The Department of Homeland Security has been asked to do more with less, requiring tough decisions.
Good morning, Madam Secretary. It is a pleasure to have you kick off our budget season, albeit later than usual. The fiscal year 2014 net discretionary budget request for the Department of Homeland Security is $39.04 billion, not including an additional $5.6 billion in disaster relief funding that does not count toward the discretionary cap. This total is some $550 million below the equivalent number for the current year.
This year also marks the 10th anniversary of the creation of DHS and the continuing efforts to make 22 components operate under a common vision and leadership. Complicating these efforts is the reality that, like all federal agencies, you have been asked to do more with less, and this has required some tough decisions. I am pleased that a full-year Homeland Security Appropriations Act was included in the final Continuing Resolution, providing an allocation of funds that is more aligned with your current needs. It provided significant and necessary funding increases, for example, for preparedness and anti-terrorism grants, Customs and Border Protection salaries, and advanced research. However, you are still under the thumb of sequestration.
Today, I look forward to exploring how the Department is assessing risk and prioritizing funding in this era of shrinking budgets. It is also time to reflect about where the Department of Homeland Security has been and where you are heading. This includes the Department's efforts to enforce our nation's immigration laws, which we all know are in dire need of comprehensive reform. As bipartisan efforts to craft legislation continue, no doubt security at the border will remain center stage.
Despite what some opponents of comprehensive immigration reform say, significant progress has been made along the southern border. This Subcommittee, under both Democratic and Republican leadership, has been at the forefront of these changes, and we must resist misleading claims about border security by those wishing to block reform. Two decades ago, fewer than 4,000 Border Patrol agents monitored the entire Southwest border. By the end of FY 2012, there were more than 18,400. Fencing totaling some 651 miles has also been constructed in targeted areas of the border. Now sensors have been planted, cameras erected, and unmanned aerial vehicles monitor the border from above. Couple these efforts with targeted outbound inspections of vehicles for illegal drugs, weapons, cash, and other contraband heading south into Mexico, resulting in some impressive seizures in California, Texas, and Arizona over the past three years, and you can see just how successful our border security efforts have been. You should be proud of how far we have come, under your leadership and that of your predecessor, to secure our borders.
Recalling our efforts to apply cost-effectiveness criteria to the border fence, I know how elusive the definition of "secure" can be. I also know that we cannot simply throw an unlimited supply of money at the Southwest border and assume that will solve all the problems. We must continue to look analytically for the right mix of personnel, infrastructure and technology to find the best path forward. I hope you will shed some light on your thinking in that regard.
In addition, the Administration has taken positive steps to improve its immigration enforcement policies. Here too, some have been eager to criticize, but I believe it is both prudent and wise for the Administration to focus on the removal of criminal aliens first and foremost, while providing prosecutorial discretion on less pressing cases and deferred action in the case of the so-called Dreamers. With limited resources, we simply must prioritize our efforts.
Much has been made of the release of ICE detainees in February, although following Director Morton's testimony I hope we have reached the point where suspicions of a political motive have subsided. In that regard, I hope you can touch on the funding realities ICE must deal with when facing a statutory mandate that ties its hands on the number of individuals it detains. Director Morton has testified that this requirement will reduce such priorities as the investigation into human and drug smuggling, as well as child pornography. We need to get to the point where ICE decision making about the use of detention is based only on consistent, reviewable, risk-based criteria, and it has full discretion and available funding to use less costly supervision methods and alternatives to detention when risk is low.
I also support your effort to better focus the Secure Communities program to be sure it is fulfilling its intended mission and not being applied indiscriminately. Now that the Secure Communities program has been implemented nationwide, I look forward to examining how effective this program has been at fulfilling its intended mission.
I must also commend you on the job FEMA continues to do. Over the past few years, FEMA has faced significant challenges, including an unprecedented 99 Presidentially-declared disasters in 2011. In comparison, 2012 had about half that number, with 47 Presidentially-declared disasters, but it included Hurricane Sandy, a storm of historic magnitude. Currently every state in the Nation has pending disaster recovery projects with FEMA.
In each of these instances, FEMA has done a remarkable job of working with affected areas to make sure that individuals, families, and localities have the resources to remove damaged structures and debris and to begin the rebuilding process. This recent experience confirms that much of the lost capacity we witnessed following Hurricane Katrina has been restored.
I must say, however, that I am very disappointed to see the budget propose a net reduction to FEMA grants, as well as offering the same, flawed National Preparedness Grant Program rejected by all sides in the Continuing Resolution. The budget also proposes a significant reduction to Coast Guard personnel and acquisitions that raises serious questions about future Coast Guard capabilities and recapitalization efforts. On its face at least, this significant reduction in funding for the Coast Guard appears to have been made in order to provide $714 million to complete construction of the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility. We must seriously consider the implications for the rest of DHS, particularly if there is a viable option to phase in NBAF construction and avoid a tradeoff with the Coast Guard or with other Science and Technology efforts in FY14.
So we have a number of questions that will need to be addressed quickly by you and your components as this Subcommittee works to produce a bill in the coming weeks.
Madam Secretary, I look forward to your testimony and working with you again this year.
Source: U.S. Department of HCA
