[Senate Hearing 113-707]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 113-707
.
NOMINATIONS OF HON. SARAH SALDANA,
RUSSELL C. DEYO, AND HON. MICKEY D. BARNETT
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
NOMINATIONS OF HON. SARAH SALDANA, TO BE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY FOR IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, RUSSELL C. DEYO,
TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY, AND HON. MICKEY D. BARNETT, TO BE A GOVERNOR, U.S.
POSTAL SERVICE
__________
SEPTEMBER 17, 2014
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
92-905 PDF WASHINGTON : 2015
________________________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MARK BEGICH, Alaska MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
Gabrielle A. Batkin, Staff Director
John P. Kilvington, Deputy Staff Director
Stephen R. Vina, Chief Counsel for Homeland Security
Deirdre G. Armstrong, Professional Staff Member
Keith B. Ashdown, Minority Staff Director
Christopher J. Barkley, Minority Deputy Staff Director
Andrew C. Dockham, Minority Chief Counsel
Daniel P. Lips, Minority Director of Homeland Security
Sarah Beth Groshart, Minority Counsel
Scott M. Behen, Minority U.S. Government Accountability Office Detailee
Joseph D. Moeller, Minority U.S. Postal Service Office of the Inspector
General Detailee
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
Lauren M. Corcoran, Hearing Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Carper............................................... 1
Senator Coburn............................................... 9
Prepared statements:
Senator Carper............................................... 35
Senator Coburn............................................... 37
WITNESSES
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Hon. John Cornyn, A U.S. Senator from the State of Texas......... 1
Hon. Michael Chertoff, Executive Chairman and Co-Founder,
Chertoff Group, and Former Secretary, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security.............................................. 5
Hon. Sarah R. Saldana to be Assistant Secretary for Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Testimony.................................................... 11
Prepared statement........................................... 41
Biographical and financial information....................... 43
Letter from the Office of Government Ethics.................. 77
Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 80
Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 124
Letters of support........................................... 126
Russell C. Deyo to be Under Secretary for Management, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security
Testimony.................................................... 13
Prepared statement........................................... 130
Biographical and financial information....................... 132
Letter from the Office of Government Ethics.................. 153
Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 156
Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 172
Letters of support........................................... 184
Hon. Mickey D. Barnett to be a Governor, U.S. Postal Service
Testimony.................................................... 15
Prepared statement........................................... 190
Biographical and financial information....................... 195
Letter from the Office of Government Ethics.................. 215
Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 219
Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 231
NOMINATIONS OF HON. SARAH R. SALDANA,.
RUSSELL C. DEYO AND HON. MICKEY D. BARNETT
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2014
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in
room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas R.
Carper, presiding.
Present: Senators Carper, Coburn, and Ayotte.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN CARPER
Chairman Carper. Well, good morning, one and all.
Bienvenido. We are glad you are here and look forward to
getting to know our nominees, better.
We are honored that we have been joined by one of my
favorite people in the Senate, Senator John Cornyn from Texas.
We are delighted that you are here and able to introduce your
constituent.
We are happy to see our former Secretary here. Judge, great
to see you, Michael, my neighbor across the Delaware River.
And, Mickey, very nice to see you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you
for your service.
I am just going to lead off and ask Senator Cornyn if he
would make whatever remarks he feels appropriate. Again, we are
delighted that you could come. Thank you.
OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN CORNYN, A UNITED STATES
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS
Senator Cornyn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am proud to be
here this morning to introduce one of my constituents, Sarah
Saldana----
Chairman Carper. How many do you have, any idea?
Senator Cornyn. Twenty-six million, but she is definitely
up at the top of that list of the most important----
Chairman Carper. I have 881,412. [Laughter.]
Senator Cornyn. As you know, Ms. Saldana has been nominated
to serve as the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS)
Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE), a position of profound importance to our country, and
particularly to my State, our State of Texas.
ICE is one of the Nation's largest law enforcement
agencies, with more than 19,000 employees and responsibilities
including the interior enforcement of our immigration laws,
national security, drug interdiction, and fighting child
exploitation.
As our Nation experiences a surge of illegal immigration
and accompanying criminal activity by those who make a living
off of exploiting others, it is more important than ever that
the next person who leads this agency will do so with strength
and with integrity.
Ms. Saldana is a native of Corpus Christi, Texas. She
learned from a young age the importance of hard work and
education. She was one of seven children born to working class
parents. She watched her mother study to become a nurse and
work nights to provide for the family. In turn, she studied
hard in school and told herself, what you think you can do, you
can do. And, certainly, Ms. Saldana has accomplished great
things.
In 2011, Ms. Saldana became the first Latina United States
Attorney in Texas history, and only the second woman to hold
that position in the 135-year history of Texas's Northern
District, a region that includes the Dallas-Fort Worth
metroplex and spans 100 counties and stretches across 95,000
square miles.
Chairman Carper. How many counties do you have?
Senator Cornyn. Two-hundred-and-fifty-four.
Chairman Carper. We have three. [Laughter.]
Senator Coburn. He visits all three of them every year.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cornyn. We have more cows than people in some of
them. [Laughter.]
Chairman Carper. We have 300 chickens for every person.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cornyn. In her role as U.S. Attorney and prosecutor
over the past decade, Ms. Saldana has served our State with
honor, fighting corrupt public officials, organized crime, sex
traffickers, and other dangerous criminals.
Throughout her career, Ms. Saldana has developed a
reputation for her decisive and fair temperament and her
commitment to excellence. If respect for the rule of law is our
standard, and I think it should be, we would be hard pressed to
find a person more qualified to enforce the law than Ms.
Saldana.
For this reason, I was proud to lead the fight for her
nomination as United States Attorney, along with Senator
Hutchison, and I am proud to introduce her to Members of the
Committee here today. I am glad to see my colleague and friend
Senator Coburn here as the Ranking Member.
Everyone here today recognizes that there are enormous
challenges facing ICE in the coming years, and I have talked to
Ms. Saldana about those quite candidly and I think she
understands the nature of the challenge that confronts her and
confronts the Department of Homeland Security in these
challenging times.
And, I even asked her, why in the world would somebody who
has such a great reputation and has accomplished so much as
United States Attorney and all the public service she has
performed in the past, why would you want this job, where you
are actually not going to be able to call all the shots from a
policy standpoint. That is going to come from above, including
the President of the United States. And, her comment to me,
which I genuinely appreciate, is she said, ``Well, I have to
try.'' To me, that is a pretty good answer, because given all
the challenges and the divisions that we have in the country,
particularly when it comes to the immigration issue, I admire
someone who said, this is a messy business, but I have to try,
and so I admire that.
So, I think this hearing gives you and the Senate an
opportunity for an open and honest conversation with Ms.
Saldana about exactly what she would do, if confirmed, to
address these challenges. I do not need to urge this Committee
to take its time and ask her the hard questions. I am sure you
will.
But, I do have a request, Mr. Chairman. I do not serve on
this Committee, but I do serve on the Senate Judiciary
Committee, and as you know, the Senate Judiciary Committee has
a lot of interaction with ICE and the Department of Homeland
Security, as well. I mentioned this to Ms. Saldana, but, of
course, this will be decided by you and by Chairman Leahy and
the Majority Leader, but I think it would be enormously
productive if, following this Committee's hearing and decisions
with regard to this nomination, that there be a sequential
referral to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
I have signed a letter, along with Ranking Member Senator
Grassley, requesting that, and I think that would do a lot, I
think, to help Senators gain the sort of familiarity and
confidence that I have in Ms. Saldana as a person, but also
help her when she is confirmed develop the kinds of
relationships that are going to be very important and very
productive to her chance to succeed in this very difficult job.
So, I hope you will join me in that request.
The most difficult question facing the next leader of ICE
is how they will respond to President Obama's upcoming actions
on immigration enforcement. As we all know, the President has
announced that after the November elections, he will
unilaterally issue a series of Executive Orders that will
attempt to change our Nation's immigration laws without the
consent of Congress. I believe such actions would violate our
Constitution and the laws of the land, and I have mentioned
that quite candidly to Ms. Saldana, and also to Secretary Jeh
Johnson, and told them that for those of us who, in good faith,
want to try to move forward and fix what is broken in our
Nation's immigration laws, this would undermine the good will
and the opportunity, the confidence of the American people,
that we need in order to get the job done. So, this is going to
be tough, and I hope the President reconsiders.
We should be deeply concerned about the damage that such
unilateral executive actions would have to our already broken
immigration system, as I said, and they would, of course, I
think, contribute to the perception that is already being
marketed by the cartels who traffic in children and other
immigrants--this is their business model, as we know, and they
make a lot of money doing it, and it is far from compassionate.
This gives the impression that we will not enforce our laws,
which, indeed, contributes to the magnet of illegal
immigration.
We need to fix our broken immigration system, but we need
to eliminate illegal immigration and accommodate our current
immigration laws in a way that reflects our values and reflects
our interests as a Nation.
I really do believe, and I realize how harsh this sounds,
but I do believe that the President's announced plans are an
invitation for lawlessness and will ensure that the surge of
the illegal immigration on our Southern border will continue
for years to come. So, I hope, with all sincerity, he does
reconsider.
So, I am concerned about the implication of the President's
stated intentions. I am also concerned about what that means in
terms of Ms. Saldana's opportunity to be successful in the job
to which she has been nominated and which I expect she will be
confirmed. Although she is tough, she is smart, and fiercely
independent as a prosecutor--she has demonstrated that--I am
concerned that if she is confirmed, her voice will be silenced
or undermined by these unilateral actions that the President
has said he intends to take.
So, I am glad that Ms. Saldana will have the opportunity to
discuss these very serious issues before the Committee today,
and I am confident you will be impressed with her, as I am, and
that if she is given this opportunity and a fair chance to be
successful by enforcing the laws of our land and then
advocating policy changes that need to be made to improve our
broken immigration system, I think she will be a success as the
Director of ICE.
So, I look forward to hearing Ms. Saldana's responses to
the Committee's questions and helping members of the Senate
make an informed decision about this important nomination.
And, I would just close, again, with this plea, Mr.
Chairman. I hope you will work with us on this sequential
referral, because, as I told Ms. Saldana, I think this is
really important to the Senate getting a sense of confidence
about who she is and also helping her develop the kinds of
relationships she is absolutely going to need if she is going
to be a success in this important position.
Thank you very much.
Chairman Carper. Well, let me just say to our friend,
Senator Cornyn, I was impressed by her before. Having you sit
here and say these things that you have about her today makes
me all the more impressed. Your insight is very helpful, I
think, to our Committee.
Let me take under advisement with Dr. Coburn your
suggestion on sequential, and I think we will want to have a
conversation with you and with Chuck Grassley on his birthday--
it is today--and maybe with Senator Leahy, the Chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, just have a good conversation about it as
quickly as possible and see if we cannot find some appropriate
resolution.
But, thank you so much. I know you have a lot going on and
you are good to come by.
Tom, anything you want to add before Senator Cornyn leaves?
Senator Coburn. No, just to say to Senator Cornyn, thank
you.
Chairman Carper. John, thank you so much.
Do people call you Judge? Do they call you Mr. Secretary?
Do they have other names for you?
Mr. Chertoff. They have other names. On a good day, it is
Judge or Mr. Secretary. On a bad day, I cannot say it in this
company---- [Laughter.]
Chairman Carper. It is great to see you. Thanks for all of
your service for our country, and especially for being here
today to say something nice about Russ Deyo, when no one else
would. [Laughter.]
Thank you for joining us.
OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MICHAEL CHERTOFF, EXECUTIVE
CHAIRMAN AND CO-FOUNDER, CHERTOFF GROUP, AND FORMER SECRETARY,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Chertoff. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Coburn, it is
good to be back, particularly not in the hot seat, but more as
a collateral participant.
Chairman Carper. It is a lot more fun this way, is it not?
Mr. Chertoff. A lot more fun. And, I am delighted to be
here to introduce Russ Deyo, who, as you know, is the nominee
for Under Secretary for Management at the Department of
Homeland Security.
I wrote a letter to each of you on his behalf, which I ask
be made part of the record.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The letter from Mr. Chertoff appears in the Appendix on page
186.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know I do not have to tell you how important this job is.
It is not one that usually gets a lot of visibility in the
national press, but it is really critical to the functioning of
the Department of Homeland Security. And, I know both of you
have taken a particular interest in the management issues at
the Department.
I have to say that maybe this is a more challenging time
than any in recent years for a couple of reasons. First, we are
operating in a constrained budget environment. But, second, the
challenges have increased.
Senator Cornyn made mention of the issues at the border and
the surge we had over the summer of unaccompanied minors. I
would add to that the fact that, in light of what is going on
in Iraq and Syria and the foreign fighter problem, I think
there are going to be enhanced challenges in terms of border
security and aviation and infrastructure security as we deal
with what I think is inevitably going to be some fallout from
the operations we are undertaking in the Middle East right now.
And, I even have to say that the Ebola issue is going to
present a challenge. A lot of people do not realize the
Department of Homeland Security has a critical role to play in
dealing with the possibility of a global pandemic. We went
through this back in the days of the severe acute respiratory
syndrome (SARS) epidemic and then when there was concern about
avian flu, and I think that is going to be yet another
obligation and responsibility.
So, the tasks are going to multiply and these cannot be
discharged without an efficient management structure.
I know that while the Department has matured quite a bit
with the leadership of this Committee and the people at the
Department, there is more work to be done. The acquisition
system is not fully mature. The financial management system is
not fully mature. The budgeting system is not fully mature.
There are challenges with respect to human resources. All of
these are critical for the Department to perform its security
function and its other functions.
And, that is why I am so delighted that the President has
nominated Russ Deyo. Russ is a fellow alumnus of the U.S.
Attorney's Office in New Jersey. We did not overlap, but his
reputation was very well established when I arrived there to
start my tenure. He did an outstanding job as an Assistant U.S.
Attorney and he is an outstanding lawyer.
But, more to the point for the particular position he has
been nominated for, he has broad experience in the private
sector, not only as General Counsel of Johnson and Johnson,
which is one of the leading companies in the United States, but
as someone who had responsibility across a broad range of
management issues--human resources, procurement, health care
compliance, real estate--and, of course, that is pertinent to
St. Elizabeths', which I know you all have an interest in.
Chairman Carper. Let me just say, with respect to St.
Elizabeths', thank you very much for your ongoing support for
that project and for your continued input. We are grateful for
that.
Mr. Chertoff. And, I am happy to continue to assist with
that.
So, Russ brings to the position he has been nominated for a
broad range of experience with one of the best enterprises in
the world in dealing with all of the issues that are going to
have to be dealt with as an Under Secretary if he is confirmed.
I had the opportunity to meet with him. In fact, I tried to
twist his arm a little bit to take this job, and I am glad that
the twisting worked. And, as you get to know him and work with
him, if he is confirmed, you will find him to be a smart,
experienced, and devoted public servant who will actually bring
a unique set of skills to this job which are very critical.
So, I thank the Committee for hearing from me. I could not
give a stronger endorsement to Mr. Deyo for this position. I
think, if he is confirmed, he will serve effectively and
honorably, and I think you will enjoy working with him, which,
of course, I know is also important to you.
I am afraid I am going to have to excuse myself, but again,
I want to thank the Committee for the opportunity to appear,
and I want to thank Russ for inviting me to introduce him.
Chairman Carper. Well, you are good to come and join us
today. I know he appreciates very much your introduction and
your presence here. So do we, and your words mean a great deal.
Dr. Coburn, anything you would like to say before Judge
Chertoff leaves?
Senator Coburn. It is great to see you again.
Chairman Carper. Yes, great to see you again. Thanks so
much. Take care.
And, Mickey Barnett, I will introduce you in just a moment,
but we are delighted to have had John Cornyn and Judge Chertoff
be here.
Let me just go ahead. I have a fairly brief statement I
would like to give, and then yield to Dr. Coburn for whatever
comments that he would like to make. And, then, we will swear
in our witnesses and get started.
As you know, we are meeting today to consider three
nominations, Sarah Saldana, Russell Deyo, and Mickey Barnett,
who now serves, in the second year as the Chairman of the Board
of Governors for the U.S. Postal Service. Sarah has been
nominated to head up ICE, and Russ Deyo to be the Under
Secretary of Management at the Department of Homeland Security.
I would just say that Secretary Johnson, whom we have
enormous respect for, told us that he was sending us a couple
of good names, and we think that he and the President have.
Mickey, we are grateful for your service and your
willingness to serve further as a Governor on the Board of
Governors.
I know my colleagues and I on the Committee are pleased to
see the President has put forth nominees. The head of the ICE
agency has been vacant for, or without a Presidentially
appointed leader, I want to say, for 14 months, and we need
this position filled. It needs to be filled with a
Presidentially appointed and Senate approved leader. We are
grateful for those who have served in the interim in this
capacity, but this is far too long, particularly when we think
about all the issues we face along our borders and the more
than, I think, 400 laws that ICE enforces. Thankfully, Ms.
Saldana has agreed to step forward and take up this challenge
and we appreciate it.
As Senator Cornyn has said, you have a distinguished record
as the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, where
you represent the U.S. Government in some 100 counties. In this
role, you have the front row seat to the threats that our
country faces every day from transnational criminal networks,
something that will serve you well if you are confirmed for
this position.
Ms. Saldana is a true American success story. We have heard
a little bit about it from Senator Cornyn, rising from humble
beginnings in South Texas as the youngest of seven children, to
become an accomplished partner at the major law firm and one of
the Nation's top law enforcement officers. I think when you
were a kid growing up in Corpus Christi, I was a Naval flight
officer, got my wings at Corpus Christi Naval Air Station, not
far from where you grew up.
You come to us highly recommended by Senator Cornyn and
others. But, as our friend from Texas, Senator Cornyn, has
said, this Committee knows all too well Ms. Saldana has been
nominated to one of the most difficult positions in our
government. This is a hard job, and that is why it is important
to have a proven leader and a respected member of the law
enforcement community at the helm.
Ms. Saldana, you will have a tough job ahead of you, if
confirmed. You know that, but I believe that you are up to the
task and look forward to supporting your nomination.
The Committee is also considering today the nomination of
Russ Deyo to be Under Secretary for Management at the
Department of Homeland Security. This is an extremely important
position, as Judge Chertoff has said, given the challenges
associated with melding 22 different agencies together into one
cohesive Department, and we have come a long way. I like to
think that this Committee, led by Senator Lieberman and Senator
Collins before, now by Dr. Coburn and I, that we had something
to do with it, but we have had good leadership in the
Department and real progress has been made in addressing some
of the many challenges they faced. But, in order for that to
continue, we need strong leadership, and I think Mr. Deyo will
be able to provide precisely that kind of leadership.
Until his retirement in 2012, Mr. Deyo had an impressive
27-year career with Johnson and Johnson, where he served in
several top positions, including General Counsel and Vice
President for Administration. And, like the Department of
Homeland Security, Johnson and Johnson is a large organization
with multiple divisions that have distinct, yet related,
missions. Mr. Deyo's perspective from the private sector will
be a valuable asset to another Johnson, that being Jeh Johnson,
particularly as you work toward the unity of effort that will
make the Department greater than the sum of its parts.
Mr. Deyo, I think the Department and the American people
are fortunate that you are willing to take on this assignment,
and we thank your family for sharing you with us.
We are also fortunate to have with us Mickey Barnett--nice
to see you--who has been renominated by the President to serve
on the Postal Service's Board of Governors. Mr. Barnett
currently serves, as I mentioned, as the Chairman of the Board,
a position he has held for 2 years. If confirmed, he would
embark on a third term with the Board, where he has been a
Governor since 2006, one of the longest-serving Governors in
America, I would say. A different kind of Governor.
Mr. Barnett's nomination comes at a very challenging time,
as we know, for the Postal Service. The Postal Service operates
at the center of a massive printing, delivery, and logistics
industry that employs millions of people. In recent years, the
organization has been faced with a decrease in First Class Mail
volumes, as we know, and by extension, revenues. The Postal
Service today carries barely enough cash to make payroll. We
all want a Postal Service that our constituents and businesses
can rely on, one that has a chance of continuing the remarkable
progress we have seen made in package delivery, really
remarkable, and a Postal Service that takes full advantage of
other opportunities that lie ahead, about which I am actually
very encouraged.
Our Committee has sent a bill to the full Senate--Dr.
Coburn and I and our staffs have worked on it for, it seems
like forever, but I think we have done good work. The Committee
reported it out by a big bipartisan margin. It is before the
Senate now for their consideration. But, our bill would enable
the Postal Service to save billions of dollars in pension and
health care costs. We believe our bill is a solid,
comprehensive, and realistic response to a real crisis and we
look forward to debating it, discussing amendments to it on the
floor, and acting on it during the upcoming lame duck session.
Congress holds the keys to the Postal Service's future, but
the Board of Governors serves a vital role in setting the
direction and policies of this large organization. I think the
Senate must move quickly to confirm all the nominees to the
Board--there are now five that are before us, including the
four who have already been considered and approved by this
Committee, a month or so ago, and they are, I think, a good,
strong quartet.
I look forward to talking with you today, Mr. Barnett,
about what you think needs to be done further to address the
challenges facing the Postal Service and the skills that you
bring to the table.
And, to conclude, I want to thank all of our nominees again
for being here, for your willingness to serve our Nation in
these important roles, and also, again, to thank your families
for sharing you with us.
And, with that, let me yield to my friend, Dr. Coburn.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COBURN
Senator Coburn. Well, first of all, I thank all three of
you for being willing to serve. Appreciate you being here and
your family's sacrifice that comes along with your commitment.
I have a formal statement\1\ that I would ask unanimous
consent to be placed in the record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Senator Coburn appears in the
Appendix on page 37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had a great visit with Russ Deyo yesterday. I have been
aware of the work of Governor Barnett for a number of years.
And, I look forward to our meeting this afternoon, Ms. Saldana.
I just would say, Homeland Security's primary mission--one
of their five core missions--the first mission is preventing
terrorism and enhancing security, and that all fails if we do
not have interior enforcement, and we do not right now. So, the
big job--and I am so appreciative of Jeh Johnson. Ms. Saldana
comes with law enforcement background. She gets it. But, Jeh
has managed to put in line effective people at almost every
spot as he has taken over Homeland Security.
And, my hope is, is as we go through this process, that we
can do speedily the work of getting you into positions. And, on
that basis, I am not excited about a sequential referral on
your nomination, simply because I think we need your feet on
the ground, and if we have a sequential referral, that means
you will not be approved until sometime in December. So, I
think that is unfortunate. It is unnecessary. And, so, I would
love to be in on that discussion.
Anyhow, I am significantly concerned about ICE. It is
20,000-plus employees. That is 15 times what you are doing now.
And, what we have heard in terms of whistleblowers and
legitimate things that we have checked out, the rule of law is
not occurring in ICE today. It is more troubled than anybody
knows, and you will soon find out. So, I am extremely grateful
for you being willing to take this on, because it is a
difficult challenge for our country.
I know your husband is from the big city, Oklahoma City--
when I talk to people about immigration, they are not upset
that people want to come here. They are upset that the rule of
law is being applied inequitably cross different groups. And,
their question is, well, if the rule of law does not apply in
this issue area, why does it apply somewhere else? And, if it
does not apply to them, why does it apply to me? And, so, the
very glue that holds us together, which you have spent your
career, Ms. Saldana, enforcing, is the idea of the rule of law.
It is not perfect, but the attempt at equal justice for all
under the law has to be the thing that guides us as we look at
the immigration issue, and--ICE specifically--and, they are a
very real responsibility for protecting this country.
So, again, I would just say, thank you, all three, for
being here. I thank your families and look forward to your
testimony.
Chairman Carper. Dr. Coburn, thank you.
We have been joined by Senator Ayotte. Good morning, Kelly.
Nice to see you. Thanks for joining us.
Just a very brief further couple of words about each of our
nominees, and then I will administer an oath and we will give
you the opportunity to present your testimony and then we will
have some good conversation.
As we have noted earlier, Ms. Saldana is a proud native of
Corpus Christi, Texas, and currently serves as the U.S.
Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. Prior to her
confirmation as U.S. Attorney, she was the Deputy Criminal
Chief of the Fraud and Public Corruption Section of the Office
of U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas. However,
she began her professional career in a different kind of public
service, convincing teenagers to do their homework as an eighth
grade English teacher in Dallas, Texas. God bless you. I mentor
an eighth grader, so I know. Thank you, again, so much for
being here and for your service.
Our next nominee, Russ Deyo, again, 27 years of experience
with Johnson and Johnson (J&J), most recently a member of the
Executive Committee responsible for managing global operations.
Prior to J&J, Mr. Deyo was an Assistant U.S. Attorney, as we
have heard, for the District of New Jersey. He served as the
Chief of the Special Prosecution Unit during the last 3 years
in the U.S. Attorney's Office. We understand you have come out
of retirement to consider this position. I just wonder if your
wife knows you are doing this, and maybe you can share that
with us--oh, I see she is here. That is a good sign.
[Laughter.]
Our thanks to you, ma'am, for your willingness to share
this fellow with us for a while.
Our last nominee, of course, is Mickey Barnett, who has
been renominated to the U.S. Postal Service's Board of
Governors. He was first nominated to the Board in 2006 and now
serves as its Chairman. Earlier in his career, he served on the
Hill as an aide to one of my favorite colleagues, Pete Domenici
from New Mexico, later was elected, I think, to the State
Senate. Is that right? So, you are a Senator, too. In addition
to his current duties on the Board, Mr. Barnett is managing
partner of the Barnett Law Firm and has practiced law in New
Mexico for over three decades.
Before we invite our witnesses to give their statements,
our Committee rules require that all witnesses at nomination
hearings give their testimony under oath, and if you would all
stand, please, and raise your right hand, I would appreciate
it.
Do you swear that the testimony you will give before this
Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you, God?
Ms. Saldana. I do.
Mr. Deyo. I do.
Mr. Barnett. I do.
Chairman Carper. Please be seated.
Ms. Saldana, you may proceed with your statement. Feel free
to introduce your family members. I had a chance to meet some
of them, but please feel free to introduce them. And, I would
say to Mr. Deyo and Mr. Barnett, if you have family members or
friends who you would like to introduce, before you speak, just
introduce them to us.
Ms. Saldana.
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE SARAH R. SALDANA,\1\ NOMINATED TO BE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Ms. Saldana. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Dr. Coburn, and
Senators of this Committee, I really do appreciate the time you
have given me to appear today to be considered for the position
of Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
and I truly do appreciate the time that Senator Cornyn took to
join me, give me a Texas hug before I gave this testimony. He
has been very supportive over the years, both with respect to
me personally and with respect to my office.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Saldana appears in the Appendix
on page 41.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
And, I do want to introduce my family, if I may. My husband
of 26 years, Don Templin, my brother, Lupe Saldana, my sister
Marisela Saldana back here, who is a State District Court Judge
back home. My niece, Lupe's daughter, Cindy Saldana. She looks
like an actress back there. [Laughter.]
And, a couple of very good friends that wanted to be here
with me today.
I am honored by the trust and confidence that the President
of the United States has shown in me by nominating me to this
office. I am so grateful for the support of Secretary Johnson
and the others at ICE, both on the enforcement and removal side
and on the investigation side, with whom I have worked for
years now back home in Dallas. They have been highly supportive
over the years, and certainly with respect to my preparation
for my testimony today.
Senators, I sit before you today as a third generation
American, the youngest of seven children, and that should tell
you something about me. Raised by my mother, essentially on her
own in South Texas. I am a lifelong Texan and very proud of it.
I would like you to know my mother's name, Inez Garcia
Saldana, and if she were living today, I can only imagine the
pride that she would have in seeing me testify before this very
esteemed Committee, talking about a nomination to an office
that is so critically important to the country, and with
respect to my nomination by the President of the United States
of America. I wish she were here.
Chairman Carper. I have a hunch she is watching.
Ms. Saldana. I think so, too, Senator.
I will tell you, I mentioned her because she is singularly
responsible for my being the person I am today. She taught me,
not even so much through her words as through her deeds, the
values that she herself practiced: Self-reliance, hard work,
and giving of yourself to the public and to others.
In this brood of seven siblings, I have four brothers who
divide my loyalties among the different branches of the
military. Two of my brothers are Marines, as is my husband,
Don. One served in the United States Navy, and the fourth,
David, who I am sure is listening today, is a Purple Heart
recipient who served with the United States Army in Vietnam.
I have no military experience myself, but I have served my
country in various ways. You have mentioned as an Assistant
United States Attorney and currently the Chief Law Enforcement
Officer in Dallas and the Northern District of Texas. And, I
will tell you, Senators, even though I have 40 years of work
experience, these years in the United States Attorney's Office,
enforcing the rule of law in the great State of Texas, have
been the best years of my professional life, unequivocally.
And, in these years at the U.S. Attorney's Office, I have
worked closely with the people at Homeland Security, as I
mentioned, the Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) people
and the people on the investigation side, in helping them to
take on the task that is the mission of the Department of
Homeland Security. And, I know that they are listening and
watching, and I will tell you that I join them in wanting to
secure the homeland and to ensure public safety.
I have the greatest respect and admiration for them, as I
do for all the agencies I work with, the Federal Bureau of
Investigations (FBI) and the Secret Service and Education and
all the others. Often, they work at their own personal peril,
and often, without any public acclaim. And, I would be truly
honored, if confirmed, to continue to serve them back in Dallas
and in the Northern District of Texas, and on a national level
with all of their colleagues.
Senators, I believe it is important for me to commit to you
this morning, at this critical time, as you consider my
nomination, that I will be cooperative and transparent with
this Committee, any of the other Committees of the Congress,
and that I truly appreciate the role I come to you before
today, even in my role as United States Attorney. You are the
lawmakers. I enforce the law.
And, as U.S. Attorney, I am also ever mindful, and I want
to assure you that I worry about the management of the agency.
I worry about the expenditure of the taxpayers' funds. And, I
do my best every day in my role as U.S. Attorney to ensure they
are spent wisely and effectively and toward that ultimate goal
of homeland security.
So, I understand the enormity of the task before me that
you and Senator Cornyn have referenced, and should I be
confirmed, but neither am I intimidated by it. I know I have
shared a story with my colleagues at the Department of Justice
(DOJ) that they probably get tired of hearing, but I will
repeat it here.
I have never been so proud in my life as the first time I
stood before a jury in a Federal courtroom and looked at them
and said, ``My name is Sarah Saldana and I represent the United
States of America.'' And, I am equally proud to tell you that
again today.
I hope to be confirmed as Assistant Secretary. I want to
join you in your efforts to promote public safety and to ensure
the safety of the homeland, and I thank you.
Chairman Carper. Well, thank you for an inspiring
statement. Thank you.
Mr. Deyo, I am glad I do not have to follow that----
[Laughter.]
But, I am glad you are here to follow. So, you are
recognized. Feel free to introduce anyone you would like from
your family or from the guests that are here.
TESTIMONY OF RUSSELL C. DEYO,\1\ NOMINATED TO BE UNDER
SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Deyo. Thank you, Chairman Carper and Dr. Coburn. It is
an honor for me to appear before you today as you consider my
nomination to be Under Secretary for Management at the
Department of Homeland Security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Deyo appears in the Appendix on
page 130.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
And, Chairman Carper, as you point out, I am very pleased
to have members of my family here. Stephanie is my wife of 43
years. We have been in love since high school. My two
remarkable children are here, Jacqueline--she is gone because
of the grandchildren that I will get to in a minute. She is a
working mom. My son, Bentz, who is a published author and dad.
Chairman Carper. Would you raise your hand? Thank you.
Mr. Deyo. Jacqueline's husband is also here, Xavier Seys.
He is a Frenchman by birth, but recently became a U.S. citizen
and is a proud proponent of the special benefits that come with
being a citizen of our country.
Chairman Carper. Good. Would you raise your hand?
Mr. Deyo. He is probably not here. He is chasing the two
grandchildren, Mathis and Oscar out in the hall. Mathis is 3\1/
2\. Oscar is 18 months. I try to have every moment with them,
so I invited them, but they are rambunctious and they are
wandering the halls. They are delightful, as is Bentz's
daughter, Hailey Jane, who is home with her mom, Jen, in New
Jersey, and made it possible for Bentz to be here today.
Chairman Carper. We are glad that all of you could be here.
Welcome.
Mr. Deyo. Thank you. As to my background, as you have
pointed out, I retired in 2012 from Johnson and Johnson after
27 really wonderful years, the last 15 years on the Executive
Committee, the principal management group responsible for the
company's global operations.
I must confess, I love retirement, time with the grandkids,
traveling with Stephanie, serving on nonprofit boards, and
occasionally lecturing at business and law schools. But a few
months ago I received a call out of the blue from Secretary
Johnson asking if I would consider being a nominee for the role
of Under Secretary for Management. And, after meeting with a
number of knowledgeable people, including former Secretary
Chertoff, and long discussions with my family, I decided to
proceed, and here is why.
Dr. Coburn, you made reference to the mission of Homeland
Security, and I find it both critical and inspirational. I take
it personally. It requires constant vigilance, a willingness to
change, and the ability to react to new circumstances. If
confirmed, I would be honored to join the hard working men and
women of the Department and will endeavor to bring my
experience to support this critical mission.
Like both of you, I have enormous respect for Secretary
Johnson. It is based on our past working relationship and his
demonstrated leadership. It means a lot to me that both he and
former Secretary Chertoff, whom I also greatly respect, believe
I would bring value to this role.
I do think my experience in private industry should bring a
fresh perspective to this role. As you well know, DHS consists
of several operational components. The Under Secretary for
Management leads a group of six administrative functions that
provide support to these components. But, importantly, this
management group is also an engine that can drive better
outcomes and greater efficiency through collaboration by and
between the components and by standardization of strong
policies, practices, and reporting.
As you have pointed out, Johnson and Johnson is similarly
decentralized, over 250 individual operating companies around
the globe in the pharmaceutical, medical device, and consumer
space. In my roles on the Executive Committee, I was
responsible for an array of functions that served these
operating companies: Human resources, compliance, quality, real
estate, security, procurement, and corporate procurement. In a
tough competitive environment, companies like Johnson and
Johnson need to be proactive, anticipating problems and
opportunities and planning for contingencies. If confirmed, I
would try to reinforce this proactive approach going forward.
In sum, I believe that my experience at Johnson and Johnson
should serve me well in meeting the challenges that the
Department faces to collaborate, align priorities, manage money
effectively, and deliver on its critical mission.
I have been blessed by my family, by my work, by the
enormous benefits of being a citizen of the United States. This
provides me an opportunity to provide some payback for the
opportunities I have had, and I would be very proud to conclude
my career representing the United States and working with the
men and women of the Department.
Strong work has been done by those who served in the role
of Under Secretary for Management in the past. I would work
hard to build on that foundation to make the Department even
stronger, if confirmed.
I very much appreciate your consideration.
Chairman Carper. There is an old saying that paybacks are
hell, but not all of them are, and in this case, this could be
a gift from God and we are grateful for it. Thank you for your
willingness to serve and for your testimony.
Mr. Deyo. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. With that, let me turn to Chairman
Barnett. Mickey, please proceed. Thank you. Welcome.
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE MICKEY D. BARNETT,\1\ NOMINATED TO
BE A GOVERNOR, U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
Mr. Barnett. Thank you, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member
Coburn, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to appear today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Barnett appears in the Appendix
on page 190.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also want to thank Senator McConnell for his
recommendation and President Obama for my nomination.
These past 8 years have been a real learning experience in
regard to the Postal Service. Fortunately, I have served
together with talented and experienced Governors, and together,
we have been able to reach consensus on every significant
issue, including the selection of the current Postmaster
General and Deputy Postmaster General.
I have now become a passionate advocate of the Postal
Service and its incredible history of service to the people of
our country. I feel an obligation to do everything I can to
make sure it continues to be a viable entity capable of prompt
and reliable delivery of the mail and packages.
As everyone here knows, the Postal Service is in a crisis
mode. Our liabilities are approximately $68 billion, and we
have a fleet of over 200,000 delivery vehicles with an average
age of more than 22 years. Even with a reduction of more than
200,000 career employees over the past 8 years, a reduction in
mail processing facilities, and a reduction in operating hours
at some post offices, we are unable to service our debt, pay
down our liabilities, or pay for needed capital investments.
Our most profitable product, First Class Mail, continues to
decline at 8 percent a year, while our costs, like everyone
elses, continue to rise. Allow me to elaborate.
The erosion of First Class Mail volumes are being driven by
rapid changes in the way Americans communicate. Smartphones,
texting, e-mails, and the Internet were unheard of only a few
short years ago. Today, they are the primary way most
individuals interconnect.
Fortunately, as First Class Mail has declined, the U.S.
Postal Service's package revenues are growing by more than 10
percent compared to last year, and advertising mail revenues
are relatively steady. However, to fully leverage the package
revenue opportunities and remain competitive, the Postal
Service will need to invest billions of dollars in new delivery
vehicles, infrastructure, and new package sorting equipment.
The Postal Service, working in conjunction with the Board,
have developed a reasonable approach to pay down its debt,
achieve financial stability, and if given flexibility through
comprehensive Postal reform legislation, it can put negative
headlines in the rear-view mirror.
Focusing on the business decisions that are within its
authority to independently implement, the Postal Service, as I
said, decreased its career workforce by 205,000 and reduced the
annual cost base by $15 billion since 2006 through workforce
reductions, all through attrition and voluntary retirement
incentives. The Postal Service has also implemented cost
reductions for retail, mail processing, transportation,
delivery, and administration, literally, every area of the
organization. In fact, most of these cost reductions have taken
place behind the scenes, in areas that do not directly impact
Postal customers.
Moving forward under current law, the Postal Service has
some limited flexibility to make further cost saving changes.
However, these measures are insufficient to close the remaining
financial gap. Given its current governance and business model
constraints, the Postal Service cannot achieve financial
stability without the passage of comprehensive Postal reform
legislation. If given the flexibility by Congress to quickly
adapt to today's evolving marketplace and customer demand, the
Postal Service can chart a path forward to remain viable and
relevant for many years to come.
As Chairman of the Board of Governors these past 2 years, I
have had the opportunity to meet with members of the Senate and
House to discuss Postal reform, and I will not repeat those
requests here. But, and this is an important point to
emphasize--even if all of the reforms are made, the Postal
Service will remain in trouble if it does not work to
aggressively generate additional revenue.
The Board of Governors has made a concerted effort to meet
with many large mailing customers to discuss and learn what we
can do to improve. The Board has gone to San Diego, Las Vegas,
Phoenix, Kansas City, and New York to receive this input from
the business community on how we can best go forward to put us
on a path to profitability. These meetings, along with the
marketing efforts of Postal management, have resulted in
significant increases in package delivery. We believe this
growth will continue and will offset some of the declines in
the mail volume.
I will close with this--two years ago, we met with the
futurists. I did not know what a futurist was at the time, but
we met with this lady. She predicted that in 30 years, there
will be no paper. Now, I am not here to tell you this is a
reasonable prediction, because I have no idea, but if that is
even possible, the Postal Service must be forward thinking. If
true, there will be no mail in 30 years. That is why we are so
focused on increasing our package delivery.
I am hopeful to continue my service on the Board of
Governors and can add to my 8 years of experience. I am happy
to respond to any questions, and thank you for the opportunity
to appear here today.
Chairman Carper. Chairman Barnett, thank you so much for
your testimony, for your service and willingness to serve
further.
I am going to start my questioning today with the standard
three questions we ask of all nominees. You do not have to
rise. You do not have to raise your right hands. But, here are
the three questions.
Is there anything that any of you are aware of in your
background that might present a conflict of interest with the
duties of the office to which you have been nominated? Ms.
Saldana.
Ms. Saldana. No, sir.
Chairman Carper. Mr. Deyo.
Mr. Deyo. No.
Chairman Carper. Chairman Barnett.
Mr. Barnett. No.
Chairman Carper. OK. Second question. Do you know of
anything, personal or otherwise, that would in any way prevent
you from fully and honorably discharging the responsibilities
of the office to which you have been nominated? Ms. Saldana.
Ms. Saldana. No, sir.
Chairman Carper. Mr. Deyo.
Mr. Deyo. No.
Chairman Carper. Chairman Barnett.
Mr. Barnett. No.
Chairman Carper. OK. And, finally, do you agree, without
reservation, to respond to any reasonable summons to appear and
testify before any duly constituted Committee of Congress if
you are confirmed? Ms. Saldana.
Ms. Saldana. Of course.
Mr. Deyo. Absolutely.
Mr. Barnett. Yes.
Chairman Carper. OK. Thank you very much. So far, so good.
I am just going to start with you, Ms. Saldana, if I can.
We know that the leadership position to which you have been
nominated is a really demanding, tough job. I once joked with
Lisa Jackson. She had been nominated by the President,
President Bush, George W. Bush, to serve as the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator for our country, a hugely
challenging job, as well. And, at the end of the hearing, I
suggested to her that she turn around and say goodbye to her
children because she would not see them until Christmas. They
started crying and---- [Laughter.]
It was not that bad. I was not that heartless. But, I did
convey the idea that this is a busy job and they might not see
her as much as they would like. So, I would just say to your
husband, how long have you all been married, twenty----
Ms. Saldana. Twenty-six.
Chairman Carper. Twenty-six years. Well, you will see her
before Christmas, but maybe not as much as you would like, if
she is confirmed.
I want to talk about two things. We mentioned leadership
and the word management cropped up a time or two. Most of what
I have learned about leadership--I learned a lot from my
parents about values, but I learned in the Navy, and 23 years
active in Reserve duty, a good deal about leadership. And, I
think leaders are folks who have the courage to keep out of
step when everyone else is marching to the wrong tune. We lead
by our example. It is not do as I say, but do as I do. I think
leaders should have the heart of a servant. I think leaders
should be humble, not haughty. And, I think leaders need to be
purveyors of hope and appeal to people's better angels and
inspire people to work. If you think you can, we think we
can't--I think that is Henry Ford--you are right. So, that is
the kind of leaders that I look for as we have folks come
before our Committee.
I would like for you to talk a little more about
leadership. I want you to talk, whether it is about management
and how your life and your life's experiences, including your
work experiences, have embedded in you the kind of management
skills that could be helpful, maybe upsized and upscaled in
this assignment. But, just talk with us about that, please.
Ms. Saldana. And, I had thought a lot about that----
Chairman Carper. Make sure your microphone is on, please,
because we want to hear every word.
Ms. Saldana. There is a green light.
Chairman Carper. OK.
Ms. Saldana. Is that the first sign of a good leader--
there. Thank you.
Mr. Deyo. You are welcome.
Ms. Saldana. All right.
Mr. Deyo. That is what management does to help. [Laughter.]
Ms. Saldana. That is a very thoughtful question, Mr.
Chairman, and I have given that a great deal of thought, and I
believe every experience I have had, and when I talk to young
people, both high schoolers and college kids and students in
law school, I tell them to take advantage of everything they
have done in their life. Whether you are serving sodas in a
drug store or doing whatever you do, enjoy it, learn from it,
and all of these experiences build on each other to make you
the person you are.
So, I have been working for a long time. I have been living
for a long time, and working about 40 years, and, starting with
the school teacher that you mentioned and the challenges
there----
Chairman Carper. Did you ever work as a kid, growing up in
Corpus Christi?
Ms. Saldana. In a drug store, actually. That is why I
mentioned that----
Chairman Carper. So did I.
Ms. Saldana. Yes. So, I have come to learn that leadership
requires you to be the point of the spear, the face of the
organization, the face of the group you are leading, and I have
done that with the U.S. Attorney's Office, I believe.
I believe that a leader really needs to be the face of the
office, to conduct himself or herself with the greatest ethics
and integrity and professionalism. As you mentioned, you lead
by example. If you are not conducting yourself at the highest
standards of excellence and integrity, it is difficult for
people to follow.
I have had to exercise good judgment, not only in my
positions at the U.S. Attorney's Office, but in representing
some of the largest corporations in the country when I was
working with Baker Botts and Haynes and Boone, firms I am very
proud to have been associated with. Once again, excellence was
an expectation there.
And, so, during that time when I did that, I picked up the
skills of communication and the importance of relationships,
and I do not say that in a manner that is intended to be
disrespectful. What I am saying is relationships are important.
You have them all your life, and it is a matter of fostering
them and making sure that you do not slam the door behind you
when you leave from one place to the other.
And, then----
Chairman Carper. I would just interject there. I think one
of the reasons we have a productive Committee here is because
of the trusting relationship that Dr. Coburn and I worked to
create, and really with the Committee and with our colleagues.
One of the things that is most missing here in the Senate these
days--and in the House--is the trust especially across party
lines. So, I concur. that is enormously important.
Ms. Saldana. And, there is nothing like good judgment, as
well, and I have honed that judgment over the years, and a
little bit of common sense does not hurt, either.
Surrounding yourself with the very best people. In a
position like this, the demands are great. You cannot get into
the weeds, necessarily, but you can make sure that the people
that are around you running the day-to-day operations are the
finest, the best trained, and that you work as a leader of that
office to provide them the tools they need.
Decisionmaking--once again, deliberate, but timely. You
cannot just sit on decisions, and you have to think them
through. And, I can see where that skill will serve me well in
this particular position. Be thoughtful. Get all the
information you can, and then do what is in the best interests
of the American people.
And then, finally, and I think I have repeated this, but it
bears repeating, communication, communication, communication.
In this position, with 20,000 employees across the world, with
all the agencies we have somewhat overlapping jurisdiction
with, all of that, it is important to be communicating with
them, and I have done that as a United States Attorney. I have
had to deal with the local law enforcement in 100 counties.
There is a sheriff in each one of them. There is a police
chief. There are constables. And, I think all of that is going
to serve me well if this Committee does and the Senate confirm
me.
Chairman Carper. Thank you so much for those responses.
I will yield to Dr. Coburn. When we come back, Mr. Deyo, I
will have a couple of questions for you and Chairman Barnett.
Thank you. Tom.
Senator Coburn. Mr. Chairman, I will make it easy. I do not
have any questions for Russ Deyo or Mickey. I pretty well am
satisfied. I have not had a chance to have a private visit with
U.S. Attorney Saldana, and so all of my questions are really
going to be directed to you, and I have a ton, so you will have
to forgive me. A lot of them will probably end up being in the
record.
I am really worried about ICE. I mean, when ICE releases
600 criminals based on sequestration, nobody seems to know why.
Nobody has taken responsibility for it. And, I am not talking
about minor criminals. I think the organization has some real
conflicts within it, and I think it comes back of whether or
not the leader is going to be establishing that we are going to
follow the law. The rule of law is important. We are going to
make that our mantra, and we are going to do that in a kind and
compassionate way, but we are going to do it. So, bear with me
as I go through some questions for you, if I may.
Last month, the DHS Inspector General (IG) released a
report that Senator McCain and I had requested which found ICE
released thousands of illegal immigrants last year prior to the
sequester, and that more than 600 of these had significant
criminal records. Now, I am talking criminal records here in
the United States. Are you aware of that report, one? What are
your views about the decision that somebody made, that nobody
will own up to, that we released criminals onto the street?
And, can you assure this Committee that that will not happen
under your watch?
Ms. Saldana. The answer to the first question is, I am
aware of that, Senator, and I will tell you that I understand
the concern you have. I think it is a concern to all the
American people, so I am glad you brought that up. I want to
speak to that directly with respect to the general concept of
keeping track of people who are in the country and making
deliberate, thoughtful decisions. If, in fact, the pressures of
limited resources versus ensuring the safety of the American
public, I do that every day as a United States Attorney.
I have not studied and gotten behind the facts regarding
that report, sir, I will be candid with you, but I feel a very
strong commitment that that is one of the top issues that I
would like to study and certainly learn more about. But, in the
end, all I have done the last few years is enforce the law.
That is what I know to do. I like the fact that you mentioned
some compassion, that there is certainly room for that. But, we
have to protect the American public first.
And, so, all I can assure you, Senator, is that I will act
in the manner that you are requiring the Director of this
agency to act, and that is with the principle of the rule of
law certainly in mind. But, I understand those pressures and I
will just have to take a look at that, Senator, and talk more
about that with you, I hope.
Senator Coburn. OK. ICE Homeland Security investigations
has a complex mission with enforcement that spans a number of
different laws. However, many of these laws overlap with a lot
of other Federal agencies and law enforcement agencies. If you
gain this nomination and are confirmed, how are you going to
assure us that you do not expand into areas of mission creep,
because I see that as part of our problem right now, is you
have limited resources, but we are expanding the mission when,
in fact, some other Federal agency has it covered already. How
are you going to make sure that we do not go beyond what is
truly part of the essential and primary mission of Homeland
Security?
Ms. Saldana. Well, I have just gotten to appreciate even
more how broad that mission is. But, I do recognize, since I
work now daily with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the
Secret Service, and the Homeland Security Investigations (HSI)
at ICE, certainly, that there are areas of overlap and we
cannot afford today to run into each other with respect to the
responsibilities we are carrying out.
And, just using cybercrime as an example, everyone has got
to step up, all the agencies that have some responsibility
there, but it is also important to stretch the taxpayer dollar
by coordinating and collaborating. I do that as United States
Attorney. I sit down with the heads of every agency I work
with, with the District Attorney, with the heads of local law
enforcement, our public safety, Department of Public Safety,
once a quarter. We break bread together. We talk about what we
are doing.
Senator Coburn. I have it. I am not ever going to get
through these if I let you go on----
Ms. Saldana. Yes.
Senator Coburn. I understand it, and I appreciate that.
One of the things you discussed was prosecutorial
discretion in the area of immigration enforcement, including
the need to focus prosecutorial resources on the biggest
threats to public safety. But, as ICE Director, you would have
investigative discretion to determine what to investigate. So,
my question is, would you apply the same logic, focusing
investigative resources on the biggest threats?
And, let me just give you some contrast. How do you compare
the threat of illegal immigrants, especially those with
criminal records, or those who overstay their visa terms in
terms of intending to be a threat to us, as we saw in 9/11,
compared with the threat to public safety for fraudulent
copyright, fraudulent counterfeit merchandise? How do you weigh
those two and how do you apply that investigative resource to
what is most important for us in terms of protecting the
homeland?
Ms. Saldana. Well, as I do now as United States Attorney,
Senator, you have to look at what is the biggest threat to the
American public and to the constituents within your district. I
believe that you have to assess every case, and here is where
process and systems that are in place are the most important
thing, because you have to be able to assure the public that
you are looking at every case on the merits, on the facts, and
on the law.
So, this is what I would do as one of my first things, if
this Senate were to confirm me, is to look at the processes in
place to determine, to make that very assessment. But, it has
to be on a case-by-case basis. It cannot be by categories,
necessarily.
So, I agree with you, Senator. I think that is an important
issue facing the agency, and I certainly have kept up and read
some of the reports. I want to get in there and work on this
issue.
Senator Coburn. Senator Carper, do you want me to go on, or
do you want to?
Let us talk EB-5 for a minute. Over the past year, I and
others have engaged in significant oversight of the EB-5
immigrant investor visa program at the United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). It is fraught
with problems, including very real threats to our national
security, and it has rampant fraud. That is indisputable.
In the course of that investigation, I have reviewed a ton
of documents, including an ICE HSI tasking that stated, the
only way to protect national security was to sunset the
Regional Center portion of the EB-5 program. That is ICE's own
report on its own program. ICE HSI must carry out investigation
of any referrals made by USCIS involving this or any other
immigration benefit program.
So, my questions are the following. ICE HSI made this
recommendation to sunset this program, yet USCIS continues to
expand this program despite its very real inherent national
security vulnerabilities. As Assistant Secretary, how will you
work to ensure that ICE recommendations for preventing national
security threats are given credence and implemented by
agencies, in this case, USCIS?
Ms. Saldana. Senator, you have identified the top priority
within Homeland, and that is the national security threat. You
have identified the top priority within the Department of
Justice in which I serve now. I am not familiar with all the
facts and circumstances related to the situation you are
talking about. That is one thing that the Director of ICE has
to focus on, is any process that touches upon how we assess
these threats and what we do about them.
If I am confirmed, I need to get involved, get all the
information I can, hopefully, discuss this matter further. It
sounds like you have studied this a great deal. But, the bottom
line is, that is the top priority of the Director of ICE, is
assessing the systems that determine the severity, the
seriousness, of any national security threat, and I commit to
you I will do that, and, hopefully, get your assistance in kind
of assessing the problem.
Senator Coburn. With me, it is unexplainable, why EB-5
Regional Center programs have not been shut down already. I
cannot get an answer to it. I cannot get anybody that wants to
take responsibility for it. China steals our intellectual
property. They, as a nation-state, invade our computers all the
time. And, they are going to have over 98 percent of the EB-5
regional programs this year, where they are taking money they
have stolen from us, invest it back into an EB-5 program, and
then put counterintelligence people on the ground in this
country with our blessing. It makes no sense whatsoever, and
nothing is being done about it. This should be one of your
highest priorities, because it is a real risk to this country
and we are sitting there saying, come on, do it some more,
because we have not shut down the Regional Center program.
Ms. Saldana. And, I will do that, Senator. I will.
Senator Coburn. The Associated Press (AP) last week
reported that the United States is sharply curtailing
deportations. The AP noted, the Department of Homeland Security
figures show it deported 258,000 illegal immigrants through
July 28 of 2014. The same period last year, 321,000. According
to the L.A. Times, deportations from the interior are down more
than 40 percent since 2009. And, the Associated Press also
reported that ICE is on pace this year to remove the fewest
immigrants since 2007.
We have had the discussion on what the law says, in terms
of the rule of law. This flies in the face of what the rule of
law is. However, the administration has claimed it has deported
record numbers, and the reason they can claim that is because
they talked about people who come across and are immediately
deported, which, we did not use to count the numbers that way.
So, we are playing games. We have a spin game going on with the
administration in terms of what the factors are about real
interior deportations.
I give that to you so that when you work with this
Committee--the one thing you find is we will work with anybody
as long as they shoot straight with us. So, numbers are
important, and how you get the numbers are important. So, if
you change the baseline or change the denominator, you ought to
be honest enough to tell us that, and I just put that forward.
Mr. Chairman, I will stop right now and I will submit the
rest of my questions for the record, or I will get them covered
this afternoon.
Ms. Saldana. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Carper. Thank you, Dr. Coburn.
Ms. Saldana, I am going to let you take a breath, have a
drink of water---- [Laughter.]
Chairman Carper [continuing]. And I will turn to your
colleagues here, Mr. Deyo and Chairman Barnett, if I can.
One of the folks who has testified before the Committee any
number of times in the past was Jane Holl Lute, who was Deputy
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. I thought she
served with great effect. She was a very good leader. And, she
used to go over and meet--sometimes, Secretary Napolitano would
go, as well--but, they would go over and meet with the
Government Accountability Office (GAO), Gene Dodaro who heads
up GAO, and basically sit down with him and say, ``What do we
have to do to get off your High-Risk List?''
The High-Risk List is something the GAO puts out every
year, about every other year, and it covers, really, our broad
Federal Government, and the idea behind the High-Risk List is,
how do we get better results for less money in almost
everything we do? It is an invaluable service they provide.
And, the question is what our agencies do with it. What do they
do with it?
DHS, as you may know, was on the High-Risk List for a
number of years because they were unable to achieve unqualified
financial statements, and now they have finally done that,
after all these years. Others, they made real progress. The
person who held this post before you, actually, was a very
strong leader and manager.
As you know, the management of this Department remains on
GAO's High-Risk List, and we feel--I hope you do, too--that
this is an operation that continues to need a lot of attention.
The Department has an Inspector General. This Department's IG
has also produced a considerable body of work related to
management of the Department. Real progress has been made, and
it has been made in the last 6 months, but also in the last 6
years, and a lot of people have been responsible for that.
But, more needs to be done. If it is not perfect, make it
better. That is my motto. And, so, I would just say, what would
your approach be to working with both the GAO and with the
Inspector General to address the Department's major management
challenges? What are some of those that still you think would
require your immediate attention? How much would you work with
GAO and the IG to achieve those?
Mr. Deyo. Thank you, Chairman Carper. First, let me say, I
had the benefit of a conversation with Jane Holl Lute
telephonically, and I plan to meet with her again. I share your
perception of her. I have also met with Rafael Borras and some
of the other former Under Secretaries for Management, and I
have a lot to learn from them. They have all been very
helpful----
Chairman Carper. You talked to Jane Holl Lute and Rafael
Borras. Those are two of the smartest calls you could make.
That is good.
Mr. Deyo. I look forward to learning more from them.
In terms of Inspector General and GAO, I know the benefit
of independent oversight and receiving that kind of input and I
welcome it, and I would intend to work closely with both GAO
and the Inspector General in terms of understanding their
concerns and being held accountable for addressing them. I
think it should be in open, transparent discussions.
To get a little bit deeper into it, but not too deep, when
I think about my own personal priorities based on the
preliminary views I have looked at, it pretty well aligns with
the high-risk areas that GAO has identified, and I think that
alignment underscores the value of the GAO input, as well as my
concern about improving the management and the efficiency and
effectiveness.
I also had a conversation with George Scott at GAO and that
was also very positive.
Chairman Carper. OK. One of the reasons that the
Department's management is on the High-Risk List is that its
processes for planning and for overseeing major acquisitions
are still relatively immature, at least by Federal standards.
In general, GAO has found the Department has good policies on
paper, but that many major acquisitions have moved forward
without the kind of documentation and review that these
policies actually require. And, the Department needs to find
better ways to align planning and outcomes across the whole
Department. This would both eliminate duplication, we hope, and
to ensure that the resources are matched to the highest
priorities.
This is a large part of what Secretary Johnson calls his
unity of effort. That is what it is largely all about. Based on
your experiences, what is the proper balance, if you will,
between an organization's headquarters and its components in
terms of management and accountability?
Mr. Deyo. First of all, I agree with you about the power of
the unity of effort, and I also agree that the structure of the
lifecycle management of acquisitions looks pretty good. What is
needed is discipline about each stage review to make sure that
the requirements are clearly defined, each step is being met
before it moves on, and that takes discipline and it takes
collaboration between the center and the components.
I think it is a question of shared accountability, where
both feel accountable for the outcomes that the--particularly
on the highest priority acquisitions that are most critical to
the mission, and we need to gain alignment with the components
and the center on what those are. They need to be the highest
priority, appropriately addressed, and put at the top of the
list and managed well because the outcomes are so critical.
So, it is shared accountability, it is management willing
to demonstrate the benefits it is bringing to help the
components fulfill their function, but also, if necessary,
demonstrating the benefit of a common practice and process.
Does that answer your question?
Chairman Carper. Yes, I think so. I think you come close.
Mr. Deyo. I have to see it firsthand to see how it really
operates before I can delve too deeply.
Chairman Carper. All right. As you may know, for the first
time, this Department, the Department of Homeland Security,
achieved a clean opinion on its financial statements in fiscal
year 2013. A lot of people worked very hard, and that is
regarded certainly by us as a major achievement, and it is one
that we hold out regularly to our friends in the Department of
Defense, who have been around a lot longer than DHS, and say,
well, look what they have done at DHS. What kind of progress
are you making at the Pentagon? And, they are starting to make
some progress. But, actually, the example provided by DHS, and
sort of the road map it has provided, is very helpful, of
leadership by example, and we are using it, I hope,
effectively.
But, while that is a major achievement, of getting a clean
financial opinion, I think the Department's success here was
due in large part to the clear message that was sent from the
top leadership of the Department for what was and remains an
important goal. What would be your messaging to the rest of the
Department about the importance of maintaining a clean audit?
And, based on your reviews thus far of the Department's
financial systems, to the extent you have been able to do that,
what do you think should be the goals of the modernization of
the financial systems? Any thoughts you have on that? What
benefit might that bring to the efficiency, the efficient
operation of the Department? Those three questions.
Mr. Deyo. I share your view and applaud the success in
getting a clean audit. That is a tremendous accomplishment. It
is not meaningful, however, unless it is sustained, because you
have to have confidence in those balance sheets, in those
numbers on an annual basis. And, I know that the Department and
the finance group are absolutely dedicated to making that
happen.
The next big piece, as far as I can see so far, is we need
to have a fully integrated financial management system across
all the components. You have to have reliable information so
you can make smart budget decisions and have good analytics to
make good strategic decisions. And, having ledger sheets that
do not match up and you cannot compare apples to apples across
the groups makes it very difficult to make informed strategic
decisions.
I think it is critical that the agency have a long-term
focus, and you cannot do that if you do not have reliable data.
So, that is an existent high priority within the finance group,
and, indeed, with the leadership of the Department, and I
strongly embrace that. At Johnson and Johnson, it would be
unimaginable that, despite all the complexity and the
decentralized nature, that there was not a common financial
system so that you could accurately make strategic decisions
and accurately report what the actual financial numbers were.
Chairman Carper. All right. Good. Thank you. Thank you for
that.
Do you mind if we turn to Mickey Barnett for a while----
Mr. Deyo. I would be pleased with that decision. I support
that decision. [Laughter.]
Chairman Carper. As I sometimes say when I ask questions
like that, I say, ``I am Tom Carper, and I approve that
message,'' so, all right.
To our Chairman, we had some interesting conversations just
this week with the Postmaster General, Pat Donahoe, and also
with our Deputy Postmaster General, Ron Stroman, and some good
conversations. Among the questions we have been exploring are,
how is the Postal Service doing? For the most part, when we
talk about the Postal Service, there is so much red ink, cut in
half, reduce by half the workforce, reduce by half the mail
processing centers, reduce the time that thousands of our Post
Offices are open in rural communities across the country. The
tone is actually pretty negative.
But, as it turns out, in spite of all that, there is, I
think, a remarkable transformation going on within the Postal
Service. I have said any number of times in this room, the real
key to success long-term for the Postal Service, I have
learned, is how do we take this 200-plus-year-old distribution
network and make it relevant, not just relevant, but successful
and vibrant in a digital economy in the 21st Century, and it is
possible to do that. And, little known to most of the people
that I serve with and to the rest of this country, you are
actually beginning to do that.
And, one of the things we talked about, is how the First
Class Mail continues to drop. That is a problem, because the
Postal Service, for years, that has been your bread and butter.
You make money doing other things, but that is the most
profitable part of the business, and a lot of that business has
gone away, especially in the last 7 years, as you know better
than any of us.
But, just as the Internet has taken away a lot of business
for the Postal Service, it is in the process of giving it back,
big time. I am going to ask you to talk a little bit about some
of the new opportunities that are being pursued. Like, this
morning, between 3 a.m. and 7 a.m. in San Francisco, the Postal
Service is out there delivering groceries and doing this in
partnership with, Amazon. I think it is with Amazon. I
understand you are going to reach out to 100 grocery chains
across the country. I think there are 32 ZIP codes in San
Francisco.
This took place this morning. You used your trucks, your
vehicles that otherwise would not be doing anything to deliver
the groceries. I think you folks have access to high-rise
apartments because you Postal folks have keys, anyway, to get
in to deliver the mail, and you have the opportunity to deliver
the groceries, as well. So, you have these vehicles that
otherwise would not be used. Let us put them to use. And, part
of your skill sets is the ability to provide access to these
buildings and better service, which is important.
We understand that the deliveries you are making on Sundays
for Amazon has grown from a couple hundred ZIP codes now to
over 5,000, and growing. There is growth, continued growth in
flat rate boxes. There is some, I think, good growth already in
Priority Mail, and you are about to see a lot more of that, we
think, as we come into the holiday season. So, those are all
positives.
I would just ask you to talk about this glass half-full
story for the Postal Service, not just the glass empty or half-
empty, but talk to us about a glass half-full, what we need to
do in this body to make sure that it is a glass half-full and
that the Postal Service will not be a burden to the people of
this country, the taxpayers, but it will be something we can
all be enormously proud of. Please.
Mr. Barnett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and also thank you to
you and your staff, who I know have worked diligently now for
years trying to get postal reform legislation, which we hope
will eventually occur.
It is half-full in all of the things you describe. The
Board has been diligent at going everywhere we can go to meet
with potential customers to expand our income opportunities.
Some have been very fruitful, as the Chairman pointed out.
Others are continuing to grow. The growth of small businesses
and eBay and those kind of things are going to be large growths
in small package delivery, of which we are well positioned to
be the choice of the consumers or the businesses for delivery.
It cannot be all half-good because we have competitors in
the arena, which is great, and we would like to operate as they
do, as a business. These are what we call the competitive sides
of the business. They are not like first class, governed by
monopolistic-type theories of utility regulation. However, we
are not as nimble as we need to be because most of our--we can
do trials, we can do tests, but everything else has to go to
the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) for approval. That is a
tedious, expensive, and very slow moving operation over there.
And, so, we sometimes have great opportunities, great ideas,
and it takes us months to get it to fruition.
The test marketing for the grocery delivery has been a
success. We saw film of them at 3 in the morning and film of
them going to doorsteps and things like that. That ties in with
a large amount of effort that the Board and management has done
to try to come up with possibly a 21st Century mailbox, because
as package delivery overtakes mail delivery, it has new
problems. The two existing problems are where do you leave the
packages if the party is not home, and second, our delivery
vehicles are not now equipped to do the volume we need to stay
solvent, particularly when they are 22 years old and they are
designed for mail delivery, not package delivery. Now, we have
some package delivery, but not near the volume that we hope to
grow to.
We, clearly, can be the last mile for every carrier in the
country. We probably can do it more efficiently than they can
in every area except probably a densely urban site. It is
profitable for anybody to deliver in that environment. It is
not as you go more rural, to your State or particularly my
State out in the Southwest. Lots of things are very far apart,
and we are well equipped to do it, and we need to, with 150-
million-plus delivery sites every day.
I will not go through the litany of needing more
flexibility on delivery time. We need help on Workers' Comp. We
have a guy, 100 years old, that once worked 3 weeks for the
Postal Service when he took office in 1957, worked 3 weeks, and
he has been on Workers' Comp since then. That is a system that
is broken and we need a way of, one, resolving the Workers'
Comp benefits, and, two, having some date certain at which they
convert to retirement.
But, those are all postal reform ideas. The phenomenal
success of Postmaster General Donahoe and the entire team at
the Postal Service is unprecedented. The fact you could reduce
your workforce by several hundred thousand people with no work
stoppages, no labor unrest, no anything, is somewhat
unprecedented in this country's history. It has all been done.
Now, I am not saying there is not some concern over it, but it
has been done very well.
Second, the last time I appeared, we had some discussion
about the difficulties faced in closing of rural Post Offices,
those that have--and we reached a very good compromise at
reducing them to 2 hours a day, 4 hours a day, or 6 hours a
day. That has worked very well. So, there has been--I will call
that a political solution, but a compromise solution to that
sort of thing. And, by and large, the uproar seems to have died
about that and most people, 2 hours a day is plenty for the
hundred people that may live in the vicinity of a rural Post
Office.
Chairman Carper. As I understand it, what the Postal
Service did, and I thought this was smart, they asked the
question, how would I want to be treated if I lived in one of
these several thousands of communities where there is not a
whole lot of volume by the Post Office, but there is a desire
to continue to have that Postal Service in some form, and what
I think you did in thousands of communities, you just basically
said to them, well, here is a menu of options. Which would be
most desirable or preferable to you? You can have your Post
Office open, maybe, 2, 4, 6 hours a day, not by a full-time
Postmaster, but by someone who is going to come in, maybe make
$15 an hour to make sure that service is provided on a daily
basis most days.
You said, you could have the option of, like, the rural
letter carrier, who will say that your table there encompasses
an area that is serviced by a rural letter carrier and each of
your name tags represents a different spot around the route
that the carrier goes to, and where Ms. Saldana's name tag, at
8 in the morning, the rural letter carrier will be there to be
a mobile Post Office, almost like a bookmobile. And, then,
where Mr. Deyo's name tag is, that will be a 9 stop, where he
can provide, like, a mobile Post Office. And, where your name
is, it would be 10. I thought that was a pretty good option
that was provided to folks in rural areas.
Another option was, maybe, to co-locate the Post Office
with a general store, a convenience store that offers,
actually, longer hours of operation than might otherwise be
available.
I think that was very smart, and the communities could
actually say, we like this, we do not like that, and have a
real say in it. I thought that was smart.
In terms of what we can do--Congress, working with the
President--what we can do to further facilitate and nurture,
promote innovation, what can we do to enable you, the Postal
Service, to find new ways to make money, maybe things that you
are thinking of doing, maybe even that you are beginning to do
that we can actually then have great potential. People talk a
lot about other countries, the Postal Service delivers wine,
beer, spirits. We do not do that here, although FedEx and UPS
do. Is that an area that you need authorization? But, there are
other ideas. Where do we come into this and where can we be
helpful?
Mr. Barnett. The primary way, I think, the Congress would
come in, and the President, would be to free us up to do it. We
are treated as a utility, which was certainly a reasonable
model for a couple hundred years, because we were more like a
utility. This side of the business we are talking about on
package delivery is extremely competitive and there is no
longer any need to regulate it as a utility, and we would
encourage you to take most of the rules and regulations off,
let us operate.
The Board is very cognizant--the way this is set up, we are
all appointed to represent the public, but we recognize the
public is lots of things. The business community is part of the
public, as well. Obviously, the consumers, the residences, the
businesses that mail is delivered to, or packages. We take all
that into account. We are not going to go crazy and use
monopolistic-type powers to go drive somebody out of business.
Chairman Carper. The Postal Service is not interested in
becoming a bank, is it?
Mr. Barnett. No, it is not.
Chairman Carper. Are you interested in becoming an
insurance company?
Mr. Barnett. No. There has been nobody on the Board,
whatsoever. And, in fact, a great deal of time has been spent
over this recent boomlet of being small loan offices or banks
or that sort of thing, and that is not our core function. We do
not think we could make any money doing it. And, we think we
should focus on the future, which is small package delivery. We
are looking at other things, some I would probably rather not
say in an open Committee meeting----
Chairman Carper. Fine.
Mr. Barnett [continuing]. But, there are certainly things
in the digital area that we think we can do. But, we have not
completed the task of getting to monetize something we think
could be a very valuable service. The Post Office is the most
trusted governmental agency, based on every study for the past
10 years.
Chairman Carper. Does that include the Senate offices of
Dr. Coburn and myself?
Mr. Barnett. I do not know if the survey did, Mr. Chairman.
I am certain you were higher than we were. I do not know.
Chairman Carper. I do not know about that. [Laughter.]
Mr. Barnett. But, that is what we would like to get into,
if we possibly can.
Chairman Carper. OK. Let me just mention a couple of other
opportunities I think are good ones. A lot of people are going
to be voting over the next couple of months, especially in
Oregon and in----
Mr. Barnett. Colorado.
Chairman Carper [continuing]. I want to say Washington----
Mr. Barnett. And Colorado, as well.
Chairman Carper. Yes. But, now they vote by mail, and they
have a very good turnout compared to the rest of the country. I
think it is cost effective. And, as you say, Colorado is now
going to try it, too. I think that is potentially not just a
good piece of business for the Postal Service, but, actually,
something that could be very good for our country as we seek to
encourage folks to exercise their Constitutional right, maybe
even to save some money in doing that.
I heard, for the first time, I was talking with the
Postmaster General and the Deputy the other day about if we
actually do pass comprehensive immigration reform, which I hope
we will, I think it would actually make the job of defending
our borders easier, not harder. But, if we end up with a
situation where 10 million people living in this country need
to get some kind of documentation about their legal status,
they are going to have to get it somewhere, and a lot of folks
get their passports from the Postal Service and there might be
an opportunity to find a way for the Postal Service to meet
this need, if we do pass some kind of comprehensive immigration
reform.
And, I am told that there are actually some centers, one of
them just outside of L.A., where the Postal Service has, like,
a pretty big facility for the issuance of passports, and people
come in--it almost sounds like a Department of Motor Vehicles
facility where people come in and they get their drivers'
licenses and stuff like that, but whole families come in to
apply for passports and get good service using technology. That
is a piece of business, I think, that could be pretty good.
And, you mentioned a couple ideas in the digital world. I
am encouraged by all that.
There are some things that we need to do, and one of those
is to give you the opportunity, when you have a good idea, when
it does not tread all over or walk all over other providers of
those services from, say, the private sector, that we give the
chance to do that.
The other thing, though, the 800-pound gorilla in the room
on the Postal Service, is with respect to health care. My wife
just retired from DuPont. She actually retired about 5 years
ago, and she teaches now full-time at the University of
Delaware. But, she has just turned 65. She looks about 45, and
if you see her, tell her I said that, but it is true.
[Laughter.]
But, when she turned 65, the DuPont Company reached out to
her and said, we love you, Martha, but you are 65 now. You are
eligible for Medicare. We want you to sign up for Medicare Part
A, Part B, Part D, and, by the way, we will provide wrap-around
coverage, health coverage, for you that fills the gaps, and
they do that for all the retirees who reach 65. Frankly, so do
hundreds, maybe thousands, of other companies in America who do
that. That is what they do, including those that compete with
the Postal Service. The Postal Service cannot do that. They
would like to. As a matter of equity, they pay more money into
Medicare than any other employer in the country, but they do
not get fair value for their money.
So, a big part of helping the Postal Service to right its
ship financially is to address this problem, this challenge,
and there is a way to do that that is, I think, fair and
equitable for retirees, for the taxpayers, as well, and I think
that is a big one for us to take up.
The other thing I would say is for us--and you have not
said this directly, but we need--there is an adjutant rate case
that has been decided by the Postal Regulatory Commission for
the short term, usually about a 4.3 percent rate hike, and it
is temporary. It does not last forever. And, what our bill that
reported out of Committee, Dr. Coburn and I led on, is that
that temporary rate increase actually would become the new
baseline, the new revenue baseline, which we think is
appropriate, given all the cuts that the Postal Service has
made rightsizing your operation. We think that is part of what
the Congress can and should do.
If we do all of that and you do your part--I think we are
in a position to recapitalize the Postal Service. And, as I
mentioned today, there are 32 ZIP codes, San Francisco
groceries being delivered for Amazon, apparently going pretty
well. Not all those trucks that are being used in those 32 ZIP
codes, certainly not all the trucks going across the country,
whether it is on Sundays in those 5,500 ZIP codes, whether it
is today or any other day of the week, they are not rightsized
for delivering packages and parcels. And, when you are
delivering groceries in Phoenix, Arizona, some day, and it is
98 degree outside and you are delivering ice cream and you have
a truck that is 98 degrees warm, I do not know how that works
as a delivery vehicle. So, some work needs to be done on the
fleet.
But, you have 190,000 vehicles, 22 years old, on average.
They are energy inefficient. They do not have the kind of
technology onboard that can enable them to communicate with,
literally, with their counterparts, much less with their
customers, and we can address all of this.
And, the last thing I would say is, in North Dakota with
member Heidi Heitkamp, a Member of this Committee, valued
Member of this Committee, and we visited a mail processing
center, and it was a fairly small one, but we went into the
back of the operation just to see how they did it and I
remember this one guy carrying around these big old boxes and
moving them from place to place, trying to get the bar code
reader on them and then get them ready to be shipped out. Part
of what we would do if we could recapitalize the Postal Service
is not just replace the fleet over 3 or 4 years to modernize
it, we can also modernize the mail handling operation,
especially with respect to packages and parcels and all of
that. And, there is some really cool technology we can put on
the vehicles and some really cool technology we can put in Post
Offices, which basically look pretty much like they have looked
like for years, and provide better service to folks.
This is definitely glass half-full, and the question is,
are we going to continue to fill it and enable you to do your
share? I sure hope that we will.
The last question I would ask is this. How many people
under the law can serve at any one time on the Postal Board of
Governors? How many people?
Mr. Barnett. Nine.
Chairman Carper. And, how many people serve on it today?
Mr. Barnett. Four.
Chairman Carper. And, so, you Chair a Board of Governors
that has three other Governors, and your term expires, is it
sometime later this year?
Mr. Barnett. December 8.
Chairman Carper. OK. So, on December 9, if we do not do
something, how many people are serving on the Board on
Governors?
Mr. Barnett. We will be down to three, and two of those
three, next year is their last year.
Chairman Carper. All right. Not a good situation.
Mr. Barnett. It is not, and we really hope you will send us
several more.
Chairman Carper. Dr. Coburn and I had a hearing here, maybe
2 months ago----
Mr. Barnett. Right.
Chairman Carper [continuing]. With, I think, four nominees
from the President, several Democrats, I think at least one
Republican, and your name, if we can basically act this year,
and I fervently hope that we will--I would like to act this
week on the nominations, but we need to act this year--some of
the Democratic nominees are probably not greatly favored by
some of our Republican colleagues, and the converse of that is
true, as well. We need to get over that. This is a good,
balanced group of nominees, and the most important element I
have ever seen in any organization I have ever been a part of,
whether it was in the military, or whether it was academia,
whether it was in business, whether it was here in this
operation, athletic teams, leadership is the key. Leadership is
the key, and we need strong leadership, and that includes the
Board of Trustees.
Mr. Barnett. Mr. Chairman, in the more than 8 years I have
been on the Board of Governors, every decision has been by
consensus. There has not been any friction on a partisan basis
in the slightest. We have reached consensus on every issue.
Chairman Carper. That is an important point.
Let me just turn to our staff that are here and see if
there are any other questions that they would have me ask
before we excuse you.
[Pause.]
The staff members have said they think these are the best
three witnesses we have ever had. [Laughter.]
And, they have gone to say, they wish we could clone you
all and have you serve in other responsibilities across our
Federal Government. We are working on cloning at the University
of Delaware and Delaware State University, it is a partnership,
and we will see how that turns out.
Seriously, this has been enjoyable, informative, and, at
times, inspiring. We are grateful for what you have already
done for our country and what you are willing to do going
forward.
The nominees have filed responses to biographical and
financial questionnaires, answered pre-hearing questions
submitted by the Committee, and had their financial statements
reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics. Without objection,
this information will be made part of the hearing record, with
the exception of the financial data, which are on file and are
available for public inspection in the Committee offices.
With that, the hearing record will remain open until noon
tomorrow, that is September 18, until 12 p.m., for the
submission of statements and questions for the record.
Do any of you have any last words you would like to leave
us with? We always give you a chance to give an opening
statement. I also give our witnesses a chance to make a very
brief closing statement, so this would be your opportunity to
get in the last word. Ms. Saldana.
Ms. Saldana. Senator, I just am marveling at this process,
and I have learned a civics lesson today and I truly appreciate
your consideration of my nomination. Thank you.
Chairman Carper. You are nice to say that. Thank you. Mr.
Deyo.
Mr. Deyo. I join in those same comments. Thank you very
much, Mr. Chairman. And, I would like to congratulate the staff
members. They have been very easy to work with, but direct,
which is exactly how it should be.
Chairman Carper. Good. I always say, I like to surround
myself with people smarter than me. My wife says, it is not
hard to find them. [Laughter.]
Mr. Deyo. I have heard that myself.
Chairman Carper. I will say this. I noticed when you were
speaking, Mr. Deyo, I was watching your wife's lips move when
you spoke. [Laughter.]
I think after--how many years have you been married? What
is it?
Mr. Deyo. Forty-three.
Chairman Carper. You two have this down pretty well, so
that is good.
Mr. Deyo. Thanks for letting me know.
Chairman Carper. Sure. [Laughter.]
Chairman Barnett, any last word?
Mr. Barnett. No, sir.
Chairman Carper. OK. All right. With that, this hearing is
adjourned and we thank you all so much.
[Whereupon, at 11:47 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]