[Senate Hearing 118-163]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-163
NOMINATIONS OF HARRY COKER, JR.,
JEFF REZMOVIC, AND SUZANNE E. SUMMERLIN
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
NOMINATIONS OF HARRY COKER, JR., TO BE NATIONAL CYBER
DIRECTOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
JEFF REZMOVIC TO BE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, AND SUZANNE E. SUMMERLIN
TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL, FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
__________
NOVEMBER 2, 2023
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
53-995 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan, Chairman
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada MITT ROMNEY, Utah
JON OSSOFF, Georgia RICK SCOTT, Florida
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
LAPHONZA BUTLER, California ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
David M. Weinberg, Staff Director
Christopher J. Mulkins, Director of Homeland Security
Claudine J. Brenner, Senior Counsel
William E. Henderson III, Minority Staff Director
Christina N. Salazar, Minority Chief Counsel
Andrew J. Hopkins, Minority Counsel
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
Ashley A. Gonzalez, Hearing Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Peters............................................... 1
Senator Carper............................................... 4
Senator Rosen................................................ 13
Senator Lankford............................................. 15
Senator Hassan............................................... 17
Senator Hawley............................................... 19
Senator Ossoff............................................... 22
Senator Blumenthal........................................... 23
Prepared statements:
Senator Peters............................................... 27
Senator Carper............................................... 29
WITNESSES
Thursday, November 2, 2023
Harry Coker, Jr., to be National Cyber Director, Executive Office
of the President
Testimony.................................................... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 30
Biographical and professional information.................... 32
Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics................. 47
Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 52
Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 75
Letter of support............................................ 82
Jeff Rezmovic, to be Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security
Testimony.................................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 87
Biographical and professional information.................... 89
Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics................. 105
Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 108
Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 124
Letters of support........................................... 132
Suzanne E. Summerlin, to be General Counsel, Federal Labor
Relations Authority
Testimony.................................................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 147
Biographical and professional information.................... 149
Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics................. 168
Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 171
Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 184
Letter of support............................................ 193
NOMINATIONS OF HARRY COKER, JR.,
JEFF REZMOVIC, AND
SUZANNE E. SUMMERLIN
----------
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2023
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in SD-
562, Senate Dirksen Building, Hon. Gary Peters, Chairman of the
Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Peters [presiding], Carper, Hassan,
Sinema, Rosen, Ossoff, Blumenthal, Butler, Lankford, Romney,
Scott, and Hawley.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PETERS\1\
Chairman Peters. The Committee will come to order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Senator Peters appears in the
Appendix on page 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today, we are considering three nominations: Harry Coker,
to serve as the National Cyber Director (NCD); Jeff Rezmovic to
serve as the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS); and Suzanne Summerlin to be General
Counsel (GC) for the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA).
Welcome to each of the nominees and to your friends and
family members who I know are joining us today. It is good to
see smiling faces behind you as well. Congratulations, and
thank you for your willingness to continue to serve the public,
as well as your prior public service to what is truly, with all
three of these positions, very important positions for the
Federal Government.
Mr. Coker, if confirmed, you will play a key role in
strengthening our nation's cybersecurity. This Committee worked
to establish the Office of the National Cyber Director (ONCD)
to develop and coordinate a comprehensive whole-of-government
approach to cybersecurity. Since the office was formed in 2021,
I have been pleased to work with former Director Chris Inglis
and Acting Director Kemba Walden on their efforts to stand up
the new office and develop the first-ever National
Cybersecurity Strategy and first-ever National Cyber Workforce
and Education Strategy. The next National Cyber Director will
be instrumental in driving the implementation of these
strategies. The National Cyber Director must be able to foster
collaboration and cooperation across government, and with
partners in the public and private sectors.
Our country faces significant cyber threats, including from
foreign agents, cybercriminals, and so-called ``hacktivist''
groups. In order to protect our economy and critical
infrastructure from these evolving threats we must take a
comprehensive approach to cybersecurity.
Mr. Coker, I look forward to hearing about your plans to
lead the office and buildupon the progress already made by this
young agency.
Mr. Rezmovic, if confirmed, you will oversee the budget and
financial operations for one of the largest and most complex
Federal agencies. The Department of Homeland Security has an
annual budget of over $60 billion that supports the work of
over 250,000 employees that keep our nation safe each and every
day.
The CFO for the Department plays a key role in ensuring
that DHS is using its resources both effectively and
responsibly. It is vitally important that the CFO understands
the complexities of DHS and its components and is committed to
working with Congress in an open and transparent manner.
Mr. Rezmovic, I look forward to hearing more about your
background and your approach to the CFO role.
Ms. Summerlin, I am very glad that we are considering your
nomination to be FLRA General Counsel today. The FLRA has not
had a Senate-confirmed General Counsel for nearly seven years,
since January 2017. This prolonged vacancy has been detrimental
to the agency and its work enforcing Federal labor relations
laws.
The FLRA's General Counsel is responsible for investigating
and prosecuting Unfair Labor Practice cases, ensuring both
Federal employees and agency management are treated fairly and
in accordance with Federal labor relations laws.
The FLRA General Counsel must be able to impartially
evaluate cases and effectively manage a small but very
dedicated team of attorneys and staff in offices across the
country. Ms. Summerlin, I look forward to hearing more about
your experience and plans for this role.
Welcome again to all three of you.
The Committee has heard from a wide range of individuals
and organizations in support of each of your nominations, and
today's hearing is an important opportunity for us to hear from
you directly about your qualifications and your plans for
taking on these very challenging roles.
It is the practice of this Committee to swear in witnesses,
so if each of you would please stand and raise your right hand.
Do you swear the testimony that you will give before this
Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you, God?
Mr. Coker. Yes.
Mr. Rezmovic. Yes.
Ms. Summerlin. Yes.
Chairman Peters. You may be seated. Thank you.
Harry Coker has dedicated his career to defense and
national security. He most recently served as Executive
Director of the National Security Agency (NSA), directly
supporting the Director and Deputy Director as the
organization's third in command. He was awarded the National
Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal for his work.
Prior to his time at NSA, Mr. Coker served at the Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) for 17 years. He is a graduate of the
U.S. Naval Academy, the Naval Post-Graduate School, and
Georgetown University Law School, and is a career Naval
Officer. I am always glad to welcome a Navy man to this
Committee. I know Senator Carper agrees with me that it is
always great to see a Navy man here in front of the Committee.
You are now recognized for your opening comments.
TESTIMONY OF HARRY COKER, JR.,\1\ TO BE NATIONAL CYBER
DIRECTOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
Mr. Coker. Chairman Peters, Ranking Member Paul,
distinguished Mmembers of the Committee, I am honored to appear
before you as the nominee to lead the Office of the National
Cyber Director. I would like to thank President Biden for
nominating me and this Committee for its continued support of
this important position and office.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Coker appears in the Appendix on
page 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also want to recognize and thank my family, to include
extended family of mentors, classmates, friends, and my church
family. Without their support, I would not have had the
opportunities that I have been blessed with. My mother, who
served a career as a Navy wife, and then became an educator,
and my father, who would have turned 91 today, was a Navy Chief
and then an educator. They raised their nine children with love
and discipline. My late wife remains an inspiration because of
her strength and passion for life. Our daughters and
granddaughter are carrying on her legacy in a manner that would
make her immensely proud.
I have proudly served our Nation for over four decades in
the military and as a civil servant. Although it was not called
``cyber'' when I first became interested as a high schooler in
Parsons, Kansas, by the time I graduated from the United States
Naval Academy I recognized the importance of what is now known
as cyberspace. I worked at the intersection of technology and
national security for the next 20 years while serving our
Nation in uniform as a naval officer. I continued this work in
a different capacity, spending another two decades as a civil
servant and senior leader at both the Central Intelligence
Agency and the National Security Agency.
Since retiring from government service in 2019, I have
continued focusing on the challenges our Nation faces in
cyberspace by supporting organizations that prepare for and
respond to evolving cyber threats. During this time, I have
seen a need for stronger partnerships and collaboration between
the public and private sectors, and if confirmed, I will
continue to ensure that collaboration is the North Star at the
Office of the National Cyber Director and the guiding principle
for the Administration's cyber work with all partners,
including Congress.
The challenges we face in cyber are both broad in scope and
dynamic. There is a proliferation of persistent and capable
threat actors from nation-states and criminal organizations
that regularly target our schools, hospitals, cities, and
businesses. Here at home, according to public reports, hundreds
of thousands of open jobs that touch on ``cyber'' need to be
filled. There are also risks to our supply chain and the
technologies that underpin our digital ecosystem, spanning from
the need to update legacy systems to the challenge of securely
designing the products of the future.
Although the risks in cyber are pervasive, the President's
National Cybersecurity Strategy and its Implementation Plan are
the roadmaps we need to tackle them. The solutions cannot be
about any one entity, or even just the Federal Government.
Taking action in the face of these challenges requires working
together to improve our cybersecurity posture.
I am prepared to take on these challenges. If confirmed, I
will work with interagency colleagues, the private sector,
Congress, and many others to help foster a digital ecosystem
that is inherently more defensible, resilient, and aligned with
our values.
I have observed how the Office of the National Cyber
Director has risen to address these obstacles. The inaugural
National Cyber Director did yeoman's work crafting and standing
up the office with the support of the President and this
Committee. The current Acting National Cyber Director has
carried on that legacy. Just in the past year, the office
spearheaded the President's National Cybersecurity Strategy, a
public implementation plan for the Strategy, and the National
Cyber Workforce and Education Strategy. It produced joint
guidance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
Federal agency cybersecurity spending priorities, and it has
hosted leaders from numerous industries at the White House
seeking substantive feedback on core cybersecurity issues and
driving subsequent public-private collaboration.
Collaboration with many stakeholders is what motivates me
to return to public service just as eagerly as I did when a
Navy recruiter visited my high school many years ago. Today
cyber is often front-page news, and I remain humbled and
honored by the opportunity to again serve our great Nation. If
confirmed, I will bring the full complement of my experience,
expertise and ethos to the position of National Cyber Director.
Thank you for considering my nomination and I look forward
to answering your questions.
Chairman Peters. Thank you, Mr. Coker.
Now we will turn over and recognize Senator Carper, who
will introduce one of our nominees.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER
Senator Carper. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Before I do that I want
to say Harry Coker, I am a retired Navy Captain, the last
Vietnam veteran serving in the U.S. Senate. I was 17 years old
when I raised my hand and took an oath to defend our country
and Constitution. It is an honor especially to welcome you as
one Navy veteran to another.
You notice not all of our Members are here right now. There
is a debate that is unfolding on the floor today. There are
like 300 men and women who have been nominated, senior ranking
officers in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and we
have not been allowed to have a confirmation vote. We are going
to try to get three of them done today. One of them would be
the first woman ever to be nominated to serve as the Chief of
Naval Operations. So this is a big day. It is a big day because
you are here, but it is a big day in the Senate. We are going
to do our job.
Congratulations on your nomination, and congratulations to
you as well. I see Jeff Rezmovic has some support right behind
him. It looks like his mom and dad are here. What are their
names?
Mr. Rezmovic. Senator, my parents are Victor and Evi
Rezmovic.
Senator Carper. The lady in the green dress, is that your
daughter?
Mr. Rezmovic. That is my wife, Melanie.
Senator Carper. Oh, sorry. I was just going to say, thanks
to your mom and dad for raising you, and actually all of your
parents. My dad was a Chief Petty Officer in World War II as
well. But thanks to them for raising you, and Suzanne, your
parents too, with the idea that we have an obligation to give
back and to serve. We are delighted to be here with you today.
I am going to say a few words about Jeff Rezmovic. I might
be mistaken on this, Mr. Chairman, but I think it has been like
a decade. I think it may have been a decade since we had a
Senate-confirmed Chief Financial Officer in the Department of
Homeland Security. I think that is awful. An agency with a
budget the size of this one, it is an almost $100 billion
budget, and that is unacceptable, and I am hopeful we can take
a big step forward toward filling that vacancy and a couple of
others.
Jeff knows DHS better than just about anybody I know. He
has served in various leadership roles for over a decade,
including as Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, as well as
Acting Deputy Chief of Staff and as a Counselor to the Deputy
Secretary as well. All of that. He has also worked for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and for the U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). You must be about
100 years old. That is a lot of service.
His dedication to our country has driven his successes,
leading him overseas to oversee thousands of employees and
drive the Department's mission to support the functions of
human capital, security, procurement, information technology
(IT), and a lot more.
Jeff is exceptionally well qualified to serve as the
Department's next CFO, and I know his long-held institutional
knowledge and his extensive experience in budget management
will serve our country well.
Again, welcome to his parents, and thanks to them and to
his wife for their willingness to serve him, and we look
forward to hearing from you today.
I am going to slip out and go to the floor and try to get a
couple of people confirmed to serve in other roles, but I will
be back later for the vote.
Thank you, all. Congratulations.
Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Carper.
Mr. Rezmovic, you are recognized for your opening comments.
TESTIMONY OF JEFF REZMOVIC,\1\ TO BE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Rezmovic. Chairman Peters, Ranking Member Paul, and
distinguished Members of the Committee, it is an honor to
appear before you today as the President's nominee to serve as
the Department of Homeland Security's Chief Financial Officer.
I am grateful to the President for nominating me, and to
Secretary Mayorkas and Acting Deputy Secretary Canegallo for
their leadership and their support. Thank you, Senator Carper,
for your kind introduction. That means more to me than you
know. It means a great deal to my family as well. Thank you. I
am also grateful to all of you for consideration of my
nomination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Rezmovic appears in the Appendix
on page 87.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would not be here today without the love, support, and
inspiration of my wife, Melanie, who is sitting behind me. She
is my best friend, my partner, and my home. She is also a
career public servant at the U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID), and she carries an incredibly heavy load
for our family, despite having a demanding and meaningful job
herself.
My parents, Victor and Evi Rezmovic, are also here with me
today. They are both immigrants and naturalized citizens. They
are both the children of Holocaust survivors, and they are both
former public servants. My work ethic, my integrity, my
resolve, and my commitment to public service are a direct
result of having won the parent lottery.
My two sons, Ben and Cory, are too young to understand what
today's hearing is about, but I hope that they watch it one day
when they are older. I hope that it can help them to see that
public service is hard work, but it is work that matters a
great deal. It is work that is worth doing despite its
challenges. I hope they see that there is joy and pride in
committing your life's work to something greater than yourself.
Public service is all I have done and it is all I have ever
aspired to do. It is why I came to Capitol Hill right out of
college. It is why I served as a Law Clerk on this Committee's
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) while I was in
law school. It is why I have spent the last 13 years at the
Department of Homeland Security.
Over those years of service, I have not only learned about
the essential work of the Department of Homeland Security, but
I have learned what makes it great, and that is the career
civil servants who fulfill the Department's critical missions.
I know firsthand how important the DHS Office of the Chief
Financial Officer is in enabling the Department's mission
because I have worked alongside its personnel for years. Among
other things, they develop and execute budgets to deliver on
the Department's missions; they modernize our financial systems
to ensure that we are expending taxpayer resources
appropriately and responsibly; they engage with the Government
Accountability Office (GAO), the Office of Inspector General
(OIG), and Congress as partners in strengthening the
Department; they oversee financial assistance programs to
eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse; and they measure the
effectiveness of our work to ensure that DHS is always
improving and always delivering.
In my previous role as the Department's Deputy Chief of
Staff and in my current role as the Department's Associate
Deputy Under Secretary for Management, I have had the privilege
of working closely with this dedicated team of public servants.
It would be the greatest honor of my professional life to lead
them, and to support and empower the work that they do each day
to help execute the DHS mission for the American people.
During my tenure at DHS, I have served under Secretaries
and Deputy Secretaries of both political parties. I have served
at the Department's headquarters and in two of its operational
components. I have worked alongside career officials and
political appointees. What I have found, universally, is that
there is no group of people better suited to protect this
nation from the threats of today, and to prepare for the
threats of tomorrow, than the personnel of the Department of
Homeland Security.
Thank you again for considering my nomination, and I look
forward to your questions.
Chairman Peters. Thank you.
Suzanne Summerlin has a wide range of experience in Federal
labor law. She has advocated for civilian employees at more
than 30 agencies, most recently in her capacity as Deputy
General Counsel and Deputy Executive Director for the Federal
Education Association.
Prior to her legal career, Ms. Summerlin was an award-
winning journalist, producer, and documentarian. She has
received both her undergraduate and graduate degrees from the
University of Florida, and is proud to be 100 percent public
school educated.
Ms. Summerlin, you are now recognized for your opening
comments.
TESTIMONY OF SUZANNE E. SUMMERLIN,\1\ TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL,
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
Ms. Summerlin. Thank you and good morning. Chairman Peters
and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
appear before you today as nominee for the position of General
Counsel at the Federal Labor Relations Authority. I am deeply
grateful for the trust that President Biden has placed in me
through this nomination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Summerlin appears in the Appendix
on page 147.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, I would like to thank the Members of this
Committee and their staffers for reviewing my qualifications
for this position, the staff at the FLRA for their support
during this process, and my colleagues throughout the Federal
sector labor bar for their confidence in me to fulfil the role
of General Counsel of the FLRA.
It is a profound honor to be considered for this critical
role. Through my experience, I understand that the demands of
the General Counsel require not only legal expertise but also a
deep understanding of the unique challenges and
responsibilities of managing labor relations in the Federal
sector. If confirmed, I will be committed to upholding the
statute's mission to promote fair, effective, and efficient
relationships between agencies, their employees, and their
unions.
I myself have been in the working world since I was six
years old. Whether it was a job on a film set as a background
actor, producing live television, or working as an attorney, I
have learned that disputes at work are inevitable.
Oliver Wendell Holmes referred to labor struggles as the
``one of the eternal conflicts out of which life is made.''
Fortunately for us, in the case of the Federal sector, Congress
has devised a way to manage that eternal conflict. It created
the statute.
Since 1978, the statute has established the rulebook by
which agencies, their employees, and their unions resolve labor
disputes.
I have witnessed firsthand that when the players follow
this rule book, follow the statute, everyone benefits--and I do
mean everyone. When agencies and unions follow the rules it
``promotes the efficiency of the Federal service.'' To me what
that means is that taxpayer dollars, agency resources, and the
time and talent of dedicated career civil servants can all be
focused on the mission of their individual agencies and not
tied up in labor disputes.
If confirmed as General Counsel, I will dedicate myself to
applying the law judiciously, balancing the interests of
employees, unions, and management in a fair and impartial
manner. I will work tirelessly to ensure that the FLRA
continues to promote labor-management harmony and effective
government operations.
In conclusion, I am honored to be nominated to serve as
General Counsel at the FLRA and to work closely with its
dedicated staff. If confirmed, I pledge to approach this role
with integrity, transparency, and an unwavering dedication to
the principles of fairness and justice under the statute. I
look forward to your questions.
Chairman Peters. Thank you for that.
There are three questions that the Committee asks of every
nominee, and I am going to ask each of you to respond briefly
with just a yes or no. Mr. Coker, I will have you go first and
we will just go down the row here.
First, is there anything you are aware of in your
background that might present a conflict of interest with the
duties of the office to which you have been nominated?
Mr. Coker. No, sir.
Ms. Summerlin. No, sir.
Mr. Rezmovic. No, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Peters. Second, do you know of anything, personal
or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and
honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office for
which you have been nominated?
Mr. Coker. No, sir.
Ms. Summerlin. No, sir.
Mr. Rezmovic. No, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Peters. Last, do you agree, without reservation,
to comply with any request or summons to appear and testify
before any duly constituted committee of the Congress if you
are confirmed?
Mr. Coker. Yes, sir.
Ms. Summerlin. Absolutely.
Mr. Rezmovic. Yes, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Peters. Great. Thank you.
Mr. Coker, the Office of the National Cyber Director, as
you know was established in the 2020 National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA), making it a certainly relatively new
organization. My question for you is what experiences do you
have in growing and maturing organizations, and if confirmed,
how would you go about assessing the existing ONCD structure
and working to mature the office?
Mr. Coker. Yes, sir. First off, thanks to this Committee
for supporting the standup of the office. The office, from my
perspective, has demonstrated its value. Although standing up
organizations, which I do have experience with, at the initial
phase is a lot of process, a lot of discussion, a bit of chaos
and dynamic atmospherics, that is natural.
Personally, I have had the opportunity to stand up
organizations at the small unit level. Specifically, when I was
at sea, a ship got a new and unique capability and I was tasked
with standing up the organization that had to develop the
processes to operate and maintain that system. It included
collaboration across a number of naval platforms.
Later in my Department of Defense (DOD) career I was on the
team that stood up, a plank owner if you will, the Department
of Defense Space Architect, another effort that was very
collaborative, but we stood it up from the ground floor.
In my civil service career, I had the pleasure of standing
up a number of organizations, one of which was a collaborative
effort between the Department of Defense and the intelligence
community (IC) just after 9/11. Valuable lessons learned there.
My private sector experience includes work with startups,
literally with startups, that are understanding the lay of the
land and developing their business cases as they seek funds to
address those business or use cases. From the government
perspective, in partnership with those startups, we saw the
value in dialogue between the public and private partnerships.
Then the last example I will leave you all with is during
the latter part of my civil service career I was on a small
team of fingers that helped to restructure the organizational
construct of a major organization. There were plenty of lessons
learned there, one of which was it is difficult to over-
communicate with the need for change and how everyone is
involved in effecting that change.
Chairman Peters. Great. Thank you.
Mr. Rezmovic, I congratulate you on your 13 years of
service to the Department, under both Republican and Democratic
administrations. Your experience holding several leadership
roles in two DHS components and at the Department's
headquarters I think gives you some unique perspective on DHS
management as well as DHS operations.
But for the purposes of better understanding that
experience, if you could tell us how your experience has
prepared you to take on this particular role as Chief Financial
Officer and the steps that you have taken to ready yourself to
take on a much bigger role would be helpful for members of this
Committee to hear.
Mr. Rezmovic. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. As
you said, I have served at the Department for 13 years, both at
headquarters and in operational component roles. During my time
as the Department's Deputy Chief of Staff I also led the
Department's budget development and budget execution, served as
the primary senior-level interlocutor between the Department
and the Office of Management and Budget.
I have also critically been able to, and had the good
fortune to, engage with our frontline workforce over the course
of my many years in the Department, and have been able to
understand what their needs are, and if confirmed as the CFO,
what will drive me is delivering for our workforce. I have had
the good fortune of seeing them out in the field, especially
our frontline personnel. I understand what their needs are,
large and small. I have good relationships with the
Department's component heads, both operational as well as
headquarters, and I look forward, if confirmed, to being able
to leverage those relationships in furtherance of delivering
for our Department's personnel.
Chairman Peters. Thank you.
Ms. Summerlin, as you know, the extended period without a
confirmed General Counsel has significantly disrupted FLRA's
ability to adjudicate charges of unfair labor practices (ULPs)
all across the government enterprise. At one point it caused a
backlog of almost 500 complaints, which I think we should all
agree is unacceptable.
My question for you is if confirmed, how will you approach
the challenges created by such a prolonged vacancy, and if you
could give this Committee some idea of your initial priorities,
if confirmed, that would be helpful.
Ms. Summerlin. Absolutely. Yes. The initial priorities, the
FLRA fortunate enough to have an outstanding Acting General
Counsel over the course of a couple of years who did yeoman's
work in clearing out the majority of the backlog. In fact, I
believe it did clear out the backlog in its entirety until she
had to step down from the position I think at the beginning of
August.
It is my understanding a small backlog has developed, 50 to
60 cases right now. I think that is going to be the top
priority of my term as General Counsel is to get in there and
clear the backlog. I am so fortunate to be able to rely on the
expertise and on the staff who have just gone through this
process to clear the 500 case backlog that was there. So 50
probably seems quite doable compared to that.
That will be the first thing that we knock out of the park,
absolutely.
Chairman Peters. Thank you. Senator Carper, you are
recognized for your questions.
Senator Carper. Thank you, sir. Mr. Rezmovic. I was
literally present at the creation for the Department of
Homeland Security, and we have seen the transformation of 22
agencies into a single department to serve our country, while
it has been not always easy to watch. There were some
struggles, some good times, some really tough challenges that
we faced around the world. We see them even today.
But while the Department has made major strides and major
progress toward improving management functions, we need to
strengthen the financial management functions of the
Department, and that remains on GAO's High Risk List.
I would just ask, what would be your approach to working
with GAO, led by Gene Dodaro, to ensure that these
recommendations are fulfilled from GAO? Can you share with us
any specific priorities you have with regard to strengthening
the Department's financial management functions? Please, go
ahead.
Mr. Rezmovic. Senator, thank you for the question. GAO is a
partner in strengthening the Department, and the more that we
treat them as a partner the better we are and the stronger we
are as a department. I am not just saying that because my mom,
who is sitting behind me, served at GAO for 30 years.
Senator Carper. Really?
Mr. Rezmovic. True story. I am saying it because we have
seen the results.
Senator Carper. Was she Gene Dodaro's predecessor?
Mr. Rezmovic. We have seen the results. When the Department
was created it was immediately placed on the GAO High Risk
List, in its entirety. The scope of the High Risk List area was
implementing the Department of Homeland Security. Over the
course of significant engagement and partnership with the GAO,
what we have seen over the past several years is a significant
narrowing of the scope of the Department's High Risk List area,
from implementing the Department of Homeland Security to
strengthening DHS management functions, to, in the most recent
GAO High Risk List, strengthening DHS IT and financial
management functions.
We have to get off the GAO High Risk List. If confirmed as
the Department's CFO, among my greatest priorities will be
moving forward with financial systems modernization. Right now
we have approximately 40 percent of the Department's spending
occurring on modern integrated financial systems, and of course
we have to get to 100 percent. If confirmed, my priority would
be to ensure that that work stays on time, on budget, and I
will look for every opportunity to accelerate that work.
Senator Carper. You will be pleased to know you do not have
eyes in the back of your head, but when you talk about your
mom's experience at the General Accountability Office I can see
what she is thinking. She is thinking, ``That is my son.'' That
is pretty encouraging.
All right, Mr. Coker, I am going to pick on you for a
minute there. My dad was a Chief Petty Officer in the Navy. So
was my uncle, my mom's brother, and my grandmother was a Gold
Star mother. But we bleed Navy blue in my family, and probably
you in yours too.
But it is great to have you here before the Committee as a
nominee to serve as our National Cyber Director, and we thank
you again for your distinguished service to our country.
More than eight years ago, a former colleague and friend of
ours, someone that Senator Lankford knows very well, Tom
Coburn, and I worked together to enact legislation that would
make it easier for the Department of Homeland Security to hire
cybersecurity professionals. Following a lengthy development
period, the program has proven, I think by most people's
regards or opinions, successful. DHS has begun hiring under the
Cyber Talent Management system.
That said, there remains an enduring urgent need to hire
more cybersecurity professionals across the Federal Government
and throughout the private sector, and we must continue to
focus on bolstering our cyber workforce to ensure that we are
doing all we can to recruit and retain the best and brightest
minds out there to improve our nation's cybersecurity.
In your testimony you highlighted the cyber workforce
shortage and the risks it poses for our cybersecurity posture.
If confirmed as National Cyber Director, how will you lead the
charge to strengthen our Federal cyber workforce and engage the
private sector to ensure recruiting efforts are in line with
our cybersecurity goals?
Mr. Coker. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss what I
think is most important, not just professionally but
personally, and it is people. The Workforce Education Strategy
is all about getting the right people, with the proper
development, to address the hard problems that our nation
faces, in this case in cybersecurity.
If confirmed, I would, frankly sir, continue the good work
that ONCD has done with its partners. The strategy that we have
mentioned tackles this challenge head-on. It recognizes that it
is a whole-of-nation challenge. It gets the right involvement
with the private sector but also with another key partner, the
State, local, tribal and territorial (SLTT) governments.
If confirmed, sir, what I would do is drive to those levels
to ensure that they know a few things, and one is based on
mentoring that I do in Baltimore City with middle school kids.
I ask what are their favorite subjects. They span liberal arts,
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), all
of that. That is no longer the case, and that has to be
messaged. Frankly, that strategy, that Workforce Education
Strategy, has a pillar, a foundation in that we need to
increase the cyber skills of all Americans. That is one,
regardless of interest in STEM.
Then we need to transform cyber education, and that is why
it is important that we have such a strong partnership, again,
with State and local governments. This is a challenge, again,
whole-of-nation, but it is going to be the State and local
governments that have to lead that. ONCD and that strategy has
made a point of ensuring that SLTTs are aware of the resources
that are available. Again, my recent government experience with
the Centers for Academic Excellence is an opportunity to show
educational communities how to transform a curriculum by
providing guidance.
The last point I will briefly mention, sir, is that we need
to change the way we look at vacancy notices, job
questionnaires. In cyber, it should not be a requirement for
everyone to have a four-year degree. You can get that cyber
education without going through a four-year college. Again, we
need to deliver that message broadly and deeply.
Those are just a few of the steps that I would take, if
confirmed, sir.
Senator Carper. All right. That is good. I would just share
with my colleagues and with all of you, we are in session. We
go into session here usually Monday afternoons, start voting
Monday afternoons and Monday night. We are in session most
Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, and we finish up Thursday
afternoon. A lot of us go home, back to our States and to our
families.
One of the things I do, I do customer calls. I do customer
calls every week. We only have three counties and a million
people in Delaware. But I visit the businesses large and small.
I ask them, ``What are your needs and what can we do to help?''
Almost everybody says we need people to come to work. One of
the greatest needs is in terms of cyber. The cyber areas are
really tough to do. We just need to do a better job on the
private sector, colleges and universities, to prepare that
workforce. Thank you.
Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Carper.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROSEN
Senator Rosen, you are recognized for your questions.
Senator Rosen. Thank you, Chair Peters. I really appreciate
you holding this hearing, and thank you to all of you for being
here today.
I want to move on to critical infrastructure, as we are
talking about all of these things, cyber and STEM, because
according to a recently released 2024 Department of Homeland
Security threat assessment, both foreign and domestic cyber
actors--and I am going to quote here--``continue to seek
opportunistic access to critical infrastructure sector targets
for disruptive and destructive attacks.''
Now more than ever, the role of the Office of the National
Cyber Director is key in maintaining the defense of our
critical infrastructure sectors.
Mr. Coker, given the fact that the vast majority of our
critical infrastructure is owned or controlled oftentimes by
private entities, it is essential that the Federal Government
closely collaborate with the private sector. How do you view
the Office of the National Cyber Director's role in
facilitating these relationships with the private sector in
regard to critical infrastructure?
Mr. Coker. Yes, ma'am. Thanks for that question. It is a
vital one. My perspective has been, for years--and I would be
able to follow up on it more hands on if confirmed--national
security, especially cybersecurity, requires partnerships
across the public sector and the private sector. Although I
have been in situations where that partnership was not a true
partnership, where it was more one way--give me what you have
got, tell me what you know, and I will see you later. That will
not be effective in cybersecurity. I am delighted that, from my
optic, the Federal Government, generally, and ONCD, in
particular, recognizes the necessity of partnership with the
private sector.
I have had experiences where the private sector has
actually brought threat information to the government. Another
way to look at the private sector with regard to cybersecurity
is in many cases they are on the front line, and I can use an
analogy. It is not perfect but it is close enough. They are on
the front line, fighting the threats every day. You could say
that is a combatant command, if you will. In this case a
supporting command would be ONCD and others in the Federal
Government, but ensuring that the private sector knows there is
a true partnership and that their knowledge, their
capabilities, and their risks are appreciated and supported.
If confirmed, I would communicate that regularly. I would
demonstrate the value of the partnership. One of those areas is
in information sharing. Again, we cannot succeed without the
strength of that partnership.
Senator Rosen. Could you elaborate a little bit on the
secure-by-design products, because the secure-by-design
products, they are designed to protect against malicious cyber
actors gaining access to devices, data, all the connected
infrastructure. Would you ensure that some of these agencies
are using and procuring this secure-by-design software so that
the Federal Government can engage better, building on that
topic?
Mr. Coker. That secure-by-design, it really does flow from
one of the major shifts that is incorporated in the National
Cybersecurity Strategy, the two shifts being rebalance of
responsibility defending cyberspace to those that are more
capable. The second major shift, that gets directly to your
point, is to realign the incentives to a long-term investment,
and that is where it comes into place. We need to ensure that
it is not just a focus on first to market. It needs to be
secure to market. The government can incentivize secure-by-
design secure to market. So that is the way that needs to be
demonstrated, as we shift that balance to realign the
incentives toward that.
Senator Rosen. I like that secure to market. You set me up
perfect for the next question because the initiatives that are
outlined with the goals set by the National Cybersecurity
Strategy, all of these things are in there. It is so important.
How would you, if you are confirmed, ensure that these
initiatives are outlined, the things you are talking about,
that you get the necessary support and funding?
Mr. Coker. Again, I may have set you up for that question
but----
Senator Rosen. You did not know it was my next question. It
was perfect.
Mr. Coker. You set me up for something that, again, I have
been just delighted, as I have been doing my reading and
preparation and the strategy that we referred to is a document
that is the result of more than 400 sessions with folks, not
just across the government, not just across the Federal
Government, but State, local, tribal, and territorial, but our
private sector partners. They are a key.
So it is having that plan that is not just the President's
or not just ONCD's, not just the Federal Government. It is the
United States' cybersecurity strategy. I get the sense that the
private sector partners, and actually other Federal and State
partners, believe it is their plan, our plan together. So ONCD
has done a masterful job on that.
Also key to that strategy is the implementation plan that
comes along with it. Sixty-nine initiatives that flow from that
strategy that go to every issue that I am aware of related to
defending our cybersecurity strategy. Not just those
initiatives but I think it is 18 or so different departments or
agencies that are tasked and held responsible, held accountable
for that implementation.
Last on that point, there are milestones associated with
that. As a former program manager in the government, I know it
is key to have cost schedule and performance, have those
metrics. They have to be there. If you cannot measure it, you
cannot manage it. So ONCD, to their credit, and to the
partnership's credit, has done a masterful job in pulling that
strategy and implementation plan together.
Senator Rosen. Thank you. I see my time is just about up,
but as a former computer programmer--I will submit this for the
record--I introduced the Civilian Cybersecurity Reserve Act to
allow people working in the private sector to serve, like they
do in other areas of Reserve or Guard type duty, based on that,
because there is a lot of technical expertise, people want to
serve, and sometimes it is years to get that experience. I will
submit that for the record and we can talk about that.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Rosen.
Senator Lankford, you are recognized for your questions.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANKFORD
Senator Lankford. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all of
you for going through the process. It is a lengthy, long
process to be able to go through, so I appreciate you and your
families and what you are doing on this.
Mr. Coker, thank you for the time. I got a chance to be
able to pick your brain at length this week in my office.
Thanks for making yourself available just to be able to walk
through this, obviously many things that are exceptionally
important to the entire nation, that you will be tasked to work
on, so I very much appreciate that. For your family, and for
you and your lengthy service, thank you for that kind of
engagement.
I do want to be able to ask some questions, though,
specifically and to be able to walk through a couple of things.
FLRA's regulations provide no interested person outside this
agency shall make or knowingly cause to be made any prohibited
ex parte communication to any authority member who is or who
may reasonably be expected to be involved in the decisional
process of the proceeding. I know you know that well, as a
counsel, obviously, or potential Counsel. You are aware of
that. Any thought son that as far as just in part of the FLRA
regulation?
Ms. Summerlin. I feel like that is a very common provision
that you would see in most statutes of this type, certainly
within the labor sector. It is vital and important to keep a
wall between the folks who are asking for resolution before the
authority and for the folks that are providing that resolution
in the form of the three members of the Federal Labor Relations
Authority.
Senator Lankford. Which we all agree is exceptionally
important on that. You are also aware that Chairman DuBester,
from FLRA, in an Inspector General (IG) investigation, based on
ex parte communications, that he was accused to have, and that
he then withdrew his nomination. He was going through the
process, was preparing to be able to come before this
Committee. When the IG investigation came out and there were
multiple emails that came out on that, he withdrew his request
to be able to be in this, which the President accepted.
The interesting part to me on that was he withdrew based on
those communications, but when we go through the emails you
were often the other person on the other side of those emails,
back and forth. In 2019 and 2020, Chairman DuBester reached out
to you several times in phone calls and in emails. October 23,
2019, Chairman DuBester emailed you specifically ``if you might
have a minute to chat sometime this week. Wanted to update a
couple of FLRA matters of interest.'' On November 13th of that
same year, Chairman DuBester emailed you to ask ``if you had a
second to chat sometime this week for an update.''
In June 2020, Mr. DuBester reached out to officials on an
email, which you were included on, requesting a phone call to
provide a quick update. You responded to that with some
suggested times to be able to set up a call. After the call,
one of your colleagues replied to the email chain, ``Thanks for
keeping us informed. We are very grateful.''
These matters were apparently related to things that were
at FLRA. Do you remember those calls or those emails back and
forth with him?
Ms. Summerlin. Thank you for your question, and I
understand that I have responded to these questions throughout
this process. I think it is important to know that I have never
seen, nor was I ever contacted by the Department of Treasury
Office of Inspector General in regard to these allegations or
this report. I have never had inappropriate or unethical
communications with Mr. DuBester.
In my duties at the National Federation of Federal
Employees (NFFE), I was tasked with communicating legal
developments to the Federal Workers Alliance (FWA). The FWA is
an organization of unions that represent workers in the Federal
sector. The president of NFFE, Randy Erwin, is also the co-
chair of FWA, and as such he sometimes tasked me to do FWA
work. I would speak to representatives of several agencies
involved in the Federal worker labor issues, including the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the FLRA.
Mr. DuBester was often the contact I was given to call to
set up times for him to come in and brief the FWA on new
developments at the FLRA.
This is similar to updates given to us by OPM at the time,
and in keeping with what I understood to be a tradition of FLRA
members coming to speak to the FWA, and to also other
organizations. I have seen Mr. DuBester and other members of
the FLRA speak at conferences, for labor, labor management
relations together.
Like I said, I was never contacted in the course of this
investigation. We are talking about phone calls that happened
four and five years ago. I was never contacted or given a
chance to refresh my memory or recollection of these. However,
I can say with certainty that Mr. DuBester was always prefacing
everything that he was saying, giving disclaimers at all times
to his ethical duties, because he had the ethical duties as a
member of the FLRA. He was constantly telling us, ``I can only
discuss public information,'' ``I can only tell you what is
available out there.''
Senator Lankford. I understand, but obviously, based on the
IG investigation, he has withdrawn from this. We are not
talking about Mr. DuBester at this point on this. I am trying
to be able to figure this out. I do know we contacted the
inspector general, and we just asked the question, based on the
email chains and such, and we said, ``OK, is there any concern
here?'' The inspector general's response to us was, ``The email
chains that were between you and Mr. DuBester is an example of
the kind of message that contributed to our conclusion that the
former FLRA chairman engaged in a pattern of activity that
created the appearance of impropriety.''
Again, that is not about you. That is about him.
Ms. Summerlin. Right.
Senator Lankford. But it was specifically about the back
and forth that he was having with you at that time.
Ms. Summerlin. I wish somebody would have given me a call
so I could have talked to him about it. These were ministerial
phone calls in nature. They were phone calls that were setting
up times for him to come in and brief--we are lawyers. We like
it to be spoon-fed for us sometimes. We like to have people
come in and give us presentations on what is going on with the
case law. It is a pretty normal thing.
If I had been asked by the inspector general I would have
been able to give that information.
Senator Lankford. Mr. Chairman, we will just walk through
it from there, obviously. There are unique challenges that we
have that the Administration, quite frankly, has put us in
front of that obviously you were not a party to in the middle
of all of this in the conversation the Administration is going
to make. But we have an individual that the inspector general
obviously did an investigation, came back and said, hey, there
is the appearance of impropriety here of actually sharing
information, through a pretty lengthy investigation. The
challenge that the Administration has put in front of us, the
other side of that communication now, is sitting in front of us
as the next person to be nominated. It does create a unique
challenge that we have as a Committee that we do need to be
able to talk about.
Chairman Peters. Very good. Thank you.
Senator Hassan, you are recognized for your questions.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HASSAN
Senator Hassan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to you
and the Ranking Member for having this hearing. Thank you to
our witnesses here, our nominees, for your willingness to
serve. We thank your families too, because service is a family
endeavor, and we really appreciate it.
Mr. Coker, I want to start with a question for you, and it
is really following up a little bit on an area that Senator
Rosen started to ask you about. Earlier this week this
Committee heard from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Director Christopher Wray that the FBI helped a children's
hospital thwart a cyberattack sponsored by the Iranian
government. That target of that attack was Boston Children's
Hospital, a hospital that provides critical care for families
across New England, the country, and frankly, around the world.
As National Cyber Director, you would be responsible for
implementing the National Cyber Strategy. If confirmed, what
will your office do to help agencies and stakeholders implement
the strategy in ways that will enhance cybersecurity
specifically for our health care system?
Mr. Coker. Yes, ma'am, and thank you for the question. That
really does get to one of the key shifts that is advocated for
in the National Cybersecurity Strategy, rebalancing the
responsibility for defending the cyberspace to those who are
more capable.
Hospitals, as we all know, have critical functions in
health care. They also have privileged information about
individuals, and then they have, frankly, life and death type
of information and systems. It is imperative that they be
protected. But that major shift would take some of that
responsibility, in this case away from hospitals, and shift it
up to those that are more capable. For example, our partners
across the Federal Government have threat information, specific
threat information that they would share with hospitals and
other entities if it is credible and timely. Our partners
across the Federal cyberspace also have capabilities that are
available to entities, in this case hospitals, to help build
and test their cybersecurity systems.
Part of ONCD's responsibilities, as I see it, is to make
sure that those that are less capable are more aware of the
threats and capabilities that they can take advantage of.
Senator Hassan. Thank you for that, and I know that the
health care community would look forward to continuing this
work with partners like you and the agency.
Mr. Coker. As would I, ma'am.
Senator Hassan. Ms. Summerlin, I have a question for you.
Obviously, Federal employees work every day in service to our
country, and the unions that represent them are critical
partners in ensuring that agencies can attract and retain a
talented Federal workforce. If confirmed, how will you foster
productive partnerships between unions and Federal agencies to
ensure that the Federal Government can attract and retain top
talent?
Ms. Summerlin. Thank you for your question, Senator, and I
think this is something that is very close to my heart because,
in my experience working in the Federal sector, seeing the
labor sausage getting made up close, and as an American
taxpayer I become concerned when I see labor disputes drag on
for years. I get concerned when I see bad relationships between
agencies and their employees and their unions. Because what the
statute contemplates and what the Office of General Counsel
(OGC) can do is foster positive relationships, and I think that
there is a little bit of a joke. It is the Federal Labor
Relations Authority, not the Federal Labor Enforcement
Authority. We are here to build relationships.
That is what I think, first and foremost, is the most
important thing--and I think one of the best ways to do that
from the Office of General Counsel's standpoint, is to move
through these cases as effectively and efficiently as possible.
Because when these cases drag on for years, unfortunately we
have not had a confirmed General Counsel for a number of years.
There were cases that came down that had major, huge amounts of
interest, and all this money that was spent on delay, that as
an American taxpayer I do not like to see that happen. As
somebody who is concerned about Federal labor management
relations I definitely do not like to see that happen.
What we want to focus on first and foremost is building
these relationships, and we can do that through things that are
not necessarily prosecuting ULPs, but part of that, and then
when we do have to prosecute a ULP we need to do it
effectively, efficiently, and as quickly as possible.
Senator Hassan. Thank you for that.
Mr. Rezmovic, in May I held an Emerging Threats and
Spending Oversight Subcommittee (ETSO) hearing on the national
security threats posed by aging technology infrastructure
within the Department of Homeland Security. The three DHS Chief
Information Officers (CIOs) who testified at the hearing
stressed the need for financial resources to support IT
modernization. A strong working relationship between the CFO
and CIO is critical for curtailing wasteful spending on aging
technology and prioritizing investments in modern, more
efficient, and effective systems.
If confirmed, how will you partner with the Chief
Information Officer of DHS to manage investments in IT
modernization in a fiscally responsible way, including reducing
the agency's reliance on legacy IT?
Mr. Rezmovic. Senator, thank you for that question. I know
our Chief Information Officer extremely well. I work with him
very closely. The Department has approximately an $8 billion IT
budget, and as you well know, a lot of legacy systems. The
Chief Information Officer did recently put out an IT Strategic
Plan that I think will be helpful here in identifying and
prioritizing what are the right projects to move forward with
in the near term.
If I were confirmed, I would be focused on a few things.
One, I would be laser-focused on financial systems
modernization, making sure that it stays on time, on budget.
That is certainly under the remit of the Office of the CFO.
Right now we have approximately 40 percent of our Department
spending occurring on those modern systems, and we need to get
to 100 percent.
Second, I would want to make sure that we are incorporating
the right modernization projects through our regular budget
cycles. I would work closely with the CIO on that.
Third, when it comes to issues that arise in between budget
cycles, making sure that we have the tools and resources that
you have helped to make available to us, to include the
Technology Modernization Fund (TMF) and the Non-Recurring
Expense Fund.
Senator Hassan. I appreciate that very much, and I thank
you, Mr. Chair. I will submit a question for the record for Mr.
Coker about preparing for a post-quantum world and what we do
as our adversaries develop better and better quantum
technology. But I will submit that for the record. Thank you
very much.
Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Hassan.
Senator Hawley, you are recognized for your questions.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HAWLEY
Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations to
the nominees. Thanks for being here.
Mr. Coker, let me start with you. Are you familiar with the
case Missouri v. Biden from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals?
Mr. Coker. I am vaguely familiar, sir, from what I have
read in the open press.
Senator Hawley. Let me refresh your memory. This is a case
in which, first, the Federal District Court, then the Federal
Court of Appeals held that the White House and assorted other
various Federal agencies violated the First Amendment of the
United States, illegal actions, unconstitutional actions, by
coercing and colluding with the biggest social media
corporations in the world to suppress and censor protected
speech.
Let me read you a few passages. ``Officials from the White
House began communicating with social media companies,
including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google, in early 2021.
From the outset, that came with requests to take down flagged
content. In one email, a White House official told the platform
to take down a post as soon as possible (ASAP), and instructed
it to keep an eye out for tweets that fall in the same genre so
that they could be removed. In another email, an official told
the platform to remove an account immediately and said he could
not stress the degree to which this needs to be resolved
immediately.'' The court goes on to find--these are findings,
by the way, not allegations, findings--those requests for
removal were met.
The court goes on. ``The White House did not only flag
content, they started monitoring the platform's moderation
activities too, and they often asked for and received frequent
updates to the platform's moderation policies. They not only
continued the platforms to take down content the official
flagged and provided requested data to the White House, they
also changed their moderation policies expressly in accordance
with the White House's wishes.''
Bottom line here, the court found that the White House
successfully pressured and coerced, once again, the biggest
corporations in the world to censor Americans. Here is how the
court summarized it. They said it was ``a coordinated campaign
of unprecedented magnitude, orchestrated by Federal officials
that jeopardized a fundamental aspect of American life.'' That
is pretty strong language. This is pretty bad stuff.
Do you think that this is wrong, Mr. Coker? Do you think
that the White House meeting with social media corporations and
pressuring them to censor protected speech by Americans is
wrong?
Mr. Coker. Sir, with regard to ONCD, we do not have a role
related to that. We are focused on the digital infrastructure
and the digital ecosystem, and that is where ONCD is today, and
if confirmed, I presume that is the roadmap that ONCD would
continue to follow.
Senator Hawley. You would not see it as any part of your
remit to meet with social media corporations?
Mr. Coker. I would meet with whatever entity, if confirmed,
that could help build and maintain a more defensible digital
infrastructure and a more resilient digital infrastructure.
Senator Hawley. You would be against any efforts to use
your office or any other office you have input in, in the White
House, if you were to be confirmed here, to censor or
manipulate or otherwise engage in unconstitutional activities?
Mr. Coker. I am strong proponent, of First and Fourth
Amendments, free speech and privacy. I do not see any role in
ONCD in that area. But again, if I could speak personally,
censorship is not an area that I personally believe in. I am
advocate for constitutionally protected speech.
Senator Hawley. Good. I ask you because cybersecurity is
often cited, and you can see it in this decision, is often
cited as a reason to censor. This is part of the rationale that
the White House and the FBI and DHS all used, according to
these Federal courts, to go to these big corporations and say,
``You have to do what we tell you to do.'' The finding of the
court was the government basically turned these corporations
into an arm of the Federal Government. I emphasize, the biggest
corporations on the planet, with the most extensive control of
speech on the planet, and our government used them, turned them
into an arm of itself, and in some of these cases post by post
and said, ``Take this down. Take that down. Censor this
person.'' In my home State of Missouri, parents who were trying
to circulate a petition about school policy with regard to
masks had their posts taken down at the direction of the White
House. This is not in a novel. This happened. For all I know it
is still happening, in this country.
I want to make sure, Mr. Coker, that you are going to be a
voice for the First Amendment, and if somebody comes to you and
says, ``You need to go and meet with these social media
companies and you need to do this stuff, you need to tell them
take down those posts, I do not like that, we are threatening
you,'' you will say, ``No how, no way.''
Mr. Coker. Sir, I took my first oath to the Constitution
when I was 17 years old, and I have taken it periodically ever
since. There is no stronger advocate for the United States
Constitution, to include all amendments, than I am, sir.
Senator Hawley. Good. You would be a breath of fresh air in
that regard, in this White House.
Let me ask you something else. Am I right in thinking that
you have served, maybe you currently serve, as a senior
advisory group member within ODNI?
Mr. Coker. I have worked some projects for ODNI.
Senator Hawley. OK. Have you been involved in any
discussions regarding ODNI's obligation to declassify
information about the links between the Wuhan Institute for
Virology (WIV) and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
pandemic?
Mr. Coker. Not at all, sir.
Senator Hawley. OK. Do you know what I am referring to
here?
Mr. Coker. No, sir, I do not.
Senator Hawley. Well, we passed a law--and I say ``we,'' I
mean this body passed a law. We passed it unanimously out of
the Senate. It was passed by the House of Representatives. It
was signed by the President. I happen to know something about
it because I wrote it, and it requires ODNI--requires, not
requests, requires ODNI--to declassify, I believe the language
we settled on is ``any and all information''--pretty broad--
``any and all information related to the origins of COVID-19.''
ODNI has not complied with that statutory obligation. They
had a deadline. They blew right through it. When they finally
did give us information they gave us a five-page summary. They
gave us no actual information, none of the detail required in
the statute. I know this is a family hearing, Mr. Chair, they
basically have given us the finger. Let us put it that way. Too
bad; we are not going to comply.
I cannot tell you how destructive I think that is, not just
to the relationship between the White House and the Congress,
but to the basic rule of law. The American people have a right
to expect the laws will be followed, and also when it comes to
something like COVID-19 that their government will be honest
with them about what they know. That is what this law requires,
what they know.
If you are confirmed, will you commit to us, Mr. Coker,
that you will comply with statutes duly enacted that this body,
Congress, enacts and writes into law.
Mr. Coker. Absolutely, sir.
Senator Hawley. All right. Very good. Thank you. I will
have some other questions for you all and I will submit them
for the record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Hawley.
Senator Ossoff, you are recognized for your questions.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR OSSOFF
Senator Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and
congratulations to you all for your nominations. It is a
pleasure to be here with you.
Mr. Coker, Georgia is increasingly a hub for technological
innovation in the cyber sector, and the Georgia Cyber Center in
Augusta is a world-class facility that I would like to invite
you to visit. This institution strengthens not just Georgia but
the Nation and helps to train, develop, and implement
technologies and techniques crucial to securing critical
infrastructure and to securing the overall U.S. cyber
environment.
My question for you is will you commit to joining me in
Augusta, Georgia, at the Cyber Center, should you be confirmed
to this post, to meet with key cybersecurity leaders in Georgia
and discuss ways that the White House can support our efforts
in Georgia?
Mr. Coker. If confirmed, sir, I would love to visit
Augusta, Georgia, and the Cyber Center with you. I actually
have experience there in Augusta. I had the honor of visiting
and working with NSA Georgia in Augusta a number of times, and
I have former colleagues who work at the Cyber Center. It would
be, again, my honor to visit Augusta on that topic.
Senator Ossoff. Excellent, and the men and women at NSA
Georgia and the U.S. Army Cyber Center for Excellence at Fort
Gordon are doing an outstanding job for the Nation.
Mr. Coker. Yes, sir, they are.
Senator Ossoff. I would like to discuss with you cyber
threats to the Legislative Branch, and just as Executive Branch
agencies are a target for foreign intelligence services (FIS),
adversaries, and hackers, so too is this institution and the
U.S. House and Legislative Branch components.
What I would like from you is a commitment that consistent
with the relevant boundaries, separation of powers, that you
will find a way to work with me to make sure that the Senate
Sergeant at Arms (SSA) is maximally empowered to defend U.S.
Senate networks. Should you be confirmed, will you sit down
with me and have a conversation about whether and how that
might be possible?
Mr. Coker. If confirmed, I would be delighted to, sir.
Information sharing, especially as it applies to situational
awareness for cyberspace, it is vital. I would be delighted to
meet with you and whomever you think is appropriate on that
topic, sir.
Senator Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Coker. As I believe you have
testified, and as I have no doubt, you agree having a highly
qualified cyber workforce is crucial to U.S. cybersecurity.
Both public and private sector entities need highly qualified
professionals who are trained in this complex and ever more
important area.
I wrote legislation called the Community Opportunity Act,
which passed as part of the Creating Helpful Incentives to
Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) and Science Act, which
established the Dr. David Satcher Cybersecurity Education
Program, named after the former Surgeon General of the United
States and a proud Georgian, which authorizes National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to award grants to
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and
minority-serving institutions to establish and enhance their
cybersecurity education programs.
Will you commit, if confirmed, to working with my office to
help ensure, consistent with the boundaries, the proper
parameters of your obligations at the White House, to ensure
that this legislation is effectively implemented?
Mr. Coker. Although I am not familiar with the legislation,
sir, from what you tell me it is something that fits very
nicely and appropriately with the Cyber Workforce Education
Strategy, in particular, trying to close that hundreds of
thousands gaps in community-related vacancies by going to
underserved communities, places we have not gone before, and
not at all lowering standards. I come from one of those
underserved communities, rural Kansas, where I had not heard of
the Naval Academy, but the Naval Academy had the good sense to
recruit to places they had not recruited to often enough. In
this case it sounds like the act would take the same type of
approach to filling these critical gaps.
Senator Ossoff. Mr. Coker, I have good news. It is not
merely legislation. It is now law, and I look forward to
working with you to implement it. I would suggest that your
schedule permitting perhaps while you are in Georgia visiting
Augusta we could also pay a visit to the Atlanta University
Center and discuss with the HBCU leadership there how they can
ensure that their students are empowered to join the cyber
workforce.
I appreciate all of you for your service to the country and
congratulate you on your nominations and look forward to
working with you to ensure that our nation is protected and
that our national interests are pursued and advanced. Thank
you.
Mr. Coker. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Ossoff.
Senator Blumenthal, you are recognized for your questions.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BLUMENTHAL
Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. This week, as you
all know, President Biden issued a pretty sweeping order on
artificial intelligence (AI), and the issue of security is
central to that order, covering issues like malicious deep
fakes, cybersecurity of infrastructure, protections for AI
models.
Senator Hawley and I are working on comprehensive
legislation on AI, and cybersecurity is at the core of our
work. Our focus is not only on the steps the Executive Order
(EO) proposes but also issues like the use of AI by foreign
adversaries. This field is moving very quickly, as you well
know, and yet it has barely received any mention in the
National Cybersecurity Strategy that was published this March.
Let me ask you, looking at how quickly this field is
moving, looking at how important it is, what issues would be
your focus, Mr. Coker, as National Cyber Director, and what
should we be doing to address those risks?
Mr. Coker. With regard to AI, sir?
Senator Blumenthal. Yes.
Mr. Coker. AI, like many emerging technologies, has pros
and cons, and I can just speak to some of the potential
benefits to artificial intelligence as they apply to
cybersecurity. There is an awful lot of data that is not just
available but that is essential to cybersecurity, so much so
that big data analytics need artificial intelligence capability
to process through those mounds of data and turn it into
actionable intelligence in a timely manner. That is a direct
area in which artificial intelligence can and must support
cybersecurity.
But like with many technologies and emerging capabilities
there are other sides that we need to be concerned about with
artificial intelligence. Although I have not made it through
the recent Executive Order just yet--it is over 100 pages--from
what I have seen at a top level there is recognition of those
potential concerns, and that needs to be a focus area along
with the potential benefits of artificial intelligence.
Senator Blumenthal. What are the key assignments that you
have under the Executive Order, or that you would have, if
confirmed?
Mr. Coker. My understanding is that the Office of the
National Cyber Director does have a seat, actually, on the
White House Artificial Intelligence Council, so ONCD will sit
on that council, sir.
Senator Blumenthal. In terms of the 2024 Presidential
election, talk to us perhaps a little bit about what keeps you
up at night when you think about it, in terms of cybersecurity.
Mr. Coker. With regard to elections, they are run by State
and local governments, and so my concern is that State and
local governments get all the support that they need to be able
to execute their respective elections in a safe, accurate, and
confident way. Given the role that ONCD, and frankly, the
Federal Government by and large, would have, it would be a
supporting role to the State and local, tribal and territorial
governments with regard to how they run their elections.
If confirmed, from an ONCD perspective, I would ensure that
those SLTTs are aware of the resources that are available to
them, specifically there are partners that could take a look at
how defensible and resilient their election infrastructure is.
There are other partners that could provide timely and credible
threat information. But again, it is the State and local,
tribal and territorial governments that have the lead, with the
Federal Government in support.
Senator Blumenthal. Do you have, in your office, in the
Office of the National Cyber Director, an outreach function to
State and local governments?
Mr. Coker. I have not had the benefit of meeting with the
entire office and getting that type of insight, sir, but from
my reading of the strategy, both the National Cybersecurity
Strategy and the National Cyber Workforce and Education
Strategy, ONCD has a strong outreach, not just to those SLTTs
but across the private sector as well. Without having sat
through an organizational chart I am very confident that that
type of outreach is in place at ONCD, sir.
Senator Blumenthal. I think States are going to need the
benefit of the expertise and insight that your office and you
can bring to bear, so I think that is going to be a very
important function that you can perform, and hopefully you have
the resources to do it. I do not know how big your staff is in
that office.
Mr. Coker. I absolutely agree, sir. Again, ONCD has been
referred to as a coach. There are other players on the field,
and in the case of election security those players on the field
really are the State, local, tribal, and territorial
governments that ONCD, amongst other partners, needs to support
with the expertise and other resources to, again, effect sold
elections, sir.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you very much. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Peters. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
I would like to thank our nominees again for joining us
here today and for your willingness to serve in these very
important positions.
The nominees have filed responses to biographical and
financial questionnaires,\1\ and without objection this
information will be made part of the hearing record,\2\ within
the exception of the financial data,\3\ which is on file and
available for public inspection in the Committee offices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The information on Mr. Coker appears in the Appendix on page
32.
\2\ The information on Mr. Rezmovic appears in the Appendix on page
89.
\3\ The information on Ms. Summerlin appears in the Appendix on
page 149.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hearing record will remain open until 12 p.m.,
tomorrow, November 3, for the submission of statements and
questions for the record.
This hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:19 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]