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).

• 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 Executive 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
• Kazakhstan: As Stable as Its Government Claims? Hearing Before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, January 25, 2012

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

  This is the January 25, 2012 hearing "Kazakhstan: As Stable as Its Government Claims?" held before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. From the opening statement of Christopher H. Smith: "Today we will discuss the state of human rights and democracy in Kazakhstan. The Government of Kazakhstan, controlled by the authoritarian President-for-Life Nazarbayev, has long sought to obscure its serious human rights and democracy deficiencies by claiming that at least it is a haven of stability in Central Asia. Stability has in fact become the basis of the Government of Kazakhstan's claim to legitimacy. Of course, stability can never be an excuse for dictatorship or widespread torture and similar abuses. We simply can never accept the hidden premise of the Kazakhstan Government's talk of stability, that human dignity can be bargained away in some exchange for stability. Likewise, we cannot accept at face value the claim that Kazakhstan is in fact as stable as its Government claims. This claim must be carefully examined. That is what this hearing is about today." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: William Courtney, Susan Corke, and Sean R. Roberts.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Implications of a Nuclear Agreement with Iran (Part IV): Hearing Before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, September 9, 2015

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

  This is the September 10, 2015 hearing "Implications of a Nuclear Agreement with Iran (Part IV)" held before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Chairman Edward Royce: "As Iran grows stronger across the board, the United States will be weaker to respond. By removing economic sanctions, the President is withdrawing one of our most successful, peaceful tools for confronting the Iranian regime. As international investment pours into Iran, there is going to be tremendous political pressure to not upset that apple cart--to keep the agreement going at all costs, no matter what Iranian cheating might be found. Why do I think that? Because we have already seen General Soleimani of the Quds Force take his trek, his trip into Russia to negotiate. We have already seen the announcement of the Fateh 313 rocket, a missile with a range of over 300 miles. That was presented a few weeks ago. […] Are the temporary restraints on Iran's nuclear program under this agreement worth that cost? President Obama is clearly betting that it is--that Iran will change enough over a short 10 to 15 years to be trusted with what by then will be internationally endorsed bomb-making technology on an industrial scale. But as we will hear today, that is a bet against history. As one witness recently wrote, Iran's enduring hostility toward us isn't 'an accident of historical inertia. 'But a choice by Iran--a choice based upon a world view that was founded in large measure on a fiery, theological anti-Americanism, an officially sanctioned and officially disseminated view of Americanism as satanism.' That is why we are used to hearing that rhetoric from the Ayatollah that Israel is the little Satan and the United States is the great Satan." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Chuck Wald, William Fallon, John Bird, and Leon Wieseltier.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Trans-pacific Partnership: Prospects for Greater U.S. Trade, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, March 4, 2015

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

  This is a testimony compilation of the March 4, 2015 hearing "The Trans-pacific Partnership: Prospects for Greater U.S. Trade," held before the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific. From the opening statement of Matt Salmon: "The scale of our economic ties with Asia is vast. Three of seven of our top trading partners are in Asia. Three of our top six holders of U.S. Treasury bonds are in Asia, where their combined ownership exceeds $2.5 trillion. Trade, especially U.S. economic and trade policy in the Asia Pacific will be one of the major issues this Congress will deliberate. Increased U.S. presence in the region through the Trans-Pacific Partnership would greatly improve the American economy as well as provide considerable diplomatic and strategic benefits." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Claude Barfield, Tami Overby, Scott Miller, and Celeste Drake.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Energy Revolution in the Western Hemisphere: Opportunities and Challenges for the U.S., Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, May 14, 2015

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

  This is the May 14, 2015 hearing "Energy Revolution in the Western Hemisphere: Opportunities and Challenges for the U.S." held before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of subcommittee chairman Tim Murphy: "These CARICOM [Caribbean Community] countries suffer from some of the most expensive energy prices in the world, hampering the growth of their island economies. Isn't it time that we figure out innovative and cost-effective ways to export our recently discovered energy abundance to help these small countries once and for all get off their dependence on subsidized energy from Venezuela? Not only does this make economic sense, but it also might actually help the U.S. geopolitically when the votes are cast at the U.N. and the OAS [Organization of American States]. Today, the Western Hemisphere has some amazing opportunities for deeper U.S. engagement with Mexico's energy sector reforms, energy revolutions in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, offshore exploration activities by Caribbean countries, and potentially new resources in the Arctic. In Mexico, the promise of opening Pemex to foreign investment will not only potentially benefit U.S. companies but will go a long way in improving the efficiency of Pemex while stabilizing, indeed, increasing Mexico's stalled oil production. This will lead to a more prosperous Mexico and that, unquestionably, is in the national interest of the United States." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: James H. Knapp, Kevin Book, Jamie Webster, and Jeremy Martin.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Reviewing the Administration's FY 2016 Budget Request for Europe and Eurasia: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, June 16, 2015

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

  This is the June 16, 2015 hearing on "Reviewing the Administration's FY 2016 Budget Request for Europe and Eurasia," held before the House Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threat. From the opening statement of Daana Rohrabacher: "Getting to the matter at hand, the President has asked that Congress authorize over $50 billion for international affairs programs for Fiscal Year 2016. Over $1 billion has been requested for programs of all types in the jurisdiction of this subcommittee. That is a sizeable increase from roughly $640 million spent for Fiscal Year 2014. Given the events in Eastern Europe over the past 18 months, much of the increased spending is targeted on Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Alina Romanowski, Susan Fritz, Daniel Rosenblum, and Jonathan Stivers.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Drones: The Next Generation of Commerce? Hearing Before 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 "Drones: The Next Generation of Commerce?," held before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. From the opening statement of committee chairman Jason Chaffetz: "This is a first in a series of hearings the Oversight and Government Reform Committee intends to have as we talk about emerging technologies. One of the great competitive advantages for the United States of America is our leadership in information technology. It's our leadership in creativity. It is the entertainment industry. We lead in a lot of different areas. And one of the things that the United States has done, has been a bastion, it's been a great place for entrepreneurs to come up with creativity and allow those ideas to enter the marketplace and thrive. And they create whole new industries. They create literally millions of jobs and billions of dollars in revenue and income. And there are also some interesting public policy issues that we need to discuss. As you have new and innovative companies and ideas and products and services that consumers are demanding and that the public wants, then we have an opportunity, I think, to make sure that we're fostering that growth and creating an atmosphere where those businesses and entrepreneurs can thrive. So today, we're going to start talking about drones, the next frontier for commerce because it does offer some exciting possibilities. But it also does create some challenges and some things that as the public and as a society we need to talk through." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael Whitaker, John Cavolowsky, Paul E. Misener, Brian Wynne, and Harley Geiger.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• China's Rise: The Strategic Impact of Its Economic and Military Growth: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 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 on "China's Rise: The Strategic Impact of Its Economic and Military Growth," held before the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific. From the opening statement of Matt Salmon: "China is at a crossroads. Its quest for development and global influence has come at a high cost of alienating partners and allies alike. There are cracks in the foundation, and imbalances remain politically, economically, and militarily. China cannot forsake and undermine the same international order that has helped incubate its rise to prominence. It cannot forget the agreements that it should honor or the spirit in which they were made." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Derek Scissors, Han Dongfang, Jerome Cohen, Adam Hersh, and Alison Kaufman.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Examining DHS Science and Technology Directorate's Engagement with Academia and Industry, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies of the Committee on Homeland Security, 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 'Examining DHS' held before a Subcommittee of the House Homeland Security Committee. From the opening statement of John Ratcliffe: 'The subcommittee meets today to examine the Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology or S&T Directorate. The ability for S&T to engage with academia and industry is a critically important function, especially in times of shrinking budgets and limited resources. S&T must be able to leverage the resources of academia, Federally-Funded Research and Development Centers, industry, and the full spectrum of what S&T Under Secretary Dr. Reginald Brothers has called the 'S&T ecosystem' in order to better enable the DHS components to carry out their missions to protect the homeland.' Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John Ratcliffe, Cedric L. Richmond, Bennie G. Thompson, Jacob Parker, Marc A. Pearl, Samuel H. Aronson, and James R. Langevin."

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Oversight of the Amtrak Accident in Philadelphia, Hearing Before the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, June 2, 2015

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

  This is the June 2, 2015 hearing on "Oversight of the Amtrak Accident in Philadelphia," held before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. From the opening statement of Bill Shuster: "The National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB] has reported that the train was traveling at 106 miles per hour despite a 50-mile-an-hour speed limit on that portion of the track. Eight passengers tragically lost their lives, and approximately 200 were injured. We were not aware of any defects or issues identified to date with respect to the track, the locomotive or other infrastructure. Today, we will get an update from the NTSB on where their investigation stands, and any additional information they can provide on the cause of this accident. Since the accident, the Federal Railroad Administration and Amtrak have taken several steps to improve safety along the Northeast Corridor. Amtrak is assessing all the curves along the NEC to determine if additional speed restrictions should be imposed. Amtrak has also announced it will be installing inward-facing cameras in its locomotives to help gain a better understanding of how incidents occur. And they have also committed to finish implementation of Positive Train Control on the Northeast Corridor by December of this year." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Christopher A. Hart, Joseph H. Boardman, Sarah Feinberg, and Dennis R. Pierce.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Port of Entry Infrastructure: How Does the Federal Government Prioritize Investments? Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, July 16, 2014

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

  This is the July 16, 2014 hearing on "Port of Entry Infrastructure: How Does the Federal Government Prioritize Investments?" held before the House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security. This hearing focuses on the budgetary priorities of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. From the opening statement of Chairman Miller: "Our Nation relies on the efficient flow of commerce across our border, and it is the job of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to not only facilitate commerce, but to also secure the homeland. To accomplish this mission, sufficient port of entry infrastructure is needed along with robust Customs and Border Protection staffing." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: John Wagner, Michael Gelber and Oscar Leeser.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Oversight of the Ongoing Rail, Pipeline, and Hazmat Rulemakings, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, April 14, 2015

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

  This is from the April 14, 2015 hearing "Oversight of the Ongoing Rail, Pipeline, and Hazmat Rulemakings," held before the House Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. " From the opening statement of Jeff Denham: "Our hearing today will focus on numerous matters related to current railroad, pipeline, and hazardous material rulemakings within the subcommittee's jurisdiction. Last year, we had two hearings that covered these ongoing rulemakings: one on hazardous materials safety and tank cars and the other on pipeline safety. I have heard too many times from industry and safety advocates that the Department of Transportation needs to move more quickly to implement the safety provisions Congress has passed. It is unusual to hear that industry wants to be regulated, and is pushing for rules to actually be completed. But the reality is companies can't invest in new equipment, in new employees, and in new ventures without regulatory certainty. In those two hearings, we expressed our frustration with the administration. Not enough progress has been made getting these numerous rules out. Sadly, today we are back asking the same questions. Where are these rules? Why are they still delayed? What is the administration doing about it? We believe in a risk-based, data-driven approach to safety. The administration states that they do as well. So, it should be easy to come up with rules that are data driven, apply cost-benefit principles, and get them out so both the public and industry can act accordingly." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Jackie Speier, Sarah Feinberg, Timothy P. Butters, and Christopher A. Hart.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Words Have Consequences: Palestinian Authority Incitement to Violence and Markup of H. Res 293, Expressing Concern Over Anti-Israel and Anti-Semitic Incitement Within the Palestinian Authority, Hearing and Markup Before 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 and markup titled "Words Have Consequences: Palestinian Authority Incitement to Violence and Markup of House Resolution 293, Expressing Concern Over Anti-Israel an Anti-Semitic Incitement Within the Palestinian Authority." From the opening statement of the Honorable Edward Royce, "This morning we consider the recent wave of terror that has gripped Israel. In a span of weeks, Palestinian militants have attacked more than 100 Jewish men, women, and children. Ten of those who have been knifed have died. A 2-year-old toddler, a 13-year-old on a bike, a 70-year-old woman on a bus are among those who were wounded. This is terrorism at its core when anyone who steps outside could be next. These attacks, mainly stabbings, have been driven by a deliberately misleading message. Palestinian Authority officials and extremist clerics have falsely claimed that Israelis are trying to change the status quo by limiting Muslim access to the Temple Mount/al-Aqsa Mosque compound that is holy to both faiths. The calls for killing have been amplified on social media as Arabic hashtags like 'the knife intifada,' 'poison the knife before you stab,' and 'slaughtering the Jews,' rapidly spread a message to attack those who are Jewish. Palestinian President Abbas regrettably has joined the hate speech. Israel is contending with a deep-seated hatred, nurtured by Palestinian leaders over many years in mosques, in schools, in newspapers, and on television channels." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Elliott Abrams, Jonathan Schanzer, and David Makovsky.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Terrorism in Africa: The Imminent Threat to the United States: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, April 29, 2015

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

  This is the April 29, 2015 hearing on "Terrorism in Africa: The Imminent Threat to the United States," held before the House Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. From the opening statement of Peter King: "We are holding this hearing to raise awareness and to discuss threats related to the spread of Islamist terror ideology on the African continent. While this has been happening over the last decade, I still do not believe that the United States has an appropriate counterterrorism strategy to address the threat, which leaves the homeland and U.S. interests vulnerable. There is no doubt that we are behind the curve in taking threats from terror groups in Africa seriously. We have seen on too many occasions that al-Qaeda-affiliated groups in Africa will attack American and Western interests when they see an opening. This was true in Libya, Algeria, Nigeria, and Kenya." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Peter T. King, Brian Higgins, and Bennie G. Thompson.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Jihadist Safe Havens: Efforts to Detect and Deter Terrorist Travel, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, July 24, 2014

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

  This is the July 24, 2014 hearing, "Jihadist Safe Havens: Efforts to Detect and Deter Terrorist Travel," before the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. This hearing focuses on the importance of mitigating the threat of terrorist travel and recruitment, notably within the United States. From the opening statement of Chairman King: "It is essential that the White House articulates American interests in the region, and elicits greater cooperation from European and foreign partners to identify and track individuals seeking to join extremist groups. As the diaspora of fighters and ideology spreads, there will be long-term consequences and a direct threat to the U.S. and the West. It is time for the Administration to implement a plan to safeguard the Homeland before Westerners who have become further radicalized in these conflicts are sent home to carry out attacks." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Fred Kagan, Robin Simcox, Peter Brookes, and Seth Jones.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Evolution of Terrorist Propaganda: the Paris Attack and Social Media, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, January 27, 2015

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

  This is the January 27, 2015 hearing on "The Evolution of Terrorist Propaganda: the Paris Attack and Social Media," 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: "Terrorists' use of social media has exploded over the past several years. Terrorist groups from ISIS to the Taliban use social media platforms to recruit, radicalize, spread propaganda and even raise money. Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that it is unlawful to provide a designated foreign terrorist organization with material support or resources, including any property-tangible or intangible-or services, among them, communication, equipment, and facilities. If foreign terrorist organizations are using American companies to spread propaganda and raise money, the question that remains is: Is this a violation of American law? That is the question for us today. I asked the Department of Justice this question directly in August 2012. Their answer? They refused to say, as they put it, in the abstract whether a particular company is violating the law or not under this section. So they didn't give a definitive answer. American newspapers would have never allowed our enemies in World War II to place ads in, say, the New York Times for recruitment of people to go and fight against America. So why do social media companies allow terrorist content on their platforms?" Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Mark Wallace, J.M. Berger, Evan Kohlmann, and Rebecca MacKinnon.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• ISIS: Defining the Enemy, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, April 29,2015

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

  This is the April 29, 2015 hearing "ISIS: Defining the Enemy" held before the House Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of Ted Poe: "The Middle East is a complex place. Major players weave an intricate web of support and opposition. As you can see on the screen that is on each end of the committee room--and Ambassador, I think there may be a chart that you have been furnished as well-- it is hard to keep track of who supports what groups. But one thing is clear. Nobody seems to like ISIS [Islamic State of Iraq and Syria]. Yet, despite everyone being against ISIS, we are not winning the battle against the war on ISIS. One of the reasons, I believe, is because it is not clear we understand the group very well. It is time we called it like it is. ISIS is a radical Islamic terrorist group. The White House doesn't really like to talk about this but we cannot defeat ISIS if we do not understand who they are. It is critical that we know what its goals are, how it seeks to achieve those goals. Even if the White House doesn't think ISIS is Islamic, ISIS does. ISIS explains its actions and justifies them through its interpretation of the Islamic law and Islamic writings. This philosophy is reflected in its daily actions and its deadly actions. ISIS beliefs state that Christians either must renounce their faith or embrace Islam or die. It is no coincidence then that we have seen ISIS specifically target Christians not because Christians are stealing their jobs or fighting against ISIS but merely because they are Christians." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Robert Ford, Maryam Rajavi, and Walid Phares.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2016, Part 5, Hearings Before the Subcommittee on the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, February 25, 2015

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

  This is the February 25, 2015 budget hearing entitled, "Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2016, Part 5," held before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, of the Committee on Appropriations. From the opening statement of Nita M. Lowey, U.S. Representative from New York: "You come before us with a budget request of $75,800,000,000, amounting to an increase of $4,200,000,000 in discretionary funding. Your request includes welcome policy proposals that will fund medical breakthroughs, provide affordable child care for working families, and create jobs. The department's budget is symbolic of the President's budget as a whole in that it calls for investments in research, education, training, infrastructure--all vitally important and interconnected. These investments are necessary not only to the health infrastructure but are crucial to growing our economy and creating jobs." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Sylvia Burwell.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2016, Part 6, Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, March 24, 2015

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

  This is the March 24, 2015 National Labor Relations Board hearing entitled, "Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2016, Part 6," held before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, of the Committee on Appropriations. From the opening statement of Nita M. Lowey, U.S. Representative from New York: "You come before us with a budget request of $75,800,000,000, amounting to an increase of $4,200,000,000 in discretionary funding. Your request includes welcome policy proposals that will fund medical breakthroughs, provide affordable child care for working families, and create jobs. The department's budget is symbolic of the President's budget as a whole in that it calls for investments in research, education, training, infrastructure--all vitally important and interconnected. These investments are necessary not only to the health infrastructure but are crucial to growing our economy and creating jobs." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Mark Pearce and Richard F. Griffin Jr.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• United States Department of Homeland Security: Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, July 14, 2015

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

  This is the July 14, 2015 hearing "United States Department of Homeland Security" held before the House Committee on the Judiciary. From the opening statement of Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte: "While testifying this March, ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] Director Saldaña expressed her enthusiastic support for mandatory detainers. Then, the very next day, she retracted that statement made under oath and called mandatory detainers highly counterproductive. There are now more than 200 jurisdictions, including San Francisco, which refuse to honor ICE detainers. This effectively releases criminal aliens onto the streets with all too tragic results. Secretary Johnson's solution, the Priorities Enforcement Program, is a failure. Politely asking for cooperation from sanctuary cities is a fool's errand. The clear answer to this problem is for DHS to mandate compliance with detainers and for this Administration to defend the mandatory nature of detainers in Federal court. Unfortunately, the Administration has taken neither of these crucial steps to keep our communities safe. Prior to Secretary Johnson's appointment, DHS, under the Obama administration, went beyond simple nonenforcement and took the leap of granting administrative amnesty to a class of hundreds of thousands of unlawful aliens. Then, last November, Secretary Johnson announced that DHS would grant such deferred action to over 4 million more unlawful aliens. By granting these classes of people deferred action, he would bestow benefits such as legal presence, work authorization, and access to the Social Security trust fund, and the earned income tax credit. It is within the constitutional authority of Congress, not the Administration, to grant such benefits to classes of unlawful aliens. Twenty-six States believe that Secretary Johnson's planned grant of deferred action en masse would cause them irreparable harm. They challenged the plan in Federal court. The judge agreed with the States and has granted a temporary injunction." Statements, Letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Jeh C. Johnson.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Rebuilding the Chemical Safety Board: Finding a Solution to the CSB's Governance and Management Challenges, Hearing Before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, March 4, 2015

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

  In the context of this document 'Chemical Safety Board' may be abbreviated 'CSB.' This is the March 4, 2015 hearing "Rebuilding the Chemical Safety Board: Finding a Solution to the CSB's Governance and Management Challenges," held before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. From the testimony of Assistant Inspector General for Investigations at the EPA: "I am here at the request of this committee to report on how the CSB has conducted itself in line with relevant laws and rules. Today I have laid out several areas of significant concern with regard to potential waste, fraud and abuse as identified by the EPA OIG [Office of the Inspector General] in our investigative and audit work. While these may be tantamount to walking on quicksand, it is not the role of the EPA OIG to decide how the CSB conducts its business. It is up to Congress to judge whether appropriated money is being spent in the most economic, efficient and effective manner." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Rafael Moure-Eraso, Manuel Ehrlich, Rich Engler, Mark Griffon, and Patrick Sullivan.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Ensuring Aviation Safety in the Era of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Aviation of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, October 7, 2015

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

  This is the October 7, 2015 hearing "Ensuring Aviation Safety in the Era of Unmanned Aircraft Systems," held before the House Subcommittee on Aviation. From the opening statement of Frank LoBiondo: "Unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS, represent the latest frontier in aviation technology. While still a new industry, UAS are already contributing to our economy and changing how companies do business. Across the country, we already see UAS used for a myriad of operations, from surveying, photography and safety inspections, to medical delivery and search and rescue. With each new use, businesses and commercial users can save time, money, and even lives. But like any other new technology, UAS bring new challenges as well. In the past year, pilots have been reporting sightings of UAS near airports at an accelerating rate. In 2014, the FAA received 238 reports of drone sightings. In 2015, the number has already exceeded 600. Safety is paramount in aviation and the increased number of suspected sightings raises serious questions. Some of these reports involved airliners and occurred at low altitudes near the nation's busiest airports. Other reports involve pilots of general aviation aircraft in less busy airspace. The real possibility of a mid-air collision must be taken seriously in order to prevent tragic consequences." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael G. Whitaker, James Hubbard, Tim Canoll, Richard Hanson, Mykel Kochenderfer, and Denis J. Mulligan.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2016, Part 7, Outside Witness Testimony, Hearings Before the Subcommittee on the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session

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

  This is the 2015 hearing entitled, "Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2016, Part 7, Outside Witness Testimony" held before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, of the Committee on Appropriations. This document is a compilation of many witness statements regarding the 2016 appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Iran Nuclear Negotiations After the Second Extension: Where are they Going? Hearing Before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, January 27, 2015

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

  This is the January 27, 2015 hearing on "Iran Nuclear Negotiations After the Second Extension: Where are they Going?," held before the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the Opening statement of Chairman Royce: "This morning we are looking at the prospects for reaching a viable nuclear agreement with Iran; one that increases our national security. This has been, and will continue to be one of the committee's top priorities. For those of us that have worked on his issue for a number of years like Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and myself, Mr. Sherman, Mr. Engel, we remember well last year or last session. We presented legislation here that I and Mr. Engel authored that passed this committee unanimously that attempted to bring more pressure on Iran by giving the Ayatollah a choice between economic collapse or compromise on his nuclear weapons program. It passed here unanimously, as I mentioned, and in the floor of the House of Representatives, 400 to 20. Some would argue--certainly we believe this--that the leverage that we brought to bear has helped bring Iran to the table. But we have dealt with administrations in the past, whether Democrat or Republican. Mr. Sherman and I can tell you in terms of sitting through many of these meetings, our frustrations with the delay in really bringing the type of leverage and sanctions to bear on Iran to get the type of deal that we thought was verifiable." Statements, letters and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Eric Edelman, John Hannah, Ray Takeyh and Robert Einhorn.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Threat of Islamic Extremism in Russia, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, September 30, 2015

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

  This is the September 30, 2015 hearing "The Threat of Islamic Extremism in Russia" held before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. From the opening statement of subcommittee chairman Dana Rohrabacher: "This afternoon we will hear testimony, expert testimony, on the topic not thought to be, but in reality of great concern and importance, the threat of Islamic extremism inside Russia and what that might mean to the United States and global security. The fight against violent, radical Islam is one of the major challenges of our time. Islamic terrorists have targeted numerous countries for attack, including the United States and Russia. They have declared war on the modern civilized world. Their barbaric actions in Syria remind us daily of their depravity. They must be stopped and they must be defeated. The future of America, Russia, and, yes, of Western civilization, depends on that. The lives of millions will be in jeopardy if we don't do what is right today. Given the global nature of this fight, it is in the interests of our national interests to understand the growth of extremism in other parts of the world and in other countries, such as Russia. It is alarming to read reports of Muslims living in peaceful and in free democratic countries being attracted or recruited into radical Islamic terrorism. This frightening reality is happening in Europe and elsewhere. Media reports indicate that over 2,000 Russian-born fighters may have traveled to the Middle East to join ISIL. Our collective inability to stem this tide is both shocking and unnerving." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: T.J. Kennedy, Stu Davis, and David Hoover.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• DHS's Effort to Secure .gov: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, June 24, 2015

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

  This is the June 24, 2015 hearing entitled "DHS's Effort to Secure .gov," held before the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies of the Committee on Homeland Security. From the opening statement of Subcommittee Chairman John Ratcliffe: "The subcommittee meets today to hear what the Department of Homeland Security is doing to secure U.S. Government networks from cyber hackers. The magnitude of the latest breach at the Office of Personnel Management, or OPM, and the impact that it will have on tens of millions of Americans and our National security for decades to come is simply unacceptable. OPM was warned about its poor IT security. Yet, we still found them asleep at the switch. To put it in perspective, OPM was responsible for safeguarding extremely sensitive data, personnel files, and security clearance information for tens of millions of Federal employees. Yet, OPM's efforts to secure its networks were frankly laughable. The stakes were immense. Yet, the cybersecurity efforts were pathetic. In my opinion, this could be classified as cybersecurity malpractice. The Federal agency guarding this sensitive information demonstrated gross negligence and willful disregard of earlier warnings. We need to know who in this administration is really in charge and who is truly responsible for securing our Federal Government's civilian information systems." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Andy Ozment, Gregory C. Wilshusen, and Daniel M. Gerstein.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Global Battleground: The Fight Against Islamic Extremism at Home and Abroad, Hearing Before the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, March 24, 2015

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

  This is the March 24, 2015 hearing on "A Global Battleground: The Fight Against Islamic Extremism at Home and Abroad" held before the House Committee on Homeland Security. From the opening statement of chairman Michael T. McCaul: "The committee is meeting today to hear testimony on the global war against Islamist terror. Before 9/11 we failed to recognize this threat when it was right before our eyes. This failure brought us into war with violent Islamist extremism, the perversion of a religion into a deeply insidious worldview. Any attempt to deny the ideological underpinnings of the threat endangers our security. Throughout history we have seen power vacuums filled by violent groups, deranged dictators, and extremist ideologies. Nowhere is this more evident than with the rise of Islamist terror groups, which have spread like wildfire on this President's watch because of two glaring leadership failures. The first failure was the President's decision to spin a false narrative. The White House proclaimed our fight was against core al-Qaeda and that that group was on the path to defeat. In reality, the Jihadist threat had metastasized. The President refused to characterize the Fort Hood and Boston Marathon attacks for what they were--acts of brutal Islamist terrorism. The second leadership failure was the President's decision to dismantle America's counterterrorism policies and return to a pre- 9/11 law enforcement posture. The President tried to close Guantanamo Bay and release hardened terrorists, sought to give terrorists 2 the same legal protections as U.S. citizens, negotiated and swapped hostages with terrorists, and failed to prevent the rise of ISIS and the emergence of al-Qaeda sanctuaries." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Michael T. McCaul, Newt Gingrich, Michael V. Hayden, Philip Mudd, and Brian M. Jenkins.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Reporting Data Breaches: Is Federal Legislation Needed to Protect Consumers? Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, July 18, 2013

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

  This is from the July 18, 2013 hearing, "Reporting Data Breaches: Is Federal Legislation to Protect Consumers?," before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade. From the opening statement of Lee Terry: "In today's economy nearly everyone leaves a digital footprint. Even if you made a concerted effort to avoid smart phones, laptops, and social media, you would have a difficult time keeping your personal information from being held in an electronic database somewhere. Consumers should have the peace of mind that their data is protected in a responsible way. But with all types of nefarious activities online, so-called 'hacktivists' are finding new ways to steal data. So in the event that our personal data becomes exposed, we need to be able to trust that the companies in possession of our data will notify us of the exposure. And certainly it is in those companies' best interest to notify promptly and clearly in order to preserve a trusting relationship with consumers. Given these considerations, the question before us is: What are the rules of the road for companies that experience a breach in their data stores? Currently, the laws that govern data breach notification are a patchwork of state and territory-specific statutes. Unfortunately, they tend to differ from each other in many ways. For example, while a number of states have adopted a common definition of 'personal information,' even more states have adopted alterations to that definition, and those vary unpredictably. This definition is important because it triggers the duty to notify of a breach." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Lee Terry, Dan Liutikas, Debbie Matties, Jeff Greene, Kevin Richards, Andrea M. Matwyshyn, and David Thaw.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• Wrecking the Internet to Save it? The FCC's Net Neutrality Rule, Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, March 25, 2015

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

  In the context of this document, 'Federal Communications Commission,' may be abbreviated 'FCC.' This is the March 25, 2015 hearing on "Wrecking the Internet to Save it? The FCC's Net Neutrality Rule," held before the House Committee on the Judiciary. From the opening statement of Chairman Bob Goodlatte: "On February 26, the Federal Communications Commission voted 3-to-2 along party lines to approve the commission's new Open Internet order. FCC Chairman Wheeler argues that this order will preserve and protect the Internet as a platform for innovation, expression, and economic growth. He claims that the order will not raise Internet service costs, slow broadband speeds, reduce investment, limit consumer choice, or let the government regulate rates. Chairman Wheeler also asserts that the commission's dramatic, last-minute departure from the FCC's proposed rule was made independently without undue White House influence and was consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act. Today's hearing will challenge each and every one of these assertions. The order will undoubtedly raise Internet service costs. The text specifically permits the FCC to impose additional fees, raises the rate carriers must pay to deploy broadband, and opens the door to higher State and local taxes. The result is an estimated $11 billion in new taxes and fees. This estimate, moreover, does not include regulatory compliance costs. An army of lawyers and accountants will be required to com- ply with the 300-plus page order and the dizzying array of additional regulations, proceedings, and opinions that it contemplates. The order will also slow broadband speeds."

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015
• California Water Crisis and Its Impacts: The Need for Immediate and Long-Term Solutions, Oversight Field Hearing Before the Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, March 19, 2014

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

  This is the May 19, 2014 hearing titled 'California Water Crisis and Its Impacts: The Need for Immediate and Long-Term Solutions' held before the Committee on Natural Resources before the House of Representatives. The following is from the opening statement of the Honorable Doc Hastings, "Entire agriculture economies and ways of life grew around our ability to irrigate these once-dormant lands. In our regions, respective regions, food grows where water flows. Conversely, communities wither and die when the water spigot stops. As many of you know, this is an all-too-familiar occurrence here in the San Joaquin Valley. And, if it can happen here, it can happen anywhere in the Western United States, including my home area. As Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, I have painfully watched the cycle that has gone on over here for the past several years. In 2009 and 2010, a man-made drought brought this region to its knees, where communities experienced 40 percent unemployment and food lines handed out Chinese-produced carrots to the victims of senseless regulatory drought. That followed, then, with two good years of water. During those relatively good times, the House passed a comprehensive bill--and, I might add, every Member on this dais voted for that bill--that was intended to ensure that man-made drought never returned. Unfortunately, that bill fell on deaf ears in the Senate and by this administration. And so now we are back yet with another drought, and this one could be far more catastrophic than the previous one." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Janelle Beland, Sylvia Chavez, Tom Coleman, George Delgado, Jeff Denham, Steve Knell, Kevin McCarthy, David Murillo, Devin Nunes, Larry Starrh, Kole Upton, David Valadao, and Mark Watte.

  United States. Government Publishing Office

  2015