tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN May 13, 2015 7:00pm-9:01pm EDT
his candor and good judgment and i knew right away he had more to offer to the united states army. likewise, admiral john richardson was a clear choice. he's a bold thinker, a tremendous leader and the go-to officer for many of the navy's tough issues in recent years. from preparing for the ohio class replacement ballistic missile submarine to handling problems of integrity and ethics. he is in high demand. i had to wrestle him away from the secretary of energy. but as anyone who has worked with john will tell you, he is worth the fight. i told ernie that if i could clone john richardson i would. i know he'll do an excellent job of helping steer the united states navy in the years to come. so to mark and your wife holly
anne, john and your wife dana congratulations and thank you and thank your families for your willingness to continue serving our great country. and again i want to thank the general and admiral for their accomplishments. general mille and admiral richardson are well-positioned to build on that progress. i look forward to working with them and other d.o.d. senior leaders as we drive change, build the force of the future and help the president with real solutions for the national security challenges we face. thank you. this weekend the c-span cities tours partnered with
comcast to learn about ft. laurderdale, florida. >> this was cultural tourism. when they would set up their villages along the way, the buses would stop because here was a tourist attraction. the seminoles camping by the road. so when they came into the tourist attractions they were getting food, a weekly allotment of food and they were also getting the rental of sewing machines where they could rent and use them when they lived in the tourist attraction and they would also get fabric because they were sitting there sewing and making things for a craft market. this is a little boy's belted shirt from the 1920s. this was an experimental time for patchwork and you can see on the bottom this is not a design
that is native today. the designs were bigger in the '20s and sometimes they weren't used any longer than that particular decade. the thing about devil's triangle and bermuda triangle all kinds of things have happened. it was a regular navigation training mission. they would take off from the base and flight 19s they would go east out to the bahamas. north of bimini they would drop bombs and they would continue on another 70 miles or so and make a turn north and go 100-something miles and make a turn back west toward ft. laurderdale. later at night they would send out these big rescue planes and one of them disappeared with 13 men on board. and they start a five day search
and never found anything. >> watch all of our events saturday from 5:30 p.m. eastern on c-span 2's book tv. and sunday afternoon at 2:00 on c-span3. ♪ ♪ sitting in a tip can ♪ ♪ far above the world planet earth is blue and there's nothing left to do ♪ >> sunday night, veteran canadian astronaut chris hatfield produced videos on his many activities on the international space station and shares scientific and personal information about being in space. >> the only time i felt a shiver
of fear was on the dark side of the earth and looking at actually and watching a shooting star come in between me and the earth and at first i had the reaction of wishing upon a star and i had a realize that that was a huge dumb rock from the universe going 20 miles a second that missed us and made it down to the atmosphere. it was a big enough one that you could see it. if it had hit us we would have been dead in an instant. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's q and a. a panel of inner city youth participated in a discussion looking at youth violence prevention. this is 55 minutes.
>> good morning, everyone. if we can have all the panelists come up to their seats. and if everyone can give them a loud round of applause, please. [ applause ] i'm extremely biassed and i think this is the best panel you will all will have not including the workshop that the young people put on yesterday. but when you think why this work is so important and who are the people we are serving these are the young people we need to keep in mind. they are not only doing the work but they are the most impacted by this issue. instead of reading their bios i will say they are all in the folder and i encourage you to read them. they are all doing some amazing and dope work at very young ages. many of them still can't vote yet. but they're doing the work. and so with that being said i
would also encourage everyone to use the hashtag. we want to make sure that everyone knows this panel is happening and the young people are at the forefront of this issue and they are leading the charge in many cities across the nation. with that being said i'm super excited to be here today. i haven't had the opportunity to join over the two days but from the tweets and instagram pictures that i saw it was not only informative but an opportunity for us to share best practices and think about how we can move forward as a nation and prevent young people from losing their lives too early. this is my fourth time attending the conference. i first came four years ago as a youth panelist and joined the philadelphia commission and now back as a moderator. if that is not an indication how we must continue to nurture
young people in this work. not only can they provide information as young person but they can relieve you in your duties when it's time or when it's not time. [ applause ] now over the last few months and weeks, we have all had the opportunity to be front row and center to some of the nation's most serious issues. that happened not that far from here in baltimore where young people are continuing to fight for their lives and continuing to be at the forefront of movements making sure that young people have an adequate and accurate seat at the table where they can provide youth engagement that goes beyond the town hall setting. this is about including young people not just in the conversations but in the planning, the implementation and the -- the analyzing afterwards because we want young people to be the leaders not just for the future but for now.
i'm super excited for this panel and i'm going to jump in and have each of our panelists tell us why they got engaged in this work. most do because something something traumatic happened in their lives but it's important to set the stage and identify what drove them to be engaged in this work and how they want to be engaged moving forward. so with that being said i'm going to start the closest to me. >> can you say your name and why you got engaged? >> my name is kayanna johnson and i got involved because whenever someone is lost we have failed ourselves as a community. and i think that when we talk about youth violence i think that the root causes of youth violence goes to the broken foundation.
i think when we start to talk about communities our communities are broken. and we need to do a better job of fixing them and working to be proactive instead of react everyone. and i think there are too many occasions when we are being reactive to situations where there are acts of violence or young people lose their lives where we need to be more proactive. we talk about prevention that is proactive instead of reactive. in addition to that just seeing my peers losing their lives or being involved in acts of violence when we talk about you know, going back to the peace with communities there should be no reason that anyone should live in broken communities and communities where you know you're constantly seeing you know, boarded up homes or going to schools with a lack of resources. no one wants to live that way. and when you have communities like that then i think when you have communities that are broken then you're going to have violence that stems from that.
that's why i got involved in the work i want to see my communities grow. i want to see my communities flourish. that's why i'm here. >> thank you. i think it's work. >> hello? my name is antwane. the reason i got involved in violence prevention is because not everyone in my neighborhood has the same opportunity i have. if i could create one opportunity for different teens then that's what i'm trying to accomplish now. not every teen is going to get reached out in the same way because we're all different. we're all unique. i fell in love with this about three years ago and i ran with it. and just been doing different
programs and helping the youth and changing the way the community looks so that it has a positive impact on the younger kids that are growing up. >> good morning i'm mahogany mayfield. i feel like i don't have a choice to be here. i'm black and i'm also a female. and we speak on men of colors and boys of color and often in remembrance of but women are affected by this indirectly and directly. even when it's not direct but when men of color and boys of color are criminalized killed, murdered slaughters these effect us emotional. these are our fathers and friends, the fathers to our children our boyfriends, our brothers, our uncles. we don't have a choice but to be engaged. i'm here on behalf of myself my
city of louisville. i've had the opportunity i've had the support. this is what i have to do. >> good morning, everyone. i'm engaged in this because at a young age -- at the age of 15 i lost my best friend to suicide and it all came from the pressure of society. i was stuck in a place i didn't want to be. but somehow i gained mentors. they encouraged me. they nurtured me. they didn't plant me on the concrete to fail. they planted me in the grass. they watered me. they nurtured me. from there works i'm here now. and what they instilled in me i give back to the communities. we're talking about our children and about our future. a lot of people don't like the
way i quote this guy. but one of my favorite quotes is from a rapper by the name of due pab shakur. i have been able to prove it was wrong but i still love it. he stated but there is no hope for the youth but the true fear is there ain't no hope for the future. >> thank you. >> my name is emanuel. and why did i engaged to be engaged for the violence because innocent people are getting killed such as babies and toddlers, children are getting killed for nothing. i figure i can tell someone so they can tell someone to help the city out. thank you. >> thank you. now each of you have, i think clearly laid the foundation. we have to be proactive instead of reactive there's no choice
but to do this work. we have to nurture young people and engage them. my question would be -- and we can start with mahogany. what is your current role in this work? how do you define in the your city and what is one of your biggest accomplishments you have been able to achieve in the city or outside that work in preventing youth violence. >> i'm on the city's implementation team. this is out of our office of safe and healthy neighborhoods and it's geared to taking on 13 goals, decreasing the rates of homicides, suicides and off overdoses. so right now i'm excited that we're about to launch off our youth implementation team. and what is really most rewarding about this work is seeing my pierce. we received 65 applications ages 13 to 24 years old. and from all eight divisions of the metro police department.
so being that liaison between our city-wide implementation and youth implementation as well as being a student and being involved with the community seeing all the positive work going on gives a light of hope. >> considering that a lot of times that we have youth programs the faces of the programs aren't young people do. you think your role as a member of the implementation team has played a role in being able to properly engage young people? >> i guess in a sense but i have to give kudos to the team i'm a part of with mr. anthony smith with the youth implementation team. youth are going to be on the forefront, taking on the issues. they're going to take on five goals with regards to shootings assaults and homicides as well. that way we have not only the youth voice or being reactive, having the youth come in after something takes place but having
them on the forefront seeing this work go forth. >> how would you describe your role in the community in preventing youth violence. >> my role in the community, back in baltimore i'm the chair for the baltimore city youth commission and my main focus is making sure that young people have a voice at the table. decisions about us cannot be made without us. we work to provide a platform for young people to be engaged and meet with the decision maker in baltimore to provide recommendations to them to improve policies and programs and systems in place for young people but also providing that relationship because we know that relationships are key in this work. also, in addition to that, being able to allow those key decision makers and leaders to provide insight to us about what's going on. but just having that open
conversation making sure that young people are engaged and have a seat at the table. >> i would say my roles in this community is just to help build it up. i'm involved in an explorers program in cleveland and the main focus about the program is to help bring teens in to get them off the street and show them the other side of law enforcement. a lot of teens see law enforcement officer you're stopping me now what. with our program you don't see the officers in uniform. you see them in plain clothes just like we are and you get that connection with them. you see them playing around. you don't have to see them all strict and stern with you. you get that connection with them. i'm involved with the my com program just to help build areas up and build a positive effect so we can get more areas in
cleveland. the other role i'm involved is my voice through z 107.9. they access different questions like we're doing on the panel today and let our voices be heard as the youth instead of just the adults talking. >> and you talk ability sharing experiences as a young person can change the achievement to success. how would you describe your role as a part of a football team and this work? >> i would have to say for me being in high school or middle schoolers follows whatever high schoolers do. so with that being said if we go around with our pants sagging and our shirts not tucked the middle schoolers are going to do it. if we don't go to class and if we stipschool the middle schoolers will do it. so i figure as me in a team,
ourselves like if we come together, we can stop that. like, we will be able to put, you know some of the middle schoolers on a team to help us or you know, let them play give them a try. don't just let them be in a middle school and don't experience anything. the purpose of us doing that is to keep them off the street, let them come to school have a reason to come to school and succeed in life. >> so would i be correct in assuming that the power is really in peer to peer collaboration and showing young people -- giving young people a clear example of how to be successful? >> yes. >> mr. cole am i correct in assuming you are a police officer? >> yes, ma'am. >> have you arrested anyone since you've been here? [ laughter ] >> i haven't par taken in any police activity. >> just wanted to clear that up. why a police officer and how do you think this work plays a role
as you not only as a youth leader but in preventing youth violence. >> i'm in a special role, as you can see. i'm a young officer. i'm able to connect with the youth. i chose this line of profession because this is what we're missing for the youth. they need safety. a lot of kids are not thriving at school because they're scared to be in school. a lot of kids are not going to school because they're scared going to school or on their way home. i know because i was as well. everyday struggle getting back and forth. >> what is one of the biggest accomplishments that you have seen not only in your work but in the work being done by your city? >> i love what my director has done entrusting the c.o.p. program in our department, identifying the problem, enforcing and education. it's not strictly enforcement.
you will not see our c.o.p. guys out there in hard uniforms. it's a softer mentality. we are trying to gain the trust of the community. we are not trying to separate the law enforcement from the community. >> i think we need a round of applause. that's not happening many places around the country. [ applause ] [ applause ] over the last two days you have been participating as leaders and as participants in the conference. what have you seen or experienced that gives you hope for the future? starting with antwane? >> just being at this conference has just shown me what everyone not only in my state but the whole united states is doing. it shows me there is hope for me and my peers and the younger generation that's coming up and that we are trying to make a difference. it just makes me happy to see
that there is -- there's other people out there that really do care just as much as everyone here does because if we didn't care we wouldn't be here. just making an impact and seeing that everything that i do has the exact same goal as what mahogany or emanuel or kayanna has. that's what i would say. >> for me over the past few days i have to say that the most touching point for me was when the gentleman spoke yesterday. i do apologize. i don't remember your name exactly. but i think he started a conversation that needs to be had. i think that a lot of times we run from that conversation. we're uncomfortable to talk about it. and the question are we serious about the work that needs to be done at the ground?
are we serious about changing our communities for the best? and i think that that was very inspiring and he definitely provided information that i wasn't aware of. so i definitely have to take that back and research it and try to figure out how can we move forward and be serious about the work. i think we are all doing great work but is that work going to be sustainable and is that work going to change communities that are suffering at the ground level? >> so when you say are we ready? what are the indicators for you that will conclude that not only individuals in this room are ready but to you go back in your community are ready? >> just like he said yesterday, you know not necessarily creating new programs but enhancing the programs that we already have. and you know, i'm a firm believer in building strong communities. communities are able to thrive
and flourish off human capital and place capital and that putting the economy back in the community, providing those jobs, providing housing quality housing at that. providing education that you know, is the same education that, say, in maryland the same education that someone in howard county or montgomery county has. so quality education quality housing. just a quality lifestyle. simple lifestyle. >> i think it opens it up for how can the people in this room support you? community members, police officers, police commissioners support the work that you're doing not just providing a platform but helping to elevate that work. starting with mr. henry on the end and ask what support do you need to help not only continuing to prevent violence in your communities but get others involved in that work? >> i would have to say the
members who started the program -- i would say, thank you. that's saving a lot of people's lives and a lot of people come to school and you know, not be on the streets. but at the end of the day you still need more effort. there's not enough people. they still have people on the streets. they got children that don't come to school. so i figure if you know, if everyone come together, maybe you know we have half our go to school or get a job. >> we can popcorn it but do we want to continue from the end? >> yes, ma'am. what we're missing is boots on the ground. because that's where it all starts. >> do you mean cops or people? >> in general we need boots on
the ground. we have people sitting behind desks and looking at data. data is great but if you are not actually seeing what's going on how do you verify for yourself. so by boots on the ground i mean mentors. there are a lot of programs. don't get me wrong there are a lot of programs a lot of great ones but we have no one behind it push it, nobody growing it. we have a select number of things we can do with this. one program that i'm fond of because i went through it myself is -- and their recidivism rate is 35%. the national average is 85%. why? because they put those boots on the ground. they got guys to care about what they're doing and not just sitting behind desks. >> you want to challenge people to get out of offices and go into the communities? >> pretty much if we can get you out of the office --
[ applause ] >> make them work for their money. makes sense. [ applause ] mahogany? >> what i think we need from everyone is funding, of course. i'm not just kidding. but i think definitely we need courage. we have a variety of positions. we have a variety -- one thing that has really been -- i guess enlightening for me is the generational gaps being closed in this summit alone. we have government officials and the youth here. if we see the things we want to be implemented if we have that support and you know the systematic changes that need to be taking place we have the officials here. if we can work together. you are hearing from us, raw information what we want to be seeing done. and if this is -- you know, one of your passions and something you want to see changed coming to summits is great but each of
us are here. the people we want to see and the people who want to change the most -- it will take putting on your boots and knocking on doors and getting out of the office and seeing the work being put forth. >> antwane. >> i would just say two things as far as support. one, when we are here we are hyped about what we are going to do. but when we go home we lose that hypeness. we have to stay focused and connect with people and make plans while we're here and not make plans and once we go home move on to another project. something else we need to do is getting the youth input like you're doing today. a lot of people will talk to other adults about what needs to be done be.
but that adult might not have the same mentality as i do and i'm 18. so if you can get more of the youth input, then that's what's going to make the programs thrive. >> and based on that i want to ask kayanna how do you describe authentic youth engagement for you. what does a city official to engage you in a way beyond just asking your opinion? >> absolutely. this is something i always talk about is effective youth engagement. i think a lot of times we can have those conversations and you know, have conversations with young people but i think what's key is that we need to be intentional and genuine. and when we're having conversations there needs to be actionable items in the conversations. not just have the conversations with emotions but what are the solutions that are going to
follow those solutions? i think that with the young people, they need to see the direction action to be engaged and in order to stay engaged. they need to see something fruitful coming out of those conversations. >> that's a great point. one of the things i struggle with being a young person and work with young people is that you only have to cross them once before they forever look at you side-eyed. and so to better help the people in the room so young people don't continue to throw shade what is a piece of advice you give to the adults in the room in moving forward engaging you in the work and listening a lot of times doesn't happen. we hear them talk a lot but are they listening to you? what is one piece of advice a lot of times we don't take it well. what is one piece of advice that
you would give and be as candid as you can. >> just be genuine and intentional. just have an open ear and i think that a lot of times young people can tell whether or not you're genuine. a lot of people who i came here today with lieutenant russell he is a genuine person and is a police officer. we talk about police and youth relations. that is key in youth violence prevention. when we talk about that relationship, i think he does a great job of building relationships. i call him my dad because he is a mentor to me. and he's genuine. he's genuine in what he does and being a role model for me. >> anyone else? >> sure. what we need is to initiate the youth. and by that i mean build rapports. you can't gain information from someone if you do not know them.
it's simple. how i find what works best for me is talking. i talk to the youth and i'm not seen as an adult because i still look so young. and i'm -- >> understandable. you will appreciate that in ten years. i promise. >> i'm not seen as an adult. and i'm always seen as a big brother. why? because i'm able to share that experience with them. i understand exactly what they've been through and i stand where they want to go. but i am also able to give them advice and build rapports and that's what adults are missing with the youth bridging that gap and building rapports. >> don't tell a young person to pull up their pants without learning their names. build a relationship first. anyone else? >> i would say not to ask questions that you're not
necessarily ready to receive the answer or you don't have the resource -- [ applause ] and i will also want to make sure you have the resources available or access to the resources. once, like you said you will be side-eyed forever and that interferes with change. there is negative things with the government alone. we start to see just like that barrier there. until broken promises and if this is not, you know, something that you're committed to then i wouldn't even make that promise or you know what i mean, waste the youth's time as well as your own. >> great point thank you. can we give the panel a round of applause? [ applause ] and i think what you said, mahogany as we go into the question and answers as a caution, don't ask questions you're not ready to receive the answer to.
but we are going to take questions from the audience, one or two or three at a time and turn it over to the panelists to answer. normally questions start with who, what when, where and why and end with a question mark. if you have a comment, make it short. but we want to hear as much as possible from the panelists. there are microphones in the back. don't be shy. and when you ask your question if you could just introduce yourself. >> my name is -- from boston. i manage the mayor's youth council. if you were mayor of your city for a day with unlimited resources, you could make anything happen what is something you would change about your city? >> i really like that question. we should jump into that right now. who wants to answer? mayor for the day. besides the paycheck.
it's a pretty cool job, i hear. >> i would just start off by actually engaging the youth and just actually taking some of them and getting their ideas about when they would like to change and start from there. >> if i was mayor for a day, i would set up four or five camps around the city people in memphis love barbecue. [ laughter ] that's a way to get people out -- get them out of the house. i would help build relationships with the community from the police perspective. >> i would start with food, justice in a lot of times in neighborhoods you have a chicken joint, a mcdonald's and a liquor store. we don't understand the importance of nourishment. it controls the way you think and kr0 controls the way you participate in school and how
you feel and healthy living. i would definitely make sure that there is equitable and people are able to get the meals they deserve to eat and are going to properly nourish you. >> [ applause ] anyone else? >> for me. if i were mayor for the day not a lot i can do in a day because things take time in order to change. but if i was mayor for the day i would do something similar to -- i think going back to that community level back in baltimore, i think that's what's happened in the past couple days when we talk about the community coming together that's key. the community coming together fellowshiping and building the relationships. to repair the broken community we have to come together as a community and just start to build those relationships. so -- >> great point.
>> if i was mayor for the day i would probably say i would open hospitals, open more schools, activities for young children like you know, stuff for them to do. in new orleans children follow -- it's called follow the leader. they do what they see. if i was the mayor i probably try to open those game rooms and laser tag and they don't really have activities out there for them to do. so i probably would do something for them to do, open stuff. >> gentleman in the back? >> i wondered if you could give an example of where you think there's been the most impact whether it was a meeting or an event where the youth really changed some of the programs or policies? i think learning from the different cities has been really
important and also we also appreciate the work that you and all of you are doing. >> we'll get another question before we go to the panel. >> jack calhoun and on the mayor question, next time you get that question say we're going the change the law and have you be mayor not for one day but for four years. thank you, you have been terrific. what keeps your legs under you? what keeps you going? >> so two questions we have on the floor, what keeps you going and what is -- i would assume what is that moment that meeting that interaction that happened to get you better engaged in this work. you can answer either question? >> what keeps my legs under me seeing the product of your work, seeing someone transformed from a gang member to a high school
graduate to a college graduate. that's what keeps my legs under me. being able to engage the youth is what keeps me and motivates me. you know sometimes -- i open up my door too far sometimes and i get calls 3:00 4:00 in the morning because they need someone to talk to or they are in a situation they are unable to get out of. i have to be able to drive myself to know that i put myself in this predicament where i am the person they call. so that keeps my legs under me. >> thank you. anyone else? [ applause ] >> for me i would start by answering the second question. what keeps me going is that support system. you know, i will continue to say this it's the relationships that you build, the relationships that you make and also, the products of the work that you're
doing. i know really quickly just a quick story a gentleman that worked for a community development corporation saw a young gentleman, 17 years old who was a dropout experiencing family issues. his mom put him out because his step dad didn't like him. he came to my office every day. he came there just to talk. me building that relationship. helped him with a resume and link him to g.e.d. programs. he said i just want to thank you. i feel like you are the only one who cares about me. and things like that are powerful when you are able to build relationships and are a mentor to someone that is key. those things actually work and those are the things that will move our cities forward and our nation forward. >> for the rest of the panelists what was that moment that meeting that helped the change for you?
>> i guess for me, it was once i got into college i'm a student at the university of louisville. once i started to see this -- the discrepancies between who i went to high school with who i grew up with and who i saw on campus and getting involved on campus and seeing the work that is being done but a lot of it isn't always impactful. and just seeing if i see there are programs throughout there's funding out there and people who want to make these changes but don't know what is going on it's like if i have an idea of what's going on and care to know what's going on then i'm going to get in those positions to be a part of those changes. >> i take a hit at that question as well. that moment for me was being out in my community. one of my first mentors he got me that exposure that i was missing growing up in the heart of memphis, frazier growing up
in one zip code my entire life i wasn't exposed to different things. i never knew what i would grow to like because all i seen was neighborhood drug dealers or wanting to be a professional athlete or a rapper. but once i got that exposure it opened my mind. you grow accustomeds to what you see. that exposure, he took me to the university of memphis campus. i said you know what, i won't with able to -- this is just the beginning for me and wanting better. from there graduated high school and was accepted to the university of memphis. i tried to get out of memphis but god kept me there to continue my work as i do. and that was a pivotal moment for me was that exposure. that's what i try to help the youth gain. >> thank you. gentleman in the back? >> i just like to say first of
all to the panelists, first of all i'm very proud of each and every one of you. and -- especially, two years ago, he came up to this conference. he didn't have a suit. matter of a fact, he refused to wear a suit. i had it all set up for him to go get a suit and i wanted him to look nice but he decided he wanted to wear a polo and jeans which was okay. but my point is to each and every one of us in the audience, we must provide support for the youth. he became -- he is telling his story but he at an early gauge got in trouble. okay? we could have written him off. but he pulled himself up by the boot straps and decided that he
wanted to become a police officer. but in order to become a police officer, you must have a sterling background. nothing in your background. you must be as clean as a whistle. that was not the case with him. he had at best a checkered background. so now, what do we do? this young man we told him what to do and pull yourself up by the boot straps you're doing well. but he wants to become a police officer. but he got one little thing that's holding him back. so director armstrong looked at it looked at him and said, well normally, in a situation like this we file 13 the application because of his background. but director armstrong being a product of a single mother from north memphis, knowing that people in his life gave him a
chance, he decided that he was going to give him a waiver and decided that i'm giving you this waiver. i'm putting stock into you. i'm putting my trust into you. and now you see the product. and so what i'm saying -- [ applause ] what's what i'm saying to each and every one of us who have positions of power who have an opportunity to give these young people not just lip service but an opportunity, take a chance. take a chance. take a chance. thank you. >> thank you. and i forgive you for not having a question. but i think what i can ask the panel is that there are so many misconceptions and for all of you on the panel a lot of times people say because you're here
any young person can do it. in many cases you're not just the exception but the rule. what would you say to the members of the audience not only about misconceptions they have about young people but about giving young people a chance? >> what we find today and what i've found in most of my research that i've done myself is that a lot of people make mistakes not because they're criminals but because they're hungry. but because they need money. because they're not fitting in well into school. from this mistake, they could have skewed an entire life up. i was given a chance. i'm thankful for it. i refuse to mess that up. someone took a chance on me seven years ago. by saying you know what? you're not what your background
say you are. i can tell. someone else gave me a chance by accepting me into the university of memphis. they didn't have to. showing a steady improvement shows the product. where you come from is just where you come from. i am a product of my environment. i am memphis, tennessee. i refuse to give up on memphis. thank you. >> thank you. [ applause ] i heard dr. bell was here yesterday and he says we are all more than the worst thing we have ever done. i think what you just shared is a clear example of that is that we all make mistakes not because we're perfect but because we're human. one or two more questions from the audience. gentleman in the back. >> first of all, thank you for allowing me to hang out with you
all last night and throughout the conference. one of the words that was thrown to you prior to you getting here was expectations. hopefully that -- those expectations that you came with have been fulfilled. one question i have for you is considering all that you've heard thus far throughout this summit and the realities of things like baltimore do you still have hope that things will change? things will get better for the youth? >> we should start with ms. johnson johnson since she is from baltimore. >> i do have hope and i will always have hope. i love my city and know that my city can be extremely great. i think speak to the most recent occurrences in baltimore, i think we have definitely seen a lot of hope. although it was not necessarily shown on television.
over the past couple days i received a lot of questions, what is it like in baltimore? is it still bad? is it this? is it that? but a lot of times people baltimore is it still this is it that? the efforts of communities from faith-based to young people to city leaders coming together to take back the community and to take back our city and make it the best that it can possibly be. and so of course i have hope. today we have people here who are vested in moving our nation forward and i definitely have hope and i think that yesterday when mr. bell asked the question, are we serious, i think a lot of people said yes. and so moving forward does -- you know continuing the work and just moving forward. >> thank you. anyone else? >> i do have hope. and as far as everything is
going on right now, i would say those are just setbacks. those are things that we are going to try and see how much do we really care? and if we give up just because of things that are going on, then everything we've done is just a waste of time. so as far as baltimore and as far as the cleveland incidents we have to take the negativity out of that and create the possibility. >> i don't want to be the negative one of the bunch but when these issues take place, we are like black lives matter protests, we have to shift our thinking and realize these are social justice issues. police brutality has always taken place. police brutality is not the only issue harming all of us. so i think until we really shift that change and really see what is the root cause of a lot of these issues, i mean there
won't be progression because we are not taking on the actual issue at hand. so -- >> great point. i think it's important to recognize that the each goes beyond these low-hanging fruits but they have also been providing generational trauma for a long time for many of the communities, particularly baltimore as we've seen. more comments? >> yes. do i have hope? yes. for every ten, if i can get ahold of at least one i've made a difference. that one will spiral down and maybe he'll get ahold of two and maybe those two will get ahold of four. this right here is a continuing effort. my hope for you is that we stop being reactive and start becoming more proactive. if we can change it on the front end, it will save a lot more time and money on the back end. every year in the united states, it takes about $28,000 to house
a prisoner. well, it takes about $28,000 to pay for a four-year college. so you do the numbers on that. that's why i have hope. one day we will be proactive instead of reactive. >> okay. we have time for two more questions. we'll take the gentleman here and the lady in the back. yes? >> good morning. thank you guys for what you do. it takes a lot of courage to do it. i'm a school principal in new orleans, one of the alternative schools. what role do you feel that entertainment, art and media plays in the perpetuation of violence whether it's the absorption or absorption of emulation of violence? i see the middle schoolers walking around and perpetuating violence and going to prison as if it's a badge of honor.
i know it's a big question but what role do you feel art and media plays in the perpetuation of violence? >> we'll take one more. yes, ma'am? >> i'm from detroit and i'm just so proud of each and every one of you and all of the young people in this room and i want to give everyone a round of applause, the young people in the room today. you are here today because you matter and we matter and we want to make a dinsfference. at home in detroit we do an annual survey and i'm going to ask you one of the questions real quickly. what do you think are the triggers for you and what are we doing -- what are we doing that works well for this to get at this to really reduce it? what should we replicate? what should we replicate and what are the triggers so we can know really where we should focus or energy and efforts on? >> so three questions.
thank you for your question. what are the triggers and what should we be replicating as well as the role in media in perpetuating violence if there is a role. i'll start with you. >> i'll start with the role of media. i think we all know that media plays quite a negative role in influencing young people and perpetuating violence. i think that you know, it's very sad when the only role model that a young person has is little wayne or a rapper or someone like that because they want to live those lifestyles that they are living. they are taking drugs and saying i'm in love with a co-co or something like that when in actuality, that's not the lifestyles that they are living. if we have more role models and more mentors, then we have more people who they can look up to, who they aspire to be like.
you know, whether that's politicians or the community leader or the man across the street or the grandmother of the community who, you know, are -- who serves the role of you know, being those role models and mentors. and so i think that media definitely plays a negative role but we can definitely counteract those images for those young people, being someone that young people can look up to. >> what can be replicated? what are the triggers? anyone? >> the triggers, some that we've seen a lot of recently are the riots. they are fascinated with violence and somewhat it does play a part with the music as well. so i try to answer those both at the same time. we've become accustomed to what
we are seeing and what we are hearing but a lot of people are unable to differentiate between the two, that media plays a huge part in, you know every day life but you have to take what they give you with a grain of salt as well. they portray some of these cities to be the worst of the worst when they never show the good that is going on. so the triggers and what can be done about them are to be proactive. you can't let things get out of hand and expect to be able to snap your finger and get it back in line. we have to come together as a community, as a city as a nation and be proactive to the issues and not let them get out of hand to trigger the effect. >> i think whenever we like to blame the media or more particular, like music and pop culture as the -- i guess the
enflunsen influence of this, you would not sing this music or be like these artists if you couldn't relate to it. we have to look at how -- okay so if they have, you know guns, if they have access to that, the rappers didn't give them that. why are they able to relate to the music that they are listening to? that's a way of shifting the responsibility and we have to look at the circumstances like clearly they are coming from similar background so we have to question, why are the rappers even able to rap about this? why was this their background instead of blaming them. but i guess we also have to make sure that we have mentoring. not everyone is going to be interested in having mentoring after school but making sure that our school systems are educating us that not everybody is going to go to the nfl, not everybody is going to go to the nba and a lot of people, a lot of them are just misguided and i don't say that in a negative manner but it's the truth. if that's all that out there we have to realize, when has the
media ever been reliable? so, i mean i just think that they want to blame them or start looking at the real issue. >> i knew you were going to be after my own heart because that was exactly where my mind was going. i can guarantee you there's at least one person at every table that has gangster music on their phone and they are not shooting anyone and they are not -- may not be cussing anyone out. i have tupac on my phone right now. i think it's important to -- yes, don't judge me. yes, the media does play a role but if you educate young people they can make the differentiation between what is reality versus what's music and what's selling. so i think it's important to provide young people with all of the information. with that being said we're going to have to close out the panel but i think it's important to note all of the notable and amazing points that the young people gave. i would also ask all of the other young people in the room to stand up because i think it's important to recognize these aren't the only ones here. we have a number of amazing
people here. [ applause ] so you can still find these young people throughout the day and get their input on many of the questions asked today. i want to thank everyone for listening attentively and for asking questions. with that being said, we're going to end the panel and thank you all. [ applause ] here's the line-up on c-span 3. a proposed hearing on infrastructure spending to improve border security. then bill de blasio speaking at the u.s. capitol on what he calls a progressive agenda to combat income inequality. and then a senate foreign relations hearing committee on the security implications of extending the nuclear agreement
with china. federal investigators say that the amtrak train that crashed in philadelphia on tuesday night killing at least seven people was traveling at 106 miles per hour before it ran off the rails along a sharp curve where the speed limit is just 50 miles an hour. more than 200 people aboard the washington-to-new york train were injured in the wreck. lawmakers gave their reaction during hearings and on the house and senate floors. we're going to show you just a couple of them now. >> before we begin today i'd like everyone to keep in their thoughts and prayers the passengers, employees, first responders, victims, families who were involved in last night's derailment just outside
of philadelphia. a number of agencies in this bill, the department of transportation federal railroad administration, amtrak, philadelphia's transit agency partially funded through the federal transit administration and the national transportation safety board are all working to respond to the derailment and investigate the cause of the accident and provide aid and comfort to the victims and their families. it's likely to be a while before we get answers on the why and how this happened. the ntsb is on site starting their investigation. i know the federal railroad administration and amtrak are there to cooperate and assist in any way possible. that's why it's so important that the committee complete its work so that these agencies can
do their chores. with that let me turn now to the chairman of the subcommittee mario diaz ballart on his maiden voyage on these choppy seas. mr. chairman? >> thank you so much. before we begin i'd like to extend our thoughts our prayers to the passengers, to the victims, the families of the victims of last night's disaster as well as to the first responders and health care providers who always do such a great job and tend to be unsung heroes. i know that we can speak for everyone not only in this committee but around the country, that our hearts and prayers are with them. again, it's a sad and frightening event. as the chairman said, as with any transportation disaster the ntsb will conduct a thorough and professional investigation and
issue a report of their findings and from those findings, congress must look at what we can do to try to avoid this from ever happening again. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. i apologize for getting here so late. i was in another hearing. i want to express my condolences to those who were injured in last night's terrible accident, to the families of the victims who died. also want to express my strong support for amtrak. tens of millions of passengers ride the northeast corridor every year, including me passing through penn station to my district in baltimore. sadly, the republicans on the house appropriations committee have proposed cutting capital funding for this service by 25% for fiscal year 2016.
while we can not speculate on the causes of last night's accident media reports indicate that it occurred in a sharp curve and there are many such curves and tight turns along this very old coreridor. we would never find it acceptable to operate 19th century technology and yet we continue to operate many sections in the northeast corridor on 19th century technology. we should be expanding it and take all necessary steps to make it into a good repair. a bill pending before congress would expand the fencing along the border at an expense of $2.4 billion, that according to senator cory booker. there was a hearing on technology and border security
today that included testimony from homeland security and u.s. customs and border protection officials. senator booker asked them, quote, what's the payoff? before we throw money at the problem, we should find out if we're getting a return on our investment. the hearing is about two hours. this hearing will come to order. our ranking member is still a few minutes out, so we'll get under way here. when he gets here, i will express again the fact that we're very glad that senator carper's stop was in wilmington. he was on the train that derailed and, of course, our thoughts and prayers are with the family and victims of that tragedy. our thoughts and prayers are also with all of our law enforcement officials that, you
know, step out of their door stop every day and risk their lives for our public safety. and rather than me say it, i can't say it better than what secretary jeh johnson said in the letter. i would like to read this. dear colleagues, this is national police week. this week we honor the sacrifice and commitment of the men and women in law enforcement. we pay special tribute to those who have given their lives in the line of duty and offer support to their families. the past year our department lost two border patrol agents in the line of duty. this week's agents names will be added to the memorial in washington, d.c. i'm also mindful of border patrol agent xavier vega jr. who last august was killed during a robbery while fishing with his family in texas. whatever you are this week, i encourage you to honors to who have chosen the law enforcement profession. i ask everybody here in the hearing room, in honor of those individuals that secretary
johnson was commending as well as all of our law enforcement officials that have given their last full measure just if we recognize a moment of silence. thank you. i can actually ask consent to have my opening statement read into the record. and i guess what i would like to do is get right down to testimony. it is tradition of this committee that we swear in witnesses so if everybody rise and raise your right hand. do you swear the testimony you will give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? >> i do.
>> thank you, please be seated. >> our first witness is assistant commissioner randolph d. alles. pronounce that right? alles. okay. i rarely get it right. don't feel bad. randolph alles is the assistant commissioner for the office of air and marine of the department of homeland security. oam is the largest aviation and maritime law enforcement organization. he served as the u.s. marine corps for 35 years, retiring in 2011 as major general. assistant commissioner alles. >> thank you, sir. and good afternoon, sir. good to see you again. you may recall we last visited our site in corpus christi in january. thank you for coming down to see that. i would encourage any members of the committee to come visit our sites. i think that's very beneficial in understanding what we do
better. as you noted, the office is a critical component of our later border strategy. the personnel operate 257 aircraft, 283 vessels and sophisticated network across the u.s., puerto rico and the virgin islands. oam's critical and maritime missions fall into four areas, main awareness, investigation, interdiction and contingency operations and national taskings. we not only contribute to the security of our land border, but facilitate efforts with the coast guard to secure the coastal shoreline through the coordinated use of integrated air and marine forces. since the consolidation of air and marine assets 11 years ago, we have transformed a border air wing composed of light observation aircraft into a modern air and maritime fleet, with sophisticated surveillance sensors and communication systems. we are working to increase the connectivity and net working among all our air and marine
assets and continuing the effort to reduce the number of our aircraft type and position our assets for highest utilization increasing the operations. i would like to highlight a few of our assets and describe how technology is force multiplier that respond to threats to our nation's borders. first is the -- our mq 9 predator that plays a critical role in the border strategy and management by increasing situational awareness so that air, land and maritime environments. it just returned from deployment in el salvador where it contributed to seizures of $362 million of contraband. second is our multienforcement aircraft, with sophisticated technology systems allow it to be effective over land and water, replacing several older aircraft, single mission aircraft and inside so it will be beneficial for us. beyond that, we use our cbp, beyond our borders, our track and airborne early warning
aircraft which have been central in countering natural operations in the transit zone and also against transnational criminal organizations moving drugs out of the source zone through the transit zone and in towards the united states. we work in conjunction with aviation assets, interceptor vessels to operate in coastal waters to combat smuggling and protect u.s. ports from acts of terrorism and we have our air marine operations center, national task force that focuses on criminal use of noncommercial air and advances. so chairman johnson and the ranking member when he comes and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the capabilities and our efforts and in securing our borders. i look forward to taking your questions and look forward if you can come out to our sites. thank you. >> thank you. our next witness is assistant
commissioner mark borkowski, he is the assistant commissioner for the office of technology and innovation and acquisition with u.s. customs and border pro section of the department of homeland security. he's responsible for ensuring technology efforts are properly focused on mission and well integrated access across cbp. mr. borkowski served as the component acquisition executive. prior to his deployment, he served as the border initiative program. mr. borkowski. >> thank you, chairman johnson and senator booker. appreciate the opportunity to be here today. i represent the acquisition community. our responsibility is to deliver the stuff that the operators need. we buy it. i know there is some question about the distinction between us and dhssnt. let me highlight that a little bit to start. dhsnt makes sure there is stuff there.
it is not always ready. we don't always have systems, technologies, software that we need. so first has to be there. once it is there, we have to figure out how best to get it. that means we have to know what the options are, we have to do the business case analysis, we have to figure out how many to buy and have to understand why we're buying it. and for that, of course, we ask the people in uniform, the green or the tan or the blue uniforms, the folks on either side, they describe what we need. it is our job then in acquisition to somehow put that in practice and deliver capability that those operators can use to produce mission outcomes. our focus, the thing we have gotten the most attention on recently, has been the technology for surveillance between the ports of entry. as you know, there is a program called sbi net, which was a very challenging program. we concluded it was not the right system to go across the entire border and much too expensive. we scaled down our ambitions somewhat and selected a much
more modest portfolio of systems that the border patrol selected and tailored to each area of the border. we focused that on arizona because that's where the action was at the time. we are in the throes of completing that plan, which we call the arizona technology plan. and it consists of everything from small, you can imagine handheld long range binocular like sensors to more complex systems on high towers with radars and cameras connected in a command and control center and the purpose of those systems is to give the border patrol better information about what's on the ground, what the threat of that activity is, whether it is a migrant or somebody carrying a weapon, and more options for how to respond. outside of arizona, obviously, the border patrol indicated to us there is activity there is migration. as we have done things in arizona, traffic migrated or for a variety of other reasons. south texas is an area. what we have done is because we were successful in the arizona technology plan, in saving money, we have been able to divert resources to south texas and largely that has been based
on dod re-use. congress has been very strong advocate of us partnering with the department of defense, to use what was already taxpayer investments to leverage those for our capacity and we have been very successful with that in south texas. for example, we're flying aerostats now and we now have surveillance that we probably would not have had until 2018 or 2019. that's a quick summary of our progress and what acquisition does. i look forward to answering your questions as we go forward. >> thank you. our next witness is deputy chief ronald vitiello. i knew it. vitiello. deputy chief of the border patrol, he has served as an agent in supervisory roles of tucson and chief patrol agent of the rio grande valley sector. deputy chief vitiello. >> thank you, chairman johnson, senator booker. it is a pleasure for me to be
here to appear before you to discuss how technology and tactical infrastructure acts as force multipliers toward the u.s. border patrol border security enforcement efforts between the ports of entry. i'm pleased to represent the crucial contribution made to the homeland security enterprise and dhs. this is a special week in washington culminating in the national police officers memorial on the south capital lawn. we observed chief fisher and the secretary commemorate the valor of the fallen, specifically in the unveiling of two new name on the memorial. we honor them and the 115 other guardians the nation lost in 2014. while the basic border patrol mission has not changed in the past 90 years, the operational environment in which we work and the threats we faced changed dramatically. today, our mission includes deterring acts of terrorism, and preventing and responding to
other criminal activity. the effective deployment of fixed and mobile technology, tactical infrastructure is critical to border patrol operations. with the resources, our front line is more informed, effective and safer. the border patrol works closely with the acquisitions colleagues within cbp and dhs to develop and deploy technology and infrastructure. the deployment of tactical infrastructure including fencing, roads and lighting is a critical component of our security efforts. it denies, deters and slows down illegal entrants providing more time for agents to respond. detection technology supplements physical barriers by extending the visual range. ground sensors alert agents to movement and activity while mounted cameras and sensors on aircraft fix towers and border patrol vehicles can be controlled remotely to verify targets. all of this technology and infrastructure works together
and ultimately enables the border patrol to gain situational awareness and forewarn of any danger. the border patrol evaluates our posture and adjusts our capabilities to secure our borders. we work to identify and develop technology such as tunnel detection and monitoring technology, small unmanned aircraft systems, tactical communication upgrades, and border surveillance tools tailored for the southwest and northern borders. there is no doubt that technology is a critical factor in the border patrol strategic plan, which implements a security approach based on risk. the strategy going forward will emphasize joint planning and execution advancing counternetwork approach, and a dhs wide unity of effort. thanks for the opportunity to testify how technology and tactical infrastructure help us secure the border. >> thank you.
our next witness is director anh duong. close? >> yes. >> wow. one out of four is not too bad. director duong is the director of borders and maritime security vision in the science and technology director of the department of homeland security. she focus on developing technologies to put into operational use along our sea, land and air borders and ports of entry. miss duong came to the u.s. as refugee of war from vietnam and spent 25 years working in naval, science and technology directing all of u.s. navy explosive research and development. miss duong. >> good afternoon, chairman johnson, and senator booker. good afternoon, chairman johnson and senator booker. thank you for this opportunity to testify along with my colleagues from border protection with whom we work closely. the science and technology directorates mission is to deliver effective and innovative insight, methods and solutions for the critical needs of the
homeland security enterprise under the leadership of undersecretary broaders, we have direction and defined our visionary goals, which are driven by the 2014 quadrennial homeland security review, white house policy, congressional guidance, and secretary johnson's unity of effort initiative. these goals are screening that matches the pace of life, a trusted cyberfuture, protecting privacy, commerce and community, enable the decisionmaker actionable information at a speed of thought, responder of the future, protected, connected and fully aware. and resilient communities, disaster proofing society. three of these goals are relevant to border security. screening at speed, enable the decisionmaker, and responder of the future. all three require a common enabler, situational awareness in order to screen people and goods with minimum disruption at the pace of life, enable
decisionmakers at various levels and arm responders with information to keep them safe and fully aware. from an operational standpoint, given our broad border against a multitude of ever changing threats. the need for situational awareness is paramount. smt uses technology to improve situational awareness, which in turn enables security. considering both smt visionary goals, and today's operational needs, we're pursuing an enterprise capability to provide improved situational awareness across the homeland security enterprise, called the border and coastal information system or basis. this work includes integrating and fed rating existing stand alone data sources, developing new sensor systems to create new
data, developing an integrating decision support tools and analytics to translate data into actionable information and sharing information with partners. the development for the basis is ongoing for the maritime environment. work for our land borders started in fy 15. to the border situational awareness and providing new data sources, numerous systems are undergoing assessment while providing interim capability. examples include a system in arizona to detect illegal border crossers, a tunnel activity monitoring system in texas, a canada/u.s. sensor sharing pilot, and a system for detecting and tracking small doc aircraft in washington. technology is an essential ingredient of effective border security.
smt will continue to collaborate to bring technology to operational use and help and enhance the border security. i thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to testify under this very important subject. >> thank you. our next witness is rebecca gambler, she is the director of the u.s. government and accountability offices, homeland security and justice team. she leads gao's work on border security, immigration and dhs management. prior to joining gao, she worked at the national -- for democracy and international forum for studies. >> good afternoon, chairman johnson and members of the committee. i appreciate the opportunity to testify at today's hearing to discuss gao's work reviewing dhs efforts to acquire and deploy various technologies and other assets along u.s. borders. dhs has employed a variety of assets in its efforts to secure the southwest border including various land-based surveillance technologies, tactical infrastructure, which includes
fencing, roads and lighting, and air and marine craft. gao reported on dhs' management and oversight of these assets and programs including numerous reports on surveillance technologies under the former security border initiative, and the current arizona border surveillance technology plan. gao has also reported on fencing and other tactical infrastructure with about 652 miles of pedestrian vehicle fencing currently in place along the southwest border. my remarks today will reflect our findings in three areas related to dhs' efforts to secure the border. one, dhs' efforts to implement the technology plan, two, efforts to modernize radio systems and, three, office of air and marines mix and placement of assets. first, cbp has made progress toward deploying programs under the arizona border surveillance technology plan including fixed and mobile surveillance systems, agent portable devices, and
ground sensors. and these technologies have aided the border security efforts. however, we have also reported that cbp could do more to strengthen the management of the plan and technology programs and better assess the contributions of surveillance technologies to apprehensions and seizures along the southwest border. for example, cbp has experienced delays in some of its surveillance technology programs and the plan dates for initial and full operational capability for the integrated fixed towers, for instance, have slipped by several years. we have also previously reviewed cbp's schedules and life cycle cost estimates for the cost programs under the plan and compared them against best practices. overall, the schedules and estimates reflected some but not all best practices. and we found that cbp could take further action to better ensure by more fully applying best practices. improved situational awareness
and agent safety. cbp has also begun requiring border patrol to record data with in its database on whether or not an asset like a camera assisted in an apprehension or seizure. these are positive steps but cbp needs to develop and implement performance measures an analyze data to fully assess the contributions of its technologies to border security. second, with regard to radio systems, earlier this year we reported that cbp and ice had taken action to upgrade their tactical communications infrastructure. for example, cbp and ice completed various modernization programs for their tactical communications such as upgrading outdated equipment and expanding coverage in some areas. however, agents and officers who use the radio systems reported experiencing challenges such as coverage gaps and
interoperability issues which affected their operations. we also found that cbp and ice could take further steps to strengthen and record training on upgraded radio systems provided to officers and agents. third, with regard to air and marine assets, in 2012, we reported that the office of air and marine could better ensure that its mix and placement of assets were effective and efficient by, for example, more clearly linking deployment decisions to mission needs and threats, documenting analyses used for the placement of assets and considering how deployments of border technology affect requirements for air and marine assets. we found that these steps were needed to help cbp better determine the extent to which its allocation decisions were effective in addressing customer needs and threats. in closing, we have made
recommendations to dhs in all of these areas and others to help the department in its efforts to manage and implement technologies, infrastructure and other assets to secure the border. dhs agreed with some of these recommendations, and has actions plans or under way to address some of them. we will continue to monitor dhs' efforts in response to our recommendations. thank you for inviting me to testify and i would be pleased to answer any questions at the appropriate time. >> thank you. our next witness is michael garcia, he is legislative attorney for the congressional research service where he worked since 2003. in his capacity, mr. garcia has focused on issues related to immigration and border security, international law and national security. mr. garcia. >> thank you, chairman johnson, ranking member carper and members of the committee. i'm honored to be testifying before you today regarding the legal authorities and requirements related to the deployment of fencing and other barriers along the u.s. borders. the primary statute governing barrier deployment is section
102 of the illegal immigration reform. section 102 was amended in 2005, 2006, and 2007. these revisions coupled with increased funding for border projects resulted in hundreds of miles of fencing being deployed along the southwest border. however, it appears additional defense deployment halted after 2011. section 102 a expressly authorized dhs to deploy barriers and roads along the borders to deter illegal crossings. section 102 b provides that fencing shall be installed along not less than 700 miles of the southwest border. but fencing is not required at any particular location when dhs determines that other means are better suited to obtain control.
and in section 102 c allows the dhs second to waive any illegal requirement that impedes the expeditious construction of border barriers and roads. in recent years, attention has primarily focused on section 102 b and c, so i'll focus my comments on those provisions. prior to the most recent amendments in the 1996 act, section 102 b required dhs to construct double layered fencing along five specific stretches of the southwest border. the current version of section 102 b no longer requires fencing to be double layered. and provides dhs with discretion regarding where fencing should be installed. although section 102 b is characterized as requiring 700 miles of fencing, the provision actually states that fencing shall be deployed along not less than 700 miles of the southwest border. it prioritizes the amount of the border and the amount of fencing
used by dhs. last year dhs stated that fencing had been deployed along roughly 652 miles of the southwest border. there may be questions regarding the firmness of the 700 mile language. section 102 b states that notwithstanding its requirements, dhs is not required to construct fencing at any particular location, where it deems fencing inappropriate. this clause could be interpreted to meanwhile dhs must deploy fencing along 700 miles of the border, it is not required it deploy fencing at any discreet point. a broader reading of this clause might permit dhs to construct fencing along less than 700 miles of the southwest border if the agency believes fencing is only appropriate along the lesser mileage. however, there are a number of challenges to such a reading.
as an initial matter, the notwithstanding clause does not say that dhs may construct fencing a-long a lesser mileage of the border it says that fencing isn't required at any particular location. if dhs may construct only the amount of fencing it deems appropriate, it is unclear why section 102 b would state that fencing shall be deployed along not less than 700 miles of the southwest border. the legislative history of section 102 b and several courts description of the provision also seemed to give greater support for understanding the 700 mile requirement as a firm one. dhs officials have seemingly taken differing interpretations of section 102 b over the years. a court's consideration of this issue may depend upon whether the meaning of section 102 b is seen as ambiguous and dhs' construction is deemed reasonable. in any event, there is no statutory deadline for when the required fencing must be
completed. and it is also not clear who would have standing to bring a legal challenge against the fencing strategy. turning to section 102 c, this provision grants the dhs secretary the power to waive legal requirements that may impede the construction of border, roads and barriers. wafer authority has been used to facilitate the construction and the upkeep of border projects. but this authority could not be used to waive constitutional requirements. thus, for example, just compensation needs to be given to priority property owner whose land is condemned for purposes of barrier installation. this concludes my prepared statement. i'll be happy to answer any questions you have. >> thank you, mr. garcia. i'm kind of interpreting your testimony that congress might have passed a law that wasn't crystal clear? i guess i would be shocked. senator booker, i guess you have to leave so i'll turn it over to you. >> i'll be leaving here and
preparing remarks for the floor in regards to the train accident we had. i know senator carper was on that train and got off earlier and i'm happy to see that he is here and well and i would like to express my sympathies to the more than 100 people in the hospital recovering from their injuries. i just want to ask this one question before i have to run. ms. gambler. from the notes that i have customs and border protections spent about $2.4 billion to complete 670 miles of border fence. the vast majority was a single layer fence. designed to keep vehicles from crossing. if congress were to implement the defense that would require more land acquisition, more supplies, more labor to build and a man by border patrol, i'm trying to understand the payoff and the cost benefit analysis in our estimation. according to the gao, undocumented entries to the united states during the time actually fell 69% between 2006 and 2011, which is pretty
impressive. but the drug and contraband seizures nearly doubled. and so, are you -- you're an expert looking at cost and benefits and challenges associated with border fencing and technology. if congress eventually approves another 700 miles of double layer barrier part of the border bill, do you share my concern in understanding the cost benefit analysis. and what in your opinion would it be as the 700 miles is put into place? >> so i think that's a very important question. and it goes to something that gao has reported on both as it relates to fencing but also as it relates to other assets, as well, to include technology, which you mentioned, which is really being able to assess what we're getting out of different investments that we're putting
in place along the border. whether it's fencing or technology. and what we've found and reported on is dhs could do a better job of collecting data and develop measures and metrics to assess what contributions they're getting out of different investments. whether that's fencing or whether or not that's technology or other assets. and so, what we've recommended is that dhs take steps to, you know, better collect the data, better develop performance measures and metrics so that we can be able to answer the question you just asked, which is what are the contributions that we're getting out of these, the different structures and technologies we're putting in place. >> before we throw a whole bunch of money at the problem, try to figure out what is going to get us the best results for the money that we spend given the ultimate array of decisions we have between assets like technology, drones or fencing. >> dhs has defense that would allow them to assess on the
technologies front what contributions they're getting out of the technologies they've deployed to seizures and apprehensions, for example. using the -- for the towers that have been deployed, they're starting to collect that data now, and what they need to do is start using that to actually analyze and assess the performance and progress they're making. >> so before politicians make decisions, you really think there should be a data-driven decision through thorough analysis? is that what you're saying? >> we certainly think it's important for them to assess the performance of the systems and how that's contributing to their efforts to secure the border. both as it relates to fencing technology and other assets they might put in place. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman, thank you for your time. >> thanks. we'd like to turn it over to our ranking member, again. we're all very pleased on the committee you got off in time. so if you'd like to say a few words and give us your opening statement. >> thank you. thank you. and i want to thank the folks on
our committee, and frankly, a lot of my colleagues and people around the country would express, just personal feelings that those riding that train last night from washington up to new york are feeling and thinking. i ride a train a lot. and get to know the people who are like the crew on the trains. and i think you ride with a lot of the same people. and never imagine when i got off the train last night that six people from that train would be dead this morning. and we prayed for all of them. and particularly for the -- and also, just a prayer of thanksgiving for the first responders who turned out late at night and the difficult circumstances. a lot of folks were heroes last night and heroines. but a lot of passengers who did extraordinary heroic things. so let's keep them all in our thoughts and prayers. i used to be an amtrak board member. so i've been involved in train accidents as a board member. and sometimes with loss of life and sometimes just a lot of damage. and this is never easy.
and especially hard, as you know. but appreciate all the feeling that people have expressed very much. i want to also express to all of you, a heartfelt thanks for you being here and for what you do with your lives, and trying to make our lives in many instances a lot safer and better quality of life. grateful for that. i'd like to express my thanks for letting us participate in this preparation and putting together, i think, just a really good panel of witnesses. chairman and i and the board is not too many months ago. and we had the opportunity of all walks of life. and one of the questions, what do we need to do more or less of in order to secure the borders? and we heard a lot of things.
but one of the phrases we heard over and over again is technology is the key to securing the border. technology is the key to securing the border. i could not agree more. i could not agree more. and i look forward to hearing from our panel today about the technologies and other tools that conserve as what i call as force multipliers for our agents on the ground. i'm sure my colleagues and our witnesses would agree that we need smart, targeted border security investments. and to me, this means placing a priority on acquiring advanced cameras, sensors, radars so our agents have realtime situational awareness along our borders. for example, been very impressed with vader technology on our drones and surveillance towers. but i've seen along our borders. also means working with the department of defense to reuse equipment no longer needed in theater and places like afghanistan such as the aerostats now we use along the rio grande valley.
finally, means making sure the assets we do have are being used effectively. if we have an airplane, helicopter, drone in the sky. those assets with the right kinds of cameras and surveillance equipment to ensure we're not just flying blind. navy guy for many years, retired navy captain. and i remember many a day, we used to chase nuclear submarines when we weren't in southeast asia all over the world. and the idea of fighting nuclear submarines, using binoculars, and not so effective. frankly, the idea of looking for people in a search and rescue mission using binoculars from a p3 aircraft, not so effective. and when we sent aircraft without the right kind of surveillance technology, we're wasting a lot of fuel, and a lot of people if we're not careful. one of the things i'd like to really hear from our panel today about what technology is working along the border, what's working so we can deploy more of that, find out what works, do more of that, find out what doesn't work and do less of that.
i'd also welcome hearing from each of you today. what isn't working so we can reduce our expenditure on those activities. i know dhs has struggled in the past with some technology deployments that we hope to talk about some of those lessons learned. from what i understand, dhs with the help from our friends at gio has already made many improvements in the acquisition policies. and we look forward to hearing more about that today, as well. we applaud that. and one lesson i've learned over the years, you can't manage what you can't measure. we talked about this a minute ago. that's why it's vital that dhs continue to develop better metrics to measure the progress in securing our borders. and another lesson from the trips i've taken to the mexican border is things do change. things do change. and we've seen that as a move away from california, to arizona, all the way down to the south texas area over the last
couple of years. in this last year with the flood of the last two years was a whole lot more young people coming up and looking for a place to just find refuge. that may explain why i think our agencies have to be nimble. not a big one for us being prescriptive. maybe together working together we can figure that out and be good listeners. we also need to listen to many experts who have told us that the border security can be won only at the border. and those who say cannot just be won at the border. and i don't think it can be won only at the border. we have to take some other steps to address the factors it brings to the borders. to me that means passing comprehensive immigration reform. and also means trying to identify what are the factors causing tens of thousands of people every year, every year to try to get out of honduras, guatemala and salvador. and i said many times, we're contributing to the misery by our addiction to meth
amphetamines, crack cocaine and so forth. lack of hope, lack of economic opportunity, president's -- i think, good plan there, and the vice president is sort of deserves our support. the other thing is, i think we need comprehensive immigration reform. made a good stab at that a couple of years ago. i hope we'll come back and finish the job before long. and so that would, that would pretty much sum up what i want to say. i'll close with this. we care a lot, i think almost everybody on this committee would be described as fiscal conservative. and if you look at the size of our budget deficit, go back about six years, budget deficit peaked out at $1.4 trillion. and it's been coming down since then. it's down by about 2/3. but we still have a big deficit by historical standards.
and we need to continue to work on that. three things, i think, we need to do. we need tax reform that lowers the rates, broadens the base and helps raise money for deficit reduction. we need entitlement reform that serves old people, poor people, frankly saves these programs for our kids. find way to save money in the entitlement programs so they'll be around for our children and grandchildren. >> thank you, senator. you'll enjoy our hearing next week talking about the 30-year deficit and those projections and certainly address those issues you were just raising. as i was speaking to the witnesses, again, and appreciate your thoughtful testimony and all the time you've put into it. if you're going to solve any problem, you really do need the information. that's really the basis of all these hearings is just to lay out that record. lay out the reality. a number of times in testimony we've already talked about having the data. we've had a number of office
inspector general reports. we had one on an oam and we'll get into that a little bit later. just had one issued today on the lack of data driving decisions based on prosecutorial discretion. and deferred action on childhood arrivals. those are serious issues in terms of not having the information. i'd say one of the things frustrating to me, this committee has really delved into the whole issue of immigration reform and border security is just, you know, especially as an accountant, as a guy from manufacturing background. just not having good, solid information and data. recognizing those, it's pretty difficult to obtain that. but we try and do it through testimony, from getting good opinions, chief, i do have to start out a little housekeeping because we were made aware, i think earlier today, that one of our witnesses border agent chris cabrera received notice to appear before a cbp and internal affairs for this thursday. they want to talk to him about
his congressional testimony. you know, my lutheran catechism tells me to put the best structure on it. i'm hoping the reason they want to talk to agent cabrera is they're a little concerned about some of his testimony that might vary with, you know, some of the information that we get from dhs in general. potentially talking about the fact that, you know, he testified to us on the got aways. that there's a certain level of, i guess, informal potential intimidation if they report more than 20 people coming through. the only apprehend ten and all of a sudden the supervisor's there and providing a lot of scrutiny. again, i'm highly concerned about that. we bring people before the committee, swear them in. we swear them in to tell the truth. and i'm -- i do hope that this is an effort to, you know, understand what his testimony was and try to determine whether there are some real distortions in terms of the information, the data we're going to need to
solve this problem. i hope i have your commitment and custom border protections management that this is not any kind of intimidation or retribution. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for that observation. the question. it is, in fact, your impression is correct. we were very concerned about chris's testimony. we're very concerned about the numbers. we want you. we need ourselves to have the data to be as accurate as possible. and chris, we work with him very well. we work with the national border patrol council to the extent that we need to and have to. they're good partners, they have been for us. and we want their testimony to reflect accurately what happens in the field. and he left the suggestion and impression that there was intimidation or misconduct going on in with regards to how the data's collected. that's not my impression, i'm quite sure that the agents and their supervisors and management of the area were chris was discussing are focused on doing the right thing for the right reasons. and so we did, in fact, refer the remarks to the office of
internal affairs for getting to the bottom of whether or not there was misconduct in that area. again, it's my impression, that's not what our leadership and our managers do down there. but it helps. >> okay. good. good. that is very good news. and we'll be watching that. you know, we're talking about all the technologies, the forced multiplier, when we were down on the border. certainly, we hear the aerostats, only up 60% of the time, which means down 40% of the time. same with the uavs. obviously -- and i'll give you a chance to certainly respond to the office of inspector general report. but do we have any information in terms of what percent of individuals were actually detecting? or what percent situation awareness do we have? we have secretary johnson here, i think it was two weeks ago. and he made the blanket statement, i appreciate the honesty that is that, you know,
by the end of this administration, we will not have achieved 100% situational awareness. i understand that. what percent are we at right now? is there any estimate of that? can anybody speak to that? >> i can't be precise as it relates to the situational awareness across the 2,000 miles of the southwest border. we do have a very well understood, it's very well understood what activity levels are, where the hot spots for activities are and how our deployments support that. so as, you know, appropriate for this hearing, the technology is very important. we are -- the data that we collect as it relates to that activity and our observations and the recording of the outcomes of those individual interdictions feeds information where the assets and the agents give us that realtime information. so in a place like downtown nogales, where you visited in downtown brownsville where we do have surveillance technology, a very robust deployment of agents in the downtown environment.
so in realtime, you can collect information about activity and the results of the activity. the results, which includes the people arrested people who ran back and what we call got aways. in other locations, we use other methods to try and do that. there's a lot -- there's lots of space along that 2,000 miles where we don't have that kind of deployment. so we use things like change detection technology to help inform overall. there's also a piece of situational awareness that us having to understand what the capabilities of the criminal network are, how we interact with our fellow law enforcement agencies, our international partners to understand what's happening on the other side of the border, and putting those pieces together along with the observations of people who live along the border that tell us, this is out of the ordinary, this is not. if you start to put all of those things together, it gives you an idea of what's happening across the entire border. >> okay.
but, again, we're always looking for some kind of metric. and certainly laws we've passed call for a metric, you know, call for a goal of 100% situational awareness, 90% of operational control. so the question i have is as long as a lot of laws have been passed that way or that's certainly the idea behind some of these laws. are we not calculating that? are we not trying to track that metric now in anticipation of having potentially comply with the requirement for 100% situational awareness? >> so we look at a suite of data that says, these are the arrests, we look at things like recidivism, there are other elements we're trying to bring in, the secretary is focused on, in the unit of effort of tying the data together. we've struggled with the idea of combining situational awareness. i think it's one of those phrases for a title that we seem to all understand. but when you get down to it, how do you measure something with a different connotation for a different environment? >> so would the position of department of homeland security be, then, they would just really reject or certainly resist having piece of legislation where you got that metric 100% situational awareness? >> i think we would all enjoy having a defined set of
circumstances that says if you have these four criterion met, you do have situational awareness. we think it's broader. it's obviously if you have technology, a piece of machinery that surveils the border in realtime 24/7, that's an element of situational awareness. z there are other pieces to that. it becomes difficult to decide exactly where you're at and what what the actual definition is. but -- >> so while we're on this topic, before i turn it over to the ranking member. anybody else want to comment on this? ms. gambler? >> we've, as i've mentioned, reported on the need for cbp to put in place, you know, measures to assess progress made in securing the border. and we've, you know, reported, as well, you were asking questions about sort of estimating flow and things like
that. our understanding and certainly the chief can speak to this perhaps better than i can, but those are -- those are estimates. when you're talking about things like that. the border patrol does record apprehensions. but the other data points that go into estimating flow turn backs and got aways as we discuss are estimated by the border patrol. >> thank you. senator, carper? >> thank you, mr. chairman. the time line that i am -- i have all the time in the world. so i'm going to yield to my time for a while and maybe i could pick up in a little bit. thanks. >> thank you, senator carper. following up on the chairman's questions, did any of you have a concise definition for situational awareness? okay. that's good enough. i would just say, i think before we can even talk about situational awareness and how important situational awareness
is, i don't know what the hell we're talking about, you know. and so the next question is, is situation awareness a prerequisite for having a secure border? chief? >> i believe if we can come to terms on the definition for situational awareness, then you can constructively then go from there, recognizing what the data is and say whether you have situational awareness or not, and based on the activity levels, capability that cbp and others bring, then you can leap from there or jump from there or work out from there to that secure border definition. >> all right. so, moving forward here, i think we all want to have a secure border. and, look, if we want to get hung up on terminology, we can get hung up on terminology. how many people are getting through and how many people are being apprehended? and how secure is it? how safe is it? and are we spending the money in ways that make sense? whether it's on drones or radar or ground sensors or fences? and so the next question i have, and most of these are going to be to you, chief.
but mr. murkowski, you feel free to jump in if you feel and assess the two. are drones used on the northern border? >> yes, sir, they are used on the northern border. >> in concert with the canadians? >> no, they are used in conjunction with the border patrol, sir. >> it's not a joint effort? you guys? >> it is not. >> how about radar in the northern border? >> we do pull in all faa radar feeds dod feeds. >> how about radar under 5,000 feet on a northern border? >> the coverage is limited.
>> okay. >> what about ground sensors? >> yes. on the northern border. and those feeds are directly shared across international -- >> okay. that's good. how many miles would you say on a northern border ground sensors are utilized? >> i could be precise to the record with some data -- >> that'd be fine. >> each of the sectors. >> when we're talking about a technology like drones and ground sensors in particular, less on radar, but when ground sensors and drones in particular, is there -- is there some reduction in manpower when they're utilized? or is that not the case? >> in making us more efficient? >> well, what i'm saying, do you need as many people underground or get by and still have a safe border? >> correct. both the sensors and the aircraft allow for us to do more with fewer. >> with fewer. okay. that's -- that's good to know. can you tell me other than sharing the ground sensor information. you know, canada's a pretty good ally of ours. is there anything else you do besides border crossings in a joint way? >> yes, under several frameworks
by each leadership in the department at higher levels, we work with canada in every area as it relates to border security. >> there's private land, public land, there's national parks, indian reservations. typically, we're on the border everywhere, both private and public land. there's a recognition from landowner, and within 25 miles, you know, as the job demands -- >> yeah. >> we enter private land. >> that's better than i got for information last week. i appreciate that. when you -- i want to talk about partnerships for a second. i think the border patrol did a poor job as far as building partnerships and this was eight or nine years ago. you've improved with highway patrol, local police folks. with ranchers, with farmers,
hopefully with other agencies, too. i'm talking about federal agencies. how do you feel those partnerships are working? and is there anything we can do to make those partnerships work better? >> we -- i believe that we've recognized that's part of how we're going to be successful in the environments that we work. having partnerships, leveraging each other's authority, exchanging information so that people are recognizing where threats are. that's always going to be part