    [Senate Hearing 114-914]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 114-914

                       OVERSIGHT OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S
                     FISCAL YEAR 2016 REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT
                   PROGRAM: FISCAL AND SECURITY IMPLICATIONS

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                        SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND
                             THE NATIONAL INTEREST

                                     OF THE

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION
                                   __________

                                OCTOBER 1, 2015
                                   __________

                               Serial No. J-114-31
                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

                    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                            www.judiciary.senate.gov
                                www.govinfo.gov

                                    ------

                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    53-713                    WASHINGTON : 2025

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                      CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa, Chairman
    ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah                 PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Ranking
    JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama                 Member
    LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
    JOHN CORNYN, Texas                   CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York
    MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah                 RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
    TED CRUZ, Texas                      SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island
    JEFF FLAKE, Arizona                  AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    DAVID VITTER, Louisiana              AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
    DAVID PERDUE, Georgia                CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
    THOM TILLIS, North Carolina          RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut

                Kolan L. Davis, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
          Kristine Lucius, Democratic Chief Counsel and Staff Director

             SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND THE NATIONAL INTEREST

                        JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama, Chairman
    DAVID VITTER, Louisiana, Deputy      CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York,
      Chair                                Ranking Member
    DAVID PERDUE, Georgia                PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
    CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa            DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
    JOHN CORNYN, Texas                   RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
    MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah                 AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    TED CRUZ, Texas                      AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
    THOM TILLIS, North Carolina          RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut

               Danielle Cutrona, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
       Rebecca Joy Slaughter, Democratic Chief Counsel and Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page

    Sessions, Hon. Jeff..............................................     1
    Schumer, Hon. Charles E.
        prepared statement...........................................    67
    Grassley, Hon. Charles E.........................................     6
        prepared statement...........................................    60
    Leahy, Hon. Patrick J............................................
        prepared statement...........................................    63
    Durbin, Hon. Richard J...........................................     4
        prepared statement...........................................    64

                                   WITNESSES

    Barlett, Lawrence................................................     8
        Prepared statement...........................................    36
        Responses to written questions...............................    69
    Carey, Robert....................................................    12
        Prepared statement...........................................    50
        Responses to written questions...............................   126
    Emrich, Matthew D................................................    11
        Prepared joint statement.....................................    40
        Responses to written questions...............................   141
    Strack, Barbara L................................................     9
        Prepared joint statement.....................................    41
        Responses to written questions...............................   141

                                    APPENDIX

    Items submitted for the record...................................    35

                       OVERSIGHT OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S
                     FY 2016 REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM:
                        FISCAL AND SECURITY IMPLICATIONS

                                  ----------

                           THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2015

                                  United States Senate,
                                Subcommittee on Immigration and
                                          the National Interest
                                    Committee on the Judiciary,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:07 p.m., in
    Room 226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Sessions,
    Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Sessions [presiding], Perdue, Grassley,
    Tillis, Durbin, Klobuchar, Franken, and Blumenthal.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS,
                A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA

        Chairman Sessions. Thank you all for being with us. I am
    glad Senator Durbin can be with us. He is very knowledgeable in
    these areas.
        We are having a vote going on now, so we were able to vote
    early and come on by, and sorry that we did not get to start
    right on time.
        I would like everyone to be present to be able to watch the
    hearing without obstruction. If people stand up and block the
    views of those behind them or speak out of turn, it is not fair
    or considerate to others, and officers will remove those
    individuals from the room.
        Before we begin with opening statements, I want to explain
    how we are going to proceed. We have one panel of witnesses
    today, Government witnesses. I will make an opening statement,
    followed by opening statements from Senators Schumer, Grassley,
    and Durbin. Each witness will have 5 minutes for an opening
    statement. Following their statements, we will begin the first
    round of questions, and if each Senator wishes to continue with
    questions, we will have a second round of questions. If there
    are no objections, I will start with my opening statement.
        The hearing today will focus on the administration's
    proposed refugee settlement program for FY 2016. In particular,
    we will examine the economic and security implications of the
    administration's plan to boost significantly the admission of
    refugees to nearly 200,000 over 2 years, including a large
    increase in Syrian resettlement.
        Too often, discussions of any one particular immigration
    program lack broader numerical context. Refugee admissions,
    asylees, and parolees are all in addition to our huge annual
    intake of one million green card holders each year and the plus
    the 700,000 foreign workers and the 500,000 students that we
    have.
        Before addressing the policy question of whether or not to
    admit additional groups of refugees, we should first consider
    the broader immigration circumstances that we have in our
    country.
        This week marks the 50th anniversary of the 1965
    Immigration and Nationality Act. Pew Research has done an
    exhaustive study on the Act, and here are some of their
    findings, as well as findings from the Census Bureau and the
    DHS, the Department of Homeland Security.
        In the last five decades, 59 million immigrants have
    entered the United States. Immigration, including the children
    of post-1965 immigrants, has added 72 million to our population
    of 330 million. One-fifth of the world's immigrants live in the
    United States. No other country has taken in more than 1 in 20.
    We have taken in 6 times more immigrants than all of Latin
    America and 10 million more than the European Union, who has a
    more than 50 percent greater population. We have permanently
    resettled 1.5 million immigrants from Muslim countries in the
    United States since 9/11. In 1970, fewer than 1 in 20-21
    million Americans were foreign born. Today it is approaching
    one in seven and will soon eclipse the highest levels ever
    recorded in the country.
        Pew projects new immigrants and their children will add 103
    million individuals. Six in ten decades of the 20th century
    witnessed immigration declines. Every decade of the 21st
    century will see rapidly rising immigration, with each decade
    setting new all-time records.
        After four decades of large-scale immigration, Pew polls
    show that by a more than 3-to-1 margin, the public would like
    to see immigration reduced rather than increased. According to
    Rasmussen, only 7 percent of Americans support resettling
    100,000 Middle Eastern refugees annually in the United States.
        More recent studies from the Georgetown Professor Eric
    Gould and Harvard Professor George Borjas, both knowledgeable
    experts, have linked this huge increase in the foreign labor
    supply to the crippling wage stagnation and joblessness that is
    affecting many of our workers.
        With that context in mind, we must consider what our
    economic, social, and security infrastructure can responsibly
    handle. Let us not also forget that we are presently dealing
    with our own hemisphere's immigration crisis. The situation in
    Syria and throughout the Middle East is a serious one, but it
    cannot be solved with emigrating large numbers of people from
    that region.
        While the United States may have a role to play and does
    have a role to play, such as establishing safe zones in Syria
    as recommended by General Petraeus, it would be more
    appropriate to effectively support the refugees in locations
    closer to their homes with the long-term goal of being able to
    return them safely to their homes. That is why the Middle
    Eastern nations clearly must take a larger role and the lead,
    actually in resettling their region's refugees. It is not sound
    policy to respond to the myriad problems in the region by
    encouraging millions to abandon their home. Resettling the
    region's refugees within the region is the course likeliest to
    produce good long-term reforms and stabilization.
        It has also been reported that as many as 3 of 4 of those
    seeking entry into Europe are not refugees from Syria but
    economic migrants, many from many different countries. In a
    September 23d Washington Post article, this is what they
    reported quote: ``There are well-dressed Iranians speaking
    Farsi who insist they are members of the persecuted Yazidis of
    Iraq. There are Indians who do not speak Arabic but say they
    are from Damascus. There are Pakistanis, Albanians, Egyptians,
    Kosovars, Somalis, and Tunisians from countries with plenty of
    poverty and violence, but no war. It should come as no surprise
    that many migrants seem to be pretending they are someone else.
    The prize, after all, is the possibility of benefits,
    residency, and work in Europe'', close quote.
        We will have that same problem here, and we do have that
    problem here. We must be cautious. The administration
    originally proposed a ceiling of 75,000 refugee admissions in
    the next fiscal year. Last week, the administration announced
    that it plans to accept at least a floor of 85,000 refugees
    next year and at least 100,000 the next year. Once here with
    refugee status, those individuals can claim any job and collect
    any Federal welfare benefit. Recent statistics from the
    Department of Health and Human Services Office of Refugee
    Resettlement indicate that 75 percent of refugees receive food
    stamps and more than half receive free health care and cash
    benefits.
        For refugees from the Middle East, the numbers are even
    higher. More than 90 percent of recent Middle Eastern refugees
    draw food stamps and about 70 percent receive free health care
    and cash welfare.
        Refugee settlement also comes with security risks as we
    have witnessed with the surge of ISIS recruitment among, for
    example, Somali refugee communities in Minnesota. Anyone
    claiming to have a serious and honest discussion of refugee
    resettlement must ask the difficult questions about
    integration--how can we accomplish that?--assimilation and
    community safety. This is certainly true with respect to
    countries like Syria where we have little or no information
    about who the people are, no background information, no ability
    to determine whether they are radicalized now or might become
    radicalized after their arrival in the United States.
        Indeed, the FBI Assistant Director for Counterterrorism has
    testified that the United States does not have quote, ``the
    systems in place on the ground'', end of quote in Syria to
    collect enough information to properly screen refugees. That is
    pretty obvious, frankly. Our Subcommittee is currently
    investigating the scores of examples of refugees and asylees
    who go on to commit acts of terror or become involved with
    terrorist organizations.
        The economic and physical security of the American people
    must never be a secondary consideration. With workers' pay
    stagnant, our entitlement programs on the verge of insolvency,
    our law enforcement struggling to combat radicalization and
    increasing crime, and our schools and communities struggling to
    keep up, voters are rightly and justifiably wondering about
    their Government's priorities and how we should conduct our
    business. That is what we will explore today.
        Senator Durbin, I am glad you can be with us. I know you
    are knowledgeable on these issues, and once again I would like
    to thank our witnesses who are involved with or lead the
    agencies that handle these difficult issues every day, and we
    look forward to their testimony. Senator Durbin.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,
               A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

        Senator Durbin. Thank you very much, Chairman Sessions.
        My mother was an immigrant from Lithuania. She was brought
    to America at the age of 2 with her brother and sister. My
    grandmother carried them off a boat in Baltimore and put them
    on a train to what they considered to be the Promised Land--
    East St. Louis, Illinois. My grandmother did not speak English
    very well, but she was determined to have a better life for her
    children and her family. She worked hard. Our whole family
    worked hard. As her son, I ended up with a full-time job.
        When you reflect on my background, my family's story, it is
    not just mine. It is America's story. It is who we are. We are
    Nation of immigrants.
        On the issue of refugees, there are two Members of the U.S.
    Senate who are the sons of refugees. One is running for
    President of the United States.
        I want to put this in context when we talk about issues. We
    are talking about real lives and real people. Today we are
    talking about the worst humanitarian crisis of our time.
        This refugee crisis has almost 60 million people who have
    been forcibly displaced from their homes around the world.
    Syria is the epicenter. When they ask me what I think of when
    you say the two words ``Vietnam War,'' instantly my first
    impression is a photo image of a little girl, a victim of
    napalm, naked, running down a road toward the camera, crying,
    with her arms extended. What is my image of Syrian refugees? A
    3-year-old Syrian boy who drowned in the Mediterranean--Aylan
    Kurdi. I looked at that little corpse that had washed up on the
    shore and thought, ``That is my grandson.'' That is the image I
    take from the Syrian refugee crisis.
        More than half of Syria's 23 million people have been
    forced from their homes. More than 4 million Syrians are
    registered as refugees, including almost 2 million children.
    More than 10,000 Syrian children have been killed. Thousands
    are unaccompanied and separated from their parents. They are
    not economic migrants. They are refugees fleeing for their
    lives.
        The poet Warsan Shire, who is herself a refugee from
    Somalia, put it well when she wrote, ``No one leaves home
    unless home is the mouth of a shark. No one puts their children
    in a boat unless the water is safer than the land.''
        The Syrian refugee crisis has placed a great strain on many
    countries. The tiny country of Lebanon, population 4.2 million,
    now hosts 1.2 million registered Syrian refugees, more refugees
    per capita than any country in the world. That is almost 30
    percent of their population. Jordan, of course, going through
    the same type of strain.
        Do we have any obligation in the United States to face
    this? I think we do. History tells us we should.
        We have taken some positive steps to address this crisis.
    The United States is the most generous donor to the refugees of
    any Nation in the world. We are providing safe haven to
    hundreds of Syrian visitors in this country who were allowed to
    stay on a temporary basis when the war developed. After last
    year's hearing, I held a hearing on the Syrian refugee crisis.
    The administration issued exemptions so they could stay and not
    return to the danger of Syria. So far, the United States of
    America has accepted about 1,600 Syrian refugees. Sixteen
    hundred, a small number.
        May I join with Senator Klobuchar and 13 other Senators
    asking the Administration to admit at least 65,000 by the end
    of 2016. The administration is now looking at 10,000. Why does
    it take so long? Because our vetting process is very careful.
    It takes from 14 to 24 months after the initial interview for a
    refugee to be accepted in the United States. This notion--and
    you will hear it on the campaign trail--that we just throw our
    doors open and say, ``Come on board,'' is not true at all. I
    have gone through a classified briefing, and the background
    checks that we impose on these people are very serious and very
    thorough, and they take a long, long time.
        Germany has announced they are taking 800,000 Syrian
    refugees. Their average time for vetting? Four months. Ours?
    Eighteen to 24 months. We are careful. If we are going to show
    that we have a heart, we are also going to be thoughtful about
    it, too, and do everything humanly possible to avoid any
    dangerous person from ever coming to our country.
        What is the lesson of refugees in the United States? There
    is a lesson from World War II, isn't there? Remember a ship
    called the ``St. Louis.'' It came to our shores with Jews from
    Europe. They said, ``If you do not take us, we will go back to
    Europe and die.'' We did not take them. They returned to the
    Holocaust.
        After the war, we accepted many refugees, hundreds of
    thousands. In Vietnam, we think maybe some 400,000 ended up
    coming to the United States. Soviet Jews who were allowed to
    come to this country to avoid persecution, over 200,000. Let me
    add, when it came to Cuban refugees, the numbers now are about
    650,000, including, as I mentioned earlier, the fathers of two
    of our colleagues in the U.S. Senate, one of who is running for
    President.
        We resettled more than 150,000 refugees from the former
    Yugoslavia, and the reason I want to raise that point is
    because there is something that must be said. We are talking
    about many Muslims who have come to the United States and
    become an important part of our country. In my condo building
    in Chicago, Illinois, there are two Bosnian Muslims who are the
    hardest-working people I know, so proud of their families and
    proud to be part of this country; and as we will find here from
    groups that sent us statements, including, in particular, a
    letter signed by 400 faith leaders expressing strong opposition
    to any effort to limit the resettlement of Muslim refugees.
        Let me just close by saying on an economic basis it is
    true. Some of these refugees come here dirt poor and need a
    helping hand. I met four of those families just 2 weeks ago in
    Chicago. The statistics will also tell us that that changes
    very, very quickly. As soon as they can command enough of the
    English language, they are off and working, and working hard at
    some of the toughest jobs. Some of them turn out to be pretty
    successful: the late General John Shalikashvili; Sergei Brin,
    the co-founder of Google; former Intel CEO Andrew Grove, the
    pioneer of the semiconductor industry; oh, and I did not
    mention Steve Jobs, the son of a Syrian immigrant. So, I would
    hope today that as we reflect on this issue, we reflect on
    history.
        The last thing I will say is I would like to introduce the
    Members of this Subcommittee to Hassam Alustrum. Mr. Alustrum,
    are you here? Please stand. Thank you, sir. He fled his home in
    Homs, Syria, in 2013 after his house was shelled by a missile
    from the Syrian Army. He moved into another house with five
    other families, and that house was shelled and destroyed as
    well. He moved to another neighborhood, but barrel bombs were
    being dropped in that neighborhood. He then fled Syria with his
    wife, Suha, and two children. After a long and difficult
    journey through the desert, Mr. Alustrum ended up in Jordan
    where he applied for refugee status. After a long process, he
    and his family came to the United States on June 16th this
    year. He now works two jobs. He moves furniture during the day
    and he is a baker at night in order to support his family. Mr.
    Alustrum is not a terrorist, and he is not a fiscal drain on
    America. We should be proud that our country has welcomed Mr.
    Alustrum and his family. That is what our country's refugee
    settlement program is all about. I hope my colleagues in
    Congress will come to understand that as a result of this
    hearing.
        Thank you, sir.
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you, Senator Durbin, and thank you
    for your guest that you introduced.
        We are looking to establish a good, sound policy that
    fulfills the United States' responsibility in this regard and
    that does so in a smart and effective way. Senator Grassley,
    did you have an opening statement.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES E. GRASSLEY,
                 A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

        Chairman Grassley. I think because of time I will put my
    statement in the record. I do have a statement, and I am going
    to put it in the record.
        [The prepared statement of Chairman Grassley appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Senator Klobuchar. Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Sessions. Yes.
        Senator Klobuchar. I am going to have to leave a little
    early for something I committed to, but I just wanted to put my
    statement in the record as well. I know that Senator Durbin
    mentioned the work that we have done to try to get more Syrian
    refugees into our country. We have been moving at a very slow
    pace. Just coming from a State that Senator Franken and I
    represent, which is the home of so many refugees, we are so
    proud of our Hmong population. We took in these Hmong people
    who fought on our side in the war in Vietnam, and now they are
    integrated in our community and thriving. We have very strong
    Liberian and Somali populations, and it is a major part of our
    State's fabric of life. I think people have to remember that
    when we talk about this issue because, as Senator Durbin said,
    90 of our Fortune 500 companies were formed by immigrants, 200
    immigrants or kids of immigrants, 30 percent of our U.S. Nobel
    Laureates were born in other countries. I hope we think about
    that when we consider this refugee issue.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        [The prepared statement of Senator Klobuchar appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chairman Sessions. All right. If the panel would stand,
    raise your right hand, and take the oath. Do you affirm that
    the testimony you are about to give before this Committee will
    be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so
    help you God?
        Mr. Bartlett. I do.
        Ms. Strack. I do.
        Mr. Emrich. I do.
        Mr. Carey. I do.
        [Witnesses are sworn in.]
        Chairman Sessions. Please be seated.
        I will briefly introduce our witnesses. For reference,
    their full biographies are available on the Committee's
    website.
        First, we have Larry Bartlett, Director of Admissions for
    the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration at the
    Department of State. Mr. Bartlett is the Director of the
    Refugee Admissions Office of the U.S. Department of State's
    Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration. He previously
    served in various State Department leadership positions and
    served in a variety of capacities with the Peace Corps.
        Next, we have Ms. Barbara Strack, Chief of the Refugee
    Affairs Division at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
    Service. She joined the USCIS as Chief of the Refugee Affairs
    Division in 2005. Ms. Strack previously held positions with the
    National Immigration Forum, the former Immigration and
    Naturalization Service, as counsel to a U.S. Senate
    Subcommittee, and in private practice of law in Washington, DC,
    at O'Melveny & Myers. She is with the Department of Homeland
    Security.
        Next, we have Mr. Matthew Emrich, Acting Associate Director
    of the Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate at the
    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, also with Homeland
    Security. Before he was selected as Acting Associate Director,
    he served as a Deputy Associate Director of FDNS and has over
    21 years of immigration, law enforcement, and intelligence
    experience. Before his civilian Government employment, Mr.
    Emrich served for 8 years on active duty in the U.S. Marine
    Corps in the counterintelligence and infantry fields. He also
    has worked in Baghdad as a deployed senior human intelligence
    analyst for the Multi-National Force--Iraq.
        Finally, we have Mr. Bob Carey, Director of the Office of
    Refugee Resettlement. Mr. Carey most recently served as vice
    president of resettlement and migration policy at the
    International Rescue Committee, leading the agency's advocacy
    on refugee, immigration, and anti-trafficking, and community
    development policy issues. He also served as chair of the
    Refugee Council USA.
        This is a good panel with much experience in lead key
    agencies that are critical to how we handle the refugee
    program. Mr. Bartlett, if you would, give us your opening
    statement.

               STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE BARTLETT, DIRECTOR,
                OFFICE OF REFUGEE ADMISSIONS, BUREAU OF
                  POPULATION, REFUGEES, AND MIGRATION,
                U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC

        Mr. Bartlett. Mr. Chair, distinguished Senators, thank you
    for holding this briefing and bringing attention to the
    importance of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. Thank you
    also for the opportunity to appear before you with my
    colleagues from the Departments of Homeland Security and Health
    and Human Services and to update you on the measures we have
    taken to protect refugees around the world and provide new
    homes to some of the most vulnerable.
        According to the United Nations High Commissioner for
    Refugees' latest statistics, there are nearly 20 million
    refugees in the world. The vast majority of these refugees will
    receive support in the country to which they fled until they
    can voluntarily and safely return home. The United States
    contributes to the programs of UNHCR, the International
    Committee of the Red Cross, the International Organization for
    Migration, and other international and nongovernmental
    organizations that provide protection and assistance to
    refugees until they can return home.
        In 2014, some 126,000 refugees voluntarily repatriated to
    their country of origin. That is the lowest recorded number
    since 1983. A small number of refugees may be allowed to become
    citizens in the country to which they fled, and an even smaller
    number--primarily those who are the most vulnerable--will be
    resettled in a third country. While UNHCR reports that less
    than 1 percent of all refugees are eventually resettled in
    third countries, the United States welcomes over half of these
    refugees.
        Since 1975, Americans have welcomed over 3 million refugees
    from all over the world. The United States Refugee Admissions
    Program reflects the United States' highest values and
    aspirations of compassion, generosity, and leadership.
    Resettlement opportunities are focused on refugees who have
    immediate needs for durable and lasting solutions.
        While maintaining our leadership role in humanitarian
    protection, an integral part of this mission is to ensure that
    refugee resettlement opportunities go only to those who are
    eligible for such protection and who are not known to present a
    risk to the safety and security of our country. Accordingly,
    our program is committed to deterring and detecting fraud among
    those seeking to resettle in the United States, and applicants
    to our program are subject to more intensive security than any
    other type of traveler to the U.S. to protect against threats
    to our national security. The Department of State collaborates
    with the Department of Homeland Security on this and also
    collaborates closely with the Centers for Disease Control and
    Prevention to protect the health of U.S.-bound refugees and the
    U.S. public.
        For the past 3 fiscal years, the program has met its target
    for refugee arrivals, an unprecedented achievement in the
    program's history. In 2016, the program will grow to serve
    85,000 refugees, at least 10,000 of whom will be Syrians, in
    order to respond to the increased needs in the Middle East.
        The program enjoys substantial support from State and local
    governments as well as community members. The program resettles
    refugees to 48 States, 173 cities, and 304 sites. As a public-
    private partnership, it requires the support of American
    nongovernmental organizations, charities, faith-based groups,
    and thousands of volunteers and supporters of the program in
    hundreds of communities across the country. Recently, the
    Department of State has received an outpouring of interest from
    individuals, churches, and community organizations wishing to
    help with Syrian refugee resettlement.
        With the continued support of Congress and the American
    people, refugee resettlement will remain a proud tradition for
    many years to come. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Bartlett appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you very much. Ms. Strack.

                 STATEMENT OF BARBARA L. STRACK, CHIEF,
               REFUGEE AFFAIRS DIVISION, REFUGEE, ASYLUM,
               AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE,
               U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES,
                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
                        SECURITY, WASHINGTON, DC

        Ms. Strack. Chairman Sessions, Ranking Member Durbin, and
    distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify today.
        Next month will mark the 10th anniversary of the Refugee
    Corps, a cadre of specially trained officers at USCIS who are
    dedicated to adjudicating applications for refugee status
    overseas. I have been honored to serve as the Chief of the
    Refugee Affairs Division over these 10 years and to work with
    this talented staff who are equally committed to the
    humanitarian mission of offering resettlement opportunities to
    refugees while safeguarding the integrity of our program and
    our national security.
        This program has consistently benefited from the support of
    colleagues throughout USCIS and DHS as a whole, including
    USCIS' Asylum Corps, international staff, and Fraud Detection
    and National Security Directorate. As reflected by this panel
    today, we also work closely across departments.
        The Refugee Resettlement Program has forged strong and deep
    relationships with colleagues in the law enforcement, national
    security, and intelligence communities, and we continue to
    benefit enormously from their expertise, analysis, and
    collaboration. It simply would not be possible to support a
    resettlement program of the size and scope that the U.S.
    maintains today without this critical interagency
    infrastructure.
        As you know, the United States has a proud and long
    tradition of offering protection, freedom, and opportunity to
    refugees from around the world who live in fear of persecution
    and are often left to languish in difficult conditions of
    temporary asylum. USCIS remains dedicated to fulfilling this
    mission as an integral part of this is to ensure that refugee
    resettlement opportunities go to those who are eligible for
    such protection and who do not present a risk to the safety and
    security of our country. Accordingly, we are committed to
    deterring and detecting fraud among those seeking to resettle,
    and we continue to employ the highest security measures to
    protect against risks to our national security.
        My written testimony describes in detail the screening
    measures and safeguards that have been developed by the U.S.
    Refugee Admissions Program and enhanced over time. While many
    of these enhancements were first deployed in connection with
    the Iraqi Refugee Resettlement Program, they are now being
    applied more broadly to applicants of all nationalities,
    including Syrians, who represent a growing portion of our
    caseload. This entails biographic and biometric security
    checks, and a refugee applicant is not approved for travel
    until the results of all required security checks have been
    obtained and cleared.
        In addition to security checks, USCIS conducts individual
    in-person interviews with applicants to determine their
    eligibility for refugee status. Recognizing that well-trained
    officers play a critical role in protecting the integrity of
    the refugee process, we place great emphasis on providing the
    highest-quality training to our adjudicators. This involves
    detailed training on specific refugee populations, including
    special training on the Iraqi and Syrian caseloads, in which
    outside experts from the intelligence, policy, and academic
    communities participate. In every instance, officers assess the
    credibility of applicants and evaluate whether the applicant's
    testimony is consistent with known country conditions.
        Given the wide geographic scope of the U.S. Refugee
    Admissions Program, including remote and sometimes difficult
    locations, USCIS coordinates closely with PRM to schedule
    refugee interviews every quarter of the fiscal year. In a
    typical quarter, USCIS will deploy over 100 staff in up to 16
    or 17 different locations. As a result of these carefully
    coordinated operations, as you have heard from Mr. Bartlett, we
    have succeeded in meeting the refugee admissions ceiling of
    70,000 for a third year in a row.
        Looking forward to FY 2016, USCIS is prepared to work
    closely with the State Department and other interagency
    partners to support a Refugee Admissions Program of 85,000,
    including at least 10,000 Syrian refugees. We will continue to
    look for opportunity to improve and streamline our operations
    while maintaining the integrity of the program and our national
    security.
        When I meet with new officers joining the Refugee Corps, I
    talk with them about the United States' longstanding tradition
    of offering protection to those fleeing persecution. I look at
    our work as being the stewards of this tradition for this time
    and this generation. We are committed to meeting this
    responsibility and preserving this American hallmark.
        In closing, I would like to thank the Subcommittee for this
    opportunity to testify, and I would be happy to answer your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Strack appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you, Ms. Strack. Mr. Emrich.

                 STATEMENT OF MATTHEW D. EMRICH, ACTING
                ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, FRAUD DETECTION AND
            NATIONAL SECURITY DIRECTORATE, U.S. CITIZENSHIP
               AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, U.S. DEPARTMENT
                  OF HOMELAND SECURITY, WASHINGTON, DC

        Mr. Emrich. Thank you, Chairman Sessions, Ranking Member
    Durbin, and other distinguished Senators, for the opportunity
    to update you on the measures we are taking to ensure the
    security of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.
        In addition to the security checks that my colleagues Mr.
    Bartlett and Ms. Strack have described and that are in our
    written testimony that apply to all refugees regardless of
    nationality, USCIS has begun an additional layer of enhanced
    review of Syrian refugee applicants. This enhanced review is
    performed by headquarters-based staff from the USCIS Fraud
    Detection and National Security Directorate, or FDNS.
        I would like to take a moment to describe the role of FDNS.
    Also within the DC-based element of the Fraud Detection and
    National Security Directorate is the Intelligence Division,
    which is in close and regular contact with our DHS Intelligence
    Community partner, the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis,
    other DHS components, and Intelligence Community member
    agencies.
        FDNS also has full-time liaison officers stationed at the
    FBI headquarters National Joint Terrorism Task Force, Interpol,
    and the FBI Terrorist Screening Center. We rely on these
    everyday connections to share information with our law
    enforcement and intelligence partners at the headquarters
    level, both proactively and when asked, and these connections
    also reinforce the established information-sharing agreements
    that exist within the security check rubric.
        Before refugee applicants are scheduled for interview by a
    USCIS refugee officer in the field, Syrian cases are reviewed
    at CIS headquarters by a Refugee Affairs Division officer. All
    cases that meet certain criteria are referred to the FDNS
    headquarters-based staff that I mentioned earlier for
    additional research and review. FDNS intelligence analysts
    conduct open-source and classified research on referred cases
    and synthesize an assessment for use by the interviewing
    officer. This information provides case-specific context
    relating to country conditions and regional activity, and it is
    used by the interviewing officer to inform lines of inquiry
    related to the applicant's eligibility and credibility.
        Throughout this review process of Syrian refugee
    applicants, FDNS engages with law enforcement and Intelligence
    Community members to obtain additional clarifying information,
    to assist in identity verification, or to deconflict to ensure
    USCIS activities will not adversely affect ongoing law
    enforcement investigations. When FDNS identifies terrorism-
    related information, it nominates an individual or individuals
    to the terrorism watchlist using standard interagency protocols
    or provides additional information to our existing records.
    Additionally, FDNS intelligence analysts draft reports that
    alert U.S. law enforcement agencies and the Intelligence
    Community of information that meets standing intelligence
    requirements.
        We work very closely with the DHS Office of Intelligence
    Analysis and our many law enforcement and Intelligence
    Community partners to identify options for new potential
    screening opportunities to enhance the existing process. We are
    doing this constantly.
        In addition to the checks that I have described, refugee
    applicants who travel to the United States are screened at the
    port of entry, as is the case with all individuals who travel
    to the United States. The screening at the port of entry is
    conducted by Customs and Border Protection and the
    Transportation Security Administration.
        The humanitarian crisis in the Middle East is severe, and
    my staff and I are reminded on almost a daily basis of the
    strife and atrocities that have been occurring in this area--
    that have been occurring for some time and that are occurring
    now. We are always committed to maintaining and always seeking
    to enhance a thorough screening effort in close coordination
    with our partners so that we may maintain the integrity of the
    program and our national security.
        I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Emrich appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chairman Session. Thank you. Mr. Carey.

              STATEMENT OF ROBERT CAREY, DIRECTOR, OFFICE
              OF REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
               HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, WASHINGTON, DC

        Mr. Carey. Chairman Sessions and distinguished Members of
    the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify on the
    Department of Health and Human Services' responsibilities in
    facilitating the resettlement of refugees in the United States.
    In my testimony today, I will describe the role that HHS plays
    in the Refugee Resettlement Program.
        The Refugee Act of 1980 established the Office of Refugee
    Resettlement within HHS and outlined the United States'
    commitment to humanitarian relief through the resettlement of
    persons fleeing persecution on the basis of their race,
    religion, nationality, membership in a social group, or
    political opinion.
        Since the passage of the Act, over 3 million refugees from
    more than 70 countries have been provided safe haven in the
    United States, along with the possibility of a new beginning
    and freedom from persecution and displacement.
        The Departments of Homeland Security, State, and HHS work
    together to advance America's humanitarian response to refugees
    through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.
        In FY 2014, nearly 140,000 individuals were eligible for
    resettlement services through ORR programs. These programs
    assist refugees, asylees, Cuban and Haitian entrants, victims
    of torture, foreign-born victims of human trafficking, and
    special immigrant visa holders to become employed and self-
    sufficient as soon as possible after their arrival.
        ORR carries out its mission to serve refugees through
    grants and services, administered by State governments and
    nonprofit organizations and an extensive public-private
    partnership network. ORR grants are designed to facilitate
    refugees' successful transition and integration into life in
    the United States. Refugees arrive with distinct skills and
    experiences, and we strive to provide the benefits and services
    necessary to leverage those assets and talents.
        ORR funds support--transitional, time-limited support for
    medical services for individuals not eligible for other public
    benefits. Through programs administered by States and nonprofit
    organizations, ORR provides cash and medical assistance to
    eligible populations for up to 8 months after their arrival in
    the U.S. In addition, ORR funds foster care programs for
    unaccompanied refugee minors, certain minors granted special
    immigrant juvenile status, and unaccompanied minor victims of a
    severe form of human trafficking.
        ORR provides funds to State governments and private
    nonprofit agencies to support social services, including
    English language instruction, employment services, case
    management, social adjustment services, and interpreter
    services. These funds are allocated to States based on a
    formula tied to the prior 2 years of arrival data which
    accounts for refugees' and other entrants' movements to other
    States after their initial resettlement as well.
        ORR programs also support economic development activities.
    These focus on financial literacy, establishing credit, and
    matched savings in support of business starts, educational
    goals, car purchases essential to employment, and business
    startups that in turn employ thousands of individuals.
        A portion of new entrants participate in the voluntary
    agency Matching Grant Program rather than the Refugee Cash
    Assistance Program. Through this program, voluntary
    resettlement agencies provide services to help refugees become
    employed and self-sufficient within their first 4 months in the
    U.S. In FY 2014, the program served 30,000 individuals and
    reported economic self-sufficiency rates of 76 percent for
    refugees at 180 days after arrival. Given the proven success of
    the program, the President's budget proposed a $22 million
    increase to the 2016 Matching Grant Program to serve an
    additional 10,000 individuals.
        Finally, I would like to share with you the story of one
    refugee. Rikan, 28, and his family were forced to flee their
    homeland in northern Iraq when the U.S. military began its
    withdrawal due to family members' employment with American
    forces and related threats to their lives. Starting over was a
    challenge for Rikan, as it is for all refugees. He applied for
    more than 100 jobs during his first 7 months in St. Louis while
    attending English language classes. His first job in the U.S.
    was working at a local grocery store. Three years later, he has
    opened a car dealership. His mission is to provide fellow
    immigrants with affordable and reliable used cars. The business
    has been open for 2 years. He employs a number of other
    individuals, and he now is helping other refugees and
    individuals from communities to buy their first cars. His
    determination to succeed is representative of the determination
    I see in so many of the refugees who arrive in our country.
    Despite unimaginable hardships, violence, and oppression, they
    arrive seeking opportunity, not handouts, an opportunity to
    give back to their communities, achieve the American dream.
    HHS' programs assist refugees and other vulnerable populations
    to do just that.
        I welcome your interest in the U.S. Refugee Resettlement
    Program at HHS. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our
    work, and I would be happy to answer any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Carey appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you, Mr. Carey. You mentioned
    refugees, asylees, Cuban and Haitian special programs that are
    also akin to refugees, and that totals 140,000 that you have
    responsibility for?
        Mr. Carey. Yes, sir.
        Chairman Sessions. That includes 85,000 refugees?
        Mr. Carey. These numbers are from 2014. In the current
    year, they include responsibility for 70,000 refugees.
        Chairman Sessions. About an equal number more than that.
    You also mentioned self-sufficiency. You define self-
    sufficiency to include Government assistance reports, do you
    not?
        Mr. Carey. The Matching Grant self-sufficiency rates
    include individuals who are employed in full-time employment at
    180 days after arrival.
        Chairman Sessions. They still may be eligible for food
    stamps, Medicaid, and other assistance programs. Isn't that
    correct?
        Mr. Carey. Refugees are admitted as legal permanent
    residents, and they are eligible for any benefits--or they
    adjust to legal permanent resident status after one year.
    During their time of assistance, they are eligible as other
    individuals would be during their first 8 months in the United
    States.
        Chairman Sessions. I am just trying to clarify this because
    I think we all need to fully understand it. As I understand it,
    from 2008 through 2013, refugees from the Middle East, for
    example, 91 percent are eligible and receive SNAP, food stamp
    benefits, and high percentages receive cash benefits, TANF,
    housing benefits, and Medicaid. Is that correct?
        Mr. Carey. I believe----
        Chairman Sessions. Do you deny those statistics? They are
    Government statistics.
        Mr. Carey. Those figures include refugees who are receiving
    benefits during their initial resettlement period as provided
    through ORR and States and local governments.
        Chairman Sessions. My understanding is that through that 5-
    year period, which is a long period, you had a very high
    subsidy rate, and I just think we should know that, because
    when they come in, you provide assistance to help them get
    established, but they are immediately then eligible for the
    same aid programs that we provide American citizens, and that
    most of them will be starting at lower incomes and become
    eligible for health care and other benefits.
        Mr. Bartlett, in general, you know, it is important for
    us--I tried to ask my staff to make sure how does this thing
    really work. Maybe you would be the one to ask. Refugees
    typically go, I understand, about 90 percent to the United
    Nations, who then give them some sort of number and send them,
    at least some of them, to the United States nine resettlement
    offices around the globe. Is that right?
        Mr. Bartlett. Mr. Chairman, let me explain. First of all,
    UNHCR, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, is our largest
    partner overseas. We provide substantial funding to that
    agency, and I think as you and others have mentioned, it is
    important that we assist refugees overseas. It is not just
    about bringing them here. It is about helping them, and helping
    them to have an opportunity to go home should that occasion
    present itself. We do work heavily through UNHCR. They have
    offices in all refugee-hosting countries around the world, and
    so they are our primary partner.
        If I could, one of the things I would like to say in
    response to helping people overseas, the U.S. Government has
    provided $4.5 billion since the beginning of the Syria crisis
    to do just that, to help refugees, number one, survive----
        Chairman Sessions. Does some of that count the U.N. money?
        Mr. Bartlett. Absolutely.
        Chairman Sessions. In addition to the UN----
        Mr. Bartlett. No, it goes primarily to the United Nations,
    International Committee of the Red Cross, International
    Organization for Migration, and then a host of NGO's that are
    operational. We work through those partners because they are
    the ones who actually know how to do the jobs.
        Chairman Sessions. We are the largest contributor to that
    program?
        Mr. Bartlett. That is correct. It is with the intent that
    people, number one, want to go home, which they do, and that
    they will be able to do so. There does come a point in time
    where the strain on the hosting countries--Jordan, Turkey,
    Lebanon, obviously the big 3--becomes immense, and we want to
    do our partner also through resettlement.
        At that point in time, the UNHCR, because they have field-
    level people working in camps or working in urban areas where
    they have NGO's who are doing that, identifies specific people,
    specific families who they consider most vulnerable. So, we are
    looking----
        Chairman Sessions. I was just trying to get an overview of
    it.
        Mr. Bartlett. Okay.
        Chairman Sessions. The U.N. would send it to your people.
    You would then evaluate them or at least take information from
    them. Then it goes to Homeland Security, who does background
    checks and personal interviews. Is that correct?
        Ms. Strack. Yes, sir, that is correct.
        Chairman Sessions. My time is almost up. I do not want to
    keep my colleagues waiting, but that is basically right. Then
    there are checked indices which are virtually nonexistent. Mr.
    Emrich, I know you have got a good plan there, but there is no
    place to check. There is not anybody, as we will establish
    later. Then if they are approved, airfare is provided to the
    United States.
        Mr. Bartlett. Sir, if I could just say, not only do they
    have to go through security checks but also through medical
    exams, and we do that in part for the health of the refugee but
    also the health of the United States to make sure we are not
    importing contagious diseases. The airfare, frankly, is
    provided as a loan to the refugee, and the refugee, once they
    arrive, signs a promissory note to pay back the loan. Over the
    course of about 10 years, we have an 80 percent repayment rate,
    and that money goes back into future refugee programs.
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you. Colleagues, we will go to the
    next questions. Mr. Carey, we do not want to--we just need to
    be aware that when we talk about the cost of the program--and
    we have a $1 billion cost, colleagues, we are not talking about
    the new stress on Medicaid, food stamps, schools, hospitals,
    the housing allowances that they may be entitled to, and other
    costs of that kind. That has not been provided. Isn't that
    correct? You are not estimating that, Mr. Carey?
        Mr. Carey. ORR's budget for assistance to refugees during
    FY 2015 is $585 million. After 1 year, refugees adjust to
    permanent resident status, and they are then eligible for
    services on a means-tested basis in the communities in which
    they are resettled.
        Chairman Sessions. Actually, they are eligible for those
    immediately, are they not? Or do they have to wait a year
    before they become eligible for food stamps or Medicaid?
        Mr. Carey. They are eligible for services for 8 months
    under the ORR program, and then they are eligible as any other
    resident, legal resident, would be.
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you. Senator Tillis.
        Senator Tillis. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for holding this
    important meeting. Thank you all for being here, and thank you
    for your service, past and present.
        I want to go back to trying to understand whether or not we
    have the resources and the coordination that is necessary to do
    this safely. Before I do, I cannot help but point out that a
    lot of this crisis is created, if we talk about the Syrian
    situation--but we are talking about far beyond that; this is
    10,000 Syrian refugees. In the case of Syria, it is because we
    have a despotic regime in the way of Bashar al-Assad, and I
    think a policy there that has finally led the Syrian people to
    believe they simply cannot live with any sense of comfort and
    safety in this country. It is a humanitarian disaster that is
    already playing out in the hundreds of thousands. If you go to
    Jordan and see the second largest city there now, it is a
    refugee camp with a number of Syrians in it. If you take a look
    at what the EU is doing, this is a crisis, and I think in some
    part it is a crisis because of failed policies that the United
    States has in the region trying to stabilize it.
        Secretary Kerry said that we were going to increase the
    number of refugees from 70,000 in FY 2015 to 75,000. Then a
    couple of weeks later, he said that that number may be 85,000--
    it could go as high as 100,000--and that he was more or less
    setting a floor of 10,000 for the Syrians in particular. We
    know that this discussion is about a larger number, somewhere
    between, let us say, 85,000 and 100,000. I am trying to get the
    math to work.
        I do not think any of you have been told that your
    resources are being increased proportionate to the number of
    refugees that you are going to have to work on, whether it is
    the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security,
    or the Department of Health and Human Services.
        At the most fundamental level, I am trying to figure out
    how you absorb this within the current rate of funding that you
    have without something giving, and one of those things that may
    give could be the very important thing that we all have an
    obligation to ensure, and that is the safety and security of
    the homeland. There is a lot of vetting that has to occur.
    There is going to be handoff between the various agencies. How
    do we make sure with this increased workload and increased
    pressure to help the refugees that we do not make a mistake
    that could potentially put our homeland at risk? I will start
    with anyone in the agency glad to go first, maybe Homeland
    Security.
        Mr. Bartlett. I was going to start with the numbers,
    because that is perhaps the easier part of the question, and
    then we will go to the security vetting. Just to be clear, yes,
    we--our goal, our target, our ceiling, whichever you want to
    call it, for this fiscal year, the one we just started, is
    85,000. Within that 85,000, we are striving to admit 10,000
    Syrians. That is not a cap.
        Senator Tillis. Mr. Bartlett, the only clarification I have
    is that Secretary Kerry said that it is a ceiling--it is not a
    ceiling; it is a floor. That suggests to me language that could
    anticipate more over time.
        Mr. Bartlett. The President signed a determination earlier
    this week for 85,000. I think if that were to be raised, that
    would again need to be re-signed at a higher number. Then the
    100,000 refers to the aspiration, the goal to do 100,000
    refugees in FY 2017.
        I would say on the State Department side, in terms of
    resources, we know that it will take more to bring in 85,000
    refugees. We are looking across our programs to see where we
    can gain efficiencies. I can assure you on our side there will
    be no shortcuts on security; there will be no shortcuts on
    medical screening; there will be no shortcuts on processing. We
    will be having discussions about budgetary needs in the future,
    but at the moment in time, there will be no shortcuts in terms
    of our responsibilities to the American people.
        Senator Tillis. Ms. Strack.
        Ms. Strack. Thank you. At a planning level, we had
    anticipated that the refugee ceiling for FY 2016 was likely
    going to rise to 75,000. As an operational person and for
    planning purposes, I had anticipated an increase from 70,000 to
    75,000.
        You are probably aware we at USCIS are in an unusual
    situation in that we are fee-funded agency. The money that
    supports my program, the resources that support my program, are
    paid by applicants for other immigration benefits. Everyone who
    applies for a green card or applies for naturalization, a piece
    of that fee supports the refugee and asylum programs at USCIS.
        Having spoken to our Office of Chief Financial Officer, he
    has informed us that there is sufficient funding in what is
    called our ``examination fee account'' to cover the 85,000
    anticipated admissions in FY 2016 by reprioritizing between
    programs. I would like to reiterate, as Mr. Bartlett said, in
    no way are we cutting any corners or are we changing the
    security checks or cutting back on the elements that we think
    are integral to the integrity of the program.
        Mr. Emrich. I would just like to echo what Mr. Bartlett and
    Ms. Strack have said regarding the security checks. We will not
    cut corners. The security check requirements were developed in
    the interagency with the consultation and expertise of the FBI,
    our DHS partners, and the Intelligence Community partners, and
    the security regime was set up with all that input, and I have
    heard no discussion of making any cuts to it for any reason.
        I would like to point out that the grants of refugee status
    are discretionary so that if there is a doubt, the case is
    referred for further review. If there is a national security
    concern, that individual's application is denied.
        Mr. Carey. As the refugee situation continues to evolve,
    the administration is assessing ORR's capacity and resource
    needs for FY 2016. With an increased number of refugees, it
    will be important to preserve currently available resources and
    fund this account at a sufficient level.
        Senator Tillis. Mr. Chair, if I may just ask one question
    related to accountability. Mr. Bartlett, I understand that you
    are working with the decisions that have been made, but it does
    seem to me that if we went from 75,000 to 85,000 over a couple
    of weeks, given the growing crisis, a serious crisis where
    people's lives are at stake, that it is going to go up again,
    we cannot only answer this question in the context of the
    current commitment we have made but the likely commitment we
    will make going forward. I share some of the Chair's concerns
    about the ongoing costs, but more than anything else, before
    this Committee, I have had to have the sad discussion about an
    immigration decision that led to a young man that murdered
    people in my city of Charlotte because the handoff was not done
    properly. It was someone who was granted deferred status. It is
    not specific to this, but it speaks to the various agencies
    working together using the data effectively. In this case, it
    resulted in the deaths of people in my home city just 20
    minutes from where I live.
        I would like to know that as you move forward and you all
    have individual pieces, you are passing the baton in many
    cases, who ultimately owns the responsibility as we go through
    and process 85,000 or 100,000 or 120,000? What agency or who
    ultimately owns the responsibility if we have to come back and
    there is a lapse?
        Mr. Chair, that is my final question. Thank you for your
    indulgence.
        Ms. Strack. The responsibility for actually adjudicating a
    refugee petition, it is one of our forms, the Form I-590, that
    responsibility falls to USCIS. We approve that. We would not
    approve it if we have derogatory information on that
    application, and as Mr. Emrich mentioned, we also have
    discretion so we can deny a case when we feel that is
    appropriate, even if there is not a derogatory security check
    but there is other information that we think makes that
    individual not a good candidate to come to the United States.
        There is another check. When the applicant arrives at the
    airport, our colleagues at Custom and Border Protection, the
    inspectors at the airport can also make a decision at that
    point whether to admit based on the fact that the applicant
    already has an approved refugee status.
        Mr. Bartlett. Senator, if I could just say one thing about
    the build from 75,000 to 85,000, this program is certainly not
    linear. We have been planning for 75,000; now we are planning
    for 85,000. We will be building the program throughout the year
    so that arrivals will be peaking toward the end of the fiscal
    year, not at the beginning. We will have an opportunity to
    review how we do this to make it more efficient and as
    effective or perhaps more effective than it is now.
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you, Senator.
        You make a very valid point. I do not see--and if we go to
    100,000, that is going to--the next year, as proposed, and
    Senator Kerry, Secretary Kerry, our former colleague, told us
    in consultation with the Judiciary Committee last week that it
    would be substantially increased over the 85,000, he thought.
    He frankly told us that.
        This is not the bottom numbers, and the problems we are
    facing from security is here now. This is not just scare
    tactics. I am reading a Minneapolis paper interviewing a coach
    with a lot of kids playing ball. The coach is Ahmed Ismail. He
    says quote, ``There are monsters out there'', end of quote. It
    goes on to say, ``More than 20 young men left this Somali
    immigrant community from 2007 to 2009 to join al-Shabaab,
    Arabic for `The Youth,' an al-Qaeda affiliate operating in the
    war-torn land their parents fled. In the past year,
    disappearances began again, this time to the Islamic State
    terrorists fighting in Iraq and Syria.''
        I am just saying we need to be--we know this is serious.
    Mr. Emrich and Ms. Strack, you do not have the ability to do
    efficient checks on these, as we will talk about later.
        Senator Perdue, thank you for being with us, and thank you
    for giving me this moment to make that point.
        Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will be
    brief. I really appreciate you calling this hearing. I know
    that Congress has a responsibility, and the President does as
    well, that we review this every year. Yet, I was chagrined to
    learn that we have not done it since 1979, so thank you for
    doing this. I thank the witnesses for being here today.
        I just have a couple quick questions. Mr. Emrich, we have a
    perfect case study here in Iraq where there were systemic
    problems in the screening of Iraqi refugee applicants here. At
    a recent hearing, the FBI Assistant Director Michael Steinbach
    told House Homeland Security, and I am quoting this, the
    administration has quote, ``learned its lesson,'' unquote,
    since the problems it had with the Iraqi refugee admissions
    effort. Can you tell us what specific measures in your agency
    have been taken to remedy the problems? What do we learn from
    that exercise that we can apply here?
        Mr. Emrich. Absolutely. Let me just briefly describe the
    nature of the checks we do now and how they have changed. The
    checks are multilayered. They involve both biographic
    information and not just one data element but multiple
    biographic data elements and fingerprints, so biometric data.
        The checks are done not just at one time. They are done
    over a period of time, and in some cases continuously
    throughout the process.
        They touch against a broad range of U.S. Government
    holdings, so our biometric check, our fingerprint check checks
    against FBI fingerprint holdings. It checks against DOD
    fingerprint holdings, which include fingerprints that have been
    obtained overseas. It also checks against the DHS fingerprint
    system, which contains records of any time someone has passed
    through a U.S. border, their fingerprints are captured, and
    they go into the DHS system.
        Senator Perdue. Can I interrupt you? I am sorry to do this
    because I want to hear the rest of this. In Iraq, we also had
    background checks and actually talked to people on the ground
    in Iraq when we had a lot of troops on the ground and a lot of
    people in Iraq. We do not have that in Syria. Is that not going
    to create a tremendous shortfall in data in addition to the
    technical checks you are talking about?
        Mr. Emrich. We have added a specific interagency check
    since the time that we were in Iraq, and we can brief you on
    that in detail in another setting. Another additional thing
    that we have done for this population is the enhanced review
    that I described. The individual comes in contact first--the
    refugee applicant comes in contact with UNHCR. He provides a
    story, and at that time all of his family members and the
    applicant--I am saying ``he.'' It could be a ``she.'' The
    principal applicant is registered as do the family members.
    Then that interview--that individual is interviewed again at
    the RSC. By the time our folks are reviewing the application,
    they have already been talked to twice. They have had a very
    good incentive to provide accurate information to the UNHCR
    because that is how--at that registration, that is how they get
    food rations and housing for the most part.
        I do not want to discount the importance of the interview
    here because this is the face-to-face encounter where the
    refugee officers have been specially trained in the country and
    country conditions. They know what questions to ask an
    individual who is leaving Syria. They know what questions to
    ask about military service, what questions to ask about
    possible bars. If there are national security concerns there,
    we look at the consistency of all those encounters, and that
    gives us an opportunity to ask additional questions. We have
    individuals with a lot of expertise who can inform questions
    there.
        Senator Perdue. Okay. Thank you. I need to go on to this
    last question. If there is any other major point you want to
    make on that? Okay. Thank you.
        Mr. Bartlett, I apologize. I am about out of time, but I
    just want to get back to one thing, and that is, the definition
    of a refugee. If someone leaves Syria--and, look, we know there
    is a major humanitarian crisis there. We know that. We have
    been talking in the Senate about the causes of that. What I
    would like to do now is if someone leaves Syria and they go to
    Turkey and they live there a year and all of a sudden they do
    not like where they are in Turkey and they apply to the U.S.,
    are they by definition considered a refugee, a Syrian refugee,
    for U.S. consideration in our process?
        Mr. Bartlett. I think I have to defer to DHS, because they
    make the final determination.
        Ms. Strack. The definition of a refugee is contained in the
    Refugee Convention----
        Senator Perdue. I understand.
        Ms. Strack [continuing]. And U.S. law very closely tracks
    that. Basically looking at whether a person has a separate past
    persecution or has a well-founded fear of prosecution on
    account of one of the protected grounds, which is race,
    religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a
    particular social group. However, there is a bar under U.S. law
    to resettlement if an individual has been firmly resettled in
    another country. There is quite a bit of law around what it
    means to be firmly resettled. If you are living in precarious
    circumstances, if you are not able to work, if your children
    cannot go to school, you know, if you are in a tenuous
    circumstance, that does not amount to firm resettlement even if
    you have been in a country for a long period of time. It is a
    fact-specific circumstance. A short way of thinking about it is
    if you have the set of sort of rights that were similar to what
    a green card holder would have in the United States, that you
    can live and work indefinitely, that starts looking like firm
    resettlement. We would investigate that on an individual basis
    and look at what the laws are in the country of first asylum.
        Senator Perdue. One last quick question, and I apologize,
    Mr. Chairman. Of all the refugee applications, how many are
    accepted versus rejected would you say in a given year, a
    percentage?
        Ms. Strack. Worldwide, our average approval rate is about
    80 percent. Right now it is higher than that for Syrian
    applicants, but it is likely to come down. Right now it is
    running a little over 90 percent for Syrian applicants. That
    percentage is based on all the cases that have been decided yes
    and no. What it leaves out is cases that are still under review
    or still on hold. We think a number of those hold cases, when
    they are finally decided, are going to turn into denials. When
    we have a little more experience with the caseload, we expect
    that the rate will come down somewhat.
        Senator Perdue. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you. This is very important. I
    read in my opening statement what the Europeans were finding,
    where you had the nice-dressed Iranian speaking Farsi saying he
    is from Iraq, Indians who do not speak Arabic but say they are
    from Damascus, Pakistanis, Albanians, Egyptians, Kosovars,
    Somalis, Tunisians who apparently are trying to get in as
    Syrian refugees. We are now approving 90 percent of those who
    apply.
        Here in the Washington Post article also, it goes on to
    say--it had one story, there are ``shady characters'' in the
    group, too, ``admitted criminals, Islamic State sympathizers
    and a couple of guys from Fallujah''--Iraq--``one with a fresh
    bullet wound, who when asked his occupation seemed confused.''
    `` `Army,' said one. His friend corrected him. `We are all
    drivers.' ''
        ``The refugees report that a forged Syrian passport can be
    bought on the Turkish border for as little as $200. A reporter
    from the Daily Mail bought a Syrian passport, ID card, and
    driver's license for $2,000 in Turkey under the name of a real
    man who was killed in the conflict.''
        You face, Ms. Strack, a difficult problem. Mr. Polinkus,
    the former head of the Association of CIS Officers, has told us
    that the agency has become a rubber stamp, that there is no way
    they have the ability to do what is asked of them.
        Mr. Emrich, I know you say you have not changed any of your
    procedures, but the procedures just are not going to do the
    job, and let us talk about that, honestly about it. The
    Director of National Intelligence, Mr. Clapper, recently
    stated, `` `We do not put it past the likes of ISIL to
    infiltrate operatives among these refugees.' He further stated,
    `It is a huge concern of ours.' "
        Do you think that he is correct, Ms. Strack. Do you
    disagree with that?
        Ms. Strack. I guess I would like to talk to you about what
    our process is. I guess----
        Chairman Sessions. No, I am just asking, are you concerned?
    He said, ``We do not put it past . . . ISIL to infiltrate
    operatives in those refugees. . . . It is a huge concern for
    us.''
        You and Mr. Emrich are supposed to be evaluating these
    people. Is it a concern for you? Do you think that is a danger?
        Ms. Strack. Yes, sir, that is a concern for us, and I think
    that is what informs--that is the background that is the
    relationship we have with the Intel Community, so they share
    information with us about what they see as risks, and what we
    have been describing to you is the methods and the procedures
    that we have to try to mitigate those risks.
        Could I just speak briefly to the document issue?
        Chairman Sessions. Okay.
        Ms. Strack. I know Larry wanted to discuss this as well. We
    think there is a difference between--we are not working in
    Europe. We are not resettling refugee applications out of
    Europe. We are working primarily in Jordan and Turkey. I think
    the incentives for other nationalities, for non-Syrians, is
    different in those countries of first asylum, as a first piece.
        The second piece is I did want to say we do not rely on any
    single document. In general, worldwide we see quite a
    difference between refugee populations, some of which are very
    highly documented, and some of which, because of the nature of
    their refugee experience, do not have a lot of documents.
        We think documents are informative. We look at them. No
    single document is taken as a gold ticket for refugee approval.
        Chairman Sessions. I am sure that is true. We also are told
    there are--European officials stated not long ago that a
    million are in North Africa waiting to cross the Mediterranean.
    There are a lot of people that would like to become a refugee
    to the United States or Europe, and you have to sort through
    them. What if they do not have any documents? A lot of people
    do not have any documents. What do you refer to then?
        Ms. Strack. In general, again, as I mentioned, we have
    found with Syrian refugees--and I would say the same thing is
    true with Iraqi refugees. In general, they have many, many
    documents. What we do is it is the process that I think Mr.
    Emrich described, and it is also our training. We involve the
    law enforcement community, the Intelligence Community. We
    invite them in to train our refugee officers and to talk to
    them about country conditions information. If someone does not
    have documents, for example, they might tell us, ``My documents
    were destroyed when a barrel bomb fell on my house.'' We will
    ask when and where that happened, and then we can check with
    Intelligence Community or often even open-source information to
    find out if that is realistic. Was that happening at that place
    at that time?
        We have a multifaceted approach to this. We have actually
    reduced the number of interviews we ask our officers to do of
    Syrian cases because we recognize that they are so complex and
    we want the officers to be able to explore all of that
    information, often informed by the up-front individualized
    research that Mr. Emrich has described. If there are issues, we
    can come back----
        Chairman Sessions. I am not doubting your dedication to try
    to do right with the ability that you have. On February 11th,
    before the House Committee on Homeland Security, FBI Assistant
    Director Michael Steinbach expressed significant concerns with
    screening Syrian refugees. I do not see how this can be denied.
    I do not see how you can gloss over this. He says quote, ``The
    concern is Syria is that we do not have systems in places on
    the ground to collect information to vet.'' That would be the
    concern, is we would be vetting data bases that do not hold
    information on those individuals, and that is a concern.
        He went on to say, ``You are talking about a country that
    is a failed state, that is, does not have any infrastructure,
    so to speak.'' All of the data sets, the police, the intel
    services, that normally you would go to to seek information do
    not exist.
        Mr. Emrich, you query these systems. Is that your
    responsibility? Just yes or no. Do you supervise making the
    inquiries?
        Mr. Emrich. I do.
        Chairman Sessions. If there is no data base to query, then
    how can you have valid information?
        Mr. Emrich. There is data that we check against, and we
    would be happy to describe this to you in a different setting.
        Chairman Sessions. You just tell us under oath. You are a
    public official. Do you think there is adequate data, when you
    query these data bases, are you likely to have any valuable
    information from them?
        Mr. Emrich. I will tell you that we often find valuable
    information and that we check every single thing that is
    available to us.
        Chairman Sessions. I am sure you check everything that is
    available. Mr. Steinbach I think is making the plain fact that
    there are no real data bases in Syria to check. Isn't that
    right?
        Mr. Emrich. We check--we check everything that we are aware
    of within U.S. Government holdings. We are either inquiring
    about looking into or we currently check. As far as I am
    concerned, if we have not overturned every stone, we are in the
    process of overturning every stone.
        Chairman Sessions. There you go again. We are turning over
    everything that we can overturn. I do not deny that. American
    police officers check the National Crime Information Center on
    everybody they arrest. They do not have a National Crime
    Information Center. You do not have access to their criminal
    history records. Those are in, I guess, Assad's control. They
    do not have a computer data base that you can access. Isn't Mr.
    Steinbach telling the truth? Do you disagree with what I read
    from him that the things that you would normally check just do
    not exist?
        Mr. Emrich. I would point out that in many countries of the
    world from which we have traditionally accepted refugees over
    the years, the U.S. Government did not have extensive data
    holdings.
        Chairman Sessions. All right. Mr. Franken, I am sorry to
    run over. Thank you. Not too badly.
        Senator Franken. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Anytime.
        Ms. Strack, in prior years we have admitted far more
    refugees than we currently do. In 1980, we admitted about
    200,000 refugees. In the early 1990's, we admitted over 100,000
    per year. Last year, in the midst of a humanitarian crisis, we
    admitted fewer than 70,000.
        It seems to me that the numbers we are bringing in today
    are pretty modest by comparison. It also seems to me that our
    past experience has demonstrated that we can resettle refugees
    in a manner that is consistent with our national security.
        Ms. Strack, what do you draw from our past experiences in
    admitting refugees? Can you describe the measures in place that
    ensure that those admitted to the United States will contribute
    positively to our society?
        Ms. Strack. Senator, I think there may be several of us on
    the panel who would like to speak to your question. I think it
    is important to remember in the immediate aftermath of the
    September 11 attacks, there was a pause in refugee
    resettlement, and it was a desire to make sure that the best
    screening available was in place in the wake of that situation.
    For 2 years, the United States Refugee Resettlement Program had
    very, very low numbers, that I would say those of us who work
    in this field for a living consider disappointingly low
    numbers, but it was necessary at the time to make sure that
    those appropriate safeguards were in place.
        I think having those safeguards in place, we have worked
    very diligently on an interagency basis, and, again, with
    strong relationships with law enforcement, national security,
    and intelligence community so that we are able to have the
    program grow in a way that we think is responsible, it has
    integrity, and it is consistent with our national security
    obligations.
        Senator Franken. Anyone else care to jump in on that?
        Mr. Bartlett. Sir, I would just say that, in addition to 9/
    11, I think with the Iraq response and our resettlement
    response to Iraqis and any obligation I think that we owe to
    many of those--well, to all those Iraqis who worked for us, we
    also layered on a new check, and that was a moment in time when
    a new check was developed with two different security agencies,
    and that also impacted our arrivals. Again, we did that out of
    a sense of responsibility to the people that--not only the
    people that we are bringing here but the people that we are
    bringing them to, you know, our communities.
        I think you are correct that we have had larger programs in
    the past. In response, I think the infrastructure we work with
    now is a little more complicated. We are--the intention is to
    not only grow this 85,000 program to 100,000, perhaps in years
    beyond, we will see; but to do it in a way that is responsible
    to our communities.
        Senator Franken. Before I run out of time, I want to ask
    this question, which I think speaks to the whole hearing, the
    whole subject in a different way. I am not sure if anyone has
    asked this. I am sorry. I went down to the floor and gave a
    speech on something else.
        I think it bears repeating that approximately 4 million
    people have fled violence in Syria, and that is roughly 17
    percent of the country's total population, and, of course,
    those that are internally displaced. Families, many of them
    with children, are braving these treacherous journeys in order
    to escape persecution. Senator Durbin brought up Aylan Kurdi
    and that picture that I do not think anyone who has seen it
    will ever forget. And like Senator Durbin, I have a grandson
    who that image reminds me very much of.
        I think--also Senator Durbin--do you mind if I go a few
    seconds over?
        Chairman Sessions. No.
        Senator Blumenthal. I do.
        Senator Franken. You do?
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Franken. Okay. I will do this as fast as I can.
        Senator Blumenthal. I am just kidding.
        Senator Franken. Okay. I never know when you are kidding.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Blumenthal. I just want to know why he got the
    louder laugh.
        Senator Franken. Timing.
        [Laughter.]
        This is such a sober subject. Many of our partners in the
    EU are formulating a plan--are going to redistribute some
    120,000 migrants among member states. Germany has stepped up.
    The U.S., on the other hand, thus far has accepted only 1,500
    Syrian refugees, although the administration plans to expand
    the number to 10,000. I have joined colleagues--Senator Durbin
    mentioned the letter that he and Senator Klobuchar led. I was
    on that letter saying--this is quite a while ago--urging the
    administration to resettle 65,000 by the end of 2016.
        This is what I want to ask, because I think these numbers
    are important in the context of the debate about national
    security. Director Bartlett, do you think that strong
    leadership from the United States on this issue would boost our
    standing in the region? Should we not be concerned that a tepid
    response here lends credence to the kind of narrative that our
    enemies spin about the United States in their efforts to sow
    discord?
        Mr. Bartlett. Sir, I would submit that our leadership has
    been strong in the region. We stepped up early on, not just for
    the Syrian crisis but also the Iraqi crisis. You know, our
    footprint originally in the region was emergency response, and
    people have asked us before, you know, why we have been slow to
    resettle. We are not the only ones who have been slow to
    resettle affirmatively. UNHCR, in fact, only started a
    resettlement program about 2 years ago for Syrians because the
    hope for the Syrian people, and I think the hope of the
    international community, is that people can go home. That is
    really what any refugee wants, is they want the ability to go
    home, and that is to Syria.
        It is really only about 2 years ago that UNHCR as an
    institution said it has been too long, the countries that are
    hosting these refugees are bearing too much of a
    responsibility, and we need to help. UNHCR was very aggressive
    in setting a pretty high benchmark for all of us. We joined
    early on. We did not announce a number. We did not announce a
    goal. We basically said we are open for referrals. At the
    moment we have 19,000, and we are going to continue to accept
    those. Although we have a 10,000-entrant goal for this next
    year, we are not limited by that goal, and we will continue to
    accept referrals from UNHCR as this tragedy continues.
        Senator Franken. Thank you. I would just submit--and I am
    way over. I would submit that that is something to be thinking
    about. Thank you.
        Ms. Strack. Senator, if I may just add very briefly,
    Senator Durbin mentioned in his opening remarks that we do have
    a long process in the U.S. program in order for someone to come
    into the system, our average processing times. I do not think
    any of us are satisfied with those average processing times,
    and I can tell you that I have very strong direction from my
    Deputy Secretary to look hard at the places where we can effect
    efficiencies without cutting corners in any way in order to see
    that we can be more efficient so that when those referrals do
    come to us, we are able to process them effectively and
    efficiently as much as we possibly can.
        Chairman Sessions. Senator Franken, I would just note that
    in 2013 the United States issued 117,000 green cards--that is
    permanent residency in the United States, a pathway to
    citizenship--to migrants from Muslim countries, including
    70,000 to migrants from just Middle Eastern countries, admitted
    40,000 designated refugees and asylum seekers--refugees and
    asylum seeker, which are essentially the same, from all Muslim
    nations. I think we have been generous.
        Senator Franken. I am sorry, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Sessions. I just wanted to make that point. I
    understand. Senator Blumenthal.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to
    thank Senator Franken for his excellent questions and his
    comments. He is absolutely right that this issue deserves the
    most sober of treatment.
        I beg to differ, Mr. Bartlett. We may have stepped up more
    recently, but we have done far less than we should have in the
    region. Having visited some of those camps, al-Zaatari, for
    example, I think the United States could and should have done
    more and now can and should do more. Not just because it
    improves our standing in the region, but it improves our sense
    of self-worth as a Nation. We are a Nation of immigrants, and
    many of those immigrants are refugees, like my father who came
    to this country in 1935 to escape persecution in Germany at the
    age of 17, speaking virtually no English, having not much more
    than the shirt on his back, and knowing almost no one. This
    country gave him a chance to succeed, just as we will countless
    other refugees in the future, as we have done in the past with
    refugees of many, many other countries. The need for this
    program is as serious and urgent as ever because there is no
    shortage in the world of inhumane dictators, territorial
    conflicts, environmental crises that contribute to the largest
    refugee crisis since World War II. That is what we are facing
    right now.
        My view is that we need to improve and speed the screening
    techniques because the American people need to be satisfied, as
    has been expressed here, about the efficacy and accuracy of
    those screening techniques.
        I have proposed a number of reforms, three in particular,
    for example, expanding the P3 program, which gives resettlement
    applicants with U.S. families the ability to skip the referrals
    from the UNHCR and apply directly to the Resettlement Support
    Center; second, improving the timing and security of medical
    and security screenings to ensure that applicants or their
    entire families do not have their checks expire, forcing them
    to redo many of those screenings, when individual parts of the
    test expire while they are waiting for other parts to be
    completed; and, third, keeping families updated about their
    status. Frequently a large family's resettlement will be
    delayed because a single family member is waiting to be
    approved.
        Those are kind of commonsense, straightforward methods of
    reforming the screening process so that it takes weeks, not
    years, to reach conclusion, and I think they are doable. They
    may require more resources. That is where the U.S. Congress
    should be involved, and I will be sending a letter within a few
    days detailing those proposals.
        The large audience here I think is testimony to the
    importance of this subject, again, not just because of our
    standing or image in the world but our self-image, our self-
    worth, our view of ourselves as a Nation. My feeling is that
    the American people still believe that we are the Nation of the
    Statue of Liberty, that we have arms open to people who want to
    come here for opportunity and freedom and to escape persecution
    and harm abroad.
        Mr. Chairman, if there is no objection, I would like to
    enter into the record some of the evidence of that widespread
    interest and support: a letter from former Republican and
    Democratic officials, including Ambassadors Ryan Crocker and
    Robert Ford, and former Bush administration official Robert
    Wolfowitz, calling for the United States to accept 100,000
    Syrian refugees; a letter from 18 mayors, including Chicago
    Mayor Rahm Emanuel, asking the Obama administration to resettle
    Syrian refugees in their cities because, I am quoting,
    ``refugees make our communities stronger economically,
    socially, and culturally,'' end of quote; and a letter signed
    by 400 faith leaders expressing strong opposition to any effort
    to limit the resettlement of Muslim refugees.
        Chairman Sessions. Without objection.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
        [The information appears as a submission for the record.]
        Senator Blumenthal. If I may just ask a question, although
    I am, with your permission, going beyond my time. Mr. Bartlett,
    and anyone else who wants to answer, if the P3 program were
    expanded to settlement applicants with American family members,
    would that have any negative impact on our national security?
    Would you be willing to consider such an expansion?
        Ms. Strack. Senator, I think that is something we would
    certainly take under advisement and discuss amongst ourselves.
    There have historically been some problems with the Priority 3
    program in terms of false claims of family relationships. You
    may be aware we suspended the program for a period of time
    until we were able to reintroduce some integrity features. I
    think with the proposed expansion of the eligibility categories
    in the United States, we would want to think about it very
    carefully through that lens and based on that experience to
    make sure that in expanding it that we had the appropriate
    safeguards at the same time.
        If I may mention, of your three points that you addressed
    earlier, I think on the second piece about improving the timing
    of security checks and addressing the issue of having them
    expire, that has traditionally been a challenge for all of us.
    We do have some recent improvements I think we could share with
    you and brief your staff. We have introduced some automation
    just this past summer, with the agencies that do the vetting,
    and we believe that is going to address significantly--through
    the institution of recurrent vetting is going to help us
    ameliorate that problem of security checks expiring and the
    challenges that that has presented to us. I think we will have
    some positive news for you on that score.
        Senator Blumenthal. Does anyone else want to address that
    question?
        [No response.]
        I am aware that some changes have been implemented. I would
    be interested not only in your plans but in evidence that, in
    fact, they are having an effect, because I think that the
    credibility of the entire Refugee Settlement Program hinges on
    effective screening, and one of the principal measures of
    effectiveness is timeliness. The delays can, in effect, be
    self-fulfilling expectations when those tests or screenings in
    effect expire, and they should expire after a period of time,
    but they need to be done more expeditiously.
        I thank the Chairman for his patience. I have a lot more
    questions which I will submit for the record.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
        Chairman Sessions. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
        I thank you, panel, I would just kind of like to walk
    through some of the details of how you do your work, because I
    believe that as presently constructed, we are not able to do
    what you are suggesting today we are able to do, and the costs
    are much greater, Mr. Carey, than you suggested in your
    statement. We have got billions of dollars in costs that are
    going to occur as a result of all the programs that refugees
    are entitled to receive. While we had 18 Democratic mayors
    asking President Obama to send more Syrian refugees to their
    cities, homelessness in the United States has doubled since the
    last recession. We have a financial crisis, too. Every new
    dollar spent on these refugees will essentially be borrowed
    because it is new expenditure and we do not have new revenue to
    pay for it.
        New York City Mayor de Blasio called for more refugees, but
    had originally said this is a European problem. I do not think
    the Europeans helped us with the Central American problem. We
    have got countries like Brazil and Argentina that are not
    taking any refugees. New York City Hall announced it would
    spend $1 billion more over the next 4 years focusing on
    homelessness in New York.
        I would say somebody needs to be talking about the American
    people, what we want to do. We want to help. We are helping. We
    are doing more financially than any other country in the world
    to help deal with this crisis. I do not accept the idea that we
    are not doing our fair share. Europe should be picking up the
    largest share of the problem, frankly, and I do not see it
    there. A good policy is that people should be helped to stay as
    close to home as possible, and our overriding policy goal
    should be to create stability in Syria and Libya and Yemen and
    Iraq so people can go home. We have allowed that to get away
    from us. We can criticize our policymakers for allowing this
    dangerous humanitarian disaster to occur. I just would say I
    think we have to ask those questions about who we are going to
    serve and whose interest we are trying to serve.
        Mr. Emrich, can you name a single computer data base
    outside of maybe some very, very small but significantly
    valuable intelligence data bases for Syria that you run a check
    against? Does Syria have any that you can access?
        Mr. Emrich. The Government of Syria does not, no, sir.
        Chairman Sessions. All right. Fundamentally, they are the
    ones that keep records. We keep them in the United States on
    people who are arrested and so forth. They--you do not have
    access to any if they exist in Syria?
        Mr. Emrich. As Ms. Strack mentioned, in most cases these
    individuals do have documents from Syria. We do have various
    ways of identifying those documents. As she described, our
    officers are trained in fraud detection. I would be happy to--
    we would be happy to brief you in another setting on some of
    the ways that we have to do this.
        Chairman Sessions. In a public setting--I am asking you to
    be--talk to the American people. The American people are asking
    you a question. I read what the FBI Director said. He said
    there is no data base to check. He suggests there is no way
    that they can get sufficient information on--implies a
    substantial majority of these persons. Aren't you left to
    basically look at whatever document they produce and conducting
    an interview?
        Mr. Emrich. I can assure the American people that we have a
    robust series of screening measures here that encompass the
    wide range of U.S. Government resources, that involve U.S. law
    enforcement agencies and Intelligence Community members, that
    these processes and these screening measures are constantly
    reviewed, that we are continuously looking at ways to improve
    these, that they incorporate both biometric and biographic
    checks; they incorporate an in-depth interview with a trained
    U.S. Government officer; they involve an additional interview--
    or inspection, rather, when the person presents himself or
    herself at the U.S. port of entry.
        Ms. Strack. Senator, if I may, we have not----
        Chairman Sessions. Wait a minute--I am just going to say
    this: I have been in law enforcement 15 years. I know how the
    National Crime Information Center works. I know how you run
    background checks, Mr. Emrich. There is no way you can do
    background checks of any significance. I am sure we have some
    intelligence data on a number of people throughout the region,
    and if you get a hit on that, I am sure you would reject them.
    You have only a minuscule number of people that have been
    identified, I am sure, in that fashion. I do not believe you
    can tell us with any certainty that you have an ability to
    conduct an efficient background check.
        Let us say you have no information. Let us say there is a
    question. Do you have any ability to send an investigator to
    Iraq to check and see if the person actually lived on this
    street, actually had the job he claims to have had?
        Ms. Strack. Sir, if I may----
        Chairman Sessions. I was talking to Mr. Emrich.
        Ms. Strack. Okay.
        Mr. Emrich. While we do not have the ability to send an
    investigator to Syria, we do have resources that we can use to
    verify various elements of someone's testimony and story.
        Chairman Sessions. I am sure there are things you could do.
    Are you telling us you can do that for a majority of the people
    that you interview? You have the ability for a majority of the
    people you interview to have independent data of value to help
    identify them?
        Mr. Emrich. We in many cases, are able to find independent
    data.
        Chairman Sessions. Many cases. I asked a majority.
        Mr. Emrich. I cannot quantify. I have seen----
        Chairman Sessions. Twenty percent or 80 percent you get
    positive data from? Can you tell us? Is it less than 20 or more
    than 80?
        Mr. Emrich. I cannot give you a number.
        Chairman Sessions. The reason is you do not have the
    ability. I wish you did, but you do not. Ms. Strack.
        Ms. Strack. Mr. Emrich covered the point I was going to
    cover, sir.
        Mr. Bartlett. Mr. Chair, if I could just--sorry, not on
    security screening, but I want to go back to a point you made
    about humanitarian response.
        Chairman Sessions. Right.
        Mr. Bartlett. The U.S. responsibilities versus those of
    other countries in the world. I know you mentioned Brazil is
    not taking refugees. I wanted to set the record straight that
    Brazil, in fact, has stepped up quite large in terms of the
    Syria crisis. They have done a humanitarian visa program and
    have allowed thousands of Syrians to come to Brazil. They are
    not coming technically as refugees, but they are coming from
    the immediate region of the Middle East. There are about 30
    countries that are involved in refugee resettlement of Syrians,
    and so, you know, you are right, right now Europe is taking the
    bulk because people are moving across land borders. There are
    countries like New Zealand, Australia, and Canada that are also
    playing a significant role.
        Thank you.
        Chairman Sessions. According to the information I have, the
    United States has 6 times more migrants than all the Latin
    American countries combined. Do you dispute that?
        Mr. Bartlett. I am only talking about refugees at this
    point, sir.
        Chairman Sessions. I have also seen numbers that indicate
    that perhaps they have agreed in recent--how long ago was that
    that they have agreed to step up their----
        Mr. Bartlett. It has been within the last year. It might be
    6 to 8 months. They have done quite a large job.
        Chairman Sessions. All right. We have been doing it for a
    long time. We have been very generous and I think the world
    leader in doing this. We are proud of that, and we want to be a
    great country for handling refugees. I just believe that we
    need to understand the reality, how much it is going to cost
    and the danger of admitting those who could be a threat to the
    United States.
        Ms. Strack, there was a number of examples of people who
    have involved themselves in terrorism since they have been in
    the United States. Sometimes when they come, they may not be
    radicalized, but somehow, some way, become radicalized. There
    is no way you could identify that, I do not suppose. Is there?
        Ms. Strack. No, sir, we cannot predict the future.
        Chairman Sessions. We know the Boston bombers came as
    refugees.
        Ms. Strack. They did not, sir.
        Chairman Sessions. They did not? How did they come?
        Ms. Strack. I would have to check with some of my
    colleagues, but they were not refugees.
        Chairman Sessions. Were their parents refugees?
        Ms. Strack. I will need to check with some of my other
    USCIS colleagues.
        Chairman Sessions. We had a Bosnian refugee along with wife
    and relatives charged with donating money, supplies, and
    smuggled arms to terrorist organizations in Syria and Iraq. I
    do not think that is in dispute. Ramiz Hodzic and his wife were
    among six Bosnians living in Minnesota, Illinois, and New York
    who were charged last week conspiring to provide material
    support to groups that we consider terrorist organizations.
        An Uzbek refugee living in Idaho was arrested and charged
    with providing support to terrorist organizations in the form
    of teaching terror recruits how to build a bomb.
        Somali Americans in Minnesota were charged--seven were
    charged with trying to join ISIS.
        It is not an easy job. There is always risk. We want to be
    sure you are fully equipped and able to do the best job we can,
    and I think we should be careful as we go forward and always
    try to protect the national safety, as you indicate.
        Do you know, can any of you tell me how many people who
    have been given refugee status since 2001 have been identified
    as affiliated with terrorism in any manner?
        [No response.]
        Chairman Sessions. We have got a lot of public records on
    them. I certainly do not have the full number, that is for
    sure.
        USCIS is generally fee-funded. Of course, there are a lot
    of things you could spend those fees on, and if you use fees to
    expand dramatically the number of refugees from Syria or other
    places in the Middle East, that does tend to drain the money,
    does it not, Ms. Strack, that you would otherwise have for
    other needs of your agency?
        Ms. Strack. Yes, sir. In order to reprioritize fee funding
    to the refugee program in FY 2016, that will come out of other
    USCIS priorities.
        Chairman Sessions. To follow up on, I guess, Mr. Tillis' or
    Mr. Perdue's question, Mr. Bartlett, if we go to 100,000, are
    you aware of how many of those over the 75,000 this year--that
    is 25,000 more--how many of those would be coming from Syria
    and/or the region?
        Mr. Bartlett. We do not have a projection what it would
    look like when we bring 100,000 in. What I can tell you is that
    we traditionally respond to the humanitarian crisis of the
    time. In the last 5 years, we have resettled a number of
    Burmese, Bhutanese, Somalis, Iraqis--some of those who worked
    for us--now increasingly Syrians, and Congolese. We have had a
    very big program build on the Congolese coming out of the
    Democratic Republic of the Congo who have been in basically
    asylum, kind of temporary asylum conditions for many, many
    years. We will again, those will be the populations. They will
    shift according to, you know, if peace, for example, exists or
    if conditions exist to be able to return home, then those
    populations decline. One would predict that probably Syria and
    Iraq would continue to be large.
        Chairman Sessions. Secretary Kerry indicated that when he
    gave us some sort of consultation. He told us--he floated the
    figure 75,000 for next year, then 85,000 we heard. He told us,
    he warned us it might be substantially more. 100,000 would
    certainly be a lot, well within what he suggested he may
    recommend. We do not get fees from those, do we, Ms. Strack? I
    mean, it is a normal immigrant that has to pay fees that help
    subsidize these kind of procedures.
        Ms. Strack. That is correct, sir. There is no fee to apply
    for refugee status.
        Chairman Sessions. The Washington Post said that Azar Zareb
    and his wife arrived in 2002 as refugees. Their sons and
    daughters followed a short time later--from Chechnya, of
    course. It indicates at least the parents, if not the sons,
    came as refugees, would it not?
        Ms. Strack. I would need to check with my colleagues, sir.
        Chairman Sessions. What about the parole program? Is that
    under the Homeland Security section?
        Ms. Strack. It actually is a shared responsibility with the
    dissolution of the former Immigration and Nationality Service
    into the immigration operational divisions at Department of
    Homeland Security. CBP, Customs and Border Protection, as well
    as USCIS have parole authority.
        Chairman Sessions. It was indicated in a staff briefing
    that DHS is looking at a categorical case-by-case program for
    parole, which is a program that has, I think, some
    difficulties. I am not sure it is the kind of thing that ought
    to be done with regard to Syria, but apparently it is being
    considered. Is it still being considered, to your knowledge,
    using the parole program to deal with the Syrian problem?
        Ms. Strack. Sir, the USCIS received a letter that had been
    signed by 70 Members of Congress asking the administration to
    consider what we have called a ``Syrian family reunification
    parole program.'' At the time there was a model based on a
    Cuban family reunification program. Under the design of the
    Cuban program, family members in the United States were
    eligible to apply for green cards for their family members. It
    is the Form I-130. They are eligible for that application and
    had been approved beneficiaries, but their family members were
    not able to actually take advantage of that and come to the
    United States because of the numerical limits on family based
    immigration every year. The program in Cuba was to take those
    people who are, in fact, eligible for green cards and let them
    come to the United States and wait in the United States in lieu
    of waiting in Cuba. The letter that we received recommended
    that the administration consider a similar sort of program, so
    this would be a relative in the United States who would
    petition on behalf of a close relative, and if that beneficiary
    was a Syrian, the recommendation was that we consider granting
    parole to that Syrian beneficiary.
        At the time, the administration made a decision not to do
    that program at that point in time. As the conditions have
    continued to deteriorate and as we have had requests from other
    stakeholders to take another look at that, my leadership has
    agreed that they would take another look at that program. It
    does not mean that the decision will change, but they have
    agreed to consider it.
        Chairman Sessions. You got a request, and I am sure you
    should consider it. I think that is a problematic way to do
    business. We are increasing the numbers of refugees for Syria,
    and I think that is the appropriate way to openly and directly
    deal with that. The parole system was never designed to be used
    in this fashion, as I understand the law.
        With regard to resettlement, I guess, Mr. Carey, does that
    fall within your area?
        Mr. Carey. Yes, it does.
        Chairman Sessions. In general, I believe you had some sort
    of consultation with communities about a desire to resettle a
    number of people in their community. What is your policy on
    that? Can you assure us that any community that would receive a
    direct flow of refugees would be consulted before this happens?
        Mr. Carey. I believe I will defer to my colleagues at the
    Department of State on that who handled the admissions and
    placement portion of the program.
        Mr. Bartlett. Sir, I can--the State Department has the
    responsibility first for the placement of the refugees in U.S.
    communities, and HHS' responsibilities then are longer term in
    terms of support and integration, adjustment. We have--again,
    we do consult very closely at the community level. We put the
    responsibility on the partner in that community, so the
    affiliates I talked about before, 320 or so. We ask them--in
    fact, we require them to do consultations each quarter of the
    year.
        Chairman Sessions. Consultations with the Mayor or the
    Governor?
        Mr. Bartlett. Consultations included elected officials, so
    it could be city council as well as mayor. It includes other
    people who are providing services, so schools, health clinics,
    other medical service providers, law enforcement, as well as
    volunteer groups that are supporting refugees. We want to talk
    with the broad community, not just the people who are involved
    exactly in the resettlement program, but also people who are
    affected by it. So, that consultation takes place quarterly.
    That consultation includes a representative from the State
    government, so somebody who is working either attached to the
    Governor's office or who has communication with the Governor's
    office, and then those consultations are fed back through the
    national headquarters and then to the State Department.
        What I can assure you is--and, in fact, I was just in Twin
    Falls, Idaho, 2 weeks ago--that we want to listen to every
    voice in the community. Not everybody is a supporter of
    refugees. Not everybody is a supporter of Syrian resettlement.
    We want to take all of those voices into account and see how we
    can respond. What I can tell you is that overwhelmingly we find
    that the majority of citizens appreciate the program and
    support it. We want to find a way to make that work for
    everybody.
        Chairman Sessions. Very good. We are talking about a very
    major undertaking. A Heritage Foundation study has reported
    that 10,000 refugees over a lifetime will cost the United
    States Treasury $4 billion--excuse me, $6.5 billion for 10,000,
    because most of the people are going to struggle at lower
    incomes. There is a cost on that. Then you say you go to
    30,000, 70,000, 100,000, that is a substantial cost. Each year
    if you did another 100,000, over 30 years you have increased a
    very large number of people statistically speaking will be
    drawing more benefits than they pay in. It puts stress on
    Medicare, it puts stress on the food stamp program, it puts
    stress on Social Security and Medicare, because most will pay
    into the program presumably if they work, but like most people
    they will pay in less than they take out, and that is why those
    programs are on such a crisis path today. It is a huge
    financial cost.
        Then we have the difficulty of being able to screen the
    applicants effectively, and I think if you need more help, Mr.
    Emrich or Ms. Strack, I hope you will ask for it. I am worried
    that it is almost impossible, even with more staff, to really
    get the information because we are not going to be able, as
    some people might think, to go out to the neighborhood and
    actually interview people to make sure this is the same person
    who lived on this street, that worked at this job, and was a
    good and decent person. We see that in Europe, how it is
    happening in huge numbers.
        I believe the American people are generous and kind and
    decent. They want to contribute to helping solve this refugee
    crisis. We are in a significant degree. We are entitled to have
    our officials protect our interest, the people's interest, and
    that is what I think we have tried to do today. I do not blame
    any of you for the difficult job you have, but I do think that
    we need to ask ourselves how so much instability occurred in
    the world. We need to ask ourselves how we can positively
    assure that stability is returned to as much of that area of
    the world as possible and to try to create a circumstance and
    financially help in a humanitarian way people that are really
    hurting. Many of them are, and we know that.
        Thank you for your service to your country. We appreciate
    that. The record will stay open for 1 week, and you are
    dismissed. Thank you very much.
        [Whereupon, at 4:05 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
        [Additional material submitted for the record follows.]

                                A P P E N D I X

    Submitted by Chair Durbin:

     American Baptist Churches USA, September 29, 2015................   192
     American Immigration Council.....................................   193
     American Immigration Lawyers Association.........................   201
     Asylum Access....................................................   205
     Barq, Mirna, statement...........................................   277
     Center for Victims of Torture....................................   210
     Christian Reformed Church........................................   214
     Church World Service (CWS).......................................   215
     Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach........................   216
     Disciples Home Missions (DHM)....................................   218
     Elizondo, Reverend Eusebio, testimony............................   292
     Ethiopian Community Development Council, Inc. (ECDC).............   219
     Evangelical Immigration Table....................................   220
     Franciscan Action Network........................................   221
     Friends Committee on National Legislation........................   222
     Heartland Alliance Ending Poverty................................   223
     HIAS.............................................................   227
     Human Rights First...............................................   229
     Interfaith Alliance, Statement of Rabbi Jack Moline..............   232
     Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights..................   234
     Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services........................   237
     National Imigrant Justice Center.................................   242
     Orsborn, Catherine, testimony....................................   264
     Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism........................   250
     Save the Children................................................   260
     Southeast Asia Resource Action Center............................   276
     Syrian American Medical Society..................................   279
     Urban Justice Center, International Refugee Assistance Project...   284
     U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants.......................   289
     We Belong Together...............................................   304
     World Relief.....................................................   306

    Submitted by Senator Sessions' Office:
     Simpson, James, testimony........................................   266

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]