c-span powered by cable. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? it is way more than that. comcast is partnering th community centers to create wi- fi enabled community center so they can be ready for anything. comcast supports c-span's public service as well as these providers giving your front row seat to democracy.

the homeland security secretary testified before the security committee on the 2025 budget request and the hearing entered before the house delivered two impeachment articles against him to the senate in both of those were later dismissed. [inaudible conversations]

>> the committee will come to order. without objection the committee may recess at any point. good morning, secretary mayorkas, and thank you for >> the committee will come to order and without objection the committee may recess at inany point. good morning, secretary mayorkas, and thank you for joining the committee to discuss the budget that you and the president have put forth for the department of homeland security and on march 1 the department celebrated its 21st anniversary. i want to thank the public servants throughout dhs to dedicate their lives to securing the homeland in this work is vital that the safety of the nation and the security. when you took the oath of office, you swore to support and defend the constitution of the u.s. against all enemies foreign and domestic and there discharge the duties of the office. and the immigration and nationality act makes clear further that you have a duty to

control and guard the borders and the boundaries and borders of the united states. during your three years as secretary, you failed to fulfill this oath and 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 her first day in office and we have witnessed a devastating results of your open border agenda and i shared this before but i do feel it is necessary to repeat. you abolished working policies and in following the statements of your boss and his campaign trail, promises to improperly grant asylum to anybody who came in as a result people from all over the world tested the system and came in were released and they did that in the mass waves began in the cartels took advantage and regulated that flow to overwhelm across our border and you responded by removing the agents from the border and

marshall's and to process and release these people and to violate laws passed by this with detention and removal. with the border wide open and occupied processing the mass waves of people, they support drugs, criminals and trafficked humans and this led to the deaths of thousands and the loss of billions of dollars and created a crisis that you finally acknowledged as such in recent testimony. even your counterpart the fbi director christopher wray has said there isn't a way to ensure hamas and other terrorist are now part of the other got aways who left the country on caught during your watch and hear those encountered in 2023 adds to the threat we face at home because you chose not to enforce the law and your refusal to follow those laws is contemptible and your disregard of the request

of this branch of government in pursuit of the constitutional duty to conduct oversight and your statements to this body of 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 but instead of acknowledging the failures and changing course, your actions remain unchanged. you have doubled down. this budget request reflects this obstinance. it fails to take seriously the crises threatening the national security interest especially with the wide-open borders and you do requesting 1.45 billion dollars cut in topline spending for the cdp budget from what congress enacted last year including a $245 million cut funding for the border security operations budget. and instead as you did in the other budget you proposed a $4.7 billion slush fund called the southwest border contingency fund which, ironically, wouldn't use to restore the border but process

and release more legal aliens quick we and the interior. and i may remind you that the founders, one of the executive branch, if the founders wanted the executive branch to get a slush fund, it would not have detailed the funding details of this body for the division of power and again that is treading on the constitution. and this won't solve the humanitarian crisis it facilitated while trying to hide the truth from the american people in your budget proposal provides for 350 new border patrol agents and the fact packed and 23 provided funding for eight times that number. the budget only request funding for 34,000 and by comparison in fy 2021 the previous administration requested 60,000 ice beds at a time when illegal crossings were at their lowest. your targets for removals of illegal aliens are at this point 20 amid the covid-19

pandemic and i.c.e. removed 185,884 aliens while in fiscal year 19 i.c.e. removal succeeded 267,000. last year despite 3.2 million inadmissible encounters at the border, 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 the roughly 2 million got aways on your watch to say nothing of the millions of encounters, many of whom have been released and meanwhile the chinese communist party carries out multifaceted covert espionage and missions against the u.s. and beijing has shown if we give an inch they take a mile and, or secretary, you have given them 1951 miles of the southern border. while we are appalled by the handling of the immigration issues, this looks to work with

the department on key issues and this past february the administration issued an executive order for providing for more stringent cyber security at the ports as well as an emphasis of supply chain security and we support these initiatives in your proposal recognizes that the cyber workforce is vital to the protection of our homeland strengthening the cyber work force pipeline. it is a top priority for the remainder of the year. it is imperative that the employees you requested for the agency are utilized effectively. to that end i must ensure that authorities and resources align with the mission. secretary, the world is growing more dangerous and the adversaries in china, russia, iran and elsewhere are expanding capabilities to undermine our interests within the homeland and wall parts of this request deal with some of those threats, the request is a whole fails to meet the important time we have. i now recognize the ranking member, the gentleman from mississippi for his opening

statement. thank you and good morning. i do want to begin by thinking secretary mayorkas for being here today. your testimony before this despite unfounded extreme attacks against you speaks to your character, integrity and commitment to the department of homeland security, its mission and people. and in what seems like a split screen, this morning the committee is holding its annual hearing in the department of homeland security budget request and this afternoon republican members will deliver to the senate their baseless articles of impeachment and perhaps the most politicized partisan stunned this committee has ever engaged in and from the moment the secretary took office in 2021 members of the other side of the aisle and they have targeted for their

gain. chairman greene promised donors at a campaign event that he would bring an impeachment case against him and he told his contributors to get the popcorn and propolis -- promised it would be fun. according to an internal republican memo, republicans have already scheduled a committee vote to impeach the secretary prior to holding a hearing and this was a sham from the start. after two hastily throwing together so-called impeachment hearings, they provided not even a shred of evidence of and impeachable offense and republicans short-circuited their own marker and refuse to let democrats off in their rush to the house floor. and in advance of the vote, the secretary who is jewish and whose mother survived the

holocaust, was referred to using language the american jewish community has included in its glossary of anti-semitic terms. and here with unanimous consent insert in the record an article describing this incident. >> so ordered. >> the impeachment vote failed and in another embarrassing miscalculation of house republican leadership on the second try, republicans limped their sham impeachment articles across the finish line and over two months later republicans are still transmitting the impeachment articles to the senate at a time when they waited until it was politically advantageous and so much for the claims of urgency about the border. they wanted to have a dog and pony show march into the senate showing yet again what deeply unserious people they are.

the senate ship is amiss with baseless impeachment articles without delay and to make matters worse in their zeal to impeach the secretary, republicans have shirked their responsibility to conduct meaningful oversight of dhs and advanced many critical missions and republicans have not yet failed a single full committed oversight hearing on cyber security and domestic terrorism and aviation security, disaster preparedness and response or election security to this congress and for a commitment 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. at the time or by this time

last congress the committee had reported 49 measures during a global pandemic and this congress by contrast, the full committee, has reported fewer than half that number and this is what happens when republicans make somebody who espouses political violence and pushes anti-semitic tropes and wants to defund the fbi and the de facto leader of their party and this is what happens when republicans prioritize the whims of members and this served the american people and it is chaos and dysfunction by design and if you don't believe me, look at how long it took us to elect a speaker. we did nothing but vote after vote after vote. and to add insult to injury democrats were accused of

slowing things down. we are the minority party and not in charge and if republicans are looking for somebody to hold accountable, they should start looking in the mirror. through it all, secretary mayorkas has remained steadfast and continues to do his job of security missions including border security and immigration enforcement. he has used the full range of authorities at his disposal and stretch the resources provided by congress to secure the border and under his leadership the department has removed record levels of migrants containing more people than congress provided funding for and prevented unprecedented amounts of fentanyl from entering our communities and republicans talk about supporting border security but talk is cheap.

and if republicans were serious about improving conditions along the border, they would provide the department of funding necessary to do so and, instead, the majority of committee republicans, a dozen in fact, including the chairman voted no on providing them the funding it needs to secure the border and republicans have also refused to consider the border security supplemental funding that they requested months ago starving dhs and its frontline personnel. and it's the money they need to carry out their duties. americans are not fooled by this and they understand that where you invest your resources, it speaks to what you really value. if republicans value border security like they claim, they would pay for it.

i want to hear secretary mayorkas talk about the budget request for the department of homeland security and i want to ask how we can support the department, its mission and its 260,000 dedicated personnel which is our responsibility. it has one -- is one i know our democratic members take seriously. mr. chairman, the committee can do better. it has done better under leadership from chairman's of both parties. i look forward to returning to better days on this committee. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields. other members are reminded that opening statements may be submitted for the record and we are pleased to have the secretary here and i would ask the secretary to rise and raise his right hand.

>> do solemnly swear the testimony you will give before the committee on homeland security, the u.s. house of representatives will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you got x let the record reflect he did answer in the affirmative and you can be seated. i will formally introduce our witness. secretary mayorkas is the seventh secretary of the homeland security, a role in which he has served in since 2021 and prior to that he served as the deputy secretary of dhs and the director and i do thank you for being here today. the witnesses full statement will appear in the record and i recognize secretary mayorkas for five minutes to summarize. >> every day the 268,000 men and women of the department of security carry out the mission to protect the safety and security of the american people and they protect our shores, harbors, skies, cyberspace and

leaders and they stop deadly drugs in fentanyl from entering our country and they lead the response to maritime emergencies and as we speak they are engaged in the response to the tragic francis scott key bridge collapse in baltimore and they help communities rebuild after natural disaster and they combat the scourges of human trafficking for online child sexual exploitation and so much more. all of this despite a perennially insufficient budget and the dedicated public servants of dhs deserve full support and the american people deserve the results of fully resourced dhs. this outlined in fiscal year 2025 budget for dhs are critical to meeting these goals and i welcome the opportunity to discuss this budget and highlight some of its key proposals with you today. when the department was founded in the wake of 9/11 the threat of foreign terrorism against high visibility targets was a

high concern. and that persists but we now also confront the terrorism related threat of radicalized offenders in small groups already resident here in the united states. this budget provides for an $80 million increase for the departments nonprofit security grant program and additional funding for targeted violence and terrorism prevention grants so dhs can better help communities prevent tragedies from occurring. and as loan actors and states increasingly target the critical infrastructure and data the budget provides this with needed funding to improve our cyber security. fentanyl wreaks havoc in communities across the country and dhs has arrested more individuals for these related crimes in the last two fiscal years than in the previous five

combined. the presidents budget includes critical funding to advance the strategy including funding for nonintrusive inspection to allergy 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 the border enforcement and maximized our available resources and authorities and we have removed or returned 630,000 individuals that didn't have a legal basis to stay and more than in any other fiscal year since 2013 and it would further expand these efforts and provide funding for law enforcement personnel and bolstering that processing and that is fundamentally broken and only congress can fix it and it has not updated the immigration enforcement laws since 1996. 28 years ago. only congress can deliver on our need for more border patrol

agents and asylum officers and immigration judges, facilities, and technology. the administration works closely with a bipartisan group of senators to reach an agreement on a national security supplemental package which would make the system changes badly needed and give dhs tools and resources needed to meet the border security challenges. we remain ready to work with you to pass this tough, fair, bipartisan agreement. finally, extreme weather continues to devastate communities and last year fema responded to 100 disasters in the budget provides $22.7 billion to assist community leaders and help survivors in the aftermath of major disasters and additional funding to invest in resilience strategies that will save lives and taxpayer money in the decades to come. essential to the success across all missions that is the department's ability to recruit and retain a world-class workforce and in addition to the workforce i mentioned the budget includes $1.5 billion to

fairly compensate the workforce and the recently passed 2024 budget, the welk from -- welcome and helpful was enacted to eight and implement a hiring search but reduced by 20% much- needed support for cities dealing with migrant related challenges and cut medical 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 and resources and support the extraordinarily talented and dedicated public servants of dhs need and deserve. >> thank you, mr. secretary. members will be recognized by order of seniority for their five minutes of questioning. i would like to say the secretary has a hard out today which is going to come up much

faster than we would want or desire and i understand he has a busy schedule. typically my policy is to let people go beyond the five minutes if they are making a question and continuing a train of thought but unfortunately we won't allow that and they do hate that. as i have applied the rule evenly to both sides i will apply for today's hearing the five minutes with the gavel for both sides of the aisle so it is five minutes and that only because we want to allow everybody here to get an opportunity to ask questions of the secretary. i do want to ask the staff on both sides if they would communicate this change for today to the individuals who are not present right now. i recognize myself for five minutes of questioning. >> mr. secretary, you issued guidance that directed dhs personnel to essentially disregard this and it means

disregard laws passed by congress and you 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 and the solicitor general and arguments before the supreme court arguing on your and your boss's behalf as well as your self in testimony said you had prosecutorial discretion i think is the term that gets used to disregard those laws when the resources are overwhelmed and that has been the argument that shall detain language can't be adhered to because the resources were overwhelmed. is this generally correct? >> it is not. i will assure you that we did enforce the laws that congress has passed which is the direction i have given to the workforce throughout my tenure. >> during the court trial,

texas versus the u.s., the solicitor general made it clear that the reason the policies that you have written have been written that way is because there is a form of discretion allowed to make that choice that we are not going to follow this shall detain and we could get thousands and thousands of examples of where that happened. we do have a memorandum from you that basically says, just because it says this it doesn't mean it is a reason to detain someone. i do want to ask this question. do you know how many i.c.e. detention beds were empty on average during your tenure? >> mr. chairman, let me be very clear that we maximize the use of detention beds available. sometimes, we are curtailed by using these detention beds and if i may -- >> do you know the number? >> by orders of court and for example certain restrictions

are used in terms of space and availability of beds by reason of the covid-19 pandemic. >> let me share what has been put out in documents from your department. in each year of your tenure there are thousands of beds available per day and roughly 9000 on average in fy 2022 and 3000 per day in fy 23 meaning while you assert that shall detain is what you want to do and what you agree the law says, we are leaving thousands of beds empty every day and this doesn't account for the various and i think it's in california and i can't think of the name of the facility where the courts order you not to use the bed and we don't include these and it is thousands and at least 3000 a day empty and yet the arguments before the supreme court and in your testimony before have been that the resources are overwhelmed and we have to catch and release these people in the

country and in your opening statement you said we need more resources. it is interesting, though, in that claim for more resources that we can adhere to the laws that you are in this budget decreasing the requested i.c.e. detention beds. that seems to me to be a logical is the reason we can't enforce the laws as they are written on the books is because we don't have enough resources and there are thousands of empty beds and we ask for less in this budget. that does not make any sense. i would submit to you that it speaks to somewhat of an intent to not adhere to that shall detain. but that is my perception on this. let me ask you this. just

recently on your last trip here, you actually admitted there was a crisis at the southwest border and what changed? >> mr. chairman, nothing changed and i recognize the enormous challenge at the border presents ever since i began my tenure and actually well before that. that when i served as the deputy secretary. >> when you came to congress and said there wasn't a crisis at the southern border in your first few trips and secure the border and nothing changed between then and now when you say it is a crisis? >> i have never minimized the challenge that the southern border presents and i didn't demise it when i served as a federal prosecutor for 12 years from 1989 through 2001. >> i will gavel myself since i have five seconds left and i recognize the ranking member for his five minutes. >> thank you very much and welcome, mr. secretary. republicans have wasted little

time playing political games with the southern border while rejecting any serious solution and voting against border security and funding. if you are foreign, you should support resources and if you are against it, i will assume that you voted against it because you are not for it. i don't know why this happens. but democrats, historically, have supported robust funding for dhs. and is it a perfect agency? of course not. none of them are and we strive for perfection but we do understand resources are absolutely important and republicans have tried to starve dhs personnel of the resources needed to do their job and the chairman said not another dime for dhs and when it comes time to fund the department i guess addressing

the surge of migration and stopping human trafficking in fentanyl is not worth $.10 to the republicans charged with overseeing dhs. republicans have voted against or ignored against every opportunity to provide necessary resources to dhs and they voted no on the 2023 omnibus and they refused to consider the presidents supplemental request and they called a bipartisan border deal dead on arrival within minutes of it being released. disturbingly, just a few weeks ago, two thirds of the republicans on this committee voted against funding dhs and border security and republicans have taken their marching orders from donald trump. he wants chaos at the border to help his chances in this election.

they want a show and not solutions. democrats are united in finding solutions and providing the agents and offices of dhs with the resources needed to do so safely and effectively. mr. secretary, can you describe how additional resources in the presidents emergency supplemental or the bipartisan bill will help the department address the issues of the southern border? >> the presidents supplemental would provide us with vital resources needed to hire additional personnel across the spectrum of our workforce that could 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 importantly, actually change the law and authorize us to use tools long needed to address that system. it would take a multiyear asylum process and reduce it to as little as 90 days or even less and that is a game changer in terms of deterring illegal migration to our border. >> thank you. let's go to election security. we do have elections coming up. they are coming up this november. as you know, dhs is responsible for securing critical infrastructure including elections and following russian attempts to interfere with the 2016 elections, officials from across the trump administration worked to counter efforts to

undermine confidence in election outcomes. unfortunately, after inciting a riot at the capital because he wasn't reelected, donald trump spent four years making legitimate election security work so politically toxic that i am worried the federal government is reluctant to support election officials and other stakeholders the way it should in this november and last week's baseless claim about voter fraud by the former president and speaker will only make the work of the election officials harder. mr. secretary, secretaries of state and other stakeholders relied on dhs to support and administer secure elections in 2020. can you assure us that dhs will bring the full range of its resources to support the 2024 elections? >> i can. >> i do yield back. >> i do not recognize the

chairman of the committee on foreign affairs and the former chairman of this committee for his five minutes of questioning. >> good morning. you did take an oath to protect the country from enemies both foreign and domestic. i do believe in many respects he violated that oath and i will start with the immigration and nationality act. it does state that the government should take into custody any alien that has committed an aggravated felony. those are dangerous violent criminals. and as you know, you are and attorney, as a my shall is mandatory language and it doesn't say maybe. it doesn't say, well, whatever you think at the time but it says, shall and those are words by the congress. mandatory language means you

shall detain. in december 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 or not this poses a current threat to public safety isn't to be determined according to bright lines or categories. our personnel shouldn't rely on the fact that a conviction or result of the database alone. in other words you directed your own agents on the ground on the border to defy the laws of congress and release violent terminals into our country and you know what this means under the statute but for those who do not, it means it includes

murders, pedophiles, drug traffickers and 501(c)(3) . and god knows how many have been released due to the policy you issued. my state took this up on appeal to the supreme court where justice kavanagh asked whether impeachment would be wanted 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 application of the statutory responsibility by an executive. in my view you have defied the law and defied in -- the intent of congress and you made this country far more dangerous of a place, not to mention the hundreds of those on the terror watch list to have gotten into this country. how do you respond?

>> mr. chairman, i have three points. number one you mischaracterize the enforcement guidelines. >> i read directly from them. >> secondly, we have removed more aggravated felons each month than the prior administration did. third, my enforcement guidelines mirror to a great extent in the quoted language a prior enforcement guideline that other administrations have issued and the fact of the matter is we enforce the law and we deem public security -- i will reclaim my time and you said you enforce the law when you told your agents don't take into account prior criminal conduct. aggravated felons don't take into account the fact they may have a murder conviction or a conviction for rapists. that is what is under the

statute and you said don't take that into account and you can say that you have the best record ever as a secretary of homeland and you can say that but nobody believes it. i have to tell you that back home in my state of texas, very very upset and i will close with the supreme court justice story of 1833 where lord admiral has neglected to safeguard the seas it should be deemed and impeachable offense. i believe that is 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. in my last question to you is, how many persons on the terror watch list have gotten into this country? >> i would be pleased to

provide that after the hearing. >> we provide names and backgrounds? >> i can assure you the security of the american people is our highest priority. >> we will provide you with any information you need in the appropriate setting. >> a bit of a nonanswer, but i will take that. >> i now recognize the gentleman from california and the ranking member of the subcommittee on border security enforcement. >> thank you. and welcome. the first question is you did take an oath to protect our country and have you upheld that oath? >> i have, congressman and i think that is the fifth time i have taken the oath of office in my public service career. >> thank you. i am the ranking member of the subcommittee for border security and enforcement and a bit of my mission to understand and learn the needs of personnel at the border, both of them and all of our borders,

and we have been at the southern border numerous times and have spoken to men and women in the green and blue uniforms. it is clear today we are facing challenges at home and abroad like we never faced before and my colleagues and i returned from a trip to africa and a common issue across many countries we fidgeted -- visit is -- visited was refugees. there are 10 million knees -- 10 million refugees in one country alone. here we are talking about the budget, a budget for the resources you need and the department of homeland security to protect our great country. yet i have watched my colleagues on the other side of the aisle block the president's emergency supplemental request and even refused to consider the bipartisan border bill and in the last few months my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, have repeatedly

threatened to shut down the government over the homeland security budget. secretary, can you please explain to us in plain terms what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, their refusal to pass emergency supplemental requests, how does it put the national security in danger? >> with the additional resources, we would be provided with the presidents supplemental budget request, we would be able to advance significantly the security of the border. we would have additional equipment and additional technology, additional personnel, in every facet of border security. >> you talk about additional personnel. do we have a shortage of personnel right now at our borders? >> we do. we need additional office of field operations and personnel to man the ports of entry and

an additional border patrol agent. >> the ports of entry. let me talk about that. that is where most of the fentanyl coming into this country enters through our ports of entry and that area is about 70% of all of it. but you are saying we are short of personnel in these critical junctures? is that what you are saying? >> we are and we need additional field personnel to equip those ports of entry with a staff we need to enforce those laws. >> i want to go back and re-ask this question that you didn't finish answering asked by my colleagues which is thousands of empty beds, how do you explain that? >> congressman, recently we have been overcapacity in our i.c.e. detention facilities and there are court cases that impose restrictions on our ability to

use the beds we have been funded. >> so if the laws were to change would some of those not apply? with that be the case? >> i would get back to on that and i will share to you that the president -- forgive me. the bipartisan senate legislation would have funded the department of homeland security with 50,000 detention beds and far more than we are resourced this year and even more so than we were resourced last year. >> how would that affect the situation that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were talking about? all of these individuals who could be essentially held with these empty beds so to speak? and adding to these empty beds the talk of all of these people being released would they be held at these beds? >> as everybody does recognize, the more detention beds we are funded for, the more

individuals that we would be able to detain and the supreme court has clearly recognize the fact that the detention bed capacity for which we have been funded is inadequate to comply to the letter of the law. >> beyond that the bigger picture is processing individuals in our borders that may or may not be eligible for asylum and we are critically short in those resources and i do hope this moves forward and we can address that issue. we are out of time. inc. you for being here. >> the gentleman yields and i recognize mr. higgins from louisiana and the chair of the subcommittee on border security and enforcement for five- minute. >> thank you, mr. chairman. over the past year i have found many members of congress failed to grasp the full meaning of the constitutional writ of impeachment proceedings and

impeachment isn't a criminal proceeding but it could 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 that any written law could be and embezzlement of money as a betrayal of trust but that is not a statute. the house committee on homeland security advanced articles of impeachment against the department of homeland security secretary mayorkas. he has been impeached by the people's house. these articles don't impugn the secretary's character nor list dissenting views on how to handle the crisis at the border. but instead the articles against the secretary carried the charge of high crimes and

misdemeanors. it is important that all americans recognize the true meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors. and while some of my colleagues have claimed the discharge is confined to specific violations of criminal statutes, let's not fail to recognize the founders original intent and well- documented debate regarding the origin and meaning of this term and article 2 section 4 of the constitution reads that 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. the founding fathers used this phrase having 400 years of historical precedent which didn't limit itself into direct criminal misconduct but more importantly encompassed a neglected duty and abuse of

power and this isn't funny, mr. secretary. literally, missed demeaning the office in high authority that had been entrusted and enshrined in this phrase in the constitution. and the founding fathers put explicit trust in congress to determine what constitutes and impeachable offense and what is encompassed in high crimes and misdemeanors and impeachment was never intended to be a criminal proceeding but instead a review by the american people of the role of the executive and a mechanism for accountability, when all else has failed. the secretary had not only betrayed the trust of the american people that his service as secretary has left a scar on the soul of the nation that may never be removed. the articles of impeachment brought against secretary

mayorkas past the house and were delivered this afternoon to the senate. it is vital the senate upholds the 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 and the communities are crushed under the weight of 12 million illegal aliens in this span of three years and crime has reached unprecedented levels within american communities across the country.

the arrogant disregard of the secretary mayorkas for the security and sanctity of the american people has brought congress to this point and he has brought unspeakable pain of cron -- upon the nation and his service as secretary will forever be shrouded in shameful failure and generational trauma. secretary mayorkas has been impeached by the house and he must be tried by the senate now and removed from office. mr. chairman, i yield. >> the gentleman yields and i recognize the gentleman from louisiana in the ranking member on the counterterrorism law enforcement task course. >> thank you, secretary, for joining us today and as we review the fiscal year of fy 2025 budget request, the physical buzz it -- budget request democrats -- reflects the commitment to work in good

faith to address security challenges facing the nation and today's review is important so we can continue to find solutions and not politics. these are solutions that we as americans should want and we often have different approaches. but what we do see here and the impeachment is nothing more than a witchhunt and an opportunity to cloud the issues as evidenced by the fact that the senate has a measure that would bring us to a measure of the 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 victory is but to give the american people victories and this is a fight to make sure we have a secure border and we are here to make sure we see things through a lens and not as republicans or democrats but as americans and to do what is right and unfortunately, that has not and is not happening and i will go on record as predicting that the united states senate wouldn't even take up these articles of impeachment why? because they are meritless and baseless and because they are purely political in nature and not rooted in the fairness and justice of the american way. i will pivot a bit if we might because we talked about this quite a bit. i will pivot to flood insurance. mr. secretary, the last time you were here before this committee, i relayed my concerns about fema 2.0 and it will leave many in my district

especially in low and moderate income committees -- communities priced out of their homes and you stated that you are reviewing a need to continue to review this given the concerns that have been expressed and since then i've only seen flood insurance prices get worse and given the urgency of this situation and the impact on vulnerable communities, can you provide the committee with how the department is taking steps to help communities struggling with this? >> i will follow-up with you and provide you with an update on flood insurance 2.0 and i can ensure you we are taking extraordinary measures to reach otherwise disenfranchised populations and we have issued guidance and changed policies to make sure that the minority and underserved communities have a greater access to the

grant programs and to individual assistance and other resources that fema provides in the wake of natural disasters and to strengthen and protect communities and i will provide you with an update with respect to flood insurance 2.0 specifically. >> one of the things that we have repeatedly asked from both this committee as well as in transportation infrastructure for which i also serve in individual meetings in my office and in the office of the fema administrator is the formula. what algorithm or formula

because the rates are higher than the note was. this is untenable and i ask that you look into that and share meaningful answers. >> i will do so. >> the gentleman yields. i recognize the gentleman from mississippi and the vice chair committee on homeland security for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you mr. chairman. i want to point out what i highlighted last week when you

testified. you came in during your opening statement and talked about the budget being insufficient. you seek to place the blame on congress that we are not giving you the resources or your department the resources that you need. but last year and the fy24 budget which we just passed, congress appropriated 61 deck $8 billion in discretionary spending which was more than you asked for. and so congress is giving you more money than you are asking for but you repeatedly are coming into these hearings and trying to say that you don't have the financial resources that you need to carry out the job. the detention bands are incredibly troubling in the fact that you come in and you again ask for less detention beds then we fund in the fy24 budget. you told me in the hearing last week that you agreed with the senate 50,000 detention beds but yet you come in and he

asked congress only to fund 34,000 when we currently are funding 41 deck and -- 41,500 and you continue to seek to place the blame on us. i'm reading from the physical report 2023 annual report. in the annual report mr. secretary, a report issued by your agency on page 17 it says, congressional funding for detention beds have remained relatively static for several years and the detained population is limited as a result. and the question from mr. korea, you talk about the fact that the court says there have been an adequate funding for detention beds. so how do you come in here and ask for less detention beds but yet every time you testify, you try to place the blame black -- back on congress. we are funding more detention beds every year than you are

asking for a time in where we say a record number of immigrants are coming across the border. a time where you have finally admitted that there is a crisis on the border where we are seeing reports every day in the media about violent crimes committed by immigrants not in custody or detained but released into the interior and yet you come in here and is a key part of the budget, you are asking for substantially less detention beds? i find that especially troubling mr. secretary as a look at this and continue to look at the report provided by ice where i see according to the fy23 year end report that the docket that shows the number of non- detained individuals who you allowed into the country has reached over 6.2 million people. 6.2 million. i spoke just yesterday with the

ice director. pick in my conversation, i brought up the fact of what was in the report. he told me, mr. secretary, that that number is now over 7 million and that the report is old. it is more than 7 million. it was reported several weeks ago that by the end of this physical year, fy20 -- 24, october 1st, the number is expected to grow to 8 million. we see this record number of immigration in the record number of people you, as the secretary are allowing to come into the country but yet we are seeing you do nothing to off for more detention beds . i had the opportunity to ask you last week before the appropriations committee about

the news article. a news article reported by fox news provided use of the content we met last week. this is from an article jake dated january 8th, 2024. it says secretary mayorkas told border patrol agents but above 85% of illegal immigrants have been released into the united states what goes on in the first paragraph and says the homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas admitted that the rate of release of illegal immigrants apprehended at the southwest border is above 85% and secretary mayorkas made the statement meeting privately with agents in the resources in the room that heard that and it goes on to say there were at least three agents that verified fox news that you made that statement. mr. secretary, did you make the statement that was reported january, 2024? >> congressman, as i mentioned

last week, i do not recall that exchange and an internal meeting with the workforce and i assure you the area of the southern border is our highest priority. >> i recognize the general for michigan, ranking member of the subcommittee on airtime security for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you mr. chair. mr. secretary, clearly you have a tough job. you are faced with a worldwide migration challenge a deeply broken immigration system and limited resources to address the challenges. and unfortunately, my republican colleagues don't seem to want to help fix that problem. i admire your efforts to expand the programs for migrants for countries facing extreme conditions like haiti and cuba

as well as to restore family reunification programs for families facing widespread violence and 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 phd program in the united states to study. and that would have changed my life. and i went to the american embassy in mumbai. i got there at 5:00 a.m. in the morning and stood in line only to be denied my student visa. and the embassy

continued to deny it for four more times. the fifth time the visa got approved only because the denying officer was on vacation to the united states. in our visas, it is an issue. the immigration country quota is creating such a stressful environment for families. technology companies are unable to find a skilled workforce. countries like canada and australia are taking away some of our skilled workforce because of our broken immigration system. i want to see an orderly immigration process that benefits united states and benefits our economy and helps create american jobs.

how do you think congress can help you to achieve that? >> congressman, the president on his very first day in office presented congress with a comprehensive legislative package to fix what everyone agrees is a broken immigration system. to advance to advance that piece of legislation and to advance the senate 's bipartisan legislation would transform the broken immigration system and reform it. it has not been reformed since 1996. it is long outdated and long broken. >> thank you mr. secretary and i want to give you an opportunity to respond to the congressman's questions and i think you may not have adequate time to respond if you so choose to do. >> congressman, we support the

funding of 41,500 beds. we support the funding of 50,000 detention beds of the senate bipartisan legislation provided. it is most regrettable that the bipartisan legislation is not advanced. we urge congress to advance it. it would enhance the border security immeasurably. >> mr. chair, i give my time to the gentleman from new york. >> i wanted to follow up on what chairman mccall was talking about. he is citing the ina shell detained language. and the memo you issued in september of 2021. i want to give you an opportunity to explain what it says in the memo. 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. 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? >> congressman, the direction to law enforcement agents is to use their discretion had their experience to determine who presents the greatest public safety threat and to detain those individuals period. >> the gentleman's time has expired. someone else can yield if they like. i recognize mr. bishop, the german from north carolina and the chair of the subcommittee on oversight for five minutes of questioning. >> secretary mayorkas, you frequently testified about the actions and efforts of dhs over the time you have been secretary. let me ask about the results of your more than three years of tenure. do you consider the results of your administration at the derivative homeland security to be a success? >> i am incredibly proud of the work of the men and women of the department of homeland security, congressman. >> do you consider it to be a success? >> i'm incredibly proud of

everything they do. >> do you consider it to be a success? >> a tremendous -- i consider them a tremendous success in the -- may. >> do you consider your administration to be a success? >> with the resources, they have done an extraordinary job. >> in november of 2022, i asked you if you continued to maintain that the border is secure. he said yes and it is getting more secure every day. do you still say so? >> congressman, with the resources and authorities we have been provided, it is as secure as we can make it. >> under your orders, apartment of homeland security to parole [ inaudible ] ending the united states and he went on to a variety of crimes including the beating of a young woman to death in georgia. the statute grants you a 32 parole aliens into the united states only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public

benefits. which was it in that case? humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit that you paroled him and the united states? >> congressman, we abide by the role -- by the law and in obedience with the law. the public safety of the american people is the highest priority and i am pleased to share case details with you on any case subsequent to the hearing. i don't have the case details with me today. >> i'm not asking for details. 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? >> my answer remains the same. >> you mean you would have to review something before you could provide case details or you just can't say it in this forum? >> the form.

>> you don't know? >> i don't have the details with respect to that individual's case. and i would be pleased to provide them to you, congressman. >> mr. secretary, news reports or the heritage foundation oversight project has released this document that is allegedly a flyer distributed at a nongovernmental organization in mexico called the resource center which apparently reads in part if translated, "reminder to vote for president biden when you are in the united states. we need another four years of his term to stay open". i understand the rcm has denied. this is authentic. there are other competing reports. what actions is the department of homeland security taking to ensure, especially given the millions of illegal injuries,

including 2 million god always, that noncitizens are being prevented from registering and voting unlawfully? >> individuals that are not citizens of the united states cannot vote in federal elections. >> that's not what i asked. i asked what actions dhs is taking to make sure that does not occur. >> two things. number one, i believe that the 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 -- >> so said shorter, nothing. how can congress and the american people have confidence that the outcome of closed elections will not turn on the votes of noncitizens who registered and voted unlawfully? >> 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. we have mandated -- >> i will reclaim my time. last point, i'm curious , you asked for less detention beds and you explained that you did that based on the level of detention beds needed under the senate bipartisan bill. how is that bill bipartisan other than supported by james langford? is there another republican in the senate or the house supporting the bill? >> congressman, we continue to support the bipartisan legislation that a group of senators worked on for months. >> my time is expired mr. chairman. thank you. >> gentleman's time is expired. i recognize the gentleman from rhode island and the recordkeeper of the subcommittee on counterterrorism and law enforcement intelligent for his five minutes of questions. >> 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 national disasters to name a few . while you have been diligently doing your job along with colleagues at the department to protect the american people in the face of these challenges, republican colleagues in the house have been playing politics, culminating with the political impeachment that had no legal basis. i'm sorry that some colleagues have chosen to make you the target of political tax instead of getting you the tools you need to do your job and keep people safe. and 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 4.7 billion for itself was

porter contingency fund to provide resources to the department when migration along the southwest border warrants additional capacity. this is the right thing to do. i hope that our republican colleagues will support the 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 in inexcusable thing that the college did not pass the final for skill 24 budget forcing the department to work under multiple cr's reducing operations and over straining the workforce the department and i hope that fiscal 25 will be different. funding the department of homeland security is also critical because our nation faces an increased threat from the rise of domestic violence extremists. we heard from you mr. secretary and the fbi director

christopher wray last november during the worldwide threats that the top domestic terrorism threat that we face continues to be from racially and ethnically motivated and antigovernment motivated violence extremists. some of these are organized groups. like the group that engaged in the plot to kidnap the governor of michigan and some of the groups that stormed the capital on january 6th in a violent attempt to overturn a legal and lawful election. others are lone actors like the individual that attacked paul pelosi. many of these individuals are shamefully inspired and scapegoated by members of the congress and by former president trump. but the government accountability office has shown that domestic terrorism awaited cases increased dramatically in recent years. 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 of domestic violence extremists, particularly as we grow closer to the election? and what steps is the department taking to address any potential threats to governing bodies, officials and the public at large? >> congressman, director christopher wray and i expressed a heightened threat environment. indeed individuals drawn to violence because of ideologies of hate and false narratives and antigovernment sentiment. they are a significant concern of ours. we do a number of things. we disseminate information and analysis to a state and local tribal territory, law enforcement and other officials. we distribute grant funds. we are grateful for congress' support of the grant funds. we need those funds to increase and to enable local communities and protect and guard

themselves. as i mentioned in my opening statement, we have a very important targeted violence and terrorism grant program that enables communities to employ best practices and the identification of an individual who may be drawn to violence and intervene before a tragedy occurs. those are some examples. >> thank you mr. secretary for that and particularly the support of state and local law enforcement agencies. as we saw january 6, it is often law enforcement in uniform who are on the receiving end of these assaults and this violence and we need to do everything we can to support them against this threat. thank you very much and i'm out of time. i yelled back. >> gentleman yields. i recognize mr. gimenez, joan from florida, chair of transportation maritime security subcommittee. >> thank you mr. chairman. i find it amazing that our democratic colleagues across the aisle are always

throwing money at the issue. it is always money money money. except the real culprit here has been over 64 actions taken by the executive branch that have caused the problem at the border. not once have i ever heard any democratic colleagues ask for, why don't we start constructing a wall again? why don't we reinstitute the remain in mexico policy which would take care of 70% of the problem we have had. i believe in the fiscal year 21, mr. mayorkas, we have had a new record number of encounters at the border and i think it only surpassed by fiscal year 22 when we had another record and counter at the board and then surpassed again in 2023 when we had another record for encounters at the border. do you expect another record in 2024? >> congressman, i strongly encourage congress to pass the senate's bipartisan legislation which would make a significant difference in advance security interest at the southern border and the northern border. >> have you ever ask for the

president to reconsider some of the 64 actions that have led to the crisis we have right now at the border? >> congressman, we are facing the largest displacement of people around the world including our hemisphere. >> have you ever asked the president of the united states to reconsider any of the 64 executive actions see has taken to address the crisis at the border? >> congressman, i'm not familiar with the 64, to which you refer and i assure you they are not because of the largest displacement of people in the world including an our hemisphere and to include of course at home. -- a significant number of people fleeing the authoritarian regime in cuba which both you and i have personally experienced. >> i think the authoritarian regime has been in place for about 60 years. and so it doesn't make sense to me that somehow now they are all fleeing the authoritarian regime of cuba.

you and i both left that authoritarian regime a long time ago. again, are you familiar with the president's executive order to stop the construction of the wall and the southern border? >> i am most certainly am. >> have you advised him that maybe it is a good idea to start construction again on the southern wall or the wall on the southern border to stop the flow of illegal immigration? >> congressman, i don't believe it is. >> thank you. i only have a certain amount of time . you said no. thank you. have you ever talked to the president about reinstituting the remain in mexico policy which many experts have said probably would take care of 70% of the problem? have you ever talked about that? >> the remain an mexico program was implemented in january of 2019 i believe. i believe in 2019, the number of encounters at the southern

border exceeded those in 2018 by almost 100% if i have my data correct. >> but the number of counters -- encounters in 2020 were the number of encounters in 2021 far less. would he say that is correct? >> congressman, if you recall what occurred in 2020 , two points. number one, the covid pandemic. number two, remain in mexico, in order to implement it, we rely on the sovereign nation of mexico agreement. mexico has unequivocally stated it will not support any implementation of remain in mexico, the success of which is quite dubious. >> interesting point. they did support the remain in mexico policy and you unilaterally withdrew it. it wasn't because of mexico asking you if you would stop it. you just did it. i only have about 56 seconds.

we are currently witnessing total chaos and disorder in haiti. the u.s. has already begun to evacuate citizens and are collaborating with the regional partners to address the violence. is the united states admitting haitians into the state of florida and elsewhere that have not received a viable background check? >> congressman, we screen and that individuals before pulling them into the united states. >> thank you. and i yield my time. >> gentleman yields. 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. >> thank you very much. i'm prepared to press on. i might revisit that at some point with your indulgence. >> absolutely. i just know last time we had you in here, i think you went four hours straight and never got a break and i felt bad about that. i wanted to offer. i now recognize the gentle lady from texas, ms. jackson lee, for her five minutes of

questioning >> we will go with mr. iv and the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you for being here today mr. mayorkas and for the work that you do. i have been listening to my colleagues on the other side talk about treading on the constitution. it seems to me the impeachment proceeding that was moved forward out of the committee was the true scar on the constitution. it is interesting to me if we go back. i want to say the fix was in. almost before you went to the job, article of impeachment in august of 2021. i'm not sure you finished unpacking entirely yet. but there was already a

movement to remove you from office. then we have the chairman speaking to donors talking about, this is going to be fun, referencing the impeachment of you and get the popcorn. that was almost a year ago. and then we came to the actual hearings that were held here. i think there were two. i had a little of experience dealing with impeachment proceedings in the house previously back in the 80s when i worked on the judiciary committee staff. we didn't remove anybody from office. in fact, we gave people do process. they had the chance to present evidence and the like. and it was taken in a more serious manner than this was. i have to say that we heard another one of my colleagues trying to reconstitute what the standard is for impeachment. the language is pretty plain on its face. bribery and other high crimes

and misdemeanors. there has been an effort to try to recalibrate that. there is no evidence of you creating treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. so they lowered the bar. i want to read something from one of your predecessors. mike chernoff, who was the homeland security secretary under the bush administration. he said, in referencing this, the effort to impeach you, he wrote this in january. "i can say with confidence that the role the investigating of the house committee on homeland security, they have failed to put forth evidence that meets the bar. that is why republicans are not seeking to hold mr. mayorkas to the constitution's high crimes and misdemeanors standards for impeachment they make the unsupported argument that he is derelict in his duty". with respect to that issue, the issue of trying to get something done, instead of continuing on with the theatrics of impeachment, former secretary chernoff says,

i don't agree with every policy decision that the biden administration has made. the aspects of immigration strategy are worthy of debate. 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 discussed the bipartisan senate bill. while moving forward with the effort to put together an impeachment proceeding against you, you were working in the senate. senator langford and others to put together an actual bipartisan bill to address the problems at the border. and 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 trying to find a bipartisan effort to address these concerns since the day. we have a lot of statements being made here today about the

problems at the border and the budgets and the issues along those lines. you have already addressed some of the budgetary issues. i do want to say this. i think it is critical for the senate. after we are done with this, these theatrics will be over and it will be marching the articles of impeachment over to the senate and asking the senate to remove you from office after the trial. i think the senate has made it clear that that is not going to happen and it shouldn't. in fact there shouldn't even be a trial over there. this is such an adulterated process here and such a scar on the history of the constitution the first time in 150 plus years where there has been an effort to remove a cabinet member going this far. and 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 is not what i expected when i got here.

i saw different when i worked here in the 80s and saw different from how to supposed to be done. this is not how it was supposed to be done. we want to conclude on this note. just a couple of members on the house republican caucus and i don't want to patent with too broad of a brush. -- >> gentleman's time is expired. >> thank you. i appreciated and thank you mr. mayorkas. >> at this time, recognize the gentleman from the great state of texas, august fluker, for five minutes of questioning. >> secretary, is the border secure? >> as i have articulated earlier in this hearing. >> yes or no is fine. is the border security? >> with the authorities and funding we have, it is as secure as it can be. >> we all know that this is not a budget issue. it is a policy issue. is a terrorist attack inside the united states of america eminent? >> let me assure you

congressman that the safety and security of the american people is our highest priority. >> is it eminent? >> same answer. >> is a terror attack on the homeland of the united states of america eminent today? >> me assure you that we remain vigilant. >> have you brief to the president that terror attack on the united states of america's eminent? >> congressman, let me assure you that the safety and security of the american people -- >> re: the principal advisor on matters of homeland security to the president of the united states? >> i'm one of them. >> to be brief to the president that there are suspected terrorists still at large inside the united states? >> let me assure you as i have previously that the safety and security of the american people -- >> i would like to remind you that you are under oath. have you brief to the president of the united states that there are people who match the terror watch list and are still at large inside of our country? >> i repeat my answer. >> is that a no?

>> heavy not brief to the president? >> i have brief to the president. >> let me ask you a question about your previous testifying in november. i asked you then. i said, is every person mentioned on the terror watch list been apprehended? and you did not give me an answer . i will ask you again. those that have match the terror watch list that have attempted to or have entered the country illegally, are they detained 100% of them? >> congressman, let me assure you again the individuals that pose a threat to our national security or the safety of the american people are the highest priority for detention and we execute. >> are they all detained? christopher wray sitting next you had the courage to answer

this question and he said no. do you agree with christopher wray and his testimony in november of 2023 that not every single person that matches the terror watch list has been detained? do you agree with that testimony ? >> if you are referring to the terror screening dataset, yes. we make public safety national security determinations. >> i think it is very important that you answer this question. the american public deserves to know the answer. are there people who have match to the terror screening data base, terror watch list, any acronym you choose to use, still at large and not -- not apprehended today? >> congressman, if we determine that an individual on the terrorist screening dataset is a threat to national security for public safety, they are a priority for detention. >> i understand they are a priority but that does not mean they are detained. are you going to testify honestly under oath today.

and i would like to remind you that you are under oath when your testifying. are there people still at large that match the terror watch list? >> congressman, if an individual is on the terror screening data set and they pose a threat to national scrutiny or public safety, they are a priority for detention. >> is our country at risk of a terror attack? >> congressman, we are in a heightened threatened environment. >> is that a yes? >> we are in a heightened threat environment as director wray and i have both testified. and it is therefore why the personal of the department -- >> have you brief to the president of the united states on the heightened threat? >> congressman, i have briefed the president as others on the threat landscape that the united states is facing and that is driving the vigilance of 260,000 men and women in the department of homeland

security. >> mr. secretary, you said earlier to my colleague mr. bishop that you would be willing to share the details on any case but 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 seven days on the actual metrics and details for the terror screening database and who those people are? will you brief us in an unclassified setting who those people are? >> congressman, i would be pleased to follow up with you in the appropriate setting. >> i yelled back. >> gentleman yields back. chair recognizes mr. goldman from the state of new york for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and secretary mayorkas. thank you for being here again to endure the completely uncalled for and 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. fluker just said that it is a policy issue and not a money issue. okay. is the senate bipartisan bill that you worked on, along with the second most conservative senator in the senate, an independent and a democrat, that was endorsed by senate republican leadership, a policy bill or an appropriations bill? >> congressman, it is both an appropriations bill and an immigration reform bill in fixing what everyone agrees is a broken system. it would provide us with new legal authorities that are much- needed and would really advance the security at the border. >> 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? >> congressman, it of course depends on the demographics. but as a general rule, i believe it is approximately 20- 25% ultimately receiving asylum but i would want to verify that statistic and i probably shouldn't share it. >> understood. there are different numbers. but it takes at least five years or perhaps as many as 10 years for a case to be completely adjudicated, is that right? >> it takes many years before a case is finally adjudicated. >> . >> let's say we have an asylum processing system that could process any applications within 90 days or six months. is it

correct that that means that 75- 80% of the people that apply for asylum would not get asylum and would be returned to their own country? >> that would enable us to remove people far more quickly. you are correct. and it would make a change of the difference in the ability to enforce the southern border of the united states. >> is that 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 five years to work. is that correct? >> and of course this creates

a tremendous incentive for people to come across the border. the problem is not the 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 the policy bill. unfortunately, republicans have put politics over the 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's quote donald trump who said he sabotaged the bipartisan deal to secure the border because "it made it much better for the opposing side"

and he stated that he killed the deal. senator langford himself said that a top republican told me that if i try to move a bill that solves the border crisis during the 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 of 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 and you don't want to solve the problem. >> the gentleman's time is expired. i recognize the gentleman for new york, the chairman of the subcommittee on cybersecurity for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you mr. coley.

i will remind mcculloch that the only bill passed from the house that address the border crisis was one we passed hr two. nothing actually passed the senate. we have acted and if they want to send us a bill, let them. they have not been able to. secretary, i want to ask a question about the nonprofit security grant program. anti-semitism is on the rise here and this has been exacerbated by the horrendous acts of the terror in israel october 7th and the war that has followed. this program protects a lot of americans and 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. seeing what we have seen and knowing what you know, the risk on the ground especially to these jewish americans, is $385

million enough? >> congressman, we make trade- offs under the fiscal responsibility act. 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 and a heightened threat environment. anti-semitism and violence born of it continues to be on the rise as do other violent acts born of hate. >> we think 385 is enough to protect the americans at these facilities? >> we believe it is a significant advance in the protection of our communities across the country. >> thank you. >> i want to move now to the cyber workforce. report came out that was startling. cica has for the entire defense, action ot operational

technology . they have a response team of 11 people. four employees and seven contractors. that is grossly below the need of what we need. what is the current cyber workforce cap at the department of commentary right now? >> congressman, i will have to get back to you on the specific number. let me express my deep gratitude on the part of cica and the department for your support of cybersecurity. >> i think cisa does a great job. they only have 11 employees that cover ot. they have a great use of cyber management. we are repeatedly seeing cyber attack after cyber attack after

cyber attack. america is starting to ask, what are we doing? there is a workforce problem. a workforce shortage. 11 employees. that is not good. not good enough. i understand the request this year for cisa -- cisa is $3 billion to fund the entire agency. there needs to be more focused. no spoken about this. you oversee the agency. and i see that cisa released its notice a proposal for the budget request at 115 come almost 116 million for it supplementation including staffing and technology. i have been a supporter of this and i think it could do great things for our cyber defense.

now when you have competing rules like the sec legislation which you yourself said is duplicative, i don't know if there is a need 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. i think i would like to see more from the agency yourself included. pushing back on these rules and others that are proposed, the current cyber reporting building is just one of i think five that the chairman has proposed. there is a report out there. 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. the rule is duplicative. we have said it is bad. i think you have to tell the president that this rule has to

stop. >> . >> i understand you want to go next. i recognize the gentleman from new jersey, mr. menendez, for five minutes. >> thank you mr. secretary is always for being here . we appreciate your willingness to engage with us both in this setting and individual offices and conversations. i feel it is important to address some of the things that have been said hereby our republican colleagues. they should not stand uncorrected. first, it has been said that you violated your oath and i wholeheartedly disagree with that. calls that you 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 servants that serve alongside you for your work. chairman mccall also said you destroyed the fabric of this country. i heartily disagree with that. thank you again for your service to the country.

mr. bishop questioned the success of your administration. i want to refer back to with the former homeland security security secretary said about the impeachment. impeachment is diversion from fixing the broken immigration laws and giving dhs the resources needed to secure the border. that is the conversation we should be having today. if we are going to judge success, i commend the work that you and your colleagues have done and i would question the success of this committee and the oversight jurisdiction and failure to live up to the mandate. i have two quick questions. we discussed the remain and mexico policy. you said that requires the cooperation of mexico. we also heard about building the wall. former president trump said mexico would play for the wall. has mexico agreed to pay for the building of the wall?

>> it has not. >> thank you for clarifying that point. before he moved on to the substantive question that you came to discuss, i imagine you spent an immense amount of time and resources as the agency has had to come appearing for the impeachment proceeding that came through the committee. i'm proud to see you still standing and you will continue to keep standing. and a reminder that republicans have been more successful at removing their own members from positions like former speaker mccarthy and now the process seems to be underway for removing speaker johnson. 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 of great concern to many of us. i want to talk about your work combating fentanyl. the department of homeland security is on the front lines executing president biden's plan. you and dedicated servants at

dhs are stopping more drug traffickers in the last two years in the previous five combined. the president requested emergency supplemental funds for dhs and october of last year and it is now april. the republican colleagues have refused to consider providing these funds that will combat drug trafficking. how is supplement to funny requested to support your ongoing efforts to combat fentanyl? >> a supplemental request would provide two very important streams of funding at least. one is for personnel. more investigators. more support staff for the investigators. and 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 that is so remarkably effective at our ports of entry which are the

primary avenues through which smugglers seek to move fentanyl into the country. >> and democrats look forward to getting you those resources so that you can continue that important work. the department has done an impact don't -- done a commendable job stopping fentanyl from entering the country and dhs stopping and arresting more drug traffickers in the last two fiscal years in the previous five combined as i mentioned. how does the administration budget request for 2025 build on the successes of the last two years? >> congressman congressman, it continues to fund personnel so that we can continue to not only implement the strategic operations we have underway but also to build on those operations and develop new ones. and to deploy personnel to different countries that are source countries and the transnational criminal investigative units where the investigators work with international partners to not

only have precursor chemicals but they, used to manufacture fentanyl and the finished product itself >> thank you and i appreciate all of your service to our country. i yield back. >> i recognize ms. green, the gentle lady from georgia, for five minutes, for questioning. >> 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 number one issue across america in poll after poll and that is why this committee impeached you. mr. secretary, the oversight project released a bombshell report last night on your connection to the dark money in geo- industrial complex of illegal immigration. i know you saw this from one of my colleagues just earlier. they found flyers throughout the resource center matamoros refugee camp in mexico telling

illegal aliens, reminder to vote for president biden when you are in the united states. we need another four years of his term to stay open. eyewitnesses saw the flyers also being handed out to migrants who were using rcm for assistance coming to the united states. and an audio recording, the founder of rcm, and gabby ceballos, 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 into the united states. and you are familiar with their work. we know that you served as a former board member of the group that funds illegal immigration and they are very proud of you mr. secretary. they congratulated you on your

nomination. you worked as a board member of an ngo working in conjunction with other ngos that 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, noncitizens, 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 and children and murdering people like lakin riley. you are familiar with her, right? >> i am familiar with the case. >> you should have deported her so she could be alive today. her parents would have

appreciated that. and kayla hamilton who was brutally raped and murdered by a cartel member. her mother spoke to us . 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 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 on human trafficking and drug trafficking at our border. you allowed approximately 300 americans to be murdered every single day from fentanyl that comes across our border. now you are aiding the ngos to steal our elections to your budget. i demand proof of citizenship in our elections and that is something every member of congress should care about. we don't need illegal aliens voting in our elections.

we are supposed to be here talking about the budget. but we are talking about how money is being used to make sure people come into our country and are able to get a social security number in which they can register to vote. on that note, mr. mayorkas, i demand 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. >> the gentle lady yields. i recognize mr. garcia, the gentleman from california for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you mr. secretary for being here. i'm sure you had to listen to a lot of information -- i'm sorry you had to listen to a lot of misinformation. for the record, you are here and 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. i look forward to continuing you doing a difficult job for the country and the

administration. since he last testified, we know donald trump has become the presumptive nominee of his party. immigrants like you and me remember and understand and know his dangerous rhetoric in the way he talks about immigrants like us. i want to go back to the 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 sending people that have a lot of problems and they are bringing those problems with them. they are bringing drugs. they are bringing crime and they are rapists". >> we both no noncitizens are 60% less likely to commit crimes than citizens. they are just using this xenophobic rhetoric to demonize migrants that are trying in many places to search for a different and better life and run away from extreme violence in their home countries. the rhetoric we know is continuing. trump calls immigrants that enter the country often times animals. he just did so recently. he said and i quote "democrats

say, please don't call them animals. they are humans". trump said "no. they are not humans. they are animals". it is dehumanizing rhetoric and it is wrong and unacceptable. . >> does this type of rhetoric fuel violence here in the united states? >> lso trying to characterize as we talk about migrants.rize he at one of his the largest deportation operation in american history. i want to talk a little bit about something that donald trump has also tried to ald characterize as we talk about migrants. he and one of his main lieutenants has promised large- scale rates and has suggested using national guard troops and sending them from republican- led states into neighboring states led by democrats.

what we are seeing in texas, there is a real risk. if we see national guards being used this way in the future, can you in your opinion the national guards be used in texas? >> can you repeat the question? >> is there additional risk that we could see national guards being used in a way that could be dangerous at the border? >> congressman, the deployment of national guards can be an effective force multiplier when it is coordinated with federal authorities specifically the united states border patrol. when it is not, it resents a risk to our efforts at the security border. >> i think we just saw that recently play out in a dangerous and disturbing way. i also want to note some things about the way that they use migration and the way he views the world. it's important to point out.

we know that they pointed out that mexicans are essentially and murderers. we have seen that already. he told members that when they protect immigrants from african countries that they didn't want migrants from what he called countries and that is his quotei and not mine. suggest that bringing people from countries such as norway, because the they are apparently nice. he tried over and over to thank -- muscles from coming to the countries on. now, trump continues with his view of the world to attack a legal immigration system. these dispel every year and there was a hiring freeze at the custom immigration service and his administration has used every possible way of disqualifying and denying visas.

secretary, can you tell us how policies like denying visas undermines the situation at the border? >> grossman, individuals who qualify for visas significantly contribute to the advancement in this country, which is quite evident, especially in the economic arena and we have seen that with skilled workers and nonskilled seasonal workers, agricultural workers and many other avenues. we are enriched by them. >> thank you. en i think i'm out of time. i will yield back. >> i know represent gonzales from texas. >> i don't want to talk about you, but the men and women who serve under you. particularly, some of the threats that they are dealing with. this transnational criminal organization, venezuelan gangs. they are growing in influence

and criminal activity throughout the country. i believe there are significant threats to our homeland and it's not just regional or miami . it is all over the place. my question is specifically on hs i. what is homeland security investigations doing to tackle it? >> homeland security investigations and our sister agencies in the federal government have an unprecedented attack against not only transnational chris -- criminal organizations after rustic -- domestic operations with respect to our efforts against that specific gang. >> i would appreciate that. is hsi part of fbi's anti-gang task force? >> i believe it is. >> this is important and that we use every leverage of government s tools both at the

federal, state and local level to go after these criminals. i'm talking about criminals and bad actors that are in our communities. how do we find them and prevent them from committing crimes? i think hsi will be on the forefront of a lot of that. i represent a large part of west texas. oil and gas is a big part of that. i was on a recent swing through west texas where they are seeing a rising amount of oil theft. i bring this up, because a lot of it is tied to the open border crisis. some of these actors are not o american citizens. what do you do with someone? you pull someone over and they are not a citizen, then this is where homeland security should have a role to play. do you know if hsi is part of the permian basin oilfield theft tax force -- task force? >> i do not know the answer to that question. >> it would be important that

they look into this if they are not. how do you use every lever and tool? if you pull someone over and they are not a citizen, homeland security has a role to play in that to determine who this person is . why are they here illegally? what do you do with them? what i'm saying is that in some cases, local law enforcement will release them. there is no one to turn them over to. you can see this coming from a mile away. we have apprehended someone and i'm not talking about all people.de i'm talking about a bad actor that would have been apprehended committing a low- level crime or another kind, then a month later they commit a serious crime. i want to get ahead of that and i believe hsi will be a big part of working with the fbi and the local and state taskforces in order to get it done. i would ask that you bring that

to attention. energy is critical infrastructure and important that we protect that. when i went through this a year ago, there were three counties that brought it up. i have seen every county bring it up and every sheriff i am talking to is bringing it up. i am seeing the threat grow andy expand. the increase in chinese nationals that we see. 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? this is a rising issue. china is a difficult actor to deal with. is there anything that congress can do in order to prevent china from sending its people over? t,

>> i would like to consider what legislative action would be warranted, but i can assure you that i share your concern with respect of the issue and have engaged with my counterpart from the people's republic of china and we have in fact made strides in the removal of chinese nationals who do not qualify for relief in the u.s. >> i think there needs to be more of that and it needs to be more public. there needs to be more highlighting of the fact that if you come in illegally from china, we will send you back. with that, i yelled back and i appreciate it. >> i now recognize the gentleman from new york for five minutes. >> thank you. i do want to remind my colleagues that you lived a great american success story. you are a political refugee born in cuba and came to the u.s. and graduated from law school and became a prosecutor for nine years as a u.s. attorney and you are the youngest u.s. attorney in the nation. you were a director of

the program and deputy of security department of homeland security and now you have achieved this position and i want to thank you for your public service to our country. i am new to congress and i just got elected in february. i was watching what was going on down here and you tune it out a little bit all of the back-and-forth. one of the things i talked about in my campaign and i certainly want to highlight is that every problem we face is complicated. nothing is simple. you cannot solve complicated problems in an environment of fear and anger where everyone is yelling and screaming at each other. it's impossible and you can never get to the meat and bones of doing the work necessary. that is why i was excited by the senate bill, bipartisan compromise that you worked along with senator lankford, murphy, which didn't have everything i wanted, but it was

a compromise. my colleagues, let's say they get everything they want and trump is elected. let's say the get the majority of the senate and congress and i hope it doesn't happen, but let's say it does. under no circumstances will they get enough votes in the senate to pass the bill. they will have to do something bipartisan under any circumstances. you can't get a bipartisan bill under any circumstances unless people work together. it's great that we got more money for the customs border patrol agents and bring it up to 22,000 in the 2024 appropriation and we got more detention beds. under the senate bill, we would have gotten more custom border patrol officers, as well and more detention beds, then money for the wall. we would have gotten money for technology. we would have gotten money for a bunch of other things. it would have been some serious

policy changes. 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. right now, we have all of these people and everyone is freaking out. it seems like it's common, but there will be a surge again between now and the summer i'm sure. if people have to wait eight years and get a work permit in the meanwhile, then that will encourage more people to come. if we can cut that down and i think you said 90 days and six months from other people, then if we can cut it down to adjudicate these asylum cases of which 80% of people will be denied asylum, then it will

discourage other people from paying the coyotes and coming i over to do this stuff. can you explain how we reduce the time it takes? what will it take from this body to reduce the time it takes to adjudicate the asylum cases down to a matter of months? >> congressman, you are correct . reducing that time would change the risk calculus and deter 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, changes to the system , policy changes to the system and ample resources for us to implement those fixes. >> can you tell us some of the changes that would happen that would make the asylum process more quickly? when they get adjudicated, 70% or 80% get

denied, then they are not eligible. we could stop this from happening. what are the policy changes? >> among the compromises included, raising the standard and shrinking disparity from that initial threshold and the ultimate merits standard. it also resourced our system with 4300 asylum officers to adjudicate those cases much more swiftly. t >> i want to thank you for your public service. i'm saddened when i hear some of this stuff from different people. it's upsetting and not productive. we have serious business and these are serious problems. we don't want crimes or breaking the law, but we have to work together. >> i now recognize that -- the chairman from new york. >> do we have a problem at the southern border? >> yes, we do.

>> you characterized that it's not a crisis. >> i have said now repeatedly that it is a crisis and i have never minimized the severity of the challenge at the border, regardless of words used. >> appreciate the evolution on that. 1.7 million noncitizens are being paroled into the country and migrant crises in multiple cities, like new york city. up how grave is the crisis at the southern border? >> congressman, the situation is grave and requires solutions and i strongly support and urge congress to pass the bipartisan. >> we will get into that in a moment, secretary. my colleague on the other side of the aisle to my west mentions how some solutions are complicated. i would offer that there are simple solutions, which ought to be implement it. i find it disingenuous that many folks from the other side

of the aisle often point a budgetary reason as to why we can't have a secure border. i want to talk about non- budgetary reasons, including president biden's policy choices and specifically his executive orders that he has issued or extended. i think the clerk may have a copy of 64 different executive orders that president biden has issued that has either rolled back border policies that many agree have been successful or implemented some that made your job more difficult. in the entirety of the four years in the trump administration, there were 2.4 million encounters. in the first 40 minutes of the biden administration, 7.6 million encounters at the southwest border. comparatively speaking, 200% more than 20% less of time. should the department of

homeland security less alien encounters of southwest border? >> we are driving to reduce the number of counters. >> it is your goal to have less? >> yes. >> great. does less encounters leads to less noncitizens being paroled into the country? >> yes. >> if there are less paroled into the country, would there be less migrant crises, like the ones in new york? >> congressman, the source in the challenge in new york city is varied. one source of that is a public official's decision to deliberately not communicate --. >> the question was, do less encounters leads to less migrant crises? i will say that the answer is yes, but you may have a different opinion. i

on the mexico policy, when president biden announced that he was resending the mexico policy, what do you think went through the mind of a migrant from central or south america and many who come here for economic reasons. what do you think went through their mind who now know that if he or she made it to the southern border that they would be granted entry and more likely to be granted entry into the country? >> i believe that the policy throughout its duration -- i believe and i will verify, but approximately 70,000 migrants ran through it in the two years that it was in operation. i think you're overemphasizing. >> let me ask a different question. why repeal? what is the value to border security by repealing the policy? >> congressman, it was not an effective policy.

it was causing a tremendous amount of human tragedy south of our border. because it was that policy, it was rescinded. >> your testimony is that the 200% increase of migrant encounters at the southwest border in 20% less time is because of covid? >> no, i have not testified to that. the situation and 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. >> i will reclaim my time. president biden should go back to the successful trump era border policies and the senate should take up hr two, the only bill that has asked either chamber in this town. i yield back.

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

which is one of my very serious issues. let's give them internships or access and put them to work. i think you would have at least a portion of the battle where et you would have 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. let's see if we can do something constructive in this committee. 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 their own failings. do you believe 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? >> i have been in public service for 22 years. i have taken the oath five times and i would hear to the oath to which i have sworn and i have abided by the law each and every step of the way. >> this is for the american people if you are still tuning in about whether the southern border is secure, they need that answer. i would ask the question as someone who believes that you do best of what you have and 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 answer was that we need to do more? what more would you do to secure the american border if

you felt it was necessary and that you wanted to tell the american people that this is what we need and have? >> we are dealing with a fundamentally broken immigration system. that is our fundamental problem. i would encourage congress to pass a bipartisan senate legislation, which would bring advancing reform to the broken immigration system and also resource our department to execute those reforms advantageously. >> it seems like a simple proposition to me and 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 the second article of impeachment breach of public trust. that is that we know congress has the sole power of impeachment and that you shall be removed for the impeachment trust, then what is that reach

and what is your belief is a breach of trust? >> i'm not aware of any. let me assure you that i do not spend time on the proceedings. i focus my attention exclusively on the work of the department of homeland security. >> is an answer that i wish some of our colleagues would decide to not be here for that and to be able to listen. we do know that iran is a major proponent of terrorism and they decided to exercise that definition by bombarding israel with 300 missiles that they decide to use the drones against an ally for this horrible attack . what would you give as an answer? did we, the u.s., generate an attack on israel? was that are doing?

>> it was not. >> are we prepared to be supportive in helping defend our homeland? >> we most certainly are and we do that every day through the extraordinary work of 260,000 men and women in our department. >> you haven't seen anybody stand up and resign and say that they are frightened and don't want to do the work or protect the homeland? have you seen that? >> i have not. people risk their lives every day on behalf of our country both departments and in our branches of the military. >> time has expired. >> i know you want me to say that, mr. chairman. i see no reason for the gentleman to be impeached. >> i now recognize. >> there is no reason. >> thank you. your open border

polities illegal aliens from regions in the middle east in west africa that are known for terrorism. clearly, this administration's policies have countries such as iran and attacks on israel. can you tell me competently that no current or former iranian revolutionary guard court members or members of islamic terrorist organizations have been granted parole in the u.s.? >> let me assure you that any individual who poses a threat to our national security is a priority for detention and removal. >> what about anyone from the people liberation army of the chinese communist party? >> same answer. >> violation on free speech. testified that the committee i

quote, countering this informationda that threatens th homeland and providing the public with accurate information and response are critical to the billing congressionally mandated missions. secretary, do you but they have -- believe congress has given censorship? >> we do not censor free speech and we abide by the first amendment. >> in missouri versus biden found and i quote again, likely encouraged social media platforms content moderation decisions and thereby violated the first amendment. did you know that your agency was pressuring social media platforms? >> we do not censor speech or pressure platforms to do so and i believe the trial court's

ruling was reversed in part by the appellate court and i can speak further, because i believe the litigation continues. >> documents recently obtained freedom of information act and show that dhs argued already to regulate misinformation, disinformation, however the content of the documents have been redacted. i question members regarding this and it was not satisfied with the response, what congressional authority does dhs have in this case? >> let me give you some real- life examples that we do. i'm sure that you will support it. when human smuggling organizations spread disinformation, department of

homeland security, we publish accurate information with respect to our policies. when criminal organizations domestically in the wake of natural disaster spread disinformation, two victims of the natural disaster to deceive them and fall prey to those criminal organizations, we provide accurate information with respect to what fema does and does not do. when 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 go on wednesday. we actually communicate accurate information with respect to the election process in coordination with state and local officials. 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. >> mr. secretary, able to touch eight individual? >> i respect what you just told us and i hope this is happening, but is dhs able to reach out to all bodies that they are engaging with with the right information to oppose negative information? >> we disseminate information as broadly as possible. >> is that on the dhs site or on social media platforms? >> we have webpages that broadcast that and we also -- state, tribal, local and territorial partners, law enforcement et cetera. >> time has expired. i now recognize gentleman from

california and ranking member of the subcommittee of cyber security and infrastructure security. >> welcome back. thank you and they were men and women who are doing this for our community, especially a w vulnerable time for the homeland. i know it's probably not comfortable for you to have any of us reference the impeachment that speaker johnson brought to the floor, but i want to get some dates right. was it february 13 when speaker johnson was finally able to get the votes to impeach you? is that the date? >> i don't recall. >> i think it was a very 13. by the way, it was a second server impeachment for using analogy. the first one was a fault and they couldn't get the votes and you had have only got one sermon that would have been it, but it was tennis and they got a second serve and were barely able to do it. today is april 16th, so i'm not

great at math, but i think it's two months. have the impeachment articles been sent over for the senate of the trial? are you aware? >> i don't know whether some things have occurred while i have been testifying before this committee. >> we were told that there was an urgency and crisis at the border and that we have to do this now. we have to bring one of our colleagues who is suffering and going through cancer treatments. we had to bring him out of those treatments, so that he can come and be the vote, so we could get you impeached and sent over to the senate. o it has been two months and it's still not over. i don't think it's the urgency we were told. it seems like it was more that the former president wanted us to do this. speaker johnson did it and we seem to go wherever the former president wants us to if that is on border policy or funding ukraine. it's not really an

america first agenda, but me, me, me first when it comes to the former president, then they get dragged along, which is why the articles as we sit here today have still not been sent over. 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? >> i'm not sure i understand your question. >> americans have a right to speak freely about our elections, but do you see our adversaries as having a right to pollute our public form when it comes to speech? >> one of the threat streams attacking the integrity is disinformation from adverse nationstates, which include people's republic of china, russia, iran and north korea.

>> i also find it interesting -- some of my colleagues don't like that you are going after this information, 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's disinformation that is the problem. multiple republican members are saying that disinformation is our foreign adversary's tool of choice, as mr. rogers on this committee at the time said. mr. perry from january 6 also goes into identifying foreign disinformation as being the problem.

again, what we want the department to do is not to decide -- choose sides politically. they just want chaos, so that they can go towards their authoritative -- i authoritarian states. look at what's going on in america. they are undermining it. when you look at disinformation and see it, that it doesn't have a straight line as far as benefiting one party or the other that our adversaries more than anything want chaos in america? >> adverse nationstates seem to attack our nation and democracy in this country. we battled their efforts every day. >> again, thank you for what you do. we are grateful that you are in the chair and it's not an easy place to sit. i am

confident that there will be a swift acquittal if it ever gets sent over to the senate and i yield back. >> i now recognize the gentleman from new york for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you for being here. have you read hr to dig? >> it's been a while since i have. >> were there any parts that you agreed with? >> i would have to review it again. >> it was the most comprehensive border security bill that has been passed out e of the house of representatives in decades. you are not certain or short of any of the items in that legislation that you would agree with? >> let me assure you that i support the senate's bipartisan legislation. >> i'm not asking about the legislation, i'm asking about hr 2. the only piece that has

been passed through the house of representatives and we continue to talk about this bipartisan legislation and the magical legislation that has yet to make it 'tout of the senate that doesn't have the support to make it, but we still have the administration, secretary of homeland security telling us that we should support legislation that can't get past. you don't remember any parts that you support? >> congressman, i can share with you some of the grave infirmities of hr 2. >> and asking about what you support, because my point is that back in may, house republicans out ntof this committee passed hr 2 to secure the border act. we sent it over to the senate. that shed -- should have begun the negotiation. that should have been the starting point to secure the border. i have heard colleagues on the other side of the aisle say that people in america are quote, freaking out that there is chaos and people are

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

that is including my home in new york. a democrat mayor who i don't agree with on everything, but i agree with him on this. he said and i quote, this issue will destroy new york city. i am proud to have served the nypd as a detective and that has been absolutely devastating to see the horrific challenges that law enforcement are faced with throughout this country. just recently, we saw nypd cops attacked by illegal migrants who just got done robbing a target. months ago, we saw nypd officers brutally attacked in midtown n mile and -- manhattan we saw in the bronx recently where there was a 911 call made for a person with a gun and consummate there -- their way into the box and there were illegal migrants who had

illegal guns and products. days after in roosevelt field mall, there were two who committed larceny in a store and arrested by the national county police department. guess what the address was? the home in the bronx where the guns and narcotics were found. can you tell me at what part of this budget request would better support law enforcement? >> quite a number of parts. the additional personal request and funding for additional law enforcement personnel in the department of homeland security. >> do you know that there was money in there for additional law enforcement? a >> in addition, congressman, the grant funds that we are seeking to distribute to state and local law enforcement through the homeland security grant program and urban area

security initiative and other programs. >> everything you just mentioned was parts of hr 2? it seems like you do know what you agree with in that legislation. to my point, that is exactly where we should start. i urge my colleagues on the other side, let's work on this as americans. hr 2 is our starting point. >> i now recognize ms. clark from new york for her five minutes. >> i want to thank you for your hard work and 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, but 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. republicans efforts to make it harder to vote will disenfranchise low income and minority folders -- voters and will do nothing to make them d more secure. we should focus on the real threats, which include foreign interference efforts, which i know secretary mayorkas is committed to addressing. additionally, i am deeply disturbed by congresswoman attacks. originally known as the hebrew immigrant society that has been supporting refugees for over 140 years. conspiracy theories fueled the anti-somatic murder of 11

individuals at the tree of life synagogue in pittsburgh and it is disgraceful to see the same miss information repeated in this committee, so i want that on the record. mr. secretary, last month mu issued the notice of the rulemaking for mandatory cyber incident reporting and i congratulate the department on this important milestone. dhs must redouble their efforts to harmonize incident report rules across the government. the department cyber incident reporting counsel will play a critical role in the process. secretary mayorkas issued a report containing recommendations regarding the cyber incident reporting roles last september. what actions have they taken since the report was released re to promote harmonization? what more can they be doing to

promoted? >> thank you very much for your question. we are working with federal departments and agencies across the administration to execute on the imperative of harmonizing our rules. not only that, but we are working with our international partners, so that harmonization is not restricted to the domestic environment, but international arena, as well. >> that is good news. as part of the infrastructure investment, congress provides $1 billion in grants to state, local and tribal and territorial governments to strengthen their cyber defenses. this program is based on bipartisan legislation that i authored with my colleagues on this committee. unfortunately, this expires in 2025, which could mean state and local governments cut their spending as they continue to face

serious cyber security threats, including from foreign adversaries like china and russia. it's my hope that the committee will work together to this, so we can build. do you agree that state and local governments will continue to support as they defend their cyber intrusions and will you commit to working with me and the committee to reauthorize the state of local cybersecurity grant program? >> i do and i will, congresswoman. >> wonderful. one other note of concern with the nation of haiti, you said -- should have received a letter or been cced on a letter regarding the can turn individuals being returned at this stage who could be sentenced to harm's way into famine and the myriad of challenges that the 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 and families across the nation of haitian descent. >> i want to follow your line of questioning quickly and a very important line of questioning, which is to ensure that we get fixed what is broken . sometimes we have equipment technology that is not working correctly. i would like to submit into healthcare.gov and effective 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 equivalent that will help you do the job? >> so ordered and into the record. time has expired. >> thank you.

>> absolutely. i now recognize ms. slowly from florida. >> i would like to continue the discussion about the cyber security and infrastructure security agency and specifically the chemical facilities antiterrorism standards program that is overseen. would you please describe how your budget provides continued support for the program? >> i will have to remind myself of the specific funding for that program. that funding is very important and of course it has been a tremendous peril recently. we strongly support and continuation of the program. it enables us to ensure that high risk chemical facilities are as secure as they need to be. >> would you agree that the continuation of the program is an important part of the mission to protect critical infrastructure? >> i would.

>> would you encourage our friends and partners over in the senate to take up the bill passed by the house and is currently there waiting consideration and action? >> i look forward to revealing that bill again, but we do consider the program to be very important. >> i would like to return to the subject of the role in elections infrastructure and its efforts to help state and local election officials protect can you describe what it does to help state and local election officials for threats against foreign adversaries to that infrastructure? >> 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 six 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, which is to safeguard the integrity of our election processes. >> moving to the question to cyber attacks, what efforts is cisa making to bolster its own internal cybersecurity? i know they were victim to a recent cyber attack , so can you describe the efforts internal to cisa on cybersecurity? >> that is the priority for the department as a whole. our chief information officer and that team is consistently working day in and out to enhance our security. in addition, cisa works to

enhance cybersecurity of the federal civilian domain and 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 and this is a significant issue area of ours and the cyber security threat factor is not diminishing unfortunately. >> related to hsi, i would like to go back to the subject, which you addressed earlier , as it relates to some transnational gang activities pretty specifically within her budget, i would like to discuss hsi's operations in regards to child exploitation and human trafficking. your budget calls for additional funding to help hsi investigators combat human trafficking. does it not? >> it does. >> would you explain the types of activities that hsi takes

specifically as it relates to the exportation and trafficking of children? >> congresswoman, i named crimes of exploitation one of our six mission priorities for the first time in the s department's history. tomorrow, i will be with hsi in new york city launching a new campaign against online child sexual exploitation and abuse. this is not only nationwide, but 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 great threat. the extent of the crime could not be overstated. the work of hsi and combating it is heroic both in disseminating education and awareness, investigating the crimes and rescuing victims

and holding perpetrators accountable. mr >> thank you. i yield back. >> i recognize that gentlemen from texas. >> good afternoon. my colleague has initiated the conversation i wanted to have with you, as well. heavy discussions with hsi , dps and in the state of texas, one of the biggest issues that they are confronted with is the ability to in aggregate data on criminals moving individuals in the trafficking space. are you comfortable with the money that you are asking for in the cyber threat domain and the artificial intelligence and machine learning space? they are two different entities that work well together. my concern is that the right hand is not talking to the left and we need to expand the ability for agents to process data and in the budget

proposal, only $5 million for the new ai office. are you happy with that number? >> we are pleased with receiving additional funding when it comes to crimes of exploitation. if i had a wish list, the amount of money would be greater and personnel that we could dedicate to this would be greater. this heinous crime is extraordinary depth of depravity and we work every day. it is remarkable what our personal do to combat this with state and local partners, as well as international partners. this is one of the top issues raised when i am engaging in the arena with our partners, as well as our european union callings. >> i hate to speak for the ball it -- body itself, but we are

hungry for the expansiveness of ai in this space and this is where i will be hyper aggressive in order to save the women and children in this. that is the third time i have done that to me. i was hoping you weren't going to do that. we could go into the pronouns and all of that stuff. >> three strikes and out. i understand that. let me share with you that we are harnessing ai to advance the mission in the fight against online child exploitation. at the same time, it presents a risk, because the perpetrators use it to advance their depraved criminality. this is what we are harnessing for good and fighting against bad. >> that is where we were going earlier. r

i am hoping that we do and i know that is a very aggressive problem set. i will roll to immigration. i never saw the senate bill, soe give me a little latitude on this one. i think you are the 14th homeland security . is that correct? >> i am the seventh confirmed. >> i don't know where i got 14. mr. hunter was in front of the border security subcommittee a few weeks ago and we were talking immigration policy. i had asked, tasked and requested , because in your opening statement, he said that congress has not reformed immigration since the 90s. it is our job to pass legislation, but the subject matter lives underneath your umbrella and i -- are you the

subject matter expert in immigration? >> i am admiring of those who know much more than i. >> we are in agreement with this, it seems that the front- line operators are the best to address the immigration issue where the blockade is. has a policy ever been written for the department and sent up to congress? i have never seen one. i am asking, have you done that in your tenure as secretary? >> have i submitted policy recommendations? >> rewritten the policy that mr. garcia holds up regally in our hearings that you can't even read. that is the absolute problem. has the homeland security department said, here is the problem. congress can't get anything done for the last 20 years, so we will write it for you and submit it. has homeland security done that? >> there are two powerful examples.

on his first day in office, president biden presented the legislation to congress. secondly, i have the privilege and honor of sitting beside the bipartisan group of senators who worked out a compromise that i urged congress to pass. >> his time has expired and i now recognize the gentleman from alabama for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you for being here, secretary mayorkas, on the 2025 presidential budget request. the request reflects the administration's priorities, correct? >> it does. >> 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 have acknowledged the threat that unmanned aircraft systems at our southern border and saying in part, drones are being used in a number of different ways

to create a public safety risk. you and i agree on this point. the cartels use the drones of the border and it is alarming. using them to track the movement of border patrol agents to providing overwatch for human smuggling to transportingc narcotics and outfitting them with explosive payloads. for each drone that they fly, the mexican cartel lies 17 based on the last information i got. this issue has not improved since last year. in fact, last month in a senate hearing, commander general testified that the number of drone incursions alarmed him saying that he has quote, talked to who are responsible for incursions at the border and they put the number of incursions at thousands. he went on to say that he sees the potential of the threat

posed by drones to the national defense as only growing. is counting the illicit use of drones at the border a priority for dhs? >> it certainly is. >> is very concerning and confusing to me that this is where budget request for the counter eas program. you see it right behind me. zero. not one penny. not one penny and the threat is unbelievable. our border continues to bring a threat to our homeland and it is unconscionable that you wouldn't request a single penny for to carry out its counter eas -- uas mission. i mexican cartel have the -- we

have the ability to block, drop or intersect these drones. moving on, i want to address the detention beds. as illegal aliens continue to pour across the border, your 2025y2 budget request funding f just 34,000 beds, barely half of the 60,000 requested by the trump administration in 2021. in may 20, you testified that you are quote, concerned about the overuse of detention. is it safe to presume that this is what you want to cut that space and release them on the streets of america? >> it is not my desire to cut detention beds. i should say that returning the counter authorities, we are seeking to harness artificial intelligence to amplify the strengths of our

capabilities. can drop them, block them or intercept them. it's being used in ukraine and in israel, the only thing that capability you have to request technology, matter of fact, in my community where i live in huntsville, alabama, where we could block them, drop them or intercept them. is being used in ukraine. it's being used in israel. the only thing is the capability, you've got to request it to make sure that it happens so i promise you, i hope that we can come to agreements because when those uavs are coming into america, setting down, dropping fentanyl, being stuffed full of cash and being flied back to the mexican cartel, it's totally unacceptable and i take you for your word that you can do something about it. if congress is willing to fund even more i.c.e. bed space or near trump era levels, would this be a solution to detaining more illegal aliens? subpoena congressman, the greater the detention capacity, the greater our ability to contain more people. the bipartisan senate

legislation funded 50,000 detention beds and that's a powerful example. >> thank you, mr. secretary. at the beginning of 2022 you testified to congress that you had operational control of the border, then the following hearings you backtracked, altered 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 know to be true, that your border policies don't work? mr. chairman, i yield back. >> the gentleman's time has expired. i recognize the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. king, five minutes for questioning. >> i think the chairman. mr. secretary, i'm really concerned about real i.d. compliance. i want to shift the narrative to discuss that, which will be a part of budget t implementation, real i.d. 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. citizens refer that's how it was sold when it was passed years ago. under your leadership the department is going to start implementing this. this transportation security administration, tsa will be prohibited from accepting drivers license and identification cards that don't meet certain standards, federal standards. you said as you continue to work closely with u.s. states to meet real i.d. requirements. so here's where i'm going to take this. i heard from two illinois state lawmakers that illegals in their states, they've got verification, are now able to obtain real i.d. compliant driver's license. i want to reiterate that. in illinois, illegal aliens now can get real i.d. compliant driver's license by checking the box on, quote, 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. it comes under the parole, which is something that's been implemented by you in this administration. so with that roll, this employment authorization documents box can be checked. in my opinion, i think most americans would say this totally undermines real i.d. 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 interval, you can do some background checks but the united states ability to understand who these people really are, we don't. is real i.d. compromised? i believe it is. i think this is a glaring fault in the system. so i'm going to go to a quick question to you, yes or no, should illegal aliens get real i.d. driver's license? subpoena congressman, i look forward to following up with you on the integrity of the real i.d. program as it is envisioned and we are phasing in. that has been the program. >> because i got limited time, mr. secretary, yes or no, real

i.d., should the illegal aliens have the option, in your opinion, to get real i.d. compliant driver's license is, yes or no? >> i look forward to following up with you. >> i wish you had a no on that. next question, should illegal aliens vote as illinois and new york, we know that they are voting? should illegal aliens be allowed to vote in this country, yes or no? >> it is my understanding that illegal aliens cannot vote in federal elections. >> are they allowed to vote? the answer is yes in new york and in illinois they are allowed to vote and so whether it's federal, my question to you a while ago, i'd love your answer, should they be allowed to vote. >> congressman, that policy issue is outside of the remit of the department of homeland security. >> we need to move on for time, i'm sorry. mr. secretary, you have continued that, quote, the entire hemisphere is grouped with a level of migration that is unprecedented in recent history, end of quote. you said that more or less today in your opening statement. i think that this avoids accountability for the invasion of the southern border. i think it shift 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? the answer is no. it ultimately is, for those who have the context of the wizard of oz, it's like the wizard sending 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 the levers and spinning wheels. i think the american people have this figured out. the migration is because it's been advertisement under this administration,, into this country. i come from the sooner state in oklahoma, sooner state. history designates legal land run occurred in the 1880s. this was not for illegals. this was for legal citizens. history will remember this time, i believe in the past three years, as bidens land run for illegals paid for by u.s. taxpayers. taxpayers are being asked to give their treasure and their children's treasurer of the

future for this. fair organization says it cost us $4000 for every illegal immigrant. a gold rush to transport illegals to the city of their choice, free emergency healthcare and then once these people have a child there's cash payments in the form of earned income tax credits. thousands of dollars of food stamps once they have a child. food stamps once they have a child, medicaid on top of the food stamps so here is where i'm going with this. does your budget propose -- especially one that we deem it as the slush fund, allow for dollars to go into countries as far south as panama for ngos, nongovernment organizations to promote people coming to our country and in effect telling military age men, go north, young man, go north >> >> gentlemen's time is expired. alan i recognized mr. crane from arizona for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you mr. chairman. you know it's interesting because i hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle

consistently talk about how we can't agree on anything over here on the republican side of the aisle. there's some truth to that. there has been definitely some debates, some arguments within our own party but one thing that we can agree upon is that you're doing a horrible job, sir, and that you needed to be impeached. that's wild seeing as how we've been able to agree upon very few things that 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 st 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? >> yes i did, congressman. >> how many times have you done that? >> i certainly can identify five point

>> thank you. are you aware of article four, section 4? do you know what that article is? >> may be more than five instances. i just want to be clear. >> okay, great. article four, section 4, are you familiar with that article he'll >> when i was sworn is as an assistant. >> it's called the invasion clause. do you know what the evasion clause says, sir? the federal government will protect and defend each state from invasion, okay? since you don't seem to be getting it, i had our staff here bring up this graph here. n this is you. this is the last administration. again, you, last administration. that looks like an invasion on a graph. we've heard from the people that have sat here and testified in these chambers about their family members being and murdered by people that weren't supposed to be here that your administration allowed to be here and didn't keep track of, didn't report, didn't detain. tell me sir how you haven't

allowed an invasion into this country. >> congressman, i'm incredibly proud to support the men and women of the department of homeland security to enforce the laws of the united states every single day, many of whom risk their lives to secure our borders. >> despite your horrific leadership, yes they do, and i'm proud to know many of them d as well. they are great people that we all know what the morale is like in the border patrol right now, and it's horrible. i hear from border patrol agents everyday. again, sir, my question is how have you not violated your oath to protect and defend the constitution of the united states, specifically article four, 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?

>> 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. >> you may be working every day but it seems as if you're working for the other side of the aisle. it seems as if you're working for our enemies, and that's es exactly what the american people see. that's exactly why they supported us impeaching you and that's 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? >> man, you could launch whatever false and deplorable accusations that i >> do you think our adversaries are stupid, sir? >> congressman, our adversaries very incapability and we address the defense of the united states and interest of the united states accordingly. >> no you're not. you are not doing that.

as a matter of fact, do you think it's possible that maybe some of our adversaries, the most dangerous ones like the chinese, 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're here, once you allow them to be here? do you think that's possible, secretary mayorkas? >> congressman, over the last 11 months we have moved and returned 630,000 people, more than any fiscal year since 2013. >> you're bragging about how much he returned but you don't want to brag about how many you let in, do you? >> 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. >> thank you mr. chairman. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields. the members of the committee

may have some additional questions for you, mr. secretary, and we would ask that you would respond to those in writing. i think there were several at the time but kind of fell and i'll let those members send those to you for you to follow up on. pursuant to committee rule 17 d the hearing record will be held open for 10 days and i think the ranking member has a unanimous consent request and also closing statement so i'll just let you do those together, mr. ranking member. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i have unanimous consent that portions of the july 18, 2018 hearing transcript by mr. swalwell be inserted into the record. >> so ordered and you are recognized for your closing remarks, sir. >> thank you very much, i'd like to thank secretary mayorkas for agreeing to testify before this committee today despite ongoing 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'm not sure i can say the same for colleagues on the other side of the aisle, who prefer ranting while steadfastly refusing to provide 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's appalling.

dhs, homeland 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 a become yet another mega order 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 inland natural disasters, nor did they engage with dhs's work to defend against legitimate threats to our 2024 election. instead, choosing to waste r time, drumming up anti- immigrant sentiment with

unfounded allegations. nor do 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, get my republican colleagues seem more interested in pretending to be outraged then doing the hard work of governing. this is simply not the way to get things done. it takes complete and utter compromise, like we saw in the senate, where they drafted a bipartisan bill that would've imposed a tougher set of border security reforms than we've 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've 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 with a couple other committees.

but it's a 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 and i want to assure you that it's this committee's still valued by some members of this ef committee. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back and thank you again, mr. secretary. >> closing statement. before i start i'd like to clarify a couple things that have been addressed in today's hearing and i'll be brief, mr. secretary. the fact that immigration laws haven't been up dated doesn't mean we don't get to follow the immigration laws on the books, and i would agree with you, we desperately need some of grade to our immigration laws.

those will occur in this committee and that actually happens over in judiciary. so i appreciate the continual mentioned that that needs to be addressed but it doesn't obfuscate or even allow a variance of any kind in the laws that have already been passed by the body. it doesn't excuse violation of the law. i'd also like to clarify something that is quite frankly i think dishonest, at least disingenuous, suggest that because someone or a group on this side of the aisle or that side of the aisle votes one way or the other on a budget, not for 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 budget customs and

border patrol, it is dishonest to say that side that voted that way voted to cut spending of customs and border patrol that we forget multiple times today. that's just flat dishonesty. that's all you've got to say to support or defend the actions of the southern border, well i guess that tells everybody the truth about what's really going on. another point i'd like to clarify, someone made a commentt that impeachment hearings earlier were two hearings. it was a 10 month, five phased investigation of oversight with subpoenas that were never complied with, by the way. this notion that there were two hearings is just false. and about legislation on addressing border security, the process is pretty simple in the constitution and the rules of the committee in the house and the senate, we passed the bill, we sent it to the senate. they can amend it. we go to conference committee.

we do that every year on the ndaa. if the leadership of the senate really wanted to do something, they would pick the law that was sent over a year ago. in terms of the budget discussion today and a i and all this other stuff, multiple members talk about this stuff. i want to clarify because you just don't to say this happened and this happened in some kind of jedi mind trick to tell the american people the people here on the side of the aisle didn't talk about ai. this committee talked about ai, human trafficking, mr. garbarino talked about ai, cybersecurity. just somewhat infuriating that people just think they can say something that's not true and everybody is going to believe it. i want to correct the record. 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 hearing, sending it to you guys, you'll execute that budget. that was what our founders envisioned so creating slush funds, it's against the whole foundation of the constitution. so that's why things like that aren't supported in this budget, other budgets that do get voted on and authorizations. under funding 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's a motivation. people come because it's an a incentive to come. and i -- that's why it's important for us not to see cuts to those. and we know a lot of the dollars in the slush fund are going to do nothing but continue the policies that you've been doing, which is ushering more people in. i think the interesting number to me, if you look at the curve on young got aways, as you pull

people off the border to process, the known got aways number actually flat lines or decreases a little bit because they're not out there to see the known got aways, so they don't see them because they're not out on the border, they're actually processing people. so i think that unknown number just increases massively. but that's speculation on my part. it's good common sense and that's a number we have no clue how big that number is. we brought it in this committee many times and have shown the videos from ranchers where folks are wearing camouflage. you seen the shoes that have been piled up in arizona, just inside the border, and the backpacks which we know are just full of fentanyl. during your tenure as secretary, a record number of illegal aliens cost into the country, too many of whom have

connections, many of whom have connections to transnational criminal organizations. you're from california originally. the very good report on how the honduran cartels have linked up to the gangs in san francisco and created this nexus is shocking. it all happened on your watch. most recently of course, and it's been mentioned here, an illegal alien murdered a college student, lincoln riley, paroled by your department into the country and left a trail of crime in his path. she's just one of thousands of americans who are getting murdered or otherwise victimized by illegal immigrants. 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. that young woman is dead simply because the laws weren't followed. mr. secretary, the

number of known got aways i've talked about already. that number has trailed off because we are not out on the border looking anymore. i don't want to imagine that undetected number. it just scares me to death. seemed to scare 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, fy 25 dhs seeks to hire only 350 new border agents. i don't think that number is enough and that's why all the authorizations we sent over, it's been significantly higher than that despite what's been said here today by others who like to misrepresent what really happened. when you testified in the senate and senator capitol 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 the working conditions, and these are your policies that have created that.

we've been committed to providing strong oversight to the department and most importantly the actions that you've taken as a leader. we've investigated those policies. we've investigated those failures. we look forward and we hope that we can work together on those issues that i mentioned, beginning cybersecurity, ports, vulnerability of our supply chain. in a lot of those areas we do agree on and where there is overlap, where we do agree, we're 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 sovereign workforce and i've got a bill that i personally am meeting and helping put together. we'll get a copy of it to director easterly, make sure she gets eyes on it, and others from your department. we'll want your help on that and i'm sure you will like to build it 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 adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

>> do you solemnly swear that in the testimony you're to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and often but the truth, so help you god? >> saturdays, what american history tv's congress investigates as we explore major investigations in our country's history by the u.s. house and senate. each week writers and historians tell these stories. you'll also see historic footage from these periods and examine the impact and legacy of key congressional hearings. this week we look at the investigation that followed the deadly 1993 siege at the branch davidian compound near waco, texas, and what that event has mentioned the years that followed. watch congress investigates saturdays at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 2.