tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN June 14, 2016 9:00pm-12:01am EDT
who actually worked quite sometime on matters that are important to us today. mike thompson from california, who has been our leader on the issues of gun safety, addressing gun violence in the house democratic caucus. corrine brown, our colleague from florida and our colleague who is the representative of the location where the unfortunate incident in orlando, florida, took place that took the lives of 49 people and injured 53 others. and we thank her for being with us. and david cicilline, who has been a fighter for the rights of all americans, including the lgbtq community, and is one of the quality caucus co-chairs. we're going to ask each of them to speak. we'll all try to be brief. it's kind of tough because i think the reason we had a very long caucus meeting is because members were very vocal.
they were addment and they were une-- adamant and they were unequivocal. we can't have moments of silence when we see americans perish. as robin kelly, republican from illinois, said we can't just think about americans lives that are lost when it's mass shootings. every day there is an american that is killed -- 30 people, 30 americans killed every day as a result of the use of weapons. and we need to stand up and the message was very clear in today's caurks. members will stand -- today's caucus. members will stand. we understand it's important to express to the people of this country this moment of silence to let the families of the victims know we are thinking of them. by god, this is the people's house, and if we can't stand up and then do something, then we're in trouble. there are any number of things
that could be done. must do a better job identifying and checking the background of those who seek to buy weapons, especially assault weapons. we could ask people to pass the legislation that mike thompson introduced and asked through a discharge petition so every member could sign onto to make sure if you can't fly because you're on a no-fly list because of the potential to commit terrorist attacks, then you should not be able to buy a weapon by going into a gunshop and walking out with something that will let you do your mass destruction. we must do beater job of red flags, people showing fanatic extremism or severe psychological strain. but what we shouldn't do is simply bow our heads for a moment of silence. unfortunately, that's all speaker ryan would allow us to do yesterday. terrorists should not be able to buy guns, but right now a suspected terrorist might enter a store, a gunshop and walk out with a weapon of his or her
choice. our republican colleagues refuse to act in the house of representatives. speaker ryan said in a statement after the shooting, as we heal -- this is a quote. as we heal we must be clear-eyed about who did this, end quote. mr. speaker, we're very clear-eyed about this. the man responsible for the unconscionable mass shootings in orlando was investigated by the f.b.i., and at one point he was on a federal watch list and yet he got his hands on an assault weapon and he committed mass murder. mr. speaker, let's be clear and let's be clear-eyed. let's not allow a vote on this -- to not allow -- excuse me -- a vote on this critical bipartisan legislation to keep someone who's on the no-fly list
from buying a gun is wrong. it is time to allow the american people to speak through their representatives and have a vote. inaction is a choice. and in congress it has proved harmful. let me yield to the vice chair, joe crowley. mr. crowley: thank you. first and foremost, i just want to respect those lives that were lost and the families and our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims of this horrific act. secondly, i just want to make comment about last night. the reaction i think that my colleagues and myself included expressed on the floor was one of outrage, of frustration, of a desire to want to see something happen, not out of disrespect to everyone. even those of my colleagues that chose to not stand or to leave
the chamber, again, not out of disrespect to the victims but out of respect to them because to simply stand for a moment of silence and then do nothing is really the ultimate case of disrespect. and that is what the republican leadership has continued to do. i would suspect that chairman ryan -- that speaker ryan could not wait to get out of the rostrum last night because he was uncomfortable as well when he heard us yelling for a bill. where is a bill? where is the no-fly, no buy bill? where is the thompson legislation? is it the end all? is it a panacea? no. but it's a start. it's a start to try to do something to help prevent events like this from happening again. we in the democratic caucus have no disrespect to any of these families.
we love these families. we're concerned about them. they're our families. they are american families that are hurting, and these 49 victims join a long list of victims and families that are hurting because their congress will stand for a moment of silence but do absolutely nothing, absolutely -- don't even talk about it, don't even bring it up, don't hold a hearing. call a select committee on umpteenth when it comes to other things but not when it comes to gun violence. nada, zip. they're complicit in this by not acting and not taking a stance in some way. demonstrate to the american people you have some understanding what has taken place again and again and again. and still they stand there like deer in a headlights. we're incredibly frustrated, as demonstrated on the floor last night, and we're going to be incredibly frustrated until we get something passed and we're
going to continue to protest in some format to demonstrate to the republican members of the house of representatives and to their constituents that their failure to do something is complicit in events like what took place this weekend. and with that i will yield to the champion on our side of the aisle on the issue of guns and gun safety, my good friend from california, mike thompson. mr. thompson: thank you very much. i'll give you a real clear-eyed assessment on who this shooter was in the latest tragedy. he was someone who shouldn't have had access to firearms. plain and simple. and the list of folks who fall into that category as which know are pretty long. 30 people a day are killed by someone using a gun. we've had large-scale massacres such as what happened in orlando have happened more often than any of us want to think about.
and our response, the congress of the united states, the people's house, our response has been stand for a moment of silence. we've had over 30 moments of silence since the tragedy in sandy hook. we've had moments of silence ad nauseam. but i think what we haven't had, we haven't had one single vote on any piece of legislation to address the issue of gun violence prevention. we've not had one single vote on any piece of legislation that tries to make sure we do everything possible to keep people who shouldn't have guns from getting guns. it's an embarrassment. it's an act of cowardness, and we should all be ashamed of ourselves. as the chairman and vice chairman noted, one of the most specific efforts that we put forward is a simple piece of legislation that says if you're on the no-fly list you can't buy a gun.
now, as was mentioned, the shooter from orlando had been on the no-fly list. the irony is when he was still on the list he could have gone into a gun store and legally purchased the same firearms that he legally purchased when he got off the list. that's wrong. there's a big gaping hole in our safety net. there's a big gaping hole in our responsibility to make our communities safe. we should call this bill to the floor. it has bipartisan support. there's a discharge petition on it now. we should call that bill to the floor. it should be taken up for a vote and we should pass that. we should do everything in our power to make sure that people who shouldn't have guns don't get guns. and there's no conflict with the second amendment. it's no conflict with legal folks being able to purchase
legal firearms. it's our responsibility and we're not living up to that responsibility. mr. becerra: corrine brown, florida. ms. brown: thank you. i come this morning with a very heavy heart. i've had the honor of representing orlando for 24 years, and orlando is an international city. it's all of that but it's also a family-oriented community and the community has come together, whether it's the first responders, whether it's the airline, whether the community came together to pay for all of the funerals, they had a vidgelal last night. -- vigil last night. over 10,000 people came out. sunday morning when i got up i heard it, i got to church to pray. i believe in prayer. i went down to orlando to be with my orlando family. now, when i came back here yesterday, we always have those moments of silence prayer when something happens.
i received a notice that we were not going to come down to the floor. the speaker was just going to handle the whole thing. in other words, the orlando -- the florida people wasn't even allowed to come to the floor for that one minute to say nothing and do nothing. that is unacceptable. i had a press conference and i was talking to people in london. they think the people in the world thinks something is wrong with us. why is it that this continues to happen and we are the do-nothing congress? now, you know, it's questionable about whether this was a hate crime. clearly it was a hate crime. it was an lgbt pride month and the club. i mean, it was clear a hate crime. now, we in congress need to do something other than that moment of silent prayer.
the community expects us to do more. to whom, you know, all my colleagues all the time talk about prayer. to whom god give much, much is expected. he expects us to do more than just stand up for a moment of silent prayer. mr. becerra: let me now ask the author of hate crimes prevention legislation, david cicilline. mr. cicilline: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to express deep sadness and condolences and prayers to the victims of this horrific and monstrous shooting, to the families, to those still in the hospital. i think as corrine said, we all reacted the same way when we
heard this news. i think americans all across this country were horrified to hear about the single largest mass shooting in the history of america which took place in orlando, florida. and we are all incredibly frustrated. while there is not a single piece of legislation that will solve all of the problems of gun violence, a combination of measures taken together can significantly reduce the likelihood that our constituents, people who live in cities and towns all across this country can be protected from gun violence. and the failure to have a piece of legislation that will solve all the problems is not a license to do nothing about it. and we have a number of bills that will make a big difference in helping produce safer communities and help protect people from the ravages of gun violence. one of those bills is the hate crimes prevention act, which would require that someone who is convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime be prohibited from purchasing a firearm. and if you look at -- there was a wonderful report done entitled "hate and guns: a terrifying
combination," that really tracked what happens with hate crimes. people begin with more modest assaults and efforts to intimidate and it escalates as the attacker wants to make a point to a particular community based on their ethnicity, race or sexual orientation. so a black family may be the victim of some graffiti and then maybe to some other assault on their home and then eventually have their church firebombed. there is a pattern of escalation with these hate crimes. this legislation is to catch it before it happens. if someone is convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime which is compelling evidence of what the future holds, prevent that person from walking into a store and buying a gun and using that to harm other people. there are other examples, the terror watch list. there are a number of things. we got to do something. we don't need any more moments of silence. what we need is sustained action. many moments of sustained action to get things done, to keep the american people safe. there are a number of solutions
that will do that. we're calling on our republican leaders in the house to bring those bills to the floor. let us debate them. i serve on the judiciary committee. we haven't had one vote on a single measure that would help protect americans from gun violence. it's a national disgrace that that has not happened. mr. becerra: questions. reporter: you know this event happened at a gay nightclub. there are a number of amendments that deal with anti-lgbt discrimination. the republicans seem to put the genie back in the bottle. how can you fight that saying, look, this is what we're talking about? you guys don't want to deal with this issue but we're trying to force you to deal with this issue and put it in appropriation bills? mr. becerra: i'll respond quickly. i don't think we're going to stop. we weren't going to stop on that effort because we knew we had the votes.
we had passed this measure authored by sean patrick maloney, our colleague from new york. and so we're going to continue. and i think what happened in orlando this weekend simply fortifies our efforts to make sure that we make this congress act. but let me see if my colleagues want to comment on that. mr. cicilline: look, there's no question that hateful rhetoric and the discrimination that exists within the lgbt community in places across our country is a tremendous and serious challenge. we sew a number of states, about 30 states that are actively considering bills to legalize some form of discrimination against members of the lgbt community. and so in that -- this environment, it's particularly important that we take some steps to ensure that members of our community are protected from discrimination of any kind because the strongest kind of refutation of that language, that members of the lgbt should not be treated equally, it is discriminated against on their
sexual orientation or gender identity is wrong. we need to pass the equality act which mostly all members of the democratic caucus co-sponsored. a comprehensive civil rights bill. that would be a strong statement to this. i know what we as a party intend to do use everything we can to reinforce the founding principles of this country, that everyone should be treated equally, that people should be treated with dignity and respect and people should not suffer discrimination of any kind. reporter: when did you start circulating the no-fly bill and can you talk about how many you gathered, how many signatures? mr. thompson: we started a couple months ago. as i said, it's a bipartisan bill. i think there's 175 democrats who signed the discharge petition.
one of our colleagues in the caucus today who wasn't on the list told me he was going to go to the floor right away and sign it. so we're one more than when we started today. mr. becerra: we need a few courageous republicans to join as well. reporter: do you have any real reason you can defeat these efforts in the republican-led house? and many ways republicans are characterizing this is a terrorist attack but not attack on the gay community like the house democrats are. mr. becerra: so we know, as congressman cicilline mentioned, on the discrimination legislation -- the measure to try to prevent discrimination against lgbtq in this country, we had the votes. we had a bipartisan vote some 200 -- we had up to 218. 218 members in the house, republicans and democrats, who are in support of ending discrimination against the lgbtq community.
we know the votes are there. now that the republican leadership can twist arms and make people flip-flop is another matter. but policy-wise, we know we have bipartisan support. politically, we understand what republican leadership is trying to do, and certainly under the leadership of donald trump it should not surprise people this has become the party of lincoln has become the party of trump. we believe most people with common sense would say saying to somebody if you're on the no-fly list, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. no fly, no buy. i believe most people, including gun owners will say, that makes perfect sense. so we don't believe there's any problem finding the votes. it's finding a republican leadership that's willing to do something. and that's the problem we have now. it's not the votes. it's finding leadership in congress, in this republican
congress that wants to do something. mr. thompson: if you brought up the no fly, no buy legislation, or brought up the background check that peter king and i brought forward, it in the house of representatives. mr. becerra: overwhelmingly. mr. thompson: it's up to the republican leadership. they have to show the courage to bring it up. the american people want it. there are number votes on the floor to pass it. they just have to screw up the courage to bring it up for a vote. >> he was not on the no-fly list. >> i'm suggesting if you are on the no-fly list you should not be will to buy firearms. this person was on it and then taken off. there should have been some
notification if someone is on the list. the fbi figures there is not enough information. the fbi ought to get a call and they can revisit to see if things have changed. it doesn't foreclose on us being able to add that. first thing is to get the bill up for a vote. at the time it was not an issue. the situation was on the list. the important point is right now the law is if you are on the no-fly list, the terrorist watchlist, you can legally go into a federally licensed gun ar-15, whatever , and i thinkas
that is wrong. i don't think you should be able to do that. >> republicans are going to say it would not have prevented this action from happening. >> i don't think anybody suggest we should have a bill specifically for every instance that happens. if that is what the republicans are saying they better by their tongue because the only bill that we can pass that would prevent all of these things from happening is a bill to ban firearms. are you telling me the only bill is a bill to ban all firearms? get elected to do something, not just sit around. i don't think anyone believes when congress passes something it resolves all the problems of the world. pretending the only thing is perfection is to say you don't want to do anything.
this is a congress that has not able to do anything. [inaudible] >> we know there are some problems. we know people are trying to acquire weapons to do americans harm. to do nothing to prevent that when we know people who are on the no-fly list, there is a strong chance some individuals may try to move forward with their bad intentions and to do nothing about that, to allow those folks are on a no-fly list -- to allow them to continue buying weapons or at least to check them and do the universal background checke, what if you are just someone who is in a bad
mental state and could do nothing to check on your status, your well-being, to be able to pick up a weapon. sandy hook, perfect example of someone who should not have had a weapon. we have stopped it? who knows. but we should try. we are talking but giving the american people a sense that we are pointed try to make their lives better. to do nothing is to accept the current circumstances. we have an epidemic of gun violence. over 2000 people on the no-fly list have legally purchased firearms through licensed dealers. >> thank you all very much.
>> we have to be quick today. we have a picture. we had a terrific caucus. senator sanders took time to talk about his experience. it was very moving. our nation was shaken by the worst mass shooting in modern american history. 49 dead. scores injured. some very critically. this is an attack on the lgbt community, latino community, and
america. everyone in america was attacked. it demands action. people of orlando responded to this unimaginable tragedy with unity and generosity. they came together in a time of crisis to get things done. congress we want to react the same way. with closing the terrorist gun loophole. 2000 suspected terrorists were able to buy guns from 2004 to 2014. wolfsists have urged loan -- lone wolves to take advantage of america gun laws. easily is awash with obtainable firearms. what are you waiting for?
republican who said the problem is not guns. what is the response of republicans? more guns. and care more about the nra the five they are having with , drivings of america further in radicalism than protecting american citizens. absolutely shameful. why do they run for office if they are calling the nra more than their constituents? we will do this on the cgs appropriation bill. there is no excuse for allowing suspected terrorist by guns. we have other things to do. how about funding the fbi? they complain about the fbi saying they are not doing
enough. they always shortchange the resources they have. republicans voted against this in december. it was a terrible mistake. they have a chance to make it right. we are going to force a vote fully fund the fbi. ,f republicans are shortchanged $100 million. both of these amendments are germane and deserve an up or down vote. >> the lesson of orlando, san bernardino, that we have learned across america with these horrible mass shootings, we need to do a better job in america
keeping guns out of the hands of are felons, mentally unstable, people with terrorist connections have no business owning guns in the america. common sense dictates we as a congress listen to the pleas across america to stop this gun violence. over 1000 gun violence incidents, 200 people killed in that great city. it breaks my heart. i love that city. they are scared to death about firearms and what they are doing. do we have the guts to do something as a congress? in fronting to cower of the national rifle association?
i would like to make another statement. in times of crisis our nation expects leadership grounded in american values. president george w. bush after the tragedy of 9/11 made it clear those responsible would be held accountable. he warned america not to hold all muslims responsible for the radical views of a few. orlando, president obama condemned this act of hate and terror and promise to dedicate every resource to investigate and hold accountable those responsible for this tragedy. contrast this bipartisan leadership with donald trump, the man who would be the republican president, in the wake of the orlando tragedy, congratulated himself for his bigotry toward muslims. the questions facing republican , hisrs again this week
emotional rants, his serial insults, his devices singling out enemies to be loathed than this thing wishes him from any other candidate in modern american political history. them and/or strong and characterizes outrageous comments as only being off message and unscripted is to dismiss the toxic rhetoric of donald trump as only the product of poor political coaching. how many of these same congressional leaders are making plans to extend the republican convention in cleveland? how many will bring families, children, friends to join them in a standing ovation to honor
the lethal range of their unhinged nominee? --tory will remembering them history will remember them. >> thank you. last year, 244 people on the terror watchlist tried to purchase guns. terrorists walked into gunshots and attempted to purchase firearms. 223 were able to get firearms. only 21 went empty-handed. when -- oforists, suspected terrorists, when they sought to purchase a gun last year were successful. let our republican colleagues contemplate that. they want to fight terrorism, they say they are one to continue a situation where 91%
of spectre terrorists can get a gun. who are they kidding? i have a simple question. when the senators voted against the terror gap last year, why is that acceptable? why should suspected terrorist be able to purchase firearms? why? why? no reason. the answer is obvious. agree.rican people republicans, democrats, independents agree it is absurd. the nra is the tail that wags the republican dog. withra is more concerned the rights of suspected terrorists and they are with the victims of gun violence and republicans bow down to that nra
horrible choice. if they continue to oppose the terror gap the nra and the nra itself will be in part responsible for every terror attack that involves a gun in this country. plain and simple. there is no other way to avoid that fact. bill we areming going to try you again to close this dangerous loophole once and for all when the senate considers the next appropriation bill. can we win? we will win sooner or later. we will keep trying. we're not giving up. reporter say you can't win. why do it. every time we have a vote, hopefully we can win. hopefully they will change their minds. if not, they will face the consequences and that makes progress move forward.
the moment of soul-searching for our republican colleagues is now . what is it going to be? are they going to side with the extremist in the nra with the majority of their constituents and all americans who simply don't believe terror suspects should have access to guns. the people who seem to believe it other republican senators on the floor of the -- that body. >> since sunday night, tens of thousands of people around the country from los angeles to boston, charleston, s.c. to fort worth, texas have turned out for vigils to mourn the heinous act of terror that erupted over the weekend in orlando. that was an attack on our values . an attack on the lgbt community that has entered -- endured so
much violence and an attack on every single family across the country. the question these families are asking around the kitchen table is what will it take for this congress to enact commonsense reform to keep our communities safe? it is mind-boggling. every stay in this country including my home state has been affected by horrific gun violence. for this past time congress to have a vigorous debate about what we can do to stem the tide. republicans continue to block us at every turn. they are so adamant that we do nothing, they blocked us on the most obvious amendment of all, to prevent people who are on the terror watchlist from being allowed to buy a gun. when you have politicians so beholden to the gun lobby they can't even support the idea that
potentially dangerous criminals and terrorists shouldn't be allowed to walk out of a store they gun, there is a serious problem with our priorities. something 90% of americans want. like so many americans, i am tired of hearing the thoughts and prayers of my colleagues with zero follow-up. time for action, we cannot wait for another mass shooting. i hope our colleagues on the other side of the aisle will finally wake up to the problem at hand and work with us to make hurting as a crisis every single day. senators -- 968 waiting for us.
i will take a couple of quick questions. support an assault weapons ban? >> do i? yes. >> without showing probable cause, should the government -- >> the answer is that his fullest miss. last question. >> are you pushing to get energy tax incentives? >> the fact is we would love to get it extended. we should not do it on a short-term basis. [inaudible]
>> house members received a briefing from the fbi and federal officials about the investigation of the mass shooting in orlando. johnson,arks from jeh alan grayson, and intelligence committee ranking member adam schiff. this is 25 minutes. >> thank you. [laughter] >> i think we had an informative session and many questions about the pending investigation which the f.b.i. director answered. it's important to remember it's still early, 2 1/2 days after the attack in the orlando. i suspect we will be back up here. i know we have a meeting tomorrow with the senate and there will be opportunities to testify publicly. reporter: what do we know about
the radicalization of the suspect? that started at the time he was watching these videos in 2012, 2014? >> it's fair to say this individual was someone who self-radicalized. there is no evidence at this point that he was part of a group or a cell acting here in the united states. and there's no evidence at this point that this was a frit-directed attack, in other words that this individual had been directed by a terrorist organization or its leadership from overseas to carry out an attack. and this is the environment we're anywhere we have to cope with terrorist-directed attack, the prospect of a terrorist-inspired attack from a home-grown extremist which
requires that we take the fight militarily to the islamic state, al qaeda overseas. we continue with our aggressive law enforcement efforts here at home but there is a role for the public to play, public vigilance and public awareness do make a difference. it is almost always the case where someone self radicalizes. someone close to see the signs and see where the individual was going and we continue to build bridges to american muslim communities to help them help us in our efforts to counter extremism here at home in the united states. and so these are things that we are going to continue to do in the department of homeland security since i have been secretary. we have redoubled our efforts at countering violent extremism and building bridges to american
muslim communities. i have been around the country meeting with muslim communities of many different types and so this whole effort requires a whole of government approach. we mourn the loss of the victims, those who were killed in orlando. we mourn with their families. i know the president will visit orlando on thursday. and so the message here is there are a lot of people in national security, law enforcement, homeland security, working overtime to protect the american homeland but there is a role. public awareness and if you see something, say something is more than a slogan. reporter: are you aware of whether his wife tried to talk him out of it? >> i offer you to the f.b.i.
congress can support us through a budget, through adequate funding to resource our efforts in law enforcement, in national defense, homeland security and i have been pleased with the bipartisan level of support that we have been receiving from congress for things like t.s.a. reprogrammings. we got the sign from congress yesterday on that so we can keep the wait times down nationwide through converting part-time to full-time our t.s.o.'s and bringing more on. there is a role for congress to play in terms of ensuring our homeland security efforts are adequately funded.
got to go. thank you. mr. jolly: i will tell you this is clear this is an individual who sought to be a terrorist and he achieved that. it is unfortunate. they were well aware of this individual. they had worked the case very hard, but obviously this is one that turned out with consequences that the nation will forever regret. this is someone who south to enact terror on the homeland. reporter: did they explain why? mr. jolly: you have to ask law enforcement. [inaudible]
>> the first question was about gun control and we will arrive as to what the right policies. we have lived through this for 20 years. the partisan solutions aren't working. this is a week one nation mourning together and if we can't arrive at a consensus and reject this democrat-republican and we dishonor those who were lost. shame on members of congress who use a tragedy in orlando to play politics. and that's on both sides of the aisle and shame on presidential candidates who do the same thing. a members' briefing that turns into questions of partisanship is unfortunate to the american people. a tribute to law enforcement.
they were doing the best they could in this case. this was someone who was intent on being a terrorist and unfortunately he achieved it. reporter: if someone is bent on being a terrorist should they be able to purchase a firearm? mr. jolly: nobody wants people who are on the no-fly list to buy firearms. at the same time, there is people on the no-fly list who have no due process. the answer doesn't just sit on one side of the aisle or the other. i have draft legislation but it says if you are denied because are on the no-fly list, you have 30 days of due process to petition a court to purchase a firearm and the government has the responsibility to prove why you are on the no-lie list. we can get there together. you shouldn't be on the no-fly list without due process and when they fall back into their partisan trenches, we get nothing done.
it is as heartbreaking to see people yelling on the house floor and presidential candidates casting credit or blame marco rubio. this is dust gusting and we shouldn't be republicans or democrats. we should solve this issue. the briefing is important. the partisanship is disgusting. reporter: did they say anything about his phone? mr. jolly: it's a samsung and not an apple. they do and i'll leave it to law enforcement. but i do understand they have the phone. the reports are that they have access to the phone. reporter: did you learn anything new in there? mr. jolly: and this is very important, this is very important, this is someone who
had south out the opportunity to be a terrorist and to enact terror on the homeland and he achieved it. the intent was clear here and -- you need to ask -- \[inaudible] mr. jolly: the entire profile is being studied and i would leave it to law enforcement. reporter: do you know if his wife was involved in the planning of the attack. mr. jolly: that is an open question that i suggest you ask law enforcement but clearly everybody related to him is being asked questions about what they knew. reporter: law enforcement and the f.b.i. drop the ball at all in vetting his background? mr. jolly: i know they are studying this question. this was a person of interest and revisiting every decision they made.
this is somebody that they had been following and it speaks to the effort of law enforcement that they are working very hard. how do you stop everybody. we know how many they have stopped. that's a question we wrestle with. i know law enforcement is wrestling with as well. this is not the time to second guess law enforcement. they will do that themselves and reevaluate best practices. congress will provide the oversight to make sure those best practices are implemented. reporter: did you get more answers today on what happened? mr. grayson: the information they had was interesting and we were told it was going to be a classified briefing. [inaudible]
mr. grayson: what is happening now the f.b.i. is following up with the computer, social media to try to make sure he acted alone and there are no further threats. my concerns are a little different. it's possible to kill so many people so quickly and didn't get any further information about that. the weapon was described to us but didn't have anything like an ammunition count, the time it took to kill so many people. why this was the worst mass shooting, one person with one weapon was able to kill 50 people in a matter of minutes. reporter: there are a lot of questions about orientation -- [inaudible] mr. grayson: what is coming in now is information.
well, there was a third discussion of what could have been done to prevent this situation from happening again and that's part of the conversation. we make the laws. reporter: anything you can say about the wife's role and whether or not she tried to talk him out of the attack? mr. grayson: we got some information. i don't feel like i can discuss that. reporter: were there other attacks planned to be carried out, even though he is not alive. any other people he was working with? mr. grayson: there is no evidence of that whatsoever. we have to be vigilant, but no evidence of that. reporter: \[inaudible] -- [inaudible] mr. grayson: i think that's
absurd. the reason why we suffered the worst mass shooting in history is because it was possible for one person to kill so many people so quickly. he couldn't have done it with a box cutter or a rock but an automatic weapon. that's what made this tragedy possible. now, by the way, it is a semi-automatic weapon. one that is capable of firing over 100 rounds in less than a minute. one victim who was shot more than a dozen times. one victim more than a dozen times. mr. thornberry: a lot of the details of this case have been
in the press. the f.b.i. gave us additional details. it just seems to me, we can tell from the press that this case is an exact template of what isis is trying to provoke, take an individual who's unstable, who may be angry, have a variety of issues, take the ideology and plug into that and encourage those individuals to act. and that presents a real challenge for law enforcement and everyone. \[inaudible question] mr. thornberry: they have a lot more people to question. a lot of additional issues to go into. this is still very preliminary right now. [inaudible] mr. thornberry: there were some process questions.
who gets checked and under what circumstances as people are questioned by the f.b.i., are they forever more on some sort of a list and so forth. and all of that will be explored further, i'm sure. reporter: they actually had him on the watch list and weren't notified when he did buy them? mr. thornberry: no. i'm trying to calculate what one can say. it's been in the press -- there were other previous investigations of this individual and they did not have enough information to pursue them further. reporter: it was a red flag, though. mr. thornberry: there are lots of questions and we have to be careful about looking back and
saying that something else should have happened. we need to ask those questions and see how the process can be improved, if it can and what the ramifications for that is. should everyone who ever gets questioned by the f.b.i. be on sort of watch list. we don't want to go that far. but we have to ask those sorts of questions. i think for me, we have to pay attention to the authorities that law enforcement and intelligence folks have, the resources they have because part of the reasons they close investigations they have to use those resources for a higher priority. and it's really important to tarnish isis' reputation by defeating them there and combating their ideology, so it is harder for these people who may have grievances oranger to plug into this ideology and
think they are accomplishing something great. that has to be on our radar screen as well. reporter: you mentioned that resources may have been needed elsewhere. mr. thornberry: i don't know that. the f.b.i. are going to go back and look at that. my point is, there are a number of people who have traveled back and forth to iraq and syria. in addition to that there are americans who are radicalizing on the internet. there are so many resources that law enforcement has and that's a big challenge. reporter: are they looking into the shooter's sexual orientation? mr. thornberry: sure, everything that motivated this guy and past behavior. [inaudible] >> not while i was there.
>> you had a meeting yesterday and come up with new legislation? mr. thornberry: it's possible. the house has passed a number of things in this area. i would say that the better way rollout that house republicans offered last week contained some proposals in this area, but of course, as we go to learn more details about this incident, as things are learned, there may well be additional steps, additional legislation that we take. now, i will be parochial and say one of the best things he we can do is pass the bill that provides authority for our military to defeat isis over there and takes this image down a notch or two that is attracting people. [inaudible]
mr. thornberry: they were just reporting where they are in the investigation. it's still early. reporter: was it partisan at all? mr. thornberry: some people ask long-winded questions. obviously, the whole background check issues. there were questions. reporter: are republicans looking at that issue? mr. schiff: there was an issue if someone has been watch listed and then moved off the watch list should nonetheless be the subject of a flag when they seek to purchase a weapon such that the f.b.i. could consider a
reopening of the investigation. i asked the director if that would require a legal change, something that could be done as a policy matter by the department. that i think is a question he was not able to answer without doing further legal research. it is a question that many members have been asking and something we are going to look into. there are certainly some process issues that need to be considered. but nonetheless given some of the radical statements that have been reported in the past, the purchase of that kind of weapon at least for many of us would have set off an alarm bell. reporter: have you received any type of legislative response from congress? mr. schiff: they haven't asked for a legislative response and
they want to steer clear of making legislative recommendations. they were mostly briefing us on the facts of the investigation. we learned a lot more about the we learned more about the hours leading up to the attacks. we know there are a lot of unanswered questions about what was driving him to commit this savage act. >> this is an issue of terrorism or gun control? foremost,f: first and it is a terrorist act and an act of hate. there is an element in any mass shooting, whether it's motivated by terrorism or someone coming into a school to shoot a bunch of kids,, where the ability to make it more difficult for a shooter to kill vast number of the people in a short order, is a step we ought to take.
we should not exclude that merely because it is a terrorism case. we are spending billions, of dollars on intelligence spending, troops into harm's way. we are developing better collisions between the community and law enforcement and the muslim community to get more information about those who are radicalized. why wouldn't we consider additional measures to make these attacks less lethal? i have to go vote. thank you very much. representative nydia velazquez of new york reads the names of the 49 victims killed at the orlando nightclub. rep. velazquez: stanley almodovar the third. amanda alvear. antonio davon brown.
tomlinson. torres.enitez we will never forget. loss,ile we mourn your your memory will inspire us to fight for change. i yield back. >> coming up tonight on c-span, the house homeland security committee looks at visitors overstaying their visas and calls for new visa entry and tracking exit system. the latest on the must shooting in orlando -- mass shooting in a window, and updates from lawmakers. remarks from president obama after meeting with his national security council. updates from attorney general loretta lynch and democratic and. republican lawmakers.
♪ >> c-span"s "washington journal" live every day with policy issues that impact you. coming up wednesday morning, ranking democrat congressman any thompson of mississippi will discuss threats to the u.s. homeland in light of sunday's mass shooting in orlando, florida. virginia republican covers meant rob wittman on efforts to combat isis overseas, and whether the military is prepared should the current tactics be changed. representative jackie spear will discuss the latest on the mass shootings and what lawmakers learned from tuesday's closed-door briefing with national security officials. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal." join the discussion. wednesday, a house committee meets to vote on censuring john
koskinen in the irs targeting investigation. watch live at nine clock a.m. eastern on c-span three. testifying but the administration's efforts to establish a community effort in that country. live from the senate foreign relations committee in 2:15 eastern, also on c-span3. that 50 is notay the new 30, and 50 is the new 50. and it looks good, and it's ok. people are to own their age. we ought not to talk about being over 50 as a period of decline. >> on q&a, aarp ceo talks about the health and financial challenges older americans face, and what aarp is doing to assist them. she is the author of the book "disrupt agent: path to live
your life at. any age" >> people over the age of any five. the second is-=- when these programs were put in place, life expectancy was 68 years old. not only are there more people in the system, but they are living longer. we have to be able to look at these programs and make meaningful adjustments that are going to be -- going to allow people to live with dignity at a much longer period of time. >> on c-span's q&a. >> in this morning's washington post, this headline citing coverage "trump revoking washington post credentials. the move is the newspaper on a long list of media outlets the presumptive nominee has banned for reporting that displeased him. margaret sullivan says, does it matter? not in the way you
think. she is joining us from the post newsroom. thanks for being with us. margaret: you're welcome. host: explain your response to this development. margaret: it's a disturbing one. it seems to suggest that donald trump doesn't have the basic respect for press rights that he would hope and expect that a leading candidate for president would have. the post editor called it nothing less than a repudiation of the role of a free and independent press. i think he is right about that. host: can you give us a sense of what happened yesterday that displeased donald trump, and how the company campaign -- the tru mp campaign forced the post to either change the headline, or kill the story? margaret: my understanding is that that is not what happened. post editors look at the headline, which they believed
went a little too far, and changed the headline. marty baron said publicly that it wasn't -- that the headline change was not a result of the trump campaign reaching out. host: let's take a step back. what was the story all about? margaret: donald trump gave an interview to fox news after the orlando massacre. and said that president obama wasn't tough enough and wasn't smart enough, and there was something else going on. this andost road about said that he seemed to be suggesting that -- that trump seemed to be suggesting that president obama was tied to the shooting in some way. or was complicit in some way. his remarks did seem to suggest that, or at least create some vague suspicion. reaction to that story
or revoked the post's press credentials. i don't think it was just about that story. he has been unhappy with the post's coverage of trump university, the veterans contributions, and other ways in which the post has been pretty strong and aggressive in its coverage. host: in fact, calling the post "phony and dishonest." margaret: that means, for our reporters, they won't be able to attend trump's rallies. at this point, we don't know whether it goes beyond that. does it mean that he's not going to talk to the post at all? with the national
political correspondent this morning. she says that is untested at this point. it is certainly not helpful to coverage, to not be able to attend rallies. but it's a much more serious thing if the access is cut off altogether. host: and your essay is available online at washington post.com. did you get any reaction from the trunk campaign in the last 24 hours? margaret: i reached out to the communications director. i had a bit of e-mail traffic with our and said that i like to speak to donald trump, and understand exactly what he thinks the role of the press in society. and get him to explain more about why he did this. she said she'd get back to me, but i haven't heard from her. host: has this ever happened, in your memory, with a major consumptive party nominee? margaret: it is not. i don't think there is any president for it. -- any precedent for it.
host: to put it in your words, you're in good company -- politico, the des moines register, the huffington post, all banned from trump events. margaret: it's getting to be a big club. it is disturbing. many of them are major news outlets. and certainly, the post is one of the most important national and political reporting outlets. it's a big deal. host: the washington post has a team of reporters looking into donald trump's business dealings and life. do you think that in any way has anything to do with his decision yesterday? margaret: i don't know whether it had anything to do with his decision yesterday. but he has expressed his displeasure about this team. although i know he is also cooperated and given interviews. host: since you bring it up in your essay, your reference to bob woodward, richard nixon, and the washington post's role in
the watergate investigation, are there any parallels? margaret: that is right. i spoke with bob woodward, one of the 2 watergate reporters this morning. i talked to him a little bit about how the nixon white house retaliated against those stories. howshe talks to me about there was an effort to push back but that it took a strange form at first in just cutting off the access of a society reporter to white house parties. but then eventually it got to be a much more serious thing. host: margaret sullivan, what is the biggest thing, if there is, inside the washington post newsroom? margaret: i think the tone was set by marty baron yesterday when he said that the post will continue doing aggressive, honest, honorable reporting. that seems to be the feeling going forward, not -- there is no sense at the paper is somehow cowed by this.
rather, it is a disturbing development because of what it says. but i don't think it's going to keep the post from doing great work. host: the headline "does it matter that donald trump has banned us? not in a way that you would think." margaret sullivan, columnist for the washington post. thanks for your time. margaret: thanks so much. pledge 72ecretary, we of our delegate votes to the next president of the united states. [applause] ♪
>> now we are hearing on security risks posed by individuals that overstate their visa. the host homeland-- homeland security, and immigration enforcement. 45 minutes.hour and >> the committee on homeland security, subcommittee on border and maritime security welcome to order. we are meeting to examine dhs' entry, exit, and visa overstate effort. before we begin i would ask we observe a moment of silence for those killed and wounded in the terror attack in orlando.
thank you. our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and families of this terrible tragedy. i recognize myself for an opening statement. border security naturally evokes images of the hot arizona desert, dusty border roads, agents in green, fencing, and camera towers. a broader view recognizes that there is more than just security along the southwest border to consider. time again, terrorists have exploited the visa system by legally entering america. the 9/11 commission put it this way, "for terrorists, travel documents are as important as weapons." commission's focused is not surprising. since the 1993 world trade center bombing, terrorist have abused the hospitality of the american peopleto conduct attacks at home. thegyptian convicted of 1993 world trade center bombing worked illegally in the u.s. as a cab driver after his truth visa had expired.at least
4 of the 9/11 hijackers overstayed their visas. or were out of status. a missed opportunity to disrupt the attacks that killed nearly 3000 americans. among the most important weaknesses, the attackers exploited was the poorest outer ring of border security. the hijackers passed through the u.s. border security, a combined total of 68 times without arousing discussion. a suicide attack was taken out on the u.s. capitol in 2012. the suspected in the country since 1999 on a tourist visa but never left,. another man arrested in the aftermath of the boston marathon bombings, who helped destroy evidence, was able to return to the u.s. despite being out of status on his student visa. clearly, visa security is an important element of keeping the homeland security. to put the national security risk in perspective, a widely cited 2006 pew hispanic center study indicated as many as 40%
of all illegal aliens do not cross the desert in arizona, california, or texas, but come through the front door at our land, sea and ports of entry with permission, that overstate their welcome. earlier this year, we released a overstate report demonstrating the visa overstate problem may be much worse than previously thought. in fiscal year 2015, fewer people were apprehended by the u.s. border patrol van overstayed their visas. and are suspected to still be staying in the country, making the estimate closer to 68% of those illegally in the u.s. we have a graphic up there. a little bit of math-- oh, where did it go? it was up there -- to show what we are talking about. if you think about a 54% effective rate. 223,000 got aways, but visa
overstays, 483,000. the unlawful presence is up to 700-5000, just based on these two numbers. that actually calculates as 60% 68% onul presence --as lawful present -- unlawful presence. it is only as good as the assumptions. the point is, we spend a lot of time focusing on the southern border, as we should, but there is another problem here. we have unlawful presence from the visa overstays. that is what we are focusing on today. i'm concerned there are unidentified public safety risks in a population that large. which has historically been the primary means for terrorist entry to the u.s. in order to tackle the challenge, the government has to identify those who overstate their visa in the first place. a mandate to track exits from the country has been in place for more than 20 years. a mandate for a diametrically
based exit system has been a requirement for 12 years. since 2003, we made substantial progress, adding biometrics to the entry progress. we take finger prints and photographs of most visitors entering on a visa. we have made only marginal progress when it comes to biometric exit.there had been a series of exit tsojects at nations air por over the last 10 years. no plan has been amended for a biometric to the ability. we are engaged in a series of operational experience, such as the use of mobile devices with biometric readers designed to support a future biometric system. until recently, the political will to make biometric exit a priority was missing. thankfully, it appears that a permit is turning this corner. secretary johnson is committed to a 2018 rollout of a biometric exit system at the nation's
highest volume airports. an ambitious timeline, but long-overdue. congress has provided a steady funding stream in the form of new fees that will enable cdp to bring this system online. putting a biometric exit system in place as the 9/11 commission noted, "an essential investment international security." because of that system, visa holders can overstay their visas and disappear into the u.s., just as four of the 9/11 hijackers were able to do. once they identify overstays, we must dedicate resources to properly remove those from the country illegally. otherwise we put our citizens at risk on it necessarily. yet even as we dedicate resources to pursue this small subset of overstays, up to 25% of this group has already departed the u.s. after special agents conducted full field ime chasing tails.
adding a reliable exit system allows our national security professionals to focus efforts on preventing terrorist attacks. doing so mitigates the chance that visitors can stay beyond their admission, and reduces the terrorist threat in the process. the american people need answers to these simple questions. how many overstays are out there? and can immigration and customs enforcement quickly identify and remove these overstays to mitigate national security risks? i look forward to receiving answers to these questions and look forward to addressing the challenges of these overstates. the jump in for an opening statement. >> i thank chairman mcsorley for holding a hearing on the national security risks posed by visa overstays. i want to express my some of these to the families of those lost in the attack in orlando. my prayers are with those injured in the tragedy. i expect to learn more about the national security implications of this attack at a house when
wideing -- at a house briefing later today. i hope we can touch briefly on the role of the department and its components related to this incident. i am pleased we are addressing the overstay issue. while congress has in recent years paid a great deal of attention to securing our southern border, less attention has been focused on successfully addressing these overstays. the approximately 527,000 individuals who overstate in fiscal year 2015 is a far greater number than the 331,000 individuals apprehended along the u.s.-mexico border, illustrating the scope of the overstay problem. as a member of congress represented a district along the southern border ,i understand the challenges related to deploying a biometric exit system in ports of entry. our airports and seaports were not built for exit controls, nor were our land borders.
overcoming these in for structure and technology challenges is an integral part of dh's task. i look forward to hearing from eyewitnesses about what progress dhs has made toward addressing these challenges, as well as what their plans are for fulfilling the secretary's commitment to begin deploying biometric exit at airports by 2018. i hope to hear about how the department plans to address biometric exit at our land borders, particularly mexico. unlike canada, mexico currently does not have the entry infrastructure, technology, and processes necessary to share traveler information with the u.s. whatever the ultimate solution, dhs must ensure it does not slow legitimate travel and trade so important to communities like those that i represent. i hope to hear from ice how it prioritizes individuals that overstate and may pose a public
safety threat. with limited resources, we must first address those who may do us harm. deploying a metric exit at ports of entry and addressing overstays is no easy task. but it is a necessary part of ensuring meaningful border security. i thank the witnesses for joining us and yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. other members are reminded opening statements may be cemented for the record. we are joined by 4 distinguished witnesses. the dividend assistant director for field operations.mr. wagner served as director of passenger programs, with the possibility for all traveler admissibility programs, including the trusted traveler program, the electronic authorization, immigration advisory program, and fraudulent document analysis unit.
in 2013-- he has served at ice headquarters since 2010. burriesci is department of homeland security assistant secretary. she has screened the visa waiver program. before joining dhs, she worked in the private sector, focusing on identity management programs and federal personnel identity verification credentials. the acting deputy director for the promotional insecurity. as deputy director, he manages the technical direction of the apex engine program, and guides business community outreach initiatives. mr. burns was previously the
director for air entry engineering project for 2013 to 2014. he led a partnership with the u.s. customs and border protection to enhance air and exit processes by implement an technologies for use in airports. writteness' full statements will appear in the record. the chernow recognizes mr. wagner for five minutes. >> distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss borders reductions process and incorporating biometrics into her exit operations. as it pertains to identifying travelers who may have overstayed their period of admission. since assuming the responsibility for the dhs entry exit policy in 2013, we have actively move forward on several initiatives. i like to begin by briefly discussing how we collect current arrival and departure data from foreign visitors. environment,d sea
we require that manifests require biographic information on all passengers, which are run against numerous law enforcement databases. if necessary, address any potential risks as far advance of travel as possible. when that traveler arrives in the u.s., they present their passport to the officer, who confirms the validity of the document, the accuracy of the manifest, and for foreign nationals, fingerprints are collected, and a digital photograph is collected. if traveler has a visa, we compare those finger prints against those collected at the embassy. if they are traveling under the visa waiver program, instead of 10 fingerprints, we compare them against the previous visit. the cbp officer reviews all the results of the pre-arrival biographic vetting to make sure there are no previous violations or risk factors determined, whether we needed further inspection.
we interview the traveler to determine the purpose and intent of travel. we then stamp the passport and right the period -- write the period when that same person leaves, we receive biographic information. this allows us to create a departure record. it is through this exit process that we apprehended the times square bomber. arrested 379p passengers as a result of the manifest provided by the carriers. we use this information to generate overstay lists on a daily basis. determining status can be more complicated then matching entry and exit data. a person may receive a six-month then receive an
extension. need to bests carefully correlated against other lists. they are run through our automated targeting system. tot information is provided ice for appropriate action. this articulates the foundation for biometrics into the exit aspect. are usingation we today is actionable. it can be enhanced with departure toon validate and confirm the information we are acting on. the challenge is not so much the technology as the infrastructure. points of entry were not designed to have departure control. there is no designated space for a control.
where the biometric space takes is critical. this would not provide assurances the person boarded the plane and left. defaulting top the data which is the same as today. we have launched several pilots mentioned earlier. facial comparison. pedestrian piloting. -- testing the ability of our systems to compare facial images of travellers departing in the united states against previously provided images by the travellers. this is done in an automated fashion without impacting airport operations. this is the logical next step in building honor previous pilots focused on the collection and
matching front end efforts. this is integrating this data into the back end systems. we can incorporate this into the existing processes. the analysis will provide the final set of specifications and requirements for the biometric exit procurement to be released in early 2017 to provide the best technologies that meet mission needs for the exit system. biometrics could provide data verification. we'll continue close collaboration with the department and ice in the development and implementation of the biometric exit concepts and continue to work with the private industry partners including airlines and airports who are essential in the deployment and development of the solutions. thank you for the opportunity to appear today. i would be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. the chair recognizes mr. healey.
>> good morning, distinguished members. thank you for the opportunity to discuss ice's role in over stay enforcement and how we would benefit from the biometric exit . for 30 years i have spent my career in federal law enforcement and i recognize that visa overstay enforcement is an important issue for the subcommittee. i would like i would like to outline my agency's involvement as a recipient of information collected by my dhs colleagues represented here today in how we use the information. ice homeland security investigations or hsi through the counter terrorism and criminal exploitation unit is dedicated to initiating enforcement action on priority overstay violators. the mission is accomplished in close coordination with cvp and our primary objective is to vet the system generated leads we receive in order to identify true over stay violators for appropriate enforcement action.
ice uses special agents, analysts and systems to specifically address nonimmigrant overstays who may pose a national security and public safety concern. in fiscal year 2015, our agents and analysts devoted approximately 650,000 investigative hours on overstay in enforcement. in fiscal year 2015, the counter terrorism and criminal exploitation unit received approximately 971,000 system generated potential overstay leads received from entry exit international student databases and other government systems. the system generated leads are created using biographical and travel data stored in the arrival and departure information system. the system allows dhs to identify nonimmigrants who have remained in the united states beyond periods of admission or violated visas. once the leads are received, ice
conducts automated and manual searches against additional government databases, social media, public records to determine if a potential overstay has departed the united states, has adjusted to a lawful status or requires further review in which case a lead will be sent out to a field office. additionally ice prioritizes overstay leads through risk based analysis, a targeting framework consisting of ten tiers was developed in close consultation with the intelligence and law enforcement communities to ensure our national security and public safety concerns are prioritized . to accomplish this we meet regularly with interagency partners to ensure our targeting methodologies are in line with current and existing u.s. government threat information, trends and priertds. -- priorities. to better manage investigative resources the counter terrorism and criminal exploitation unit not only relies on the
previously discussed prioritization framework but also incorporates focused enforcement and removal operations on individuals who are threats to national security, border security, public safety or who are convicted of significant criminal offenses. of the leads analyzed in fiscal year 2015, approximately 1% or roughly 10,000 leads were determined to potentially pose a national security or public safety concern. fortunately with further investigation ice is able to determine that even many of these leads were not, in fact, high risk. however all of the leads were sent to hsi field offices for further up investigation. of the 10,000 field referrals or 10,000 investigations sent out to the field, our offices have approximately 3,000 investigations still ongoing and roughly 4,000 of those investigations have been closed
because even after the initial vetting it was determined those individuals were in compliance. the remaining leads are in continuous monitoring. more importantly, as a result of the 10,000 investigations, we made over 1900 arrests of which 139 were criminal arrests and secured 86 indictments and 80 convictions. in conclusion, ice will continue to work alongside our partners within dhs in pursuing visa over stays who violate the terms of their admission. theimplementation of willtric exit system improve the efficiency and effectiveness in identifying and removing visa overstay violators. thank you again for the opportunity to be here. i look forward to taking your questions.
>> thank you. the chair recognizes ms. parise for five minutes. >> before i begin i would like to express my sincere condolences for the people of orlando who lost a friend or family member this i weekend and i appreciate the moment of silence earlier. thank you distinguished members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to appear here today to discuss dhs's progress to support border security and immigration enforcement i missions. i am the deputy assistant secretary, part of the dhs office of policy. the screening coordination office is charged with developing cross departmental policy for the screening and vetting of people with advising the assistant secretary of the policy. the screening coordination office collaborates with the interagency partners to develop screening policies that involve multiple departments. this whole of government approach to screening involves decisions about how to share information and interact with one another across the government.
i am here with my colleagues today to discuss over stays and biometric exit. on january 19, 2016 dhs released the entry exit overstay report for fiscal year 2015. the first such report in a this generation. this provides information on the number of individuals in the country who over stayed their period of admission presented by country. the report covers 87% of all nonimmigrant travellers coming to the united states by air and sea. it reflects that 99% of these nonimmigrant travellers depart within their period of admission. at the time the report was issued, 416,000 of these individuals were suspected of remaining in the united states as an overstay. since the report was issued the number dropped to below 355,000 individuals. while the report represents a tremendous step forward dhs recognizes it doesn't answer all of the questions. you have heard dhs officials in leaf in the past dhs identified
, quality errors in historic data that while now fixed prevents us from being able to retroactively produce reports for prior fiscal years. that said and for transparency, dhs provided numbers in the appendix of the report. as the report states, the ability to estimate overstay rate is dependent upon the completeness and accuracy of arrival and departure records. during the fy-14 data dhs identified discrepancies from certain air carriers which resulted in artificially elevated rates. these data quality issues have been resolved for tourism it is travellers. the tables are an accurate for these over categories. over the past two years dhs has made progress in terms of its ability to accurately report data on overseas. dhs anticipates we will broaden the scope of future words with
the emphasis on student visas. dhs submitted the comprehensive biometric entry and exit plan to congress april 20, 2016. over the last decade with the support of congress, dhs through the combined efforts of cvp, ice and mpdd's office of biometric identity management enhanced the capability to record arrivals and departures within the united states. cvp is the agent for operationalizing a comprehensive entry and exit system with biometrics building off the current biographic system that exists today. secretary johnson directed cvp to redouble efforts to achieve a biometric entry and exit system and implement at the highest volume airports in 2018. while it takes time, effort and innovation, dhs believes it put forward a responsible and thoughtful approach to achieve a sustainable solution. this solution recognizes one
technology may not be suitable for each land, air and sea that environment and that one that one process may not be appropriate for all our environments. our over arching goal is a fully integrated scaleable and sustainable exit entry enterprise including biometrics. with the ongoing support of congress most recently dmon emonstrated in the appropriations act of 2016 dhs will continue to advance a biometric exit system that can be integrated into the current screening architecture. thank you for the support. we will provide updates to congress well past this hearing. thank you. >> thank you. the chair recognizes mr. burns. >> good morning. thank you for this opportunity to testify along with my colleagues today from the office of policy, customs and border protection and immigration and customs enforcement with whom we work closely. the mission of the science and technology directorate is.
insights andver solutions for the critical needs of the homeland security enterprise. we work closely with the operating components like icvp and oversight offices including the office of policy to address the gaps in operational capabilities and invest in efforts that will result in products to close the gaps. 2012, cvp as for efforts to -- in response, the created the apex air entry which is composed of several vital parts. apex projects are key protects in close to achieve improved capabilities. with respect to air entry and our goal is to help
evaluate technologies and concepts of radiations to verify the arrival and departure of foreign nationals from u.s. to airports. to determine candidate technologies, air conducted a comprehensive survey of commercially available standard space fingerprint iris and facial recognition technologies. we work closely with experts from the national institutes for standard and technology to solicit assistance and analyze results. additionally we additionally we had interagency and international expertise from the dhs office of biometric management, the department the department of defense, federal bureau of investigation, department of state and foreign government partners. we identified matching algorithms for testing in the maryland test facility. which many visited over the past two years. we evaluated cost, speed and operational footprint. those that performed well were selected or scenario-based testing.
since june, 2014 air has a diverse group of volunteers from 50 countries of origin for our testing and we have simulated actual environmental conditions. to inform concepts of operation and scenario based testing and collect data in support of cvp cost analysis, we send teams into the field to observe current airport operations. this entailed close cooperation with field staff and airport and airline stake holders. air facilitated working sessions with frontline officers to solicit operational insights and technicalir project's road map. we engaged industry groups including airlines for america, airport council international north america, international air transport association and the association of american airport executives to gain an understanding of the direct and indirect economic impacts of various biometric exit concepts of operation in the airport we
environment. we regularly invited airline, airport and biometric groups to the maryland test facility and hosted webinars to keep stake holders updated and solicit feedback. through the air project we have gained an understanding of the state of the art technologies and how they interact with passengers and might fit into various concepts of operation. with simulated testing of the biometric exit technology complete cvp has taken responsibility for the pilots. apex air's products will inform the path forward to the program. as we move into 2017 they will continue to assist in data analysis for the upcoming phases as needed and will invest in additional work should the need arise. this transition of air exit work, the apex air project will end this year. we will share high level results and less sons learned with partners including the
transportation security s administration. s & t will work with cvp's office of field operations to reengineer the entry process. this work is important not only to implementing a full entry and exit process but helping cvp in international travel. leveraging emerging and mobile technologies, we'll explore ways to build upon and further secure valuable programs like mobile passport control, global entry and countering and measuring. technology is an essential ingredient of border security. s & t will collaborate with our components and partners to bring technology to operational use and help enhance border security. i thank the committee for the opportunity to testify on this important subject. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. i recognize myself for five minutes for questions. i want to make sure we understand the scope of the challenge and the numbers. your visa over stay report for fy-15 indicated 482,000
overstays has been whittled down to 355,000. i know you understand this. for the record that was just for air and sea. also just in b-1 and b-2 we are categories. we are missing the rest of the categories arriving by air and all sea. all over land arrivals and departures. is that correct? >> yes. >> if we were to explapolate about the 1% rate of over stays what would the number be if we say 1% of the additional people not measured what are we talking about here? >> we'll have the numbers on the canadian border in the next it's t report. it's tough to it's tough to est -- it is tough to estimate. >> we measured how many visitors
about total? >> 382 million passengers last year total. 250 million across the land border. 112 million air and sea. >> if we can extrapolate the same rate to total visitors i'm trying to understand what we think the magnitude of the overstay might be. does that make sense, if we extrapolate the 1% rate. >> yes. let us get the numbers for you. >> great. mr. healey, i am concerned. these numbers are pretty large. we have known 482,000 but probably more. we have gone through the process of how to whittle that down with the resources to identify who are high risk. i have questions. you mentioned you test it against several databases. in your testimony it talks about viewing social media and other means. are these not tests that are done prior to issuing someone a visa and are the things you are finding to identify somebody high risk, they are here for 90 days.
they have committed a crime just in those 90 days? and i'm particularly interested in social media. the committee has been concerned about use of social media for vetting people prior to issuing a visa. i want to know what we are doing with social media after the fact to identify high risk over stayers. >> as you are aware, secretary johnson did direct that a social media task force be created within the department. the department is about to transition into a dhs social media center of excellence which will be housed and hosted by cvp which we'll be a part of. in answer to the first part of the question, on a limited basis, we do utilize social media in a visa security program for individuals coming into the u.s. we do we do not utilize social media to review every application. >> i'm familiar with that. i'm talking about whittling down 480,000. >> yes, ma'am. getting to the overstay population, my numbers are larger than the 480,000. my numbers include everything
received coming out of ada so that also includes students, all visa the categories. the first thing we do is check to confirm whether or not those individuals have departed again. will go back to adis. we'll also check with cis to see if they have attempted to we'll get benefits. we'll reach out to the intelligence community, be more than happy in a detailed briefing to give you background. we reach out to the intelligence community. after those decisions are made, we continue our vetting process by prioritizing the names can use in have criteria we coordination with the intelligence committee and law enforcement. we'll put we'll put the names within certain categories and rely on analysts to manually vet those names. if we are able to establish some type of derogatory information, able to establish the location
, then we'll continue to prioritize as we go down the line. when we get to the point where the leads are ready to be sent out to the field. we in turn, sometimes we'll use social media if we don't have the opportunity to locate the individual. we want to enhance our ability to find that person. than those leads will go out to the field. once once in the field again 40% of the leads we sent out of the 10,000, ma'am. it was determined that individuals were in compliance. they had already either departed or had applied for and received cis benefits. the remaining individuals we will proceed whether it be a , criminal-type investigation or an administrative removal. >> what is the average time frame for the process that you mentioned? somebody is here for 90 days. they have overstayed the visa and now you are whittling down the numbers. are we talking days, weeks, months? >> it could be a month, couple of months, ma'am. once the information -- the
manual vetting process to go through these, forget the automated batch reviews that we do. analysts have to go through this information. because from our perspective it can't go into the field unless we know it is a real individual and we know where the individual is located. it can take a little bit of time. again, again, ma'am, these are all just b-1's, b-2's. >> great. it was previously it was previously reported to me that about 3% of the resources are used on these types of investigations, visa overstays. is that an accurate percentage? >> i have to get back to you. last year, total total within , we spent 650,000 hours on visa overstay enforcement. i have i have a unit and this is all they do in coordination. >> how many people are in the unit. >> i have to get back to you, i would ma'am. i would say well over a hundred.
>> okay. my time is expired. ms. torres from california. >> thank you. what are the different challenges of implementing an entry and exit system on the northern border versus implementing that similar technology at our southern border. in a follow up from that for ms. burish? once he answers, can you please follow up and discuss the training process of how we intend to bring up to date the agents working at both borders. >> at the land borders, unlike on the in bound traffic we don't have facilities in ports of entry constructed to be able to
stop traffic and confirm somebody's departure. that's common on both borders. places where they collect a toll to cross a bridge there is some natural stop and go which we can conduct some operations in. if it is a highway that goes across they don't stop until they hit the canadian or mexican inbound facility. the canadian government does record the arrival by graphically into canada. the have worked out an arrangement where we have worked out the data. on the mexican border the government doesn't collect that type of information. some of the discussions we'd have with them is there a possibility to help them build the infrastructure to do that and have a similar oh type of exchange. when we focus on the biometrics, none of the countries have the ability to collect the
biometrics from passengers in a vehicle that's moving or stop ping. there is the extra challenge of finding technology can work and look inside of a passenger vehicle or a bus with 50 people aboard to achieve those biometric short of getting everyone out and lighting up to collect it. i think i think looking at the numbers of non u.s., nonmexican, noncanadian citizens crossing the land borders, the numbers are low. if we look at the numbers, visa waiver travellers they are low crossing the land borders. we are looking at efforts and what programs can build to start with those populations first and start to move out doing this. it will be a little bit of a manual-type process until the technology emerges to do that. >> okay. can you talk about the training process of bringing agents up to date on training biometrics? timeline, time frame as to what that will take?
and can you also touch on the infrastructure that the canadian has versus what we have and how the two compare? >> the office of policy doesn't direct training for officers. i will defer those questions to cvp. >> this was on the training of the biometrics. i'm sorry? the officers go through an there is academy. there is ongoing training erts fforts on current trends. >> i'm not talking new hires but the people that are already there and we have a new system coming up. >> right. we will embark on a training regimen to teach them the new systems, with the policies are, technical requirements on how to operate the systems and what the trends are with what we are seeing and trying to accomplish as far as fraudulent documents, counterfeit. >> is that eight hour program, two weeks, six months?
what does it look like? >> it depends on the type of technology we are delivering and how complex or new it is to the office. it might be as simple as a four-hour training. if it is something brand-new and a new approach with policy implications it may be a full day, two days or a week. it all depends. >> what are you looking at planning-wise for personnel that would be taken out of the field to do that type of training? >> for which -- >> we are talking about implementing a biometric program but you are telling me we have no answers as to how we plan to implement and train the folks that would be utilizing the program, budgets you would need to implement it. >> right. when we make the final determination on how the technology will operate, there will be a personnel cost on
getting officers to work the equipment. and then respond to the information the equipment will provide. if we have a mismatch on a biometric of someone departing the u.s. an officer has to respond. respond. if we have a case where the law enforcement action, the law enforcement officer will have to respond. >> thank you, i am out of time. >> the gentleman from pennsylvania has a limited amount time you recognize out of order for five minutes. >> what happened this weekend in orlando was tragic. my prayers are with the victims and their families and brave law-enforcement officers on the front lines in this fight. this attack is at the very least inspired by radical islamic terrorism. demonstrating that isis is at war with us and want to attack our western values. one way they will do this is through our visa programs.
.his threat is not new congress first mandated the establishment of the fully functional entry exit system in the illegal immigration reform and responsibility act of 1996. the 9/11 commission taught us that, to terrorists, travel documents are just as important as weapons. that is the preferred method of entry to our country for terrorists. come here legally and disappear into the heartland. according to the 9/11 commission , august and september of 2001 -- in conducting a search for two of the 9/11 hijackers in the united states on expired visas. point i have consistently raised since joining this committee.
where --e terrorists with the 1993 world trade center whenngs received amnesty cover has an immigration reform passed in 1986. he was a cabdriver claimed to be a seasonal agricultural worker. the only thing he planted in america was a bomb. into the support, congress followed the recommendations of the 9/11 commission and required the use of biometric technology by passing the intelligence prevention act. our government has not implement the exit component. i believe it should be a priority to address this loophole. we should know in real time when a foreign national has left our country. came onwhen i first this committee we were talking about roughly 40% of illegal aliens being present in our country because of their overstayed visas, yet the
department's own incomplete data shows that in the fiscal year 2015, 483 individuals overstayed their visas while 337,000 were caught by the southern border. more people overstayed their visa then were caught illegally crossing the southern border. mr. wagner and mr. healy, we have always assumed about 40% of the people in the united states illegally overstayed their visas. can we now say that is a gross understatement of the overstayed problem? were you surprised to find more individuals overstayed their visas that were apprehended crossing the southwest border? >> if we look at the visa population, 1% overstay their visa, all the travelers -- >> you are counting people who come in multiple times. >> these are individuals that
overstayed their period of admission on a visa. we calculated it at -- for the , 1.74 overstayed. i don't think you can draw a comparison to the people crossing the lamb border in between the ports of entry -- the land border in between the ports of entry. i don't understand the comparison that is being made between those numbers. ofut one to 2% -- 1% to 2% people who overstay their visas but not sure i understand the correlation. >> are you surprised more people understood -- overstayed their visas then cross the border illegally? >> i was not surprised by these numbers. >> i'm not surprised by the numbers either serve. we received the information and wanted to let you know we are as committed to trying to track
thesend trying to vet numbers for public security -- national security and public safety purposes. we follow them to where they take us. >> i know my time is running out. i have introduced legislation to ourkes a simple tweak laws. if someone illegally crosses the southern border there unlawfully present in the united states and if someone crosses and comes in on a visa and overstays, the term as they are unlawfully present in the united states. yet the penalty is very different even though both people in this situation have the same legal status. unlawfully present. their status is the same. unlawful border crossing is a crime while overstaying your visa is a civil offense. doesn't make sense that the penalty is different and why does it not make sense for the
penalty this be the same for both? >> the chair recognizes mr. smith from texas for five minutes. smith: i did not know if you're giving more time or not. , let me direct my first questions to you. i have particular interest in the subject of overstay her's. i introduced a law -- i introduced the bill that has not been fully implemented. year i think the administration deported about ers. visa overstay her' the fewest of any year in this administration? let me to you what the figures are and ask you
the question again. this administration removed 10,400 and 2011, 1600 to 12. 2500 in 2015. the fewest number ever deported by this administration in one year. i would like to go to the overall figure. we heard estimates as to the percentage of people in the country here illegally being overstayers. let's take 10 million people in the country illegally, half are here because they are in illegal status. 5 million people now in illegal status because they are visa .ver stayers one 20th of 1%. that sounds to me like an extension of the administration's amnesty program.
why are you not prioritizing these individuals? 2500, the fewest of any year under this administration. 11 20th of 1%. is this part of their amnesty efforts? >> from my perspective when you took a look at the removals process, when we look at cases that we for and individuals that have gone into proceedings and you look at removals for adhere -- for that year, the removals .rocess can be lengthy if we grab someone today they might not necessarily be removed anytime soon. in terms of our prioritization, utilize our prioritization scheme along with resources we have. >> i understand that but the administration's stance, why have they not requested more money in their budget if they want to send more individuals home? they have not requested the
money sufficiently to do so. how many investigations were conducted last year? >> specific to 2015 we sent out 10,000. >> 10,000 individuals whose identity you knew, whose location you knew, but you did not consider it to be a priority because they yet been convicted of serious crimes? >> that is not true. those investigations were sent out for field investigators to locate and try to remove these individuals. and i had one other point? if we don't have the location of an individual or if we have a teenager who might not necessarily be of age but we are .ware they are in our pool if we have a situation where we know someone has applied for a benefit that have yet to receive the benefit, all of that, plus the individuals we cannot locate the field get continually monitored. people were5,000
continuously monitored and we periodically check those against the intelligence community, against cmis, to make a determination of whether we have -- >> many thousands of those individuals could have been deported. you picked what he 500 of the many many thousand and you mentioned they applied for a benefit. an immense amount of fraud where individuals know how to game the system, apply for a benefit and they know they will not be deported. my concern with the administration's actions is that by sending so few home the message they are sending wide and far is, just get into the country if you're not convicted of a serious crime you're going to be allowed to stay. you're going to get the money. that is the wrong message to send because it increases more illegal immigration. it sends a message the ministry's and to implement
amnesty by another means. the wrong message to send if you are serious about trying to address illegal immigration in america. i will yield back. >> the chair recognizes mr. duncan from south carolina. >> we talk a lot about these overstays. visa overstays with some students in my office this morning. of allall visa overstays illegals in this country were people that overstayed their visa, people we gave a permission slip to enter this country. bottom line is, they came to this country with a permission slip and decided to stay. for whatever reason. the numbers you have here, 60%, and alarming number. we have entrusted these people with access to our country and they chose to violate the trust.
i think that is low hanging fruit for enforcement. we are not chasing a foot in the desert. -- a footprint in the desert. some biometrics according to mr. wagner. we know where a lot of them were headed, work visa or student visa. visa, why not contact the university if their visa has expired and find out if they are still enrolled? maybe they need to have their visa extended? middle get them into legal status and out of illegal status by extending their visa then we start reducing this number from 68% to a lower number and we can focus on the real problem, our poor southern border being infiltrated by elements that have nefarious ideals. whether that is drug trafficking, human trafficking are intent on doing harm to this
nation. isis has said they will infiltrate and exploit our poor southern border. take them at their word. requests tot of government agencies. i just sent a letter, several letters to the department of state asking about a white paper that was used to justify them circumventing the will of congress in the visa waiver program that we passed back in december and ways to try to get foreign nationals met visited iran or syria sudan to circumvent our processes in the will of congress negotiate with the white house even to allow those people to travel the united states. they wrote a memo to justify that. we have asked for that, i'm asking for it again from the department of state to provide what we requested to congress. ask mr. chairman perry
firearmsabout the 150 unaccounted for by the cvp. can you respond to why we have not gotten a response on this? >> i was unaware you did not receive a response yet. >> how about government agencies be responsible to the united states congress and respect our requests for information? ok. to one thing on the visa overstays. bombing, the original person of interest taken to hospital, turns out he was a visa overstay. he was supposed to go to ohio university and was over in massachusetts as a student at another university.
why didn't ohio let the u.s. government know that this german who came to the university on a student -- that this gentlemen who came to their university on a student visa was no longer enrolled there? gentlemen is not in the country anymore by the way. an exit system. right now we are checking airline manifests. if i go to japan i'm going to scan my thumb when i'm leaving, they will know i left the country. congress has mandated that system. what are we doing? >> i'm not aware that japan is doing biometrics on departure. i'm not aware of many countries doing what hundred percent biometric exit on departure. some countries have put in automated gates to speed their own citizens apart or from that country so there are some automated gates that they do allow people to use but they
also have officers and departure systems set up so it is easy to put up a gauntlet of machines to get everyone going through. we are working to deploy the biometric capability on departure. we launched a pilot yesterday. >> when do we expect the federal government to finish this project? > we will have this deployed in operational by 2018. the secretary is committed to doing this. several steps we have to take before we get there including launching this pilot which we did yesterday which will give us the final requirements for what this solution will look like. >> i appreciate you saying 2018 and i look forward you coming back to this committee and telling us this is done, we will now when people have exited the country that have entered from a foreign country. i yield back. >> chernow recognizes -- chernow recognizes mr. lee from texas.
>> chair recognizes mr. heard from texas. >> i would like to thank my colleague. recognize you have a difficult job. it has been argued that an accurate entry exit system would efforts are reducing need to review leads that turner to be false positive. could you point to the committee how leads are generated and sent to the field offices? >> yes i can. the information, the referral, is received from arrival departure information system. from there it gets plugged into
the automated targeting system cvp belongs to. this is all basically automated. we are bouncing it up to the intelligence community, a batch request. we send it over to see i s -- to cis to see how many applied for benefits and we will go back to departed inhow many the window between receipt and processing. about 971,000 number i provided you, we have already eliminated 141,000 records in that click exchange between us in cvp. we are going to wait for the response from the intelligence community. we will take appropriate action depending on how we prioritize something depending on the response. now we meet with a group of interagency intelligence community and law enforcement partners. they have giving us a tiered to prioritize individuals
in terms of u.s. security interests. -- more than happy to close in a closed setting to give you greater detail. once the information comes to us and is prioritized, i have to have analysts who have to vet all of that information. we are looking for any type of derogatory information across 22 government systems that will enable us to turn around and validate what we are doing and locate the individual. it will continue to work its way through the chain. once we get to that determination it's going to be sent out to the field office. the referral goes out as a collateral lead investigation. the field offices provided with a jacket. all the information we have. requestedoffice has to go for received. it can go democrat railroad, administrative road. -- it can go down --
>> that is helpful for the american people to understand the process you go through to identify the leads you have to follow. what a biometric exit capability reduce that amount of time because it allows you to focus on people that are actually still the country? ,> the example i would use those investigations that could send out to the field, 40% of those deemed to be in compliance. it's not efficient use of resources. if we have the appropriate system we will be able to better apply those resources towards a legitimate enforcement use instead of somebody who's ari left the country or accrued cix benefits and we can't take action on them. a backloge currently of unmatched overstay records for terrorism and public safety threats? >> in what way? thes there -- as you vetted potential leads through the intelligence community, those 22
agencies, and there was derogatory information, is there a number that you have not been able to begin an investigation on? >> some of it would be the information received. we might have a name and a date of birth. we might have john smith staying down at a hotel in disney world. depends on the individual and the information. this group, the compliance enforcement advisory panel, they are essential to assisting us in getting us the information we need quickly so we can follow up on leads. >> do you have a percentage of those folks that have been identified in one way or another as having an overstay that have -- they have derogatory information and you have a limited amount of information to conduct your investigation? >> yes, sir.
even if they leave goes out to the field and it is exhausted, meaning the agents cannot locate the individual, it circles back around and goes back into our tank and that would be inclusive of our intelligence community engagement as well. if we don't have enough to move forward, we will hold it in our -- we will a bounce those requests of other systems to update and refresh the record. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes mr. jackson lee. -- ms. jackson lee. theet me acknowledge representatives hear from the department of homeland security and add my personal appreciation to your service. we are having this hearing and it was scheduled before the
heinous and horrific terrorist attacks of this past weekend. we know every day that you are on the front lines in many of you i have engaged with on a number of issues. we also live in a nation that deals with the issues of civil liberties and civil rights and we understand security has to be responsive to that. , lete i asked my questions me make a few comments. as i look at the pew research center we know there are about 93,000 overstays it out of canada, 100 23,000 out of europe and about 42,000 out of mexico. central america. we go down with south africa -- south america -- this overstay issue is not predominant anyone area.
i believe the president's approach of focusing on those that would do us harm is the most important approach. let me add to the record that of 44.9-- a total million non-visitor emissions in the united states expected to depart -- of this number an estimated 500 27,127 individuals .verstayed that is 1.17%. today am going to say the congress has higher responsibilities right now. -- if you ared to a terrorist on a terrorist list most americans will not realize department of homeland security can only abide by the law. the fbi can only abide by the law. they cannot stop terrorists or individuals who have been buying a gun.rom
i hope we can pass that this week. that we can have that legislation passed. the bending of the assault weapons is something the secretary of homeland security has offered to provide security to the american people. that bill is ready to be passed right now. find theeve we will alleged perpetrator, now dead, that did the heinous attack on the gay community, heinous latinos, americans, dominant numbers of these o individuals were from the hispanic community. this individual was not an overstay. was the individual -- do you have any in facts that he was an overstay? that, hed to clarify was a u.s. citizen born in new york. we are here confronting an issue
that is important. the american people believe there should be rhetoric rather -- there should be regular order , i believe in conference of immigration reform. in fact, you would have a process for admission. or you would have a process for the overstays to engage in regular order. i think that is important. i want to raise one question about technology. i have supported pilot programs dealing with the technology, the biometric technology of overstays. you're much better at overstay situations in the airports or aviation than you are at the land areas as i understand it. would you share with me what you are doing science technology if you do it quickly. i have one last question on dealing with this technology that you need to better refine the issues of overstays.
for all overstays you come in legally and it expires and you don't leave. thank you. >> to follow up, it is as mr. wagner said. an application issue. biometric technology is rapidly evolving. how do we take the actual pieces of technology and build them into the operational process? is veryer situation different from the operations of the airport. we are continuing to look at all biometric to allergy -- biometric technology to make sure we can bring the proper technology to the table linking it to the operational process. i will stop as he said he wanted more time. >> i do. i am gratified for that. >> the gentle lady's time has expired. >> could i get this last question out on the record? >> i cut everybody off a little after five. if you want to submit it for the record. >> i will do that for the record
them. esther craig healy -- mr. craig healy, i would be interested in student overstays, which is somewhat difficult and whether or not we include, incorporate the institution they are supposed to be going to as an assist or a partner in determining, a reporting feature that universities have to utilize with respect to students. i would add employment as well because a lot of visas, individuals have their families without then employment, looking for employment they may be considered an overstay. >> i was going to ask about student visas in my next round so i will ask the panelists to answer concerns about the student visa process. those are not in this report just so we know. i want to note esther healy, in
your testimony you said for ctc eu's frowny one list, you listed a series of projects and initiatives and one of them is called the recurrent vetting program. let's talk about the student visa process and compliance with universities, information flow in how that works. ma'am. in terms of the student exchange and visitors program we do have on several fronts in terms of overstays, we would not treat them any differently than we would any other overstay category. in the numbers i referenced earlier, those are not only being fed in terms of submissions coming in -- in other words if the school determines a student is no longer within a program and they terminate the student, the school will report that to see bus and that will come into us. >> could you talk about the compliance rate?
nearly 100% compliance rate for passing information to you. fines?re any >> there could be. i will have to get you specifics in terms of the actual program. from our perspective, we do have a robust compliance program. psychunannounced visits. as you are aware every school is mandated that they be certified every two years. we have a robust engagement with schools. it's required that the schools are designated school -- their designated school officials report information. if there is a problem with the student they are required to report that within a 30 day period. a new program in terms of field representatives.
60 individuals geographically placed around the country. the job is to be the in between. they visit schools to make sure the information flow is continuing. in terms of your question about g, as a part ofn our prioritization process, every student that is legitimately in the united states attending school, when derogatory information comes in, it is that it against -- it is vetted against every individual student. in terms of specific compliance rates i would have to get back to you on that. >> will next year's report include visa overstay information on students as well? >> we plan to include the student visas. as well as the u.s. canada land border, non-us, non-canadian travelers. >> i want to follow up on the report, entry exit overstay report. i ask unanimous consent that it be entered into the record, the one that has been
referenced several times today. table one gives -- several countries are over 2%. testimony there is consideration to potentially using these overstay numbers to impact future inclusions in the visa waiver program. can you clarify what is being looked at related to that? overstay rates is part of something larger called the disqualification rate. that is one of the requirements for a potential country to become a member country. we do look at those overstay rates. >> in the testimony it says we are looking at -- i can find the exact page, looking at future use of this information related to visa waiver countries.
i was wondering what that meant. >> thank you for that question. as we have testified, we have been working on the reliability and accuracy of that data. as that data improves, we would use that information for making determinations on whether a country's status remains and whether their designation in the program remains or we need to take additional action. is that currently being utilized to make a determination? >> there is not a visa waiver program country that is currently over the 3% requirement. >> for the non-visa waiver countries we've got afghanistan 18%, chad,kina faso, 17%. djibouti, 17%. these are huge numbers. what is the information in this?
are you using it to decide whether countries should continue to have a certain number of nieces or trying to address the issues of noncompliance with the country? >> the department of homeland security and the state department -- the state farm and issues the visas. >> is there any -- are we continuing to issue visas to these countries that have 20% to 30% overstay rates? is there any sort of punishment or accountability? >> that might be a question better referred to the department of state. >> is there any coordination any of you can speak about from this information to the department of state? >> the department of state has the numbers that you have referenced. has the report information. >> i recognize ms. sheila jackson lee. for a moreng to ask
explicit response from mr. wagner and mr. healy on the job-related visas. any precise numbers you may have of those. i want to recite these numbers again because i think it is worthy of including in the record. 44.9 million nine immigrant visitor admissions. 527record shows estimated thousand 127 individuals overstay their visas. 1.17%. the report goes on to say in other words 98.8% of nonimmigrant visas comply with their terms of admission and departed on time and -- in fiscal year 2015. do have isolation of the numbers dealing with those who are overstays as it relates to work? we have not broken those out
yet but we will include those in the use report. this year's report included about 85% of all travelers so all the other visa classifications covers about 15% of commercial air passengers. >> i think that will be very helpful. let me get to the bottom line of what my concern is. this should all be about, as we look at how we help you do your job, and i have already said a metric of new laws under the title we have been speaking about, comprehensive immigration reform, which refines and defines, probably in a more detailed manner, what happens to overstays maybe based on the level of threat. i'm not arguing for overstays. there are persons who are in the united states unauthorized. but i think the question for the american people is the issue of security and the level of threat that these individuals represent
. mr. wagner has reinforced the public information that the terrorist for and not annt in orlando was immigrant. the individual was a citizen of the united date for new york. -- united states born in new york. i'm concerned that the department of homeland security is taken away from a major responsibility dealing with the level of threat. mr. wagner, mr. healy, you're in homeland security investigations . have you been able to assess overall the 500,000 individuals that have overstated? can we include in the report and assessment of the threat they represent which i believe is what the american people would be concerned. >> let us look at that for inclusion in the next years report. some analysis of what the
overstay population encompasses. >> i think that would be helpful. >> that is something we would have to consider and provide that information at a future date. >> let me continue that line of questioning. in your recollection -- and help me. i have served on homeland security i'm trying to just monitor mass shootings. san bernadino, it would've come to your attention, were any of those individuals -- virginia tech, an individual from the asian community. , coloradot, newtown in the theater. do any overstays come to mind in any of those mass shootings? i may not have calculated all of them. >> i can't think of any of hand.
>> we all want to do our research to make sure we are giving accurate questions. coming to your mind at this time , and i believe that if one was it would probably remain very viable. a enough for you to remember an individual because it would've come to your attention as to what kind of person perpetrated those particular incidents. not, column i was not. newtown was not. san bernadino was not. --ividuals whose status though they were immigrants as i recall. , let me sayo 9/11 that i am not ignoring that. i use the term mass shootings. 9/11 did have overstays. my question would be, after 9/11 the department of homeland security was created. do you feel you have enough
structure in place that you would have caught or been drawn to the overstays that were part of the acts of 9/11? >> i believe we would have identified them with the systems that are in place now in the measures in place now i believe so. >> can you expand on those systems without breaching coveted geology? >> one of the things we do is we take the visa database the state weartment provides us and run recurrent checks every day on that information and if someone appears on a watchlist that has a current visa one of the things we look -- we say is, have they left the country. we will provide that information to the fbi. .o the intelligence community we have ways to identify those in real time when those things happen.
>> madam chair i will yield back. mr. healy, did you want to comment on the investigation part of it? >> i was going to add that we rely heavily on our law enforcement partners to help us so i'm comfortable that they are providing good guidance for the individual's should be targeting and focusing on. >> let me thank you, madam chair. i think i want to leave my time at the microphone with the ultimate question of the threat to the people of the united states. i think any hearing we have needs to be in that context. i think the man and women -- the .en and women will for lawyer i cannot help saying that this week we must pass no-fly, no by. if you have had discussions terrorist activities or threatening comments toward the american people you cannot buy
an assault weapon or any guns of any time. i think the gentle lady for -- i will go toxpired another round. i appreciate the patience of the panelists. mr. healy, you mentioned testimony of 10,000 leads last year. 1910 arrests. 80 convictions. is that number of arrests to convictions, that seems like a small percentage of arrests. is that pretty typical or he could you -- or could you speak about those arrested but not convicted? >> not only criminal arrests but administrative arrests. in a situation where they might be a criminal prosecution following as part of an investigation or that might be virtue of the fact that an administrative arrest because the individual was an overstay. you know how many were
criminal arrests and administrative? walk me through the process of and administrative arrest? what does that mean? what happened after the arrest? >> an individual will be encountered and issued a notice to appear and it could be broken down into a couple of different .ategories the individual might receive a notice to appear and they are required to appear before immigration judge. if it's a visa waiver program, they are not required to appear before an immigration judge because that is waived by virtue of the fact that the person came in through the visa waiver program but it would not go down the criminal route, not go through the u.s. attorney's office. it would be internal administrative protocol that's run by ice and enforcement and
removal operations. >> do you know how many were administrative of the 1910? if you don't -- >> i have them. i will get it for you. >> this may be for the record. since you brought it up. those who have been given notices to appear. are you tracking those that do not appear and do they go back into the system? >> that is correct. we can get those numbers. >> are they included in the 355,000 remaining? left youre sort of numbers and came back to the numbers. >> they would come back to us and want back up in our continuous monitoring. burns, can you talk about the index program -- the apex program and how that is going to inform our implementation of future biometric exit program?
>> the apex air program was indicative of the departments commitment to answer the question. it was really a collaboration between cvp and smt to look at the issue. we brought in all of the stakeholders that would have to deal or be impacted by what we were doing. it was important to bring in the airline industry and everybody that would be a part. the first couple of months was getting everybody to identify the problem from a operational perspective but also from airline operational perspective as well. the team was brought and inclusive. we worked with industries small and large business to identify the technology. the three we deemed would sit in this construct, to bring them across the border to start the process. biometric technology is here to
stay. i think it will help answer the question. the issue is, its application within the environment. the simple thing is lighting or the environmental conditions of humidity will impact how we work it. we ran a series of operational how welln to see pieces would come together and all of that information is provided to cvp so they can build into their longer acquisition program. we started knowing that whatever the products we were going to bring out had to fit into their acquisition program. operational requirements, cost and the fed analysis. all those things that would help them make a successful decision, was provided to them. we made sure we look at it from a holistic perspective. see, what can we do
to speed up entry as we brought things forward for exit. five seconds added to an entry process is huge amount of time. intore down to looking operational processes that were -- working with the general public was important. 1700 people from 18 to 81. we looked at all the cities. -- all ethnicities. it has to work everyone in the traveling public. >> my understanding is there is an aer report that is going to be delivered to us. can you give us a timeframe? >> we are in the process of completing the high-level report of our findings. it's not as detailed as we would like because many of the companies that brought the technology did it under the agreement that their intellectual property would be retracted.
i can get back to you with the specific date. mr. wagner, in your trying testimony, said the compliance near 100%. in 2015 the number was 92%. can we talk about what steps are being made to bring that is close to 100% as possible and what of the reasons it is not 100%? >> the airline transmits the information to us. vetting.e-arrival betti we compare it against whatever the airline transmitted. we keep a log of discrepancies. we issue very few finds these days. a dozen last year
total. generally for a late transmission of information or missing crew data. we can get you a break down of that. where we see the technical issues of data birth where they formatting issues like that especially when his keystroke in overseas by a airline personnel. by and large that the unit is accurate or you what we found without bound, even on the departure manifestly are not there to marinate -- to validate each transmission. what we are finding with the mobile technology we deployed, let's confirm the accuracy of what airlines are providing. we are finding it was in the high 90 percentile of accuracy. when we conclude our report on the mobile technology will .nclude those figures >> i understand the differences
of what we can do and what we can't and that we do not have a similar exchange with mexico. is there anything we can do with mexico to address providing some better information for land ports of entry in the mexican border short-term and what are ideas for longer-term? >> we continue to hold discussions about the databases they do have. what kind of information are we showing ready. at the land border they do not have a system or the technology or infrastructure to collect the passenger level -- they collect license plates but at the traveler level they don't have a system. it's a case of, we can build it haver side or maybe we this opportunity to work with mexico to build the infrastructure to collect it and both of us use it. the ideas and concepts kicked around but we have not solidified an approach that will
work. >> a lot of what we talked about so far in the focus of the hearing is tracking people who are over overstaying. testimony, then pilot program making sure -- they could have a fraudulent passport, stolen passport and you can match their fingerprint to them but it still may be that there is fraud involved and that is not the person it is supposed to be. the pilot project we have to facial recognition, i'm interested in the outcome of that. legislationhurd has to make that permanent for all passengers. can we comment on the fraud case? you may match biometrics to their passport but it is not the
right person we have a whole another problem. >> we have seen the amount of altered or counterfeit type documents decreased tremendously especially in the commercial air environment. where the risk remains is a person with a legitimate document that does not belong to them. a stolen document, borrowed document. that is where the risk is because you can compare the person against it. most of the countries issue electronic passports that at least at the minimum have a photo including u.s. travel documents. but we are able to do with the facial comparison technology is read that ship, open it up, take a picture of the traveler, compare the two using algorithms to tell us with some probability that it does belong to that person. imposters. a person using an illegitimate
document that does not belong to them. a couple of weeks ago at jfk we had a woman arrive from a flight from ghana. the officer did not think the picture matched with the traveler, put her in front of the camera and recorded it and -- she turnedshe out to be a person from liberia who had been denied a visa previously last year. knowing that she had a u.s. routinelyould not subject her to fingerprints upon entry. , we canis comparison confirm she is an imposter. the fact that she was not denied a visa. incredibly helpful to make that determination of you the -- of who the true document holder is. >> mr. healy, if you were in charge, with unlimited resources
to do your job to whittle down those that have overstated and quickly be able to locate them and take appropriate action, ?hat else would you need i'm also interested in local law enforcement. often the first people encountering individuals. the information flow between federal and local officials and what access they may have. >> i think we are going in the work we are doing. from where we have come from to where we are now. no system is perfect but all the players that need to be engaged are engaged. cbp is in the process of pulling it together in terms of the automation process which is making it a lot easier for us. ,n terms of local engagement through our field offices, our
task forces, we are at the hip with local partners. what i would hope for, i would hope that we continue to move in the direction we are moving and i think we will get there soon. >> i do want to follow-up on mr. barletta's question. right now if somebody overstays -- they cannot come in for two years if it was a short overstated and 10 years if it was long overstay. only are really the disincentives or accountability items. would it be valuable to provide some other accountability to these overstayers to make it a crime? to have some finds? penalty of not
being able to reenter? are there thoughtful disincentives we should consider? >> people that overstay as time goes on the numbers get whittle down. they are subject to the three-year to tenure bar of getting a visa to come back. that information goes to state and they have to go to state and apply and state their cases. once they depart the united states or are removed, it has been difficult to come back in unless they deal with the wafer and there are procedures to do that.
i do not know if making them into a criminal act would change behavior of people who would stay here. >> are individuals who left 60 days late consider the same as individuals you caught 60 days later and put out? that is a different behavior. >> i believe it would be the same. >> do you feel that those disincentives are adequate? >> i think people that will stay here permanently will try to stay here permanently. it will be difficult to come back in once a person leaves that has been identified as an overstay. i think we have exhausted a lot of items here.
let me give the opportunity for any members of the panel to share perspectives you were not asked about that were not in -- not in your testimony. is there anything else you want to leave with us we have not outidered on this issue? >> of the 1900 that you asked about, 130 of those were criminal. of 1910?130, not 80 80 convictions of 130 criminal arrests. that's a higher rate of conviction. great. just told like to add follow-up on what we discussed, our plan is to deploy this 2018.on in fall of the secretary has charged us with doing that. we have put together a strategy contingent on the government or chairman process to spend the
fees that congress has made available to us to do this as a reference of $1 billion over 10 years to do that. several steps that will be engaging industry and doing reques for proposals over the next 18 months to be able to get there. there are some tight deadlines but we will be going through that structure procurement process to be able to take that money and put it onto a contract and be able to spend it to deploy solutions. >> anything else to add? thanks. i appreciate the hard job you will have. -- you all have. different perspectives on what is important. i think at some point quantity has a quality all its own when
you talk a lot the magnitude of individuals. it only takes one person to be a we need to be vigilant about this and do everything we can to make sure that those were trying to use our system and trying to do us harm are very quickly identified and the public remains safe. i appreciate all the efforts that are being made. i think a lot of work has been done but we still have a lot of work left to do. will be partnering with you to make sure that it gets done. technology and procedures and whatever else is required. i appreciate your testimony. members of the committee may have some additional questions so please get back and we ask yo r