative is to be understood or followed, 
what are those events? I mean I look around the world and I go 
in South America. Was there some tsunami, was there a hurricane 
that I was not aware of? But the answer is no.
    It ultimately is, for those who have the context of the 
``Wizard of Oz,'' it is like the wizard is standing at the 
microphone saying, disregard the man, as the curtain is being 
pulled back by the little dog, Toto, disregard the man standing 
behind the curtain pulling levers and spinning wheels. I mean, 
I think the American people have this figured out.
    The migration is because there has been an advertisement 
under this administration, come into this country. You know, I 
come from the Sooner State, in Oklahoma, the Sooner State. 
History designates a legal land run occurred in the 1880's. 
This was not for illegals. It was for legal citizens.
    History will remember this time, I believe, in the past 3 
years as Biden's land run for illegals, paid for by U.S. 
taxpayers. Taxpayers are being asked to give their treasure and 
their children's treasure of the future for this. The FAIR 
organization says it costs us $4,000 for every illegal 
immigrant.
    A gold rush to transport illegals to the city of their 
choice, free emergency health care. Then once these people have 
a child, there is cash payments in the form of Earned Income 
Tax Credits, thousands of dollars, food stamps once they have a 
child. Food stamps once they have a child, once they have a 
child, again, Medicaid on top of the food stamps.
    So, here is where I am going with this, does your budget 
propose, which I will contend it does, especially the one that, 
you know, we are deeming as the slush fund, allow for dollars 
to go into countries as far south as Panama for NGO's, 
nongovernment organizations, to promote people coming to our 
country and in effect telling military-aged men to go north 
young man, go north?
    Chairman Green. The gentleman's time has expired.
    I now recognize Mr. Crane from Arizona for 5 minutes of 
questioning.
    Mr. Crane. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, it is 
interesting because I hear my colleagues on the other side 
aisle consistently talk about how we can't agree on anything 
over here on the Republican side of the aisle, you know, and 
there is some truth to that. There has been, you know, 
definitely some debates, some arguments within our own party.
    But one thing that we can agree upon is that you are doing 
a horrible job, sir, and that you needed to be impeached.
    That is pretty wild seeing as how we have been able to 
agree upon very few things with the margin that we have, but we 
could all come together, look at the data, hear the stories 
back in the district, listen to the family members that have 
been destroyed because of your complete dereliction of duty, 
and we all agree that you needed to be impeached.
    Secretary Mayorkas, did you swear an oath to protect and 
defend the Constitution of the United States?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Yes, I did, Congressman.
    Mr. Crane. Yes? How many times have you done that?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I certainly can identify 5 when I----
    Mr. Crane. OK. Thank you.
    Secretary Mayorkas [continuing]. Was sworn in----
    Mr. Crane. Are you aware of Article IV, Section 4? Do you 
know what that--do you know what that article is?
    Secretary Mayorkas. There may be more than 5 instances. I 
just want to be clear to the best----
    Mr. Crane. OK. Yes, OK. Great. Article IV, Section 4, are 
you familiar with that article?
    Secretary Mayorkas. When I was sworn in as an assistant----
    Mr. Crane. OK. Since you are not going to answer, it is 
called the invasion clause. Do you know what the invasion 
clause says, sir?
    Secretary Mayorkas. The second time was when----
    Mr. Crane. The Federal Government will protect and defend 
each State from invasion. OK? Since you don't seem to be 
getting it, I had our staff here bring up this graph here. This 
is you. This is the last administration. Again you, last 
administration. That looks like an invasion on a graph.
    We have heard from the people that have sat here and 
testified in these chambers about their family members being 
raped and murdered by people that weren't supposed to be here 
that your administration allowed to be here and then didn't 
keep track of, didn't deport, didn't detain.
    Tell me, sir, how you haven't allowed an invasion into this 
country?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, I am incredibly proud to 
support the men and women of the Department of Homeland 
Security who enforce the laws of the United States every single 
day, many of whom risk their lives to secure our borders.
    Mr. Crane. Yes, despite your horrific leadership, yes, they 
do. I am proud to know many of them as well. They are great 
people. But we all know that. We all know what the morale is 
like in the Border Patrol right now and it is horrible. I hear 
from Border Patrol agents every day.
    Again, sir, my question is, how have you not violated your 
oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United 
States specifically Article IV, Section 4, which says that you 
as Homeland Security will protect each State from invasion, 
again, you, last administration? How can you make that 
argument?
    Secretary Mayorkas. I work every day quite proudly to 
advance the security of the border and support the men and 
women of the Department of Homeland Security.
    Mr. Crane. You may be working every day, but it seems as if 
you are working for the other side of the aisle. It seems as if 
you are working for our enemies and that is exactly what the 
American people see. That is exactly why they supported us 
impeaching you and that is exactly why you had so many Members 
of this conference that is often divided come together to 
impeach you, sir.
    Let me ask you this question, Secretary Mayorkas, do you 
think our enemies are stupid?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, you can launch whatever 
false and deplorable accusations----
    Mr. Crane. Do you think our adversaries are stupid, sir?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, our adversaries vary in 
capability and we address the defense of the United States and 
the interest of the United States accordingly.
    Mr. Crane. No, you are not. OK. You are not doing that. As 
a matter of fact, do you think it is possible that maybe some 
of our adversaries, the most dangerous ones, like the Chinese, 
the North Koreans, the Iranians, the Russians, et cetera, might 
employ unconventional warfare and send their soldiers because 
our border is wide open through the Southern Border without a 
uniform, without firearms, with instructions to wreak havoc in 
this country once they are here, once you have allowed them to 
be here? Do you think that is possible, Secretary Mayorkas?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, over the last 11 months we 
have removed or returned 630,000 people, more than any fiscal 
year since 2013. And our----
    Mr. Crane. Well, you are bragging about how much you have 
returned, but you don't want to brag about how many you have 
let in, do you?
    Secretary Mayorkas. Congressman, individuals who arrive and 
claim asylum are placed in immigration enforcement proceedings. 
If they do not qualify for relief under our laws, we seek to 
remove them in enforcing our laws.
    Mr. Crane. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman Green. The gentleman yields.
    The Members of the committee may have some additional 
questions for you, Mr. Mayorkas, Mr. Secretary, and we would 
ask that you would respond to those in writing.
    I think there were several during that we--the time kind-of 
fell and I will let those Members send those to you for you to 
follow up on.
    Pursuant to committee rule VII(D), the hearing record will 
be held open for 10 days. I think the Ranking Member has a 
unanimous consent request and also closing statements. So, I 
will let you do those together, Mr. Ranking Member.
    Mr. Thompson. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I 
ask unanimous consent that portions of the July 18, 2018, 
hearing transcript referred by Mr. Swalwell be inserted in the 
record.
    Chairman Green. So, ordered.
    [The information follows:]

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

    Chairman Green. You are recognized for your closing 
remarks.
    Mr. Thompson. Thank you very much. I would like to thank 
Secretary Mayorkas for agreeing to testify before this 
committee today, despite on-going baseless, partisan attacks 
against him. Mr. Secretary, you have done what I consider a 
good job at defending this administration given the constraints 
that you have to operate from in terms of resources.
    The Secretary's willingness to appear in support of the 
Department's needs demonstrate his character as a truly 
dedicated public servant. I am not sure I can say the same for 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle who prefer a ranting 
while steadfastly refusing to provide the authority and 
resources the Department needs.
    Well, you can't have it both ways. You can't look the brave 
DHS employees in the face and claim you support them when you 
refuse to put your vote where your mouth is. Yet this is 
exactly what my Republican colleagues have done this entire 
Congress. It is appalling.
    DHS only received funding for fiscal year 2024 due to 
overwhelming Democratic support, just like in 2023. Yet 
Republicans tried to claim that it is you, Secretary Mayorkas, 
that is undermining border security. This hypocrisy is 
astounding.
    The hearing which was supposed to be about the DHS budget 
has become yet another MAGA border hearing. I did not hear one 
Republican colleague raise concerns about whether FEMA will 
have the funding needed to respond to an increasing number of 
deadly national disasters, nor did they engage with DHS's work 
to defend against legitimate threats to our 2024 election.
    Instead, choosing to waste time drumming anti-immigrant 
sentiment with unfounded allegations. Nor did they want to 
discuss how the Department is responding to domestic terrorist 
attacks that have left American communities scared and 
outraged.
    DHS is tasked with handling all of these issues and more, 
yet my Republican colleagues seem more interested in pretending 
to be outraged than doing the hard work of governing. This is 
simply the way to get things done. It takes complete and utter 
compromise, like we saw in the Senate where they drafted a 
bipartisan bill that would have imposed the toughest set of 
border security reforms we have ever had.
    The fact that MAGA Republicans rejected the proposal out of 
hand and instead pursued a baseless and unconstitutional 
impeachment against you, Mr. Secretary, tells the American 
people all they need to know.
    The leader of the Republican party, Donald Trump bragged 
about killing this legislation because it would have helped 
President Biden. Republicans in both the House and Senate have 
said they will not pass this legislation to improve border 
security in an election year. Republicans are saying the quiet 
part out loud. They will not support the Department and fix the 
border because it benefits them politically.
    Secretary Mayorkas, I appreciate your willingness to engage 
with this political circus and again advocate for the needs of 
the Department.
    The other thing I want to mention is that we didn't get to 
talk about AI. Cybersecurity is, as you know, within part of 
our mission. We share it with a couple of other committees. But 
it is the new frontier that we have to be front and center to 
defend all our systems.
    So, I look forward to working with the Department on our AI 
defenses going forward. The work that you and DHS employees do 
is critical. I want to assure that it is this committee's real 
value by some Members of this committee.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you again, Mr. 
Secretary.
    Chairman Green [continuing]. Closing statement. Before I 
start I would like to clarify a couple of things that have been 
addressed in today's hearing, and I will be brief, Mr. 
Secretary.
    You know, the fact that immigration laws haven't been 
updated doesn't mean we don't get to follow the immigration 
laws on the books. I would agree with you, we desperately need 
some update to our immigration laws. Those don't occur in this 
committee. That actually happens over in Judiciary. So, I mean, 
I appreciate the continual mention that that needs to be 
addressed, but it doesn't obviously cater or even allow a 
variance of any kind in laws that have already been passed by 
the body. It doesn't excuse violation of the law.
    I would also like to clarify something that is, quite 
frankly, I think dishonest, at least disingenuous, suggest that 
because someone or a group of this side of the aisle or that 
side of the aisle, you know, votes one way or another on a 
budget that you are not for, you know, spending money to 
increase border security.
    For example, if you vote against a budget that decreases 
Customs and Border Patrol and then you turn around and vote for 
a budget that increases dollars for Customs and Border Patrol, 
it is dishonest to say that that side who voted that way voted 
to cut spending to Customs and Border Patrol. Yet we have heard 
that multiple times today. That is just flat dishonesty. If 
that is all you have got to say to support or defend the 
actions at the Southern Border, well, I guess that tells 
everybody the truth about what is really going on.
    Another point I would like to clarify, someone made a 
comment that impeachment hearings earlier were 2 hearings. It 
was a 10-month, 5-phased investigation of oversight with 
subpoenas that were never complied with, by the way. So, this 
notion that there were 2 hearings is just false.
    About legislation on addressing border security, you know, 
the process is pretty simple in the Constitution and the rules 
of the committee or the House and Senate. You know, we passed a 
bill. We sent it to the Senate. They could amend it. We go to 
conference committee. We do that every year on the NDAA.
    If that leadership of the Senate really wanted to do 
something they would have picked that bill up that was sent 
over over a year ago. In terms of, you know, the budget 
discussion today and AI and all this other stuff, multiple 
Members talked about this stuff.
    I want to make sure I clarify because, you know, you just 
don't get to say, you know, this happened and this happened and 
some kind of Jedi mind trick and tell the American people that 
the people here on this side of the aisle didn't talk about AI. 
Ms. Lee talked about AI, about human trafficking. Mr. Garbarino 
talked about AI, cybersecurity.
    I mean, it is just somewhat infuriating that people just 
think they can say something that is not true and everybody is 
going to believe it. So, I want to correct the record on that.
    I have to be candid, your 2025 budget request I think 
undermines our country's ability to handle national security.
    I think this idea of cutting Customs and Border Patrol, 
creating some slush fund that you guys get to decide on your 
own how to use, is really contrary to the whole founding 
principles of us doing a budget here, sending it to you guys, 
you all have to keep that budget. That was what our Founders 
envisioned.
    So, creating slush funds, that is just--it is against the 
whole foundation to the Constitution. So that is why things 
like that aren't supported in this budget or budgets that do 
get voted on in authorizations. Underfunding Customs and Border 
Protection facilities I think is just going to result in an 
increased flow of migrants across the border.
    When we catch and release and do those kinds of things it 
is a motivation. People come because it is an incentive to 
come. That is why it is important for us not to see cuts to 
those. We know a lot of the dollars in this slush fund are 
going to do nothing but continue the policies that you have 
been doing, which is just ushering more people in.
    I think the interesting number to me, you know, that if you 
look at the curve on known got-aways, as you pull people off 
the border to process the known got-aways number actually 
flatlines or decreases a little bit because they are not out 
there to see the known got-aways. Right? So, they don't see 
them because they are not out on the border. They are actually 
processing people.
    So, I think that unknown number just increases massively 
because I--you know, that is speculation on my part, but it is 
good common sense. That is a number we have no clue how big 
that number is, but we brought it in this committee many times 
and have shown the videos, you know, from ranchers where folks 
are wearing camouflage.
    You have seen the carpet shoes, I am sure, Mr. Secretary 
that have been piled up in Arizona just inside the border and 
the backpacks, which we know are full of fentanyl. During your 
tenure as Secretary a record number of illegal aliens have 
crossed into the country, too many of whom have connections, 
many of whom have connections to transnational criminal 
organizations.
    You are from California originally. The very good reporting 
on how the Honduran cartels have linked up with the gangs in 
San Francisco and created this nexus is shocking. It has all 
happened on your watch.
    Most recently, of course, and it has been mentioned here, 
an illegal alien murdered a college student, Laken Riley, 
paroled by your Department into the country and left a trail of 
crime in his path. She is just one of thousands of Americans 
that have been murdered or otherwise victimized by illegal 
immigrants.
    The most gut-wrenching part of her murder is that it could 
have been prevented if you and your administration had chosen 
to enforce the laws on the books. But that young woman is dead 
simply because the laws weren't followed. Mr. Secretary, the 
number of known got-aways that I have talked about, already 
that number has trailed off because we are not on the border 
looking anymore.
    I don't want to imagine that undetected number. It just 
scares me to death. It seemed to scare Mr. Wray--or Director 
Wray. He talked about that when he was here testifying. You 
claim that your budget will address the issues we face at our 
border, but if we look at the numbers, the math doesn't add up 
to me. Fiscal year 2025 DHS seeks to hire only 350 new Border 
Patrol agents. I don't think that number is enough and that is 
why all the authorization we have sent over, it has been 
significantly higher than that despite what has been said here 
today by others who like to misrepresent what really happened.
    When you testified in the Senate and Senator Capito asked 
you how you will reach your hiring goals, you couldn't give a 
sizable answer. The truth is, Mr. Secretary, morale at DHS is 
at an all-time low because of the working conditions and these 
are your policies that have created that.
    We have been committed to providing strong oversight to the 
Department and, most importantly, the actions that you have 
taken as a leader. We have investigated those policies. We have 
investigated those failures. We look forward and we hope that 
we can work together on those issues that I mentioned at the 
beginning: cybersecurity, ports, the vulnerability of our 
supply chain and a lot of those areas we do agree on. Where 
there is overlap, where do agree, we are going to move those 
things forward as quickly as we can.
    So, I look forward to doing that with you and your team. 
This committee is focused on strengthening our cyber work force 
and I have got a bill that I personally am leading and helping 
put together. We will get a copy of it to Director Easterly and 
make sure she gets eyes on it and others from your Department.
    We will want your help on that and I think you will like 
the bill that we are putting together.
    That really ends my comments for the day and again I thank 
you for coming. I understand the emotions of being here today.
    Without objection, the committee does stand in adjournment.
    [Whereupon, at 1:18 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]

                           A P P E N D I X  I

                              ----------                              

  Questions From Chairman Mark E. Green, M.D. for Honorable Alejandro 
                                Mayorkas
    Question 1. Last month, a Chinese illegal immigrant was arrested 
after driving onto a Marine Corps base in California without 
authorization and ignoring orders to leave. Chinese nationals 
encountered at the Southwest Border this year are up over 900 percent 
compared to just fiscal year 2022. Do you think there could be more 
threats among the 1.7 million inadmissible aliens you have paroled and 
the nearly 2 million who have evaded apprehension at the border? Yes, 
or no?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 2. Don't you think America's adversaries, such as China, 
would want to exploit our Southwest Border if it means they will be 
released into the country?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 3. Since fiscal year 2021, the Border Patrol has 
apprehended more than 351 individuals at the Southwest Border whose 
names appear on the terrorist watch list. We also know from several 
recent reports that agents have inadvertently released illegal aliens 
who later turned out to be on this list because agents did not have 
sufficient information at the time of release. In fact, I sent you a 
letter earlier this month asking why known terrorists are being 
released into the United States.
    Are vetting procedures sufficient to assure the American people 
that they are safe from terrorists and gang members coming across the 
border? Yes, or no?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 4a. How many terrorists or violent criminals are currently 
in the interior of the United States because they were not properly 
identified when they were initially processed by Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP)?
    Question 4b. How many of these criminals and suspected terrorists 
are you actively tracking down to arrest and deport?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 5a. What has happened to the 350+ individuals on the 
terrorist watch list apprehended by CBP?
    Have they all been removed from the United States?
    Question 5b. Are they still in U.S. Custody?
    Question 5c. Have they been released into the interior?
    Question 5d. If so, how many?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 6. You are using programs like CBP One and the 
Congressionally-unauthorized Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela 
parole program to facilitate illegal immigration. Many of those you are 
letting in using this latter program are from failed states or 
countries that have poor relations with the United States, such as Cuba 
and Venezuela.
    Are you able to conduct a meaningful background check on a foreign 
national who has never entered the United States if you do not have 
access to those countries' criminal records?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 7. Do you have access to criminal databases of countries 
of which we do not have relations? Yes, or no?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 8. How do you search records in real time for those who 
come from countries that do not maintain digitized records?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 9. Can you provide a list of countries with databases that 
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has real-time access to in 
order to conduct searches during processing and how comparable those 
databases are to U.S. criminal databases?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 10. You told Congress last week that sanctuary cities or 
States should work with U.S.A. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
(ICE) to arrest and deport individuals that pose ``a threat to public 
safety or national security.'' I agree, they should. Yet, ICE, under 
your leadership, has arrested and removed far fewer of these threats. 
In fiscal year 2019, 86 percent of ICE arrests were of criminal aliens, 
and 90 percent in fiscal year 2020--during COVID! That dropped to just 
32 percent in fiscal year 2022 and 43 percent in fiscal year 2023. In 
fiscal year 2019, 91 percent of ICE interior removals involved criminal 
aliens, 92 percent in fiscal year 2020. This dropped to 61 percent in 
fiscal year 2022 and 49 percent last year.
    Why should you expect these sanctuary cities to arrest more 
criminals when they see you doing the opposite?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 11. How can we take these comments seriously when you have 
placed a 3-year hold on onboarding new local law enforcement agencies 
under the 287g program to help ICE track down and arrest criminal 
aliens?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 12. Secretary Mayorkas, this fiscal year alone, the Border 
Patrol has recorded more than 22,000 apprehensions of Chinese nationals 
illegally crossing the Southwest Border. That's a 1,000 percent 
increase from the entirety of fiscal year 2019. Gloria Chavez, Chief 
Patrol Agent for the Rio Grande Valley Sector, told us last year that 
agents must use a taxpayer-funded translation service to interview 
these individuals, which can take 6 to 7 hours each. That represents as 
many as 154,000 man-hours just interviewing Chinese nationals. We have 
heard of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) special agents being 
relegated to handing out sandwiches at detention centers, now we have 
Border Patrol agents relegated to translating instead of locating and 
apprehending illegal aliens.
    Do you think this rising, unprecedented number of Chinese nationals 
crossing the Southwest Border illegally is a national security threat?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 13. Are Border Patrol agents tied up with translating when 
they could be protecting the homeland?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 14. In the budget request, DHS asks for an additional $1.4 
billion for the Shelter and Services Program through the border 
supplemental, which will fund non-governmental organizations (NGO) that 
help facilitate this border crisis. You have stated that some of those 
dollars will go to local jurisdictions to cover the costs your crisis 
has forced on them.
    Why don't you put those dollars toward more detention and removal 
resources so that those jurisdictions are less burdened in the first 
place?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 15. What is the number of known got-aways, or people who 
evaded Federal law enforcement so far, this fiscal year?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 16. Do you have any idea of how many of those got-aways 
were carrying fentanyl, which is responsible for killing thousands of 
Americans?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 17. In a recent House Appropriations Committee hearing on 
the budget, you stated that ``A separate $265 million would be used by 
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to bolster 
refugee processing as we continue to expand lawful pathways . . . ''.
    Is it your intent to secure DHS funding to expand and expedite 
alien processing versus securing our Southwest Border?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 18. I am concerned by the ease with which undocumented, 
unvetted individuals who have entered the United States illegally are 
able to utilize documents given to them by DHS to board commercial 
flights. This presents a significant security vulnerability to 
passenger aviation, as terrorists or other bad actors could utilize 
this vulnerability to board a flight or access a crowded airport.
    Is DHS allowing migrants who have crossed illegally into the United 
States to utilize DHS documents to board commercial aircraft without 
going through the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) 
passenger vetting process?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 19. I am concerned about TSA's slow time line for the 
development and deployment of new technology at security checkpoints. 
Currently, TSA is projecting that it will have all its new Checkpoint 
Property Screening Systems (CPSS) and second-generation Credential 
Authentication Technology (CAT-II) machines fully deployed in fiscal 
year 2042 and fiscal year 2049, respectively. This year's DHS budget 
proposes funding for the purchase of 83 new CPSS and 133 CAT-II 
machines.
    What impact will this have on the planned completion dates of full 
deployment of these systems?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 20. Aside from additional Congressional appropriations, 
what can DHS do to help accelerate these slow time lines?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 21. The crisis at the Southwest Border has turned into a 
large-scale humanitarian disaster. A large percentage of aliens are 
indebted to the cartels who bring them here, and many are physically 
abused or threatened. In fiscal year 2020, 250 aliens were found dead 
at the border. In fiscal year 2021, that number nearly doubled to 560. 
And it was reported that in fiscal year 2022, the number was up to 
nearly 900.
    How many were reported in fiscal year 2023?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 22. Who is responsible for these deaths, and do you feel 
any sense of responsibility for the policies that lead to their deaths?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 23. In fiscal year 2020, Border Patrol rescued, or saved 
from harm, nearly 1,200 aliens from drowning, dehydration, and 
starvation while they were attempting to cross the Southwest Border. In 
fiscal year 2021, that number more than doubled to 3,400 rescued aliens 
and it was reported that in fiscal year 2023, the number was up to 
7,100.
    How have these efforts affected CBP's work and resources?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 24. In fiscal year 2020, CBP encountered 34,100 
unaccompanied minors at the Southwest Border. In the subsequent 3 
fiscal years, that number was never below 137,000.
    Why is the Border Patrol finding hundreds of thousands of 
unaccompanied minors at our borders?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 25. Can you explain how your policies are not encouraging 
parents in other countries to send their children on the dangerous 
journey to the United States, considering that is what seems to be 
occurring?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 26. How are your policies not encouraging coyotes to 
continue to abandon minors at the border?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 27. In the fiscal year 2025 budget, your target is 75,000 
ICE arrests of criminal aliens in the United States.
    Why is the target of arrest of criminal aliens so low? Shouldn't 
the Department's target be 100 percent of all criminal aliens?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 28. Seventy-five thousand is 40 percent less than the ICE 
arrests under the Trump administration in 2019. Shockingly, 75,000 is 
17 percent lower than in 2020 under the Trump administration, which was 
at the height of COVID when most people weren't even leaving their 
homes!
    How do you justify such shockingly low ICE arrests of criminal 
aliens?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 29. Since January 2023, the number of criminal aliens you 
have released into the country has increased by more than 210,000, to 
over 617,000. This is a massive increase. It is unsustainable and it is 
a danger to our country.
    Americans want to know--why are you only allowing ICE to arrest 
75,000 instead of hundreds of thousands of arrests?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 30. In last year's supplemental funding package, DHS 
requested $4.7 billion for the Southwest Border Contingency Fund 
(SWBCF). Because of how this is structured, it would be harder to track 
and oversee than traditional appropriations.
    Mr. Mayorkas, how do you propose that would certify that encounter 
rates have reached a point that would trigger the Southwest Border 
Contingency Fund?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 31. Having an open-ended Contingency Fund seems to provide 
financial incentive to components and NGO's for increased encounters at 
the Southwest Border.
    How does access to this fund provide any incentive to reduce 
encounters?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 32. The President's Proposal for the SWBCF notably does 
not include additional resources for border barrier system and 
technology.
    Would you say that border barrier system and associated technology 
is an essential part of our border security?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 33. Which office would control the distribution of funds 
if the SWBCF were triggered?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 34. Language in the budget explicitly prohibits DHS from 
using this money to acquire, maintain, or extend border security 
technology or capabilities.
    If the money is meant to help CBP deal with the crisis, why are you 
prohibiting them from doing so?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 35a. CBP reports that there have been more than 200,000 
border crossings each month for most of the Biden presidency, and 
December 2023 saw the highest numbers at over 300,000 encounters just 
along the Southwest Border. CBP reports that aliens from far away 
adversarial countries, such as China and Russia, are arriving at our 
Southwest Border in never-seen-before numbers.
    Do you think Biden's open border policies and rhetoric have 
encouraged this mass flow of migrants from all over the world, 
including adversarial countries?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 35b. Can you be sure that these aliens from adversarial 
countries do not pose a national security threat to the United States?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 36. How many of those encountered are expelled on grounds 
of espionage, terrorism, or threat to the American homeland?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 37. How does the budget request for DHS reflect this 
heightened threat landscape?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 38. Fiscal year 2025 includes the Presidential election in 
November. While DHS has an important role to play in protecting cyber 
and physical infrastructure, DHS, and specifically the Cybersecurity 
and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), should not tread into First 
Amendment territory with efforts to curb mis-, dis-, and mal-
information.
    Will any of DHS's budget go toward mis-, dis-, and mal-information?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 39. How does DHS plan to use resources requested under 
this budget for election-related activities?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 40. Are you stating that DHS currently has a working 
relationship to receive criminal background information on Haitian 
nationals from the prison gangs with their de facto leader ``Barbeque'' 
who runs large parts of Haiti?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 41. Three weeks ago, the large container ship M/V Dali 
crashed into Baltimore's Francis Scott Key Bridge resulting in the 
deaths of 6 individuals and the suspension of vessel traffic in and out 
of the Port of Baltimore. According to news reporting, when asked about 
new regulations following the crash, CISA, the Coast Guard, DHS, and 
the Department of Transportation (DOT) pointed elsewhere for 
jurisdiction. Chad Sweet, former chief of staff to the first DHS 
Secretary for the United States, Michael Chertoff, told CNBC recently 
that this passing of regulatory responsibility is a ``gap'' in national 
security revealed by the bridge collapse.
    How can this ``gap'' in national security caused by a burdensome 
bureaucratic structure be remedied to prevent future disasters and 
security threats at our ports?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 42. Secretary Mayorkas, the devastation caused by the 
destruction of Baltimore's Francis Scott Key Bridge illuminates both 
the importance and fragility of the maritime sector, a major component 
of our critical infrastructure and supply chain.
    How is DHS working to protect our maritime infrastructure, 
specifically through cybersecurity, from state adversaries like the 
People's Republic of China (PRC) and non-state actors including 
terrorist organizations who may see this event as an opportunity or may 
be inspired to target port operational technology?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 43. The vast majority of ship-to-shore cranes used at 
American maritime ports are manufactured by the Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy 
Industries Company Limited (ZPMC), a state-owned Chinese company 
controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). We have already seen 
attempts by the CCP to take advantage of this vulnerable access point 
to U.S. ports. In 2021, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 
discovered intelligence-gathering equipment on board a vessel 
delivering ZPMC cranes to the Port of Baltimore.
    How is DHS, the Coast Guard, CISA, and other DHS components working 
with other maritime stakeholders to ensure terminal operators are 
prepared to deter and counter threats?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 44. In February, the White House released an Executive 
Order on port security and the Coast Guard released a Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on Cybersecurity in the Marine 
Transportation System. Both will look at reporting requirements, which 
CISA is also doing under the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical 
Infrastructure Act of 2022 (CIRCIA) NPRM.
    How does the budget ensure that CISA's efforts to implement CIRCIA 
and the Coast Guard's efforts to develop regulations for ports are 
harmonized?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 45. President Biden's campaign maintains a TikTok account. 
However, your own Department has rightfully banned the use of the app 
on Government devices.
    Do you see TikTok, and other CCP-affiliated platforms such as Temu, 
as a danger to U.S. national security?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 46. Would you advise the Biden administration or Biden 
campaign not to use TikTok given the security risks?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 47a. Chief Patrol Agent Anthony Good told this committee 
last year that they ``cannot vet them all,'' when it comes to Chinese 
nationals illegally crossing the border. He added concerns that 
information can be hidden regarding a person's agenda, ideologies, or 
reasons for coming. Our committee has been informed that some of these 
Chinese nationals have ties to the People's Liberation Army and the 
CCP.
    Are you aware that a leaked CBP memo from last year even revealed 
that Border Patrol agents have been instructed to ask far fewer vetting 
questions for Chinese nationals crossing the border illegally?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 47b. Is it possible there are now direct links to the CCP 
within the United States that, if not already, could be mobilized to 
conduct espionage and surveillance against the United States?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 48a. I want to focus on cybersecurity for a moment, 
another key priority of this committee. DHS is tasked with protecting 
our critical infrastructure, specifically through cybersecurity, from 
adversaries like China and Iran who are seeking opportunities every day 
to target our infrastructure. On February 7, CISA released an alarming 
advisory about the ``pre-positioning'' of Volt Typhoon, a PRC state-
sponsored actor, in the information technology (IT) environments of 
several critical infrastructure sectors, including energy, 
communications, and water systems.
    Can you please describe the distinct steps CISA has taken to 
address the threat posed by Volt Typhoon?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 48b. More broadly, how does your budget position DHS to 
get ahead of threats to critical infrastructure like Volt Typhoon?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 49a. The Joint Cyber Defense Collaborative (JCDC) has been 
a priority CISA initiative for this administration. However, Congress 
has received little information about how the JCDC functions, plans, 
and engages with stakeholders. As a result, we are only left with 
largely negative industry feedback about its value and a scathing 
Politico article, which included a quote that said JCDC ``has been dead 
for a while now.''
    Make the case for the JCDC. Why should it receive any funding if 
industry partners do not see its value?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 49b. Why is funding the JCDC a better investment than 
existing efforts in CISA that will be eliminated or reduced to support 
the JCDC?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 50. How does CISA's budget ensure the United States can be 
a proactive, instead of a reactive, cyber defender?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 51a. The NPRM states that ``While CISA agrees that there 
could be some point at which the number of reports submitted begins to 
yield diminishing marginal returns, CISA believes that, due to advances 
in technology and strategies for managing large data sets, the 
potential challenges associated with receiving large volumes of reports 
can be mitigated through technological and procedural strategies.''
    How does this budget request fulfill the assumption that CISA will 
have the right technologies to receive and process the information it 
will collect under CIRCIA?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 51b. How does the budget ensure that these technologies 
will ensure information collection is useful and not an additional 
burden on industry?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 52. It was reported earlier this year that you admitted to 
Border Patrol agents in Texas that roughly 85 percent of illegal aliens 
apprehended were released into the interior. In the first 2 years of 
the Biden administration CBP released over 3 times the number of aliens 
than under the Trump administration. Jason Owens, Border Patrol chief, 
told our committee during an official interview: ``there are more 
people probably that are being released on their own recognizance to 
await their immigration hearing than I have seen in my career.'' That 
is astounding and terrible for America! He also said illegal aliens are 
turning themselves in because they believe, ``they're going to be 
processed and given a notice to appear so that they can await their 
immigration hearing in the United States.'' This is a racket! It's your 
racket. You have incentivized criminality. Anthony ``Scott'' Good, 
Chief Patrol Agent of the El Paso Sector, told us, ``I would say that 
the more people that are released, the more there is a draw.''
    Do you agree with your most senior Border Patrol agents that 
detention is a necessity, and that mass-release of illegal aliens is 
encouraging more to cross illegally?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 53. Last year Yuma Sector Chief Patrol Agent Sean McGoffin 
told the committee that it is a ``matter of border security policy to 
maintain detention'' on illegal aliens until their immigration case is 
heard. Let me say this: your Department has prioritized releasing 
illegal aliens into the public, dangerously jeopardizing homeland 
security.
    Do you agree with Chief McGoffin's assessment?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 54. You have previously stated--falsely, I would add--that 
your policies of mass-parole are above-board and have been used by 
prior administrations. This is despite your directing more than 1.7 
million paroles in just over 3 years--unprecedented. We all know 
there's no way you can be issuing these paroles on the required case-
by-case basis, as the law mandates. Even Bill Clinton's former 
Immigrations and Naturalization Service (INS) commissioner has said 
your use of mass parole is unprecedented.
    Do you take responsibility for your directives of mass parole?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 55. The DHS budget only asks for enough funding for 350 
new Border Patrol agents. However, in your supplemental budget request 
last year, you asked for roughly 1,300 new agents.
    Can you explain the discrepancy, or does it show that your 
supplemental request was just partisan, political posturing to make it 
look like you were acting seriously about the border crisis?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 56. In your fiscal year 2025 budget, you request $16 
million to support the planning and prepositioning of assets needed for 
the protection of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, which will be hosted in 
North America. The World Cup will bring thousands of people from across 
the world to the United States and an event this size poses many 
challenges such as: the threat of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) 
attacking a crowd, the trafficking of narcotics, sex trafficking, and 
an increased threat to our law enforcement officers who work tirelessly 
to protect the American people. Your track record is abysmal. Under 
your leadership, we have seen 7,444,308 migrant encounters at the 
border; 85,000 children missing when they were transferred from CBP to 
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); and historic amounts 
of migrants from countries such as Venezuela and China. Americans are 
dying on your watch.
    What steps are you taking to ensure these failures do not continue 
and all threats are mitigated during the FIFA World Cup?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 57. I am not convinced that you are doing everything in 
your power to protect the American people. I hope that come 2026, you 
are no longer the Secretary of Homeland Security. The Biden 
administration continues to play games when it comes to ICE detention 
facilities throughout the country. In fact, it appears that you are 
coordinating with the Department to minimize detentions and maximize 
non-detentions.
    Why is the Department prioritizing non-detentions of illegal aliens 
in ICE custody?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 58. The Adelanto detention facility in southern California 
has the capacity to hold roughly 2,000 illegal aliens at a time. You 
have refused to challenge an outdated court order issued during the 
pandemic keeping you from sending more illegal aliens to the facility.
    Will you challenge this court order?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 59. Have you reached a determination on what to do with 
the facility? If not, why not? If so, when?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 60a. You have lauded the CBP One app as a key tool in your 
``migration management'' plan. Over 501,000 individuals have made 
appointments to present at Southwest Border ports of entry. According 
to data shared with the committee, 96 percent of 278,000+ inadmissible 
aliens who scheduled appointments through the app from January 12, 
2023, through September 30, 2023, were issued a ``Notice to Appear'' 
and released into the United States on parole.
    Can you tell the committee how many individuals have been released 
on parole into the United States after making an appointment on CBP 
One?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 60b. Can you guarantee that every individual paroled after 
making an appointment on CBP One does not pose a national security 
threat that might have been missed in any vetting that was done?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 61. The fiscal year 2025 DHS budget proposes ending the 
diversion of the Aviation Passenger Security Fee (PSF), or 9/11 
Security Fee, to the Treasury. The 2024 appropriations package ended 
half of the diversion and returned the $800 million to DHS. The fee, 
which is collected from commercial airline passengers, was intended to 
help fund TSA's security operations at airports. However, a portion of 
the funds are still diverted from TSA to pay for unrelated Government 
spending.
    If the PSF diversion is ended, will the entirety of the fee be used 
to pay for TSA operations as originally intended? If not, does DHS have 
plans to utilize these funds for other purposes or other DHS component 
agencies?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 62a. In 2019, the Trump administration implemented a 
policy requiring DNA testing of family units apprehended at the 
Southwest Border. The policy was implemented to determine whether 
groups presenting themselves to Border Patrol as ``family units'' were 
actually related or simply grouped together by the cartels smuggling 
them across. At the time, as many as 30 percent of adults arriving at 
the border with minors were not biologically or legally related. CBP 
ended this testing last year and the committee was told that testing is 
now only done on an ``ad hoc basis.''
    Are you aware that your budget request does not ask for any new 
funding to support DNA testing?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 62b. Why would you end a vital method of ensuring that 
unaccompanied children are not being abused and exploited by the 
cartels?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 63. The Department's initial schedule for the 
implementation of the Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology (HART) 
system, which aims to consolidate all biometric identity information 
across the Department, was scheduled to reach full program completion 
by June 30, 2024, according to its May 2019 initial plan.
    Is the Department still expecting to reach this deadline?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 64. On September 12, 2023, the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) published a report on the implementation of the HART 
system, finding that the Department would require a third re-baseline 
that would again drive up the costs of the system. The President's 
fiscal year 2025 budget request states that DHS will transition from 
the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) to the HART 
system by fiscal year 2025.
    How can the Department ensure the transition occurs on time, given 
that it has already faced 3 postponements?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 65. Of the 9 recommendations in the GAO report, all 9 
remain open.
    Does the Department have any time line in place to implement the 
recommendations provided by GAO?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 66. Mr. Secretary, we are expecting a rewrite of 
Presidential Policy Directive-21 (PPD-21), which outlines the roles and 
responsibilities of each Sector Risk Management Agency (SRMA).
    How does the budget reflect new responsibilities that CISA may need 
to assume under PPD-21 as an SRMA and as National Coordinator of SRMAs?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 67a. Funding for the National Risk Management Center 
(NRMC) was cut by over $20 million in this budget request, including 
what appears to be more than half of the funding for risk management 
research and development.
    Can you please walk us through decisions to reduce funding for the 
NRMC, and how it plans to fully execute its priorities: SRMA analytic 
support, analytic capability development and integration, and election 
security?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 68. Last month, Robert Wells, assistant director of the 
Counterterrorism Division at the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), 
told the committee that the agency believes Iran is capable of a 
``variety of attack options against U.S. targets, to include cyber 
operations intended to sabotage public and private infrastructure.''
    As the world descends into the realm of cyber warfare, how is DHS, 
and CISA specifically, ensuring preparedness across critical 
infrastructure, both those operated by private and public entities?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 69. From 2001 to 2021, Qatar donated $4.7 billion to 
institutions of higher education in the United States.
    How is DHS working to combat the malign influence of regimes like 
Qatar, which is affiliated with Hamas, at institutions of higher 
education--especially as this could help spread antisemitism that is 
then used to inspire home-grown terrorism that bolsters Iran proxies, 
such as Hamas and Hizballah?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 70. The committee heard from Office of Intelligence and 
Analysis (I&A) stakeholders in a recent roundtable, in which 
bureaucratic barriers to timely info sharing were mentioned.
    How is I&A working to coordinate better with State and local 
authorities in the wake of uncovered plots by Iran proxies to 
assassinate former U.S. national security officials, and other growing 
domestic threats from the Islamic Republic?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 71. Over the past several decades, the PRC has taken an 
increasingly aggressive posture on the world stage. The PRC has 
committed humanitarian violations, supported the traffic of illicit 
fentanyl, and established predatory economic practices to edge ahead in 
its peer competition with the United States. In response to this 
aggression, the United States has drastically scaled back any funding 
it provides to the PRC.
    At this time, does the Department provide any funding to the PRC? 
If so, how much funding is provided and for what reason? If you can't 
answer this, will you answer where you think we should be funding the 
PRC in any way?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 72a. In late March of this year, numerous hackers linked 
to the CCP launched a series of cyber attacks targeting U.S. officials, 
journalists, and American and British corporations. This led to the 
U.S. Department of Justice charging 7 hackers, all of whom are believed 
to be living in China. On March 6, 2024, the New York Post reported 
that your Department is spending $3 million on a private law firm to 
defend you in the on-going impeachment process. That equals the salary 
of roughly 70 new Border Patrol agents. Clearly you believe defending 
yourself is more important than defending the border.
    Can you confirm that the approximate amount that American taxpayers 
are paying for a private law firm to defend you against charges is $3 
million?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 72b. Do you deserve such a benefit since you are willfully 
and systemically refusing to comply with the law?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 73. What kind of message do you think it sends to your 
Border Patrol agents when you're calling for more resources from 
Congress, but also spending Department funds for your own political 
survival?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 74. Do you take responsibility for the nightmare your 
decisions are putting Border Patrol agents, CBP officers, and ICE 
Office of Removal Operations (ERO) officers, and HSI special agents 
through?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 75. In January 2024, ICE arrested an illegal alien in 
Minnesota who belonged to the Somali terrorist group al-Shabaab. The 
individual had lived freely in the country for nearly a year after 
being caught and released by Border Patrol crossing the border in San 
Ysidro, California, in March 2023.
    Rep. Pfluger asked you this question last year, but I am going to 
ask again because I think the American people deserve an answer: Do you 
or do you not have a policy to detain all inadmissible aliens on the 
terrorist watch list without exception?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 76. FBI Director Chris Wray hinted before this committee 
that there may be more out there--are there others we don't know about 
today?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 77. The DHS budget zeroes out funding for Non-Intrusive 
Inspection (NII), despite your repeated requests for NII funding in 
last year's border security supplemental.
    Is stopping the flow of fentanyl a priority for your Department?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 78. Why aren't you asking to fund NII in this year's 
official budget?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 79. CISA's tabletop exercises are a core service the 
agency provides to the critical infrastructure community to ensure the 
security and resilience of our Nation's vital functions. It is also one 
of the most in-demand services. However, CISA Exercises appears to have 
taken a budget cut in fiscal year 2025.
    How is the Department planning to meet the growing demand for 
tabletop exercises?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 80. In May 2022, you told a Senate committee that 
detention ``has been misused in the immigration system for many 
years.'' Do you stand by this statement?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 81. CBP spends millions of dollars on the CBP One app to 
fast-track aliens into the interior. In August 2023, it was reported 
that the cartels had hijacked the app using Virtual Private Networks 
(VPN) to register individuals for appointments even if they were not in 
northern Mexico, as your policy requires. The report also notes you 
were briefed about these vulnerabilities.
    Did you know the cartels were using the app in this manner?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 82. Just a few days prior, you told the House Judiciary 
Committee under oath that the app, ``cuts out the smuggling 
organizations that impose such tragedy and trauma on vulnerable 
individuals purely for the sake of profit,'' but this report shows that 
cartels were making money from the app.
    Were you lying to the Judiciary Committee? Didn't this app just 
open new revenue streams for the cartels?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 83. Are there still vulnerabilities in the app that are 
being exploited by the cartels?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 84. Since January 2021, around 2 million illegal alien 
got-aways have evaded Border Patrol and entered the country. Most 
recently in fiscal year 2023, at least 600,000 illegal alien got-aways 
were recorded.
    Do you think it's possible that some of these 2 million got-aways 
are on the terrorist watch list? [IF NO]--Please explain to the 
committee how you know for a fact that none of the 2 million got-aways 
are on any terrorist watch list or criminal database?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 85. Does DHS have a plan to locate all the got-aways, 
especially violent criminals or those who may be on the terrorist watch 
list?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 86. Can you guarantee the American people that known or 
suspected terrorists are not amongst these got-aways?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 87. In the fiscal year 2025 budget request, the President 
requested $100.5 million for the Science & Technology Directorate's 
(S&T) Border Security Thrust Area. Within this program, S&T has led 
efforts to develop new digital forensic tools to protect children from 
on-line sexual abuse.
    Can you elaborate on how the Countering Child Sexual Exploitation 
and Abuse program will help protect children from sexual abuse?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 88. The Budget Overview stated that ``New child 
exploitation cases are growing exponentially with seized images often 
exceeding 900,000 each week.''
    As you have worked with HSI, do you know the cause of this 
increase?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 89. Are you working on an Artificial Intelligence (AI) 
tool to sift through images and evidence, or what kind of technology 
are you considering?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 90. How is this program different from the Transnational 
Organized Crime and Counter Networks program, which, according to the 
Budget Overview, will also target ``crimes of human trafficking, forced 
labor, and child sexual exploitation.
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 91. The fiscal year 2025 Office of Countering Weapons of 
Mass Destruction (CWMD) Budget Overview stated that the Biological 
Detection for the 21st Century (BD-21) program was rendered 
``obsolete'' after a capabilities assessment.
    What did the assessment reveal about the BD-21 program? Why was it 
rendered obsolete?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 92. CWMD is transitioning from BD-21 into an Environmental 
Biodetection (EBD) Capability Development and Maturation project. The 
fiscal year 2025 President's budget requests $7.8 million for this new 
project.
    How will the EBD program differ from BD-21?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 93. What will CWMD do to ensure that new biodetection 
technology is efficiently acquired to improve the detect-to-warn time 
line?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 94. Based on your awareness--however limited that may 
actually be--of what is going on at our Southwest Border, would you 
acknowledge that the Mexican cartels are using the flood of millions of 
illegal aliens to essentially facilitate the importation of even more 
fentanyl into the United States??
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 95. A GAO report titled ``Office of Intelligence and 
Analysis Should Improve Privacy Oversight and Assessment of its 
Effectiveness'' states that I&A has not produced or submitted required 
reports on the feedback it collects from customers. The Homeland 
Security Act of 2002 requires I&A to produce these reports and submit 
them to Congress. Furthermore, I&A failed to complete periodic 
compliance reviews between January 2017 and September 2022 because 
officials stated that they ``did not document all the reviews they said 
they completed.'' Finally, GAO stated that ``I&A's performance measures 
generally do not align with its strategic goals; therefore, I&A is 
unable to assess progress toward its strategic goals.'' I&A is 
responsible for providing timely and accurate intelligence to various 
DHS components and State, local, Tribal, and territorial partners. 
However, we could talk for hours about the failures and inefficiencies 
present at I&A.
    What are you doing to ensure that these inefficiencies are 
addressed during your time as Secretary?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 96. In your fiscal year 2025 budget request for I&A there 
is a budget increase to $348,302,000 from fiscal year 2024, which was 
$316,640,000.
    How will these additional funds assist the Office of Intelligence 
and Analysis since they have struggled to execute its statutory 
mission?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
   Questions From Honorable Delia C. Ramirez for Honorable Alejandro 
                                Mayorkas
    Question 1. What does USCIS need to continue decreasing backlogs 
and fulfilling our promise as a Nation of welcome and possibility?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 2. Do you think the Biden administration's calls for $1.4 
billion for Shelter and Services Program (SSP) funding in the 
supplemental, and no specific carveout in fiscal year 2025, is 
sufficient to meet the needs of impacted border and interior 
communities?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 3. What is DHS's plan to better coordinate a unified 
integration and care response for new arrivals with other Federal 
agencies, State and local governments, and community-based 
organizations?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 4. Why does the President's fiscal year 2025 budget 
request include $2 billion to sustain 34,000 ICE immigration detention 
beds and $360 million for ICE's non-community-based alternatives to 
detention models that require intensive supervision and surveillance 
versus $15 million for the Case Management Pilot Program? Research 
shows community-based case management alternatives to detention are far 
more cost-effective, costing less than $50 a day per person versus $164 
per ICE detention bed. They are extremely effective, as more than 95 
percent of participants comply with immigration requirements. And they 
are far less retraumatizing than other alternatives to detention that 
function as non-physical prisons and, of course, far more humane than 
detention.
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
    Question 5. What percentage of ICE ERO's budget is allocated toward 
language services for individuals who are detained and have limited or 
no English proficiency?
    Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.

                          A P P E N D I X  I I

                              ----------                              

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 ______
                                 
               President Biden's New Plan To Regulate AI
                   now comes the hard part: congress
By Sara Morrisonsara@vox.com
Oct 31, 2023, 2:45pm EDT
    Since the widespread release of generative AI systems like ChatGPT, 
there's been an increasingly loud call to regulate them, given how 
powerful, transformative, and potentially dangerous the technology can 
be. President Joe Biden's long-promised Executive Order on the Safe, 
Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence 
is an attempt to do just that, through the lens of the administration's 
stated goals and within the limits of the executive branch's power. The 
order, which the president signed on Monday, builds on previous 
administration efforts to ensure that powerful AI systems are safe and 
being used responsibly.
    ``This landmark executive order is a testament of what we stand 
for: safety, security, trust, openness, American leadership, and the 
undeniable rights endowed by a creator that no creation can take 
away,'' Biden said in a short speech before signing the order.
    The lengthy order is an ambitious attempt to accommodate the hopes 
and fears of everyone from tech CEOs to civil rights advocates, while 
spelling out how Biden's vision for AI works with his vision for 
everything else. It also shows the limits of the executive branch's 
power. While the order has more teeth to it than the voluntary 
commitments Biden has secured from some of the biggest AI companies, 
many of its provisions don't (and can't) have the force of law behind 
them, and their effectiveness will largely depend on how the agencies 
named within the order carry them out. They may also depend on if those 
agencies' abilities to make such regulations are challenged in court.
    Broadly summarized, the order directs various Federal agencies and 
departments that oversee everything from housing to health to national 
security to create standards and regulations for the use or oversight 
of AI. These include guidance on the responsible use of AI in areas 
like criminal justice, education, health care, housing, and labor, with 
a focus on protecting Americans' civil rights and liberties. The 
agencies and departments will also develop guidelines that AI 
developers must adhere to as they build and deploy this technology, and 
dictate how the government uses AI. There will be new reporting and 
testing requirements for the AI companies behind the largest and most 
powerful models. The responsible use (and creation) of safer AI systems 
is encouraged as much as possible.
    The Biden administration made sure to frame the order as a way to 
balance AI's potential risks with its rewards: ``It's the next step in 
an aggressive strategy to do everything on all fronts to harness the 
benefits of AI and mitigate the risks,'' White House deputy chief of 
staff Bruce Reed said in a statement.
What the order does . . . 
    The order invokes the Defense Production Act to require companies 
to notify the Federal Government when training an AI model that poses a 
serious risk to national security or public health and safety. They 
must also share results of their risk assessment, or red team, testing 
with the government. The Department of Commerce will determine the 
technical thresholds that models must meet for the rule to apply to 
them, likely limiting it to the models with the most computing power.
    The National Institute of Standards and Technology will also set 
red team testing standards that these companies must follow, and the 
Departments of Energy and Homeland Security will evaluate various risks 
that could be posed by those models, including the threat that they 
could be employed to help make biological or nuclear weapons. The DHS 
will also establish an AI Safety and Security Board comprised of 
experts from the private and public sector, which will advise the 
government on the use of AI in ``critical infrastructure.'' Notably, 
these rules largely apply to systems that are developed going forward--
not what's already out there.
    Fears that AI could be used to create chemical, biological, 
radioactive, or nuclear (CBRN) weapons are addressed in a few ways. The 
DHS will evaluate the potential for AI to be used to produce CBRN 
threats (as well as its potential to counter them), and the DOD will 
produce a study that looks at AI biosecurity risks and comes up with 
recommendations to mitigate them.
    Of particular concern here is the production of synthetic nucleic 
acids--genetic material--using AI. In synthetic biology, researchers 
and companies can order synthetic nucleic acids from commercial 
providers, which they can then use to genetically engineer products. 
The fear is that an AI model could be deployed to plot out, say, the 
genetic makeup of a dangerous virus, which could be synthesized using 
commercial genetic material in a lab.
    The Office of Science and Technology Policy will work with various 
departments to create a framework for screening monitoring synthetic 
nucleic acid procurement, the DHS will ensure it's being adhered to, 
and the Commerce Department will also create rules and best practices 
for screening synthetic nucleic acid sequence providers to ensure that 
they're following that framework. Research projects that include 
synthetic nucleic acids must ensure that providers adhere to the 
framework before they can receive funding from Federal agencies.
    The order has provisions for preserving Americans' privacy, 
although it acknowledges that the ability to do so is limited without a 
Federal data privacy law and calls on Congress to pass one. Good luck 
with that; while Congress has put forward various data privacy bills 
over the years and the need for such regulations seems more than clear 
by now, it has yet to get close to passing any of them.
    Another concern about AI is its ability to produce deepfakes: text, 
images, and sounds that are impossible to tell apart from those created 
by humans. Biden noted in his speech that he's been fooled by deepfakes 
of himself. The EO calls for the Department of Commerce to create and 
issue guidance on best practices to detect AI-generated content. But 
that call is a far cry from having the technology to actually do so, 
something that has eluded even the leading companies in the space.
 . . . and why it's not enough
    Even before the order, Biden had taken various actions related to 
AI, like the White House's Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights and 
securing voluntary safety commitments from tech companies that develop 
or use AI. While the new Biden EO is being hailed as the ``first action 
of its kind'' in US government history, the Trump administration issued 
an AI EO of its own back in 2019, which laid out the government's 
investment in and standards for the use of AI. But that, of course, 
predated the widespread release of powerful generative AI models that 
has brought increased attention to--and concern about--the use of AI.
    That said, the order is not meant to be the only action the 
government takes. The legislative branch has work to do, too. Senate 
Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, whom Biden singled out for praise during 
the order signing, attempted to take the reins in April with the 
release of a framework for AI legislation; he's also organized closed 
meetings with tech CEOs to give them a private forum for input on how 
they should be regulated. The Senate Judiciary subcommittee on privacy, 
technology, and the law put forward a bipartisan framework in 
September.
    Rep Don Beyer (D-VA), vice chair of the House's AI Caucus, said in 
a statement that the order was a ``comprehensive strategy for 
responsible innovation,'' but that it was now ``necessary for Congress 
to step up and legislate strong standards for equity, bias, risk 
management, and consumer protection.''
    While the Biden administration repeatedly claimed that this is the 
most any government has done to ensure AI safety, several countries 
have also taken action, most notably in the European Union. The EU's AI 
Act has been in the works since 2021, though it had to be revised to 
incorporate generative AI and the US reportedly isn't thrilled with it. 
China created rules for the use of generative AI last summer. The G7 is 
currently figuring out a framework for AI rules and laws, and just 
announced that they've reached an agreement on guiding principles and a 
voluntary code of conduct. Vice President Kamala Harris will be in 
England this week for an international summit on regulating the 
technology.
    As for whether the order managed to be all things to all people, 
the general response seems to be cautious optimism, with the 
recognition that the order has limits and is only a start. Microsoft 
president Brad Smith called it ``another critical step forward,'' while 
the digital rights advocacy group Fight for the Future said in a 
statement that it was a ``positive step,'' but that it was waiting to 
see if and how agencies carried the mandates out.
    ``We face a genuine inflection point,'' Biden said in his speech, 
``one of those moments where the decisions we make in the very near 
term are going to set the course for the next decades . . . There's no 
greater change that I can think of in my life than AI presents.''

                                 [all]
```