tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN February 24, 2016 10:05am-12:06pm EST
that. why aren't we spending the money here? she says climate change is an issue related to wildfire and droughts, storms, and since $1.3 billion -- >> we are spending -- >> the question is why aren't we spending it here rather than sending it overseas to bureaucrats? >> there are 20 major nations in the world that account for the vast majority of the majority because the less developed countries are now growing in their emissions as a result of their own practices. if we don't help these that are burning coal without any kind of restraint on how they burn it, we are going to regrettably suffer. it's in our self-interests to make better choices about what their future. it opens up jobs because we are
the most advanced. we could be creating more jobs as a result of getting countries to invest more thoughtfully in their energy future, but they can't afford to do it on their own. we're helping make a transition to the future. there will be $50 trillion spent on the whole gamut. that's jobs for poem all over the world. and so i think had is an extremely smart investment in our security as well as in our economy and i think when americans are presented that choice, americans, in fact, they already are overwhelmingly in support of our doing something about climate change. >> during your confirmation -- switch to syria here. during the confirmation hearing
january 2013, you were asked about the situation in syria. you stated every day that goes by gets worse. i asked you about putin's support of assad in syria. at the time of your confirmation hearing there were 60,000 individuals estimate it had to have been killed in the crisis in syria. the estimate this past weekend is it's now up to 470,000 killed in the crisis in syria. that was the numbers and the international survey on this. 300 more killed every day like the last three years. russia continues to support the assad regime. opposition groups in syria. putin's attempting to change the battlefield to bolster the assad regime in terms of anything related to peace. it includes bombing civilians,
the current is vladimir putin's war in syria. why would he stop now? it says both of aleppo's main hospitals were systematically destroyed by russian air strikes last year. nobody should be surprised that despite signing the agreement russia would continue its air strikes against those and it regards as terrorists which they point out is an elastic term for putin. today's "new york times" editorial lying on mr. putin. putin ceasefire to him is a tack tech, even a smokescreen not a goal. john kerry, secretary of state, thought he could achieve through his agreement with mr. lavrov. russia has now made a joint statement it will agree to a
cessation of hostilities february 27th. the only thing they have been consistent with is failing to keep its words. what do you support if it violates the ceasefire and it is a smokescreen or some kind of a charade? >> well, in answer to the question what does john kerry think he can achieve -- >> and the consequences for russia if they do violate. >> my job is war is the absence of failure of diplomacy. our job is to see if there is a way to bring this to an end. i'm not naively vouching for the fact this is going to work but
the alternative is i go and visit countries while the war wages on and nobody makes the effort to stop it. that's the alternative. you'd be criticizing me if i were doing that. why isn't there diplomacy to try to find a solution? it is a well known fact i have advocated for strong efforts to make sure we achieve something. there's significant discussion taking place now about plan "b" in the event that we don't succeed it at the table. so, look, put yourself in president putin's shoes. he can drop bombs and move the battlefield, and he has changed it for assad. no question about it. he has had a better impact for assad. but the answer is no.
i think president putin is smart enough to understand that if he just sits there over time, those people who supported the opposition will get different weapons, more weapons, and they will continue this fight. and a syria without the capacity to put it back together that we have today. the story was written about car it thage. they made a desert and called it peace. you can make a desert in the desert. and call it what you want. this war will not end with assad there. it just will not end. president putin can bring in more. he can start additional bombing.
because of the sectarian nature of this, if he thinks he's going to be better off fight iing on behalf of a dictator who has driven most of his people out of the country or into refugee status, killed a bunch of them, if he thinks he'll be better off supporting hezbollah and iran and assad against an increasingly sectarian divide, that is very dangerous. >> it seems there were no co consequences for putin's violation of the ceasefire. i've not heard one from you with regard to this administration. >> there are a number of things being talked about right now. i think it's out there. this is a moment to see whether or not we can make this work.
not talk about the down sides. >> u.n. ambassador samantha power talked about all of the failures of russia to -- or the violations of russia with ceasefires in ukraine. it seems we're seeing this picture again. >> let's see if we do and let's see what plan "b" is or isn't that's what it takes. >> i've had terse words with the secretary in public before and it's not my job certainly today to defend them and i'm not -- i think ever since august/september of 2013 when we did not take the actions that this committee authorized against syria, russia and others have known we're not going to do those things to cause there to be a price and i think the secretary is negotiating a
situation where there is no plan "b." russia knows there will be no plan "b." unless the other side knows there will be no consequences, we know there's not going to be under this president. secretary kerry probably knows they're not going to be. and russia knows. and that's what makes it difficult. >> that would be actually senator -- honestly, i appreciate your comments. but it would be a mistake for anybody to calculate president obama isn't going to decide that if this doesn't work there aren't another set of options. i don't buy that. anybody who presumes that is misjudging this president and his record.
my first choice, the first choice of the security team, but there are plenty of people who are thinking about, okay, if it doesn't work then what? including the president of the united states who has the responsibility to make that choice. anybody who thinks that there is impunity for violating this and going forward is making a great mistake in my judgment. >> we've been thinking about it for two and a half years, senator kaine? >> i'm way late for a meeting i was supposed to be at. i'm going to save my questions for the budget committee hearing that we're going to have. let me offer a statement to you, mr. secretary. as a member of this committee but just as a citizen, we owe you a huge debt of thanks. you played a part as a senator. you have played a major part in unfreezing three frozen relationships the united states has had bilaterally as a senator, working with senator mccain you unfroze a very painful relationship between the united states and vietnam.
it could have failed. there was no guarantee it would work. you played a major role. now as secretary of state you played a major role in taking two other relationships that have been frozen with iran and with cuba and putting them into a new chapter. there is a guarantee that the lack of engagement fails. it will be a long time before we know the outcome of the work you've done diplomatically just like it took a number of years to realize where they're now begging us to be their security partner, begging us to be their trade partners. that wasn't obvious when you did what you did in the early 1990s and yet that has been a path of progress where even though we
still have challenges in vietnam no one wants to go backwards and back to a frozen relationship. there have been achievements. the roosevelt brokering of the end of the russia/japanese war. truman and marshall and the marshall plan was an achievement. opening to china was an achievement. the northern ireland accords. i think the work that you've done on these three very tough, working with others, senator mccain, and the encouragement of a president obama who cares about diplomacy, thank goodness, i think it will rank in the very top ranks of diplomatic achievements. no guarantee of success. diplomatic effort is almost a guarantee of failure. i'll save my questions for next
week. >> thank you very much. >> senator shaheen? >> thank you, mr. chairman, and mr. secretary, thank you. i don't have as broad a perspective to provide thanks to you as senator kaine did but certainly appreciate your tireless efforts to promote american values around the world. minute matter and as i think you have been very supportive of the special immigrant visa program, those who helped us and from the armed services committee and i sent you and secretary johnson a letter two weeks ago. asking you to reinterpret the language from last year's defense authorization bill.
because i believe the department's initial reading was inconsistent with what our intent was when we passed that bill. that we have disqualified many afghan applicants who really work to serve this country and should not be disqualified because they face serious threats if they are disqualified. i don't know if you have any update but take a hard look. >> i couldn't agree with you more. we share that concern. we do not want people who had -- who had already expressed or received approval before september last year to suddenly be caught up in this change inadvertent ly that would be grossly unfair and dangerous, obviously. so two things.
one, we are reviewing it in the legal department, and we're trying to see whether or not -- in fact, the law can be interpreted in a way we can just make it happen appropriately. if that didn't work or doesn't work then we're going to work with you very clear ly to quicky legislate a change that remedies this problem. i agree with you, we don't want people treated that way. it would be a gross miscarriage of justice if that happened. >> thank you. i appreciate that. to stay on the subject of immigration, one of the thin things -- one of the most horrible outcomes of the civil war in syria is the refugee crisis that has been created by that. the implication is not just for syria, for the middle east, for so many of our allies, for europe.
and they have highlighted a refugee crisis around the world that is getting worse not better. i was surprised to see the migration and refugee from the international disaster assistance accounts in budget and given the crisis that we're facing, it's hard for me to understand the rationale for that. can you speak to that? >> first of all, i think we don't have a way of predict iin exactly what the demand is. we have another $125 million to deal directly with the refugee crisis. $600 million and some for aid and another -- the difference would be for education and so
forth. but our sense is that if we don't have enough we'll have to come back and discuss that with you. we have an ability to have some flexibility. >> it's a double-edged sword. we don't like it because it got in the way at the budget and i agree with that. on other hand it gives us plexability to respond to these and there have been more of them which is why it has evolved the way it has. >> and i appreciate that. i put myself with senator cardin and corker that says that's not the way we ought to be solving our budget problems. let me go to the eu. i mentioned the threat posed by the syrian refugees to the eu
union. it's facing more threats than at any time since world war ii given russian aggression and ukraine and other countries, given the threat from further terrorist attacks, the potential exit of the uk from the european union. can you talk a little bit about how we're trying to respond to some of those challenges and how this budget strengthens the attack and to support europe? >> the first thing we've done was agree to work with them on the nato deployment for the flow of refugees and we are talking with them now about what further
extensions may or may not be needed. as i said earlier we have plussed up our budget to all of the frontline states with respect to this. in addition to that we pledged $925 million i talked about in london for the refugees. one of the things that has motivated our policy is this notion we're the world's largest donor, $5.1 billion and this thing can keep on going and we can keep writing a check but we don't want to. what we would rather do is push forward on the other front to see if we can't get an end by the cessation of hostilities and legitimate diplomatic process. and, you know, while i've said
again and again here i'm not going to vouch for the fact that this works, we have to put it to the test. we have no alternative but to test this. with all the cynicism and all the doubts that each of us will carry to the table, we have to test it. and then we'll know if people aren't serious that gives you a whole different set of choices. that will have the most profound effect of all on europe and it's the one way really to deal with the issue in a more last iing a effective way. >> thank you. my time is up and you've been here long enough. i just want to add as a post script that i support the efforts to counteract extremism the state department has taken. that's critical as we think about how we're going to fight back against isis and terrorism
groups. we have undertaken a new initiative around countering violent extremism. so i just would hope that as the state department is working on this issue that we're working with homeland security to make sure that it's a coordinated effort to be across government. >> we're working very closely with them hand-in-hand. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator cardin? >> i was listening to some of my colleagues comment about u.s. involvement internationally. when i first came to the congress we could not pay a foreign assistance bill. it was not a popular thing to do. today i don't think we'd have any trouble at all, mr. secretary, getting the political support for a $50 billion foreign bill based upon u.s. globally. that's a credit to involving
leadership to explain the importance of our power. we have the military might and i agree president obama will use that when it's needed. it should be a matter of last resort. we have the ability to accomplish some really good things for the world because we do get involved in the issues. you've been able to advance the national security of america and we're proud to be your partners here. you've had a good relationship and got things done together. thank you, mr. secretary. >> let me just thank you. i thank you both. we really appreciate when we came up you were there.
i appreciate you. thank you. >> listen, we appreciate your indulgence. you've been here two and a half hours. on a bipartisan basis, people have extended their appreciation for your tremendous effort. the details of the budget we'll get into more with staff. we appreciate your appearance on work on behalf of our country. i look forward to seeing you in the next setting. the meeting is adjourned. if you would answer questions that we'll leave the record open to the close of business thursday, we'd appreciate it. the meeting is adjourned.
we are live on capitol hill this morning where attorney general loretta lynch is set to testify about the justice department's fiscal year 2017 budget request. the obama administration is requesting $29 billion for the agency next year. the attorney general appearing before the senate appropriations subcommittee that overseas spending for the justice department. texas congressman john culberson is chair of the subcommittee. should get under way in just a moment.
the appropriations subcommittee will come to order. it's a privilege to have you with us here today, attorney general lynch. our first hearing together with me as the new chairman and you as the new attorney general. we deeply appreciate your service to the country and on behalf of the law enforcement community across america and for all of us as americans who depend on the good work that you and your officers and every law enforcement officer of the state and local level do, we want to thank you. as america's chief law enforcement officer, we're counting on you to keep us safe to make sure the laws are enforced as written by congress. we're just immensely grateful for the sacrifice you and everyone that wears the uniform make on behalf of our great country. in this year fiscal 2017 we'll be working to ensure the department of justice has the resources it needs to do its job and not only enforcing our laws as written by congress but to
combat cyber crime, gangs, terrorism, even trafficking and espionage. of course our subcommittee has the responsibility to ensure our constituents' hard earned tax dollars are spent wisely and frugally in compliance with federal law as written by congress, and we are confident that the relationship that you and i and your staff have already developed, that we're moving in the right direction which i deeply appreciate and we'll find ways to continue that cooperation in ensuring that the money that is the hard earned money our constituents pay to the irs and the federal government is use d to keep our streets safe and is spent wisely and frugally. it's very important, and i know you as the new attorney general, will do all you can to ensure we don't hear that any of our hard-earned tax dollars are spent for lavish parties, unnecessary expenses or
unauthorized activities. and in our hearing today and in the weeks and months to come throughout the remainder of president obama's term in office, i know you will work to convince this committee that the department of justice is working to diligently enforce federal law and spend our hard-earned tax dollars wisely and frugally to protect us. and even those federal laws that the administration wants to change but does not have congressional support to change, that's an important part of this, it's our responsibility as good stewards of the constituents' dollars. i would like to hear in particular today how your department is protecting america's second amendment rights, ensuring state and local governments are not refusing to cooperate with the department of homeland security in releasing violent criminals into communities. as the new chairman of this subcommittee, the rule is that if a federal agency or a state or local government expects to
receive federal money they have to comply with federal law and i'm delighted with the letter you sent me. it looks like we're on the same page. very, very pleased to hear that. we also want to talk about what the department of justice is doing to combat cyber crime and espionage and above all protecting the united states from terrorism. i look forward to working with you throughout the year as the appropriations process moves forward and before i proceed i would like to recognize our ranking member, mr. honda, from california for any remarks he would like to make. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to thank you for your leadership and fostering really a collegial open atmosphere amongst the members of our subcommittee and also would like to welcome to our subcommittee attorney general lynch and thank you for coming here to testify today. as our nation's chief law enforcement officer we are grateful for your service to our country and your commitment to upholding the rule of law.
we're also especially thankful for the thousands of hard working men and women at the department of justice who work around the clock to keep us safe. i look forward to building upon last year's successes by putting together a strong cgs appropriations that supports the mission ofwnñwñ our law enforce agencies in protecting the american people especially the most vulnerable among us and those communities that have been investigated in the past. i'm pleased that the president's budget provides for a healthy increase for what has been a relatively stagnant department of justice budget over the past few fiscal years. this year's request includes resources for law enforcement at the federal, state, and local levels to help keep up in combatting the threats to the american people. it also provides resources to those in distress such as victims of sexual assault and human trafficking as well as
victims. it is critical to our country and that it is vitally important that the department of justice has the resources in t needs to effectively enforce our nation's laws. with that, i want to thank you again for joining us this morning. i lookd ?n forward to hearing y /estimony and in response to thx our subcommittee. mr. chairman? >> thank you, mr. honda. you're recognized for your opening statement and without objection your written statement will be entered into the record in its entirety. and if we could i would encourage to you keep your statement to five minutes to summarize and that will give us additional time for questions. but, again, welcome, look forward to hearing your opening statement and we'll proceed. thank you. >> thank you so much, mr. chairman. good morning and also good morning and thank you also to ranking member honda, all the distinguished members of the committee, the hard working staff. it's an honor to appear before you today. i'm grateful for this opportunity to discuss the
president a's fiscal year 2017 budget for the department of justice which reflects our enduring commitment to creating the stronger nation and the more empowered communities that every american deserves. in the last year thanks to the thousands of dedicated men and women who serve the department of justice and thanks to the ongoing support of this distinguished committee we have taken tremendous steps towards that goal. we have defended the integrity of our markets and beauty of our natural resources. we've worked to end human trafficking, to disrupt the flow of illegal drugs and weapons, and to eradicate international corruption. we've created new opportunities for second chances in our justice system and trust in our cities and towns. these are real and meaningful achievements and in the 2017 budget request will allow us to build upon this encouraging progress.
the first priority is the safety and the security of the american people. it would invest in $781 million in our national security capabilities including evolving challenges like home grown extremism, online radicalization and increasingly sophisticated encryption. among other items that request contains funds for a new state-of-the-art fbi headquarters which would streamline communications and also significantly boost our ability to thwart emerging criminal and terrorist threats. it devotes an increase in $63 million to enforcing our intelligence sharing capabilities. this would allow us to more rapidly coordinate with our federal partners and counterparts overseas. it directs $38 million to the tools we need to lawfully access encrypted data and communications so that we can
successfully investigate and prosecute criminals and terrorists who attempt to hide the evidence of their crimes. as we've seen recently we've made clear the going dark problem is a very real threat to law enforcement's mission to protect safety and ensure criminals are caught and held accountable. if an independent judge finds reason to believe that a certain eitem contains evidence of a crime then that judge can authorize the government to conduct limited search for that evidence. if the government needs the assistance of third parties to ensure that the search is actually conducted judges all over the country and on the supreme court have said that those parties must assist if it is reasonably within their power to do so. that is what we have been asking. and the public's safety we must protect to ensure we have done everything under the law to fully investigate terrorist
attacks on american soil. now as technology continues to evolve we are focused on stepping up our work against those who use the internet to steal trade secrets and to jeopardize the privacy and the property of everyday citizens. accordingly the fiscal year 2017 budget would dedicate $121 million in additional resources to investigating cyber crimes and fortifying the constituent department's vital information network. $85 million will be used to enhance the capacity to collect and analyze digital evidence and to increase the overall number of cyber investigations. together had funding will allow us to keep pace with the fast changing pace of cyber crime. our commitment to protecting the american people is matched by our dedication to ensuring they
benefit from a criminal justice system that is fair, responsive and effective. the 2017 budget requests an increase of $247 million for one of our most successful and ground br groundbreaking undertakings in that area. this encourages incarceration for low level nonviolent o offenders, eases overcrowding and correctional facilities and frees resources for the prevention and deterrence of the most serious crimes. $184 million would go to the bureau of prisons re-entry, rehabilitation and mental health programming which are all essential xoenlts of our work to help formally incarcerated individuals make the most of their second chance while ensuring that our communities are strong and safe. those are the communities we seek for every american and they require bonds of trust and respect between law enforcement officers and the people we serve
helping to repair those bonds where they have frayed is one of my top priorities as attorney general. and the president's request reflects that focus with an increase of $25 million and a number of programs design ed to foster collaboration between law enforcement including racial reconciliation as well as improved data collection. it includes addition al funds, the department's smart policing program which encourages local jurisdictions to improve police/citizen interactions while developing cost effective solutions it to crime in their communities. it enlarges our investment in the policing hiring program which extends funding it to state and local departments to hire or retain officers so that they can continue to meet the full range of their constituents' needs. those of us who work in law enforcement have a special responsibility to protect the most vulnerable among us.
prey on the vulnerable and human trafficking which destroys families and weakens communities and erodes our society's basic foundations of decency and security. the fy-17 budget sets aside $389 million for the efforts to combat this skournlg including $45 million for efforts to help victims of trafficking rebuild their lives and reclaim their futures. we also resolved that each and every one of our young people should grow up in safety and security. which is why a net increase of over $64 million for office of justice program grants focused on juvenile justice and at-risk youth including an increase in $25 million for the delinquency prevention program which seeks to prevent people from entering the criminal justice system by providing assistance and guidance as early as possible.
i look forward to working with this committee and congress to secure the timely passage of the president's budget which asks for a total of $29 billion in discretionary funding for the department. including $27 billion for federal programs and $2 billion for state, local and tribal assistance programs. this level of funding will ensure that the outstanding men and women of the department of justice i am so proud to lead can continue their tireless work to protect america's citizens to defend america's values and strengthen america's communities in the days and months ahead. i thank you once again for the opportunity to appear before you today, and i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you, mr. chairman and mr. ranking member. >> thank you very much. attorney general, there's been a lot of concern expressed by our constituents and citizens across the country. about a proposal just released
yesterday that the department of defense released to close the military detention facility at the u.s. naval station in guantanamo bay that at present holds detainees. as you nope in the fiscal year 2016 2016 appropriations act for the department of justice it includes two very specific provisions that prohibit funds from being used to transfer, release or assist in the transfer of detainees to the united states or its territories and that prohibits the department of justice from acquiring, building or modifying any facility in the u.s. or its territories to house detainees and i just wanted to ask, make sure to reassure the country and the congress. would you agree the federal government is prohibited from establishing such facilities and transferring guantanamo detainee into the united states or its territories. >> certainly that's the state of the law most recently passed. certainly as it respects the
department's appropriations. we also do not participate in efforts to do so. i believe the president's plan reflects the administration's ongoing goal to close guantanamo bay because of the ongoing problems its causes its enemies particularly abroad as the terrorist recruiting center and in the national security work we see the effects of that. the administration is committed to closing that. we support those efforts. i would note the administration is committed to working with congress to make it happen. certainly in light of the current statutory framework we anticipate that's what will occur. if there is a request of the department in connection with the effort of course we'll be happy to help in that regard. >> obviously you will not take. we are not aware of efforts at this time in any event.
>> thank you very much. in january the obama administration announced new executive action dealing with americans right to bear and keep arms. that's a source of concern to americans across the country. the second amendment is guaranteed to all americans as the subcommittee chairman. it's important that i will do everything in my power to ensure that right to keep and bear arms is protected. i was concerned for the guidance on firearms on licensing is part of this. i want to ask in particular will the guidance impact or affect hobbyists who may engage in ordinary transfers? >> thank you very much. i agree it is an important issue worthy of debate. the guidance published by atf which will be distributed at gun shows and to individuals who
have questions about whether or not they are required to obtain a license to sell firearms is designed to gather existing law in one place in a clear, easily understandable version of the various court cases that opined on the issue. so individuals who have the questions who routinely come to atf, either the gun shows or able to have at their fingertips an outline of what the current hlq.5áurjr)t onenpz is a hobby col. just want to reassure people [, jp gun to a family
we have tried to have clear examples of the typical situations where activities and where they fall in the category of a collector transfer, a hobbyist transfer. people will see in the examples the type of everyday activities typically not covered by the law that requires them to get a license and would distinguish them from individuals who are engaged in the business. >> for americans listening they need to know unless they are engaged in the regular buying and selling of fire arms for profit as a part of their daily life that's what they do as part of their living. those folks need a license. otherwise you are not targeting or going after individual americans to keep and bear arms or transfer them to family
members, buy and sell them casually or occasionally. they are not on the radar screen. >> while that's generally the case there are situation where is the courts in reviewing the statute have found that even the sale of a few weapons, even if it's not someone's everyday livelihood. if there are other factors they hold themselves out. they have a business card, for example. they may go to not even a gun show but a flea market. the courts have held that the individuals in those situations can be considered as being engaged in the business. so our concern is, again, as i noted a number of people reach out to atf for guidance. these are individual who is want to comply with the law. we thought it would be helpful to provide clear examples of situation where is the courts found that individuals with certain activities are engaged in the business of dealing in firearms and provide assistance to gain a license if they want to continue making certain types of sales. the number of guns isn't the
only factor. in fact, it need not be someone whose only job or source of economic income is the selling of firearms. the courts found that achlts as much as i enjoy being a lawyer we shouldn't impose it on everyone else to seek out the cases and do the research to try to find what the courts said about these particular situations. we felt it would be useful in response to requests to gather the information in one clear easily understandable format. >> i appreciate the response from the director of the atf and your office. it is important to assure americans they can relax and there is no reason to be concerned unless you are doing it to make a profit on a regular basis. that's important. i think for all of us. i appreciate your answer. i recognize mr. honda.
>> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm not sure we dealt with sexualle assault kit testing. today there are estimated 400,000 untested rape kits still collecting dust in the evidence room. we must provide adequate resource for collaborative efforts to ensure the tests to reduce the existing rape kit backlogs. 45 million for reducing the sexualle assault law nationwide. this is in addition to fy-15. the president's fy-17 budget requests including another 41 million for the program. are there best practices out of the work so far and would you
share with us the policies and progress. >> thank you for your commitment to the issue. the current budget request includes 41 million for a community grant program to ensure the resolution of the sexual assault cases to get the kids tested. these are, in fact, kid kits ne submitted to crime labs and the numbers are staggering. 10,000 in some cities. 11,000 in others. these represent victims. they represent individual women who suffered one of the most heinous crimes that we can. with respect to this, we have, in fact, funded the different laboratories working with a dna related forensic program to reduce the backlog also. we are looking to enhance the capacity and capabilitile since 2009 we have been working with the effort. in the labs funded by dna
enhancement and backlog have processed over 550,000 cases. as a result of just this work alone over a quarter million cases, about 240,000 cases have been uploaded and we have gotten almost 100,000 hit sos far. 92,000 hits. we have connected the information from the rape kit with someone already in the system. i don't have those figures for you. certainly it allowed us to close cases and further investigations. we reannounced the recent grant last september. i was privileged to be in new york with the vice president at the new york forensic laboratory and announcing that in conjunction with the manhattan district attorney cy vance. at the same time we received communication from other district attorneys across the country that money that the federal government provided and money that the manhattan d.a.'s office was provgcq' allowed thm
funds go toward. just to ensure the perpetrators are caught. these members are aware two years ago in the violence against women act the amendment allowed tribal nations for the first time to have jurisdiction over nonindian perpetrators of violence against indian women on the reservation. this had been a gap that prevented justice for a number of victims. this year, we are also including grant money to help tribal law enforcement agencies and tribal courts with their court programs to focus on prosecuting those cases as well. it is our hope and intent to deal with the issue of victims of crime on indian land. both with a view toward focusing on dealing with victim trauma, particularly that of children and strengthening the tribal justice systems that allow for prosecution of the crimes on the actual reservation.
>> the sexual assault kit testing issue, is there an issue there and are the programs available. >> thank you. my apologies. i was late on the floor. i apologize. i missed part of the opening statement. a couple of questions this morning. i work closely with our leadership in pinellas county, florida. as many heard regarding the asset forfeiture program when the memo went out in december announcing a suspension of reimbursement of the requests. that created a lot of concern and consternation among local
law enforcement. i'm aware of the requests that came up. the additional rescission that is came through as well that led to the decision. we had a constructive meeting with senior leadership a month ago. the department anticipates renewing the equitable sharing of the asset forfeiture program sometime in the coming months. >> it has been one of great concern to our state and local colleagues and also to those of us in the department of justice who rely upon them so heavily for the important work they do in the task forces. if you look at the task forces throughout the department of justice law enforcement agencies, they are 50 to 60% local law enforcement. they have the best information and we found it to be an incredibly helpful partnership
and one that's saved lives and built cases. when the rescissions were give ton the department last year. we were forced to temporarily suspend payments. i have been in contact with the leaders of the law enforcement groups including police and the national sheriffs groups to discuss the situation with them and advised them as i am happy to advise you that this is a temporary deferral of payments. we anticipate that through the course of the work over the year that the asset forfeiture fund will be able to be reple niched to an amount we can resense of humor the payments. we initially promised the law enforcement partners an update a month after the actions. i spoke to them at the end of the january. we promised to update them also on a monthly basis and a promise, i think, to update this
body by march as well. we essentially are looking at the fund to make sure we look at the obligations to victims, et cetera, that we have the ability to start the payments. we have made the request of law enforcement partners to remain and continue submitting requests to us. so we can process them as funds are available. we made sure they are aware though the payments are deferred the joint law enforcement operation payments haven't been. so much of that money goes to support the incredible amounts of overtime in supporting the joint efforts. we are essentially prioritizing those so that in the immediate term they can cover those expenses. we asked them to continue and i have received commitments that they will work with us.
there is a little bit of disagreement on how they got there. the rescission was larger than anticipated but there is the settlement of roughly 090 million dollars coming into the fund. this committee provided flexibility as to when the department could execute the rescission. while i look forward to, woing in a constructive manner i want to make sure the committee stays on top of ensuring equitable has restarted and decisions regarding the accounting of the fund weren't made for political purposes. and the best judgment of the department. in the estimation of the committee, the rescission could have been held off for several months and perhaps prevented a delay. at the end of the day woe appreciate the partnership between local law enforcement and your department.
it is critical to communities particularly in human trafficking which has been a priority of yours. i thank you for that. i'm about out of time. i would ask one more question. if you could provide your perspective on the 1033 program. i know it is largely a department of defense program that shares surplus equipment with local law enforcement. it has been a program that in some ways has been under scrutiny. from the very top of the president of the united states himself on down. could you provide your perspective as the attorney general in terms of the role surplus equipment provides in local law enforcement leadership or your concerns about it. >> certainly. this has been a topic of concern. i hope constructive discussion over the last year. certainly since i have been in this chair. we have had the opportunity to talk about it again with my state and local colleagues and my law enforcement officers and she riffs about the issue. i'm sure the group is aware the administration did issue
guidelines on the acquisition of surplus d.o.d. equipment using federal funds. >> right spmg of course departments yug using other funds wouldn't deal with those guidelines. the focus was on making sure the equipment was not only appropriately sourced but appropriate training was provided for the equipment. we see greatle value and benefit in having that where state and local entities, police officers, sheriff's departments can obtain surplus equipment. it's been effective in specific operations that we can all come to mind. it's been effective, for example, with helping ensure that swat teams are resourced. we want to make sure, again, the appropriate training is in place and the equipment is accounted for. the initial review was to democrat what types of equipment
worked best and where federal funds were involved to come up with a list that would at least in the administration's view continue to meet local law enforcement needs and also deal with the issues of perhaps over use of equipment or use of the equipment by departments that were not as well trained as others. and where the use of it, rather than being in the sense of protecting the community, swat-type situations was used in ways that inflamed tensions which is not the intent of anyone. i have had an ongoing dialogue with the law enforcement groups as well as sheriffs about this program. they could still obtain the equipment they need using federal funds or grants, for example. it could be put to good use, effective use in terms of public safety without the intended -- the unintended collateral consequences of having the more open program that existed before.
>> i appreciate that. i know the full committee chairman came in. i would offer for your consideration, i have shared this with folks in the white house as well. this is also an interest of mine given my relationship with local law enforcement. my approach is simple. i have it in legislation that's been introduced. keeps the 1033 program in place. it does require local law enforcement to certify that they have personnel capable or trained on the equipment they are use lgsing. it leaves the decision for which is most appropriate in the hands of local law enforcement. it requires the training to make sure any equipment is operated in the means of the mission. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> it's my the kentucky, the gentleman from kentucky and chairman of the full committee, hal rogers.
>> thanks for recognition of a former life. i appreciated the time i served as d.a. and law enforcement. thank you for being here. your request is a 3% increase over current levels. this system has a responsibility to prioritize the administration of justice in support for the men and women in law enforcement. i believe we can do so without spending away financial integrity. it highlights important programs but the budget request doesn't reflect the very real budget constraints that we are faced with. we look forward to the challenge we both face in that regard together. that said, let me mention concerns i have, especially.
first i'm disappoint ed that yo proposed to slash by 39.6 million. i have heard about the importance of the very flexible grant program through crime prevention and drug enforcement activities. such a drastic reduction in federal support will be devastating for my state and local partners. particularly as we work collaboratively to address the open yoed epidemic facing the country. losing a hundred people a day now to that scourge. ep demiracle by the cdc definition. speaking of open yoeds i'm concerned you proposed to cut money from the national prescription drug monitoring program.
a million dollars may seem insignificant. it's nearly 8% of the funding of the program. states are able to catch people who are abusing prescriptions. i can't imagine you would want to do any kind of harm to that kind of program. it's been extremely successful. every state has a program except missouri and they are coming around. boy, they are slow. it works. it's reduced prescription abuse in 49 states. yet you are trying to shave it away. there is progress to be made. the grant program is part of the solution to the opiode epidemic facing our country.
i hate going to those emergency rooms and seeing a dead young teenager. with the family surrounding them. this program is critical to stopping just that. i would appreciate your telling me what you are going to do about it. now those in each state are learn ing to link up with each other. if a person in kentucky goes off to tennessee thinking they can defeat the system. they pick it up and tells them they have a problem. we are getting interopera bill ti and trying to make it real time. it's been days of delay. if we can make it realtime we have a real thing going. i would hope you can help us.
i'm highly concerned with the department's suspension of equitable sharing payments from the proceeds of the asset forfeiture program. those funds are essential in helping law enforcement fight drug trafficking among other things. the men and women working at the state and local agencies are your partners. often working side by side with federal agents. and d.o.g. must restore the payments as soon as possible. to avoid permanent harm to public safety around the country. that's critical. i can't believe the action of the department in regard to it. i'm troubled by your continued approval of marijuana legalization efforts around the country. a clear violation of federal law. four states and the nation's capital legalized recreational use of this drug without any
federal response. marijuana is a known gateway drug for young people. its long-term effects on their intellectual development is unknown. bottom line is this. congress makes the laws of the country. your task with en fortsing federal law as the chief law enforcement officer. i hope you will see 0-17 as an opportunity to fulfill your mandate given to you by the congress in this regard. thank you for being here. i want to ask you briefly about prison construction. overcrowding in penitentiaries poses significant problems for both inmates and guards, not to
mention prisoners. in overcrowded facilities. inmate misconduct increases. availability and vocational training and meaningful work opportunities diminish and substance abuse. there is also a significant security threat to guards vastly outnumbered by inmates. it's dangerous in medium and high security prisons where the majority of inmates are serving sentences for violent crimes w. this in mind i am concerned to see your request slash the bureau of prison construction funding by a whopping $417 million. nearly 80% in a time of such need. of these crowded federal
penitentiaries. it's a headline in tomorrow's newspaper. the over crowding in federal prisons and the treatment we are subjecting people to including guards and staff. that's going to be a story. how do you intend to deal with the short-term problem of prisoner and guard safety with such a dramatic reduction in necessary resources to build new facilities and renovate the old? can you help me? thank you, mr. chairman, for the opportunity to speak on one of the challenges facing the priszen system today and the bureau of prisons isn't immune from that. thank you for your attention and interest in this and for your support for the department over
the years. this committee was instrumental certainly in prior years up to and including 2016 for providing the department with funds, approximately $444 million in fy-2016. and those funds are going to build a new prison. i believe it will be in kentucky. inmate safety. certainly implicated by that. the reason the same number wasn't reflected in the 2017 request is we did receive money in 2016. it's a multi the fact you don't
see the same number repeated isn't a reflection of the cessation of work. certainly not of commitment. but simply that having been given the funds we are working toward utilizing them. and would not ask for the same funds again. that's going to help us. you mentioned mental health in particular. you will see within the bureau of prisons portion of the budget funding to deal with the issues also. because where we can deal with those issues, we'll have safer institutions for the inmates and the correctional officers who work there. >> thank you for that statement. i'm over my time.
thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i recognize the gentleman from washington state, mr. kilmer. >> thanks for being was. i have a bunch of questions. i will try to get to as many as i can. i share the concerns about opiode abuse. it's a number of communities in my neck of the woods. i have rural communities including small towns. i understand the need to balance prevention and treatment and enforcement to stop the spread here. i know the office of justice programs provides grant funding for state and local law enforcement assistance. i'm hoping you can speak to how the funds are distributed and whether communities like the ones i'm talking about. rural towns, small towns, whether they are able to benefit adequately and what they can do to improve the benefit to those struggling with the opiode
epidemic. what they can do to utilize this support. >> congressman, thank you for raising the issue. frankly it's the law enforcement issue of the time. of course the opiode issue is a presur sor to the heroin epidemic as well. as we look at the heroin epidemic so many individuals began with prescription drug abuse. they move on to heroin. we have about $380 million for the jag funding, an increase over fy-2016. they don't have programs that specifically address open yoed abuse in rural areas. but the grants are available to
all law enforcement agencies particularly for the purchase of niloxone. we have spent a great deal. it's the rapid response over dose treatment. and using grant money to make sure that while we may not be able to fund a clinic, we can make sure the small police departments and sheriffs office. the whole administration approach, not just the department of justice but a number of other agencies are involved certainly what's
emerged from the discussions is we have to view it as a public health crisis and a law enforcement issue. not just focus on law enforcement but have a public health component to improve resources for the families and people who fall victim to this. >> thank you. i appreciate the focus on that. we want to switch gears. too often we hear stories about distrust between neighborhoods and the police who protect them. there are good news stories out there. one of the cities i represent, tacoma and communities like them are working hard to foster a good relationship between law enforcement and the populations they serve. we saw a great effort by the city's leadership and the law enforcement leadership called project peace. it was trying to bring people together to see how they can improve ties between the community and the police. i guess i would point out those efforts are costly.
and programs like project peace can be limited in success due to resources being spread thin in a large city. the department's budget proposed doubling the community policing development program. i'm grateful but i'm concerned if that's enough oh meet the demand in our nation. i want to get a sense how confident you are that the additional funds requested in the budget will meet the needs of the communities. >> well, congressman, that's an excellent question. the needs are deep. i have spent a great deal of time on the issue in 2015. i was engaged in a six-city community policing tour. i traveled the northwest and this year i will travel to six more cities focusing on cities that had a challenged relationship with the police. a shooting, pattern of practice investigation. even a lawsuit.hdñ
by found a way to create a dialogue and build the privileges. i'm focused this year on cities exemplifying the sixle pillars in the policing task force that was a product of last year's task force. i'm always happy to pull in more. we have key increases for building community trust and community policing for body worn cameras, smart policing, collaborative reform. also the community relations service will be important in this. we are asking for $3.5 million. community relations and not law enforcement officers but they go into the community and work to build bridges. they work with community leaders in particular and law enforcement and the local elected officials as well to
foster dialogue around the important problems. they are not investigators gathering evidence for the law enforcement component at all. there will be additional funding. i think that will be helpful. the most promising efforts i have seen is i traveled the country. those that come from the community as you mentioned such as project peace. we aren't cooing to support them. it is a deep, ongoing need. i'm impressed with the work i have seen going on across the country and i'm hopefulle funds we request for a host of issues will help in that regard. as i talked to police departments.
they are seeing the utility providing for accountability and a level of trust in the types of interactions that law enforcement has with civilians. we see civilian complaints go down. in communities and departments implementing the body worn cameras. we see use of force incidents go down. that's all part of the web we have to build to rebuild the trust. the bonds frayed in some areas. i believe frankly this can be accomplished because i have seen it happen. >> thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. kilmer. i would like to recognize the former district judgele, the gentleman from texas, mr. carter. >> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome. speak to you. he says i come from a background of what's the highest trial
court in our great state of texas. and have come familiarity that the criminal justice system in our state. this last monday, i did what we call a telephone town hall. we get in touch with roughly 35 to 50,000 and let people get online and ask questions on the phone. when we get about 10 or 15 of the same people asking the same question, pick that question. this question came up. this is a tough one people will be saying it's politics. i told themle i would ask you. the state department stated that the e-mails sent and received on hillary clinton's personal server refused to disclose numerous e-mails as they contained top secret information.
the secretary of state should have known better. if the fbi makes the case that hillary clinton mishandled classified information to prosecute the case. do you know of any efforts under way to under mine the fbi investigation and please look the american people in the eye and tell us what the position is. you are the chief prosecutor of the united states. >> thank you, judge and congressman carterer. with respect to the investigation into how information was handled by the state department, how they handled classified information, as i seem sure you know the matter is being handled by career independent law enforcement agents. fbi agents as well as the career independent attorneys in the department of justice. they follow the evidence, look at the law. they will make a recommendation to me when the time is appropriate. we are not able to comment on the specific investigation at
this time. i will say again that this will be conducted as every other case. i am aware of no efforts to under mine our review at all. >> there were no people concerned about that. this is an american public concern. maybe the justice department will do it for political reasons. i'm not accusing you of that. didn't ask for the information. i said no one is above the law in the united states. it should be brought before a grand jury. the right thing to do is bring somebody before the grand jury. that's where you are. i hope you remain there.
another question. a few times in history it e's bn difficult to be a police officer. today it is. you often have belligerent holding cameras in your face when an officer wants to make an arrest. there is civil unrest and police don't feelle the department of justice really supports. most importantly, i'm concerned of the perception among law enforcement officers that the doj is opening investigations as an intimidating tactic to force state and local police to push the administration's soft stance on crime. what are you doing to change the perception amongst many of the law enforcement agencies that the doj is looking over their shoulder, waiting to sue their department every time they make
an arrest. i have heard about attorneys refusing to prosecute drug and alien smuggling cases along the border. let me tell you, you get caught with 200 pounds of marijuana in bell county or williamston county you g to prison. i can't say that about the smugglers on the southwest border. would you please comment? >> thank you for the opportunity to talk about the important relationship the department has with our colleagues in state and local law enforcement. they are very much our colleagues with respect to the work we all do to the protection of the american people. the issue, as we have discussed of trust between the municipalities and law enforcement. the communities we all serve was an important one. i have traveled the country speaking to law enforcement
officers. i speak to the law enforcement officers, community members. it is how dedicated they are to their jobs, how focused they are on the mission. i talked to them about why they came police officers and the mission they feel and the pressures they feel. this is a time of great change in policing. what i hear is the dedication and commitment to continuing their work in protecting the american people. where we have situations where the bonds have been broken and law enforcement feels under siege as well . we have had conversations with officers. we try to en gaugele them in discussions about why that is and what might be the cause of it. one thing i will say is a benefit of having been a prosecutor for over 20 years i noted with a positive view the way in which we to interact with police departments in this current administration. i was involved in reviewing
police issues in the '90s. i have been involved in reviewing them. now with the attorney general. one of the benefits of the relationship is that the department had police departments coming to it and asking for assistance. through the community oriented policing program which people refer to as the comes and the program. we fund police officers. we have the budget for you to improve to inkraes the ability to provide additional local law enforcement support. we provide what's called collaborative reform. technical assistance. we don't charge departments for this. police departments come to us and say, you know, we are having a problem or an issue. it may be a community relations issue or maybe a training issue. it may be keeping up with the latest data, finding the resources to, as we have done, to support them in buying vests, buying the body worn cameras.
i have seen a relationship between law enforcement at the state and local level and the department of justice through this. we speak directly to departments. we try to engage them so they can be the fist person holding an officer accountable when there's been a problem. we know there will be issues and the important thing is to make sure as we deal with the issues the american people see we are dealing with them in a transparent way, fair way and everyone is treated equally before the law. we have had a great positive response to that. so we provide a great deal of support to our local law enforcement officers. again through the program, you will see in the budget a number of other agencies we are seeking to provide support. we spent time trying to get their input. i found it positive to have their input in the policies that the department is putting forth. most recently we promulgated
policies on dealing with sec shall assault victims and domestic violence victims. this was greatly informed by discussion with the state and local colleagues. they are the first responders in the caseses. as we support those with grants for training we rely on them for the actual on the ground experience to talk about the best practices and policies. this department of justice is focused and is, in fact, working well with state and local law enforcement. we have a positive bond with them. we do the same work. we have the same mission. we carry out the highest duty of the american people. >> quick follow up. yesterday i found a bill to include the active shooter program in the comes criteria.
the small department around the country that wants to train their people up on the active shooter issue. they don't have the funds to know that your office helped us. we appreciate it. hope you will support adding the active shooter to the criteria of the comes grants. we were clearly told the chairman has been told also that it has to be over 200 poundses of marijuana in the rio grandeel valley and along the border or the justice department won't prosecute. we think 200 pounds in a lot. thank you. >> thank you, judge. >> every law enforcement officerle should know the department of justice has their back. that's a message i hope you will continue to speak out loudly and clearly and repeatedly to make sure all the local law enforcement officers know how
dedicated you are and your department is to supporting and helping them last august our neighborhood tep ti darren goforth was murder ed in my neighborhood. it was a catastrophic event. all of us in this across the country are concerned. we want every law enforcement officer in the country to know that the members of congress and particularly the department of justice, that we have their back and we support them. we appreciate the relationship you have -- information that local and state and federal law enforcement officers have to know -- have to have a complete and open relationship or they share every bit of information possible about criminal defendants and a source of great concern to the country and i
know from our conversations before the hearing began a concern that you have as well and i'm delighted we are headed in the same direction is with sanctuary city policy where is a state or local jurisdiction refuses to share information with the federal homeland security, judge carter or with the department of justice. the information sharing is creditle kachlt -- critical. the policies in a lot of the cities and counties and states have where they will refuse to honor a detainer to hand over a criminal defendant in their custody to federal authorities to be is dangerous. it's standard procedure that if individuals in the williamston county jail, if they are in the polaski county jail and before they are released it's just a long standing common sense that the polaski county sheriff will check with state and federal
authorities for an outstanding warrant. when that individual served time in the county jail won't be released. if there is a warrant in michigan, they will call michigan and say, do you want this guy? michigan, come pick him up. that's been the standard policy of every law enforcement agency in the history of the country. until you get to city where is they will not release the individuals. if they have an i will legal alien with a criminal warrant for their arrest, these communities have policies and this is unaccept abdominal. it's resulted in the murder of untold thousands of individuals and the one i know that hangs in everyone's mind of great concern is a young lady shot and murdered in san francisco who died in her father's arms.
she was shot and murdered by a convicted felon, a five-time deportee released on the streets of san francisco due to the illegal ang share policy. the refusal to share information, cooperate with federal law enforcement authorities is just unacceptable. if you expect federal money, comply with federal law. i want to thank you, attorney general lichblg for your timely response and expressing the concerns we laid out here. you said in part where the department of justice receives a credible allegation.
they are receiving funds under a department grant. after they have assured the department that they are in compliance with applicable federal laws where that entity, where you have credible evidence that they violated a specific applicable federal law the department can seek criminal or civil enforcement options against the entity. as we discussed title 8, section 1373 of the u.s. code specifically prohibits state or localities that have policies that prohibit the sharing of information with i.c.e. about the immigration status of prisoners. the law says local jurisdictions cannot interfere with the sharing of information with federal authorities.
also conveyed in a letter. i want to reiterate the fact one thing we hope will be effective also is our policy whereby the bureau of prisons instead of deferring to the state or local entity and turning an individual over to them that instead immigration customs enforcement or i.c.e. will have the ability to step in and exercise their detainer first. we have in the past deferred because we work. we are dealing with the jurisdiction that essentially is not prone to honoring the detainers and those vary across the country. they vary over time and place. our policy is going to be that ice instead will have the first detainer and that individual go
into ice custody and te por tags. -- deportation. if the jurisdiction has a concern we'll talk to them. we would have to have assurances that i.c.e. would have to get the individual back at the end of an adjudication. so the deportation process could go under way. we are trying to be respectful of our state and local colleagues' desires and goals to prosecute cases and deal with the issue. as well. >> i appreciate that. as an example of the cooperative relationship the committee had with the department of justice and with you as the new attorney general, i want to ex press my sincere gratitude for this new policy. yes? >> i'm not clear.
will the department seek to cease any grants going to a particular so-called sanctuary city if they violate your terms? will you seek to stop a grant program? >> well, we are, again, with the grants tied to applicable law, again, it has to be a connection between the issue and the grant. for example, a grant for human trafficking would be different from a grant for community policing. but certainly as part of the audit process, part of the inspector-general review and part of the overall department and civil division can take under investigation. if we receive a credible allegation that they have violated a federal law we'll make the referral. there is an audit process in general but we have the office of inspeck tor general who can step in and do a specific investigation of a specific
jurisdiction. we have the civil and criminal divisions depending upon how the allegation arises. >> is this a new policy? >> it is in response to the new and as a result of discussions made with the chairman here and oh members. as i indicated we feel that a way to deal with the issue immediately is to make sure individuals being released from the bureau of prisons would go directly into immigration custody and dealt with for deportation there. a large part of the problem has been as part of the collaborative working relationship with our state and local partners. with an individual coming out of federal prison when i was a young prosecutor the individual would be released from federal custody but have to go to new york state custody to either finish a sentence or be
prosecuted. then at that point at the end of the state case deportation would be an option. where a city isn't necessarily inclined to work with the department of homehand security and as a general a general matt, we will instead use the immigration detainer first. as i indicated where jurisdictions indicate this was likely to be a problem, we will talk with them and work with them. it's particularly an area of concern for us because there is case law that exists that, only in one circuit, but there is case law with a particular holding that in certain circumstances cities compliance with the requirement that they provide us information may be voluntary. we're also actively litigating the matter in two other jurisdictions. and so this matter may be un unsettled for some time in the courts. we feel the way to deal with this issue immediately is to
have the policy change as well as to have the review of the grant program that we've been discussing with. >> a great example of the cooperative relationship that the committee has had with the department of justice. she's announced today a new policy that first of all the department of bureau of prisons will check to see if there's a criminal alien in the custody of the federal prisons has a deportation order and where this individual may also, in the case of this guy who murdered state steinle, san francisco has a policy they're not going to honor the federal detainer. department of justice has changed the policy at the bureau of prisons, that you'll not release that individual to san francisco. you're going to hand them over to i.c.e. so he can be deported. we thank you for that change in the policy. that's very important.
secondly we've also learned that the department is moving towards, this will be litigated forever. we count wait on that. the lives of countless americans depend on quick desasive action. in response to the concerns i had earlier this year you responded immediately in a favorable way which i appreciate. they're moving right away to go look carefully and we'll provide you with a list of the jurisdictions that do have policies where they will not share information with federal authorities. they've got an explicit policy on the book. we're not sharing information. we will not hand over these individuals to i.c.e. for deportation. you've indicated you're going to begin an audit process to be, to encourage them. we want them to change the policy. we want to give them a chance to change the policy, correct? that's the goal. change the policy so you hand these individuals over to federal authorities for
deportation. >> mr. chairman, if i can suggest something. >> yes, please. >> this is encouraging to hear this but i believe the old saying of trusting and verifying. >> ronald reagan and -- >> i wonder if you could give us a report on this after a period of time here, say four months, give us a report on how many of these instances you have actually had success with so that we have some way to gauge -- >> exactly. >> -- how things are going and maybe make mid course corrections as we go. this is significant. very important matter for a lot of us. and i'd like to know that it's working. is that agreeable? >> well certainly i think that we're all moving to an evidence-based model in a host of things. and certainly we're happy to work with you and your staff to provide you the information, both with regard to the new bop
policy which would be instruck tiff also. >> yes. >> and also any instances again where we have these allegations occurring. as you know, once a matter goes into investigation, it will be referred to the inspector general. for example, we wouldn't have if mfgs about the investigation readily available at that point. but certainly if these situations do come up, i think we can work with the committee to find a way to keep you informed. >> let's do a quarterly report. >> let's do that. >> for a while to see how things are going. so we would expect that she would give us a report on how things are going, as much detail as you can give us at the end of the first quarter. >> i think that's a good idea. would that be agreeable? >> thank you, sir. >> i know the country is grateful to hear you're moving in this direction. 's a good time for it because i know the grant solicitations are just now coming in, mr. chairman. the jurisdictions, local, city
and state jurisdictions across the country, madam attorney general are just now beginning to send in their applications for the various law enforcement grants. it's a good time for this change to kick in. as i said, we will provide you and the your staff with a list of the jurisdictions that have these policies that refuse to provide information, refuse to honor detainers. and i deeply appreciate your movement in this direction and we'll find a way to do this in a cooperative, friendly and supportive way to ensure that these jurisdictions are in compliance with title 8137 3, that they have a chance to change their policy and try to avoid losing their federal grant money. but if they insist and we'll work with you. if they insist on hanging on to their policy and they won't honor detainers and won't share information, don't ask for federal money unless you follow federal law. we're going to work with you
cooperatively in a supportive way to ensure that that happens and to ensure that the law enforcement communities across the country continue that cooperative relationship that has been so successful in the past. we really appreciate very much your help in this matter and look forward to working with you. we'll get quarterly reports, chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. as the ranking member, i'm going to ask, request a congressional five minutes if i may. i want to add my congratulation to the attorney general also in that while you respond to our questions and because i understand it's very complicated and there's a lot of different things that need to be considered as you move forwards on this complex issue of criminal justice and civil rights and things like that that we have to face. and i, too, would look guard to
seeing the quarterly report. because i'm confident that will be based upon good judgment and laws that we expect to be able to follow. and so -- and i think that mr. chairman had touched upon some of the other issues on the policies on clarification of -- and the guidelines are the sales and handling of firearms rel tiff to hobbyists and those folks. i won't take any time to do that. i do notice that a lot of the concerns that we do have has been based upon lack of resources and things like that. but i just want to say that we as congress have also been part and parcel of providing the appropriate resources in the past. and i'm very glad that this past year that we've had an increase
and i think that bodes well for all members of this subcommittee. we could have an expectation on increasing staffing, increasing in training. and i think that was a lot of concerns around that. and a lot of this is we're able to hire for folks to do the things that is expected of your department. i see that we're making progress in sexual assaults on college campuses. and with the atf, there's a lot of clarification on the kinds of priorities and policies that are going to be promulgated by the atf. and also in terms of law enforcement hiring overall, this is going to be an increase in that. so i think this should be an expectation of meeting some of these needs and i'm very gratified to see cops coming
back. i think cops has a community relationships and they understand working in conjunction with the communities is beneficial for everybody around. we'll learn a lot from them. one of the questions i wanted to formulate is around human trafficking and cyber systems and cyberstalking. we just finished the super bowl in santa clara county. and the super bowl was the culmination of a lot of work that's been done by different agencies. and i've noticed that each department that's involved in providing services to make sure that we have a safe environment and successful outcome of activity like super bowl -- which the next one will be in houston, i believe. >> yes, it is. >> so over the last couple of years and this year we've been looking at the services that's
expected in terms of providing a safe environment. and so i just wanted to have some sort of comment about budget, personnel, assignments in such a way that you can provide those services without having to juggle your -- the different departments' budgets so that in the next super bowl in houston, it's be run smooth and seamlessly through the sathcy so that the congressman can expect the houston super bowl to come out well just as it did this past year. i don't care who's in the team but i hope that it's the 49ers. but the basic question is, can you give us some feedback on the budgetary approach to providing the necessary resources and
personnel to address the kinds of expectations that one would have having a safe environment at the next super bowl? we have a template. we have folks who have been involved in it that we can touch bases with to ask that question. and i'll be asking that question of every department, federal, local, state, so that houston will have a good solid preparation for -- in the event that whatever team goes to the super bowl, they'll have a good outcome. and i think the two things that are very prominent in the planning would be human trafficking and cybersecurity and cyberstalking. do you have any comments relative to that? >> yes. thank you. those two important issues actually do collide at an event like the super bowl or the
olympics if we were to host it again here. it would be a similar situation certainly. and i think not just you, congressman but the committee for your support in human trafficking. i know it's an important issue for you and your efforts have really made a difference in the lives of people so i thank you and your committee for the support over the years and in this most recent budge as well. with respect to human trafficking generally, we're of course looking for zsh i think is request is $89.3 million for 2017 with $45 million going to the trafficking program and for cyber we're asking for a total of $121 million which would increase positions the fbi would receive funds to inclose their personnel and doj's internal security, dea's internal security and our grants as well. with respect to a specific event
like the super bowl, i would request the opportunity to come back to you and your staff with more specific information on that. but what i can tell you on that, for the super bowl in particular and other large events, what happens at the planning stage is a great deal of coordination between the department of justice, the department of homeland security as well as the intelligence community to see if there's any national security throats. human trafficking in particular, every office is required to have a human trafficking coordinator and be part of a human trafficking task force. this pulls in the state and local partners and helps us get information on the current state of affairs involving cases and investigation but also things that are about to occur as large events like the super bowl are put together. so prior to an event -- for example, the super bowl was in new jersey a few years ago. my office, when i was in the u.s. attorney's office there was involved, along with the u.s. attorney from new jersey with the preparations for those
events. so months before the actual game is played, the planning for how to both have law enforcement presence and also protection for any victims that we may be able to rescue begins to occur. in terms of every agency involved, looking at the resources they would need. this is another example also of how we work so well request our state and local counter parts. how we work at an event like that will depend of course working closely with local law enforcement as well as providing resources from fbi, from dea if we feel that narcotics will be involved, and where we have had, for example, situations where we've increased funding to our human trafficking task forces. we used the information and the intelligence gathered from them also. i appreciate the opportunity to give you more specific information about a specific event as that comes to fruition. we do have templates for how the
security protocols are put together for that. we feel confident that we can take them to texas and receive as arm a reception as we did in new jersey and san francisco and making sure the event is as safe as possible and also that it is not used taz a cove for illicit activity such as human trafficking. i would appreciate the chance if i could to come back to you about that. but to note that the human trafficking task forces begin to focus on these events months before they come to fruition and specific plans are set in place and specific operational plans are set in place. >> thank you. i also want to add my changes to the chairman for helping us fund and put into law the establishment of the human trafficking survivors advisory which is going to be very helpful and also look forward to hanging out with the chairman when that event comes around. i'm sure it will be a lot of