tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 21, 2016 7:00pm-12:01am EDT
your corporation? >> look, i wouldn't want to go back to a period of time when the awareness was shockingly low and the access almost nonexistent for epipens. i believe we have balanced that access. it does come at a price. we're trying to balance that while continuing to have access in more places. i hope the other 65,000 schools, that we can get free epipens to them. i'm also proud of the hearing and understanding this growing minority of patients and the uninsured or people facing that high out of pocket, that we took immediate action to put the generic out there, which is unprecedented, as well as some of the actions from the tripling the co-pay card or raising the eligibility of the patient assistance. >> i appreciate that. so i'm going to read a couple of quotes from a "los angeles
times" story, august 25th. and this quotes, miylan, profiteering, tax-dodging company, taking heat for jacking up the price of epipen by 5,000%, announced thursday it will help more patients cover their soaring out of pocket costs for the allergy drug device. that's good for some individuals, "the l.a. times" continues, patients and families, but at heart it's a cynical move that actually protects the company's profits and harms the health care system. as i explained before, the author continues, that's because such moves are often marketing schemes dressed up to look like fingerpri philanthropy. he goes on to say, what mylan is doing is expanding its patient assistance program by providing a savings card worth up to $500
per prescription and doubling eligibility to households earning up to 400% of federal poverty level or $97,000. many of them therefore would pay nothing out of pocket for the device. the truth is, however, that these programs are detested by insurers, health care economists, and government agencies with good reason. in fact they're illegal when applied to medicare and medicaid patients because they may violate federal anti-kickback laws which bar payments to patients to insure services. those agencies will have to cover everything beyond the co-pay. you're not familiar with any of this, the article or what he's ascribing to your motives? >> which is why we went the step of putting a generic on the marketplace so we could make sure we touched every patient and tried to make sure every access point was covered. so by putting the generic in and dropping the wholesale cost to
300, we believe we went certainly beyond. again, to provide access to as many patients as we can. >> okay. in this article he quotes a health care economist from emory university, david howard. he talks about what you're doing as programs that are triple boon for manufacturers. they increase demand, allow companies to charge a higher price and provide public relations benefits. the manufacturers' costs look high in absolute terms but the payoff is even greater. manufacturers can afford to pay a lot of 25 or $50 co-payments. is this changing the dynamics? >> completely. >> how long did you have the previous practice before you changed to the generic? >> we still have the patient assistance program and the c co-pays for the brand. but by introducing the generic, we hope there's 85, 88% generic
utilization of the generic. >> how long did you have the profits under the old system? it sounds like you did it for altruistic purposes. this article would portray it in a different way. >> congressman, i think the parts of you were reading go to the patientan ancsince program, the co-pay, is what they were giving their description of, versus the generic. >> but nmy point is you're makig it sound like you introduced the generic for purely altruistic purposes. the way he describes it is it was a business practice that took advantage of the situation for some period of time. >> the generic -- putting the generic in is, like i said, an unprecedented move so that we could reach patients -- >> that's not the question. i believe in redemption so i'll give you the generic. but prior to that, you were making money off the situation that the "l.a. times" described. my question is how long did you do that. >> i don't agree with the "l.a.
times" description of the programs or our process. and i don't think they spoke about the generic program that we've now announced. like i said, we have invested, with the point of wanting to reach more patients, if we're now reaching almost 3 million patients, that's 2 million more that are protected and hopefully much better, in a much better position if an anaphylactic event occurs, aside from the school program, again, because so many people have allergic events that have never had a known allergy. >> my time has gone by. i'll just say, from this article and other articles, i didn't bother to quote the "usa today" article or the "marketwatch" article, that you had a business practice that was immensely profitable, you have admitted to that, and you've changed it, but it seems like you've changed it in anticipation of what the public has responded to. with that i'll yield back the
balance of my time. >> thank you. i recognize the gentleman from georgia for five minutes. >> ms. bresch, you've had a lot of pressure put on you. i'm personally hesitant to go down the path, i get very worried when we start going down that street. my concern is where the bottleneck is occurring. i would like to ask you, an abbreviated new drug application, as i understand it, is an application when companies want to manufacture a generic drug, that's what they must utilize; is that correct? >> for a true generic. so an authorized generic like we've been talking about now, that's not approved. >> so a true generic. do you know how many abbreviated new drug applications are currently pending with the fda?
>> we have 1700 responses that we sent back to sponsors requesting additional information. we're waiting for that information to come back. there are other -- there are other applications that are in-house that we're reviewing, again, on the timeline that we've discussed earlier. >> it's my understanding that the generic applications submitted to the fda are outpacing those applications that are approved three to one; is that correct? >> i can't verify that number. there are 2300 applications before the agency, and this -- >> 2400? >> 2300. this year we've moved 600 products through the middle of this year. >> could you verify for me, can you get the numbers back to us, what the number of applications submitted versus those that are being approved. and next can you tell me the median approval time for generic drugs right now? >> i don't have that information before me.
it's also changing. so in the period before we got the user fee -- >> i'm talking about now. i would like that information as well. >> i would offer to get you the trend if i could. i think that would probably be more useful. >> okay. because the generic pharmaceutical association says it's taking 47 months, it's taking four years. >> that's simply misunderstanding. >> what do you mean, that's misunderstanding? >> 47 months is from the beginning of kadufa one, the beginning of the user fee act. any products that are being approved now that have been -- >> from the beginning of the process to the end of the process, are you disputing that it takes four years? >> i'm disputing that for products that come in today, it will not take 47 months. >> well, i mean, you can make all sorts of promises. i'm talking about realistically, for those who have been trying, they've been trying for four years from the time they start to the time they finish.
>> there are products that come in and are sometimes insufficient to get approval. sometimes that's because the data that they submitted aren't appropriate. >> okay. all right. i don't want to run around the bush. i'm trying to find out how long does it take from beginning to end and from those that have been involved in the process, they're telling us it takes four years. now, from -- since 2012, the generic manufacturers, of course, have been paying fees to the tune of billions of dollars to try to speed the process up through the generic drug user fee agreement. and this past july, as i understand it, the fda actually said that they enacted more than 90% of the generic applications. i'm assuming that's a little bit of what you're referring to now? >> that's the backlog. the applications that have been submitted to us. >> the backlog is 90%? >> compared to the beginning of kadufa one, there was a total of around 4600 applications that we
needed to review. we've acted on more than 90% of those. in fact there are fewer than a hundred of them that have not gotten a response. >> so are you saying of the 4600 there's only 100 left, that 4500 have been approved? >> less than 100 of them remain to have a response. again, those products that have a full dossier, have given us the data that we need, have been approved or been given tentative approval. products that are not sufficient, i don't think you would want us to rubber stamp those. >> no, i don't want you to rubber stamp. the free enterprise system works when you have multiple companies out there offering products and options for people. we have a scenario now that epipen basically -- you've got 94% of the market, whatever, and you're the only major player. and the reason for that is because you guys are not processing a host of others who are trying to get in the market. and when it's taking three,
four, five years for that to occur, and who knows how many millions of dollars to go through the process. i mean, no wonder the whole system is not working. >> i would like to show you the trend data. that is not the trend we're seeing for the cohort that are being -- >> the european counterpart only has 24 generic drugs awaiting approval, and they do it from beginning to end in less than a year. that is not what we're experiencing here. >> the european system is quite different from ours. >> well, it must be. it's not taking nearly as long as ours does. >> i would say they are apples and oranges to try and compare, honestly. >> mr. chairman, my time has expired and i yield back. yes, we've got tremendous concerns of a drug going from 100 to $600. and there's issues that you all have to deal with. but we can't place all the blame on you. the fda has got to get their act together and start working the process and getting this thing going through.
and i look forward to receiving the information that you said you would send. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. we'll now recognize the gentleman from vermont for five minutes. >> mr. chairman and mr. ranking member, thank you for having this hearing. i think your opening statements have set the right tone, what is it in the market that is broken that is causing these prices to be increased. also mr. heiss is asking whether there is go we can do as the fda and the approval process, i'm all in if we can do it without compromising safety. mylan has a facility in vermont, it's a good employer. third, what the drug companies do i totally agree is vital important. my first wife had cancer, nine
years of medications extended her life and alleviated her suffering. so it's important. but here's the dilemma. it's best summed up by a letter i received, we got a lot of them, from a person in essex junction. my 4-year-old son has a severe peanut allergy. i'm a single mother. i can't afford to pay this much for epipens and i can't afford not to because that cost is possibly his life. the heart of the matter here is that moms and dads are being given a hobson's choice. they can pay more than they can afford or they can risk a loss they cannot endure. and that's why it's so urgent that we work together to get to the bottom of this. i want to focus my questions on some of what i think are the market breakdowns for lack of
competition. and again, mr. heiss, i acknowledge the fda, maybe we've got to make some reforms there. but there are some things that are happening. when your company bought the epipen, the company got the epipen, that was in '07, i think, right? >> yes. >> and how many epipens were sold then? >> much less than today. i think it was -- it was certainly less than half of -- >> probably way less than half, right? i have a question about the basic economics. usually when you sell more of something, the per unit cost goes down. is that not the case with epipen? >> so no, cost of goods has gone up every year. and our investment has continued, we've continued to invest in the product. >> you'll give us the figures on that. because i understand you're saying it's 50 bucks that is the
money in your pocket, which sounds like it would be reasonable. but as you can tell from a lot of the questions, there's a lot of head scratching going on here about that. >> i totally appreciate that. i appreciate there's been a lot of misinformation, understandably so, given the complexity, as many of you have pointed out, in the system. >> i'm going to ask you to get your graph out that you gave us, where the wholesale acquisition price is 608 bucks. that's what people are paying. and then you get down to the bottom, it's 50 bucks for the profit per pen. >> yes. >> that 50 bucks sounds reasonable. but the rebates and allowances, who is getting all that money? >> so that goes -- that is between the other people in the supply chain. the pharmacy benefit managers, retail pharmacy, wholesalers and insurers. >> isn't the service that a
pharmacy benefit manager provides essentially to negotiate the best price with the pharmaceutical companies to get a given drug? and they get a rebate, right? >> probably it would be better to have a pbm. i think that the pharmacy manager, the system, that that is -- >> i'm not talking philosophically. we're all trying to understand how it works. so the pbm buys huge quantities of drug a, b, or c, and then they get a discount from the -- from pfizer or from you, and they keep some of that, that's the way they make their money. and part of their way of negotiating is with a so-called formulary, right? so if you have heart disease, there might be an option of drug a, b, or c, and they put on the formulary drug a, and there's increased volume there, they get a rebate, right? >> mm-hmm. >> with respect to epinephrine,
there is no formulary. if you have an anaphylactic shock, there's only one thing you need, and it's the product that you sell. >> no, there has been competition, as we've said. if i only could just get this point, aviq, which launched their product at the end of 2013, so we did have to face formulary choices of not even being on the formulary due to the competition in the marketplace. >> but somehow you've ended up with 94 or 97% of the market. >> i would ask that people recognize our product and that it is more complicated. aviq was recalled off the market for safety reasons, which is a very rare event. >> i understand that. in this graph, what is just impossible to understand is how does something cost $608 when the company that sells it is only making 50 bucks? and that is hard to understand.
>> and i understand how complicated and how head scratching that is, which is why, you know, i've said i would welcome the opportunity to sit down -- i know this is about epipen, but to look at the system. >> i'll have to keep going. this is hammering that vermonter who has that hobson's choice. but it's also very tough on taxpayers. our medicaid program in 2011 was paying $111 per script, and we spent in vermont, and this is a lot of money for us, we spent then $111. now it's $557. we went from $250,000 of taxpayer money to 1.7 million. that's tough. i mean, it really is tough. >> and look, that's why the generic, being able to put it into the market that would help lower health care costs across the board. >> but the generic -- what i
understand, it used to be the position that you had, mylan had, is that doing these authored generics was a real threat to the generic industry. that's the public record of your point of view. >> a decade ago. and that -- and i know that this is complicated, but the authorized generics of keeping the generic, in this instance that's not the case, but -- >> the cost of epipen in the netherlands is 105 bucks. that's where your corporate headquarters are. how did they get 105 and you moved your headquarters from the u.s. to the netherlands, how is it they get to buy it for 105 bucks? and we pay 608? >> sir, one, i'm not sure of the cost. but what i would say is they have a completely different system.
>> i yield back. >> we would appreciate some clarification on that. but now let's -- we do have a pharmacist, the only pharmacist in the house and the senate, pleading to have him on this committee, we will now recognize mr. carter of georgia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, before i start, can i inquire of you, the witnesses took an oath, they're still under oath now? >> absolutely. >> okay. i just want to make sure. ms. bresch, have you ever seen a child have an anaphylactic shock? did you ever witness that? >> i haven't. >> you have not? >> no. >> have you ever gone up to a pharmacy counter and carried a pack of two epinephrines and two epipens and told a mother of a child who has had anaphylactic shock who has an allergy that the price of that is going to be $600? >> no. >> have you ever seen a mother
cry because she can't afford the medication for her child? the reason i ask you this, ms. bresch, is i have. i've experienced this. i've seen a mother go out and have to call family members to see if she can get the money together to try and see if she can pay for this medication that she knows her child has to have. i've witnessed that firsthand. none of us are without blame here, ms. bresch, none of us, and i include my profession as well. let me ask you a couple of yes or no questions. first of all, the 608 wholesale acquisition cost, is that awp? >> no, sir. >> it's just wholesale acquisition. >> yes. >> okay. wholesale acquisition cost at $608. you said that your company receives approximately $274, is that right, after rebates and allowances? >> correct. >> okay. so after you take out the
expenses like manufacturing, acquisition costs, packing, regulatory compliance, all of those things, your profit is even less than that; is that correct? >> correct. that would be the $50 per pen. >> okay. so after you do that, ms. bresch, do you have any contracts with pbms? does mylan have any contracts with pharmacy benefit managers, pbms? >> yes. >> can you describe some of those contracts for me very briefly? >> the contracts are around products, multiple products, to participate on the formulary so patients have access to the products. >> okay. so we established earlier that over half of the list price does not go to mylan. do you know how much the pbm receives? >> i don't have a breakdown between the channels. but that's where showing that between those -- >> i understand.
but do you know specifically how much the pbm, the pharmacy benefits manager, receives? >> i don't specifically know the breakdown between those four buckets, between the pbms, the pharmacy, the insurers, or the wholesalers. >> nor do i, and i'm the pharmacist, and i don't know either. in fact nobody knows, there's the problem. nobody knows how much this is going to the pharmacy benefit manager, because there is no transparency. there's the problem. do you know how much the pbm receives in rebates and other fees that are related to the epipen whenever one is adjudicated through a pharmacy? >> i don't. >> you don't. nor do i. all i know is that my computer calls the insurance and they tell me how much i'm supposed to charge the patient. i don't know how much you're getting as a manufacturer. i don't know how much the insurance company is getting. i don't know how much the pbm is getting. that's where transparency is coming in.
that's what we need. do you know how much of the epipen savings, the related savings and rebates that the pbm gives back to mylan, you said you have contracts with the pbms. how much do you get back from the pbm? >> i don't know. >> remember, you're under oath. do you know how much you get back in rebates from the pbm? >> i just don't want to give you an inaccurate number. i agree we have contracts. >> do you know? can you provide that information? mr. chairman, can i ask for that information? >> absolutely. >> i'm just saying i don't want to give an inaccurate number to you. >> okay. so you don't have how much the pbm receives or keeps for itself, nor do i, nor does anyone else, none of us know. what we do know is this. prescription prices, prescription drug prices have soared, and so have the profits of pbms. they are in the billions of
dollars. until we have more transparency in the pbm market, we're going to continue to see these kind of cost increases. we're going to continue to see this. that's why we need bills like house resolution 244. my good friend, representative doug collins from georgia, has introduced this bill dealing with the mac transparency, it's called mac transparency act. this would hope us aelp us and step towards transparency. mr. chairman, i want to thank you for holding this hearing today and i want to reiterate my request that i have made to you and this committee from time to time about further investigating how deceptive practices by pbms are impacting drug prices. would you agree with that, ms. bresch? >> i certainly agree transparency is needed for -- the health care system has evolved dramatically over the last decade.
i'm sure you've seen as a pharmacist, that the system hasn't kept pace with this evolution of the health care system. >> the system hasn't kept pace? billions of dollars, billions of dollars in profits. i have to sit there and take a prescription to the counter to a mother whose child has suffered from anaphylactic shock and watch her cry and watch her have to call family members in order to get the money to pay for this medication. and we don't know where it's going. you say it's not going to you. where is it going? i need to tell her. i need to tell her where that money is going. >> the most immediate thing i can do is put a generic in the market. >> don't go there. you know i know better than that. that is wholly -- that is just -- that is a crock, and you know that i know that. there is no difference whatsoever -- ms. bresch,
don't -- >> the price -- >> you cut the price in half. do not do that to me. don't try to convince me that you are doing us a favor here. you are not doing a favor by that. you could have dropped the price of epipens just as well. but instead, you said no, we're going to make a generic. but -- >> to the point of the wholesale acquisition cost of getting had to those patients and making the difference, to make sure everyone who needs an epipen has one, i couldn't ensure by the wholesale acquisition cost, the branded side of the channel, that -- >> you did not want to cut the price on the epipen brand, whatever you want to call it, because you wouldn't have gotten the rebates from the pbms like you're getting them now. i'm waiting for the information that you've promised to send to this committee, mr. chairman, i'm going to hold her to that. >> sir, what i can tell you is that to by pass this, the most
immediate thing that we could do was to put a generic in, because it bypassed the formulary. everything you're just describing. >> are you getting a rebate on those generics from the pbms? are you getting a rebate on the generic version of epipen from the pbms? >> i don't -- i don't -- those are still under -- we haven't done those arrangements yet because we're launching -- >> are you planning on getting a rebate from the pbms for the generic certificativersion of e? >> i don't know. >> remember the oath to tell the truth. >> i am not negotiating those -- i can tell you, as you know, the formula formularies, the pbms and the generics, it's very different than on the brand side of it house. >> will the gentlemen yield? i just want to help clarify something. >> i yield. >> this is to help -- i just want to take this one step further. do you know what you get from the pbms for the regular epipen?
how much rebates? the gentleman was talking about that. do you? >> that's what i said, i don't want to give an inaccurate number. >> you can give us that information? >> absolutely, i can go back and work on that. >> you expect to be getting rebates from the generic, is that right? yes or no? >> he asked specifically about the pbm, and i don't want to give an inaccurate -- >> i didn't ask you that. i said are you getting -- are you getting -- >> we pay rebates. we pay rebates on the generic as well. >> that's not what he's talking about. you know what he's talking about. >> i can't sit here today and tell you what comes back on the generic. what i can tell you is that there's discounts and rebates paid. but it's a much smaller degree on the generic. >> mr. chairman, reclaiming my time. this is a shell game. that's all it is. ms. bresch, i hope you never have the experience of going to
a counter and telling a mother of a child who has suffered from anaphylactic shock that she needs to pony up $600. i hope you never experience that, ms. bresch. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. ms. bresch, when can we expect this committee to have that information that was asked by mr. carter? what's reasonable? you're the ceo. you've got how many employees? >> yes. i'm not sure what's asking or -- >> you don't know what he's asking? do you want him to ask again? >> no, i know he's asking what it takes to get that information. we will do it as soon as possible. >> what is a reasonable date? can you get that to us in a week? >> ten days? >> okay. ten days. yes. ten days. thank you. appreciate it. let's now recognize ms. watson coleman for a generous five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and i'm really sorry i couldn't be here all day. i may ask you some questions
that have already been asked. i want to talk about sort of the company and how generous it is and what a good life it seems to be associated with, being associated with the company. your perks in particular aren't limited to just an astronomical salary and stock benefits. you also have access to the company jet, is that true? >> yes. >> mylan's public filing lists the amount of money you spent on the company's jet. in 2015, spent $310,000. in 2014 you spent $319,000. does that sound correct? >> yes, that sounds correct. >> did you fly here today? >> earlier in the week. not today. yes, i flew, but just not today. >> and did you fly on the private jet? >> i did. >> and were you accompanied by anybody? >> other employees. >> yes? or are you asking me? >> i'm saying other employees
accompanied me. >> do you have any idea how much that cost? >> look, i know that -- it's fortunate and it's for efficiency and safety -- >> let me ask you another question. from where did you fly? >> from pittsburgh. >> from pittsburgh? is that where you're located? >> yes. >> okay. it is a little stunning to see that so much money could be spent on your traveling around in a jet while we're having this discussion about whether or not americans are being bilked for a lifesaving drug like epipen. i know the importance of epipen because when i was a legislator in the state of new jersey, we voted for legislation to make sure all the schools had it. so i'm very interested in your response to mr. welch. if this drug had increased so
very much, wouldn't there have been an associated decrease to the cost of people because it was so widely used, economies of scale? apparently that's not the case. i want to talk a little bit about the company and some of its tax benefits, because i think i want to participate in the backdrop of a picture here. we know that you've profited from increasing the price of epipen. but you've also -- this company has also increased its profits in another way, and that's by taking advantage of a tax loophole, particularly the tax inversion which involves a company moving its headquarters abroad to lower the amount of taxes they pay in the united states. in 2014, mylan moved its official headquarters to the netherlands, is that true? >> yes. you wrote in a letter to shareholders about the tax inversion, and i quote, the transaction also is expected to lower mylan's adjusted tax rate,
currently forecasted to be approximately 24 to 25% in 2014 to approximately 20 to 21% in the first full year after the consummation of the transaction and to the high teens thereafter. what was mylan's company-wide effective tax rate in 2014? >> i believe it was in the mid-20s to low 20s before we inverted. >> what is it today? >> it's between 15 to 17%. >> so from our perspective, last year, hardworking americans had to pay 25% on all amounts that they've earned over $28,000. but mylan had earnings in 2014 to close to a billion dollars. you pay a lower tax rate than many individuals who are struggling and who are possibly parents who need access to those
drugs for their children. did you lower the cost of the epipen since mylan would be saving so much in taxes by this move? >> so the 15 to 17% is our global tax rate. i mean, that's after averaging everything out. we in the united states are still paying higher taxes on everything that we sell from the united states. >> so the benefit that you derive from moving your headquarters, did you lower the epipen cost here in this country? >> we're still paying taxes -- >> that's a yes or no, ma'am. that's a -- that would be no? >> we did not lower them. >> okay. according to an article in "the washington post," some mylan employees received stock as part of their conversation. that same article said that mylan paid you more than $5 million to cover these taxes.
while mylan skirted its tax liability and left hardworking americans to foot this bill, you didn't have to worry because mylan paid $5 million to cover your personal taxes. that's really hard to deal with and hard to believe. you are the ceo of mylan, right? >> yes. >> when mylan moved its official headquarters abroad, did you move to the netherlands? >> no. >> according to your website, and i quote, the achieve executive officer and other executive officers of mylan nv carry out the day-to-day conduct of mylan's nv worldwide business at the company's principal offices in canonsburg, pennsylvania. is that true? >> yes. is there anything more than a virtual office in the netherlands so that you could claim to be a tax purpose resident there? >> we are now domiciled in the netherlands and run our global
business. but physically, yes, we work out of canonsburg. >> so basically, you're running the business out of canonsburg, so you simply moved your address to another country so that you couldn't have to pay the tax rate in this country at the same time you sell this lifesaving drug at an increased cost to families who can barely afford it. it sounds to me like this is a sham and a shell and it's sad to hear this. do you think it's fair that you don't have to pay the taxes as a u.s. company? >> so again, we do pay taxes here in the united states for all of the sales, all the revenue that we receive here in the united states. so we are absolutely paying our taxes for everything that we sell here in the united states. >> the one thing i get is that you all are very smart about
avoiding responsibility and straightforwardness. you know, but there's a bill that could close the loophole that you have your virtual office over in the netherlands and claim to be a resident for tax purposes. and that's the stop corporate inversions act of 2015, which was introduced in january of last year. i'm sorry to say my republican colleagues have failed to act on it. but i think that having had a hearing of this nature, we are -- we can expect i think to have more attention to this matter. and with that, i thank you for the generosity of time, mr. chairman, and i yield back. >> thank you. we'll now recognize the gentlewoman from new mexico. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i too want to thank the ranking member and the chairman for bringing this hearing together and having you. unfortunately, it's not our first hearing on such matters.
i mean, we are talking and dealing with turing and valeant, seeing a disturbing pattern where congress provides a variety of mechanisms to invest in innovation for pharmaceutical companies so that we get the right treatments and medicine. we give you patent protection, we give you r&d money. what we get in return is a monopoly using your generic aspect in a way that we did not intend. and have a hearing where we're not going to get any relief. you've made it clear you're following the rules, you're completely justified, and the amount of money that you're spending on salaries and bonuses and infrastructure and acquisitions is all justified while you're making a billion dollars on a drug that most people can't afford with a patient assistance program that most drug companies created in
the '90s so that as drug prices went up, policymakers would hesitate before dealing with price legislation that would make it fair to consumers. the problem is if you're a consumer and you have to have it because it's lifesaving,'s already unfair, because we're going to have to do whatever we need. and quite frankly, my constituents aren't so happy about a prescription drug assistance program. nobody wants to give you their tax returns or their social security number or tell you over the phone what their income is or provide you those income statements. and i don't know what you pay for those staff to provide those to do that evaluation. the reality is just don't do it. make the drugs affordable. and you create an environment where you have preferences and make sure it's on the preventive drug list. instead of having any more conversations, i don't think we've gotten very many of our questions answered, because in fact, mr. chairman, it is true,
it is very complicated. we've created an environment where they don't have to be transparent, so they aren't. let me give you an example where what we thought, what we intended in terms of policy making with generics and competition worked. in ten years, when we decided that as a public health issue we should have two-year points, have defibrillators in all public places, because we want to save people's lives. we know that vehicle creates an opportunity where laypersons can help administer that level of care and prevent a person of dying from a heart attack. and in ten years, by having six companies effectively compete, we've dropped those prices of defibrillators by about two-thirds. unfortunately, that's an anom y anomaly. today we're seeing price increases in therapeutics and generics, longer patent protections. we negotiated longer patent
protections in 21st century cures. i would suggest today, while we have bipartisan, now, support and real interest in protecting our consumers, that maybe it's time that this committee leave t lead the effort, join up with ways and means and energy and commerce. i think it's time to consider allowing fda to look at price increases and ask them to include that when they prioritize generic applications. i propose that maybe we need a price protection program for public health drugs, and that we need to decide a public formulary. there's no formulary for the epipen. you've got it. a formulary works when there's competition. there are different drugs on that formulary for high blood pressure, insulin. you don't need a formulary. you're it. and you're it except that in canada, and all over europe, your drug is much cheaper.
so i think we should import those drugs right back. we paid you to figure out the device, the application, the drug, now we're protecting you with a generic, we're allowing you to do patient assistance programs under the guise of trying to make sure it's affordable. we create rebates and very complicated, you pay them, they pay you back. i say let's demystify it. let's make sure that congress puts in real patient protection programs to prevent companies like yours from taking advantage of every policy aspect that was intended to make affordable health care. and quite frankly, as long as i'm on this rant, i'm tired of paying prescription drug companies and drug manufacturers and device companies to treat these issues. if we put the same kind of money that we are allowing you to keep, to deal with curing allergies, we wouldn't be having this conversation about an epipen, would we? so i say we shift it, instead of
trying to, you know, pull out information, where i agree, i think you've been far less than transparent, and i think we ought to do transparency legislators. i think there is a whole host of ideas where we could lead instead of being dragged down this path, where we're upset for our constituents, when none of these prices on their own, at these companies' hands, will shift. they certainly haven't. pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies, now pbms, when you try to shift to pbms, they're all making incredible profits in an environment where that profit making environment has all been at the hands of policymakers trying to create a competitive, innovative, private sector, high quality investment to protect america. and instead, we've created that access around the world, and
we've left americans holding, if you will, the financial bag. and i for one am tired of that. so i don't need any answers, because i won't get any that are fair from you or your company. but i'm expecting congress now to take a much different leadership role. and i thank my colleagues on this committee and the leadership by the ranking member and the chairman, because maybe, because of your greed and the other companies', maybe you finally put congress into a position where bipartisan, we will have the courage to finally do what's right for our constituents. i have that courage. i believe my colleagues do too. i yield back. >> i gentleman the gentlewoman. i recognize the gentleman from wisconsin. >> i'm out of breath, i just got here. okay. first of all, for you, mr. throckmorton, and maybe some of has asked this question, if they've asked it, just say go to the next question. have we figured out why the market is not working, why other companies are not marketing
these things and undercutting mylan? >> there is another product that is being marketed. why it's not marketed more broadly, why these increases in prices, i think is the question you're asking, isn't it? >> right, right. is the other product lower cost? >> i'm told that product is lower price, yes. >> okay. we don't want ms. bresch to -- you do have competition, you only have 94, 96% of the market, right? >> that's our current market share. but there's been products in and out of this marketplace over the years. and as -- >> are the products in the marketplace today? >> pardon me? >> are there products in the marketplace today? >> yes. yes. >> and are they lower price than your product? >> the -- there's an adreniclik authorized generic. i'm not sure of its exact price. i believe it's in the $450
range. >> okay. mr. throckmorton, because i don't mean to ask you to support your competition, is there a reason why, if there are generics available, people aren't producing this stuff for substantially less? >> there are no generics in the way that i think you're speaking of them. the generics that are available are so-called authorized generics, which are random name products that have chosen to remove their name from their label. otherwise they are -- >> that's not what this is. >> our interest, i would say the broader interest that we have is in encouraging real competition, which means multiple manufacturers creating many different versions of epinephrine auto injectors, including true generics, generics approved. >> epipen you would argue is not
as good or not the same thing? >> if you were looking at simply the numbers of manufacturers in the area, there are two manufacturers currently making epinephrine auto-injectors for prescription in the u.s. there is a third product that's approved that was voluntarily withdrawn last fall because of some manufacturing issues. they addressed those manufacturing issues. they would be able to come back onto the market also. >> do you expect them to, given that presumably there's a high markup? >> we are offering assistance to them to do exactly that. >> my next question, for ms. bresch, a kind of more difficult question. and i'm not suggesting any governmental problem, but i read a book a little while ago by charles murray, i don't know if you're familiar with him, famous author. he talked about the moral decline of america. and a lot of that moral decline, he focused on what i'll call the underclass, and a lifestyle that is not something that many
people in my age group had when we were growing up. but he focused a little bit on the upper class. and one of the things he focused on, which i think maybe collectively isn't a huge amount of money, maybe it adds, you know, a penny to each prescription drugs you have, but i think it's bad for the fabric of society. i realize it's legal. and i'm not just targeting you, because it's common across the board. it came up earlier that, you know, you're making whatever, 19 or $20 million a year. that's fine, maybe that's a half cent off of every prescription you guys make. but the point murray made is, there was a time in this country where chief executives got along making a lot less, and they apparently make a lot less in sizable companies around the globe. and i think the point he made was this is a sign of greed.
and while, you know, it may be relatively small amount for every person in the country, it probably tears a little bit at the moral fabric as people who work for companies and make relatively small amounts of money look at the chief executive making more money than anybody could possibly imagine. do you ever feel guilty or have pangs of guilt making such a large sum of money, not as somebody who founded the company, but as an employee who really doesn't have a lot of risk yourself? >> look, i am blessed and fortunate. i've been working at this company for 25 years. and representing 40,000 employees. so what mylan has continued to provide access to multiple medications here in the u.s., over 600 products -- >> i know. i'm sure there are many employees who work for you who do wonderful things, valuable
scientists who are saving people's lives. i'm just saying as you walk around the cubicles and see all the people making $40,000 or $50,000 or $60,000 a year, do you ever feel guilty that you and the board nv directors have arranged to have you make $20 million a year. >> i am -- i love that mylan is trying to make a difference every day in what we do and how much product and how much access we are bringing in the savings to this country alone which over the last decade have been $180 billion. >> probably more of the scientists who work for than you, but you understand what i'm saying. maybe you don't understand. and maybe you're very good, and maybe you're worth it. one of the things that frustrates a lot of americans is there are a lot of people who run their companies into the grounds and make tens of mill n millions of dollars. but i'm just going to ask you to comment again. do you think it's good for the moral fabric of society and want
people to believe in the free economy system when in a business, some people make $20 million a year? >> i think to your point, the free market system and delivering, being a well-run company and delivering great shareholder value is part of that free market system. >> i'm sure they're getting good value. you see what i'm saying? maybe you don't understand what i'm saying. there are a lot of people out there. we're going into election season. there are a lot of people throughout who think the system is in part broke because they're working their butt off doing very valuable things and maybe they've been told to take cuts in pay and they see a chief executive making a huge amount of money. way more proportionately than she could even, adjusting for inflation, than chief executives made 50 years ago. and as i understand it, more than they make in other western countries. and i think it grates at some
people. it causes distrust in our system. i'm not suggesting we take away your freedom to make that amount of money. i'm just saying in all walks of life there are people who have the capability of making more and voluntarily say, i don't need that amount of money. and i just wondered if you had any comments on the system that we have in america where so many chief executives, not just you, seem to be making far more money than i think anybody would even know what to do with. and that's my only question. >> and i -- other than commenting that, yeah, the free market system and -- is, i hope that there are companies that are definitely giving back, giving back and creating access and providing many things. and like i said, i go back to mylan and what we have been able
to create and with 80 billion doses capacity and building up to lower those health care costs. >> i'll take it you're not answering the question. because deep inside you are a little embarrassed at what you make. >> i'll now recognize myself for five minutes. your last comment about reducing the price, i find offensive and inaccurate, but let me go first. is epipen -- is it a brand drug, or is it a generic drug? >> epipen is a brand drug. >> does that mean it's an innovator drug? >> you mean based on cns classification? it's a noninnovator drug. >> noninnovator drugs are often -- really generics, correct? >> the definition, the cms has a statutory definition for innovator and noninnovator drugs. >> so you think it's a branded
product but it's a noninnovator drug for the purpose of cms? >> yes, that's how it's classified. >> and you are familiar that mylan had to settle $118 million settlement with the department of justice back in 2009, right? >> i'm not familiar with -- i'm trying to -- what settlement? >> with the department of justice to resolve allegations that mylan had underpaid the rebate obligations in the medicaid prescription drug rebate program with respect to several other mylan products. not epipen. but you're familiar with that? >> i'm not recalling the settlement that you're speaking of. >> this is the justice department. i'll ask unanimous consent to enter this into the record dated monday october 19th, 2009. four pharmaceutical companies pay $124 million for submissions
of false claims to medicaid. without objection, so ordered. have you or anybody at mylan spoken with cms? >> yes, there's been conversations with cms. >> have you had any of those conversations with cms about epipen or the generic epipen? >> i have not. >> have you spoken with anybody at health and human services about epipen? >> i have not. >> nobody? >> no. >> has anybody at your company been in negotiations or discussions with cms regarding epipen? >> yes, i -- people at the company have talked to staff, has talked back and forth. >> who at your company has done that? >> i think there's been several people. i mean several people within the
company that have had conversations. >> can you get us the names of those people? >> i'm sure we could tell you, yes. >> within that ten days? >> i'm sure that we can do that. >> we would also like the names of the people at cms they've been in discussions with. can you give us the names of the cms people your staff has been working with? >> i'm sure we can. like i said, i've not had any -- >> ten days reasonable? >> sure. >> because the concern here is that -- and the question really is, why is mylan classifying epipen as a noninnovator drug? >> when we acquired the product, it had been designated as a noninnovator drug, and there's been several points throughout time that have confirmed that status. >> do you believe that the generic that you're planning to introduce -- when, by the way,
do you hope to introduce the generic? >> certainly before the end of the year. over the next -- >> so in the next 90 days or so. >> yes. >> and do you -- are you going to work to classify that as a noninnovator drug or innovator drug? >> i'm not sure what that classification -- we haven't submitted that -- we haven't submitted yet because we haven't launched the product. >> i need to spend a few minutes going through this. this chart that's right next to you. and i also need help with you. it's going to take a few minutes. i appreciate the indulgence of the committee to understand some of the definitions. mr. carter pointed out there's a revenue line here that seems to be missing, correct? let me go first to the mylan revenue, 274. find that for me. is that the average revenue per -- what is that? 274. what -- define that. >> the average revenue that mylan receives per two-pack
of -- >> so in your letter to me and mr. cummings of september 15th, page 2, at the very top of the paragraph, i'll read here, you write, approximately 85% of consumers who are prescribed the epipen auto injector pay less than $200 for a two-unit pack. and a majority pay less than $50. is that accurate? >> i actually thought it was lower than the $200. >> okay. >> actually thought the majority of patients pay less than $100 and then many pay less than $50. >> well -- >> they're both in the majority, right? 85% of consumers who are prescribed an epipen auto injector pay less than $100. and for a two-unit pack. and a majority pay less than $50. >> yes. >> so, how many -- of those that
purchase the epipen, how many are -- do it as a prescription? do you have to have a prescription? >> yes, you have to have a prescription. >> so 100% of that universe. >> yes. >> so if your average revenue to mylan is $274, and the majority of people are paying less than $50, the minority is paying what to get it? >> well, it could range from -- it could be anything because all the plans, if you are uninsured or if you are -- it would range because every plan is different. >> so what's the highest number? is 608 low? >> it could -- because we don't set the price that's -- when the patient walks up to the -- >> i'm talking about your revenue. >> our revenue is the 274 per
pen on average. >> so that's the average number. and you just told me that the majority pay less than 50 bucks. so i'm trying to figure out with the remainder, what are they paying? >> but the cost to the patient is different than what we're receiving. >> yes. >> i think -- >> but you just -- look, you told me that you sell 4 million two-packs, right? 8 million individual. 4 million two-packs. >> correct. >> if you multiple 4 million two-packs times the 2. -- $274 you get to $1.1 billion. >> correct. >> so how is it that the majority of -- according to what you wrote us -- pay less than $50. if the majority of 4 million people, just more than 2 million people are paying less than 50 bucks, how do you get to an
average of $274? >> because the patient -- but the patient is paying is not coming back to mylan. and when we were speaking earlier of the people, the middlemen in the system, so that's either the pharmacy benefit managers, retailers, wholesalers, insurers is where, because i'm not -- i'm not interfacing directly from a price perspective or pay perspective to the patient. >> you are representing to us that 85% of consumers are paying less than 100 bucks. and that a majority of paying less than $50. the reason you're having this hearing is not because the public thinks they're getting a good deal. i got a $600 product and i only had to pay $48. that's not why you're here. they're telling uthey are having to pay much more. >> it's that's growing minority that i spoke of earlier that is being faced with the wholesale
acquisition cost or more at the counter. >> how do you define profit? what is profit to you? >> so the 50s per pen profit or the direct epipen related cost. so allocation off of that. >> that's not what you wrote me. you wrote this letter less than a week ago. here's what's you says. among other things, this profit is used to fund research and development and to maintain and improve our facilities across mylan in which we invest $1.2 billion this year alone, more than 3 million every day. that's not the definition of profit. >> i think what we were saying is that's how we reinvest the profit we make. but i thought you were asking me how -- >> when there are five executives over five years that take out $300 million, where in your p & l does that show up? does it show up in your profit
line? does it show up in ebitda? where does it show up? >> it's not coming out of -- the $50 number i'm showing you per pen is taking no company allocation to that whatsoever. >> that's what you just wrote to me. you said this profit is used for -- we're supposed to believe that your $50 profit is funding r&d and facilities and all that? because that's exactly -- i just read to you verbatim what you wrote to me. >> we absolutely take our profits and reinvest in our business. to your point, this year alone, 750 million in r&d were spending, bringing hundreds of millions to the market. >> where on your p & l does that show up? >> and i'm saying it's not -- we didn't take any of that out of this 50 -- when we're showing -- >> i'm not talking about the $50. the whole thing. come on. you amortized your fixed expenses and operating expenses over everything, correct? >> correct.
but i'm -- >> where does that show up in that spreadsheet? >> it's not. >> tell me where that number is. >> it's not on there. it would be -- $50 would be lower if we were taking those company allocations like running the business out of this. this is straight just epipen. >> i've gone way past. i'm going to come back to this because your numbers are so askew. it just -- it really is troublesome. let me recognize the ranking member, mr. cummings. >> thank you very much, chairman. you know, when mr. ciarelly appeared before us, he took the fifth. and to be frank with you, you might as well have taken the fifth, too, with the kind of information we've gotten here today. because i don't think that we -- i tell you, this reminds me of a
game when it's like hiding the ball. and it's like a shell game. and we can't -- it seems like we can never figure out where the ball is, and as i said from the very beginning, i was concerned that we would be here in a rope-a-dope situation. it's worse. it's worse. in a rope-a-dope situation, the boxer sort of holds on and tries to get through. and then at the end, he comes back and wins. in this situation, not only are you holding on and trying to win, but in the end, you are placing us in a position where we are not making very much
progress here at all. i'm saying, i've been in 99% of this hearing, and i practiced law for many years. and i tell you, i don't know what your lawyers are telling you, but you -- i don't think that you have been frank with us. and i can understand it a little better if you didn't know what this hearing was all about. and i don't say those words lightly. let me ask you a few questions and see if we might be able to move forward here a little bit. your numbers just don't add up. if i can sum up this hearing, it would be the numbers don't add up. and it is extremely difficult to believe that you're making only $50 in profit when you just increased the price by more than
$100 per pen. do you have any internal company documents that track the total profits you have made off of epipen from 2007 when you acquired it until today? do you have any of those documents? >> well, we certainly could -- i sitting here today don't have a cumulative number, but i totally understand, and i know, if i had only read everything that's been out there around the price, i can totally understand how perplexing it is, and the system, and i would hope that while i don't have answers how to fix all of it, i think i couldn't agree more the transparency of the 608 down is needed across the board because patients have no visibility. pharmacists -- nobody has got a visibility of the value or
the -- what's being paid for what. >> hold on for that one little thing you just said. you talk about the value of the medication, right? you know, you can take that. when you talk about the value of a medication, i guess you're saying, if you have a certain medication that will keep you out of the hospital. a certain medication will save your life. where does that end? in other words, how do you put value on life? you follow what i'm saying? you have to go on and on and on. so if that's the measurement? >> no, that's why i -- >> but you said it 50 million times in this hearing and it sounds like you're saying because i'm able to save somebody from possibly going to the hospital, whatever, that's supposed to be incorporated in the value and that's partly why we're able to charge these prices. and are you telling us that you're doing us a favor? that you're doing our constituents a favor by raising
these prices? >> i think, hopefully, what you'll see with the generic coming to the market is -- >> i'm talking about right now. right now. right now. i've got -- the other night i was at a pta meeting in my district. and i had a mother who has three children. and all of them use epipens. she has to have one set at home and one at the school. and she sat there in tears because she's only making maybe $50,000 a year, or less. and she's trying to figure out how she's going to afford this. as i listen to you more and more and you talk about -- i think i wouldn't be so -- i think i might be a little more trustful if i hadn't heard some of this before. or hadn't read some of it before from people like ciarelli who called us imbessils.
but when you present to me you have these assistance programs, as i see the assistance programs, and, by the way, everybody comes in with the same story. there must be some playbook that you all use. and they say, oh, we've got an assistance program. we're going to help some people. the next thing you know, they then use that to justify not bringing the prices down. you understand that? >> i do. and that's exactly what you come in here to do. you've done it. that's what you're doing. are you going to go down on the price? are you going to come back down on the price at all? put aside the generic stuff. what about coming down on the price? >> we believe that the generic was much more meaningful to make sure we're reaching those patients so that across all the access points. and one thing i would say, and i
know you've had other companies in here and i know orphan drugs, there's been conversations across this. i would say, just to -- as an example, mylan's had an orphan drug product called sistagon on the market for years and years. and at a -- it treats a very small number of patients. less than, i believe, it's now 500. it's a very, very rare disorder. and we -- that price has stayed around $1200 to $2,000 annually to provide the medicine needed every day, where a company came on the market three years ago at $300,000 to treat that same patient population with just a more convenient dose. so i understand that there are the things that you have seen and companies that you've spoken to, but i would hope that you would be able to look at mylan and the role we've played with
generics. the role that i play if i talk about our sistagon experience or trying to -- trying to make sure that the access point for people who are both carrying it, but in schools and in other public places so that there is an epipen there, or an epinephrine auto injector there for anyone who needs it. >> we appreciate all of that, but do you -- does mylan have a slogan that seeing is believing? >> yes. >> you do? >> yes. >> seeing is believing? that's what we want to do. we want to see the records. we want to see the records. you -- you're refusing to say how much profit your company makes. you're repeating talking points with no substance whatsoever, and you're trying to claim your
massive price increases are actually a good thing for american families. our committee requested documents from mylan but so far you've failed to produce everything we've asked for. as you've just said, the mylan slogan is seeing is believing. so in summary, miss bresch, will you agree today -- i know the chairman has asked you to produce some documents within the next ten days and information in the next ten days. will you agree today to produce all the documents the committee has requested so we can confirm what's going on here? >> we will certainly produce everything that we can. >> what does that mean? i don't know what that means. we've given you -- we've asked for specific documents. >> i know we've been responsive. i know we're still -- this has been realtime.
i understand that we've produced thousands of documents. a couple thousand documents, and i know there's more that we have to produce. and i'm saying that i'm sure we will produce everything that we possibly can to give you the visibility and the transparency to the numbers that's i'm showing you. >> and we'll be clear. we want your agreements and contracts with manufacturers. we want -- and suppliers, distributors, pbms and any of your other partners in the distribution channel for epipen. will you produce those? >> i can't speak to all of those contracts of the -- from the confidentiality agreements in some of those, the competitive information in some of those, but that's why i've got to rely on the lawyers who are producing these documents to make sure we're staying compliant with some of the other provisions in the contracts. >> so you will get us what you -- i know you're all lawyered up back there, but
you're going to make sure that you consult with your lawyers to get us what you can? >> yes. >> all right. thank you. >> now recognize the gentleman from georgia, mr. carter. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'll be very brief. i find the chart very interesting. can you hold it up a little more. i can't see the very bottom of it. okay. so we've got wholesale acquisition costs at $608. rebates and allowances. this is what you give back to patients and that's minus $334. >> no, no, the -- this rebates and allowances are all the things that you were speaking of, the pbm, retail, that's all the rebates and things that flow to all the -- >> so you're giving a rebate to a pbm? >> yes. >> you're giving a rebate to a pbm? >> yes. >> that's where that comes in there. >> it's part of it. >> it's part of it. >> it's in there.
>> okay. so you're giving a -- what are allowances? >> that's -- so all of the fees that -- there's wholesaler fees, discounts, rebates. that's just capturing everything that's between the 608 and the 274 which is what mylan receives. >> are you getting any rebates from pbms? >> and that's what i said i didn't want to give you an inaccurate number. >> what was not my question. i didn't ask you for a number. i said are you getting rebates from a pbm? >> and across our across -- >> yes or no? are you getting rebates from a pbm? >> but for epipen, we are paying reba rebates. >> are you getting rebates from a pbm? >> i don't -- we're not getting epipen specific rebates from an epipen from being the manufacturer. >> so you are not getting rebates from a pbm?
>> i don't believe so on -- like if we're just talking about epipen. >> you just told me earlier you were going to produce documents that would give us the numbers. >> so we -- what i don't want to confuse is where our manufacturer -- we'll also an employer. we have a pbm that is managing all of them in the u.s. i didn't want to give you an inaccurate number if there were rebates that come from the pbm as an employer versus the manufacturing. we're paying the rebates for the products. >> this is amazing. this is amazing. i have never in my life seen such a shell game. i'm speechless, and that doesn't happen very often. >> and that's why we have said and encouraged, to your point that transparency and how -- where that's flowing and how it works so that you do know what
the cost is. >> okay. let me -- let me ask one more question, and i'll stop. can you hold it up again. you took an oath earlier today saying you would tell the truth. >> yes. >> is that the truth, $50 per pen? >> yes. >> that is the truth? >> our profits, approximately $50 per pen. >> mr. chairman, i yield. >> thank you. just a few questions as we wrap up. on that chart again, i would like to see a definition of rebates and allowances. i'd like to see a definition for each of those numbers. for instance, cost of goods sold. what do you include and not include in that number? >> that's everything that we're paying from to our partner for the cost of goods sold. >> so, that's it?
what else is in the cost of goods sold? >> because we're -- we have a partner on the product. >> yeah. >> so we pay a price to -- >> you buy it as a finished product? >> yes. >> so you don't manufacture it? >> no, we're partnered on the product. >> so you pay them $69 -- >> per two-pack. >> per two-pack. >> for two epipens. >> for two epipens. so that's your turn-key price? >> yes. >> what would you call direct epipen auto injector costs of $105. what is in that number? >> so sales, marketing, the disease awareness. so everything that would be directed to epipen or around anaphylaxis awareness. that would be all-inclusive of
everything directly related to epipen. >> and the number for research and development, your fixed cost, variable cost at your company, where do those show up? >> that's not on here. these are just direct epipen related costs. if you look at our entire company. >> obviously, that was the point i was trying to just say earlier that this -- this is looking at a product on a stand-alone basis versus saying it takes a company or human resources or other entities to sell the product. so this doesn't take any of that into consideration. this is just giving you an proximate profit on just from an epipen perspective. >> and not to pick so much on your own personal compensation. none of that comes out of this number? these numbers? you want us to believe that your profit is less than $50. >> if you took company
allocation and all that in, yes. >> i don't know who the investors of this company are, but, man, i'm telling you, this is some fishy business because these things do not add up. we would expect a very professional presentation on your p & l, and these dumbed down versions here do not make sense without the definitions in here. it's just -- it just feels like you're not being candid and honest with congress who is asking you for some very basic information. >> and we -- >> and your attorneys over there are scrambling, all uncomfortable. but we just want some basic information. you dug this hole for yourself. you guys dug this hole for yourself. we ask for some simple basic information. don't tell me that you're pulling all your r&d costs and
fixed expenses and all your facilities and all of that out of your profit. out of your profit line. any responsible p & l would -- it would lay this out for us. you can make this thing go away by being honest and candid, and we just don't think you are. that's why we're in what number hour here and we're asking you to provide more information. and don't come here and tell us you're doing the world a favor by increasing the price from $125 to over $600 and everybody else is making money but poor old mylan. that's just -- it just doesn't smell right. doesn't pass the basic sniff test. >> and, chairman, i don't think we said we weren't making money. i think all we were trying to set the record straight as to the dollar amounts that have been out there around the 608 price to show that what we actually receive is the 274 and to walk down that. and we'll happily provide the
definitions and that transparency to show you the $50. >> i just don't buy the idea that the majority of consumers are paying less than 50 bucks. i mean, that's what you're telling us. >> right. and that's what -- >> trust, but verify. trusting is believing. the mylan way. show it to us. >> that's what our data shows, and we will. >> we haven't seen it. appreciate you providing that to us. i have two quick fda questions here. dr. throckmorton, how many abbr abbreviated new drug applications are pending before the fda right now? >> 2,300 actions are currently before -- >> and how long is the average wait time for an approval of a generic drug? >> i'd like to get that information and get it back to you as soon as i can. >> can you define what -- in fairness, what i asked ms.
bresch, what's a reasonable time before we start raising the red flag here. >> can i -- >> ten days? >> ten days sounds like a common number if that would be good enough for you. >> we would appreciate that. mr. cummings? >> just briefly. ms. bresch, you mentioned that you had some confidentiality agreements. that doesn't apply to us, congress, you know that, right? hello. >> no, i didn't know if there's confidentiality. >> that doesn't apply to us. and i'm sure your attorneys will work that through. i just hope that -- i just want to go back as briefly as i close with what i said before. i've asked you every kind of y way, would you -- would the prices come down, and you basically made it clear --
basically you fall in the same category of ciarelli. and the valiant people. they go through the hearing, go through the motions. at least you tried to answer some questions. but in the end, our constituents still suffer. and i hope that when you fly back on your jet, you'll think about that mother i told you about or the people that mr. carter talked about a few minutes ago trying to just take care of their families. and, you know, i don't -- i try to really look at things from a very -- in a way, a very balanced way, but i can tell you that i've been on this committee for 20 years, and very rarely have i seen a situation where it
seems that we could not get the answers that we were looking for to this degree. and what that does is it goes against credibility. and that's a very, very difficult hurdle. and so that's why we really do need to see the documents. and what we're trying to do is -- you can make all the money you want. i just don't like the idea of it being done in a way that's not transparent, and i don't like it being done on the backs of people who can least afford it. and you keep trying to convince us that mylan is doing a great favor. but mylan is making money. mylan is doing fine. but to come in and to say some of the things you've said, it just makes me feel that maybe you don't think we're that
medicine. if you missed any of this hearing, you can see it in its entirety at our website, c-span.org. the vice president of afghanistan told the united nations today that attacks from terrorist groups against afghan civilians are being planned from pakistan territory. his remarks are next on c-span3. local law enforcement officials testify about security challenges facing the u.s. after that, the premier of china talks about his country's economy. and later, a conversation on technology and innovation. c-span's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. this thursday morning, we're live from the cannon house office building on capitol hill where members of the house homeland security committee discuss the recent bombings in new york and new jersey. also the overall threat
environment in the country and the work of their committee. guests include new jersey democratic congressman donald payne jr., georgia republican congressman barry laudermilk, brian higgins and pennsylvania republican scott perry who is the chair of the subcommittee on oversight and management efficiency. watch c-span's "washington journal" live beginning at 7:00 eastern thursday morning. join the discussion. afghan vice president sarwar danesh spoke about security challenges facing his country and the region. topics included iran, syria, north korea's nuclear program and relations with pakistan. his remarks at the u.n. general assem plea in new york city are about 30 minutes. >> so i have great pleasure in welcoming the vice president of the islamic republic of afghanistan. his excellency sarwar danesh,
and i invite him to address the general assembly. >> translator: mr. president, your excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, it is my distinct pleasure to attend the 71st session of the u.n. general assembly. i would like to sincerely congratulate ambassador peter townsend from fiji at assuming the presidency of this year's general assembly session. and want to thank his excellency
ban ki-moon, the u.n. secretary-general, for a decade of his persistent efforts and wise leadership in arenas of support on fundamental freedoms, the rule of law, justice for all, and wish him every success in his future endeavors. mr. president, the 21st century has brought with it an ever-complex international arena. some old conflicts have lingered. with new threats and challenges in the forms of wiviolent extremism and terrorism, displacement and migration, climate change and other challenges have emerged
threatening all of humanity. we have realized that their cooperation provides the most viable avenue to promote peace and security. and to ensure a world without hatred and conflict. we believe that the u.n. still remains the single most important international body for the promotion of global peace, security and prosperity and that achieving a more stronger organization remains a priority for all of us and the way forward. the united nations' vital role in helping afghanistan transition into a democratic and realistic society is a clear example of the profound impact in helping to create real change for better societies and communities around the world. allow me to update the assembly
on the current state of affairs in my country. while the government of national unity in afghanistan has passed two years since establishment, i would like to briefly present our view of the achievements of the government of national unity under the leadership of his excellency, dr. muhammad ashraf ghani, the elected president of the islamic republic of afghanistan. mr. president, we in afghanistan aim to strengthen the spread of national participation and cooperation for reflection and implementation of wishes and will of the afghan citizens. based on national consensus, all groups, political figures and afghan elites inside and out of the government are jointly sharing ideas for strengthening the political system and the government of national unity and for implementation of reforms
within the framework of national interests. the afghan nation has inherited a legacy of conflict, oppression, discrimination and inequality. we believe democracy is the best solution to these problems as it provides the only foundation to ensure justice and inequality and enable social and political groups to be adequately represented. to this end, we have a modern institution that provides for this goal. and only its full implementation can ensure political stability in our society. our government has made considerable achievements in different areas over the past
two years, including reducing maternal and child mortality, increasing access to education, improving basic freedoms, strengthening the telecommunications and information sectors, improving the rule of law and preserving justice and human rights. internationally, our government has gained a proper status for proving to be a trustworthy partner to the many countries that are engaging afghanistan and have enlisted for security and stability of the country. we are sparing no effort in implementing our commitments towards reforms. our plan and systematic efforts are ongoing to eliminate
corruption and strengthen good governance, judicial reforms, promote women's empowerment, ensure effective service delivery for our citizens, ensure accountability standard at all levels of the government, institutionalize merit-based appointments of senior officials, as well as to secure transparency in government contracts with the establishment of the national procurement committee. in order to strengthen transparency of our future parliamentary presidential and district council elections, the process of consultations and technical and legal studies on reforming the electoral bodies and electoral laws has concluded, and initial steps towards electoral reforms will begin very soon.
combating the threat of narcotics is another priority of the national unity government. in this regard, we are cooperating closely with the u.n. odc and other international partners and will continue our joint efforts with the national action plan framework. at the warsaw nato summit last july, nato members and our other allies pledged to provide 1 billion u.s. dollars in support on an annual basis for the afghan national defense and security forces until the end of 2020. also the results of our mission which offer support in areas of training advisory and assistance
to the afghan security forces was also extended beyond 2016. we extend a particular debt of gratitude to the united states of america for providing the largest share of support. in less than two weeks time, afghanistan and our international partners will come together at the brussels conference to review and reach important decisions on the fullest scope of the joint partnership in the way forward. the national unity government will be presenting comprehensive update on the positive trajectory of our reform efforts conductod the basis of self-reliance. through mutual accountability framework, we look forward to our international partners to make new assistance on the basis
of afghanistan peace and development framework. mr. president, despite these achievements, continuation of the undeclared war against afghanistan, the need for security still remains a serious challenge for the government of national unity as our people are still subject to merciless attacks of terrorist groups. currently, more than ten terrorist groups were sent from outside afghanistan with the goal of creating obstacles for our state building efforts and preventing the establishment of peace and stability are fighting against us in afghanistan. one of their main objectives is to suppress democracy, freedom of speech and our free and independent media. that is why our journalists are subject to serious threats while reporting from the battlefields.
and also during terrorist attacks. afghanistan requests the united nations to appoint a special representative for the safety of journalists focused on the protecting all journalists, including those serving in afghanistan. over the past several months, terrorists, including taliban and daesh who continue to enjoy foreign support attacked the peaceful and civil demonstration of the enlightenment movement in kabul and killed tens of our educated youth and elite. they also attacked the university of afghanistan and other civilian facilities, killing hundreds of innocent civilians. based on existing evidence,
these attacks were planned and organized from the other side of the line inside pakistani territory. this year, the taliban tried to take control of more areas in the country, especially in kunduz and helmand provinces. as a result, hundreds of extremist militants of taliban and daesh, many of whom were foreign fighters, were killed or captured. we call on the international community to pay particular attention to the elimination of terrorist safe havens located outside of the country. we are -- to implement their international pledges in the fight against terrorism and to avoid a dual policy of making a
distinction between good and bad terrorists which undermines the international order. we ask all of you, what were the previous leaders of the taliban and al qaeda residing. and where were they killed. and this very moment, where are the leaders of the taliban and haqani network cloelocated? from where and how are terrorists being trained, equipped and financed during a full-scale war? we have repeatedly asked our neighboring country pakistan to destroy the known terrorist safe havens, but we, unfortunately, have yet to witness any change in the situation. afghanistan has always desired peaceful relations with all countries of the region. however, the government of national unity reserves the
right to do whatever is necessary for the defense and protection of our people. we have also kept open the doors of peace and negotiations for those taliban elements and other groups who are willing to give up violence, return to peaceful life and adhere to our constitution. in this connection, a peace agreement is about to be signed between our government and the islamic party that will be an important step for progress in our peace process. we believe that the quad lateral coordination group composed of afghanistan, people's republic of china, pakistan and the united states can remain a useful platform to further peace
efforts. so long as the government of pakistan acts in good faith to meet and fulfill its commitment within the parameters of the qcg's road map. mr. president, despite our security challenges, afghanistan has always maintained a positive approach in regards to our relations with all regional countries. and islam ic world. we consider them to be our best partners and seek to strengthen our cultural, social and economic ties and to use our experience to promote peace and co-existence and present a moderate interpretation of islam. in this regard, we welcome the express readiness of the organization of the islamic cooperation and any islamic country to help promote the
peace agenda in afghanistan. i want to add that islam as a religion, as a clear thought, culture, civilization and history on the one hand respects human dignity, rights and freedoms and drives national sovereignty from the will of people. and on the other hand, is against any kind of injustice, exclusivism, hatred, radicalism and violence. those individuals and groups that resort to violence, terror and killing under any name are not acquainted with the spread of this humane religion and are using islam as a tool to achieve their evil goals. how can islam possibly give permission for terrorism and suicide attacks? to take lives of thousands of
innocent people. who are clearly considered human as representative of god. in the holy versus of koran and considers the killing of one innocent human equal to that of killing all of humanity. we expect of the prominent islamic scholars who will take part in a conference in mecca to further enlighten the true image of islam and declare their condemnation of terrorist and extremists on behalf of our great religion. mr. president, in order to achieve regional cooperation, we need to have a stable region. afghanistan's foreign policy is founded on the creation of an economy based society. afghanistan is an active member of the regional organization of sarc and echo and an observer member of the shanghai
organization. it aims to actively take part in the revitalization of regional cooperation agenda within the heart of asia, stumble and -- processes. afghanistan and all of the regional countries have common threats and common interests. we should come together and cooperate to fight against our common threats, including terrorism, radicalism, drugs, organized crimes, illegal immigration and smuggling. also, the establishment of the regional railroad, energy transit, mine extraction, trade and transit can provide an important joint economic cooperation for us. afghanistan is an important
crossroad of trade, transit and economic activities can connect the south asia with central asia and the middle east to the east and south asia. within china, iran, afghanistan and expansion of cooperation in the port of iran. with implementation of these projects afghanistan can reach to international markets and countries can also get better connected with respect to the principle of noninterference and other countries i'm holding use of force in resolution of conflicts, respected territorial integrity and national governty,
exchange of knowledge and science and technology and most important of all we can prepare for economic growth of all countries of our region. request neighboring countries and in the region and the first country to become the un country and member state and it's international commitments or in the last 16 years we have served as a point of emergence whereby the international community has come together in this connection i wish to also highlight and thank the un's role in
facilitating a role for afghanistan stability and prosperity. >> during recent years we have signed documents of long-term tra teejic cooperation with 20 of our allies including the us, eu and in a to and important conferences of london, chicago and warsaw and policies and decisions and like other members of the international community it's serious and decisive in fighting against radicalism and it's against this ominous phenomenon. it has been years since our nation is at the forefront of the fight against terrorism and
has made tremendous sacrifices in order to defend common values of humanity. we have lost many of our great national figures and hundreds of in peace officers and journalists and members. however we believe that terrorism has become global threats against world peace. this is true when we witnessed science of radicalism and different forms in europe and america and incidents of terrorist attacks in many countries over the world. in this regard, and considering the extent of these threats, measures of the international
community against tourism and radicalism will not be enough and successful millions the effective wholistic measures encompassing political, cultural, economic and even military aspects are considered as a universal strategic need. the un should hold an international conference with the gain of introducing a new set up to combat terrorism. we believe serious efforts in the fight against terrorism and radicalism are in need of exact and thorough planning for at least 20 years and in this plan afghanistan should receive special attention from the international community as they are at the forefront of this fight. one of the ominous outcomes of violence and radicalism is the new wave of immigration last year that made it an important
international challenge. we express gratitude to the countries that offer support especially germany and other european countries that welcome african refugees with open arms. also reports the un and it's member states to have a new approach toward this international challenge and countries where immigrants are coming from to deal with the root causes and reasons of immigration. especially the ominous phenomen phenomenon. mr. president, a glimpse show that injustices, threats of violence and conflicts are still endangering millions of human lives throughout the world. we are witnessing the extent of terror in syria. we announced our full support to
a comprehensive solution to the syrian conflict that will reflect the will of all syrians. we also have the conflict in yemen. resolve the issue of palestine and the legitimate rights and pal state prisons including the right to have an independent government and invite all sides to start direct talks in order to achieve a sustainable solution and peace and peaceful co-existence. afghanistan supports the historic agreement would mean 5 plus one countries and the republic of iran in the nuclear program within the joint
comprehensive man of action and peace and stability and development and program i should have that we believe are dangerous for the region and endanger war peace and security. mr. president, since 2001, when we commenced a new chapter of our modern history, afghanistan has regained it's historical place among responsible members of the family of the nations that are presented in this assembly. and it's our full and abiding commitment to uphold the charter or render a role in promoting
global peace, justice, human rights and rule of law. and human rights council for the period of 2018 and 2020. we call respectfully and all of the friends and all the member states that support our candidacy in the you coming elections. so in conclusion i wish to reiterate on behalf of the afghan people and government our deepest gratitude to all of our international partners and peace and security and prosperity for the past 16 years. and especially sacrifices of nato and troops in the fight against terrorism in afghanistan. together we have come a hong way in our journey.
but our task is unfinished. we look to continued support for the coming years and stand confident in realizing the goals we have jointly set to achieve. here, i wish to highlight once again afghanistan's firm commitment to the realization in a world in which peace and justice and tranquility prevals. i thank you. the front page headline in today's washington post is also available online at washington post.com. donald trump used charity's money to settle his legal disputes and the reporting of david hooking into this story. and thanks very much for being with us. >> glad to be here. >> first did donald trump violate any irs rules? >> well, the irs hasn't really
even investigated this case so i hate to be the final judge and jury but the irs will say that if you're the president of a charity as trump is here you can't use the money in your chair toy buy things for yourself and to benefit your businesses. that's called self-dealing and totally against the wall and a number of cases trump did just that. took money out of his charity either to pay off money that his businesses owed or buy things to decorate the hallways of his clubs or his house. >> this is the latest in a series of stories that you have been working on. i know you sent donald trump so questions. so far no answers from the exam pain but what are some of the questions that are still unanswered? >> the biggest question is whether trump had given any of his money to charity since 2008 and it's named after him. since he is giving no money to them and as far as i can tell not much money to anybody else.
anybody got any of the millions of dollars and almost no gifts since 2009. >> how much time has donald trump spent on his foundation? >> that's a good question. every year in his irs filings he has to tell the irs how many hours a week he spends working on the trump foundation. for nine years he told the irs an average of zero hours per week. i don't know how that's possible. in the last filing in 2014, or the last filing that we have access too he said he worked 1-half hour per week. >> let me put two examples on the table and have you exmain. first case of martin greenberg in 2010. what was this about? >> he was a player at a charity golf tournament and that charity golf tournament had a prize, a $1 million prize. if you hit a hole in one and you win $1 million. and on the 13th hole he hits a hole in one. everybody goes crazy. he gets his picture taken.
goes to the clubhouse to celebrate his million dollars and they pull him out and they say actually you won nothing because the rules of the hole in one contest say that the ball has to travel 150 yards from the tee to the hole or else it doesn't count. if it's less than 150 yards the prize isn't good. they set up the golf course in the way that the hole was always going to be too shooter so when he made that, it was too short. he sues. he sues trump's golf course and there's a legal settlement in which they agree to pay some money to charity as sort of a way of settling the lawsuit. but what you can tell from tax records is that his foundation received nothing from the golf course it's the actual party to the lawsuit. instead $158,000 donation to the donald trump foundation charity. so it ameans that the charity paid a settlement that the golf course was supposed to pay. >> more significantly front page
of the post is a check from the foundation. $100,000 to fisher house but there's a story behind this check. what is it? >> so trump has a resort, a club called mar-a-lago. he puts up a giant flag pole. brought him a lot of good publicity but it was against the town rules. the flag pole was too high. he ends up with $120,000 of unpaid fines to the town against this club. so they go to court. and the agreement is that the town had wave the $120,000 of unpaid fines. and has to make it apart of fisher house that isn't do it. and trump's golf course paid nothing to fisher house. and effectively the club had an
obligation of $100,000. >> what is this all about and we found two cases in which trump at charitiesty options bought large pictures of his own face. one for $20,000 and one for $10,000. and he paid using donald trump foundation money. now that means if a charity pays for those items the charity owns them and they must be used for charitable purposes. >> he had to use his own money. to use the charitiesty's money at a means by law the portraits had to have charitable use. one painting is still missing. one of them we will find yesterday hanging on the wall of the bar of trump's golf resort outside of miami. unless they run a soup kitchen in the bar that is not a
charitable use and not a proper use of something bought by charity. >> we were a couple of days away from the first presidential debate. a lot of questions about the clinton foundation that will come up and now questions about the trump foundation. does one negate the other? >> they're really very different and they're different in the moral understanding of both. the clinton foundation is huge. it deploys more than 200,000 people and the question for clinton is a moral responsibility. and did he get favors for folks that are also donor foundation. and the work is true and real and in the case of the trump foundation it's a much smaller enterprise. it doesn't do any of its own charitable work put passes money
on and the question is about the moral responsibility of wealth. trump is a wealthy man and wants it to be known that he's wealthy and made a big deal about how philanthropic he is but he doesn't feel the responsibility to use any of his own wealth for philanthropy. he seems to do everything he can to have other people pay for his fill lan t instead of him. >> he made that reference. other people's money. >> after a lot of media pressure he paid it but before that i can't find any evidence that he was using anything other than people's money to pay off his charitable obligations. >> the latest in a series of investigative pieces looking into the donald j. trump foundation. the story's available online at washington post.com. thank you for being with us. >> thank you. >> we'll look back at past
presidential debates. saturdays on cspan at 8:00 p.m. eastern. this saturday is a 1976 debate between general ford and former georgia.gov more jimmy carter. >> we were faced with heavy inflation, over 12%. we were faced with substantial unemployment but in the last 24 months and we have 500,000 more americans out of work three months ago. and since mr. ford has been in office in two years we've had a 50% increase in unemployment. >> the 1980 debate with former california governor ronald reagan and president jimmy carter. >> when i made my decision to stop all trade with iran, as a result of the taking of our hostages i announced then and have consistently maintained since then that if the hostages are released safely that we
would make delivery on the items. >> we had adequate warning that there was a threat to our embassy and we could have done what other embassies did either strengthen our security there or remove our personnel before the kidnap and take over took place. >> and the 2000 presidential debate between former texas governor george w. bush and incumbent vice president a al gore. >> i'll balance the budget every year. i'll pay down the national debt. i will put medicare and social security in a lock box and protect it. >> one quarter of the surplus for important projects and send one quarter of the surplus back to people that pay the bills. >> watch past presidential debates saturday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on cspan. the cspan radio ap and cspan.org.
>> this weekend our nation was shaken by terrorist attacks in minnesota. and new york and new jersey. and the injured victims and their families and i appreciate your deputy commissioner miller and our hearts go out to the people, the good people of new york. the threat environment is as high as we have ever seen it. especially from radical islamist extremists.
last year this committee tracked the most home grown jihadist plots ever in a single year mt. united states and in 2016 could be even worse. our city streets are are once again becoming the battleground. ft. hood. boston. chattanoo chattanooga, san bernardino, orlando. some said this regular terrorism is the new normal but i strongly reject that argument. complacency is not an option. terrorists are threatening american lives, our livelihood and our way of life. we cannot falter with so much at stake. that is why yesterday i released a national strategy to win the war against islamist terror. with proposals for fighting the enemy oversaes and stopping radicalization in our community.
and make sure that our front line defenders are better prepared to stop acts of terror. this means that police, fire and other emergency professionals need to be able to detect suspicious activity and catch potential terrorists before it's too late. if a plot goes undetected it's quickly to prevent loss of life. we saw that play out this weekend when our first responders acted heroically to protect their fellow citizens. so to the witnesses testifying today i want you to know this committee is greatful for your service to our communities and your sacrifices for our country. also want to convey one message above all else and that is that we have your backs.
we're committed to give you the tools to fight terror. and it's the challenging times. it's been a hard year especially for law enforcement. you have tough questions in the press and you're staring down violence in our streets every day. that's why this committee has fought to protect important dhs grant funding that you rely on. in fact, later today the house will vote on my bill to authorize an additional $30 million in annual grants to help your communities guard against the dynamic terror threat including active shooter attacks, i.d.s and suicide bombers. >> we have pushed federal agencies to share intelligence with you and share more quickly and comprehensively. we need to ensure that the federal government properly
incorporates the valuable ct information you develop from the streets. the street intel in the communities where you serve every day. today i hope you'll share with us what is working on the front lines and what is not. in particular, we want the to know how we can better support you to respond to this unprecedented terror threat. last weekend i went to the 9/11 memorial service and listened to all the nearly 3,000 names of those killed read aloud. we do this each year to remember the fallen and to honor the heroism we saw on that faithful day. from first responders, from police, and every day citizens. like those brave americans we lost, our witnesses this morning have sworn an oath to protect our people. so before we start, let me just say again, thank you.
with that the chair now recognizes the ranking member mr. thompson. >> thank you mr. chairman. i'd like to thank you for holding today's hearing. in light of the recent terrorist attacks in minnesota, new jersey, and new york, i'd like to offer my sympathies to the victims and their families. i believe we all agree that terrorism and any other violence in our streets is an all too common occurrence. we must act boldly to stem this tie. mr. miller, thank you for coming to town. i know it's a very busy time for you and obviously you are still doing your work before this community today. thank you for your service. we still stand with the land owner and have not forgotten about the victims of the june terrorist attack. plflt chairman in just the past
four months, incidents in orlando, dallas, minnesota, new york, new jersey have brought in to sharp focus the complex diverse and confounding nature and those that are inspired to carry out attacks do not neatly fit a single profile or single hateful or violence or extremist ideology. and seemingly was not part of a terrorist cell. just this past saturday a hone actor that's been investigated for possible ties for isil attack ten people at a mall in minnesota. also last weekend in new jersey and new york it's believed that the suspected bomber that also shot two police officers may have been inspired by al qaeda and right now appears to have
acted alone. in july a perpetrator who had no former affiliation with any particular group but may have been inspired by a black separatist group shot and killed five police officers in dallas texas. we know by now that our law enforcement is a target for terrorists. we also know that law enforcement's job is made more difficult by the availability of assault weapons. earlier this month, one of our subcommittees received testimony from representatives of local law enforcement identifying the availability of guns and the lone wolf threat as serious problems for police. in fact, i would note that one of our witnesses to date, has gone further in describing this challenge by stating that the widespread availability of guns in this country makes it possible for potentially dangerous persons to legally
acquire weapons to cause mayhem and causalities. and this isis abroad and home grown extremist. i look forward to engaging the chief on this point. even a terrorist note that it is far easier to carry out an attack in the name of that ideology with a gun than in europe. a testimony by one former member of isil published this summer underscores this point. and terrorist recruitment in the followers. for america, it is easy to get them over the social network because the americans have open gun policies and if they have no prior record they can buy guns.
we don't need a contact man to provide guns for them. mr. chairman we have seen the scenario, the former isil member mentioned unfold with assault weapons here in this country. we saw it in san bernardino where perpetrators inspired by isil walked into a soft target and killed 14 people and injured another 22 with an assault style weather. we saw it again this june in orlando and walked into a night club and killed 49 people with an assault weapon. i witnessed it and recognize the impact of assault weapons was having on our homeland security. and make a determination of what they stand for and how prevalent some of these assault rifles available to date. otherwise we don't make some
modification. ergoing to continue seeing some of what you see happening here now here in orlando. i agree with you that radicalization is a problem. and not to give into terrorism. and places where our constituents live work and play at risk of becoming battlegrounds hike syria and afghanistan. as lawmakers we make it more difficult for terrorists to carry out attacks on u.s. soil. taking an action and it would be a good start. however it seems that in the waning days of this congress there's more appetite for counter productive proposals such as closing the border to muslims or ethnically profiling
texas and finally mr. john miller. deputy commissioner for the new york city police department. and he is very busy and back home at new york. thank you for being here now. i'd like to recognize his opening statement. >> good morning chairman call ranking member thompson. and really represents 68 of the largest cities of the kriets and the chairman of the homeland security committee. i want to first of all thank you plflt chairman and your committee for your outstanding leadership and your work in this vital area at a time when i think the threat not only continues to expand but the consequences of terrorism are hitting our communities every
day. i can tell you that the one thing that keeps us all up is the issue of the lone wolf. and just in the last few days we have seen the consequences. and become radicalized and we can no longer call this an emerging threat. it's an imminent threat or on going threat and it's a threat that we continue to fight. we witnessed the horror of the lone wolves not just this weekend and the city. we also have to keep in mind that we have our own home grown extremists with very different views and they're extremes no matter which way you look at that. three thanksgivings ago is you have a man by the name of mr. mcwilliams that is part of the
priesthood who on that thanksgiving night went around austin trying to burn down the mexican conciliate and with an aflt k. 47 type of assault rifle aattacked the conciliate and attacked the federal courthouse and attacked our headquaters firing 108 rounds into our occupied headquaters nearly striking one of our detectives in the middle of the night. we have an american hero and texas hero and only in texas can a police sergeant take a shot while he is being shot at with an ak 47 from 312 feet away. strike the suspect in the heart while holding two horses with one hand. >> i think it speaks to the professional i feel of the american police officer and the courage despite the national discussion around policing
today. >> he know they're out there and they're going to continue to hurt us and radicalization is how we get to that point. it's important for this committee. especially for elected officials to temper our comments and temper our broad brushes we're using to paint members of the community and religion of the race of a national origins as criminals or as terrorists. individuals feel marginalized or feel that they're not welcome end up being much more susceptible from radicalization whether it's from a street gang or islamist using social media to radicalize folks. it's critical that we continue as police departments and sheriff's departments and as a nation to build bridges to make people feel welcome. the communities we serve whether they're muslim, african
american, hispanic, asian, christian, jewish they're the greatest force multipliers. they're the ones that are going to spot the suspicious behavior. they're the ones that have to feel they have to feel there was a community member that found one of the unexploded devices. it was i believe a member of the community that happened to own a bar that trusted a new york city police department that felt they were included by the new york city police department and help the new york city police department capture that suspect before he can carry out more terror in our nation. and do that for our community. the crown terrorist enterprise you know is important us. we continue to work on the national level with the sheriff's department with their
intel commanders group to be able to tie some of the issues that we see across the country to be able to not just disrupt but prevent terrorism and look forward to talking about that. one of the areas we need help with is the law enforcement terrorist prevention program. there's no national coordination. no designated official at dhs which prepares and ill plement a terrorist prevention plan and letp needs to be explored and hopefully absolutely strengthened. one of the piggest frustrations i have as a police chief and my colleagues will share this is as it relates to grant funding and the distributional funds fema is still not the right organization to be spear heading that. it's too much focused on response. well we're responding to the terrorist attack and already feel the american people.
we have to have another office that understands the importance of prevention and the importance of disruption and unfortunately fema, despite our efforts of police executives to put more effort in terms of funding for prevention and disruption continues to focus on me response and it's too late not only in terms of the psychological impact of the nation and we want you to look hard at how those funds are being distributed and who is responsible for the funds being distributed. and dlifr the results that the division of congress because it lacks authority, budget and staffing. we hope that you will consider remedying this organization by further directing dhs to put some teeth into that position. fortunately the incumbent
assistant secretary of law enforcement continues to work with us but she is able to do so because of the efforts of deputy secretary who has been playing an entry gral role in helping her despite the challenges. it continues to be a great challenge and i hope that we will look at having industry when we put in a search warrant and not sit on it for days on end when we have seconds hours minutes to try to disrupt the next attack. whether it's a person with mental illness, islamic radical or some other radical we have to have laws that make these things a priority. i want to thank congressman donovan and ranking member payne for your leadership and making it a stand alone asset at the federal level.
we hope your bill passes because it will be instrumental in helping us respond to the next threat and i want to say thank you for 5308. we should take the interest for terrorist organizations and invest that interest in the safety of the american people and the safety of every day crime and i thank you for your leadership and i look forward to the discussion. >> chair recognizes the sheriff. >> my name is michael bouchard
and i have been in law enforcement for almost 30 years. i'll be speaking briefly but in my actual testimony i submitted i will go into a greater depth and be at 30,000 foot. i'm the vice president in charge of affairs for major county sheriff's association of america and i'll testifying on their behalf and like all of you and all of our fellow americans on 9/11 our world was changed dramatically. the men and women of law enforcement work as neighbor streets do not become the next battleground. >> the major violence has evolved and the expansion of encryption and the use of social
media and inspiration of lone wolf attacks and recruitment is very evident and very prevalent. we find ourselves at a new age where criminals and terrorists enthusiastically operate beyond the confines of law through encrypted networks and applications in mobile devices i'd like to submit our paper following this discussion. >> home grown violent extremists is another example of the threat environment facing local law enforcement. they come from a variety of backgrounds and driven by reely jous or ideological factors. they prevent a uniquely dangerous situation for law enforcement. robust community engagement as was mentioned by the chief is very important in a direct way
of combatting violent extremism. it requires commitment to meet with leaders of diverse communities and those relationships become resilient. as evidence of recent radical islamist terrorist attacks and others the threat posed by our governments refugee and visa programs are real. when it's conducted and no information is available from their home country it's impossible to verify the information needed to make an informed decision on the threat level posed by an applicant. and found the u.s. citizenship and immigration services granted citizenship to over 800 individuals from special interest countries that have been ordered deported or removed under a different name. that's the vetting process we're talking about. it requires them to consult with state or local governments and
the intended distribution of refugees to localities. despite this requirement no one is making any members of the association on this issue. there's been over 1200 refugees settle in my state with the majority and not one phone call. with the increased threat environment law enforcement has been continuously asked to do more with less. the president proposed an fy 17 budget that cuts funding by 45%. the total amount received have been reduced every year. through executive action and not legislation the administration recalled certain 1033 military surplus equipment. on the same day as the san bernardino terror attack my office received an order to return an armored personnel carrier to be destroyed because it looks too militarized. it pulls up to protect money and
it's viewed as normal but if law enforcement pulls up in the same vehicle at the same building to protect lives somehow it's bad in fy-16 congress allocated a initiative to help prepare for event and complex coordinated attacks. and they proactively offered suggestions to fema and address law enforcement needs. and no progress has been made on that issue either. and after i self-deploy to involved agencies to ground zero and hurricane katrian we engaged in dialogue on how to train regional response teams. where does that program stand today? i don't know. it's been two years we worked on that and it's completely fallen off the map. our boarders are more secure
than ever and undocumented individuals continue to illegally enter the homeland. if we don't have border security we do not have national security. i'd like to thank the committee and staff for all of their work and bipartisan and countless bills passed the community with the aim to secure our homeland. i'd hike to thank for his committee and engage us in local law enforcement. greatly appreciated and often not hurt at other levels. i thank the committee and look forward to other questions. >> good morning, chairman mccall and ranking member thompson and members of the committee. it is indeed an honor and a privilege to me to provide testimony today during this hearing to discuss ways to stop the next attack. to be a doomsday reporter.
the nation experienced a paradigm shift in our global war on terror. i agree that we should not accept the current state of affairs as the new normal. there's been numerous recent violent incidents on soil that indicates that terror subjects brought the fight to our homeland and they're now focussing on soft targets in our cities and counts which puts local law enforcement officers squarely in the cross hairs of violent extremists. my community, the metropolitan orlando area experienced such an attack on the 12th. members responded involving an active shooter.
the incident remains under investigation by the fbi but it is believed that a lone gunman killed 49 innocent people and injured another 53 persons in the pulse night club incident. the incident began shortly after 2:00 a.m. when omar began firing at patrons of the club on a night designated as latin night. if we're going to be successful at reducing the attacks on american citizens by violent extremists federal state and local law enforcement authorities must improve our working relationships in three ways. number one, we must improve the access to information. the sharing of actionable intelligence information that can be used to identify an
arrest subject involved in plotting attacks before an attack occurs. funding to include training and equipment must be increased. as it relates to information, the department of homeland security, dhs should reassess policy on state and local agencies from having access to the data base that identifies individuals as being in this country illegally. and they are not aware of the subject's status. it's clearly a function of the federal government and sheriff's do not seek this authority.
we have enough on our plate. >> they already know they are illegal and have the authority to arrest and deport them. local and state law enforcement should know who they are dealing with even if they cannot arrest for immigration violations. as it relates to sharing information, florida sheriffs have seen increased immune kags from the department of justice and dhs to state and local law enforcement concerning critical incidents. assistant secretary at dhs's office of partner engagement has been a driving force behind this and most have been invited to
participate in conference calls following international events effecting law enforcement and public safety and give credit for increasing communication with state and local law enforcement and for pushing facts to sheriff's directly as opposed to sheriff's receiving information from the national news media. in order for american law enforcement to prevent, respond to and mitigate domestic terror attacks, analytics and training will be entry gal will be integral. it's numerous projects funded in previous years by the urban area security initiative grant program. we have been working for the past two years to get dhs funding restored to our ree swron.
region. they worked with the orlando police and these efforts. we have petitioned dhs and fema to reassess the msa and the need to strengthen and security central florida from another terror attack. like the pulse night club incident. the central florida region has been fortunate to receive $45 million since 2004. the orange county's sheriff office has managed the funds. the funding received prior to 2013 was critical to our region's ability to prevent, protect, respond to and recover for not only terrorism but broad range of other threats and hazards. we are only as good at preventing a terror attack as the quality of information that
we receive about that attack. i will gattis cuss one of our most notable regional partnerships called the central florida intelligence exchange. it's located in orlando. it is only one of three fusion centers in florida. it serves as a central repository and local law enforcement agencies. in addition to this counter terror i feel focus, assisting agencies and assistance needed to recover from hazards such as hurricanes and national advertise asters. and the investigation of crimes that possibly contain terrorist activity or other homeland security issues. in other words fusion centers
located throughout the country are pivotal to our nations. due to the lack of funding critical needs in the fusion center have been lost. and areas near the university of central florida. due to a loss of funding we have not been able to expand the project into areas around our top tourist destination. prior to june 12th, 2016 we have more than a dozen funded training exercises over the past 12 years. i believe the agencies responding to the pulse incident flaw leslie initiated an active
shooter response. because of training paid for through historical funding. you have a list of the training exercises in your material. we train to respond as a region to a terror attack of the disaster. about 150 of my deputies along with multiple other law enforcement and fire and ems agencies responded to assist the orlando police department doing the pulse incident and it was a natural thing to have regional capability and vulnerability assessment. regional prepareness and response and recovery efforts are pivotal to the mission of stopping or reducing terror attacks. presently fema uses the office of management and budget's geographical boundaries to find in the federal register when calculating risk scores for msas.
we believe the boundaries should be expanded to include the area to the east and the msa to the north. we realize that that is a heavy li lift. in september 2015 we began the process of lobbying the federal government to come bien it. it was broadly supported and numerous letters were written to the fema assistant administrator of grant programs and the office of information and regulatory affairs. you have a list and copies of materials. and dallas and other places most recently in new jersey and might be minute and there is a need to have an overall increase in new asset funding across the nation.
an overall increase would expand the ability to the for the top 100 high risk areas from 85% to 90% or better area with the most risk. areas like central florida will no doubt make the list. congressman has expressed support to increase funding nationwide. in 2016 the orlando msa was 34 on the list of 100. when only 29 were funded. local and state agencies have equipment needs and the requiz sit training for use of the equipment including mobile command centers, surveillance equipment, tact car length weapons, armored vehicles and explosive detection is important. in closing, i thank you for allowing me to speak and i ask the committee to analyze the current msa methodology formula
and the data used in the formula to reflect current threats and vulnerabilities. thank you. >> thank you sheriff. the chair recognizes commissioner miller for his opening statement. >> thank you mflt chairman and thank you for your continued help and support with our program. as well as peter king and donovan that comes out of the new york city law enforcement community as done kathleen rice. good morning to the members of the committee. first i'd like to thank the chairman for giving us this opportunity to talk about this. and changing threat and how we might respond to a terrorist attack. nobody had any idea that we would be sitting here within days of an actual terrorist attack. talking about how we did respond new york city has been the target of more than 20 terrorist attacks.
and some have succeeded and most have been prevented through the use of good intelligence and robust of syria using the internet and social media tools that delivered a call to arms to those that travel to syria or fight for isil and there that interact but also understanding how to leverage propaganda that includes compelling videos, two-way conversations over social media
applications, both encrypted and unencrypted, online magazine filled with messages, giving useful tactical critiques on attacks that have already happened, including the orlando shooting, and giving instructions on how to make bombs. these are specific custom design messages to urge people who could not come to syria to fight or iraq, to kill americans here, the message is "hold a promise" to those who are receiving them, of valor, of belongings, of empowerment. and these messages containing these false promises resinate particularly with recruits who are failing in life, living in the margins, who have low self esteem or feel isolated. no city in the american has been as many plots and attacks.
no city has paid in much as blood as we did on 9/11 and the 15-year since, no city his invested in the effort to prevent, if possible, or respond if necessary, to a terrorist attack. we thank this committee. we thank our appropriators. we thank the department of homeland security and secretary j. johnson for steadfastly continuing to support those efforts with funding. that said, the nypd and the city of new york invests significant amounts of our own budget to support those efforts. this year alone, the nypd created the critical response command, the crc is a highly trained, especially equipped, uniform force of over 500 officers that work full time every day as a counter terrorism force in the streets of new york city. they protect critical locations
and shift between key potential terrorist targets depending on the intelligence we've evaluated that day and the global threat stream. we've provided the same weapons and training through our strategic response command, srg, the city wide flying squad that can be called on to assist our emergency service unit which is s.w.a.t. capable unit that is our go-to first responders for any crisis. that adds up to capabilities that is unmatched by any municipal police department on the globe, as far as we know. we've trained over 8,000 regular patrol officers and tactics to counter the active shooter, as we have seen this trend grow over recent years, those are the officers who are most likely, because of their proximity in number, to arrive in such a
scene first. the nypd has built what is widely regarded as the most sophisticated intelligence bureau outside of the intelligence government. that bureau works hand in hand, particularly the fbi, joint terrorism task force and homeland security. over at the jtt in new york we have over 100 detectives assigned inside the jttf that are integrated and operating gross designated as federal law enforcement officers. the nypd has spent over $300 million over the last eight years combined city and federal funds to build and maintain the das or domain awareness system. this combines a network of cameras across the city, over 8,000 of them, with data from our 911 call system, with license plate readers, with radiation detection, sensors across the city, with law enforcement databases.
in the last year under former commissioner bill braden, that data faced inwards to people like me at police headquarters was pushed outward, it was turned outward to the people who need it the most and could use it the most and that's the cop on the street. every police officer in new york has access to that information from their department issued smartphone. this phone is able to access the network, it means during a terrorist incident, as we saw just this week, that having 1,500 people who work full time on counter terrorism can quickly be changed to 36,000 in the street. we're able to push law enforcement information, pictures of the suspect, information we had to every police officer in the street who was working when we decide today go out with a picture of the suspect we had probable cause to arrest, all of that with the power of just hitting a send
key. in the moments starting after 8:30 p.m. on saturday night when two bombs were placed in new york city on that evening. i also have to say the seemless cooperation between the fbi and nypd in our homeland security partners, whether that was fbi, ert, evidence response technicians, working in a post blast with our crime scene investigators, bagging and tagging the same way, sending everything to the same lab, the fbi lab at quantico, whether it was our nypd bomb squad detectives, working side by side with their sabt, special agent bomb techs from the fbi, our detective bureau, jttf. it was a force multiplier that worked that case as if they did it every day together, because they do. thank you and i'll be happy to
take questions. >> thank you commissioner miller. i now recognize myself for questions, i think the last time i saw you, john, we were in new york at the 9/11 ceremony the next day, received an intelligence briefing at the intelligence unit at nypd. little did we know that within days there will be a terrorist attack in the streets of new york. i was presented a video by i think encapsulates the threat moving forward and in my ways in prothetic in terms of what we saw happen last saturday. >> in all its gloiry, remaining and expanding.
seeing a changing evolving message now coming out of isis syria to stay home and attack in the united states? >> i think we are. i think that the messages, especially the preramadan message which called on people to attack where they were, has shifted from come to syria and fight with us on the battlefield to, as one of the message have clearly written, it said we love you more doing actions in their countries, referring to countries other than syria, meaning we would rather have you fight at home than come here and fight on the battlefield. >> which concerns me from homeland security perspective, because i think as we have some success military, we'll see the battleground coming more here to the united states. this is a copy of mr. rahamaes
journal that was found on his person when he was taken into custody. i know you're familiar with it. he talks about the sounds of bombs being heard in the streets. streets praised osama bin laden his brother. he talked about fort hood texas. he talked about pressure cooker, bombs and pipe bombs in the streets as they plan to run a mile. he talks about god willing the sound of bombs be heard in the streets, gunshots to your police, death to your oppression, you continue your slaughter against be in afghanistan iraq, syria, pal stan, he wrote, according to his compliant in another section, he wrote that his guidance comes from the man that you mentioned, chief isis spokesman and external operations chief who was killed by an air strike, who talked about killing where you
are. precisely, i think the evolving threat we're facing. commissioner miller, i have to ask you this question, was the suspect, mr. rahami, at any point in time, under the radar? is there anything we could have done differently to have stopped him? >> i'm sure than if after every incident, our federal partners will go backwards to this case and re-evaluate that. but based on what i've seen so far as part of the investigation, he seems like many suspects who came to contact with this system at various times and was handled to the extent that the system of the law and guidelines that we operate under would allow them to. >> and it's unfortunate in many of these incidents and we stop most of these things as you know, but the ones we miss, it seems like it's always after the fact that somebody comes forward
i noticed he was radicalizing but i saw this or that but they failed to report it to authorities and i think that's probably what we'll find out to be the case here. chief, we have for today authorizing nearly $40 million for grants to train an active shooting, to train in ied and to train in suicide bombers. can you tell me how that could help your city and my city, the city of boston, help better prepare for this type of event. >> you know that training is really key to be prepared to respond, and unfortunately, with the tightening budgets around the country, one of the first things that goes away is the training budget. so from the perspective of the major city chiefs, your bill will go along way in preparing the resources throughout the nation and big cities and throughout the counties and
without it i don't think that we can prepare, to the extend, that we need to. unfortunately for us in austin we make it a priority, so we sacrifice, not every city has that ability, and i think for us we desperately need the funding. >> thank you very much, coming from the outset, there's no question this committee is absolutely committed to keeping america as safe can possibly be. 100% is what we strive for every day and the man in women is various departments, we salute you for that. one of the things we struggle with is when thesen incidents of the long wolves appear. you get a lot of people after
the fact what he should have done this and should have done that. so now there's a discussion that well, maybe we need to put more surveillance on the individuals and to some degree even profile individuals. and i think mr. miller, since new york is kind of the melting pot and as a practitioner of this, especially in light of the bartender dialing 911 saying, i think we have a problem. can you explain that kind of engagement with those kind of communities, what your experience has been?
>> you cannot profile a community at the same time, that count on in these cases. we have had many people from the arab muslim and help us in various investigations over various times. and in the context of that video, we've also kind of sat down and to them on the idea the main stream so we want have to be able for the messaging and powerful propaganda that some of their young people might be susceptible to and work with them to try and figure out how do you counter that message and what do you use. so this is a conversation with a community of partners that has
to keep going and you can't keep it going by separating them. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much. a lot of the statement proliferation weapons. but some of us have even promoted the notion that why should be able to by -- being on the terrorist watch list is, you know, what we're trying to do is close every potential vuner b vulnerability that we know of. it has nothing to do with the second amendment. it's just that if you're too bad to get on a plane and then it's clear in the minds of to -- to
improve that you're not. and so chief, can you kind of on where that assault weapon. and clearly that one of the challenges we have in this nation is the fire arms in the fact that we use the second amendment as a -- an excuse to pass common sense laws that will help keep fire arms in the hands of law abiding americans of sound mind. i can tell you coming from the state of texas where the second amendment is king. i spent a lot of time talking to conservative members of our community, they are in favor of universal background checks. they're in favor of closing the gun show loophole where we can watch people go in there, if you've got the cash, cash is king, you can buy whatever you
want. we have a responsibility as policy makers, i would urge this body, is this body that can get it done at the national level, to celebrate the second amendment by ensuring that we take steps to ensure that responsible people are gun owners and not people that will do harm to their fellow americans and quite frankly as it relates to mental health, it might do harm to fellow americans or themselves. we need help, i know the support is out there. i think that the survey show that from the american people and at the end of the day, it's the will of the people and i hope that this body will put the politics aside and really join the american people and being pragmatic and taking steps to keep the fire arms out of the wrong hands. >> thank you. chair, you had 49 people killed in your county by someone with
one of these weapons. but more importantly, that individual was what we call lone wolf, in terms of somebody who we could not really bring a nexus to somebody overseas or something like that. can you, in your law enforcement experience, explain what the challenge is for identifying extremist in communities, whether you're a member of the klu klux klan, whether you're a member of isil or any other entity and how does that play into your day-to-day law enforcement experience? >> thank you for the question. i can tell you that it is a challenge for us to identify the individuals who cause me harm to our nation, we're only as good
as the information that we received so, i believe that we have got to improve our analytical capabilities and sharing intelligence information across the federal state and local authorities. we sometimes see where we operate in silos, all of these issues tend to happen in local communities and what we say to our residences that if you see something suspicious, we want you to tell us about it. and they're often giving information to us at the local level and we push it to the federal level, but sometimes once it gets there and it is analyzed, it doesn't come back in a systematic way so that we can use that actionable intelligence information and a possible terrorist attack. in some cases, even as it relates to our gun laws,
sometimes it doesn't make sense what happens. i'll give you an example, just a couple of days after the pulse nightclub incident in orlando there was a reporter who came to town, international reporter from the uk who was writing a story, and to prove his point how easy it is to acquire an assault weapon in america, he bought one. he went to a local license gun dealer and was able to buy an assault weapon. he was -- not a u.s. citizen, but at some point had been in our country and had some form of legal status at some point. before he return today the uk he bought an assault weapon that he purchased and said, i don't want it, i can't take it back. the reason i bought it was to
prove a point how easy it is and i'm not a u.s. citizen. i have said to people like the director coleman and others, to me that makes no sense because as american citizens if we were in the uk, we couldn't go there and buy an assault weapon, and so why should he have been allowed to buy one in our country. the other thick i see gaping holes as it relates to the mentally ill, we have a national database that is suppose to have information about some form of mental illness that disqualifies them from buying a firearm. quite frankly the information isn't being put into the database because of this lack of -- lack of, i think,
understanding within the mental health community is what constitutes mental illness. so we've gotten to improve there as a country as well. >> thank you. >> chair recognize as the gentleman from new york, mr. king. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank all the witnesses for your testimony, mr. miller, congratulations on a very successful weekend and i know the investigation is on going. but i was actually down on 23rd street the morning after. what you said about the fbi and nypd is you couldn't tell one from the other. i would like to follow up, though, i wouldn't want this to get caught up in semantics, the ranking member profiling and whatever, it's also good police work, though. i mean you and i are old enough to remember, i'm holding than you, if -- the fbi or the nypd were in the italian american community, not because they didn't trust italian americans they knew that was where the threat was coming from. every bar on the west side of
manhattan, fbi undercovers to try to get information. i think as an irish american, i didn't consider that profiling. it was coming from the irish american community, certain elements of it, even though 88, 99%, i think in new york where you have a number of muslim communities and neighborhoods and there are, overwhelming majority are cooperating and supportive. if there is going to be something happening, i don't see how it's considered unconstitutional or bad police work to have undercovers, to have informers, the same it's done when you're tracking down any other type of crime when it's coming from a particular community organization. >> excuse me. we operate under the guidelines. the guidelines specifically say that we operate on information on behavior on actions, but we do not we do not place
undercovers or spas or people in the community to watch people who are engaged in completely constitutional protected activities, whether that's at a restaurant, the house of worship, or a meeting. we're also not lacking for business. i think a representative king and it was very few in congress who know as much about this as you do, given the time that you've spent in this field, that in the 15 years since 9/11 through every suspicious encounter that's been reported, we have amassed a large number of names, incidents, reports and when they're filed away. >> one is if you snu about this
person why didn't they stop. the other is if you have that many contacts with that many people over that period of time the next time something happens it's going to involve somebody you knew, heard about, investigated, bumped or otherwise checked out. that's a good thing that when you're assessing who to look at first and they come up in those records, it gives you a basis to go forward. well, it's also a liability in that people have somewhat of a misconception about our ability to put someone under surveillance, leave them there, definitely in the new york case these were contacts that happened in 2014 with no thing that happened in between that time and this time.
that's not -- not prejudging this, somebody will go through it with a fine-tooth comb, we always do, it's not realistic that somebody comes on the radar, you'll be able to follow them or friends or associated for an extended period of time while you have investigations on burner. >> violate any guideline, assuming a hypothetical here. if there are -- because of the travel, one because of the assault against family members and his father saying he was a terrorist. for the local police to be told about that so they will be alert to anything else they might here. i'm not saying hounding the guy. i'm saying for the street cop to say, keep your eyes and ears open on this guy in case you hear something about him he'll be at a different level. >> based on my understanding of our guidelines, it wouldn't --
based on my recollection of the attorney general guidelines and the fbi's domestic intelligence operations guide, i don't believe it would either. >> thank you commissioner. i just wanted to get that on the record because i think many of the unfair allegations were made against the nypd over the years for certain organizations and the media. thank you for your outstanding service, appreciate it. >> and i would just point out, for the record, that the independent inspector general of the nypd just completed an audit of ten years of intelligence bureau records and determined that 100% of the records they evaluated show that there was a proper purpose and basis for the investigation and they were carried out within those guidelines. >> reporters got the surprise for talking about the abuses of nypd even though they've been cleared, i yield back. >> recognize the gentleman from new york, mr. higgins.
>> thank you, mr. chairman. firstly, just let me say with respect to the new york city police department, the literature since 9/11 that counter terrorism intelligence is probably the most effective in all the world. it's extraordinary work that's done and counter terrorism, unfortunately, never get credit for what didn't happen. and what you do, every day, is preventing things from, in fact, happening. so it's great, great work and they say the terrorist only have to be lucky once. counter terrorism officials have to be lucky all the time. but it's also worth noting here that since 9/11, 2001, a period of 15 years, 94 people were killed by islamic terrorist. 157,000 americans have been killed with guns. you're 3,000 times more likely to be killed by an american with
a gun than a terrorist. every day in america 90 people die from gun violence. in orlando, 49 people dead, 53 people wounded, deadlyiest attack on u.s. soil since 9/11, one shooter, semiautomatic rifle, semi automatic pistol, legally purchased. one shooter, 49 people dead, 53 people wounded. newtown, connecticut, 26 people dead, 20 kids between the ages of 6 and 7, first and second graders, dead. most had multiple wounds in them. six adults were also killed, most of whom who were diving in front of the kids to shield them from the shooter. one shooter, legally purchased
gu guns, sensible gun safety had been mentioned here has been reject bid this congress, despite the fact that 90% of the american people support sensible gun safety legislation. you know, people often invoke the second amendment to justify the continuation of this hell, but the framers of our constitution establishing the second amendment could never have anticipated this kind of hell. the topic today is stopping the next attack, how to keep our cities from becoming a battleground. well, they're already a battleground. there's a moral contradiction when you have, adds the ranking member said previously, a terror watch list. these are individuals that are known to be involved in some degree in terrorist activity,
yet at the same time they are allowed to purchase guns, semi automatic rifles, semi automatic pistols. the very guns that are found in all of these mass shootings, so you can't with any credibility hold a hearing with a topic stopping the next attack, how to keep our cities from becoming battlegrounds without fundamentally addressing what most people on this panel agree with and, that is, very common sen sensikal gun safety measures i would ask you to respond. >> i think it expired in the conversation that came out of that for years with no change,
was one indicator and sen ccyni people would have said when a member of congress is shot down in public place, that would change, the shooting of gabby giffords went on for three weeks and faded away, that would have ended the discussion in colorado passed a tough gun law and the governor was run out of the state after that, some might have said when they kill our kindergarten children in their schools, that that would be the straw that broke the back, but we talked about that for a while and nothing happened there either. in some measure when you consider the fact that the greatest loss -- on u.s. soil since 9/11 in the terrorist attack happened at 2:00 in the morning on a place off the main path, an lgbt club on latino
night, by a lone wolf gunman, you have to ask yourself, have we figured out who we are and do we want to change. >> i think the witnesses for being here in participation. i also want to commend new york, if you look at what happened for recent investigation and what happened with the london bombings and the spain bombings, closed-circuit television was critical in the investigation and apprehension of suspects in every case. and i would urge all of your major metropolitan areas to emulate new york and placement of those closed-circuit cameras. i did want to ask y'all, my experience has been that just as
was the case here in new york, that local law enforcement really has to have a good relationship with the federal officials for everybody to be successful. what do you see are ways that we can improve communication between state and local officials and the feds that you need to interact with? and do you get a chance to exercise, regularly, with them, if so, why not? >> thank you. congressman, that's a very good question. we do interact and work extremely well with our federal partners. the communication is a point we've raised for a number of years. many of the conference calls preamble you've heard more already about this incident in the news that we're going to talk about today. you know, most of us, i presume, have a top secret clearance sitting at this table, if not at least secret and there's a need,
i think, for real-time information sharing on that capability. that's not in place. years ago i probably -- probably a decade ago i suggested that they create such a platform and encrypted cell phone was created, as such. and i paid for it for my homeland security division chief, myself, low and behold we find out they don't really work. we no longer have device to communicate real time on direct pressing needs. we have to go back to the days of runners. >> you're talking more about equipment. i'm talking more about personal relationships. do y'all have a chance to interact and develop personal relationship so you know, bob, that the fbi the key guy you need to get in touch with, do you have a chance to do that. >> we do. we have great relationships when i'm talking about the equipment, if there's a timely need for sharing information, there's a lag because, literally, we have to go to the same location to communicate that. i had a meeting in my state and
the sheriff from l.a. was there and had something unfolding that was at a secret level and we were looking for coast guard stations to get him into communication, that's a problem. when terrorist can communicate in encrypted platform and we can't. so the relationships are there. i would say that one of the challenges that we face, though, across the country is build a great relationship with our sacs and they move every two years. they come and go very frequently. i know professional development and organizational needs are important, but it is a challenge once you develop a deep relationship, i think i've been through probably six sacs in my tenure. >> okay. chair. >> the only thing that i would add is i talked about the fact that we have a fusion center in orlando and because of that fusion center, it forces us on a daily basis to work across jurisdictional lines and that is
not the case in most cities around america. we only have three in the state of florida and we have a multiple large metropolitan areas. so i do believe that there is a need to increase the number of fusion centers because, again, they work on the prevention side collecting information and data that can be used to prevent an attack. and that's -- this whole conversation today is about preventing an attack. so i believe that that has to be part of the solution. it forces us to work together and it also allows us to gather better information, actionable intelligence information, that is. >> chief. >> in terms of our -- my relationship in austin, we have a phenomenal relationship with our local sac. >> do you have a chance to exercise with -- >> we have not exercised because funding is an issue. that's why again i hope the 59 passes and we can hopefully do
some exercising with them. in terms of information sharing, it's better today than it's always -- than it's ever been, for my region. however, i think that depends a lot on the sac. fortunately, i have a good sac. i've had good sacs. i also push back pretty hard when they're not sharing information. i don't think that's still the case nationwide. it's not even across the country. >> thank you, my time has expired. thank you if what you've done for our country. >> recognize mr. payne. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to thank the witnesses for their testimony this morning. i'd also like to recognize 29 individuals that were injured this week and pray for their speedy recovery and also the two
brave officers in new jersey who engaged the culprit officer hammer and officer pedia of the linden police department, which is in my district. >> many gun safety laws are enacted at the state level, so while you might live in a state with strict gun laws, such as mine, your communities might remain vulnerable because of the lax gun laws in neighboring states. how does this work approach to gun control effect your policy efforts mr. miller, if you could take a stab at that? >> if we have, if not, the toughest gun laws in the nation in new york city, certainly one
of them but none of our guns come from new york city. that has been true for many years. we have mandatory minimum sentencing. we have a rigorous process, but most of our guns come from out of state. >> and the ability and the access to these assault weapons in other states, really poses a great potential for acts, such as we've seen over the course of the last several years. and when i talk about it with my colleagues that feel that there could be a potential infringement on the second amendment rights, you know, getting an understanding of what we end up against in our
communities is something that can be horrific as we saw in orlando. and always my argument to people in law enforcement that sometimes did not see the wisdom in trying to get these weapons off of the streets is, you know, what happened in dallas was my greatest fear that, you know, i would try to tell one day these weapons are going to be turned and used against you. and in dallas we saw that happen. and that is the reason that we fight to try to make sure that these weapons are not available
to people that should not have them and, really, i don't think should be available to the public. they're only going to be used against law enforcement and to think that a terrorist would have the upper hand on our law enforcement does not bode well with me. so, can you -- the events of the last weekend, you know, really have put the country on edge, the information we received was constantly being updated and, you know, the situation was very fluid. i think lessons learned from boston helped us in this situation and it was really incredible to hear how fluid this situation has become through interagencies.
can you talk about the federal government and how it shared relevant information with you with respect to the different law information organizations different involved. >> from the moment the explosion happened, i called the police commissioner and i called my fbi counterpart in the time that it took me to drive to the scene, my fbi counterparts were there. we came up with a game plan and we received continuous information throughout that night with the development of every clue, a phone that led to a subscriber name, a fingerprint that led to an individual, phones that -- devices that were connected from the new jersey case to other devices, people who are connected to devices through physical evidence and
there was nothing hidden, nothing held back, nothing to classified, we sat together in the same command post, customs and border protection and dhs played a vital role in helping us understand who was who in their records and contacts. i would say it was a model of cooperation and to respond in part to mr. rogers' question do we exercise together. we train together, the emerging threat with our federal partners, but we work together every day. we eat together, we drink together. we don't sleep together yet, but that's just because we don't sleep much. >> well, thank you and as i -- as i yield back, chief, thank you for acknowledging the hard work that mr. donovan and i have done in interoperability and
communications for all of your departments. i yield back. >> chair recognizes mr. duncan. >> thank you, mr. chairman. gentleman, the four of y'all are in law enforcement, do y'all carry fire arms, not in here, but do you carry a firearm daily? i think i was getting a head shake. >> i do on duty, but a lot of times i don't off duty. >> okay. thank you. the ranking member injected gun control into this because the narrative of the left. and for the record, he's an added participant in the shooting sports. i've shot competitively against him, he's a great shot. so he exercised his second amendment rights. we're here in these ivory towers of government protected in law enforcement. there's a capital place with the firearm to protect us.
if more gun laws were the actions, more restrictive gun rights, gun rights that are effect the south side of chicago would be the safest place on earth, you could leave your doors open, you could walk the streets at night and you could allow your children to play in the front yard, but yet that's not the case. more gun laws are not the answer. there are 357 million americans or 357 million fire arms in americans in the hands of law abiding citizens. the problem we need to look at, and let me tell you about the law abiding citizens, when seconds count, the police are just minutes away. and they have the ability to draw a firearm to protect themselves, their families, their property, their neighbors, their constitution, if necessary. so we've had gun control injected into this debate. but let me tell you that i think
the problem is gun free zones. because restricting where a law abiding citizen can carry fire arms, federal state property prohibited from having firearm, orlando was a bar. mass shooter, gun free zone. columbine, sandy hook, no one had access to firearm, we're counting on law enforcement to be there. law enforcement can't be everywhere nor do we want you to be there. the second amendment is there for us to protect ourselves and our family, so we've had the no-fly list injected into this. there are 200,000, 80% of which are foreign nationals the other 20% are u.s. citizens, we can look hard at them. when you think about the no-fly list. how in the world do you get on
the no-fly list and how do you get off. where is due process to know what the charges are, who is accusing you, have a chance to interview witnesses and defend sthemss, but too many americans are on the no-fly list and they don't even know it until they go try to fly somewhere. that's fifth and sixth amendment due process rights that are guaranteed us. so we're relying on big government to actually take care of us, to find these terrorists. but guess what, they missed it america. they missed it in orlando. that guy was suspected of terrorism. they missed it in new jersey. dad said, i think my son is involved in terrorism. they investigated for terrorism. dad said yesterday, hello, they missed it in fort hood. he had soldier of allah on his business card. there were signs and signals for him all over. missed in san bernardino because
the wife -- there are a lot of questions about how she came into this country. they missed it in boston. the fbi was informed by russia, for all intensive purposes that somebody had been traveling over there and possibly been in contact with terrorist organizations and may have gotten some training and missed it. we had loss of lives. what we continue to do is talk about gun control debate when we need to talk about the second amendment and constitutional rights. the fifth and sixth amendment rights and due process. but yet we'll continue to allow unfettered immigration from countries. they just granted citizenship to 858 individuals who were removed under identity when during the naturalization process, the digital fingerprint records weren't available. we give them citizenship. we cannot rely on the federal government to continue to try to keep a safe. we've got to revert back, i
believe, to the individuals, the law abiding citizens in this country. we've got to look at the gun laws that are out there now, that prohibit law abiding citizens to carry guns. we need to have allow some sort of program in schools so somebody will have access to firearm to protect our children. you know, we'll continue to allow terrorist to come in here. we'll continue to attack the constitutional rights of americans. we'll continue to have restrictive gun control laws in the state and in an effort in the country. if you look at mr. higgins' statistics and you take out suicides, the numbers go way down. you take out criminal violence related to drugs, that number goes way down. but yet, we'll continue to have this debate. we'll continue to have a sit-in
on the halls of -- floor of congress, to shutdown the process over the issue. we'll continue to invite somebody who makes something that looks like a bomb, brought it to school, now it's a clock and we invite him into the white house. the good thing the guy in new jersey didn't say, oh, that's just a clock. mr. chairman, i appreciate this hearing, but we've gotten off track from the get-go talking about violating the second amendment rights of americans. when we won't have a real conversation about the gun free zones, people that are on the terrorist watch list and how they get off, and no-fly list and how that might be used. if you're on the list and you're a foreign national 80% are, no fly, good-bye. they're identified as terrorists, why are we keeping them in this country. i don't think a single person on the terrorist watch list committed any of these acts of
terror we're talking about, if i'm wrong, correct me. gentlemen, i'm going to look at you right now and i'm going to thank you for what you do to keep our citizens safe. law enforcement in this country is under attack, but we have eve got your back, as the chairman said. we appreciate the men and women in blue that are walking that thin blue line. thank you for what you do. it's not an easy job. people in the third congressional district of south carolina appreciate what you do, god bless you and i'll yield back. >> chair now recognizes mr. richmond from louisiana. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me just start with the people make the assertion all the time that more guns are the answer, guns in schools, guns in churches, guns in movie theaters. we have armed guns in banks and banks get robbed and people get killed every day. to the extent that people think
that's the solution, i think you're dead wrong. but as we talk about law enforcement, we talk about having your back. let me tell you what having your back means, we had a committee meeting about combatting terrorist recruitment and about putting disspelling the propaganda that comes from isis or isil. and i simply wanted an amendment that said why don't we target sovereign citizens and they shot me down. >> well let me tell you what sovereign citizens did in the meantime, they shot down three officers in baton rouge, injured another couple, so when we start talking about having your back, it's making sure that we have the intelligence and we focus on everything. we're smart enough to do two and three things at one time, that is combat lone actors, to infiltrate sales and track them. it's also to see what is the
real threat to your officers and deputies on the streets. if you want to talk about your officers and your deputies you have to talk about sovereign citizen that's killed more police officers than anybody else, but this committee doesn't want to talk about it. in fact, this committee went out of its way to ignore the issue. and let me just tell you about baton rouge as we talk about having our law enforcement's back, you had one actor, one sick individual with a lone gun, he was better armed than the police officers that responded, because his lone gun, the bullets would go through our police officer's vests and our police officer who responded, responded with pistols that wouldn't go through his vest. so the question becomes, are we funding our police departments like we should, are we making an
investment in our law enforcement in an extent to help them protect lives? so as still have to talk about the department of homeland security and this committee, combine it with judiciary. we had two unfortunate incident this week again where an african-american male was killed in an incident involving law enforcement. but we spend more time talking about whether colin kaepernick is standing for the national anthem but we don't want to talk about why he's kneeling. so in this committee we're having this hearing, which is not a new hearing, we have it all the time. in judiciary, the other committee with jurisdiction over something like this, we're talking about impeaching the irs director.
at some point we have to be bigger than this. and we have to be focused on issues that we see and no one is diminishing terrorist attacks because i think there's one common goal between everybody and that's to figure out a way to stop them. but when you start titling our hearing with stopping the next attack, how do we keep our cities from becoming a battleground, d'uh, wake up, it's been a battleground. it's a battleground on a number of fronts. but if we're going to talk about how to fix it, we're going to have to put the resources, so we can share intelligence, we can arm our law enforcement. we have to make sure we have the capabilities to stop an attack before it happens but we also have to realize the magnitude of the incident gets exaggerated if
the person has an assault weapon. so i will ask one question and whoever wants to answer it, please have at it. the attack in minnesota where 10 people were injured, tell me what that looks like if instead of a knife he had an ak-47 or an ar-15 with a high capacity magazine. does anyone want to -- >> it looks like a lot of dead americans that were simply shopping and i won't even respond to mr. duncan because i don't think it's -- needs to be responded here today and i respect this office and this institution, i'll just take the fifth at that. >> let me just ask this last question. do sovereign citizens pose a
real threat to your officers that answer traffic stops, serve subpoenas, and just walk around every day? >> i believe sovereign citizens pose one of the most significant threats to civilian law enforcement today. a couple of years ago i had one of my sergeants shot. he survived but shot by an individual who fancied himself as a sovereign. many of these incidents that you have referred to in which there were lone gunmen, if you delve into their background you'll see that perhaps they, too, subscribe to the sovereign ideology. >> if no one else wants to answer, i'll yield back, thank you, mr. chairman. >> chair now recognizes mr. mcsally from arizona.
>> thank you, mr. chairman. as you are doing your jobs and outreach and trying to address this new threat that's metastasizing, and we have individuals being radicalized on the internet to take action into their own hands, one of the things i'd like to focus on is specifically the phenomena of girls and women becoming radicalized, becoming jihadists, trying to travel to iraq and syria. i held a round table with my colleague, kathleen rice, on this phenomena months ago because there's a specific dynamic going on that we haven't seen where we have girls and women not just being victimized and recruited but also being hardened jihadists themselves and leading some of those efforts. just for numbers, of the 250 americans who have attempted to go to syria, 1 in 6 are women. almost a fifth of them are teenagers but more than a third of the teenagers are girls. so we're seeing this new phenomena. we've seen some cases in the media, three teenaged girls from colorado who were intercepted in germany trying to travel over there.
a 19-year-old from minnesota who we found when she was in syria, a mississippi former chief -- cheerleader honor student whose father is a police officer and navy veteran trying to plot to head over to syria with her fiance. this is a new phenomena. do your outreachers in your communities have anything focusing specifically on women and girls that are radicalized or are they just part of the general efforts for outreach? if any of you would like to answer. >> we've watched this very closely. certainly mindful of the number of travelers we've seen. as you see from the propaganda videos we've kind of collected and put together for the chairman, they're very sophisticated in their pitches, in their outreach. you can't ignore the san bernardino case as an example of radicalization targeting females
in the united states, we also have an active prosecution now involving two women in new york city who were planning to use pressure cooker bombs to launch a plot that we interindicted last year in a year and a half long undercover operation so this is something we're very concerned with and part of our discussion with the community, while we kind of struggle with them to come up with what is the counternarrative and who can deliver it. >> anyone else want to. >> in austin, texas, a couple years ago we had a family, husband, wife, and children with jttf arrested at houston international on their way to syria through turkey. for us the key is not specifically addressing women but addressing young people through educational programs, through economic opportunities. i don't think you too often see people that are educated wanting to blow themselves up. that's the exception, not the rule.
so youth programs and educational and economic opportunities is one of the things we do. >> we know isis is using a specific message to recruit girls and women, sheriff, do you have something to share? >> you're correct, and that's clearly a concern on many levels because it brings in a demographic that typically is less likely to be as scrutinized because so many of the bombers, terrorists in the past have been fighting-age males. i worked on a case study in the middle east, a suicide bomber attempt of a female and as they broke it down they analyzed the psychological reasons why she was put into that position and thought it was her only thing she could do to feel better about herself. and so i guess the disaffected and those vulnerable to a message of this is a higher purpose and you'll be valued if you do this are the ones generically. i think that we need to have more outreach to
interdict that message and bring them away from that siren call, if you will. >> great, thank you. my second question, sheriff bouchard, you said you don't have real-time information sharing. this is a concern to me. we've broken down some stove pipes since 9/11 across the federal agencies. we've done some work between federal, state, and local. but i think we have a long way to go. fusion centers are important but some fusion centers aren't as good as others. i had a bill hr 3503 to address improving fusion centers and giving higher access to security clearances to you all and your teammates so that you have better information out on the front lines. it was passed unanimously in the house, being held up in the senate right now but if you were in charge what would you do to -- i have a little bit of time, sheriff bouchard, break down those stove pipes. some of it is policy, some is clearances, some equipment. what would you do in order to
make sure you have all of the information you need? >> well, i think you touched on a lot of the important issues as it relates to how we better communicate but it gets back to the methodology sometimes. and an urgent situation. as you mentioned, i have a top secret clearance but i don't have an instantaneous ability to receive information without actually physically bringing us together and in this day -- in terms of the technology available and we see used by terrorists, it's a bit frustrating to literally have to drive someplace to get actionable information. >> that's insane. and we need to work on that together. and i know i'm out of time. does anyone else have anything to say on that issue? we can follow up. >> i think it's important that police chiefs have gone through a background investigation and have been licensed peace officer s. they're known entities. they're not any threat to our nation. sadly, the majority of police chiefs don't a top secret clearance if there's an issue for a police chief, we need to look at how we can provide that information for
that person who ultimately is responsible for the safety of that community outside of the clearance process. that's food for thought because the truth of the matter is, a lot of police chiefs are in the dark about investigations in their area of responsibility. >> that's something we need to improve, mr. chairman, and i yield back. thank you. >> if i can -- a quick follow-up. i know in boston the boston police commissioner told me he could not even talk to his four police officers on the joint terrorism task force about the investigations. we have made efforts to change that. there's been talk of an mou to change that. chief, has that changed? >> i don't have a ts clearance. so i will just say this. i'm still the police chief in austin, texas, and whether my people work for the jttf or not, they work for the people of
austin and my direction is the day they don't tell me something we need to know, they don't work for the federal government, they work for austin and they're withholding information at their own peril. fortunately, we have a pretty good relationship with our local sac. but it's still an issue and i think the answer is that we not only have a right to know, we have a need to know regardless of the clearance level of that investigation as far as responsibility. >> i couldn't agree more. commissioner miller, is that the state of play in new york? >> in new york we don't have those issues. i think it's in part because with over a hundred detectives on the joint terrific task force, there's very little information we're not handling ourselves or have access to. however, understanding the discussion that occurred after boston, major city chiefs, intelligence commanders committee, chuck dewitt worked together with partners to draw up to redraw
mr. chairman the mou with how a joint terrific task force operates with its local partners in terms of access they're entitled to, clearance levels, computer access and so on. and that is -- that new mou i believe is in effect now. so that should bring improvement to the situation. and i think we can count on major city chiefs to anecdotally check on that to make sure it's being enforced. >> let me pledge my support to help you. i have talked to the fbi about this mou, i know it's been -- going back and forth but it seems to me any commissioner or police chief that has officers on the task force should -- at least the chief should be briefed on those cases. and you have the street intel. you have the intelligence on the streets. the chair now recognizes mrs. watson coleman.
>> thank you, mr. chairman. to each of you let me say, i am profoundly grateful. i can listen to the challenges you're experiencing on so many different levels from so many different areas and how safe we are, relatively speaking. and irknow it is because you are dedicated, you speak to your colleagues wherever you need to and you're smart at what you do, and you are keeping us safe. and i thank you from the bottom of my heart. i also want to recognize the great state of new jersey and the linden police department was very helpful in addressing the situation that we encountered this weekend working with new york. sometimes my wonderful state gets overlooked, mr. chairman. we're small but we're mighty. the other thing i'd like to say, two things quickly and i have one question. number one is that i can hardly believe more guns anywhere should be the answer to a safer
community, society, school, or any other place, that's a ludicrous thought on anybody's part. and number two is i think you all have expressed in some way, shape, or form that the proliferation of illegal guns in the communities are harmful not only to the community but even to your law enforcement and that that is not the direction in which we should continue to go. following up on that, i wanted to highlight something with you, chief acevedo -- see? in today's testimony and at a meeting with the homeland security advisory subcommittee you stated that right wing extremism is as much of a threat as foreign organizations. i have an article that goes back in 2014 in which you express that as it relates to someone who was part of an association, a self defined associate of some
priest hood, some -- >> phineas priesthood, yes. >> phineas priesthood. do you still believe that that is our -- one of our greatest threats coming from right wing extremism? and also do you recognize and feel that extremism even on the left is as much of a great threat? may i have your comments on that. >> thank you. absolutely. i get beat up in my great state. any time you mention right wing anything you get beat up. but extremism whether it's left or right is just that -- extremists. the sovereign citizen movement in this nation is alive and well. if you look across the landscape you will see police officers that have been shot and killed by members of this movement and the only reason i mentioned that in the homeland security advisory council, to the secretary and this body is that we don't want to be myopic as we look at the threat domain around
our country. it's not just from foreign extremists, it's alive and well in our own nation and if you look at the totality of the victims of the threat, those right wing extremists really do, just like left wing extremists with bombs in the '70s and so forth, do pose a significant threat. >> so i believe that this committee has certainly given the attention to the foreign extremists. i'm wondering if from your vantage points are there sufficient resources available to you in support, even in grants and other funding, that help you with identifying those threats that are posed by both -- by extremists who are not foreign-born extremists and if you would all just give me yes, no, and what you'd like to offer because i only have a few minutes, i would appreciate that also starting with you, mr. miller. >> the grants make no distinction as to domestic terrorism versus foreign so they
can be applied equally so it's not an issue for us. >> for us, funding continues to be an issue. we are a city that lost its funding and any funding that we can get -- we're down to a third. unfortunately, we know there are a lot of competing interests and a lot you have to fund but we need help. the militia movement and the sovereign citizen movement is alive and well in our nation and i think it's an absolute threat to the safety of our communities. >> as the commissioner said, the grants and the training relates to any kind of threat. all hazards was some of the verbiage we worked on many years ago so we apply that standard. when we do our training. >> funding remains an issue for us as well. i believe it's pivotal we continue to work across the silos, if you will, to get information so i'm looking forward to it. and again, in
our community we had a homegrown violent extremist who attacked the nightclub there in orlando. >> it's good to know we can use these resources on any of the areas we've talked about. the question then becomes where there are -- there is no problem because you can -- is it applied appropriately. thank you very much, thank you, mr. chairman. >> chair recognizes mr. carter from georgia. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank all of you for being here, obviously this is extremely important, the work you do is extremely important and i want to preface my remarks, my questions by saying i'm not trying to be adversarial or ask you to be adversarial. i'm just trying to get to the root of the problem or just to improve things. maybe there's not a problem. i'd like to start with you, mr. miller. mr. miller i can only imagine being in the high threat
environment that new york city is that you probably deal with a greater number of threats than we truly realize. i suspect that's the case and my question to you is this, and it's about communication. is -- we all understood how incredibly important it is, particularly in this area. particularly between the federal authorities and the local authorities. i just want to ask you, has the department of homeland security supported your mission? have they done that? especially in regards to emergency communications? >> so the department of homeland security, particularly under secretary johnson, has been the most accessible department of homeland security i've known since 9/11 having done this job in both los angeles when art was in california and new york city so that's in terms of our
ability to work with dhs. if we ask them for something, they work hard to get it for us. when you refer to communications, are you talking about the passing of information or actual interoperability? >> i'm talking about everything. >> we get a steady stream of products from dhs and i am fortunate enough -- and it may be because of the size and scope of new york -- to have two dhs intelligence advisors assigned to the nypd to make sure that that feed and flow is early and often. >> okay, let me put it this way. how can we improve it? i'm always telling my staff we have to get better, we have to get better. how can we make it better? >> i'm unfortunately a satisfied customer. i've got nothing. >> fair enough. >> from that department on that issue. >> fair enough. >> i'll talk about money till the cows come home but on that issue i'm good.
and, you know, look, i understand that. and i understand it takes money. but it also takes implementation, communication, so much more and that's where i'm trying to get to here is the communication factor. >> i would suggest one answer to that question which is heather phuong who is the assistant secretary for law enforcement, was a police chief. she understands what we need and how we need it and what we need it for. the hiss history of that, before heather, had been a long line of people who didn't come from law enforcement, assorted generals and military people and other appointees. i would urge in the future that for the sake of communications that person always be law enforcement. >> good, i think that makes perfect sense. chief acevedo -- i'm sorry. whatever. it's just not a popular name in south georgia, i apologize. nevertheless, chief of the austin, texas, police department
over 2500 law enforcement officers and personnel to protect your city. have you ever worked with the federal law enforcement training center? are you familiar with fletc? >> yes, sir, i've actually worked there and actually instructed there. it's a great facility and they offer a lot of support to state, local law enforcement. >> has anyone else had experience with the federal law enforcement training centers? we have one in our district in glencoe, georgia. i've toured it, i've seen the work they do. it's a great facility, a great opportunity to utilize a resource and i'm wondering if you had that experience. >> we have had the experience and i've completed training there as well as members of my staff. but going back to your question about dhs and perhaps what can be done. >> please. >> the metropolitan and orlando area, when we were on the list
to receive asset funding we did so when the secretary had the discretion to select different metropolitan areas to receive funding, he no longer has that discretion. his rank, order, and perhaps it would be good for the secretary to have some discretion, particularly when you have an incident like we had when we're 34th on the list and only the top 29 receive funding, if the secretary has some discretion there to fund different regions based on what has occurred most recently, i think that would assist in many ways, we are similarly situated as austin in that we once received funding and then it was discontinued. >> right. well, again, let me -- yes, is it okay, mr. chairman? >> i would like to thank you for the question.
obviously we've heard a bit about the realtime communications. in new york it's probably different because they're co-located. even though we're part of a fusion center and i have people assigned there, it's not co-located with my headquarters. therefore the realtime communication gap necessitates a drive. but there's communication that hand taken place for years. that's an officer safety issue. even if we're not empowered or asking to be empowered to be in charge of deportation we should be empowered with information so that deputy knows that person may be an additional threat to him or her on the side of a dark road for reasons they don't know. it goes deeper than that. i've been bringing this same topic up for over a decade. when someone gets booked into the jail, sheriff's nationwide runs the jails, we don't get realtime information in most of those facilities.
the status of anybody or information. as it relates to even criminality in this country. when it comes to reimbursement for someone that is and comes from the federal government it's still a phone call to find out unless you're participating in certain programs a phone call to find out if anybody is eligible for reimbursement but they won't even tell you who. >> thank you for your answers, that's exactly what i wanted to hear. that's exactly the kind of things we need to be working on. and to get better. we always want to get better. thank you for what you do, it's extremely important. we want to help. that's why we had this hearing today, to find out what you just described to us. thank you, mr. chairman, for your indulgence. >> chair recognizes the gentlelady from california who represents san bernardino, ms. torres.
>> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman, and first of all i want to thank all of you for working so hard and diligently to keep our communities safe. i know your job is not easy and i know that you are -- there are critics of the work you do every single day but we appreciate everything you do. for deputy commissioner miller you talked about data from 911 systems in new york and how that is part of the intelligence you have on potential terrorist members of the community. can you explain what that entails? how is that data collected? does it come through the 911 system? 911 dispatchers are also a part of that communications system? can you talk to us about how that process works? >> so in the nypd, like most police departments, the 911 system feeds into a computer-assisted dispatch
system where calls are summarized on a keyboard as they come in and sent to computers and police cars over the police radios and now to these hand held devices. as the calls come in and the call takers take them, they can stack up in a dispatcher's queue as they're received whereas where the officers are receiving them directly they're going direct to this device even before they come over the radio. it's reduced our response time by a full minute and change in certain areas of the city. that's one element. the second element is the ability to harness the power of this data as it's correlated, which is you get a 911 call of an assault in progress in an apartment, possible domestic violence, when you look at the call on the phone instead of just what you get over the police radio it will tell you who called, what is the callback number. if you tough touch that call
back number -- >> critical information about the location and who may live there, if it's a targeted member or someone that has been identified? >> yeah, it's -- it's more about that information than terrorist intelligence. it's a daily tool the police can use. however, in the throes of a terrorist incident it can become vital because now you can push information instantly and pictures and videos to the police. >> how are your 911 dispatchers trained to pull this information out of your callers during the interview process? >> they go through their pects, police communications technicians, they go through an extensive training process of their own and an extensive vetting process being hired about working under pressure, multitasking and so on. >> and being able to interview potential suspects and potential victims of crime, nosey neighbors that may have intelligence on what is happening next door, someone who
may be potentially targeting their neighborhood, correct? >> i think an example is when we were looking for the suspect in this latest bombing, on the floor of the 911 center, every operator working that day was told, we're going out with this picture, you can expect a lot of potential sightings to come in, when you get those calls ask where is the person, what are they wearing right now? are they carrying any packages, parcels, backpacks, bags, that kind of thing and to keep that caller on the line until you have the rest of the information and then to transfer them to the intelligence operations desk so my detective cans get more. >> thank you so much. the reason why i'm asking you this if you don't know, there has been a push to reclassify 911 dispatchers by the office of management and budget and i think it's a very shortsighted decision not understanding that
this is a critical position for first responders and as a former 911 dispatcher this is a very important issue to me. >> the 911 operator dispatcher call taker is the very first line, it's the person who gets to call for help first. >> so now let's talk about the radio system. i'm very concerned about the san bernardino incident. as officers are responding and as the dispatchers are giving them directions on which way to travel and suspect information there was no way for them to switch to an encrypted radio channel. this is really important because the suspects, had there been more than two people involved, they could have positioned themselves in a place to target the officers as they're responding. what do you think that we need to do in that -- from that perspective?
>> well, we're very fortunate in our region that our interoperability is absolutely where it needs to be and we have the ability to move to a unified encrypted channel in central texas. as a matter of fact, with our f-1, formula 1 event in november, dhs is going to come out and look at our operability but the truth of the matter is a lot of jurisdictions don't have that capability. it's something that needs to be worked on. >> they don't have enough capability and there's not enough funding for them to be able to purchase radios and the systems that they need. i've exceeded my time. thank you. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. katko. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. miller, you may not remember this but i had the pleasure of attending a briefing with chairman mccaul and mr. king about a year ago in new york with you and the chief and some others and i was thoroughly impressed by the professionalism and the ability to get the job done and i want to commend you for that.
one of my colleagues on the other side mentioned that you don't often get credit for what you stop but i can assure you that were it not for your great leadership that there would be much more problems in new york city so i applaud your efforts and i hope to continue. one of the things i would like to explore and one of the things i think this committee is uniquely positioned to help you all with is something i hear again and again and that's the lack of information sharing and the lack of breaking down lines of communications on the federal, state, and local level. i've had a bird's eye view of this for 20 years as a federal organized crime prosecutor first in el paso, then in puerto rico, then in new york state and the syracuse area so everywhere you went, the biggest problem was getting the team to work together and breaking down those barriers. and now it seems like in new york the necessity is the mother of invention and you have to work seamlessly, that's the only way you'll be able to
remotely do your job. so i'd like to examine what mr. miller's situation is, which is really the exception to the rule because everywhere else is quite different and mr. demings i think you mentioned that you have to improve our analytical capabilities and you mentioned that there's barriers where you were getting access to ice databases, for example, and those are the types of things i'm concerned with and want to half a hear about. so perhaps, mr. demings, mr. bouchard and mr. acevedo, what is the biggest problem that you see with respect to information sharing? one of the things i see first and foremost, how long it takes to get a background check done for someone joining the task force which is maddening but what else do you see that we can work on and perhaps mr. miller can comment on ways we can fix it. the mou system seems to be one of them. maybe using the model new york is trying to implement
nationwide might be something that could help for us. but i would like to hear from mr. demings first if i may. >> i will say that we enjoy a pretty good relationship with our federal authorities in the metropolitan and orlando area because of what we have in terms of the theme parks, we have federal agents who are embedded within our theme parks so that forces us to communicate i believe there's still room for improvement, however. the situation i talked about earlier in which a law enforcement officer stopped someone on the streets of our nation when they do a -- typically we're trained to check for -- run a national check to see if the person has any type of warrants or what have you and we run it within our respective states as well but there's nothing that comes back from that national database that tells us whether or not that person that we have encountered
is illegal or not. it's something we've suggested, it's a policy within i.c.e. that needs to change, where we want to have access to that realtime information. >> that's something we can look at and my staff i hope is taking notes. yes, they are. good. all right, go ahead. >> i would ask this same question, is it a policy issue, a funding issue or a communication technology issue? the different systems don't communicate and integrate well. and for years we've been getting well, it could be part of all three. so we've been asking these questions for literally a decade and some folks have said well, we don't want you to have that information about status or immigration because it allows you to profile. understand the only time the database is queried is when we've already stopped an individual and even worse when
they're in our jail and we're still not told. so we need that information for situational awareness and the understanding of who we have and who was in our jail and that's not there. >> mr. acevedo? >> the major county sheriffs have been working with dhs now. i've been on the body for nine years trying to get this enterprise up and running. it's still not where it needs to be. quite frankly, we need support for our intelligence commanders. that's 68 intelligence commanders throughout the nation, each one of those organizations -- and that's just the major city chiefs and then we have how many members from the sheriff's department. we desperately need funding to support at least two meetings a year with these commanders because relationships matter. and we all know that needle in the haystack we're looking for is more than likely going to be found by a state or local county law enforcement officials.
and we need to share that information, but it's still not where it needs to be and we need to support that enterprise to continue to build out. we're going to be dead at the rate we're going. and i don't mean by a terrorist attack, i think of old age. so we want to put that on your radar, the cie and intelligence commanders group and finding funding. $2 million seems like a lot of money but in the grand scheme of things that's a drop in the bucket. dhs has the funding but we need you all to yourselves or an appropriations committee to actually order them, to peel off that money so we can at the state county and local level do what we need to do to keep our community safe. >> thank you. mr. miller, you have a much different posture than your colleagues because of the fact that ground zero is new york city for the terrorist targets. that helps break down barriers. can you share with us the ways in which you've been able to effectively share information with the local agencies that
other jurisdictions may struggle with doing? >> we engage in extensive liaison efforts. some programmatic but as chief acevedo said, this is people to people and networking. first we have the shield program which has thousands of members and it's our outreach to the private security, the public/private partnership where we provide them regular briefing materials, constant alerts on breaking events, and training. second, we have a sentry program that is not on the counterterrorism side but the intelligence side where we have developed a network of partnerships in the surrounding areas from new jersey to nassau, suffolk county, upstate as far as boston, a virtual corridor of northeast partners who we bring together at a major
conference once a year and go through a series of presentations and information sharing exercises but we also communicate with regularly. when something happens somewhere, we will pick up the phone, we have a point of contact, same thing in reverse when something happens here and both of those are based on e-mail platforms, cross communications and information we send out. >> before i conclude, mr. chairman, i want to note for the record that i did not engage in the gun debate during my questioning. >> we thank you for that. i think the title of the hearing was the threat that we face post- 9/11. so the chair recognizes ms. jackson lee from houston, texas. >> thank you very much, again, let us acknowledge the work of all of you as first responders, some of you have had the privilege and opportunity to meet and let me thank you personally for your work. let me put on the record that
the united states, dhs, for example, has 240,000 employees that have a range of responsibilities from aviation to border security. i believe there are a million firefighters, 750,000 are volunteers and 18,000 police departments, 556,000 full time employees. to chief acevedo, let me thank you personally, we know the great work you're doing in the state and i want to commend to the major chiefs the legislation we submitted to a number of individuals called the law enforcement trusted integrity act, that's just a note for myself for you to look at it dealing with police/community relations and even that has something to do with us working together. let me also say that i think the record deserves the clarification and the little 12-year-old in northern texas, if you will, that 12-year-old had a clock and i think what is important in order for us to embrace all of those who are going to help us solve this
problem we must understand where to direct our anger and questions. i want to say to the educators who saw something and said something, is that is what we say in the department of homeland security. but what we also want to have occur is that you balance the knowledge that you have as to the individual, the family or, in this instance, a 12-year-old child. so if you knew that you had a bright 12-year-old child, you could have asked that child what is that and also see something and say something. that's how we solve problems. i'd like to also add into the record the sikh man who found a bombing suspect did what every american would have to do. a sikh, obviously a faith that many americans have could have just as well been in oakland, michigan, a muslim.
could have been a store owner so i ask unanimous consent to put this into the record. >> without objection. would the gentlelady yield? commissioner miller has a meeting with the department of homeland security and has to -- >> can i talk quickly? >> if you have a very quick question. because he has to depart. >> thank you, mr. miller. give us the level of importance that good intelligence is coming from civilians, coming from the muslim community, coming from neighbors and as welcoming from fusion centers or infusion centers and, of course, jttf which is an investigatory arm. the height, what level to do you put the right intelligence at? >> i put it at the top because
having the right intelligence, the right partnerships, the right sources, is the difference between having prevented 20 attacks or having had 20 attacks. >> i can congratulate that and i will pursue my other line of questioning with the other gentlemen. please let me put on the record my appreciate for the service of commissioner bratton who i know you had the privilege of working under and we worked with. and thank you for your service. let me go to chief acevedo and the other chiefs that are here. thank you. my focus is to get you the money. to get you the money you need that you've come here using your time to come up and explain to us what we need not to look backward but to look forward. so first, chief, tell me how effective fusion center is in the state of texas. chief acevedo, i'm sorry. >> thank you for that question and great to see you. our fusion center is key. prior to the fusion center we really didn't have the mechanism
by which when we spotted threats or we saw something going on to quickly act on it and i can tell you just last weekend a member of -- former member of congress received a threat and we were able to very quickly track that down because of our fusion center then we were smart enough to leverage our relationship with the state of texas and the department of public safety where we've placed our fusion center at dps headquarters and pay them $1 a year for the next 10 years, thank goodness and as a result we've been able to leverage the relationship, the assets and i -- although we don't get u.s.e. funding, when we received that funding back i believe in 2008 we entered it knowing we as a community and region were going to commit and were committed to maintaining that fusion center and were doing so at a great cost locally because it's that important to us. >> let me ask mr. bouchard and
mr. demings the same question. do we need more resources for the fusion center? fusion centers? because michigan and florida. >> thank you, ma'am. yes, i think nationwide the fusion centers are in need of resources because while all that has been going on, certainly, the country has gone through a recession and that affected the police agencies in terms of their budgets and personnel. i cut 165 positions during the downturn which i still don't have back and yet, you know, i want to have a commitment to the fusion center but i have to fund 100% of it so i have to pull someone out of our deployment and put them into the fusion center. it would be helpful if there was a way on a combined platform if they're going to be assigned to a federal joint terrorism or joint effort that there should be some funding stream, we believe, it would be helpful to add to the interaction and grow that. >> i agree, chief. >> because a lot of agencies can't afford it and even i find it challenging because we're asked to be on the jttf, we're asked to be on identity theft
with the secret service, we're asked to be on the fugitive with the u.s. marshals, asked to be on all these different things. >> allow me to get mr. demings. thank you, i support you in that. mr. demings, my sympathy to you for your community experienced. your experience and what you need in a fusion center to gather the intelligence you need. >> the fusion center plays a pivotal role in our state and as it relates to national security. last year we had 66.1 million visitors who came to orange county, where i'm from, and that was number one in the nation but with our fusion centers, while the primary focus is on counterterrorism efforts, it also has assisted in allowing us to manage natural disasters and also all crimes and so it is a pivotal tool preventing terror attacks but also preventing crimes from occurring in our community as well. >> mr. chairman, i have one last question. >> it's a brief one, i hope. >> it is, mr. chairman.
first of all, i'll make this statement. i think getting guns off the street would help all of you including officers as we move toward dealing with this question of police/community relations but i offer a note about many of us who have a bill to close the gun show loophole and i have one that indicates to report any time guns are sold and you don't have the background check completed and then also i think it's important to take note of the fact that we need to report when guns are transferred without that background check done. guns do kill. let me ask you this question as to how you draw that information. that's how we keep these dangerous issues from happening. tell me how valuable it is to have relationships with diverse communities, diverse faiths? obviously i'm going say muslims but a variety of people and if you talk about right wing attacks, how valuable it is to have information for you to do your job and have people willing
to talk to you to do your job? >> i indicated earlier that we had 66.1 million visitors. well, they come from everywhere, so it is absolutely important for us to have relationships in the broad, diverse communities that we have and so we really focus on that before an incident occurs. we try to have established relationships and we're depending on those relationships to provide the information in advance to assist in preventing an attack. >> thank you, mr. bouchard and then mr. acevedo. >> i think relationships are key on many levels. we talked all threats all hazards whether it's traditional crime or counterterrorism. you have to have relationships so people feel comfortable to call and tell you they see something odd and maybe it's related to terrorism or a drug house. they have to have that confidence in that relationship.
everyone's got their own kinds of platforms to do that. i launched a thing called the sheriff's relations team, srt, and we try to put together community members to be a funnel because sometimes people don't feel comfortable calling police but they may feel comfortable calling people on that team who can then connect to us, and also create platforms that allow anonymous information to flow to us in an uninhibited manner. >> in relationships, they are key. i spoke to this earlier, congresswoman, whether it's the immigration debate or whatever we have to stop painting people with broad brushes, because it puts up fences and tears down trust and in my community i spent a lot of time speaking in english and spanish to my immigrant community, my muslim community, the austin police department, the only ones that need to fear us are those that would do harm to members of our community. so as we move forward we have to continue to build bridges to all segments of
society instead of tearing them down. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. ratcliffe. >> first, i'd like to thank you for the service to our country and all our communities. i know the deputy commissioner miller had to leave and i'm hoping to have the opportunity to commend him and his folks for what is truly remarkable and amazing response to the terrorist events in new york and new jersey this past week and the incredible speed at which they were able to identify and apprehend the suspect. mr. rahami. i think that probably saved the lives of countless americans and, of course, we're all grateful that officer padilla and investigator hammer are expected to make a full recovery from their injuries sustained during their heroic actions but these events only underscore how everyday members of our law enforcement community, your
teams, say good-bye to their loved ones and put their lives on the line to protect their neighbors and now unfortunately you all are being asked to do not just the traditional jobs that we've always asked law enforcement to do, you now have to answer the call when terrorists attack. in that respect, you really are the first line of defense in ensuring our streets don't become battle fields. and it seems to me if we're asking you to go to battle, the least we can do is ensure you get the type of equipment you need to protect your selves and protect all of us. i will tell you it's not very often i get a chance to talk about a federal program that serves a noble purpose like that and does so effectively, efficiently, and essentially no cost to taxpayers. those types of federal programs are about as rare as a $3 bill. but the 1033 surplus program is exactly that kind of program, and i think you all know that.
it's a program that allows the department of defense to transfer certain surplus defense equipment that's already been paid for and in many cases already been used to protect our troops and to repurpose that for state and local law enforcement to use in counter-terrorism, counter-drug activities and emergency situation that is arise in our communities all the time. that was the case, anyway, until unilateral executive actions by president obama, which cut access to that type of critical equipment that agencies like yours depend on. in fact, many of you had, i assume, to send back some of the equipment that you'd already received from the program, equipment like tracked armored vehicles, the kind law enforcement in my district say have saved lives in crisis situations and which double as rescue vehicles in some circumstances. and because of the president's action here, some of the s.w.a.t. teams that have had the
benefit of lifesaving body armor and ballistic helmets won't have that benefit anymore because they can't afford that equipment without this program. so i think the president's actions here are frankly inexcusable. i think he has put the safety of your officers and his politics ahead of the public safety. so in response to all of that, earlier this year i introduced the plus act, protecting lives using surplus equipment act of 2016, which would reverse the president's executive order and restore that program to law enforcement agencies like all of yours. sheriff, i want to start with you. i notice you mentioned it in your opening statement. i really want to get your perspective on the administration's unilateral decision to strip equipment like this from agencies like yours. i'm interested in the policy, of
course, but i'm less interested in the hypothetical and want to know how this is affecting officers like the ones you manage out in the real world. >> thank you and thank you for your leadership on this. we have, i think, pretty much across the board found 1033 extremely helpful in assisting law enforcement. we saw realtime evidence of that in san bernardino, use of armored vehicles and tactical equipment to save lives. a real life example, the day that was playing out we received an order from washington to return our tract vehicle that day. it was loaded on a flatbed and the intent was to blow it up. and the track vehicles around the country are used not just for dangerous armored situation but also traverse terrain across the country, sand and snow. northern michigan can get 5' of snow. track vehicles only way to get to certain situations. i know san bernardino found themselves with running fugitive hunt that killed a number of
people. they had to borrow park's cats to drive through some of the deep snow. a real life example, we had a gunbattle that lasted 12 hours with individual who killed a police officer and barricaded themselves in a house firing fully automatic weapon not just through the windows but through the walls and striking neighbors homes. we used armored vehicles to evacuate the neighbors and obviously protect our deployed deputies around the scene as we continued that running gunbattle all night long. towards the end of that gunbattle we wanted to insert into the second story. the only way to do that was with an armored vehicle that actually had a ramp to the second story. that armored tract vehicle was recalled by federal government. our region no longer has ability to have ramp to a second story and an armored capability. that was saving lives. it was taken and intended to be destroyed. that's the kind of situation we're facing.
just go a step further. most of the real problems are coming from the rulemakers. i said i'm the point person for major county sheriffs of america and i'm in more meetings than i can count. in one meeting 37 people in the room, two of us were fulltime law enforcement. so the people making rules actually was asked the question in one of these meetings what caliber is 223. the people making decisions don't know equipment and tactics used with equipment and they get to decide when and where and how we use that. i think that's the problem. they are writing rules that are rather extensive. they keep changing them. they have changed them a number of times. not formalized, back dating to october of last year and we don't know what those rules are yet. at one point we had to train our whole agency owned a specific set of training department wide. not people using it authorized to call it out but the whole agency. so much of this is driven by perception. it's incredibly frustrating. they talk about militarized
tract vehicles removed because they look too militarized. but you can still get armored vehicles with wheels. that doesn't go to the tactic or terrain. i had to turn in 12 bayonets. they thought we were fixing bay owe nets and charging homes. 12 were used at honor guards at funerals. we had to go and buy them for the honor guard that the federal government recalled. so much recalled by use and not those making decisions. it's incredibly frustrating. >> thank you, sheriff. based on the answer you just gave me would you agree with me that the president's decision is jeopardizing well-being and your officers. >> i certainly would agree with that statement. i said after san bernardino, the sheriff, a friend of mine, said they came prepared and america is less prepared as we sent back our armored vehicles that same day. >> i'm out of time. chief, i saw you nodding your
head in response to that. i want to give you a chance to comment. >> whether it's 1033 or asset forfeiture, we need to deal with individual departments if they abuse or misuse the equipment or the assets and not paint the entire profession and paint the entire profession with a broad brush. you remember the mraps, everybody hates them. the chairman and i had a press conference, we didn't get one for austin because my s.w.a.t. team was too big for our city configuration. i said when you have floods and we're a state prone to flooding, we need those mraps to rescue people. not a month passed when we had some major flooding in central texas. guess what the pd south of me used, an mrap to rescue kids stuck inside elementary schools that
basically flooded all around it. it's not the equipment, it's the way it needs to be used. 1033, asset forfeiture hold departments accountable for misusing equipment and let's not paint the entire profession with a broad brush. >> thank you, chief. i'll yield back. >> thank you. i want to thank witnesses for valuable testimony and witnesses and members for their questions. before i conclude, i want to first of all thank all of you. being in law enforcement for 20 years, i hear what you discuss, i kind of miss it, to be frank. but i want you to get some comfort out of this that your words are not falling on deaf ears. we have heard time and again over the last several months and other hearings about we need to do a better job sharing information, state, local, and federal agencies on the same page especially with respect to background checks and information sharing. we're mindful that we are in the process of doing things about that. your testimony does help. the fusion center issue really
bothered me. i didn't realize there were so many cuts. that's very troubling given the fact last few years now up to over 1,000 isis related investigations in all 50 states. not a time to be paring down but plussing up. we have to give you the equipment you need to make you as safe as possible and make you do as effective a job as you possibly can. we can't do that when we start cutting things. they have to be mindful of that. no matter what happens going forward with the election, we need to convince the administration you need to be properly supported. not time for cuts but maintaining and plussing it up. need to be safe. need to give you the tools to keep it safe. thank you for the job you do. finding the needle in the haystack every day is a brutal task.
i commend you all for the job you do. i wake up every day worried about things going on in the committee, i can't imagine what you go through. i thank you for what you do. members may have questions for the witnesses. we'll ask them to respond in writing. the hearing record will be held open for 10 days. without objection, the hearing stands adjourned. thank you, gentlemen. [ background noise ]
after the hearing, new york city deputy police commissioner john miller and house homeland security chairman michael mccaul spoke to reporters. >> you're supposed to drop the mike at the end of the act. >> i'm michael mccaul, chairman of the homeland security committee. with me is commissioner miller of the new york police department. first i want to commend the great work of nypd and its efforts to take down the terrorist that was responsible
for the terrorist attacks in both new york and we believe new jersey. it was incredible police work. and the quick apprehension in taking this man off the street. i have actually mr. rahami's journal with me. this came up at the hearing in terms of what persuaded him, what inspired him. he discusses on wanwar alaki, a the chief isis spokesman and their external operations chief as well. he has since been killed in an air strike. it's clear from this journal that mr. rahami was receiving inspiration from the isis spokesman, mr. adnani. this is a new era of terror. as the commissioner testified, the message coming out of
raqqah, syria has changed and evolved from come to syria and join the fight, to now kill where you are. that was the message of the isis spokesman, mr. adnani, was to kill where you are, with whatever it takes, by whatever means necessary. and i think we saw that unfortunately playing out in the streets of new york and new jersey, and in minnesota this last saturday. with the great work of nypd and others, we can hopefully stop that from happening again. with that, commissioner. >> i think part of the subject of today's hearing was the increasing level of sophistication of the communications and propaganda of these terrorist groups targeting particularly young people across western europe, but especially the united states. the last message that sheik adnani sent out, calling for
americans and others to do attacks, also gave specific instructions that they should claim credit if possible during the actual attacks. and we have seen, whether it was the german train stabbing, the murder of the french police officer at his home, and the murder of his wife, or some of the other recent attacks, including orlando, and orlando, the shooter called 911 to pledge his allegiance to isis. in france, the individual went live streaming on his facebook page to claim responsibility in the name of isis while he was still holed up in the house, having committed the murders. after the germany train bombing, the individual had presupplied isis with a video of his claim of responsibility, holding the knife he was going to use, that he had sent them electronically. we're seeing an increasing
lowering of the bar in terms of inexpensive, unsophisticated, yet high impact attacks that they're calling for. and people who are buying into a line of propaganda that promises valor, belonging, empowerment, and i think the recent events in new york city, where we see the emergence of another individual and another attack kind of underscores really what's a morphing and changing threat picture since 9/11. >> do you believe there were some mistakes like in san bernardino, trying to read the early signs about mr. --
>> in all these incidents there's always a postmortem, if you will, to look back and see what could have been done differently in terms of lessons learned. again, i commend the work of nypd. and the quick response of this investigation was flawless in getting this suspect into custody within a short time. >> does the nypd stand by the statement made on monday that the suspect acted alone? >> the statement on monday was, as far as we know the suspect acted alone. the caveat there is now we have a suspect in custody. the manhunt part for that known individual is over. and there will be an extensive investigation through the joint terrif terrorism task force, which is now the lead agency based on a complaint filed yesterday, there will be an extensive investigation into connections with any group, associates, family members, friends, anybody
else who may have been involved. >> you don't have any update on how long it will be before you begin to say, well, there might have been this, there might have been that? >> i don't understand the question. >> now that you do have him in custody, you've had him in custody for 48 hours. i asked specifically about monday, and i understand the idea that that was what you knew then, but that hasn't changed in any respect 48 hours later. >> i wouldn't answer that question one way or the other. we have amassed a great deal of information in the past 48 hours. but we have to see where that information takes us. so to be crystal clear on that, we're open to any possibility that he acted alone, that there were other involved, that he could have been inspired by a group, enabled by a group, directed by a group. we're just not there yet. >> the point of your hearing today was about preventing future attacks. to both of you, what's the
biggest thing congress can do to help local law enforcement? >> today, very good timing. we have a bill, my bill on the floor to provide additional grant funding from the department of homeland security to train local police departments and fire departments and emergency responders with this new active shooter threat, and also the ied threat and the suicide bomber threat that we're seeing now coming into our communities. as the commissioner stated, this is the new method of choice for attacks. and it's imperative our police departments be adequately prepared and trained to respond to that sort of attack. i think the bill will be on the floor this evening and will address that.