Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Taking Sexual Assault Seriously: The Rape Kit Backlog and Human Rights, Hearing Before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, May 20, 2015

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is a testimony compilation of the May 20, 2015 hearing on "Taking Sexual Assault Seriously: The Rape Kit Backlog and Human Rights" held before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution. From the opening statement of Chuck Grassley: "Today, the Judiciary Committee will hear from several witnesses about untested DNA evidence from sexual assault forensic exams. We will consider whether backlogs of untested DNA evidence remain a problem, despite the enactment in 2004 of the Debbie Smith Act. The Debbie Smith Act, which is named after our first witness, originally passed Congress, with my support, as part of the 2004 Justice for All Act. Congress last reauthorized this important federal statute in 2014. It sends funds to states to help reduce backlogs of untested DNA evidence from crime scenes and from convicted offenders. Reducing such backlogs of untested DNA evidence is critically important to survivors of sexual violence, as Debbie Smith will today testify. We are pleased to have Debbie, who played such an important role in the enactment of the Debbie Smith Act, with us at today's hearing." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Debbie Smith, Scott Berkowitz, Skylor Hearn, Lisa Madigan, and Sarah Haacke Byrd.

  United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary

  2015-05-20
• Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings for Supreme Court Nominations: Historical Overview and Data [April 13, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "After a President submits a Supreme Court nomination to the Senate, the Judiciary Committee assumes the principal responsibility for investigating the background and qualifications of each Supreme Court nominee. Since the late 1960s, the Judiciary Committee's consideration of a Supreme Court nomination typically has consisted of three distinct stages--(1) a pre-hearing investigative stage, followed by (2) public hearings, and concluding with (3) a committee decision as to whether to recommend approval of the nomination by the full Senate. This CRS [Congressional Research Service] Insight provides an historical overview of the second stage of this process--public hearings on nominations submitted to the Senate. As of this writing, Senate debate about Merrick Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court has focused, in part, on whether to hold committee hearings for the nomination. Note that this Insight does not take a position related to this ongoing debate."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMillion, Barry J.

  2016-04-13
• Nomination of the Honorable Neil M. Gorsuch to Be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (Day 3), Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, March 22, 2017

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This testimony compilation made by the HSDL staff is from the March 22, 2017 hearing,"Nomination of the Honorable Neil M. Gorsuch to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (Day 3)," before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary. The purpose of this hearing was to consider the nomination of the Honorable Neil M. Gorsuch as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael Bennet, Cory Gardner, Neal Katyal, Neil M. Gorsuch, Nancy Scott Degan, Shannon Edwards, Deanell Reece Tacha, Robert Harlan Henry, John L. Kane, Leah Bressack, Elisa Massimino, Jameel Jaffer, Jeff Perkins, Guerino J. Calemine III, Jeff Lamken, Lawrence Solum, Jonathan Turley, Karen Harned, Heather McGhee, Fatima Goss Graves, Pat Gallagher, Eve Hill, Peter Kirsanow, Alice Fisher, Hannah Smith, Tim Meyer, Jamil Jaffer, Kristen Clarke, Sarah Warbelow, Amy Hagstrom Miller, William Marshall, and Sandy Phillips.

  United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary

  2017-03-22
• Nomination of the Honorable Neil M. Gorsuch to Be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (Day 2), Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, March 21, 2017

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This testimony compilation made by the HSDL staff is from the March 21, 2017 hearing,"Nomination of the Honorable Neil M. Gorsuch to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (Day 2)," before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary. The purpose of this hearing was to consider the nomination of the Honorable Neil M. Gorsuch as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael Bennet, Cory Gardner, Neal Katyal, Neil M. Gorsuch, Nancy Scott Degan, Shannon Edwards, Deanell Reece Tacha, Robert Harlan Henry, John L. Kane, Leah Bressack, Elisa Massimino, Jameel Jaffer, Jeff Perkins, Guerino J. Calemine III, Jeff Lamken, Lawrence Solum, Jonathan Turley, Karen Harned, Heather McGhee, Fatima Goss Graves, Pat Gallagher, Eve Hill, Peter Kirsanow, Alice Fisher, Hannah Smith, Tim Meyer, Jamil Jaffer, Kristen Clarke, Sarah Warbelow, Amy Hagstrom Miller, William Marshall, and Sandy Phillips.

  United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary

  2017-03-21
• Northern Triangle of Central America: The 2019 Suspension and Reprogramming of U.S. Funding Adversely Affected Assistance Projects, Report to Congressional Requesters

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Highlights: "The U.S. has funded assistance to the Northern Triangle of Central America for many years. This assistance aims to promote prosperity, good governance, and security in the region; to address the causes of migration; and to combat transnational crime. In March 2019, the administration suspended foreign assistance funding from the Northern Triangle countries until the governments in the region agreed to take actions to reduce the number of migrants coming to the U.S. border. GAO [Government Accountability Office] was asked to review the effects of the 2019 suspension and reprogramming of assistance funding to the Northern Triangle. This report (1) identifies the funding appropriated by Congress for the Northern Triangle that was suspended and reprogrammed to other countries, and how the approach to U.S. assistance to the region changed after March 2019; (2) examines the effects of suspending and reprogramming assistance funding on project implementation; and (3) examines the extent to which the suspension and reprogramming of assistance funding affected the ability of U.S. agencies to meet their foreign assistance performance targets for the region."

  United States. Government Accountability Office

  2021-09
• Federal Hiring: OPM Should Collect and Share COVID-19 Lessons Learned to Inform Hiring During Future Emergencies, Report to Congressional Addressees

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Highlights: "The COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019] pandemic has had far-reaching effects on federal programs and operations. To address this public health crisis, Congress and the administration made several hiring authorities available to agencies to hire staff with the needed skills to effectively respond to the pandemic. The CARES [Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security] Act includes a provision for GAO [Government Accountability Office] to report on ongoing monitoring and oversight efforts related to the COVID-19 pandemic. This report examines: (1) the new hiring authorities provided to federal agencies for COVID-19 response and the extent to which selected agencies have used them; (2) selected agencies' experiences using those hiring authorities, including lessons learned; and (3) OPM [Office of Personnel Management]'s efforts to assess agencies' use of the COVID-19 related hiring authorities."

  United States. Government Accountability Office

  2021-10
• Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate: S. 2525, Domains Critical to Homeland Security Act

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Cost Estimate as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on August 4, 2021. From the Document: "S. 2525 would authorize the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to identify and analyze potential threats to infrastructure, industries, technologies, and intellectual property critical to the economic security of the United States. The agency would be required to report its findings and recommendations to the Congress annually through 2026. The bill would authorize the appropriation of $1 million each year from 2022 through 2026 to carry out the new requirements. Using historical patterns of spending for similar programs and assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing S. 2525 would cost $3 million over the 2022-2026 period and $2 million after 2026."

  United States. Congressional Budget Office

  2021-10-25
• Increasing Transparency into COVID-19 Spending

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Background: "In March 2020 the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act created the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC) to promote transparency and conduct and support oversight of pandemic-related funds and the response to the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). The objective of this review was to identify specific gaps in transparency in award data for federal assistance spending in response to COVID-19. We conducted the review in accordance with the Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation issued by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE)."

  Pandemic Response Accountability Committee

  2021-10-20
• Attorney General's Annual Report to Congress on Department of Justice Activities to Combat Elder Fraud and Abuse [October 18, 2019]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Executive Summary: "Our team has pursued elder justice cases, targeting criminals here and abroad, with ever increasing passion, sophistication, and cooperation. [...] While prosecuting these crimes and advancing prevention efforts are key mechanisms in bringing justice to abused older Americans, it is also important to provide the resources necessary to help victims recover and ultimately regain their sense of well-being. This report highlights the Department's dedication to supporting victims, including the FBI developing a new Victim Specialist position to provide crisis intervention, to conduct needs assessments, and to refer victims to resources and referrals when appropriate. These are laudable accomplishments, but we realize there is much more work to be done."

  United States. Department of Justice. Office of the Attorney General

  2019-10-18
• Anthropological Contributions to the Study of Disasters [Chapter 8]

  Show summary     Open resource [ms word]     (open full abstract)

  From the Abstract: "This chapter addresses the contributions of anthropology towards the field of disaster studies and emergency management. Anthropology's concern with the holistic study of humanity in relation to social, political, cultural, and economic contexts, as well as the breadth of its studies done internationally, seem to make it well-positioned to answer calls from within the field of disaster studies for an 'expanded horizon.' This article examines contemporary contributions and investigations, following the life-cycle of a disaster event, from pre-disaster vulnerability, conceptions of risk, individual and social responses and coping strategies, and relief management. It concludes by providing recommendations for future research."

  United States. Federal Emergency Management Agency

  Doug, Henry

  2005
• Cyber Threats and Vulnerabilities to Conventional and Strategic Deterrence

  Show summary     Open resource [html]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "Therefore, while technologically advanced U.S. military capabilities form the bedrock of its military advantage, they also create cyber vulnerabilities that adversaries can and will undoubtedly use to their strategic advantage. To support a strategy of full-spectrum deterrence, the United States must maintain credible and capable conventional and nuclear capabilities. However, adversaries could hold these at risk in cyberspace, potentially undermining deterrence. If deterrence fails in times of crisis and conflict, the United States must be able to defend and surge conventional capabilities when adversaries utilize cyber capabilities to attack American military systems and functions. In this way, cyber vulnerabilities that adversaries exploit in routine competition below the level of war have dangerous implications for the U.S. ability to deter and prevail in conflict above that threshold--even in a noncyber context. The strategic consequences of the weakening of U.S. warfighting capabilities that support conventional--and, even more so, nuclear--deterrence are acute. Additionally, the scope and challenge in securing critical military networks and systems in cyberspace is immense. Therefore, urgent policy action is needed to address the cyber vulnerabilities of key weapons systems and functions."

  National Defense University Press

  Borghard, Erica D.; Montgomery, Mark C.

  2021
• Technology and Information Warfare: The Competition for Influence and the Department of Defense, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and Information Systems of the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Seventeenth Congress, First Session, April 30, 2021

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the April 30, 2021 hearing on "Technology and Information Warfare: The Competition for Influence and the Department of Defense," held before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and Information Systems of the Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of James R. Langevin: "[F]oreign adversaries can target U.S. and allied citizens almost instantly without crossing physical boundaries or borders. These threats will only grow as artificial intelligence, machine learning, and other technology-enabled information operations exponentially increase the speed and the scope of the danger. So according to the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, state adversaries are employing artificial intelligence-enabled disinformation attacks to sow division in democracies and disrupt the public's sense of reality. But how to confront these national security challenges is a difficult question. So I believe the Nation must respond forcefully to deter bad actors in the information domain, invest in robust U.S. public diplomacy, and educate the public and our service members about these dangers. We must also articulate a vision for the information environment and delineate thresholds of behavior that will trigger a response. So I was sort of encouraged when the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence recommended that the United States develop a new strategy to counter disinformation while investing in technology to counter artificial intelligence-enabled information warfare." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Glenn S. Gerstell, Nina Jankowicz, Joseph W. Kirschbaum, and Herbert Lin.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2021
• Department of Defense Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations: Challenges and Opportunities in the Invisible Battlespace, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and Information Systems of the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Seventeenth Congress, First Session, March 19, 2021

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the March 19, 2021 hearing on "Department of Defense Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations: Challenges and Opportunities in the Invisible Battlespace," held before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and Information Systems of the Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of James R. Langevin: "While previous CITI [Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and Information Systems] hearings covered what lies ahead in defense, again, the military is facing unseen challenges in the electromagnetic spectrum right now. Many of the United States most important weapons systems, like the F-35 or 'Ford'-class aircraft carrier, are at a disadvantage today without uncompromised access to the electromagnetic spectrum. So this challenge and the importance of electromagnetic spectrum operations will only grow as emerging technologies like autonomous weapons, connected battle networks, artificial intelligence, and directed energy continue to fundamentally change warfare. Future combat will be less about the capability of individual weapons systems and more about how a networked system of systems communicate and work together through the use of the electromagnetic spectrum. [...] [W]e have more work to do to ensure that the United States maintains its advantage and closes the gap where we have lost our edge. As the Department modernizes its systems and capabilities, it must ensure that both new and existing platforms are networked together in a joint environment. To do so, we need to develop the right management structures, strategy, and resources at the Department of Defense. And I know our witnesses will have much insight into how to accomplish these objectives." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Bryan Clark, William Conley, and Joseph Kirschbaum.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2021
• Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2012, Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session on H.R. 2596/S. 1572, An Act Making Appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2012, and for Other Purposes, March 10, 2011, and April 7, 11, and 14, 2011

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Barbara A. Mikulski: "When we talk about numbers and statistics and cuts and shutdowns and showdowns, we need to know that there are consequences to this, and that there are people every single day out there, putting themselves in harm's way not only to protect us overseas--and we salute those troops there--but we have boots on the ground in the United States of America. And they are in our streets and our neighborhoods. […] We also note that in local law enforcement--well, eight Federal law enforcement agents died last year in the line of duty--eight. Also we were told through the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund that 160 police officers died nationwide. That is a 40 percent jump in our thin blue line from what it was in other years. Forty percent more police officers have died. We are a Nation at risk, and our law enforcement is at risk. Now, there will be appropriate memorial services, which we salute. But we have to protect those who protect us. And that means adequate pay--first of all, let us start with respect. Let us realize that there are many people who are called to defend and protect the United States, and many are in our Federal law enforcement. So I am going to be asking you questions today about what is going to happen in terms of what you see in 2012 and the consequences to the continuing resolution." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Barbara A. Mikulski, Eric H. Holder, Jr., the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012
• Transition in Afghanistan: Views of Outside Experts, Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, United States House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, February 27, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the February 27, 2013 House Armed Services Committee hearing, "Transition in Afghanistan: Views of Outside Experts." From the opening statement of Howard P. McKeon: "The question before us is whether or not we can continue to prevent Afghanistan from being used as such a sanctuary. The NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] mission officially ends December 31st, 2014. Although we have not finalized the transition to Afghan security lead, President Obama already has announced withdrawal of half of the U.S. forces in Afghanistan, approximately 34,000 troops, by this time next year. […] The President has decided to conduct the significant withdrawal of U.S. troops during the same time period that the Afghan security forces will be in the lead across the entire country for the first time. Moreover, the Administration does not have a discernible plan to reinforce the Afghan security forces if they cannot hold the gains and/or maintain the necessary security across the country. Consequently the President's approach is fraught with risk and lacks a comprehensive strategy to ensure the security and sovereignty of Afghanistan, and thereby U.S. interests over time." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Howard P. McKeon, Adam Smith, David W. Barno, Anthony H. Cordesman, Catherine Dale, and John Keane.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• DOD and DHS: Implementing Agency Watchdogs' Recommendations Could Save Taxpayers Billions, Hearing Before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, March 19, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the March 19, 2013 hearing, "DOD and DHS: Implementing Agency Watchdogs' Recommendations Could Save Taxpayers Billions" before U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Reform. From the opening statement of Darrell E. Issa: "Today we will hear from witnesses from two of the largest Government agencies: the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security. With the attention of policymakers on how to best manage sequestration, this is a time to lead the discussion by finding and eliminating waste as part of that savings. For weeks, the Administration has made a concerted public relations effort to speak about the dire consequences of sequestration, and there will be some areas that will be, quite frankly, missed. But, candidly, the claims of a dire consequence have been disproven. We are not here to argue over sequestration directly. As a matter of fact, we are most interested in the $67 billion that have been identified by the IGS that, if implemented, could save most of the cost of sequestration. We certainly understand that some of that $67 billion is one-time. But, this year, this cut is essential and we can do some of it through means less painful to the American people then across-the-board cuts. Recognizing that we are dealing with two of the larger pockets of money and, in the case of Homeland Security and our Department of Defense, we are dealing with the very security of the American people." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Robert F. Hale, Lynne M. Halbrooks, Rafael Borras, Elijah Cummings, John Mica, Kerry Bentivolio, Gerald E. Connolly, Brett A. Mansfield, Paul A. Gosar, Jackie Speier, Darrell E. Issa, and Charles K. Edwards.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• Tribal Law and Order Act One Year Later: Have We Improved Public Safety and Justice Throughout Indian Country? Hearing Before the Committee on Indian Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, September 22, 2011

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Daniel K. Akaka: "Aloha and welcome to the Committee's oversight hearing on the Tribal Law and Order Act One Year Later: Have We Improved Public Safety and Justice Throughout Indian Country? Today, our Native communities face severe and disproportionate threats to their public safety. Nationwide Indian reservations suffer from a violent crime rate of more than two-and-a-half times the national average. And with some reservations facing a violent crime rate as high as 20 times the national average. And women in our communities are especially vulnerable to violence. More than one in three Native women will be raped in their lifetime and two in five will fall victim to domestic or partner violence. These grave statistics are the result of a complicated jurisdictional maze that often allows severe crimes to go unpunished in Native communities. Native justice systems are also extremely underfunded and lack adequate data, training and coordination with State and Federal agencies to deal with the problem." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Daniel K. Akaka, Tim Johnson, Jon Tester, John Thune, Larry Echo Hawk, Troy A. Eid, Pamela S. Hyde, Brendan V. Johnson, Jackqueline Johnson-Pata, Thomas J. Perrelli, Ivan D. Posey, Theresa M. Pouley, Rose L. Weahkee.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012
• True Cost of the War, Hearing Before the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Eleventh Congress, Second Session, September 30, 2010

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Bob Filner: "We all look at the data that comes from these wars. It struck me one day that the official data for the wounded is around 45,000 for both wars; and, yet, we know that 600,000 or 700,000 of our veterans of these wars, of which there are over a million already, have either filed claims for disability or sought health care from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for injuries suffered at war- 45,000 versus 800,000. This is not a rounding error. I think this is a deliberate attempt to mask what is going on, in terms of the actual casualty figures. We know there is denial of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is considered a weakness among Marines and soldiers to admit mental illness, so we don't even have those figures until it is possibly too late. We all know that women are participating in this war in a degree never before seen in our Nation's history, and yet, an estimated half or two-thirds have suffered sexual trauma. The true cost of war." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Bob Filner, Ciro D. Rodriguez, John Batiste, Linda J. Bilmes, Joseph A. Violante, Corey Gibson, Lorrie Knight-Major, William L. Nash, Joseph E. Stiglitz, Donna R. Van Derveer, Paul Sullivan, James D. McDonough Jr., and Swords to Plowshares.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2011
• Institutionalizing Irregular Warfare Capabilities, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, Hearing Held November 3, 2011

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the April 5, 2006 hearing on "The U.S.-India Global Partnership," held before the U.S. House Committee on International Relations. From the opening statement of Mac Thornberry: "We appreciate everybody being here for this hearing on a topic that I think will play a significant role in the security of the country moving ahead. It seems to me the basic question is to what extent we learn from our experience and build on it, and to what extent we assume that the past was just an aberration and now we can, quote, 'get back to normal.' I am not sure that the conventional wisdom about normal is quite right. Dr. Sebastian Gorka and David Kilcullen found that of the 464 conflicts since 1815 recorded in the Correlates of War database, 385 of them involved a nonstate actor. That is 83 percent. Dr. Bernard Fall's research, cited in the '2006 Marine Corps and SOCOM Multiservice Concept for Irregular Warfare,' found there were 48 small wars in the first 65 years of the 20th century, which, taken together, involved as many people and as many casualties as either of the two World Wars. A review of U.S. military activities over the last 20 years in places like Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Colombia, the Philippines, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Uganda confirms this trend." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: James R. Langevin, Mac Thornberry, Peter C. Bayer, Sinclair M. Harris, Jerry P. Martinez, Daniel J. O'Donohue, Susan A. Davis, Bill Shuster, Jeff Miller, and Bobby Schilling.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012
• Operation Odyssey Dawn and U.S. Military Operations In Libya, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, March 31, 2011

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the March 31, 2011 hearing "Operation Odyssey Dawn" held before the House Armed Services Committee. From the opening statement of Howard P. McKeon: "The House Armed Services Committee meets today to receive testimony on the President's decision to commit Armed Forces in an international effort to shield Libya's civilian population from the fury of a repressive tyrant. I commend our fighting forces for manning the wall between freedom and tyranny, and I honor their bravery, but I have concerns about our objectives in Libya, our contribution to meeting those goals, and the length of America's commitment to what could be a prolonged conflict. […] With Iraq and Afghanistan already occupying a considerable share of American resources, I sincerely hope that this is not the start of a third elongated conflict, especially in a region where we have other, more discernible strategic interests. With America's fighting men and women in harm's way, it is not my intention to second-guess or undermine the administration's authority, but I would like an explanation of the nature of this threat and how American interests will be advanced through the use of military power." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Howard P. Mckeon, Adam Smith, and Robert M. Gates.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2011
• Undersea Warfare Capabilities and Challenges, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, September 12, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the September 12, 2013 hearing on "Undersea Warfare" held before the U.S. House Committee on Armed Forces, Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces. From the opening statement of Randy Forbes: "I want to welcome our members and our distinguished panel of experts to today's hearing that will focus on our undersea warfare capabilities and challenges. […] As to this hearing, I continue to believe that the undersea war- fare capabilities provided by our United States Navy provide a pre- eminent role in the--our control of the global commons. These capabilities provide the United States with a key asymmetric advantage over any potential aggressor. Even in a time of declining re- sources, it is crucial that our Nation continue to retain our strategic advantage in undersea warfare." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Randy Forbes, Richard P. Breckenridge, and David C. Johnson.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2014
• Border Security Oversight, Part II: Examining Asylum Requests, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on National Security, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, July 17, 2013

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  This is the July 17, 2013 hearing, "Border Security Oversight, Part II: Examining Asylum Requests" held before the U.S. House Subcommittee on National Security of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. From the statement of Joseph E. Langlois: "The United States has a long history of providing humanitarian protection to refugees and other vulnerable individuals. We are party to the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and the Convention against Torture (CAT), which obligate contracting states to abide by the principle of non-refoulement -- to refrain from returning individuals to countries where they fear certain types of harm. Our obligations under the Protocol and the CAT are implemented through various mechanisms, all of which incorporate the principle of non-refoulement. For example, individuals may seek asylum in the United States in one of two ways, either by applying for asylum 'affirmatively' with USCIS or 'defensively' while in removal proceedings before an Immigration Judge within the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). In general, any individual present in the United States and not in removal proceedings may file an affirmative asylum application with USCIS. Affirmative asylum procedures require an in-depth, in-person interview of every principal asylum applicant. This interview is conducted by specially trained Asylum Officers. These officers are a professional cadre within USCIS, dedicated full-time to the adjudication of asylum claims. They are extensively trained in national security issues, the security and law enforcement background check process, eligibility criteria, country conditions, making proper credibility determinations, and fraud detection." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Joseph E. Langlois.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2013
• Crime in California during the COVID-19 Pandemic

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Introduction: "As the COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019] pandemic struck the US in early 2020 and led to social dislocations, financial and health stresses, and alterations in our daily routines, crime rates in California and across the country also changed, sometimes in unpredictable ways. Throughout the nation, there have been widely cited media reports [hyperlink] of increases in homicide rates [hyperlink], aggravated assaults, and gun-related violence [hyperlink]. Additionally, there have been reports [hyperlink] of sizable increases in auto theft across the country. At the same time, many law enforcement agencies reported declines in the types of offenses that tend to increase with the volume of social interactions, such as robbery and larceny theft. In this brief, we use Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) data published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), California Department of Justice (DOJ) data, and US Census data to assess the degree to which crime in 2020 changed relative to crime in 2019 in California. We also compare crime trends in California to trends in other states. This policy brief expands on testimony [hyperlink] provided to the California Committee on the Revision of the Penal Code, and includes 437 municipalities, whereas the testimony only included municipalities with over 100,000 people."

  California Policy Lab

  Bird, Mia; Gill, Omair; Lacoe, Johanna . . .

  2021-09
• Alaska Military Land Withdrawals, Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Public Lands of the Committee on Interior and Insular, Affairs, United States Senate, Eighty-Seventh Congress, First Session, May 10 and 15, 1961

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  These are the May 10 and 15, 1961 hearings on "Alaska Military Land Withdrawals," held before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands of the Committee on Interior and Insular, Affairs. From the Opening Statement of Ernest Gruening: "This hearing on Senate bills 353, 354, 355, 356, and 357 has been called at the direction of the chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Lands, Hon. Alan Bible, of Nevada, with the approval of the chairman of the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Senator Clinton Anderson of New Mexico, who appointed me as chairman of a special subcommittee to take testimony on these bills in Alaska. This hearing will concern itself also with House bills 2279 through 2283[.]" Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: J.H. Michaelis, Edgar M. Walker, James D. Crawford, C.A. Boyd, Frank Griffin, James Lake, Edward Gowen, Leslie Vierick, Van Coffern, William I. Waugaman, Frances Walker, Bill Sites, Glenn DeSpain, and Joe Steinard.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  1961
• Emerging Military Technologies: Background and Issues for Congress [Updated October 21, 2021]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Summary: "Members of Congress and Pentagon officials are increasingly focused on developing emerging military technologies to enhance U.S. national security and keep pace with U.S. competitors. The U.S. military has long relied upon technological superiority to ensure its dominance in conflict and to underwrite U.S. national security. In recent years, however, technology has both rapidly evolved and rapidly proliferated--largely as a result of advances in the commercial sector. [...] This report provides an overview of selected emerging military technologies in the United States, China, and Russia: [1] artificial intelligence, [2] lethal autonomous weapons, [3] hypersonic weapons, [4] directed energy weapons, [5] biotechnology, and [6] quantum technology. It also discusses relevant initiatives within international institutions to monitor or regulate these technologies, considers the potential implications of emerging military technologies for warfighting, and outlines associated issues for Congress. These issues include the level and stability of funding for emerging technologies, the management structure for emerging technologies, the challenges associated with recruiting and retaining technology workers, the acquisitions process for rapidly evolving and dual-use technologies, the protection of emerging technologies from theft and expropriation, and the governance and regulation of emerging technologies. Such issues could hold implications for congressional authorization, appropriation, oversight, and treaty-making."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Sayler, Kelley M.

  2021-10-21
• COVID-19: Federal Agencies' Initial Reentry and Workplace Safety Planning, Report to Congressional Addressee

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Government Accountability Office (GAO) Highlights: "The federal government employs approximately 2.8 million civilian workers, a workforce that plays an important role in maintaining vital government services. The White House, OMB [Office of Management and Budget], and other cognizant agencies issued guidance to support federal agencies as they developed tailored plans for bringing the federal workforce back to offices and safely conducting on-site work. The CARES [Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security] Act included a provision for GAO to monitor and oversee the federal government's response to the COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019] pandemic. This report (1) examines agencies' approaches to initial reentry planning, (2) assesses the extent to which agencies' workplace safety plans are consistent with federal guidance, and (3) examines the coordination and oversight of federal reentry and workplace safety planning across the government. GAO analyzed federal guidance from cognizant agencies to identify crosscutting themes for reentry planning, and reviewed OMB guidance on workplace safety principles. GAO assessed workplace safety plans, reentry plans, and relevant documentation from the 24 CFO [Chief Financial Office] Act agencies against the themes and principles identified in guidance and interviewed agency officials. GAO also reviewed guidance to identify oversight and coordination responsibilities and reviewed prior GAO work on pandemic preparedness and interagency collaboration."

  United States. Government Accountability Office

  2021-10
• HASC Committee Print 112-4: Leaving Guantanamo: Policies, Pressures, and Detainees Returning to the Fight, January 2012

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "In March 2011, Chairman Howard P. 'Buck' McKeon and Ranking Minority Member Adam Smith directed the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee to undertake an in-depth, comprehensive bipartisan investigation of procedures to dispatch detainees from the Guantanamo Bay detention facility (GTMO) over the past decade. This necessarily included an examination of mechanisms intended to prevent former detainees from reengaging in terror-related activities. In conducting this study, committee staff travelled to eleven countries, interviewed nearly every senior official directly involved in these matters in both the Bush and Obama administrations, received briefings from the Department of Defense and Department of State, consulted with eighteen subject matter experts, met with two former detainees, and reviewed thousands of pages of classified and unclassified documents. Subcommittee Members convened a hearing, three Member briefings (including one that was classified), and travelled to several relevant locations. This report finds that the Bush and Obama administrations, in reaction to domestic political pressures, a desire to earn goodwill abroad, and in an attempt to advance strategic national security goals, sought to 'release' or 'transfer' GTMO detainees elsewhere. Those 'released' were judged a sufficiently low threat that they were sent to countries with no expectation of follow up. 'Transferred' detainees, because they were assessed as relatively more dangerous, were conveyed with the expectation that some process would be applied in the receiving nation to mitigate the threat they potentially posed."

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012-01
• Best Practices and Next Steps: A New Decade in the Fight Against Human Trafficking, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, June 13, 2011

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Christopher H. Smith: "At this hearing, we'll be examining in particular the most effective policies and tools developed by the government and the private sector to combat human trafficking. No country, and few industries, are untouched by this pervasive human rights abuse. [...] This hearing provides an opportunity, and an important opportunity, to see what new and effective measures are being taken by various stakeholders, and what the U.S. Government can do to help encourage and facilitate those efforts. Of particular interest are the evolving roles of public-private partnerships. In the past 5 years, several effective initiatives that aim to prevent trafficking and assist victims had been undertaken by the private sector. [...] This hearing will highlight the need to harness the insights and the expertise of government and various actors from civil society alike. Such coordinated efforts should always be an emphasis of public policy, but are particularly necessary in times of severe budgetary constraints, such as now facing our global economy. Such partnerships bring together a broader range of expertise, leverage resources to obtain better results, and spread awareness to people who can make a difference, but who may otherwise never hear about human trafficking." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Luis CdeBaca, Deborah Cundy, Chai Ling, Nancy Rivard, Philp Kowalcyzk, Kevin Bales, David Abramowitz, Donald M. Payne, Russ Carnahan, Ted Poe, and Christopher H. Smith.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012
• Renewing the United Nations Mandate for Iraq: Plans and Prospects: Hearing Before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight, House of Representatives, One Hundred Tenth Congress, Second Session, November 19, 2008

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of William D. Delahunt: "This is the eighth in a series of hearings which the subcommittee has held on the Bush administration's efforts to consummate what was initially described as a long-term security agreement with the Government of Iraq. I appreciate the involvement of my friend and colleague and ranking member, the gentleman from California, in this undertaking; he is presently attending another meeting, and I am going to proceed with my opening statement and when he arrives he will deliver his. The first hearing in this series was held on December 19, 2007; almost a year ago. Much has changed since then. I would note that the proposed agreement is now called Agreement on the Withdrawal-- here he is. I am going to suspend, because in a prior conversation we discussed that I would defer to him to make his opening statement, because I know he will be going back and forth because the Republican Conference is organizing today and I know they have a series of votes." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: William D. Delahunt, Oona A. Hathaway, Raed Jarrar, Thomas Donnelly, Michael J. Matheson, and Issam Michael Saliba.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2008
• Secret Service on the Line: Restoring Trust and Confidence, Hearing Before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, May 23, 2012

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the opening statement of Joseph I. Lieberman: "Over its nearly 150 year history, the Secret Service has built an extraordinary reputation for selfless and skilled devotion to the important and dangerous work its agents do -- protecting the President and other high officials of our government. That reputation was sadly stained last month when 11 Secret Service employees engaged in a night of heavy drinking in Cartagena, Colombia, which ended with them taking foreign women back to their hotel rooms. We have called this hearing as part of our Committee's responsibility to oversee the functions of the federal government, particularly those within the Department of Homeland Security, including the United States Secret Service. […] In recent days, the Secret Service provided protection for world leaders at both the G8 and NATO summits. The Presidential campaigns are in full swing, and the Secret Service needs to protect the candidates and secure the two national conventions. And the President and Vice President need protection every day. The credibility of the Secret Service is too important and its mission too critical to our country to leave any questions about Cartagena and what preceded it unanswered." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Joseph I. Lieberman, Susan M. Collins, Scott P. Brown, Ron Johnson, Rob Portman, Thomas R. Carper, Mary L. Landrieu, Mark J. Sullivan, and Charles K. Edwards.

  United States. Government Printing Office

  2012