Prepared Statement of Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee
Hearing on the Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate Secretary Johnson’s presence here today. Hearings like this are essential to Congress’s oversight of the Executive Branch.
Secretary Johnson has committed to cooperating with Congress. He has instructed his staff to respond to every letter in a timely manner. Unfortunately, there are still some letters from over a year ago to which the Department has failed to respond to. Many times, the answers are not responsive. So, it’s nice to have him here to provide answers on issues we all care about.
Two weeks ago, the House Judiciary Committee asked the Secretary to explain why the Department released more than 36,000 convicted criminal aliens from its custody in 2013. He didn’t have an answer at the time, saying he wanted “a deeper understanding” of this issue. I look forward to hearing today what he’s learned since then.
Releasing 36,000 people with criminal convictions is no small matter. These individuals have been convicted of homicide, sexual assault and kidnapping. They are drunk drivers and drug offenders. And, now they are free to roam our streets.
The administration cannot hide behind the excuse that it released these individuals due to a court order. That might be true in some cases, but in many cases, the decision to release criminals was entirely voluntary. The Department needs to explain its decisions in specific cases and in detail.
I’m also concerned that the President believes he can and should act on his own when he doesn’t get his way with Congress.
He said, “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone.”
For example, in 2012, Congress was not consulted about deferring enforcement action on individuals in the country illegally. The Department made its own rules. And the program has proven to be a haven for loopholes and mischief.
The Secretary just announced a renewal of the program, and weakened it, as far as I’m concerned. For example, the administration gutted the requirement and made the process easier to reapply by eliminating any need to provide evidence. What’s alarming is that the Department confirmed that it does not routinely check the validity of documents that are presented by applicants.
When applications seem to be rubberstamped and lawful status is so easily obtained, it’s no wonder there’s been a surge of unaccompanied alien minors at our southern border. The number of minors coming to the United States has climbed from 6,000 in 2011 to an expected 145,000 in 2015.
Some are calling it a humanitarian crisis. And, it is. These are vulnerable children. They’re being guided through the desert, their lives on the line. They are escorted with strangers, away from their family in some cases, not knowing what lies ahead. There is massive potential for these children to be abused.
If the administration doesn’t do its due diligence to verify the relative or parental relationship when it releases these children, the children could be put in the hands of pimps or traffickers.
Children are being lured into these dire circumstances by false promises. This administration has refused to be serious about immigration enforcement. Its “get to yes” philosophy has sent a signal that everyone has a chance of getting immigration benefits, even if you have to break the law to get them. The administration is finding ways to get around the rules, implementing many of the recommendations in the internal 2010 amnesty memo that was leaked.
This is a disaster made by the administration. Therefore, President Obama must take responsibility.
Unfortunately, the administration doesn’t seem to be prepared. It has failed to propose any solutions that will prevent children from being put in this situation in the future.
For starters, the President needs to send a signal that the law will be enforced and that people with unlawful status will be returned to their home country. Instead of reviewing deportation policies and suggesting ways to remove fewer people, the President should task Secretary Johnson with finding ways to actually enforce the laws we have on the books.
What is ironic is that the Executive Branch has taken action on so many controversial matters but refuses to do more to close loopholes and improve national security in several programs.
For example, in January, the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Holder v. Martinez paved the way for former gang members here illegally to argue that their status as a former gang member entitles them to remain in the United States. This would open the door to violent gang members renouncing their membership as a ruse in order to stay here. But the Department of Justice didn’t appeal the ruling. I’ll be interested in hearing from Secretary Johnson about what he thinks of this decision.
The new exemptions to the immigration law that were announced by Secretary Johnson in January are also very concerning. These exceptions would allow foreign nationals who have provided “limited” material support to terrorists and terrorist organizations to obtain asylum in the United States. We shouldn’t be relaxing our laws to permit anyone with a connection to terrorism to live here. And especially when it is reported that up to 70 percent of asylum applications show signs of fraud, I don’t have confidence in the Department’s ability to effectively carry this out.
In addition, the Department’s management failures in administering the Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorist Standards program, intended to regulate chemical facilities for national security purposes, are well documented. Although some welcome progress has been made recently, I continue to be concerned that the program is not functioning effectively. The Department is far behind in meeting its deadlines under the program.
Optional Practical Training, created by Executive Branch regulation, provides foreign students to obtain work in their major area of study during and after completing an academic program in the United States. A 2014 GAO report found extensive and alarming mismanagement of the program. The Department doesn’t know where thousands of these individuals are working, if at all. Given the risk that foreign students have posed to the homeland, this is a serious matter. I asked Secretary Johnson to place a moratorium on the program until he can certify that all participants have been located.
There are two other issues I’d briefly touch upon. The EB-5 Regional Investment Program is an employment-based immigration program designed to stimulate job creation through foreign capital investments. Yet, we have been told that this program is being used to facilitate terrorist travel, economic espionage, money laundering, and investment fraud. The Inspector General said the agency cannot manage the EB-5 program effectively. The program needs a complete overhaul and some real attention from this administration before the vulnerabilities have a devastating effect on our homeland.
I hope Secretary Johnson can help us get this program on track if it is to continue operating.
Finally, I want to comment on the use of drones. The use of drone technology holds great promise for the securing of our borders. But DHS should be as transparent as possible about how it intends to use drones. In July 2013, it was reported that a Customs and Border Protection document connected to its drone program, apparently made public through a FOIA request, suggested that CBP might arm its drones with non-lethal weapons. CBP reportedly issued a statement shortly thereafter disclaiming any such interest. But if that was the case, why would the document say that?
Overall, there are a wide variety of issues that I hope we will address in today’s oversight hearing. I expect full candor from Secretary Johnson today. Anything less would be unfair to Congress and to the American people.
-30-