    [Senate Hearing 114-592]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 114-592

                   FRONTLINE RESPONSE TO TERRORISM IN AMERICA

    =======================================================================

                                     HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                   HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                FEBRUARY 2, 2016

                                   __________

            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
    22-716 PDF                   WASHINGTON : 2017
    ________________________________________________________________________________________
    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, gpo@custhelp.com.

            COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                        RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin Chairman
    JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
    ROB PORTMAN, Ohio                    CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
    RAND PAUL, Kentucky                  JON TESTER, Montana
    JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
    MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming             HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
    KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire          CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
    JONI ERNST, Iowa                     GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
    BEN SASSE, Nebraska

                        Keith B. Ashdown, Staff Director
         Brooke N. Ericson, Deputy Chief Counsel for Homeland Security
                      Colleen E. Berny, Research Assistant
                  Gabrielle A. Batkin, Minority Staff Director
               John P. Kilvington, Minority Deputy Staff Director
         Brian B. Turbyfill, Minority Senior Professional Staff Member
            Robert H. Bradley II, Minority Professional Staff Member
                         Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
                       Benjamin C. Grazda, Hearing Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                     ------
    Opening statements:
                                                                       Page
        Senator Johnson..............................................     1
        Senator Carper...............................................     2
        Senator Baldwin..............................................     3
        Senator Heitkamp.............................................     4
        Senator Tester...............................................     4
        Senator Portman..............................................     5
        Senator Booker...............................................    27
        Senator Ayotte...............................................    30
        Senator McCaskill............................................    33
    Prepared statements:
        Senator Johnson..............................................    39
        Senator Carper...............................................    41

                                    WITNESS
                           Tuesday, February 2, 2016

    Wally Sparks, Chief of Police, Everest Metro Police Department,
      Weston, Wisconsin..............................................     6
    Hon. William J. Bratton, Police Commissioner, New York City
      Police Department, New York, New York..........................     8
    Rhoda Mae Kerr, President and Chair of the Board, International
      Association of Fire Chiefs, Austin, Texas......................    10
    Edward F. Davis III, Chief Executive Officer, Edward Davis, LLC,
      and Former Commissioner of the Boston Police Department,
      Boston, Massachusetts..........................................    13
    Mark S. Ghilarducci, Director, California Office of Emergency
      Services, and the Governor's Homeland Security Advisor, Mather,
      California.....................................................    15

                         Alphabetical List of Witnesses

    Bratton, Hon. William J.:
        Testimony....................................................     8
        Prepared statement...........................................    52
    Davis III, Edward F.:
        Testimony....................................................    13
        Prepared statement with attachment...........................    62
    Ghilarducci, Mark S.:
        Testimony....................................................    15
        Prepared statement...........................................    98
    Kerr, Rhoda Mae:
        Testimony....................................................    10
        Prepared statement...........................................    55
    Sparks, Wally:
        Testimony....................................................     6
        Prepared statement...........................................    43

                                    APPENDIX

    The BENS Report..................................................    64
    Statement submitted for the Record from Chief Gregg A. Cleveland.   110
    Responses to post-hearing questions for the Record from:
        Mr. Sparks...................................................   114
        Mr. Bratton..................................................   122
        Ms. Kerr.....................................................   126
        Mr. Davis....................................................   132
        Mr. Ghilarducci..............................................   163

                   FRONTLINE RESPONSE TO TERRORISM IN AMERICA

                                  ----------

                           TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2016

                                         U.S. Senate,
                               Committee on Homeland Security
                                      and Governmental Affairs,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m., in
    room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson,
    Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Johnson, Portman, Ayotte, Ernst, Sasse,
    Carper, McCaskill, Tester, Baldwin, Heitkamp, Booker, and
    Peters.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHNSON

        Chairman Johnson. This hearing will come to order. I want
    to welcome all of our witnesses.
        The issues that we deal with in this Committee, I think,
    speak right to our mission statement: to enhance the economic
    and national security of America. And what we have here today
    is a hearing that is really going to be talking about what
    happens at the ground level--the men and women who really spend
    their lives trying to protect the rest of us, and the very
    difficult issues that they are grappling with.
        We have Chief Wally Sparks from Wisconsin here. I met him
    at one of our listening sessions as I traveled through
    Wisconsin talking about national security issues. And the way
    that this hearing, from my standpoint, is designed is that we
    want to listen to Chief Sparks, who is trying to prepare for
    what the rest of you have actually had to deal with, and what
    he is trying to grapple with. And then, as we move on down the
    list in terms of the testimony, you can start filling in, at
    that moment, whether you had an active shooter or whether it
    was an act of terrorism that you were having to deal with. Tell
    us what worked, what did not work, and what we have to really
    improve.
        I know that, for Senator Baldwin and I, this hits pretty
    close to home because on August 5, 2012, there was an active
    shooter at the Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. And when
    you look at the webcam from Lieutenant Brian Murphy's patrol
    car, you see the bravery of the men and women who first
    respond, who rush into danger.
        Now, fortunately, Lieutenant Brian Murphy is alive today,
    but he was shot 15 times by the perpetrator of that heinous
    crime. And then Officer Sam Lenda also came on. You can see,
    again, in the video, the bravery of the men and women.
        So I think that it is the responsibility of this Committee
    to make sure that the men and women who capably and
    courageously protect our security have the tools and the
    resources to perform that task. That is really what this
    hearing is about. What tools and resources are required from a
    Federal Government standpoint? How do we prioritize that
    spending?
        The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has about $1.6
    billion appropriated for grants and the Department of Justice
    (DOJ) has appropriated about half a billion dollars. That is
    about $2 billion that we allocate for grants to help folks like
    you. It sounds like a lot of money, but in a Federal budget
    that is starting to approach almost four thousand billion
    dollars--it is about $3.7 trillion right now--that is about
    0.05 percent of our Federal budget.
        Now, I think that the defense of this Nation, the defense
    of our homeland, is a top priority of the Federal Government. I
    think that we need to prioritize that spending and put that at
    the top of the list.
        So, with that, I will turn this over to Senator Carper, and
    then we also have Senator Heitkamp and Senator Baldwin who
    would like to make some brief opening statements as well.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER

        Senator Carper. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for
    holding this hearing. I want to say thank you to Senator
    Baldwin and Senator Heitkamp for proposing this in the first
    place and also thank you to all of you who came here to make it
    real for us. Thank you for what you do with your lives and for
    your service to your communities and to our country.
        Since September 11, 2001 (9/11), the Federal Government has
    worked hard to ensure that those on the front lines in this
    country--our police officers, our firefighters, and our
    emergency medical personnel--are better prepared to help
    prevent and respond to terrorist attacks and natural disasters.
    For example, we have helped local officials develop response
    plans for mass casualty events. We have also helped train
    thousands of law enforcement officers. And we have helped build
    a network of fusion centers, as you know, to deliver more
    timely information to our first responders.
        Of course, we have also provided, as the Chairman has
    alluded to, grant funding for equipment, for personnel, for
    training, and for other needs. I am pleased that the spending
    bill that we just passed in December, signed by the President,
    contains over $1 billion in grant funding to help States and
    localities prepare for and respond to terrorist attacks and
    other disasters.
        The recent tragedies in Paris, Boston, Chattanooga, and San
    Bernardino, however, are a stark reminder that we must remain
    vigilant and ensure as best we can that our first responders
    are ready for anything that might come their way.
        That is why we will be paying close attention next week to
    the President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 budget request. We need
    to make sure that it provides the selfless men and women who
    keep us safe with the resources that they need to save lives
    and stay ahead of the threats that we face as a Nation.
        Today's terrorist threats are very different from those
    that we experienced on 9/11.
        Today, we unfortunately know that one or two people with an
    assault weapon or a homemade bomb can create unimaginable havoc
    and throw a whole city into chaos and turmoil. Cities like New
    York, Boston, and Washington, D.C. have been dealing with
    terrorist threats for quite some time. We know that, with the
    help of online radicalization, a terrorist attack can happen
    anytime, anywhere.
        I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses today
    about how Congress can further help communities, both large and
    small, to be better prepared for the type of terrorist attacks
    that we are witnessing today, such as active shooter events.
        I also want to hear about what else we could be doing to
    stop homegrown terrorism and, extremism--something that I know
    all of our witnesses are familiar with.
        Last December, I introduced legislation to strengthen the
    Department of Homeland Security's efforts to work with
    community leaders in identifying and preventing homegrown
    terrorist threats. It is my hope that we can move this
    legislation soon, so that the Department is better equipped to
    counter the hateful messages put out by the Islamic State of
    Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and other terrorist groups.
        Again, we thank you all for joining us and a special thank
    you to Senators Heitkamp and Baldwin. Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Senator Baldwin.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BALDWIN

        Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
    you and Ranking Member Carper for so quickly responding to
    Senator Heitkamp's and my request to hold this important
    hearing.
        Like many of my colleagues, I hear from constituents
    frequently about their very real fears of being attacked in
    their own communities--and these concerns are not unwarranted.
        Just last week, in my home State of Wisconsin, a terrorist
    attack was thwarted. A 23-year-old man had a vicious plan to
    kill, he said, at least 30 people at a Masonic temple in
    downtown Milwaukee. In my initial conversations with the
    Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), officials indicated
    that the fusion centers and the FBI databases, such as
    eGuardian, which allows law enforcement to share intelligence,
    were very useful in thwarting this planned attack.
        In my view, we need to find ways to expand the use of these
    tools, while certainly also guarding the privacy of our
    citizens.
        We were fortunate in this case, as we have been in others,
    in preventing the attack. However, there will be undoubtedly
    more attempts to disrupt our way of life. We have to remain
    vigilant and ensure that our first responders have what they
    need to prevent attacks and respond to them if they do occur.
        One of the things that we have been taught in recent years
    is that we must be able to prepare for the unthinkable. If you
    think about 9/11, up until that point, security for commercial
    flights was not designed to address the methods that were used
    by those attackers.
        I am working to address a similar blind spot by improving
    the safety and security of trains that transport hazardous
    materials. Often more than a mile long, these trains carry
    volatile crude oil and other materials past the back yards of
    my constituents and through our downtowns, which are densely
    populated urban areas. And while I am proud to have made some
    headway in including two provisions in our recently passed
    highway bill to improve first responder access to information
    in advance about these trains, I feel that there is still a
    significant safety concern for our citizens.
        So, I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses
    today about what we can do. I hope that we have some take-homes
    after this hearing and that we have specific actions that the
    Federal Government can continue to take to address and assist
    first responders in their tireless efforts to respond to
    emergencies and keep Americans safe.
        Thank you for all that you do, and thank you for being
    here.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Senator Baldwin.
        I have had other requests, so let us keep this short, OK?
    Senator Heitkamp, 2 minutes.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HEITKAMP

        Senator Heitkamp. Thank you, Chairman Johnson and Senator
    Carper for agreeing to hold today's hearing.
        As Senator Baldwin has said, once Paris happened, the first
    response that I had was: What if I were North Dakota's Attorney
    General (AG) responsible for the Bureau of Criminal
    Investigation? And how well would we perform, compared to the
    people in San Bernardino? How well prepared would we be? And
    you add that on top of these horrific attacks. No part of our
    country is immune. No part of our country is somehow exempt
    from this happening. It is not the left coast or the right
    coast. It can happen right in the heartland, and we found that
    out when, in 2015, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
    (ISIL) declared the Minot Air Base, which is responsible for
    intercontinental ballistic missiles, a terrorist target.
        And so, I am curious about where we go from here. Do you
    get enough information from the Federal Government? Are they
    sharing information? Are there turf protections? Are we, in
    fact, training our first responders to, first off, keep
    themselves safe and not do things that put themselves at
    unnecessary risk, but also to contain the event? What are the
    challenges that you have, as people who think about this,
    immediately after this event? What are you doing today? And how
    can we help? How can we help change outcomes? How can we be
    better partners with those men and women who will always be our
    first responders: the State and local people who are on the
    front lines?
        So thank you for everything that you do. Thank you for
    appearing today. And I look forward to hearing more, learning
    more, and helping to build a stronger Federal-State-local
    partnership to protect all of the citizens of this country.
        Chairman Johnson. Senator Tester.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TESTER

        Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
    flexibility. I want to thank you, the Ranking Member, and
    Senator Baldwin and Heitkamp for this hearing. I want to thank
    the panel members here today. I appreciate the work that you
    do. It keeps this country safe and, quite frankly, we need to
    defeat ISIS, but we also need to protect our civil liberties.
    And I think that you guys know that, as we move forward. And we
    protect civil liberties by employing best practices and making
    sure that the Federal Government gives you the resources that
    you need to be successful.
        It was about a year ago that we had some in this body who
    turned funding for DHS into a political football. That is
    unacceptable. Quite frankly, you need consistency, you need
    continuity, and you need predictability. As first responders
    and emergency personnel at the State and local level, you are
    on the front lines of fighting terrorism in this country.
        So, as this hearing is going to demonstrate, we need to be
    serious about this issue--not play political games with it--and
    give you guys the resources that you need, so that you can do
    your jobs and so that we can hold you accountable for those
    jobs.
        Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Johnson. Senator Portman.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PORTMAN

        Senator Portman. Mr. Chairman, I thank you and Senator
    Carper for holding this hearing. We appreciate you all for
    being here.
        I just was in Ohio meeting with some of our folks who are
    local law enforcement in central Ohio, the Columbus area, who
    are part of the fusion center. These are county officials and
    city law enforcement officials. And my question to them was the
    same thing that I always ask our local law enforcement: Are
    these fusion centers working as a two-way communication?
        Usually this panel is populated by Federal law enforcement
    officials, and that is good. And we bring them up, and we talk
    to them about what they are doing. We have three fusion centers
    in Ohio--one in Columbus, one in Cleveland, and one in
    Cincinnati. I also met, by the way, with the FBI last week. Our
    regional office covers half of Ohio. And my concern is that,
    from what I am hearing from local law enforcement, it is
    sometimes a one-way street. In other words, local law
    enforcement is providing information, which is important, but
    often they have a difficult time getting that information back.
        So what I am interested in hearing today, particularly, Mr.
    Chairman, is what kind of information flow do you see coming
    from the Federal Government back to you? That is where I think
    that we can be the most helpful to you in ensuring that the
    citizens that we represent are safe.
        Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Senator Portman.
        I ask that my written statement be entered in the record,
    without objection.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Senator Johnson appears in the
    Appendix on page 39.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Senator Baldwin mentioned the attack that was thwarted on
    the Masonic temple in Milwaukee. I just wanted to very briefly
    read quotes from the foiled perpetrator, Samy Mohamed Hamzeh.
    These are excerpts of quotes that he gave to an FBI informant.
        ``I am telling you, if this hit is executed, it will be
    known all over the world. The people will be scared, and the
    operations will increase. This way we will be igniting it. I
    mean, we are marching at the front of the war, and we will
    eliminate everyone.''
        That is what this hearing is about. That is the enemy that
    we face. That is the mindset of these people who want to
    slaughter Americans in our own homeland.
        So, again, thank you all for your testimony and for your
    service to your communities, to your States, and to this
    Nation.
        And with that, it is the tradition of this Committee to
    swear in witnesses, so if you will all stand and raise your
    right hand. 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?
        Chief Sparks. I do.
        Commissioner Bratton. I do.
        Chief Kerr. I do.
        Mr. Davis. I do.
        Mr. Ghilarducci. I do.
        Chairman Johnson. Please be seated.
        Our first witness is Chief Wally Sparks. Chief Sparks is
    the chief of police of the Everest Metro Police Department (PD)
    in Wausau, Wisconsin. The department serves three communities
    with a total of 18,000 residents. He has 30 years of experience
    in law enforcement and currently serves as president of the
    North Central Chiefs of Police Association. Chief Sparks.

     TESTIMONY OF WALLY SPARKS,\1\ CHIEF OF POLICE, EVEREST METRO
                  POLICE DEPARTMENT, WESTON, WISCONSIN

        Chief Sparks. Good morning. I would like to thank all of
    you for this invitation. I am truly honored to be able to speak
    before this Committee today. When I was advised of who I was
    testifying with, and especially who I was testifying in front
    of, I was quite surprised that a local police chief from
    Wisconsin was included in this group.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Chief Sparks appears in the Appendix
    on page 43.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        But then, as I looked at the subject matter of the hearing
    and realized how the topic of terrorism in America impacts each
    and every single law enforcement officer in this country, I
    finally understood why it was important for me, or somebody
    like me, to be here.
        I am sure that nobody on this Committee has ever heard of
    the Everest Metro Police Department before, yet when it comes
    to my distinguished colleagues, just the abbreviation of the
    New York Police Department (NYPD) is all that is needed, and
    everyone knows exactly what we are talking about.
        But as I began to put that into perspective, I realized
    that there is only one NYPD--and only one Los Angeles Police
    Department (LAPD) or Chicago PD, for that matter. They
    essentially have no peers in this country. Everest Metro PD, on
    the other hand, probably mirrors similarly-sized departments
    and communities in each and every State. When I look at the
    States that each of you serve and represent, I imagine that
    every one of you has your version of an Everest Metro PD or a
    Marathon County.
        And here are just a few statistics that underscore that
    point: 84 percent of all sworn officers in the United States
    belong to local police and sheriff's departments. When it comes
    to local police departments, 86.2 percent have less than 50
    officers and 72.8 percent have less than 25 officers. For
    sheriff's departments, 77 percent have less than 50 deputies
    and 58.3 percent have less than 25 deputies. Perhaps the most
    telling statistic is that 49 percent, or almost half, of all
    law enforcement agencies employ fewer than 10 full-time
    officers.
        I provide these statistics because I feel that it is
    important for this Committee to understand that, while the
    events in larger metropolitan areas tend to dominate the
    headlines, the majority of policing efforts occur in smaller
    communities. The size of a law enforcement agency can have a
    significant impact on the delivery of policing services in a
    community, particularly when discussing threats like terrorism.
        So while I speak for our particular department, I am
    probably echoing the voices of thousands of other local police
    chiefs and sheriffs across this Nation who face the same
    concerns and challenges that I do.
        Even though our department is staffed very lean with 25
    officers, we are still able to provide a relatively high level
    of training, which you will find included in my written
    testimony. This is likely not the case for those 49 percent of
    departments with less than 10 officers, however.
        We also understand that terrorists typically look for soft
    targets, and they are learning and adjusting to how we, as law
    enforcement, respond to threats. I think that there has been a
    false perception in many communities, people think, ``It would
    never happen here.'' But that reality is changing, with law
    enforcement leaders across the country now remarking, ``It may
    very well happen here, and if it does, are we prepared?''
        So the first emphasis should be on making sure that all of
    our law enforcement officers are given the proper training and
    equipment needed to respond to such an event. There is no
    Federal blueprint on what every law enforcement officer should
    be trained in nor on the necessary equipment needed for a
    response.
        There should be more of a coordinated effort between the
    Federal, State, and local agencies to make sure that local
    agencies are properly trained and equipped. Failure to address
    this will result in greater loss of life when these incidents
    occur and will likely spur more attacks on smaller communities
    as terrorists realize that they offer relatively soft targets.
        The other key piece lies in effectively engaging and
    utilizing all law enforcement officers in the effort to prevent
    attacks. In the wake of the San Bernardino incident, there has
    been a significant focus on the ``If you see something, say
    something'' campaign. These calls will likely come into local
    PDs as suspicious activity complaints. If the local law
    enforcement agencies are not aware of critical information
    pertaining to subjects in their community who are on the State
    or FBI's radar, then we are missing a key piece of the
    preventative puzzle.
        In my 30-plus years in law enforcement, dialogue with the
    Federal agencies has generally been a one-way street. This has
    improved with increased efforts to expand information sharing
    through the creation of fusion centers and Joint Terrorism Task
    Forces (JTTFs). However, the information gap still exists.
        We need law enforcement leaders that will break down
    parochial boundaries and cut through bureaucratic policies and
    red tape. We must build closer relationships at every level and
    push critical information down to our frontline officers, if we
    are going to successfully thwart attacks. Our officers need
    information in real time so that they can properly assess
    potential threats and respond accordingly.
        I want to thank each of you for your valuable time today,
    and I look forward to answering any questions that you may
    have.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Chief Sparks.
        I originally mentioned the dashboard camera from the Oak
    Creek incident, but with our next witness I also have to
    mention the iconic pictures of the brave men and women of the
    NYPD, the New York Fire Department (FDNY), and the Port
    Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), as they walked
    up the stairs of the World Trade Center (WTC), walking into
    danger. That is really, again, why we are so appreciative of
    your efforts.
        Our next witness represents those fine men and women.
    Commissioner William Bratton is the 42nd police commissioner of
    the city of New York, the second time he has held the post. Mr.
    Bratton served as the Los Angeles police chief from 2002 to
    2009, making him the only person ever to lead the police
    agencies of the two largest cities. Commissioner Bratton.

       TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE WILLIAM J. BRATTON,\1\ POLICE
     COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, NEW YORK, NEW
                                  YORK

        Commissioner Bratton. Good morning. My thanks to the
    Committee for the opportunity to speak with you today.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Commissioner Bratton appears in the
    Appendix on page 52.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The issue before us, the frontline response to terrorism in
    America, is more pressing than at any time since 9/11. We
    believe that New York City, where I am the police commissioner,
    remains the top target for terrorists in the United States.
    Since the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, New
    York City has been the target or nexus for at least 20
    terrorist plots--more than any other American city. There have
    been four major cases in just the past 2 years.
        Since 9/11, the NYPD has spent hundreds of millions of
    dollars in Federal funding, city and State monies, and private
    grants to counter that threat. My predecessor as police
    commissioner, Raymond Kelly, oversaw the creation of a
    sophisticated intelligence and counterterrorism capability. It
    was highly capable, but it was limited by significant head
    count restrictions, even though it was staffed with more than
    1,000 personnel. Over the past 2 years, Mayor Bill de Blasio,
    whom I work with, has addressed that by providing the largest
    personnel and equipment allocations in the NYPD's history.
    Because of these allocations, we are evolving in order to face
    the increasingly diffused and complex threat picture.
        That picture now includes ISIS and lone-wolf actors--
    threats that barely existed 2 years ago and certainly did not
    exist on 9/11. These entities--ISIL and others--attempt to
    attract recruits through promises of valor, belonging, and
    empowerment. While we are always on guard for the spectacular
    al-Qaeda-style attack, with ISIS, we have seen a shift toward
    low-tech, low-cost, and high-impact attacks, oftentimes
    inspired and not directed by ISIS. November's Paris attacks
    left 130 people dead. In San Bernardino, 14 were killed. In New
    York City, this past spring, we saw three separate plots--all
    influenced by ISIS--to either behead people, bomb public
    events, or attack police, specifically.
        But we cannot address these threats without partners. Two
    years ago, I directed John Miller, my deputy commissioner for
    intelligence and counterterrorism, to execute a ``collaborative
    reset'' with our closest allies: the FBI, the Secret Service,
    DHS, FDNY, and PANYNJ. Today we believe that we have seamless
    relationships with all of these agencies. By way of example,
    the FBI sits in on the NYPD's intelligence case meetings, and
    we sit in on their meetings. We have also worked to improve the
    NYPD's intelligence capabilities.
        For more than a decade, with the help of the New York City
    Police Foundation, we have placed NYPD liaison officers
    overseas, where they work with and learn from local law
    enforcement agencies. We currently have 11 stations and have
    recently added one in Australia, as well as seconding an
    officer to Europol. By getting real-time, on-the-ground insight
    into overseas terrorist attacks--in Tunisia, France, Australia,
    and Canada--the liaison program has helped us redesign our
    tactical posture in New York City.
        Given the nature of the threat, however, intelligence must
    be accompanied by improved response and prevention
    capabilities. Our primary asset in this regard has been our
    Emergency Service Unit (ESU), the best trained police officers
    in the world. But ESU is small, fewer than 600 officers, and
    needs to be mobile. So for years, critical sites in New York
    were instead guarded by patrol officers who were borrowed each
    day from routine precinct assignments. These officers were
    neither trained nor equipped to counter the type of threats
    that they were deployed against. With the help of Mayor de
    Blasio and the New York City Council, we created the Critical
    Response Command (CRC). This new unit, CRC, is a dedicated team
    of over 500 specially-trained officers with special weapons and
    enhanced body armor and vehicles. They are briefed on the
    latest intelligence, deployed daily to potential terrorist
    targets, and prepared to mobilize for active shooter or
    terrorist events.
        We have also revamped our citywide task force, the 800-
    member Strategic Response Command, which is primarily used for
    crime response and disorder control. They, too, have been
    trained and equipped for the new threat picture--all of them
    are equipped with long guns, for example.
        Today, we have 1,800 officers who are capable of being
    deployed with special weapons across the city. That capability
    is unmatched by any other city.
        Despite this, it remains likely that the first officers on
    the scene of any event will be patrol officers. Accordingly, we
    have already trained over 3,500 of our officers in active
    shooter tactics in a 2-day training. We will eventually be
    training all 35,000 officers. In the training, officers learn
    how to form small ``contact teams'' and move toward the threat,
    with the aim of reducing the gunmen's ``time on target'' and
    saving lives. We will continue the training until all of our
    patrol officers have been trained.
        And through our 16,000-member Shield Program, a public-
    private partnership, we have already trained 20,000 civilians
    in what to do--run, hide, or fight--if they find themselves in
    such a situation. But, again, these threats cannot truly be
    addressed without partners. For example, we have worked with
    the New York City Fire Department to develop ways to get to the
    victims of a Paris-style or Mumbai-style attack as quickly as
    possible. The Rescue Task Force uses the new tactical teams
    that we have developed to provide force protection for
    paramedics in ``warm zones'' where shooting has ended, while
    other teams--primarily ESU officers--go after the terrorists or
    gunmen simultaneously in ``hot zones.''
        Our efforts go far beyond these particulars, but being
    mindful of time, my descriptions of a small number of others
    will be very brief.
        We have expanded the number of our bomb detection K-9
    dogs, known as ``vapor wake dogs.'' We have added almost $160
    million of technology, including the issuance and development
    of smartphones to all 36,000 officers. The apps on these
    devices have been paid for, in many instances, by Department of
    Homeland Security grants. It is technology unrivaled by any
    police organization in the world.
        We also conduct many multi-agency tabletop exercises, which
    we have had the good fortune to have the Secretary of Homeland
    Security recently attend in New York.
        And under the leadership of FBI Assistant Director Diego
    Rodriguez, the 35-year partnership in our Joint Terrorism Task
    Force--the first one in America--continues. One hundred of my
    detectives are assigned to that unit.
        New York City faces threats like no other and has invested
    like no other, in terms of dollars, personnel, and
    partnerships.
        I, along with my colleagues, would be happy to answer your
    questions relative to this testimony and any other issues that
    you might have interest in. Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Commissioner Bratton.
        Our next witness is Rhoda Mae Kerr. Ms. Kerr is a fourth
    generation firefighter and currently serves as the fire chief
    of the Austin Fire Department. She is also president of the
    International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) and the vice
    president of the Metropolitan Fire Chiefs Association. Ms.
    Kerr.

      TESTIMONY OF RHODA MAE KERR,\1\ PRESIDENT AND CHAIR OF THE
     BOARD, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE CHIEFS, AUSTIN, TEXAS

        Chief Kerr. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Johnson,
    Senator Carper, and Members of the Committee. I thank you for
    allowing me to testify here today. I am honored that I get to
    be the lone representative of the fire service in this great
    country.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Chief Kerr appears in the Appendix on
    page 55.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The International Association of Fire Chiefs represents
    more than 11,000 members and leaders of the Nation's fire,
    rescue, and emergency medical services (EMS). It is important
    to recognize that the terrorist threat is evolving. The attacks
    on 9/11 were carried out by a foreign terrorist group using a
    coordinated strategy. The attacks were designed to generate
    media attention and public fear.
        As you mentioned, over the past years, we are seeing a
    different terrorist threat. The incidents in Boston, Paris,
    Garland, Chattanooga, and San Bernardino used a variety of
    tactics. They were carried out by lone wolves or smaller groups
    of individuals. They used tactics like gunfire and explosives.
    In some cases, they may have communicated with overseas actors.
    But in all cases, the planning for these attacks was hard to
    detect.
        The Nation's fire and emergency service is adapting to
    respond to both large-scale and localized threats. For example,
    we worked with our law enforcement partners and other
    stakeholders to remove silos that were common prior to 9/11.
    Also, the IAFC and other organizations are educating our
    members and developing resources to help prepare for the wide
    variety of threats. We look forward to partnering with Federal,
    State, tribal, and local agencies, as well as other
    stakeholders, to protect our communities.
        In order to prepare for this new threat environment, local
    fire departments require accurate information about threats to
    our jurisdictions. Federal agencies like DHS and FBI can
    educate us about the new tactics, techniques, and procedures
    that terrorists use. Because many fire chiefs do not have
    security clearances, this information should be transmitted at
    the For Official Use Only (FOUO) or unclassified level. We need
    to be aware of what the terrorists' plans are, not the sources
    or the methods used to obtain them.
        Like many major fire departments across the country, I have
    firefighters stationed at my local fusion center. However,
    there still needs to be greater fire and EMS involvement in
    fusion centers. Also, the IAFC recommends that fire chiefs
    reach out to local FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force offices and
    local law enforcement agencies to stay informed.
        We also support the National Counterterrorism Center's
    (NCTC's), Joint Counterterrorism Assessment Team, which invites
    first responders to work with Federal intelligence analysts.
        Fire departments can be partners in the information-sharing
    system. The IAFC encourages fire departments to take part in
    the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative. Much
    like evidence of domestic abuse, firefighters can report
    evidence of suspicious activity, such as caches of explosives
    or civilians asking for details about emergency response
    procedures.
        Fire and EMS departments also can educate law enforcement
    agencies about evidence of the use of fire or hazardous
    materials as weapons. Local fire and EMS departments also need
    to plan and exercise for the response to a major terrorist
    attack. They must develop capabilities to provide rapid on-
    scene care, triage, and transport to patients. They must also
    plan an exercise with local law enforcement officers, emergency
    management personnel, and public health officials for these
    events.
        Command and coordination are important aspects of an
    effective response. The IAFC supports the implementation of the
    National Incident Management System (NIMS). NIMS implementation
    requires constant use and preparedness exercises to ensure its
    adoption by all emergency and support functions.
        Many fire and EMS departments also have mutual aid
    agreements with surrounding jurisdictions. These agreements
    support localized and regionalized planning and
    interoperability. For example, specialized response
    capabilities, like a Hazardous Materials (Hazmat) Team, can be
    shared in a region.
        An interoperable communications system is also a vital
    component of an effective response, and we thank Congress for
    its leadership in allocating that 20 megahertz (MHz) in the 700
    MHz band and for its $7 billion to help build a nationwide
    broadband network. The First Responder Network (FirstNet) is
    expected to focus on data communication first, and then, to
    develop voice communications capability in the future.
        In the meantime, local jurisdictions must rely upon the
    land mobile radios, and there are several large cities, Boston
    included, that still rely upon the T-band for interoperable
    communications. We encourage you to look at the statutory
    requirements that are going to require them to sell that T-band
    network.
        I am aware of the time here, so I am going to try to wrap
    up my remarks very quickly.
        In order to respond to the wide variety of terrorist
    threats, the Federal Government provides grants like the Urban
    Areas Security Initiative (UASI) and the State Homeland
    Security Grant Program for specialized equipment, training, and
    exercises. Local fire and EMS departments use this funding to
    build and sustain mass casualty and hazmat response
    capabilities. In addition, these funds are used to staff fusion
    centers, and the grants also provide a vital incentive for
    stakeholders to collaborate on terrorism response planning.
        Again, as mentioned, it is important to note that the
    public can play a vital role in terror response. The Stop the
    Bleed campaign is working to educate the public about how to
    provide hemorrhage control with the use of tourniquets during a
    terrorist attack or an active shooter event. Local fire and EMS
    departments can build upon public education programs like
    Austin's ``Do Your Part'' program to provide the training.
        I would like to thank Congress for its focus on homeland
    security preparedness for first responders, and I am going to
    thank you all. I am going to close out because I am over my
    time. I am going to thank the Committee for the ability to
    represent the fire and emergency service today. The terrorist
    threat has evolved, and the Nation's fire and EMS systems and
    departments are adapting to meet this threat. In order to be
    prepared, it will require a partnership of Federal, State, and
    local agencies, along with the private sector and the American
    public. And I look forward to working with you all on these
    efforts.
        Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Chief Kerr.
        Our next witness is Ed Davis. Mr. Davis is the president
    and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Edward Davis, LLC, a
    security and business strategy firm. Mr. Davis served as the
    police commissioner of the city of Boston from December 2006
    until October 2013 and he led the local response to the 2013
    Boston Marathon bombing. Mr. Davis.

     TESTIMONY OF EDWARD F. DAVIS III,\1\ CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
    EDWARD DAVIS, LLC, AND FORMER COMMISSIONER OF THE BOSTON POLICE
                   DEPARTMENT, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS

        Mr. Davis. Good morning, Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member
    Carper, and distinguished Members of the Committee. Thank you
    for inviting me to participate in the ``Frontline Response to
    Terrorism in America'' hearing. This is a critically important
    topic that touches each and every one of us and is in the
    forefront of the daily news across the country and throughout
    the world. It may be the active shooter incident in a
    conference room that devastated a community in San Bernardino
    or improvised explosive devices (IEDs) at the Boston Marathon
    finish line that destroyed the lives of many of my fellow
    Bostonians. The terrorists who commit these heinous acts are
    radicalized here and abroad, but the theme and the intent is
    the same: chaos and the destruction of civilian populations,
    offering no quarter to women or children. We must stop it, and
    we must do so in an urgent and coordinated fashion.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Davis appears in the Appendix on
    page 62.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Today, Commissioner Evans and Mayor Walsh admirably protect
    the city of Boston and do a great job in dealing with
    terrorism. But in 2014, I testified before this Committee on
    what worked and what did not work during the Boston Marathon
    bombing response. At that time, I recognized the deceased.
    Again today, I shall do the same: 8-year-old Martin Richard,
    Krystle Campbell, Lingzi Lu, and Massachusetts Institute of
    Technology (MIT) Police Officer Sean Collier. I also recognize
    every other victim in the United States, and those abroad,
    whose lives have been senselessly taken by terrorists. We can
    never forget them.
        Progress has been made since we dealt with the Boston
    tragedy. We are seeing improvements in the quality of
    intelligence, coordination of agencies, sharing of information,
    training, and equipment. Game-changing technologies have been
    developed at a rapid rate, and first responders, including the
    medical community and fire departments, are receiving life-
    saving training and equipment, like the tourniquets issued to
    all Boston police officers after the incident.
        Recent terrorist attacks in San Bernardino, Chattanooga,
    and Garland, Texas demand a coordinated, common-sense response.
        Community policing plays a very important role in the
    prevention of these incidents. My former colleagues have long
    recognized the effectiveness of community policing and are
    laser focused on building community relationships,
    transparency, and accountability. This becomes most effective
    when reaching out to community members that are sometimes in
    the shadows, those that do not attend community meetings or
    religious services, and those activist groups that never sit
    down with law enforcement officials. We need to move beyond our
    comfort zone if we really want change and the important
    information needed to prevent these attacks. Community policing
    efforts need to be continuously and properly funded and trained
    up. They should also be audited.
        Intelligence gathering and sharing is another critical
    prevention tool utilized by Federal, State, and local agencies
    to fight terrorism. Fusion centers across the country provide
    crucial information every day, in real time, to multiple
    agencies as well as forward redacted information to the private
    sector. Their value for prevention and crisis response
    management has been proven time and time again. Fusion centers
    should continue to meet annually to discuss issues, needs,
    concerns, and trends--what is working and what is not. Funding
    needs to be increased in order to attract talented analysts and
    grow properly managed and effective fusion centers that
    coordinate intelligence from all levels of government.
        Since 2013, intelligence sharing among agencies continues
    to improve. Impediments have been removed. Federal, State, and
    local law enforcement need to continue working together as
    equal members of Joint Terrorism Task Forces across the country
    and in fusion centers, with unrestricted access to information
    that could identify terrorists in their early stages and
    prevent catastrophic events. However, separate systems are ripe
    for dysfunction. Any deterrent to this seamless coordination
    needs to be extinguished.
        Intelligence gathering occurs in this country,
    domestically, every day. For 35 years, I have been a police
    officer working on drug cases and organized crime cases. We
    collect intelligence. We cannot be afraid to recognize that
    fact and to manage it properly with the proper Federal
    oversight. We need to look at what is happening, pay attention
    to it, and make sure, as Senator Tester said, that it is done
    constitutionally--but it does happen and it needs to be
    coordinated at the top level of government.
        I am a member of and work closely with the Business
    Executives for National Security (BENS) organization. I have
    included their recommendations, which I think are very well
    thought out and on point, as to what can work to streamline our
    intelligence-gathering services here in the United States.
        In addition to that, there are other things that worked
    really well during the Boston Marathon. Police officers respond
    the way that they are trained. DHS provided us money through
    the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) system to do that
    training, and we responded the way that we prepared. That made
    all of the difference in the world. And if you do not train,
    you do not respond properly.
        Social media is extremely important in ``establishing a
    dialogue with people. You cannot establish a relationship in a
    crisis. But social media allows police agencies, fire agencies,
    and other public service entities in a city to connect with
    people, to communicate with them, and to establish a dialogue.
        And, finally, equipment is extremely important. The ability
    to be able to respond, as Commissioner Bratton said, with
    specialized equipment--not to be on display when it is not
    needed, but to be immediately available when the balloon goes
    up, as they say, is extremely important.
        Finally, in closing, what I learned, in my role during the
    terrorist attack in Boston, is that there is no panacea. The
    reality is that such a challenge requires informed and trusting
    community members who are not afraid to speak out, coordinated
    intelligence gathering and sharing among all equal partners who
    strive to prevent attacks, highly trained and well-equipped law
    enforcement, fire, and EMS departments that respond in unison,
    and, finally, all of you to continue to legislatively and
    financially support these important efforts.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Davis.
        Our final witness is Mr. Mark Ghilarducci. I think that I
    got that right. Mr. Ghilarducci serves as the director of the
    California Governor's Office of Emergency Services and
    previously served as the Secretary of the California Emergency
    Management Agency. He also serves as the Governor's homeland
    security advisor (HSA), where he oversees Statewide public
    safety, emergency management, emergency communications,
    counterterrorism efforts, and the State Threat Assessment
    System (STAS). Mr. Ghilarducci.
        Senator Carper. First thing, would you just pronounce your
    name for us?
        Mr. Ghilarducci. Ghilarducci.
        Senator Carper. Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. I was pretty close.
        Senator Carper. That was great.
        Mr. Ghilarducci. Pretty close, yes.
        Senator Carper. I am sure that we have butchered it in
    worse ways than that.
        Mr. Ghilarducci. No. Very good. Thanks.

       TESTIMONY OF MARK S. GHILARDUCCI,\1\ DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA
       OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES, AND THE GOVERNOR'S HOMELAND
                  SECURITY ADVISOR, MATHER, CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Ghilarducci. Well, good morning everyone, and,
    particularly, Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and
    ladies and gentlemen of the Committee. Thank you so much for
    the invitation to address you on this important topic. It is
    really an honor to represent California and the National
    Governors Association (NGA) today to and to discuss the work
    that we are engaged in from both a homeland security and an
    emergency management perspective.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Ghilarducci appears in the
    Appendix on page 98.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As California's director of the Governor's Office of
    Emergency Services and homeland security advisor to Governor
    Brown, my portfolio and responsibilities straddle both homeland
    security and emergency management. As a result, I bring a
    unique and nuanced perspective to bear today as my
    ``aperture,'' so to speak, for viewing and working on many
    diverse and complex disasters and emergencies--whether man-made
    or the result of natural circumstances--is wide open.
        The State's and the Governor's homeland security advisor
    plays a critical role in ensuring that objectives, priorities,
    and collaborative operational actions remain coordinated within
    States and with local governments. The chief executive of a
    State is ultimately responsibile for public safety and must be
    kept informed and engaged. The homeland security advisor, who
    is the Governor's point person on statewide security, must be a
    focal point for Federal-State-local coordination and
    collaboration to ensure a coordinated and proactive posture in
    support of local government and the State infrastructure.
    Anything other than this undermines the larger unity of effort
    and the common operating platform necessary to detect, deter,
    prevent, protect, respond to, and recover from a potential act
    of terrorism.
        As seen with the San Bernardino case, we continue to
    experience challenges in obtaining pieces of intelligence, in
    our ability to connect the dots, and in the lead-up to a
    possible act of terrorism. There were a number of signs
    associated with the suspects' actions and the related
    engagement with co-conspirators that we, as an enterprise, were
    unable to acquire.
        Some of this is due to the use of encryption technology by
    the bad guys. Some is due to legal provisions in place for
    gaining access to or initiating the tracking of suspected
    homegrown violent extremists (HVE). But some aspects of this
    challenge can be still attributed to gaps in information
    sharing and communication across all levels.
        In recent years, homegrown violent extremism and
    cybersecurity threats have evolved in fundamental ways and, in
    many ways, we are still reactive rather than proactive in terms
    of countering these evolving threats. This needs to change.
    Built into our homeland security enterprise must be nimbleness
    and proactiveness, so that we can get out and remain out in
    front of these threats. This needs to have its foundation in
    empowerment at the local and State levels, and it should start
    with information sharing.
        Currently, there exist many organizations engaged in this
    intelligence arena, including the FBI, Department of Homeland
    Security, the Department of State (DOS), State law enforcement,
    local law enforcement, the fusion centers, and the
    international intelligence community.
        There remain information and intelligence stovepipes and
    organizational protocols protecting designated proprietary
    information that needs to be shared. Plots and terrorist
    actions are carried out in communities at the local level and
    within States. The impacts of such events, of course, are felt
    nationally and internationally. This effort must be approached
    as one team, fighting one fight, so that we can, together,
    remain coordinated and lean forward as legally as possible,
    leveraging all levels of government capabilities so that we can
    all be on the same page in the effort to detect, deter, and
    protect lives and property.
        Currently, we as a Nation--local, State, and Federal--are
    not optimally suited, in my humble opinion, to proactively
    prevent evolving HVE-style threats. DHS remains a good partner,
    but needs continual evaluation in order to be consistent with
    current threat streams. Its coordination and communications
    could be improved. Funding, training, and information sharing
    can be inconsistent and there needs to be more robust
    coordination with the homeland security advisors, Governors,
    and State top-level homeland security officials when engaging
    with locals and/or private entities within States.
        With respect to fusion centers, there are 6 centers in
    California, with some 72 across the country, and they are all
    essentially frontline components to our Nation's homeland
    security. Over the last several years, we have been forced to
    evolve into all-hazard, all-crime centers in order to justify
    existence. This has spread these centers thin at times, with
    regard to their mission focus, and forced them to become
    distracted at times from their core mission of
    counterterrorism.
        In California, our fusion centers are closely coordinated
    by our STAS and oversight is provided by the homeland security
    advisor. These centers, facilitated by local governance boards,
    have incredibly strong public-private partnerships that are
    leveraged to facilitate intelligence and information sharing as
    well as to prepare for and respond to emergencies. This is all
    coordinated at the regional and State levels. Building on these
    best practices and looking at what works in a State the size of
    California is important.
        What worked best in San Bernardino was this exact system.
    The response was very well executed in the overall context,
    where the local authority led the immediate response and was
    supported in a unified command through mutual aid coordinated
    by the region and the State. This included personnel,
    specialized equipment, intelligence and information,
    situational awareness, authorities and clearances of
    regulations, victim services, and recovery assistance.
        Outside of the FBI, which is the lead Federal agency
    supported by components of DHS, there were a few other Federal
    agencies that provided direct services, incident funding, or
    mutual aid assistance in a coordinated way, as did California's
    mutual aid and standardized emergency management system. This
    should be highlighted as a best practice and used as a
    performance metric in modeling a strong unity of effort. The
    team in San Bernardino was a unified team of local, State, and
    Federal agencies working together with wrap-around and
    integrated incident objectives. The incident required the
    combined efforts of multiple organizations beyond law
    enforcement, to include fire and EMS, public health, emergency
    management, telecommunications, and faith-based nongovernmental
    organizations, just to name a few.
        I am proud to say that the relationship between local,
    State, and Federal agencies in California is very strong, and
    this was evidenced by the actions of city, county, State, and
    Federal responders who came together in San Bernardino with the
    common objectives of saving lives, protecting further loss of
    life, and neutralizing a moving threat. This very dynamic and
    dangerous situation demanded close coordination and
    communications, and its success can be attributed to excellent
    relationships, good training, appropriate equipment and
    supplies, and robust coordination at all levels.
        Nevertheless, San Bernardino did present lessons to be
    learned, with gaps and challenges, particularly, with
    information and intelligence sharing at all levels still being
    a challenge and not at the level or quality that needs to be in
    place to fully safeguard this country.
        As an HSA, I require timely and regular intelligence
    updates during an event of San Bernardino's magnitude to keep
    the Governor informed, to engage with my local and Federal
    counterparts, and to coordinate the statewide homeland security
    and mutual aid mission that I spoke of previously.
        When an event like San Bernardino occurs, we must be
    careful not to revert back to not wanting to share
    ``proprietary'' information. The FBI in the San Bernardino case
    received strong support from the Joint Regional Intelligence
    Center (JRIC), located in Norwalk, California. But along the
    way, it became a one-way information-sharing relationship
    between the FBI and that fusion center. This impacted the
    fusion center's communications responsibilities to the State.
    This presented challenges and resulted in gaps in relevant
    information getting to senior leaders and decisionmakers, who
    needed to be kept informed, particularly, when the news was
    reporting the ``proprietary'' information through open-source
    media. This required the development of a time consuming work-
    around to obtain necessary information at a number of critical
    junctions at the information-sharing stage.
        This must be one team, fighting one fight. With all of the
    money and infrastructure established since 9/11 to safeguard
    this country, we need to move past ``proprietary'' if we are
    truly going to function in a manner that allows us to protect
    the American people and maximize our total unity of effort.
        In closing, let me reinforce that it is critical that we,
    as an enterprise, understand that the threat landscape
    continues to shift toward a more diffuse, amorphous threat that
    focuses on homegrown radicalization and lone-wolf actors, who
    are inspired by foreign terrorist organization's propaganda and
    extreme ideologies, and are leveraged to act in any way
    possible in all of our communities--large and small. This is a
    new norm, just as deadly and much harder to counter. We must
    remain vigilant, but also nimble and proactive enough to
    address this evolving threat.
        Enhanced training, adequate funding, the maintenance of
    equipment and resources, and that collective unity of effort
    are all absolutely necessary in order to meet these
    requirements.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I would be happy
    to answer your questions.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Ghilarducci.
        I really appreciate the attendance of my colleagues here.
    There are two choices: either limit the questions to 5 minutes
    or limit them to 7 minutes, but I am going to use the gavel. So
    we will keep it at 7, but I do not want answers going beyond 7
    either. So let us discipline ourselves to be respectful of
    everybody's time.
        Chief Sparks, I want to start with you. I get a feeling
    Senator Portman is going to be talking about information coming
    down the chain. I really want to talk about the grant programs
    that actually work, the coordination--we have heard that term a
    number of times--with other departments, both big and small.
    Can you just speak to which grant programs are essential, which
    ones work, and hopefully which ones could be improved upon?
        Chief Sparks. Well, the problem is, especially for smaller
    agencies, it is really difficult to get some of those grant
    funds down to the local level so that we can utilize them for
    some of the training and equipment that we need. We
    particularly like the Community Oriented Policing Services
    (COPS) grant. We applied for a COPS grant, and typically what
    we saw was that, in Wisconsin, they went to the large cities.
    They went to Milwaukee and Madison, and very little filtered
    down to the local level.
        But, as you heard from some of the other people on the
    panel, it is critical--that training is critical. Like Mr.
    Bratton said, in New York they have special teams that are
    specifically trained with the equipment that they need. But, in
    rural communities and in smaller departments, that response is
    going to be from frontline patrol officers. So, whatever
    equipment they have in their squads is going to be used to
    respond. And, in smaller communities, you may have only one or
    two officers, so you are going to have people coming from
    multiple departments trying to go in there. So, we need to be
    able to have grants that can be designed, not only for the
    smaller communities, but presented in a fashion that encourages
    the communities to work together and to train together.
        In the county that I work in, we have nine law enforcement
    agencies, excluding State and Federal. And only three of those
    have probably the frontline training that they need to respond
    to active shooters and provide emergency medical treatment
    through Tactical Emergency Medical Specialists (TEMS) and
    provided equipment--and each of our officers carry that
    equipment.
        The other six agencies really have no level of training,
    and if we have an incident, we are going to be working with
    them. So it is important that you can funnel funds through your
    grant programs that are designed to--maybe on the ``train-the-
    trainer'' programs through the local municipalities, start
    funneling grant funds through a technical college system, where
    you can put them out regionally through the State and
    encourage--or maybe even tie into that funding--the idea that,
    at the county level, you will train the trainers, but the
    caveat is that you have to reach out to the other
    municipalities that provide that training.
        Chairman Johnson. So, it takes just a lot of time and
    resources to write a grant, correct?
        Chief Sparks. Exactly.
        Chairman Johnson. So, I think that potentially one of the
    solutions, from an overall Federal standpoint, is determining
    how we can help the smaller communities, so that you can spend
    the time training rather than grant writing. And I think that
    we are all mindful of that. Let us face it. The thwarted plot
    was in Milwaukee, but no community is safe. So I think that we
    really need to be mindful of that.
        Commissioner Davis, you talked about the need for
    intelligence-gathering capability explained and how we are
    gathering it, but then we always hear about stovepipes. Can you
    speak to the problems that we are still running into and what
    needs to be done to continue to lower those stovepipes, so that
    we actually do have what I consider to be the first line of
    defense against these terrorist acts, an effective
    intelligence-gathering capability, while being mindful of our
    civil liberties?
        Mr. Davis. Certainly, Senator. So, in being mindful of
    civil liberties and in understanding that intelligence
    gathering does occur, coordination of the various agencies is
    really important. And one of the problems that I see is that,
    if you pick one agency to be in charge of it all, then the same
    kind of problem occurs with some focus on that particular
    agency.
        If this goes up to the level of the Director of National
    Intelligence (DNI) Office, then the control is happening--or
    the oversight, the auditing, and the sort of direction of best
    practices is occurring at the highest levels of government, and
    it is not vested in the one agency or the two agencies that are
    picked out among equal players. And I really think that that is
    important. Anytime that you have silos, you have the
    possibility of missing something. And it has happened over and
    over again, and based upon my colleague's testimony in the San
    Bernardino case, it seems to have happened again there. And I
    think that it will continue to happen until there is a coach,
    somebody that is in charge of the whole thing that says that
    you have to play together properly. It is like a sports team.
        Chairman Johnson. Talking about playing together, kind of
    going back to Chief Sparks' problem in a smaller community,
    again, being mindful of the fact that in New York or in
    Boston--maybe talk to Mr. Ghilarducci here--how do we get those
    funds allocated in an efficient way? How do we provide the
    training, so that, not only are we covered in the large
    cities--where, let us face it, those are very severe threats.
    But how do we get the training, the dollars, and the grant
    money down to the smaller communities in an efficient manner? I
    will start with you, Commissioner Bratton. And do you feel some
    kind of responsibility to help that process? Because,
    obviously, I know that you are fighting for the funds, but what
    can we do to help?
        Commissioner Bratton. I am coming at it from a different
    perspective than some of my colleagues, having been in charge
    of Los Angeles (L.A.) and New York, the two largest cities in
    the country. The issue of how to get it down to the smaller
    agencies is not one that I have had to grapple with, but how to
    get funds is certainly one that we have grappled with. Early on
    in the DHS process, as it was being created, the issue of
    control was centered at State government levels, where the
    money would come down through the State and the State would
    take a certain percentage as their fee, if you will. We have
    had great problems with that, both in L.A., and, in some
    respects, even now in New York.
        So I do not have a solution for you on that issue, other
    than to reinforce the importance of those grants--and in no
    city have they been more important than in New York, where we
    have received, since 9/11, about $1.4 billion from the Federal
    Government through various grants, all of which have been part
    of the wide range of activities that we engage in in New York.
    This is similarly the case in Los Angeles, which received
    hundreds of millions of dollars during this time.
        One of the great strengths of democracy, is the way that we
    operate in this country, with all of these thousands of
    communities--18,000 police departments--but it is also one of
    our greatest weaknesses: trying to get them coordinated and
    trying to get them collaborative. And that still remains a very
    significant weakness. How do we get all of these silos, at some
    point in time, to come together?
        Chairman Johnson. I will be respectful of my time as well.
    That will probably be a question for the record--any
    suggestions on what we can do, Mr. Ghilarducci, in terms of
    California. Again, I do not want to take more time because I am
    out it, but I would really like to see your recommendations for
    how we can effectively and efficiently allocate those
    resources, even to the smaller communities as well.
        Senator Carper.
        Senator Carper. Thank you. Thank you very much, everyone.
        Chief Kerr, just give us one really good example of how the
    Federal Government can better support fire and emergency
    service providers. Just give us one good example.
        Chief Kerr. I think that the way that we can help support
    our first responders and the fire and emergency medical service
    is through continued grant funding and the sharing--and this is
    the key, critical thing that we have heard here today--of
    intelligence and information. The fire service does not have
    State or Federal backup or reinforcements. The local fire
    service is it when it comes to responding to terrorist events.
        So it is really important that every entity, whether they
    are in a small, local community or in a large, major urban
    city, has access to the intelligence and the information, so
    that they know what they are going into.
        So I think that it is really important that we can somehow
    fund or prepare people to be part of the Joint Terrorism Task
    Force offices. I am very fortunate in Austin. I have a
    firefighter in the Austin Regional Intelligence Center. I have
    a firefighter that sits on--or is part of--the FBI Joint
    Terrorism Task Force. And I have another firefighter that is
    destined to the National Counterterrorism Center in that regard
    as well. But that is not the case for firefighters around the
    country, and that is something that we definitely have to
    improve.
        Senator Carper. Great. Thank you so much.
        Commissioner Bratton, I think that you may have mentioned
    in your testimony--did you hold up a smartphone? I think that
    you indicated that these smartphones were being provided for, I
    think that you said, 36,000 police officers. Here is my
    question, and I will make you a guided missile. Here we go. I
    remember when we wired every public school classroom in
    Delaware with access to the Internet. We provided a lot of
    computers in the school classrooms and I went, as Governor, to
    visit the schools to see how the teachers were using them--and
    they were using all of the technology for their emails. And I
    said, ``I do not think that is what we had in mind.'' And we
    had to train them. We had to train them. It was a combination
    of using our technical community college to train them and,
    frankly, using younger teachers to teach the older teachers how
    to use the technology.
        What advice would you have for other police departments--or
    fire departments, for that matter--across the country that are
    using this kind of technology, buying the phones and all of
    these apps, to make sure that they actually get their money's
    worth?
        Commissioner Bratton. It is a new field, in the sense of
    how police agencies--and I will speak to my agency--are using
    these devices. I think that I would be correct if I were to
    indicate that what we are doing in New York is probably
    unparalleled anywhere else in the country at the moment. We
    have been fortunate, through Federal grant funds as well as
    asset-forfeiture funds, to have been given hundreds of millions
    of dollars so that we have been able to develop technology that
    we will be seeking to share with my colleagues across law
    enforcement and the fire services--lessons learned, as you
    will, as we move forward with this technology.
        But it is essential that we get this technology into the
    hands of our police officers, so that if I am looking for a
    terrorist on a terrorist alert, I can send out his information,
    his photo, to 36,000 officers instantly. If I am looking for a
    lost child with autism, I can send out that photo. My officers
    instantly, through their various apps, can access just about
    everything that we have, in the way of intelligence, on an
    issue.
        So it is 21st Century technology that has come, fortunately
    very early in the 21st Century, and it is going to be essential
    going forward.
        Senator Carper. All right. Thank you. My question was about
    the training. We are not going to pursue this any----
        Commissioner Bratton. Training is absolutely essential in
    the job, but where we are with the training is that we are
    learning every day. The creativity of our officers and how they
    use these devices, we are keeping a running journal on how they
    are using the devices to creatively use the information, solve
    crime, and connect with the community. The connection with the
    community is one of the principal benefits. So the training
    that we give initially is, we are training them----
        Senator Carper. That is good.
        Commissioner Bratton. We are learning from them also.
        Senator Carper. That is good. You mentioned connections to
    the community--and I only have a limited amount of time, so I
    apologize for interrupting you. Secretary Johnson just hosted
    for breakfast the leadership of the homeland security
    authorizers in the House and the Senate, as well as the
    appropriators. One of the things that we talked a bit about was
    the Department's interest--they are very much interested--in
    our passing legislation that authorizes something called
    ``Community Partnerships and Countering Violent Extremism
    (CVE).'' And the idea there is to go to the root causes. And it
    is all well and good that we degrade and destroy ISIS--I think
    that that is critically important. It is important that we do a
    very good job of vetting the people that are trying to come
    here, either as refugees, through the Visa Waiver Program
    (VWP), or through any other kind of program. But it is also
    important that we figure out how to reach out into the
    community. It could be to faith-based groups, it could be to
    nonprofit organizations, or it could be to others. And what the
    Department is trying to do--and we have given them some money
    to create the entity, have the leadership, and get the grants--
    to have $50 million for grants.
        Would you just respond to this approach? Is this a valuable
    approach for us to pursue. Mark, do you want to go first? That
    way I do not have to say your last name. Ghilarducci?
        Mr. Ghilarducci. You guys will get it.
        Senator Carper. It is coming to me. Go ahead. Just be very
    brief.
        Mr. Ghilarducci. Yes. Let me just say that there is nothing
    linear about any of these homeland security and
    counterterrorism efforts. It has to be a whole-of-community
    approach. If we are really going to counter this, it has to
    involve all of these entities--nongovernmental all the way down
    to school kids.
        This dynamic is changing our country and we need to be
    informing and empowering people to, not only recognize what is
    happening, but to be a part of the solution.
        Now, that can be done while protecting civil liberties and
    our constitutional rights. But, much like we have seen in
    history in the past, there are certain things--certain
    threats--whether they are natural or man-made, where we want to
    empower folks to be able to make themselves a part of the
    solution.
        So this effort that the Secretary is talking about is a
    good one because it does actually begin that process of
    countering and----
        Senator Carper. I am going to ask you to hold it right
    there. Thank you very much.
        Raise your hand if you think that what the Department of
    Homeland Security is pursuing is a smart idea.
        Let the record show that four to one say that it is a smart
    idea. Commissioner Bratton, we will talk with you about it
    later. Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Senator Baldwin.
        Senator Baldwin. Thank you. I appreciate all of your
    testimony. I want to start where the conversation is right now.
    We are talking about communication. We have been talking about
    communication at the local, State, and national level, talking
    about communication among peer agencies--and how we can do a
    better job if we have a ``coach'' rather than silos, and
    talking about public and private conversations as well as
    conversations within governmental agencies.
        Chief Kerr, you talked a little bit about interoperability
    in your testimony, especially regarding real-time response to
    an emergency--whether that emergency is man-made or naturally
    occurring. I want to just use a quick example. Mr. Chairman, I
    have some testimony from Chief Gregg A. Cleveland, the fire
    chief from La Crosse, which I would like to ask unanimous
    consent to enter into the record.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The statement from Chief Cleveland appears in the Appendix on
    page 110.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Chairman Johnson. Without objection.
        Senator Baldwin. Great.
        The reason that I raise this relates back to some of the
    concerns that I expressed about the movement of hazardous
    materials--obviously subject to an accident if it is by train
    or even if it is by truck, but also subject to nefarious
    terrorist activity.
        In La Crosse, Wisconsin, where Chief Cleveland works, they
    have invested huge amounts of money into upgrading their
    communications equipment to respond to a real-time emergency.
    La Crosse is on the Mississippi River. La Crosse has a rail
    line running through it along the Mississippi. On the other
    side--the Minnesota side--there is also a rail. Both transport
    hazardous materials on a daily basis. Their upgraded
    communication system could not operate with the Minnesota
    side--even though they had just invested a very significant
    amount of local resources with that upgrade.
        What is your sense of the status right now, in terms of
    interoperability? And I would certainly be interested in all of
    you--hearing your perspective briefly on where we are right now
    with those investments as well as how you would be able to
    communicate in real time during an emergency--natural or man-
    made--with the agencies that you need to coordinate with. Let
    us start with you, Chief Kerr.
        Chief Kerr. Thank you, Senator Baldwin. The FirstNet, which
    I mentioned, is the federally designated network and it is an
    independent entity within the U.S. Department of Commerce. They
    are the ones that have been charged with completing and working
    out the 20 megahertz band that was designated for
    interoperability.
        The first part of that is going to be for sharing data only
    and then the voice transmission will come second. So the land-
    to-mobile radio system, which Chief Cleveland was talking
    about, has its limitations when it is built out only to
    communicate within its own entity. That is a critical part of
    being able to communicate and share information ``across the
    river'', so to speak, which you are not able to do.
        The answer eventually will be FirstNet, but it is not going
    to come in the next year or two.
        Senator Baldwin. Let us go down the panel. Chief Sparks,
    can you talk about your reality on the ground in Everest?
        Chief Sparks. Actually, countywide in a scenario, we do
    have interoperability. So, police, fire, and EMS, we are going
    to be coordinated, as far as our communication goes.
        Commissioner Bratton. Where we are is certainly not where
    we need to be. We are making progress all of the time.
    Recently, Congress--yourselves--voted to increase the spectrum
    available to us--dedicated spectrum--which is critical to
    interoperability. But every community is still wrestling with
    it. In my city, by the end of this year, finally, my subway
    cops--the cops who work below ground and then the others who
    work above ground--will be able to use radios below or above
    ground without having to go through a whole series of
    connections to try and talk with each other. And, similarly, we
    are continually improving our relationship communications with
    our fire colleagues.
        But we still have a long way to go in this country. It is
    going to cost a great deal of money to do it. It can be done,
    but the devil is in the details--and the devil is in the
    budget.
        Senator Baldwin. Is that your most significant gap, the one
    you pointed out with the subway police?
        Commissioner Bratton. It is a significant concern,
    certainly in an active-shooter issue and in a disaster issue.
    The interoperability capabilities that we have seen time and
    again in every one of these instances is the inability to
    communicate in real time.
        Senator Baldwin. Mr. Davis.
        Mr. Davis. We have cobbled together a system of
    interoperability in Boston that works effectively. It is not
    pretty, but it gets the job done. But that interoperability is
    based upon the T-band that the chief mentioned earlier. And the
    FirstNet legislation removes that T-band from us at a
    particular point in time. And with the slow progress of
    FirstNet, we need to address that issue because if we lose the
    T-band, then we lose our interoperability in Boston.
        Senator Baldwin. Mr. Ghilarducci.
        Mr. Ghilarducci. I would just say that there is no silver
    bullet with interoperable communications. And I think that
    initially after 9/11, when we were talking about interoperable
    communications, there was the thought that you could lay down
    an overarching system nationwide--and I think that this is the
    concept behind FirstNet, which we have been engaged with.
        But in the absence of that--and leading up to that--we have
    dealt with a lot of regional interoperable capabilities.
    California, specifically, has a very robust mutual-aid system.
    We move resources up and down the State for disasters all of
    the time, and so that precipitates the need to have multiple
    agencies talking to each other in different jurisdictions. A
    lot of that is done via mobile interoperable communications
    capabilities, which have to be put in place. It is backed up
    through a redundant system to the Statewide Microwave Network
    that can support that. And we have had some regional projects,
    like the L.A. Regional Interoperable Committee (LA-RICS) and
    the Bay Area Regional Interoperable Communications Systems
    Authority (BayRICS). There has been a lot of engagement by the
    private sector into that, which has complicated the matter a
    little bit. I am sure that you do know, in the Bay Area, that
    really was a large factor that actually caused that BayRICS
    project to end.
        So I would say again, like the other panelists have said,
    we have further to go on the interoperability. But, there are
    pockets of development that have been put in place in
    California that have worked pretty well.
        Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Senator Baldwin.
        Again, I want everybody to be mindful of the clock and of
    wrapping things up so that we stay on time. Senator Heitkamp.
        Senator Heitkamp. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to discuss making sure that we are all taking a
    ``one team, one fight'' approach and sharing information,
    because if there is one thing that I hear over and over again
    when talking with my first responders, it is that, once an
    incident happens, we are all in it--and then, there is that
    immediate response of collaboration and cooperation--but that
    starts eroding, in terms of what we know, what we can find out,
    who is talking to who, and where we can go from here. And I
    think, Director, you spent a lot of time in your written
    testimony on this issue. We had certainly hoped that after 9/
    11, when we talked about these communication gaps, we would be
    further along in making sure that there was a fair amount of
    Federal to State and local respect for the need for data, for
    information, and for intel.
        You raised a lot of these concerns in your testimony. You
    did not offer us a whole lot in the way of solutions--other
    than a ``let us do better'' kind of systemic structure that we
    could be looking at which could be helpful as we deal with your
    Federal partners. So could you offer some concrete examples of
    how we could do better in terms of information sharing?
        Mr. Ghilarducci. Well, let me just start out by saying that
    the overarching information sharing structure and our
    collaborative efforts have improved exponentially since 9/11,
    to use that as a baseline. That does not mean that we do not
    need to do more, and as we have these events that occur, like
    Boston, San Bernardino, or Chattanooga, we learn little bits
    each time about what has worked and what still needs to be
    improved.
        I think that generally there is a sense in the
    organizational cultures that exist to want to keep information
    sort of inside their organization. This is not just at the
    Federal level. It is also at the local level and at the State
    level. And so, we need to build into our training programs
    right from the beginning--in our academies and in any of the
    training programs that we are doing on terrorism--curriculum
    expressing the importance of sharing information. Really one of
    the cornerstones of being able to counter terrorism is sharing
    critical information amongst all of the players. It does not
    matter that I am wearing a State patch and he is wearing a
    Federal patch and she is wearing a local patch. When it comes
    to this--that is the concept of ``one team, one fight''--and we
    should be able--we all have clearances. We should be able to
    all get that information appropriately.
        Senator Heitkamp. I understand what you are saying,
    Director, but what you are talking about is changing the
    culture--not systemic changes. And I am interested in any other
    comments from any of the other panelists in terms of how we
    institutionalize cultural changes, not just say, ``Let us do
    better, let us work together better''. So maybe, Mr. Bratton,
    you can help me here.
        Commissioner Bratton. I think that at this particular time,
    I could point to my city as a model of what you are trying to
    get to. For many years in New York, the collaboration was not
    all that it could have been. We were dealing with a combination
    of personalities, skill sets, and intelligence handlers not
    trained to the same level. The BENS Report that both
    Commissioner Davis and I would recommend to the Committee
    speaks to a lot of these issues: the importance of leadership,
    the importance of the collaboration of that leadership, which
    pushes down into the organization, but also the creation of
    systems that ensure the sustainability that you are talking
    about, and also the training of personnel. A major gap in our
    situation is our intelligence handlers. Many of them come into
    the organization and within a couple of years they leave
    because there is no upward mobility--and the quality of
    training is not consistent across the agencies.
        Senator Heitkamp. One of our roles here is to hold Federal
    agencies accountable, is to have that oversight--that kind of
    accountability. In order to do that, we need something more
    concrete than ``You need to change your culture'' or ``You need
    to be more communicative.'' We need to have benchmarks or
    measurements that can, in fact, be enforced and will, in fact,
    build a better culture because there will be a known list of
    expectations.
        I am curious about--and I will look at--the BENS Report and
    take a look at those secondary sources. But you are all here
    right now--and we have training needs and we have equipment
    needs--I recognize all of that. We are working hard to make
    sure that we are using everything as efficiently as we can. But
    I think that it is more elucidating to get to this problem of
    information sharing, which I think is critical for the
    protection of the citizens of this country. And so, where are
    the benchmarks so that we can say, ``Look, this is what our
    expectation is. How are you communicating beyond the fusion
    centers? Are these fusion centers simply box-checking or are
    they actually doing what we expect them to do? ''
        Mr. Sparks, you and I come from the same small-town
    universe--actually, you are from a very large town in my
    universe. And it needs to filter down, not only to the major
    cities and not only to the major States, but we also need to
    have that trust level with States like North Dakota and
    Wisconsin. So what would you offer in terms of our ability to
    look at holding Federal agencies more accountable?
        Chief Sparks. Well, let me give you a classic example. I
    talked to one of the chiefs in our area. He retired just a
    couple of years ago as a Federal Supervisory Police Officer. He
    did not want me to state the specific organization. But he said
    that he was frustrated because he had a lot of information that
    would come to him--terrorist-related information--and he would
    have specific information, but he had local contacts who he was
    not allowed to share anything with.
        Now, I understand the need for secrecy on an active
    investigation, but some of this was general information: ``This
    person is going to your community. He is meeting up with this
    person.'' And he said that he was frustrated because he could
    not share that information with local law enforcement. And, as
    he moved up the chain of command and asked why, he said that it
    was because those local law enforcement officers did not have
    security clearances.
        So, to touch on some of the other comments here, you have
    to be able to eliminate some of that. And, even if you cannot
    trust local law enforcement with information, we are shooting
    ourselves in the foot. We are not going to be able to prevent a
    lot of this stuff. You are missing 80 percent of law
    enforcement agencies across this country. You have to break
    down some of the policies that are inhibiting that.
        Senator Heitkamp. I think that there are a lot of us here
    who go into the secret, hidden room and hear things, only to
    walk out and see them on the front page of the New York Times.
    We share your pain in terms of overclassification and the
    overprotection of data. And that is something that we need to
    be talking about, because you cannot get the expertise of the
    men and women who are the eyes and ears--who are on the street
    every day and could say, ``Oh, that is what they are talking
    about. We have seen that.'' In fact, doing so builds on that
    intelligence. We have to get through this issue.
        And so, thank you, we look forward to any additional
    suggestions that you have going forward. My time is up.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Senator Heitkamp. That might
    be a good subject for a hearing, the overclassification of
    material, because I think that it is certainly within our
    Committee's jurisdiction on oversight, but it potentially even
    falls under legislative jurisdiction. Senator Booker.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BOOKER

        Senator Booker. First of all, I just want to thank the
    panel. Your leadership is extraordinary. Having been a mayor
    and having had to deal with the challenges of an urban police
    department, I am aware that every single day we have officers
    out there who are doing heroic things that never make the
    papers or never make the news, but ultimately that are saving
    American lives and securing property. So I am grateful for your
    service and your commitment is just something that is worthy of
    respect.
        I would like to first talk really quickly about the idea of
    dual usage. It has come up a few times. The reality is that we
    do all of this work to prepare for counterterrorism, but our
    first responders, when gunshots go off, they are responding to
    a situation.
        Now, there have been at least 80 mass shootings, as defined
    by four fatalities or more, since the Columbine massacre of
    1999. Nine of those mass shootings were at schools. Less than
    10 of these incidents have been described as a product of
    homegrown extremism. And when I am talking about that, I am
    talking about mass shootings, not bomb threats or other plots.
        Many capabilities which support terrorism preparedness
    simultaneously--obviously--support preparedness for these other
    hazards, which are becoming incredibly frequent in our Nation.
        And so, what I would like to understand is, as we are
    funding a lot of these things--really two sides of this--one
    is: Can you discuss sort of the dual use, why this is helpful
    in that effort? But then also, Mr. Ghilarducci----
        Mr. Ghilarducci. You guys are going to be perfect at
    pronouncing it when we are all done. [Laughter.]
        Senator Booker. Thank you very much. ``Booker'' is a hard
    one, too, so I feel your pain. But you talked about how it
    might be straining some of these resources because there are
    multiple usages for them. So I would just like to understand--
    and perhaps starting with Commissioner Bratton, who I owe a lot
    of gratitude. We share a metropolitan region. The work that you
    and your department do benefits everybody in the New York City
    region. I like to think of it as the Newark region. But I want
    to thank you for your leadership. I would love to get your
    thoughts about this.
        Commissioner Bratton. Actually, you raise a great point,
    because one of the good things, if you will, about the issues
    of terrorism--and particularly the form of terrorism that we
    are most concerned with in this country at this time: the lone
    wolf--is in many respects--other than motivation--not different
    than what we are dealing with with the active shooters, with
    all of their various motivations. The response is very similar.
    We learned after Columbine that we have to get in there and get
    the shooter. We learned through the various terrorist acts
    committed around the world that we have to get in there and get
    the shooter. And we are constantly learning about how to deal
    with the shooter, while at the same time preparing to deal with
    the victims who are in the same location while we go in.
        So the duality is a strength that we can build on because
    we can train our officers to deal with the current terrorist
    threat--and the most significant one currently is an ISIS-
    inspired or ISIS-directed assailant--and at the same time, in a
    country that has as many guns as we do, where mass killings
    have become a very commonplace circumstance and one that our
    officers--all 800,000--and our firefighters increasingly are
    drawn into, we can prepare them for all active shooters. So
    training for one is effectively training for the other.
        Senator Booker. Yes, please, Chief.
        Chief Kerr. I would just like to comment on the dual threat
    and the dual use. I am proud to say that in Austin we have
    worked extensively with our law enforcement partners and have a
    developed, strategic operating plan that we use and have
    drilled and exercised on. And I think that the importance
    here--how you all can help--is first of all by providing those
    opportunities and, second, by providing the funding that will
    allow us to continue to hold those large-scale exercises and
    drills so that we are practicing what we need to do and sharing
    standard operating procedures. This way, we are skilled at
    getting into the ``warm zone,'' applying those tourniquets, and
    pulling people out that are savable and then allowing law
    enforcement to protect us and go after the shooter. Let the
    fire service or the EMS service get in there, get the people
    out, and get them into the cool zone where they then can be
    transported for treatment.
        Senator Booker. Great. Would somebody else like to comment?
        Mr. Davis. Thank you, Senator. The issue of dual use is
    extremely important in the city of Boston. We leverage the
    funding that we have been using for the fusion center to work
    on crime analysis across the board. The intelligence streams
    are all the same. We are looking at different crimes that are
    occurring and deriving an incredible benefit, reducing common
    crime and violent crime in the city by centralizing those
    functions into one group. They are specially trained. They
    become very good at the numbers--at predicting where crime is
    going to occur--so that our deployments are much more
    effective. It works very well for us in Boston.
        Senator Booker. Thank you. Mr. ``G''?
        Mr. Ghilarducci. Actually, I think that what you saw in San
    Bernardino was the execution of how dual-use training and
    policies and procedures came together. Those officers, those
    firefighters, and the Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) medic
    program were all trained. In fact, at the time of the San
    Bernardino shooting--that exact time--we had a multiagency
    active shooter training going on. I do not know if you knew
    this or not, but, in fact, many of the people in the class
    thought that the actual event at the health center was part of
    the exercise--until they realized that it was not.
        One of the things that I have been able to do in my role as
    HSA is drive funding--and put requirements on that funding--so
    that fire service, law enforcement, and EMS, which are going to
    develop a training program in these kinds of things, have to
    come together around the table and development common sense
    operational constructs and build that into everything across
    the board, from school safety to hospital safety. And that
    really has been a benefit to all of----
        Senator Booker. Thank you, Mr. Ghilarducci.
        A last question in 30 seconds, Commissioner. So you have
    heard a lot here. If you were a U.S. Senator--we are having
    issues with interoperability, with critical investments being
    made so that we can do the training. There have been some
    concerns about funding programs. You are obviously a big-city
    leader, but you see States like mine that have lots of small
    towns--not necessarily the experience that you have--working
    together. Could you give like three things that you would do
    and that you would focus on if you were a U.S. Senator?
        Commissioner Bratton. Funding is absolutely critical. The
    development of standards, as the Senator spoke to, is also
    critical. And, third, in this day and age, the issue of
    communications is absolutely critical across the line, up and
    down--and that also requires funding. So I would suggest your
    role in the U.S. Senate--as well as your colleagues' role in
    the House--is to ensure that funding is available for hometown
    security, because hometown security is what homeland security
    is all about.
        Senator Booker. Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Senator Ayotte.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AYOTTE

        Senator Ayotte. Thank you, Chairman. I want to thank all of
    you for being here today.
        Commissioner Davis, I wanted to follow up regarding the
    Boston bombing terrorist attack--I really appreciate your
    leadership on that.
        Mr. Davis. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Ayotte. You came before this Committee, and you and
    I talked about issues with the JTTF. I raised these issues with
    Director Comey of the FBI, and as I look at the background we
    received on this hearing today and what happened in Garland,
    Texas--in that situation you also had the FBI tracking one of
    the individuals involved. The FBI sent a memo to the Garland
    police and to the North Texas JTTF hours before the attack, but
    that information never got to the actual patrol officers who
    were there. As we talked about what happened post-Boston and
    the things that needed to be communicated at the local level--
    something that Chief Sparks raised as well--the question is: is
    how do we stop that? The reality is that it is a patrol officer
    who is likely to come upon one of these situations. The FBI is
    not out roaming the streets in the way that the patrol officers
    are. Where are we now with the JTTFs in terms of disseminating
    that critical information to the officers? And have we improved
    that? How do we get at this fundamental issue?
        I was very interested that you brought up the concept of a
    ``coach''. Who should that ``coach'' be? Because you talked
    about DNI. Right now, as I look at this system, it seems like
    the FBI is the ``coach'', but we still have instances where--
    whether it is a security issue or , whether it is a need-to-
    know issue--the information is not getting to the front lines.
    We would love to get your impression, Commissioner Davis, on
    that. And we would love to get your impression as well,
    Commissioner Bratton, Chief, and anyone else who wants to jump
    in.
        Mr. Davis. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate that, and I had
    a great team in Boston. It was a real team effort there.
        Prior to the Boston incident, we had two special agents in
    charge in Boston, Warren Bamford and Rick DesLauriers. Both of
    those men were incredible partners and opened up the place to
    us. We worked very closely with them. Director Comey and I have
    spoken since I stepped down. I believe that the FBI wants to do
    the right thing.
        However, there are silos and bureaucracies involved, and
    when that happens, things start to break down. And despite the
    best intentions of everyone involved, it really is important
    that someone is auditing the functions. Every year, the FBI
    comes into the Boston Police Department and audits our motor
    vehicle checks to make sure that they are all legitimate. But
    who is auditing for larger issues? Who is looking at the
    transfer of information----
        Senator Ayotte. Is anyone doing that right now within the
    Federal Government?
        Mr. Davis. No, absolutely not. And so, that really needs to
    happen. And I mentioned the DNI. I just think that if all
    partners are equal, then the ``coach'' cannot be one of the
    partners. I think that it needs to be somebody----
        Senator Ayotte. Agreed. It has to be someone who is not
    directly in the line of command--that is what you are saying.
        Mr. Davis. Right, because then you have the same problem of
    being protective of your information and it goes back to the
    old issue of police wanting to make the busts themselves.
    Everybody wants their own information, because if you give it
    to somebody else, then you might lose the arrest.
        But the other issue that you brought up, the technology
    side of things, is extremely important, Senator. Going back to
    the NYPD, when those two officers were killed, Baltimore had
    information that was faxed--pictures were faxed from the
    Baltimore police to the NYPD. The state of communication among
    police agencies is really reprehensible in this day and age and
    the use of these devices that Commissioner Bratton has shown
    will help with that. But it needs to be a nationwide
    initiative. It cannot just be department by department, because
    when you set up individual protocols, you have other
    communication problems.
        So there are two levels that you talked about which are
    extremely important, Senator.
        Senator Ayotte. Commissioner Bratton, I wanted to get your
    impression.
        Commissioner Bratton. Prior to your arrival, I had
    displayed a smartphone device that the department has
    customized and will, by March, be in the hands of every one of
    the 36,000 New York City police officers. It is a model and a
    device that can be shared with American law enforcement--and it
    was developed very specifically after the murder of our two
    officers--because the messaging--the traditional messaging--the
    length of time that it took to get information out to the field
    was too long. And in any event, even as the information arrived
    in New York, it would have been too late to save the lives of
    those two officers.
        With this instant messaging now, I can instantly send out
    an alert to 36,000 officers. I can override everything else
    that they are doing and indicate that this is a terrorist alert
    or that there is a ``threat on your life'' alert, and the
    capability can effectively be expanded nationwide with the
    coordination and collaboration of capabilities. So we are
    moving in this direction thanks to technology.
        On the issues of collaboration and leadership, we are very
    fortunate with the leadership of Director Comey, who
    Commissioner Davis and I have had extensive involvement with.
    He is going to be around for about 8 years, and that is
    essential, because in our world, people come and go very
    quickly. He is committed to this. He is trusted by us. He is
    committed to the idea of information sharing, and the
    relationship that we have in New York City with our FBI is a
    direct result of his leadership, indicating that the FBI will
    get along with the NYPD. And the commitment on my end is that
    the NYPD will get along with the FBI. And this is essential.
        So the benefit that we have at this time is that the
    technology is becoming available--and I think that I would
    argue that the leadership's support of collaborative
    relationships is also available and will be around for a while.
        Senator Ayotte. Thank you. And, I think that as you think
    about resources, this would be worthy of a national investment.
        Commissioner Bratton. I think so.
        Senator Ayotte If you think about both the terrorism and
    law enforcement contexts, this would be a huge protection
    measure for the country.
        I wanted to follow up. You mentioned forfeiture briefly,
    Commissioner Bratton. Recently, in the end-of-the-year budget
    deal, one of the things that was grabbed was over $1 billion in
    forfeiture money.
        Commissioner Bratton. Which is a major mistake and
    something that we resent tremendously.
        Senator Ayotte. Yes, so that is why I am asking you about
    it. As I look at what my police officers are doing and what my
    law enforcement in New Hampshire is doing with the forfeiture
    money, it is obvious that we did some really important things--
    increasing funding for first responders and funding to combat
    the heroin epidemic facing my State. On the other hand, I think
    that people around here are not understanding the value of
    forfeiture resources and the consequences of taking the
    forfeiture resources that help address the problems for our
    first responders.
        So I just wanted to put that on the record and make sure
    that people understand here. We have to turn this around. We
    should not do this again. These resources are critical to first
    responders.
        Commissioner Bratton. These smartphone devices could not
    have been bought without $160 million of forfeiture money from
    my local district attorney's asset forfeiture fund. It did not
    come from the Federal Government, fortunately, because it is no
    longer there.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Senator Ayotte.
        Two points. I do not think that anybody has asked to have
    the BENS Report entered into the record.\1\ I will do so,
    without objection.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The BENS Report referenced by Senator Johnson appears in the
    Appendix on page 64.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I actually circled your comment about auditing, and I would
    really like to work with you, Commissioner Davis, to develop a
    way to audit so that it is a positive thing as opposed to being
    viewed negatively. But I would encourage any colleague to work
    with me on that. I turned around to my staff and said that that
    is a piece of legislation that we should work on as a result of
    this hearing. Senator McCaskill.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MCCASKILL

        Senator McCaskill. Thank you. It is an honor to be here in
    front of all of you. I am still in uniform withdrawal from my
    days as a prosecutor. So it is terrific to be with all of you,
    and one of my specializations, Ms. Kerr, was arson prosecution.
    So I spent a lot of time with fire chiefs also.
        A few months ago, I introduced a bill--and I want to
    emphasize this--that would not end any Federal programs for
    local law enforcement and would not cut any funding for local
    law enforcement. One of the things that Mr. Davis touched on in
    his testimony which is profoundly important is that a
    discussion over whether law enforcement is too militarized or
    does not have enough resources is really irrelevant if you do
    not have the trust of your community. I do not need to lecture
    you guys on how important it is, in terms of the rule of law in
    this country, that people have trust that law enforcement is,
    in fact, going to be fair, trained, and competent.
        So, one of the things that we did in carefully drafting
    this bill was to make sure that we did not cut it--we did not
    eliminate programs--but we talked a lot to the National
    Tactical Officers National Association (NTOA) and worked with
    them on the language of the bill. Then, basically, the bill
    requires States to establish certain minimum training
    requirements for any officer with decisionmaking authority on
    the deployment of SWAT--necessitating that SWAT members attend
    some kind of training.
        I believe that most States are already in compliance with
    this. Most States do require some kind of SWAT training. But I
    would ask you all to comment on whether you think--in light of
    the $1 billion in Federal resources that are going to State and
    local law enforcement--that requiring some kind of minimal
    training, through language that was helped to be drafted by the
    National Tactical Officers Association, is a reasonable thing
    for the Federal Government to do. Mr. Bratton?
        Commissioner Bratton. I can speak to that and speak
    strongly in support of it. Training is absolutely essential for
    SWAT entities or for any police officer function. And the trust
    that you are talking about, let us face it, we have a crisis of
    confidence in the American criminal justice system at the
    moment. It is not just police any longer. That has been the
    focus for most of the last 30 years. It now goes to grand
    juries, it now goes to prosecutors, and it now goes to judges.
    Every element of the criminal justice system is now under
    attack because there has been a diminution of trust. We can get
    it back, but it is going to require standards and it is going
    to require training. Training is the heart and soul of it all--
    for SWAT teams in particular. It cannot be just an odd
    assortment of people coming together equipped with heavy
    weaponry. They need to constantly train together and they need
    to basically adhere to standards. The organization that you
    referred to has very significant standards for what they would
    want their members to be capable of achieving.
        Senator McCaskill. Does anybody have a problem with the
    Federal Government establishing some kind of minimal standards
    of training for the deployment of SWAT resources that have been
    given to State and local governments by the Federal Government?
    OK.
        Commissioner Bratton. I think that you are talking about
    two different issues. One issue is the equipment that has been
    given to them relative to the standards set for them--because
    the equipment issue is one that is the subject of great debate
    at the moment, as you know--the type of equipment given, how it
    is being utilized, and the lack of standards as to how it
    should be utilized. So there are several different issues.
        Senator McCaskill. That is what this bill would do. This
    bill would say that, if you are going to get this type of
    equipment from the Federal Government, you would be required--
    --
        Commissioner Bratton. As to how it should be utilized, how
    it should be----
        Senator McCaskill [continuing]. To have a program in place
    that would require training. The notion is that we would no
    longer--because what we discovered--we discovered a number of
    things after Ferguson in a hearing that we had in this
    Committee. One was that of the three programs--the DHS program,
    the Byrne grant program, and the 1033 program of the Department
    of Defense (DOD)--the leaders of those three programs sat in
    your chairs and they had never met each other before. They had
    never met each other before that day, which was jaw-dropping to
    me. We also learned that there was a proportionality issue,
    where we had little-bitty, tiny departments getting Mine
    Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAPs) that had been in a
    shed for years. We had little-bitty, tiny departments getting
    way more military weapons than there were even sworn officers
    in their departments. There did not seem to be any rhyme or
    rationale regarding need and whether or not those communities
    were equipped to handle that equipment. Yes, Mr. Sparks?
        Chief Sparks. I guess that I want to touch on this in two
    respects. Being a smaller community, we have a couple of
    members of our department that are on a countywide SWAT team.
    But our officers--we do not have the luxury that some of the
    larger cities have. We do not have regional SWAT teams. So if
    we respond to an active shooter incident, it is going to be
    patrol officers responding. And when you are talking about the
    equipment needed, they need at least long guns--they need
    tactical rifles. They need, obviously, their ballistic vests.
    But it would be nice to have ballistic shields and helmets--not
    that they are worn, but that they are in those squad cars,
    because, by the time a SWAT team arrives, that incident is
    over. And, the quicker that we can get the appropriate
    equipment to our patrol officers, the better--because they will
    be the ones there. It is not going to be a SWAT team. And it is
    going to be a significant amount of time before we actually get
    people who are SWAT trained or people who have the tactical
    equipment there to respond. So, if we are not equipping our
    frontline officers--all of our officers on SWAT team are
    trained. In fact, we have seven officers in our department that
    are SWAT trained. And we also do a lot of additional training
    as far as active shooter incidents. But they are not all SWAT
    team members. And across America, the majority are going to be
    patrol officers who need that equipment.
        Senator McCaskill. Right. Well, that is why I want to make
    sure--I mean, I think that one of the reasons we wanted to do
    this is to make sure that your department gets that equipment
    that you need and not five Ballistic Engineered Armored
    Response Counter Attack Trucks (BearCats) or five MRAPs that
    were not even ever designed to run on city streets in the first
    place. I guess that that is the argument that I am making,
    getting your department, Mr. Sparks, what you need in light of
    who your personnel are and what your demands are. None of that
    was going on with these Federal programs. There was nobody
    checking, there was no reporting back, and there was no--they
    could not even tell me if the equipment was being used in the
    various communities that were getting it--especially the DOD.
    Once it was out the door, they were done.
        I have been a little disappointed that there has not been
    more robust support for the bill because I think that law
    enforcement is in a little bit of a defensive crouch, and there
    was a sense that well, if you open this up, then maybe somebody
    will take the programs away. I am not going to let anybody--I
    do not want anybody to take the programs away. I have seen how
    they work. I know that they are important. I do think that a
    little bit of tweaking in terms of proportionality and training
    is probably the order of the day--and I would certainly
    appreciate you all taking a look at the legislation and seeing
    your way through to let us know if there are any problems that
    you see with it that we need to fix, which we are willing to
    do. On the other hand, it would be helpful if we could get more
    folks--I think that people are just afraid of doing anything
    and worried that it is going to take something away. I would
    like to see us get beyond that, if possible.
        Thank you all very much.
        Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Senator McCaskill.
        We really could go on and on. There are so many questions.
    But what I would like to do is give everybody an opportunity to
    just make a final comment--please keep it somewhat brief--
    before we close out the hearing. We will go in reverse order.
    Mr. Ghilarducci.
        Mr. Ghilarducci. All right. Well, great. Again, thank you
    very much for the opportunity to speak with you.
        This has been a fascinating discussion, and I think that it
    just presented the challenges that we continue to face. The
    threat continues to change. Your support, the support of the
    Federal Government to State and local governments, is
    absolutely critical. And you started off, Senator, saying the
    percentage of funding that is really made available is
    minuscule compared to what the need is. California, since 2008,
    has lost $150 million in homeland security funds. We need to
    reverse that trend and we need to put resources into our
    communities to get us to where we need to be.
        Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. We need to prioritize spending.
    Commissioner Davis.
        Mr. Davis. Well, thank you for your attention to this
    issue, Senator. I just truly believe that this threat has
    created a theater of war, domestically--and we need to address
    it like that--the geographic distribution of these pieces of
    equipment, not to each individual small town, but
    geographically, so that they can be called in, if necessary.
        But the bottom line is--and it goes to the last question
    that was asked--that the balance between the militarization of
    policing and the community policing that we all want in our
    communities requires strong leadership on the part of Chief
    Sparks, Commissioner Bratton, and other people who are in those
    positions across the Nation. They have to keep pushing not to
    allow that military mentality to take over, remembering that we
    are there to keep the peace--not just to arrest people.
        Thank you, Senator.
        Chairman Johnson. Chief Kerr.
        Chief Kerr. Thank you, and I appreciate the invitation. I
    just want to remind all of you that the title of this hearing
    is ``Frontline Response to Terrorism in America.'' I encourage
    you not to forget about the part and the role that is played by
    the fire service and EMS. We realize that there is funding
    needed to help our law enforcement partners, but I encourage
    you all to make sure that we do not forget and ignore the fire
    service and EMS.
        Just one comment on what Commissioner Bratton talked about
    regarding his device right here that he keeps holding up and
    the information that they can get from that. Imagine the
    information that can go to every first responder in America
    through a smartphone or a smart device--and that really is part
    of what FirstNet is about--transmitting data to make sure that
    a first responder who goes into a house to help somebody that
    has a seizure where the man sits up and shoots the first
    responder in the chest, that if that first responder had
    information, that this person had behavioral issues prior to
    going into that house, then the first responder may still be
    alive today.
        So, it is important that we are really taking care of our
    first responders who are taking care of our community--whether
    they are law enforcement, fire, or EMS.
        Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Commissioner Bratton.
        Commissioner Bratton. Thank you. Well, the issue of concern
    here is terrorism on the front lines, and I will go to Senator
    Booker's comment about duality. It is quite clear that we are
    losing more lives through traditional crime in this country,
    and at the same time, we are very concerned about the potential
    for losing more lives to terrorism.
        The benefit that we have is the duality, the idea that
    while combating one, we can combat the other. So, the
    technology that we have referenced and the collaboration that
    we have referenced, that means that you--who have to make the
    funding decisions as it relates to this issue, terrorism and
    crime--can get double the bang for the buck. That smartphone
    that I held up works for terrorism notifications, as well as
    fire coordination notifications, as well as for crime
    prevention.
        Similarly, so much of what we have talked about, in terms
    of interoperability, the device that works for conveying data
    for terrorism works for conveying data about a fire or a life-
    saving emergency. So we do benefit, at this particular time,
    that there is the duality of concern about crime, which takes
    more lives, and the growing potential of more lives being taken
    by terrorism. Actually by solving one, we can solve the other.
        Chairman Johnson. Chief Sparks.
        Chief Sparks. I just want to touch on--when it comes to
    priority and the funding, we need to make sure that all of the
    departments out there at least have the basic level of training
    for active shooter response. It is critical. There are a lot of
    small communities that still do not have that. So, if we can
    funnel that through on criteria that gets it out to those local
    agencies, then that would be great.
        And then, we can encourage the cooperation among these
    small agencies, because they are not going to be responding on
    their own, so that means getting people within counties to
    actually work together and train together.
        And then, regarding the information sharing, we have to
    break down some of those silos--and some of the policies are
    inhibiting that free flow of information.
        And the last point that I really want to talk about--and
    you talked about law enforcement in general as taking a hit--in
    my community, since a lot of these incidents have occurred, it
    is just the opposite. The outpouring of support has been
    phenomenal and the community trusts the department. And I think
    that it is important for you to recognize that these high-
    profile incidents do not define who law enforcement is. We have
    people on the front line that are willing to put their lives on
    the line--and do not lose sight of that, because it is that
    local police officer, in whatever community it is, who is going
    to be the one charging in there when an incident occurs--and
    they deserve a little more respect.
        Senator Carper. Can I say something?
        Chairman Johnson. Sure.
        Senator Carper. Before we close, I just want to thank
    Senator Heitkamp and Senator Baldwin, again, not just for
    suggesting this as a topic for a hearing, but also for you and
    your staffs, and for our staffs, who collaborated in inviting
    all of you to come. And you were a terrific panel--and I said
    this to the Chairman. And we generally have very good panels--
    but you guys are terrific, and we are grateful, not only for
    your service, but also for what you have done here in conveying
    this information in very helpful ways.
        Thank you.
        Chairman Johnson. Senator Carper, I mentioned this earlier.
    Go to the YouTube page and look at the dashcam video from those
    first responders responding to the Sikh temple shooting. Take a
    look at the pictures of those first responders walking up the
    stairs of the World Trade Center. We see the service and the
    sacrifice.
        I want to thank all of you for your time, for putting
    together this very thoughtful testimony, for your answers to
    our questions, but really thank you for your service to your
    communities, to your States, and to this Nation. Truly, I think
    everybody on this panel would certainly agree with that and
    approve that message. Correct?
        Senator Carper. I am Tom Carper, and I approve this
    message. [Laughter.]
        Chairman Johnson. So, with that, the hearing record will
    remain open for 15 days--and, by the way, I think that you can
    probably expect some questions for the record, and we would
    appreciate your responses to those.
        The record will be held open until February 17th at 5 p.m.
    for the submission of statements and questions for the record.
        This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:07 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

                                  ----------

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]