>> the house rules committee has adjourned after approving the rules for debate on legislation that would provide aid to israel, ukraine and taiwan we expect lawmakers to begin work on these bills when the house returns for legislation. final passage could possibly stretch into the weekend. as always, you will be able to follow the house live when members return here on his van. now back to our programming item schedule. rejoin join it in progress. -- we rejoin it in progress. to this delay in processing and can you commit to working with me on trying to reduce the times and let us know what resources you need so we can provide them? >> senator, you certainly have my commitment to working with you on reducing the backlogs and waiting times. we -- we are addressing the

regulatory need to extend the renewal period for work authorization. very importantly, u.s. citizenship and immigration services has promulgated a final payroll that will put the agency back on firm financial footing. and has not received a fee adjustment for i believe more than seven years even though there is a statutory requirement to be considered every two years. and so i expect the financial condition of u.s. citizenship and immigration services to approve for us to be able to hire the people that we can and address the backlogs that have indeed been growing. despite those backlogs, i must say that uscis, as it is known by its acronym, has done extraordinary work over and above its normal mission requirements, whether it is uniting before ukraine or

operation allies welcomed. it is a remarkable workforce which is characteristic of all the men and women in the department of homeland security. >> thank you. my time is up. one more question i will submit to the record for anti-semitism and violent extremism. we will submit that to the record. thank you for that testimony today. >> thank you, mr. chairman. yesterday, we saw senate democrats set fire to the constitution when they refuse to allow your impeachment trial. you, sir, as the better of joe biden's policies have set fire to the sovereignty of this nation, to the safety and security of this nation, and in total disregard to the law of the land. the secure friends act of 2006 requires you to maintain operational control of the border, and they define operational control as preventing the entry of terrorists, unlawful aliens,

and narcotics. you know what, it doesn't surprise me now when i go back and talk to law enforcement officers in my home state and they tell me that the crime crisis is so bad that the amount of human trafficing, fentanyl trafficking, and the crime related to those is so bad that we cannot arrest ourselves out of this. i can triple their officers and it would not be enough to cover the cases. mr. secretary, how many people died from fentanyl in this country in the last three years or last year? >> senator, i would be pleased to provide you with that data. >> what would be your guest? >> so you don't know? 20 50,000 americans have died from fentanyl poisoning, and that is on your shoulders. how many people have you paroled in the last three years? any idea? >> senator, i would be pleased -- >> you are in charge and have no idea. is at 1 million. is it 2 million.

is a 3 million? how many of those have committed a crime? how many people that you have paroled have committed a crime? >> senator, if you would be -- if you would be pleased to -- >> mr. secretary, do you recall a visit in january to eagle pass? you are in eagle pass in january. do you recall? >> in that precise month, i made over 20 visits to the border so forgive me for not remembering it. >> the recall being in a room in eagle pass, texas, with a large number of officers. do you admit the release rate was 85% at that time? >> no, as i testified before, i do not remember the particular exchange to which you refer. >> what percent arrange would you say are released? >> i don't want to guess but i have said before senator, i would be pleased to provide you with whatever data -- >> how can you come to this hearing and these are things i know and this is 1/100 of my

job. so i know as well. we have multiple witnesses releasing 85% of the folks at the border. there is no way possible that you could vet that number of people at a time. 85% of the people coming in and illegally breaking our laws. no vetting process. free healthcare and a plane ticket or bus ride to somewhere. you say you are protecting the nation's sovereignty but you have really facilitated an invasion. sir, this is an invasion. 11 million illegal encounters under your watch. next question. why are you mass importing tens of thousands of venezuelans into our country via parole knowing they cannot be deported because venezuela isn't accepting removal flights? >> we are not doing that, senator. >> you are not paroling tens of thousands of venezuelans into

this country? >> senator, your question was broader than that. the way you framed your question, we are not doing that which you asked. >> are you importing tens of islands of venezuelans into this country? >> the term importation is incorrect. we have a cuban-haitian, nick whalen, venezuelan parole program. for those who don't have a basis to remain -- >> why are you paroling them knowing that venezuela will not take return flights? >> that is falls. we have in fact negotiated in the past removal flights to venezuela. those are suspended right now. we also removed venezuelans to new mexico for example. >> so why do you say it is not correct when it has been suspended? that is why americans don't trust you or the government anymore. because you are setting it up to twist the truth and giving incomplete answers. this is really a de facto

amnesty orchestrated by your administration. there is a reason why venezuelans won't take them back. next question. it is my understanding that we have technology deployed that helped track the number of got- aways that have evaded capture by our border patrols. is that correct? >> we do have technology that is a force multiplier for our personnel. >> i'm asking you, has this technology been operational since you took the post? >> i would like to get back you if there is any deficit in its operational capability. senator, i will be pleased to get back you on that. >> has the system ever gone down under your tenure? >> i would be pleased to -- >> how can you not know that? has it been done once or twice or weeks at a time or months at

a time? any ranger thought that you can give us? do you keep track of it in any way, shape, or form? >> senator, we deploy so many different technologies across the expanse of our department which consists of 268,000. fa technology goes down for a short period of time, i may not have visibility of that. i am secretary of the department. >> you think it has been down for a significant amount of time or a insignificant amount of time? >> senator, i would be pleased to provide you the information that your request and will look into it. >> how can you keep track of the got-aways if you have no program in place that tells you if this is working or not working? >> i am sorry, senator. can your peer question? >> yeah. how can you tell how many got- aways you are reporting if you don't know when this technology is working or not working? in other words, how do we know that 2 million known got-aways is a good number?

>> senator, of the individuals on the ground and in u.s. custom protection, i have the operational capability of equipment they use. they oversee counting the number of individuals who evade -- >> but you rely on technology to observe those as well and you don't know if you have technology that is working or not working. >> the answer you have given is you do not know. you don't know much of any of the questions and answers to the questions we are asking you. this is why we need an impeachment trial. this is why americans are demanding an impeachment trial. i yield back. >> 90 minutes here. i have one senator and perhaps another one. we will give you a full 10 minute break with your indulgence so we can get through this first-round. senator butler, you recognize for your questions. >> thank you mr. chair and to the ranking member for the

hearing today. thank you, secretary mayorkas for joining. it is interesting, the nature of my colleagues' energy and attention. when that same energy and attention seemed to lapse when there was an opportunity to do something to provide the kinds of supports, resources, and technologies that were requested, negotiated in a bipartisan way. so i find that that energy -- something for you to respond to. a note from myself. this is a hearing about resources that you need. and the it is required to execute such a role that you are performing on behalf of the united states of america. let me just appreciate how your work and your team's work letter to last week's

announcement in applications and the competitive grant process for shelter services at our borders. i was recently in san diego, and our san diego ports of entry, talking with incredible men and women doing this work every day who don't get enough credit for the difficulty in challenges that they are facing. and your office and your team work with us to make sure that application and grant process was competitive. and so i just want to appreciate you for some of the work that you are doing it. in the context of the request of the president's budget and the work that your team is doing relative to ssp, it seems that there is a little bit of a disconnect that i wanted to ask you to talk to me about. fema requested $130 million per

ssp in fy 25. yet, homeland security has acknowledged that the demand also exceeds the six and a $50 million that has been appropriated in fiscal year 24. why is the budget request so low compared to previous years? >> senator, thank you for recognizing the extraordinary work of the men and women in the department of homeland security. i believe we requested $830 million in funding if i am not mistaken in fy 25. i will have to drill down on that. i should note that the bipartisan senate legislation would have funded the program at $1.3 billion. we make very difficult trade- offs in the context of the fiscal responsibility act. there is no question that the demand for funds exceeds the amount of funds we have been

provided, and that is why we are so careful in the allocation of resources. we issued our first tranche under the ssp and the first issuance and our next tranche will be under a competitive clause. >> thank you, sir. we look forward to following up. on our part, we look forward to staying in touch about it. one other piece that i wanted to call just to your attention is another hack in which you are a component that you wear on behalf of our country. senator hansen noted the incredible responsibility of keeping the american people safe. one such group of people are our men and women in-service. and, last december, under senator blumenthal's

leadership, there was a permanent subcommittee on investigations hearings relative to the sexual assault coast guard members. during that hearing, we learned that the coast guard had a ugly history of sexual assault that dated back decades. even worse, we learned that leaders of the coast guard systematically covered up reports on the pervasiveness of that sexual assault. so, just, one, are there suggestions or requests he made in your budget to continue to hold these perpetrators accountable and to support those young women in the coast guard who are doing -- young women and men -- who have

experienced such assault? have you taken this on and what are the next steps that you are anticipating? >> senator, thank you for your question. first, the fundamental point that it is a fundamental value of our department in the u.s. coast guard specifically that everyone, everyone feels safe in the workplace and that individuals who make others feel unsafe need to be held accountable. that is a fundamental principle. a fundamental value. i can assure you that the united states coast guard is fully focused on making sure individuals are held accountable. that everyone feels safe in the workplace. and that the coast guard of tomorrow is better than the coast guard of yesterday. i have complete confidence.

she and i have met a number of times and the united states coast guard is working in coordination with the department's inspector general to ensure accountability where it is due. >> thank you. i will yield back, mr. chair. >> thank you, senator. i will recognize senator ossoff and then we will take a 10 minute break. senator blumenthal will be back in first up and still in the first round for him. but after that, we will take a 10 minute break for everyone. you are recognized for your questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and secretary mayorkas, welcome back to the committee. mr. chairman, i cannot help but reflect on what has happened in the last few months in the senate. no one, and i mean no one is interested in or takes seriously lectures on border

security from senate republicans. no one. in one of the most stunning acts of political cowardice in recent american history, a bipartisan border security bill co-authored by a conservative republican member of this committee was put forward in the u.s. senate. it would have tightened asylum standards. to stop exploitation of the asylum system. it would have surged enforcement resources to the border. it would have meant more expedited removals of those who enter this country unlawfully. it would have empowered the federal government to take the fight of the drug cartels who are laying waste to communities across our country with fentanyl. a bipartisan border security bill co-authored by a

conservative republican member of this committee, and it was not just voted down by senate republicans. it was denied even a debate on the floor of the united states senate. because the former president of the united states -- and he said this publicly -- thought it was not in his political interest for the nation to be served. it was not in his political interest for a bipartisan border security bill to be enacted by congress. the american people are smart. so all of the performative chest pounding today on border security is utterly disingenuous. when senate republicans aggregated their basic governing responsibility and refused even to let us debate and amend that bipartisan border security proposal.

the american people see that and understand that. now, mr. secretary, the american people also see and understand what is happening at the southern border and just as they see the hypocrisy and cowardice of senate republicans on border security, they do not see success in the administration's handling of the crisis at the southern border. and i wonder if you have reckoned fully with the fact that you do not have a good- faith partner in the minority party in congress willing to work with you to advance bipartisan border security legislation. you are going to have to rely on your authorities, and it is past time to do so. so, to the extent you have additional legal authorities, that you can responsibly deploy to control this unacceptable crisis at the southern border

that threatens our national security, it is long past time to do so and that brings me to the budget request because i cannot understand this mr. secretary. it is a $3 billion decrease from fiscal year 24 for cvp. you agree, i presume, that the situation at the southern borders a serious threat to national security. >> i do, senator. >> and that cvp personnel are essential to tackling this crisis, mr. secretary. >> most certainly. >> and that there were not sufficient customs control borders and agents at the border. correct? >> we need more resources and one of those resources is additional personnel, senator. >> so why are you requesting a $3 billion decrease in fiscal year 2025? >> senator, the construct we have proposed is a baseline budget plus a $4.7 billion

contingency fund, and i am not certain that you are accounting for that $4.7 billion contingency fund in the gross amount that we are requesting for fiscal year 2025. that contingency fund is really -- the model is that additional funds would be released to us based on the number of encounters that we experience at the southern border. and so that $4.7 billion must be included when looking at our fiscal year 2025 request. >> are those funds explicitly allocated and reserved for hiring and deploying cbp officers? >> include our ability -- >> but the additional funds can be used for other purposes. this is an insufficient request of the u.s. congress given the severity of what we are facing at the southern border.

>> i would be very, very pleased to work with this committee and the congress on increasing the resources above and beyond that which has been requested. >> so given the urgency of the need, why did you not request more funding for customs and border patrol? >> senator, we work within the context of the fiscal responsibility act. we continue to believe that these ordinary resources that would have been delivered under the senates bipartisan legislation would have been transformative. not only in the provision of resources, but in the delivery of authorities that we currently do not have. >> yeah. and i agree with you but president trump killed the bill for political reasons and it is gone. you don't have a good-faith partner in the minority here. only you, through the funds that you request and use from the congress and the appropriations process and by using those authorities that there is discussion of you exercising, only you have the

power to address this crisis and i urge you -- i urge you to act with utter urgency to do so. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator ossoff. we will take a break and when we come back sanders blumenthal and cinema will be allowed their first-round question and then it is my intent to go into second round for those members who come back for a second round. but we now stand at recess for 10 minutes. dhs taken?

>> for folks have not asked questions for the first round, i will recognize senator blumenthal for his first round. seven minute questions. and then it is my intention to move to a second round for those members who wish to come back. they will be limited to five minutes. senator blumenthal, you will recognize for your question. >> thanks, mr. chairman and mr. secretary for being here. i think whether any of us on this committee disagree or agree with you, your responsiveness to our questions, your willingness to be here, and, frankly, your patience are really admirable and i thank you for your public service. i want to ask about a topic that we have discussed briefly which is investigation we are conducting in the subcommittee on investigations concerning the coast guard. we have an inquiry into the coast guard's handling of their internal inquiry known as

operation fouled anchor. i am just going to be really blunt with you. we have been extremely disappointed. in fact, angry with the coast guard's slow pace of response to that inquiry. we sent our initial request letter to the coast guard in september. for documents. only about 3% of those documents have been received. and they are only responsive email records. i understand that the total document production includes 11,700 pages. it largely is consisting of investigative records. there are fewer than 300 pages of emails. i know they have other work to do. but this delay is unacceptable.

and i say with sadness that it seems to reflect a resistance to coming clean about operation fouled anchor. and we have had discussions with the coast guard. we have prepped them on this issue repeatedly. and i would like your commitment to this inquiry to make sure the coast guard is responsive and i would like to ask you what you can and will do to make sure that the coast guard fully cooperates with our subcommittee inquiry including accelerating the pace of its response without redactions. >> senator, let me -- allow me to provide -- >> my commitment to work with you and the subcommittee and fully supporting the commandant commitment -- similar commitment -- to work with you and the subcommittee.

it is intolerable for anyone in the united states coast guard or any agency or office of our department to feel unsafe. we must hold perpetrators accountable. we owe it to you and this committee to be transparent in the work that we do to achieve the life of that value. the commandant with who i have met a number of times in relation to this investigation is fully committed to achieving that value to ensuring the coast guard is better tomorrow than it was yesterday to cooperating fully with you and your committee and you have my full commitment. >> thank you. one of the apparent or stated reasons for the slow pace of responsiveness is the lack of the technology necessary to screen the documents.

i am going to exaggerate a little bit, but they are using 1950s technology. maybe it is 1980s technology but that is no excuse. if you were sent to the coast guard on a mission, you would not take as an excuse, well, our votes cannot get there because they have not been modernized. the coast guard ought to be responsive to our inquiry and it will send the most regrettable message if we have to in effect subpoena these records from the coast guard. so it is more than just good intentions. and i know that you have those intentions and i trust and hope that the commandant does its job to make sure survivors and victims are vindicated in this

inquiry that operation fouled anchor, work product, and transcripts and interviews and whatever documents are relevant or are provided without unnecessary redactions. and i hope that you will fulfill that commitment. >> i most certainly will, senator. and i have approved a waiver of -- i believe it is deliberate privilege so that redactions can be eliminated in the subcommittee that you help lead. it receives the information that it needs. thank you. >> we are going to press that inquiry with full of vigor and priority, and i appreciate your cooperation and partnership in pursuing it. i want to ask about a topic unlikely to be raised by my colleagues, which is plum island. and you are to be forgiven if it does not immediately strike a chord with you.

one of the last gems of undeveloped land in the middle of long island. more than 100 acres. it currently houses the united states department of homeland security. plum island animal disease center. but it is also home to pristine beaches, wildlife, shorelines, habitats for hundreds of plants and animals. it is truly a treasure not just for new york and connecticut which share long island, but for the nation as a whole. unfortunately, the operation of the new facility which is supposed to replace it, a facility that is going to be in kansas relocating that animal disease center has been delayed. and it has caused a setback in the transfer of plum island.

so the funding has been left in some uncertainty. the multiyear plum island closure and support program was estimated to cost $150 million. but that funding is now uncertain. they request notes that as a result of the delay, dhs will need additional funding to cover the cost of the plum island disease center program. i am very concerned about the delay. i hope that you can commit to working with me and my colleagues from connecticut and new york to finding a long-term conservation housing plan on plum island that will avoid commercial development and a degradation of this pristine and treasured natural resource. >> good deal, senator.

>> senator sinema, recognize for your questions. >> thank you for your questions and for secretary mayorkas for being here today. i went to correct a few statements that have been made related to the bipartisan border security proposal. we introduced it earlier this year along with senator lankford and senator murphy. first it was misinformation related to the 5000 daily entries. it was actually 4000 encounters that triggered a closure of the border. and once we hit that number, including individuals who enter through our ports of entry, the border will be closed until encounters dropped to 80% of that threshold level so this number was actually based on capacity. this has worked closely for secretary mayorkas and his team allowing us to meet our international obligations while making sure that we maintained detention capacity so that dangerous individuals would

not be released into the country. secondly, we assured that 1400 individuals were able to apply for asylum to a orderly process at ports of entry. these individuals would not be able to curtail or delay regular trade or travel. and for those who were granted access through our ports, they would no longer have been paroled into the united states for two years without a work permit. instead, they would have been placed into a rigorous and rapid process with an initial screening within 90 days and determination within six months. and these individuals would not have received a work authorization until such time the legitimacy of their asylum claims had been determined. and that of course are the facts of the legislation which is contrary to some of the misinformation we heard here today. so, mr. chairman, fiscal year 2023 set a new record for nationwide encounters. this year has brought no relief. with the tucson sector in my state alone encountering over 340,000 individuals, this is the busiest sector along our

southern border by over 40,000 encounters. as you know, arizona's port of entry was called for an entire month so port officers could help border patrol agents manage the surge of migrants crossing the desert. that, as you heard from me, devastated the small businesses in the community that depend on international travel. so, right now, a normal day in arizona meets migrants are released directly to border communities. they do not have the infrastructure to manage these releases. this is a coordinated effort between cities, counties, and ngos. in phoenix there securing transportation out of the state. we tried to fix that problem with your help and technical assistance. senator lankford, senator murphy, and i crafted a proposal that actually addressed and reduce the encounter numbers we have seen steadily increasing over the last decade for conwell partisans here in d.c. have decided having a problem to talk about is more important than problem-solving, this does not mean that we can to stop working to provide relief in

arizona. in arizona, we still must continue to find ways to make meaningful policy changes to secure our border and make arizona family safe and ensure migrants are treated safely and humanely. as you know, the secretaries help secure $650 million in fiscal year 2024 for the shelter services program to limit the burden on financial -- the financial burden on local communities. i was pleased to see the notice of funding opportunity published last week that gave arizona its fair share of the money available. as you know, this money has come quite late. we were just days away from pima county ceasing all activities to process and manage migrants. so what steps is chs going to take to make sure additional funds are distributed and that we do not find ourselves in this critical situation once again? >> senator, one thing. let me state i was honored to work with you and the other senators on the bipartisan legislation that would have been transformative, not only in provision of resources but in the change of authority in

which we will be equipped with the most significant change since 1996. long-overdue. we announced with the first distribution last week a competitive process for the second tranche of funds under the shelter and services program. we are going to receive applications for it for existing recipients, as well as those who are first-time applicants and we are very focused on getting the dollars out the door as quickly as possible and as fairly as possible. >> thank you. during the last meeting, we spoke about the margin of error. first of all thank you for following through on that commitment. fema announced a 5% margin of number which is critical for ngos who are providing services. i was also pleased to see that the most recent fiscal year

reward offers a cap on hotel booking. in order to make sure that ngos in arizona are effective with these grant dollars, fema will need to make sure that communication with our communities is clear and precise. how to make sure that information is clear and consistent and accommodating given the uncertainties of responding at the crisis at arizona's border? >> senator, the model we have developed is to have an identified point of contact for each jurisdiction to ensure that the jurisdiction is receiving and timely fashion the information it needs. if there is any concern with respect to the consistency, accuracy, or timeliness of information, that is something i would like to know about, because we owe it to the local communities. so that they can manage their

responsibilities. >> following the end of title 42, they introduced a series of policies designed to incentivize migrants at ports of entry into deter arrivals between ports of entry. of course, we have not seen the arrivals contract between ports of entry. it has been the opposite. we have seen increasing, growing numbers of migrants between ports of entry. so why do you think the measures implemented today have not been effective in what powers you need to reassert control particularly between the ports of entry? >> senator, we have seen at times significant drop in the numbers. we work very closely with our partner to the south with mexico. enforcement effort must not be exclusively at our border. it must occur prior to reaching our border. the best solution that i have seen in my many years of the department of homeland security is the bipartisan legislation that you negotiated with

senators murphy and langford. that is a solution that we continue to believe congress needs to pass. it is transformative in the many, many ways that we have touched upon this briefly this morning. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you and, senator sinema, thank you for the tremendous work you did on the bipartisan package. you are a true problem solver who is willing to pull up her sleeves. unfortunately some were willing to throw rocks and not find concrete solutions. secretary mayorkas, thank you for appearing before the committee and i also want to thank you for the opportunity to thank the dedicated men and women at the department of homeland security for the work they do every day. this will remain open for 15 days until may 3rd at 5:00. the submission of statements for the record. this meeting is adjourned.

>> attorneys in president [vio clip] form psident -- attorneys in former president tru trial have sected jurors. in a case involving hush money payment to an adult film actress. lawyers for the defense in the prosecution still need to select alternate jurors for the trial. during this thd day of jury selection, the presiding judge dismissed a juror who said she felt intimidat tt some personal informati w made public, a ler excused another juror after prosecutors said hmit n have disclosed prior brushes with the law. opening statements could begin as ely as monday. this will be the first time ever a former u.s. president is the defendant in a criminal trial.

friday on c-span, theouse begins work on a series bills to provide aid to israel, ukraine, and taiwan. the legislatio is similar to what was passed by the senate in february as one package. by in-house, members are expected to coid each dollar amount individually. on cpatwo, the senate resumes debate on the foreign intelligence sueillance act, which allows r warrantless surveillance of communications outside the u.s.. current authority is said to expire friday at midnight if congress does not te tion. reauthorization of section 702 was approved in the hseast week. as always, watch the house live on c-span and the senate live on c-span two. >> more than 32 hundred students from across the country participated in the 20 year anniversary of c-span's studentcam documentary competition. this year, we asked