Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 1/2! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, which is half the size of the Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• Serial No. 114-2: The North Korean Threat: Nuclear, Missiles and Cyber, Briefing Before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, January 13, 2015

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

  This is the January 13, 2015 briefing on "The North Korean Threat: Nuclear, Missiles and Cyber," held before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Chairman Edward R. Royce: "First, this rogue regime has no interest in being a responsible state. Second, while Kim Jong Un continues to carry out human rights abuses around the world and by carrying out attacks, for those of you who remember some of the exercises that the North Koreans have taken offshore, as well, most importantly, of what they have done to their own people. The way in which a country treats its own people will sometimes tell us how they will treat others. The current President of South Korea, her mother was assassinated by North Korean agents. So, we looked at that U.N. report that was recently filed, after the evidence and interviews with many of the survivors, defectors out of North Korea, this was the conclusion of the report. The United Nations has found no parallel in the contemporary world for the treatment of people in North Korea. That is quite a statement. And in the meantime, of course, instead of assisting that population, the resources that North Korea gets its hands on continues to go into its nuclear and missile systems and, of course, cyber weapon capability as well. And third, the third point, North Korea's weapons are not merely for show. We and our allies in Northeast Asia are facing a brutal and dangerous regime, one that not only is trying to miniaturize nuclear weapons to put them on ICBM's, but also one, as I said earlier, that has been involved in the past in central Asia and in the Middle East in proliferating these different types of weapons, missiles and other types of offensive capabilities as well as nuclear weapons capability." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Sung Kim, Daniel Glaser, and Gregory J. Touhill.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• H. Doc. 113-180: Imposing Additional Sanctions with Respect to North Korea, Communication from the President of the United States, Transmitting Notification of an Executive Order Issued with Respect to North Korea that Expands the National Emergency Declared in Executive Order 13466 of June 26, 2008, as Amended by Executive Order 13551 of August 30, 2010, and Executivee ORder 13570 of April 18, 2011, Pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1701 Et Seq, January 2, 2015

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

  This is the January 2, 2015 communication from the President of the United States on "Imposing Additional Sanctions with Respect to North Korea." From the document: "Pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), I hereby report that I have issued an Executive Order (the ''order'') with respect to North Korea that expands the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13466 of June 26, 2008, expanded in scope in Executive Order 13551 of August 30, 2010, and relied upon for additional steps in Executive Order 13570 of April 18, 2011. The order takes additional steps to address North Korea's continued actions that threaten the United States and others. In 2008, upon terminating the exercise of certain authorities under the Trading With the Enemy Act (TWEA) with respect to North Korea, the President issued Executive Order 13466 and declared a national emergency pursuant to IEEPA to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by the existence and risk of the proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material on the Korean Peninsula. Executive Order 13466 continued certain restrictions on North Korea and North Korean nationals that had been in place under TWEA."

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015-01-02
• S. Hrg. 113-476: Transformation: Afghanistan Beyond 2014, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs of the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, April 30, 2014

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

  This is from the April 30, 2014 hearing, "A Transformation: Afghanistan Beyond 2014" before the Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. From the testimony of Jarrett Blanc: "Sustaining progress in Afghanistan after 2014through the Transformation Decade depends on the continued growth of Afghanistan's governance and security institutions and continued support by the international community for a sovereign, stable, unified and democratic Afghanistan. This partnership must be based on the principles of mutual respect and mutual accountability and should recognize the increasing responsibility of the sovereign Afghan state and a calibrated reduction of financial and other assistance from the international community. Stability requires Afghan progress on security and political goals which must be matched by effective governance, the advancement of rule of law, human rights, and economic reform. Our assistance programs through this period of transition will remain focused on building the capacity of Afghan institutions to sustain the gains of the last decade, including continued support for Afghan women." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Jarrett Blanc, Fatema Z. Sumar, Kathleen Campbell, John Allen, and Parnian Nazary.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Serial No. 114-44: A Review of the President's Executive Actions on Immigration, Joint Hearing Before the Subcommittee on National Security and the Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, June 17, 2015

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

  This is the June 17, 2015 hearing entitled "A Review of the President's Executive Actions on Immigration," held before the Subcommittee on National Security and the Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. From the opening statement of subcommittee chairman Ron DeSantis: "On November 20, 2014, just 2 weeks after the 2014 midterm elections, President Obama made far-reaching unilateral changes to our Nation's immigration policy, despite saying on over 22 different occasions that he did not have the authority to do so. In his address on that day, the President said that: We're a Nation of laws. Those who broke our immigration laws must be held accountable, especially those who are dangerous. That's why over the past 6 years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent. And that's why we're going to keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security. We will prioritize, just like law enforcement does every day. The administration's actions, however, have not matched the President's rhetoric. According to documents provided to the House Judiciary Committee by DHS in April of this year, ICE arrests of criminal illegal aliens has declined 32 percent from the same period a year before, with 51,337 administrative arrests of criminal aliens in fiscal year 2015 compared to 75,171 arrests in the same period in fiscal year 2014. Those declines occurred across the board of criminal offenses. [...] Plainly, the President's assertion his administration will keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security is not--is contradicted by those facts. Simply put, the President's policy changes are not doing a good job of protecting the safety of the American people." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Sarah R. Saldana, Leon Rodriguez, and John Roth.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• H.A.S.C. No. 114-17: Hearing on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs Before the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, Full Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy, Strategy, and Posture in Afghanistan: Post-2014 Transition, Risks, and Lessons Learned, March 4, 2015

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

  This is the March 4, 2015 hearing on "U.S. Policy, Strategy, and Posture in Afghanistan" held before the House Armed Services Committee. From the opening statement of William M. Thornberry: We have been engaged in military action in Afghanistan for 14 years. The predictions that this would be a long conflict have proven accurate. While there have been setbacks in recent years, there is also cause for cautious optimism. The United States and its allies, especially the Afghan forces, have made some meaningful gains. A counterinsurgency is one of the toughest types of war a democracy can fight. While this conflict has been a difficult one, it is not impossible. And both our future security and the future of the Afghan people depend on our success. [...] But now is a critical moment. We must not repeat the mistakes of Iraq, where an early withdrawal that was based, in my view, on political rather than strategic calculations contributed to the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant [ISIL], where an enemy once devastated has reconstituted itself to pose an even bigger, more deadly threat." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John F. Campbell.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• H. Rept. 114-392, Part 1: North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act of 2015, Report to Accompany H.R. 757, Including Cost Estimate of the Congressional Budget Office, January 11, 2016

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

  From the Summary and Purpose: H.R. 757, the North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act (NKSEA), is the first comprehensive sanctions legislation directed at North Korea. It is intended to address North Korea's nuclear, ballistic missile, and other WMD threats; its counterfeiting of U.S. currency and other illicit activities; its misuse of the financial system through money laundering; its severe human rights abuses; its cyber activities; and other activities that violate applicable U.N. Security Council resolutions, including arms trafficking, WMD proliferation, and luxury goods imports. As of 2014, no comprehensive sanctions legislation exists to address these threats. The purpose of this legislation is to compel the Government of North Korea to verifiably suspend, and ultimately dismantle, its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, including, but not limited to, the cessation of all uranium enrichment and plutonium related activities. Through the application of broad-based sanctions, it is also intended to deprive North Korea of the resources it requires to develop other unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles, acquire destabilizing convention weapons that threaten U.S. allies in the region, support terrorism in the region and across the globe, and engage in the systematic oppression of the people of North Korea. Finally, it is intended to force the Government of North Korea to accept a degree of transparency that will allow for the verification of its commitments, peaceful coexistence with its neighbors, including South Korea, and an end to the repression of the North Korean people.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2016-01-11
• S. Hrg. 114-601: Situation in Afghanistan, Hearing Before the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, February 4, 2016

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

  This is from the February 4, 2016 hearing on "Situation in Afghanistan" before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the statement of John McCain: "In 2001, U.S. forces went to Afghanistan because that was where, under the sanctuary of the Taliban regime, al-Qaeda planned and trained for the September 11th attacks that killed 3,000 innocent civilians on American soil. Our mission was to ensure that Afghanistan would never again be a safe haven for al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups to attack the United States or our allies and partners. That mission has been successful for fourteen years, but it is far from over. U.S. forces are carrying out that mission today by performing two critical tasks: counterterrorism and training, advising, and assisting our Afghan partners. Both of these tasks are vital to achieving our strategic goals and protecting our homeland. We are taking the fight to America's enemies in Afghanistan while at the same time building a sustainable Afghan security force that can stand on its own, take on violent extremists, and deny terrorists safe haven in their country." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John F. Campbell.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2017
• H.A.S.C. No. 114-82: Afghanistan in 2016: The Evolving Security Situation and U.S. Policy, Strategy, and Posture, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, Hearing Held February 2, 2016

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

  This is the February 2, 2016 hearing entitled, "Afghanistan in 2016: The Evolving Security Situation and U.S. Policy, Strategy, and Posture," held before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of William M. ''Mac'' Thornberry, U.S. Representative from Texas' 13th Congressional District: "The committee meets today to hear from our U.S. and NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] commander in Afghanistan, General John Campbell. [...] This is a crucial time in Afghanistan. We all read the press reports about the growing presence of ISIS [Islamic State of Iraq and Syria]. We read about the Taliban being more aggressive, partly because of their internal power struggles, [...] partly because they are trying to position themselves for any peace talks that may come. There are some who believe that Al Qaeda is regrouping in the area. And there are a number of other groups. And yet, our commitment to Afghanistan seems to come a year at 2 a time, which causes some question about how reliable a partner we are. [...] The committee and the American people are looking forward to an update of the status of the situation today in Afghanistan [...] [and] whether the Afghans are making progress in developing their military and being able to handle their own security needs effectively. [...] [We] continue to ask: Why are we still here, 14 years later? Why is it important?" Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John F. Campbell.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2016
• Serial No. 115-12: Pressuring North Korea: Evaluating Options, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House Of Representatives, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, March 21, 2017

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

  This is the March 21, 2017 hearing titled, "Pressuring North Korea: Evaluating Options," held before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Ted Yoho, U.S. Representative from Florida and Chairman of the Subcommittee: "We are meeting today during what is probably the most significant shift in U.S. policy toward North Korea since it began its illicit nuclear program. The new administration has shown a willingness to embrace new thinking on the North Korea issue, and my goal for today's hearing is to discuss ways Congress can continue to drive a policy on North Korea that finally implements all the tools we have available. [...] Secretary of State Tillerson left the world's media breathless last week when he restated that all options are on the table regarding North Korea, implying military options. His next statement that we have had many, many steps we can take before we get to that point, received less attention, but was really actually more significant. This is what I hope to focus on today: The many unused or incompletely implemented tools that we can use before the last resort of military action, something none of us would like to see. North Korea's nuclear program has never been a bigger threat, and we need to respond with all the tools at our disposal." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Bruce Klingner, Sung-Yoon Lee, and Anthony Ruggiero.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2017
• Serial No. 114-148: U.S. Response to North Korea's Nuclear Provocations, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, January 13, 2016

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

  This is the January 13, 2016 hearing on "U.S. Response to North Korea's Nuclear Provocations" held before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific. From the opening statement of Matt Salmon: "On the evening of January 6, North Korea likely conducted its fourth nuclear weapons test. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un claimed that the test was a fusion reactive hydrogen bomb. Most experts are skeptical, given seismic evidence and North Korea's penchant for overstatement. But it is, nonetheless, incredibly concerning. We convene this hearing today not only to join the international community in condemning the test, but to work to find a feasible lasting solution to address the North Korean nuclear threat. For many in the United States, if we think of North Korea it is usually the butt of a joke, reference to either The Interview or Team America movies. Despite repeated calls from both respectable civilian thinkers and top military leadership citing North Korea as a top threat in the Pacific theater, North Korea seems to have been off the Obama administration's radar. Instead, they have dismissed the imminent threat by employing its so-called ''strategy of patience''--or, excuse me, ''strategic patience.'' For our allies in the region, North Korean provocations mean so much more, and it should for the United States as well." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Victor Cha, Bruce Klingner, and Bonnie Glaser.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2016
• Serial No. 115-20: Afghanistan's Terrorist Resurgence: Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Beyond, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, April 27, 2017

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

  This is the April 27, 2017 hearing on "Afghanistan's Terrorist Resurgence: Al-Qaeda, ISIS [Islamic State of Iraq and Syria], and Beyond" held before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Ted Poe: "When our forces invaded Afghanistan in 2001, the goal was simple: Remove the Taliban government that sheltered the plotters of the 9/11 attacks and destroy al-Qaeda. It has been 16 years that the United States has been at war, and Afghanistan is still a haven for terrorists who seek to attack and kill Americans. Just today, two Americans were killed in the eastern province of Afghanistan. Our military quickly toppled the Taliban government in 2001, and the Taliban/al-Qaeda forces fled to Pakistan where they regrouped and launched more attacks against our troops. Since then, the Taliban has waged insurgency in Afghanistan, destabilizing the country and creating perfect conditions for terrorists to exploit. The Taliban insurgency today is stronger than any other point since 2001. The Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction said in January, 171 Afghan districts are controlled, influenced, or contested by the Taliban. As long as the Taliban is successful this means good news for al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda has a long history of loyalty to the Taliban, or Osama bin Laden swore allegiance to the Taliban's leader, Mullah Omar, even before 9/11. And when bin Laden was killed, Ayman al-Zawahiri renewed his oath that cemented ties between al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Wherever the Taliban has influenced, al-Qaeda is not behind. Since 2010, United States' officials have claimed that al-Qaeda had a small presence in the country limited to only 50 to 100 fighters. That is absolutely incorrect. The United States has killed and captured more Afghan, more terrorists, since that time than was claimed to be in the entire country." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Bill Roggio, Seth G. Jones, and Vanda Felbab-Brown.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2017
• Serial No. 115-4: Countering the North Korean Threat: New Steps in U.S. Policy, Hearing Before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, February 7, 2017

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

  This is the February 7, 2017 hearing on "Countering the North Korean Threat: New Steps in U.S. Policy" held before the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the statement of Chairman Edward Royce: "At this point it's clear that very, very soon North Korea is going to be able to target all 50 States in the United States, as well as target our allies. At the same time, it's the rapid speed of this advance and the fact also that North Korea has this history of proliferating. They get their ICBM technology or they get their ability to create a nuclear bomb and they sell that, and this is another concern that we have, because this is really a ''game changer'' to our national security. [...] So our panel this morning has important insights on Kim Jong Un's goals, on vulnerabilities that we can exploit, and on how the President can better use the authorities that Congress has given him through the legislation that we passed here in the committee." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Victor Cha, Sue Mi Terry, Anthony Ruggiero, and Robert L. Gallucci.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2017
• Serial No. 114-118: North Korea: Back on the State Sponsor of Terrorism List? Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, October 22, 2015

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

  This is the October 22, 2015 hearing entitled, "North Korea: Back on the State Sponsor of Terrorism List?," held before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the testimony of Sung Kim: "Multiple UN Security Council resolutions require North Korea to abandon its nuclear and ballistic missile programs, and prohibit countries from engaging with the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea] to buy or sell weapons and related items and technologies. North Korea itself committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs in the 2005 Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks. Yet North Korea continues to violate these obligations and prior commitments through its continued pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, and its illicit proliferation of weapons and technologies abroad. This conduct poses a growing threat to the United States, our friends and allies in the region, and the global nonproliferation regime. […] We are committed to using the full range of tools -- deterrence, diplomacy, and pressure -- to counter that threat and to make clear North Korea will not achieve security or prosperity while the regime pursues nuclear weapons, abuses its own people, and flouts its longstanding obligations and commitments." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Sung Kim and Hilary Batjer Johnson.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• S. Hrg. 113-554: Situation in Afghanistan: Hearing Before U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, March 12, 2014

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

  This is the March 12, 2013 hearing on "The Situation in Afghanistan" held before the Senate Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of Chairman Levin: "This committee has held regular hearings on Afghanistan over the years. More than 2,200 Americans have given their lives there, and thousands more have been wounded. Despite those sacrifices, and despite the fact that Afghanistan harbored the terrorists who attacked our Nation in 2001, a recent Gallop poll showed that for the first time, a plurality of Americans believe that sending our forces to Afghanistan was a mistake. I do not share that view. More importantly, neither do the Afghan people. A recent public opinion poll in Afghanistan shows that a large majority of Afghans believe the conditions in the country have improved over the last decade." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of Joseph F. Dunford.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• S. Hrg. 110-1254: Goods Movement on our Nation's Highways, Hearing before the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, One Hundred Tenth Congress, Second Session, May 8, 2008

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

  This is the May 8, 2008 hearing, "Goods Movement on our Nation's Highways" before the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. From the opening statement of Barbara Boxer: "The current highway, transit and highway safety authorization legislation, SAFETEA-LU [Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act, Legacy for Users], will expire on September 30, 2009. Goods movement and its impact on congestion and air quality will at the top of my list of issues that need to be addressed through the authorization process. Today's hearing is the first step." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael Gallis, Charles Potts, and Mortimer Downey.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• H.A.S.C. No. 115-53: Combat Aviation Modernization Programs and the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Request, Hearing on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs Before the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces Hearing, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, June 7, 2017

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

  This is the June 7, 2017 hearing on "Combat Aviation Modernization Programs and the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Request," held before the U.S. House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces. From the opening statement of Michael R. Turner: "The subcommittee meets today to review the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force aviation investment and modernization budget request for fiscal year [FY] 2018." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Arnold W. Bunch, Jerry D. Harris, Paul A. Grosklags, Jon M. Davis, and DeWolfe H. Miller III.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2017-06-07
• S. Hrg. 112-861: Hurricane Sandy: Response and Recovery, Progress and Challenges: Hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on the Department of Homeland Security, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, December 5, 2012

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

  This is the December 5, 2012 hearing, "Hurricane Sandy: Response and Recovery, Progress and Challenges," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations. From the statement of W. Craig Fugate: Hurricane Sandy was the eighteenth named storm of the 2012 Hurricane Season, and the tenth hurricane. A high pressure pattern over northern New England coupled with a strong mid-level trough moving east from the Midwest were the two primary features that established Sandy's eventual landfall trajectory into southern New Jersey on the evening of October 29th. With tropical-force winds reaching out 580 miles, Sandy was the second-largest Atlantic storm on record. Hurricane Sandy affected the east coast, from North Carolina to Maine, particularly lashing the New Jersey and New York coasts with heavy rain, winds, snow, and a record storm surge. Additionally, Sandy affected states as far inland as West Virginia, Ohio, and Indiana. In the days leading up to landfall of Hurricane Sandy, FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] worked with the whole community to support our citizens and first responders as they prepared for the storm. By leaning forward, the agency was able to support a prompt, coordinated response effort while effectively understanding the needs of survivors and planning for future needs." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: W. Craig Fugate and Shaun Donovan.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• S. Hrg. 113-652: Aviation Safety: FAA's Progress on Key Safety Initiatives, Hearing Before the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, April 16, 2013

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

  This is the April 2013 hearing "Aviation Safety" before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. From the opening statement of John D. Rockefeller, IV: "Americans take the safety of their aviation system for granted. And, they should -- given that all too often air travel is a difficult experience, safety is the last thing passengers need to worry about. There are certain expectations built into modern air travel. Airline passengers expect that their pilot is experienced and rested; that their aircraft has been properly maintained; and that air traffic controllers will guide their plane safely through the skies. But, the industry and regulators should never take the safety of the system for granted. I know that none of us in this room do; everyone here today is deeply committed to aviation safety. Our strong aviation record did not happen overnight. Everyone involved has worked hard to cultivate a strong safety culture. The FAA [Federal Aviation Administration], aircraft manufacturers, and airline employees all hold safety as their number one priority, as do we. Congress has spent a considerable amount of time in the last few years strengthening the FAA. It wasn't easy, but we got it done. And, the aviation system will become even safer because of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act we passed last year and the Airline Safety Act we passed in 2010." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael Huerta, Deborah A.P. Hersman, Gerald L. Dillingham, and Jeffery B. Guzzetti.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• S. Hrg. 113-752: Preventing Potential Chemical Threats and Improving Safety: Oversight of the President's Executive Order on Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security, Hearing Before the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, March 6, 2014

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

  This is the March 6, 2014 hearing on "Preventing Potential Chemical Threats and Improving Safety: Oversight of the President's Executive Order on Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security," held before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. From the opening statement of Thomas R. Carper: "Sometimes decades can go by without an incident. But sometimes, unfortunately, things do go wrong, as we know, and it is our duty to ask whether we could have done better, what we could have done so as to prevent the next incident from happening and prevent injuries and, in some cases, death. That is why the President has issued his Executive Order, as you know, on chemical facilities, creating the Chemical Facility Safety and Security Working Group, and that is why we are here today to ask how we can do better. Everything I do I know I can do better. I think that is true of all of us. I think that is true of all of our governmental agencies, too, and, frankly, the private sector." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Mathy Stanislaus, Rafael Moure-Eraso, Michael Wilson, James S. Frederick, Evan P. Hansen, Billy Pirkle, and Scott Berger.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• S. Hrg. 113-615: The Impacts of the Government Shutdown on Our Economic Security, Hearing Before the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, October 11, 2013

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

  This is the October 11, 2013 hearing on "The Impacts of the Government Shutdown on Our Economic Security," held before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. From the opening statement of Deborah A. P. Hersman: "On October 1, 2013, the NTSB [National Transporation Safety Board] delivered furlough notices to 383 of our 405 employees. Our contingency plan for operations following a lapse in appropriations provides that all activities of the NTSB be shut down except for those necessary to prevent imminent threats to the safety of human life or protection of property, consistent with Anti-Deficiency Act requirements and OMB guidance. Here is what we are not doing in the 10 days that have passed since the shutdown: 14 accidents have occurred in which we have not dispatched investigators, including an 8-fatal bus crash that occurred in Tennessee, a 4- fatal general aviation accident that occurred in Arizona, and a worker fatality that occurred just blocks from here on Washington's Metro system. In addition to the activities that we are not initiating, the shutdown has resulted in the suspension of work on over 1,000 investigations in all modes of transportation. These delays slow our determination of probable cause and the issuance of safety recommendations, essentially delaying safety to the American public, resulting in lost lives and injuries." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Deborah A. P. Hersman, Marion C. Blakey, Alan I. Leshner, Keith Colburn, and Rachel Weintraub

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• S. Hrg. 113-696: The Future of Unmanned Aviation in the U.S. Economy: Safety and Privacy Considerations, Hearing before the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, January 15, 2014

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

  This is the January 15, 2014 hearing, "The Future of Unmanned Aviation in the U.S. Economy: Safety and Privacy Considerations," before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation. From the opening statement of Diane Feinstein: "I believe civilian drone technology, much of which has been developed in California, has great potential for both beneficial uses and for job creation; but the unique capabilities of the drone bring with it significant risks, most notably related to privacy and public safety. I believe we should proceed with caution and that Congress must act to set reasonable rules to protect the American people and ensure that in industry ask reach its potential." Statements, letters, and other materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Diane Feinstein, Michael P. Huerta, Mary Cummings, Henio Arcangeli, and Christopher R. Calabrese.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• S. Hrg. 113-744: NRC's Implementation of the Fukushima Near-Term Task Force: Recommendations and Other Actions to Enhance and Maintain Nuclear Safety, Hearing Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, January 30, 2014

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

  This is the January 30, 2014 hearing "NRC's Implementation of the Fukushima Near-Term Task Force" held before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. From the opening statement of James M. Inhofe: "It was in 2003, when I was chairman of this committee, that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC] asked Congress for a bigger budget to build a new building and add significantly to its staff to support the expected approval of four design certifications for new reactor designs and 17 Construction and Operating License Applications (COLAs). Now, 10 years later, the NRC has only approved one design certification and two COLAs. The NRC's workload did not increase the way that it was expected, but the Commission still increased its staff by almost 30%. This is very concerning to me because over the past few years the Commission has been developing sweeping new regulations that impose draconian costs on the industry without producing sufficient benefits. It is as if the NRC, with its new building and all of its new people, has been using its spare time to come up with new things the nuclear industry must do to maintain compliance with the law. NRC has done this most clearly in its reaction to Fukushima. While it is reasonable for us to review what went wrong there and make sure we aren't vulnerable to the same problems, it is not reasonable for the NRC to use the disaster to justify new, expensive rules that do not reduce risk. I question whether the NRC is still employing its own 'Principles of Good Regulations.'" Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Allison M. Macfarlane, Kristine L. Svinicki, George Apostolakis, William D. Magwood, IV, and William C. Ostendorff.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• H.A.S.C. No. 113-107: Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request for Atomic Energy Defense Activities and Nuclear Forces Programs, Hearing before the Committee on Armed Forces, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, April 8, 2014

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

  This is the April 8, 2014 hearing 'Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request for Atomic Energy Defense Activities and Nuclear Forces Programs,' held before the House Committee on Armed Services. From the opening statement of subcommittee chairman Mike Rogers: "First, today, 2 years late, we have finally received the administration's proposed nuclear force structure under the New START [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty]. I am glad to see that the President made the right decision, the decision that was obvious to us 2 years ago. We will take a hard look at this in the coming weeks, and we will discuss it today, I am sure. Second, the governance and management of the DOE [U.S. Department of Energy] and NNSA [National Nuclear Security Administration]. We had a hearing 2 weeks ago to receive the interim report of the congressional advisory panel on this topic. It was sobering, and it confirmed what this subcommittee has been saying for many years. We had 13 members show up at that hearing. I hope that shows just how serious we are taking this. We are as serious as a heart attack, and we want to make sure that we see some bold actions at the NNSA. Third, promised capabilities and programs keep slipping despite significant budget increases. Fulfillment of the requirement for this responsive nuclear infrastructure keeps being pushed into the distant future, and we have wasted billions of dollars with false starts. The follow-on to the air-launched cruise missile is pushed and may put both the nuclear security enterprise and the Strategic Command in a real bind. The interoperable warhead, a key pillar of the administration's future stockpile strategy, has been pushed out of sight on the calendar. Fourth, integrity and leadership problems in our nuclear forces. General Harencak and Admiral Richardson, we appreciate the updates you and your services have been providing us." Statements, letters, and other materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Terry J. Benedict, Elaine M. Bunn, Garrett Harencak, Edward Bruce Held, David G. Huizenga, John M. Richardson, Andrew C. Weber, and Peter S. Winokur.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Serial No. 113-71: Examining the Federal Protective Service: Are Federal Facilities Secure? Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, May 21, 2014

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

  This is the May 21, 2014 hearing on "Examining the Federal Protective Service" held before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. From the opening statement of Lou Barletta: "Today we are examining the Federal Protective Service [FPS] and the security of our federal buildings and facilities. FPS, with 1,300 personnel including law enforcement officers and nearly 14,000 contract guards, is charged with protecting over 9,000 federal buildings and facilities across the Nation owned or leased by the General Services Administration. While FPS it not responsible for all federal facilities, its role is central to protecting federal workers and visitors to federal buildings nationwide. Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, our country has taken steps to prevent and be better prepared for terrorism and other threats. And, unfortunately, public buildings are proven targets. Whether because of their symbolism or because of the number of federal employees and visitors that use these facilities, the threat to federal buildings has a long history." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Lou Barletta, Mark L. Goldstein, L. Eric Patterson, David L. Wright, and Stephen Amitay.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Senate Report 114-168: Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2015, Report of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on S. 1611, November 30, 2015

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

  "The USCG [U.S. Coast Guard] is tasked with providing maritime security, law enforcement, and prevention and response activities for more than 4.5 million square miles of ocean, 95,000 miles of coastline, 26,000 miles of commercial waterways, 361 ports, 3,700 marine terminals, and 25,000 miles of inland and coastal waterways-this is the largest system of ports, waterways, and coastal seas in the world. It is unique among the military branches for having a maritime law enforcement mission, with jurisdiction in both domestic and international waters, while also serving as a Federal regulatory agency as part of its mission set. [...] In 2014, the Commandant of the USCG (Commandant) stated that the USCG's mission demands were on the rise. Increasing activity in the Arctic and the destabilizing impacts of violence, corruption, terrorism, and drug trafficking in the Caribbean Basin, Central America, and Mexico continue to test the USCG's current capabilities. In order to meet these challenges, the USCG is in the midst of a major asset recapitalization that began in 2002. This effort will modernize the USCG's ships, boats, aircraft, and command, control, communication, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems."

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015-11-30
• State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2016, Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, May 6, 2015

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

  This is the May 6, 2015 hearing on "State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs" held before the Senate Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. From the opening statement of Lindsey Graham: "Our hearing today is on global health programs, and we have a panel of incredibly brilliant people who I am honored to welcome to the United States Senate, so you inform the Senate, the American people, and the world about the good causes that you represent. [...] The private sector, the Federal Government, and other international organizations and other governments have been collaborating for well over a decade to take the fight to AIDS [acquired immune deficiency syndrome], and we are winning and AIDS is losing. At the end of the day, the scourge is being put in a box, but growing in some areas of Africa for reasons that we must address. In terms of future commitment of money, now is not the time to back off. We are literally inside the 10 yard line when it comes to containing some of these diseases like AIDS and malaria, and there are thousands if not millions of young people alive today because of America's intervention and the taxpayers' generosity. It is a national security effort in my view to stabilize developing parts of the world so rampant diseases like AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis can be contained, and does not create further instability in regions that are already unstable. Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Deborah L. Birx, Mark Dybul, Elton John, and Rick Warren.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015-05-06
• Serial No. 114-29: Policing Strategies for the 21st Century: Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, May 19, 2015

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

  This is the May 19, 2015 hearing "Policing Strategies for the 21st Century" held before the House Committee on the Judiciary. From the opening statement of Chairman Bob Goodlatte: "While I refuse to consider the actions of police officers in Ferguson and New York as justifying the responses that befell those cities, it is clear that we must find a better way for our police and citizens to interact both in everyday situations and when more difficult circumstances arise. We have a distinguished panel before us today with deep knowledge of police training, tactics, and policies. We have longstanding leaders in the police community. We have instructors responsible for police training. Finally, we have those tasked with monitoring those police departments that have not met the standards we require of them. I am hopeful that this will be a constructive and positive hearing that focuses on current rules and regulations in place, the training our officers receive, and how we can train them better in order to apprehend criminals while minimizing harm to innocent citizens. I am especially interested to hear what we can do to raise the level of trust among our police officers and citizens while still protecting both. Policing will never be an easy or safe job, but I believe we must do everything we can to ensure that our officers have the tools and training they need to protect themselves and our Nation's citizens." Statements, Letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: David A. Clarke, Jr., W. Craig Hartley, Jr., Susan Rahr, Matthew Barge, and Deborah A. Ramirez.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Senate Report 114-146: Tsunami Warning, Education, and Research Act of 2015, Report of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on H.R. 34, September 22, 2015

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

  "A tsunmai is a set of ocean waves caused by abrupt movement of the ocean floor, initiated by earthquakes, volcanic eruption, meteor strikes, or underwater landslides that can have devastating impacts to coastlines and coastal communities, sometimes within minutes of a disturbance. Tsunami waves can hit coastlines near where they are generated, or they can travel for thousands of miles, at speeds up to 600 miles per hour and impact areas far from the location of the disturbance. [...] Currently the uses of real-time, deep ocean detectors that can directly detect tsunami waves and data from seismic gauges combined with models are essential for early detection. These relatively recent developments, in conjunction with continuing community education, have been shown to reduce the loss of life. [...] In the wake of such a disaster, Congress began to discuss the circumstance surrounding the Indian Ocean tsunami and the international capabilities for tsunami detection and warning. In 2006, Congress passed the Tsunami Warning and Education Act (P.L. 109-424) that directed the Administrator of NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] to operate a tsunami detection, forecasting, and warning program for the Pacific and Arctic Ocean regions and for the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea, and Gulf of Mexico region. The legislation also directed NOAA to establish a tsunami hazard mitigation program to improve preparedness of at-risk areas in the United States."

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015-09-22
• Serial No. 114-19; Serial No. 114-32: Examining the Export-Import Bank's Mandates: Joint Hearing Before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade, and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, April 30, 2015

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

  From the Opening Statements of: "Ex-Im [Export-Import], as has been stated, is demand-driven. We are self-sustaining. We charge our customers interest and fees for our services. And the result? In 2014, we supported 164,000 jobs. On top of that, we have sent nearly $7 billion to the Treasury over the past 2 decades, making Ex-Im one of the few agencies that actually makes money for the taxpayers. We have been reauthorized 16 times by overwhelming bipartisan majorities. Over that time, Congress has provided oversight and added three mandates: one for small business; one for renewable exports; and one for sub-Saharan Africa. Mandates have directed Ex-Im to provide extra attention to these three areas. […] Ex-Im has continually improved its products and services to give entrepreneurs the tools they need to compete and win in the renewable energy sector in sub-Saharan Africa and against foreign small businesses. That means more U.S. jobs, and more American leadership abroad." Statements, letters, and other materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Fred P. Hochberg, Jason Chaffetz, Denny Heck, and Gwen Moore.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015-04-30
• S. Hrg. 113-653: Assessing the Risks, Impacts, and Solutions for Space Threats, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Science and Space of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, March 20, 2013

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

  This is the March 20, 2013 hearing on "Space Threats" held before the Senate Subcommittee on Science and Space. From the opening statement of Ted Cruz: "Space flight and our capacity to maintain world-leading advantage in space flight is a critical priority for the nation and certainly a critical priority both for the State of Texas and the State of Florida. And so I am eager for our collective journey to ensure that NASA and all of the related programs have sufficient resources, sufficient priority to do what needs to be done. And I appreciate all of the witnesses coming here today to address these important topics and also to begin the process of what I hope this subcommittee will do over the coming years, which is continuing to make the case to the American people about the importance of these programs, about the benefits that they produce for the private sector, that they produce for men and women across this country, and, at the same time, looking for ways to improve those benefits, to expand the cooperation that we presently have between NASA and the private sector, and to look for ways to even further increase positive benefits that are realized in everyone's day-to-day life." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: James Green, Edward T. Lu, Richard DalBello, and Joan Johnson-Freese.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015