[House Report 112-127]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Union Calendar No. 77
112th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 112-127
_______________________________________________________________________
REPORT ON LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES
of the
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND
SECURITY
FIRST QUARTER
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
first session
(Pursuant to House Rule XI, 1(d))
June 28, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
REPORT ON LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY
Union Calendar No. 77
112th Congress
1st Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Report
112-127
_______________________________________________________________________
REPORT ON LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES
of the
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND
SECURITY
FIRST QUARTER
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
first session
(Pursuant to House Rule XI, 1(d))
June 28, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC, June 28, 2011.
Hon. Karen L. Haas,
Clerk of the House of Representatives,
The Capitol, Washington, DC.
Dear Ms. Haas: Pursuant to clause 1(d)(1) of Rule XI and
Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, please
find attached a report of the legislative and oversight
activities of the Committee on Homeland Security during the
first quarter of the 112th Congress. The Committee considered
the Activity Report in open session, a quorum being present, on
June 22, 2011, and ordered the measure to be reported to the
House with a favorable recommendation, without amendment, by
voice vote.
Sincerely,
Peter T. King,
Chairman
Union Calendar No. 77
112th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 112-127
======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE AND OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND
SECURITY FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE 112TH CONGRESS
_______
June 28, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. King, from the Committee on Homeland Security, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
Overview
The Committee on Homeland Security met on January 26, 2011,
for an organizational meeting for the 112th Congress under the
direction of Chairman Peter T. King of New York. The Committee
Membership was set at 33 Members with 19 Republicans and 14
Democrats.
The Committee established six Subcommittees: the
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and
Security Technologies; the Subcommittee on Transportation
Security; the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and
Management; the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response and Communications; the Subcommittee on Border and
Maritime Security; and the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and
Intelligence.
CONTENTS
Page
Jurisdiction and Legislative History............................. 3
Membership and Organization...................................... 9
Full Committee................................................... 11
Subcommittee on Cyberseurity, Infrastructure Protection, and
Security Technologies.......................................... 19
Subcommittee on Transportation Security.......................... 29
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Management........ 35
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and
Communications................................................. 41
Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security..................... 51
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence................ 59
Committee Oversight Plan......................................... 65
Appendices
Appendix I-Committee Rules................................... 81
Appendix II-Membership Changes to the Committee.............. 95
Additional Views................................................. 101
Jurisdiction and Legislative History
A provision for the establishment of a Committee on
Homeland Security was included in H. Res. 5, the Rules of the
House of Representatives for the 112th Congress, agreed to on
January 5, 2011. The jurisdiction of the Committee is as
follows:
HOUSE RULE X
Committees and their legislative jurisdictions
1. There shall be in the House the following standing
committees, each of which shall have the jurisdiction and
related functions assigned by this clause and clauses 2, 3, and
4. All bills, resolutions, and other matters relating to
subjects within the jurisdiction of the standing committees
listed in this clause shall be referred to those committees, in
accordance with clause 2 of rule XII, as follows:
(I) Committee on Homeland Security
(1) Overall homeland security policy.
(2) Organization and administration of the Department
of Homeland Security.
(3) Functions of the Department of Homeland Security
relating to the following:
(A) Border and port security (except
immigration policy and non-border enforcement).
(B) Customs (except customs revenue).
(C) Integration, analysis, and dissemination
of homeland security information.
(D) Domestic preparedness for and collective
response to terrorism.
(E) Research and development.
(F) Transportation security.
* * * * *
General oversight responsibilities
2. (a) The various standing committees shall have general
oversight responsibilities as provided in paragraph (b) in
order to assist the House in
(1) its analysis, appraisal, and evaluation of-
(A) the application, administration,
execution, and effectiveness of Federal laws;
and
(B) conditions and circumstances that may
indicate the necessity or Desirability of
enacting new or additional legislation; and
(2) its formulation, consideration, and enactment of
changes in Federal laws, and of such additional
legislation as may be necessary or appropriate.
(b)(1) In order to determine whether laws and programs
addressing subjects within the jurisdiction of a committee are
being implemented and carried out in accordance with the intent
of Congress and whether they should be continued, curtailed, or
eliminated, each standing committee (other than the Committee
on Appropriations) shall review and study on a continuing
basis-
(A) the application, administration, execution, and
effectiveness of laws and programs addressing subjects
within its jurisdiction;
(B) the organization and operation of Federal
agencies and entities having responsibilities for the
administration and execution of laws and programs
addressing subjects within its jurisdiction;
(C) any conditions or circumstances that may indicate
the necessity or desirability of enacting new or
additional legislation addressing subjects within its
jurisdiction (whether or not a bill or resolution has
been introduced with respect thereto); and
(D) future research and forecasting on subjects
within its jurisdiction.
(2) Each committee to which subparagraph (1) applies having
more than 20 members shall establish an oversight subcommittee,
or require its subcommittees to conduct oversight in their
respective jurisdictions, to assist in carrying out its
responsibilities under this clause. The establishment of an
oversight subcommittee does not limit the responsibility of a
subcommittee with legislative jurisdiction in carrying out its
oversight responsibilities.
(c) Each standing committee shall review and study on a
continuing basis the impact or probable impact of tax policies
affecting subjects within its jurisdiction as described in
clauses 1 and 3.
(d)(1) Not later than February 15 of the first session of a
Congress, each standing committee shall, in a meeting that is
open to the public and with a quorum present, adopt its
oversight plan for that Congress. Such plan shall be submitted
simultaneously to the Committee on Government Reform and to the
Committee on House Administration. In developing its plan each
committee shall, to the maximum extent feasible-
(A) consult with other committees that have
jurisdiction over the same or related laws, programs,
or agencies within its jurisdiction with the objective
of ensuring maximum coordination and cooperation among
committees when conducting reviews of such laws,
programs, or agencies and include in its plan an
explanation of steps that have been or will be taken to
ensure such coordination and cooperation;
(B) review specific problems with Federal rules,
regulations, statutes, and court decisions that are
ambiguous, arbitrary, or nonsensical, or that impose
severe financial burdens on individuals;
(C) give priority consideration to including in its
plan the review of those laws, programs, or agencies
operating under permanent budget authority or permanent
statutory authority;
(D) have a view toward ensuring that all significant
laws, programs, or agencies within its jurisdiction are
subject to review every 10 years; and
(E) have a view toward insuring against duplication
of Federal programs.
(2) Not later than March 31 in the first session of a
Congress, after consultation with the Speaker, the Majority
Leader, and the Minority Leader, the Committee on Government
Reform shall report to the House the oversight plans submitted
by committees together with any recommendations that it, or the
House leadership group described above, may make to ensure the
most effective coordination of oversight plans and otherwise to
achieve the objectives of this clause.
(e) The Speaker, with the approval of the House, may
appoint special ad hoc oversight committees for the purpose of
reviewing specific matters within the jurisdiction of two or
more standing committees.
Special oversight functions
3. (g)(1) The Committee on Homeland Security shall review
and study on a continuing basis all Government activities
relating to homeland security, (including the interaction of
all departments and agencies with the Department of Homeland
Security.
(2) In addition, the Committee shall review and study on
a primary and continuing basis all Government activities,
programs and organizations related to homeland security that
fall within its primary legislative jurisdiction.
----------
Legislative History To Accompany Changes to Rule X
(Congressional Record, January 4, 2005, Page H25)
Rule X and the Committee on Homeland Security
Legislative History
Overall Hhomeland Security Policy-The jurisdiction of the
Committee on Homeland Security over ``overall homeland security
policy'' is to be interpreted on a government-wide or multi-
agency basis similar to the Committee on Government Reform's
jurisdiction over ``overall economy, efficiency, and management
of government operations and activities. . . .'' Surgical
addresses of homeland security policy in sundry areas of
jurisdiction occupied by other committees would not be referred
to the Committee on Homeland Security on the basis of
``overall'' homeland security policy jurisdiction.
For example, the Committee on Homeland Security shall have
jurisdiction over a bill coordinating the homeland security
efforts by all of the critical infrastructure protection
sectors. Jurisdiction over a bill addressing the protection of
a particular sector would lie with the committee otherwise
having jurisdiction over that sector.
Organization and Administration of the Department of
Homeland Security-The jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland
Security would apply only to organizational or administrative
aspects of the Department where another committee's
jurisdiction did not clearly apply. The Committee's
jurisdiction is to be confined to organizational and
administrative efforts and would not apply to programmatic
efforts within the Department of Homeland Security within the
jurisdiction of other committees.
Homeland Security Oversight-This would vest the Committee
on Homeland Security with oversight jurisdiction over the
homeland security community of the United States. Nothing in
this clause shall be construed as prohibiting or otherwise
restricting the authority of any other committee to study and
review homeland security activities to the extent that such
activity directly affects a matter otherwise within the
jurisdiction of that committee.
Individual Committee Concerns
Agriculture-The jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland
Security over ``border and port security'' shall be limited to
agricultural importation and entry inspection activities of the
Department of Homeland Security under section 421 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002. The Committee on Agriculture
shall retain jurisdiction over animal and plant disease policy
including the authority reserved to the Department of
Agriculture to regulate policy under section 421 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, and the Animal Health Protection
Act, the Plant Protection Act, the Plant Quarantine Act, and
the Agriculture Quarantine Inspection User Fee Account. The
Committee on Agriculture shall retain jurisdiction over the
agricultural research and diagnosis mission at the Plum Island
Animal Disease Center.
Armed Services-The Committee on Armed Services shall retain
jurisdiction over warfighting, the military defense of the
United States, and other military activities, including any
military response to terrorism, pursuant to section 876 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Energy and Commerce-The Committee on Homeland Security
shall have jurisdiction over measures that address the
Department of Homeland Security's activities for domestic
preparedness and collective response to terrorism. The words
``to terrorism'' require a direct relation to terrorism. The
Committee on Homeland Security's jurisdiction over ``collective
response to terrorism'' means that it shall receive referrals
of bills addressing the Department of Homeland Security's
responsibilities for, and assistance to, first responders as a
whole. The Committee on Energy and Commerce (and other relevant
committees) shall retain their jurisdiction over bills
addressing the separate entities that comprise the first
responders. For example, the Committee on Energy and Commerce
shall retain its jurisdiction over a bill directing the
Department of Health and Human Services to train emergency
medical personnel.
Financial Services-The Committee on Financial Services
shall retain jurisdiction over the National Flood Insurance
Program and Emergency Food and Shelter Program of FEMA, and the
Defense Production Act. The Committee on Financial Services
shall retain its jurisdiction over the anti-money laundering,
terrorist financing, and anti-counterfeiting activities within
the Department of the Treasury and the financial regulators.
Government Reform-The Committee on Homeland Security shall
have jurisdiction over ``the organization and administration of
the Department of Homeland Security.'' The Committee on
Government Reform shall retain jurisdiction over federal civil
service, the overall economy, efficiency, and management of
government operations and activities, including Federal
procurement, and federal paperwork reduction. The Committee on
Government Reform shall retain jurisdiction over government-
wide information management efforts including the Federal
Information Security Management Act. The Committee on Homeland
Security shall have jurisdiction over integration, analysis,
and dissemination of homeland security information by the
Department of Homeland Security, and the Committee on
Government Reform shall retain jurisdiction over measures
addressing public information and records generally including
the Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act. The
Committee on Government Reform shall have jurisdiction over the
policy coordination responsibilities of the Office of
Counternarcotics Enforcement.
Intelligence-The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
shall retain jurisdiction over the intelligence and
intelligence-related activities of all departments and agencies
of the Federal Government, including the Office of the Director
of National Intelligence and the National Counterterrorism
Center as defined in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2004.
Judiciary-The Committee on the Judiciary shall retain
jurisdiction over immigration policy and non-border enforcement
of the immigration laws. Its jurisdiction over immigration
policy shall include matters such as the immigration and
naturalization process, numbers of aliens (including immigrants
and non-immigrants) allowed, classifications and lengths of
allowable stay, the adjudication of immigration petitions and
the requirements for the same, the domestic adjudication of
immigration petitions and applications submitted to the
Department of Labor or the Department of Homeland Security and
setting policy with regard to visa issuance and acceptance. Its
jurisdiction over non-border enforcement shall be limited to
those aspects of immigration enforcement not associated with
the immediate entry of individuals into the country, including
those aspects of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement. The Committee on Homeland Security shall have
jurisdiction over border and port security including the
immigration responsibilities of inspectors at ports of entry
and the border patrol. As used in the new Rule X(1)(l)(9) and
this legislative history, the word ``immigration'' shall be
construed to include ``naturalization'' and no substantive
change is intended by the new rule's not containing the word
``naturalization.''
Science-The Committee on Science shall retain some
jurisdiction over the research and development activities of
the Department of Homeland Security as such matters are
incidental to the Committee on Science's existing jurisdiction
(except where those activities are in the jurisdiction of
another committee).
Transportation and Infrastructure-The Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure shall retain jurisdiction
over the Coast Guard. However, the Committee on Homeland
Security has jurisdiction over port security, and some Coast
Guard responsibilities in that area will fall within the
jurisdiction of both committees. Jurisdiction over emergency
preparedness will be split between the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Homeland
Security. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
shall retain its jurisdiction under clause 1(r)(2) over
``federal management of emergencies and natural disasters.''
This means that the committee retains its general jurisdiction
over the emergency preparedness and response operations of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Bills addressing
FEMA's general preparation for disaster from any cause shall be
referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
The Committee on Homeland Security shall have jurisdiction over
the Department of Homeland Security's responsibilities with
regard to emergency preparedness only as they relate to acts of
terrorism. Thus, the Committee on Homeland Security shall have
jurisdiction over the responsibilities of the Office for
Domestic Preparedness, in accordance with section 430 of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002.
As indicated earlier, the Committee on Homeland Security's
jurisdiction over ``collective response to terrorism'' means
that it would receive referrals of bills addressing the
Department of Homeland Security's responsibilities for, and
assistance to, first responders as a whole and not over
measures addressing first responder communities individually.
The Committee on Homeland Security shall have jurisdiction
over the functions of the Department of Homeland Security
relating to transportation security, while the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure shall retain its jurisdiction
over transportation safety. In general, the Committee on
Homeland Security would have jurisdiction over bills addressing
the Transportation Security Administration and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure would have jurisdiction over
bills addressing the various entities within the Department of
Transportation having responsibility for transportation safety,
such as the Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration. The jurisdiction of the
Committee on Homeland Security does not include expenditures
from trust funds under the jurisdiction of other committees,
including but not limited to the Highway Trust Fund, the
Airport and Airway Trust Fund, the Harbor Maintenance Trust
Fund, the Federal Buildings Fund, and the Inland Waterways
Trust Fund.
Ways and Means-The jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways
and Means over ``customs revenue'' is intended to include those
functions contemplated in section 412(b)(2) of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 and includes those functions as carried
out in collection districts and ports of entry and delivery.
Membership and Organization of the Committee on Homeland Security
(19-14)
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Peter T. King, New York, Chairman
Lamar Smith, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Daniel E. Lungren, California Loretta Sanchez, California
Mike Rogers, Alabama Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Henry Cuellar, Texas
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Laura Richardson, California
Candice S. Miller, Michigan Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tim Walberg, Michigan Brian Higgins, New York
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Jackie Speier, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Ben Quayle, Arizona William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Scott Rigell, Virginia Kathleen C. Hochul, New York
Billy Long, Missouri Vacancy
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Mo Brooks, Alabama
______
On January 5, 2011, the appointment of Mr. Peter T. King of New
York as Chair, and Mr. Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi as Ranking
Minority Member, pursuant to H. Res. 6 and H. Res. 7, respectively.
The Majority Members of the Committee were elected to the Committee
on January 18, 2011, pursuant to H. Res. 37; and the Minority Members
on January 19, 2011, pursuant to H. Res. 39.
Mr. Blake Farenthold of Texas was elected to the Committee pursuant
to H. Res. 42 on January 19, 2011.
Mr. Mo Brooks of Alabama was elected to the Committee pursuant to
H. Res. 53 on January 25, 2011.
Ms. Jane Harman of California resigned as a Member of the House of
Representatives on February 28, 2011.
Mrs. Donna M. Christensen resigned as a Member of the Committee
effective March 7, 2011.
Ms. Kathleen C. Hochul of New York was elected to the Committee
pursuant to H. Res. 293 on June 2, 2011.
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY, INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION, AND SECURITY
TECHNOLOGIES
Daniel E. Lungren, California, Chairman
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Tim Walberg, Michigan, Vice Chair Laura Richardson, California
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Billy Long, Missouri William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
Mike Rogers, Alabama, Chairman
Daniel E. Lungren, California Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Tim Walberg, Michigan Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Jackie Speier, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois, Vice Chair Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Mo Brooks, Alabama Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT
Michael T. McCaul, Texas, Chairman
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Billy Long, Missouri, Vice Chair Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND COMMUNICATIONS
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida, Chairman
Joe Walsh, Illinois Laura Richardson, California
Scott Rigell, Virginia Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania, Vice Vacancy
Chair Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Blake Farenthold, Texas (Ex Officio)
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND MARITIME SECURITY
Candice S. Miller, Michigan, Chairman
Mike Rogers, Alabama Henry Cuellar, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Loretta Sanchez, California
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Ben Quayle, Arizona, Vice Chair Brian Higgins, New York
Scott Rigell, Virginia Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COUNTERTERRORISM AND INTELLIGENCE
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania, Chairman
Paul C. Broun, Georgia, Vice Chair Jackie Speier, California
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Loretta Sanchez, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois Henry Cuellar, Texas
Ben Quayle, Arizona Brian Higgins, New York
Scott Rigell, Virginia Vacancy
Billy Long, Missouri Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
Committee on Homeland Security
Peter T. King, New York, Chairman
Lamar Smith, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Daniel E. Lungren, Loretta Sanchez, California
California Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Mike Rogers, Alabama Henry Cuellar, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida Laura Richardson, California
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Candice S. Miller, Michigan Brian Higgins, New York
Tim Walberg, Michigan Jackie Speier, California
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Joe Walsh, Illinois Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Patrick Meehan, William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Pennsylvania Kathleen C. Hochul, New York
Ben Quayle, Arizona Vacancy
Scott Rigell, Virginia
Billy Long, Missouri
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Mo Brooks, Alabama
Organizational Meeting of the Committee
The Committee on Homeland Security met on January 26, 2011,
for an organizational meeting for the 112th Congress under the
direction of Chairman Peter T. King of New York.
The Full Committee met pursuant to notice and adopted the
Committee Rules for the 112th Congress by unanimous consent.
The Committee also approved the Committee on Homeland
Security's Oversight Plan for the 112th Congress and Committee
Resolution No. 1, relating to staff hiring all by unanimous
consent.
The Committee established six Subcommittees: the
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and
Science Technologies; the Subcommittee on Transportation
Security; the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and
Management; the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response, and Communications; the Subcommittee on Border and
Maritime Security; and the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and
Intelligence.
----------
Oversight Activities of the Committee
CURRENT TERRORIST THREATS
Since September 11, 2001, there have been four terrorist
attacks against the Homeland; two of them were successful in
killing innocent Americans. Additionally, law enforcement
officers have arrested dozens of individuals plotting attacks
against the Homeland and our allies. Since 2009, there have
been approximately 30 domestic terror cases alone. On December
21, 2010, Attorney General Eric Holder stated that in the last
2 years there have been 126 people indicted on terrorism
charges, including 50 U.S. citizens. The threat from al-Qaeda
and its affiliates continues to remain extremely high.
On January 24, 2011, the Committee conducted a Member site
visit to the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) to educate
Members on the NCTC and receive a threat briefing from the NCTC
Director. The NCTC was established in August 2004 by Executive
Order 13354, and codified by the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-458). The NCTC
serves as the primary organization within the United States
Government for integrating and analyzing all terrorism-related
intelligence that has a foreign nexus.
On February 9, 2011, the Committee held a hearing entitled
``Understanding the Homeland Threat Landscape Considerations
for the 112th Congress.'' The Committee received testimony from
Hon. Janet Napolitano, Secretary, Department of Homeland
Security; and Hon. Michael E. Leiter, Director, National
Counterterrorism Center.
On February 16, April 7, May 5, and June 2, 2011, Members
of the Committee received follow-up classified briefings from
NCTC, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Federal
Bureau of Investigation to stay current on the latest
intelligence and threats to the Homeland. The Committee intends
to hold regular, monthly briefings with the Intelligence
Community.
On February 18, and March 18, 2011, Committee staff
received classified intelligence briefings from the Department
on threats to the United States borders.
On May 25, 2011, the Full Committee held a hearing entitled
``Threats to the American Homeland After Killing Bin Laden: An
Assessment.'' The Committee received testimony from Hon. Lee
Hamilton, Bipartisan Policy Center; Ms. Frances F. Townsend,
Senior Vice President, Worldwide Government, Legal, and
Business Affairs, MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc; Mr. Peter
Bergen, Director, National Security Studies Program, New
America Foundation; and Mr. Evan F. Kohlmann, Flashpoint Global
Partners.
FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET REQUEST
As part of the Committee's oversight responsibilities
Committee staff reviewed the President's budget request for the
Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2012, and on
March 3, 2011, the Committee held a hearing entitled ``The
President's Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request for the Department
of Homeland Security.'' The Committee received testimony from
Hon. Janet Napolitano, Secretary, Department of Homeland
Security. Based on a Committee staff review of the President's
budget request for fiscal year 2012 and testimony received, the
Committee completed its Views and Estimates of the President's
budget request and submitted them to the House Budget Committee
for its consideration.
RADICALIZATION
One of the greatest threats facing the Homeland is that of
homegrown violent Islamic terrorists who depart from mainstream
Islam and are radicalized to al-Qaeda's violent ideology. These
individuals often have no contact with known terrorist networks
overseas, making it exponentially difficult for law enforcement
to detect these individuals who may be actively plotting
attacks. Interception often requires cooperation and a
partnership from members of the Muslim community, who may be
witnesses to an individual's path toward radicalization. As
part of the Committee's oversight of domestic radicalization,
staff held a series of meetings with representatives of
Federal, State, and local law enforcement, academia, religious
organizations, private sector entities and non-profit
organizations. On March 10, 2011, the Committee held a hearing
entitled ``The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim
Community and That Community's Response.'' The Committee
received testimony from Hon. John D. Dingell, a Representative
in Congress from the 15th District of Michigan; Hon. Keith
Ellison, a Representative in Congress from the 5th District of
Minnesota; Hon. Frank Wolf, a Representative in Congress from
the 10th District of Virginia; Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, President
and Founder, American Islamic Forum for Democracy; Mr.
Abdirizak Bihi, Director, Somali Education and Social Advocacy
Center; Mr. Melvin Bledsoe, Private Citizen; and Sheriff Leroy
Baca, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
Committee staff held over 15 different meetings with
domestic and international experts and academics. The meetings
focused on discussing the current threat of homegrown terrorism
and violent extremism within the United States and what
measures can be taken to address this problem. Briefers
included representatives of the Ahmaddiyya Group, the World
Organization for Resource Development and Education, the Anti-
Defamation League, a former United States attorney with
expertise in this area, representatives from Johns Hopkins
University, representatives from the New York Department of
Corrections, and representatives from the U.S. Bureau of
Prisons, among others.
One platform for Islamic radicalization is within the U.S.
prison system. On June 15, 2011, the Committee held the second
in a series of hearings entitled ``The Threat of Muslim-
American Radicalization in U.S. Prisons.'' The Committee
received testimony from Mr. Patrick T. Dunleavy, Ret. Deputy
Inspector General, Criminal Intelligence Unit, New York State
Department of Correctional Services; Mr. Kevin Smith, Former
Assistant United States Attorney, Central District of
California; Mr. Michael P. Downing, Commanding Officer,
Counter-Terrorism and Special Operations Bureau, Los Angeles
Police Department; and Dr. Bert Useem, Department Head and
Professor, Sociology Department, Purdue University.
OVERSIGHT OF WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE
One of the Committee's primary responsibilities is to
ensure that American taxpayer dollars are spent wisely by
eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. The Committee believes
that conducting effective oversight ensures that American
taxpayer dollars are tracked and are being spent wisely. As a
result, the Committee has made it a priority to identify high-
risk programs and ensure transparency within the Department.
The Oversight, Investigations, and Management staff held
multiple meetings on the Department's Transformation and
Systems Consolidation (TASC) solicitation. On May 20, 2011,
Committee staff met with the DHS Chief Financial Officer on the
Department's decision to cancel TASC following the Government
Accountability Office's recommendation to reevaluate its
requirements. According to the Department, the Federal
Information Technology (IT) policy changes, as well as advances
in IT altered the requirements with regard to the scope of work
and the need for an already integrated finance, acquisition,
and asset management solution.
On March 15, 2011, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security held a hearing entitled, ``Strengthening the Border -
Finding the Right Mix of Personnel, Infrastructure, and
Technology.'' The purpose of the hearing was to review
Department of Homeland Security actions related to the purchase
and deployment of border technology along with personnel and
infrastructure resources.
On April 5, 2011, the Chairmen of the Subcommittee on
Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications and the
Subcommittee on Cybsersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and
Security Technologies sent a letter to the Secretary of
Homeland Security requesting information on the procurement of
detection systems for biological agents.
On May 4, 2011, the Subcommittee on Transportation Security
held a legislative hearing on ``H.R. 1690, the MODERN Security
Credentials Act.'' The purpose of the legislation and the
hearing was to address redundant and burdensome security
background checks conducted by the Transportation Security
Administration for transportation workers. The bill eliminates
a specific redundancy whereby commercial motor vehicle
operators must undergo two security threat assessments to gain
a Hazardous Materials Endorsement and a Transportation Worker
Identification Credential. During the hearing, witnesses
testified about the burden duplicative processes place on
workers, as well as the cost implications.
In addition to the hearings described above, the Committee
engaged in other oversight activities aimed at identifying and
addressing waste, fraud, and abuse within the Department. On
May 4, 2011, the Chair of the Emergency Preparedness, Response,
and Communications Subcommittee and the Chair of the Oversight,
Investigations, and Management Subcommittee sent a letter to
the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
regarding processes for vetting employees with access systems
in response to a case of employee embezzlement.
On May 27, 2011, the Chair of the Oversight,
Investigations, and Management Subcommittee and Ranking Member
sent two letters to the Government Accountability Office to
conduct audits of the Department of Homeland Security related
to information technology governance and high-risk information
technology investments. Through this work, the Committee
intends to identify process improvements and potential cost
savings.
Committee Members and staff held a series of meetings with
Federal officials and private sector stakeholders regarding the
Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology
Directorate. The oversight included a review of the how the
Department could improve technology transfer with other Federal
agencies to enhance capability and reduce costs.
CODEL
From March 20 through March 27, 2011, Subcommittee on
Transportation Security Chairman Rogers led a Congressional
Delegation to the State of Israel to examine critical homeland
security issues including aviation security, counterterrorism,
intelligence and information sharing, and border security.
Members had the opportunity to meet with U.S. State Department
officials stationed in Israel and Israeli government officials,
including the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of
Israel. Members examined various topics including, but not
limited to: U.S. relations with Israel; Israel's nuclear
program; Israeli security; counterterrorism; information
sharing; border security; and on-going threats to the region.
Members also visited Ben Gurion International airport, the
largest and busiest airport in Israel, to observe aviation
security measures and discuss cooperation on security.
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, highlighted
the fact that our Nation's first responders lack true
interoperable communications. In the 10 years since the
attacks, billions of dollars have been spent, yet public safety
officers are unable to effectively communicate with one
another.
On February 1, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from the Department of Homeland Security's
Office of Emergency Communications (OEC) to receive an update
on OEC's current activities. Staff held a follow-up meeting
with OEC on March 23, 2011 to receive an update on the
completion of Goal 1 of the National Emergency Communications
Plan. From January 3, 2011 to May 13, 2011 Committee staff met
with representatives from various stakeholder organizations and
the private sector, including the Amateur Radio Relay League,
to inform the development and continued discussion of the
Broadband for First Responders Act of 2011 (H.R. 607), which
was introduced by Chairman Peter King and Ranking Member Bennie
Thompson on February 10, 2011.
On March 4, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
from the Department of Homeland Security to receive a briefing
on the National Communication System. On May 13, 2011,
Committee staff attended a briefing provided by various State
and local stakeholder groups on the need for the allocation of
the D Block to public safety.
The Committee held a hearing on March 30, 2011, entitled
``Public Safety Communications: Are the Needs of Our First
Responders Being Met?'' The Committee received testimony from
Mr. William ``Bill'' D. Carrow, President, The Association of
Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO) International;
Sheriff Paul H. Fitzgerald, First Vice President, National
Sheriffs' Association; Chief John E. ``Jack'' Parow (Ret.),
President and Chairman of the Board, International Association
of Fire Chiefs; and Mr. Gregory L. Simay, At-Large Director,
Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communication System. The
purpose of this hearing was to review the state of public
safety communications, and evaluate the progress that has been
made since 9/11. Issues, such as the need for a National
interoperable public safety wireless broadband network, the
need to reallocate the D Block to public safety uses, and the
coordination between Federal, State, and local partners were
discussed.
MASS TRANSIT SECURITY
An attack on our Nation's mass transit systems could have
devastating consequences for innocent passengers, National
infrastructure, and our economy. Each year, the American public
takes over 10 billion trips on public transit systems,
travelling more than 55 billion miles annually.\1\ An attack on
one system could impact not just the immediately affected
system, but disrupt public transit systems throughout the
United States, thereby affecting the way tens of millions of
Americans get to work every day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/FactBook/
APTA_2010_Fact_Book.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike aviation, mass transit relies on an open
infrastructure with multiple access points and a significantly
higher passenger volume. The tactics and techniques used for
passenger screening in aviation are generally not feasible in
the open environment of a mass transit system. Consequently,
these systems can be a very attractive terrorist target. On
February 28, 2011, the Chairman of the Full Committee met with
representatives from Amtrak to discuss their rail security
initiatives and security problems.
The Full Committee held a hearing on May 4, 2011, entitled
``Securing Our Nation's Mass Transit Systems Against a
Terrorist Attack.'' The Committee received testimony from Hon.
John S. Pistole, Administrator, Transportation Security
Administration, Department of Homeland Security; Hon. W. Craig
Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Richard Daddario, Deputy
Commissioner for Counterterrorism, New York City Police
Department; Mr. Richard L. Rodriguez, President, Chicago
Transit Authority; and Mr. Daniel O. Hartwig, Deputy Chief-
Operations, BART Police Department, San Francisco Bay Area
Rapid Transit (BART).
As a result of testimony received during the hearing,
Chairman King and Congresswoman Yvette D. Clarke sent a joint
letter to the Appropriations Committee Homeland Security
Subcommittee on May 6, 2011, requesting $300 million in funding
for the Transit Security Grant Program in fiscal year 2012.
SECURING SENSITIVE INFORMATION
In July 2010, Wikileaks posted thousands of sensitive and
classified military documents on a website. This intentional
release of classified information significantly jeopardized the
lives of U.S. military and intelligence personnel, as well as
U.S. National Security. That threat was only compounded when
Wikileaks, in November 2010, released another trove of
documents that included thousands of confidential diplomatic
cables. As a continuation of the Committee's oversight from the
111th Congress, the Chair of the Full Committee sent a letter
to the Secretary of the Department of Treasury seeking the
designation of Wikileaks and its founder on the Specially
Designated Nationals List. Additionally, on February 15, 2001,
Chairman King introduced H.R. 703, the ``Securing Human
Intelligence and Enforcing Lawful Dissemination Act,'' to
expand the prohibition against the disclosure of classified
information.
PROSECUTION OF UNINDICTED CO-CONSPIRATORS
On April 15, 2011, the Chair of the Full Committee sent a
letter to the Attorney General of the United States to inquire
about the decision to not prosecute the 246 individuals and
organizations named as unindicted co-conspirators in the U.S.
v. Holy Land Foundation. On April 29, 2011, the Committee
received a response.
ANWAR AL-AWLAKI
On May 26, 2011, the Chair of the Full Committee sent a
letter to the Attorney General of the United States to request
documents and case files related to al-Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula (AQAP) terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki and his possible
involvement in the planning and execution of the September 11,
2001 terrorist attacks.
TERRORIST DETAINEES AT GUANTANAMO BAY
On May 11, 2011, the Chair of the Full Committee sent a
letter to the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff to request an explanation of reports that the
Defense Department may allow terrorist detainees held at
Guantanamo Bay to receive visits from wives and other family
members. The Chair expressed grave concern with the potential
damage to our National security posed by the prospect of such
visits. No response to the letter has been received.
SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING
The ``If You See Something, Say Something,'' program
originally implemented by New York City's Metropolitan
Transportation Authority, is a simple and effective program
that aims to engage the public and key frontline employees to
identify and report indicators of terrorism, crime, and other
threats to the appropriate transportation and law enforcement
authorities. The Committee has worked with the Department of
Homeland Security, as well as other Federal, State, local, and
private sector entities to expand the ``If You See Something,
Say Something'' campaign. On January 26, 2011, Chairman Peter
King introduced, H.R. 495, the ``See Something Say Something
Act of 2011''. The legislation amends the Homeland Security Act
of 2002 to grant immunity from civil liability to persons who,
in good faith and based on an objectively reasonable suspicion,
report suspicious activity indicating that an individual may be
engaging, or preparing to engage, in a violation of law
relating to an act of terrorism.
ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND FIRST RESPONDERS
On April 12, 2011, the Chair of the Full Committee sent a
letter to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
regarding concern over the risk-based and effective allocation
of grant funds for the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI).
On April 29, 2011, the Committee received a response.
----------
Full Committee Hearings Held
``Understanding the Homeland Threat Landscape-Considerations
for the 112th Congress.'' February 9, 2011. (Serial No.
112-1)
``The President's FY 2012 Budget Request for the Department of
Homeland Security.'' March 3, 2011. (Serial No. 112-6)
``The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community
and That Community's Response.'' March 10, 2011.
(Serial No. 112-9)
``Public Safety Communications: Are the Needs of Our First
Responders Being Met?''March 30, 2011. (Serial No. 112-
13)
``Securing Our Nation's Mass Transit Systems Against a
Terrorist Attack.'' May 4, 2011. (Serial No. 112-22)
``Threats to the American Homeland After Killing Bin Laden: An
Assessment.'' May 25, 2011. (Serial No. 112-9)
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security
Technologies
Daniel E. Lungren, California, Chairman
Tim Walberg, Michigan Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Patrick Meehan, Laura Richardson, California
Pennsylvania Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Billy Long, Missouri William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex
Officio)
Legislative Activities of the Subcommittee
CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI-TERRORISM SECURITY AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2011
H.R. 901
To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to codify the
requirement that the Secretary of Homeland Security maintain
chemical facility anti-terrorism security regulations.
Summary
The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
currently has authority to regulate chemical facilities under
the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) issued
pursuant to section 550 of the Department of Homeland Security
Appropriations Act, 2007 (Pub. L. 109-295). H.R. 901 would
codify the Secretary's authority to regulate chemical facility
security within the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and extend
this authority for 7 years to allow the program to be fully
implemented and achieve its objectives of enhancing chemical
facility security and reducing risks of terrorism. The
provisions contained in H.R. 901 largely reflect the original
statute, i.e. Section 550, and will enable the Department of
Homeland Security and chemical facilities to continue
implementing CFATS uninterrupted using the existing risk-based,
performance-based approach without imposing additional,
burdensome requirements that could slow or hinder progress
being made by both the Department and the chemical facilities.
H.R. 901 is intended to provide long-term certainty to the
Department and chemical facilities regarding the requirement to
improve security at our Nation's chemical facilities while
preserving the ability of American companies to compete, remain
innovative, and create jobs.
Legislative History
H.R. 901 was introduced in the House on March 3, 2011, by
Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California and eight original co-
sponsors and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security,
and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Within
the Committee H.R. 901 was referred to the Subcommittee on
Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security
Technologies.
The Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure
Protection, and Security Technologies considered H.R. 901 on
April 14, 2011, and ordered the measure to be favorably
reported to the Full Committee, without amendment, by a roll
call vote of 6 yeas and 4 nays (Roll Call Vote No. 4).
----------
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
CHEMICAL SECURITY
On February 11, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Preventing Chemical Terrorism: Building a Foundation
of Security at Our Nation's Chemical Facilities.'' This hearing
reviewed the Department of Homeland Security's risk-based
efforts to strengthen the security of hundreds of chemical
facilities around the Nation; assessed progress of the Chemical
Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) implementation;
examined actions that DHS and chemical facilities have taken to
date under the CFATS regulations and discussed near-term steps
to strengthen the program going forward in order to reach
longer-term goals; and examined whether the Department's
approach is striking an appropriate balance between
strengthening security and enabling growth in this vital sector
of our economy. The Subcommittee received testimony from Hon.
Rand Beers, Under Secretary, National Protection and Programs
Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Timothy J.
Scott, Chief Security Officer, The Dow Chemical Company
(testifying on behalf of the American Chemistry Council); Dr.
M. Sam Mannan, PhD, PE, CSP, Regents Professor and Director,
Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center, Texas A&M University
System; and Mr. George S. Hawkins, General Manager, District of
Columbia Water and Sewer Authority.
Committee staff participated in numerous meetings,
including conferences, with CFATS stakeholders. Through the
January to June time frame, staff met with various
representatives from the private sector in addition to Federal
Government entities impacted, or prospectively impacted, by
CFATS, including the DHS National Protection and Programs
Directorate, the United States Coast Guard, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
These oversight activities led to the introduction of H.R.
901, discussed above, and will continue to inform the
Committee's legislative and oversight priorities related to
CFATS implementation, as well as the development of ammonium
nitrate regulations as required by the Secure Handling of
Ammonium Nitrate Act, Section 563 of the Fiscal Year 2008
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act (Pub. L.
110-161).
NUCLEAR REACTOR FACILITY SECURITY
On March 11, 2011, an earthquake and tsunami struck Japan
causing an on-going nuclear emergency at the Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear Power Station and a global impact on the nuclear
sector. Committee staff have been examining the integrated
effort of numerous U.S. Government agencies to support Japan's
effort to respond to this event, as well as take lessons
learned and apply them to U.S. nuclear security activities, and
the related role of DHS, in order to better prepare the nuclear
sector for extreme events including terrorist attacks on the
homeland.
On March 25, 2011, Committee staff visited the Calvert
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant on the Chesapeake Bay in Lusby,
Maryland. This facility is owned by Constellation Energy and
located approximately 50 miles southeast of Washington, DC. The
purpose of the trip was to observe nuclear power plant security
measures (physical security, cybersecurity, and personnel
security) to determine how the facility interacts with the
Department of Homeland Security and State and local first
responders to address vulnerabilities and respond to a
potential attack or accident at the facility. The Committee
will continue to examine what steps the Nation's nuclear energy
industry is taking to ensure the safe and secure operation of
facilities in light of the events in Japan.
Committee staff toured the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) Emergency Operations Center on May 6, 2011, and received
briefings on the mission, goals, and functions of the NRC and,
specifically, on the NRC Emergency Preparedness and Response
Program and the NRC's security policy and operations to ensure
NRC-regulated nuclear facilities remain among the Nation's most
secure critical infrastructures. Partnerships between the NRC
and the DHS Federal Emergency Management Agency, as well as the
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, the National Protection and
Programs Directorate, and State and local entities were
explored.
On May 12, 2011, Committee staff also met with
representatives from the Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear
energy plant in Buchanan, New York, on the Hudson River,
approximately 25 miles north of Manhattan. Similarly, these
representatives provided their perspective on the implications
of the events at Fukushima for the U.S. nuclear energy
industry, as well as a detailed overview of the multiple
barriers and redundant systems in place to prevent and prepare
for such an event whether due to natural causes or terrorist
attacks.
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) pose a daunting challenge
to homeland security because of their great potential to cause
catastrophic consequences. Terrorists actively seek to acquire,
build, and use such weapons and technologies. Dangerous
chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN)
materials, technology, and knowledge, often dual-use, circulate
with ease in our globalized economy and are controlled unevenly
around the world, making it difficult to limit their access and
movement and ultimately prevent terrorist acts. A panel of
experts known as the WMD Commission has released several
reports in recent years detailing that these agents remain a
threat, and that biological and nuclear weapons in particular
are most concerning. In the 111th Congress, then-Ranking Member
Peter King and former Committee Member Bill Pascrell introduced
bipartisan legislation focused on achieving success in
countering the WMD threat (H.R. 5057). During the 112th
Congress, the Committee has continued to examine efforts across
the Federal Government aimed at expanding and strengthening
capabilities to prevent, detect, protect against, mitigate,
respond to, and recover from such attacks. Committee staff met
with stakeholders involved in activities across the spectrum of
WMD defense to keep Members fully informed of advances being
made, as well as gaps that persist.
On March 31, 2011, the Chair of the Subcommittee sent a
letter to the Committee on Appropriations' Subcommittee on
Homeland Security urging continued support for appropriations
for radiological and nuclear transformational research and
development within the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office's
(DNDO) budget, instead of transferring this portfolio to the
Science & Technology Directorate per the President's budget
request, to enable DNDO to continue carrying out its activities
as authorized under the SAFE Port Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-
347).
On April 5, 2011, the Chair of the Subcommittee on
Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security
Technologies, Chairman Bilirakis of the Subcommittee on
Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications, and the
Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response, and Communications, sent an oversight letter to the
Secretary of Homeland Security requesting responses related to
the procurement of Generation-3 BioWatch detection systems.
Once received, the response will enable the Committee to
evaluate whether the Department's decisions to date on the Gen-
3 procurement are the product of a sound acquisition process
and based on valid science, and whether, going forward, the
Department has in place the tools, technical expertise, and
acquisition policies and procedures to effectively support the
successful delivery of the needed rapid biodetection
capability.
On April 7, 2011, Committee staff observed the Securing the
Cities (STC) full-scale exercise in New York City, New York
(NYC). STC is a successful initiative by DNDO to reduce the
risk of a radiological or nuclear attack on the NYC region by
enhancing regional capabilities to detect, identify, and
interdict illicit radioactive materials. STC involves 13
principal partners coordinated through the New York Police
Department (NYPD). The exercise served as a milestone to assess
the effectiveness of the program to date. Ultimately, DHS
envisions utilizing the detection and interdiction architecture
implemented in NYC as a template for radiological and nuclear
protection of other U.S. cities. During the exercise, Committee
staff toured the Lower Manhattan Security Coordination Center
and learned of the NYC infrastructure being protected by STC;
visited the NYPD Emergency Operations Center to observe
regional cooperation and real-time information sharing among
Federal, State, county, and city agencies in the tri-State
area; and observed the exercise at multiple choke points
including land and sea to view fixed, mobile, maritime, and
human-portable radiation detection systems in use.
In addition to the STC exercise, DNDO conducted an external
assessment of the STC program. On May 5, 2011, Committee staff
received a briefing from the STC Strategic Assessment Team led
by experts from Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, and the University of Tennessee.
The assessment concluded that the STC initiative is a valuable,
worthwhile program that should be completed in the New York
City region and, in parallel, expanded to other cities in a
phased approach.
Since the beginning of the 112th Congress, Committee staff
participated in numerous meetings with DNDO and radiological/
nuclear defense stakeholders to ensure the Members of the
Subcommittee were fully informed and in a position to conduct
appropriate oversight. In particular, staff received a briefing
from senior officials on the Global Nuclear Detection
Architecture Strategic Plan delivered in December 2010 and
discussed next steps in developing Implementation Plans. In
addition, representatives from the National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) briefed staff on the Academy's 2011 report, ``Evaluating
Testing, Costs, and Benefits of Advanced Spectroscopic Portals
(ASPs).'' DNDO subsequently provided staff information on how
they were addressing the recommendations from NAS on the ASP
program.
The Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure
Protection, and Security Technologies, Subcommittee on
Counterterrorism and Intelligence, and Subcommittee on
Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications held a
joint classified Member briefing on the present and evolving
threat of WMD terrorism on May 13, 2011. Representatives from
the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, National
Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), and the National
Counterproliferation Center (NCPC) briefed Members on terrorist
intent, capability, and plans to develop, acquire, and use
chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) weapons.
This information will provide the foundational underpinning for
the Committee's future legislative and oversight activities to
address shortfalls in National WMD preparedness.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DIRECTORATE MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION
During the 112th Congress to date, Committee staff
conducted extensive meetings with Federal officials, academic
experts, the private sector, and other stakeholders on the
mission and operations of the Science and Technology (S&T)
Directorate, the component of the Department of Homeland
Security responsible for research, development, testing, and
evaluation of homeland security technologies. S&T was a new
entity upon the creation of the Department and has experienced
considerable growing pains and Congressional scrutiny during
its 8 years of existence. Since the administration's transition
in 2009, S&T underwent a structural realignment, developed a
strategic plan, and conducted an expansive portfolio analysis
that informed resource allocation and fiscal year 2012 budget
planning. The Subcommittee's oversight has focused on
examining: (1) the linkage between the S&T's strategic plan and
its programs; (2) inadequate transparency and detail in its
budget justifications; (3) the persistent lack of
responsiveness to the needs of its customers and end-users; (4)
S&T's ability to provide scientific and technical support to
components throughout a technology's acquisition lifecycle; (5)
leveraging of the scientific capital of the Department of
Energy National laboratories, other Federal Departments and
Agencies, academia, and the private sector; and (6) the failure
to more rapidly develop and transition homeland security
technologies. Staff will continue to monitor S&T as it evolves
and assess whether it is achieving the goals and objectives as
stated in its strategic plan.
On March 31, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
from the Department's Centers of Excellence (COEs) to learn
about the tools, technologies, and other capabilities being
developed by this network of universities and partners. The
Subcommittee's continued oversight will focus on examining the
linkages between the COEs, the Department, and other customers,
as well as the ability of the COEs to provide enduring, cross-
cutting technology and basic research needs for the Department
and the Nation.
Committee staff attended the DHS S&T Expo on April 28, 2011
in Washington, DC. At the expo, S&T demonstrated and displayed
homeland security technologies that support our Nation,
including first responders, when protecting, responding, and
recovering from hazards and terrorist attacks. Staff interacted
with subject matter experts from the Department, as well as
Department-funded laboratories and other technology developers.
On May 13, 2011, Committee staff held a roundtable
discussion with Dr. Tara O'Toole, Under Secretary for Science
and Technology at the Department. Dr. O'Toole addressed the
shifting strategy of the Directorate toward rapid fielding of
technology and acquisition support, interagency collaboration
on research priorities, and the implications of proposed
research and development budget cuts on homeland security.
SAFETY ACT IMPLEMENTATION
The Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective
Technologies Act of 2002 (SAFETY Act), (6 U.S.C. 441 et seq.;
Title VIII, Subtitle G of Pub. L. 107-296, the Homeland
Security Act of 2002) is intended to encourage the development
and deployment of anti-terrorism technologies by limiting the
liability of sellers of the technology and others in the
distribution and supply chain for third-party claims arising
out of acts of terrorism where the technology has been deployed
to prevent, respond to, or recover from such act. Despite
Congressional intent for broad application and use of the
SAFETY Act protections and efforts by the Department to
streamline the SAFETY Act application process, the Department
continues to experience difficulty generating interest in the
program and developing efficient internal review processes.
Committee staff met with Department officials to monitor
the program's progress and consulted with various stakeholders
concerned with the pace and requirements of the SAFETY Act
review process. Other aspects of Subcommittee oversight
included the application burden, general program awareness,
options for expedited review, renewal process and rate, and the
SAFETY Act's coordination with procurement.
On March 9, 2011, the Chair of the Full Committee and the
Chair of the Subcommittee sent a letter to DHS' Under Secretary
of the Science and Technology Directorate requesting an update
on the implementation of the SAFETY Act, including: annual data
on quantity of applications, designations, and certifications;
corresponding data on renewal applications; processing times;
review process and criteria; use of the pre-qualification
process; program metrics; and program costs. The Committee
received a response on May 13, 2011.
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Unlocking the SAFETY Act's Potential to Promote Technology
and Combat Terrorism.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from Mr. Paul Benda, Acting Deputy Under Secretary, Science &
Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; Mr.
Marc Pearl, President and Chief Executive Officer, Homeland
Security and Defense Business Counsel; Mr. Brian Finch,
Partner, Dickstein Shapiro LLP; Mr. Scott Boylan, Vice
President and General Counsel, Morpho Detection, Inc.; and Mr.
Craig Harvey, Chief Operations Officer and Executive Vice
President, NVision Solutions, Inc.
CYBERSECURITY THREAT
The threat posed by hackers, nation states, terrorists, and
common thieves to the critical infrastructure of the Nation has
only increased in recent years. It is important that the
Subcommittee understand the threat environment and the
implications to the security of the country. Committee staff
participated in multiple briefings and meetings with
stakeholders including officials from the Intelligence
Community and the Department of Homeland Security.
On February 11, 2011, Members of the Subcommittee received
a classified Member-only briefing on an assessment of the
current cybersecurity threat. Representatives from the
Department of Homeland Security and the National Security
Agency were present.
On March 16, 2011 the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Examining the Cyber Threat to Critical Infrastructure and the
American Economy.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
Hon. Phillip Reitinger, Deputy Under Secretary, National
Protection and Programs Directorate, Department of Homeland
Security; Mr. Gregory C. Wilshusen, Director, Information
Security Issues, Government Accountability Office; Dr. Phyllis
Schneck, Vice President and Chief Technical Officer, McAfee
Inc.; Mr. James A. Lewis, Director and Senior Fellow,
Technology and Public Policy Program, Center for Strategic and
International Studies; and Ms. Mischel Kwon, President, Mischel
Kwon Associates.
CYBERSECURITY MISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
The Department of Homeland Security is the primary point of
contact and coordination for all civilian, non-intelligence
U.S. Government networks as well as privately held critical
infrastructure. Understanding how the Department currently
fulfills that role and how it can improve its relationship with
other Federal agencies as well as with the private sector is an
important function of the Subcommittee. Committee staff
participated in numerous meetings with private stakeholders as
well as the Department to support the Members of the
Subcommittee in their conduct of oversight.
On April 15, 2011 the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The DHS Cybersecurity Mission: Promoting Innovation and
Securing Critical Infrastructure.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Mr. Sean McGurk, Director, National
Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center, Department
of Homeland Security; Mr. Gerry Cauley, President and CEO,
North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Ms. Jane
Carlin, Chair, Financial Services Sector Coordinating Council;
and Mr. Edward Amoroso, Senior Vice President and Chief
Security Officer, AT&T.
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION MISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY
Committee staff received multiple briefings from the
Department of Homeland Security National Protection and
Programs Directorate, specifically with the Office of
Infrastructure Protection on activities conducted by the Risk
Management Analysis, Enhanced Critical Infrastructure Program
(ECIP), Protected Critical Infrastructure Information Program
(PCII), as well as meetings with the Government Accountability
Office and the Congressional Research Service regarding the
current state of critical infrastructure protection.
On February 24, 2011, Committee staff visited the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The briefing provided an
overview of FERC's jurisdiction and authorities, a look at the
electricity and natural gas markets, major rulemakings
currently under way, and it provided an opportunity to share
information on electric transmission, smart grid security and
cybersecurity. The visit also included tours of FERC's market
monitoring and reliability monitoring centers.
On April 26, 2011, Committee staff visited the House of
Representatives mail facility in Capital Heights, Maryland. The
briefing and facility tour focused on security measures and
screening protocols in place for detecting dangerous materials
in the mail system. Staff also received an overview of the
facility's coordination with the United State Postal Service
and private partners FedEx and UPS.
FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE
On February 25, 2011, Committee staff visited a Federal
Protective Service (FPS) facility in Alexandria, Virginia.
Staff received an overview of FPS' mission to secure Federal
buildings. The visit included a brief on the agency's legal
authorities, as well as its budget, recruiting, and training
challenges.
On March 8, 2011, Chairman Lungren sent letter to GAO
requesting a review of FPS' management of its contract guard
program.
On March 14, 2011, Chairman Lungren sent letter to GAO
requesting a comprehensive review of changes in physical
security in Federal facilities since September 11, 2001.
On May 23, 2011, the Federal Protective Service Deputy
Director, Kris Cline provided staff briefing on bombing attempt
and corrective actions taken at the Detroit Federal Building.
On May 23, 2011, Chairman Lungren sent letter to GAO
requesting a comprehensive review on FPS future plans following
decision to move away from Risk Assessment Management Program
(RAMP).
NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE
On February 24, 2011, Committee staff visited the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a one-day visit. The
briefing provided an overview of FERC's jurisdiction and
authorities, a look at the electricity and natural gas markets,
major rulemakings currently underway, and provided an
opportunity to share information on electric transmission,
smart grid, and cyber security. The visit also included tours
of FERC's market monitoring and reliability monitoring centers.
On April 26, 2011, Committee staff visited the House mail
facility. The visit included a tour of the facility during
which employees explained the facilities role in preventing
dangerous materials from reaching Members of Congress and
staff. Staff also received an overview of the facility's
coordination with the United State Postal Service and private
partners Fed Ex and UPS.
On May 24, 2011, Chairman Lungren requested a GAO study of
the Department of Homeland Security's decision to change its
process for assessing Level 1 and Level 2 status to critical
infrastructure.
On May 24, 2011, Chairman Lungren requested a GAO study of
the Department of Homeland Security's ability to identify and
resolve cross-sector dependencies. These dependencies are
created by statute or regulation and could force the outage of
two or more sectors (i.e. electric and gas) simultaneously.
On June 1, 2011, Chairman King and Chairman Lungren sent an
oversight letter to Assistant Secretary Rand Beers notifying
him that the reorganization of the National Programs and
Protection Directorate without notice to Congress was in
violation of the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The letter
requested an immediate and complete briefing on the matter to
the full committee.
From June 7 through 11, 2001, bi-partisan Committee on
Homeland Security staff joined Senate and Department
representatives on the United States - European Union Expert
Meeting on Critical Infrastructure Protection. The meeting
covered the following topics: information sharing,
international cooperation, interdependencies, the economics of
critical infrastructure protection and the threat of solar
weather on critical infrastructure.
----------
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Preventing Chemical Terrorism: Building a Foundation of
Security at Our Nation's Chemical Facilities.''
February 11, 2011. (Serial No. 112-3)
``Examining the Cyber Threat to Critical Infrastructure and the
American Economy.'' March 16, 2011. (Serial No. 112-11)
``The DHS Cybersecurity Mission: Promoting Innovation and
Securing Critical Infrastructure.'' Apr. 15, 2011.
(Serial No. 112-19)
``Unlocking the SAFETY Act's Potential to Promote Technology
and Combat Terrorism.'' May 26, 2011. (Serial No. 112-
27)
Subcommittee on Transportation Security
Mike Rogers, Alabama, Chairman
Daniel E. Lungren, Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
California Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tim Walberg, Michigan Jackie Speier, California
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Joe Walsh, Illinois, Vice Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Chair (Ex Officio)
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex
Officio)
Legislative Activities of the Subcommittee
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION OMBUDSMAN ACT OF 2011
H.R. 1165
To amend title 49, United States Code, to establish an
Ombudsman Office within the Transportation Security
Administration for the purpose of enhancing transportation
security by providing confidential, informal, and neutral
assistance to address work-place related problems of
Transportation Security Administration employees, and for other
purposes.
Summary
The legislation aims to enhance transportation security by
providing confidential, informal, and neutral assistance to
address work-place related problems of Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) employees by strengthening and refining
the role of the TSA Office of Ombudsman.
Legislative History
H.R. 1165 was introduced in the House on March 17, 2011, by
Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas, Ms. Speier, Mr. Thompson of
Mississippi, and Mr. Davis of Illinois, and referred to the
Committee on Homeland Security. Within the Committee H.R. 1165
was referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation Security.
The Subcommittee on Transportation Security considered H.R.
1165 on May 12, 2011, and ordered the measure reported,
favorably, to the Full Committee, amended, by voice vote.
MODERNIZING OF DOCUMENTATION AND ELIMINATION OF REDUNDANT
IDENTIFICATION AND SECURITY CREDENTIALS ACT
H.R. 1690
To amend titles 49 and 46, United States Code, and the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 to provide for certain improvements in
surface transportation security, and for other purposes.
Summary
The legislation, as amended, requires the Department of
Homeland Security to establish a comprehensive task force with
representatives from industry, labor, and Government agencies
to evaluate the effects of harmonizing the disqualifying
offenses and waiver processes for transportation workers,
evaluate potential fee reductions for transportation workers,
and provide its recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland
Security within 180 days after enactment. The bill ensures that
airport operators continue to manage their own security
credentialing programs. This will give local airports the
flexibility they need to enhance their own security, provided
they meet minimum Federal standards.
The legislation also eliminates a redundancy whereby
commercial motor vehicle operators must undergo a Federal
security threat assessment in order to obtain a Hazardous
Materials Endorsement (HME), which is needed to transport
hazardous materials, and a similar assessment to obtain a
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC), which
is needed to enter onto a port facility. Instead, this bill
repeals the requirements for a threat assessment as part of an
HME, and requires all commercial truck drivers who carry
security-sensitive cargo to simply obtain a TWIC. The Secretary
of Homeland Security is required to identify a list of all
security-sensitive materials, which are materials that have a
security nexus and have potential links to terrorism.
Legislative History
H.R. 1690 was introduced in the House on May 3, 2011, by
Mr. Rogers of Alabama, Mr. McCaul, Mr. Walsh of Illinois, and
Mr. Brooks and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security.
Within the Committee H.R. 1690 was referred to the Subcommittee
on Transportation Security.
On May 4, 2011 the Subcommittee on Transportation Security
held a hearing on ``H.R. 1690, the MODERN Security Credentials
Act.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Stephen
Sadler, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Transportation Threat
Assessment and Credentialing, Transportation Security
Administration, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Darrell S.
Bowman, Group Leader, Advanced Systems & Applications, Virginia
Tech Transportation Institute; Ms. Jeanne M. Olivier, A.A.E.,
Assistant Director, Aviation Security & Technology, Aviation
Department, The Port Authority of New York & New Jersey
(testifying on behalf of the American Association of Airport
Executives); Mr. Martin Rojas, Vice President, Security &
Operations, American Trucking Association; and Mr. Randall H.
Walker, Director of Aviation, Las Vegas McCarran International
Airport, Clark County Department of Aviation (testifying on
behalf of the Airports Council International-North America).
The Subcommittee on Transportation Security considered H.R.
1690 on May 12, 2011, and ordered the measure reported,
favorably, to the Full Committee, amended, by voice vote.
RISK-BASED SECURITY SCREENING FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES ACT
H.R. 1801
To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for expedited
security screenings for members of the Armed Forces.
Summary
This legislation directs the Transportation Security
Administration to develop and implement a plan to provide
expedited screening for any member of our Armed Forces-and any
accompanying family member-when that individual is traveling on
official orders through a primary airport.
Legislative History
H.R. 1801 was introduced in the House on May 10, 2011, by
Mr. Cravaack, Mr. Bachus, and Mr. Rogers of Alabama, and
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security. Within the
Committee H.R. 1801 was referred to the Subcommittee on
Transportation Security.
The Subcommittee on Transportation Security considered H.R.
1801 on May 12, 2011, and ordered the measure reported,
favorably, to the Full Committee, without amendment, by voice
vote.
----------
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
THREATS TO AVIATION AND SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
The Subcommittee conducted oversight activities to assess
the threats to aviation and surface transportation. Committee
staff met with a wide range of representatives from the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the
transportation industry, and other stakeholders to examine
information sharing, coordination among Federal, State, and
local partners, and other security matters. Recent intelligence
collected from bin Laden's compound further emphasizes the
threat to both our aviation and surface transportation systems.
Subcommittee Members and staff have met with various
stakeholders regarding aviation and surface transportation
security, including the TSA Administrator, the Department of
Homeland Security, the Government Accountability Office (GAO),
as well as multiple industry associations and corporations to
discuss particular issues related to transportation security.
On February 10, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Terrorism and Transportation Security.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Hon. John S. Pistole,
Administrator, Transportation Security Administration,
Department of Homeland Security. The purpose of this hearing
was to examine the TSA's progress in developing meaningful
security measures, discuss the future of the agency as a nimble
counterterrorism organization, and identify areas for
operational improvements and cost savings in order to
strengthen TSA's effectiveness and efficiency at preventing
terrorism and protecting the traveling public.
On February 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a classified
Member briefing on current threats to the Nation's aviation and
surface transportation security. Representatives from the
Transportation Security Administration were present to respond
to Member questions.
On February 17, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman Rogers sent a
letter to the Transportation Security Administration Assistant
Administrator requesting more detailed information on TSA's
aviation, pipeline, and surface transportation efforts. On
March 18, 2011, the Subcommittee received a reply.
AIR COMMERCE
On August 1, 2010, the Department of Homeland Security met
the mandate in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act (Pub. L. 110-53) to screen 100 percent of air
cargo transported on domestic passenger aircraft flights and
flights departing the United States. The Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) is not currently able to screen
100 percent of all inbound cargo on international passenger
flights but recently estimated it would meet the mandate by
December 2011. TSA is working with foreign nations to increase
air cargo security standards on passenger aircraft in an effort
to achieve the requirement of 100 percent of in-bound cargo
more expeditiously. The Subcommittee continues to discuss with
private sector stakeholders and TSA methods to improve security
while promoting the free flow of commerce.
On March 9, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Securing Air Commerce From the Threat of Terrorism.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. John Sammon, Assistant
Administrator, Transportation Sector Network Management,
Transportation Security Administration, Department of Homeland
Security; and Mr. Stephen Lord, Director, Homeland Security &
Justice Issues, Government Accountability Office. The purpose
of this hearing was to examine on-going challenges for securing
inbound cargo on international passenger flights to the United
States; TSA's efforts to develop screening measures in
collaboration with industry and foreign partners; and the
technology available to conduct those screening measures.
TRANSPORTATION WORKER IDENTIFICATION CREDENTIAL
The Subcommittee has conducted oversight of TSA on
transportation security credentialing programs, including the
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) in order
to eliminate inefficiencies and redundancies within the threat
assessment process and reduce costs for card applicants. In
addition to providing oversight of TSA, Committee staff met
with multiple private sector stakeholders representing
different modes of transportation.
On March 17, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman Rogers sent a
letter to the Government Accountability Office requesting to be
a co-requestor of a report entitled ``Transportation Worker
Identification Credential: Internal Control Weaknesses Need to
Be Corrected to Help Achieve Security Objectives.''
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member briefing
on the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)
Program. Representatives from the Transportation Security
Administration and the United States Coast Guard were present
to respond to Member questions.
AVIATION SECURITY
The Subcommittee has continued to examine passenger and
baggage screening technology and procedures, international
cooperation issues, and Transportation Security
Administration's (TSA) security programs in order to identify
where progress has been made, and where shortfalls remain in
strengthening aviation security.
Subcommittee Chair and Committee staff met with
representatives from TSA and the Federal Air Marshal Service to
discuss the use of canines for explosives detection. Similarly,
Subcommittee Chairman Rogers met with the State of Israel's
Deputy Chief of Mission to discuss international cooperation
and aviation security and counterterrorism efforts.
On March 11, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman Rogers sent a
letter to the Administrator of the TSA expressing concern with
inaccurate contractor reporting concerning test results for X-
ray technologies deployed by TSA in the Nation's airports.
On April 7, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Strengthening International Cooperation on Aviation
Security.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. John
W. Halinski, Assistant Administrator, Office of Global
Strategies, Transportation Security Administration; Mr. Filip
Cornelis, Head of Unit for Aviation Security, Directorate
General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission; Mr.
Rafi Ron, President, New Age Security Solutions; and Mr. Jim
Marriott, Chief, Aviation Security Branch, International Civil
Aviation Organization. This hearing examined international
standards that are designed to ensure the security of both
passenger and all cargo aircraft; how the United States works
with its foreign partners to ensure screening equipment is up-
to-date and adequate for the volume and type of passengers,
baggage, and cargo it needs to screen; the success of the
foreign airport assessments program; and how TSA shares
information on security technology, passenger name record data,
and other vital security protocols with foreign partners.
On June 14, 2011 the Subcommittee received a Members
briefing on the Transportation Security Administration's
Behavior Detection Officer Screening of Passengers by
Observation Techniques (SPOT) program. Members were briefed by
representatives from the Transportation Security
Administration.
On June 16, 2011 Chairman King and Ranking Member Thompson
sent a letter to the Administrator of TSA requesting more
information regarding a recent report of racial profiling by
Behavior Detection Officers (BDOs) at Newark Liberty
International Airport.
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION AUTHORIZATION
On May 25, 2011 the Subcommittee received a Member briefing
on the Transportation Security Administration's authorization
for fiscal years 2012 and 2013. Members were briefed by
representatives from the Transportation Security
Administration.
On June 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Authorizing the Transportation Security Administration for
Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Hon. John S. Pistole.
Subcommittee staff has met with various industry
stakeholders from the surface and aviation transportation
industries to solicit their input for the Transportation
Security Administration Authorization bill for fiscal years
2012 and 2013.
----------
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Terrorism and Transportation Security.'' February 10, 2011.
(Serial No. 112-2)
``Securing Air Commerce From the Threat of Terrorism.'' March
9, 2011. (Serial No. 112-8)
``Strengthening International Cooperation on Aviation
Security.'' April 7, 2011. (Serial No. 112-17)
``H.R. 1690, the `MODERN Security Credentials Act''' May 4,
2011. (Serial No. 112-23)
``Authorizing the Transportation Security Administration for
Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013.'' June 2, 2011. Serial No.
112-28)
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Management
Michael T. McCaul, Texas, Chairman
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Billy Long, Texas Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex
Officio)
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
WAR AGAINST MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS
The violence in the Mexican war against drug trafficking
organizations has escalated in recent years. As a result, the
drug-related violence along the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico
border has become more brutal and widespread. Given the
increase in violent crime, the Subcommittee examined the role
the Department of Homeland Security is playing to address
Mexican drug-related violence at and near the border.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The U.S. Homeland Security Role in the Mexican War Against
Drug Cartels.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr.
Luis Alvarez, Assistant Director, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Brian
Nichols, Deputy Assistant Secretary, International Narcotics
and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State; Mr.
Frank Mora, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Western
Hemisphere Affairs, Department of Defense; Dr. Kristin Finklea,
Analyst, Domestic Social Policy Division, Congressional
Research Service; Mr. Jon Adler, President, Federal Law
Enforcement Officers Association; Dr. David Shirk, Director,
Trans-Border Institute, University of San Diego; Mr. John
Bailey, Professor, Government and Foreign Service, Georgetown
University; and Dr. Ricardo C. Ainslie, Department of
Educational Psychology, College of Education, The University of
Texas at Austin.
On April 27, 2011, Full Committee Chairman King and
Subcommittee Chairman McCaul sent a letter to the Secretary of
State urging support for H.R. 1270 and requesting the State
Department to ``develop a comprehensive strategy with the
overall goal of assisting the Mexican Government in their
effort to win the war against the drug cartels.''
During a speech given March 24, 2011, the Secretary of
Homeland Security stated: ``the border is better now than it
ever has been.'' On May 11, 2011, the Subcommittee held a
follow-up hearing entitled ``On the Border and in the Line of
Fire: U.S. Law Enforcement, Homeland Security, and Drug Cartel
Violence,'' to examine current border security efforts and
reports of spill-over violence. The Subcommittee received
testimony from Mr. Grayling Williams, Director, Office of
Counternarcotics Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security;
Ms. Amy Pope, Deputy Chief of Staff & Counselor, Criminal
Division, Office of Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department
of Justice; Mr. Steven C. McCraw, Director, Texas Department of
Public Safety; Hon. Thomas C. Horne, Attorney General, State of
Arizona; Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez, Zapata County, State of
Texas; and Chief Victor Rodriguez, McAllen Police Department,
State of Texas.
As a follow up to the May 11 hearing, Subcommittee Chairman
McCaul sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office
requesting among other things an audit of the Merida
Initiative.
DHS MANAGEMENT
On Friday, March 11, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman McCaul met
with the newly confirmed DHS Under Secretary for Management,
the Honorable Rafael Borras to discuss his vision and goals as
the Under Secretary.
On March 11, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman McCaul met with
the Government Accountability Office (GAO) regarding issues
facing the Department of Homeland Security. Among the topics
discussed were duplication of Government homeland security
programs, border security, transportation security,
cybersecurity, Fusion Centers, and DHS contracting.
On April 13, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman McCaul met with
Mr. Charles Edwards, the Acting Inspector General of the
Department of Homeland Security. The purpose of this meeting
was to better understand what the DHS Office of Inspector
General is planning for future investigations.
Committee staff also met separately with several management
leaders at DHS. These include the Department's Chief Human
Capital Officer, the Chief Procurement Officer, the Chief
Financial Officer, the Chief Administrative Officer, and the
Chief Information Officer.
DHS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
The Department of Homeland Security is the largest procurer
of information technology (IT) systems in the Federal civilian
Government with a fiscal year 2011 IT budget of roughly $6
billion. The Department plans to use these funds to manage 90
``major'' IT investments intended to assist the Department in
carrying out its mission of leading the National effort to
secure America against terrorist attacks and other threats and
hazards. Recently DHS has reported that over half of these
``major'' investments have encountered or are at risk of
encountering significant cost and schedule shortfalls.
In light of this, on May 27, 2011 Subcommittee Chairman
McCaul and Ranking Member Keating sent two letters to the
Government Accountability Office (GAO), the first requesting
GAO to review how well the Department is managing at-risk
investments; the second, to assess the extent to which the
Department has established IT governance and oversight
structures, and how these are being used to manage and oversee
IT investments.
DENYING TERRORIST SAFE HAVENS
The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act
(IRTPA) of 2004 and the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) of 2010 require the administration to report on U.S.
efforts to deny terrorists safe havens. A June 2011 GAO report
titled, ``Combating Terrorism: U.S. Government Should Improve
Its Reporting on Terrorist Safe Havens,'' reviewed the extent
to which the Department of State (DoS) identified and assessed
terrorist safe havens and interagency efforts to deny
terrorists safe havens. GAO found that although DoS does
identify existing terrorist safe havens in its Country Reports
on Terrorism, that report lacks the level of detail required by
Congress. Specifically, GAO states that ``the DoS report is
incomplete without including the contributions of its various
interagency partners to address terrorist safe havens.''
Additionally, the GAO notes that the U.S. Government has
not developed a list of all U.S. efforts to deny safe haven to
terrorists. DoS has identified only a few efforts that it
funds, but does not include other U.S. Government funding
efforts, including funding by the Department of Defense (DoD).
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) currently receives
its funding for programs and activities that deny safe havens
from DoS and DoD.
Following the release of the GAO report, on June 3, 2011,
the Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the threat of safe
havens to the U.S. Homeland and what the Department of Homeland
Security _ working in conjunction with other Federal Government
agencies _ is doing to combat this threat. The Committee seeks
to assess whether further actions are needed by the United
States to deny terrorist safe havens and strengthen at-risk
States. The subcommittee heard testimony from Ms. Jacquie
Williams-Bridgers, Managing Director, International Affairs and
Trade, Government Accountability Office; Mr. Mark Koumans,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, International Affairs,
Department of Homeland Security; Ms. Shari Villarosa, Deputy
Coordinator for Regional Affairs, Department of State; Mr.
James Q. Roberts, Principal Director for Special Operations and
Combating Terrorism, Office of Special Operations/Low-Intensity
Conflict & Interdependent Capabilities, Department of Defense;
Mr. Steve Coll, President and CEO, New America Foundation; Dr.
Bruce Hoffman, Director of the Center for Peace and Security
Studies and Professor, Georgetown University; and Dr. Daniel
Byman, Director of Research and Senior Fellow, Saban Center for
Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution.
DHS ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT
The Department of Homeland Security has been criticized in
the past for, among other things, failing to supervise projects
and allowing the costs of certain contracts to exceed initial
estimates. As a result of this lapse, on May 27, 2011
Subcommittee Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Keating sent a
letter to GAO requesting a review of the contracting mechanisms
at the Department.
DHS WORKFORCE MORALE
In recent years, the Department of Homeland Security has
ranked as one of the Departments with the lowest morale among
employees within the Federal Government. Understanding why the
Department is considered such a difficult place to work is
imperative. The ``Best Places to Work in the Federal
Government'' rankings compiled by the Partnership for Public
Service and American University's Institute for the Study of
Public Policy Implementation showed DHS in 28th place out of 32
agencies in 2010, the same ranking as in 2009. Additionally, in
2010, the Department administered an internal survey, which
returned more than 10,000 completed responses. The findings of
this survey show leading indications of dissatisfaction ranged
from: the Department not dealing with poor work performers to
the way promotions are decided. As a result, on May 27, 2011
Subcommittee Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Keating sent a
letter to GAO requesting an investigation into why this is the
case, specifically: to what extent the Department has
identified the root causes that have contributed to low
employee morale, and what progress has made in addressing these
issues within the Department.
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AT FEMA
In light of the March 31, 2011 criminal complaint filed
against a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) employee
for embezzlement, on May 4, 2011 Subcommittee Chairman McCaul,
along with the Emergency Preparedness, Response, and
Communications Subcommittee Chairman Bilirakis, sent a letter
to the Administrator of FEMA requesting information regarding
what processes are in place to vet employees, particularly
those with access to financial systems, and what internal
controls are in place within FEMA's various payroll systems to
help identify possible fraudulent activity.
OVERSIGHT OF ST. ELIZABETHS CONSTRUCTION
The construction of the Department of Homeland Security
Headquarters at the St. Elizabeths facility is the largest
Federal construction project to occur in Washington, DC area
since the construction of the Pentagon. The project will bring
the Department components together under one roof and house
roughly 14,000 employees on the campus. Over $1 billion has
been appropriated for its construction.
On May 31, 2011, Members conducted a site visit to the St.
Elizabeths campus to examine the progress of construction and
plans moving forward.
DENYING SAFE HAVENS
On June 3, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Denying Safe Havens: Homeland Security's Efforts to Counter
Threats from Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from Ms. Jacquie Williams-Bridgers, Managing
Director, International Affairs and Trade, Government
Accountability Office; Mr. Mark Koumans, Deputy Assistant
Secretary, International Affairs, Department of Homeland
Security; Ms. Shari Villarosa, Deputy Coordinator for Regional
Affairs, Department of State; Mr. James Q. Roberts, Principal
Director for Special Operations & Combating Terrorism, Office
of Special Operations/Low-Intensity Conflict & Interdependent
Capabilities, Department of Defense; Mr. Steve Coll, President
and CEO, New America Foundation; Prof. Bruce Hoffman, Director,
Center for Peace and Security Studies and Director, Security
Studies Program, Georgetown University; and Prof. Daniel L.
Byman, Security Studies Program, School of Foreign Service at
Georgetown University and Senior Fellow, Saban Center for
Middle East Policy, The Brookings Institution.
----------
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``The U.S. Homeland Security Role in the Mexican War Against
Drug Cartels.'' March 31, 2011. (Serial No. 112-14)
``On the Border and in the Line of Fire: U.S. Law Enforcement,
Homeland Security and Drug Cartel Violence.'' May 11,
2011. (Serial No. 112-24)
``Denying Terrorist Safe Havens: Homeland Security's Efforts to
Counter Threats from Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.''
June 3, 2011. (Serial No. 112-29)
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response and Communications
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida, Chairman
Joe Walsh, Ilinois Laura Richardson, California
Scott Rigell, Virginia Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania, Vacancy
Vice Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Chair (Ex Officio)
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex
Officio)
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY
Since the beginning of the 112th Congress, States and
localities have experienced thwarted terror plots, severe
winter storms, tornados, a tsunami, and widespread flooding. It
is imperative that the Federal Government, along with its
partners at the State and local levels and the private sector,
works to prepare for and respond to terrorist attacks, natural
disasters, and other emergencies.
On February 4, 2011, Committee staff conducted a site visit
at Mt. Weather to receive a tour and briefing on the Federal
Government's continuity of operations plans.
On February 8, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member site
visit to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)
National Response Coordination Center in Washington, DC. This
visit provided Subcommittee Members with an overview of FEMA's
mission and operations and efforts to work with its State,
local, and private sector partners. Members met with officials
from throughout the agency including the Administrator and
Deputy Administrator of FEMA. Following the briefing, Members
toured the National Response Coordination Center.
As part of the Subcommittee's oversight, on February 24,
2011 and March 22, 2011 Committee staff met with
representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and
the U.S. Marine Corps to receive a briefing on the
prepositioned equipment program.
On March 16, 2011, Chairman Bilirakis met with the Director
of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Office of
Disability Integration and Coordination to discuss efforts to
integrate individuals and other functional needs into emergency
preparedness and response efforts.
Committee staff participated in a site visit to the Calvert
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, in Calvert County, Maryland on
March 25, 2011. Staff toured the facility and received a
briefing on the plant's security and disaster preparedness.
On March 29, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
of the Nuclear Energy Institute to discuss the response to the
disaster at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant in Japan and
disaster preparedness efforts at nuclear power plants in the
United States.
On April 5, 2011 Committee staff met with representatives
from the Homeland Security Policy Institute to discuss
resiliency, and on April 21, 2011, staff participated in a tour
of the Department of Health and Human Services' Emergency
Operations Center.
On May 5, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member briefing on
Presidential Policy Directive 8-National Preparedness (PPD-8),
which outlines the administration's vision for strengthening
preparedness and resilience. PPD-8 repeals and replaces
Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) 8-National
Preparedness, signed by President George W. Bush in December
2003. Members were briefed by the Deputy Administrator for
National Preparedness, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and
the Senior Director for Preparedness Policy, National Security
Staff, The White House.
On May 5, 2011, the Committee staff attended a briefing on
FEMA's direct housing program. This included a preview of the
agency's hurricane season preparedness and queries on its
housing contracts oversight.
On May 5, 2011, Committee staff received a briefing from
representatives of NORTHCOM on the Department of Defense's
disaster response posture.
Committee staff participated in a site visit to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission's Emergency Operations Center on May 6,
2011, and received a briefing on its activities.
On May 6, 2011, Committee staff attended FEMA's quarterly
Response and Recovery briefing at FEMA Headquarters and
received an update on operations in response to tornados and
flooding in FEMA Regions IV and VI.
On May 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member site visit
to the American Red Cross' disaster operations center. The
visit provided information on the Red Cross' role in disaster
response and services it provides through its local chapters.
On June 10, 2011, the Subcommittee held a field hearing in
Clearwater, Florida entitled ``Weathering the Storm: A State
and Local Perspective on Emergency Management.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Bryan Koon, Director,
Florida Division of Emergency Management; Ms. Nancy Dragani,
Director, Ohio Emergency Management Agency (testifying on
behalf of the National Emergency Management Association); Mr.
Gerald Smith, Director, Lake County Division of Emergency
Management (testifying on behalf of the Florida Emergency
Preparedness Association); Mr. John ``Rusty'' Russell,
Director, Huntsville _ Madison County (AL) Emergency Management
Agency (testifying on behalf of the International Association
of Emergency Managers); Ms. Chauncia Willis, Emergency
Coordinator, City of Tampa, Florida; and Ms. Linda Carbone,
Chief Executive Officer, Tampa Bay Chapter, American Red Cross.
FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
AGENCY
The President's fiscal year 2012 budget request includes
$10.06 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), a $283 million reduction from the level in the fiscal
year 2011 Continuing Resolution. The request included
reductions in the Management and Administration account, which
were largely attributed to efficiencies and streamlined
business processes. The request also proposed to restructure
homeland security grant programs through the elimination and
consolidation of a number of smaller grant programs into the
large State Homeland Security Grant Program and Urban Area
Security Initiative funding accounts.
On March 9, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Ensuring Effective Preparedness and Response-An Assessment of
the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
Hon. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
In preparation for the hearing, Committee staff met with
representatives from FEMA on February 16, 2011 to receive a
briefing on the President's fiscal year 2012 budget request.
MEDICAL PREPAREDNESS
The mission of the Office of Health Affairs (OHA) is to
provide health and medical expertise in support of the
Department of Homeland Security's mission to prepare for,
respond to, and recover from all hazards impacting the Nation's
health security.
As part of the Subcommittee's oversight, staff attended a
number of conferences and met with stakeholders. From January
10 through 11, 2011, Committee staff attended the annual Public
Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise conference
in Washington, DC.
On February 4, 2011, Committee staff visited the Multi
Agency Collaborative Environment (of the Department of Defense)
in Virginia to receive a briefing on their work with the
National Biosurveillance and Integration Center.
From March 15 though 16, 2011, Committee staff traveled to
New York City for ``Tales of Our Cities'' a conference focused
on medical preparedness for a catastrophic incident.
On March 17, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Ensuring Effective Preparedness, Response, and Recovery for
Events Impacting Health Security.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Dr. Alexander G. Garza, MD, MPH, Assistant
Secretary for Health Affairs, Chief Medical Officer, Department
of Homeland Security. This hearing provided Subcommittee
Members with an opportunity to examine the President's fiscal
year 2012 budget request for OHA and OHA's progress in
developing its mission to provide for health security, to
discuss the future of the agency as a nimble and effective
provider in this regard, and to identify areas for improvements
and cost savings.
In preparation for the hearing, Committee staff met with
representatives of the Office of Health Affairs on February 3,
2011 to receive a briefing on its mission and activities. On
February 15, 2011, Committee staff met with OHA representatives
to receive a briefing on the President's fiscal year 2012
budget request for OHA. Committee staff once again met with
representatives from OHA on March 14, 2011 to receive a
briefing on medical operations and challenges in medical
credentialing for their first responder workforce.
During the hearing, Subcommittee Members expressed concern
about Project BioWatch. Subsequent to the hearing on April 5,
2011, the Subcommittee Chair Bilirakis and Ranking Member
Richardson joined Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure
Protection, and Security Technologies Chairman Lungren and
Ranking Member Clarke in sending a letter to the Secretary of
Homeland Security expressing concern about the Department of
Homeland Security's acquisition processes as they relate to
Project BioWatch.
On March 29, 2011, Committee staff received an update
briefing from the Director of the Office of Public Health
Preparedness and Response of the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention on that office's activities.
On April 7, 2011, Subcommittee Chair Bilirakis and Ranking
Member Richardson introduced H.R. 1411, the ``Metropolitan
Medical Response System Program Act,'' which authorizes the
activities of the Metropolitan Medical Response System,
including medical surge capacity and countermeasures
distribution.
On May 9, 2011, Committee staff participated in a panel
discussion at the Institute of Medicine on ``Discussions on
Future Directions for National Biosurveillance.''
On May 19, 2011, Committee staff attended Biowatch Gen-3
visitor day in Chicago, IL to learn about and observe field
testing of the Generation 3 technology.
On June 9, 2011, Subcommittee staff visited Tampa General
Hospital in Tampa, Florida to meet with officials about
emergency preparedness efforts and medical surge capacity and
tour the facility.
OUTREACH TO STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS, AND THE PRIVATE
SECTOR
From January 3, 2011 to May 31, 2011, Committee staff met
with various Federal agencies and stakeholder groups
representing the first responder and emergency management
community to discuss issues of concern to their membership.
This includes representatives from the Department of Homeland
Security's Office of Policy to discuss the new Tribal Liaison
Officer position; the National Association of Counties; the
National Emergency Managers Association; the Big City Emergency
Managers, and the International Association of Fire Chiefs'
Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee.
On May 12, 2001, Subcommittee Chair Bilirakis met with the
Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Private
Sector Division to receive a briefing on the Division's
operations and efforts to incorporate the private sector into
emergency preparedness, response, and recovery efforts.
EXERCISES
The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) National
Exercise Program works to coordinate preparedness exercises at
the Federal, State, and local level. Each year, FEMA conducts a
National Level Exercise (NLE), which includes participation
from senior leadership in the Federal interagency process along
with State and local partners. National Level Exercise 11, a
functional exercise held from May 16 through 19, 2011 simulates
a catastrophic earthquake in the New Madrid Seismic Zone.
On April 1, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member briefing
on preparations for National Exercise 2011, including efforts
to use lessons learned from recent catastrophic earthquakes in
New Zealand and Japan to inform the scenario. Members were
briefed by FEMA's Deputy Administrator for National
Preparedness and the Director of the National Exercise Program.
In preparation for this Member briefing, Committee staff
received several briefings on FEMA's National Exercise Program
and National Level Exercise 2011. On March 2, 2011, Committee
staff received a briefing from FEMA officials on the National
Exercise Program. Committee staff received a briefing on
preparations for NLE 2011 on March 23, 2011. In addition, on
May 16, 2011, Committee staff observed the NLE 2011 functional
exercise. Staff traveled to the Master Control Cell located in
Herndon, Virginia, and the American Red Cross Disaster
Operations Center and received briefings from representatives
of FEMA, the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, the American Red Cross, and Voluntary Organizations
Active in Disasters.
PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE TO CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL, AND
NUCLEAR THREATS
Terrorists actively plot and have attempted to use weapons
of mass destruction (WMD) to attack the United States. At a
2010 Committee on Homeland Security hearing with the
Commissioners of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of
Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism (WMD Commission),
the Commissioners noted that ``it is more likely than not that
there will be a weapon of mass destruction used someplace on
earth by a terrorist group before the end of the year 2013 and
that it is more likely that the weapons will be biological
rather than nuclear.'' In the WMD Commission's report card on
U.S. Government efforts to protect the Nation from WMD
terrorism, the Government received a grade of ``F'' on its
efforts to enhance the Nation's capabilities for rapid response
to prevent biological attacks from inflicting mass casualties.
On April 13, 2011, the Subcommittee began a series of
hearings entitled ``Taking Measure of Countermeasures.'' The
first day of hearings was subtitled ``A Review of Government
and Industry Efforts to Protect the Homeland Through
Accelerated Research, Development, and Acquisition of Chemical,
Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Medical
Countermeasures.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Ms.
Cynthia Bascetta, Managing Director, Health Care, Government
Accountability Office; Dr. Segaran P. Pillai, Chief Medical and
Science Advisor, Chemical and Biological Division, Science and
Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; Dr.
Richard J. Hatchett, Chief Medical Officer and Deputy Director,
Strategic Sciences and Management, Department of Health and
Human Services; Dr. Gerald W. Parker, Deputy Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense, Chemical and Biological Defense,
Department of Defense; Ms. Phyllis Arthur, Senior Director,
Vaccines, Immunotherapeutics, and Diagnostics Policy,
Biotechnology Industry Organization; Mr. John M. Clerici,
Principal, Tiber Creek Partners LLC; and Dr. Daniel Fagbuyi,
Medical Director, Disaster Preparedness and Emergency
Management, Children's National Medical Center. This hearing
provided Members with the opportunity to question Federal and
private sector witnesses about the substantial challenges that
remain in the research, development, and acquisition of medical
countermeasures.
On May 12, 2011, the Subcommittee convened the second day
of hearings, subtitled ``A Review of Efforts to Protect the
Homeland Through Distribution and Dispensing of CBRN Medical
Countermeasures.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Dr.
Alexander Garza, Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs and
Chief Medical Officer, Office of Health Affairs, Department of
Homeland Security; Rear Admiral Ali Khan, Director, Office of
Public Health Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human
Services; Mr. Mike McHargue, Director of Emergency Operations,
Division of Emergency Medical Operations; Florida Department of
Health; Mr. David Starr, Director, Countermeasures Response
Unit; New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene;
Chief Lawrence E. Tan, Emergency Medical Services Division, New
Castle County, Delaware (testifying on behalf of the Emergency
Services Sector Coalition on Medical Countermeasures); and Dr.
Jeffrey Levi, Executive Director, Trust for America's Health.
This hearing provided Subcommittee Members with the opportunity
to examine various distribution and dispensing plans and
efforts at the Federal, State, local, and private sector
levels, including an assessment of the challenges faced in
distributing and dispensing countermeasures to large segments
of the population.
In preparation for these hearings, Committee staff held
numerous meetings with representatives from the Department of
Homeland Security, the Department of Health and Human Services,
the Government Accountability Office, the WMD Commission, State
and local governments, and the private sector.
On May 13, 2011, the Subcommittee along with the
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, and the
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and
Security Technologies, held a classified Member briefing on the
threat posed by WMD terrorism. Members were briefed by
representatives of the National Counterterrorism Center and the
National Counter-proliferation Center.
EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS AND INDIVIDUALS
On January 5, 2011 and January 31, 2011, Committee staff
attended briefings by Federal Emergency Management (FEMA)
officials on their plans to recoup up to $643 million in
potentially improper Individual Assistance payments from
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and other subsequent disasters.
Committee staff received a further briefing on FEMA's
recoupment efforts on March 15, 2011.
On January 12, 2011, Committee staff received a briefing
from representatives of the Department of Homeland Security's
Office of Inspector General (DHSOIG) to learn about the OIG's
audit of grant programs to ensure efficiency and that funding
is used in compliance with relevant statutory requirements.
On January 24, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from the DHSOIG's office to discuss the results
of an audit of New York's management of State Homeland Security
Grant Program and Urban Area Security Initiative grant funds.
On February 9, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from the National Academy of Public
Administration to receive a briefing on their work with the
Federal Emergency Management Agency to develop performance
measures and metrics, pursuant to Pub. L. 111-271, for grants
administered by the Department of Homeland Security.
Subcommittee staff received a further update of this work on
May 3, 2011.
On February 11, 2011, Committee staff met with Elizabeth
Harmon, Assistant Administrator of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's Grant Programs Directorate to discuss
various issues related to homeland security grants.
On March 1, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
of the Government Accountability Office to discuss their
oversight of grants administered by the Department of Homeland
Security under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
On April 7, 2011, Committee staff received a briefing from
representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and
the Office of Intelligence and Analysis on the use of grants to
support State and local fusion centers.
On May 18, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Coast Guard,
the Transportation Security Administration, and the Office of
Intelligence and Analysis to receive a briefing on the
Department's guidance for the fiscal year 2011 grant programs.
On May 24, 2011 Committee staff met with representatives
from FEMA's National Preparedness Assessment Division to
receive a briefing on FEMA's efforts to develop performance
measures and metrics for the various grant programs.
On June 8, 2011, Subcommittee staff attended the National
Academy of Public Administration's second panel meeting with
representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency,
``Developing Performance Measures and Assess the Effectiveness
of FEMA's Homeland Security Grant Programs.''
On June 8, 2011, Subcommittee staff met with
representatives from the City of Tampa Bay, Florida to discuss
the Urban Area Security Initiative.
TRAINING
On February 16, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives of the National Domestic Preparedness
Consortium to receive an update on current operations.
Committee staff conducted a site visit to the Center for
Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama on May 18, 2011, to
observe current operations and training capabilities and
participate in training.
From May 18 through 19, 2011, Committee staff conducted a
site visit to the National Emergency Response and Rescue
Training Center in College Station, Texas to observe and
participate in first responder training programs.
On June 8, 2011, Subcommittee staff visited the
Hillsborough County Sheriff Department's Practical Training
Center to view the training facility that is used by State,
local, and Federal law enforcement.
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
On February 1, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from the Department of Homeland Security's
Office of Emergency Communications (OEC) to receive an update
on OEC's current activities.
On March 4, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
from the Department of Homeland Security to receive a briefing
on the National Communication System.
On March 23, 2011, Committee staff received a briefing from
representatives of the Office of Emergency Communications to
receive an update on the completion of Goal 1 of the National
Emergency Communications Plan.
On March 28, 2011, Committee staff participated in the New
York State Association of Chiefs of Police seminar on emergency
communications.
On April 13 and 26, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from stakeholder organizations on the
cancellation of the Department of Justice's Integrated Wireless
Network program.
On May 11, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
from the Interagency Communications Interoperability System
based in Los Angles to discuss the system and various
communications issues.
On May 13, 2011, Committee staff attended a briefing
provided by various State and local stakeholder groups on the
need for the allocation of the D Block to public safety.
ALERTS AND WARNINGS
Terrorist attacks and natural disasters can occur at any
time, often with little to no notice. Alerts and warnings
provided in advance on potential threats and hazards can help
to direct the public to get out of harm's way, which will save
lives.
On February 10, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to
receive a briefing on the Integrated Public Alerts and Warnings
System (IPAWS).
On March 3, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
from the Department of Homeland Security on the Emergency Alert
System.
On March 29, 2011, the Chairman of the Subcommittee met
with representatives of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
to receive a briefing on the Integrated Public Alerts and
Warnings System (IPAWS).
On March 31, 2011, Committee staff met with stakeholders to
discuss the Emergency Alert System.
On March 11 and 31, 2011, Committee staff participated in
conference calls to receive information on the new National
Terrorism Advisory System.
On May 17, 2011, Committee staff met with stakeholders
regarding the implementation of the Commercial Mobile Telephone
Alerts (CMAS)/Personalized Localized Alerting Network (PLAN)
system.
MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
On April 15, 2011, Subcommittee Chair Bilirakis, Ranking
Member Thompson, and Senators Lieberman, Collins, and Akaka
sent a letter to the Comptroller General requesting that the
Government Accountability Office conduct a review of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) workforce planning
and management efforts.
On May 4, 2011, Subcommittee Chair Bilirakis and
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Management
Chairman McCaul sent a letter to FEMA Administrator Craig
Fugate regarding the recent criminal complaint filed against a
FEMA employee for embezzlement and fraud. The letter requested
information on FEMA's efforts to vet its employees and internal
controls in place for various payment systems to monitor waste,
fraud, and abuse.
----------
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Ensuring Effective Preparedness and Response _ An Assessment
of the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request for the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.'' March 9, 2011. (Serial
No. 112-7)
``Ensuring Effective Preparedness, Response, and Recovery for
Events Impacting Health Security.'' March 17, 2011.
(Serial No. 112-12)
``Taking Measure of Countermeasures: A Review of Government and
Industry Efforts to Protect the Homeland Through
Accelerated Research, Development, and Acquisition of
Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Medical
Countermeasures.'' April 13, 2011. (Serial No. 112-18)
``Taking Measure of Countermeasures: A Review of Efforts to
Protect the Homeland Through Distribution and
Dispensing of CBRN Medical Countermeasures.'' May 12,
2011. (Serial No. 112-18)
``Weathering the Storm: A State and Local Perspective on
Emergency Management.'' June 10, 2011 (Clearwater,
Florida). (Serial No. 112-30)
Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security
Candice S. Miller, Michigan, Chairman
Mike Rogers, Alabama Henry Cuellar, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Loretta Sanchez, California
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Ben Quayle, Arizona, Vice Brian Higgins, New York
Chair Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Scott Rigell, Virginia Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina (Ex Officio)
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex
Officio)
Legislative Activities of the Subcommittee
JAIME ZAPATA BORDER ENFORCEMENT SECURITY TASK FORCE ACT
H.R. 915
To establish a Border Enforcement Security Task Force program
to enhance border security by fostering coordinated efforts
among Federal, State, and local border and law enforcement
officials to protect United States border cities and
communities from trans-national crime, including violence
associated with drug trafficking, arms smuggling, illegal alien
trafficking and smuggling, violence, and kidnapping along and
across the international borders of the United States, and for
other purposes.
Summary
The Jaime Zapata Border Enforcement Security Task Force
Act, establishes in United States Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) a Border Enforcement Security Task Force
(BEST) program to enhance border security by addressing and
reducing border security threats and violence by: (1)
facilitating collaboration among federal, state, local, tribal,
and foreign law enforcement agencies to execute coordinated
activities in furtherance of border security and homeland
security; and (2) enhancing information-sharing among such
agencies.
H.R. 915 authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security
(DHS), acting through the Assistant Secretary for ICE, to
establish BEST units after considering: (1) whether the area
where the unit would be established is significantly impacted
by cross-border threats; (2) the availability of federal,
state, local, tribal, and foreign law enforcement resources to
participate in the unit; and (3) the extent to which border
security threats are having a significant harmful impact in the
area and in other jurisdictions. Authorizes the Secretary, in
order to provide federal assistance to the area so designated,
to: (1) obligate such sums as are appropriated for the BEST
program; (2) direct the assignment of federal personnel to that
program; and (3) take other actions to assist state, local,
tribal, and foreign jurisdictions to participate.
The bill directs the Secretary to report on the
effectiveness of the program in enhancing border security and
reducing the drug trafficking, arms smuggling, illegal alien
trafficking and smuggling, violence, and kidnapping along and
across U.S. borders.
Legislative History
111th Congress
H.R. 1437, the ``Southern Border Security Task Force Act of
2009,'' was introduced in the House on March 11, 2009, by Mr.
Cuellar and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and
in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary. Within the
Committee, H.R. 1437 was referred to the Subcommittee on
Border, Maritime, and Global Counterterrorism. No further
action occurred on H.R. 1437 in the 111th Congress.
H.R. 1437 contains provisions similar to those in H.R. 915
in the 112th Congress.
112th Congress
H.R. 915 was introduced by Subcommittee Ranking Member
Cuellar on March 3, 2011. ICE has partnered with Federal,
State, local, and foreign law enforcement counterparts to
create the Border Enforcement Security Task Force (BEST)
initiative. The teams are designed to increase information
sharing and collaboration among the agencies combating this
threat on both sides of the border by bring all relevant
stakeholders together under one roof. The purpose of this bill
is to authorize ICE's BEST Teams.
H.R. 915 was introduced in the House on March 3, 2011, by
Mr. Cuellar and Mr. McCaul and referred to the Committee on
Homeland Security. Within the Committee, H.R. 915 was referred
to the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security.
On June 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security considered H.R. 915 and favorably reported the measure
to the Full Committee for consideration, amended, by voice
vote.
SECURE BORDER ACT OF 2011
H.R. 1299
To achieve operational control of and improve security at the
international land borders of the United States, and for other
purposes.
Summary
H.R. 1299 was introduced in the House by Subcommittee
Chairman Miller on March 31, 2011. A recent GAO report
indicates that the U.S. Border Patrol has less than 44 percent
of the Southwest border under operational control and less than
2 percent of the Northern border under control. The purpose of
the bill is to require DHS to develop a plan to gain
operational control, as defined by the Secure Fence Act of
2006, of the U.S. borders within 5 years. In the event that the
Secretary should try to utilize another measure, other than
operational control, that measure must be evaluated by the
Sandia National Laboratory for suitability in measuring control
of the border. The Secretary must also develop a comprehensive
new measurement system which captures the effectiveness of
security at the ports of entry. Lastly, it requires CBP to
provide the Committee with its resource allocation model for
the current future year staffing requirements and detailed port
of entry manpower data.
Legislative History
H.R. 1299 was introduced in the House on March 31, 2011, by
Mrs. Miller of Michigan and 18 original cosponsors and referred
to the Committee on Homeland Security. Within the Committee,
H.R. 1299 was referred to the Subcommittee on Border and
Maritime Security.
On June 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security considered H.R. 1922 and favorably reported the
measure to the Full Committee for consideration, amended, by
voice vote.
Providing U.S. Customs and Border Protection with access to
Federal lands to carry out certain security activities in the
Southwest border region.
PROVIDING U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION WITH ACCESS TO FEDERAL
LANDS TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN SECURITY ACTIVITIES IN THE SOUTHWEST BORDER
REGION
H.R. 1922
To provide U.S. Customs and Border Protection with access to
Federal lands to carry out certain security activities in the
Southwest border region, and for other purposes.
Summary
H.R. 1922 was introduced by Representative Quayle on May
13, 2011. Over 20.7 million acres along the U.S. Southern
border are Federal lands managed by the Department of the
Interior (DOI) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA).
Federal land managers are using environmental regulations to
impede U.S. Border Patrol from accessing these lands and
effectively securing the border. The purpose of this bill is to
give U.S. Customs and Border Protection unfettered access to
Federal Lands for the purposes of conduction motorized patrols.
Legislative History
H.R. 1922 was introduced in the House on May 13, 2011, by
Mr. Quayle and six original cosponsors and referred to the
Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the
Committee on Homeland Security. Within the Committee, H.R. 1922
was referred to the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security.
On June 2, 2011, the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security considered H.R. 1922 and favorably reported the
measure to the Full Committee for consideration by voice vote.
----------
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
BORDER SECURITY BETWEEN THE PORTS OF ENTRY
The concept of Operational Control of the Border as used in
the U.S. Border Patrol's National Strategy has become the
standard of measure that describes how much or how little of
the border is secure. According to the Border Patrol,
approximately 1,107 miles are under effective operational
control, but Customs and Border Protection has no plans to gain
additional miles under control for the rest of fiscal year 2011
or in fiscal year 2012.
In order for Border Patrol agents to be effective, they
must have the right combination of personnel, infrastructure,
and technology. Since the cancellation of SBInet, the question
remains: ``What is next?'' The addition of Border Patrol agents
and infrastructure alone cannot secure the border; suitable
technology must be used to support the agents in the field as a
force multiplier.
State and local law enforcement, first responders, and
other Government officials can, and should, be leveraged to
accomplish the shared goal of a secure border and safe
communities. State and local officials in many cases are the
first to encounter criminal elements associated with the influx
of illegal crossings. The Subcommittee is examining the current
programs in place that delegate customs authority to State and
local law enforcement can inform the future use of such
authorities in securing the border against illegal immigration
and the smuggling of contraband.
The Subcommittee received a briefing on January 19, 2011,
from officials from Customs and Border Protection's (CBP)
Office of Technology Innovation and Acquisitions (OTIA). The
briefing discussed the Department of Homeland Security's plan
to move forward in the aftermath of the Secretary's decision to
cancel the Secure Border Initiative.
On January 27, 2011, Committee staff received a briefing
from members of the Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems
International on the issue of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)
as a tool to help secure the border.
On January 27, 2011, Committee staff met with officials
from the U.S. Border Patrol to discuss fiscal year 2010
statistics and how they relate to operational control of the
border. The brief reviewed what metrics the Border Patrol uses
to define levels of control on the border.
On February 4, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
to discuss two reports; the first titled ``Enhanced DHS
Oversight and Assessment of Interagency Coordination Is Needed
for the Northern Border'' and the second titled ``Preliminary
Observations on Border Control Measures for the Southwest
Border.''
On February 15, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Securing Our Borders-Operational Control and the
Path Forward.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr.
Michael J. Fisher, Chief, Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Richard
M. Stana, Director, Homeland Security and Justice, Government
Accountability Office; and Hon. Raul G. Salinas, Mayor, City of
Laredo, Texas. The hearing focused on the Department's efforts
to gain and maintain operational control of the border. It
examined the effectiveness of the U.S. Border Patrol's measures
for obtaining operational control including statistics on
apprehensions, contraband seized, and number of Border Patrol
Agents assigned to the Southwest border. Additionally, the
hearing provided Members an opportunity to explore whether a
Department-wide strategy to secure the border exists.
Committee staff met with officials from Customs and Border
Protection on March 8, 2011, to receive an update on technology
and personnel on the border.
On March 15, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Strengthening the Border-Finding the Right Mix of Personnel,
Infrastructure, and Technology.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Mr. Michael J. Fisher, Chief of the Border
Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of
Homeland Security; Mr. Mark Borkowski, Assistant Commissioner,
Office of Technology Innovation and Acquisition, U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Mr.
Michael C. Kostelnik, (Maj. Gen. Ret.) Assistant Commissioner,
Office of CBP Air & Marine, U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
Department of Homeland Security; Major General Hugo E. Salazar,
Adjutant General, Arizona National Guard; and Mr. Richard M.
Stana, Director, Homeland Security and Justice, Government
Accountability Office.
The Majority Members of the Subcommittee sent a letter to
the President of the United States on April 1, 2011, requesting
an extension of the current National Guard deployment at the
Southwest border, past the June 30, 2011 deadline. The National
Guard has been a valuable force multiplier in the border
mission-known as Operation Phalanx-and has proven to be well-
equipped to provide the necessary support to civilian law
enforcement personnel. The National Guard has expertise in a
variety of border security skills such as ground surveillance,
criminal investigative analysis, and command and control
capabilities. The letter further requested that the National
Guard not be limited to assisting civilian law enforcement, but
to function to the full extent allowed under Title 32, Section
502(f) duty status.
Committee staff held a briefing on April 12, 2011 with
representatives from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
regarding cooperation between their organization and State and
local law enforcement officials. The briefing covered areas of
effectiveness and areas that needed improvement.
Committee staff met with representatives from the
Government Accountability Office on April 25, 2011, to discuss
and examine SBInet, and their recommendations for the future of
this program.
On April 26, 2011, the Subcommittee received a briefing
from representatives from ICE on their Border Enforcement
Security Task (BEST) Force teams. The briefing focused on their
work with State and local law enforcement in the areas
surrounding the BESTs.
Committee staff met with the Deputy Chief of the U.S.
Border Patrol on April 27, 2011 to discuss the Stonegarden
grant program's effectiveness and other programs the U.S.
Border Patrol uses to leverage State and local resources to
secure the border.
State and local law enforcement, first responders, and
other Government officials can, and should be, leveraged to
accomplish the shared goal of a secure border and safe
communities. The Subcommittee examined this issue in a May 3,
2011, hearing entitled ``Border Security and Enforcement-
Department of Homeland Security's Cooperation with State and
Local Law Enforcement Stakeholders.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Mr. Kumar Kibble, Deputy Director, U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland
Security; Mr. Ronald Vitiello, Deputy Chief, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Sheriff
Larry Dever, Cochise County Sheriff's Office, Arizona; Sheriff
Todd Entrekin, Etowah County Sheriff's Office, Alabama; and Mr.
Gomecindo Lopez, Commander, Special Operations Bureau, El Paso
County Sheriff's Office, Texas.
SECURITY AT THE PORTS OF ENTRY
Examining how the Office of Field Operations uses their
resources appropriated by Congress to stop the illicit flow of
money, guns, and drugs across the U.S. borders is crucial in
determining control of the border. The Department of Justice
(DOJ) has recently reported that nearly 90 percent of all drugs
smuggled into the U.S. flow through official ports of entry.
However, recent statistics-provided by Customs and Border
Protection-show that CBP personnel are apprehending fewer than
half of major violators, such as drug smugglers, at the border.
On March 7, 2011, Committee staff received a briefing from
representatives from Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE)
on the current situation with Mexican Drug Cartels. The
briefing covered techniques on smuggling drugs into the United
States and money and weapons out of the United States.
On March 11 and 23, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from both the Department of Treasury's
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and ICE to
discuss the current financial issues of the Mexican Drug
Cartels, specifically, their use of stored value cards (SVCs).
Allocation of resources at the ports of entry in terms of
manpower, canine units, and infrastructure and whether or not
those resources are properly deployed to stem the tide of
illicit guns, money, and drugs that cross through the ports of
entry needed to be evaluated. On April 5, 2011, the
Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Using Resources
Effectively to Secure Our Border at Ports of Entry-Stopping the
Illicit Flow of Money, Guns, and Drugs.'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from Mr. Thomas Winkowski, Assistant
Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of
Homeland Security; Mr. Stan Korosec, Vice President,
Operations, Blue Water Bridge Canada; Mr. Timothy J. Koerner,
Vice President & Chief Security Officer; and Hon. Richard F.
Cortez, Mayor, City of McAllen, Texas.
PORT AND MARITIME SECURITY
The United States Coast Guard (USCG) plays a vital role
within the Department of Homeland Security. The USCG safeguards
U.S. ports, waterways, and coastal waters, interdicts illegal
drug smuggling, performs search and rescue operations, inspects
and ensures safety for all maritime vessels entering the United
States and aids in law enforcement on the water; all while
maintaining a state of defensive readiness.
On January 13, 2011, Committee staff conducted a site visit
to the Maritime Security Response Team (MSRT) in Chesapeake,
Virginia. The visit allowed staff to conduct oversight and gain
greater knowledge of the missions and capabilities of the
MSRTs.
On February 8, 2011, Committee staff met with
representatives from the USCG to discuss the International Port
Security Program (ISPS). The meeting specifically focused on
the inspection process and program effectiveness.
Committee staff met with representatives from the USCG on
March 17, 2011, for a briefing on the current status and
effectiveness of Interagency Operational Centers (IOCs) and
their plans for future development.
On April 13, 2011, the Subcommittee conducted a site visit
to the U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, DC.
Subcommittee Members and staff met with the Commandant of the
Coast Guard and examined security-related issues.
On April 14, 20, and 27, Committee staff met with
representatives from the USCG, the Government Accountability
Office, and relevant stakeholders to understand their concerns
of the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)
program. Committee staff received a briefing on April 19, 2011,
from representatives from the USCG on the Shiprider program and
discussed relevant legislation.
On May 13, 2011, the Subcommittee met with representatives
from the USCG for a scoping meeting for the upcoming hearing
with Admiral Papp. During this meeting, staff was able to
discuss possible topics for the hearing and to request any
information they needed.
On May 26, 2011, Subcommittee staff met with
representatives from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
The briefing covered issues regarding the Shiprider program and
current and potential integrated law enforcement programs at
the Northern borders.
On May 31, 2011, Subcommittee staff held a meeting with
representatives from GAO regarding the upcoming U.S. Coast
Guard hearing. The meeting purpose was to discuss the work GAO
had done regarding Coast Guard acquisition plans, and other
challenges facing the Coast Guard.
Following September 11, 2001, the USCG greatly increased
its maritime security operations, including its focus on Ports
and Waterways Coastal Security (PWCS) and defense readiness
missions. On June 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
``Securing the Nation's Ports and Maritime Border - A Review of
the Coast Guard Post 9/11 Homeland Security Missions.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Admiral Papp, Commandant
of the USCG. In the hearing, the Subcommittee examined what
Admiral Papp meant when he stated that the service may need to
``reduce the number and range of capabilities [the USCG has]
added since 9/11, until properly resourced and this will be
acceptable.''
----------
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Securing Our Borders Operational Control and the Path
Forward.'' February 15, 2011. (Serial No. 111-4)
``Strengthening the Border Finding the Right Mix of
Personnel, Infrastructure and Technology.'' March 15,
2011. (Serial No. 112-10)
``Using Resources Effectively to Secure Our Border at Ports of
Entry _ Stopping the Illicit Flow of Money, Guns, and
Drugs.'' April 15, 2011. (Serial No. 112-15)
``Border Security and Enforcement _ Department of Homeland
Security's Cooperation with State and Local Law
Enforcement Stakeholders.'' May 3, 2011. (Serial No.
112-20)
``Securing the Nation's Ports and Maritime Border _ A Review of
the Coast Guard Post 9/11 Homeland Security Mission.''
June 14, 2011 (Serial No. 112-31)
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania, Chairman
Paul C. Broun, Georgia, Jackie Speier, California
Vice Chair Loretta Sanchez, California
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Joe Walsh, Illinois Henry Cuellar, Texas
Ben Quayle, Arizona Brian Higgins, New York
Scott Rigell, Virginia Vacancy
Billy Long, Missouri Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex
Officio)
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
THREAT FROM AL-QAEDA TO THE U.S. HOMELAND
The Subcommittee has made significant efforts to understand
the evolving threat from al-Qaeda and its various franchises
throughout the world.
The Committee staff held multiple meetings with and
briefings by stakeholders, including the Department of Homeland
Security, experts from the Center for Strategic and
International Studies, the Rand Corporation, and experts on al-
Qaeda from academia and retired intelligence operatives.
On February 15, 2011, the Subcommittee received a
classified Member-only briefing by the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense, Special Operations and Combating
Terrorism, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); the Deputy
Director for Special Operations, J3, The Joint Staff; a Senior
Intelligence Analyst, Middle East Branch of the Joint
Intelligence Task Force on Counterterrorism; a Yemen Analyst,
Middle East Branch of the Joint Intelligence Task Force on
Counterterrorism; a Senior Intelligence Officer, Middle East
and North Africa Branch, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA),
Directorate of Intelligence; and a Yemen Analyst, Middle East
and North Africa Analysis branch of the DIA Directorate of
Intelligence, on the threat from al-Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula.
On April 27, 2011, Committee staff conducted a site visit
to the United States Military Academy at West Point, and met
with representatives from the Combating Terrorism Center at
West Point and West Point cadets.
Committee staff also conducted an in-depth examination of
the various terrorism threats and U.S. counterterrorism policy
and as a result on March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a
hearing entitled ``Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland-al-
Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from Dr. Jarret Brachman, Managing Director,
Cronus Global; Dr. Christopher Boucek, Associate, Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace; and Mr. Barak Barfi,
Research Fellow, New America Foundation. The Subcommittee
hearing was followed by a classified Member-only briefing from
the National Counterterrorism Center, the Department of
Homeland Security, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
RECENT UNREST IN NORTH AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST: THE IMPLICATIONS FOR
U.S. HOMELAND SECURITY
Committee staff attended multiple briefings from noted
experts on policy implications regarding the uprisings across
North Africa and the Middle East against established
authoritarian regimes which occurred during the spring of 2011
and the potential policy and security ramifications for the
United States. Specific topics included the importation of
liquid natural gas from Yemen and common areas of interest in
counterterrorism and security between the United States and
Saudi Arabia.
On April 6, 2011 the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Unrest in the Middle East and North Africa: Ramifications for
U.S. Homeland Security.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from Mr. Philip Mudd, Senior Research Fellow, New America
Foundation; Mr. Thomas Joscelyn, Senior Fellow and Executive
Director, Center for Law and Counter Terrorism, Foundation for
the Defense of Democracies; Mr. Rick ``Ozzie'' Nelson, Director
and Senior Fellow, Homeland Security and Counterterrorism
Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies; and
Mr. Brian Katulis, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress.
SUBCOMMITTEE OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY'S
INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS DIRECTORATE
As part of its oversight, the Subcommittee met with
officials from a number of offices and agencies within the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including the Office of
Intelligence and Analysis, the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Policy, the Federal Emergency Management Agency,
the Office of Operations Coordination and Planning, the DHS
Counter Intelligence mission and the Fusion Center program
office, and programs within the U.S. Secret Service.
Subcommittee Chairman Meehan, Full Committee Chairman King
and other Members visited the National Counterterrorism Center
(NCTC) where Members received a classified threat briefing from
the NCTC Director and met with officials of the NCTC.
Subcommittee Chairman Meehan also held multiple meetings with
the Federal Bureau of Investigation both in Washington, DC and
in Pennsylvania, as well as the Homeland Security Under
Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis.
Committee staff attended security conferences including the
National Fusion Center Conference held in March 2011 in Denver,
Colorado, and traveled to New York for security briefings by
the New York Police Department and the New York State
Intelligence Center.
On June 1, 2011, the Committee on Homeland Security's
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence held a
hearing entitled ``The DHS Intelligence Enterprise _ Past,
Present, and Future.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
the Honorable Caryn Wagner, Under Secretary for the Office of
Intelligence and Analysis, Department of Homeland Security; Mr.
Rear Admiral Thomas Atkin, Assistant Commandant for
Intelligence and Criminal investigation, U.S. Coast Guard; Mr.
Daniel Johnson, Assistant Administrator for Intelligence, U.S.
Transportation Security Administration; Mr. James Chaparro,
Assistant Director for Intelligence, U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; and Ms. Susan Mitchell, Deputy Assistant
Commissioner, Office of Intelligence and Operations
Coordination, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
DOMESTIC RADICALIZATION
The Subcommittee aided the Full Committee in its efforts to
understand domestic radicalization, violent extremism, and
threat mitigation. Subcommittee staff has held over 15
different meetings with domestic and international experts and
academics. The meetings focused on discussing the current
threat homegrown terrorism and violent extremism within the
United States and what measures can be taken to address this
problem. Briefers included representatives of the Ahmaddiyya
Group, the World Organization for Resource Development and
Education, the Anti-Defamation League, a former United States
attorney with expertise in this area, representatives from
Johns Hopkins University, representatives from the New York
Department of Corrections, and representatives from the U.S.
Bureau of Prisons, among others.
On April 14, 2011, the Minority initiated a classified
Member briefing from the Department of Homeland Security and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation on the issue of domestic
radicalization.
Committee staff, in conjunction with staff from the Senate
Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, attended
multiple conferences and conducted site visits to the Coast
Guard's Intelligence Coordination Center.
THREAT TO THE U.S. HOMELAND FROM SOUTH ASIA
The Subcommittee has continued to examine events in South
Asia as they relate to the U.S. homeland, and in particular,
monitored events in Pakistan, including the killing of Osama
Bin Laden. Committee staff met with representatives of the
Council on Foreign Relations, the New America Foundation, the
RAND Corporation as well as the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace to better understand the complex social and
political environment in South Asia. Committee staff was
briefed by multiple experts with personal experiences in
Pakistan, Afghanistan, and India regarding conditions on the
ground in these critical areas and implications for
counterterrorism policy and intelligence gathering.
On May 2, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman Meehan met with
representatives from the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of
Pakistan to discuss the situation within the country and the
killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
On May 3, 2011 the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The Threat to the U.S. Homeland Emanating from Pakistan.''
The Subcommittee received testimony from Dr. Frederick Kagan,
Resident Scholar and Director, American Enterprise Institute
Critical Threats Project; Dr. Seth Jones, Senior Political
Scientist, The RAND Corporation; Mr. Stephen Tankel, Visiting
Fellow, South Asia Program, The Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace; and Mr. Shuja Nawaz, Director, South Asia
Center, The Atlantic Council. The hearing focused on the recent
successful action against Osama bin Laden by the U.S. Special
Forces in Pakistan, Pakistan's support to the War on Terror,
and the plethora of terrorist organizations based in Pakistan.
STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS
The Subcommittee has made efforts to foster relationships
with counterpart bodies in different countries and regions
around the world. Both Members and Committee staff held
meetings to include the representatives from the governments of
both the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
and the State of Israel.
On February 16, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman Meehan met with
the Ambassador of Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and other embassy
representatives to discuss counterterrorism and intelligence
issues and U.S.-Jordanian bilateral relations.
On April 15, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman Meehan addressed
Members of the World Affairs Council on counterterrorism and
intelligence issues.
TERROR FINANCE
The Subcommittee has examined issues surrounding terror
financing. Committee staff received a briefing from Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) officials on Mexican drug
cartels. Additionally, Committee staff met with the Federal
Bureau of Investigation's Terrorist Financing Operations
Section, the Drug Enforcement Agency's Special Operations
Division, and the former Ambassador to the Organization of
American States to discuss Latin American drug trafficking
organizations and their connections with international terror
networks.
On March 24, 2011, the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and
Intelligence Staff held a meeting with Ambassador Roger
Noriega, Visiting Fellow with the American Enterprise Institute
and former U.S. Ambassador to the Organization of American
States. Ambassador Noriega outlined in detail the ties between
Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and the most senior levels of the
Venezuelan government. He laid out an extensive network of
narco-trafficking ties from Venezuela into North America and
Europe, including the involvement of Venezuelan officials and
described a network of Hezbollah and IRGC front companies
involved in money laundering, drug trafficking, and bulk cash
smuggling all done specifically to skirt U.S. and U.N.
sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran and Hezbollah.
He also briefed staff on high-level connections between high-
ranking members of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's regime
and Venezuelan diplomats to Iran and terrorist organizations
including Hezbollah.
On April 7, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman Meehan sent letters
to the Secretary of State and the Attorney General calling for
their personal involvement to secure drug kingpin Walid
Makled's extradition to the United States.
On May 9, 2011, Committee staff received a briefing from
Section Chief Timothy Gallagher, Cyber Division; Supervisory
Special Agent Keith Mularski, National Cyber Forensics and
Training Alliance, both of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
On May 31, 2011, Committee staff held a meeting with
Ambassador Roger Noriega, Visiting Fellow with the American
enterprise Institute and former U.S. Ambassador to the
Organization of American States. The meeting focused on
Hezbollah's activity in Latin America.
On June 1, 2011, Committee staff held a meeting with Mr.
Douglas Farah, president of IBI Consultants and Senior Fellow
at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, to discuss
Hezbollah in Latin America.
On June 10, 2011, the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and
Intelligence Staff held a meeting with Mr. Matthew Levitt,
Senior Fellow and Director of The Washington Institute's Stein
Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, and professorial
lecturer in international relations and strategic studies at
Johns Hopkins University's Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced
International Studies (SAIS). The meeting focused on
Hezbollah's activity in Latin America.
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WMD)
Committee staff visited the Defense Threat Reduction Agency
and received a briefing on the Agency's Strategic Command
Center. Topics of discussion included: cooperative threat
reduction and international engagement; planning, readiness,
and operational support; research and development; and
integration of technology with tactics, techniques, and
procedures to work across the interagency process on the key
WMD issues of nonproliferation, counter proliferation, and
consequence management.
Additionally, on March 11, 2011, Committee staff held a
meeting with representatives from the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) on the FBI's Weapons of Mass Destruction
Program.
On May 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity,
Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies, the
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, and the
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and
Communications received a classified Member-only briefing by
representatives from the National Counterterrorism Center
(NCTC) and the National Counter-proliferation Center (NCPC),
both of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, on
the threat from four categories of WMDs that terrorists may
seek to acquire and use in a WMD terrorist attack chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN).
----------
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland _ Al Qaeda in the
Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).'' March 2, 2011. (Serial No.
112-5)
``Unrest in the Middle East and North Africa: Ramifications for
U.S. Homeland Security.'' April 6, 2011. (Serial No.
112-16)
``The Threat to the U.S. Homeland Emanating from Pakistan.''
May 3, 2011. (Serial No. 112-21)
``The DHS Intelligence Enterprise _ Past, Present, and
Future.'' June 1, 2011. (Serial No. 112-27)
Committee on Homeland Security Oversight Plan for the 112th Congress
Rule X. Clause 2(d) of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 112th Congress requires each standing
Committee in the first session of a Congress to adopt an
oversight plan for the two- year period of the Congress and to
submit the plan to the Committee on Government Reform and the
Committee on House Administration.
Rule XI. Clause 1(2)(d)(1) requires each Committee to
submit to the House of Representatives not later than the 30th
day after June 1 and December 1, a semiannual report on the
activities of that committee. Pursuant to (2)(d)(2)(B), the
first report shall include a summary of the oversight plans
submitted by the committee under clause 2(d) of rule X.
----------
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY OVERSIGHT PLAN
Clause 2(d) of Rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives for the 112th Congress requires each standing
Committee to adopt an oversight plan for the two-year period of
the Congress and to submit the plan to the Committees on
Oversight and Government Reform and House Administration not
later than February 15th of the first session of the Congress.
This is the oversight plan for the Committee on Homeland
Security for the 112th Congress. It includes the areas in which
the Committee expects to conduct oversight during the 112th
Congress, but does not preclude oversight or investigation of
additional matters as the need arises.
In the 112th Congress, the Full Committee will examine
terrorist threats against the homeland, including the
increasing threat of homegrown terrorism and Islamic
radicalization in the homeland, as evidenced by the terrorist
attacks at Fort Hood and Times Square, and thwarted plots on
the New York City subway and in Portland, Oregon. As stated by
the Attorney General, in the last 24 months, there have been
126 terrorism-related indictments, including 50 against U.S.
citizens. The Committee will also analyze the radicalization of
U.S. residents by foreign terrorist organizations via the
Internet and the influence of English speaking radicals such as
Anwar Al Awlaki. The Committee also intends to examine what
approach the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to
take to address the increasing radicalization of individuals
within the United States.
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will also examine
the effect on national security of the transportation of
unprivileged enemy combatants to the United States to be
detained and tried before a jury in a Federal civilian court.
The examination will include a review of the potential risk of
holding high-value detainees, such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
and other co-conspirators of the attacks of September 11th, on
domestic soil; the risk of inadvertent disclosure of sensitive
information during the trial; and the recommendations delivered
by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS or Department) as
part of the Guantanamo Review Task Force.
The Committee will also examine the Obama Administration's
policy concerning the Detention Center at the U.S. Naval
Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. This oversight will include a
review of the Secretary of Homeland Security's role as a member
of the President's Guantanamo Detention Task Force, as outlined
in Executive Order 13492. Furthermore, the Committee will
examine the homeland security ramifications of the
Administration's plans to purchase detention space within the
United States for the purposes of detaining enemy combatants
currently held at Guantanamo Bay and conducting military
commissions for terrorists detained at Guantanamo.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COUNTERTERRORISM AND INTELLIGENCE
counterterrorism
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
counterterrorism policies of the U.S. government, with specific
focus on the Department of Homeland Security. This examination
will include an assessment of the worldwide threat against the
U.S. homeland from Al Qaeda core, Al Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula (AQAP), Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), al
Shahbab, Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)
and other emerging terrorist groups.
department of homeland security intelligence enterprise
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will conduct
oversight of the Department of Homeland Security's Intelligence
Enterprise, including intelligence activities throughout the
Department and component agencies. Additionally, the Committee
will oversee the progress made in the coordination and
collaboration of information collection and intelligence
analysis occurring across the DHS Intelligence Enterprise, as
well as the further development and role of the Homeland
Security Intelligence Council (HSIC) in coordination and
collaboration with Departmental intelligence activities.
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will review
efforts to build the intelligence, analytical, and assessment
capabilities of the Department and to ensure its full
participation in the Intelligence Community as part of its
homeland security mission. The Committee will examine whether
the Department is receiving relevant intelligence and law
enforcement information from other Federal agencies in a timely
manner; whether the Secretary of Homeland Security is
appropriately involved in the prioritization of the Federal
government's intelligence collection requirements for homeland
security purposes; and the Department's role in managing,
distributing, and otherwise using terrorist threat information
in furtherance of its homeland security mission.
Additionally, the Committee will examine the hiring
authorities, practices, and career-development of intelligence
analysts and professionals within the Department. The Committee
will examine the progress of DHS intelligence analyst training
programs, and whether they are meeting the needs of both the
Department and state, local, and private sector partners.
counterintelligence
Throughout the 112th Congress, the Committee will track the
development of the newly reorganized Department of Homeland
Security Counterintelligence Program, to ensure it is fully
meeting the Department's needs. The primary mission of DHS'
Counterintelligence Program is to prevent adversaries from
penetrating the department to exploit sensitive information,
operations, programs, personnel, and resources.
information sharing
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
progress being made to improve terrorist and homeland security
information sharing efforts among Federal, state, and local
governments, law enforcement entities, first responders,
emergency management personnel, and the private sector. The
Committee intends to explore the Department of Homeland
Security's coordination and collaboration with the National
Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), particularly through the
Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group, and
efforts to disseminate necessary terrorist threat information
among Federal, state, and local governments and the private
sector. While supporting the Department's and government-wide
information sharing efforts, the Committee will review efforts
to ensure the security of sensitive and classified information
and guard against unlawful access or disclosure, as in the case
of WikiLeaks.
In addition to examining the Office of Intelligence and
Analysis, the Committee will examine the Department of Homeland
Security's efforts to establish policy for and coordinate
information sharing efforts from across the Federal government
to and from state and local fusion centers throughout the
country. Additionally, the Committee will examine the
Department's internal processes and coordination efforts in
sharing information between the fusion centers and the
Department. Further, the Committee will examine unclassified
information designations and whether such designations impact
the ability of the Department or other Federal agencies to
share information among Federal, state, local and private
sector partners.
the national operations center
The Department of Homeland Security's National Operations
Center (NOC) serves as the national nerve center for
information sharing and domestic incident management, by
increasing the vertical coordination among Federal, state, and
local government and private sector partners. In the 112th
Congress, the Committee will oversee the Department's efforts
to collect and fuse information in the NOC in order to maintain
domestic situational awareness, and to carry out its role as
the primary national-level center during domestic incidents and
special events.
united states secret service
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
homeland security operations of the United States Secret
Service, including its critical role of protecting the
President of the United States and presidential candidates in
the 2012 presidential election.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND MARITIME SECURITY
operational control of the border
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will focus on
additional policies and resources necessary for the Department
to gain operational control over the land and maritime borders
of the United States, including but not limited to personnel,
technology, infrastructure, and coordination. The Committee
will also assess the status of programs and international
agreements to secure U.S. land borders on the north and the
south from illegal entry by persons or contraband.
Furthermore, the Committee continues to be concerned about
the threat of spill-over violence stemming from the rise of
drug cartels and the increasingly violent conflict throughout
Mexico. During the 112th Congress, the Committee will conduct
rigorous oversight of these issues.
border screening and terrorist travel
In the 112th Congress, the Committee intends to review
efforts to ensure the deployment and implementation of
technology, training, and infrastructure enhancements to assist
border and consular officials in identifying, intercepting, and
disrupting terrorists or others who would do our Nation harm
and who are attempting to enter or travel within the United
States. As a part of this review, the Committee will monitor
the Department's efforts to detect, detain, and remove aliens
apprehended at or near U.S. borders and ports of entry who are
subject to deportation, particularly those from special
interest countries. The Committee will address security-related
deficiencies in the immigration and naturalization process that
terrorists could use to gain entry to or remain in the country
for illegitimate purposes. These weaknesses have and will
continue to be exploited by terrorists and those seeking to
commit terrorist acts. The Committee intends to explore
challenges preventing the aggressive deployment of personnel to
high-risk visa issuing posts to improve visa security.
The Committee will also examine the integration, security,
and reliability of criminal, immigration, and terrorist
databases used to screen persons seeking to enter this country,
to include advanced passenger information and the US-VISIT
program. The Committee will also assess the development of
secure travel documents. In addition, the Committee will
examine the integration and effectiveness of transportation and
border security screening systems for detecting high-risk
passengers and cargo transported within the United States and
across our borders.
port and maritime security
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine various
aspects of port and maritime security, including the security
of port facilities; the screening of vessels, passengers,
cargo, and crew for potential terrorists, terrorist weapons,
and contraband; the development of international security
standards for shipping and containers; and the implementation
and operation of the Transportation Worker Identification Card
(TWIC). The Committee also plans to review how the Department
manages risk emerging from maritime threats and vulnerabilities
such as small boats that could be utilized in acts of
terrorism.
The Committee plans to review the efficiency and
effectiveness of the Department's supply chain security
programs, such as the Customs Trade Partnership against
Terrorism (C-TPAT) and the Container Security Initiative (CSI),
to ensure a proper balance between the facilitation of lawful
trade and the security of America. This will include an
assessment of implementation of the Maritime and Transportation
Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-295), the Security and
Accountability for Every (SAFE) Port Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-
347), relevant provisions of the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458), and the
Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007
(P.L. 110-53).
u.s. coast guard
In the 112th Congress, the Committee plans to review the
Coast Guard's homeland security missions, to include ports,
waterways, and coastal security; drug interdiction; migrant
interdiction; law enforcement; and defense readiness. The
Committee will examine Coast Guard afloat, aviation, and shore-
based operations in support of these missions to ensure that
the service is using a risk-based, layered strategy to enforce
laws and keep America's waters secure. This will include a
specific assessment of the Coast Guard's anti-terrorist
capabilities, most notably those found within the Deployable
Operations Group and its units, including Maritime Safety and
Security Teams, Port Security Units, Tactical Law Enforcement
Teams, and the Maritime Security Response Team. Additionally,
the Committee will review resource and asset needs within the
Coast Guard to determine whether the service is operationally
ready to address threats and emergencies while pursuing a long-
term sustainable path of fleet recapitalization. The Committee
will specifically examine the progress, efficiency, and
efficacy of acquisitions programs such as the Integrated
Deepwater Systems project to ensure major procurements remain
on schedule without a reduction in readiness throughout the
service.
Furthermore, the Committee will closely investigate the
Coast Guard's specific maritime security operations and
initiatives, such as the International Port Security Program
and the inspection of vessels originating from ports with
inadequate anti-terrorism measures. The Committee will examine
these and other programs to ensure that the service is
developing a full sense of maritime domain awareness and
executing all of its missions in the most effective manner
possible to keep America secure.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
national strategy for transportation security
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
Department of Homeland Security's continuing efforts to
implement the National Strategy for Transportation Security;
the efforts of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
in fulfilling its mandate under the Aviation and Transportation
Security Act of 2001; and TSA's policies and programs to
address security threats against all modes of transportation.
The Committee's review will consider the Department's capacity
for protecting the most at-risk transportation systems, the
resiliency of critical infrastructure related to
transportation, the development and deployment of technology to
detect biological, chemical, and radiological threats,
passenger screening, and other methods to prevent or mitigate
terrorist attacks. Additionally, the Committee will examine the
Department's staffing needs, its inventory and use of detection
canines, and its allocation and objectives for transportation
security grants.
passenger and baggage screening
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will review TSA's
deployment of technology and implementation of procedures
related to the screening of passengers in all modes of
transportation and will examine TSA's balancing security
interests with the need for the efficient flow of travel,
including privacy and civil liberties safeguards. The Committee
will conduct oversight on the cost and effectiveness of
technology related to the screening of baggage; information
sharing within the Federal interagency process; coordination
with international partners, and the effectiveness of the
credentialing process. The Committee will also review TSA's
passenger search policies and pre-screening programs, including
the screening of passengers against no-fly and selectee lists,
the performance of the Secure Flight program, and other
measures that affect the security of domestic and international
air travelers.
aviation security
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the risks
and consequences of terrorist attacks on passenger and cargo
aircraft, as well as the development of security measures to
reduce or mitigate such risks. The Committee's oversight will
review programs and procedures implemented by the Department of
Homeland Security related to the security of all types of
aircraft, including commercial passenger, air cargo, and
general aviation aircraft. In addition, the Committee will
examine airport perimeter and access controls and technology
for limiting access to the secure areas of commercial and
general aviation airports. The Committee will also examine the
training and management of the Federal Air Marshal Service.
surface transportation
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will review the
Transportation Security Administration's efforts to secure
surface transit systems, including the most at-risk mass
transit systems, buses, subway light rail, and passenger rail,
freight rail, pipelines, and highway systems. Moreover, in
examining the security of surface transportation systems, the
Committee will consider the roles and responsibilities of other
DHS components including the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA), as well as agencies external to DHS, including
the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA),
state and local agencies and private industry. The Committee's
examination will include a review of TSA plans for providing
resources to adequately train and staff surface transportation
inspector units.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND COMMUNICATIONS
federal preparedness and response
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
Administration's efforts to review and update Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 8 (HSPD-8), which directs the Department
to create a national program and multi-year planning system to
conduct terrorism preparedness-related exercises, and the
impact the delay caused by this review has had on efforts to
update the National Planning Scenarios and other preparedness
activities. The Committee will also examine the Department's
efforts to implement the Post Katrina Emergency Management
Reform Act of 2006.
national response and incident management
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
effectiveness of the National Response Framework (NRF),
including the Department's role in coordinating the response
efforts of all applicable Federal departments and agencies and
the coordination among the Department and state and local
governments, first responders, nongovernmental organizations
and the private sector in implementing the NRF. The Committee
will also examine the development and integration of doctrine
that addresses prevention, protection, and recovery, including
the draft National Disaster Recovery Framework. In addition,
during the 112th Congress, the Committee will oversee the
Department's implementation of the National Incident Management
System (NIMS), including the Department's integration of NIMS
with the NRF.
interoperable communications
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will monitor the
progression of the Emergency Communications Preparedness Center
and the Department's Office of Emergency Communications and
Office of Interoperability and Compatibility. Specifically, the
Committee will review the Department's coordination and
planning, technical assistance, communications standards, and
best practices for interoperable communications systems and the
proposed public safety wireless broadband network for first
responders. The Committee will also oversee the Department's
implementation of grants for interoperable communications. In
addition, the Committee will examine the Department's progress
in the establishment of the Integrated Public Alerts and
Warnings System to ensure interoperability among different
warning systems.
assistance to state and local governments and first responders
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
extent to which the Department implements a risk-based approach
to the allocation of grants and ways to improve the
Department's administration of grants to enhance the ability of
state and local governments and emergency responders to
mitigate against, prevent, protect against, respond to, and
recover from a terrorism attack or natural disaster. The
Committee will review the coordination of the Department's
grant programs with other agencies across the Federal
government; coordination within the Department in developing
guidance and administering grants; challenges in the funding
pipeline; strength of regional partnerships developed through
grants; and the distribution and expenditure of such grants at
the state and local levels. The Committee will also review
ongoing efforts to measure grant funding investments against
improved preparedness capabilities.
first responder training
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will review the
Department's terrorism preparedness training programs,
incorporation of such training into first responder
certification processes, the level of coordination among
Federal, state, and local training programs and the awareness
of first responders serving state, local and tribal governments
concerning these programs. The Committee will also review
existing DHS training centers and determine whether the
Department optimally utilizes these facilities to enhance first
responder terrorism preparedness.
exercises and simulations
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will monitor the
Department's implementation of HSPD-8 and its progress in
creating a planning system to conduct terrorism preparedness-
related exercises. To that end, the Committee will examine the
Departments' National Exercise Program and ongoing efforts to
streamline and improve it to ensure the program enhances the
preparedness of the Nation. The Committee will review whether
FEMA is incorporating lessons learned from national exercises
into future training, planning, exercises, and other
activities. The Committee will conduct oversight of the
National Level Exercise 2011 (NLE 2011), which is centered on a
catastrophic earthquake in the New Madrid Seismic Zone and
examine related Department of Defense (DoD) led exercises.
chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear planning, preparedness,
and response
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
significant challenges posed by chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) weapons to homeland security
and assess the government's progress in implementing security
strategies including prevention, preparedness, and response
approaches that utilize multiple tools and policies to reduce
the likelihood and impact of CBRN attacks and, thus, the CBRN
risk to the Nation. The Committee will oversee the Department's
efforts to understand the evolving CBRN threat landscape, as
well as integrate and share this information. The Committee
will examine the Department's capability to mitigate CBRN risks
through appropriate means including preparedness and response
to CBRN threats with a focus on public health capacity to
respond. In particular, the Committee will look at the capacity
of the medical community to ready its existing resources,
develop its capabilities, and surge in times of crisis. A
critical facet of the Nation's medical preparedness for CBRN
threats is the availability of effective medical
countermeasures. The Committee will consider issues such as
priorities for countermeasure development and state and local
preparedness for distribution and dispensing of
countermeasures. The Committee will also oversee preparedness
for agricultural terrorism events, to include food defense
policies and veterinary leadership at the Department of
Homeland Security.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY, INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION, AND SECURITY
TECHNOLOGIES
cybersecurity
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
Department's role in hardening our national critical
infrastructure against cyber attacks by fortifying Federal
civilian networks and collaborating with the private sector to
develop the means to detect and prevent cyber attacks, reduce
vulnerabilities, provide incident response, and facilitate
recovery. That oversight will consider the Department's ability
to detect the incursion of malicious activity; attribute the
source of that activity; and promote best practices, risk
assessments, and sharing of threat information across all
levels of government and the private sector. In addition, the
Committee will examine the Department's ability to foster
cybersecurity research, development, and educational activities
to secure cyber networks. Additionally, the Committee will
examine the Department's efforts to recruit and train
cybersecurity personnel. The Committee will also examine the
resiliency of national critical infrastructure to withstand
cyber attacks and the need to optimize supply chain risk
management to protect against manipulation without
unnecessarily impeding commerce.
The Committee will review the integration of the various
cyber missions carried out across the Federal government,
including the Department's collaboration with the defense and
intelligence agencies and its role in fulfilling the goals of
the National Cyber Security Plan. The Committee also will
examine the development and implementation of the National
Cyber Incident Response Plan, which expands upon the National
Response Framework.
the safety act
The Support Anti-terrorism by Fostering Effective
Technologies Act (the SAFETY Act) was included as subtitle G of
the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and authorized the Secretary
of the Department of Homeland Security to designate, upon
application, certain anti-terrorism products and services as
qualified to participate in a Federal liability protection
program. The SAFETY Act helps to foster the creation of anti-
terrorism products and services and facilitates job creation.
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will review the need
for further congressional guidance on the process and criteria
used to review and approve applications for SAFETY Act
certification and designation; the process and criteria used to
renew SAFETY Act certifications and designations; expansion of
SAFETY Act protection for risk mitigation strategies,
processes, and procedures; the increased use of SAFETY Act
protection internationally; and the Department's ability to
keep pace with the rising demand for SAFETY Act protections.
critical infrastructure protection
Pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7
(HSPD-7), the Department is responsible for integrating sector
specific strategies into a National Strategy for Critical
Infrastructure Protection, and for coordinating Federal efforts
across all such infrastructure sectors. During the 112th
Congress, Committee oversight will focus on the implementation
of the National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure
Protection, including the Department's national coordination
responsibilities and its sector specific critical
infrastructure protection responsibilities. The Committee will
also examine the Department's efforts to assess national
critical infrastructure priorities by maintaining the National
Asset Database.
In addition, the Committee will review the Department's
progress in identifying, prioritizing, recommending, and
implementing protective measures to reduce vulnerabilities for
critical infrastructure and key resources, including its
administration of programs to promote private sector sharing of
critical infrastructure threat and vulnerability-related
information, and its administration of systems and programs to
provide timely warnings of potential risks to critical
infrastructure.
safety and security of federal buildings and facilities
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will continue to
monitor the safety and security of Federal buildings and
Facilities, including the role and responsibility of the
Federal Protective Service.
chemical facility security
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will continue to
examine the implementation, scope, and impact of the
Department's existing authority and regulations to secure
chemical facilities and take action, as appropriate, to
optimally balance the program's effectiveness in reducing the
risk posed by certain chemical facilities and the everyday
demands for chemicals in commerce.
science and technology
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will oversee the
capability of the Department's Science & Technology Directorate
to rapidly develop and deliver products and technology
solutions to its customers, including the operating components
of DHS, and state and local emergency responders and officials,
to help them secure the homeland by preventing, protecting
against, and responding to terrorist threats and natural
disasters. The Committee will examine, in particular, the
Department's progress in developing a more rigorous process to
identify, prioritize, and fund research, development, testing,
and evaluation (RDT&E) opportunities that balances risk to the
homeland with cost, impact, and time to deliver. The Committee
will review the Department's efforts to coordinate the homeland
security research and development agenda and leverage
scientific knowledge and technical expertise, research, and
facilities at relevant universities, research institutions,
government and national laboratories, and the private sector,
including the Homeland Security Centers of Excellence and
Federal Funded Research and Development Centers. The Committee
will also assess the status of the Department's technical
infrastructure and workforce to ensure current and future
homeland security RDT&E needs will be met.
The Committee will review the Department's activities
relating to evaluation, testing, and certification of private
sector homeland security technologies. The Committee will
evaluate the Department's role in facilitating the transfer and
commercialization of exiting technologies (including
modification of military technologies) for use by Federal
state, local and tribal government and first responders.
technology to counter chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear
threats
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will examine the
Department's progress in improving the Nation's capability to
counter the threat of terrorist use of chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear weapons in the United States through
multi-layered approaches that emphasize early detection at the
Federal, state, and local levels, as well as post-event
capabilities for remediation. The Committee will oversee the
Department's development and implementation of the overarching
strategic plan for the Global Nuclear Detection Architecture.
The Committee will review the Department's chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear analysis capabilities and
information sharing mechanisms to provide actionable
information and an integrated operating system to guide
decision makers in carrying out appropriate responses,
including interdiction. To enhance the ability to interdict
chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear smuggling
across U.S. borders (land, air, and sea), the Committee will
oversee the Department's progress in employing risk-based
methods for developing, testing, certifying, deploying, and
operating current and next generation chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear detection equipment. The Committee
will also examine the Department's ability to detect chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear materials in the interior
of the U.S. and the Department's coordination with state and
local partners to reduce the risk of radiological and nuclear
terrorism to metropolitan urban areas and critical
infrastructure through expanding the Securing the Cities
Initiative. Finally, the Committee will examine the
Department's chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear
forensic activities to support national priorities for
deterrence, attribution, and prosecution.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT
departmental operations and efficiency initiatives
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will oversee the
Department of Homeland Security's day-to-day operations to
ensure that it is operating in the most efficient and effective
manner possible. Pursuant to Clause 2(d)(F) of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee will work to identify
potential opportunities to eliminate duplicative or unnecessary
programs, find efficiencies that will contribute to the
Department's ability to meet its vital missions, and identify
areas for cost savings. The Committee will also conduct
rigorous oversight to ensure departmental regulations enhance
security without posing an unnecessary barrier to private
sector job creation. The Committee will fully investigate
homeland security programs and practices, as warranted.
financial management
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will continue its
oversight of the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to
consolidate its 13 separate financial management systems into
one, unified system, known as the Transformation and Systems
Consolidation (TASC) project. In coordination with this review,
the Committee will also review the Department's efforts to
enhance internal controls and provide information that will
enable clean audit opinions.
departmental workforce
Throughout the 112th Congress, the Committee will monitor
the Department's efforts to recruit and retain personnel and to
address employee concerns set forth in the Office of Personnel
Management's Federal Human Capital Survey and the Department's
own personnel surveys, which have indicated morale problems
across the Department. In addition, the Committee will examine
the Department's Balanced Workforce Initiative, which seeks to
convert contractor positions into Federal employees, to ensure
an appropriate balance is struck between Federal employees and
private contracts and guard against any unnecessary elimination
of private sector jobs.
information technology systems management
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will review the
Department's efforts to address information technology (IT)
challenges, including the management and integration of the
Department's IT systems. The Committee will review the
authorities and activities of the Chief Information Officer
(CIO) and component CIOs to ensure the effective management and
coordination of these key functions. The Committee will also
monitor the Department's progress in IT architectural planning,
investment management, policy development, operations, and
related personnel management.
hspd-12 implementation
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will monitor the
Department's implementation of Homeland Security Presidential
Directive 12 (HSPD-12), Policy for a Common Identification
Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors, including the
Department's completion of card issuance, installation of card
readers, and other identification security efforts, such as the
use of logical access control systems.
headquarters consolidation
In the 112th Congress, the Committee will review the
Department's efforts to consolidate its headquarters from more
than 40 locations throughout the National Capital Region to
eight or nine locations. The cornerstone of this effort is the
St. Elizabeth's headquarters consolidation project. The
Committee will monitor the progress of the consolidation to
ensure the plan is completed on time and within budget.
acquisition management
During the 112th Congress, the Committee will review the
efforts of the Department of Homeland Security to improve the
integration and coordination of the procurement functions of
its components, and to ensure that effective management
controls are put in place to prevent contract waste, fraud, and
abuse while promoting efficiency and effectiveness. The
Committee will review the authorities and activities of the
Chief Procurement Officer to ensure the effective management of
this key function. The Committee also will review the
Department's implementation of Section 831(a) of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002, which grants the Secretary authority with
respect to research and development projects to use more
flexible contracting mechanisms in an effort to attract
``nontraditional government contractors'' for needed homeland
security technologies, as well as the Secretary's use of other
streamlined acquisition practices.
privacy and civil liberties
Section 222 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (the Act)
created a Privacy Officer for the Department of Homeland
Security to ensure that the Department's information gathering
and analysis functions and other programs across its components
adhere to established standards for the protection of privacy.
Section 705 of the Act also established an Officer for Civil
Rights and Liberties to review and assess information alleging
abuses of civil rights or civil liberties by employees and
officials of the Department of Homeland Security. During the
112th Congress, the Committee will monitor the Department's
efforts under such laws to strike an appropriate balance
between the need to combat terrorist attacks against the United
States with the privacy expectations and civil rights of U.S.
citizens.
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I C E S
=======================================================================
APPENDIX I
Committee Rules-Committee on Homeland Security
Adopted January 26, 2011
RULE I.-GENERAL PROVISIONS.
(A) Applicability of the Rules of the U.S. House of
Representatives.-The Rules of the U.S. House of
Representatives (the ``House'') are the rules of the
Committee on Homeland Security (the ``Committee'') and
its subcommittees insofar as applicable.
(B) Applicability to Subcommittees.-Except where the
terms ``Full Committee'' and ``subcommittee'' are
specifically mentioned, the following rules shall apply
to the Committee's subcommittees and their respective
Chairmen and Ranking Minority Members to the same
extent as they apply to the Full Committee and its
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member.
(C) Appointments by the Chairman.-Clause 2(d) of Rule
XI of the House shall govern the designation of a Vice
Chairman of the Full Committee.
(D) Recommendation of Conferees.-Whenever the Speaker
of the House is to appoint a conference committee on a
matter within the jurisdiction of the Full Committee,
the Chairman shall recommend to the Speaker of the
House conferees from the Full Committee. In making
recommendations of Minority Members as conferees, the
Chairman shall do so with the concurrence of the
Ranking Minority Member of the Committee.
(E) Motions to Disagree.-The Chairman is directed to
offer a motion under clause 1 of Rule XXII of the Rules
of the House whenever the Chairman considers it
appropriate.
(F) Committee Website.-The Chairman shall maintain an
official Committee website for the purposes of
furthering the Committee's legislative and oversight
responsibilities, including communicating information
about the Committee's activities to Committee Members,
other Members, and the public at large. The Ranking
Minority Member may maintain a similar website for the
same purposes. The official Committee website shall
display a link on its home page to the web site
maintained by the Ranking Minority Member.
(G) Activity Report.-Not later than the 30th day after
June 1 and December 1, the Committee shall submit to
the House a semiannual report on the activities of the
Committee. After adjournment sine die of a regular
session of Congress, or after December 15, whichever
occurs first, the Chair may file the second or fourth
semiannual report with the Clerk at any time and
without approval of the Committee provided that a copy
of the report has been available to each Member of the
Committee for at least seven calendar days and the
report includes any supplemental, minority, or
additional views submitted by a Member of the
Committee.
RULE II.-TIME OF MEETINGS.
(A) Regular Meeting Date.-The regular meeting date and
time for the transaction of business of the Full
Committee shall be at 10:00 a.m. on the first Wednesday
that the House is in Session each month, unless
otherwise directed by the Chairman.
(B) Additional Meetings.-At the discretion of the
Chairman, additional meetings of the Committee may be
scheduled for the consideration of any legislation or
other matters pending before the Committee or to
conduct other Committee business. The Committee shall
meet for such purposes pursuant to the call of the
Chairman.
(C) Consideration.-Except in the case of a special
meeting held under clause 2(c)(2) of House Rule XI, the
determination of the business to be considered at each
meeting of the Committee shall be made by the Chairman.
RULE III.-NOTICE AND PUBLICATION.
(A) Notice.-
(1) Hearings.-Pursuant to clause 2(g)(3) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Chairman of the Committee
shall make public announcement of the date,
place, and subject matter of any hearing before
the Full Committee or subcommittee, which may
not commence earlier than one week after such
notice. However, if the Chairman of the
Committee, with the concurrence of the Ranking
Minority Member, determines that there is good
cause to begin the hearing sooner, or if the
Committee so determines by majority vote, a
quorum being present for the transaction of
business, the Chairman shall make the
announcement at the earliest possible date. The
names of all witnesses scheduled to appear at
such hearing shall be provided to Members no
later than 48 hours prior to the commencement
of such hearing.
(2) Meetings.-The date, time, place, and
subject matter of any meeting, other than a
hearing or a regularly scheduled meeting, may
not commence earlier than the third day on
which Members have notice thereof except in the
case of a special meeting called under clause
2(c)(2) of House Rule XI. These notice
requirements may be waived if the Chairman with
the concurrence of the Ranking Minority Member,
determines that there is good cause to begin
the meeting sooner or if the Committee so
determines by majority vote, a quorum being
present for the transaction of business.
(a) Copies of any measure or matter to
be considered for approval by the
Committee at any meeting, including any
mark, print, or amendment in the nature
of a substitute shall be provided to
the Members at least 24 hours in
advance.
(b) At least 24 hours prior to the
commencement of a meeting for the
markup of a measure or matter, the text
of such measure or matter, including
any mark, print, or amendment in the
nature of a substitute, shall be made
publicly available in electronic form
and, to the extent practicable, posted
on the official Committee web site.
(c) Not later than 24 hours after
concluding a meeting to consider a
measure or matter, the text of such
measure or matter as ordered forwarded
or reported, including any adopted
amendments, shall be made publicly
available in electronic form and, to
the extent practicable, posted on the
official Committee website.
(3) Publication.-The meeting or hearing
announcement shall be promptly published in the
Daily Digest portion of the Congressional
Record. To the greatest extent practicable,
meeting announcements shall be entered into the
Committee scheduling service of the House
Information Resources.
RULE IV.-OPEN MEETINGS AND HEARINGS; BROADCASTING.
(A) Open Meetings.-All meetings and hearings of the
Committee shall be open to the public including to
radio, television, and still photography coverage,
except as provided by Rule XI of the Rules of the House
or when the Committee, in open session and with a
majority present, determines by recorded vote that all
or part of the remainder of that hearing on that day
shall be closed to the public because disclosure of
testimony, evidence, or other matters to be considered
would endanger the national security, compromise
sensitive law enforcement information, tend to defame,
degrade, or incriminate a witness, or violate any law
or rule of the House of Representatives.
(B) Broadcasting.-Whenever any hearing or meeting
conducted by the Committee is open to the public, the
Committee shall permit that hearing or meeting to be
covered by television broadcast, internet broadcast,
print media, and still photography, or by any of such
methods of coverage, in accordance with the provisions
of clause 4 of Rule XI of the Rules of the House.
Operation and use of any Committee operated broadcast
system shall be fair and nonpartisan and in accordance
with clause 4(b) of Rule XI and all other applicable
rules of the Committee and the House. Priority shall be
given by the Committee to members of the Press
Galleries. Pursuant to clause 2(e) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee
shall, to the greatest extent practicable, provide
audio and video coverage of each hearing or meeting in
a manner that allows the public to easily listen to and
view the proceedings and shall maintain the recordings
of such coverage in a manner that is easily accessible
to the public.
(C) Transcripts.-A transcript shall be made of the
testimony of each witness appearing before the
Committee during a Committee hearing. All transcripts
of meetings or hearings that are open to the public
shall be made available.
RULE V.-PROCEDURES FOR MEETINGS AND HEARINGS.
(A) Opening Statements.-At any meeting of the
Committee, the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member
shall be entitled to present oral opening statements of
five minutes each. Other Members may submit written
opening statements for the record. The Chairman
presiding over the meeting may permit additional
opening statements by other Members of the Full
Committee or of that subcommittee, with the concurrence
of the Ranking Minority Member.
(B) The Five-Minute Rule.-The time any one Member may
address the Committee on any bill, motion, or other
matter under consideration by the Committee shall not
exceed five minutes, and then only when the Member has
been recognized by the Chairman, except that this time
limit may be extended when permitted by unanimous
consent.
(C) Postponement of Vote.-The Chairman may postpone
further proceedings when a record vote is ordered on
the question of approving any measure or matter or
adopting an amendment. The Chairman may resume
proceedings on a postponed vote at any time, provided
that all reasonable steps have been taken to notify
Members of the resumption of such proceedings,
including, when practicable, circulation of notice by
the Clerk of the Committee. When proceedings resume on
a postponed question, notwithstanding any intervening
order for the previous question, an underlying
proposition shall remain subject to further debate or
amendment to the same extent as when the question was
postponed.
(D) Contempt Procedures.-No recommendation that a
person be cited for contempt of Congress shall be
forwarded to the House unless and until the Full
Committee has, upon notice to all its Members, met and
considered the alleged contempt. The person to be cited
for contempt shall be afforded, upon notice of at least
72 hours, an opportunity to state why he or she should
not be held in contempt prior to a vote of the Full
Committee, with a quorum being present, on the question
whether to forward such recommendation to the House.
Such statement shall be, in the discretion of the
Chairman, either in writing or in person before the
Full Committee.
RULE VI.-WITNESSES.
(A) Questioning of Witnesses.-
(1) Questioning of witnesses by Members will be
conducted under the five-minute rule unless the
Committee adopts a motion permitted by clause
2(j)(2) of House Rule XI.
(2) In questioning witnesses under the five-
minute rule, the Chairman and the Ranking
Minority Member shall first be recognized. In a
subcommittee meeting or hearing, the Chairman
and Ranking Minority Member of the Full
Committee are then recognized. All other
Members that arrive before the commencement of
the meeting or hearing will be recognized in
the order of seniority on the Committee,
alternating between Majority and Minority
Members. Committee Members arriving after the
commencement of the hearing shall be recognized
in order of appearance, alternating between
Majority and Minority Members, after all
Members present at the beginning of the hearing
have been recognized. Each Member shall be
recognized at least once before any Member is
given a second opportunity to question a
witness.
(3) The Chairman, in consultation with the
Ranking Minority Member, or the Committee by
motion, may permit an extension of the period
of questioning of a witness beyond five minutes
but the time allotted must be equally
apportioned to the Majority party and the
Minority and may not exceed one hour in the
aggregate.
(4) The Chairman, in consultation with the
Ranking Minority Member, or the Committee by
motion, may permit Committee staff of the
Majority and Minority to question a witness for
a specified period of time, but the time
allotted must be equally apportioned to the
Majority and Minority staff and may not exceed
one hour in the aggregate.
(B) Minority Witnesses.-Whenever a hearing is conducted
by the Committee upon any measure or matter, the
Minority party Members on the Committee shall be
entitled, upon request to the Chairman by a majority of
those Minority Members before the completion of such
hearing, to call witnesses selected by the Minority to
testify with respect to that measure or matter during
at least one day of hearing thereon.
(C) Oath or Affirmation.-The Chairman of the Committee
or any Member designated by the Chairman, may
administer an oath to any witness.
(D) Statements by Witnesses.-
(1) Consistent with the notice given, witnesses
shall submit a prepared or written statement
for the record of the proceedings (including,
where practicable, an electronic copy) with the
Clerk of the Committee no less than 48 hours in
advance of the witness's appearance before the
Committee. Unless the 48 hour requirement is
waived or otherwise modified by the Chairman,
after consultation with the Ranking Minority
Member, the failure to comply with this
requirement may result in the exclusion of the
written testimony from the hearing record and/
or the barring of an oral presentation of the
testimony. The Clerk of the Committee shall
provide any such prepared or written statement
submitted to the Clerk prior to the hearing to
the Members of the Committee prior to the
commencement of the hearing.
(2) To the greatest extent practicable, the
written testimony of each witness appearing in
a non-governmental capacity shall include a
curriculum vita and a disclosure of the amount
and source (by agency and program) of any
Federal grant (or subgrant thereof) or contract
(or subcontract thereof) received during the
current fiscal year or either of the two
preceding fiscal years by the witness or by an
entity represented by the witness. Such
disclosures shall be made publicly available,
with appropriate redactions to protect the
privacy of the witness, in electronic form not
later than one day after the witness appears.
RULE VII.-QUORUM.
Quorum Requirements.-Two Members shall constitute a quorum
for purposes of taking testimony and receiving evidence. One-
third of the Members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum
for conducting business, except for (1) reporting a measure or
recommendation; (2) closing Committee meetings to the public,
pursuant to Committee Rule IV; (3) authorizing the issuance of
subpoenas; and (4) any other action for which an actual
majority quorum is required by any rule of the House of
Representatives or by law. The Chairman shall make reasonable
efforts, including consultation with the Ranking Minority
Member when scheduling meetings and hearings, to ensure that a
quorum for any purpose will include at least one Minority
Member of the Committee.
RULE VIII.-DECORUM.
(A) Breaches of Decorum.-The Chairman may punish
breaches of order and decorum, by censure and exclusion
from the hearing; and the Committee may cite the
offender to the House for contempt.
(B) Access to Dais.-Access to the dais before, during,
and after a hearing, markup, or other meeting of the
Committee shall be limited to Members and staff of the
Committee. Subject to availability of space on the
dais, Committee Members' personal staff may be present
on the dais during a hearing if their employing Member
is seated on the dais and during a markup or other
meeting if their employing Member is the author of a
measure or amendment under consideration by the
Committee, but only during the time that the measure or
amendment is under active consideration by the
Committee, or otherwise at the discretion of the
Chairman, or of the Ranking Minority Member for
personal staff employed by a Minority Member.
(C) Wireless Communications Use Prohibited.-During a
hearing, mark-up, or other meeting of the Committee,
ringing or audible sounds or conversational use of
cellular telephones or other electronic devices is
prohibited in the Committee room.
RULE IX.-SUBCOMMITTEES.
(A) Generally.-The Full Committee shall be organized
into the following six standing subcommittees and shall
have specific responsibility for such measures or
matters as the Chairman refers to it:
(1) Subcommittee on Border and Maritime
Security;
(2) Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response, and Communications ;
(3) Subcommittee on Transportation Security;
(4) Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and
Intelligence;
(5) Subcommittee on Cybersecurity,
Infrastructure Protection, and Security
Technologies;
(6) Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations,
and Management
(B) Selection and Ratio of Subcommittee Members.-The
Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Full
Committee shall select their respective Members of each
subcommittee. The ratio of Majority to Minority Members
shall be comparable to the Full Committee, except that
each subcommittee shall have at least two more Majority
Members than Minority Members.
(C) Ex Officio Members.-The Chairman and Ranking
Minority Member of the Full Committee shall be ex
officio members of each subcommittee but are not
authorized to vote on matters that arise before each
subcommittee. The Chairman and Ranking Minority Member
of the Full Committee shall only be counted to satisfy
the quorum requirement for the purpose of taking
testimony and receiving evidence.
(D) Powers and Duties of Subcommittees.-Except as
otherwise directed by the Chairman of the Full
Committee, each subcommittee is authorized to meet,
hold hearings, receive testimony, mark up legislation,
and report to the Full Committee on all matters within
its purview. Subcommittee Chairmen shall set hearing
and meeting dates only with the approval of the
Chairman of the Full Committee. To the greatest extent
practicable, no more than one meeting and hearing
should be scheduled for a given time.
(E) Special Voting Provision.-If a tie vote occurs in a
Subcommittee on the question of forwarding any measure
to the Full Committee, the measure shall be placed on
the agenda for Full Committee consideration as if it
had been ordered reported by the Subcommittee without
recommendation.
RULE X.-COMMITTEE PANELS.
(A) Designation.-The Chairman of the Full Committee,
with the concurrence of the Ranking Minority Member,
may designate a panel of the Committee consisting of
Members of the Committee to inquire into and take
testimony on a matter or matters that warrant enhanced
consideration and to report to the Committee.
(B) Duration.-No panel appointed by the Chairman shall
continue in existence for more than six months after
the appointment.
(C) Party Ratios and Appointment.-Consistent with the
party ratios established by the Majority party, all
Majority members of the panels shall be appointed by
the Chairman of the Committee, and all Minority members
shall be appointed by the Ranking Minority Member of
the Committee. The Chairman of the Committee shall
choose one of the Majority Members so appointed who
does not currently chair another Subcommittee of the
Committee to serve as Chairman of the panel. The
Ranking Minority Member of the Committee shall
similarly choose the Ranking Minority Member of the
panel.
(D) Ex Officio Members.-The Chairman and Ranking
Minority Member of the Full Committee may serve as ex
officio Members of each committee panel but are not
authorized to vote on matters that arise before a
committee panel and shall not be counted to satisfy the
quorum requirement for any purpose other than taking
testimony.
(E) Jurisdiction.-No panel shall have legislative
jurisdiction.
(F) Applicability of Committee Rules.-Any designated
panel shall be subject to all Committee Rules herein.
RULE XI.-REFERRALS TO SUBCOMMITTEES.
Referral of Bills and Other Matters by Chairman.-Except for
bills and other matters retained by the Chairman for Full
Committee consideration, each bill or other matter referred to
the Full Committee shall be referred by the Chairman to one or
more subcommittees within two weeks of receipt by the
Committee. In referring any measure or matter to a
subcommittee, the Chair may specify a date by which the
subcommittee shall report thereon to the Full Committee. Bills
or other matters referred to subcommittees may be reassigned or
discharged by the Chairman.
RULE XII.-SUBPOENAS.
(A) Authorization.-Pursuant to clause 2(m) of Rule XI
of the House, a subpoena may be authorized and issued
under the seal of the House and attested by the Clerk
of the House, and may be served by any person
designated by the Full Committee for the furtherance of
an investigation with authorization by-
(1) a majority of the Full Committee, a quorum
being present; or
(2) the Chairman of the Full Committee, after
consultation with the Ranking Minority Member
of the Full Committee, during any period for
which the House has adjourned for a period in
excess of 3 days pursuant to a concurrent
resolution when, in the opinion of the Chairman
of the Full Committee, authorization and
issuance of the subpoena is necessary to obtain
the material or testimony set forth in the
subpoena. The Chairman of the Full Committee
shall notify Members of the Committee of the
authorization and issuance of a subpoena under
this rule as soon as practicable, but in no
event later than one week after service of such
subpoena.
(B) Disclosure.-Provisions may be included in a
subpoena with the concurrence of the Chairman and the
Ranking Minority Member of the Full Committee, or by
the Committee, to prevent the disclosure of the Full
Committee's demands for information when deemed
necessary for the security of information or the
progress of an investigation, including but not limited
to prohibiting the revelation by witnesses and their
counsel of Full Committee's inquiries.
(C) Subpoena duces tecum.-A subpoena duces tecum may be
issued whose return to the Committee Clerk shall occur
at a time and place other than that of a regularly
scheduled meeting.
(D) Affidavits and Depositions.-The Chairman of the
Full Committee, in consultation with the Ranking
Minority Member of the Full Committee, or the Committee
may authorize the taking of an affidavit or deposition
with respect to any person who is subpoenaed under
these rules but who is unable to appear in person to
testify as a witness at any hearing or meeting. Notices
for the taking of depositions shall specify the date,
time, and place of examination. Depositions shall be
taken under oath administered by a Member or a person
otherwise authorized by law to administer oaths. Prior
consultation with the Ranking Minority Member of the
Full Committee shall include written notice three
business days before any deposition is scheduled to
provide an opportunity for Minority staff to be present
during the questioning.
RULE XIII.-COMMITTEE STAFF.
(A) Generally.-Committee staff members are subject to
the provisions of clause 9 of House Rule X and must be
eligible to be considered for routine access to
classified information.
(B) Staff Assignments.-For purposes of these rules,
Committee staff means the employees of the Committee,
detailees, fellows, or any other person engaged by
contract or otherwise to perform services for, or at
the request of, the Committee. All such persons shall
be either Majority, Minority, or shared staff. The
Chairman shall appoint, determine remuneration of,
supervise, and may remove Majority staff. The Ranking
Minority Member shall appoint, determine remuneration
of, supervise, and may remove Minority staff. In
consultation with the Ranking Minority Member, the
Chairman may appoint, determine remuneration of,
supervise and may remove shared staff that is assigned
to service of the Committee. The Chairman shall certify
Committee staff appointments, including appointments by
the Ranking Minority Member, as required.
(C) Divulgence of Information.-Prior to the public
acknowledgement by the Chairman or the Committee of a
decision to initiate an investigation of a particular
person, entity, or subject, no member of the Committee
staff shall knowingly divulge to any person any
information, including non-classified information,
which comes into his or her possession by virtue of his
or her status as a member of the Committee staff, if
the member of the Committee staff has a reasonable
expectation that such information may alert the subject
of a Committee investigation to the existence, nature,
or substance of such investigation, unless authorized
to do so by the Chairman or the Committee.
RULE XIV.-COMMITTEE MEMBER AND COMMITTEE STAFF TRAVEL.
(A) Approval of Travel.-Consistent with the primary
expense resolution and such additional expense
resolutions as may have been approved, travel to be
reimbursed from funds set aside for the Committee for
any Committee Member or Committee staff shall be paid
only upon the prior authorization of the Chairman.
Travel may be authorized by the Chairman for any
Committee Member or Committee staff only in connection
with official Committee business, such as the
attendance of hearings conducted by the Committee and
meetings, conferences, site visits, and investigations
that involve activities or subject matters under the
general jurisdiction of the Full Committee.
(1) Proposed Travel by Majority Party Committee
Members and Committee Staff.-In the case of
proposed travel by Majority party Committee
Members or Committee staff, before such
authorization is given, there shall be
submitted to the Chairman in writing the
following: (a) the purpose of the travel; (b)
the dates during which the travel is to be made
and the date or dates of the event for which
the travel is being made; (c) the location of
the event for which the travel is to be made;
(d) the estimated total cost of the travel; and
(e) the names of Members and staff seeking
authorization. On the basis of that
information, the Chairman shall determine
whether the proposed travel is for official
Committee business, concerns a subject matter
under the jurisdiction of the Full Committee,
and is not excessively costly in view of the
Committee business proposed to be conducted.
(2) Proposed Travel by Minority Party Committee
Members and Committee Staff.-In the case of
proposed travel by Minority party Committee
Members or Committee staff, the Ranking
Minority Member shall provide to the Chairman a
written representation setting forth the
information specified in items (a), (b), (c),
(d), and (e) of subparagraph (1) and his or her
determination that such travel complies with
the other requirements of subparagraph (1).
(B) Foreign Travel.-All Committee Members and Committee
staff requests for foreign travel must include a
written representation setting forth the information
specified in items (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) of
subparagraph (A)(1) and be submitted to the Chairman
not fewer than ten business days prior to the start of
the travel. Within thirty days of the conclusion of any
such foreign travel authorized under this rule, there
shall be submitted to the Chairman a written report
summarizing the information gained as a result of the
travel in question, or other Committee objectives
served by such travel. The requirements of this section
may be waived or abridged by the Chairman.
(C) Compliance with Committee Travel Policy and
Guidelines.-Travel must be in accordance with the
Committee Travel Policy and Guidelines, as well as with
House Rules, the Travel Guidelines and Regulations and
any additional guidance set forth by the Committee on
Ethics and the Committee on House Administration.
Committee Members and staff shall follow these rules,
policies, guidelines, and regulations in requesting and
proceeding with any Committee-related travel.
RULE XV.-CLASSIFIED AND CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION.
(A) Security Precautions.-Committee staff offices,
including Majority and Minority offices, shall operate
under strict security precautions administered by the
Security Officer of the Committee. A security officer
shall be on duty at all times during normal office
hours. Classified documents and controlled unclassified
information (CUI)- formerly known as sensitive but
unclassified (SBU) information- may be destroyed,
discussed, examined, handled, reviewed, stored,
transported and used only in an appropriately secure
manner in accordance with all applicable laws,
executive orders, and other governing authorities. Such
documents may be removed from the Committee's offices
only in furtherance of official Committee business.
Appropriate security procedures, as determined by the
Chairman in consultation with the Ranking Minority
Member, shall govern the handling of such documents
removed from the Committee's offices.
(B) Temporary Custody of Executive Branch Material.-
Executive branch documents or other materials
containing classified information in any form that were
not made part of the record of a Committee hearing, did
not originate in the Committee or the House, and are
not otherwise records of the Committee shall, while in
the custody of the Committee, be segregated and
maintained by the Committee in the same manner as
Committee records that are classified. Such documents
and other materials shall be returned to the Executive
branch agency from which they were obtained at the
earliest practicable time.
(C) Access by Committee Staff.-Access to classified
information supplied to the Committee shall be limited
to Committee staff members with appropriate security
clearances and a need-to-know, as determined by the
Chairman or Ranking Minority Member, and under the
direction of the Majority or Minority Staff Directors.
(D) Maintaining Confidentiality.-No Committee Member or
Committee staff shall disclose, in whole or in part or
by way of summary, to any person who is not a Committee
Member or authorized Committee staff for any purpose or
in connection with any proceeding, judicial or
otherwise, any testimony given before the Committee in
executive session. Classified information and
controlled unclassified information (CUI) shall be
handled in accordance with all applicable laws,
executive orders, and other governing authorities and
consistently with the provisions of these rules and
Committee procedures.
(E) Oath.-Before a Committee Member or Committee staff
may have access to classified information, the
following oath (or affirmation) shall be executed:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will not
disclose any classified information received in
the course of my service on the Committee on
Homeland Security, except as authorized by the
Committee or the House of Representatives or in
accordance with the Rules of such Committee or
the Rules of the House.
Copies of the executed oath (or affirmation) shall be
retained by the Clerk of the Committee as part of the
records of the Committee.
(F) Disciplinary Action.-The Chairman shall immediately
consider disciplinary action in the event any Committee
Member or Committee staff member fails to conform to
the provisions of these rules governing the disclosure
of classified or unclassified information. Such
disciplinary action may include, but shall not be
limited to, immediate dismissal from the Committee
staff, criminal referral to the Justice Department, and
notification of the Speaker of the House. With respect
to Minority staff, the Chairman shall consider such
disciplinary action in consultation with the Ranking
Minority Member.
RULE XVI.-COMMITTEE RECORDS.
(A) Committee Records.-Committee Records shall
constitute all data, charts, and files in possession of
the Committee and shall be maintained in accordance
with clause 2(e) of House Rule XI.
(B) Legislative Calendar.-The Clerk of the Committee
shall maintain a printed calendar for the information
of each Committee Member showing any procedural or
legislative measures considered or scheduled to be
considered by the Committee, and the status of such
measures and such other matters as the Committee
determines shall be included. The calendar shall be
revised from time to time to show pertinent changes. A
copy of such revisions shall be made available to each
Member of the Committee upon request.
(C) Members Right To Access.-Members of the Committee
and of the House shall have access to all official
Committee Records. Access to Committee files shall be
limited to examination within the Committee offices at
reasonable times. Access to Committee Records that
contain classified information shall be provided in a
manner consistent with these rules.
(D) Removal of Committee Records.-Files and records of
the Committee are not to be removed from the Committee
offices. No Committee files or records that are not
made publicly available shall be photocopied by any
Member.
(E) Executive Session Records.-Evidence or testimony
received by the Committee in executive session shall
not be released or made available to the public unless
agreed to by the Committee. Members may examine the
Committee's executive session records, but may not make
copies of, or take personal notes from, such records.
(F) Availability of Committee Records.-The Committee
shall keep a complete record of all Committee action
including recorded votes and attendance at hearings and
meetings. Information so available for public
inspection shall include a description of each
amendment, motion, order, or other proposition,
including the name of the Member who offered the
amendment, motion, order, or other proposition, and the
name of each Member voting for and each Member voting
against each such amendment, motion, order, or
proposition, as well as the names of those Members
present but not voting. Such record shall be made
available to the public at reasonable times within the
Committee offices and also made publicly available in
electronic form and posted on the official Committee
website within 48 hours of such record vote.
(G) Separate and Distinct.-All Committee records and
files must be kept separate and distinct from the
office records of the Members serving as Chairman and
Ranking Minority Member. Records and files of Members'
personal offices shall not be considered records or
files of the Committee.
(H) Disposition of Committee Records.-At the conclusion
of each Congress, non-current records of the Committee
shall be delivered to the Archivist of the United
States in accordance with Rule VII of the Rules of the
House.
(I) Archived Records.-The records of the Committee at
the National Archives and Records Administration shall
be made available for public use in accordance with
Rule VII of the Rules of the House. The Chairman shall
notify the Ranking Minority Member of any decision,
pursuant to clause 3(b)(3) or clause 4(b) of the Rule,
to withhold a record otherwise available, and the
matter shall be presented to the Committee for a
determination on the written request of any member of
the Committee. The Chairman shall consult with the
Ranking Minority Member on any communication from the
Archivist of the United States or the Clerk of the
House concerning the disposition of noncurrent records
pursuant to clause 3(b) of the Rule.
RULE XVII.- COMMITTEE RULES.
(A) Availability of Committee Rules in Electronic
Form.-Pursuant to clause 2(a) of rule XI of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee shall
make its rules publicly available in electronic form
and posted on the official Committee website and shall
submit such rules for publication in the Congressional
Record not later than 30 days after the Chairman of the
Committee is elected in each odd-numbered year.
(B) Changes to Committee Rules.-These rules may be
modified, amended, or repealed by the Full Committee
provided that a notice in writing of the proposed
change has been given to each Member at least 48 hours
prior to the meeting at which action thereon is to be
taken and such changes are not inconsistent with the
Rules of the House of Representatives.
APPENDIX II
Membership Changes
January 2011
On January 5, 2011, Mr. Peter T. King of New York was
elected as Chairman and Mr. Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi
as Ranking Member pursuant to H. Res. 6 and H. Res. 7,
respectively.
The Majority Members of the Committee were elected to the
Committee on January 18, 2011, pursuant to H. Res. 37; and the
Minority Members on January 19, 2011, pursuant to H. Res. 39.
Mr. Blake Farenthold of Texas was elected to the Committee
pursuant to H. Res. 42 on January 19, 2011.
Mr. Mo Brooks of Alabama was elected to the Committee
pursuant to H. Res. 53 on January 25, 2011.
----------
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Peter T. King, New York, Chairman
Lamar Smith, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Daniel E. Lungren, California Loretta Sanchez, California
Mike Rogers, Alabama Jane Harman, California
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida Henry Cuellar, Texas
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Candice S. Miller, Michigan Laura Richardson, California
Tim Walberg, Michigan Donna M. Christensen, U.S. Virgin
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Islands
Joe Walsh, Illinois Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Brian Higgins, New York
Ben Quayle, Arizona Jackie Speier, California
Scott Rigell, Virginia Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Billy Long, Missouri Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania ___
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Peter T. King, New York
___
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY, INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION, AND SECURITY
TECHNOLOGIES
Daniel E. Lungren, California, Chairman
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Tim Walberg, Michigan, Vice Chair Laura Richardson, California
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Billy Long, Missouri William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
Mike Rogers, Alabama, Chairman
Daniel E. Lungren, California Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Tim Walberg, Michigan Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Jackie Speier, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois, Vice Chair Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Mo Brooks, Alabama Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT
Michael T. McCaul, Texas, Chairman
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida Jackie Speier, California
Billy Long, Missouri, Vice Chair Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND COMMUNICATIONS
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida, Chairman
Joe Walsh, Illinois Laura Richardson, California
Scott Rigell, Virginia Donna M. Christensen, U.S. Virgin
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania, Vice Islands
Chair Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Blake Farenthold, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND MARITIME SECURITY
Candice S. Miller, Michigan, Chairman
Mike Rogers, Alabama Henry Cuellar, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Loretta Sanchez, California
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Donna M. Christensen, U.S. Virgin
Ben Quayle, Arizona, Vice Chair Islands
Scott Rigell, Virginia Brian Higgins, New York
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Peter T. King, New York Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
(Ex Officio) (Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COUNTERTERRORISM AND INTELLIGENCE
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania, Chairman
Paul C. Broun, Georgia, Vice Chair Jane Harman, California
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Loretta Sanchez, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Ben Quayle, Arizona Henry Cuellar, Texas
Scott Rigell, Virginia Brian Higgins, New York
Billy Long, Missouri Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
March 7, 2011
On February 28, 2011, Ms. Jane Harman of California
resigned as a Member of the House of Representatives. On March
7, 2011, Mrs. Donna M. Christensen resigned as a Member of the
Committee on Homeland Security. The Memberships of the
Subcommittees were modified on March 14, 2011 to reflect these
vacancies.
The Committee on Homeland Security Membership and
Subcommittee Membership was as follows:
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Peter T. King, New York, Chairman
Lamar Smith, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Daniel E. Lungren, California Loretta Sanchez, California
Mike Rogers, Alabama Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Henry Cuellar, Texas
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Laura Richardson, California
Candice S. Miller, Michigan Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tim Walberg, Michigan Brian Higgins, New York
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Jackie Speier, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Ben Quayle, Arizona William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Scott Rigell, Virginia Vacancy
Billy Long, Missouri Vacancy
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Mo Brooks, Alabama
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY, INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION, AND SECURITY
TECHNOLOGIES
Daniel E. Lungren, California, Chairman
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Tim Walberg, Michigan, Vice Chair Laura Richardson, California
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Billy Long, Missouri William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
Mike Rogers, Alabama, Chairman
Daniel E. Lungren, California Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Tim Walberg, Michigan Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Jackie Speier, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois, Vice Chair Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Mo Brooks, Alabama Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT
Michael T. McCaul, Texas, Chairman
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Billy Long, Missouri, Vice Chair Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND COMMUNICATIONS
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida, Chairman
Joe Walsh, Illinois Laura Richardson, California
Scott Rigell, Virginia Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania, Vice Vacancy
Chair Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Blake Farenthold, Texas (Ex Officio)
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND MARITIME SECURITY
Candice S. Miller, Michigan, Chairman
Mike Rogers, Alabama Henry Cuellar, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Loretta Sanchez, California
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Ben Quayle, Arizona, Vice Chair Brian Higgins, New York
Scott Rigell, Virginia Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COUNTERTERRORISM AND INTELLIGENCE
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania, Chairman
Paul C. Broun, Georgia, Vice Chair Jackie Speier, California
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Loretta Sanchez, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois Henry Cuellar, Texas
Ben Quayle, Arizona Brian Higgins, New York
Scott Rigell, Virginia Vacancy
Billy Long, Missouri Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex Officio)
(Ex Officio)
June 2, 2011
Ms. Kathleen C. Hochul of New Work was elected to the
Committee on June 2, 2011 pursuant to H. Res. 293.
The Committee on Homeland Security Membership and
Subcommittee Membership was as follows:
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Peter T. King, New York, Chairman
Lamar Smith, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Daniel E. Lungren, California Loretta Sanchez, California
Mike Rogers, Alabama Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Henry Cuellar, Texas
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Laura Richardson, California
Candice S. Miller, Michigan Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tim Walberg, Michigan Brian Higgins, New York
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Jackie Speier, California
Joe Walsh, Illinois Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Ben Quayle, Arizona William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Scott Rigell, Virginia Kathleen C. Hochul, New York
Billy Long, Missouri Vacancy
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Mo Brooks, Alabama
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY, INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION, AND SECURITY
TECHNOLOGIES
Daniel E. Lungren, California, Chairman
Michael T. McCaul, Texas
Tim Walberg, Michigan, Vice Chair
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania
Billy Long, Missouri
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex Officio) Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Laura Richardson, California
Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
Mike Rogers, Alabama, Chairman
Daniel E. Lungren, California
Tim Walberg, Michigan
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota
Joe Walsh, Illinois, Vice Chair
Mo Brooks, Alabama
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex Officio) Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Jackie Speier, California
Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT
Michael T. McCaul, Texas, Chairman
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida
Billy Long, Missouri, Vice Chair
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex Officio) William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND COMMUNICATIONS
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida, Chairman
Joe Walsh, Illinois
Scott Rigell, Virginia
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania, Vice
Chair
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex Officio) Laura Richardson, California
Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Vacancy
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON BORDER AND MARITIME SECURITY
Candice S. Miller, Michigan, Chairman
Mike Rogers, Alabama
Michael T. McCaul, Texas
Paul C. Broun, Georgia
Ben Quayle, Arizona, Vice Chair
Scott Rigell, Virginia
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex Officio) Henry Cuellar, Texas
Loretta Sanchez, California
Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Brian Higgins, New York
Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
(Ex Officio)
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COUNTERTERRORISM AND INTELLIGENCE
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania, Chairman
Paul C. Broun, Georgia, Vice Chair
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota
Joe Walsh, Illinois
Ben Quayle, Arizona
Scott Rigell, Virginia
Billy Long, Missouri
Peter T. King, New York
(Ex Officio) Jackie Speier, California
Loretta Sanchez, California
Henry Cuellar, Texas
Brian Higgins, New York
Vacancy
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
(Ex Officio)
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
Additional Views of the Democratic Members of the Committee on Homeland
Security
INTRODUCTION
During the 112th Congress, Democratic Members of the
Homeland Security Committee have diligently worked to assure
that the programs, policies, and practices of the Department of
Homeland Security are effective and efficient in safeguarding
the nation from the terrorist threat; addressing the
destructive impact of natural disasters; mitigating known and
unknown vulnerabilities, and ensuring resiliency in the
operation of both publicly and privately owned facilities and
infrastructures. The Democratic Members are committed to
protecting the homeland and ensuring that in the event of a
terrorist attack or other catastrophic occurrence, the welfare
of each and every impacted American is of paramount concern.
This Committee work has taken various forms, including the
introduction of legislation, arranging briefings from
Administration officials, and sending oversight requests to the
Department of Homeland Security. Most importantly, these
efforts have been a continuation of work done by the Democratic
Majority in the 110th and 111th Congresses. Despite minority
status, Democrats have found a way to follow through on our
earlier efforts designed to protect the American people.
While we look forward to engaging in collaborative efforts
with the Republican Majority, to date, its efforts have been
predominantly non-inclusive. This lack of bipartisan
collaboration has led to the filing of these Additional Views.
Under the Rules of the House, Activity Reports are intended
to reflect a comprehensive review of a Committee's legislative
and oversight activities. The goal must be to produce a report
of the highest caliber to inform our constituents--the American
taxpayer--of the actions we have taken on their behalf. In
compiling and reporting the activities of the Committee, we
create a record not for a political season, but for posterity.
Unfortunately, in producing this semiannual Activity
Report, the Majority opted to compile records of Committee
activities that were not officially noticed events. The report
is replete with vague, dateless references to non-noticed
meetings between Majority staff and external, non-governmental
stakeholders. Not only does this raise questions about the
influence these non-governmental stakeholders may have had, it
also may unintentionally create a cloud over the work of this
Committee. We hope that these deficiencies will not be
perpetuated in future reports and the Committee's work will be
carried out in a bipartisan and transparent manner.
Therefore, the Additional Views, filed herein are an
attempt to convey both the concerns of the Democratic Members
of the Committee and to provide a clear record of those
activities that were either publicly noticed or involved
participation of Democratic Members or staff.
LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE
In the first quarter of the 112th Congress, 58 bills and
resolutions were referred to the Committee. None of the
measures referred to the Committee have been reported to the
House. No measure referred to the Committee was considered on
the House floor.
Of the 58 measures referred to the Committee, seven bills
have been marked up and favorably forwarded to the Full
Committee. One bill was favorably forwarded by the
Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security
Technologies Subcommittee on April 14, 2011; three bills were
favorably reported by the Transportation Security Subcommittee
on May 12, 2011; and three bills were favorably forwarded by
the Border and Maritime Security Subcommittee on June 2, 2011.
Two of the measures that were favorably forwarded to the Full
Committee were authored by Committee Democrats. They are H.R.
915, the ``Jaime Zapata Border Enforcement Security Task Force
Act,'' which was introduced by Border and Maritime Security
Subcommittee Ranking Member Henry Cuellar (D-TX) and H.R. 1165,
the ``Transportation Security Administration Ombudsman Act of
2011,'' which was introduced by Transportation Security
Subcommittee Ranking Member Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX). In the
first quarter, Democratic Member offered six amendments at the
three Subcommittee markups. None of these amendments were
adopted.
The level of legislative activity in the first quarter
stands in marked contrast to the Committee's level of activity
in previous Congresses for the same period as covered in the
underlying report. In the 111th Congress, under the direction
of then-Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS), thirteen measures
that were referred to the Committee were approved by the
House.\1\ Five of the thirteen measures brought to the House
floor were introduced by Republican Members of the House. In
the 110th Congress, eighteen measures within the Committee's
jurisdiction, including H.R. 1, the ``Implementing the 9/11
Commission Recommendations Act of 2007'' (P.L. 110-53) and H.R.
1684, the ``Department of Homeland Security Authorization for
Fiscal Year 2008,'' were approved by the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The thirteen measures are as follows: (1) H.R. 549, the
``National Bombing Prevention Act of 2009,'' introduced by then-
Committee Ranking Member Peter T. King (R-NY); (2) H.R. 553, the
``Reducing Over-Classification Act,'' introduced by then-Rep. Jane
Harman (D-CA); (3) H.R. 559, the ``Fair, Accurate, Secure, and Timely
Redress Act of 2009,'' introduced by Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY); (4)
H.R. 730, the ``Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act,'' introduced by
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA); (5) H.R. 1029, the ``Alien Smuggling and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2009,'' introduced by then-Rep. Baron Hill
(D-IN); (6) H.R. 1148, a bill ``To require the Secretary of Homeland
Security to conduct a program in the maritime environment for the
mobile biometric identification of suspected individuals, including
terrorists, to enhance border security,'' introduced by Rep. Gus
Bilirakis (R-FL); (7) H.R. 1178, a bill ``To direct the Comptroller
General of the United States to conduct a study on the use of Civil Air
Patrol personnel and resources to support homeland security missions,
and for other purposes,'' introduced by Rep. Charlie Dent (R-PA); (8)
H.R. 1617, the ``Department of Homeland Security Component Privacy
Officer Act of 2009,'' introduced by then-Representative Chris Carney
(R-PA); (9) H.R. 2200, the ``Transportation Security Administration
Authorization Act,'' introduced by Rep. Jackson Lee; (10) H. Res. 14, a
resolution ``Recognizing the importance of the Department of Homeland
Security, including U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in combating human smuggling and
trafficking in persons, and commending the Department of Justice for
increasing the rate of human smuggling and trafficking prosecutions,''
introduced by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA); (11) H. Res. 195, a resolution
``Recognizing and honoring the employees of the Department of Homeland
Security on its sixth anniversary for their continuous efforts to keep
the Nation safe,'' introduced by Rep. Bilirakis; (12) H. Res. 201, a
resolution ``Recognizing Beverly Eckert's service to the Nation and
particularly the survivors and families of the September 11, 2001,
attacks,'' introduced by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY); and (13) H. Res.
498, a resolution ``Honoring and congratulating the U.S. Border Patrol
on its 85th anniversary,'' introduced by then-Rep. Harry Teague (D-NM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this quarter, of the 58 bills referred to the Committee
on Homeland Security, 33 were introduced by Democratic Members
of the House. Twenty measures referred to the Committee were
sponsored by Committee Democrats; these bills address a wide
range of homeland security challenges--from border and
transportation security to disaster preparedness and recovery
to civil liberties and counterterrorism. Listed below are the
measures, in the order of introduction.
H.R. 71, the ``FAMS Augmentation Act of 2011,'' as
introduced by Transportation Security Subcommittee Ranking
Member Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) on January 5, 2011.
H.R. 76, the ``Cybersecurity Education Enhancement
Act of 2011,'' as introduced by Transportation Security Ranking
Member Jackson Lee on January 5, 2011.
H.R. 77, the ``Border Security, Cooperation, and
Act Now Drug War Prevention Act of 2011,'' as introduced by
Transportation Security Ranking Member Jackson Lee on January
5, 2011.
H.R. 174, the ``Homeland Security Cyber and
Physical Infrastructure Protection Act of 2011,'' as introduced
by Committee Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS) on
January 5, 2011.
H.R. 175, the ``Smart Housing in Disasters Act of
2011,'' as introduced by Committee Ranking Member Thompson on
January 5, 2011.
H.R. 176, the Federal Protective Service
Improvement and Accountability Act of 2011,'' as introduced by
Committee Ranking Member Thompson on January 5, 2011.
H.R. 216, the ``Border Security Search
Accountability Act of 2011,'' as introduced by Rep. Loretta
Sanchez (D-CA) on January 7, 2011.
H.R. 225, the ``Chemical Facility Security
Improvement Act of 2011,'' as introduced by Transportation
Security Ranking Member Jackson Lee on January 7, 2011.
H. Res. 28, Expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives that the Transportation Security Administration
should, in accordance with existing law, enhance security
against terrorist attack and other security threats to our
Nation's rail and mass transit systems and other modes of
surface transportation; and for other purposes, as introduced
by Transportation Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackson
Lee on January 7, 2011.
H.R. 685, the ``Checkpoint Images Protection Act
of 2011,'' as introduced by Transportation Security
Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackson Lee and four non-Committee
Members on February 14, 2011.
H.R. 770, the ``Border Enforcement Security Task
Force Act of 2011,'' as introduced by Border and Maritime
Security Ranking Member Henry Cuellar (D-TX) on February 17,
2011.
H.R. 915, the ``Jaime Zapata Border Enforcement
Security Task Force Act,'' as introduced by Border and Maritime
Security Ranking Member Cuellar on March 3, 2011.
H.R. 1007, the ``Fair, Accurate, Secure, and
Timely Redress Act of 2011,'' as introduced by CIPST Ranking
Member Yvette D. Clarke (D-NY) on March 10, 2011. Identical
legislation, H.R. 559, as introduced by Rep. Clarke, was
approved by the House on February 3, 2009 by a vote of 413 to
3.
H.R. 1128, the ``Elementary and Secondary School
Emergency Preparedness Planning Act,'' as introduced by EPRC
Ranking Member Laura Richardson (D-CA), Transportation Security
Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackson Lee and six non-Committee
Members on March 16, 2011.
H.R. 1129, the ``Homeland Security Grant
Management Improvement Act,'' as introduced by EPRC Ranking
Member Richardson and two non-Committee Members on March 16,
2011. Last Congress, identical legislation, H.R. 5562, was
favorably reported to the House on November 30, 2010.
H.R. 1165, the ``Transportation Security
Administration Ombudsman Act of 2011'' as introduced by
Transportation Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackson
Lee, Committee Ranking Member Thompson, Counterterrorism and
Intelligence Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackie Speier (D-CA),
and Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-IL) on March 17, 2011.
H.R. 1447, the ``Aviation Security Stakeholder
Participation Act of 2011,'' as introduced by Committee Ranking
Member Thompson and Transportation Security Subcommittee
Ranking Member Jackson Lee on April 8, 2011. Last Congress,
H.R. 2200, the ``Transportation Security Administration
Authorization Act,'' as approved by the House on June 4, 2009
by a vote of 397 to 25, contained this measure.
H. Res. 240, Commending President Barack Obama and
the men and women of the military and intelligence agencies for
the successful completion of the operation that led to the
death of Osama bin Laden, as introduced by Transportation
Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackson Lee, Border and
Maritime Security Ranking Member Cuellar, Oversight,
Management, and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Michael T.
McCaul (R-TX), EPRC Ranking Member Richardson, and Rep. Cedric
Richmond (D-LA) and 35 non-Committee Members on May 3, 2011.
H.R. 1900, the ``Surface Transportation and Mass
Transit Security Act of 2011, as introduced by Transportation
Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackson Lee, Committee
Ranking Member Thompson, Cybersecurity, Infrastructure
Protection, and Security Technologies Subcommittee Ranking
Member Yvette D. Clarke (D-NY), and Rep. Danny K. Davis on May
13, 2011. Last Congress, major sections of this measure were
approved by the House on June 4, 2009, with the approval of
H.R. 2200, the ``Transportation Security Administration
Authorization Act,'' by a vote of 397 to 25.
H.R. 2265, to direct the President to forgo
recoupment of liabilities relating to assistance provided under
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act, and for other purposes, as introduced by Rep. Cedric L.
Richmond and Committee Ranking Member Thompson on June 21,
2011.
Taken together, these twenty measures reflect the view of
Committee Democrats that the risks to the homeland are multi-
faceted. Additionally, they are the product of the Committee's
extensive oversight into the activities of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS). In particular, the two measures that
were marked up in Subcommittee, H.R. 915, the ``Jaime Zapata
Border Enforcement Security Task Force Act,'' and H.R. 1165,
the ``Transportation Security Administration Ombudsman Act of
2011,'' are the products of that oversight.
H.R. 915, which was named in honor of U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Jaime Zapata, who was
killed in the line of duty, while serving on a Border
Enforcement Security Task Force (BEST) team in a Mexico, on
Feb. 15, 2011, would enhance border security and reduce
security threats by providing authorization for these ICE law
enforcement units on the border. The Committee has done
extensive oversight of the ICE BEST program which was formally
launched in 2006 to bring Federal, state, local, tribal and
foreign law enforcement and intelligence resources together to
identify, disrupt, and dismantle organizations that seek to
exploit vulnerabilities along the U.S. borders and threaten the
overall safety and security of the American public. Enactment
of H.R. 915 would mark the first time this ICE border
enforcement program, where law enforcement collaborate to
investigate, apprehend and prosecute individuals engaged in
drug trafficking, arms smuggling, human smuggling and
trafficking, violence and kidnapping along borders, would be
authorized.
H.R. 1165, the ``Transportation Security Administration
Ombudsman Act of 2011,'' was introduced on March 17, 2011 to
establish an ombudsman office within the Transportation
Security Administration that has the independence, authority,
and accountability to assist TSA's workforce in resolving
employment issues, thereby enhancing the agency's ability to
achieve its security mission. TSA's workforce is on the front
lines of our nation's fight to protect the homeland. As one of
the largest components of the Department, the stability of this
workforce is vital to the security of our nation. Yet, since
its inception, high attrition--nearly 20%--and low morale have
plagued the agency, particularly among Transportation Security
Officers (TSOs), responsible for screening 2 million air
passengers each day.
In May 2008, the DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG)
(OIG-08-62) found that TSA's Ombudsman was not trusted by the
workforce, lacked adequate independence and authority, and
failed to provide useful agency-wide trends analysis. The
subject of the utility of a robust ombudsman operation was
raised on September 23, 2010, in testimony by TSA Administrator
John S. Pistole, appearing before the Subcommittee that handled
transportation security for the first time since his Senate
confirmation. Administrator Pistole acknowledged that TSA has
``workplace issues'' and that ``the Ombudsman at TSA is one of
many avenues through which TSA employees may raise workplace
issues and concerns to see them resolved I also know from my
experience at the FBI that an effective Ombudsman program is a
valuable resource for unfiltered, candid feedback on the state
of the workplace environment, and I am committed to its
advisory role to me and the rest of the TSA leadership team.''
As mentioned above, a number of other homeland security
measures were introduced by Committee Democrats, however,
because jurisdiction over homeland security has not been
consolidated within the Committee on Homeland Security under
the Rules of the House of Representatives, they were referred
to other Committees. However, as the purpose of this semiannual
report is to provide an official record of the activities of
this Committee, Committee Democrats have refrained from listing
measures that were not referred to the Committee in these
Additional Views. The summary for the Full Committee oversight
activities in the underlying report repeatedly discusses three
measures that were not referred to the Committee--H.R. 495,
H.R. 607, and H.R. 703.
No discussion about Committee Democrats contributions to
the legislative activity of the Committee would be complete
without acknowledging Committee Democrats impact on one of the
seven measures acted upon at the Subcommittee level in this
period--H.R. 1690, the ``MODERN Security Credential Act.''
Specifically, a number of provisions proposed by Committee
Democrats were included in the Amendment in the Nature of a
Substitute that Transportation Security Subcommittee Chair Mike
Rogers (R-AL) offered at the May 12th Subcommittee markup of
H.R. 1690. The Rogers' Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute
addressed concerns expressed at the May 4, 2011 legislative
hearing on H.R. 1690 where the Committee heard troubling
testimony about the potential negative impact of the measure,
as introduced, on the airport operators. At that hearing, the
Subcommittee heard from Randall H. Walker, the Director of
Aviation for Las Vegas McCarron International Airport, who
testified at the request of Transportation Security
Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackson Lee, that the legislation
risked driving up operating costs for airport operators and
longstanding local oversight of credentialing for workers
within their airports. In the week between the legislative
hearing and the Subcommittee markup, Transportation Security
Subcommittee Ranking Member Jackson Lee worked with
Subcommittee Chairman Rogers, in a bipartisan manner, to reach
agreement on an Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute that
streamlines Federal credentialing programs while addressing
stakeholder concerns.
H.R. 1690, as amended, requires the establishment of a task
force to comprehensively examine operational impacts and costs
to industry associated with transportation worker credentialing
harmonization. The task force provision replaced previous
language in the bill which granted the Department broad
authority to impose potentially costly credentialing
regulations and processes for transportation workers in
airports and other transportation environments.
Oversight Activities of the Committee
RADICALIZATION
Despite numerous requests from Ranking Member Thompson,
other Members of Congress, and over 150 non-governmental
organizations to broaden the scope of the radicalization
hearings to include testimony on all forms of domestic
extremism, the Majority has chosen to focus solely on
radicalization within the American Muslim Community.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\Thompson, Bennie, ``Homegrown Terrorists are not just Muslims.''
Politico. January 27, 2011. Lukens, Mark, et. al, February 20, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee has held two hearings on the topic of
radicalization within the American Muslim community. On March
10, 2011, the Committee held a hearing entitled ``The Extent of
Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and That
Community's Response'', and on June 15, 2011, the Committee
held the second hearing entitled ``The Threat of Muslim-
American Radicalization in U.S. Prisons.''
Unfortunately, the narrow focus of each hearing has lead to
them being widely criticized as ``Un-American, divisive,
demonizing, and McCarthy-like.''\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Packman, David. The David Packman Show; Opinion, The Times
Tribune, February 25, 2011 available at http://im-tribune.com/opinion/
hearing-itself-radicalized-1.1109529#axzzlEvyl9tnI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contrary to the testimony heard during these hearings, the
objective evidence appears to show that the Muslim community
has been helpful in preventing or thwarting terrorist attacks
and countering the lure of radicalization. United States
Attorney General Eric Holder stated that the cooperation of
Muslim and Arab-American communities has been absolutely
``essential in identifying, and preventing terrorist
threats.''\4\ On February 9, 2011, Michael Leiter, Director of
the National Counterterrorism Center, testifying before the
Committee, stated, ``many of our tips to uncover active
terrorist plots in the United States have come from the Muslim
community. So we have to make quite clear that the communities
are part of the solution and not part of the problem.''\5\
Further, some statistics show that Muslim communities have
stepped forward to help prevent 1 out of 3 Al-Qaeda related
terror plots since September 11, 2001.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\Holder, Eric. Remarks at the Muslim Advocates Annual Dinner.
December 10, 2010. Available at http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/
speeches/2010/ag-speech-1012101.html.
\5\United States Congress. Committee on Homeland Security.
``Understanding the Homeland Threat Landscape--Considerations for the
112th Congress.'' February 9, 2011.
\6\Butel, Alejandro, Policy Report, ``Data on Post 9/11 Terrorism
in the United States,'' Muslim Public Affairs Council, at 3, (updated
Jan. 2011) available at http://www.mpac.org/assets/docs/publications/
MPAC-Post-911-Terrorism-Data.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Attorney General Holder ``the [terrorist]
threat has changed from simply worrying about foreigners coming
here, to worrying about people in the United States, American
citizens--raised here, born here, and who for whatever reason,
have decided that they are going to become radicalized and take
up arms against the nation in which they were born.''\7\
Domestic terrorism threats include animal rights extremists,
eco-terrorists, anarchists, anti-government extremists, black
separatists, white supremacists, anti-abortion extremists, as
well as Islamic extremists.\8\ According to a recent report by
the Muslim Public Affairs Council, there were 77 total
terrorist plots by U.S.-originated non-Muslim perpetrators
against the United States since 9/11.\9\ In comparison, there
have been 44 total terrorist plots by U.S. and foreign-
originated Muslim perpetrators since 9/11.\10\ Recent examples
of non-Muslim terrorist plots include the sophisticated
explosive device found at the site of a Martin Luther King Day
Parade in Spokane, Washington, which was likely the work of
white supremacists.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\Interview, Good Morning America. ABC News. December 21, 2010.
\8\See also Federal Bureau of Investigation, ``Domestic Terrorism
in the Post-9/11 Era,'' September 7, 2009, http://www.fbi.gov/news/
stories/2009/september/domterror_090709.
\9\Butel, Alejandro, Policy Report, ``Data on Post 9/11 Terrorism
in the United States,'' Muslim Public Affairs Council, updated Jan.
2011, available at http://www.mpac.org/assets/docs/publications/MPAC-
Post-911-Terrorism_Data.pdf.
\10\Id.
\11\See http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/
2014398518_apwamlkparadeexplosivelstldwritethru.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A review of successfully executed terrorist attacks in
America since 9/11 indicates that non-Muslim plots are more
likely to reach the implementation stage than Muslim extremist
plots. For instance, using publicly available U.S. government
sources, the Congressional Research Service reports that non-
jihadist successful attacks outnumber jihadist attacks 30 to 3
since 9/11.\12\ Additionally, a study conducted by the
Institute for Homeland Security Solutions, found that only 40
out of the 86 terrorist cases examined from 1999 to 2009 had
links to Al Qaeda.\13\ Further, the RAND Corporation reports
that between September 11, 2001 and the end of 2009, a total of
46 cases of domestic radicalization and recruitment to jihadist
terrorism were reported in the United States.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\Jerome P. Bjelopera, Congressional Research Service,
Memorandum, Counting Terrorist Plots and Attacks Targeting the Homeland
(Mar. 1, 2011).
\13\Institute for Homeland Security Solutions, Building on Clues:
Examining Successes and Failures in Detecting U.S. Terrorist Plots,
1999-2009 (Oct. 2010).
\14\Brian Michael Jenkins, Rand Corp., Would be Warriors, at 4
(2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Placed in context, of the approximately 3 million Muslims
in the U.S., it appears that approximately 100 have joined
terrorist attacks--suggesting an American Muslim population
that is not interested in jihadist ideology.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\Brian Michael Jenkins, Rand Corp., Would be Warriors, at vii
(2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given that the experts overwhelmingly agree that the
violent terrorist threat from Muslim extremists within the
United States is miniscule, the focus of the Committee's
examination of violent extremists within this population is
misplaced.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), in
2010, the number of hate groups topped 1,000, making the count
the highest on record since the (SPLC) began maintaining its
database in the 1980s.\16\ The most dramatic growth in the
radical right came in the antigovernment ``Patriot''
movement.\17\ One of these members of the Patriot movement, the
Hutaree Militia 9, a homegrown militia, was charged last March
with conspiracy to kill law enforcement officers in
Michigan.\18\ Conspiracy-minded organizations, such as the
Hutaree Militia 9 and other members of the Patriot movement see
the Federal government as their primary enemy and grew by 61
percent over the previous year.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\Potok, Mark. ``The Year in Hate & Extremism, 2010'' Southern
Poverty Law Center. Spring 2011, available at http://www.splcenter.org/
get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/20 11/spring/the-
year-in-hate-extremism-20 10.
\17\Id.
\18\Butel at 15.
\19\Potok, ``The Year in Hate & Extremism, 2010''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to terrorist actions undertaken by
ideologically motivated groups, the threat of acts intended to
instill fear and undermine legitimate authority may be
undertaken by individuals. Acting alone, these so called
``lone-wolf'' extremists may pose a danger. It should be noted
that formal affiliation with a group is not a necessary
predicate to radicalization, nor is it a necessary predicate to
training, obtaining resources, or otherwise supporting an
operational capability. Before the Department of Homeland
Security's ``Rightwing Extremism'' report (issued in April
2009), was taken offline, the Department reported ``lone wolves
and small terrorist cells embracing rightwing extremist
ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in
the United States.''\20\ These findings were supported by a
recent Institute for Homeland Security Solutions report that
noted that lone wolf plots have been the most successful,
reaching execution more than twice as often as plots by
groups.\21\ In April 2010, FBI Director Robert Mueller
testified before a Senate Commerce Subcommittee that homegrown
extremists and lone wolf activity are as serious a threat to
the homeland as al Qaeda and its affiliates.\22\ Sadly, these
statements by top officials in the counterintelligence
community have been substantiated by the shooting of Rep.
Giffords in Arizona, the foiled attempt to bomb a mosque in
Dearborn, Michigan, and the Holocaust Museum shooting by James
W. Von Brunn, a white supremacist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\Department of Homeland Security, Office of Intelligence and
Analysis, ``Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate
Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.'' April 19, 2009,
p. 7.
\21\Institute for Homeland Security Solutions, Building on Clues:
Examining Successes and Failures in Detecting U.S. Terrorist Plots,
1999-2009 (Oct. 2010).
\22\U.S. Congress. Senate Committee on Appropriations. Subcommittee
on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies. ``Hearing on FY
2011 FBI Budget.'' April 15, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately, the failure to accurately assess and address
the threat is not merely an issue of philosophical debate. Such
a failure could yield dangerous consequences to national
security interests, at home and abroad.
By examining violent extremism through the lens of one
particular ethnicity or religion, the Majority ignores other
potentially dangerous homeland security threats posed by
domestic extremists. Because domestic extremism--in all forms--
is a serious threat to the United States, combating the
terrorist threat depends on accurate intelligence, a cogent
assessment of the extent of the threat, and a thoughtful
determination of actions necessary to mitigate and engage the
threat. Unreliable information, hyperbolic statements, and
narrowly focused assessments of the nature and extent of the
threat will not further the goal of reducing or eliminating the
possibility of future attacks.
OVERSIGHT OF WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE
One of the Committee's primary responsibilities is to
ensure that American taxpayer dollars are spent wisely by
eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. The Committee believes
that conducting effective oversight ensures that American
taxpayer dollars are tracked and are being spent wisely. As a
result, the Committee should make it a priority to identify
high-risk programs and ensure transparency within the
Department.
Unfortunately, the Committee Majority has failed to
actively engage in diligent and on-going oversight of the basic
management and administrative functions of the Department.
Thus, the systems used in the day-to-day operations of this $60
billion Department, including acquisitions, financial
management, human resources, and information technology, have
gone unexamined and virtually unnoticed by the Majority.
While the staff of the Subcommittee on Oversight,
Investigations, and Management held informal meetings on the
Department's Transformation and Systems Consolidation (TASC)
solicitation, neither the Subcommittee nor the Full Committee
has held hearings on this troubled multi-million dollar
procurement cancelled by the Department. The failure to subject
this procurement to critical public examination will hamper the
American taxpayer's ability to determine whether waste, fraud
or abuse occurred during the two-year period of the now-
cancelled TASC solicitation.
The Majority concludes its discussion of oversight by
pointing to approximately five letters sent during a five-month
period--each on a different topic. Unfortunately, neither
outcomes nor savings were listed. Therefore, the letters
provide an indication of the occurrence of oversight; however,
the Majority's report provides no indication of the
effectiveness of its oversight efforts.
Subcommittee on Transportation Security
Since January, Majority staff has held many briefings with
non-governmental entities. However, in most cases, the Minority
was neither invited nor informed. This section of the report
reflects only those activities that were either officially
noticed or open to bipartisan participation.
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
THREATS TO AVIATION AND SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
The Subcommittee conducted oversight activities to assess
the threats to aviation and surface transportation. Committee
staff met with a wide range of representatives from the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the
transportation industry, and other stakeholders to examine
information sharing, coordination among Federal, State, and
local partners, and other security matters. Recent intelligence
collected from bin Laden's compound further emphasizes the
threat to both our aviation and surface transportation systems.
Subcommittee Members and staff have met with various
stakeholders regarding aviation and surface transportation
security, including the TSA Administrator, the Department of
Homeland Security, the Government Accountability Office (GAO),
as well as multiple industry associations and corporations to
discuss particular issues related to transportation security.
On February 10, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Terrorism and Transportation Security.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Hon. John S. Pistole,
Administrator, Transportation Security Administration,
Department of Homeland Security. The purpose of this hearing
was to examine the TSA's progress in developing meaningful
security measures, discuss the future of the agency as a nimble
counterterrorism organization, and identify areas for
operational improvements and cost savings in order to
strengthen TSA's effectiveness and efficiency at preventing
terrorism and protecting the traveling public.
On February 16, 2011, the Subcommittee held a classified
Member briefing on current threats to the Nation's aviation and
surface transportation security. Representatives from the
Transportation Security Administration were present to respond
to Member questions.
These activities are in furtherance of the Oversight Plan.
However, it is unclear whether cost savings have resulted.
AIR COMMERCE
On August 1, 2010, the Department of Homeland Security met
the mandate in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11
Commission Act (Pub. L. 110-53) to screen 100 percent of air
cargo transported on domestic passenger aircraft flights and
flights departing the United States. The Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) is not currently able to screen
100 percent of all inbound cargo on international passenger
flights but recently estimated it would meet the mandate by
December 2011. TSA is working with foreign nations to increase
air cargo security standards on passenger aircraft in an effort
to achieve the requirement of 100 percent of in-bound cargo
more expeditiously.
On March 9, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Securing Air Commerce From the Threat of Terrorism.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. John Sammon, Assistant
Administrator, Transportation Sector Network Management,
Transportation Security Administration, Department of Homeland
Security; and Mr. Stephen Lord, Director, Homeland Security &
Justice Issues, Government Accountability Office. The purpose
of this hearing was to examine on-going challenges for securing
inbound cargo on international passenger flights to the United
States; TSA's efforts to develop screening measures in
collaboration with industry and foreign partners; and the
technology available to conduct those screening measures.
These activities are in furtherance of the Oversight Plan.
However, it is unclear whether cost savings have resulted.
TRANSPORTATION WORKER IDENTIFICATION CREDENTIAL
The Subcommittee has conducted oversight of TSA on
transportation security credentialing programs, including the
Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) in order
to eliminate inefficiencies and redundancies within the threat
assessment process and reduce costs 11 for card applicants. In
addition to providing oversight of TSA, Committee staff met
with multiple private sector stakeholders representing
different modes of transportation.
On April 6, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member briefing
on the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC)
Program. Representatives from the Transportation Security
Administration and the United States Coast Guard were present
to respond to Member questions.
These activities are in furtherance of the Oversight Plan.
However, it is unclear whether cost savings have resulted.
AVIATION SECURITY
The Subcommittee has continued to examine passenger and
baggage screening technology and procedures, international
cooperation issues, and Transportation Security
Administration's (TSA) security programs in order to identify
where progress has been made, and where shortfalls remain in
strengthening aviation security.
On April 7, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Strengthening International Cooperation on Aviation
Security.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. John
W. Halinski, Assistant Administrator, Office of Global
Strategies, Transportation Security Administration; Mr. Filip
Cornelis, Head of Unit for Aviation Security, Directorate
General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission; Mr.
Rafi Ron, President, New Age Security Solutions; and Mr. Jim
Marriott, Chief, Aviation Security Branch, International Civil
Aviation Organization. This hearing examined international
standards that are designed to ensure the security of both
passenger and all cargo aircraft; how the United States works
with its foreign partners to ensure screening equipment is up-
to-date and adequate for the volume and type of passengers,
baggage, and cargo it needs to screen; the success of the
foreign airport assessments program; and how TSA shares
information on security technology, passenger name record data,
and other vital security protocols with foreign partners.
On June 14, 2011 the Subcommittee received a Members
briefing on the TSA Screening of Passengers by Observation
Techniques (SPOT) program. Members were briefed by
representatives from the Transportation Security
Administration.
These activities are in furtherance of the Oversight Plan.
However, it is unclear whether cost savings have resulted.
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION AUTHORIZATION
On May 25, 2011 the Subcommittee received a Member briefing
on the Transportation Security Administration's authorization
for fiscal years 2012 and 2013. Members were briefed by
representatives from the Transportation Security
Administration.
On June 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Authorizing the Transportation Security Administration for
Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Hon. John S. Pistole.
Subcommittee staff has met with various industry
stakeholders from the surface and aviation transportation
industries to solicit their input for the Transportation
Security Administration Authorization bill for fiscal years
2012 and 2013.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Terrorism and Transportation Security.'' February 10, 2011.
(Serial No. 112-2)
``Securing Air Commerce From the Threat of Terrorism.'' March
9, 2011. (Serial No. 112-8)
``Strengthening International Cooperation on Aviation
Security.'' April 7, 2011. (Serial No. 112-17)
``H.R. 1690, the MODERN Security Credentials Act.'' May 4,
2011. (Serial No. 112-23)
``Authorizing the Transportation Security Administration for
Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013.'' June 2, 2011.
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications
Since January, Majority staff has held many briefings with
non-governmental entities. However, in most cases, the Minority
was neither invited nor informed. This section of the report
reflects only those activities that were either officially
noticed or open to bipartisan participation.
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE AND RECOVERY
Since the beginning of the 112th Congress, States and
localities have experienced thwarted terror plots, severe
winter storms, tornados, a tsunami, and widespread flooding. It
is imperative that the Federal Government, along with its
partners at the State and local levels and the private sector,
works to prepare for and respond to terrorist attacks, natural
disasters, and other emergencies.
On February 8, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member site
visit to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)
National Response Coordination Center in Washington, DC. This
visit provided Subcommittee Members with an overview of FEMA's
mission and operations and efforts to work with its State,
local, and private sector partners. Members met with officials
from throughout the agency including the Administrator and
Deputy Administrator of FEMA. Following the briefing, Members
toured the National Response Coordination Center.
On May 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member site visit
to the American Red Cross' disaster operations center. The
visit provided information on the Red Cross' role in disaster
response and services it provides through its local chapters.
ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND FIRST RESPONDERS
On June 10, 2011, the Subcommittee held a field hearing in
Clearwater, Florida entitled ``Weathering the Storm: A State
and Local Perspective on Emergency Management.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Bryan Koon, Director,
Florida Division of Emergency Management; Ms. Nancy Dragani,
Director, Ohio Emergency Management Agency (testifying on
behalf of the National Emergency Management Association); Mr.
Gerald Smith, Director, Lake County Division of Emergency
Management (testifying on behalf of the Florida Emergency
Preparedness Association); Mr. John ``Rusty'' Russell,
Director, Huntsville--Madison County (AL) Emergency Management
Agency (testifying on behalf of the International Association
of Emergency Managers); Ms. Chauncia Willis, Emergency
Coordinator, City of Tampa, Florida; and Ms. Linda Carbone,
Chief Executive Officer, Tampa Bay Chapter, American Red Cross.
The purpose of this hearing was to receive testimony
regarding the State and local perspective on emergency
management, including successes, challenges, and innovations.
Additionally, the hearing provided an opportunity for State and
local officials to discuss the Federal Emergency Management
Agency's progress in implementing the Post-Katrina Emergency
Management Reform Act of 2006.
This field hearing furthered the intention expressed in the
Oversight Plan to examine the impact of the Departments grant
programs upon the efforts of state and local agencies to
improve all- hazards preparedness. This hearing did not reveal
cost-savings to the Federal government.
MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
The President's fiscal year 2012 budget request includes
$10.06 billion for FEMA, a $283 million reduction from the
level in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 Continuing Resolution. The
request included reductions in the Management and
Administration account, which were largely attributed to
efficiencies and streamlined business processes. The request
also proposed to restructure homeland security grant programs
through the elimination and consolidation of a number of
smaller grant programs into the large State Homeland Security
Grant Program and Urban Area Security Initiative funding
accounts.
On March 9, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Ensuring Effective Preparedness and Response--An Assessment
of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Budget Request for the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Hon. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, and Department of Homeland
Security.
The purpose of this hearing was to receive testimony on
FEMA's budget priorities, as expressed in the President's
Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Budget Request submitted to Congress on
February 14, 2011. Under the President's $43.22 billion budget
request for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) would receive $6.79
billion in FY 2012, a decrease of $323.32 million in total
budget authority from the amount anticipated under the FY 2011
Continuing Resolution (CR) budget.
On April 15, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman Bilirakis, Ranking
Member Thompson, and Senators Lieberman, Collins, and Akaka
sent a letter to the Comptroller General requesting that the
Government Accountability Office conduct a review of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) workforce planning
and management efforts.
MEDICAL PREPAREDNESS
The mission of the Office of Health Affairs (OHA) is to
provide health and medical expertise in support of the
Department of Homeland Security's mission to prepare for,
respond to, and recover from all hazards impacting the Nation's
health security.
On March 17, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Ensuring Effective Preparedness, Response, and Recovery for
Events Impacting Health Security.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Dr. Alexander G. Garza, MD, MPH, Assistant
Secretary for Health Affairs, Chief Medical Officer, Department
of Homeland Security.
The purpose of this hearing was to provide Subcommittee
Members with an opportunity to examine the President's fiscal
year 2012 budget request for OHA and OHA's progress in
developing its mission to provide for health security, to
discuss the future of the agency as a nimble and effective
provider in this regard, and to identify areas for improvements
and cost savings. During the hearing, Subcommittee Members
expressed concern about Project BioWatch.
This hearing allowed the Subcommittee to further its
oversight in accordance with its Oversight Plan for the 112th
Congress through the examination of the significant challenges
posed by chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN)
weapons to homeland security. Although the hearing allowed for
the examination of the FY 2012 Budget Request for OHA, it did
not reveal any obvious cost savings to the Federal government.
Following the hearing, on April 5, 2011, the Subcommittee
Chair Bilirakis and Ranking Member Richardson joined
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and
Security Technologies Chairman Lungren and Ranking Member
Clarke in sending a letter to the Secretary of Homeland
Security expressing concern about the Department of Homeland
Security's Project BioWatch acquisition processes.
As a result of information obtained during the
Subcommittees hearing, on April 7, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman
Bilirakis and Ranking Member Richardson introduced H.R. 1411,
the ``Metropolitan Medical Response System Program Act,'' which
would authorize the activities of the Metropolitan Medical
Response System, including medical surge capacity and
countermeasures distribution.
EXERCISES AND SIMULATIONS
The Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
(PKEMRA) requires the FEMA Administrator to carry out a
national training and exercise program that should be as
realistic as practicable, stress State, local, and tribal
emergency response capacity, and provide a systemic evaluation
of readiness.\23\ As one component of this national exercise
program, PKEMRA further requires the Administrator to perform
periodic national level exercises that ``evaluate the
capability of Federal, state, local and tribal governments to
detect, disrupt, and prevent threatened or actual catastrophic
acts of terrorism, especially those involving weapons of mass
destruction.''\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\P.L. 109-295, sec. 648(b)(2), 6 U.S.C. 748.
\24\P.L. 109-295, sec. 648(b)(3), 6 U.S.C. 748.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 1, 2011, the Subcommittee held a Member briefing
on preparations for National Level Exercise (NLE) 2011. NLE
2011 was designed to prepare and coordinate a multiple-
jurisdictional integrated response to a national catastrophic
event. Members were briefed by FEMA's Deputy Administrator for
National Preparedness and the Director of the National Exercise
Program.
This briefing furthered the Oversight Plan for the 112th
Congress by allowing Members the opportunity to discuss plans
to implement new policy affecting PPD-8. This hearing did not
identify any instances or waste, fraud or abuse or identify any
cost savings to the Federal government.
PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE TO CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL, AND
NUCLEAR THREATS
At a 2010 Committee on Homeland Security hearing with the
Commissioners of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of
Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism (WMD Commission),
the Commissioners noted that ``it is more likely than not that
there will be a weapon of mass destruction used someplace on
earth by a terrorist group before the end of the year 2013 and
that it is more likely that the weapons will be biological
rather than nuclear.'' In the WMD Commission's report card on
U.S. Government efforts to protect the Nation from WMD
terrorism, the Federal government received a grade of ``F'' on
its efforts to enhance the Nation's capabilities for rapid
response to prevent biological attacks from inflicting mass
casualties.
On April 13, 2011, the Subcommittee began a series of
hearings entitled ``Taking Measure of Countermeasures.'' At the
first hearing, entitled ``A Review of Government and Industry
Efforts to Protect the Homeland Through Accelerated Research,
Development, and Acquisition of Chemical, Biological,
Radiological, and Nuclear Medical Countermeasures, `` the
Subcommittee received testimony from Ms. Cynthia Bascetta,
Managing Director, Health Care, Government Accountability
Office; Dr. Segaran P. Pillai, Chief Medical and Science
Advisor, Chemical and Biological Division, Science and
Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; Dr.
Richard J. Hatchett, Chief Medical Officer and Deputy Director,
Strategic Sciences and Management, Department of Health and
Human Services; Dr. Gerald W. Parker, Deputy Assistant to the
Secretary of Defense, Chemical and Biological Defense,
Department of Defense; Ms. Phyllis Arthur, Senior Director,
Vaccines, Immunotherapeutics, and Diagnostics Policy,
Biotechnology Industry Organization; Mr. John M. Clerici,
Principal, Tiber Creek Partners LLC; and Dr. Daniel Fagbuyi,
Medical Director, Disaster Preparedness and Emergency
Management, Children's National Medical Center.
The purpose of this hearing was to receive testimony from
governmental and industry witnesses regarding efforts to
identify and develop medical countermeasures (MCMs) in response
to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRNE)
threats. Members had the opportunity to question witnesses
about the level of cross-departmental/agency coordination, the
pharmaceutical industry's participation in MCM research and
development (R&D), and efforts to address impediments to MCM
development.
This hearing furthered the Oversight Plan for the 112th
Congress, by allowing Members the opportunity to more closely
examine the nation's level of preparedness to respond to a
chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRNE) event
affecting the general population. It did not uncover any
instances of waste, fraud or abuse or identify any cost
savings.
On May 12, 2011, the Subcommittee convened a hearing,
entitled ``A Review of Efforts to Protect the Homeland Through
Distribution and Dispensing of CBRN Medical Countermeasures.''
The Subcommittee received testimony from Dr. Alexander Garza,
Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs and Chief Medical
Officer, Office of Health Affairs, Department of Homeland
Security; Rear Admiral Ali Khan, Director, Office of Public
Health Preparedness and Response, Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services; Mr.
Mike McHargue, Director of E mergency Operations, Division of
Emergency Medical Operations; Florida Department of Health; Mr.
David Starr, Director, Countermeasures Response Unit; New York
City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; Chief Lawrence E.
Tan, Emergency Medical Services Division, New Castle County,
Delaware, and Dr. Jeffrey Levi, Executive Director, Trust for
America's Health.
The purpose of this hearing was to receive testimony
regarding coordination between Federal, State, local, and
private preparedness stakeholders for the distribution and
dispensing of medical countermeasures\25\ (MCMs) to the
American public in the event of a public health emergency.
Members had the opportunity to question officials about
management and distribution processes of the Strategic National
Stockpile (SNS), funding, coordination efforts, challenges, and
lessons learned from the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. This hearing
furthered the Oversight Plan for the 112th Congress by
providing Members a chance to discuss the challenges of the
distribution and dispensing of medical countermeasures
following a CBRNE attack. It did not uncover any waste of
federal funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\MCMS refers to diagnostic tests, drugs, vaccines, and other
treatments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 13, 2011, the Subcommittee in conjunction with the
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, and the
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and
Security Technologies, held a classified Member briefing on the
threat posed by WMD terrorism. Members were briefed by
representatives of the National Counterterrorism Center and the
National Counter-proliferation Center.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Ensuring Effective Preparedness and Response: An Assessment
of the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request for the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.'' March 9, 2011. (Serial
No. 112-7)
``Ensuring Effective Preparedness, Response, and Recovery for
Events Impacting Health Security.'' March 17, 2011.
(Serial No. 112-12)
``Taking Measure of Countermeasures: A Review of Government and
Industry Efforts To Protect the Homeland Through
Accelerated Research, Development, and Acquisition of
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Medical
Countermeasures.'' April 13, 2011. (Serial No. 112-18)
``Taking Measure of Countermeasures: A Review of Efforts to
Protect the Homeland Through Distribution and
Dispensing of CBRN Medical Countermeasures.'' May 12,
2011. (Serial No. 112-18)
Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security
Since January, Majority staff has held many briefings with
non-governmental entities. However, in most cases, the Minority
was neither invited nor informed. This section of the report
reflects only those activities that were either officially
noticed or open to bipartisan participation.
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
BORDER SECURITY BETWEEN THE PORTS OF ENTRY
On February 15, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Securing Our Borders Operational Control and the
Path Forward.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr.
Michael J. Fisher, Chief, Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Richard
M. Stana, Director, Homeland Security and Justice, Government
Accountability Office; and Hon. Raul G. Salinas, Mayor, City of
Laredo, Texas. The purpose of the hearing was to examine DHS'
efforts to gain and maintain operational control of the border.
On March 15, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Strengthening the Border-Finding the Right Mix of Personnel,
Infrastructure and Technology.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Mr. Michael J. Fisher, Chief of the Border
Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of
Homeland Security; Mr. Mark Borkowski, Assistant Commissioner,
Office of Technology Innovation and Acquisition, U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security; Mr.
Michael C. Kostelnik, (Maj. Gen. Ret.), Assistant Commissioner,
Office of CBP Air & Marine, U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
Department of Homeland Security; Major General Hugo E. Salazar,
Adjutant General, Arizona National Guard; and Mr. Richard M.
Stana, Director, Homeland Security and Justice, Government
Accountability Office. The purpose of the hearing was to
receive testimony about CBP's use of personnel, technology, and
infrastructure to gain and maintain operational control of the
Nation's borders.
On April 1, 2011, the Majority Members of the Subcommittee
sent a letter to the President of the United States requesting
an extension of the current National Guard deployment at the
Southwest border, past the June 30, 2011 deadline. The letter
further requested that the National Guard not be limited to
assisting civilian law enforcement, but to function to the full
extent allowed under Title 32, Section 502(f) duty status.
On May 3, 2011, hearing entitled ``Border Security and
Enforcement--Department of Homeland Security's Cooperation with
State and Local Law Enforcement Stakeholders.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Kumar Kibble, Deputy
Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department
of Homeland Security; Mr. Ronald Vitiello, Deputy Chief, U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security;
Sheriff Larry Dever, Cochise County Sheriffs Office, Arizona;
Sheriff Todd Entrekin, Etowah County Sheriffs Office, Alabama;
and Mr. Gomecindo Lopez, Commander, Special Operations Bureau,
El Paso County Sheriffs Office, Texas. The purpose of the
hearing was to examine the relationship between DHS and state
and local law enforcement agencies on matters of border
security and immigration enforcement. Members questioned the
witnesses regarding relevant border security and immigration
enforcement programs, explored the appropriate roles for
Federal, State, and local agencies, and discussed potential
areas for improving cooperation and coordination.
The above hearings furthered the Committee oversight plan
by examining policies and resources necessary for DHS to gain
operational control over the borders of the United States, and
to include staffing, technology, infrastructure, and improved
coordination. The Committee's oversight in this matter has not
resulted in savings to the Federal government.
SECURITY AT THE PORTS OF ENTRY
On April 5, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Using Resources Effectively to Secure Our Border at Ports of
Entry--Stopping the Illicit Flow of Money, Guns, and Drugs.''
The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Thomas Winkowski,
Assistant Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Stan Korosec, Vice
President, Operations, Blue Water Bridge Canada; Mr. Timothy J.
Koerner, Vice President & Chief Security Officer; and Hon.
Richard F. Cortez, Mayor, City of McAllen, Texas. The purpose
of the hearing was to examine DHS' efforts to identify and
interdict security threats at U.S. ports of entry (POEs), and
particularly land border POEs. Members had the opportunity to
question witnesses about staffing, technology, and
infrastructure as well as DHS' security and facilitation
programs at POEs.
On June 1, 2011, Chairmen King and Miller and Ranking
Members Thompson and Cuellar sent a letter to CBP Commissioner
Alan Bersin requesting staffing information for CBP personnel
at ports of entry.
These activities furthered the Committee oversight plan by
examining policies and resources necessary for DHS to gain
operational control over the borders of the United States,
including staffing, technology, infrastructure, and improved
coordination. The Committee's oversight in this matter has not
resulted in savings to the Federal government.
PORT AND MARITIME SECURITY
The United States Coast Guard (USCG) plays a vital role
within the Department of Homeland Security. The USCG safeguards
U.S. ports, waterways, and coastal waters; interdicts illegal
drug smuggling; performs search and rescue operations; inspects
and ensures safety for all maritime vessels entering the United
States; and aids in law enforcement on the water, all while
maintaining a state of defensive readiness. Following September
11, 2001, the USCG greatly increased its maritime security
operations, including its focus on Ports and Waterways Coastal
Security (PWCS) and defense readiness missions.
On April 13, 2011, the Subcommittee conducted a site visit
to USCG Headquarters in Washington, DC. Subcommittee Members
met with the Commandant of the Coast Guard and examined
security-related issues.
On June 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
``Securing the Nation's Ports and Maritime Border--A Review of
the Coast Guard Post 9/11 Homeland Security Missions.'' The
Subcommittee received testimony from Admiral Papp, Commandant
of the USCG. The purpose of the hearing was to receive
testimony on the USCG's efforts to identify and address
maritime security threats within U.S. ports, waterways, and
coastal waters, including issues related to training,
technology, programs, and the future of the USCG's homeland
security missions.
These activities furthered the Committee oversight plan by
examining the Coast Guard's homeland security missions to
include ports, waterways, and coastal security; drug
interdiction; migrant interdiction; law enforcement; and
defense readiness. The Committee's oversight in this matter has
not resulted in savings to the Federal government.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Securing Our Borders--Operational Control and the Path
Forward.'' February 15, 2011. (Serial No. 111-4)
``Strengthening the Border--Finding the Right Mix of Personnel,
Infrastructure, and Technology.'' March 15, 2011.
(Serial No. 112-10)
``Using Resources Effectively to Secure Our Border at Ports of
Entry--Stopping the Illicit Flow of Money, Guns, and
Drugs.'' April 15, 2011. (Serial No. 112-15)
``Border Security and Enforcement--Department of Homeland
Security's Cooperation with State and Local Law
Enforcement Stakeholders.'' May 3, 2011. (Serial No.
112-20)
``Securing the Nation's Ports and Maritime Border--A Review of
the Coast Guard Post 9/11 Homeland Security Mission.''
June 14, 2011 (Serial No.--)
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Management
Since January, Majority staff has held many briefings with
non-governmental entities. However, in most cases, the Minority
was neither invited nor informed. This section of the report
reflects only those activities that were either officially
noticed or open to bipartisan participation.
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
WAR AGAINST MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS
The Subcommittee examined the role the Department of
Homeland Security is playing to address Mexican drug-related
violence at and near the border.
On March 31, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The U.S. Homeland Security Role in the Mexican War Against
Drug Cartels.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr.
Luis Alvarez, Assistant Director, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Brian
Nichols, Deputy Assistant Secretary, International Narcotics
and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State; Mr.
Frank Mora, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Western
Hemisphere Affairs, Department of Defense; Dr. Kristin Finklea,
Analyst, Domestic Social Policy Division, Congressional
Research Service; Mr. Jon Adler, President, Federal Law
Enforcement Officers Association; Dr. David Shirk, Director,
Trans-Border Institute, University of San Diego; Mr. John
Bailey, Professor, Government and Foreign Service, Georgetown
University; and Dr. Ricardo C. Ainslie, Department of
Educational Psychology, College of Education, The University of
Texas at Austin. The Subcommittee's Oversight Plan for the
112th Congress (Oversight Plan) does not address the
examination of Mexican Drug-Related Organizations or the
security of the Southwestern Border. As a result, this hearing
does not comport with the Subcommittee's Oversight Plan or
Clause 2(d)(F) of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
which require the Committee to identify potential opportunities
to eliminate duplicative or unnecessary programs, find
efficiencies that will contribute to the Department's ability
to meet its vital missions, and identify areas for cost
savings.
During a speech given March 24, 2011, the Secretary of
Homeland Security stated: ``the border is better now than it
ever has been.'' However, on May 11, 2011, the Subcommittee
held a follow-up hearing entitled ``On the Border and in the
Line of Fire: U.S. Law Enforcement, Homeland Security, and Drug
Cartel Violence,'' to examine current border security efforts
and reports of spillover violence. The Subcommittee received
testimony from Mr. Grayling Williams, Director, Office of
Counternarcotics Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security;
Ms. Amy Pope, Deputy Chief of Staff & Counselor, Criminal
Division, Office of Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department
of Justice; Mr. Steven C. McCraw, Director, Texas Department of
Public Safety; Hon. Thomas C. Horne, Attorney General, State of
Arizona; Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez, Zapata County, State of
Texas; and Chief Victor Rodriguez, McAllen Police Department,
State of Texas. The Subcommittee's Oversight Plan does not
address the examination of Mexican Drug-Related Organizations
or the security of the Southwestern Border. As a result, this
hearing did not comport with the Subcommittee's Oversight Plan
or Clause 2(d)(F) of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
which require the Committee to identify potential opportunities
to eliminate duplicative or unnecessary programs, find
efficiencies that will contribute to the Department's ability
to meet its vital missions, and identify areas for cost
savings.
As a follow-up to the May 11 hearing, Subcommittee Chairman
McCaul sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office
requesting among other things an audit of the Merida
Initiative.
DHS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
The Department of Homeland Security is the largest procurer
of information technology (IT) systems in the Federal civilian
Government with a fiscal year 2011 IT budget of roughly $6
billion. The Department plans to use these funds to manage 90
``major'' IT investments intended to assist the Department in
carrying out its mission of leading the National effort to
secure America against terrorist attacks and other threats and
hazards. Recently DHS has reported that over half of these
``major'' investments have encountered or are at risk of
encountering significant cost and schedule shortfalls.
On May 27, 2011, Subcommittee Chairman McCaul and Ranking
Member Keating sent two letters to the Government
Accountability Office (GAO), the first requesting GAO to review
how well the Department is managing at-risk investments; the
second, to assess the extent to which the Department has
established IT governance and oversight structures, and how
these are used to manage and oversee IT investments.
DENYING TERRORIST SAFE HAVENS
The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act
(IRTPA) of 2004 and the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) of 2010 require the Administration to report on U.S.
efforts to deny terrorists safe havens. A June 2011 GAO report
titled, ``Combating Terrorism: US Government Should Improve Its
Reporting on Terrorist Safe Havens,'' reviewed the extent to
which the Department of State (DoS) identified and assessed
terrorist safe havens and interagency efforts to deny
terrorists safe havens. GAO found that although DoS does
identify existing terrorist safe havens in its Country Reports
on Terrorism, that report lacks the level of detail required by
Congress. Specifically, GAO states that ``the DoS report is
incomplete without including the contributions of its various
interagency partners to address terrorist safe havens.''
Additionally, the GAO notes that the U.S. Government has
not developed a list of all U.S. efforts to deny safe haven to
terrorists. DoS has identified only a few efforts that it
funds, but does not include other US government funding
efforts, including funding by the Department of Defense (DoD).
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) currently receives
its funding for programs and activities that deny safe havens
from DoS and DoD.
Following the release of the GAO report on June 3, 2011,
the Subcommittee held a hearing to examine the threat of safe
havens to the U.S. Homeland and what the Department of Homeland
Security, working in conjunction with other Federal government
agencies, is doing to combat this threat. The Committee seeks
to assess whether further actions are needed by the United
States to deny terrorist safe havens and strengthen at-risk
States. The subcommittee heard testimony from Ms. Jacquie
Williams-Bridgers, Managing Director, International Affairs and
Trade, Government Accountability Office; Mr. Mark Koumans,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, International Affairs,
Department of Homeland Security; Ms. Shari Villarosa, Deputy
Coordinator for Regional Affairs, Department of State; Mr.
James Q. Roberts, Principal Director for Special Operations and
Combating Terrorism, Office of Special Operations/Low-intensity
Conflict & Interdependent Capabilities, Department of Defense;
Mr. Steve Coll, President and CEO, New America Foundation; Dr.
Bruce Hoffman, Director of the Center for Peace and Security
Studies and Professor, Georgetown University; and Dr. Daniel
Byman, Director of Research and Senior Fellow, Saban Center for
Middle East Policy, Brookings Institution. The Subcommittee's
Oversight Plan does not address the examination of terrorist
safe havens or threat of overseas terrorist activities on the
U.S. homeland. As a result, this hearing did not comport with
the Subcommittee's Oversight Plan or Clause 2(d)(F) of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, which require the
Committee to identify potential opportunities to eliminate
duplicative or unnecessary programs, find efficiencies that
will contribute to the Department's ability to meet its vital
missions, and identify areas for cost savings.
DHS ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT
The Department of Homeland Security has been criticized in
the past for, among other things, failing to supervise projects
and allowing the costs of certain contracts to exceed initial
estimates. As a result of this lapse, on May 27, 2011
Subcommittee Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Keating sent a
letter to GAO requesting a review of the contracting mechanisms
at the Department.
DHS WORKFORCE MORALE
In recent years, the Department of Homeland Security has
ranked as one of the Departments with the lowest morale among
employees within the Federal Government. Understanding why the
Department is considered such a difficult place to work is
imperative. The ``Best Places to Work in the Federal
Government'' rankings compiled by the Partnership for Public
Service and American University's Institute for the Study of
Public Policy Implementation showed DHS in 28th place out of 32
agencies in 2010, the same ranking as in 2009. Additionally, in
2010, the Department administered an internal survey, which
returned more than 10,000 completed responses. The findings of
this survey show leading indications of dissatisfaction ranging
from the Department not dealing with poor work performers to
the way promotions are decided. As a result, on May 27, 2011,
Subcommittee Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Keating sent a
letter to GAO requesting an investigation into why this is the
case, specifically; to what extent the Department has
identified the root causes that have contributed to low
employee morale, and what progress has made in addressing these
issues within the Department.
OVERSIGHT OF ST. ELIZABETHS CONSTRUCTION
The construction of the Department of Homeland Security
Headquarters at the St. Elizabeths facility is the largest
Federal construction project to occur in Washington, DC area
since the construction of the Pentagon. The project will bring
the Department components together under one roof and house
roughly 14,000 employees on the campus. Approximately $1
billion has been appropriated for its construction. On May 31,
2011, Members conducted a site visit to the St. Elizabeths
campus to examine the progress of construction and plans moving
forward. This site visit furthers the Subcommittee's Oversight
Plan, which states that the Subcommittee will monitor the
progress of the Department's headquarters consolidation to
ensure the plan is completed on time and within budget. This
oversight has the potential to identify areas for cost savings.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``The U.S. Homeland Security Role in the Mexican War Against
Drug Cartels.'' March 31, 2011. (Serial No. 112-14)
``On the Border and in the Line of Fire: U.S. Law Enforcement,
Homeland Security and Drug Cartel Violence.'' May 11,
2011. (Serial No. 112-24)
``Denying Terrorist Safe Havens: Homeland Security's Efforts to
Counter Threats from Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.''
June 3, 2011. (Serial No. 112-29)
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence
Since January, Majority staff has held many briefings with
non-governmental entities. However, in most cases, the Minority
was neither invited nor informed. This section of the report
reflects only those activities that were either officially
noticed or open to bipartisan participation.
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
On February 15, 2011, the Subcommittee received a
classified Member-only briefing by the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense, Special Operations and Combating
Terrorism, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); the Deputy
Director for Special Operations, J3, The Joint Staff; a Senior
Intelligence Analyst, Middle East Branch of the Joint
Intelligence Task Force on Counterterrorism; a Yemen Analyst,
Middle East Branch of the Joint Intelligence Task Force on
Counterterrorism; a Senior Intelligence Officer, Middle East
and North Africa Branch, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA),
Directorate of Intelligence; and a Yemen Analyst, Middle East
and North Africa Analysis branch of the DIA Directorate of
Intelligence, on the threat from al-Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula.
Committee staff also conducted an in-depth examination of
the various terrorism threats and U.S. counterterrorism policy,
and as a result, on March 2, 2011, the Subcommittee held a
hearing entitled ``Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland al-
Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).'' The Subcommittee
received testimony from Dr. Jarret Brachman, Managing Director,
Cronus Global; Dr. Christopher Boucek, Associate, Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace; and Mr. Barak Barfi,
Research Fellow, New America Foundation. The Subcommittee
hearing was followed by a classified Member-only briefing from
the National Counterterrorism Center, the Department of
Homeland Security, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
RECENT UNREST IN NORTH AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST: THE IMPLICATIONS FOR
U.S. HOMELAND SECURITY
Committee staff attended briefings regarding the uprisings
across North Africa and the Middle East. On April 6, 2011 the
Subcommittee held a hearing entitled ``Unrest in the Middle
East and North Africa: Ramifications for U.S. Homeland
Security.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. Philip
Mudd, Senior Research Fellow, New America Foundation; Mr.
Thomas Joscelyn, Senior Fellow and Executive Director, Center
for Law and Counter Terrorism, Foundation for the Defense of
Democracies; Mr. Rick ``Ozzie'' Nelson, Director and Senior
Fellow, Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Program, Center
for Strategic and International Studies; and Mr. Brian Katulis,
Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress.
SUBCOMMITTEE OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY'S
INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYSIS DIRECTORATE
As part of its oversight, the Subcommittee met with
officials from a number of offices and agencies within the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including the Office of
Intelligence and Analysis, the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Policy, the Federal Emergency Management Agency,
the Office of Operations Coordination and Planning, the DHS
Counter Intelligence mission and the Fusion Center program
office, and programs within the U. S. Secret Service.
On June 1, 2011, the Committee on Homeland Security's
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence held a
hearing entitled ``The DHS Intelligence Enterprise-Past,
Present, and Future.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
the Honorable Caryn Wagner, Under Secretary for the Office of
Intelligence and Analysis, Department of Homeland Security;
Rear Admiral Thomas Atkin, Assistant Commandant for
Intelligence and Criminal investigation, U.S. Coast Guard; Mr.
Daniel Johnson, Assistant Administrator for Intelligence, U.S.
Transportation Security Administration; Mr. James Chaparro,
Assistant Director for Intelligence, U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; and Ms. Susan Mitchell, Deputy Assistant
Commissioner, Office of Intelligence and Operations
Coordination, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
DOMESTIC RADICALIZATION
The Subcommittee aided the Full Committee in its efforts to
understand domestic radicalization, violent extremism, and
threat mitigation. On April 14, 2011, the Subcommittee held a
classified briefing provided by the National Counterterrorism
Center on the issue of domestic radicalization.
THREAT TO THE U.S. HOMELAND FROM SOUTH ASIA
The Subcommittee has continued to examine events in South
Asia as they relate to the U.S. homeland, and in particular,
monitored events in Pakistan, including the killing of Osama
Bin Laden. Committee staff was briefed by multiple experts with
personal experiences in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and India
regarding conditions on the ground in these critical areas and
implications for counterterrorism policy and intelligence
gathering. On May 3, 2011 the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``The Threat to the U.S. Homeland Emanating from
Pakistan.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from Dr.
Frederick Kagan, Resident Scholar and Director, American
Enterprise Institute Critical Threats Project; Dr. Seth Jones,
Senior Political Scientist, The RAND Corporation; Mr. Stephen
Tankel, Visiting Fellow, South Asia Program, The Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace; and Mr. Shuja Nawaz,
Director, South Asia Center, The Atlantic Council. The hearing
focused on the death of Bin Laden and Pakistan's role in the
War on Terror.
TERROR FINANCE
The Subcommittee has examined issues surrounding terror
financing. Majority staff has held numerous meetings with the
Federal Bureau of Investigation's Terrorist Financing
Operations Section, the Drug Enforcement Agency's Special
Operations Division, and the former Ambassador to the
Organization of American States. Unfortunately, the Minority
staff was not invited to the overwhelming majority of these
meetings.
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WMD)
Committee staff visited the Defense Threat Reduction Agency
and received a briefing on the Agency's Strategic Command
Center. Topics of discussion included cooperative threat
reduction and international engagement; planning, readiness,
and operational support; research and development; and
integration of technology with tactics, techniques, and
procedures to work across the interagency process on the key
WMD issues of nonproliferation, counter proliferation, and
consequence management.
On May 13, 2011, the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity,
Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies, the
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, and the
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and
Communications received a classified Member-only briefing by
representatives from the National Counterterrorism Center
(NCTC) and the National Counter-proliferation Center (NCPC),
both of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, on
the threat from four categories of WMDs that terrorists may
seek to acquire and use in a WMD terrorist attack chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN).
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland Al-Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula (AQAP).'' March 2, 2011. (Serial No. 112-5)
``Unrest in the Middle East and North Africa: Ramifications for
U.S. Homeland Security.'' April 6, 2011. (Serial No.
112-16)
``The Threat to the U.S. Homeland Emanating from Pakistan.''
May 3, 2011. (Serial No. 112-21)
``The DHS Intelligence Enterprise-Past, Present, and Future.''
June 1, 2011. (Serial No. __)
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security
Technologies
Since January, Majority staff has held many briefings with
non-governmental entities. However, in most cases, the Minority
was neither invited nor informed. This section of the report
reflects only those activities that were either officially
noticed or open to bipartisan participation.
Oversight Activities of the Subcommittee
CHEMICAL SECURITY
On February 11, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled ``Preventing Chemical Terrorism: Building a Foundation
of Security at Our Nation's Chemical Facilities.'' This hearing
reviewed the Department of Homeland Security's risk-based
efforts to strengthen the security of hundreds of chemical
facilities around the Nation; assessed progress of the Chemical
Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) implementation;
examined actions that DHS and chemical facilities have taken to
date under the CFATS regulations and discussed near-term steps
to strengthen the program going forward in order to reach
longer-term goals; and examined whether the Department's
approach is striking an appropriate balance between
strengthening security and enabling growth in this vital sector
of our economy. The Subcommittee received testimony from Hon.
Rand Beers, Under Secretary, National Protection and Programs
Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; Mr. Timothy J.
Scott, Chief Security Officer, The Dow Chemical Company
(testifying on behalf of the American Chemistry Council); Dr.
M. Sam Mannan, PhD, PE, CSP, Regents Professor and Director,
Mary Kay O'Connor, Process Safety Center, Texas A&M University
System; and Mr. George S. Hawkins, General Manager, District of
Columbia Water and Sewer Authority.
Committee staff participated in numerous meetings,
including conferences, with CFATS stakeholders. Through the
January to June time frame, staff met with various
representatives from the private sector in addition to Federal
Government entities impacted, or prospectively impacted, by
CFATS, including the DHS National Protection and Programs
Directorate, the United States Coast Guard, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
These oversight activities led to the introduction of H.R.
901.
NUCLEAR REACTOR FACILITY SECURITY
On March 11, 2011, an earthquake and tsunami struck Japan
causing an on-going nuclear emergency at the Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear Power Station and a global impact on the nuclear
sector. Committee staff have been examining the integrated
effort of numerous U.S. Government agencies to support Japan's
effort to respond to this event, as well as take lessons
learned and apply them to U.S. nuclear security activities, and
the related role of DHS, in order to better prepare the nuclear
sector for extreme events including terrorist attacks on the
homeland.
On March 25, 2011, Committee staff visited the Calvert
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant on the Chesapeake Bay in Lusby,
Maryland. This facility is located approximately 50 miles
southeast of Washington, DC. The purpose of the trip was to
observe nuclear power plant security measures (physical
security, cybersecurity, and personnel security) to determine
how the facility interacts with the Department of Homeland
Security and State and local first responders to address
vulnerabilities and respond to a potential attack or accident
at the facility.
Committee staff toured the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) Emergency Operations Center on May 6, 2011, and received
briefings on the mission, goals, and functions of the NRC and,
specifically, on the NRC Emergency Preparedness and Response
Program and the NRC's security policy and operations.
On May 12, 2011, Committee staff met with representatives
from the Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear energy plant in
Buchanan, New York, on the Hudson River, approximately 25 miles
north of Manhattan. Similarly, these representatives provided
their perspective on the implications of the events at
Fukushima for the U.S. nuclear energy industry.
These activities have not resulted in a hearing or other
product therefore it is difficult to assess whether the
Oversight Plan goals have been met.
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) pose a daunting challenge
to homeland security because of their great potential to cause
catastrophic consequences. Terrorists actively seek to acquire,
build, and use such weapons and technologies. Dangerous
chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN)
materials, technology, and knowledge, often dual-use, circulate
with ease in our globalized economy and are controlled unevenly
around the world, making it difficult to limit their access and
movement and ultimately prevent terrorist acts.
On April 5, 2011, the Chair of the Subcommittee on
Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security
Technologies along with Chairman Bilirakis and Ranking Member
Richardson of the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response, and Communications, sent an oversight letter to the
Secretary of Homeland Security requesting responses related to
the procurement of Generation-3 BioWatch detection systems. No
response has been received.
On April 7, 2011, Committee staff observed the Securing the
Cities (STC) full-scale exercise in New York City, New York
(NYC). STC is a DNDO initiative designed to reduce the risk of
a radiological or nuclear attack on the NYC region by enhancing
regional capabilities to detect, identify, and interdict
illicit radioactive materials. STC involves 13 principal
partners coordinated through the New York Police Department
(NYPD).
The Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure
Protection, and Security Technologies along with the
Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, and the
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and
Communications held a joint classified Member briefing on the
present and evolving threat of WMD terrorism on May 13, 2011.
Representatives from the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence, National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), and the
National Counter proliferation Center (NCPC) briefed Members.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DIRECTORATE MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION
During the 112th Congress, Committee staff has conducted
extensive meetings with Federal officials, academic experts,
the private sector, and other stakeholders on the mission and
operations of the Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate, the
component of the Department of Homeland Security responsible
for research, development, testing, and evaluation of homeland
security technologies. The Subcommittee's oversight has focused
on examining: (1) the linkage between the S&T's strategic plan
and its programs; (2) inadequate transparency and detail in its
budget justifications; (3) the persistent lack of
responsiveness to the needs of its customers and end-users; (4)
S&T's ability to provide scientific and technical support to
components throughout a technology's acquisition lifecycle; (5)
leveraging of the scientific capital of the Department of
Energy National laboratories, other Federal Departments and
Agencies, academia, and the private sector; and (6) the failure
to more rapidly develop and transition homeland security
technologies.
On May 13, 2011, Committee staff held a roundtable
discussion with Dr. Tara O'Toole, Under Secretary for Science
and Technology at the Department. Dr. O'Toole addressed the
shifting strategy of the Directorate toward rapid fielding of
technology and acquisition support, interagency collaboration
on research priorities, and the implications of proposed
research and development budget cuts on homeland security.
These meetings have not resulted in any hearings or other
products therefore it is difficult to assess whether the
Oversight Plan goals have been met.
SAFETY ACT IMPLEMENTATION
The Support Anti-Terrorism by Fostering Effective
Technologies Act of 2002 (SAFETY Act), (6 U.S.C. 441 et seq.;
Title VIII, Subtitle G of Pub. L. 107 09296, the Homeland
Security Act of 2002) is intended to encourage the development
and deployment of anti-terrorism technologies by limiting the
liability of sellers of the technology and others in the
distribution and supply chain for third-party claims arising
out of acts of terrorism where the technology has been deployed
to prevent, respond to, or recover from such act.
Committee staff met with Department officials to monitor
the program's progress and consulted with various stakeholders
concerned with the pace and requirements of the SAFETY Act
review process.
On May 26, 2011, the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Unlocking the SAFETY Act's Potential to Promote Technology
and Combat Terrorism.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from Mr. Paul Benda, Acting Deputy Under Secretary, Science &
Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; Mr.
Marc Pearl, President and Chief Executive Officer, Homeland
Security and Defense Business Counsel; Mr. Brian Finch,
Partner, Dickstein Shapiro LLP; Mr. Scott Boylan, Vice
President and General Counsel, Morpho Detection, Inc.; and Mr.
Craig Harvey, Chief Operations Officer and Executive Vice
President, NVision Solutions, Inc. This hearing furthered the
Oversight Plan's intention to examine SAFETY Act
implementation. However, no Federal cost savings have been
revealed.
CYBERSECURITY THREAT
The threat posed by hackers, nation states, terrorists, and
common thieves to the critical infrastructure of the Nation has
increased in recent years.
On February 11, 2011, Members of the Subcommittee received
a classified Member-only briefing on an assessment of the
current cybersecurity threat. Representatives from the
Department of Homeland Security and the National Security
Agency were present.
On March 16, 2011 the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``Examining the Cyber Threat to Critical Infrastructure and the
American Economy.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from
Hon. Phillip Reitinger, Deputy Under Secretary, National
Protection and Programs Directorate, Department of Homeland
Security; Mr. Gregory C. Wilshusen, Director, Information
Security Issues, Government Accountability Office; Dr. Phyllis
Schneck, Vice President and Chief Technical Officer, McAfee
Inc.; Mr. James A. Lewis, Director and Senior Fellow,
Technology and Public Policy Program, Center for Strategic and
International Studies; and Ms. Mischel Kwon, President, Mischel
Kwon Associates.
CYBERSECURITY MISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
The Department of Homeland Security is the primary point of
contact and coordination for all civilian, non-intelligence
U.S. Government networks as well as privately held critical
infrastructure. Understanding how the Department currently
fulfills that role and how it can improve its relationship with
other Federal agencies as well as with the private sector is an
important function of the Subcommittee. Committee staff
participated in numerous meetings with private stakeholders as
well as the Department to support the Members of the
Subcommittee in their conduct of oversight.
On April 15, 2011 the Subcommittee held a hearing entitled
``The DHS Cybersecurity Mission: Promoting Innovation and
Securing Critical Infrastructure.'' The Subcommittee received
testimony from Mr. Sean McGurk, Director, National
Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center, Department
of Homeland Security; Mr. Gerry Cauley, President and CEO,
North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Ms. Jane
Carlin, Chair, Financial Services Sector Coordinating Council;
and Mr. Edward Amoroso, Senior Vice President and Chief
Security Officer, AT&T.
FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE
On February 25, 2011, Committee staff visited a Federal
Protective Service (FPS) facility in Alexandria, Virginia.
Staff received an overview of FPS' mission to secure Federal
buildings. The visit included a brief on the agency's legal
authorities, as well as its budget, recruiting, and training
challenges.
On May 23, 2011, the Federal Protective Service Deputy
Director, Kris Cline provided staff briefing on bombing attempt
and corrective actions taken at the Detroit Federal Building.
These meetings have not resulted in any hearings or other
products therefore it is difficult to assess whether the
Oversight Plan goals have been met.
NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS DIRECTORATE
On June 1, 2011 Chairman King and Chairman Lungren sent an
oversight letter to Assistant Secretary Rand Beers notifying
him that the reorganization of the National Programs and
Protection Directorate without notice to Congress was in
violation of the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The letter
requested an immediate and complete briefing on the matter to
the full committee. Unfortunately, the Minority was not invited
to sign this letter.
Subcommittee Hearings Held
``Preventing Chemical Terrorism: Building a Foundation of
Security at Our Nation's Chemical Facilities.''
February 11, 2011. (Serial No. 112-3)
``Examining the Cyber Threat to Critical Infrastructure and the
American Economy.'' March 16, 2011. (Serial No. 112-11)
``The DHS Cybersecurity Mission: Promoting Innovation and
Securing Critical Infrastructure.'' April 15, 2011.
(Serial No. 112-19)
``Unlocking the SAFETY Act's Potential to Promote Technology
and Combat Terrorism.'' May 26, 2011. (Serial No. 112-
27)
Bennie G. Thompson,
Ranking Member.
Sheila Jackson Lee,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee
on Transportation
Security.
Yvette D. Clarke,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee
on Cybersecurity,
Infrastructure
Protection, and Security
Technologies.
Danny K. Davis,
Member of Congress.
Jackie Speier,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee
on Counterterrorism and
Intelligence.
Hansen Clarke,
Member of Congress.
Kathleen Hochul,
Member of Congress.
Loretta Sanchez,
Member of Congress.
Henry Cuellar,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee
on Border and Maritime
Security.
Laura Richardson,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee
on Emergency
Preparedness, Response,
and Communications.
Brian Higgins,
Member of Congress.
Cedric L. Richmond,
Member of Congress.
William R. Keating,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee
on Oversight,
Investigations and
Management.