[Senate Hearing 118-638]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-638
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
on
H.R. 9026/S. 4795
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE AND
JUSTICE, AND SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 2025, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
__________
Department of Commerce
Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Investigation
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Science Foundation
Nondepartmental Witnesses
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
55-290 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
PATTY MURRAY, Washington, Chair
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California \1\ SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Vice
JACK REED, Rhode Island Chair
JON TESTER, Montana MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware JERRY MORAN, Kansas
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia Virginia
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
GARY PETERS, Michigan BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona \2\ KATIE BRITT, Alabama
MARCO RUBIO, Florida
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
Evan Schatz, Staff Director
Elizabeth McDonnell, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire, Chairman
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California \1\ JERRY MORAN, Kansas, Ranking
JACK REED, Rhode Island Member
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland Virginia
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
GARY PETERS, Michigan BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico \3\
Professional Staff
Jessica Berry
Michael Bednarczyk
Lindsay Erickson
Blaise Sheridan
Angela Caalim
Brian Daner (Minority)
Kevin Wheeler (Minority)
Administrative Support
Alex Shultz (Minority)
\1\ Died September 29, 2023.
\2\ Appointed to Committee October 18, 2023.
\3\ Appointed to Subcommittee November 2, 2023.
C O N T E N T S
----------
hearings
Wednesday, April 17, 2024
Page
Department of Justice............................................ 1
Wednesday, May 15, 2024
Department of Commerce........................................... 55
Thursday, May 23, 2024
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.................... 133
National Science Foundation...................................... 133
Tuesday, June 4, 2024
Federal Bureau of Investigation.................................. 183
----------
back matter
List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements....... 377
Nondepartmental Witnesses........................................ 233
Subject Index:
Department of Commerce....................................... 381
Department of Justice........................................ 381
Federal Bureau of Investigation.............................. 381
National Aeronautics and Space Administration................ 381
National Science Foundation.................................. 382
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 17, 2024
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen (Chair), presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Murray, Reed, Coons, Manchin,
Van Hollen, Peters, Heinrich, Moran, Murkowski, Collins,
Capito, Kennedy, Britt, and Fischer.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
opening statement of senator jeanne shaheen
Senator Shaheen. Good morning. The Appropriations
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related
Agencies, will come to order.
Welcome to today's hearing to review the President's fiscal
year 2025 funding request for the Department of Justice.
Our witness today is Attorney General Merrick Garland.
Welcome, General Garland. Because this is our first hearing for
the subcommittee of the year, I also wanted to recognize and
thank my colleague and Ranking Member Senator Moran. We have
worked very cooperatively throughout 2024 and in our other
years on the subcommittee, and I know that will continue, and I
appreciate that. So thank you, Senator Moran.
I fully believe that this subcommittee will continue its
important and bipartisan work this year, both in this
subcommittee and under the leadership of Full Committee Chair
Murray, and Vice Chair Collins. And once again, I am ready to
get to work, and look forward to continuing that bipartisan
effort. And I think that we will probably be joined later by
Chair Murray and Vice Chair Collins.
This year, the President's fiscal year 2025 budget request
for the Department of Justice is $39 billion in direct
discretionary spending. That is a 5 percent increase compared
to fiscal year 2024 enacted for the Department. But
unfortunately, we are in a fundamentally different position
than the last time you appeared before this committee, Attorney
General.
Last year, we were discussing increases provided in the
fiscal year 2023 funding legislation, and where the Department
was proposing program increases to reflect a decade of efforts
to rebuild after the impacts of the Budget Control Act and
post-sequestration. Now, we are faced with the impacts of
significant cuts in fiscal year 2024 that came as a result of
the Fiscal Responsibility Act's discretionary spending limits.
Our bill faced a 3 percent cut compared to 2023. That is
roughly $2.5 billion less than we had in the prior year to fund
our bill. Those effects are real, and we are hearing for good
reason from all of our affected agencies about what this truly
means for staffing and daily operations.
For the Department of Justice those cuts meant $1.2 billion
less in fiscal 2023, and we don't know what 2025 will bring,
but we remain under the constraints of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act, and I am concerned about those continued
cuts to discretionary spending. Those cuts have very real
consequences as we know. The FBI is a good example of those
impacts. Despite a relatively modest cut of $32 million or 0.3
percent to salaries and expenses; the amount needed for the FBI
to maintain its current services for 2024 is actually $484
million. And this directly affects the FBI's ability to counter
threats of terrorism and keep our country safe.
The cuts will reduce FBI's ability to counter threats of
terrorism, combat violent crime, drugs, gangs, and
transnational organized crime. Increases are also requested to
combat drug trafficking and prevent overdose deaths in our
communities, and that is a particular issue for my home State
of New Hampshire.
As I noted last year, critical grant programs rely on the
Crime Victims Fund, which continues to experience historically
low deposits. I look forward to continuing to work together to
ensure that the Crime Victims Fund remains solvent, and welcome
the discussion today about how the Department is pursuing both
short- and long-term solutions to ensure the Crime Victims Fund
remains a dependable source of funding for survivor resources.
As I said earlier, I also look forward to working with the
Department as we look at the resources for the Antitrust
Division to ensure that they can continue to do their work.
Now, before I close, I want to thank the over 116,000
career employees of the Department of Justice, including law
enforcement personnel, intelligence analysts, and attorneys,
for their tireless work each day to keep Americans safe. Their
work is not easy, but it is vital to our country, and I am
grateful for their service.
Mr. Attorney General, I look forward to your testimony and
our discussion today. And I will submit my full statement for
the record.
Senator Shaheen. And now I would like to recognize the
subcommittee Ranking Member, Senator Moran.
opening statement of senator jerry moran
Senator Moran. Chair Shaheen, thank you very much, thank
you for convening this hearing, and thank you for the
cooperation that you have exhibited with me on this side of the
dais. I enjoy working with you, and I look forward to doing so
in this new fiscal year. The complaint yesterday in a hearing
was: Well, you did get your appropriation bills done, but they
were 6 months late. So maybe we can get them done and get them
done on time, and that would be a great, a significant
accomplishment, although something that ought to. Every city,
every county, every school board in Kansas passes a budget in a
timely fashion, and deals with their issues, and I hope that
our committee can do the same.
And General, thank you for your presence here. Thanks for
the new time and adjusting to the Senate's schedule today.
We are, what we faced last year I think was a 2.9 percent
cut, and we reduced the spending in the Commerce, Justice,
Science arena by $2.5 billion, and we will work to see if we
get a good and fair allocation to, hopefully, make things
slightly different and better in this fiscal year.
This hearing is timely and critically important. Kansans,
in fact all Americans are facing extraordinary threats to their
security, both from threats here at home and abroad, and the
Department of Justice is an integral component of addressing
those challenges. First, President Biden's challenges, the
affairs at the southern border has led to a national security
and humanitarian crisis with grave repercussions, we have lost
our ability to manage, and in some cases even know who is
crossing our borders. That includes agents of foreign powers,
potential terrorists, and others who mean to undermine our
institutions.
Additionally, it is well-established that most of the
illicit fentanyl in this country was flooded across the
southern border by Mexican cartels. I hope to hear how the
Department plans to disrupt and dismantle these cartels and
their distribution networks.
Second, events in the Middle East, including Hamas' vicious
attack on October the 7 on Israel, and Iran's support for proxy
forces, and now their own actions, have dramatically elevated
the risk of terrorist attacks in the United States. We face
serious threats of coordinated attacks, as was just seen; it
happened in Russia.
Third, violent crime continues to plague communities across
our country. Modest declines in the FBI Unified Crime Reporting
Statistics mean little when compared to the experiences people
across the country have encountered and been harmed or
traumatized by that crime. The DOJ's own reporting, that
National Crime Victimization Survey showed that a total violent
crime victimization rose in 2022.
Finally, cyber capabilities of our enemies are continuing
to improve, putting our system at greater risk. Foreign
adversaries, including China, Russia, and criminal gangs that
operate under the support and protection, are targeting
municipal drinking water systems, businesses, small and large.
In fact, Mr. General--Attorney General, our State's Judicial
Branch was subjected to a cyber attack that was certainly
disabling for a significant number of months. And the
agricultural interest in Kansas, our industry in Kansas has had
these experiences as well.
Virtually every aspect--excuse me--aspect of modern life
depends upon the networks and systems our adversaries are
targeting, and the threats cannot be understated. We live in a
dangerous world, Attorney General, as you well know. I was with
the FBI Director in Kansas, 10 days ago, 2 weeks ago, he
expressed--it was a cybersecurity conference, he expressed
that, quote: It would be hard--he would be hard pressed to
think of a time where so many threats to our public safety and
national security were so elevated, all at once.
Those are challenges that your Department faces every day.
I wish them success and I wish to be helpful in making certain
that we are able to address and reduce those safety and
national security issues.
I hope this conversation that we have today will instill
confidence in the American people that the Department of
Justice is working to address threats like these and to make
our world, our country, and our communities a safer place.
Chair Shaheen, again, thank you; and Attorney Garland--
Attorney General Garland, thank you again for being with us. I
look forward to hearing your testimony.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Moran. Mr.
Attorney General, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. MERRICK GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL,
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Attorney General Garland. Thank you, Chair Shaheen, Ranking
Member Moran, and distinguished Members of this Subcommittee
for the opportunity to discuss the Justice Department's funding
request for fiscal year 2025.
Since I last appeared before you, the public servants of
the Justice Department have continued to advance our mission to
keep our country safe, to protect civil rights, and to uphold
the rule of law. Our U.S. Attorneys' Offices, law enforcement
agents, and grant-making experts have worked together with
police and community partners across the country to help drive
down violent crime.
We have gone after the cartels that traffic in deadly
fentanyl. We have prosecuted fraud, recovered stolen funds, and
challenged illegal monopolies. We have investigated and
prosecuted hate crimes that terrorize entire communities. We
have worked to defend the reproductive freedoms that are
protected by Federal law. We have worked to combat a disturbing
threat--a disturbing spike in threats of violence against those
who serve the public, including judges, police officers,
senators, and even against our own employees. And in everything
we do, we have worked to ensure the equal protection of law
that is the foundation of our democracy.
I am proud of the work we have done. And I am deeply proud
of the way the Department's public servants, from our agents,
to our attorneys, to our administrative staff, have gone about
their work. They have conducted themselves in a way the
American people should be proud of. But we recognize that we
have much more to do. Our fiscal year 2025 budget request
reflects the difficult budget environment that we are in, and
the extremely difficult choices that we had to make because of
it.
It also reflects the resources that we need now more than
ever to continue our work. When I became Attorney General, 3
years ago, I knew that grappling with the violent crime that
surged during the pandemic would be one of our greatest
challenges.
I am glad to be able to report that last year we saw a
significant decrease in overall violent crime compared to the
previous year, including an over 13 percent decline in
homicides. That is the largest 1 year drop in homicides in 50
years, and data indicates that this decline is continuing, as
The Wall Street Journal recently reported, just this week, in
the first 3 months of this year, homicides dropped 20 percent
across 133 cities as compared to the same period last year.
But I want to be very clear, there is no acceptable level
of violent crime. Too many communities are still struggling,
too many people are still scared, and the hard-fought progress
that we are seeing can easily slip away. We must remain focused
and vigilant. To continue to keep--to help keep our country
safe from a range of threats, we are seeking a total of $21
billion to support the FBI, ATF, DEA, U.S. Marshals Service,
and the U.S. Attorneys' Offices, as well as the Criminal
Division and the National Security Division.
We will use these resources to prosecute illegal gun
traffickers and straw purchasers, to invest in the advanced
technological tools that help us fight gun violence, and to
hold accountable the cartel members, leaders, and associates
who are responsible for poisoning our communities with
fentanyl. We will use these resources to counter the threats
that the governments of Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea
pose to our country, and we will use these resources to
strengthen our work to counter both foreign and domestic
terrorism.
As the FBI Director has testified, we are facing an
increasing threat of foreign terrorism since October 7. That is
why the Department also urges the Senate to act to reauthorize
Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act before
it expires this Friday. As you know, Section 702 is
indispensable to our work to protect the American people from
cyber Nation-State terrorists, and other threats.
In addition to our own prosecutorial investigative
resources, we also recognize the importance of our partnerships
to help keep our country safe. So we are seeking investments in
the Department's three grant-making components: the Office of
Justice Programs, the Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services, and the Office on Violence Against Women. They
support community and law enforcement partners through more
than 200 grant programs.
Our budget requests more than $4.3 billion to support the
public safety efforts of our State, local, Tribal, and
territorial law enforcement and community partners, including
$2.5 billion for the COPS Program. And as part of our effort to
administer safe and humane Federal detention and prison
systems, we are requesting $8.8 billion for the Bureau of
Prisons. That includes resources to address urgent staffing and
infrastructure needs.
As I have noted many times before, when the Justice
Department was founded in 1870 one of its principal purposes
was the protection of civil rights. Protecting both the safety
and the civil rights of everyone in our country remains our
urgent obligation. Our budget seeks $201.3 million for the
Civil Rights Division to continue its essential work,
including: to deter and prosecute hate crimes, to ensure
constitutional policing, to enforce Federal laws prohibiting
discrimination in all forms, and to protect the right of all
eligible citizens to vote and to have that vote counted.
The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy;
protecting that right requires us to protect the citizens who
we rely on to fairly administer our elections. Our democracy
cannot function if the officials, workers, and volunteers who
administer our elections have to fear for their lives just for
doing their jobs.
The Justice Department is aggressively investigating and
prosecuting those who threaten election workers with violence,
and we will continue to do so. As I said, I am extremely proud
of the work of the Department's employees, the work that they
are doing to advance our mission. Their work brings them face
to face with some of our country's greatest challenges, and
many of them risk their lives to protect the public. I am
grateful to them, and I am honored to be here to represent
them.
I respectfully ask for your support for the President's
fiscal year 2025 budget requests so that we can continue our
work on behalf of the American people. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General of the
United States Department of Justice
introduction
Good afternoon, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity
to appear before you today to discuss the President's Fiscal Year (FY)
2025 funding request for the United States Department of Justice.
Since I last appeared before you, the more than 115,000 employees
of the Justice Department have continued to work tirelessly to fulfill
our mission to keep our country safe from all threats, foreign and
domestic; to protect the civil rights of everyone in our country; and
to uphold the rule of law that is the foundation of our system of
government.
Our law enforcement agents, prosecutors, and grantmaking experts
have continued to work closely with police and community partners
across the country to help protect the safety of the American people.
That has included our efforts with law enforcement and community
partners to replicate successes we have seen in communities that are
driving down the violent crime that spiked during the pandemic. Our
U.S. Attorneys' Offices and our Criminal Division are going after the
individuals and gangs responsible for the greatest violence. Our law
enforcement agencies are working with their state, local, Tribal, and
territorial law enforcement partners to seize illegal guns and deadly
drugs, including fentanyl. And our grantmaking components are working
closely with local communities to provide targeted support and
assistance. We are funding evidence-based, community-centered
initiatives aimed at preventing and disrupting violence. We are
supporting community policing efforts that build the public trust
between law enforcement and the community that we know is essential to
public safety. We are making critical investments in hiring law
enforcement officers in communities nationwide to address the crisis in
recruitment and retention. And we are providing much-needed resources
for law enforcement officer health and wellness.
We know that we must remain focused and vigilant, but we are
encouraged by recent FBI data indicating a decrease in violent crime in
communities across the country in 2023 compared to the prior year,
including an over 13% decline in homicides. This indicator of declining
violent crime comes alongside other encouraging data we have seen
released within the last year.
And in the wake of the October 7 terrorist attacks on Israel, we
have worked closely with our law enforcement and community partners to
monitor the impact the conflict in the Middle East may have in
inspiring foreign terrorist organizations, homegrown violent
extremists, and domestic violent extremists both in the United States
and abroad. Following the October 7 attacks, I directed all of our U.S.
Attorneys' Offices and all of our FBI Field Offices to meet with local
law enforcement and community leaders to strengthen our response to
threats of hate-fueled violence. We have seen a sharp increase in
threats against Jewish, Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian communities, and
we are aggressively investigating and prosecuting such threats. We will
continue to do so.
We are continuing to prioritize our responsibility to protect both
the safety and the civil rights of everyone in our country. We are
prosecuting hate-fueled acts of violence and threats of violence. We
are protecting the cornerstone of our democracy: the right of all
eligible citizens to vote and to have that vote counted. We are working
to ensure constitutional policing and to build trust between law
enforcement and the communities they serve. And we are enforcing
Federal law prohibiting discrimination in all its forms. Just last
fall, only 2 years after I launched the Justice Department's Combating
Redlining Initiative, I announced that we had secured more than $100
million for communities across the country that have been harmed by
discriminatory lending practices.
The Justice Department is also continuing to fulfill the
responsibility that underlies all of our work--upholding the rule of
law. We are adhering to the norms that safeguard the Justice
Department's independence and integrity. Principal among those norms is
that we treat like cases alike. There is not one set of laws for the
powerful and another for the powerless; one for the rich, and another
for the poor; one for Democrats, another for Republicans; or different
rules, depending upon one's race or ethnicity or religion. We follow
the facts and the law. We do not tolerate improper influence of any
kind. And we apply the law in a way that respects the Constitution.
Our work to uphold the rule of law includes protecting our
country's democratic institutions and protecting those who serve the
public from violence and threats of violence. Since the January 6,
2021, attack on the United States Capitol, the Department has engaged
in one of the most complex and resource-intensive investigations in our
history. We have initiated prosecutions and secured convictions across
a wide range of criminal conduct that occurred on January 6, as well as
in the days and weeks leading up to the attack. That includes
convictions of those who brutally assaulted officers at the Capitol;
those who obstructed the certification of the presidential election;
and leaders of both the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers for seditious
conspiracy. So far, we have charged over 1,380 individuals and obtained
over 940 convictions in connection with the January 6 attack.
We are also continuing to investigate and prosecute those who use
violence and threats of violence to target Americans who serve and
interact with the public at every level. Last month, as a result of the
work of the Department's Election Threats Task Force, a man in
Massachusetts was sentenced to three and a half years in prison for
threatening an Arizona election official. Also, in February of this
year, a woman in Texas was sentenced to 37 months in prison for
threatening to assassinate a Federal judge in Florida. In February, we
secured the conviction of a man in Florida for threatening to murder a
member of Congress. During the first week in January, we charged a man
in Connecticut for making threats against a Veterans Affairs Medical
Center and a member of Congress, and we charged an individual in
Florida for threatening to kill a member of Congress and the
congressperson's children. Last December, we secured a year-long prison
sentence for an individual in New Mexico who threatened to ``put a
bullet'' in the face of a congresswoman. These cases represent just a
fraction of the work the Department is doing to disrupt and prosecute
violence and threats of violence against those who serve the public.
Securing the $37.8 billion in discretionary resources outlined in
our FY 2025 budget request is critical to our efforts to advance the
Department's mission in service of the American people.
keeping our country safe
The Department's FY 2025 budget requests more than $21.0 billion to
sustain and expand the capacities of our law enforcement components and
U.S. Attorneys' Offices to help keep our country safe. This funding
includes:
--$11.3 billion for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to
carry out its complex mission, including keeping our country
safe from a multitude of serious and evolving threats--which
include terrorism, espionage, cyber threats, violent crime, and
the proliferation and potential use of weapons of mass
destruction;
--$2.8 billion for the United States Attorneys' Offices, including
resources to prioritize the prosecution of violent crime;
--$2.7 billion for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to
combat drug cartels and the flow of deadly drugs into our
communities (in addition to the $651.7 million dedicated to
DEA's diversion control efforts);
--$1.9 billion for the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) to assist local
law enforcement in apprehending violent fugitives in our
neighborhoods and to protect our nation's judges and courts;
--$2.0 billion for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives (ATF) to continue to implement the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act, to address the scourge of violent gun crime,
and to support the National Integrated Ballistic Information
Network and the National Services Center;
--$239.3 million for the Criminal Division to prosecute violations of
Federal criminal law, including cybercrime, drug trafficking,
child exploitation, and gang and gun-related violent crime; and
--$143.5 million for the National Security Division to enhance its
ability to pursue national security threats, including threats
posed by terrorism, cybercrime, and hostile nation-states.
Today, I would like to highlight four significant areas the
Department is focused on in our efforts to help keep our country safe:
protecting national security; combating violent crime and gun violence,
including by supporting state, local, Tribal, and territorial law
enforcement and building public trust; disrupting drug trafficking
networks and preventing overdose deaths; and protecting Americans from
economic harm.
Protecting National Security
The Justice Department's FY 2025 budget request includes nearly
$7.7 billion for national security programs to combat the wide range of
complex and evolving threats facing the United States--while protecting
civil rights and civil liberties. At the beginning of this year, the
Justice Department secured the guilty plea of the terrorist who
attacked NYPD officers in Times Square on New Year's Eve in 2022. That
case represents just a snapshot of the work the Department is doing to
help counter the threat terrorism poses to our country. Our request
includes more than $1.6 billion to support the counterterrorism work of
our 94 U.S. Attorneys' Offices; our law enforcement components,
including the FBI and the ATF; our grant-making offices; and our
litigating divisions, including the National Security Division, the
Civil Division, and the Criminal Division.
In addition to sustaining and strengthening our counterterrorism
efforts, the Department's FY 2025 budget also requests investments in
our work to investigate, prosecute, and otherwise disrupt the threats
posed by the governments of the People's Republic of China (PRC),
Russia, Iran, and North Korea. To address these threats, the Justice
Department is bringing prosecutions against foreign agents attempting
to undermine the rule of law in the United States, enforcing violations
of economic sanctions and export controls, and combating transnational
repression. For example, in February of this year, the Justice
Department seized over $108 million and 500,000 barrels of fuel that
would otherwise have enabled the Government of Iran to further its
destabilizing activities, including its support of Hamas, Hizballah,
and other Iranian-aligned terrorist groups.
In addition, the Justice Department recognizes the threat posed by
nation-states that are using cyber operations to steal our intellectual
property, target critical infrastructure, compromise our networks and
supply chains, and cause significant economic harm. That is why just
last month, we charged seven members of a hacking group backed by the
Chinese government for their roles in a years-long scheme targeting
U.S. and foreign critics, businesses, and political officials in
furtherance of the PRC's economic espionage and foreign intelligence
objectives. And, in February 2024, the Department conducted a court-
authorized disruption of a botnet controlled by Russian intelligence
services.
The Department is also accelerating its efforts alongside its
international partners to meet the threat posed by ransomware groups.
Two months ago, the Justice Department, together with our partners in
the United Kingdom, disrupted the LockBit ransomware group. LockBit was
one of the most active ransomware groups in the world and had targeted
over 2,000 victims, receiving more than $120 million in ransom payments
and making ransom demands totaling hundreds of millions of dollars. To
meet the increasing and evolving cybercrime threat posed by both
nation-states and criminal groups, the Justice Department's FY 2025
budget request includes over $1.3 billion to investigate, prosecute,
and fight cybercrime and strengthen the Department's cybersecurity and
cyber-resilience. The Department's FY 2025 budget also maintains
critical resources for the Criminal and the National Security
Divisions, as well as the FBI and our U.S. Attorneys' Offices, to
pursue complex intellectual property crime investigations around the
world.
The Department has pursued a number of measures to ensure
accountability for Russia's full-scale, brutal, and unprovoked invasion
of Ukraine. The Department launched Task Force KleptoCapture (TFKC) to
further leverage our tools and authorities to combat efforts to evade
or undermine U.S. sanctions and export controls. We also launched a War
Crimes Accountability Team to bring to justice the individuals
responsible for committing atrocities in Ukraine and deter future
aggression. In December 2023, the Department filed the first-ever
charges under the U.S. war crimes statute against four Russia-
affiliated military personnel for heinous crimes against an American
citizen.
Congress has been an important partner in strengthening these
efforts. In January 2023, the President signed into law the Justice for
Victims of War Crimes Act, which enables the Department to prosecute
war criminals present in the United States regardless of where the
offense occurs. And on December 29, 2022, the President signed into law
the Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2023. Among
other things, the Act authorizes the Department to conduct transfers of
certain forfeited Russian oligarch assets to the Department of State to
remediate the harms of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. In February 2023,
I authorized the first transfer under this new authority.
Combating Violent Crime and Gun Violence, Supporting State, Local,
Tribal, and Territorial Law Enforcement, and Building Public
Trust
The Justice Department's strategy to reduce violent crime and gun
violence is rooted in our partnerships: partnerships among Federal law
enforcement agencies who are assisting in the fight against violent
crime; partnerships with the state, local, Tribal, and territorial law
enforcement agencies tasked with protecting their local communities;
and partnerships with the local communities themselves. We are
committed to providing our partners with the resources and tools that
they need to keep communities safe and to strengthen the public trust
that is essential to public safety.
As part of that strategy, the ATF, DEA, FBI, and USMS are
partnering with state and local law enforcement agencies to embed
agents, seize and trace guns used in crimes, disrupt violent drug
trafficking, pursue fugitives, and provide other necessary support. And
our prosecutors are focusing their resources on finding, arresting, and
convicting the individuals who have repeatedly committed violent
offenses and criminal organizations that are the principal drivers of
violent crime. We have also surged prosecutorial resources to cities
that experienced a record rise in violent crime. In Houston, Texas, and
Memphis, Tennessee, we launched a Violent Crime Initiative that brought
prosecutors from the Department's Criminal Division to work closely
with prosecutors already on the ground to target those responsible for
the greatest violence. That initiative also engages with community-
based organizations that focus on violence prevention, intervention,
and reentry programs. Earlier this year, we announced an additional
surge of resources to Washington, D.C., to combat violent crime in our
nation's capital. Earlier this month, we launched the next phase of our
Violent Crime Initiative in St. Louis, Missouri; Jackson, Mississippi;
and Hartford, Connecticut.
We have also been bringing to bear our advanced technological
tools--ballistics analysis, firearms tracing, gun intelligence centers,
and local fusion cells--in our work to disrupt illegal gun trafficking
and reduce gun violence. The Department requests an increase of $18.7
million to enhance ATF's National Integrated Ballistic Information
Network and Crime Gun Intelligence Centers.
Our FY 2025 budget request also reflects the Department's
commitment to continuing to bring public safety resources to localities
across the country that need it the most.
The Department's three grantmaking components, the Offices of
Justice Programs (OJP), Office of Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS), and the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), provide vital
support to the Department's state, local, and Tribal partners through
more than 200 grant programs.
The Department's FY 2025 budget includes $2.5 billion in
discretionary and mandatory funding for the COPS Hiring Program to
enable law enforcement agencies across the country to hire more full-
time law enforcement professionals.
Our budget requests needed resources for the Office of Justice
Programs (OJP) to advance community safety and build community trust.
Those resources will fund critical longstanding grant programs,
including $524.5 million for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant Program, including resources to fund the Department's
Project Safe Neighborhoods program, and resources to fund the Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention grants. This funding will
also support community violence intervention programs, as well as
programming that promotes justice and healing for victims of crime. In
addition, these resources will support the Department's Officer Robert
Wilson III Preventing Violence Against Law Enforcement Officers and
Ensuring Officer Resilience and Survivability (VALOR) Officer Safety
and Wellness Initiative, which provides trainings, research, and
guidance on preventing violence against law enforcement and supporting
officer wellness.
The Department's FY 2025 budget includes resources to support the
vital work of OVW to improve the country's response to domestic
violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. The
Department's request includes $800.0 million for OVW--an increase of
$87.0 million above the FY 2024 enacted level--to support both
longstanding OVW programs and newer ones, such as those addressing
cybercrimes against individuals and trauma-informed training for law
enforcement officers. The request includes funding for programs to
provide support to local, state, Tribal, and territorial partners,
including prosecutors, officers, courts, and victim services, as well
as homicide and domestic violence reduction initiatives.
In addition, the Department's FY 2025 budget seeks key resources to
protect vulnerable communities and help victims of crime get back on
their feet. That includes funding to combat child abduction and
exploitation, protect victims of violence and abuse, reform juvenile
justice systems, and expand access to sexual assault nurse examination
programs. The budget also includes a legislative proposal to ensure
stable and consistent funding levels for the Crime Victims Fund over
the next decade.
The Department also seeks $29.1 million for the Community Relations
Service to provide mediation and conciliation services to communities
impacted by conflict.
Our FY 2025 budget requests funding for the Department to address
the unique public safety challenges facing Tribal communities. Last
month, I met with Tribal leadership, Tribal law enforcement, and victim
services experts on the Crow Indian Reservation and heard about the
challenges that Tribal victims of crime face in accessing the services
they need to recover and feel safe in their communities. The Justice
Department recognizes that more must be done across the Federal
government to keep Tribal communities safe, and to address the crisis
of missing or murdered Indigenous persons. We remain steadfast in our
commitment to this work. To that end, we are seeking $713.2 million for
our law enforcement agencies, U.S. Attorneys' Offices, Office of Tribal
Justice, and grantmaking components to address the crisis of missing or
murdered Indigenous persons, and to combat violent crime and support
public safety initiatives in Indian Country. This includes $261.8
million in grants for Tribal assistance, victim services, Tribal youth
programs, and domestic violence reduction programs, including $25.0
million to help Tribes hold accountable non-Indian offenders who commit
certain violent crimes in their communities, such as sexual assault,
domestic violence, and sex trafficking.
As part of the Department's work to end the gun violence epidemic,
our FY 2025 budget requests resources to continue to implement the
Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA). Since BSCA's enactment in
2022, the Department has brought charges against more than 420
defendants under the law's new firearms trafficking and straw
purchasing criminal offenses.
In the 22 months since the passage of BSCA, the law's expanded
background checks have already kept more than 700 firearms out of the
hands of young people who are prohibited from having them. Our request
seeks an additional $124.9 million to continue our efforts to disrupt
gun violence and implement BSCA. The Department's budget proposes
$884.0 million of mandatory funding for the new Gun Crime Prevention
Strategic Fund in FY 2025 and $4.4 billion in total over the next 5
years. That Fund will provide grants to support police and prosecutors
and provide an infusion of resources to enhance law enforcement access
to promising technology and evidence-based training, and to modernize
the recruitment and retention of a 21st century law enforcement
workforce. In addition, the Fund will provide communities with
resources they need to set up and support task forces to bring down
homicide and gun violence.
Disrupting Drug Trafficking Networks and Preventing Overdose Deaths
The Justice Department is working every day to get fentanyl and
other deadly drugs out of our communities and bring to justice those
who put them there. Over the past 3 years, the Department has zeroed in
on the Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels, the two largest and most violent
drug trafficking operations in the world that have wreaked havoc on
American communities. Our agents and prosecutors are working with
state, local, Tribal, and territorial partners to break apart every
link in the cartels' global supply chains, which includes the cartels'
leaders, their drug traffickers, their money launderers, their
clandestine lab operators, their security forces, their weapons
suppliers, and their chemical suppliers. In 2023, DEA seized more than
79.5 million fentanyl-laced pills and nearly 12,000 pounds of fentanyl
powder.
Earlier this month, the Department arrested dozens of Jalisco
Cartel associates in Texas on charges of cocaine, fentanyl, heroin, and
meth trafficking. In February, in New York, a precursor chemical broker
of fentanyl and methamphetamine, who provided chemicals to several
cartels, including the Jalisco Cartel, was sentenced to 18 years and 8
months in prison. Earlier this year, an associate of the Sinaloa Cartel
was sentenced to over 21 years in prison for trafficking deadly drugs
into the United States. Late last year, we charged the leaders of the
violent Malas Manas cartel with human smuggling and drug trafficking.
In October 2023, we announced charges against chemical companies and
their employees based in China for trafficking fentanyl and
methamphetamine precursor chemicals into the United States. And in
April 2023, I announced several significant actions the Justice
Department took against the Sinaloa Cartel. This included charges
against the cartel's leaders, its chemical suppliers, manufacturers,
gun and drug traffickers, and money launderers. In September 2023,
Ovidio Guzman Lopez, a leader of the Sinaloa Cartel, and the son of
Joaquin Guzman Loera, also known as ``El Chapo,'' was extradited from
Mexico to the United States.
To continue this work, the Department's FY 2025 budget requests
critical resources to combat violent drug cartels and to stop the flow
of deadly drugs into our communities. This includes our request for:
--$3.3 billion for DEA's investigations, counterdrug efforts across
241 domestic offices and 93 foreign offices in 69 countries
around the world, and diversion control;
--$1.4 billion for the USMS's efforts to capture drug trafficking
fugitives and detain them;
--$188.9 million for the FBI's counterdrug operations, including
targeting fentanyl and opioid trafficking on the Dark Web;
--$550.5 million for the Department's Organized Crime Drug
Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) to combat transnational
organized crime, money laundering, and major drug trafficking
networks;
--$48.0 million for the Criminal Division's efforts to disrupt and
dismantle drug trafficking networks; and
--$20.2 million for the Civil Division's efforts to advance national
chain pharmacy litigation and opioid-related cases.
Last fall, I spent a morning with people from across the country
who came to Washington, D.C., for DEA's second annual family summit.
They attended the summit because they had lost a loved one to a drug
poisoning or overdose and they wanted to do everything in their power
to prevent that from happening to another family. I promised them that
we would remember the victims of the poisoning and overdose epidemic,
and that we would never give up in our efforts to pursue justice for
them. I also told them that the Justice Department understands that no
one person, and no one family can defeat this epidemic alone. That is
why, in addition to our enforcement efforts, the Department is working
every day to support communities in their efforts to confront the
public health challenges of substance use. For FY 2025, the Department
is requesting more than $490.0 million in grants to address the
overdose epidemic, including an increase of $23.0 million over the FY
2024 enacted level for the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act
(CARA) grants to continue support for the Comprehensive Opioid,
Stimulant, and Substance Use Program (COSSUP), treatment court
programs, the Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program (JMHCP),
the Veterans Treatment Court Program, and Prescription Drug Monitoring
Programs.
Protecting Americans from Economic Harm
The Justice Department's FY 2025 budget request seeks resources to
continue our essential work to promote economic competition, prevent
the theft of intellectual property, deter and prosecute corporate
crime, protect the government against fraud, and combat corruption.
That includes supporting the Department's efforts to vigorously
enforce the antitrust laws that protect consumers from higher prices
and fewer choices. In March, the Justice Department sued Apple for
monopolizing smartphone markets in the United States, and earlier in
the month, JetBlue announced that it had abandoned its $3.8 billion
acquisition of Spirit Airlines after the Department proved in court
that a merger between JetBlue and Spirit would have caused tens of
millions of travelers to face higher fares and fewer choices.
Our request also seeks resources to continue our work to hold
accountable the individuals responsible for corporate crime. In
February of this year, officials from a corn milling company were
sentenced to Federal prison for their roles in a deadly explosion that
killed five workers in Wisconsin in 2017. In just the last 3 months of
2023, we secured the convictions of the CEOs of two of the largest
cryptocurrency platforms in the world--FTX and Binance. In total, we
charged over 4,800 white collar defendants nationwide in 2023.
We are also dedicating resources to addressing the increasing
overlap between our work related to combating corporate crime and
protecting our national security, including by investigating and
prosecuting terrorist financing, export control circumvention, and
sanctions evasion.
And we are devoting resources to recovering and protecting taxpayer
dollars from fraud and abuse. Last fiscal year, settlements and
judgments under the False Claims Act exceeded $2.68 billion, and the
government and whistleblowers were party to 543 settlements and
judgments--the highest annual number of settlements and judgments in
history.
Almost 3 years ago, I established the COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement
Task Force to marshal the resources of the Department, in partnership
with agencies across government, to combat, prevent, and prosecute
COVID-19 related fraud. Since then, the Task Force has charged more
than 3,500 defendants, secured more than $1.4 billion in forfeiture
orders to recover stolen funds, and filed more than 400 civil lawsuits
resulting in court judgements and settlements.
The Department supports legislation to extend the statute of
limitations for criminal offenses and civil and administrative
violations affecting COVID-19 pandemic relief funding. Such an
extension is warranted because of, among other reasons, the size and
number of the programs affected. Though the COVID-19 health emergency
may have ended, the Justice Department's work to identify and prosecute
those who stole pandemic relief funds is far from over.
To continue our work to protect Americans from economic harm, our
FY 2025 budget request includes:
--$288.0 million for the Antitrust Division to help promote
competition in the American economy and protect workers,
consumers, and businesses alike;
--$426.4 million for the U.S. Attorneys' Offices to support their
efforts to bring cases combating civil and criminal fraud and
white collar crime;
--$502.0 million for the FBI to support its work investigating
corporate crime, fraud, money laundering, intellectual property
theft, and other economic crimes;
--$256.1 million for the Civil Division's efforts to enforce laws
that protect the health, safety, and economic security of
American consumers;
--$91.6 million for the Criminal Division to support its anti-fraud
efforts and their investigations and prosecutions of white
collar crime; and
--$129.3 million for the Tax Division, to support its vital work of
enforcing our tax laws fully, fairly, and consistently.
protecting civil rights
The Justice Department was first established in 1870, in the wake
of the Civil War and in the midst of Reconstruction, with the first
principal purpose of enforcing the protections guaranteed by the 13th,
14th, and 15th Amendments. Protecting civil rights remains our urgent
charge today. The Department's FY 2025 budget requests significant
investments to advance our essential work to protect voting rights,
combat hate crimes, foster trust and accountability in law enforcement,
expand access to justice, reform the criminal justice system, defend
federally protected reproductive rights, and advance environmental
justice and tackle the climate crisis. It also includes resources to
continue our work to enforce Federal laws prohibiting discrimination in
lending. In February of this year, the Department reached a $13.5
million settlement with First National Bank of Pennsylvania to expand
access to credit services for Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in North
Carolina that for too long had been denied to them. With that
settlement, the Justice Department's Combating Redlining Initiative has
now secured over $122 million in relief for communities across the
country.
To protect and advance civil rights, our FY 2025 budget request
includes:
--$201.3 million for the Civil Rights Division--an increase of $19.7
million or 10.8 percent above the FY 2024 enacted level--to
expand its efforts to protect civil rights, including deterring
and prosecuting hate crimes, safeguarding fair elections, and
combating discrimination;
--$114.5 million for the FBI to support its work to investigate
alleged violations of civil rights laws;
--$55.8 million for the U.S. Attorneys' Offices to support their
civil rights protection work; and,
--$10.4 million for the Office for Access to Justice to expand equal
access to justice for all.
Protecting Voting Rights
The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, the right
from which all others flow. The Justice Department is continuing to
vigorously protect voting rights using all resources and enforcement
tools at our disposal. Our efforts have included increasing the number
of enforcement attorneys in the Civil Rights Division to scrutinize
emerging laws that curb voter access or discriminate against Black
voters and other voters of color. Our efforts also include filing
lawsuits throughout the United States to protect the right to vote and
filing statements of interest and amicus briefs in Federal courts to
weigh in on critical issues.
Combating Hate Crimes
No person and no community in this country should have to live in
fear of hate-fueled violence and other unlawful acts. We have seen a
sharp increase in hate crimes in recent years. That is why the Justice
Department is bringing its collective tools to bear to prevent, deter,
investigate, and prosecute hate crimes, as well as improve hate crimes
reporting. The Department's FY 2025 funding request includes an
increase of $6 million over the FY 2024 enacted level for OJP's Jabara-
Heyer NO HATE Act program, and an increase of $8 million for the
Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Program grants.
Fostering Trust and Accountability in Law Enforcement
The Justice Department is committed to ensuring constitutional
policing and to strengthening trust and deepening relationships between
law enforcement officers and the people they protect. Last month, after
an investigation by the FBI and prosecution by the Department's Civil
Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern
District of Mississippi, six former Mississippi law enforcement
officers were sentenced to between 10 and 40 years in prison for
multiple flagrant felony offenses, including civil rights conspiracy,
deprivation of rights under color of law, discharge of a firearm during
a crime of violence, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and obstruction of
justice. The Department is also continuing its work to investigate
allegations of systemic misconduct by law enforcement agencies. We are
committed to ensuring that the remedies for statutory pattern-or-
practice violations are fair, transparent, and effective.
In June 2021, the Department's Federal law enforcement components
were instructed to develop plans specific to their unique missions to
expand the use of body- worn cameras. The Department's FY 2025 budget
requests $94.0 million in new funding to strengthen trust and
accountability in law enforcement by expanding, formalizing, and
managing Body Worn Camera programs for the Department's law enforcement
agencies.
additional areas of departmental focus
Administering a Just and Efficient Immigration Court System
The Department's FY 2025 budget requests additional resources to
administer our immigration laws. That means ensuring that every case is
handled fairly, efficiently, and consistent with due process. The
Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) needs additional
resources to address the backlog of cases in immigration court. Because
of historic case volumes, that backlog has been growing for more than a
decade, even though immigration judges completed record numbers of
cases in FY 2022 and FY 2023. To help reduce this backlog, for FY 2025,
the Department requests $981.1 million--a 16.2 percent increase over
the FY 2024 enacted level--to enable EOIR to hire 159 new staff,
including 25 new immigration judges. The FY 2025 budget request also
seeks funds for EOIR's Digital Transformation Initiative, which, among
other things, includes EOIR's partnership with the U.S. Digital
Service.
Maintaining a Safe and Humane Correctional System
The Justice Department takes seriously its responsibility to
administer safe and humane Federal detention and prison systems. The
Department's FY 2025 budget requests $8.8 billion for the Bureau of
Prisons (BOP) to ensure the health, safety, and wellbeing of
correctional staff and incarcerated individuals and to ensure
transparency, accountability, and effective oversight of all Federal
prisons and detention centers.
The request includes funding to enable BOP to optimize its hiring
efforts, including an increase of $41.0 million, for a total of $205.4
million in new hiring and retention incentives. The request also
includes funding to enable BOP to address urgent infrastructure needs
arising from an inherited backlog of an estimated $3 billion in
facilities maintenance and repairs.
The Department is also requesting $409.5 million for BOP to fully
implement the provisions of the First Step Act and increase programming
to prepare individuals in Federal prison for successful reentry.
In addition, the Department's FY 2025 budget requests $2.1 billion
for the USMS for Federal prisoner detention.
Promoting Good Government
The Department's FY 2025 budget request includes funding to promote
good government efforts that ensure the responsible and efficient use
of taxpayer dollars. The Department's FY 2025 budget requests an
increase of $8.3 million for the Department's Inspector General, to
promote integrity, efficiency, and accountability within the
Department; and an increase of $51.5 million for Justice Information
Sharing Technology, to ensure continued progress toward the
Department's strategic goals of enhancing its cybersecurity posture to
better support agents, attorneys, analysts, and administrative staff in
furtherance of our mission.
* * *
I am extremely proud of the work the Justice Department's employees
have done to uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe, and to
protect civil rights. I respectfully ask for your support for the
President's FY 2025 funding request so that we may continue and build
upon that work.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, General Garland. The Vice Chair
of the Full Committee has arrived. Senator Collins, would you
like to make any opening remarks before we start questions?
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I will
wait and ask questions. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Okay. Thank you. We will call on Members
in order of arrival, with the exception of Chair Murray and
Vice Chair Collins, and ask that people keep their questioning
to 5 minutes, except for the Chair and Vice Chair, and we will
alternate between sides of the dais.
So Mr. Attorney General, we are now, as I said in my
opening statement, painfully aware of the impacts of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act and what that means. I cited the example of
FBI, in terms of the percentage cut, but what that actually
means in terms of dollars. What will happen at the Department,
particularly to the law enforcement components if it faces
similar cuts in 2025?
Attorney General Garland. Well, I obviously quite agree
with you. Overall, as a consequence of fiscal year 2024 budget,
we anticipate needing to reduce a total of 4,813 positions. And
that is not specifically about law enforcement, but I will move
to that in a moment.
The 2025 budget that we are requesting seeks to restore
1,409 positions. Specifically, with respect to law enforcement,
between 2023 and 2024, we lost 200 positions in the FBI. Our
request is an increase of 217 agents which is, as you can see,
only 17 more agents than we had in fiscal year 2023. For the
U.S. Marshals Service, we lost 72 Deputy U.S. Marshals'
positions, we are asking now for an increase of 51, which
includes what we need for purposes of the increased
requirements for security for the justices.
The U.S. Attorneys, between fiscal year 2023 and fiscal
year 2024, which of course bring our criminal prosecutions, we
lost 188 positions for Assistant U.S. Attorneys, we are asking
for 50 over fiscal year 2024, which of course does not make up
that number.
I can go through the whole number if you would like--each
if you would like, but you can see that we are--in most cases,
we are not going to be able to make up, even, for what we lost
between 2023 and 2024, but we are doing our best to be faithful
to the Congressional Statute, and to the Bipartisan Agreement.
Senator Shaheen. Well, I appreciate that. As we know, the
challenge is that there are very real impacts for these budget
cuts, and they will have an effect on the public, and on our
ability to address all of the issues that the Justice
Department is working on.
Senator Moran and I both mentioned in our opening
statements, as did you, the continuing fight against the opioid
epidemic, substance misuse, the drug cartels. I continue to be
very concerned about fentanyl use and poisoning, and New
Hampshire has lost too many people to fentanyl overdoses. Can
you talk a little bit about DOJ's efforts to interdict these
drugs and efforts to find a way to prosecute those responsible?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, Senator. I have said, and I
deeply mean this, that fentanyl is the deadliest drug threat
that this country has ever faced. I have met with families at
the DEA whose children, whose teenagers, whose infants, whose
grandparents have died. Mostly not even knowing that what they
are taking is fentanyl, thinking it is another kind of
prescription pill that they were able to get over the Internet.
We don't even refer to this as overdoses anymore; we refer to
this as drug poisoning, because that is what it is.
So we are facing this with the urgency it requires, and we
are trying to dismantle the entire network. So the network
begins in China. It begins with the precursor companies that
sell the precursor chemicals that are necessary to make
fentanyl through Mexico. So we have charged a number of those
companies. We have indicted a number of their officials. We
have even been able to snare some of them, the officials when
traveling outside of China, the Treasury Department has
sanctioned those companies so people cannot deal with them.
Some of them are regular prescription drug companies, so
sanctions are quite important.
Then we move to Mexico and the importation of these
precursors. I have traveled to Mexico myself three times, the
Deputy Attorney General, I believe at least three times, many
other parts of our law enforcement apparatus have done the
same, to persuade them to cut off access to these precursors,
to register them, and they have done some of what we have
asked. Not all, but that has been important. Then the chemicals
are made into fentanyl in Mexico, primarily in laboratories. We
have, again, on my visits, we have urged the Mexican
government, and particularly the Mexican Military, the Army,
and the Marines who are responsible, have taken over this task
to destroy those labs. And they have done some, but not as much
as we would like.
We have indicted the principal cartel leaders, including
the sons of El Chapo, so-called ``Chapitos'' of the Sinaloa
Cartel, as well as leaders of the Jalisco New Generation
Cartel, those two are the principal drivers of fentanyl
trafficking in the United States. On one of my travels, I urged
the Mexican Government and the Attorney General to approve the
extradition, and in fact, they did approve the extradition, of
Ovidio Lopez Guzman--Guzman Lopez, who was a lead Chapito.
Then----
Senator Shaheen. Mr. Attorney General, I know you could
probably go on, which is very helpful.
Attorney General Garland. Oh. I am sorry.
Senator Shaheen. We would like to talk all day about what
is being done to address this. I am out of time, but I also
have one very brief follow-up, and that is, you mentioned going
after the precursors in China.
Attorney General Garland. Yes.
Senator Shaheen. Are you seeing any difference at all since
President Biden and Xi signed their agreement around dealing
with those drugs back last fall? Has there been any change in
the way China is reacting?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. We have seen some, but
nothing like what we want or expect. The President says, the
words are nice, but we need to verify, and at this point, we
don't have very much verification.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chairman Shaheen, thank you.
Let me visit with you for a moment, Attorney General, about
AI and our national security risk.
Attorney General Garland. Yes.
Senator Moran. Both Congress and the Department of Justice
are grappling with the opportunities and threats that are
presented by the rapid development of artificial intelligence.
Two months ago, the Department appointed its first Chief AI
Officer. Yesterday, my colleagues and I, we were, in a letter,
trying to bring the risk of AI to the attention of other
colleagues of ours, we specifically are targeting the potential
catastrophic risk associated with the use of AI and the
development of biological, chemical, cyber, and nuclear
weapons.
I am looking for assurance that the Department has, is and
will pay sufficient attention to these extraordinary threats to
our national security. And I would welcome your thoughts about
what is happening with the--in the new AI Office, as well as
other DOJ components with national security responsibilities?
What is happening to consider and mitigate the national
security risks and other catastrophic risks created by AI?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, so AI has both promise and
incredible peril for us, and as is often the case in the
beginning, offense beats defense here. And we are very
concerned about the way AI can be used for everything from
mimicking a normal conversations in text, and therefore
advancing the ability to do fishing expeditions by getting
passwords from people, by using their social media to appear as
if they are a friend, and likewise, just plain hacking and
constantly and repetitive hacking in a way that clicking on the
keyboard will seem very 20th century.
So we are extremely concerned about that. AI has some
possibilities also for defense. Instead of having to defend
constantly with human actors, someday we hope to be able to
develop an AI defense to the cyber attacks you are talking
about. This does require us to enhance our AI capabilities,
that is why I recruited the AI head that you are talking about.
He is a Ph.D. in computer science, who teaches computer science
at Princeton, got his Ph.D. at Stanford. We are looking to hire
as many people with those kinds of qualifications as are
possible.
And that is why we are asking for the money that we are
asking for, specifically with respect to cyber, we are asking
in this budget for $894.6 million, which is an 11.9 percent
increase in our cybercrime combat, and a $432.9 million
increase specifically with respect to cybersecurity, which is
15.6 percent increase.
Senator Moran. Thank you for highlighting those. Let me
turn to a different topic. Last week I was disturbed to see an
NBC News report that an individual on the terrorist watch list
had been detained by the Border Patrol on the southern border
and then promptly released. The facts of this case are complex.
They are nuanced. But according to the report, when the
detainee appeared before the immigration judge, the DHS
attorneys did not inform the judge of the potential terrorist
ties despite having received that warning from the FBI.
The judge ultimately ordered the detainee to be released. I
don't expect you to be able to respond to the actions of the
Department of Homeland Security, but again, I would look for
assurances that through the FBI, the terrorist screening
center, the immigration courts are taking the necessary steps
to ensure suspected terrorists are not simply released into the
country.
You talked about the increasing terrorist threat to our
country. My last trip to the border, there were nationals,
Chinese nationals who were apprehended in my presence. I see
this as a significant threat, and I just want really to
highlight this issue to the FBI and to the Department of
Justice, making sure that you are doing your job.
Attorney General Garland. Yes. The FBI's job, and they take
it extremely seriously, is when they learn information about
somebody who has been able to pass through the border, to
follow that person, to deter that person, to disrupt that
person, and to arrest that person where we can. In the example
you are talking about, that person has since been detained. And
we are constantly in discussions with the Department of
Homeland Security about how to improve the processes between
Homeland Security and the immigration courts, and at the
border, with respect to terrorist screening.
Senator Moran. Thank you, General.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chair.
Attorney General, as you know, Vice Chair Collins and I
worked very hard on a number of provisions in the Bipartisan
Safer Communities Act with respect to both straw purchasing of
firearms, and then also gun trafficking offenses. Can you give
us an update about how the Department is using those new
offenses, and what progress you are making on that front?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. I would be happy to. So that
act is really the most important gun legislation in decades,
and has--already had significant impact on our ability to
prevent guns from falling into the hands of people who are
prohibited by Congress from obtaining them because of their
dangerousness.
So as a consequence of the Act which extended the
background checks for people under 21, we have been able to run
245,000 enhanced background checks, and we have denied 700
transactions which otherwise would have gone through, 700
people who should not have guns because Congress has so
declared. And with respect to the straw purchasers' provisions,
we have charged more than 420 defendants now with illegal straw
purchases under provisions of BSCA and associated statutes we
have on straw purchasing. So I would say it is early days, but
it has been very effective.
Senator Heinrich. Yes, we definitely want you to be able to
use those authorities. What about the Gun Trafficking
Authority, has that been helpful as well?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. The gun trafficking allows
us a separate crime, a separate penalty for trafficking guns,
where it is known that the guns are going to be used in crime.
And those have also led to successful prosecutions.
Senator Heinrich. I want to turn to fentanyl, and obviously
that is something that is on everyone's mind on this panel. One
of the things that I worked very hard on in the recent 2024 CJS
Bill is language to create a comprehensive fentanyl tracking
system. Can you tell us what you intend to do? I know we got
that legislation done a little late, as Senator Moran reminded
us, but we want you to be able to use those authorities, and
tell us about how you plan to put that together?
Attorney General Garland. Well, so DEA will be using that
to track the way in which fentanyl is prescribed and used, and
that will be very important in our enforcement efforts.
Senator Heinrich. Are you able to coordinate your efforts
with DHS to help interdict fentanyl when it comes through land
ports of entry before it gets to the U.S.?
Attorney General Garland. So the FBI and DEA do have
overseas intelligence which they are able to provide to DHS, I
will say this also comes from our intelligence community writ
large and not simply the two agencies here. It is definitely
the case that the more intelligence we can get and the more
cooperation we can get from the Mexicans as to their
information about fentanyl being moved to the border, the
better DHS will be able to interdict it at the border.
Senator Heinrich. How can Congress help you leverage better
cooperation from both Mexico and China on this front?
Attorney General Garland. Well, I am not a diplomat, so on
that phase I am not sure what Congress can do in this regard,
but we are making every effort possible. The DEA administrator
has spoken to her counterpart in China; the President, as you
know, tried to re-up the cooperation that had been suspended
with respect to drug trafficking. So at a law enforcement
level, we are trying to enhance that.
On the Mexico side, as I said, the President has directed
members of the National Security Council staff to travel to
Mexico. I have traveled, the Deputy Attorney General has
traveled, to try to enhance cooperation and get improvement in
that.
Senator Heinrich. We very much appreciate those efforts. I
want to ask you about something related to treatment for folks
who know they have addiction to Fentanyl and other opioids. Can
you talk about what DOJ and DEA are doing to increase access to
treatments like buprenorphine for patients in need? And this
has been a particular challenge in New Mexico, where people
want to get treatment but they can't always get their
prescription filled to get off of their fentanyl addiction. And
I am curious if you think it is necessary to remove medications
like buprenorphine from the suspicious order reporting systems,
because that seems to be the thing that is hanging up these
prescriptions for people who are very much wanting to get
treatment.
Attorney General Garland. Well, to begin, this mostly comes
from our grant programs, from the Office of Justice programs.
We have the so-called ``CARA'' Grants, which is the
Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act. We are asking in this
budget for $443 million, which is a $23 million increase. Those
grants include our comprehensive opioid stimulant and substance
abuse program, the so-called ``CASA'' Program, mental health
and residential substance use treatment, the drug courts, the
veteran treatments courts, prescription drug monitoring.
We also have particularly youth-focused grants, we are
seeking $47 million there for opioid affected youth. I am not
exactly sure that I have the information with respect to
buprenorphine and how it is being treated in that respect, so I
will have to get back to you on whether----
Senator Heinrich. Yes. I look forward to following up with
you on that, because I think we need to send a clear message to
the pharmacies that they should stock the medications necessary
for treatment. Thank you, Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.
Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome, Mr.
Attorney General. I very much appreciated hearing the update on
the effectiveness of the straw purchasing and gun trafficking
provisions that Senator Heinrich and I authored, and so I won't
have to ask you about that issue. I do want to turn to a very
serious and confounding problem that the State of Maine is
experiencing, particularly in our rural communities. Chinese
nationals are establishing and operating illegal marijuana
growing operations.
I first raised concerns about this problem in June of 2022.
Thanks to the work of some enterprising Maine journalists, we
now know that there are more than 200 such operations operating
in houses across our State. And by the way, those houses are
forever ruined by the operations, and that contributes to our
housing shortage as well.
Last month, I asked the FBI director about this matter
during his open testimony before the Senate Intelligence
Committee. While the director has cited the FBI's efforts to
support taskforce and secure indictments, he was unable to
answer a fundamental troubling question, and that is: Why is
China sending its citizens, sneaking them into the country, to
open illegal marijuana operations in rural Maine communities?
Just recently, three Chinese nationals were apprehended as
they crossed the border illegally in Northern Maine. Now, we
have had a tremendous effort by State, county, and local law
enforcement to identify and start shutting down these illegal
operations, but there are very clear Federal interests here,
particularly with respect to national security.
Two days ago, your Office of Legislative Affairs finally
responded to four inquiries that I had sent to the Department
on this topic. But unfortunately the response letter provided
almost no substantive information on whether the Department is
making this a priority, working with State, local, and county
law enforcement, and exploring the National Security
implications.
And I do recognize there is a limit to what you can say in
a letter of that sort. But General Garland, what are the
Criminal Division, the National Security Division, and the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Maine doing to address these illegal
growing operations? And, in particular, what are they doing to
support the tremendous, but under-resourced effort, at the
State, county, and local level?
Attorney General Garland. Senator, you have raised a
serious problem. It is not only a Maine problem. So DEA is
reporting that there are transnational criminal organizations
in some 20 States that not so much grow houses, but illegal
marijuana grows. I know specifically with respect to Maine,
that DEA and the FBI are working with the IRS, and the
Department of Homeland Security, as well as local law
enforcement, to investigate those illegal grows.
I also know that the U.S. Attorney in Maine has made this a
priority for her office. In most cases, I recommend talking to
the Office Of Legislative Affairs, but I know you are very well
synced up with the U.S. Attorney's Office there, and they
obviously have more very specific Maine information. But I
don't think anybody could take this more seriously than our
U.S. Attorney there, and she is able to harness the resources
of all of our agencies. Not only our own, but also Department
of Homeland Security and IRS.
Senator Collins. Do you have a theory on why the Chinese
are sending people, illegally, into our country to establish
these grow operations? As you point out, it is not just Maine,
I believe Oklahoma, for example, has had a problem as well.
Attorney General Garland. I don't have a theory now.
Normally, I develop a theory by learning the facts from the
different investigative entities that look into this. So, at
this point, I don't have a theory. There are a lot of obvious
theories including profit motive, and these transnational
criminal organizations are operating - reason we call them
transnational is they are operating all over the world to make
money where they can. But I can't tell you what the specific
motivation here is.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Collins.
Chair Murray.
Senator Murray. Well, thank you very much, Chair Shaheen,
and Ranking Member Moran, for holding this hearing today. Thank
you, Attorney General Garland, for joining us.
We all want to make sure that folks back home have a fair,
functioning justice system, and safe communities, which is why
we have to make sure DOJ is getting the funding that it needs.
Effective law enforcement is crucial to protect people from
cyber attacks, drug trafficking, gun violence, and so much
more. And it is critical in holding big corporations
accountable for cutting corners and engaging in unfair
practices that hurt our consumers.
And DOJ's work is vital to fighting bigotry and
discrimination and protecting people's civil rights, including
the right to vote. So we cannot short-change America's rights
or their safety. That is why this hearing is so important.
Attorney General Garland, I am really encouraged by the
investments your Department has made in Eastern Washington,
like marshaling new resources and investing in personnel to
help combat the crisis of missing or murdered indigenous
people, especially women and girls. DOJ recently launched an
MMIP Regional Outreach program, which allowed our U.S.
attorneys for Eastern Washington to add an assistant U.S.
attorney to their office who is dedicated to prosecuting those
types of cases in the Northwest. How would the resources that
your Department is now requesting for fiscal year 2025 build on
those efforts?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. This problem of missing or
murdered indigenous persons is really brought home to me. I
visited the Alaska Native villages with Senator Murkowski, and
I recently visited the Crow Reservation in Montana. But this is
a problem all across Indian Country, and we take it very
seriously. And in our budget request we have asked for $713.2
million for this program for public safety in Indian Country to
include money that we need for FBI, for U.S. Attorneys, and for
money for the local law enforcement.
Senator Murray. Thank you, I appreciate that request, we
look forward to working with you on that. The Crime Victims
Fund through VOCA accounts for nearly 70 percent of all the
funding for services that help victims in survivors of crime in
Washington State, and in Tribal and rural communities, those
programs rely solely on VOCA funding.
But we know that deposits into the funds have declined
recently and have not kept pace with the need, which has led to
cut to service providers in Washington State, meaning less help
for victims and survivors, especially in our underserved
communities in rural areas and on Tribal lands. Can you talk a
little bit about the importance of those programs and the Crime
Victims Fund as part of the Department's effort to promote
public safety and support victims of crime?
Attorney General Garland. Absolutely. This is an issue that
is particularly dear to my heart since in the aftermath of
Oklahoma City I spent a lot of time trying to improve the way
in which the Justice Department both itself deals with victims
of horrendous crime, but also helping State and local law
enforcement, and communities, to deal with these problems.
So our money for OVW grants this year, we are asking for
$800 million for the Office on Violence against Women. The
total amount we are asking from the Crime Victims Fund is $1.5
billion total, which is an increase of $147 million over
enacted fiscal year 2024. The victim's money goes to a
significant number of different places, it goes to the grants
to combat violence against women, the so-called STOP Grants,
the Sexual Assault Services Grants, legal assistance programs
for victims, transitional housing, the access to sexual assault
nurse exams, culturally specific services. I can talk more
about the Fund if you want, but those--that is the----
Senator Murray. I think that is just important for all of
us to understand the really critical importance of those funds
as we work to put our budget together. So thank you. I wanted
to ask you about the Federal Bureau of Prisons Facility at Sea-
Tac. We had recent reporting from The Seattle Times that found
that detainees were routinely unable to access basic medical
care and treatment for acute and painful conditions.
According to their reporting, 8 of 19 health care positions
at the Sea-Tac facility are now vacant. That no doubt
contributes to those issues. What is the Department doing to
improve access to care for individuals in their custody? And
what steps is the Department taking to recruit additional
health care staff?
Attorney General Garland. So the Director, Director Peters,
has stated from the very beginning that BOP considers itself a
health care organization, given how many people need health
care who are in prison. The Sea-Tac Federal Detention Center
has strengthened its recruiting efforts and has contracted for
several more medical professionals recently. In the last 6
months, it has tripled the size of its Opioid Treatment
Program, and provided more routine and chronic care. I think
that the Director has gotten the message with respect to the
deficiencies there.
Senator Murray. Okay. And I am going to be following that
very closely. So I expect to be updated on that as we go. And
finally, let me just ask you about help for at-risk youth. I
continue to hear from communities all over my State about the
need to do more to help at-risk youth avoid delinquency and
provide better opportunities for them. It is really important
that the Department's Juvenile Justice Program serve the youth
that end up in this system, and allow those kids to realize
their full potential.
This is an effort that we all know requires coordination
across nonprofits, and State, and local leaders, and the
Federal Government. So can you tell me how your budget request
would support justice-involved youth?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. So specifically on that
question, we are seeking $407 million for juvenile justice
initiatives, which is an 8.5 percent increase. This includes $3
million for a new collaborative reform for Juvenile Justice
Initiative for localities that are facing particularly serious
juvenile issues.
Senator Shaheen. General Garland, excuse me for
interrupting. Can you just pull the mic a little closer so that
people can hear better?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. I am sorry, yes. The total
budget we are requesting is $690.8 million to protect children
and a variety of programs: Office of Justice Programs grants,
the Office of Justice Program Stop School Violence grants, and
the other matters that I have already mentioned.
Senator Murray. Okay, this is a critical program, and we
will continue to be looking at that. So thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate it.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you so much, Chair Murray for
joining us.
And Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
General, nice to see you again, thank you for being here.
Your current budget, by my calculations, is $48.3 billion; is
that right?
Attorney General Garland. The budget request is for $37.8
billion for the fiscal year 2025 budget, and that would
constitute a 3.5 percent increase over the----
Senator Kennedy. But with mandatory spending, your budget
is $48.3; is that right?
Attorney General Garland. I don't have the number for
including mandatory, but I will certainly be able to get back
to you for that.
Senator Kennedy. Well, let us take out mandatory,
Attorney General Garland. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Your discretionary budget right now is
$37.8 billion.
Attorney General Garland. The fiscal year 2025 request is
for $37.8.
Senator Kennedy. It is not what I am asking.
Attorney General Garland. I am sorry.
Senator Kennedy. What is your current budget?
Attorney General Garland. Well, it is 3.5 percent less than
that, so I can take out my calculator and do the math, but I
don't have it in front of me.
Senator Kennedy. All right, well let me put it another way,
you are asking for an extra $467 million; is that right?
Attorney General Garland. The increased amount of money
that we are asking for, that is approximately right, yes.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. To your knowledge, in the past, let
us say 40 years, has the Department of Justice ever come before
Congress and said we don't need any more, we are going to make
it with what we have got, in light of the fiscal circumstances
in the country?
Attorney General Garland. Normally, I wouldn't want to
speculate, but in this case, I can't imagine that the
Department of Justice, facing increasing threats every year:
violent crime, threats on national security, drug trafficking
threats, would----
Senator Kennedy. Is that a no?
Attorney General Garland. I don't know the answer, but I
think it would be surprising if the Department ever asked for
less money. I think that would be not responsible.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. You talked a little bit in your
testimony, General, about guns, and you have been very
outspoken about the need for more gun control. With respect,
and if you don't mind me asking, do you own a gun?
Attorney General Garland. I don't.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Have you ever fired a gun?
Attorney General Garland. Many times.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Do you have 24-hour security?
Attorney General Garland. I do.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Let me ask you about fentanyl,
because that is a huge problem, and I know you are worried
about it, as are we. And we have, of course, got a problem with
the precursor chemicals coming into Mexico, to the Mexican
cartels, who manufacture the fentanyl and send it into the
United States. Isn't a big part of the problem that if you took
the Mexican drug cartels and turned them upside down and shook
them that President Lopez Obrador would fall out of their
pockets?
Attorney General Garland. Well, I will leave the metaphor
aside. The Department has said that we do not have an
investigation of the President of Mexico.
Senator Kennedy. Do you think the President of Mexico is
our friend?
Attorney General Garland. We need cooperation from Mexico.
Mexico has been somewhat cooperative with respect to our fight
against the cartels. Not as helpful as I wish they were, but
without their cooperation, we can't be successful in destroying
the cartels.
Senator Kennedy. Why wouldn't--why wouldn't the President
go to President Lopez Obrador and say, no offense, but the
fentanyl problem is killing Americans, the illegal immigration
problem is hurting Americans. If you don't cooperate with us,
and he clearly hasn't been, and he is not afraid of us, we are
going to implement tariffs on Mexico until you do.
Attorney General Garland. I think there are many ways to
encourage cooperation from another country----
Senator Kennedy. But that would do it; wouldn't it?
Attorney General Garland. I don't know whether that would
do it, or whether that----
Senator Kennedy. You don't think that would get his
attention?
Attorney General Garland. I am not a diplomat, I am not a
foreign affairs strategist, I know we need their support and
cooperation. I don't know whether that would be positive or
negative.
Senator Kennedy. So we just ask politely?
Attorney General Garland. Well, we do more than that,
considerably more than that. I don't know the answer to your
high level strategy question----
Senator Kennedy. Let me ask you one last question in my 14
seconds. I have been dying to ask you this question.
Attorney General Garland. How long have you been dying to
ask me this question?
Senator Kennedy. A long time, a long time. Mr. Hunter Biden
did not pay taxes on $1 million in 2014 and 2015, and he
deducted payments from his income tax for personal expenses
when he did file, for hookers, for a Lamborghini, for strip
clubs, for sex clubs, for porn website memberships. Why did the
Department of Justice let the Statute of Limitations run?
Attorney General Garland. As you well know, Senator----
Senator Kennedy. So you can't prosecute?
Attorney General Garland. As you well know, Senator, that
investigation is being conducted by Mr. Weiss, who was
appointed by President Trump to be the U.S. Attorney in
Delaware. Much of the investigation you are talking about
occurred during the previous administration, under Mr. Weiss.
Mr. Weiss has continued his investigations. He is now a special
counsel, he will issue a report which will explain those----
Senator Kennedy. Are you saying it is Trump's fault?
Attorney General Garland [continuing]: Which will explain--
no, I don't know whether there is fault or not. Mr. Weiss will
explain this in his report.
Senator Kennedy. But we can't--Mr. Hunter Biden walks free
on not paying taxes on a million bucks from 2014 and 2015
because the Department of Justice let it happen, right?
Attorney General Garland. And again, I am not going to
comment on decisions made in a pending investigation. In the
end, Mr. Weiss will issue a report. I will provide the report
to Congress, you will be able to question Mr. Weiss as to his
reasoning, and he will be able to defend his reasoning.
Senator Kennedy. Would you come with Mr. Weiss when he does
that?
Attorney General Garland. I am not going to know the
intricacies of Mr. Weiss' investigation. There would be no
point. It is Mr. Weiss who is responsible for this
investigation.
Senator Kennedy. But you were head of the Department of
Justice?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, and I have appointed him as
special counsel so that he can independently investigate this
matter.
Senator Kennedy. Okay----
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator
Kennedy.Senator Manchin.
Senator Manchin. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you,
Judge, for being here. I appreciate your service in so many
capacities, very much so. Let me go into a couple things. This
week the Senate is going to take up a two-year extension of
FISA, okay, Section 702. Some groups have raised concern that
House-passed FISA that was reauthorized would expand the scope,
the scope of who could be targeted under Section 702 by
changing the definition of electronic communication service
providers. I, for one, do not have those concerns because we
have, basically, expanded upon how we communicate, different
ways, and we should be looking at everything to protect our
country. Do you have concerns, or has it been brought to your
attention?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, so I know this particular
issue. Let me first state, as I know you know, 702 is essential
to our ability to protect the country in many ways, but
particularly since the Hamas terrorism attacks on October 7,
from foreign terrorism in the United States. The change that
you are particularly talking about is a technical change. It is
a consequence of Internet technology changing in the 15 years
since FISA and 702 was passed. It is narrowly tailored. It is
actually a response to the suggestion from the FISA court to
make--to seek this kind of legislative fix. It does not in any
way change who can be a target of Section 702, and----
Senator Manchin. Just the way we gather--what different
mechanisms we gather information from, I guess, right?
Attorney General Garland. It can only be--but the target
can only be a foreign person, located overseas where there is a
reasonable expectation of getting foreign intelligence----
Senator Manchin. So it is not of a concern that you have,
basically from that?
Attorney General Garland. I don't have any concern with
this technical fix.
Senator Manchin. I don't either. I just want to make sure
you help me confirm that.
Attorney General Garland. I appreciate it.
Senator Manchin. But I would like to--I am going to go
through a few things that people ask me most.
Attorney General Garland. Of course.
Senator Manchin. The concern of the border is the greatest
threat that we face right now. It has been more detrimental to
our security, I believe, than anything in modern history that I
have seen. First of all, we haven't taken action on Mexico, it
seems like we haven't used what tools we have, they are a
member of the USMCA, you know, the new, the new NAFTA, if you
will, and they haven't been a good partner, let us put it that
way. And there has been more people in my State, its number one
killer is opiates, illicit drugs coming into. We were targeted
and it just devastated our State.
Is there anything that can be done, and them being in
violation of USMCA, which could threaten their--which we would
have the ability to threaten their participation, or as a
member of USMCA? That would, to me, to be the greatest concern
they should have for their economics in their country, and I
would think they would respond, nothing else seems to have
worked, and we haven't had the response, basically shutting
down fentanyl, we haven't been able to shut down the precursors
from China, and that has killed more people in America since
the Civil War, is opiates and illicit drugs coming into our
country, than all the wars combined. It is unbelievable.
Attorney General Garland. So there is no worse threat this
country has faced with respect to drugs, than fentanyl. As I
said somewhat earlier----
Senator Manchin. And do we have the powers to use USMCA?
Attorney General Garland. This is an interesting tactic, I
have not thought about. This is something I might ask my staff
to talk on and----
Senator Manchin. Could we work on--could we work with work
with you on this.
Attorney General Garland. Ambassador Tai----
Senator Manchin [continuing]. It would be very helpful if
we could. There has to be something to shock them into
realization, that they have to be either a good neighbor, to be
part of the USMCA, or basically let us declare them not to be a
good neighbor or deserve the standing they get, because there
is an awful lot of illicit stuff comes through that border, and
also a lot of dumping comes into the border that harms our
economy. I would love to expand that with you.
And my final question is concerning the border, sir. I get
more questions on that. Does the President have the ability as
an executive order, to basically declare an emergency there and
shut it down? And I know that there is a ruling from Hawaii
which is the U.S. v. Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that he has the
broad authority, the President, to suspend the admission of
migrants.
I am having a hard time. I have been encouraging them every
way I possibly can to use the rules--tools that you have, and
your executive powers to shut this illegal until we get a
handle on it, because we are not going to come to an agreement
politically here, unless we are forced to do it.
Attorney General Garland. So I would say the best solution
to this problem is the bipartisan proposal with respect to the
border that had been worked out, both as a combination of
changes, and who can be removed and who can come into the
country, as well as the money necessary for the Department of
Homeland Security to put in x-ray machines that would be able
to stop----
Senator Manchin. Let me put it a different way. The
President has had no problem whatsoever, declaring an executive
order to, basically, to relieve or remove student debt, and
that has been challenged, and it has been upheld that he cannot
do it in court, but he does it anyway. I am fine with whatever
he thinks he has the right to do. I don't know how this is any
different to stop illegal and think they are going to take us
to court, and it might be overturned, but at least it sends the
message that we are serious about the border, is that----
Attorney General Garland. I know, as has been reported,
that the White House is considering a number of options with
respect to immigration. I don't want to get into our
deliberations as to the President, and I don't want to, you
know, make a determination about legality before we have in
front of us a particular proposal.
Senator Manchin. Well, I know my time is up. I would love
to go further into our USMCA with Mexico. I think there is
something we have to do to shock them into realization. You are
either going to be a good partner, or you are not going to be a
partner at all.
Attorney General Garland. Well, I will ask my staff to talk
to yours, and also to bring in Ambassador Tai's staff because
she seems like----
Senator Manchin. Please.
Attorney General Garland [continuing]: This is within her
bailiwick.
Senator Manchin. I appreciate it very much, sir. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Manchin.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Attorney General, welcome, good to see you again. Thank
you for the trip last summer where you had an opportunity to
kind of get a little summary on the ground of some of the law
enforcement public safety issues that we face, primarily in
rural Alaska. I appreciated that that Chair Murray had
highlighted murdered missing indigenous persons. The work that
your teams are doing, working with us in Alaska is very, very
important. Also appreciate the keen focus here in this
Committee and the Subcommittee on fentanyl.
I wish that I could say we are far enough away that we have
escaped, but our smallest of the small rural villages are being
targeted because you can sell this poison there for 10 times
more in a village like Quinhagak, or Togiak than you can in
even Anchorage. So we all need to keep leaning in on that.
Back to the issue of Tribal justice, when you were there,
we had good conversations. I think that was very important. We
have seen some measurable progress on cross-deputization
agreements between the State of Alaska and Tribes relating to
law enforcement. We have got the Not Invisible Commission
report recommendations that are giving us a little bit of a
template here, but I am a little concerned in terms of the
follow-on from your visits in so far as what more we can do to
address the public safety issues.
We have asked for some updates, we haven't gotten a lot,
and I don't want to be in a situation where these villages,
whether it is Galena, or Huslia, or really any place, feel that
you came, you saw, and then there hasn't been the follow-on. We
have got a lot of work I think we know that we need to do to
implement VAWA 2022 and the Alaska Public Safety pilot.
So I would ask that you and your team can provide us with
recommendations for improving the funding opportunities for our
Alaskan Native community in the short term here. If we can do
this within the next 30 days, that would be great, if you have
legislative proposals, but we want to keep the momentum going.
I know that you committed to me, your teams are working on
that, but if there are legislative proposals, again, we want to
try to put some of these in the pipeline.
Attorney General Garland. We are very happy to do that. I
will say that it was a real eye-opening experience for me, as
you told me it would be, to be on the ground there and to see
the difficulty of transportation between one village and
another, and the difficulty law enforcement has of reaching a
village, and the really inexcusable fact that there really
isn't sufficient law enforcement in any of the villages.
I can give just one update. I would say as a result of my
visit, I have been pressing for money for special Tribal
jurisdiction and this budget request includes a plus $14
million from fiscal year 2024 for special Tribal criminal
jurisdiction and I would say it is a consequence of what I saw
in Alaska.
Senator Murkowski. Well, let us commit to working through
some of these specifics going forward. One of the other things
that I have heard is as our Tribes are looking for Federal
financial assistance, not only in the public safety space but
in others, they have been directed to entities for technical
assistance, but it is technical assistance that is from the
lower 48, perhaps maybe not culturally responsive or
geographically relevant to many of the issues that we
experience there.
So you know I appreciate what the Department is doing to
try to help bolster the capacity of Tribes and Tribal
organizations, as they are looking to gain access to some of
these grant opportunities. But it is something that I would
like your folks to look at, because this is--this again is a
big challenge, if you are talking to somebody who has no idea
that we don't have, for instance, reservations in Alaska and
the construct of the governance just makes it that much more
challenging. So I raise that to you.
I want to comment, very quickly, on what Chair Murray had
raised about the Crime Victims Fund. You outlined the benefits
of it. But I will tell you I am very, very concerned that we
are going to be in a situation where if additional fines, fees,
penalties from other sources aren't redirected to address the
shortfalls, so many of these organizations that just are
working so hard, they are burning out, they can't deal with
this year-to-year challenge because they simply don't have the
resources.
And it is not only in the Crime Victims Fund, it is the
impact that we are seeing with our child advocacy centers. Many
of our CACs have been using additional funding for their base
operational costs, in addition to VOCA cuts. So you have got
VOCA funds that are being cut, you have got the CACs that are
hanging out there. It is just--it is really a tenuous
situation. I know you know that, but we really need to have
identified some kind of an offset for this $7.3 billion that is
proposed to replenish the Crime Victims Fund----
Attorney General Garland. And there is a proposal. If I
have time to respond now, I will--I totally agree with you.
This trying to depend on the amount of money we are able to get
in any particular year is always going to be uncertain. The
administration's proposal in the budget, I don't think there is
legislative text yet, would take effect in 2026, provide $7.3
billion in mandatory appropriations over 5 years to replenish
and stabilize the fund. I think that is better than the way we
are doing it now, year-to-year, and so our staff would be happy
to speak with the staff of the subcommittee and your own staff
as well on this proposal.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
I understand, General Garland, that you are okay to keep
going.
Attorney General Garland. Sure.
Senator Shaheen. You don't need a break. So let me ask
Senator Peters to go next.
Senator Peters. Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
Attorney General Garland, thank you for continuing to plow
through, and certainly it is good to see you here today with
us. Following the October 7 attacks, and the conflict between
Israel and Hamas, and as that continues, we are seeing
significant increase in anti-Semitism, anti-Muslim, and anti-
Arab hate. And I certainly worry a great deal, as I know you
do, about the increase in hate against these communities all
across the United States, including schools. We are seeing it
on college campuses.
I have heard from Muslim and Jewish constituents who are
worried for the safety for their families and their houses of
worship. According to recent reports, the rates of anti-
Semitism and anti-Muslim hate have hit historic highs in our
country. And Attorney General Garland, I know you have said
repeatedly that the Justice Department has absolutely no
tolerance for violence or unlawful threats of violence fueled
by anti-Semitism or Islamophobia, and that no person and no
community in this country should have to live in fear of hate-
related violence.
So my question for you is, given this profoundly concerning
trend, can you speak to how the Department utilizes your
existing resources, whether via Civil Rights Division, or
elsewhere, to support these communities that are being
impacted? And in what ways does the Department need additional
support to respond given the large increase of this type of
violence around the country?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. I couldn't have said it
better than you did with respect to the level of our concern
since the Hamas attacks on October 7, spiking hate crimes of
both against with respect to Islamophobia and with respect to
anti-Semitism, have just gone through the roof. We have brought
quite a number of prosecutions even during that time since
October 7, and we treat this in the most serious way. We have
to disrupt and deter such acts. The only way, in the end to do
that, is to get heavy sentences.
With respect to our work in this, this is a combination of
the work from our Civil Rights Division side and from our,
where it becomes domestic violent extremism, to our national
security side. We have asked for $201.3 million, which is a
10.8 percent increase for the Civil Rights Division, 14
attorneys, much of that to cover hate crime investigations,
which are spiking.
The FBI Civil Rights Section has asked for $114.5 million,
which is an increase in 30 percent for that purpose. In the
U.S. Attorneys' Offices, we have asked for $55.8 million, an
increase of 12.2 percent for the Civil Rights Coordinators to
work on these kinds of matters. An important but little known
part of the Department is our Community Relations Service,
which tries to mediate conflicts so that they don't get to the
stage that we are talking about here. And for them, we are
asking for $29.1 million, which is a 21.2 percent increase.
That is on the civil rights side. We have another whole set
of requests on the national security side where this moves from
hate crimes to what we would regard as domestic terrorism.
Senator Peters. All right. Well, good, and it is important
to keep that focus, and I appreciate your focus on that in your
request. In 2018, I led the successful bipartisan effort to
authorize a new grant program that is entitled the Emergency
and Transitional Pet Shelter and Housing Assistance Grant
Program. This program was set up as a pass-through with funds
initially going to the USDA, but the grants are administered by
the Department of Justice, and it provides emergency and
transition shelter options for domestic violence survivors with
companion animals.
And this is actually very critical given that studies have
shown that victims of abuse are less likely to leave a very
abusive situation if they have a beloved pet. Abusers often
target that pet. And in fact, a number of studies have shown
that on average, a person who is being abused, a survivor, will
delay leaving a relationship for up to 2 years, 2 years being
in that, because clearly they care about this pet who is going
to be the a target of further abuse.
So this vital program helps the Federal Government ensure
that more domestic violence shelters can accommodate victims
with pets, or they arrange a third party to make sure that the
victim knows that that pet will be secure. And in the years
since its launch, we have seen demand far outstretch the
available funding. And in fiscal year 2024, I secured
authorized funding of $3 million for the program.
So my question for you, Attorney General Garland, do you
agree that it is essential that we continue funding a grant
program authorized by my PAWS Act, and help empower victims of
domestic violence with the tools they need to escape the
violent situations that they are in?
Attorney General Garland. We have to protect the victims of
domestic violence, and thanks to the PAWS Act over the last 3
years our Office of Victims of Crime has made 31 awards,
totaling $8.8 million for the nonprofit entities that support
domestic violence survivors and their pets as they navigate
into transitional housing.
Senator Peters. Great. Well, I appreciate your support of
the program and your statement on the necessity of doing this
to help our survivors. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Peters.
Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chair, thank you again,
General, let me raise three things in pretty--I hope, short
order. We have talked, I think since the beginning of my time
at CJS and your arrival as Attorney General, about my desire to
focus law enforcement grants. There lots of opportunities for
local law enforcement to compete for grants to support local
law enforcement, but we have highlighted numerous times, to you
and to your predecessor, about the challenges that small law
enforcement agencies and small communities have.
They don't have a grant writer. It takes a police officer
off the street, or a sheriff's officer off the roadway to apply
for grants, and we have encouraged the Department to create a
separate grant program specifically for small communities. I
just would like to ask you if you,--I doubt that you have with
you, but would you see if there is any statistics that indicate
how we are faring in getting small law enforcement agencies
across the country additional resources as compared to others
or compared to the past?
Attorney General Garland. Yes, I will be happy to go back
and ask how those statistics compare. The problem you pointed
out has been pointed out to me by local sheriffs, by local
police departments in small rural areas. It is a problem
because they, you know, they don't have grant writers, they
don't have the--they may not even know about the availability.
So we have, our Office of Justice Programs and our COPS Office
have gone to great lengths to try to simplify the applications,
to reach out to rural law enforcement about the possibility of
getting grants and of helping and assisting in the
applications. But I don't know the statistics, and I will get
back to you.
Senator Moran. We would like to see if it is working. I had
suggested, and I don't know whether the suggestion--this
predates you at the Department--but that there be created a
separate grant application and program for those small
agencies. Let me also highlight anti-Semitism and hate crimes,
and you have focused your attention on this issue, and I
appreciate that. But according to data tabulated by the Anti-
Defamation League, there were 5,204 incidents between October 7
and the end of 2023. That is a number that is greater than the
entire total of those instances in 2022.
I commend you for your recognition of this issue and
efforts, and is there things that you would point to, specific
proposals in the Department's budget request that would be
evidence of attention to anti-Semitism and hate crimes?
Attorney General Garland. Well, you are absolutely right
about that. I spoke at the Anti-Defamation League Conference
earlier this year, and recited the statistics that the FBI has,
which are very much consistent with the statistics that ADL
itself is reporting. The parts of our budget that are relevant
here, and are most important, are the increases for the Civil
Rights Division, which has particular jurisdiction over hate
crime prosecutions.
The FBI's Civil Rights Section, which supports those
prosecutions, and our National Security Division and U.S.
Attorneys' Offices that bring these cases--the U.S. Attorneys'
Offices bring the hate crime cases, but then also bring along,
with the National Security Division, where hate crimes progress
even further across the board into domestic terrorism.
Senator Moran. Finally, General, I would mention an
occurrence in Kansas, the United States Penitentiary in
Leavenworth went into lockdown and then modified its operations
beginning March the 1st, now more than a month ago, there are
security situations in the BOP facility. I know that can
require certain actions to protect the safety of inmates, as
well as the staff, but these status changes are inherently
disruptive. And of course, we need to remember that inmates are
entitled to civil rights, and that the BOP staff are entitled
to a functioning environment.
My understanding is this issue with this circumstance is
close to being resolved, if it hasn't already been today, but I
wanted to make sure it was a priority for you and the
Department.
Attorney General Garland. As I am not specifically familiar
with the situation at Leavenworth, but I will ask my staff to
get back to yours today.
Senator Moran. Thank you. I just really wanted to bring it
to your attention. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran.
Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Welcome, Attorney General. Last summer, the
Senate Banking Committee passed the Safer Banking Act. It is
bipartisan legislation designed to help State-approved
marijuana businesses to access banking services. Section 10 of
the original Senate legislation would have compromised law
enforcement and National Security by requiring banks to notify
customers when the government requested termination of an
account. In essence, the original language meant that serious
criminals could be tipped off that they are under
investigation.
That includes fentanyl distributors, gun runners, mob
bosses, et cetera. Fortunately, through a bipartisan committee
process, we worked to address major flaws in Section 10 and
curbed its negative effects. Do you agree that such a policy
would handcuff law enforcement and the intelligence community
if they had to--the bank had to disclose that their account has
been terminated by law enforcement?
Attorney General Garland. I have to say I am not familiar
with the provisions of--I know what the Act is and the
proposal, I am not familiar with the requirements in general.
As a theoretical matter, without commenting on that, obviously
if we are investigating someone, and that person is advised of
our investigation, that makes our investigation, all the more
difficult and may compromise it, but I can't answer
specifically with respect to the statute.
Senator Reed. Let me prepare a letter, and send it to your
office so that you and your staff can review it and then
respond. I know when you come up here it is sort of a range of
issues from the--all the way across the board, so I completely
understand that. A quick other question and again, and this
might not--I think you would be familiar with this. The
reauthorization of FISA, there was a great debate in the House
about a warrant requirement. Would you support a warrant
requirement for U.S. persons--in 702?
Attorney General Garland. So 702 is absolutely essential to
our ability to protect the country from everything from Nation
States to foreign terrorist-inspired attacks in the United
States. I don't support a warrant requirement. We are not--we
are talking about information that has already been lawfully
collected pursuant to a court order, because the target is a
foreign individual, operating abroad where foreign intelligence
information is likely. And courts have never required us to
search lawfully collected holdings with a warrant.
So I don't think it is constitutionally required. We have--
I am concerned about errors in the query system that occurred,
and when I first came in these were reported to me and I
directed the Deputy Attorney General and the FBI Director to
put quite a number of fixes in to prevent that problem, and the
consequences been a mass--a really large decrease in the number
of queries that are made, in excess of 90 percent, and a
compliance rate in the area of 98 percent.
The problem with a warrant is a warrant requires probable
cause of something, and we don't have probable cause at the
stage of the query. A query is intended to find out what is in
our holdings so we can determine whether we have probable
cause. If you impose a warrant requirement with the probable
cause requirement, it effectively makes queries impossible to
go forward. So it would just eliminate our ability to use 702
to find out what information we have with respect to foreign
terrorism, with respect to cyber attacks, or with respect to
foreign intelligence collection by our adversaries.
Senator Reed. Mr. Secretary as you--excuse me--Attorney
General, as you understand there is an immediate requirement to
renew FISA because it lapses.
Attorney General Garland. Yes.
Senator Reed. Are you comfortable with the House version of
the legislation?
Attorney General Garland. Not knowing exactly what the
House version is, I am comfortable with, with the provisions
that provide for the fixes that we have administratively put
into place, and that do not require, though, a warrant
requirement.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Reed. Senator Fischer.
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome, Mr.
Attorney General. It is good that you are here and I appreciate
that you are here. Thank you.
I noticed that President Biden's budget request for the
Justice Department states that its goal is to uphold the rule
of law. I appreciate this goal, but I don't see a budget that
truly supports this vision. I see cuts to resources for local
law enforcement who are struggling right now. I see the
elimination of a program that helps put criminal illegal aliens
in jail, and I am seeing cuts like these in favor of more
spending to fulfill President Biden's political goals. Smart
and responsible budget cuts are important, but if you really
want to uphold the law, cuts to law enforcement programs aren't
the right place to start.
For example, your funding request for the community-based
violence intervention and prevention initiative is $110 million
more than the funding you are seeking for the Regional
Information-Sharing Systems Program known as RISS. RISS is a
proven communications program that helps State and local law
enforcement combat criminal activity.
As nice as community intervention programs are, they will
never replace the men and women in uniform who hold the Thin
Blue Line every single day. The President's request actually
tries to cut funding for the RISS Program by several million
dollars. Did the Department assess a reduced need for RISS
funding for fiscal year 2025, because that is not what I am
hearing from Nebraska sheriffs?
Attorney General Garland. I have to say that funding for
State and local police is a high priority for the Justice
Department. We are asking for more than $4.3 billion in funding
for State and local police, and $16.5 billion in a mandatory
program over 5 years. We are asking for an increase in our COPS
Hiring Program of, 893.5 percent, $2.5 billion total, $2.3
billion increase, that money goes for State and local police
hiring.
We are asking for $524.5 million for Byrne JAG grants, $323
million, a $7.5 million increase, for our Office on Violence
against Women grants which focus on local law enforcement and
prosecutors. We have asked for $133 million for our Public
Safety Officers Benefits Program----
Senator Fischer. Excuse me. I have limited time, but I know
there are a number of programs out there, but specifically to
the RISS Program, which is a program that really offers secure
information sharing, and communications capabilities,
investigative support services, and that all enhances our
officer safety. And so what I am hearing is the priority for
that program which we are looking at a $4 million decrease, and
the President's requesting $40 million.
You compare that to the community-based Violence
Intervention Prevention Initiative that has increased a top
line to $250 million over 5 years. So while we are looking at,
in the fiscal year 2024 budget, zero dollars for that program,
we are now looking at $150 million increase in that program. So
I am just curious if you reach out to local law enforcement
which I know, I know you do, but do you hear a priority being
for the RISS Program as well?
Attorney General Garland. I am sorry. It may be even
embarrassed to say that I am not sufficiently familiar with the
RISS Program. I have spoken constantly, we meet quarterly with
State and local law enforcement, and I have gone to more than
40 U.S. Attorneys' Offices to meet with State and local, this
issue hasn't been raised for me, but I will ask my staff to get
back to you. Many of the things you are talking about sound
like things that are also covered by the other grant programs
but----
Senator Fischer. We also face issues because of the chaos
that we see at our Southern border. There is a program that you
have there, it is one of the few programs that help States with
that, it is the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program which
the President has proposed to cut funding to that entirely,
entirely, reason being that it is a duplicative program.
My time is out, but I would like to submit a couple more
questions to you if you could respond to it, and specifically
that program, because we are seeing across this country,
cities, States seeing increased needs for these assistance
programs because of the chaos that we see at our border, and to
find one that again is working for my State and to see that
being cut I would like--I would like to explore the answers
that you provide for that.
Attorney General Garland. I will be happy to answer the
question.
Senator Fischer. Thank you, sir, very much.
Attorney General Garland. Yes.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Fischer. Senator----
Attorney General Garland. Madam Chair, if I could?
Senator Shaheen. Yes.
Attorney General Garland. I realized I confused my answer
to the Senator's question about the House Bill for 702 because
there have----
Senator Shaheen. Please clarify.
Attorney General Garland [continuing]: Been quite a number
of House Bills. The one that passed the House is the one that
we do very strongly support. It is the one that passed last
week, and I do urge the Senate to pass that bill.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you for that clarification.
Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Chair Shaheen.
Thank you so much, Attorney General Garland. Senator
Fischer and I may find some things to work on out of her
questioning. We are the co-sponsors of the Recruit and Retain
Bill that has already passed the Senate and would strengthen
the COPS Program's ability to help State and local law
enforcement with recruitment and retention.
As the co-chair of the Law Enforcement Caucus on the
Judiciary Committee with Senator Cornyn, and someone who spent
a decade in local government responsible for the second largest
police department in our State, I have focused in my 14 years
here, on partnerships like RISS, like information sharing, and
ways to support local law enforcement.
As you said in your opening testimony, the investments, the
initiatives that you have taken in the Department of Justice
and the brave men and women who serve us every day through DOJ,
are having an impact. In my hometown of Wilmington murder is at
a 20-year low. The broad perception of crime is not improving
at the rate we would hope, but the reality, in my hometown, we
had a crisis of shootings and murders that lasted for a decade.
We are now seeing a persistent, sustained, significant drop in
violent crime, and I thank you for your leadership on that.
The American Rescue Plan was the single largest investment
in law enforcement and public safety by the Federal Government
in our history, and I am pleased your request builds on that
success. I wanted to reference four different things briefly in
my questioning: the Victims of Child Abuse Act and the critical
work you are doing to help fund and implement that, boosting
hiring through the COPS Program as I referenced, protecting
those charged with upholding the law, our judges, at both the
Federal and local level, and enforcing IP rights.
I also think it is key that we continue funding the
implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, a
critical gun safety measure that passed by a broad bipartisan
margin here in the Senate. I worked hard with Senator Blunt to
reauthorize the Victims of Child Abuse Act programs, and I
appreciate the Department's effort to increase, by 7 percent
the funding for this. It is a critical--children's advocacy
centers are a critical resource to ensure that law enforcement,
mental health professionals, medical professionals come
together to work on child abuse investigations in a child-
centered way that is effective.
And I am proud of the work representative Krista Griffith
and her team at the Children's Advocacy Center of Delaware have
done, I used a CDS to strengthen that. The need is great, there
are a significant number of unserved children. Can you explain
why the Children Advocacy Center Program is important and what
role it plays in helping solve crimes?
Attorney General Garland. I have to say I am not intimately
familiar with the center, obviously we need children's
advocates when children are victims, they can't advocate for
themselves they need----
Senator Coons. Mr. Attorney General, I'll interrupt--I will
I would be happy to familiarize you with the investigatory tool
that it is.
Attorney General Garland. Okay.
Senator Coons. It is a unique model, its name is somewhat
misleading but it--I have seen it work on the ground in our
community. I appreciate your commitment to law enforcement
hiring and funding new positions. How are you working to ensure
that small departments can fully access the COPS Program? The
agency I was responsible for was the second largest in our
State. But frankly, COPS Programs have made a real impact in
smaller agencies.
Attorney General Garland. The Director of the program is
very sensitive to the concerns of the small agencies, both in
urban areas and in rural areas, understanding that they don't
have the luxury of having administrative officers who can fill
out the forms, do the appropriate collection of data, nor even
necessarily interrelate with respect to the Internet program,
so they have developed a reach-out programs, they have
simplified the applications. And we have tried to make known in
our quarterly meetings with all the law enforcement agencies
organizations the availability of these reach-out services.
Senator Coons. We had a Judiciary Committee hearing on this
last week, and Director Clements, I urged him to try and strike
the right balance between ensuring appropriate oversight, and
auditing and performance standards but minimizing needless and
duplicative paperwork.
The Supreme Court Police Parity Act, something that I
helped get into law, I think signals the seriousness with which
I take the security of our Federal judges. Also, frankly, the
vast majority of judicial officers are at the State and local
level, and Senator Cornyn and I have introduced a bill to
create a State Judicial Threat Intelligence and Resource
Center, housed at the State Justice Institute.
Is the Department tracking an uptick in violent threats
against Federal judges? And what do you think Congress and the
Department can do, to help secure the safety of our judiciary
at the State and Federal level?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. Yes we are and that is
reflected in prosecutions that we are bringing. Used to be
extraordinarily unusual to bring--to have those kinds of cases
and now we are fielding more and more quite serious threats,
finding those people and prosecuting them. I say the principal
way that can be of assistance is the appropriations for the
Marshals Service, which has in particular an item for
increasing $28.1 million for judicial security. The Marshall
Service are the ones who provide judicial security for all the,
well more than 2,000, Federal judges across the country.
Senator Coons. Thank you and frankly, while not as urgent
as police hiring, reducing violent crime, protecting our
judges, I continue to be gravely concerned about intellectual
property theft by China. You have a small but effective program
that helps with the training and implementation of IP theft
programs. I recommend to you sustaining it, if not growing it.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Coons.
Senator Capito.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Attorney General, for being here today, and
I just wanted to put something on your radar screen that struck
me when I listened to Senator Moran's question about
Leavenworth. We wrote a letter to you, a bipartisan letter,
Senator Manchin and I. We have quite a few employees at the
Hazelton Prison that has over 3,000 inmates. A whistleblower
came forward with pretty graphic details of mismanagement,
abuse, and worse.
And it is a chronic problem there because I think lack of
workforce and lack of ability to staff up properly. I don't
know if you have any reaction to what is going on at Hazelton
specifically, or do I need to follow up with you?
Attorney General Garland. We will follow up, but this has
come to our attention, obviously, not only from your letter and
I believe the actions were taken over the last couple of weeks,
but we will get more information to you. I think you are right
on the problem of recruitment. It is a difficult--it is not
only Hazelton where it is difficult for us to recruit----
Senator Capito. Right.
Attorney General Garland [continuing]: Correctional
officers. It is a very dangerous job in facilities that have--
you know, there has not been the capital investment over the
last decades that is required, and sometimes State and local
facilities not too far away, they are offering more money in
terms of salary. So we have asked for money for retention, and
hiring more than the normal salary that we would otherwise be
able to pay. That is what the Director thinks is going to be
necessary to recruit the number of officers necessary to
provide safety in our prisons.
Senator Capito. Right. I think safety is the issue
obviously, it has been at that facility. I know you have
answered a lot of questions on fentanyl but this is a huge
issue for West Virginia. We have the most really drug-related
deaths per capita than any other State, and most of it is tied
to fentanyl. Do you think that the $2.7 billion is an adequate
budget for the DEA? And how could our resources be better
prioritized to reduce and one day eliminate the amount of
deaths we experience from fentanyl, obviously, to stop the flow
of fentanyl would be number one, but how would you respond to
that?
Attorney General Garland. We would always like more money,
but we are obviously trying to live within the caps that were
agreed to. I think the budget that we have asked for is a 6
percent increase over the enacted for 2024, includes an
addition of 40 agents which will be very helpful. This also
includes money for diversion control which was part of the
problem in quite a number of States with respect to opioids,
and then there is the money that we have available in grants
with respect to--for of course State and local opioid addiction
treatment and protection. So that is the more than $490 million
in counter drug-related OJP grants, including the CARA Grants
and the local STOP (ph.) Grants.
Senator Capito. And we took a trip to Mexico, and met with
the President of Mexico, and Senator Moran was on that trip
just briefly and--well, he was on the trip the whole time, it
was a brief trip. Anyway we sat in and listened to the
President of Mexico basically tell us that: You have a demand
problem in the United States, and you have heard him say this
publicly, and that--because we were imploring him to stop the
flow of the chemicals that are coming in from China and then
having the development and production in Mexico and then
flowing into the United States.
What is the current state of that disruptive--of that
needed disruption between the Mexican border and the United
States in terms of getting the Mexican Government to cooperate
with our government law enforcements to be able to shut these
things down?
Attorney General Garland. Senator I have sat through that
same discussion three times by the President of Mexico, so I am
familiar with your frustration. I would say cooperation is
improving but much, much more is required. They have increased
the number of precursor chemicals on their--on the list of--
that have to be registered to come in. They have at our
request, extradited a number of the people whom we have
indicted, the heads of the Sinaloa Cartel, the Chapitos, the
sons of El Chapo, they have destroyed labs.
And I will say in connection, for example, with their
arrest of Ovidio, the son of El Chapo, a number of their
Mexican Marines lost their lives, they are--you know they are
facing an organization which, in many ways, has more heavy
weaponry than some small countries. So it is dangerous for
them, but it is not sufficient. And that is why I keep going,
that is why my Deputy Attorney General keeps going, that is why
our law enforcement agencies at all the operational level keep
going to try to get more cooperation.
Senator Capito. Thank you. Thank you for coming.
Attorney General Garland. Um-hum.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Senator Capito. Senator Britt.
Senator Britt. Excellent. Thank you Madam Chair.
Mr. General, thank you for being here today really
appreciate it. During last year's hearing I asked you about
training materials that were used to prepare the U.S. Marshals
assigned to protective details at the homes of our Supreme
Court justices in the aftermath of the leaked Dobbs decision.
Those training materials made it clear that far from having the
full authority to arrest people under any Federal statute, as
has been previously testified, the Marshals on the ground at
the homes of the justices were actively discouraged from making
arrest under 18 U.S.C. 15--Section 1507.
As we discussed last year Section 1507 makes it a crime to
picket or parade near residence occupied by a judge with the
intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court
officer, in the discharge of his duty, as I know that you are
fully aware. In the aftermath of that hearing, I and several of
my colleagues sent a letter to you on May 3 2023. That letter
recounted the contents of some of the training materials
discussed during the hearing, and also discussed new materials
that we had received afterwards. Those new materials consisted
of several different versions of post orders that were provided
to U.S. Marshals assigned to protect the homes of the justices,
and further confirmed that they had been actively dissuaded
from making arrest under Section 1507.
The letter asked for a response to 19 different questions
and/or document request by May 24, 2023. To date, almost a year
after it was transmitted to DOJ, I have yet to receive any
response to that letter. My staff repeatedly reached out to DOJ
to inquire about the status of the response, including via
email, on May 26, June 13, and July 11, and by phone on
numerous other occasions. Staff for this subcommittee actually
got involved and also reached out to DOJ's appropriation
liaison office in August to inquire about the status of the
response to my letter.
Neither my staff nor the staff of the subcommittee, to my
knowledge, have received any type of update regarding the
timeline provided for a response, or an answer to any of the
questions that were in that document. And so my question to you
is, is there is a reason that I didn't get a response to that
letter, and will you commit to me to getting one before the end
of the week?
Attorney General Garland. I will speak to my staff about
the responses to your letter. But as you no doubt know the
Director of the Marshals Service testified extensively in
February of this year on the precise questions that you are
asking, he was subject to further questioning, and he
explained. He confirmed that what I testified to before this
Committee was correct, and accurate, and true, that I had--he
testified that I had directed him that his first priority is to
protect the lives and safety of the justices of--and their
children and that they are--have full authority to make arrests
under any other statute including Section 1507 but that they
swore----
Senator Britt. Mr. General----
Attorney General Garland [continuing]: Swore that they do
not do so in a way that would risk the lives, with respect to
someone standing post who sees a----
Senator Britt. Mr.--well, Mr. General, my question is
really about the letter, I mean, I just----
Attorney General Garland. [continuing]: I am answering you,
there was a testimony by in person and----
Senator Britt. Right, well that would have been a--sir, if
I may. Then that would have been an easy thing. You are now
recounting all of the things that you could have put in a
letter. I am actually a Member of the United States Senate. I
may sit on an opposite side of the aisle, I may be from a State
that doesn't maybe come to your radar, there may be some other
reason, but I actually deserve an answer. And so I would
respect that you respect that. And even if that answer is not
something I like, over a year with no response after we are
trying to get one, and you could have very easily sent a letter
that pointed to those things right there. It is disrespectful,
and I really don't appreciate it. So----
Attorney General Garland. I have the greatest respect.
Senator Britt. So in the future though, too, and as a
former staffer myself, I would assume that somebody sitting
behind you knows that you didn't respond to me. And I just want
to say I deserve your respect and I hope that you would give it
to me in the future. And so even if it is what you just said
right here, I would like a letter by the end of the week.
Attorney General Garland. I greatly respect you, Senator. I
greatly respect the Senate.
Senator Britt. Thank you.
Attorney General Garland. I guess I would assume that then
we all----
Senator Britt. Then we will--then we will get it. And you
can put that in the letter, yes sir.
Attorney General Garland. [continuing]: We will be sure
that the transcript of the testimony gets to you in a letter,
yes.
Senator Britt. Thank you. I appreciate. Given that, I
actually have a similar concern as Senator Coons--just about
our Federal Judiciary. And when I look at what is happening
across the country, I just want a commitment from you that DOJ
and Marshals Services will enforce all applicable laws, all of
them, including obviously 1507 to protect Federal judges, and
that, as he said that we are doing everything that we can. And
if there is anything that we need to be doing more of that we
can communicate on that and certainly look forward to
partnering on making sure that we are doing it.
Attorney General Garland. As a long-time Federal judge who
cares very much about the safety and security of my former
colleagues, I have done way more than any Attorney General in
history has done, in this respect.
Senator Britt. Good.
Attorney General Garland. And I can promise you that I will
continue to do so.
Senator Britt. Excellent; and looks like I am out of time.
Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Britt. Senator Van
Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Attorney General. Great to see you today. And I do want
to start by thanking the President and the Biden Administration
for all their help and rapid help in response to the bridge
collapse in Baltimore. There are many pieces we need to pull
together, but the FBI was--they were among the first on the
scene to try to rule out foul play, terrorism, and they have
been--continuing to be present. So thank you and the Justice
Department.
We, the State of Maryland has now been enrolled in what is
called the emergency repair program. It is a program at the
DOT, and we are really glad to be part of it. Senator Cardin
and I have introduced legislation to ensure that the
President's pledge that we as a Federal Government will come
together and make sure that we cover the costs of the bridge
replacement are met.
But we also are writing into that legislation a clear
directive that any funds recouped as a result of lawsuits or
the liability will be returned to the Federal taxpayer. That
reinforces a provision already in law. I just want to ask you
and the Department for your commitment to work with us to make
sure that if there is been malfeasance, negligence, that
Federal taxpayers will be recouped--will recoup expenses that
they are putting out for bridge replacement.
Attorney General Garland. We will of course use every tool
we have with respect to recovering from any wrongdoers if we
find the kind of wrongdoing that allows us to make those
recoveries.
Senator Van Hollen. And as I understand it, whether the
suits are brought by the Federal Government, or by states
attorney generals, that the Federal Government has the first
priority claim on any monies that come in as a result of that.
Let me also thank you and the President for the regulations
guidelines that you put forward in response to the Safer
Communities Act, specifically work to close the ``gun show
loophole''.
So I chair the Appropriations Subcommittee that oversees
the FCC. One of the issues that they try to track and prevent
are robocalls, which I think every American has been the victim
of robocalls. And I want to congratulate the Department, DOJ, I
think in 2021, there was a major recovery of about $10 million
from one of these operators who was violating the various
Federal laws. But in testimony by the Chair of the FCC, Chair
Rosenworcel, she has asked for authority for the FCC to
directly bring these cases.
Because as you can imagine, there are lots of robocall
cases, understandably not all of them, you know, rise to the
level where DOJ would use its assets to prosecute, but the FCC
doesn't have the authority to prosecute, they can impose a
penalty but they can't enforce it. So my question to you is,
does the DOJ have any opposition to Congress empowering the FCC
to bring these cases directly in court and enforce them?
Attorney General Garland. So I haven't thought about that
specifically, so I have to get back to you. As a general matter
it has proven to be an element of good government to have all
of the litigation in the hands of the Justice Department
overseen by the Deputy--by the Attorney General with respect to
all of civil and criminal enforcement, to make sure that the
United States is always taking the same position in different
cases. These cases involve not just a specific question under a
statute, but many other civil procedure kinds of questions.
So I would say as a general matter the Department favors
the litigation remain in the hands of the Department. I don't--
I have not heard of any problems from the FCC with respect to
us not moving vigorously or aggressively enough on those cases,
but I will get back to you on that.
Senator Van Hollen. Well, Mr. attorney General. I am happy
to share with you the testimony of the Chair, and again she
wasn't being accusatory--with respect to DOJ, but I think it is
a fact that, you know, given all the cases that you are facing,
you don't have the time and the resources to commit to many of
the robocall cases. My understanding is the FCC has some
authority to bring cases directly.
Attorney General Garland. Some, yes.
Senator Van Hollen. Right. So I hope you would agree that
we can provide the FCC some limited authority to bring cases
that the DOJ--that are pending, you are correct, and there are
lots of penalties that are not collected, right. So it is not a
hit on DOJ, but it is a question of making sure that we enforce
Federal law.
Attorney General Garland. I will have to I will look into
those circumstances and I will ask my staff to talk to yours.
Senator Van Hollen. Thanks. So one other question, I know
the FISA legislation has come up, I heard your response to
that. Many of us believe that at the FISA court there should be
even more of an opportunity for the sort of people's advocate
to weigh in in these cases. There is a process as you well--
might know to file amici briefs, but there is legislation that
Senator Durban and Senator Wyden proposed, where one element of
that would be to require the court to appoint amici in certain
narrow cases involving Americans' First Amendment rights, cases
involving the investigation of religious figures, members of
the media, cases involving new technologies or new surveillance
programs. Would you object to ensuring that an amici is
appointed in those kinds of circumstances?
Attorney General Garland. So I tell you this is separate
from the 702 legislation that you are talking about. This would
be separate legislation?
Senator Van Hollen. I think this--no this would be--relates
to the whole--all the FISA legislation including the Section
702. This goes beyond 702 I am not talking about----
Attorney General Garland. Is this about the
reauthorization?
Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
Attorney General Garland. This is not part of that?
Senator Van Hollen. This part of the reauthorization of----
Attorney General Garland. 702.
Senator Van Hollen. I think that is where they are
proposing to include it.
Attorney General Garland. I see. So we strongly support the
bill that passed out of the House, as it is, we need this
finished by the end of the week or our authorization expires.
So anything that would get in the way of that happening I would
be reluctant to tell you, but I have to, that I couldn't
support. I think the judges know well when they need amicus and
they have the ability to appoint amicus. From my own experience
during the time I was in the same courthouse with the FISA
judges they are very pleased with the amicus that they have,
and they know well when difficult cases arrive--arise how to
appoint one and to appoint one, and there is nothing that
prevents them from doing that now.
Senator Van Hollen. No. I appreciate that. Madam Chair, I
will just end by saying, you know, in a typical, you know,
adversarial proceeding there is a representative there for, you
know, the adversary here, the question is just whether to make
sure that the people who may be, you know, on the receiving end
of the investigation have their rights protected. But we can
continue that conversation.
I will say there is quite a bit of concern about this
provision that came up today, that was added in the House-
passed bill that was not part of the Warner-Rubio Bill, but I
am sure that will be a subject of conversation in the coming
days.
Senator Shaheen. I am sure it will. Thank you, Senator Van
Hollen.
Mr. Attorney General, I understand you have a heard out at
11:30. I would like to just raise two brief points before we
close the hearing. In March of 2023 you testified in front of
the Committee and we discussed anomalous health incidents. I
relayed the situation of someone I had met on a Congressional
Delegation visit to the country of Georgia, she was the wife of
a career employee with the Department of Justice, and her life
and career had been upended because she had been affected by an
anomalous health incident, and she had not been able to get
satisfaction from the Department of Justice for that.
You talked about taking a look at that and coming up with a
rule that could be implemented, can you tell me when that draft
rule is expected to go into effect?
Attorney General Garland. I can tell you. I signed the
rule, I believe it is in with the Federal Register now, and as
soon as they publish we will be able to reach out and start
processing these claims. I am grateful for your bringing that
to my attention.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you, and I am delighted to
hear that that is progressing, and hopefully we can ensure that
people who have been affected get some satisfaction and some
help for what has happened to them.
The other issue is one that you raised earlier in the
questions from Senator Moran and Senator Capito about
recruitment and retention of our Federal corrections officers.
FCI Berlin, which is a prison in Northern New Hampshire, has
had similar recruitment issues. It is a very rural part of our
State, far away from lots of urban areas, and while lots of
people really like that, it makes it hard to recruit.
Further, a number of officers have been called down to
facilities in New York which have even more extreme challenges
with hiring, and have been asked to go serve there for a period
of time, which creates more concern and pressure in Berlin. We
are also in the--considered in the Boston Metropolitan area
which means that the issue you raised about people being able
to get more pay in other areas is exacerbated because even
though New Hampshire has a lot of rural areas to put us in with
the Boston Metropolitan area creates a real problem and that is
what the Office of Personnel has done.
So can I just ask that you work with us as we--and with the
Bureau of Prisons as we take a look at this issue, because it
creates real challenges for what is already a problematic
situation?
Attorney General Garland. Yes. Absolutely, we would be
happy to do that. And as I mentioned we have a request for some
$205.4 million for hiring and retention incentives, we are just
going to have to improve the pay scale for correctional
officers if we are going to solve this problem in the end.
Senator Shaheen. Absolutely. And throwing the--it is
complicated because of that designation of what area you are
included in, and what that means for pay.
Attorney General Garland. Yes. Yes.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. Thank you very much. You
have been very generous with your time this morning.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Shaheen. And if there are no further questions,
Senators may submit additional questions for the official
hearing record, and we hope that the Justice Department will
respond to those questions within a reasonable period of time.
We usually ask 30 days, but we understand that may not always
be possible, but hopefully within a reasonable period of time.
Attorney General Garland. Okay. Thank you. We will.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Hon. Merrick B. Garland
Questions Submitted by Senator Joe Manchin, III
Question 1. In the FY2024 minibus for CJS appropriations, I secured
language requiring a report on granting Homeland Security
Investigations (HSI) Title 21 authority to investigate drug crimes
without needing authority from the Justice Department.
This small change, which is supported by the Department of Homeland
Security, would untie our hands and allow maximum flexibility to take
the fight directly to the cartels. I understand that the Drug
Enforcement Agency (DEA) has some concerns with granting HSI this
authority.
Do you agree that more agents in the field with proper authority
would allow us to better combat the drug epidemic?
Answer. Stopping the flow of fentanyl and other drugs into the
United States has never been more important. DEA and the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) play important and complementary roles in
combating Federal drug crimes. DEA is the Administration's lead
investigative agency for combating fentanyl. As such, DEA targets the
cartels and their networks here and abroad. DHS has a vital role,
securing the border to stop drugs from coming into the United States
and pursuing investigations with a nexus to the border. The authority
DHS currently possesses allows for the interdiction of fentanyl and the
seizure of other contraband at the border.
DHS does not need Title 21 authority to execute its border mission.
In 2023, 98% of all fentanyl seizures by Customs and Border Protection
occurred on the southwest border. HSI and Customs and Border Protection
have full authority to effect narcotics, narcotics-related precursor
and paraphernalia, and drug money seizures and arrests at the border
and at points of entry. Since illegal narcotics are contraband,
wherever HSI agents encounter narcotics, they can make narcotics
seizures and associated arrests. Granting HSI broad, independent Title
21 authority could shift resources away from the border, thereby
diverting its resources and mandate away from one of the most critical
enforcement areas in the fight against fentanyl.
Moreover, granting DHS Title 21 authority and removing important
de-confliction practices currently part of the longstanding Interagency
Cooperation Agreement may discourage cooperation, increase demands on
both agencies related to deconfliction, and create delays, which would
lead to more overlap between DEA and DHS, with agents working more of
the same targets in the interior. The overall effect could be less
resources at the border, and less efficiency.
The Department is using all available resources to combat drug
trafficking, increase access to evidence-based treatment, and prevent
drug overdose and poisoning deaths in the United States. We are working
closely with law enforcement agencies here and abroad to stop deadly
synthetic drugs from flooding into our neighborhoods and to
aggressively investigate and prosecute those responsible for
manufacturing and trafficking these drugs.
What steps could be taken, absent legislation, to improve the
process by which HSI requests Title 21 authority from DOJ?
Answer. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) advises the
following: Right now, HSI has Title 21 authority, delegated by DEA
pursuant to the Interagency Cooperation Agreement, originally signed in
2009, and reaffirmed by both agencies in 2021. The Department, DEA,
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Homeland Security
Investigations (HSI) have recently reaffirmed their commitments to
working together under the process set forth for DEA delegating Title
21 authority to HSI and addressing issues related to joint training and
data tracking.
Whenever DHS has sought Title 21 authority to execute its border-
related mission, DEA has granted it. And the delegation process
promotes critical coordination and deconfliction that makes law
enforcement more effective. DEA has already delegated limited Title 21
authority to more than 4,600 HSI agents--which is over 60% of all HSI
agents, and represents more than DEA's entire Special Agent population.
There is no cap on the number of HSI agents who may be cross designated
to investigate illicit drug cases at the borders or ports of entry.
Every HSI agent who handles border-related investigations is eligible
to receive delegated Title 21 authority. HSI is also a partner at our
Special Operations Division. DEA and HSI work to resolve any challenges
with the agreement.
Question 2. Last year, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco asked
Congress to expand its ability to transfer to Ukraine the proceeds of
forfeited Russian assets. Right now, the Justice Department has this
authority only as it applies to specific sanctions. There are many
other economic countermeasures applied against Russia, including export
controls, from which we are sitting on funds that could easily be
transferred to Ukraine.
I worked with the Justice Department to introduce legislation with
my friend, Senator Lindsey Graham, that provides this authority. Our
Transferring Illicit Assets to Ukraine Act passed the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee 20-1 as part of the REPO Act. I am working with my
colleagues to get this important legislation across the finish line.
Deputy Attorney General Monaco testified that the U.S. was
``leaving money on the table'' without this authority. Can you explain
how expanding DOJ's transfer authority would unlock hundreds of
millions of dollars in support for Ukraine at no cost to U.S.
taxpayers?
Answer. The Department appreciates your efforts to strengthen the
Department's ability to expand the Department's authority to allow for
transfer of forfeited assets for Ukraine's benefit and are supportive
of the legislation.
The Criminal Division, Task Force KleptoCapture (TFKC), and the
National Security Division advise as follows:
The Department would welcome a technical fix to extend the existing
transfer authority to cover the full scope of Task Force
KleptoCapture's work to counter Russian aggression and malign activity.
In particular, the Department would welcome the authority to transfer
assets forfeited in connection with additional violations, not just the
sanctions in the existing legislation. The expansion could cover
violations of the Export Control Act of 2018, the Export Administration
Regulations, and other economic sanctions, including the 2014 sanctions
imposed in response to Russia's earlier invasion of Ukraine. These
proposed additions in the Transferring Illicit Assets to Ukraine Act of
2023 would provide the Department the ability to transfer a broader
swath of forfeited assets for the benefit of Ukraine. The Department
will continue to work diligently to forfeit such assets and has
initiated a number of forfeiture actions that, if ultimately
successful, could make additional assets available to assist in
rebuilding Ukraine if the Act is enacted.
In March 2022, the Department launched TFKC, an interagency law
enforcement task force dedicated to enforcing the sweeping sanctions,
export restrictions, and economic countermeasures that the United
States has imposed, along with its allies and partners, in response to
Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. TFKC's role is to ensure the
full effect of these actions, designed to isolate Russia from global
markets and impose a serious cost for this unjustified war, by
freezing, seizing, and forfeiting the assets of sanctioned Russian
oligarchs, and by indicting individuals for violations of U.S.
sanctions and evasions of export controls.
The Department continues to work diligently to hold accountable
those whose actions support and enable Russia to continue this unjust
war. Since its inception, TFKC has brought criminal charges against
more than 80 individuals and entities for sanctions evasion and export
control crimes, and has also seized, forfeited, or otherwise restrained
a variety of high-worth assets, including luxury yachts, real estate,
and investment accounts.
In the Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2023,
Congress authorized the Department to transfer certain forfeited
property to the Department of State to remediate the harms of Russia's
invasion of Ukraine. Specifically, the statute authorized the
Department to transfer property forfeited on the basis of a violation
of specific sanctions: those authorized by Executive Order 14024, and
as expanded and relied on by later, related executive orders. This
meant that property involved in violations of sanctions imposed for
Russia's invasion of Ukraine could be used for assistance to Ukraine.
In February 2023, the Department authorized the first ever transfer
under this new authority.
Finally, the Department notes that the existing transfer authority
is scheduled to sunset on May 1, 2025, less than 1 year from now.\1\
The Department is diligently pursuing forfeitures that may be subject
to this existing authority, but not all pending forfeiture actions may
be resolved within that timeframe. Accordingly, Congress may consider
extending the date on which this authority would sunset beyond May 1,
2025, in addition to the amendments to expand the authority.
Question 3. I was proud to help negotiate the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act (BSCA), the most significant piece of commonsense gun
safety legislation in almost three decades. As you know, many of the
agencies implementing this historic piece of legislation are located in
West Virginia. For example, the ATF's National Services Center (NSC) in
Martinsburg, WV, traces illegal guns, and the FBI's Criminal Justice
Information Services Division, located in Clarksburg, WV, handles the
National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
The ATF's recent Final Rule expands the categories of firearm
transactions that require individuals to conduct background checks and
register for a Federal Firearms License (FFL). I strongly support
closing the gun show and other loopholes, but it has always been
Congressional intent to protect bona fide personal gun transfers,
especially among family.
Will you pledge that, under the ATF's Final Rule, individuals
transferring guns to family members will not need to register as an
FFL?
Answer. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) advises
the following:
On April 10, 2024, ATF's Final Rule, ``Definition of `Engaged in
the Business' as a Dealer in Firearms,'' amending regulations in title
27, Code of Federal Regulations, part 478 was signed. The Final Rule
tracks the statutory language, which, as amended by the Bipartisan
Safer Communities Act (BSCA), requires anyone ``who devotes time,
attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of
trade or business to predominantly earn a profit through the repetitive
purchase and resale of firearms'' to obtain a Federal firearms license.
The BSCA changed the previous definition of ``engaged in the business''
by striking the language ``with the principal objective of livelihood
and profit,'' and replacing it with ``to predominately earn a profit.''
The Final Rule explicitly states that people engaged in the
occasional sale or transfer of firearms to family members are not
presumed to be engaged in the business, and, therefore, do not need a
license.\2\ This is because, as noted in the Final Rule, a person who
only sells or otherwise transfers a firearm occasionally to a family
member is less likely to have a predominant intent to earn a profit due
to their pre-existing close personal relationship (i.e., a less than
arms-length transaction).\3\
Even in circumstances involving repeat sales or transfers to family
members, the Final Rule makes clear that the totality of circumstances
governs and that there must always be an intent to earn a profit before
a license is required. The presumptions in the Final Rule are,
moreover, based on decades of pre-BSCA case law that continues to be
applicable today.
What steps can the Department take with existing resources and
authority to improve operations at the ATF facility in Martinsburg?
Answer. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) advises
the following:
ATF's National Services Center (NSC) in Martinsburg, West Virginia
is critical to ATF's mission and priorities. The NSC houses several
mission-critical functions, including the National Tracing Center
(NTC), the Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD), and the
National Firearms Act (NFA) Division. The FY25 President's Budget
request includes $43.9 million and 25 positions (zero agents) for the
expansion of the ATF facility in Martinsburg, West Virginia, to address
overcapacity, which poses significant risk to the ATF's ability to
execute both its core public safety function, in supporting State and
local law enforcement to fight gun crime, and for its regulatory
mission. This program enhancement will also support the accurate and
efficient processing of all applications to register NFA weapons.
The NTC is an excellent example of the critical work ATF carries
out in Martinsburg. Between fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2021, the
NTC processed over 7.6 million firearm trace requests to provide law
enforcement agencies with strategic and investigative leads, and 53% of
those searches were completed using out-of-business records provided to
ATF by closed dealers pursuant to Federal law. Currently, ATF completes
standard gun crime traces in approximately 7.6 days and urgent gun
crime traces in approximately 24 hours.
Question 4. I have always believed that a healthy democracy depends
on a voting system that is accessible, free, fair, and secure. While
history will tell you that we have come a long way in ensuring that all
individuals, regardless of race, sex or political affiliation, have the
ability to cast their vote, we can all agree that we still have some
work to do.
As you are likely aware, recent election cycles have been
accompanied by wide scale election interference attempts. We have seen
actors--both foreign and domestic alike--seek to sew doubt into the
results of the previous two Presidential elections, which culminated in
the dark day that was the January 6th Capitol Insurrection. I was proud
to have co-led the group that crafted and passed the Electoral Count
Reform Act, which we hope will ensure the events of that dreadful day
are never duplicated.
However, despite our best efforts, it appears that our country will
confront similar challenges again. As has been widely reported, Russia
is once attempting to erode faith in U.S. held elections this November.
We must do everything to maintain the confidence in our systems and
ensure that American's most fundamental right is protected.
What actions is the Department of Justice taking to ensure safe and
secure elections in 2024 that are free from election interference?
What resources have you requested to successfully implement your
aforementioned action plans?
Answer. Protecting the right to vote was a founding purpose of the
Justice Department. Today, fulfilling that charge means confronting the
full range of threats to our elections.
The Intelligence Community has made clear that Russia remains the
predominant foreign threat to our elections and that Iran is also
accelerating its efforts. Our National Security Division and the FBI
protect our elections from such national security threats, including
malign foreign influence and cyber-enabled campaigns.
The FBI advises that through the FBI's Foreign Influence Task
Force, the Department is identifying and counteracting foreign
operations that target our democratic institutions, with a specific
focus on our elections. Part of the Department's strategy involves
sharing threat information with companies that operate social media
platforms, so that these companies may take their own independent
actions to mitigate those threats. That includes sharing information
about specific accounts on their platforms involved in foreign malign
influence activity.
The Department has seen a dangerous increase in violent threats
against public servants, including those who administer our elections.
These public servants must be able to do their jobs without fearing for
their safety or that of their families. Through the Election Threats
Task Force, our U.S. Attorneys' Offices, and our FBI offices across the
country, the Department investigates, disrupts, and combats unlawful
threats against those who administer our elections. The Department also
provides funding through the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance
Grant (JAG) Program that states and localities may use to deter,
detect, and protect against threats of violence against election
workers, administrators, officials, and others associated with the
electoral process.
Finally, the Civil Rights Division also enforces Federal voting
rights laws. Through these efforts, the Department is challenging
discriminatory restrictions on access to the ballot, working to block
discriminatory redistricting plans, working with jurisdictions to
ensure that their voting centers are accessible to voters with
disabilities, and more.
The Department recognizes the urgency of these threats and is
prepared to confront them. The Department will continue to protect
people's safety, and we will continue to protect our democracy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Consolidated Appropriations Act, Sec. 1708(d), Public Law
No. 117-328, 136 Stat. 5200.
\2\ See 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(1), 923(a).
\3\ See Final Rule, 89 Fed. Reg. at 29026.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Gary Peters
Question 1. Organized retail crime has been harming communities and
businesses across the country. It's estimated that in 2022 Michigan
businesses lost more than $2 billion in revenue due to retail theft.
Attorney General Garland, what actions is DOJ taking, with state
and local partners, to stem these crimes and prosecute perpetrators?
Answer. The Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF),
FBI, and the Criminal Division advise as follows:
The Department continues to prioritize efforts to combat organized
retail theft by working with our law enforcement partners to identify
these organizations, dismantle them using an enterprise theory of
investigation, and employ sophisticated investigative techniques.
For example, the FBI works with state, local, and Federal partners
around the country through various task force initiatives to combat
both violent crime and organized crime. The FBI leads eight Major Theft
Task Forces around the country that are dedicated to defeating criminal
organizations involved in interstate transportation of stolen goods.
In July 2023, the Department expanded the mission of OCDETF beyond
its original counter-drug focus to begin using its joint law
enforcement resources and capabilities against all transnational
organized crime threats. As part of that expanded mission, OCDETF has
established a National Organized Retail Crimes Strategic Initiative
(NORCI) to address the increasing threats to our economic and national
security posed by criminal networks committing organized retail crime.
The NORCI will support investigative and prosecutorial efforts
targeting organized retail crime groups across the nation, enabling
Federal agents and prosecutors to develop enterprise investigations
that dismantle these networks and their money laundering
infrastructures by promoting the use of all statutory authorities,
including money laundering offenses, to disrupt and dismantle these
organizations.
Question 2. Last year, I released a report on the watchlisting and
screening processes at airports that raised concerns about the
terrorist watchlist--including who it is shared with, its
implementation, oversight, and the redress process.
In particular, the report found insufficient transparency, lack of
a holistic approach to screening, and no meaningful options to resolve
concerns for Americans who believe they are misidentified or subject to
discrimination. Certain communities, such as Muslim, Arab and South
Asian Americans, report disparate screening during travel and a
breakdown in trust over the inability to seek proper redress.
The Administration, including the DOJ and FBI, must effectively
target our resources to protect our country from terrorism while
respecting the rights of Americans.
Attorney General Garland, what steps have you taken to ensure that
there is more transparency--especially to Congress--about the watchlist
and other datasets maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center, a
recommendation in the report?
Answer. The Department is committed to working with Congress to
provide information about the watchlist and other datasets maintained
by the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC). The FBI is working with
committees interested in reviewing the updated Watchlisting Guidance.
The Department is constantly in discussions with the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) about how to improve the processes between DHS
and the immigration courts and at the border with respect to terrorist
screening.
The FBI advises as follows:
The TSC is a multi-agency organization administered by the FBI that
was established in 2003 through a Presidential Directive. Drawing
personnel from various U.S. Government departments and agencies, the
TSC maintains the Terrorist Screening Dataset (TSDS), the U.S.
Government's consolidated database of identity information about
individuals known or reasonably suspected to be or have been engaged in
terrorism or terrorist activities.
The TSC works diligently to maintain a current and accurate
watchlist while protecting privacy and civil liberties. A rigorous
multi-agency vetting process is in place to allow the TSC to determine
whether a person meets the strict criteria to be added to any
watchlist. No one may be placed on the TSDS based solely on race,
ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, or any First
Amendment-protected activities. Continuous review and quality control
measures improve the ability to make accurate identifications, and the
TSC is constantly taking advantage of new methods and technologies to
strengthen its processes. The TSC operates a 24/7 call center that
conducts identity resolution. Per established processes, when a
screening agency or law enforcement agency encounters an individual who
may be a potential match to an individual listed on the TSDS, the
encountering agency contacts the TSC to confirm whether the individual
is a positive match to a TSDS record. Encounters may be face-to-face
(e.g., at a U.S. port of entry or during a traffic stop), electronic
(e.g., visa application), or paper-based (e.g., review of a visa
petition). If the individual is confirmed to be a match, the
encountering agency will take appropriate action, consistent with the
encountering agency's procedures, policies, and applicable authorities.
Individual travelers who believe they have been unfairly or incorrectly
denied boarding, delayed, or otherwise subjected to additional
screening may seek redress through the Traveler Redress Inquiry Program
(TRIP), which is administered by DHS. The TSC participates in DHS TRIP
with respect to any inquiries related to the TSDS.
The TSC is committed to providing transparency about the
watchlisting process. In April 2024, the TSC published an updated
``Overview of the U.S. Government's Terrorist Watchlisting Process and
Procedures.'' \1\ That document provides an extensive overview of TSDS-
related watchlisting and screening processes; quality assurance
measures; processes relating to the removal of individuals from the
TSDS; relevant oversight mechanisms; and the applicable redress
processes.
Question 3. I have been hearing from formerly incarcerated
Michiganders about the significant barriers they have faced when
attempting to reintegrate into society. They have continually cited the
difficulty in accessing proper documentation--birth certificates,
social security cards, and state IDs--as they transition back to life
outside the Federal prison system.
Such documents are often difficult for the recently released to
access, preventing them from applying for jobs, finding a place to
live, and accessing other necessities. A GAO report from 2022 stated
that only about half of those formerly incarcerated in a Bureau of
Prisons facility are released with at least one ID document in their
possession. This leaves a significant portion of those formerly
incarcerated without the necessary documents they need for
reintegration. This is despite the Federal statutory requirement that
the Bureau establish prerelease planning procedures that help inmates
obtain critical identification documents.
Attorney General Garland, what are some barriers preventing BOP
from ensuring all those released have some form of documentation? Are
these barriers in any way related to resource constraints?
Answer. The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) advises as follows:
BOP works to ensure every U.S. citizen leaving its custody has
proper legal identification obtained either from a Federal or state
agency, or in the form of a Release ID Card. The lack of proper legal
identification documents can hinder the ability to obtain jobs,
housing, and other resources formerly incarcerated individuals need to
successfully reenter the community.
BOP developed a Release ID Card, equipped with security features
similar to those required by the REAL ID Act, to ensure all U.S.
citizens leaving custody have a temporary form of identification to be
used when completing the Employment Eligibility Verification (I-9)
form. BOP worked collaboratively with the Government Publishing Office
(GPO), Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and Immigration
and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to develop its Release ID Card.
All BOP facilities now have the ability to utilize the Instant ID
system to generate Release ID Cards. Since October 2023, BOP and GPO
have generated over 6,500 Release ID Cards. Twenty-six states,
including Michigan, accept the Release ID, however, six do not. BOP is
reengaging with the states that have not responded to letters, emails,
and phone calls regarding the Release ID Card. The states that have not
accepted the Release ID Card have indicated that their regulations
limit the types of documentation they can accept to issue a Real ID
Card. BOP is continuing to work to increase access to identification
documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Federal Bureau of Investigation, Overview of the U.S.
Government's Terrorist Watchlisting Process and Procedures as of April
2024 (2024), https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/terrorist-
watchlisting-transparency-document-april-2024-050224.pdf/view.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
Question 1. I am concerned about drones being used to bring
contraband items such as cell phones, drugs, and weapons into
correctional facilities.
--What is the Department doing to counter the threats posed by drones
at Federal correctional facilities and to assist state
officials in countering this problem?
--Does the Department support the use of no-fly zones, signal
jammers, or other novel means to counter the threats posed by
drones at state and Federal correctional facilities?
--What can Congress do to assist the Department and its state
counterparts in their efforts to counter the threats posed by
drones at correctional facilities?
Answer. The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) advises as follows:
To counter the threat posed by drones at correctional facilities,
BOP has worked with the Department and with the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to restrict the airspace over all its secure
facilities. Additionally, BOP has deployed drone detection technology
at its high-risk facilities where the threat posed by drone-introduced
contraband is high.
Following drone detections and interdictions, BOP works closely
with other Federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial law
enforcement located around BOP facilities to investigate and prosecute
drone contraband deliveries. For example, in November 2022, following a
joint investigation by the FBI, BOP, the Jefferson County Sheriff's
Office, and the FAA, a man pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas to owning or operating an
unregistered drone earlier that year.\1\ He had intended to use the
drone to drop contraband, including tobacco, cell phones, cell phone
chargers, various tools, vape pens, and other items, into Federal
Correctional Complex Beaumont.
As another example, following a joint investigation by the
Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General, FBI, BOP, and
Fort Worth Police Department, and with assistance from the FAA and the
Dallas Police Department, on April 6, 2023, a Texas man was sentenced
to 41 months of incarceration for flying a drone loaded with
contraband, including methamphetamine, cell phones, MP3 players,
pressed THC, and tobacco, into the Federal Medical Center Fort Worth, a
Federal correctional center.\2\
In June of 2023, with assistance from BOP's Office of Security
Technology, the Department's National Institute of Justice published a
series of reports for prison and jail leaders and staff concerning the
threat of contraband delivery via drones into correctional facilities.
The report is publicly available here: https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/
articles/addressing-contraband-prisons-and-jails-threat-drone-
deliveries-grows.
Congress could enact the Administration's durable, multi-year
reauthorization and expansion of Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-
UAS) authority to allow, in addition to BOP, state law enforcement to
use drone detection and mitigation technology without being subject to
liability under Federal criminal laws. Safeguarding the Homeland from
the Threats Posed by Unmanned Aircraft Systems Act of 2023 (S. 1631 and
H.R. 4333) represents bipartisan solutions that expand the authority,
coupled with coordination requirements with the FAA, to ensure the
continued safety of the National Airspace System and meaningful
enhanced protections for privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Press Release, United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern
District of Texas, Houston Man Guilty of Attempting to Use Drone to
Drop Contraband into Beaumont, Federal Prison Complex, (Nov. 8, 2022),
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edtx/pr/houston-man-guilty-attempting-use-
drone-drop-contraband-beaumont-Federal-prison-complex.
\2\ Press Release, United States Attorney's Office for the Northern
District of Texas, Texas Man Pleads Guilty to Delivering Contraband to
Prison via Drone, (Oct. 6 2022), https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/pr/
texas-man-pleads-guilty-delivering-contraband-prison-drone.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Kennedy
Question 1. On November 18, 2022, you appointed Jack Smith to be
special counsel to oversee the Department of Justice's criminal
investigations into former President Donald Trump. Before or after that
appointment, have you made or given any suggestion, insinuation,
encouragement, or advice (in any form) to Jack Smith, Jack Smith's
staff, or anyone else at the Department of Justice to the effect that
President Trump could or should be prosecuted before the 2024
presidential election? If so, please provide full details.
Question 2. A March 22, 2024, article published by the New York
Times (``Inside Garland's Effort to Prosecute Trump'') describes
President Trump's decision to announce his 2024 presidential campaign
on November 15, 2022, and your decision to appoint Jack Smith to be
special counsel on November 18, 2022. According to the article, a ``few
weeks before'' this decision, Jack Smith visited your office and was
asked ``how quickly he could start.'' To the best of your knowledge,
during this meeting or any other meeting with Jack Smith, did you or
anyone in your office suggest, insinuate, encourage, or advise (in any
form) Jack Smith, Jack Smith's staff, or anyone else at the Department
of Justice to the effect that President Trump could or should be
prosecuted before the 2024 presidential election? If so, please provide
full details.
Question 3. To the best of your knowledge, has anyone at the White
House or the Department of Justice suggested, insinuated, encouraged,
or advised (in any form) you, one of your associates, Jack Smith, or
Jack Smith's staff to the effect that President Trump could or should
be prosecuted before the 2024 presidential election? If so, please
provide full details.
Question 4. On November 9, 2022, President Biden--speaking at a
White House press conference--was asked how Biden would ``reassure [G7
nations] . . . that the former President will not return or that his
political movement, which is still strong, will not once again take
power in the United States? '' President Biden responded: ``Well, we
just have to demonstrate that he will not take power . . . if he does
run. I'm making sure he, under legitimate efforts of our Constitution,
does not become the next President again.'' (Emphasis added.) About one
week later, you appointed Special Counsel Jack Smith to oversee the
Department of Justice's criminal investigations into former President
Donald Trump. To the best of your knowledge, has President Biden or any
other White House officials (or associates or agents of the president)
ever made or communicated or given any suggestion, insinuation,
encouragement, or advice (in any form) to you or anyone else at the
Department of Justice to the effect that President Trump could or
should be prosecuted before the 2024 presidential election? If so,
please provide full details.
Question 5. To the best of your knowledge, has any individual or
entity within the Department of Justice made or given any suggestion,
insinuation, encouragement, or advice (of any form) to Jack Smith, Jack
Smith's office, or anyone else at the Department of Justice to the
effect that President Trump could or should be prosecuted before the
2024 presidential election? If so, please provide full details.
Answers to Questions 1-5. The Department makes decisions based on
the facts and the law. Politics played no part in my decision to
appoint Jack Smith as Special Counsel. The decision to appoint Special
Counsel Smith in this matter underscores the Department's commitment to
conducting our work independently and ensuring the integrity of
investigations and prosecutions. The Department's policies and
longstanding practices, such as the Principles of Federal Prosecution,
guide the timing of investigative steps and filing charges. Under the
Department's Special Counsel regulations, the Special Counsel's Office
is required to comply with Department rules, regulations, procedures,
and policies. Once charges are filed in court, the timing of the case
is determined pursuant to judicial proceedings.
Question 6. The Department of Justice's Justice Manual says that
``Federal prosecutors and agents may never make a decision regarding an
investigation or prosecution, or select the timing of investigative
steps or criminal charges, for the purpose of affecting any election,
or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any
candidate or political party.'' Sec. 9-27.260. If a special counsel
sought to file charges, recommended a trial date, or otherwise sought a
prosecution or litigation timeline in order to advantage or
disadvantage a presidential candidate, would any of those actions
violate Sec. 9-27.260 or any other provision of the Justice Manual?
Question 7. Department of Justice's Justice Manual says: ``Federal
prosecutors and agents may never select the timing of any action,
including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the
purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an
advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party. Such a
purpose is inconsistent with the Department's mission and with the
Principles of Federal Prosecution.'' Sec. 9-85.500. If a special
counsel sought to file charges, recommended a trial date, or otherwise
sought a prosecution or litigation timeline in order to advantage or
disadvantage a presidential candidate, would any of those actions
violate Sec. 9-85.500 or any other provision of the Justice Manual? If
so, please explain which it would potentially violate and why. If not,
please explain why not.
Answers to Questions 6-7. The Department speaks through its
filings, including matters involving special counsels. The Department's
policies and longstanding practices, such as the Principles of Federal
Prosecution, guide the timing of investigative steps and filing
charges. Under the Department's Special Counsel regulations, the
Special Counsel's Office is required to comply with Department rules,
regulations, procedures, and policies, which includes the Justice
Manual. Once charges are filed with the court, the timing of the case
is determined by the judicial proceedings.
Question 8. On October 5, 2023, President Trump filed a motion to
dismiss the criminal prosecution against him in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Columbia, claiming presidential immunity from
prosecution for official actions taken as President. On December 1,
2023, the district judge denied that motion. Jack Smith eventually
petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review President Trump's claim of
presidential immunity, saying: ``It is of imperative importance that
[President Trump's] claims of immunity be resolved by this Court and
that [President Trump's] trial proceed as promptly as possible if his
claim of immunity is rejected.'' (Emphasis added.) The Supreme Court
denied that petition. And after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit affirmed the district court, President Trump asked the Supreme
Court to review its decision.
Despite just 2 months before saying it was of ``imperative
importance that [President Trump's] immunity claims be resolved by this
Court,'' Smith now asked the Supreme Court to deny President Trump's
petition or, if the Court took the case, to schedule it on an
``expedited'' briefing schedule. Assuming it is true that these
instances represent actions taken by Special Counsel Jack Smith to
increase the odds that President Trump is tried before the 2024
election, would that violate any provision of the Justice Manual or
other Department of Justice rules, regulations, or guidance? If so,
please explain which it would potentially violate and why. If not,
please explain why not.
Question 9. On December 16, 2023, Elie Honig, a senior legal
analyst at CNN, said on air that ``any fair-minded observer has to
agree'' that Special Counsel Jack Smith is ``acting based on the
election schedule'' and that ``the motivating principle behind every
procedural request [Jack Smith has] made . . . has been getting this
trial in before the election.'' Do you agree that Special Counsel Jack
Smith is making prosecution or litigation decisions in order to try
President Trump before the 2024 presidential election? Please explain
why or why not.
Question 10. In a December 12, 2023, column for the Washington Post
(``Politics are now clearly shaping Jack Smith's Trump prosecution''),
Jason Willick says that ``Smith has all but announced that his
prosecution timeline is controlled by the 2024 general election.'' Do
you believe that Jack Smith is basing his ``prosecution timeline'' on
the 2024 presidential election? Please explain why or why not.
Answers to Questions 8-10. The Department speaks through its
filings, including in this matter. The Special Counsel Office's filings
explain their arguments for their motions. Everything the Special
Counsel does is subject to the Department's rules, regulations,
procedures, practices, and policies of the Department of Justice. The
Special Counsel regulations require the Special Counsel to comply with
the rules and policies of the Department, which includes the Justice
Manual. The Department policies and longstanding practices guide the
timing of taking investigative steps and filing charges. Once charges
are filed with the court, the timing of the case is determined by the
judicial proceedings.
The Special Counsel sought a speedy trial, and his reasons for
doing so are set forth in public filings. The district court handling
this matter will decide speedy-trial questions in that matter.
Question 11. Please describe how the Department of Justice
implements or enforces the Justice Manual to ensure or hold accountable
prosecutors (including special counsels) that make ``a decision
regarding [a] . . . prosecution . . . for the purpose of affecting [an]
election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to
any candidate or political party'' or otherwise seek to advantage or
disadvantage a political candidate?
Question 12. Please describe what disciplinary measures,
procedures, or avenues are available to the Department of Justice to
ensure that prosecutors (including special counsels) do not make ``a
decision regarding [a] . . . prosecution . . . for the purpose of
affecting [an] election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or
disadvantage to any candidate or political party'' or otherwise violate
Sec. 9-27.260, Sec. 9-85.500, or a similar provision?
Question 13. To the best of your knowledge, please describe in full
detail what actions you, or another entity or individual at the
Department of Justice, have taken to ensure that Special Counsel Jack
Smith is not violating or has not violated Sec. 9-27.260, Sec. 9-
85.500, or a similar provision of the Justice Manual or other
Department of Justice rules, regulations, or guidance in his
prosecution of President Trump?
Answers to Questions 11-13. The Special Counsel is an employee of
the Department. The Special Counsel regulations require the Special
Counsel to comply with the rules and policies of the Department, which
include the Justice Manual. The regulations also include provisions
governing the conduct and accountability of the Special Counsel. 28
C.F.R. Sec. 600.7.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Deb Fischer
Question 1. The Department's $40 million budget request for the
Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS) Program in FY 2025 reflects
a $4 million decrease compared to the FY 2024 enacted level.
--Following up on our discussion during the hearing, why did the
Department find reduced need for the RISS Program,
specifically, for FY 2025?
Answer. The Department's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) advises
as follows:
The Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS) Program is an
important tool to allow Federal, state, local, and Tribal law
enforcement agencies throughout the country to be connected through
secure information sharing. The FY 2025 President's Budget funding
request is consistent with historical funding requests for the RISS
Program and the constraints of the Fiscal Responsibility Act.
Question 2. As you know, the situation is dire at America's
borders--there have been over 9 million illegal border crossings since
President Biden took office. Every state is now a border state.
Currently, the Justice Department's State Criminal Alien Assistance
Program is one of the few resources that helps fund the costs that
state and local prisons are shouldering to incarcerate illegal
immigrants who have committed serious crimes. However, the president
has proposed to cut funding for this program entirely, citing
duplication.
--Which other program(s) fills this gap?
Answer. The Department's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) advises
that its Bureau of Justice Assistance administers the Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program, which provides state
and local jurisdictions with broad flexibility to support a wide range
of state and local law enforcement, corrections, and other criminal
justice activities, including most correctional costs that are
allowable under SCAAP.
--Several Nebraska counties use this funding. If the program is cut,
could you guarantee that other programming meets the current
needs of the states and localities that use this program?
Answer. The Department's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) advises
that its funding is subject to appropriations, and thus OJP cannot
guarantee the availability of programming or resources.
--Have you conducted analysis or estimated how much it is costing
state and local prisons to incarcerate illegal aliens who have
committed crimes with the rates we are seeing right now? If so,
please provide this information.
Answer. The Department's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) advises
that the U.S. Census Bureau maintains data based on expenditures and
employee counts from state and local governments. OJP's Bureau of
Justice Statistics extracts justice expenditures, including corrections
expenditures, and employment data from the U.S. Census Bureau and makes
it available through the Justice Expenditure and Employment Tool
(JEET).
Question 3. In the Department's FY 2025 budget request, I noticed
that the president also wants to increase mandatory spending by a total
of $4.4 billion dollars to create a broadly described Gun Crime
Prevention Strategic Fund. Your budget request identified this project
as part of President Biden's `Safer America Plan.'
--Specifically, what would this ``strategic fund'' do?
Answer. The Department's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) advises
as follows: Through a five-year mandatory program funded at $884
million annually, the Gun Crime Prevention Strategic Fund (``Fund'')
would provide grants to support police and prosecutors and provide an
infusion of resources to enhance law enforcement access to promising
technology and evidence-based training. Funding would also help
modernize the recruitment and retention of a 21st century law
enforcement workforce. The Fund would provide communities with
resources they need to set up and support task forces to reduce
homicide and gun violence and improve violent crime clearance rates.
With support from the Fund, state, local and Tribal law enforcement,
and prosecution authorities will be able to work together through these
task forces and other initiatives to enhance public safety and public
trust.
The Fund would:
--Provide resources to recruit and retain dedicated and talented
police officers. This includes supporting agencies in
developing flexible employment opportunities to meet the needs
of a 21st century workforce and expanding mental health and
wellness care for police officers.
--Support police officers with high-quality training. This includes
investments in modernizing and advancing police academies and
developing evidence-informed training programs and
comprehensive detective and investigative training modules for
law enforcement and prosecutor offices.
--Invest in technology, innovations, and collaborative efforts to
reduce violence, improve gun crime investigations, and increase
violent crime clearance rates. This includes investing in team-
based local taskforces, supporting the hiring of local
prosecutors and professional staff, expanding Crime Gun
Intelligence Center (CGIC) sites and the National Public Safety
Partnership, establishing a National Crime Analysis Center, and
other violent crime reduction strategies.
--Advance knowledge of best practices, collaboration and coordination
strategies, and the continued development of evidence-based
tools and products to drive measurable reductions in violent
crime.
--Are there objectives, metrics, and guardrails that you have
structured around this strategy?
Answer. The Department's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) advises
as follows:
The program would be administered by OJP and would provide states
and localities with dedicated resources to invest in law enforcement
and violent crime reduction strategies. OJP has developed performance
metrics applicable to each proposed program area, such as training
curricula developed, criminal justice professionals trained, violent
crime reduction capacity assessments conducted, recommendations
implemented, and violent crime rates reduced in treated areas, etc. The
Department stands ready to assist Congress in developing legislation to
enact this proposal.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much. At this point I will
close the hearing.
[Whereupon, at 11:32 a.m., Wednesday, April 17, was
recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 15, 2024
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen (Chair), presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Murray, Reed, Coons, Schatz, Van
Hollen, Merkley, Peters, Heinrich, Moran, Murkowski, Kennedy,
Hagerty, Britt, and Fischer.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN
Senator Shaheen. The Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies will come to order.
Because we have the Secretary here, of course we have votes
happening in the Senate. There are two votes. I think most of
us have probably voted on the first one. We will take a break.
We will continue the hearing and just take turns going to vote.
So today we are delighted to welcome Secretary Raimondo to
review the President's fiscal year 2025 budget request. Madam
Secretary, it is great to see you again. We have got a lot of
Members signed up to be here, so I knew it was somebody
important. So we are delighted.
The Department of Commerce's mission is to foster
conditions for economic growth and opportunities for all
communities. The President's 2025 request for the Department is
$11.5 billion, which is a 6 percent increase compared to fiscal
year 2024 enacted. Unfortunately, like last year, we will need
to contend with the tight fiscal restraints of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act. And make no mistake about it, from my
perspective, those caps have very real and harmful
consequences, and they affect our abilities to deliver for the
American people, both on the part of the Committee and the
Department.
Despite these headwinds, the subcommittee made targeted
investments in fiscal year 2024. Those include funding for NOAA
to support our fishing communities, funding for the Bureau of
Industry and Security to enforce export controls, funding for
NIST to establish an Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute,
and funding for NTIA to better serve States and territories in
administering the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Broadband
programs.
Now, despite the harsh budget environment, we also
continued to support EDA's Tech Hubs Program, which is one
important way to better ensure the industries of the future and
their good jobs start, grow, and remain in the United States.
And with that in mind, I would be remiss if I didn't
mention the incredible work that is being done in Manchester,
New Hampshire, by the ReGen Valley Tech Hub, through the
Advanced Regenerative Manufacturing Institute. The Secretary
has been there, I know, and we appreciate her interest in what
is happening there.
But ReGen Valley embodies everything a tech hub should be.
It is strong, it has regional collaboration, it has the
potential to be a globally competitive center for innovation in
biofabrication.
Now, in many ways, the President's 2025 request builds on
the investments that this committee made in 2024. In
particular, the budget proposes a $38 million increase for
NIST's AI Safety Institute, and a $32 million increase to
bolster the Bureau of Industry and Security's export control
efforts that are directed at countries like Russia and the
People's Republic of China.
However, in some ways, the budget represents a step back. I
am especially concerned about the proposal to cut critical
coastal programs like Sea Grant, IOOS, fisheries cooperative
research, and the National Oceans and Coastal Security Fund,
all of which help protect communities in New Hampshire and
around the country from coastal hazards and drive our regional
economies. And in a State that has the shortest coastline of
any State in the U.S., we can't afford to do anything that is
going to further reduce the length of our coastline.
So I know you had to make difficult choices because of the
Fiscal Responsibility Act, and I do appreciate that you
prioritized funding for the next generation of weather
satellites, but the cuts to those ocean programs would really
be devastating in New Hampshire, and in so many States around
the country.
Now, zooming out from fiscal year 2025, it is worth
stressing that Congress has given the Department tremendous
responsibilities that extend beyond annual appropriations.
Specifically, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law tasked NTIA
with connecting every American to high-speed, reliable, and
affordable Internet, and the CHIPS Act tasks NIST with building
a semiconductor supply chain and R&D ecosystem right here in
the United States.
So these are monumental undertakings, and I know that we
are all eager to hear how the Department is progressing on
efforts to implement that legislation.
And finally, given that we have just finished Public
Service Recognition Week, I think it is really important to
thank the more than 40,000 Commerce employees for their work on
behalf of the citizens of this country. Our job is to help
ensure these public servants succeed. I know that is your
interest as well, Madam Secretary, because doing that means
American workers and our American businesses will thrive.
So again, thank you for being here, Madam Secretary. We
very much look forward to your testimony.
And I will turn it over to my partner on this Committee,
Senator Moran.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Senator Moran. Senator Shaheen, Chair Shaheen, thank you,
thank you for convening our hearing.
And Secretary Raimondo, I appreciate your presence here and
I am interested in discussing with you the President's budget
request for the U.S. Department of Commerce.
As I hope you know, I value the recent investments the
Department has made in Kansas, including support for our
advanced manufacturing, and aviation sectors, and equitably
expanding high-speed Internet access across our State. I was
pleased by the designation of Kansas City as a biotechnology
Tech Hub, highlighting the concentration and expertise, and
research capabilities' resources in the Kansas City region that
is included in the Animal Health Corridor.
I have also appreciated the Department's responsiveness to
this subcommittee's interest in making certain that the CHIPS
Program is making investments in geographically diverse,
smaller semiconductor companies. I look forward to hearing from
you about what work remains for the Department to ensure the
CHIPS Program successfully brings semiconductor manufacturing
back to the United States in a way that supports our national
and our economic security.
Discretionary budget, as the Chairman said, requests a
proposed $11.4 billion--which is 642--6 percent above the
enacted amount from last year. This budget also requests an
additional $4 billion in mandatory funding for EDA's Regional
Tech Hub Program. The budget also proposes to cut successful
programs that have widespread congressional support.
The Department of Commerce has made investments to advance
our Nation's technological and manufacturing capacity, and we
must make certain that through the appropriation process, even
those that are so hugely important to our country and its
future, we have to live within our fiscal, responsibilities.
Given those FRA caps, I suspect, as the Chairman said, we are
probably back in a similar position to where we were last year.
The President's budget requests additional resources for a
variety of new and expanded programs which are well-intentioned
but are not accompanied with any offsetting costs in any other,
perhaps well-intentioned programs.
If there are fewer resources available to confront China,
that would be a significant challenge, I believe, for our
country, and something that I have great concern about. I need
to see that we have--in confronting China, that we have
effective export controls and that we safeguard our
intellectual property. I know that is something that you
support, and I appreciate that.
I also highlight support for weather laboratories and
hydrological forecasts that are important to farmers and
ranchers, in fact, agriculture across in my State, but
agriculture across the country. I always worry about
regulations. We need to support common-sense rules that protect
our domestic industries. Even well-intentioned regulations
often have unexpected consequences, so we need to have a fair
and open mind when crafting rules that impact U.S. jobs.
Madam Secretary, I look forward to continuing our positive
working relationship. I hope that the final appropriation
product will be fiscally responsible while safeguarding our
supply chain. As I say this, I smile; we want to have this, a
balanced budget, we want to have these programs that are
important to the country, and it is a challenge that we face,
but we need a fiscally responsible product while safeguarding
our supply chains, combating nefarious foreign actors, and
advancing our national and economic security. And I again,
thank you for being here today.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran.
Secretary Raimondo, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. GINA M. RAIMONDO, SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Good afternoon. And thank you for
having me. And thank you, both Chair and Ranking Member, I have
appreciated the collaboration and partnership that we have had.
And to all the Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this
opportunity to be with you to, to discuss President Biden's
fiscal 2025 budget request for the Department of Commerce.
As Senator Shaheen said, the Commerce Department has
continued to implement major initiatives authored by Congress
through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the
Inflation Reduction Act, and the CHIPS and Science Act, and
thanks to these laws, and the funding you have provided, we are
tackling our Nation's most pressing economic and national
security priorities, and I would argue doing more than any
Commerce Department has done in the past, so I want to thank
you for that.
As Senator Moran said, the budget requests $11.4 billion in
discretionary funding and $4 billion in mandatory funding for
fiscal year 2025. And I am here to ask you to support that
funding and am happy to take your questions and get into the
details.
I would just like to highlight a few of our priorities:
First, the budget positions America to prevent China and other
countries from obtaining U.S. technology, U.S. capital, and
U.S. expertise for their activities that would threaten our
national security. To that end, the budget requests a total of
$223 million, which is a $32 million increase for BIS to expand
our export control enforcement. That budget has been flatlined
for 2 years, and so we are respectfully requesting an increase
so we can protect our technology from getting into the hands of
China's Military.
Second, the budget promotes America's technological
leadership and responsible innovation in artificial
intelligence. To that end, the budget requests an additional
$61.6 million for research and development, to develop the
safety standards and evaluation for AI. These funds will
empower NIST to implement central components of President
Biden's executive order on AI, including establishing with $30
million the AI Safety Institute, which I know a number of you
are focused on.
The budget also funds a new AI, an Emerging Technologies
Policy Lab at NTIA to assess the impacts of AI technology and
develop policy recommendations.
The budget also supports resilient supply chains. We need
to go from being purely reactive to supply chain disruptions to
being more proactive, to predict disruptions to supply chains
before they happen. To that end, the budget includes an
increase of $12 million for ITA to support supply chain
resiliency and the continued work of our newly created Supply
Chain Office. It also includes $37 million for NIST's
Manufacturing USA Program and $175 million for NIST's
Manufacturing Extension Partnership.
The budget also provides resources to strengthen our
relationships with our allies to advance our shared values and
shape the strategic environment in which China operates. To
out-compete China, we need to show up in the rest of the world.
Therefore, our budget includes $379 million for ITA to expand
U.S. exports and services that will help U.S. businesses to
grow and expand in foreign markets.
The budget also invests in good jobs and equitable growth.
The budget requests $4 billion in mandatory funding and $523
million in discretionary funding for EDA to execute on the
objectives of the Tech Hub's program, which both of you
mentioned, and to build out the Good Jobs Challenge, Commerce's
signature Job Training Initiative, and to foster geographic
diversity in innovation. Excuse me.
Additionally, the budget invests $80 million in MBDA to
bolster the services it provides to socially and economically
disadvantaged business enterprises through a network of 131
centers around the country that serve every State and territory
in the U.S. Importantly, the budget prioritizes investments to
address climate change, specifically the budget includes $6.5
billion for NOAA, including $2.1 billion for the Nation's
weather and climate satellites, $1.4 billion for the National
Weather Service, and $212 million for climate research. It
provides $53 million to expand offshore wind permitting, and
$86 million to support the national marine sanctuaries and
marine protected areas.
Finally, the budget invests in our fundamental science
infrastructure. It invests over $400 million in research
infrastructure at NIST, and NOAA, and NTIA. This includes funds
for maintenance, renovations, and improvements on NIST
campuses, which I would invite any of you to come visit, and
you will see readily how desperately we need the capital for
this maintenance.
It is a tough budget, as has been said. We were faced with
difficult decisions, and so we had to prioritize. We prioritize
in capital and investments that we think are the most essential
to meet our mission, and quite frankly to save lives, and
protect lives in America.
So in closing, I would say that everything we do at the
Commerce Department is focused on strengthening America's
competitiveness at home and abroad so that American workers,
and families, and businesses of all sizes in every State can
participate and prosper in the 21st-century global economy.
And I am here, because I need your support. I want to work
with you. I need your support to ensure that our resources
enable us to meet the mission of creating the conditions for
economic growth and opportunity for all communities in every
State in America.
So I look forward to talking to you now. And of course,
even more importantly, I look forward to continuing to work
with you as we do this work together.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Secretary Gina M. Raimondo
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to discuss President
Biden's Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Budget Request for the U.S. Department of
Commerce.
Since I appeared before this Subcommittee last year, the Commerce
Department has continued to implement major initiatives authorized by
Congress through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the
Inflation Reduction Act, and the CHIPS and Science Act. Thanks to these
laws and the funding you have supported through the appropriations
process--most recently the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY24--
the Commerce Department continues to tackle our nation's most pressing
economic and national security priorities, including those related to
emerging technologies, supply chains, manufacturing, innovation, and
workforce.
The President's Budget requests $11.4 billion in discretionary
funding and $4 billion in mandatory funding for the Department of
Commerce in FY25. I'm here today to ask you to support that funding so
we can continue fulfilling the Department's mission to create the
conditions for economic growth and opportunity for all communities.
Today, I will focus on eight key areas of investment within the
Department of Commerce.
First, the President's Budget positions America to ensure U.S.
technologies, capital, and expertise are not misappropriated in
ways that harm national security or foreign policy.
In order to prevent American and allied technologies from being
exploited by countries and entities of concern to undermine our
national security, we have been working to modernize and strengthen our
export controls. We need new investments to meet new challenges such as
the People's Republic of China's (PRC) continued efforts at illicit
technology transfer to its military through its policy of military-
civil fusion (MCF), Russia's ongoing aggression against Ukraine, and
rapid advancements in technology broadly. To protect America against
these challenges, the Budget includes $223 million for the Bureau of
Industry and Security (BIS) to expand export enforcement, bolster
capacity to identify and protect sensitive technologies, evaluate the
effectiveness of existing export controls and update when needed, and
increase regional expertise to enhance cooperation on export controls
with allies and partners.
The Budget also requests $5 million for the International Trade
Administration (ITA) to address risks arising from outbound investments
from the United States into sensitive technologies that could enhance
the technological capabilities of the PRC and other countries of
concern in ways that threaten U.S. national security.
The Department also contributes to the examination of inbound
investment through its participation in the Committee on Foreign
Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The Budget includes $5.3
million to support CFIUS reviews.
Second, the President's Budget promotes leadership and responsible
innovation in Artificial Intelligence (AI).
AI holds extraordinary potential for both promise and peril.
Harnessing AI for good requires mitigating its risks. The Budget
invests an additional $62.1 million at Commerce to safeguard, regulate,
and promote AI, including protecting the American public against its
societal risks. This funding will allow the Department to implement
central components of Executive Order 14110, ``Safe, Secure, and
Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence.'' Central
to the Department's efforts, the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) will fund the creation of guidelines, tools,
benchmarks, and best practices for evaluating and mitigating AI risk,
including increased funding for the U.S. AI Safety Institute's work to
ensure needed testing, evaluation and red teaming of advanced AI to
identify and mitigate potentially dangerous capabilities and realize
the goals of the AI EO.
The new AI investments includes funding to establish a new AI and
Emerging Technologies Policy Lab at the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) to drive innovation and policy
development.
The new AI investments also include $8.9 million for BIS to
implement mandatory reporting requirements under the Defense Production
Act regarding domestic AI developers and compute providers so we can
better understand who is developing frontier AI models and the results
of safety tests on those models, and second, for Infrastructure-as-a-
Service (IaaS) providers to report when foreign entities are using U.S.
cloud to train frontier AI models. These funds would be used to hire
additional staff for these programs.
Third, the President's Budget supports resilient supply chains to
foster economic prosperity and protect national security.
The Budget includes an increase of $12 million within ITA to
support supply chain resiliency, which is critical to our national
security and economic competitiveness. The additional funding will
expand the Supply Chain Center and provide for new industry-specific
analysts to identify and assess economic and national security risks to
supply chains, as well as develop strategies that the Federal
Government can take to mitigate those risks.
The Budget also includes $37 million for the NIST's Manufacturing
USA program to help secure U.S. global leadership in advanced
manufacturing by continuing its large-scale public-private
collaborations on technology, supply chain, and workforce development.
Additionally, the Budget includes $175 million for NIST's
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), a public-private partnership
with centers in every state that offer advisory services to a diverse
set of small and medium enterprises. MEP Centers will continue efforts
to coordinate with private sector manufacturers to narrow gaps in key
product supply chains and support the adoption of critical technologies
to make U.S. manufacturers more resilient to global market disruptions.
Fourth, the President's Budget provides resources to enable the U.S. to
continue partnering with our allies to advance our shared
values and shape the global strategic environment in which
China operates.
ITA's Global Markets business unit ensures that U.S. businesses and
their workers have a robust advocate helping them identify business
opportunities globally, overcome the challenges they face abroad, and
address unfair foreign trade practices. The Budget includes $379
million for Global Markets, including a restructuring of its global
footprint to focus on the highest priority markets, and a request for
$4 million and 13 positions to support U.S. export competitiveness in
strategic markets that enhance our ability to respond to global threats
and counter unfair trade practices and economic coercion by China. The
Budget reflects our view that in order to compete effectively, we must
show up in regions around the world where the PRC is exerting its
influence, even as the United States remains the partner of choice.
The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) is a
proactive model for economic cooperation that seeks to reestablish U.S.
leadership and competitiveness in a critical region. The Budget
continues to support ITA's engagement with the 13 IPEF partners in
areas including strengthening supply chain resilience, facilitating and
capturing the economic opportunities as IPEF partners transition to
clean economies, and improving the business environment by
strengthening anti-corruption efforts and the efficiency of tax
administration. The Budget builds on the success gained from the entry
into force of the Supply Chain Pillar and the substantially concluded
negotiations over the Clean Economy and Fair Economy Pillars, which
were completed in record time.
Additionally, the Budget provides the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO) with $4.6 billion in budget authority, which will enable
USPTO to continue granting patents, registering trademarks, and
protecting American intellectual property worldwide.
Fifth, the President's Budget invests in programs that promote access
to good jobs and equitable growth.
The Budget requests $4 billion in mandatory funding and $523
million in discretionary funding for the Economic Development
Administration (EDA) to promote innovation and competitiveness and
prepare American regions for growth and success in the worldwide
economy.
The $4 billion in mandatory funding, coupled with $41 million of
discretionary funding, would enable EDA to execute on the objectives of
the Regional Technology and Innovation Hub Program (Tech Hubs Program),
as authorized under the Research and Development, Competition, and
Innovation Act, and establish cutting-edge, strategic regional
technology and innovation hubs that foster geographic diversity in
innovation and create quality jobs in underserved and vulnerable
communities.
Within this funding, the Budget also invests in two EDA programs
which recognize that workforce development and economic development are
inseparable. First, the Budget requests $41 million for the Good Jobs
Challenge to fund employer-led workforce training systems and
partnerships to train and place American workers into high-quality jobs
and support regional economies. EDA ran the first iteration of the Good
Jobs Challenge using funds from the American Rescue Plan and received
over 500 applications for 32 one-time grants. This additional funding
will allow EDA to continue to address this demonstrated nationwide
need.
Second, the Budget requests $41 million for the Recompete Pilot
Program to provide grants to distressed communities and connect workers
to good jobs that support long-term comprehensive economic development
by helping to reduce high prime-age (25 to 54 years of age) employment
gaps.
The Budget also requests $5 million for grants focused on the
economic development needs of tribal governments and indigenous
communities. This proposal would provide resources to address a long
unmet need within Indigenous communities that have historically
suffered from a lack of investment in core economic development need.
Additionally, the Budget invests $80 million in the Minority
Business Development Agency, which will bolster the services it
provides to socially and economically disadvantaged American business
enterprises.
Finally, the Budget invests $75.6 million in our Office of Space
Commerce to support the continued expansion of one of the fastest-
growing sectors of our economy and to provide space situational
awareness information that will protect U.S. industry operations.
Sixth, the President's Budget drives climate science, adaptation, and
resilience efforts.
The Budget includes $6.5 billion for the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). It prioritizes operations,
infrastructure, and continuing initiatives that provide the
environmental intelligence necessary to make informed oceans, coastal,
fisheries, weather, and climate decisions. The Budget is bolstered by
funds previously provided by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
and Inflation Reduction Act.
The Budget provides $2.1 billion for the nation's weather and
climate satellites. FY25 funding will enable NOAA to maintain all
current satellite programs by including $84 million for Geostationary
Operational Environmental Satellites R Series (GOES-R), $342 million
for Polar Weather Satellites, and $40 million for Space Weather Follow
On.
The Budget also continues strategic investments in the next
generation of climate, weather, and space weather satellites, including
$798 million for Geostationary Extended Observations, $68 million for
Low Earth Orbit Weather Satellites, and $237 million for Space Weather
Next. These investments will deliver the information needed to address
emerging environmental issues and challenges that threaten the security
of our Nation.
The Budget further invests in NOAA's weather and climate
enterprise, funding the National Weather Service (NWS) at $1.4 billion.
At this level, the NWS will continue to operate and maintain 122
Weather Forecast Offices, 13 River Forecast Centers, 18 Weather Service
Offices, and associated employee housing units, and 9 National Centers.
NOAA's Budget also includes $212 million for NOAA's climate
research programs to support the ongoing work of the National Climate
Assessment and continue high-priority long-term monitoring,
researching, and modeling activities that are critical to understanding
and addressing the climate crisis.
The Budget also includes $33.6 million, an additional $10 million,
for Mitchell Act Hatcheries in the Columbia River Basin complementing
the resources previously provided in the Inflation Reduction Act. These
additional funds are part of the Administration's commitment to
prioritize the restoration of healthy and abundant wild salmon,
steelhead, and other native fish populations to the Columbia River
Basin, and honor the United States' obligations to tribal nations.
The Budget also invests in expanding offshore wind energy while
conserving and protecting high-priority natural resources. The Budget
provides NOAA $53 million to expand offshore wind development. This
funding will enable NOAA to use the best available science to help
support the goal of deploying 30 gigawatts of offshore wind energy by
2030 while protecting biodiversity and promoting sustainable ocean co-
use. It also provides $86 million to support National Marine
Sanctuaries and Marine Protected Areas as part of the Administration's
America the Beautiful initiative. With this funding NOAA will enhance
it's capacity to expand critical conservation work and support the
designation process for additional sanctuaries.
Additionally, the Budget provides the Office of Marine and Aviation
Operations (OMAO) $533.6 million, a net increase of $90.2 million above
FY24 Enacted. This includes increases across Marine Operations and
Maintenance, Aviation Operations and Aircraft Services, and NOAA
Commissioned Officer Corps. OMAO's budget also includes $21 million to
finalize a second specialized high-altitude G-550 Hurricane Hunter to
meet national needs.
Seventh, the President's Budget enables the Department to provide the
data that leaders in communities, industry, and government need
to drive U.S. competitiveness, innovation, and job growth.
The Budget provides the Census Bureau $1.6 billion, including $399
million to prepare for the 2030 Census, $256 million for the American
Community Survey, and $158 million for the Economic Census. FY25
funding will enable the Census Bureau to continue to transform from a
survey-centric organization to a data-centric organization that blends
survey data with administrative and alternative digital data sources,
providing more timely and relevant data products to stakeholders and
the public.
The Budget will also enable the Census Bureau to invest in economic
statistics for Puerto Rico, and improve data methods and quality, hone
crosscutting research techniques and provide common technology for data
collection, processing, and dissemination across the bureau.
The Budget provides $138.5 million for the Bureau of Economic
Analysis to support economic statistics, including research on
environmental-economic statistics.
Finally, the President's Budget invests in the fundamental
infrastructure that makes science possible and the oversight
that protects the American taxpayer.
The Budget invests over $400 million in fundamental research
infrastructure at NIST, NOAA and NTIA. NIST's mission to advance
measurement science requires cutting-edge equipment and best in class
facilities; however, approximately 63% of NIST research facilities are
in poor or critical condition. NIST's failing infrastructure results in
an estimated 30-40% increase researcher downtime annually. NIST's
world-class scientists cannot continue to do the scientific research
necessary to ensure tomorrow's competitiveness in yesterday's crumbling
facilities. Therefore, the Budget includes $311.5 million for
construction and major renovations at NIST research campuses.
The Budget includes $90 million for NOAA to continue addressing
deferred maintenance and other construction requirements and $75
million for the continued recapitalization of NOAA's aging marine
fleet.
The Budget includes $2 million to maintain the Table Mountain Field
Site and Radio Quiet Zone. Table Mountain is the only Radio Quiet Zone
available for research and development of new spectrum-dependent
technologies and comprises 1,700 acres with 12 research buildings.
It is critical that the Department maintain sufficient oversight of
Federal grants to identify potential inefficient, ineffective, or
misused funding. The Budget requests $85.9 million, a $17.9 million
increase above the FY24 Enacted level, for EDA's Salaries and Expenses.
This increase will support 58 additional positions to help oversee
EDA's grant portfolio, which has increased more than eight-fold since
2017.
The Department of Commerce is a dynamic agency charged with
administering a wide portfolio of government programs; everything from
conducting the decennial Census to administering and enforcing export
controls.
However, the Department's work is unified by a common theme of
promoting America's competitiveness, and the ability for all American
workers, families, and businesses to participate and succeed in the
21st century global economy. The investments I have just outlined are
consistent with that theme, and they are all vital to fulfilling our
mission of creating the conditions for economic growth and opportunity
for all communities.
Thank you for inviting me to appear today. I look forward to
continuing to work with you, and I am happy to answer your questions.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary.
We will begin our rounds of questioning. Senator Moran and
I will begin. And we are going to take Members in order of
arrival. And because we expect to have a number of senators
here, I would urge, everyone to try and stick within the five-
minute round of questioning.
So Secretary Raimondo, last year NTIA announced State
allocations for the BEAD Program. BEAD, as we know, was enacted
as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. We had a number
of late-night conversations talking about how to structure this
in a way that made sense that could get through the Congress.
It has provided $42 billion for the program in the
Infrastructure Law.
Now, by December of last year, all States submitted their
initial proposals detailing how they plan to spend their BEAD
allocation to deliver high-speed Internet access to everyone
who is not served. So can you just give us an update on how
this is going? How are the reviews of State plans doing? Are
some States drawing down funds from their allocations already?
And what is the status?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you. So this is a, as you
said, this is an unbelievable program. We have never done
anything like this before. In the past, when Congress allocates
money to do broadband build-outs, it is very targeted in a
particular area. My job now is to connect every American. It is
a historic opportunity, and we are taking it seriously.
Where are we? Every State has received a planning grant,
and they are all hard at work doing that. The way we have
structured the program is that each State has to provide us
with their plan. You know, Louisiana is different than Kansas,
different than New Hampshire. We want to meet the needs working
with your governors to do that. New Hampshire has just shy of
$200 million. You have had your first volume, approved, and we
are now working with the Governor and the team to approve the
second volume.
A handful of States, including Louisiana, have gone fully
through the process, have had their full approval, and are
about to receive their money. The rest of the--my job is to get
this all--my goal is to get this all done by the end of this
year, every State, if not sooner. I am pushing the team really
hard to make sure we are working collaboratively with States so
that every State has their plan approved, and we start to get
the money out this year.
And I guess I will just leave it at that. It is complicated
because we can't do rate regulation, but we have to have an
affordable plan. Rural communities, we are determined to make
sure everybody is covered. So I meet with the team every week.
We go through State by State, and it is just execution.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. And as you know, there is
a lot of anticipation throughout the country, and we see it in
our State from communities, particularly in rural areas, where
they have not had access to high-speed Internet, and they are
really looking forward to it.
But one of the challenges we have is that it needs to be
affordable also. People need to be able to connect, and we have
a program, the American Connectivity Program, which is not run
by the Commerce Department, as you know, but is expiring, and
it is going to mean that there are a number of folks who, even
when they may have access to the Internet, are not going to be
able to afford it.
Can you speak to the importance of Congress acting to do
the follow-on to the ACP Program so that we can actually make
sure that households can get connected once the high-speed
Internet is built out?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, it is absolutely essential. I
cannot underscore that enough. If you believe, as the President
does, and as I do, that in today's day and age the Internet
isn't a luxury, it is a necessity, to see the doctor, collect
benefits, do anything online, apply for a job, folks need it
and deserve it in their home, in their office, in their school.
And quite frankly, $100 a month is not affordable. So if it
is--and I pick that number, sometimes it is $200 a month. I
have been all over America, in all of your States, I have
talked to rural dwellers. They tell me: Hey, Secretary, I pay
200 bucks a month for satellite service, and when the weather
is bad, it goes out. That is not meeting the mission. The
legislation says ``affordable and accessible''.
Even if we were to get providers to provide it for, for
example, $60 a month, $50 a month, that is still unaffordable
for low-income Americans. So the $30 a month ACP Initiative is,
is like life-saving, quite literally, and I cannot emphasize
enough how important it is, for you to renew that program.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I certainly agree with
that. And there is--there are several pieces of legislation
that would do that. Hopefully, we can act on that before the
end of this session.
Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chair, thank you.
Madam Secretary, let me pick up on the topic that you and
the Chair are talking, talking about. The law prohibits rate
regulation, but you support affordability. How do those two
things not clash with each other? We have had some complaints
by stakeholders that you are pressuring States in regard to
what they would call rate regulation. I assume under the--this
is not intended to be majority--but the guise of affordability.
How do you mesh the prohibition with the insistence that it be
affordable?
Secretary Raimondo. So this, you know, the law, the statute
says every State has to provide, a low-cost option, that is in
the law. The statute also says, no rate regulation. So we are,
we are doing the best to meet the intent of the law, which is,
rate regulation would be, in my judgment: Kansas, you are not
going to get approved unless you show us a $30 a month plan.
We are not doing that. We are decidedly not engaging in
rate regulation. The law says we can't, and I won't, and I am
on top of that.
That being said, I am also required to make sure every
State has a low-cost option. So we are building in flexibility
to work with the States, State by State, recognizing that in
certain States that are very rural, it is more expensive to
provide that. And it is, working with stakeholders, listening
to governors, listening to people on the ground, to make sure
that we find that balance between affordability, but not
regulating.
And by the way, back to what Senator Shaheen was saying,
the $30 a month ACP is essential for this because in a State
like yours, which is highly rural, it is very expensive to lay
fiber. Hypothetically, you know, I say like maybe $65, $70 is
as low as it can go. That is very expensive for the average
American family, and so the $30 a month support is essential.
So anyway, a long-winded way of saying it is--that is the
balance, and I talk to the governor, stakeholders, telecom
providers every week to make sure we are striking the right
balance.
Senator Moran. The support that the various programs, in
this case the BEAD Program provides, in this case to States, it
subsidizes, it assists in the providing of the service, giving
the incentive for companies to provide the service. It doesn't
incentivize the $30 a month plan? That is a question, not a
statement.
Secretary Raimondo. That is, yes.
Senator Moran. That is true, right?
Secretary Raimondo. True, correct.
Senator Moran. So it is a clash of competing goals.
Secretary Raimondo. We have to do both. We have to do both.
It has to be accessible to everyone, and affordable.
Senator Moran. Let me change topics. I am concerned about
China. One of them, I think perhaps it is known, but but I
would highlight the role that the U.S. Department of Commerce
plays in our national security, our national economic security,
our national defense. China is so aggressive in pursuing trade
deals around the world. They always seem to be at our expense.
China offers other nations better market access for their
products and continues to build economic ties with critical
partners and our potential adversaries.
What can the Department and ITA do to expand commercial
services around the world? Again, China has offices everywhere.
How are we competing with China?
Secretary Raimondo. You know, as I said in my opening
testimony, we have asked for additional funds for $4 million
additional increase for ITA to help us compete with China. We
are asking for additional funds for more export promotion. In
my tenure, I have launched several initiatives around export
promotion, particularly helping small and medium-sized
companies to do exports. We are launching new digital tools to
help small companies with export promotion.
And that is, so we have to promote more, and we are doing
more, and we are trying to focus it sector by sector, but also
quite frankly, we need to do everything we can with
countervailing duties and such to make sure that we have a
level playing field so that China can't take advantage of, you
know, U.S. businesses and workers.
Senator Moran. So you are one of the few people that I
know, that has negotiated with the Chinese, with the highest
level of Government officials in China. Do you have any--can
you tell us what potential exists for some kind of agreement
with China to diminish the challenges we face, that they are
presenting us? Is there a--is there a path forward that
provides hope instead of just, adversarial relationships?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I am smiling because I have 15
seconds, and that is a tough one. Look, let me say----
Senator Moran. I get another round.
Secretary Raimondo [continuing]. Let me say this. The
President has directed us, I think very correctly, to never
negotiate on national security. In fact, when I have met with
my Chinese counterparts numerous times, the Premier and the
Vice Premier, I have said, on matters of national security, we
respectfully refuse to negotiate. And they have asked for us
to, they have said, set boundaries around, tell us what is in
and out of bounds. And I have said no, I can't, it changes
based upon the threat assessment.
Having said that, the President has also directed us to
deescalate, to communicate, and to, as he would say: Turn down
the temperature.
So what I try to do, Senator, is promote where we can. For
instance, I have started an export promotion initiative around
health and beauty products. It has nothing to do with national
security, creates jobs in the United States, keeps a line of
communication open. We have to promote where we can, work with
them where we can, zealously advocate for U.S. businesses,
which I do because right now they mistreat many U.S.
businesses. But never negotiate on national security. And I
think that there is--my judgment is being practical, not fiery
in the rhetoric, and just try to stand firm, but talk when and
where we can.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Senator Schatz.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair, and Ranking Member.
Thank you, Secretary. First, I want to talk to you about
housing, and if you will permit me a windup here. This is one
of the only areas where the government creates a shortage, and
then sort of strokes its chin, wondering why there is not more
of the thing that we all say we want. But it really is,
restrictive zoning, covenants, minimum lot size, parking
requirements, and all of that, that has contributed mightily to
our housing shortage.
And as a Chair of Transportation and HUD, I want to fund
all the programs, but the truth is there is not enough Federal
funding in the world to deal with the throughput problem of
States and counties making it almost impossible to build the
thing that we say we all want.
And I think you have some pretty good news to report in the
Commerce Department along those lines to try to make sure that
when we think about economic development in a region, that
housing is integral to a place, thriving, or in some instances,
recovering. And I would like you to talk a little bit about
what you are doing to kind of infuse a housing thought process
into your economic development strategies.
Secretary Raimondo. Actually, that is a perfect way to say
it. And as I have said to you, you have helped us to focus on
the issue, and I appreciate that. To that end, with EDA, for
example, now as a new matter of practice, when we are putting
out our applications to applicants for local economic
development, we are proactively asking them, for the first time
to show us; what are their plans for housing, how would they,
you know, think about using our grant for the economic
development in a way that stimulates housing.
The same thing with CHIPS, the CHIPS applicants, I was
recently out in Arizona. I mean, it is exciting because the
amount of jobs we are going to be creating are tens upon tens
of thousands, but we are asking the companies, how are you
thinking about housing? Asking the governors and mayors, how
are you thinking about housing?
So I think it is very much what you just said. You know,
look, for what it is worth, I, as governor, I lived the local
challenges, and it is exactly as you say. And a lot of those
fights, if you will, have to be, whether it is zoning, or
permitting, or density requirements, are done on a local level.
But anyway, we are considering policies that expand housing
supply in everything that we do at EDA, and I think that is a
great step forward.
Senator Schatz. That is great. And it is so logical that it
seems like something that should have been done a long time
ago. You can't have economic development without housing supply
for the workers. If you are imagining an area expanding, it
doesn't happen organically, it has to be planned, and
permitted, and financed, and then constructed and then plugged
into a grid and all the rest of it. So thank you for doing
that. Please do as much, as you can in this area, and we will
support you.
On a sort of less of a love-fest question here, the NOAA
budget, as it is proposed by the President, does a fair amount
of damage to oceans here. And a 45 percent cut to NOAA's Ocean
Exploration Program, a 42 percent cut to NOAA's Coral Program,
a 10.3 percent cut to Sea Grant, and zeroing out Senator
Shaheen and White House's National Ocean Security Fund.
And I am just--I am trying to make sense of this, because I
understand the constraints of the FRA, but these are
disproportionate cuts in the ocean space, and I am wondering
what the theory of the case is here.
Secretary Raimondo. The theory of the case is--I think
those cuts stink, to be candid. But it is a really tough
topline that we have had. So we had to go through it and say,
what must we fund? And we chose to prioritize the weather
satellites, which are quite expensive, $334 million additional
for weather satellites to bring it to a total of 2 billion;
because we know that our weather predictions are a matter of
life and death, quite literally.
I will say, you know, look, I come from the Ocean State;
these are tough cuts. We have--I have directed the Department,
wherever possible, to use, infrastructure law monies and IRA
monies to make up for these shortages. We would work with you,
and Senator Shaheen, and the White House, to try to do our best
to be creative. But in the face of difficult choices, that is
how we chose to prioritize.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Secretary,
welcome.
I want to talk for a moment about seafood. The American
people love seafood. As you know, we consume about 7 billion
pounds a year, 21 pounds for every man, woman, and child in our
country. But do you happen to know what percentage of the
seafood that we eat is imported?
Secretary Raimondo. I do not.
Senator Kennedy. It is about 94 percent. Your agency is in
charge of inspecting this imported seafood, as you know. Do you
happen to know, what percentage of that 94 percent that we
import is inspected by your agency?
Secretary Raimondo. I don't.
Senator Kennedy. Yes, it is about 1 percent.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, it is small.
Senator Kennedy. And of that 1 percent that your agency
inspects, it finds something wrong with about a third. Let us
take crawfish from China, or shrimp from India, these countries
compete with American producers. These countries subsidize
their seafood producers. We don't.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. These countries allow their producers to
ignore quotas. These countries allow their producers to ignore
where they are supposed to fish. But the worst thing these
countries do, they don't abide by environmental regulations.
They shoot their product full of antibiotics, if you eat enough
shrimp from India, you will grow an extra ear.
[Laughter.]
Senator Kennedy. They also engage in false advertising. No
one needs an extra ear, Madam Secretary. For example, this is
Chinese crawfish, because of the way they produce it, horrible,
horrible environmental conditions, and because the Government
subsidizes it, they can sell it for 8 bucks, this, where in
America, it costs 14 bucks. But look how they do it; the
Chinese call it ``Boudreaux Brand of Crawfish Tail Meat, Wild
Caught''.
Senator Kennedy. I don't know anybody in China named
Boudreaux. Okay? Something has got to--something has got to be
done, Madam Secretary. I mean, the people at your Seafood
Import Monitoring Program are wonderful people.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. But all this product now is coming in, and
it is harmful, and it costs us jobs. Would you share your
thoughts with me?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So let me say a few things. First
of all, I appreciate it. I really appreciate your comment, and
it is clear we can do more, and I want to work with you to do
more. We are extremely focused on transshipment of fish, you
know, from China through Vietnam to the U.S., which is why we
impose a countervailing duty on that. We are trying to add the
duty wherever we can, even if it goes, you know, from China to
another country, Malaysia, Vietnam, to the United States.
We are very focused on, illegal fishing, unregulated
fishing, also mostly, done by China, very focused on that,
working with CBP on that. But there is--so I share, like, I
share the concern. It is unfair to American workers. It is
unfair to American fisheries. It is unsafe, as you say.
Senator Kennedy. And we don't need extra ears.
Secretary Raimondo. And we definitely don't need extra
ears.
Senator Kennedy. I mean, this stuff, this stuff is
dangerous.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, so we have to do more. And I will
commit to doing more.
Senator Kennedy. Last, last question. I want to follow up
on my friend Senator Moran's questions. You are right that the
Infrastructure Act says, your agency can't set broadband
prices. But I keep getting reports that you are. For example, I
am not going to tell you who gave this to me, but in Virginia,
when you are negotiating the Virginia plan, your agency
required Virginia to have a pre-set, or pre-determinable price
certain as a condition to, to receive any BEAD funding.
So it sounds to me like at least in Virginia, the
allegation is that your people are setting a price. And I keep
hearing this in other States too.
Secretary Raimondo. We are not. And if you hear it, you
should call me, because we are not. It is not what the law
says, and we aren't doing it. Your State, by the way, has done
a fantastic job and was, I think, the very first State to be
approved, and will be the first State to get their money.
The fact of the matter is Alaska is very different than
Louisiana. I can't say what is affordable and low cost in
Alaska versus Louisiana. It is just--it is different, so we are
allowing for flexibility, and we are working in an iterative
fashion with States to make sure it is low cost, but we are not
telling them what low cost is in their State, it is a balance.
And like I said--I am pretty hands-on in this, and if you have
concerns about these States, I am happy to talk to you.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Kennedy. I hope you
will provide the Committee with the explanation of how it is
that the seafood promotes the growth of a third ear.
Senator Kennedy. I will.
Senator Shaheen. Because I find that very interesting.
Senator King. A couple extra fingers too. It is the
antibiotics. If you eat enough of the stuff, you become
antibiotic-resistant, in addition to the extra ear.
Senator Shaheen. Although there are some people I think
could use an extra ear.
Senator Kennedy. That is true.
Senator Shaheen. So that they could listen a little better.
Senator Heinrich.
Secretary Raimondo. I have no comment on any.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Senator Heinrich. Madam Chair, I think Senator Peters might
be next, but if you want me to go now, I am happy to do that.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Peters, if you were here before
Senator Heinrich, you should definitely go next.
Senator Peters. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Thank you,
Madam Chair.
Secretary Raimondo, I certainly thank you. Good to see you
again, as always, and thank you for your testimony. You know,
earlier this year, I called on your Department and this
administration to do more to combat the economic and national
security threat posed by Chinese-made electric vehicles. I
believe that we must ensure that the EV industry is built in
the United States and in Michigan to create and protect good-
paying union jobs for Michiganders, but also ensure that U.S.
manufacturing remains strong and competitive against the
Chinese.
And that is why I applaud the Trade Representative's
announcement yesterday that your Department will quadruple
tariffs on Chinese-made vehicles to combat unfair trade
practices and protect American competitiveness. Increasing
Section 301 tariffs on Chinese-made products is certainly a
step in the right direction.
But my question for you, ma'am, is what is the Department
preparing to do to prevent tariff evasion by Chinese companies?
We know that some Chinese automakers are pursuing footprints in
in Mexico, and in Europe, and we must ensure that we don't
allow those actors to evade rules meant to create a level
playing field. So how is the Department taking this into
account in its enforcement strategy for what I think is the
right thing to do, but we have to be able to enforce?
Secretary Raimondo. I couldn't agree more. So let me first
say this. First of all, thank you for your push, persistent
push on this. I think, Europe provides a cautionary tale
because there were no tariffs, and before you knew it, China
went quite quickly from zero to 25 percent market share in
Europe of their EVs because of China's distortive practices in
keeping the price low.
So the reason that we, the President, took this action to
put a 100 percent tariff is so that that doesn't happen to us.
And we--I was proud of the President to do that because I think
it is necessary to protect our market and protect our workers.
Now, you point out another extremely important issue, because
of USMCA, cars made in Mexico, you know, it is a risk that we
worry about.
I can tell you, obviously, this is within USTR's purview,
not really my purview, with 301 tariffs or USTR working very
closely with Customs and Border Patrol. We are very focused on
this risk. We are worried about this. We know, we know, we have
public reports that Chinese companies are setting up shop in
Mexico. So we are tracking it. What the Commerce Department is
doing is helping USTR by providing, like industry analysis and
such. And I can just tell you that, the purpose of USMCA was
not to help China. It was to help the--you know, trade pact
with the signatories of that agreement, and we are going to do
whatever we need to do to make sure China doesn't use Mexico
and run around these new tariffs.
Senator Peters. Well, I appreciate that, and I appreciate
the President's strong action. He has always fought for
American jobs, and this is a prime example of the President
taking, action.
Madam Secretary, you know, the CCP-backed vehicles,
however, don't just pose a threat, an economic threat to the
United States, they also pose a real security threat as well to
our Nation. We can't allow the CCP to deploy the same playbook
we saw with telecommunications equipment such as Huawei and ZTE
when they flooded the U.S. market and created espionage and
sabotage threat.
Your Department recently announced an investigation into
the national security concerns of Chinese-connected vehicles.
And I have urged you to use this investigation to take a closer
look at the CCP-backed automobiles.
Now, I realize you can't share all, this is not a
classified setting, but I would like you to discuss some of
your concerns regarding connected vehicles from China and what
we can--and when we can expect a proposed rule from Commerce on
Chinese-connected vehicles?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. The comment period just closed,
and we expect to have the rule out this fall. We received
significant comments that we have to go through. Look, I would
say the national security risks are quite significant. If you
think about these connected vehicles, they have thousands of
sensors, thousands of chips.
They are controlled by software, which is coming from
Beijing, in the case of Chinese-made cars. They know where the
driver goes, what the driving patterns are, what you are saying
in your car. It is a lot of data around U.S. persons that goes
right back to Beijing. It is not totally different than the
threat of TikTok, which this Congress took action on, with the
threat of, you know, cranes at U.S. ports. 90-plus percent of
cranes at U.S. ports are Chinese-made. Cranes are no longer,
you know, steel, they are connected.
So I think it falls into the broader category of all of
these connected, you know, technologies, which collect massive
amounts of data on U.S. citizens, our children, our families,
our military personnel, et cetera, all going back to Beijing.
By the way, not to mention the fact that the software, I
mean, you can imagine the most catastrophic outcome,
theoretically, if you had a couple million cars on the road and
the software were--what do you call it--disabled.
Senator Peters. Yes, shut off.
Secretary Raimondo. So in any event, I will leave it at
that in an unclassified setting, but we decided to take action
because this is really serious stuff.
Senator Peters. We appreciate it. Thanks for your
leadership. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Peters. Senator
Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And good to see you, Madam Secretary; I am going to stick
with seafood here. And I want to start with what I know you
have been read into, but we are really getting concerned, as
you know, fisheries disasters in and around Alaska, but in
other parts of the country, and these disaster monies are being
held up. And right now we are looking at literally, I mean, it
is--and you can't describe it as anything other than a massive
backlog.
And it relates to this new Business Applications Solutions,
getting the payments out to NOAA employees, the vendors, the
partners. It has been a technical issue that you are starting a
new system, but you started it with a program where you have
people that are so vulnerable and have waited so long. I mean,
in in Alaska, and I don't know whether it is in other States,
probably in the Chair's, but we are looking at fisheries
disasters that were declared back in 2019, and these people
still have yet to receive their disaster funding. It is, it is
really outrageous.
So can you share with the Committee where you are, what you
are doing to address these failures, when we can expect this
system to be operational? I don't know if we can call it fully
functional, but at least operational. We have got to help these
folks.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So first of all, I agree with you,
and I know how serious it is. I really do. I have spoken to
you, I have spoken to other Members, I have spoken to fishermen
myself in Alaska, and I want you to know I don't take it
lightly. The fishery disaster assistance has, candidly, never
been a fast process.
Senator Murkowski. It has been awful.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. For like, ever. It has never been
a fast process. The new law that you have passed is good,
effective, and pushing us to streamline. But as you know, it is
very data-intensive. We have to get the catch limits, know the
data from the past, compare it to today, is an arduous process
and takes time. The BAS (ph.) implementation only made it
worse. Here is what I can tell you. We expect some decisions in
the next month or so, BAS----
Senator Murkowski. Decisions with regards to getting the
funding out the door then?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Senator Murkowski. Okay.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes, for providing funding. BAS
(ph.), this may be cold comfort for you, but I personally have
a meeting on a weekly basis with the BAS team to get this thing
back on track. IT systems, I have been doing this for 15 years,
never seem to go the way they should in government. It is not
an excuse, but it is complicated.
So the good news is the system is now working. The actual
software is working. We are processing vouchers and grants at
the same rate that we were pre-BAS. The challenge now is that
we had a 20-year-old system that individuals knew how to work
with. Now they have to learn a whole new system, so we are
still slow. But long story short, we are through the worst of
it. Not totally out of the BAS woods, I will follow up with you
on Alaska specifically.
Senator Murkowski. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. But I think you are going to see some
improvements soon.
Senator Murkowski. Well, we need to see that because we are
going into yet another season.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Murkowski. And quite honestly, prepare yourself for
another round of disasters. But our fishermen are giving up on
the whole disaster declaration process because they just can't
see the help coming in anytime soon.
Secretary Raimondo. We will get better.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you. Another question, and this
relates to your budget that is very concerning; what we have
been saying to people who are very stressed about what we are
seeing in the oceans and what is happening, particularly with
salmon, but in other species as well, crab. We are saying we
got to get more data, we have got to get more science, we got
to count on NOAA, we need to make sure their budget is there.
And then we learn that the 2024 Alaska Longline Survey is going
to be suspended this year. We understand it is high cost. Of
course, it is high cost.
But historically the Alaska Fishery Science Center has been
able to conduct the survey through a cost recovery effort. We
know that we have got increased operating expenses, we get all
that. But we established the Fisheries Survey Contingency Fund
in fiscal year 2024 to provide funding for instances like this,
and to help prevent the unexpected cancellations.
So I am just going to, just again reinforce the importance
of these marine surveys. We want to make sure that our
fisheries are going to be sustainable even in challenging
times, but we have got to know as much as we possibly can. We
have to have these marine surveys. So is there any assurance
that you can give me in this category?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I mean, in the fiscal year 2025
budget, we have prioritized the surveys. The longline survey is
paid for actually by the--by industry, and you know costs are
going up, so it is a challenge for the industry. I can tell
you, we are very focused on it. It is always a tough decision
to postpone or cancel a survey. We don't like to do that. We
are being creative as we can to make sure that we get the best
science, and we strive to meet our core responsibilities. I
share the priority and the concern.
Senator Murkowski. Well, and you know, we talked about this
during COVID, when we lost years of surveys, a couple of years
of surveys, which was horribly detrimental. So I am just going
to reinforce I will be the broken record on it. I do have more
questions that I want to submit for the record, but thank you,
Madam Secretary.
Secretary Raimondo. Um-hum.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Secretary Raimondo. By the way, next week I am talking to a
group of Alaskan commercial fishermen, just to hear and learn
and listen. I am not saying we are doing everything perfectly,
but I definitely want you to know how seriously we take it.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. The second vote has been
called. So Senator Heinrich, I am going to call on you next.
And Senator Murray is going to take over. And I am going to
go vote, and if anybody else here has not voted yet, I would
encourage you to do that. Thank you.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary, as you know probably better than most, the CHIPS
and Science Act has had just an incredible impact on
semiconductor manufacturing in this country. I know you were
recently in Arizona, at the REI Intel facilities in Rio Rancho.
They are reinvesting to the tune of 700 permanent manufacturing
jobs, and literally thousands of skilled trades jobs while they
build it out.
All of us care about jobs. But talk a little bit also about
why these new advanced packaging facilities are so important to
restoring America's leadership in making chips here at home,
and controlling our own supply chain?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you. Exactly for the reason
you said. I mean, it is quite shocking if you think about it
that in the past few decades, the United States has gone from
being the leader in semiconductor manufacturing to now being
100 percent dependent on Korea and Taiwan for our leading-edge
chips. 92 percent of our leading-edge chips come from one
company in Taiwan.
It puts us in an unbelievably vulnerable position. So as
you say, it is exciting that we are creating these jobs, and it
is thousands of them, and they are good jobs, and high-paying,
and union jobs, and it is great. This is fundamentally a
national security issue. And you mentioned packaging. We also
don't--we don't have advanced packaging in the United States,
so a disturbingly high number of chips that are in U.S.
Military applications are shipped to--made somewhere and then
shipped to China or Asia to be packaged.
Senator Heinrich. Right.
Secretary Raimondo. So if we want to secure--you know,
bolster our own national security, we need to make and package
these chips in the United States.
Senator Heinrich. Giving businesses in rural communities
the support they need is a real priority for my office. And so
I was really pleased to see a new Minority Business Development
Rural Center announced for Las Vegas, New Mexico. Talk to the
Committee a little bit about what these new rural centers will
be bringing to the table for our rural businesses.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you. So we--this is a pilot
program that we started at MBDA because we know that rural
businesses face a different set of challenges than--and you
know that very well, than, you know, non-rural businesses,
harder to access capital, harder to find resources. So we
started a pilot with rural business centers, including one in
your State. It has been very successful. The budget request
asked for $3 million so we can do more.
It is just a matter of meeting people where they are and
teaching them how to get capital, how to hire, how to train
employees, how to export, et cetera. Fundamentally, my job is
to make sure America out-competes the rest of the world, and
that means, every American business has to be able to compete,
minority-owned businesses, rural-dwelling businesses, et
cetera.
Senator Heinrich. I am going to shift gears to AI for a
moment. A number of us announced a new AI roadmap today, and
NIST is a big part of that; the Safety Institute at NIST in
particular. How do we make sure that the AI Safety Institute at
NIST is also leveraging the capacity that exists in other parts
of the Federal Government? And for me, that would mean things
like, the expertise at the Los Alamos and Sandia National Labs.
Secretary Raimondo. Um-hum. That is a critical piece of it.
So we have a very close working relationship with the
Department of Energy, who has some of the best AI experts in
the Federal Government and who has the compute.
Senator Heinrich. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. You know, they have the compute, so one
of the things we are going to be doing, for example, is testing
and evaluating the frontier models before they go out into the
world. We will need to work with the National Labs, and they
have been incredibly collaborative, in order to do that.
Setting the standards, tapping into their expertise, and quite
frankly, benefiting from their compute to run some of these
models.
Senator Heinrich. Yes. I think the next couple of years are
going to be really important for us getting the infrastructure
in place to be able to manage this transition effectively. A
last quick question, the Russian seafood ban, what is Commerce
doing to implement that ban? What more can you be doing? What
do you need from us?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Obviously, we support the
President's executive order. We are working closely with,
Treasury and CBP to enforce that. There is always more to be
done. I mean, the conversation we had earlier with Senator
Kennedy, it is what China and Russia are doing is, first of
all, human rights abuses, which is wrong, and we have to stand
against, but it also it hurts us fishermen.
Senator Heinrich. It sure does.
Secretary Raimondo. It distorts the market.
Senator Heinrich. It really hurts the stability of nations
all around the world. I mean, if you go to the South Pacific,
you will hear, endless stories about illegal fishing coming
from China.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. We will follow up.
Senator Heinrich. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. I mean, I think we are doing all we
can, to facilitate.
Senator Heinrich. Appreciate it, Secretary.
Senator Murray. Senator Hagerty.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you. And welcome, Secretary.
Secretary Raimondo. Hello.
Senator Hagerty. Good to see you.
Secretary Raimondo. Good afternoon.
Senator Hagerty. Two topics I want to discuss with you
today. One of them has to do with the census, the other with
your recent trip to the Philippines, and some of the
discussions we have had along those lines. But first, with
respect to the census, I am quite concerned that the census and
apportionment today is conducted in a way that encourages
illegal immigration. I want to just ask you for the record,
illegal aliens today are counted in the U.S. Census; is that
correct?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. As required by the Constitution.
Senator Hagerty. This total census population, and I want
to be clear, it is counted, illegal aliens are counted, this
total census population, which includes illegal aliens, is then
in turn used for the allocation of Congressional districts and
electoral votes for each State, is that correct?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Hagerty. Recently, a video emerged of a Democrat
representative named Yvette Clarke from New York. She was
calling for more illegal immigration to her New York
Congressional district because, I want to quote this, ``I need
more people in my district just for redistricting purposes.''
This is what she said.
Under the current rules, Secretary, Representative Clarke
is right, isn't she? If she has more illegal aliens coming to
her district, she will have a larger district, she will have
more power in her district relative to others that don't.
Secretary Raimondo. I am not going to comment on politics.
Like my job is to run the----
Senator Hagerty. This is just math. If you have more
illegal aliens in your district, you are likely to have more
power in your district, right? You will get greater
representation by virtue of their arrival; is that correct?
Secretary Raimondo. Like I said, the Constitution requires
us to count all persons, and that is what we do.
Senator Hagerty. The Constitution also talks about one
person, one vote. And this absolutely dilutes the notion that
citizens have the right to vote. It dilutes it. And what it
does is it actually incentivizes illegal immigration. It allows
illegal immigration to increase political power depending on
your State or your congressional district, the more illegal
aliens that you have, the greater your political power.
I introduced legislation to address this. It is called the
Equal Representation Act, that would take away this perverse
incentive, and it would make certain that only citizens are
counted for the purpose of allocating congressional districts
and for the purpose of allocating electoral votes.
This bill just passed the House of Representatives last
week, and I put this bill on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
Every Democrat voted against it in March, but I am very hopeful
that common sense will prevail, and we can see a very different
result. Americans are shocked when they find out this is
happening, particularly given the volume of illegal aliens that
are coming into America right now, and where the sanctuary
cities are located.
Turning to another topic, though, now, and that is the one
you and I have discussed a number of times, and that has to do
with the Philippines. And I mentioned to you in my past
experience when I served as Ambassador to Japan, two Chinese
firms were attempting to acquire the Hanjin Shipyards that was
in bankruptcy. The firm is--the shipyard is now named Agila
Shipyards. It is located very strategically in the Philippines'
Subic Bay. It is a deepwater shipyard right on the South China
Sea. It previously served as a U.S. Naval Shipyard when I lived
out in Japan back in the 1980s.
Unfortunately, and for different reasons, the DFC and other
organizations of the United States Government, were not able to
respond in a way that I had hoped, in terms of dealing with the
financing of this, and you and I have discussed some of those
issues there. The inability to engage directly resulted in us
putting together an ad hoc team that was comprised of
individuals in the State Department. I worked on it closely. We
went to the Japanese Government, we went to the Philippine
Government, and we eventually got it done.
It was tough, I have to say. A private sector firm,
Cerberus Capital Management, stepped in and took an important
leadership role, as well as certain individuals in the State
Department and the Department of Defense.
With that said, I really hope, and I think you would agree,
that we need to evolve beyond some type of ad hoc approach when
these situations occur. And I would love to get your thoughts,
your opinions about how we might put in place some sort of
permanent established way of dealing with these sorts of
foreign strategic assets that come available and have a way to
participate and engage rather than just allow adversaries to
acquire them.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I would love to work with you on
this, Senator, and I will follow up with you. One of the
initiatives I have been working on is the Indo-Pacific Economic
Framework, and in fact, we will be hosting in June in Singapore
an investor forum for exactly this purpose, which is bringing
U.S. investors to the table in Singapore, and exposing them to
all of my IPEF counterparts from other countries are going to
come and present their high-priority projects, infrastructure
projects, clean economy projects, energy projects, to have a
more, you know, institutional way for U.S. investors,
Australian investors, Japanese investors to look at these
investments in these countries.
The Philippines will be there, so we can focus our
investments on those priorities, because otherwise, as you say,
and as you well know, China is everywhere, all of the ports.
And I was in Kenya recently, it is not just the Indo-Pacific,
it is Kenya, China is very aggressive----
Senator Hagerty. Even in Latin America.
Secretary Raimondo [continuing]. In Panama. I was in
Panama. I recently went to Costa Rica. I brought with me two
Costa Rican U.S. businesses, including Intel. You know, like
that is a win-win. Draw down supply chain from China closer to
home in Costa Rica. Helps our supply chain and resiliency,
draws us closer to Costa Rica. So I am doing a lot of that
work. We have to be doing so much more. But I will send you
details about this event in June because I think it is exactly
what you are talking about.
Senator Hagerty. Certainly. I appreciate the work you are
doing, and if you see any opportunities with respect to the
tools that we have today, that are just not quite hitting the
mark.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes.
Senator Hagerty. I am thinking specifically about the DFC.
I was just with Scott Nathan in another hearing, but if there
are tools or adjustments to those tools that we could make,
particularly where in the Legislative Branch we could help you,
I am looking forward to working with you.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
Secretary Raimondo. Very good. Thank you.
Senator Murray. Thank you. Thank you, Secretary Raimondo. I
appreciate you joining us today. You know, the investments that
we make in the Department of Commerce are so important to our
economy, our national competitiveness, and our national
security, as you were just talking about. They really help make
sure that we have a thriving workforce, growing businesses,
strong supply chains, trade relationships, high-speed Internet
in every ZIP code in America, reliable information about our
weather, healthy salmon populations, and hatcheries, and of
course, cutting-edge research, as you well know, in
manufacturing, in critical industries, like advanced
manufacturing, clean energy, quantum computing, and so much
more.
And we know that our adversaries, like the Chinese
Government, are doing everything they can to get ahead in those
fields. We know they are not cutting their investments in the
future or leaving them on autopilot, and that means that we
cannot afford to do that either, which means we can't leave
domestic spending behind in fiscal year 2025. We are working
with very tight, inadequate spending limits, and as I have
said, repeatedly, as we talk about how to address those
inadequacies for defense, we have to do the same for
nondefense, because our competitiveness and our country's
future depend on it.
We have to write strong bills for the year ahead because if
we leave our families behind, then our competitors are going to
leave U.S. behind before too long. So I appreciate the work you
are doing, and as a reminder to all my colleagues, we need to
make sure we are funding the nondefense side as well as the
defense side.
Salmon, as you will know, are foundational to Washington
State's economy and cultural heritage. Salmon recovery is a top
priority for me, and NOAA plays a really integral role in this
work, especially on Mitchell Act hatcheries, which are a
mainstay of commercial, recreational, and treaty Tribal
fisheries in the Columbia River Basin. I secured investments in
the Inflation Reduction Act to repair and modernize those
hatchery infrastructures, and we have to continue that work
through strong annual appropriations. Can you speak to this
Committee about the importance of maintaining robust funding
for those Mitchell Act Hatcheries?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you. For 10 seconds. I just
want to, I guess, support and emphasize the first point that
you made. The way to compete with China and out-compete China
is to invest in America. There is only so much we can do to
hold them back, right, we need to--and by hold them back, I
mean deny them our technology, for example. We need to invest
in everything you are talking about. If every American has good
job training, good jobs, good manufacturing, good broadband,
that is how we outcompete. So I strongly support your
leadership around focusing on the domestic investments.
As it relates to salmon, you and I have talked about this
before. The money that we have for the salmon hatcheries goes
to States, and also to Tribes, and as you well know, this is a
way of life for Tribes, not to mention livelihood. I would say
that without the money, we won't be able to maintain salmon
populations. So the short answer, I suppose, is it is
incredibly critical. It is critical. We won't be able to
maintain the population, which means people will not be able to
maintain their jobs, not to mention the environmental
consequences.
Senator Murray. Thank you. Absolutely agree. Now, I heard
what Senator Murkowski said. I was going to say the same thing,
and I appreciated your response. But you need to know we are
hearing from our constituents that this desperately needed
funding is delayed due to issues with NOAA's payment system, as
you outlined to us. We have had several fishery disaster
declarations that directly benefit us, but our people are not
seeing the help get to them.
So I heard your response to Senator Murkowski. I would ask
you to do the same for us, to let us know in Washington State
when they are going to see these resources, because the people
are really getting disillusioned by this.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I know, and I am sorry. You will
see some announcements next month. It is definitely getting
better. I know the crabbers are hurting, and the fishery is
hurting. We are on it. And it is going to get better.
Senator Murray. Okay. And we look forward to a personal
update when you get that information, and when it is going to
be.
Secretary Raimondo. Um-hum.
Senator Murray. I want to ask you about NOAA's West Coast
Regional Center in Seattle. It houses the largest variety of
NOAA programs at a single location in all of the United States,
and employs the largest number of NOAA staff outside of
Washington, D.C. Some of those buildings date back to the World
War II Era. So as NOAA works to consolidate in the Seattle
region, I believe there is an opportunity to improve those
facilities.
An internal NOAA study arrived at the same conclusion. So I
want to ask you today, will you commit to keeping me and my
staff apprised of NOAA's plan to modernize the WRC?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, the WRC is a priority, and it is
on track. And we will, of course, keep you apprised.
Senator Murray. Okay. Because NOAA needs those top-class
facilities in order to do really important work, whether it is
weather, climate, or coastal missions, so this is a critical
area for us, and we want to stay in touch with you, and you
should do that.
Secretary Raimondo. Of course.
Senator Murray. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Murray. Senator
Fischer.
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Senator Shaheen; and thank you,
Secretary, for being here today.
Madam Secretary, as you know, NTIA received major funding
under the Infrastructure Law for Broadband Deployment, and this
funding allows States to develop plans that best fit their
needs. However, Nebraska submitted its initial proposal for
BEAD funding, and NTIA has rejected it twice. In both
instances, NTIA noted that Nebraska's application failed to
establish a low-cost broadband service offering.
I know you testified to Senator Moran that you believe this
requirement is in statute, but if Congress expressly directs
the Department of Commerce and NTIA to include this requirement
for States to describe a low-cost broadband service offering in
their BEAD applications; yes, or no?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. The law requires----
Senator Fischer. I don't believe--I don't believe Congress
did that. NTIA has only been able to cite finding sections in
the bill. Congress did not expressly state it.
Secretary Raimondo. The law is quite clear, and Senator
Shaheen and I, and Senator Collins, were in the thick of it.
The law explicitly forbids rate regulation, and I will testify
to you today that we are not in the business of rate regulation
but it----
Senator Fischer. Bud didn't you----
Secretary Raimondo [continuing]. But it also requires every
State to have a low-cost option. Affordability is a
requirement.
Senator Fischer. But in your notice of funding opportunity,
it only cites the findings section in the Infrastructure Law.
It does not cite anything in the law itself. If the statutory
reference goes beyond that, can you send that to us?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. But let me say that--yes, and I am
happy to look into Nebraska, and I am happy to talk to you and
the Governor myself. But as we were saying before, the whole
point of this, we believe the Internet is not a luxury. It is a
utility. It is something everybody needs. And if you--if it is
technically available to everyone in Nebraska but at $100 or
$200, where it is unaffordable, it might--it is not Internet
for all.
Senator Fischer. But I believe----
Secretary Raimondo. It is Internet for the wealthy.
Senator Fischer [continuing]. But Congress--it is my
understanding that Congress outright prohibited NTIA from
regulating broadband rates as part of BEAD's reauthorizing
statute. And NTIA admits that, in its official question-and-
answer document on the BEAD Program, they also note that a low-
cost broadband service offering does not require any specific
dollar figure to be attached to it.
Secretary Raimondo. Um-hum.
Senator Fischer. But the only, the only State plans that
NTIA has approved so far, they have all included specific
dollar figures for that low-cost broadband offering. So
Nebraska is not interested in trying to have broadband rate
regulation. So what are some alternatives to that specific
dollar figure--what are some alternatives that can satisfy
NTIA's low-cost broadband service offering requirement?
Secretary Raimondo. So again, we are not telling Nebraska
you have to provide a $30 a month, $40 a month option. What we
are telling Nebraska is you need to satisfy us that for your
State, based upon your needs, at the end of the implementation,
I think you guys are getting $400 million, every household in
Nebraska has to have access to affordable alternatives.
Senator Fischer. But do you have alternatives that would
qualify for that, that would meet that requirement, because----
Secretary Raimondo. They have to prove to us that everyone
will have affordable access to high-speed Internet.
Senator Fischer. So you don't have any alternatives that
you could offer my State that might work for them? Because I
know my State is a little concerned about the legal liability
it is going to have when it is sued for that lack of authority
to regulate the broadband service rates.
Secretary Raimondo. But we are not telling--I will call
you, and we can follow up on this.
Senator Fischer. Okay.
Secretary Raimondo. We are trying to get--the reason we are
doing this State by State, is to give States flexibility.
Senator Fischer. Okay. That would be good.
Secretary Raimondo. And what we are trying to do is--like,
look, this is a hard thing to do, we don't want--this is a ton
of taxpayer money going to----
Senator Fischer. I have got--I've got another one here.
Secretary Raimondo. Okay. Go ahead.
Senator Fischer. Switching gears.
Secretary Raimondo. Okay. Go ahead.
Senator Fischer. I am sure the Department's oversight of
NTIA also has brought Federal spectrum issues front and center
for you. And safeguarding the diverse missions of Federal
agencies is critical, as I know you know. Do you have any
opposition to the concept of NTIA co-leading spectrum studies
with the Department of Defense, specifically for circumstances
that would impact DOD systems?
Secretary Raimondo. No.
Senator Fischer. Great. So from your perspective, has DOD
been fair and transparent in its communications with the
Department of Commerce?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Fischer. Great. Thank you.
Secretary Raimondo. But I will come back to you on this,
the broadband.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Fischer. Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you so much, Chair Shaheen.
And Secretary Raimondo, great to be with you; I just so
appreciate the positive energy, the can-do attitude, the
business background, and the State leadership background. I
appreciate that you are from a small but mighty State that has
a long and plucky history in manufacturing, much as New
Hampshire does, as much as I would like to believe Delaware
does as well. And I am grateful to be with you.
I don't know if you remember this from our first
conversation, but my father launched the Rhode Island Seafood
Council.
Secretary Raimondo. I do. And now that you are saying it--
--
Senator Coons. Years and years ago, he was literally one of
the folks here advocating for the fishermen of New England to
receive some support or benefit when there were fishing
challenges in the region. So listening to the exchanges with a
variety of senators from both sides of the aisle brought me
back to what it was like to be in the audience visiting when he
was testifying on these issues.
Manufacturing, as you know, is something of great
importance to our country, and to me personally, I spent 8
years in the manufacturing industry before being elected to
anything. Manufacturing jobs are great jobs. They anchor
families and communities. They pay higher wages. They have
better benefits. And President Biden is presiding over a
renaissance in advanced manufacturing in the United States.
A key piece of that is the Manufacturing USA Program, where
NIST, the National Institute for Standards and Technology,
plays an absolutely critical role. I think NIST is one of the
most underappreciated high-impact components of your
Department.
There are 17 Manufacturing USA institutes that specialize
in different areas, as you are well aware. One of them in
Delaware, the National Institute for Innovation in
Manufacturing Biopharmaceuticals, or NIIMBL, will play a key
part in demonstrating the technologies needed to manufacture
the next generation of therapeutics, diagnostics, and vaccines.
NIST is planning to add two additional institutes this year
focused on AI and semiconductors. NIIMBL in Delaware is the
only NIST institute. It is the only institute not run by either
the Department of Energy or the Department of Defense, so you
have a great opportunity for the Department of Commerce to
significantly increase from one to three its Manufacturing USA
institutes.
I was struck that the budget request was for $37 million.
Given the real impact that this national network has, and for
those who misunderstand them to be only in 17 locations, every
one of them is a hub from which spokes spread throughout the
country. The NIIMBL institute in Delaware has partner
companies, and institutes, and universities in 30 States.
I recognize budgets require tradeoffs. I am going to push
to try and find a way to increase investment in this program.
And New Hampshire also benefits from having one of these
institutes. I would be interested in whether you think that is
a sufficient level of investment, given how it punches above
its weight and its potential impact.
Secretary Raimondo. You know, before we were talking about
what a tough topline we have on this budget?
Senator Coons. Um-hum.
Secretary Raimondo. So it is, I have been to NIIMBL, I have
seen it, I know about it, it is great. The work MEP does is
great, by the way. The work Manufacturing USA does is great.
The fact that we have asked for additional money in both of
those programs in light of this tough budget should tell you
how much we think it matters. And certainly, the more we have
the more good we can do.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
Secretary Raimondo. By the way, the man who just walked in
would agree also that Rhode Island is the center of the
universe, so I am glad your father----
Senator Coons. We said great things about Rhode Island.
Secretary Raimondo [continuing]. We were just discussing
how all roads get back to Rhode Island.
Senator Reed. You are absolutely right, Madam Secretary,
and it is because of you.
Senator Coons. And your advocacy in support for the
Manufacturing Extension Partnership is also deeply appreciated.
I am closely following the Regional Technology Hubs
implementation by EDA. It allows more regions to participate
than just a few superstar cities, and I was proud to see the
Greater Philadelphia PROPEL Tech Hub have advanced. That
includes NIIMBL as one of its partners. There is also only $41
million for tech hubs. Also something I think deserves more
support. I will ask one last question.
Secretary Raimondo. I agree, by the way.
Senator Coons. I think you have got a tremendous PTO
director, and the role of intellectual property in a strong
patent system in making manufacturing competitive and
successful is key. The European Commission, a year ago when you
were before us, was drafting a standard essential patent
regulation that I was afraid would encourage China's abusive
royalty-setting practices and harm U.S. innovators and
manufacturers.
In February, the European Parliament adopted the Draft
Regulation, and EU Member Nations are now likely going to adopt
these regulations as well. I think it is in real tension with
an open, global, multi-stakeholder standard setting and
licensing system that is essential to developing 6G and to R&D.
Will you work with me to make sure that the U.S. doesn't follow
the EU down this road when it comes to standard essential
patents?
Secretary Raimondo. We will. By the way, I have to thank
you, Kathi Vidal is amazing, and has enjoyed her working
relationship with you, so of course we will continue that.
Senator Coons. Thank you very much, Madam Secretary.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Coons. Senator Britt.
Senator Britt. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Secretary, it is so nice to see you today. Thank you so
much for appearing before this Committee. Your Department has
done incredible work and has a big impact on Alabama, from red
snapper to assessing anti-dumping, to countervailing duties on
imports, unfairly threatening Alabama businesses. The decisions
that you and your Department make impact the lives of millions
of Alabamians.
And on some of the issues you and I, you know, may have a
disagreement, or I may want to see you move faster. But what I
want to say is, you have been great to work with. I have my
daughter here with me today, and it is incredibly important for
me for her to see the fact that you do not have to agree with
someone to show them respect. And in fact, even if we share
very different political ideologies, where there are common
grounds, we need to move forward and work together.
And I have enjoyed that relationship with you, and I
certainly hope that will continue. And I think that her
generation needs to see that more than anything. So thank you
very much for that.
And despite obviously having some disagreements, I
certainly appreciate your whole teams' willingness to work, and
that willingness has been valuable despite the places where our
views diverge. I do think even, moving forward, we have many
opportunities to work together.
So for example, there is an exciting opportunity to find a
Tech Hub in Birmingham that would bring public-private
partnerships and academic partners together. This is a unique
opportunity that would promote a domestic supply chain for
critical medicines and spur innovation throughout the region
and across the country. I have also appreciated your personal
attention that you have given to BEAD implementation.
I know that the State has enjoyed working with your team,
and I trust that that feeling is mutual. Obviously, any program
of this size is going to have some hiccups, but I feel good
that as long as stakeholders are still at the table, we will
certainly smooth those out. Continuing to push NIST and the
NTIA to communicate from the same playbook and continue to
provide much available flexibility to groups implementing this
program, I think is critically important.
Last year, we discussed the radar. Then you gave me a
commitment that your office would work with myself, and
Congresswoman Sewell, and Congressman Aderholt to help address
the radar gaps in Alabama. Thank you for following up on that
request. We have been able to increase radar coverage of
Alabama at 3,000 feet by 4,200 square miles since last year.
That means 8 percent more of Alabama has adequate radar
coverage compared to last year.
Now, while there is plenty more work to be done, I
certainly believe every Alabamian should live with proper radar
coverage to protect and preserve lives during severe storms and
tornadoes, regardless of their ZIP code. I certainly appreciate
the progress that has been made. And I want to continue to work
with you to address those remaining gaps.
One area I am finding of increasing concern to Alabama is
The Endangered Species Act implementation, specifically
revolving around the Rice's whale. We must find a way to
preserve species based on science in ways that do not hamstring
our economy and National Security.
I was grateful the Department denied the extremely harmful
Rice's whale petition from non-government organizations last
fall. The measures included in that petition would have
severely stilled operations at the Port of Mobile, and possibly
eliminated the commercial and recreational fishing
opportunities in the Gulf.
Madam Secretary, when issuing regulations under the
Endangered Species Act, will you commit to me to carefully
consider the science, the economic ramifications, and the
National Security impacts of any regulation, as the law
requires?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes. All of it is in active
regulation. You know, we are making the rule now, but we
endeavor for it to be science-based, but also balance
commercial interests.
Senator Britt. I am so grateful to hear you say that,
because I want to reiterate that the known economic impacts at
stake here; and the lack of science that is available on the
species need to be taken into account. Alabama's commercial
fishing operations provide more than $291 million in economic
value, and recreational fishing adds another $452 million in
economic value to the region.
According to NOAA documents, the Port of Mobile has $270
million a day of economic impact. That is a little under $100
billion a year. For reference, Alabama's estimated GDP last
year was about $300 billion. That puts it into context for you.
So it has been raising alarm bells, as you can imagine,
when we see claims made by NOAA that cannot be backed up by
science, especially when these claims could be used to justify
regulations impacting a third of the State's economy. So for
example, NOAA claimed in its Species In The Spotlight
Publication that Rice's whale were declining, even though NOAA
scientists have noted that there is not enough data on the
species to declare a population trend. So similarly, NOAA has
noted that there have been few sightings of tabs in 2010 and
implied the population was maybe declining due to Deepwater
Horizon. And so obviously, if you aren't looking for them, you
know, you are not going to find them.
So as I wrap up, Madam Secretary, these are just a couple
of the examples of how the lack of data has been framed as a
crisis. And when official NOAA documentation frames a lack of
research as a reason for a regulation, I think Alabamians are
clearly and justifiably deeply concerned about the direction
the Department is heading.
So if you will, please work to ensure that scientific
integrity is protected at the Department, and that the
Department understands the balance of obviously making sure
that we are moving forward in conservation, but that the
economic and national security implications of these decisions
are balanced as well.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
Senator Britt. Thank you.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I have talked with a number of
your colleagues earlier about how many Americans earn their
living fishing, crabbing, fishing et cetera, so I will commit
to you that our decisions will have sound, scientific
background and that we have an open ear to commercial
interests.
Senator Britt. Absolutely.
Secretary Raimondo. Also, on the tornado, because of the
exchange we had at the last hearing, I went back to the
Department and directed--and looked into it, and directed the
Weather Service to work with the FAA. We have lowered the
beams, and you could take credit for having more accurate
forecasting of tornadoes for more folks at lower severity
storms.
Senator Britt. Which is just, I mean, that is huge. And so
thank you. And as I said earlier, I just appreciate the
willingness to work with you, and your willingness to work with
our team. So thank you so much.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Brit. Would you like to
introduce your daughter to the Committee?
Senator Britt. Oh, my, gosh. That is so exciting. Yes,
thank you so much, Madam Chairwoman. So this is my daughter,
Bennet (ph.) Britt. So she is--she is probably like; oh, my,
goodness, this is happening to me?
Senator Shaheen. I know. I never pass up an opportunity to
embarrass my kids.
Senator Britt. Yes.
Secretary Raimondo. How old are you? Nice.
Senator Britt. So she is in ninth grade, and she exempted
her exams, and she said: Mom, do you mind, can I come to D.C.?
Which, you know, that never happens. So I jumped on it.
Senator Shaheen. And she is here.
Senator Britt. Absolutely. And it has been a part of it.
She said: Boy, you have got a lot of hearings. I said, yes, we
do. We do.
Senator Shaheen. Well, we are delighted you are here. And
thank you for joining us.
Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chair. And Senator
Britt, Secretary Raimondo, thank you for providing a great
example for everybody, as to how you can disagree on many
issues but still work together. I appreciate it.
Madam Secretary, let me start by thanking the President,
and you, and the entire Biden Administration on the whole-of-
government response to the tragic collapse of the Key Bridge in
Baltimore. I am grateful to you and your team for providing a
quick economic analysis of the impact on the port and supply
chains, among other things. And as you know better than
anybody, it is just one example of the large scope of
responsibilities housed within the Department of Commerce.
Many agencies, including many that we are proud to be
housed in Maryland, like NOAA, like NIST, and the Census
Bureau. I wanted to just at the outset identify a couple of
concerns about the budget. I know we are all concerned about
the overall budget constraint numbers, but there is--NOAA's
Integrated Ocean Observing System, which provides important
climate and maritime data, it is slated for a 76 percent cut in
this budget, which greatly concerns me. And I will be talking
to Members of the Committee about it, and we will be submitting
a question for the record.
I also want to acknowledge the work of the NTIA, as you
mentioned, on expanding broadband, this is a very, very
important priority. I know it isn't an FCC Program, at least
with respect to the affordable connectivity piece; we look
forward to trying to extend funding for that so that more
Americans can get affordable connections.
Finally, I want to thank you for the phone conversation
that you and I and Senator Cardin had about the Greater
Baltimore Tech Hub. That designation has had a very important
multiplier effect on investment to develop the next generation
of healthcare technologies, with over $800 million in private,
and State, and local public commitments to support the proposal
that has been put forward. And I look forward, and we are
hopeful about the upcoming Tech Hub Phase 2 announcement.
So just, thank you for the initiative, and thank you for
taking a very close look at Baltimore's proposal. It would make
a very, very big difference for Baltimore, and I think a great
return for the country.
A lot of people have talked about different components,
offices within this, and the role they play. I just want to
express a general concern, which I think you share, about the
lack of funding for NIST. It is an excellent institution and
has become really a victim of its own success, in that we have
asked them to take on more responsibilities without the
funding.
It is homes of the CHIPS for America Program. It is leading
a lot of the efforts with respect to developing safe and
trustworthy AI. It is doing leading work in quantum and other
cutting-edge areas, and yet NIST effectively had an 8 percent
cut relative to fiscal year 2023, in the current fiscal year
budget 2024, and it is being asked to stretch its resources
even further.
Could you just speak generally, Secretary Raimondo, about
why we need to do more on NIST? You mentioned how the best way
to compete is to invest in America, and NIST is a critical part
of that strategy.
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Okay, very quickly on a few of
your things. Your tech--the Tech Hub proposal is fantastic. I
don't know if you are going to get it, but it is, I can say I
have met with them, it is fantastic, and I appreciated that
phone call also. If there is one program that you can find
money to increase funding for, it is Tech Hubs. These Tech Hubs
are incredible. In every nook and cranny of this country, is
great innovation, and we ought to, the United States of
America, be able to fund it. So I just would like to say that.
I am going to your State with Governor Moore shortly to
talk about what more we can do to help small businesses and
businesses affected by the collapse. Of course, we invite you
to attend that. But I want you to know we are doing everything
we know how to do to be there, especially as it relates to
supply chain disruptions due to the collapse and then business
disruption. And always want to hear from you if you have ideas
for what more we can do.
With respect to NIST, you know, if you think about the
technology of the future, you think of AI, and you think of
quantum, that is what NIST does, right. In this budget, I am
asking for $60 million in NIST for AI. Honestly, that is a drop
in the bucket for all of the testing, evaluation, and safety
work that we have to do for artificial intelligence. I can't
even imagine what China spends, and at its government level on
AI, the same for quantum.
If we don't lead the world in these two areas of
technological innovation, that is a problem for the whole
world, not just for our own national security. So I don't know
what to say. I mean, Senator Coons, earlier was talking about
IP standards, China floods standard-setting bodies for the
Internet, for AI, for IP, NIST has to be properly funded if the
United States is going to lead, especially, I would say, in AI,
and in quantum.
Also, the facilities, and I know you know this, but for
your colleagues, it is really a problem. I mean, the work that
these scientists, in a couple of cases, Nobel Prize-winning
scientists, work in facilities that, in some cases, are falling
apart. And we really need, for safety reasons, if no other
reason, to have more investment, to protect this work that NIST
does.
Senator Van Hollen. Well, thank you. You know, I am very
worried that having passed the CHIPS and Science Act, we are
doing a good job on the CHIPS piece, but we are not really
fulfilling the promise on the science part, and it will come
back to bite us if we don't do it.
Secretary Raimondo. Right.
Senator Van Hollen. And I will just say, finally, we are
very bullish in Baltimore about our Tech Hub proposal.
Secretary Raimondo. By the way, on the science piece, I
share that concern. I really share that concern.
Senator Van Hollen. Yes. All right. Well, hopefully we can,
and I know that the Chair shares that concern too, so look
forward to working with you.
Senator Shaheen. Absolutely. And we have heard lots of
interesting proposals around tech hubs on this Committee today.
So we agree. We would like to have more money to help fund that
program.
Secretary Raimondo. You feel about the situation I am in.
Senator Shaheen. Senator Merkley.
Senator Merkley. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And welcome, Madam Secretary. Speaking of science, I wanted
to ask you about the $11 billion appropriated for R&D programs
under the CHIPS Act. I think this funding is significant as it
can provide research and development value across the
semiconductor ecosystem, new sustainable materials to design
and manufacturing, all are key components for our economic
competitiveness. What are your thoughts regarding the role that
the National Semiconductor Technology Center, NSTC, can play in
bolstering R&D for advanced semiconductor technology?
Secretary Raimondo. I think it will play an absolutely
critical role. We have made great progress. In some ways, I
think that $11 billion is even more exciting than the $39
billion. The $39 billion is necessary. We need to make leading-
edge chips in America for our national security. But the $11
billion pushes us to the next frontier.
Innovations in chip design, chip materials, chip packaging.
And so we have just established, we hired somebody to run the
NSTC, we are just now in the process. We are going to have more
announcements this summer and this fall, but that is really the
signature R&D initiative which I think will, you know, catapult
the U.S. semiconductor industry for the decades to come.
Senator Merkley. Well, as you probably are aware, Oregon,
no surprise, has a deep ecosystem in chips R&D and in
manufacturing built up over the last four-plus decades. We have
all the necessary components to generate a successful NSTC tech
center. What is the timeline for expending the $11 billion in
total funding?
Secretary Raimondo. By the way, I have been there, and it
is incredible to see the ecosystem there. We will, this summer,
this summer we will put out the application, and before the end
of the year, we will make announcements.
Senator Merkley. And those will be announcements on where
an operational headquarters and the TA Center location will be.
Secretary Raimondo. Exactly. Yes.
Senator Merkley. Well, I invite you to come back to visit
that incredible ecosystem again. Can I host you?
Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely.
Senator Merkley. Okay. Great. Thank you. I also wanted to
discuss the impact of the $3.5 billion set aside in chips
funding for secure manufacturing.
Secretary Raimondo. Um-hum.
Senator Merkley. I am somewhat concerned about the impact
of the 2024 CJS Bill in terms of its impact on key
manufacturing and R&D projects that were slated to be funded by
the CHIPS and Science Act. I would like to follow up with you,
if I could arrange to meet with you later on?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I am happy to do that. In fact,
this is an issue we discussed, the secure enclave money that
came out of the CHIPS Act funds, obviously better to talk about
it in a classified setting, but I would be very happy to do
that. I would welcome that.
Senator Merkley. I will look forward to that, thank you.
Thank you very much. I want to turn to the issue of illegal,
unreported, and unregulated fishing, IUU fishing. The Seafood
Import Monitoring Program has been in place for more than 4
years, and it ensures the integrity of seafood entering the
U.S. market, at least it attempts to do so, and it is a big
contributor towards that goal.
In December of 2022, NOAA withdrew its proposed rule
updating the Seafood Import Monitoring Program, or the SIMP,
further exposing U.S. consumers to seafood sourced from
illegal, or unreported, or unregulated fishing practices; any
takeaways or insights on NOAA's ongoing comprehensive review of
SIMP?
Secretary Raimondo. The insight is we have talked about
this before and I have received your correspondence. I mean,
the insight is that the problem is getting worse not better. We
are more focused on it than ever. The President did an
executive order banning Russian imports of fish. The issue you
are talking about is mainly China, and it is not only a
violation of human rights, but it distorts the market and hurts
U.S. fishermen. So I would look forward to continuing to work
with you on it.
Senator Merkley. Well, thank you. I appreciate that very
much. The integrity of our fisheries requires the integrity of
our fishing monitoring system, and I do appreciate that in
November of last year, NOAA announced a comprehensive review of
SIMP. I think as I--I just want to stress urgency to the
completion of that, and an update of the rules to make it work
effectively.
Secretary Raimondo. I hear you. Thank you.
Senator Merkley. Thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Merkley. Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And thank
you, Madam Secretary. First, let me thank you for joining us in
Newport a few days ago for the groundbreaking on the NOAA
Atlantic Ocean Center. It is going to add to the vitality of
Rhode Island as a hub, and I use the word very explicitly, for
the blue economy. And coupled with the NOAA presence, the Coast
Guard presence, the Navy presence, the University of Rhode
Island's School of Oceanography, and just across the border,
Woods Hole, et cetera, this is a place where ocean technology
can and will take over--take off.
We have, as no surprise, I will echo the chorus about the
tech hubs, we have put in an Ocean Tech Hub, you were gracious
enough to let me come to the office and talk about it. And we
feel it is going to be a great asset for the country, not just
Rhode Island. And I would hope you could give us an idea of
when the announcements will be made for phase two, but also any
other comments that you have.
Secretary Raimondo. Well, thank you for coming to the
office to highlight the benefits and advantages of that
program. As I have said, I have been overwhelmed by the quality
of tech hubs and Rhode Island is no exception. I hear you. I
know how great the application is.
We will be making announcements this summer. So you know,
June/July timeframe, we will be making the announcements.
Senator Reed. Well, again, you will make it, I am sure,
with wisdom and commitment to the merits of the program, but
thank you for your attention to our effort in Rhode Island.
I want to switch gears a bit, one of your agencies, the
Bureau of Industry and Security, has the obligation to
promulgate regulations for exports, et cetera, and one of the
problems we have discovered is the export of U.S.-made firearms
and ammunition which has been diverted to impact on national
security, diverted to drug trafficking gangs, political
violence, et cetera.
The BIS has put forward a new rule after months of work
that will better align our national security and foreign policy
objectives. Can you explain to the Committee the process that
the BIS went through and how it protects our national security?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes, so we received information that
many of the guns which we were exporting were being diverted to
terrorists, drug cartels, drug lords, criminals in other
countries. So we paused and we studied it for a number of
months. At the end of May, we are coming out with new
regulations. The pause will end when we have new regulations.
The State Department has given us 36 countries that they
believe are problematic, political instability, narcotics, et
cetera, and we are having much tighter scrutiny of gun exports
to those countries.
What I would say is, this is a narrowly targeted regulation
focused on enhancing our national security. It will affect less
than 10 percent of all of our country's gun exports. It is not
a broad ban on gun exports; it is a narrow, narrowly targeted
restriction to improve U.S. National Security.
Senator Reed. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Let me just
conclude with mentioning the NOAA Narragansett Laboratory,
which is across the bay from the NOAA Newport Laboratory that
is being built, actually the headquarters. Cuts in the
Cooperative Research Budget are severely and potentially going
to limit the research that is done at the Narragansett
Laboratory. Cooperative research is incredibly important, and I
would like to work with you and the Department to continue to
resource that work at the Narragansett Laboratory.
Secretary Raimondo. We will do that. As I said earlier, it
is a very challenging budget. In NOAA, we decided to prioritize
weather satellites, which are expensive but necessary. I
suppose the only good news is there is $31 million for offshore
wind in the NOAA budget, but yes, we will work with you to do
everything we can.
Senator Reed. Well, thank you.
And Madam Chair, I think to emphasize the point that was
made on my arrival, that all roads lead to Rhode Island, we
should realize that Senator Britt lived in Rhode Island while
her husband played for New England Patriots, which is my
constituent. And by the way, her daughter, although born in
Boston, also resided in Rhode Island, so all roads do lead to
Rhode Island.
Secretary Raimondo. Proof, further proof.
Senator Shaheen. I can't even respond to that.
Secretary Raimondo. New England's road leads to New
England.
Senator Shaheen. That is right. New England is fine.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. I don't think we are expecting any other
Senators, but I do have a couple of final questions. I want to
go back to some of the coastal programs that have been
mentioned by a number of us. Sea Grant, IOOS, the National
Oceans and Coastal Security Fund grants, all of those programs
are critical. And again, I understand it is a tight budget, and
I understand you had to make cuts, but those are programs that
I don't think we can let be reduced to the extent that they are
or zeroed out.
Another one is the NOAA Hydrographic Mapping effort, which
includes the Center of Excellence for Operational Ocean and
Great Lakes Mapping and Joint Hydrographic Center; those are
important partnerships for the University of New Hampshire. So
we are going to be looking for ways in which we can continue
funding there. And will you commit to work with me to continue
those efforts?
Secretary Raimondo. Yes. I mean, absolutely, let us work
together. There is no--we don't deny the importance, as I said
earlier, or maybe I didn't say it, we are endeavoring wherever
we can to use Infrastructure Law monies and IRA monies to make
up for some of these losses. But yes, I would look--let us work
with your staff and see what we can get done.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. The other issue that I
have is also related to coastal concerns and fishing. You heard
from Senator Murkowski, the challenges, in Alaska. As you know,
those are significant challenges in New England as well.
The groundfish surveys in the northeast have really been
critical. I understand there are concerns about issues with the
NOAA research vessel, the Bigelow, which has been doing a lot
of those surveys. So what is the plan for mitigating the loss
of the Bigelow while it is out of service for maintenance?
Secretary Raimondo. Um-hum. We have a plan. It is out of
service for maintenance, we actually have, and I would be happy
to have my staff give yours a full comprehensive plan, for how
we will deal across the fleet, when the vessels are taken
offline for maintenance to make sure that we continue to do the
work that we need to do.
Senator Shaheen. Good. Well, we look forward to hearing
that. Another effort that has been really critical for States
like New Hampshire that have very few, sadly, very few
fishermen left, is the At-Sea Monitoring Program, and the
effort to provide assistance for that monitoring so the cost
doesn't all fall on the fishing industry, has been critical.
Can you talk about how this effort is going? In 2024 we
provided funding to integrate that program and the stock
assessments. Is that moving forward, and what do you see as the
outcomes of that research?
Secretary Raimondo. You have talked about this with me
before. I would say it is moving forward. But once again, I
think the best next step, is to have a team come over and give
you a full briefing about where we are.
Senator Shaheen. Great. We would like that, and appreciate
that. And I think there may be some other Senators on the
Committee who would be interested in that as well, so hopefully
we can invite them.
Secretary Raimondo. Let us do it.
Senator Shaheen. Okay. Well, thank you.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
At this point, I will close the hearing, if there are no
further questions this afternoon. Senators may submit
additional questions for their official hearing record, and we
hope that the Department can answer those questions, to the
extent there are any, within 30 days.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Secretary Raimondo, Department of Commerce
Questions Submitted by Senator Joe Manchin, III
Question 1. In March 2024, NOAA held a technology workshop
regarding the technologies and data available that can be deployed to
help reduce the risk of North Atlantic Right Whale (NARW) vessel
strikes. The workshop made it clear that there is robust technology in
existence today to help reduce risk without the need for blanket area
access closures.
1A. Why has your department not considered technology mandates as a
means of alternative management for reducing the risk of vessel
strikes?
Answer 1A. Endangered North Atlantic right whales are at risk of
extinction, and we must reduce the threat of lethal vessel strikes.
Just this year alone, we have documented four fatal vessel strikes for
right whales. NOAA Fisheries strongly supports the development and
testing of vessel strike risk reduction technologies. However, there
are currently no technologies available that have been proven to reduce
the risk of vessel collisions to right whales, which is why we are
investing in the development, evaluation and ultimately, the
implementation of technological solutions using IRA funding.
1B. In light of the significant technology available, would your
department not agree that implementation the proposed rule should be
delayed, to instead consider pushing for the use of available
technologies that can better reduce the risk of vessel strikes without
jeopardizing vessel operator safety and coastal economies?
Answer 1B. As noted in my written testimony, North Atlantic right
whales are among the most imperiled species on the planet, with vessel
strikes and entanglement in fishing gear killing over 200 right whales
since 2011. The Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection
Act mandate action to prevent the extinction of this species and
further its recovery. In 2021, NMFS released an assessment of its
existing speed regulations, and while the assessment found that current
regulations have reduced vessel-strike related serious injuries and
mortalities of right whales, it also highlighted the need for
additional action. NOAA is exploring and investing in technological
solutions as part of our overall Road to Recovery efforts, but until
they are fully developed, evaluated, and implemented, an effective
vessel speed rule remains critical for the survival of this species.
Question 2. We in Congress have made significant investments in
broadband infrastructure funding through the IIJA. In particular, we
are dedicating $42.5 billion through NTIA's BEAD program to help close
the digital divide--an issue we're all too familiar with in West
Virginia. While BEAD was a record new investment, we know it the
dollars will stretch further if we align the rollout with previously-
approved broadband funding, such as the FCC's 5G fund.
2A. Can you discuss the work you and the FCC have done to ensure
that the BEAD money and prospective 5G Fund complement each other, so
they can have the greatest impact in closing the digital divide!
Answer 2. The National Telecommunications and Information
Administration's (NTIA's) Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD)
Program is focused on providing high-quality fixed broadband Internet
service to residential and business locations (Broadband Serviceable
Locations) in all U.S. States and territories, while the Federal
Communications Commission's (FCC's) 5G fund is focused on support for
mobile broadband Internet services. These programs are complementary
because consumers value high-quality fixed broadband Internet services
to their homes and businesses as well as the mobility provided by high-
quality mobile broadband Internet services. In the BEAD Program, we
expect Eligible Entities will use a mix of technologies, including
fixed wireless, to connect their unserved and underserved locations. In
addition, the BEAD Program Notice of Funding Opportunity recognizes the
unique characteristics of fiber to ``ensure that the network built by
the project can easily scale speeds over time to . . . meet the
evolving connectivity needs of households and businesses'' and
``support the deployment of 5G, successor wireless technologies, and
other advanced services.'' \1\ Driving more broadband, including fiber,
deeper into our communities supports both connecting more households to
broadband and advanced wireless services.
Question 3. In the recent tin mill dispute, the International Trade
Commission (ITC) rejected the Commerce Department's findings that tin
mill from several countries had injured domestic industry. In rejecting
injury and AD/CVD remedies, that ITC affectively shuttered the
Cleveland-Cliffs Weirton, West Virginia facility, which will result in
over 900 job losses primarily from West Virginia and Ohio. The ITC is
meant to be an independent, non-partisan body governed by an equal
number of Democrats and Republicans reflecting a diversity of views.
Currently, two Republican vacancies exist, and of the four active
commissioners, three are serving on expired terms.
3A. Do you agree that having a fully staffed and fully functioning
ITC is critical to protecting American businesses and workers?
Answer 3. The United States maintains a bifurcated trade remedies
system in which Commerce measures the amount of dumping and/or
subsidization. Concurrently, the U.S. International Trade Commission
(ITC), an independent agency, examines whether the U.S. industry has
been materially injured, or threatened with material injury, because of
dumped or unfairly subsidized merchandise. Commerce and ITC
determinations are made independently and are objectively determined
solely on the factual evidence on the record before each agency. Both
agencies' determinations are subject to litigation and remand orders
from the courts. While we cannot speak to the ITC's specific staffing
and workload, robust staffing for both Commerce and ITC is imperative
for a well-functioning trade remedy system that protects domestic
industry. Commerce has initiated 91 new AD/CVD investigations and is
enforcing 690 AD/CVD orders thus far in fiscal year 2024. This is a
historic workload for Commerce, and we continue to train and deploy all
available resources to defend U.S. industries and workers against
foreign competitors' injurious and unfair trade practices. As
Commerce's workload increases, the ITC will also likely have additional
workload to manage.
Question 4. As you are likely aware, the U.S. imposes anti-dumping/
countervailing (AD/CVD) duties on imported plywood from Vietnam that
contains Chinese components. I strongly support efforts to crackdown on
this transshipment of goods. Recently, a number of Vietnamese plywood
exporters were placed on the Commerce Department's ``blacklist'' for
failure to adequately respond to a Commerce Department questionnaire on
the presence of Chinese components. As a result, a number of U.S.
hardwood plywood producers became subject to an anti-circumvention
review and determined to owe millions in duties despite Commerce still
conducting an investigation. Seeing that this investigation is not
final, premature imposition of duties to the tune of millions of
dollars can seriously disadvantage American producers cooperating with
anti-circumvention investigations.
4A. Will you commit to not levying financial penalties on firms
until the anti-circumvention review process has reached finality?
Answer 4. As background, Commerce's administrative reviews are
separate from its circumvention findings that certain plywood products
from China, assembled/completed in Vietnam, are subject to duties. The
circumvention inquiries were finalized in July 2023 and resulted in
company and country-specific findings of circumvention. As a result, a
certification program was implemented to permit exporters and importers
from Vietnam to certify that their plywood is not produced using
Chinese materials and, therefore, not subject to these remedial duties.
Certain companies that did not cooperate with Commerce's request for
information were found ineligible to participate in the certification
program. Because this matter is in active litigation, Commerce cannot
discuss the circumvention case further.
As part of the ongoing review of the AD/CVD orders on hardwood
plywood from China, Commerce is allowing previously ineligible
companies the opportunity to demonstrate that they are not
circumventing the orders. Specifically, if companies cooperate with
Commerce's requests for information, and demonstrate that they can
adequately track their production and shipments of plywood, they will
be able to participate in the certification regime, meaning that they
would not be subject to duties during the pendency of the review. If
companies can demonstrate that their prior plywood shipments are not
completed in Vietnam using certain Chinese inputs, the estimated duties
collected thus far will be refunded after the final results of review,
which are anticipated in late November 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 117-58,
Sec. 60102(a)(2)(I) (2021).
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Chris Van Hollen
Question 1A. The Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and
Security is a small, but increasingly critical agency, whose work
developing the US export control protocols is growing in significance.
It's important that we prioritize this work and speak to its
significance in meeting our national security objectives.
How would reducing the BIS's budget hinder our capacity to
implement export controls and prevent us from stopping US investment
into key Chinese technologies?
Answer 1A. The 2025 President's Budget provides BIS with the
funding needed to meet its mission-critical objectives, as the pace of
technological development is not slowing, and the geopolitical threat
landscape is only becoming more complex. Without the funding in the
2025 Budget, BIS's ability to carry out its mission will be diminished
in the following areas:
--Information Technology (IT) Systems and Security.--Reductions in IT
investment will impair BIS's ability to incorporate all-source
data during the license application review process. This
includes critical data generated by both the U.S. Government
and the private sector. An efficient and secure IT
infrastructure is essential for timely and accurate
decisionmaking in export control processes.
--Data & Analytics.--Reductions in funding for data and analytical
tools will limit BIS's access to proprietary datasets and a
modern data analytics system. These tools are essential for
understanding critical supply chains and the intricacies of
entity-business relationships. Without these resources, BIS's
ability to make informed decisions regarding export controls
will be significantly hampered.
--Enforcement.--Budget reductions will result in fewer agents and
analysts both in the United States and abroad, thereby reducing
BIS enforcement outcomes, to include the number of:
transactions identified as possible violations; end-use checks
conducted abroad to determine the bona fides of foreign
parties, disposition of U.S. exports, and inform licensing
decisions; parties nominated for addition to the Entity List;
and investigations that can lead to criminal and/or
administrative sanctions to penalize violators and deter future
non-compliant behavior.
--Specialized, In-House Expertise.--Reductions will limit access to
experts across critical fields and contracts with national labs
and agreements with other relevant entities to provide
specialized access to up-to-date, cutting-edge technologies and
markets, as well as economics and supply chain management.
--Outbound Investment.--Reductions will limit BIS's ability to fully
implement its responsibilities under this program when it is
fully enacted. BIS, along with the International Trade
Administration, will be the primary bureaus responsible for
Commerce's work on the outbound investment program. BIS will
bring its technical expertise to bear in reviewing
notifications submitted under the outbound investment program.
Reductions in BIS resources will limit BIS's ability to provide
thorough analysis of the notifications to help Commerce and
Treasury determine how and whether to amend the scope of the
technologies subject to the program in the future as
technological threats evolve.
--Domestic and International Policy Engagement.--Reductions will
deteriorate the critical investments made in interagency policy
coordination and reduce support to multilateral partnerships
that arose in the wake of Russia's full-scale invasion of
Ukraine and that also support coordinated actions related to
the People's Republic of China's semiconductor industry. The
need for new bilateral and multilateral partnerships will
continue for the foreseeable future as the People's Liberation
Army aims to reinforce and consolidate its influence in
critical global supply chains that span the Middle East, the
African continent, Southeast Asia, and beyond.
Question 1B. Our economic competition strategy can be bolstered by
the US thinking about the end goal. We currently have mechanisms in
place to analyze, research, and expand investment screening, in order
to coordinate both internally and work with our allies to increase
multilateralism.
How can expanding upon the BIS's work not only improve the efficacy
of export controls as a security tool, but also demonstrate the merits
of these capabilities to our allies and potential future partners in
this realm?
Answer 1B.
--Enforcement Partnerships.--Effective enforcement protects U.S.
national security and ensures that companies, both domestic and
foreign, that invest in an export management program are not
placed at a competitive disadvantage by those that cut corners.
BIS Export Control Officers (ECOs) play a critical role in this
regard, identifying non-compliance that can predicate BIS
investigations as well as working with foreign companies to
enhance their compliance with U.S. export controls and building
capacity with government partners to enforce coordinated
controls. BIS's FY 2025 budget request includes the addition of
four ECOs to perform these functions and liaise with allies and
partners. These include making permanent our ECO positions in
Finland and Taiwan, critical partners in our effort to prevent
Russia and China from acquiring advanced U.S. technologies like
semiconductors and quantum compute capability, as well as
establishing new ECO positions in the Western Hemisphere to
enhance export control systems across Latin and South America
and safeguard U.S. technology from misuse (e.g., diversions of
firearms to support transnational criminal organizations) or
misappropriation by nation state adversaries like China, Iran,
and Russia whose trading relationships are increasing in the
region. These investments will increase export control
cooperation across the globe as well as protect U.S. national
security.
--Advanced IT Systems and Analytics.--Investing in advanced IT
systems and data analytics allows BIS to process and analyze
large volumes of data efficiently. This capability is crucial
for vetting parties to license applications, identifying
violations in real time, and evaluating the effectiveness of
export controls, thereby enhancing U.S. national security.
--Engaging Allies and Partners:
--Interagency and International Collaboration.--Expanding BIS's
efforts can enhance collaboration with other U.S. agencies
and international partners. Sharing best practices,
information, and technological resources enhance
implementation, enforcement, and alignment of export
controls. This cooperative approach not only improves
global security but also helps ensure a level playing field
for U.S. and allied industry.
--Showcasing Success Stories.--Through successful case studies and
transparent reporting, BIS can showcase how effective
export controls have prevented unauthorized transfers of
critical technologies. These success stories can be
powerful tools in convincing allies and potential partners
of the importance and effectiveness of administering and
enforcing export controls.
--Training and Support Programs.--In cooperation with other U.S.
Government agencies, such as the Department of State's
Export Control and Related Border Security (EXBS) program,
BIS can expand its training and support programs for
allies, helping them develop their own export control and
enforcement capabilities. This includes offering technical
assistance, training workshops, and sharing regulatory and
enforcement expertise. Such initiatives not only strengthen
global security but also foster closer cooperation between
the United States and its allies. Enhanced training
programs and technical support are essential for ensuring
that allies can effectively implement and enforce export
controls.
Question 2. The International Trade Administration plays a key role
in facilitating US competitiveness, and reducing its budget to FY22
levels is directly undermining our own efforts to compete in the
increasingly complex global economy. This is a threat to our nation's
industries and our efforts at remaining economically viable, building
out resilient supply chains, and expanding technological leadership in
collaboration with our trade partners.
Question 2A. How would cutting funding for the International Trade
Administration's supply chain resiliency efforts and outbound
investment analysis reduce US competitiveness? Would this make it
harder for US businesses to compete globally?
Answer 2A. Cutting funding to FY 2022 levels would have a
significant negative impact on ITA's ability to deliver not only on
both supply chain resiliency and outbound investment efforts that help
ensure that U.S. firms can compete in a global marketplace but would
also hinder ITA's broader export promotion efforts and the ability to
protect American businesses from unfair trade practices abroad.
ITA's supply chain resilience and outbound efforts are led out of
its Industry & Analysis business unit (I&A), which is working to serves
as the analytic engine for supply chain resilience policy within the
U.S. Government. Returning I&A to FY 2022 levels would roll back the
additional $10.85 million investment that the Congress made in I&A in
FY 2023, which we used to establish a small team for a first-of-its
kind Supply Chain Center (SCC) and to add staff responsible for
critical sectors and emerging technologies important to U.S. economic
security. It would jeopardize I&A's ability to fulfill its role in
implementing Executive Order 14105, ``Addressing United States
Investments in Certain National Security Technologies and Products in
Countries of Concern''. In addition, it would cut into I&A's
longstanding efforts to promote and protect U.S. businesses by helping
them compete in a global marketplace, grow their exports, and
strengthen the supply chains on which they depend.
Rolling back this funding would:
--Diminish our ability to invest in the data needed to engage in
proactive and predictive work on key supply chains that would
inform hundreds of billions of dollars of economic activity.
--Hinder our ability to provide the sector-specific industry
expertise needed to identify and mitigate supply chain risks
across crucial industries and to prevent U.S. private capital
from financing adversary advances in critical sectors that
undermine U.S. national security.
--Delay response times in identifying and resolving supply chain
issues impacting U.S. firms.
--Diminish our capacity to mitigate trade barriers impacting U.S.
companies' ability to export to foreign markets.
--Prevent the USG from more aggressively pursuing challenges and
leave United States industries more vulnerable to national
security threats from adversary strategy in supply chains.
--Diminish our ability to advise the White House, the Department of
Defense, Department of Energy and other US agencies on programs
and investments related to specific supply chains and to
proactively identify and address supply chain chokepoints for
emerging technologies.
--Hinder our ability to substantially expand industry engagement to
fulfill the emergent and ongoing need to proactively
communicate with industry representatives about the outbound
program and answer the high volume of questions they will have
as they seek to implement this new policy.
Question 2B. How does increasing the ITA's funding across multiple
sectors--including new ventures like the Office of Critical Minerals
and Metals--help bolster its work on strengthening US national security
objectives?
Answer 2B. Increasing the International Trade Administration's
funding across multiple sectors would greatly enhance its ability to
support U.S. national security objectives. For example, ITA's Industry
and Analysis (I&A) business unit is critical to U.S. Government supply
chain work because of its broad and deep sectoral expertise, its
analytical capacity, and its unique combined commercial and national
security perspectives, which are at the heart of understanding and
strengthening supply chains needed to advance U.S. economic prosperity
and security. Though I&A has recently increased capacity to cover
sectors that are critical to U.S. national security, including creating
the Office of Critical Minerals and Metals, we do not have enough
positions to provide the depth or breadth of coverage needed to
adequately enhance U.S. competitiveness and national security,
particularly for critical and emerging technologies.
I&A's sector and supply chain-related analyses are already used
across the U.S. Government to support national security objectives.
Additional funding would enhance I&A's ability to:
--Provide sectoral understanding and supply chain-related analyses
for Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
(CFIUS) cases, helping to ensure that foreign investments do
not jeopardize U.S. national security.
--Increase I&A's capacity to identify and advocate against
technology, legislation, and regulatory issues jeopardizes U.S.
technology leadership worldwide.
--Increase expertise in sectors targeted by the outbound program who
have the technical fluency and industry relationships to
understand and anticipate national security risks associated
with cutting-edge technologies--both those currently covered
and those that may need to be recommended to the President for
future inclusion.
--Counter efforts by foreign adversaries to exploit U.S.
technological breakthroughs and gain strategic leverage by
seeking control over key supply chains.
--Expand a cross-sector supply chain risk assessment framework to
inform U.S. Government decisions about which supply chains are
most vulnerable, why, and how they can be strengthened and
undertake additional proactive analysis to identify specific
supply chain risks and provide concrete and actionable policy
recommendations to get a head of potential vulnerabilities and
disruptions.
--Provide strategic guidance to other bureaus and offices of the
Department of Commerce, The White House, Department of Defense,
Department of Energy, the Department of State, and other
departments and agencies related to industry- and sector-
specific competitiveness issues as they disburse billions of
dollars in U.S. Government investments for supply chains.
Question 2C. How can Congress expand upon the work you're doing to
ensure that we're prioritizing supply chain security comprehensively?
Answer 2C. Congress's support for the 2025 President's Budget
request for $12 million for Industry and Analysis's (I&A) supply chain
efforts would allow ITA to expand and institutionalize the Supply Chain
Center and expand the cadre of industry experts working to support U.S.
competitiveness and national security. This would enhance I&A's
capability to provide sector-driven quick-turn analyses (e.g., related
to crises or potential contingency scenarios that threaten or cause
supply chain shortages); develop and implement a cross-sectoral supply
chain risk evaluation framework; increase ITA's ability to proactively
assess additional critical supply chains to develop U.S. Government-
wide sector-specific strategies; support Commerce's work to expand
domestic manufacturing related to critical supply chains; and provide
strategic and substantive leadership to international supply chain
coordination and collaboration initiatives. Moreover, as Congress
contemplates codifying additional supply chain efforts through the
Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act (H.R. 6571/S.4375), additional
resources may be required to further supply chain security.
In addition, supporting the 2025 President's Budget request for $5
million for I&A's outbound investment program would allow I&A to create
a new office to manage its investment security activities under both
the outbound and Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
(CFIUS) programs. The new staff will be used to create an outbound team
and to create positions in I&A's sector offices for the target sectors.
This would enhance I&A's ability to address national security
challenges related to threats to U.S. supply chains.
Question 3. As the Chair of the Financial Services and General
Government Subcommittee, I am currently reviewing the FCC's FY25 Budget
Request. The FCC has requested $30M to sustain the National Broadband
Map project. I understand that the success of the mapping project
directly impacts the effectiveness of the Broadband Equity, Access, and
Deployment (BEAD) Program that NTIA administers to help provide high-
speed Internet access to every American.
Secretary Raimondo, what impact would stopping funding for the
FCC's mapping effort through FY25 have on the NTIA's work?
Answer. The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program
and other Federal broadband grant programs are dependent on the Federal
Communications Commission's (FCC's) National Broadband Map and
Broadband Funding Map (BFM) to identify broadband availability and
federally funded broadband infrastructure projects. Without the FCC's
mapping efforts, there will not be a single source of data that enables
NTIA and other Federal agencies to identify locations that lack access
to reliable broadband, which could leave many people unconnected. In
addition, the information included in the BFM allows Federal agencies
to consider whether locations are already funded by another Federal
agency, which is important to limit potential duplicative Federal
funding. Finally, NTIA intends to leverage the data tracked in the BFM
to develop the annual Federal Broadband Funding report and dashboard,
as mandated by the ACCESS BROADBAND Act.
Question 4. In the Chesapeake Bay watershed, we have been hit hard
by invasive catfish and snakehead, which are decimating our blue crabs
and striped bass populations, among other species. We rely on the
partnership of NOAA Fisheries to protect the health of the Bay, and I
appreciate the work that's been done to date with the Chesapeake Bay
Program on invasive catfish and snakehead. NOAA can and should continue
to be a key resource in addressing fishery management challenges in the
Chesapeake by, for example, conducting comprehensive scientific and
technical studies on invasive catfish and snakehead in the Chesapeake
and through environmental education initiatives.
Secretary Raimondo, can I count on NOAA to work with us to advance
management efforts of invasive catfish and snakehead in the Chesapeake
Bay?
Answer. NOAA leads the Chesapeake Bay Program's Invasive Catfish
Workgroup, which coordinates activities and recommends actions to
implement the five policy objectives outlined in the Invasive Catfish
Policy Adoption Statement.\1\ The Workgroup emphasizes bay-wide
communication among jurisdictions and engagement of a broad group of
members representing the commercial and recreational fishery, seafood
processing industry, state agencies and the science community.
Recently, the NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office worked with fisheries
managers in the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Virginia
Marine Resources Commission, and the Potomac River Fisheries Commission
on a new commitment to develop management strategies to minimize the
spread and ecological impacts of invasive catfishes in the Chesapeake.
The management strategies will use the best available science and
consider the diverse interests of stakeholders, support ecosystem
health, and increase public awareness.
NOAA also coordinates effective management and recovery of
Chesapeake Bay species using ecosystem-based science to inform fishery
management decisions that cross state boundaries. We are committed to
working with jurisdictions through the Chesapeake Bay Program should
they identify actions for snakehead control/management.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://d38c6ppuviqmfp.cloudfront.net/channel_files/17972/
final_catfish_policy_git_1-24-12--(with_signatures).pdf.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Martin Heinrich
Question 1. Secretary Raimondo, foreign-owned semiconductor
fabrication companies already receive substantial direct and indirect
subsidies from the governments of the countries they are headquartered
in. American companies that receive funding from the CHIPS and Science
Act are thus at a competitive disadvantage with foreign companies who
receive similar awards, all else being equal. How is the Department of
Commerce factoring this in when determining its awards?
Answer. The CHIPS Program Office (CPO) is evaluating applications
based on the statute and the evaluation criteria listed in our funding
opportunity. The statute and the evaluation criteria direct CPO to
select projects--whether they are proposed by domestic or international
companies as long as the projects are in the United States--that
contribute towards the United States and its economic and national
security. Each applicant provides CPO with an incentive justification
in which they explain how the CHIPS Incentives requested will
incentivize the applicant to make investments in facilities and
equipment in the United States that would not occur in the absence of
the incentives. That narrative provides applicants an opportunity to
describe international alternatives and any perceived competitive
disadvantages, and CPO will consider any and all relevant factors in
its assessment.
Question 2. Secretary Raimondo, what steps are being taken by the
Bureau of Industry and Security to modernize its IT infrastructure and
data analytics capabilities to ensure that our export controls are
enforced as effectively as possible, and what additional Congressional
resources could be provided for this effort?
Answer. The 2025 President's Budget requests a $3.5 million
increase for BIS IT systems modernization and a $4 million increase for
technical expertise on technologies, markets, and trade tools. This was
an initial investment in positioning BIS for the future. Facing more
export license applications, more items subject to export controls, a
more sophisticated threat environment, and rapid advances in
technology, BIS's underlying IT systems have become antiquated,
constraining its ability to achieve an expanded, 21st- century mission.
Therefore, BIS requests full congressional support for its FY 2025
Budget Request to begin laying the groundwork for this mission critical
IT modernization effort.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Gary Peters
Question 1. Secretary Raimondo: In fiscal year 2024, I supported
the Department's budget request of $1.6 billion dollars for the Census
Bureau. This funding is critical for decennial Census preparations, key
surveys, and improvements to make the Census Bureau more efficient in
the long run.
The 2024 enacted level was significantly reduced--over $220 million
below the President's request, and $103 million below FY23 levels. The
Bureau is now in the middle of critical 2030 preparations that are
necessary to help ensure the census is accurate--and budget shortfalls
now can actually cause risks and increased costs down the line.
As you know, an accurate census is essential for all communities.
As you know, an accurate census is essential for all communities.
How is the reduced FY24 funding level currently affecting the Census
Bureau, in terms of reduced operations or trade-offs? I would
appreciate if the Commerce Department and the Bureau could send me a
documented impact statement about these FY24 funding effects.
Answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2024
FY 2023 vs FY 2024 Enacted Comparison by activity/subactivity: FY 2023 FY 2024 Enacted change
(dollars in thousands) Enacted Request from FY 2023
Enacted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Surveys and Programs (CS&P)............................. .............. .............. ..............
Current Economic Statistics..................................... $220,627 $215,997 $(4,630)
Current Demographic Statistics.................................. 109,373 112,503 3,130
CS&P Sub Total.................................................. 330,000 328,500 (1,500)
Periodic Censuses and Programs (PC&P)........................... .............. .............. ..............
Periodic Economic Statistics.................................... 184,126 162,254 (21,872)
Decennial Census................................................ 642,481 599,861 (42,620)
Geographic Support.............................................. 112,201 112,201 ..............
Enterprise Data Collection and Dissemination Systems............ 216,192 179,684 (36,508)
PC&P Sub Total.............................................. 1,155,000 1,054,000 (101,000)
Census Bureau Total..................................... 1,485,000 1,382,500 (102,500)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FY 2024 Current Surveys and Programs appropriation of $328.5
million is $1.5 million below the level provided in FY 2023. Within
this amount, the Census Bureau will be able to continue modernization
efforts of the Current Population Survey, conduct the Survey of Income
and Program Participation with an approximate 35,000 household sample,
continue to fund the High Frequency Data Program at FY 2023 levels,
provide marginal support for the Puerto Rico Economic Program, and
partially fund the Population Estimates Program. However, supporting
these initiatives requires the Census Bureau to reduce data collection
efforts for new construction statistics and reduce data purchases that
supplement data collection in areas such as retail sales.
The Periodic Censuses and Programs (PC&P) appropriation of $1.054
billion is $101 million lower than the FY 2023 enacted level. While
PC&P programs are able to leverage available carryover and largely
offset costs to maintain current critical operational needs, several
programs will experience operational impacts and delays. Specifically,
within the Decennial Census program, the 2030 Census will be able to
continue its research and planning efforts in FY 2024 using a
combination of FY 2024 appropriated funds and available carryover.
However, slowdowns in preparation and IT solution development introduce
increased readiness risk for the mid-decade field testing and contract
award schedule risks, some of which could be exacerbated without full
support for the FY 2025 President's Budget. In addition, failure to
receive the funds requested in FY 2025 could result in delays to the
development and testing planned for the 2026 Census Test until the 2028
Dress Rehearsal as well as delay expansion of planning and operations
staffing support for the 2030 Census. Within the Enterprise Data
Collection and Dissemination Systems program (EDCADS), Center for
Enterprise Dissemination Services and Consumer Innovation (CEDSCI)
development and system upgrade activities will be significantly
curtailed, and 24-hour operational support will have to be scaled back,
which could increase the risk of system instability and outages,
affecting user experience and public data search capabilities. EDCADS
will also have to significantly reduce the level of effort in the
Research and Applications initiative, which started in FY 2023,
delaying methodology development for moving major surveys from
interviewer-administered data collection, which is becoming cost
prohibitive, to self-administered data collection, and constricting the
Census Bureau's ability to contribute to the Department of Commerce's
evidence-building infrastructure and services across the Federal
government.
Question 2. I was proud to help champion and pass the CHIPS and
Science Act to boost American manufacturing, bring down the price of
consumer goods, and jumpstart U.S. competitiveness.
But another promise of the CHIPS and Science Act is good paying
jobs for Americans--including union jobs. Recent reporting from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics shows an $18 per hour median hourly wage for
operators or assemblers at semiconductor plants--the largest group of
workers.
The median hourly wage for semiconductor production technicians is
$23 per hour. These averages fall short of the six-figure salaries we
believe this industry can and should deliver in the U.S. as this
industry ramps up.
What is your Department doing to ensure the manufacturing jobs
created through this historic investment provide good wages and
benefits--and the opportunity for workers to join a union?
Answer. As part of the process of applying to receive CHIPS funds,
applicants must create and submit workforce plans for both their
construction and facilities workforce. In both of these plans, they
must detail how they plan to abide by Good Jobs Principles developed
jointly by the Departments of Commerce and Labor; one of these
principles is worker empowerment and representation.
While terms are subject to negotiation with applicants prior to
final award, DOC has developed a number of standard terms for
negotiation that it is prioritizing in the due-diligence process. These
include, but are not limited to, workforce safety standards and worker
safety committees, establishment of facility staffing targets, and
ongoing reporting, such as reporting on applicant's adherence to the
Good Jobs Principles. Noncompliance with Federal labor laws may affect
distribution of milestone payments.
Finally, on top of OSHA standards, the DOC team has worked to
ensure that companies are required to meet the highest recognized
safety standards for workers and that worker safety committees are
required in CHIPS awards. CHIPS will require that recipients of Federal
funding will review all chemical occupational exposure levels (e.g.,
OSHA, ACGIH, and NIOSH) and apply the lowest limit (most protective)
for each chemical used in its operations. The terms in the final award
documents about worker safety committees will mirror what is in DOC's
BEAD Program, which has been raised as a best practice by worker
advocates. These committees will give workers a voice in directly
shaping their workplace's safety policies.
Question 3. I want to thank you for all your hard work to curtail
the Chinese government's access to advanced semiconductor technology,
including through export controls.
As you well know, these efforts will be most successful if they are
multilateral. Otherwise, U.S. market share in China in sectors like
semiconductor tools may be easily supplanted by Dutch or Japanese
sources and fail to slow Chinese development of leading-edge
technology.
Can you discuss what steps your Department is taking to make export
controls multilateral to improve their effectiveness?
Answer. As outlined in the Export Control Reform Act of 2018
(ECRA), multilateral controls are more effective than unilateral
controls. The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) regularly consults
with foreign governments on export control matters, including within
the four multilateral export control regimes and on a bilateral basis.
As Congress noted in ECRA, ``[e]xport controls that are multilateral
are most effective[.]'' If other countries supply the same types of
items that the United States restricts, the U.S. controls will be less
effective for two reasons. First, the countries or parties of concern
will still acquire the items at issue. Second, U.S. technology
leadership will be threatened if foreign competitors can undercut U.S.
companies and earn revenue to invest in research and development. Thus,
coordinating with allies and partners helps keep a level playing field
for U.S. companies and helps to maintain U.S. technology leadership and
competitiveness, all of which contribute to national security, as
described in ECRA.
As demonstrated by BIS's unilateral action to issue its October 7
rules to restrict the PRC's access to advanced computing and
semiconductor manufacturing, the U.S. reserves the right to act when
our national security interests require it. However, we continue to
prioritize engagement with international partners and allies to bring
them on board and implement substantially similar controls.
Question 4. I appreciate the work Commerce has done in recent years
to place problematic biotechnology companies on the Entity List.
In February, I joined a bipartisan letter urging Commerce to
investigate the ties that WuXi AppTec and its subsidiary, WuXi
Biologics, have to the Chinese Communist Party and People's Liberation
Army and whether their integration into our healthcare system threatens
our national security.
Can you describe what steps your Department is taking to
investigate these companies?
Answer. As further detailed in our response to your February
letter, BIS and our interagency partners regularly review available
open-source, proprietary, and classified information to identify
parties of concern warranting addition to the Entity List, including
input from members of Congress. While BIS is unable to disclose
information related to potential interagency deliberations on any
particular entity, BIS has added certain entities in the People's
Republic of China (PRC) to the Entity List for activities contrary to
U.S. national security and foreign policy interests, including the
harvesting of genetic data for use in campaigns of repression against
minority groups, as well as for activities related to military
purposes.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
Question 1. In January 2024, Maine experienced back-to-back massive
coastal storms resulting in unprecedented damage to critical
infrastructure, including roads, piers, wharfs, bridges, causeways, and
docks. The destruction was catastrophic for commercial fishermen who
depend upon this infrastructure for their livelihoods. In response, we
included $10 million in the FY 2024 funding bill to help repair and
renovate infrastructure damaged in recent storms.
Could you please give me an update on how soon that urgent funding
will be obligated and out the door?
Answer. We received the application from the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission for this project. Our budgetary, environmental,
and administrative reviews of the application were completed on June
28, 2024 . Funds were obligated in September of 2024. All funds are
available to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.
Question 2. For almost twenty years, NOAA has supported
approximately 50 fishing vessels in the Northeast, as a way to engage
fishermen in collecting data to address fishery science and management
needs. This has been a very successful program, in part because these
hardworking men and women know the waters where they work and know when
and where to look for fish any given day.
Why does the President's budget request propose to cut the
cooperative fisheries research program by $10 million? Do you share my
concern that cutting fishermen out of the science that underpins
fishery management decisions will further the narrative that NOAA is
not relying on the best available expertise?
Answer. The Cooperative Research program will have approximately
$3.7M available, with which NOAA Fisheries would focus on maintaining
fisheries survey coverage by retaining current key cooperative fishery-
independent surveys across the country, and leveraging recreational and
commercial fishing vessels as survey platforms (in consultation with
regional stakeholders, Fishery Management Councils, and Commissions).
NOAA Fisheries is dedicated to taking cooperative partnership
approaches with the fishing industry, academia, and state partners, and
is utilizing Inflation Reduction Act funds to improve our overall
science and survey enterprise, and better address ecosystem changes
associated with climate change.
Question 3. Recently, the Department's Office of Inspector General
issued a Management Alert for the BEAD program that was based on
industry stakeholder feedback. It raised issues with the BEAD Notice of
Funding Opportunity's fiber preference driving up costs, the
possibility of overbuilding by excluding consideration of certain
spectrum or satellite, permitting delays, and workforce shortages.
Can you please give us an update on how NTIA is working through the
challenges outlined in the Management Alert, consistent with
congressional intent? In particular, how you are addressing the IG's
concerns about the fiber preference, and what oversight actions are you
taking to prevent overbuilding?
Answer. The National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) appreciates the Inspector General's (IG)
engagement to ensure our programs operate with the highest integrity.
The IG's Management Alert relayed industry challenges and policy
positions that have been known to NTIA and stakeholders since 2022.
Indeed, these issues--from the prohibitively high cost of extending
fiber optic networks to some remote areas to the need to streamline
permitting to readying the telecom workforce to meet the moment--have
been continually addressed by NTIA, including in the Broadband Equity,
Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program Notice of Funding Opportunity
(NOFO) released in 2022 that provides states the flexibility they need
to successfully implement the BEAD Program.
The BEAD Program NOFO recognizes there is no ``one-size-fits-all''
approach to broadband deployment given each Eligible Entity's unique
challenges, and NTIA will ensure that the Eligible Entities have
flexibility in identifying the technical solutions that meet the needs
of their communities. As a result, the NOFO creates room for all
strategies and allows applicants to propose to provide service over any
form of reliable broadband service, including terrestrial fixed
wireless over licensed spectrum in certain circumstances. It also
permits funding of projects utilizing alternative technologies,
including low-Earth orbit and unlicensed wireless service, for the
locations where the cost to deploy a ``reliable broadband service
technology'' exceeds the Eligible Entity's identified ``Extremely High
Cost Per Location Threshold.'' NTIA has worked, and continues to work,
with Eligible Entities, as they develop solutions to these and other
challenges that meet their unique needs.
NTIA works to limit duplication of funding through a variety of
mapping analyses and robust interagency coordination. We are committed
to overseeing the BEAD program to ensure that NTIA and Eligible
Entities are careful stewards of Federal funds and that those funds are
directed where they are most needed, consistent with the statute's
definitions and priorities.
Question 4. Section 301 tariffs have been imposed on China due to
that country's poor record on technology transfers and intellectual
property. It is important that in imposing these tariffs, however, we
consider the ramifications to our nation's small businesses.
For example, Hussey Seating is a Maine-based small business that
produces and sells spectator seating for venues across the United
States. This family-owned business must use a set of molds and tools
that are only produced in China. I support an exclusion process to
ensure that U.S. small businesses, like Hussey Seating, are not
unintentionally and unnecessarily harmed by efforts to crack down on
China's illegal trade practices.
How are you encouraging the USTR and the President to protect
American small businesses like Hussey Seating when it comes to Section
301 tariffs?
Answer. American small businesses are essential to our economy, and
the current Administration and Department of Commerce are committed to
supporting them. Over the course of the China Section 301 tariff four-
year review, 70 analysts from ITA lent their expertise to paint a
comprehensive picture of domestic production and supply chains. And,
over the summer, DOC staff thoroughly reviewed the public comments
collected by the Office of the United States Trade Representative
(USTR), including those from small businesses. Those comments were
instrumental in shaping our recommendations for the interagency.
Question 5. I am concerned about the Section 321 Loophole, or the
China Tariff Loophole, where by brands lower their import fees by re-
directing shipment through other countries, such as Canada and Mexico,
and trucking them into the United States. This allows them to avoid
certain duties and taxes by breaking apart their imports into smaller
bundles. This has created an unfair business landscape that
disadvantages U.S. manufacturers, like New Balance, which has three
factories in Maine.
What steps is the Department, along with other entities in the
Administration, taking to address this loophole?
Answer. The Department has been assessing the impact of Section 321
(``de minimis'') shipments on the textile, apparel, and footwear
industries, along with the availability of existing policy tools that
could be used to address the increase in de minimis shipments,
including from China. My team at Commerce understands the importance of
this issue to our domestic industries and will continue to solicit
views from stakeholders. Furthermore, the Biden Administration
recognizes the complexity surrounding de minimis shipments and is
working steadfastly across the interagency to address the matter.
Question 6. I was alarmed by reports last year that Iranian drones
used in Ukraine were built with numerous parts from American companies.
It is unacceptable that American-made technology could be used by
Tehran and its proxies to attack U.S. interests. I appreciate the
Department's efforts on this issue, including providing an advisory to
companies to help ensure they are not inadvertently supplying drone
components to Iran.
Please update the Committee on the Department's work to curb
illegal exports to Iran, particularly with regard to components that
could be used in systems to attack Americans. Does the budget request
provide the resources necessary to adequately enforce export
restrictions on Iran?
Answer. BIS is committed to preventing Iran and its proxies from
illicitly acquiring Export Administration Regulations (EAR) items
through aggressive enforcement of our controls. BIS uses all of the
tools at our disposal to identify illicit procurements and prevent such
efforts, including by working with U.S. companies to identify and not
fill orders as well as with law enforcement partners, such as Customs
and Border Protection, to detain shipments.
BIS and the Department of Justice also co-lead the Disruptive
Technology Strike Force, which prioritizes interagency enforcement
resources and authorities on efforts by nation state actors like Iran,
China, and Russia to illicitly acquire our most sensitive technologies.
Since the Strike Force was established in 2023, it has announced 24
publicly charged criminal indictments, including charging two Iranian
nationals in February 2024 with conspiring to export equipment used in
the aerospace industry to the Government of Iran, in violation of the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), in connection with
an alleged conspiracy to illegally export U.S. goods and technology
without the required licenses , as well as charging an individual in
August 2024 with violations related to the procurement of U.S.-
manufactured aircraft components, including components used on military
aircraft. BIS and our law enforcement partners will continue to
aggressively pursue enforcement actions against parties illicitly
exporting items to Iran.
A critical resource for our enforcement program is the end-use
check program, which identifies efforts of parties in third countries
to circumvent U.S. export controls involving Iran. For example, BIS
Export Control Officers (ECOs) are stationed in strategic transshipment
countries like Turkey, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates to
identify Iranian illicit procurements.
BIS's FY 25 budget requests to establish permanent funding for our
ECO positions in Taiwan and Finland, as these are critical locations,
given Taiwan's importance to the global semiconductor supply chain
ecosystem and Iran's reliance on U.S. and western semiconductor
technology, in addition to the strategic locations of Finland and the
Baltics on Russia's border. Iran's expanding military relationship with
Russia, such as an unmanned aerial vehicle co-production facility,
would benefit from transshipments of U.S. items across the European
Union.
Further, BIS will be able to counter Iran's efforts to grow
economic ties in the Western Hemisphere if BIS's FY 2025 request to
establish two new ECO positions in Central and South America are
funded. These two positions will monitor U.S. exports throughout the
region and identify diversion attempts. The actions of our ECOs
predicate law enforcement leads that are then aggressively investigated
by BIS Special Agents and can result in criminal and/or administrative
penalties or regulatory action such as additions to the Entity List.
Question 7. There has been a surge of foreign boycott activities
targeting Israel, such as Turkey's recent announcement that it will
impose trade restrictions on Israel. Let me be clear, the Boycott,
Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement seeks to stigmatize,
delegitimize, and isolate the state of Israel.
This discriminatory targeting of Israel is counterproductive to
achieving peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and damages U.S.
interests in promoting stability and prosperity in the region.
What is the Department of Commerce doing to combat foreign boycotts
of Israel, particularly with regard to Turkey's recent announcement?
Answer. Promoting on behalf of OMB BIS aggressively enforces the
antiboycott regulations against U.S. persons who take action to comply
with any unsanctioned foreign boycott imposed by a foreign country
against a country friendly to the United States, including Israel. BIS
has strengthened enforcement and compliance with these rules by raising
penalty amounts and by publishing a list of entities who have been
identified as having made a boycott-related request in reports received
by BIS. This Requester List, established in March 2024 and updated
quarterly, helps U.S. companies identify requesters of boycott-related
terms and conditions, thereby facilitating compliance with our
antiboycott regulations. It also has resulted in listed parties
providing attestations to BIS in order to be removed from the Requester
List affirming the removal of boycott-related terms and conditions and
undertaking, going forward, to cease imposing boycott-related
requirements and compliance therewith as a condition in commercial
documentation with U.S. persons, thereby eliminating boycott-related
requests at their source.
In addition, on May 14, 2024, following to Turkey's announcement
that it would suspend all trade with Israel, BIS issued an antiboycott
advisory. The advisory reminded all U.S. companies, wherever located,
that the Export Administration Regulations prohibit U.S. persons from
taking certain actions in furtherance of an unsanctioned foreign
boycott and require reporting to BIS of receipt of a boycott-related
request. In particular, U.S. companies operating in Turkey were
cautioned to be alert to any requests to refrain from importing or
exporting goods to or from Israel or to provide certification that the
goods are not of Israeli origin or do not contain Israeli components or
materials.
The Office of Antiboycott Compliance, through its Advice Line,
continues to counsel both U.S. companies and representatives of
companies in Turkey regarding their responsibilities under the Export
Administration Regulations.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
Question 1. Why did the Department of Commerce decide to cancel the
2024 Alaska longline survey instead of using survey contingency funds?
Answer. The 2024 Alaska longline survey has historically been
resourced through the sale of the catch (cost-recovery) to pay for
vessel charter costs estimated at $2.5 million per year. This supports
a 150 ft freezer vessel with 15 crew, 2 contracted biologists, and two
scientists for a 90-day survey. Due to inflationary operating costs and
market conditions for sablefish (the primary catch species), the vendor
has incurred economic losses in previous survey years and cannot
conduct the survey in FY 2024 without the risk of substantial economic
loss. The $2.5M cost of the Alaska longline survey exceeded the $1.0M
contingency fund provided as new appropriations in FY 2024. The
contingency funds were directed to support a $1.018M northwest
groundfish survey charter.
Question 2. Given the importance of marine surveys to the both the
health of the fish stocks and the fishing industry that relies on them,
how does NOAA propose to notify Congress and the public when a survey
is at risk, in order to give time for folks to react?
Answer. NOAA Fisheries is committed to communicating reductions in
survey efforts to Congress and the public as soon as possible, given
changing economic conditions and fleet operations.
NOAA Fisheries is engaged in a multi-year effort to strategically
respond to climate-driven changes in the environment, maintain fishery
survey operating efficiencies and modernization efforts, and mitigate
shifting survey needs. We continue to balance national priorities that
ensure sustainable seafood by prioritizing collection of critical
survey data: against a challenging economic environment where the
rising cost of surveys and changing market conditions demand strategic
pivots within survey activities to ensure critical data collection
needs can be met. This year, the Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC)
will redesign and reprioritize effort in several of its surveys, while
advancing the use of modern methods and technologies to more
efficiently collect data and accomplish its research mission to support
sustainable fisheries management.
In the short term, NOAA Fisheries and the AFSC have identified ways
to help mitigate the impact of survey effort reduction and data loss
while supporting long-term strategic plans for responding to changing
ocean conditions. This includes reprioritization to reduce sampling
effort in some surveys while working to preserve data quality and
implementing some measures over several years. In the long term, our
broader survey modernization efforts, including the use of new
technologies and survey methods, will lead to greater efficiency,
flexibility and cost effectiveness in providing fisheries, ecosystem
and climate data to better support adaptive fisheries management. We
will continue to update Congress and the public as these survey
modernization efforts are implemented.
Question 3. Is NOAA's survey modernization effort going to provide
long-term planning and contingency plans for marine surveys given the
number of factors that affect their success (sufficient labor, funding
sources)?
Answer. Yes, NOAA's ship recapitalization and maintenance plans
will provide long-term planning mitigation for marine fisheries
surveys. In FY 2025, NOAA requested a $41M increase to marine
operations and maintenance to deliver an additional 1,123 days at sea
for a total of 2,840 days at sea to support NOAA's missions, including
fisheries research. NOAA ship Oscar Dyson will undergo a year-long mid-
life repair straddling FY 2026 and 2027. This will extend the service
life for approximately 20 years and upgrade technology and
capabilities. Planning is well underway to ensure the missions from
ships undergoing mid-life repair periods will still be completed,
either aboard other vessels in the NOAA fleet or via charters. NOAA is
also currently examining detailed designs and construction plans for
new Class C Fisheries Coastal Science vessels for the NOAA fleet to
replace the capabilities of 3 ships (Oscar Elton Sette, Gordon Gunter
and Oregon II) that will reach the end of their service lives between
2028-2033.
In addition to NOAA ships, NOAA Fisheries relies on a diversity of
sampling platforms for its data acquisition enterprise, including
charter vessels, state-owned vessels, small boats, uncrewed systems,
and other emerging technologies. NOAA Fisheries will rely on these
platforms to sustain, if not expand, its priority survey missions.
Question 4. Given the Department of Commerce's FY25 budget, which
requests a 3% increase for Fisheries Science and Management, but a 27%
increase for National Marine Sanctuaries and Marine Protected Areas and
a 141% increase for NOAA to expand offshore wind permitting, how does
this budget reflect ``NOAA's strong commitment to seafood sector
resilience?''
Answer. Offshore wind development continues to rapidly expand and
represents a significant new use of our marine waters, requiring
thorough scientific and regulatory review under NOAA's statutory
responsibilities. Currently, there are 35 active commercial energy
leases on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf across three major ocean
regions, including the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf of Mexico.
Additional lease sales are anticipated via BOEM's five-year leasing
plan, including additional leases along the continental U.S.
coastlines, off the U.S. Territories, and Hawaii. Specific to resource
needs in FY 25, BOEM plans to hold 4 wind energy lease sales in the
remainder of CY 2024 (Central Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico--Round 2, Gulf
of Maine, and offshore Oregon). In light of this, NOAA Fisheries
expects a growing demand for our resources and expertise for offshore
wind activities. NOAA remains committed to the Administration's goal of
responsibly deploying offshore wind while protecting biodiversity,
promoting ocean co-use, and sustainably managing our Nation's marine
trust resources. The FY 2025 budget reflects this commitment, and the
request includes additional funds to minimize impacts to ocean
resources, critical habitats, and fishing opportunities throughout the
planning, siting, development, and operational stages for offshore
wind, while addressing and facilitating mitigation of impacts to our
scientific surveys. The emphasis and expertise NOAA Fisheries brings to
considerations of fishing and ocean co-use to inform BOEM's leasing and
project decisions is particularly important to supporting
sustainability of U.S fisheries and seafood production during this
period of rapid change in use of the Outer Continental Shelf.
Within the FY 2025 budget, NOAA Fisheries is also undertaking a
range of activities in support of the seafood sector under NOAA's
National Seafood Strategy \1\, for example: conducting an independent
evaluation of the current state of Alaska fishing and seafood,
communicating the sustainability of US seafood, identifying
vulnerabilities to seafood supply chains in order to enhance fisheries'
resilience to future market or supply disruptions, providing loans to
industry though the Fishery Finance Program, and providing technical
assistance to USDA for domestic seafood purchases.
Question 5. What can the Department of Commerce do to document the
total costs and market barriers facing domestic seafood producers,
compared to those of foreign fisheries, and then develop a strategy to
help US producers compete against cheap foreign seafood in US and
global markets?
Answer. NOAA Fisheries' Office of International Affairs, Trade, and
Commerce (IATC) has increased NOAA's level of engagement in interagency
coordination, stakeholder outreach, and strategic planning on seafood
trade policy since establishing a Trade and Commerce Division in 2022.
Through this, NOAA has sought to build new capacities to engage on
market access, export promotion, and trade negotiations, including:
working to improve the competitiveness of the U.S. seafood industry,
and enhance stakeholder outreach, including drafting a seafood chapter
included in the 2023 Department of Commerce National Export Strategy
(NES) to help guide future action on seafood trade policy--this is the
first time a chapter on seafood has been included in the NES. The NES
seafood chapter (chapter 9) identifies factors impeding effective U.S.
Government engagement on seafood trade in support of U.S. stakeholders
and recommends ways to improve interagency coordination, including
creation of a working group focused on the seafood sector to improve
collaboration and efficiency in addressing seafood trade concerns and
policy initiatives. The NES chapter also proposes actions to facilitate
trade, increase access to foreign markets, improve outreach to
stakeholders, enhance trade data and analysis, and conduct trade
promotion activities to support the U.S. seafood industry. NOAA also
advances U.S. seafood competitiveness and conservation objectives
through bilateral and multilateral trade agreements and at
international organizations.
Recently NOAA's Seafood Inspection Program also revised the
Approved Establishment requirements to include a Quality Management
System for all participants. The Seafood Inspection Approved
Establishment program is designed to reduce inspection efforts by
partnering with industry participants and ensuring their responsibility
for food safety, wholesomeness, economic integrity, and quality
concerns for the system and products produced at the establishment. The
direct result of the revised requirement will be higher quality seafood
from US producers that will make them more competitive in both the
domestic and global market.
Our new National Seafood Strategy identifies what we, as an agency,
can do to better support the seafood sector given the many concurrent
stressors. We are committed to this work and in the midst of developing
an implementation plan identifying activities within our current
capacity. It will focus on the socio-economic and industry services
part of our work. For example,
(a) To better describe key trends and challenges, NOAA Fisheries is
conducting an independent evaluation of the current state of
Alaska fishing and seafood. This effort will result in a
``snapshot'' analysis of the market, economic, and geopolitical
drivers affecting Alaska seafood production and trade and the
effects on Alaska seafood businesses and communities which we
will share and use to inform future efforts.
(b) This past year, NOAA Fisheries identified economic and social
science analyses to be undertaken as part of the Climate and
Ecosystems Fisheries Initiative (CEFI) climate change scenario
work. These CEFI work products, due in 2-3 years' time, will
provide critical information on industry costs and
infrastructure and labor needs, as well seafood demand models
for some key commercial species.
(c) To support industry competitiveness, the Saltonstall-Kennedy
grant program provided two grants totaling $530,000 to Alaska
in FY 2023 for the promotion, development and marketing of U.S.
Fisheries, and Alaska continues to compete well in this annual
grant program open to industry, academia, and state, local, and
Indian Tribal governments to help promote U.S. fisheries by
assisting the fishing community to address marketing and
research needs. We recently announced the funding of the FY
2024 grants, of which $1.4M is going to three projects in
Alaska.
Question 6. What can the Department of Commerce do to incentivize
reinvestment and modernization in our fishing fleets and processing
plants, and make sure these programs are effectively resourced and
utilized?
Answer. There are some programs already in place within the
Department of Commerce to assist the industry in the reinvestment and
modernization of our fishing fleets and processing capacity. Some
aspects of these programs would require congressional direction or
action to increase available resources and improve utilization to
better support a more efficient and competitive U.S. seafood industry.
The Fisheries Finance Program (FFP), funded by loan authority from
Congress of $150M in traditional loans and $24M for individual fishing
quota (IFQ) loans annually, provides long-term loans to the fishing
industry and aquaculture industries. NMFS Financial Services Division
(FSD) reports that over the last 10 years FFP has approved 238
traditional loan applications for $484.7M. While these loans can be
used for many purposes such as the modernization of fishing vessels and
facilities. The FSD also administers the Capital Construction Fund
(CCF), which incentivizes fishermen to improve the fishing fleet by
enabling fishermen to construct, reconstruct, or, under limited
circumstances, acquire fishing vessels with pre-tax dollars.
The Saltonstall-Kennedy (S-K) Grant Competition \2\ may provide
grants of up to $500k. Congressionally directed priority funding areas
include promotion and market development and projects to develop
infrastructure and capacity building. The scope of this program could
be revisited with congressional direction to more explicitly meet the
objectives of incentivizing reinvestment and modernization of our
fishing fleet and processing industries, as well as supporting research
and development into processing technologies. Additionally, the
National Marine Fisheries Service participates in the Small Business
Innovation Research \3\ program. This program is targeted toward small
businesses and provides funds to support research and development
through multiple phases of the R&D process.
Question 7. What is the Department of Commerce doing to better
integrate its seafood producer support with USTR, USDA, and all the
other agencies that must better support the US seafood supply chain?
Answer. NOAA Fisheries' Office of International Affairs, Trade, and
Commerce (IATC) established the Trade and Commerce Division to
consolidate NOAA Fisheries' trade monitoring programs, coordinate
efforts on seafood trade and commerce policy, address market access
challenges, consult with industry stakeholders, and to improve U.S.
seafood trade analysis and reporting. NOAA Fisheries staff participate
as subject matter experts in interagency working groups and USTR-led
Trade Policy Staff Committees (TPSCs) to shape U.S. trade policy
positions related to trade agreements, guide U.S. positions on
fisheries subsidies at the World Trade Organization (WTO), and lead
U.S. engagement on fisheries at the Organization for Economic Co-
operation and Development (OECD).
IATC works with Federal partners and others to identify and develop
U.S. seafood markets and put more U.S. seafood on U.S. plates,
particularly for the underserved. The Seafood Inspection Program works
frequently with the USDA to increase industry's use of the Grade A
standard, and increase purchases of seafood for school lunches and
other distributions in the United States. USDA has announced they will
purchase more seafood in the coming years with a requirement for USDC
Grade A to aid in the increase of consumption of domestic seafood. The
Seafood Inspection Program is working with USDA to develop more
specifications for additional seafood products such as surimi to be
purchased.
Our new National Seafood Strategy identifies what we, as an agency,
can do to better support the seafood sector given the many concurrent
stressors. Coordinating with and leveraging resources of other Federal
agencies, including USTR and USDA, are critical to the strategy. For
example,
(a) Staff engage informally with USDA, DOT, EDA and others to better
understand overlapping priorities and resources relevant to the
seafood sector. We are able to provide technical support to and
coordinate with USDA as they evaluate how to integrate U.S.
seafood production into national food policy strategies and
USDA programs designed to support domestic food production.
(b) Our Seafood Inspection Program provides technical assistance to
USDA in their food purchasing programs.
Our International Trade and Commerce program provides technical
assistance to USTR and other Federal agencies for use in trade
negotiations or other relevant international seafood issues
Question 8. What--if anything--is the Administration and Department
of Commerce doing to encourage other G7 countries to impose similar
sanctions on Russian seafood?
Answer. Following meetings with representatives of the Alaska
seafood industry and the Alaska Congressional delegation, the
Department of Commerce provided information to the Administration in
support of the Administration's successful efforts to include a
statement in the recent G7 communique opposing Russia's
``environmentally unsustainable and unfair trading practices regarding
fish and seafood.''
Question 9. Does the Department of Commerce see encouraging other
G7 countries to impose similar sanctions as something that would be a
priority under NOAA's National Seafood Strategy?
Answer. The Department of Commerce recognizes the importance of
working with our partners, including with the G7 countries, to achieve
the goals of the National Seafood Strategy. One of those goals is to
``foster access to domestic and global markets for the U.S. seafood
industry'' by promoting fair seafood trade through combating illegal,
unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and related harmful fishing
practices along with unfair trade practices around the world and by
expanding access to foreign markets for U.S. seafood. Advocating for
the expansion of seafood import restrictions aligns with those goals.
Unified and effective import restriction actions taken by the United
States and its G7 allies are important to counter Russia's unfair trade
practices and support the U.S. seafood industry.
DOC's NOAA and ITA bureaus will work with the interagency to raise
this issue with trade counterparts, as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/s3/2023-08/2023-07-NOAAFisheries-
Natl-Seafood-Strategy-final.pdf.
\2\ https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/grant/saltonstall-kennedy-grant-
competition.
\3\ https://techpartnerships.noaa.gov/sbir/about-sbir/.
______
Question Submitted by Senator Jerry Moran
Question 1. We continue to have significant trade challenges with
the PRC with regards to U.S. farmers losing market access and facing
retaliatory actions aimed at our agricultural products. With American
farmers being shut out of the Chinese market, there is a growing need
to expand American agricultural exports to different markets.
Fiscal year (FY) 2024 provided $3 million to support ITA's National
and Regional Rural Export Centers, including $1.5 million specifically
for the National Rural Export Center in Fargo, ND. This funding was
provided to help rural businesses expand and grow in foreign markets.
Question 1A. What is the Department and ITA doing to prioritize
expanding international trade opportunities for rural businesses and US
farmers? What is the Department doing to protect agricultural exports
when the agricultural sector is too frequently the first to get hit by
retaliatory tariffs from China?
Answer 1A. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Foreign Agriculture
Service (FAS) is the primary U.S. Government agency supporting U.S.
farmers exporting agricultural products. ITA's trade specialists
regularly collaborate with FAS and are dedicated to enhancing the
global competitiveness of U.S. companies that support the food and
agriculture value chain, including farm equipment, machinery,
restaurant equipment, and food packaging.
ITA's U.S. & Foreign Commercial Service uses its presence in 127
international and 106 domestic locations to help foster new business
relationships and expand opportunities for U.S. companies through
market intelligence and targeted trade promotion programming. In FY
2024, ITA impacted $506 million in U.S. agribusiness trade and assisted
over 2,300 U.S. clients to export to global markets through export
counseling services, matchmaking services, and specialized virtual and
in-person trade promotion programming. ITA regularly partners with
private sector trade show organizers to support export programming for
U.S. companies at many of the top agribusiness trade shows in the U.S.
and around the world, such as the National Restaurant Show, Big Iron,
PACK Expo (Packaging & Processing Association's event), International
Production & Processing Expo (IPPE), Natural Products Expo West (NPEW),
Nampo Harvest Day Expo (NAMPO), Expo Agro Futuro (agribusiness show in
Colombia), and others.
In FY 2023, ITA's commitment to the important work of the Rural
Export Centers (REC) was underscored by establishing a full-time,
dedicated National REC Director position to oversee, manage and grow
the REC's work. Following designated appropriations in FY 2023, eight
new regional RECs were created to complement the National REC in Fargo,
ND, including: Upper Midwest REC (Fargo, ND); Ohio Valley REC
(Louisville, KY); Southwest REC (Midland, TX ); Pacific Northwest REC
(Boise, ID); Appalachian REC (Charleston, WV); Midwest REC (Des Moines,
IA); Southern REC (Jackson, MS); and the West REC (Las Vegas, NV). The
strategic placement of rural-focused Trade Specialists in existing U.S.
Commercial Service Field Offices near large rural areas enables ITA to
bring the full suite of customizable trade solutions and programs to
reach more rural companies. The REC launched with four market research
services and has continued to innovate and develop new products
including due diligence reports, website globalization services,
initial market viability checks, and export education webinars that
ensure sustainable export growth for rural companies.
ITA has previously raised agricultural market access issues with
the Chinese government during high level bilateral talks, brought
agribusiness companies on trade missions to help them enter/expand
their business in the Chinese market, and was planning an agribusiness
road show. These activities were halted in July 2018 when the previous
Administration imposed tariffs on a wide range of Chinese products and
China responded with retaliatory tariffs on American goods. The COVID-
19 pandemic that started in late 2019 restricted the Commerce
Department's activities and programs even further. ITA could consider
doing a road show in the agribusiness sector in China in the future
under the right circumstances.
Question 1B. Can you please give us an update on ITA's plans for
the Rural Export Center program, to include planned or completed
outreach to relevant stakeholders?
Answer 1B. ITA expanded its Rural Export Center (REC) initiative to
a nation-wide program leveraging the model and successes established in
Fargo, ND, with the original REC. Utilizing the $1.5 million included
in the FY2023 appropriations bill provided to `support rural export
centers,' Global Markets (GM) established eight (8) new Regional RECs
across the United States. The eight Regional RECs and the National REC
work in a collaborative fashion, including annual strategic planning
meetings and bi-weekly coordination meetings, to ensure this national
program delivers export promotion products and services to rural
clients across the country. The National REC, located in Fargo, ND,
specializes in conducting customized market research designed to guide
rural U.S. companies toward the most opportune exporting markets. The
eight Regional RECs conduct rural outreach in their respective
territories to ensure that GM is reaching rural companies and educating
them on the services and solutions of the Rural Export Center and the
Commercial Service to help increase exports from rural America.
For Regional REC location determinations, GM utilized key market
parameters, such as rural population rankings, rural Salesforce data
and export values within non-metro areas while capitalizing upon
existing support capacity, such as collocation with existing U.S.
Export Assistance Centers (USEAC) and rural stakeholder networks. The
new regional RECs include the Upper Midwest REC (Fargo, ND, which is
co-located with the National REC); Ohio Valley REC (Louisville, KY);
Southwest REC (Midland, TX); Pacific Northwest REC (Boise, ID);
Appalachian REC (Charleston, WV); Midwest REC (Des Moines, IA);
Southern REC (Jackson, MS); and the West REC (Las Vegas, NV).
ITA initiated rural stakeholder outreach through REC ribbon cutting
ceremonies to emphasize our support to rural business communities and
the cooperation across the Federal, state, and local trade ecosystems.
The ribbon cutting ceremonies included more than 200 stakeholders and
were held in partnership with local congressional offices and trade
partners to amplify our collective resources for the benefit of rural
exporters. ITA will continue to consult with District Export Councils,
whose members include key rural stakeholders at each REC location, to
help inform and guide the work of the RECs.
The new national footprint of RECs has enabled ITA to reach and
educate rural companies more broadly. In the first 6 months of FY 2024,
the Regional RECs have worked as a coordinated national team to provide
export counseling and promote REC services to over 635 companies. The
Regional RECs and the National REC in Fargo are collaborating to
implement an aligned strategy towards the cultivating, educating, and
resourcing of more rural small businesses to support their success in
reaching markets overseas.
Question 2. Through export controls policy gaps and third-country
circumvention, Russia continues to import the materials necessary to
sustain their military operations in Ukraine. In addition, China
continues to violate U.S. export control regulations as seen by the
growing capabilities with the Semiconductor Manufacturing International
Corporation (SMIC) and Huawei. These failures demonstrate the larger
inability of the U.S. to restrict technology flow to bad actors.
Commerce should take the necessary steps to sanction Huawei and SMIC
and block all U.S. exports to those companies. Recently, your
Department announced that it was ending licenses for two US companies
to provide semiconductors to Huawei.
Ending these licenses is a good start, but why did these licenses
exist in the first place, and why does the Commerce Department
continues to grant licenses that allows US tech to go to China? What
can Commerce do to close the loop holes in our export control policies
to stop the flow of technology into Russia?
Answer. Both SMIC and Huawei are subject to additional export
restrictions by virtue of their placement on the BIS Entity List. We
continue to assess, in cooperation with our interagency partners, the
licensing policies applicable to these entities.
With respect to Russia controls, the Department of Commerce
continually reviews and enhances our controls to ensure they advance
U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives. In FY 2022, we
published 8 regulations imposing export restrictions on Russia in
response to its war against Ukraine and in FY 2023, we published an
additional 15 regulations expanding the scope of these restrictions.
Importantly, these controls are implemented in coordination with 38
additional governments participating in the Global Export Controls
Coalition (GECC), which enhances their effectiveness. In addition to
controls on items subject to Commerce jurisdiction when destined to
Russia or Belarus or to Russian or Belarusian military end users
wherever located, including a wide range of foreign produced items made
with U.S. software, technology, or production equipment, we have also
leveraged the Entity List to restrict exports to entities supporting
Russia's military or defense industrial base. There are currently over
1,000 entities in Russia listed on the Entity List, including nearly
700 added since the beginning of the Biden Administration. Over 250
entities have been added in third countries related to Russia backfill
or evasion activities, including over 80 entities in the People's
Republic of China (PRC).
Our export controls are frustrating Russia's military ambitions by
increasing costs and delays and reducing equipment quality. Once a
major arms exporter, Russia is increasingly unable to meet its
heightened wartime demand in the face of shrinking supply. Based on our
analysis of Russian economic data, Russia suffered a $5 billion gap in
the critical items it likely sought and what it was able to import in
2023, considering the increased costs it has been forced to pay and the
amounts needed to sustain its long war across a 620-mile front. What
Russia is obtaining is not cutting-edge, but commercial-grade EAR99
items, many of which are no longer in production and have been in
circulation in second-hand microelectronics markets outside the United
States for years. Finally, Russia is paying more for what it does get.
Based on the same analysis, Russia was forced to pay over 135% more on
average for microchips after the invasion than it did in the preceding
years, 320% more for advanced GECC-origin machine tools via the PRC and
Tuerkiye, and over 210% more to smuggle critical U.S.-origin items
through third countries.
Russia is a determined adversary and relies on circumvention to
obtain the items it needs through illicit trade networks, often
established in ostensibly neutral jurisdictions. BIS will continue to
list entities, engage with partner and fence-sitter governments, and
engage with U.S. and foreign companies to identify and disrupt hidden
Russian procurement networks.
Question 3. For the past 2 years, Chinese solar companies have
circumvented U.S. trade laws by exporting solar panels tariff-free
through other Southeast Asian counties. As part of the current
moratorium on tariffs, Commerce and CBP were supposed to ensure all
panels that come in during the moratorium are ``utilized'' in a project
by December of this year. We know there is now a glut of oversupply of
cheap Chinese solar panels stockpiled in the U.S. that will have a
devastating impact on investments we have made in our domestic solar
manufacturing industry if Commerce does not enforce the utilization
requirements that are part of the moratorium.
How will Commerce track the utilization requirements that are
outlined in the moratorium? If utilization requirements are not met,
what is Commerce doing to ensure these Chinese panels are subject to
tariffs? With a record number of new antidumping and countervailing
duty investigations being filed, what is Commerce doing to ensure the
office of Enforcement and Compliance has the expertise and staff to
enforce our existing tariff laws are enforced?
Answer. With respect to utilization requirements, importers are
required to accurately certify to U.S. Customs and Border Protection
that the imported solar cells and/or solar modules covered by
Commerce's circumvention determination will be utilized and maintain
sufficient documentation supporting the facts to which the importer
certified. Parties that falsify such certifications will be in
violation of U.S. law (including, but not limited to, 18 USC section
1001) that imposes criminal sanctions on individuals who knowingly and
willfully make materially false statements to the U.S. Government.
Moreover, failure to substantiate the claims made in the certifications
may result in the importer being required to post antidumping duty and
countervailing duty cash deposits on the entries in question, and the
importer being precluded from participating in the certification
process. For additional information, please see Commerce's Solar
Proclamation FAQ page.\1\
The International Trade Administration's Enforcement and Compliance
(E&C) unit is fully committed to our mission of defending U.S.
industry, including the U.S. solar industry, against illicit trade
practices like unfair pricing and government subsidies by administering
U.S. trade remedy laws to ensure that domestic industries can compete
on a level playing field.
Just in the first 8 months of FY 2024, E&C has already initiated 91
new AD/CVD investigations and is administering 690 AD/CVD orders--a
record number. Based on current trends, we project that we will be
enforcing nearly 850 AD/CVD orders by FY 2026. As you mentioned, our
new initiations this year include antidumping and countervailing duty
investigations on imports of solar cells and modules from Vietnam,
Thailand, Malaysia, and Cambodia. We will release our preliminary
determinations in these investigations later this year. E&C is nearly
fully staffed under FY 2024 appropriations, but it is critical that E&C
receive sufficient funding to continue vigorous enforcement of the U.S.
trade laws as the volume of petitions and orders continues this record
growth. We continue to train and deploy all available resources to
defend U.S. industries and workers against foreign competitors'
injurious and unfair trade practices.
Question 4. The recent Commerce rule that limits the legal export
of firearms and ammunition threatens U.S. jobs and small businesses.
Question 4A. Do you share my concerns for the impact this rule
could have on small businesses that have broken no laws?
Answer 4A. The April 30, 2024, interim final rule ``Revision of
Firearms License Requirements,'' 89 FR 34680 (``Firearms Rule''), makes
changes to our licensing process for exports, reexports, and transfers
of firearms and related items that are necessary to protect U.S.
national security and further U.S. foreign policy.
The Department identified instances in which lawfully exported
firearms were diverted in a manner that threatens our national security
and foreign policy objectives. In our own hemisphere, legally exported
firearms have been diverted to malign actors that use them to create
regional instability, traffic drugs, and abuse human rights. The
Firearms Rule is tailored to identify and restrict exports of firearms
and related items that threaten U.S. national security and foreign
policy interests, while allowing exports of firearms and related items
that don't threaten U.S. national security or foreign policy interests.
The Firearms Rule is first and foremost focused on safeguarding
U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. BIS carefully
considered the economic impact of the rule, and as a result, the rule
is tailored to identify and restrict firearms exports that threaten
U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. BIS's intent is
not to disrupt lawful commerce that is consistent with national
security and foreign policy interests.
Question 4B. What is the Department doing to ensure small and
medium sized companies that are the backbone of U.S. manufacturing are
not severely impacted by this unjustified exercise of regulatory
authority? Do you share my concern that in the absence of access to
U.S. made firearms and ammunition, demand will shift to our adversaries
in Russia and China, who do not share our concern with denying access
to bad actors?
Answer 4B. See answer above.
The Department has taken numerous, proactive steps to ensure that
industry has clear guidance on compliance with the new requirements.
These steps include posting a Frequently Asked Questions document on
the BIS website, which will be updated as new common questions arise;
the creation of a dedicated email inbox ([email protected]) to
help quickly triage firearms-related questions; and participation in
multiple industry events to describe technical changes and answer
questions, including an overview briefing by Assistant Secretary for
Export Administration Thea Kendler to an industry association event
hosted by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) soon after the
release of the rule, a recording of which is publicly available.
In addition to these new steps, BIS conducts normal engagement with
exporters through email and phone assistance, as well as standard
outreach materials describing updates to BIS's regulations prepared by
BIS's Office of Exporter Services. BIS will continue to provide
technical assistance to exporters on the firearms rule.
BIS also sought public comments on the rule until July 1, 2024.
Reviewing public comments is an important and valued part of the
rulemaking process, and BIS will address concerns raised through
dedicated outreach, issuing guidance, or updating the regulations as
appropriate.
With respect to potential Russian and Chinese backfill, the
Department reiterates its commitment to combatting the diversion and
misuse of US firearms by bad actors across the world, while allowing
the export of firearms to end users who do not present national
security or foreign policy risks. The Department will not engage in a
race to the bottom with Russia and China to sell U.S. firearms to
criminals and cartels.
Question 5. I remain concerned about China's aggressive pursuit of
trade deals around the world at our expense. As we sit on the
sidelines, China offers other nations better market access for their
products and continues to build up economic ties with critical
partners.
What is the Department and ITA doing to expand Commercial Services
Offices around the world? Why is ITA's Global Markets business unit
restructuring its global footprint to focus on the highest priority
markets while China has commercial services representatives in nearly
every country on Earth, the US is not even present in half?
Answer. ITA has sought to expand its U.S. and Foreign Commercial
Service presence overseas in both its FY 2023 and FY 2024 budget
requests. In the 2024 President's Budget, the Department requested
significant funding to increase the Global Markets presence to compete
with China and other threats, particularly in Asia, the Middle East and
Africa, and the Western Hemisphere.
With FY 2023 appropriations, ITA's Global Markets was able to open
three new offices: Cote D'Ivoire, Guyana, and Zambia. However, to
effectively respond to the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 and
resulting budget levels for Fiscal Years 2024 and 2025, ITA must better
allocate its scarce resources in a manner that gives meaningfully
greater international coverage and places officers in critical markets
that currently lack a Global Markets presence. To this end, within its
FY 2025 budget request, ITA has requested funding that will allow the
opening of one new overseas post consistent with the strategic goal to
focus on markets around the world that have a high impact on out-
competing China.
Finally, ITA underscores that, given the dramatic difference
between its presence and China's presence, it cannot approach matching
China's presence without a fundamental re-envisioning of the resources
appropriated to Global Markets. In the meantime, ITA will continue to
be more strategic, in alignment with its interagency partners, in
driving its presence in as many places in the world where it can make a
difference for U.S. commercial and strategic interests.
Question 6. Madam Secretary, at our recent hearing you stated that
you had to make many difficult decisions in part to support our
nation's weather satellite system. You have confirmed NOAA's GeoXO
satellite architecture that is expected to increase the number of
satellites in geosynchronous orbit from two to three and will include a
suite of additional observations, with a life cycle cost of $20B.
Question 6A. Given that only between 2-3% of observations data from
GEO satellites are assimilated into numerical weather models, why is
NOAA expanding the number and types of observations rather than
expending resources to get more value out of existing observational
data?
Answer 6A. NOAA is focused on making best use of our existing
observing systems while continuing to define and develop the integrated
system that will be needed to meet NOAA and the Nation's needs in the
future. The GeoXO satellites \2\ are being designed to provide higher
resolution data more quickly to support NWS in tracking fast moving
weather events.
The primary use of GOES data by forecasters is for looking at image
animations for ``nowcasting'' purposes and for the forecasters' ability
to make decisions based on their inferences from the imagery (100
percent of the imager data is used this way) of severe weather and
environmental hazards rather than use in NWP. However, a relatively
small percentage of GOES Advanced Baseline Imager (ABI) radiance data
are directly assimilated into NWP models, and much larger fractions of
ABI imagery are synthesized into high temporal and spatial (horizontal)
winds maps that are assimilated into the forecast models.
For the wildfire and smoke detection and monitoring, GOES
observations provide critical inputs to the NWS operational air quality
forecasting models, i.e., ignition detection as quickly as within 15
minutes. Without GOES satellite data, the models are not capable of
predicting smoke and ozone in such a short period of time, compared to
the up to 12-hour delay from LEO satellite wildfire detection.
In the GeoXO era, much more data will be ingested in NWP models.
Technology insertion and innovation will make data from the GeoXO
instruments more valuable to the NWP models and nowcasting (relative to
data from the legacy missions). In addition, the GeoXO Hyperspectral
Infrared Sounder (GXS) will have a few thousand spectral channels
(versus the 16 spectral bands of GOES ABI) and will provide more
vertical information, which the models will use via assimilation to
improve forecasts.
GXS data will also be used to retrieve temperature and water vapor
vertical profiles, which are used to calculate atmospheric instability
parameters. The GeoXO imager will be complemented by the GeoXO Sounder
data, which will dramatically fill in the vertical distribution of the
winds. This capability currently does not exist with the current GOES
East and West satellites. Further, increasing fractions of the radiance
data will be directly assimilated as model resolution increases, and as
radiative transfer calculations, data quality control, and assimilation
are accelerated through the application of artificial intelligence/
machine learning (AI/ML).
With respect to better data utilization, NOAA is incrementally
implementing capabilities to increase utilization of satellite data for
weather and environmental monitoring. These efforts include increasing
its computing capacity using the cloud and access to partner servers,
increasing use of AI/ML, and development of advanced data assimilation
techniques. Many of these enhancements will be incorporated into the
operational Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System (AWIPS) that
weather forecasters at NWS use on a daily basis to process, display,
and communicate meteorological data to make accurate weather
predictions and dispense rapid warnings and advisories. The joint
NESDIS/NWS AWIPS in the Cloud pilot initiative underway in FY24 will
make available multiple satellite and visualization products to improve
the local NWS forecaster's awareness of rapidly evolving weather and
environmental conditions, significantly enhancing the productive use of
geostationary, low earth orbit, and in situ data and model outputs.
Question 6B. Furthermore, does NOAA have the compute capacity to
extract value from the extended observations or are we just buying more
data that is not used by our models?
Answer 6B. Yes, we do and will be extracting great value from the
additional observations. As advances in compute capacity occur, NOAA is
continuously reviewing and adjusting its plans to make best use of
existing and future sources of compute capacity, and to better manage
the extensive and growing data resources. The GeoXO program is working
on algorithms that will be used to develop products that deliver
applications to users so that the data are available for use as soon as
possible. National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information
Service (NESDIS) recognizes that value-add and specialized products
will be developed by users to meet their individual needs. In the 2030s
era, there will be IT innovations that will assist in data utilization
of these data.
The NOAA High Performance Computing and Communications Program
manages NOAA's operational and research computing requirements and is
constantly seeking additional sources to update and improve NOAA's
ability to assimilate and process big data from a variety of sources.
Recently, additional capabilities have been added with BIL/IRA funding,
leveraged from partner agencies such as the Department of Energy, and
from cloud sources. With the rapid IT changes and the need to maintain
a cyber secure posture for these data, NOAA is constantly assessing the
best and more affordable ways to maintain adequate compute capacity. In
recent years, NOAA's Office of Chief Information Officer has been
making NOAA satellite data available on the cloud, on a best-efforts
basis.
Simultaneously, NESDIS operates a scalable, flexible cloud platform
that will scale to support all GeoXO processing needs, including
operations and science, that is designed to be scaled with new data
flows and larger data volumes. The NESDIS Common Cloud Framework (NCCF)
will be expanded, tailored and tested ahead of GeoXO launch to ensure
processing and distribution of extended observations meet NWS latency
and availability requirements in the GeoXO era.
In the GeoXO era, NOAA's plans are to use these capabilities and
continue to access the best ways to provide data, products and services
for operations and research use.
Question 6C. The primary mission essential function for NOAA
satellites is to support weather forecasts including severe weather
watches and warnings that protect lives. Given this fact, why did you
approve an architecture for GeoXO that includes a variety of
instruments that go beyond this essential mission? Are there scientific
requirements for these additional instruments (ocean color, lightning
mapper and atmospheric composition) to be hosted in geosynchronous
orbit? What is the additional cost to the program for adding these
instruments and the corresponding mass and complexity that require a
larger satellite bus?
Answer 6C. NOAA's satellites and the architecture for GeoXO are
firmly in alignment with the Department of Commerce's Primary Mission
Essential Functions 2 and 3 \3\ to:
--Provide Satellite Imagery: Collect and provide the Nation with
critical intelligence data, imagery, and other essential
information for predictive environmental and atmospheric
modeling systems and space-based distress alert systems by
operating NOAA controlled satellites, communications equipment,
and associated systems; and
--Provide Meteorological Forecasts: Provide the Nation with
environmental forecasts, warnings, data, and expertise critical
to public safety, disaster preparedness, all hazards response
and recovery, the national transportation system, safe
navigation, and the protection of the Nation's critical
infrastructure and natural resources.
NOAA's satellites provide foundational data and information
services that support all of NOAA's Line Offices and programs to meet
NOAA's mission to serve the public and sustain US economic growth:
1. To understand and predict changes in air quality, climate,
weather, ocean and coasts;
2. To share that knowledge and information with others; and
3. To conserve and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and
resources.
The weather mission remains the top priority for NOAA's GeoXO
program. Other priorities include fulfilling data needs of NMFS, NOS,
and OAR. The decision how to satisfy these data needs is the result of
an assessment of the validated requirements in the NOAA Consolidated
User Requirements List (COURL). The Report on Requirements of NOAA's
Next-Generation Satellites (2023) provides additional information on
the satellite architecture for these systems.\4\
The additional non-weather instruments for the GeoXO program are
focused on services that the NWS and other Federal, state, and local
agencies provide to the public:
--An atmospheric composition (ACX) instrument is based on unfulfilled
requirements and data requests from the NWS, the OAR, the EPA,
and state and local environmental agencies for higher frequency
and better characterization of poor air quality. The ACX
instrument will also help refine air quality warnings and
improve air quality forecasts.
--An ocean color (OCX) instrument, awarded in May 2024, is being
added to serve NOAA's mission for stewardship of the nation's
coastal areas and fisheries, and will serve a wide range of
applications across industry and government, from commercial to
defense, that include: protecting people and food sources from
harmful algae; improving efficiency in fishing and aquaculture
operations; monitoring water quality for safety for swimming
and contact with humans; monitoring ecosystem changes affected
by offshore construction or climate change; assessing water
clarity for U.S. Navy diving and anti-submarine warfare; and
helping detect and track oil spills at sea. The geostationary
orbit enables multiple observations per day, and, when needed,
``tasked'' observations in order to monitor phenomena with
periodicity less than one day, such as diurnal and tidal
changes, and to respond to fast-moving, episodic events like
oil spills, storm runoff, and harmful algal blooms.
The cost of the new ACX and OCX instruments, including spacecraft
accommodation, data generation and distribution, and other costs, is
approximately 10 percent of the GeoXO program's $19.6B life cycle cost.
Omitting these instruments from the GeoXO mission would stall NOAA
with dated technology for another two decades, limiting the quality and
content of NOAA's air and water quality forecasts for decades.
Excluding the ACX and OCX instruments diminishes U.S. leadership behind
China, Europe and Japan.
Comparing GEO to LEO doesn't seem responsive to the question, and
doesn't appear to add any value in this response.
Question 6D. Despite the FRA budget caps, NOAA appears to be
pursuing the most expensive option to acquire data, including new
desirements to expand NOAA's portfolio rather than fulfilling existing
mission critical requirements. Rather than building expensive satellite
buses in Geo, have you considered commercial platforms such as Blue
Origin's Blue Ring that could host an imager? Why are you not pursuing
commercial options that also offer in-space edge computing that could
radically improve the ability for NOAA to extract more value out of its
observations?
Answer 6D. Acquiring data for the important weather and
environmental data requirements requires an approach that will
guarantee mission assurance and success.
Forecasting severe weather events and providing the public the
advanced warning to save themselves and their property is one of NOAA's
highest priorities. Based on lessons learned from past experiences, DOC
and NOAA, working with NASA and the Office of Management and Budget,
have developed a cost effective and risk tolerant approach to
developing GeoXO. NOAA anticipates approximately 80 percent of the
GeoXO funding will be placed on commercial contracts to acquire
instruments, launch vehicles, and mission support based on evidence
that the proposed technology is proven and can deliver.
NOAA did analyze the Blue Origin capabilities and determined that,
at this time, it does not meet GeoXO's mission requirements.
NOAA continues to explore emerging technologies to meet NOAA's
mission needs. NESDIS Systems Architecture and Engineering (SAE)
organization releases Requests for Information (RFIs) annually seeking
input from the commercial sector on what assets or capabilities they
have or project to have to meet NOAA's mission needs. These requests
provide information on NOAA's mission and what we are specifically
interested in, such as enhanced space weather observations or better
ocean winds measurements, but we also allow vendor-proposed ideas to be
submitted.
Question 6E. One of the new ``extended'' instruments that NOAA just
put under contract for $365 million is for atmospheric composition to
improve air quality forecasting and monitoring. What's the requirement
for this measurement to be made from geosynchronous orbit? What's the
business case for moving ahead with this instrument when we are just
beginning to get data from NASA's tempo mission that's making these
measurements? Why not learn from NASA's effort before launching an
expensive operational mission? Given that these observations are
intended for human health protections rather than weather forecasts,
why isn't the EPA responsible for funding this instrument?
Answer 6E. Air pollution emissions and chemistry vary greatly
throughout the day, requiring a GEO measurement to capture these
changes. NOAA and stakeholders are already learning from NASA's TEMPO
mission, which was launched in 2023, to evaluate the usefulness of its
products and to develop new applications. TEMPO is a research mission
with a lifetime of 20 months; it is not intended to provide a permanent
operational capability. Utilizing lessons learned from TEMPO as a
pathfinder, NOAA is developing the atmospheric composition instrument
for inclusion in the GeoXO program. With the GeoXO program planned to
provide GEO observations through 2055, it would be considerable time
before the next opportunity to implement an operational GEO atmospheric
composition instrument.
NOAA and EPA have their respective roles and resources and operate
according to the guidelines agreed to in the Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) that was signed in 2003 and has been renewed every 5 years since
then. The MOA cements the long-standing partnership between NOAA, the
EPA and state and local air quality management agencies. NOAA produces
twice daily air quality forecast guidance and collects satellite
observations to aid in these forecasts. EPA maintains emissions and
ground-based monitoring data that inform NOAA's forecasts. State and
local agencies, including over 360 cities and counties, issue air
pollution alerts to their citizens based on NOAA's satellite imagery
and forecasts. With GeoXO, NOAA will be able to provide better data to
the EPA and to state and local agencies. Observing agencies like NOAA,
NASA, and USGS provide satellite data and expertise, while receiving
agencies like EPA supply the resources to train their people and to
upgrade their operating systems and practices to incorporate the data.
This cooperative relationship between the observing agencies and the
implementation agencies is conducted within the US Group on Earth
Observations (USGEO).
Question 6F. Another instrument that you approved to be on the
GeoXO is for ocean color, for which NOAA just announced cost-plus-award
fee contract for $450 million. What's the scientific requirement to
host ocean color in Geo? Why is NOAA creating an operational mission
for ocean color given that the nation has been getting ocean color data
from NASA assets for over 40 years and have never utilized that data
for fisheries management, which is supposedly the business case for
including ocean color on GeoXO? Have you considered getting ocean color
remote sensing from assets in low earth orbit along with coastal drones
given the temporal and spatial aspects that NOAA wants to measure?
Answer 6F. The GeoXO instrument suite is designed to complement
(not substitute) data that is provided by LEO satellites. GeoXO will
provide more frequent data refresh over a 24-hour period versus the
once-per day data refresh from LEO satellites. The US ocean color
community, which includes users at Federal, State, Tribal levels,
require the frequency and resolution of data that GeoXO's OCX will
provide for various ocean and coastal management activities. OCX will
be able to detect phytoplankton at the species level which will inform
whether these are harmful species or beneficial species for the
ecosystem. The use of ocean color data has a longstanding history in
NOAA's mission, and using lessons learned from NASA and other partners,
NOAA will move hyperspectral ocean color research into operations for
the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and the U.S. Great Lakes. Commercial
fisheries in the U.S. are valued at $260 billion and employ 1.7 million
people. Observations from systems like GeoXO OCX allow environmental
intelligence information for NOAA and its stakeholders since
phytoplankton is at the base of the food chain that supports fisheries.
NOAA Mission Requirement: NMFS, OAR, and NOS, have for decades
documented uses for operational ocean color data and products. These
uses include: observing ocean biology, chemistry and ecology;
evaluating dynamic processes; and assessing ocean productivity,
ecosystem change, coastal and inland water quality, seafood safety,
harmful algal blooms (HABs), and land-based sources of pollution.
The OCX will complement current optical imagers (like VIIRS and
MODIS) in the spectral and spatial resolution needed to enhance NOAA's
capabilities to meet documented requirements. NOAA is using the NASA
PACE as a risk reduction mission, taking lessons learned from research-
oriented ocean color satellites and putting them towards operational
ocean color satellite missions in order to meet documented
requirements. NOAA is also implementing direction in the Explanatory
Statements of Public Law 117-328 (Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2023) and Public Law 118-42 (Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024) to
coordinate GeoXO OCX development with NASA's GLIMR.
Use of Ocean Color in Fisheries Management: Ocean color data has an
extensive history of usage within fisheries management. NOAA Fisheries
uses ocean color for stock assessments, particularly those at risk of
mortality due to red tides, which increases the risk of overfishing
after mass mortality events.
Ocean color data are used to help managers identify areas of
spatial and temporal overlap between managed species and commercial
fisheries, and have been used to inform impact assessments for offshore
wind energy development. NOAA Fisheries also use ocean color data in
end-to-end ecosystem models (e.g. Atlantis, Ecopath), dynamic ocean
management tools (e.g., EcoCast, WhaleWatch), big eye tuna forecasts,
ecosystem overfishing assessments, the AMAPPS (protected species)
model, the California-Harmful Algae Risk Mapping (C-HARM) Harmful Algal
Bloom (HAB) domoic acid probability model, and research-track stock
assessment models for North Pacific swordfish.
Business Case.--Without the capabilities of OCX, NOAA will remain
limited in the ability to provide trusted risk analysis and
probabilistic estimates of transient events, which are manifesting with
increased frequency under climate stress.
From the NOS perspective, GeoXO's OCX will elevate ocean forecasts
for authorized NOS activities, including harmful algal blooms (HABs),
oil spills, pollution, etc., providing more timely information to our
constituents. The GeoXO OCX instrument would be used to track transient
features, like HABs, Sargassum, and oil, among others, on subdaily
time-scales (every 2-3 hours), increasing the probability of capturing
cloud and glint-free images that lead to data gaps.
A geostationary configuration would generate a more complete short-
term data record (baseline), which is required to generate product
anomalies that provide early detection of changing conditions. The
hyperspectral observations from OCX would help distinguish different
types of algae and provide improved information on whether a bloom
might likely be a toxin producer. This detailed information may reduce
drinking water treatment costs, recreational exposure to toxins, and
human illness.
Use of LEO Assets and Drones.--The GeoXO instruments specifications
were developed to respond to the user needs for hyperspectral, high-
refresh ocean imagery that LEO satellites do not provide. Deployment of
drones may be hindered by inclement weather at the surface of the Earth
that satellites are not affected by. GEO ocean color data is projected
to provide economic benefits far exceeding its cost by improving
fisheries efficiency and productivity, reducing impacts due to harmful
algal blooms, and improving monitoring and safety of drinking water.
Question 7. Madam Secretary, the Department in its FY 2025 request
is asking for $62.1 million in new funding related to artificial
intelligence (AI). This includes new funding for BIS, NTIA, and NIST.
As I mentioned at the hearing, given the FRA caps, I suspect we may be
in a similar position as FY 2024 where we have to make difficult
decisions to meet our allocations.
Question 7A. Has Commerce conducted an assessment to determine if
any of these AI requests would not duplicate AI efforts at NIST, other
Commerce Departments, or elsewhere in the Federal government?
Answer 7A. The Commerce Department is dedicated to the efficient
use of taxpayer dollars, including avoiding the duplication of effort
across the U.S. Government related to artificial intelligence (AI). The
Department has actively participated in interagency coordination
discussions, and internally, the Department holds regular cross-bureau
convenings to coordinate AI programs and efforts. The Department's FY
2025 budget request for AI efforts at NIST, BIS, and NTIA reflects that
a variety of tools need to be deployed to meet the opportunities and
challenges of AI. Requested funding would help Commerce to implement
central components of the Administration's Executive Order 14110,
``Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial
Intelligence'' and continue the critical work of the newly established
U.S. AI Safety Institute (AISI), creating guidelines, tools, test
environments, benchmarks, and best practices for AI evaluation and risk
mitigation. Without the requested funding, the Department will not be
able to meet the demands placed on its bureaus, including those focused
on protecting against the national security risks of large language or
frontier models through AISI. The requested funds would further support
the Department's critical work to create a ``race to the top'' in AI
safety, security, and trust; address AI-related threats to our national
security; foster an innovative, competitive, and informed marketplace
for AI; and examine ways to use AI for good to enhance the government's
work. The Department's request spans multiple bureaus to ensure that we
meet the Nation's, and the world's, needs for safe, secure, and
trustworthy AI.
Question 7B. Can you please provide more detail on what the
Department means when it talks about, ``AI for Good''?
Answer 7B. ``AI for good'' is intended to convey that the
Department's work is not only focused on addressing and mitigating
potentially negative implications of AI, like those associated with
biological or cybersecurity risks and deep-fakes. The Department,
including through NIST, also looks to further innovation in AI, and
address technical barriers in the measurement science of AI systems to
better understand their reliability, performance, usability, and other
characteristics. The objective of this work is to enable companies and
organizations to be confident in adopting and utilizing the
technologies in the broadest array of potential applications. Like
promote and protect strategies with other technologies, a significant
portion of the Department's work is focused on promoting innovation,
and the term ``good'' has become common shorthand to communicate this
effort. The Department's FY 2025 budget request for new funding in AI
would, in part, support Departmental efforts to ensure that AI is
deployed responsibly and for the benefit of society.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.trade.gov/faq/expiration-presidential-proclamation-
10414-solar-cells-cambodia-malaysia-thailand-and-vietnam.
\2\ https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/105/3/BAMS-D-
23-0048.1.xml.
\3\ https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
list_of_validated_pmefs_by_depart
ment_v2_fema.pdf.
\4\ https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/s3/2023-06/22-J-833-NOAA-NESDIS-
User_Needs_Require
ments_and_Lifecycle_Costs_REPORT.pdf.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
Question 1. The Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
published an Interim Final Rule (89 FR 34680) that effectively
prohibits the export of most firearms, shotguns, optics, ammunition,
and related parts and components to other countries.
1A. Under the new rule, unless one of the four license exceptions
apply, can an entity export low value shipments of spare parts under
$500, temporarily export to a trade show, or return a firearm for
repair to a foreign manufacturer without an export license?
Answer 1A. The rules surrounding a specific export will depend on
the item at issue, and several other factors. Certain spare parts for
firearms and related items do not require an export license and may be
exported without authorization. However, many firearms spare parts
categorized under 0x5zz ECCNs are subject to a license requirement. For
such parts, an EAR authorization is required to authorize all exports
and reexports for these items, unless a license exception applies. This
is standard practice across all BIS requirements; if a license is
required, but the transaction does not meet the specifications of any
particular license exception, a BIS license is required.
1B. Under this new rule, would an export license be needed to ship
a $2 replacement part to Austria or Switzerland?
Answer 1B. See answer above. The regulations surrounding a specific
license exception will depend on the item at issue. For example,
certain parts, such as 0A501.x parts, would be eligible for export to
Austria and Switzerland as Country Group A:5 countries under License
Exception STA under section 740.20(c)(1), provided the export was not
otherwise restricted under section 740.2 and the export met the
applicable terms and conditions of License Exception STA under section
740.20.
Question 2. The International Traffic and Arms Regulations (ITAR)
has always (and still does) include license exemptions for spare parts
under $500, temporary imports/exports for repair, etc.
2A. Does this new rule make the Export Administration Regulations
(EAR) more restrictive than the ITAR, which focuses strictly on
defense-related items?
Answer 2A. BIS has determined that the changes described in its
firearms rules will advance U.S. national security and foreign policy
interests. As with all EAR controls, these changes are designed to be
as targeted as possible to accomplish BIS's mission to protect the
national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.
2B. Won't this new provision result in thousands more export
license applications, and what fiscal measures has BIS taken to account
for this increased caseload?
Answer 2B. As of September 2024, BIS has not seen a marked increase
in license application submissions since the new rule was implemented
on May 30.
Moreover, several changes made in the IFR will improve efficiency
and transparency in processing licenses or reduce license submissions.
For example, prior to the rule, exporters to non-A:1 countries were not
required to submit a purchase order with BIS license applications,
unless requested during the course of BIS's review of a particular
application. This practice meant that BIS processed and reviewed many
applications that did not result in actual exports, thereby
unnecessarily expending staffing resources. Likewise, the presumptions
of denial for certain high-risk transactions are expected to result in
a decrease of license applications for those destinations. Further,
transparency with respect to destinations of concern helps promote
predictable and timely review of license applications and will help
industry and other stakeholders understand the licensing process. The
rule will also allow BIS to focus time and resources on lower-risk
applications, including applications to partners and allies and
applications to government end users in all destinations.
BIS will continue to monitor pending application totals and surge
resources as appropriate to ensure timely review of applications.
Question 3.
3A. How will this new rule impact license processing times?
Answer 3A. BIS processes firearms license applications in
accordance with internal licensing guidelines, implementing
regulations, and Executive Order 12981, which outlines interagency
procedures and timelines for processing export license applications.
These policies are applied consistently across all items under BIS's
jurisdiction.
BIS has not observed a delay in processing license applications for
firearms and related items since the rule went into effect on May 30,
2024. Applications for firearms and related items submitted since May
30, 2024, currently have a median total processing time of 32 days,
which is almost a week faster than the average processing time for all
BIS licenses in 2023 of 38 days. Applications for end users in Country
Group A:1 have been processed even faster, with a median processing
time of 28 days.
Several changes laid out in the Interim Final Rule (IFR) have made
the review process more efficient. The new interagency working group
established by the rule and chaired by the State Department will
supplement the usual export licensing review process. BIS has found
that other working groups, such as the one for dual-use items
controlled for chemical and biological weapons reasons, allow licenses
to be processed faster because the interagency is able to discuss
concerns about an application and typically can come to an agreement
without having to escalate to the operating committee. BIS expects that
the interagency working group, which meets weekly, will similarly help
to move firearms license applications efficiently.
Likewise, transparency with respect to destinations of concern
helps promote predictable and timely review of license applications and
will help industry and other stakeholders understand the licensing
process. The rule will also allow BIS to focus time and resources on
lower-risk applications, including applications to partners and allies
and applications to government end users in all destinations.
BIS will continue to monitor pending application totals and surge
resources as appropriate to ensure timely review of applications.
3B. Under this new rule, how many export license applications does
BIS plan to Return Without Action to license applicants?
Answer 3B. Prior to the effective date of the Firearms Rule on May
30, 2024, BIS identified a subset of pending license applications that
were submitted prior to the release of the rule, and thus did not meet
the new requirements outlined in the rule. BIS returned without action
these pending license applications because they could not have been
processed and approved in accordance with the new requirements.
Exporters were notified if their applications were Returned Without
Action and were provided with guidance on the new requirements and best
practices for resubmitting applications. Applications may also be
returned without action for other reasons, including informing the
exporter that a license is not required or that a license exception may
apply to their transaction.
BIS will continue to provide technical assistance to exporters on
the firearms rule to ensure industry has clear guidance on compliance
with the new requirements.
Question 4. Regarding the new licensing requirement for long-
barreled shotguns and optics to all countries, and specifically to NATO
and Wassenaar Participating Group A:1 partner countries:
4A. Is it correct that these products have never required a license
for export to NATO countries and in fact are not controlled on the
Wassenaar Agreement Munitions List (WAML)?
Answer 4A. The Firearms Rule added license requirements for certain
items on the Commerce Control List when destined to countries and/or
end users that previously did not require a license. For example, prior
to the rule, shotguns were subject to different controls under ECCN
0A502 based on the barrel length and particular end user (specifically,
police or law enforcement). However, these items have long been subject
to the Export Administration Regulations, and the changes made in the
IFR ensure consistency in how those regulations are applied, as well as
reflecting the significant relationship of diversion and misuse of
firearms and related items to U.S. foreign policy and national security
objectives.
4B. If, under the new licensing requirement, U.S. exporters are
waiting additional weeks or months for an approved license, can you
assure the Committee that other countries that manufacture long
barreled shotguns and optics, which includes China, won't fill this
void, and if so, what measures has the Department taken to prevent
this?
Answer 4B. As noted above, BIS processes firearms license
applications in accordance with internal licensing guidelines,
implementing regulations, and Executive Order 12981, which outlines
interagency procedures and timelines for processing export license
applications. These policies are applied consistently across all items
under BIS's jurisdiction.
With respect to potential Chinese backfill, the Department
reiterates its commitment to combatting the diversion and misuse of US
firearms by bad actors across the world, while allowing the export of
firearms to end users who do not present national security or foreign
policy risks. We will not engage in a race to the bottom with China to
sell firearms to criminals and cartels.
4C. Considering that China is a major producer of firearm optics,
what steps have you taken to prevent China from quickly exporting to
foreign markets while U.S. exporters wait for licenses that have never
been needed before?
Answer 4C. The Firearms Rule is first and foremost focused on
safeguarding U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. BIS
carefully considered the economic impact of the rule, and as a result,
the rule is tailored to identify and restrict firearms exports that
threaten U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. BIS's
intent is not to disrupt lawful commerce that is consistent with
national security and foreign policy interests.
With respect to firearms optics, such products have generally been
subject to a license requirement for export to most destinations
worldwide, and certain license exceptions remain available to export
such optics to allies and partners, subject to certain conditions. In
addition, BIS regularly reviews its rules and regulations to determine
the effectiveness of its policies, including the impact of the policies
on industry competitiveness. BIS will also continue to provide
technical assistance to exporters on the firearms rule, and BIS has
taken numerous, proactive steps to ensure that industry has clear
guidance on compliance with the new requirements.
Question 5. Given the delays that this new rule will create, U.S.
optics manufacturers won't be able to provide timely deliveries and
will suffer the probable loss of business of their commercial exports,
including some of their government exports.
5A. What steps have you taken to prevent such irreparable harm to
U.S. exporters and manufacturers of these products?
Answer 5A. The Department's actions are aimed at safeguarding U.S.
national security and foreign policy interests. At the same time, the
Department carefully considered the economic impact of the rule. As a
result, the rule is tailored to identify and restrict firearm exports
that threaten U.S. national security and foreign policy, while allowing
exports of firearms that don't threaten national security.
BIS has not observed a delay in processing license applications for
firearms and related items since the rule went into effect on May 30,
2024, including license applications for optics under ECCN 0A504.
Applications for firearms and related items submitted since May 30,
2024, currently have a median total processing time of 32 days, which
is almost a week faster than the average processing time for all BIS
licenses in 2023 of 38 days. Applications for end users in Country
Group A:1 have been processed even faster, with a median processing
time of 28 days.
5B. Give that we trust our partner countries in NATO and Wassenaar,
and particularly the UK and Australia under AUKUS, with the most
sensitive military items, including 600-series military commodities,
missile technology, chemical and biological weapons, why are we adding
substantial new licensing burdens under this rule for items that are
commercial in nature, of low technology, widely available and
manufactured throughout the world, and not military?
Answer 5B. Exports of sensitive items on the Commerce Control List
(CCL) to our partners and allies, including in NATO and Wassenaar,
remain subject to a range of licensing restrictions and/or restrictions
on license exception availability. A license exception may authorize
the export of 600-series items to certain NATO and Wassenaar partners,
but generally only for ultimate end use by allied and partner
governments, not for personal use or commercial resale. Missile
technology requires a license to nearly all NATO and Wassenaar
partners, with the limited exception of Australia, Canada, and the
United Kingdom (UK). A license is required to all destinations
worldwide, including Australia, Canada, and the UK, for Chemical
Weapons Convention Schedule 1 chemicals, and a worldwide end-use
control applies to chemical and biological weapons-related activities.
As noted in the previous question, BIS has made several recent
regulatory updates to facilitate secure trade with allies and partners.
This general approach informed our firearms policy updates as well. A:1
countries, including Australia and most NATO countries, are excluded
from many of the new requirements in the Firearms Rule, such as the
requirement to submit a purchase order, as well as a passport or
national identity card for natural persons, with an application to
export firearms or related items. Many of the other requirements in the
rule were already in place for one of our closest trading partners,
Canada.
Question 6. The Interim Final Rule significantly reduces license
validity from 4 years to 1 year.
6A. What is the rationale for this reduction in the license
validity period, particularly since no other items controlled on the
Commerce Control List, except for items in Short Supply, are licensed
with such a short validity?
Answer 6A. Because national security and foreign policy
considerations (including human rights-related considerations) in
destinations abroad can change rapidly, the risks or potential benefits
associated with certain transactions can be difficult to predict
several years in advance. Limiting the length of the license validity
period will lead to more frequent reviews of exports and thus enable
BIS to account for developments and often fluid circumstances in
destinations; doing so enables more precise and timely consideration of
diversion risk and national security and foreign policy interests. A
shortened validity period also reduces the risk of shipments on an
expired import certificate, as well as the risk that BIS has to suspend
or revoke a license based on rapidly developing national security and
foreign policy concerns. Importantly, though, licenses extending beyond
12 months for firearms and related items may still be granted in
certain circumstances, such as transactions involving intra-company
transfers of items (e.g., from a subsidiary to a parent company) or
government contracts that require a period of performance longer than
12 months.
6B. Won't this impact the processing time to approve licenses,
which will cause exporters delays that will likely result in cancelled
orders?
Answer 6B. As noted above, BIS processes firearms license
applications in accordance with internal licensing guidelines,
implementing regulations, and Executive Order 12981, which outlines
interagency procedures and timelines for processing export licensing
applications. BIS does not anticipate that the general reduction in
validity period will impact the processing time for licenses.
6C. Given that BIS is currently taking 1-2 months to process
licenses and will now face a doubled caseload, won't this potentially
make domestic products more unattractive to foreign buyers?
Answer 6C. See answer above.
6D. How many licenses does BIS currently have pending without
action for Brazil?
Answer 6D. When queried on July 3, 2024, BIS's export licensing
database reflected 33 license applications pending for firearms
destined to Brazil.
6E. What is the longest time period that a firearms export license
application has been pending without denial or approval?
Answer 6E. As of July 4, 2024, the longest time a firearms export
license application has been currently pending is 546 days, 455 days of
which have been pending a response to a request for additional
information from the applicant.
Question 7. The 1 year license validity will at least double BIS's
annual license caseload.
7A. How does BIS plan to handle the additional annual license
caseload resulting from the change to 1 year license validity?
Answer 7A. See answer above.
7B. Where does your budget account for this increased workload?
Answer 7B. The Department does not expect to need additional
funding to manage implementation of the new rule. As noted above, BIS
anticipated an annual increase of 1,416 new license applications as a
result of the changes made. However, BIS has not seen a marked increase
in license application submissions since the new rule was implemented
on May 30, and several changes made in the IFR, such as the creation of
the interagency working group, will improve efficiency and transparency
in processing licenses. BIS will continue to monitor pending
application totals and surge resources as appropriate to ensure timely
review of applications.
Question 8. Section 505 of the FY2024 Commerce, Justice, Science,
and Related Agencies appropriations bill (Public Law 118-42) explicitly
prohibited BIS from re-organizing, yet according to BIS's website, BIS
reorganized in blatant violation of law.
8A. Why did BIS explicitly ignore a statutory requirement from
Congress?
Answer 8A. In July 2023, BIS transmitted to Congress a
congressional notification package for a realignment of staff under
Export Administration (EA), consistent with the Export Control Reform
Act of 2018 (ECRA) and in accordance with Division B Commerce, Justice,
Science and Related Agencies, Title V, General Provisions, Section 505
of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Public Law 117-328). Both
the House and the Senate approved this realignment of staff in October
2023 and November 2023, respectively.
8B. Will the newly established Human Rights and Embargoes Division
be responsible for reviewing or adjudicating any export licenses
related to firearms, ammunition, and related equipment? And if so, what
specific countries or applications will fall under the Human Rights and
Embargoes Division's responsibility?
Answer 8B. Review and adjudication of export licenses related to
firearms, ammunition, and related equipment has not been transferred to
the newly renamed Human Rights and Embargoes Division (HRED) within the
Office of Nonproliferation and Foreign Policy Controls (ONFPC). The
longstanding division of responsibility for review of firearm and
related items applications between NMT and HRED within ONFPC has
remained in effect since the release of the Firearms rule.
Since the transfer of certain firearms and related items from the
State Department to Commerce in March 2020, license applications for
firearms and related items have been largely managed by ONFPC's Nuclear
and Missile Technology Controls Division (NMT). HRED has long reviewed
a select subset of applications for certain firearms and related items
depending on the item type, its corresponding reason for control, or
specific destination.
Specifically, ONFPC's HRED is responsible for reviewing license
applications for items controlled for Crime Control reasons. Prior to
the rule's release, HRED reviewed license applications for 0A502
(shotguns) and 0A504 (optical sighting devices) items to any
destination since these items were already controlled for Crime Control
reasons. Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, with additional staff
hired under a supplemental budget allocation authorized by Congress,
HRED has also been responsible for the licensing of small arms and
ammunition exports to Ukraine with technical assistance from NMT. After
the rule's release, HRED continued to review applications for 0A502 and
0A504 items, as well as any other firearm or related item when destined
to Ukraine. Additionally, given HRED's foreign policy expertise and
experience in managing applications for firearms items destined to
Ukraine, HRED also began managing applications for any firearms items
destined to Israel beginning in October 2023.
NMT may, if needed, staff select other firearms license
applications to HRED licensing officers for initial review and
processing if additional capacity is needed to help reduce a larger
than average queue of pending license applications and ensure timely
processing. However, NMT maintains final countersign authority for any
firearms license application staffed to HRED for initial processing.
Since May 2024 when the rule went into effect, NMT has staffed only 34
license applications (out of over 2300 received as of October 15) to
HRED in order to ensure continued timely processing. HRED performed
limited processing and review activities for these 34 applications to
help address a temporary surge in the volume of applications received
by ONFPC, and to address temporary staffing shortages during periods in
which NMT licensing officers were on leave. NMT maintained countersign
authority for these applications.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Katie Britt
Question 1. Following the imposition of Section 232 tariffs,
foreign industries have increasingly pushed excess steel production
into downstream derivative products that can be shipped to the United
States without paying Section 232 duties. China in particular has used
its massive steel overcapacity to ramp up the production and export of
downstream products. One example is fabricated structural steel, where
imports have increased by around 86% by volume and more than 100% by
value since the Section 232 measures went into effect. Domestic steel
mill shipments of products like beams have fallen as a result. I
understand that a number of American steel companies have requested
that the Commerce Department recommend that the Section 232 measures on
steel be adjusted to include imports of fabricated structural steel as
a derivative product. Do you have any updates with respect to the
timing of the Department's response to this request?
Answer. The Department is committed to ensuring a level playing
field that enables domestic workers and manufacturers to compete
effectively with unfair trade practices by foreign competitors. The
Department is further dedicated to contesting efforts to hinder or
circumvent the efficacy of existing trade remedies, National security
actions such as the Section 232 Duties, were implemented to resist such
activities which threatened to impair the national security of the
United States.
The Department is aware of the concerns raised by domestic industry
regarding imports of certain derivative products of steel, including
fabricated structural steel. The Department takes these matters
seriously and, in cooperation with our interagency partners,
continuously monitors the effect of such imports in the context of the
national security objectives of Section 232. The Department will
consider appropriate action as needed to uphold these goals if such
imports are found to be occurring in such quantities or under such
circumstances as to threaten the national security of the United
States, potentially up to and including a recommendation for action by
the President.
Question 2. Since 2002, Commerce has recognized Vietnam's non-
market economy (NME) status, which applies to countries like Vietnam
that do not operate on free market principles. Has the Department
considered how treating Vietnam as a market economy under U.S.
antidumping laws would weaken the ability to enforce U.S. trade laws
and allow Vietnam to become a conduit for non-market distortions to
flow into the U.S. economy? Please describe the impacts the Department
anticipates in the U.S. economy if Vietnam were designated as a market
economy. Please specifically include which domestic industries the
Department believes would be harmed due to a change in Vietnam's market
status.
How has the market economy status issue factored into other US-
Vietnam negotiations or your other discussions with Vietnamese
counterparts?
Answer. Commerce's October 24, 2023, announcement initiating the
review of Vietnam's NME status was made after careful consideration of
the information available, including the official request from the
Government of Vietnam (GOVN) and comments from the domestic industry.
This was not a discretionary choice--Commerce initiated because, by
statute, GOVN's request met the legal threshold to initiate this type
of review; however, the fact that Commerce initiated does not pre-
determine the outcome of the NME review. To the contrary, following the
initiation of a non-market economy review, by law, Commerce is required
to conduct a fact-intensive analysis of six statutory factors to
determine the extent of government involvement in the economy,
resulting in non-market activity. As part of this process, we do
consider comments from relevant stakeholders, including U.S.
businesses. At the request of interested parties, Commerce held a
public hearing on May 8. Parties presented information both opposing
and supporting Vietnam obtaining market economy status, based on
material already included in their comments. The hearing was widely
attended by U.S. domestic industries as well as the GOVN. Commerce is
carefully considering all comments prior to issuing its final results,
which we anticipate we will be releasing at the end of July.
Question 3. China has been engaging in a campaign of surveillance
of the United States and its critical infrastructure. Chinese LIDAR
sensors have the ability to collect a vast amount of information on
U.S. critical infrastructure, geography, and human behaviors. Chinese
LIDAR companies have flooded the U.S. market with low-cost, heavily
subsidized Chinese LIDAR targeting state and local governments for the
installation at intersection, airports, ports, and bridges.
China is using the same LIDAR sensors to enable autonomous tanks in
China, and there is also evidence of Chinese LIDAR sensors have been
deployed on Chinese police patrol vehicles and surveillance systems
within China, including in Xinjiang province where egregious human
rights abuses are being deployed against the Uyghur population.
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) recently designated the
largest Chinese LIDAR manufacturer, Hesai Technology Co., Ltd. (Hesai),
as a ``Chinese military company'' that is ``operating directly or
indirectly in the United States'' under the 1260H Chinese Military and
Military-Civil Fusion Companies List. This DoD designation follows
Hesai publicly disclosing that ``The PRC government has significant
authority in regulating our operations and may influence or intervene
in our operations at any time''.
Given the national security risks associated with Chinese LIDAR
sensor technology, particularly its use near critical infrastructure,
will the Department of Commerce add Chinese LIDAR companies to the
Entities List to cut off their access to U.S. technology?
Answer. The U.S. export control system has long recognized the
importance of LIDAR technologies to our national security and foreign
policy. The Department of State's U.S. Munitions List restricts the
export of LIDAR specially designed for a military end user, and the
Department of Commerce's Commerce Control List (CCL) includes export
controls on certain types of multilaterally-controlled, dual-use LIDAR
that can be important for military applications. These types of LIDAR
technologies are controlled to all persons in the People's Republic of
China (PRC). Additionally, certain lasers that fall below multilateral
control thresholds are subject to restrictions when intended for
export, reexport, or transfer (in-country) to military end users or for
a military end use in the PRC.
Outside the export controls context, BIS is responsible for
exercising the authorities delegated to the Secretary of Commerce in
Executive Order 13873, ``Securing the Information and Communications
Technology and Services Supply Chain.'' The implementing regulations in
15 CFR Part 791 set forth procedures for investigating and determining
whether an information and communications technology or service (ICTS)
transaction involving a person owned by, controlled by, or subject to
the jurisdiction or direction of a foreign adversary:
1. poses an undue risk of sabotage to or subversion of the design,
integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution,
installation, operation, or maintenance of information and
communications technology or services in the United States;
2. poses an undue risk of catastrophic effects on the security or
resiliency of United States critical infrastructure or the
digital economy of the United States; or
3. otherwise poses an unacceptable risk to the national security of
the United States or the security and safety of United States
persons.
If an investigation finds that a transaction poses an undue or
unacceptable risk, the E.O. and implementing regulations provide a
process whereby the Department can issue a determination to prohibit or
mitigate the risk posed by the relevant ICTS transaction.
The Bureau cannot comment on deliberations by the interagency End-
User Review Committee (ERC), including whether entities involved in
specific industry sectors may be subject to review, or confirm whether
ICTS investigations have been opened into certain manufacturers,
including in the LIDAR manufacturing sector. However, as demonstrated
by the U.S. Government's controls on advanced LIDAR systems to date,
and our ongoing assessment of U.S. national security and foreign policy
concerns related to transactions with entities with a nexus to the PRC,
please be assured that this issue is one that the Department is closely
monitoring. We will continue to act in close coordination with
interagency partners, including the intelligence community, to ensure
our tools are sufficiently robust to advance the national security and
foreign policy objectives of the United States, and coordinate with
allies when possible.
Question 4. Huawei has reportedly, in partnership with SMIC,
fabricated 7 nanometer artificial intelligence chips that perform
better than previously believed possible. These entities are also
reportedly able to produce these chips at scale.
Question 4A. These companies are on the entity list, and the Biden
Administration has stated that its export controls plan on stopping
China from developing AI at this advanced level. Are there any policies
the Department would change in retrospect, enact sooner, or not enact
to make this AI development in China harder?
Answer 4A. The Entity List is one tool BIS may leverage to restrict
access to technology subject to Commerce jurisdiction by entities
acting contrary to U.S. national security and foreign policy interests.
While BIS has listed a number of People's Republic of China (PRC)
entities involved in the development of advanced computing integrated
circuits on the Entity List, it has also taken a broader approach to
limiting the PRC's access to advanced AI capabilities. In October 2022,
BIS imposed country-wide controls on certain advanced computing
integrated circuits, which can enhance supercomputing and AI
capabilities, to all end users in the PRC. These systems are being used
by the PRC for its military modernization and surveillance activities.
In October 2023, BIS broadened the scope of these controls to apply to
over 40 additional countries to address transshipment and diversion
risk, as well as access to datacenters with advanced chips. The
controls likewise restrict access by companies headquartered in, or
whose ultimate parent company is headquartered in, Macau or a country
subject to a U.S. arms embargo, including the PRC. BIS continually
evaluates the effectiveness of these controls and adjusts the controls
as necessary to ensure they advance U.S. national security and foreign
policy objectives.
Question 4B. Huawei's sales are approaching $100 billion. Has the
Department reviewed its policies such as export licenses that seemed to
have contributed to this feat?
Answer 4B. Huawei and its non-U.S. affiliates have been listed on
the BIS Entity List since May 2019, and BIS has updated the Entity List
by adding additional non-U.S. Huawei affiliates as appropriate. Huawei
is subject to a license requirement for all items subject to BIS
jurisdiction, which includes certain foreign-produced items that are
made with certain technology or software subject to BIS jurisdiction,
or production equipment that is itself the direct product of U.S.-
origin technology or software subject to BIS jurisdiction.
BIS, in collaboration with its partners from the Departments of
Defense, State, and Energy, continues to assess the existing licensing
policy for applications involving Huawei. Established by the prior
Administration in 2019, the applicable licensing policy provides for a
case-by-case review of applications for the export of items that
support technologies below the 5G-level, and a presumption of denial
for all other items.
Information in connection with any potential specific licenses or
license applications for items under Commerce jurisdiction is
prohibited from disclosure pursuant to section 1761(h) of the Export
Control Reform Act of 2018 (50 U.S.C. 4820(h)) absent a written request
on letterhead of a chair or ranking member of a Congressional committee
or subcommittee of appropriate jurisdiction.
Question 4C. The press just recently reported that BIS is
considering adding companies to the entity list in response to Huawei's
recent breakthroughs. Yet the whack-a-mole approach has not
demonstrated results, as shown by Huawei's own resilience. What other
strategies and policies can be used to maintain US competitive
advantages in this space? What policies does the Department believe it
should revisit given recent failures?
Answer 4C. As outlined above, BIS has taken a comprehensive
approach to restricting the People's Republic of China's (PRC) access
to advanced computing integrated circuits and the equipment required to
produce them, which the PRC uses to support its military modernization
and surveillance activities contrary to U.S. national security and
foreign policy interests. Use of the Entity List to restrict exports to
entities involved in the production of advanced chips is just one
aspect of this strategy. Additional steps BIS has taken include
countrywide controls on advanced chips and related manufacturing
equipment to the PRC, controls on third countries and PRC headquartered
firms operating outside the PRC to address diversion and datacenter
access, expanded jurisdiction over foreign produced items based on U.S.
software, technology, or production equipment when destined to the PRC,
and restrictions on activities of U.S. persons in servicing
semiconductor production equipment for advanced node semiconductor
production in the PRC.
In addition, BIS assesses that Huawei's attempts to produce
advanced-node integrated circuits demonstrate the strengths, not
failures, of the Department's strategy. Open-source reporting indicates
that Huawei's lack of access to advanced equipment is forcing it to
rely on costly and inefficient fabrication techniques, which lack the
precision required to produce the most advanced chips at scale. We
assess that Huawei's efforts to operationalize these techniques,
despite their shortcomings, demonstrate Huawei's resilience and
determination and the large amounts of resources the PRC government is
willing to dedicate to overcoming our controls. But these efforts do
not lead towards the conclusion that the Department's approach is not
working. As BIS does with all its policies, we continually assess the
effectiveness of our controls and make adjustments as necessary.
Question 5A. How many BIS licenses were approved for companies who
wanted to do business with entities on the Department of Defense's
1260H list of Chinese Military Companies or Treasury's Chinese Military
Industrial Complex (NS-CMIS) list?
Answer 5A. Under section 1761(h)(1)(B) of the Export Control Reform
Act of 2018 (50 U.S.C. 4820(h)(1)(B)), information obtained in
connection with licenses and license applications for exports of items
under Commerce jurisdiction is prohibited from disclosure by BIS absent
a written request on letterhead of a chair or ranking member of a
Congressional committee or subcommittee of appropriate jurisdiction.
It is important to note that different agencies have different
authorities subject to different regulatory standards that can be
applied in a variety of circumstances to address particular conduct.
BIS engages with other agencies as appropriate to coordinate on
measures to protect U.S. national security and foreign policy
interests. As a consequence, different lists may have different firms,
individuals, or other entities. However, when an entity meets the
regulatory standard for addition to two or more lists administered by
different agencies, we strive to harmonize listings to the extent
possible. For example, in the Russia sanctions context, many entities
have been designated by Treasury pursuant to Executive Order 14024,
Blocking Property With Respect To Specified Harmful Foreign Activities
of the Government of the Russian Federation, and were also added to the
BIS Entity List.
Under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), all additions to
the Entity List require a majority vote of the End-User Review
Committee (ERC), which is chaired by Commerce, with representation from
the Departments of State, Defense, and Energy. The ERC determines
whether the entity has been involved in, is involved in, or poses a
significant risk of being or becoming involved in activities that are
contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the
United States, along with those acting on behalf of such persons.
While Treasury is not formally part of the export control
``interagency'' as outlined in Executive Order 12981, which sets forth
the process for interagency review and dispute resolution of export
license applications, under BIS's current leadership we have engaged
regularly with our colleagues at Treasury to include discussions on the
Specially Designated Nationals List and Entity List actions and to
coordinate and discuss other matters of shared interest, and those
conversations will continue.
In addition, in certain instances described in 15 C.F.R. 744.8, the
EAR apply restrictions on exports, reexports and transfers (in-country)
involving persons designated pursuant to certain Executive Orders
administered by the Department of the Treasury as well as pursuant to
select sanctions statutes. In these instances, when a person is
identified and sanctioned pursuant to a particular authority, BIS
imposes license requirements.
Question 5B. Has BIS reviewed all companies on the 1260H and CMIC
list to determine whether those companies met the regulatory
requirements for inclusion on the entity list? Please provide a
description and result of the determination.
Answer 5B. BIS regularly reviews parties on other U.S. Government
lists, including those maintained by the Departments of Defense, State,
and Treasury. A number of entities on the 1260H list and CMIC list (or
certain subsidiaries and affiliates thereof) have already been included
on the Entity List based on a finding that such entities are acting
contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy interests. For
example, People's Republic of China (PRC) entities such as
Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC) and
Dawning Information Industry Co., Ltd. (Sugon) appear on the Entity
List, the 1260H list, and the CMIC List because they meet the criteria
for designation on all three lists and the restrictions imposed by each
list have been determined to be impactful by the respective agencies
who administer each list.
The U.S. Government has a number of list-based tools to restrict
the activities of individuals and entities to protect U.S. national
security or foreign policy interests. These list-based tools allow the
United States to calibrate economic pressure and promote deterrence,
while mitigating unintended economic effects on the United States and
our partners and allies. For example, in certain circumstances, Export
Administration Regulations' (EAR) restrictions may have little
deterrent effect on a particular target that is not reliant on items
subject to the EAR . In such circumstances, the CMIC List's
restrictions on access to U.S. capital markets may have greater
deterrent effect.
Although BIS administers and enforces the Entity List, BIS is not
the sole agency that determines whether these companies would meet the
requirements for inclusion on the Entity List. Specifically, under the
EAR, the End-User Review Committee (ERC) makes all determinations for
additions to, modifications of, or removals from the Entity List.
Additions to the Entity List require a majority vote of the ERC, which
is chaired by Commerce, with representation from the Departments of
Defense, Energy, and State. The ERC determines whether the entity has
been involved in, is involved in, or poses a significant risk of being
or becoming involved in activities that are contrary to the national
security or foreign policy interests of the United States. Any member
of the ERC may make nominations for the addition of entities to the
Entity List and Military End User (MEU) List.
Where appropriate, BIS has taken action to impose EAR-based
restrictions on entities designated on other U.S. Government lists. For
example, on March 20, 2024, BIS released a final rule revising 15
C.F.R. 744.8 to implement EAR license requirements for all items
subject to the EAR for all persons blocked under eleven Office of
Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)-administered sanctions programs after an
extensive review of categories of end users and global activities that
implicate both financial and export control concerns. BIS will also
continue to apply long-standing license requirements involving all
items subject to the EAR in connection with persons sanctioned under
three other OFAC-administered sanctions programs. The EAR restrictions
in 15 C.F.R. 744.8 involving these fourteen OFAC-administered sanctions
programs serve as a force multiplier and complement OFAC's blocking
sanctions, which prohibit all transactions by U.S. persons, as well as
by non-U.S. persons if there is a U.S. nexus, that involve any property
or interests in property of designated or blocked persons, unless
authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC, or exempt.
Question 6. To date, the CHIPS Programing Office has announced
grant funding to seven major semiconductor manufacturers (Samsung
Electronics, TSMC, Intel, GlobalFoundries, Microchip Technologies, BAE
Systems, Micron, and Polar Semiconductor) totaling nearly $30 billion.
However, no supply chain projects have been awarded funding.
Question 6A. Additional announcements on CHIPS funding are
forthcoming. However, it remains unclear how much of the $39 billion in
semiconductor incentives is being made available under Notice of
Funding Opportunity (NOFO) #1 and how much will remain for materials
and equipment suppliers eligible under NOFO #2. What is your best
estimate for how much funding might remain for the upstream supply
chain?
Answer 6A. Background Response.--On June 26, 2024, the CHIPS
Program Office announced that it signed a non-binding preliminary
memorandum of terms for up to $75 million proposed Federal incentives
with Entegris, a Colorado company that is a key supplier of advanced
materials and process solutions for leading edge semiconductor fabs in
the US. We are currently negotiating potential preliminary memoranda of
terms with additional large semiconductor supply chain projects. In
addition, the second NOFO, dedicated to small supply chain projects,
received over 165 concept plans, and 53 applications were invited to
the full application stage.
Response.--The Department will support the upstream supply chain
both through NOFO #1 and NOFO #2. The Department is currently reviewing
applications for large supply chain projects with capital expenditures
greater than $300M or those that manufacture wafers under NOFO 1. Under
NOFO 1, the Department has signed one non-binding PMT and CPO is
currently negotiating potential preliminary memorandum of terms with
additional large semiconductor supply chain projects. Further, the
Department has reserved up to $500M for NOFO #2 where it received over
165 concept plans and invited 53 applications to the full application
stage.
Question 6B. Considering increased demand for materials and
equipment essential for the construction of new fabs, what is the
Commerce Department's timeline for announcing CHIPS awards for supply
chain projects?
Answer 6B. CPO received full applications for the Small-Scale
Supplier NOFO through July 3, 2024. The application review process will
consist of a review for eligibility and completeness, a comprehensive
merit review based on evaluation criteria, and the application of one
or more selection factors used to determine whether to recommend an
application for award. CPO will continue to make announcements of PMTs
for other applicants over the coming months. Each PMT will be
different--a representation of the innovative approach our team has
been taking to ensure that each project will be successful. See 6A
Background Response for additional context.
Question 6C. As the CHIPS Programming Office reviews applications
from supply chain projects, what consideration is being given to the
direct funding cap and tax credit ineligibility to help guarantee that
critical investments in semiconductor materials and equipment are, in
fact, made here in the U.S., as opposed to overseas?
Answer 6C. For each application received the Department evaluates
all funding sources available to applicants. The Department has worked
closely with the Treasury Department to understand the Investment Tax
Credit (ITC) eligibility as part of understanding the applicants'
funding needs. As mentioned in the answers above, the Department is
evaluating upstream projects through both NOFO #1 and #2. The
Department is evaluating a number of large supply chain projects under
NOFO #1 and has reserved funds for small suppliers through NOFO #2.
Question 7. In FY24 QFRs, the Department was asked about the
results the Department expected to see in the next year, 2 years, and 5
years from the BEAD program as well as the benchmarks, metrics, or key
performance indicators that would be used to evaluate the program. In
part, the Department responded ``NTIA has established robust financial
and program progress reporting mandates that are aligned to the
programmatic objectives and intended outputs and outcomes of each
discrete program. These initiatives will ensure reporting that tracks,
monitors, and collects data on project performance and results.'' The
response, while true, missed the intent of the QFRs. The intent was to
understand by what metrics the Department would know if the BEAD
program had actually been successful and to ensure the metrics judging
performance were chosen before implementation, not manufactured after
BEAD money had already flown through implementation. The following
questions reiterate more plainly the intent to understand what metrics
are used to judge success and what are the desired changes in those
metrics. The last question also asks about cost effectiveness in
metrics.
Question 7A. Which specific metrics is the Department using to
judge the program's success? Please be as specific as possible. These
metrics should include both program administration and outcomes for
U.S. citizens.
Answer 7A. The National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) will measure and evaluate the Broadband Equity,
Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program's success through the outcome of
subgrants awarded to states and territories to build broadband
infrastructure. The most critical key performance indicator (KPI) will
be the BEAD Program's ability to ensure all American households have
access to reliable and affordable high-speed Internet. This KPI will
account for the number of unserved and underserved locations that are
served with broadband.
Question 7B. What changes in those performance metrics between the
status quo and different program milestones (year 1, 3, and 5 for
example) will the Department view as a success? What changes in those
metrics would the Department see as positive but insufficient to be
called a success?
Answer 7B. Consistent with the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act, NTIA designed the BEAD Program to connect everyone in America to
affordable, reliable, high-speed Internet service. As Eligible Entities
and NTIA work to achieve that goal, NTIA has been and will continue to
track different performance metrics pertaining to each phase in the
BEAD Program implementation process. For example, in years 1-2 of the
BEAD Program, Eligible Entities' milestones included applying for and
receiving Initial Planning funds to support building out their State
Broadband Office (SBO) capabilities, community engagement activities to
support the development of their BEAD Program Five-Year Action Plan,
and development (including public comment posting) of their Initial
Proposal.
Once an Eligible Entity's Initial Proposal is approved, the next
set of BEAD Program milestones include the Eligible Entity's execution
of the Challenge Process and subgrantee selection process, which all
culminate in the submission of the Final Proposal (year 3). Following
NTIA's approval of an Eligible Entity's Final Proposal, the Eligible
Entity will receive funds to begin funding BEAD Program projects. For
this period, key Eligible Entity milestones include formally awarding
subgrants and initiation of BEAD Program funded infrastructure
projects.
As projects are implemented, key project implementation milestones
include environmental and historic preservation (EHP) clearance and
permitting approvals (generally within year 3-4 of BEAD Program
implementation) and construction (generally within years 4-6 of BEAD
Program implementation). During this phase, BEAD Program subgrantees
will deploy service on a rolling basis as they build infrastructure. At
this point, NTIA will track ``locations passed'' with infrastructure
and ``locations served,'' the latter of which indicates service is
available for the location to subscribe to.
The goal of the BEAD Program is to connect everyone in America to
affordable, reliable, high-speed Internet service. Each newly connected
household and business is an important intermediate milestone toward
that goal. NTIA is working closely with the Eligible Entities and
Federal partners that fund broadband infrastructure to maximize the
reach of BEAD Program funds and achieve universal connectivity. Every
milestone that moves the process forward in expanding affordable and
reliable high-speed Internet is a positive step to providing American
households with access to technologies essential to connect with their
communities, their democracy, and one another.
Question 7C. Does the Department have any metrics attached to
dollars spent (such as a ``unit x per dollar spent'') in it's metrics?
Which ones?
Answer 7C. The Department does not have BEAD Program-specific
metrics attached to dollars spent. The costs to serve the wide range of
unserved and underserved locations varies widely and depends on
multiple factors (e.g. population density, geographic terrain,
technology, pre-existing infrastructure/conduit vs. new (i.e.,
``greenfield'') build. Given these variables, it is difficult to
clearly benchmark a national cost, such as dollars per mile of deployed
infrastructure or dollars per location passed. For this reason, the
BEAD Program Notice of Funding Opportunity enables each Eligible Entity
to take into account the cost factors specific to their state or
territory as they award BEAD funding.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Deb Fischer
Question 1. As you are aware, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF) publishes aggregate information on
international tracing requests they process. Based on their most recent
report, National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment (NFCTA):
Crime Guns--Volume Two, PART IV: Crime Guns Recovered Outside the
United States and Traced by Law Enforcement, published January, 2023,
there were less than 1% of legally exported traced firearms, which
means that the other 99.33% of U.S. firearms legally exported are not
used in crimes.
Question 1A. Did BIS consider this report before finalizing its
Interim Final Rule ``Revision of Firearms License Requirements?''
Answer 1A. Yes, BIS considered various reports during its policy
review, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives, ``National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment''
(NFCTA) report published in January 2023.
Question 1B. Does BIS think that the policy decisions made in this
Interim Final Rule offset the fact that less than 1% of the total
firearms lawfully exported out of the U.S. are traced to crimes? If so,
please explain.
Answer 1B. In developing the changes implemented by the Firearms
Rule, BIS considered many reports and analyses on the diversion and
misuse of lawfully exported firearms. BIS worked together with
interagency export control partners in the Departments of Defense,
Energy, and State, as well as other Federal agencies with technical
expertise in firearms and related items.
In reviewing the ATF report and engaging with ATF experts, BIS
concluded that ATF does not have a database of every crime gun in the
world. Thus, its NFCTA report cannot be used to conclude that only 1%
of lawful firearms exports are used in a crime. Instead, the ATF report
analyzed a sample of firearms recovered by foreign law enforcement
agencies and sent to ATF for tracing. ATF's analysis of all
international crime gun trace requests received between 2017 and 2021
indicates that at least 11% of traced firearms were lawfully exported
from the United States and later recovered in a foreign country. For
countries outside of North America, at least 37% of firearms submitted
to ATF were lawful exports; for countries in Central America, at least
19% of firearms submitted to ATF were lawful exports. The report
therefore indicates that a sizeable portion of international crime guns
are diverted from lawful exports.
Moreover, through our review process, BIS identified specific
instances in which lawfully exported firearms were diverted in a manner
that threatens our national security and foreign policy objectives. In
one case, a firearm that was licensed for export to one country was
subsequently diverted to a bordering country and used in a political
assassination. BIS also identified instances of licensed firearms and
ammunition exports being diverted to Russia via commercial resellers in
third countries; such firearms and ammunition may be used to support
Russia's further invasion of Ukraine.
In addition, partner governments, particularly those in the Western
Hemisphere, have expressed concern that U.S. firearms are fueling
violence, criminal activity, and instability within their countries.
Based on this evidence and other evidence, we carefully reviewed and
updated our policy to increase scrutiny of firearms exports to make
sure they don't get into the wrong hands, while allowing exports of
firearms that don't threaten national security or foreign policy
interests. The vast majority of firearms exports are to partners and
allies, and the rule will not substantially impact these destinations.
In other words, the rule is narrowly tailored to address risks to
national security and foreign policy, and it will not unduly burden
industry.
Question 2. According to the Export Control Reform Act, ``Export
controls applied unilaterally to items widely available from foreign
sources generally are less effective in preventing end-users from
acquiring those items. Application of unilateral export controls should
be limited for purposes of protecting specific United States national
security and foreign policy interests.''
Question 2A. How do you respond to the concerns that the Rule would
be a detriment to our national security by creating more opportunities
in the international marketplace for other countries who are not our
allies (i.e. China, Russia, etc.) to fill the void?
Answer 2A. As with all EAR controls, the changes in the firearms
rules are designed to be as targeted as possible to accomplish BIS's
mission to protect the national security and foreign policy interests
of the United States. With respect to potential Russian and Chinese
backfill, the Department reiterates its commitment to combatting the
diversion and misuse of U.S. firearms by bad actors across the world,
while allowing the export of firearms to end users who do not present
national security or foreign policy risks. The Department will not
engage in a race to the bottom with Russia and China to sell U.S.
firearms to criminals and cartels.
Question 2B. Have you accounted for how the massive increase in
BIS's license caseload and resulting lengthened time for license
approval, particularly for allied partners like NATO countries, will
reverse the strides we made with Export Control Reform and damage our
country's ability to support our allies and trusted partners?
Answer 2B. BIS recognizes the critical importance of cooperation
with allies and partners on export control implementation and
enforcement. Coordinated implementation of export controls with
likeminded countries is a hallmark of BIS's policy making, particularly
in response to Russia's illegal war against Ukraine. BIS has made
several recent regulatory updates to facilitate secure trade with
allies and partners. This general approach informed our firearms policy
updates as well. A:1 countries are excluded from many of the new
requirements in the Firearms Rule, such as the requirement to submit a
purchase order, as well as a passport or national identity card for
natural persons, with an application to export firearms or related
items.
In addition, the rule creates transparency with respect to
destinations of concern, which will promote predictable and timely
review of license applications and will help industry and other
stakeholders understand the licensing process. It will also make the
review process more efficient, thereby allowing BIS to focus time and
resources on other license applications, including applications for
exports to partners and allies and applications to government end users
in all destinations.
Question 3. According to the January 2022 GAO Report cited in the
Interim Final Rule, ``27,000 firearms recovered from 2015 through
2019--the most recent data available--show that 40 percent came from
the U.S. and the rest from 39 other countries.'' This data covers
exports of firearms while controlled under the U.S. State Department,
Directorate of Defense Trade Controls and is nearly 10 years old.
Question 3A. BIS has been licensing the export of firearms for the
past 4 years. Does BIS have any current data to support such a drastic
policy change?
Answer 3A. The Department regularly reviews its rules and
regulations to better protect U.S. national security and foreign policy
interests, which include countering the diversion and misuse of
firearms and related items and advancing human rights. The Firearms
Rule is intended to reduce the risk of legally exported firearms and
related items being diverted or misused to fuel regional instability,
drug trafficking, human rights violations, political violence, and
other activities that undermine U.S. national security and foreign
policy interests.
As noted above, in developing the Firearms Rule, BIS identified
recent instances in which lawfully exported firearms were diverted in a
manner that threatens our national security and foreign policy
objectives. In one case, a firearm that was licensed for export to one
country was subsequently diverted to a bordering country and used in a
political assassination. In another, a license exception was used to
export parts for the unlawful assembly of firearms in Taiwan. In
addition, we have identified instances of licensed firearms and
ammunition exports being diverted to Russia via commercial resellers in
third countries; such firearms and ammunition may be used to support
Russia's further invasion of Ukraine.
In addition to those specific cases, Commerce reviewed aggregate
data showing that a substantial number of firearms recovered by foreign
law enforcement agencies were lawfully exported from the United States.
Partner governments, particularly those in the Western Hemisphere,
expressed concern over the diversion and misuse of lawfully exported
U.S.-made firearms in their countries that were fueling regional
instability, human rights violations, and political violence. For
example, governments in the Caribbean region expressed concern that
individuals are using license exceptions to bring firearms,
particularly semi-automatic handguns, to their countries, and that
those firearms are being diverted to violent criminals.
Question 3B. Do any of the 39 countries where firearms were traced
back to have a similar policy of creating a presumption of denial for
firearm exports?
Answer 3B. The factors set out in the rule are consistent with U.S.
National Security Memorandum 18, the Conventional Arms Transfer Policy,
and the criteria that the United Kingdom and allies and partners in
European Union member states apply to similar transactions, including
the consideration of human rights; the preservation of regional peace,
security, and stability; internal repression, tensions, or armed
conflicts; terrorism and organized crime risks; and diversion risks.
In particular, governments, in A:1 destinations have demonstrated a
commitment to export controls as participants in the Wassenaar
Arrangement and share our interest in countering diversion or misuse of
firearms and related items, advancing human rights, and promoting
mutual security. Over 100 countries are party to the Arms Trade Treaty
(ATT). The ATT requires states party to consider whether exports of
small arms and light weapons could be used to commit or facilitate a
serious violation of international human rights, undermine peace and
security, or be used for terrorism or organized crime.
Question 3C. Is there any concern that the presumed effectiveness
of actions taken by BIS will not outweigh the harm the Department's
policy is causing industry?
Answer 3C. BIS regularly reviews its rules and regulations to
determine the effectiveness of its policies, including the impact of
the policies on industry competitiveness. BIS will continue to monitor
effectiveness and impact metrics to determine if any further updates
are warranted based on national security or foreign policy.
Question 4. As you know, there is an ongoing surge in migrant
activity in Mexico, which has greatly impacted the Mexican railroad,
FXE. FXE is an important interchange partner with US rail carriers at
the border--facilitating the movement of freight to and from the United
States. These challenges have disrupted rail freight traffic through
the El Paso and Eagle Pass gateways. Embargoes have been placed in
response to the limited ability to handle these shipments in Mexico.
How is the Department of Commerce engaging with the Mexican government
to mitigate and prevent future rail disruptions at the border?
Answer. The Commerce Department follows disruptions at the U.S.-
Mexico border closely given the tremendous impact they can have on U.S.
trade and supply chains. Commerce has worked closely with U.S. Customs
and Protection (CBP) to coordinate with the Mexican government to
facilitate the movement of legitimate trade.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Shaheen. So now, the subcommittee stands in recess
until May 23, when we will have a hearing on the Budget Request
of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the
National Science Foundation.
Secretary Raimondo. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, thank you very much, Secretary.
[Whereupon, at 4:27 p.m., Wednesday, May 15, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 23, 2024
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 9:35 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen (Chair), presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Reed, Schatz, Van Hollen,
Heinrich, Peters, Moran, Capito, Kennedy, Britt, and Fischer.
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN
Senator Shaheen. Good morning. The Subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies of the Senate
Committee on Appropriations will come to order.
I want to start by, again, by thanking my Ranking Member,
Senator Moran for the great partnership we've had. We are
looking forward to writing yet another bipartisan CJS Bill, and
hopefully we will get started on that soon. I want to welcome
today's witnesses, NASA Administrator, Bill Nelson, former
Senator Bill Nelson. We still think about you as in the family
here. And NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan--I'm getting
better, right? Affectionately known as Dr. Panch--to discuss
their agencies' fiscal year 2025 budget requests.
Thank you both for being here today, and thank you Senator
Nelson and your team for coordinating the visit with Artemis II
astronaut, Christina Koch, who was in New Hampshire, and anyone
who can keep a room full of fifth graders engaged for over 40
minutes is a great emissary for NASA. So, we really appreciated
her visit, and I'm sure had a number of want-to-be astronauts
in that room after she was there.
President Biden's fiscal year 2025 budget request for NASA
and NSF would take steps in the right direction. The request
includes $10.18 billion for NSF, which is an increase of $1.12
billion or 12.4 percent above fiscal year 2024 enacted. For
NASA, the request is $25.4 billion, which is an increase of
$509 million or 2 percent above the 2024 enacted level.
However, as Administrator Nelson, you and I discussed, I do
have some concerns about the budget. I'm particularly concerned
about the cut to NASA Heliophysics for the third year in a row,
especially since the next Heliophysics decadal will be released
later this year. And of course, as you know, the University of
New Hampshire is a leader Heliophysics research, including
leading the HelioSwarm Mission.
I can point to the geomagnetic storm that we had last week
to underscore how important our understanding of the sun really
is. And fortunately, we didn't see any real damage as the
result of that storm, but we know that those storms can
interfere with satellite systems, with GPS, with radio
communications, and studying the sun gives us real much better
understanding of what the impacts could be.
So, it's also hard to overstate the effect of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act caps on your agencies. We were forced to cut
nearly $1 billion from critical science agencies in the fiscal
year 2024 bill, and struggled to meet the high expectations to
continue to invest in the Artemis Mission and the hugely
popular CHIPS and Science Act.
So, we've seen reduced investments in innovation and space
exploration. Those investments are through NSF and NASA really
drive our economic competitiveness. They inspire the next
generation of STEM leaders, and I worry that underinvesting in
our Nation's future, especially in scientific innovation, will
be challenging as we think about our future competitors.
So, whether developing the future of artificial
intelligence or lunar space, NASA and NSF are on the cutting
edge of technological innovation and instrumental in training
the next generation of scientists, innovators, teachers, and
technicians, in particular, in the STEM fields that will define
economic growth and national security for decades to come.
And I think we all understand on this Committee, I know you
both do, that we can't take our continued leadership in
innovation and technology for granted. Our global competitors,
especially China, are not waiting idly by. They're investing
heavily in scientific and technological innovation. Earlier
this month, China launched a mission to the dark side of the
moon, which demonstrates an impressive technological
capability.
Both NASA and NSF drive us onward through curiosity-driven
inquiry and exploration. And they ensure that the foundation
for the future in fields like AI and space exploration is built
in the United States. It's imperative that we lead, not just
keep pace, which is why I continue to be a staunch supporter of
both NASA and NSF.
And with that, let me recognize my Ranking Member, Senator
Moran.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Senator Moran. Chair Shaheen, thank you very much. Thanks
for your cooperation in this setting. And our other
deliberations and work on the CJS Appropriation Subcommittee. I
look forward to, again, having a successful opportunity for us
to advance causes that we both believe in and that are
important to the country.
And welcome to NASA Administrator Nelson, and to Director
Panchanathan. We're delighted to have you back in front of our
Committee. I think it's appropriate that both of you are here
at the same time. While you have different missions, and
different responsibilities, and opportunities, the outcome of
what each of you do benefits the country in very similar ways.
The President's budget of $1.1 billion increase for NSF and
a $500 million increase for NASA, while these increases are
significant, given the fiscal responsibility spending caps,
they remain a challenge. We did the best that we could do with
the numbers that we had for both of your agencies in fiscal
year 2024, and I'm committed to doing that again.
That challenging allocation last year led to some tough
decisions, but in my view, the subcommittee, the Full
Committee, and the Senate, and Congress were able to protect
many pivotal programs and missions, including Senator Nelson,
Administrator Nelson, the Artemis Program.
Artemis will cement a new era in space exploration for the
United States. There are 16 diverse Kansas suppliers that are
supporting Artemis I Mission, and many more suppliers will be
helpful in support of future Artemis missions.
Ryan Hernandez, Administrator Nelson, who you met when we
visited D-J Engineering in Wichita, said at a press conference
in which you were participating, and this is what he said, ``I
got goosebumps right now just to be a part of the Artemis
Program and show off what we're able to do for NASA.''
Artemis is not only important to our aerospace
manufacturing workforce, but it's an inspiring opportunity for
the next generation, and that's very important for our national
economy and our national security. As Senator Shaheen said,
China is a threatening adversary. Territorial land grabs on the
lunar service and is making significant strides in their own
space program.
Over the past several years, we have laid groundwork for
the United States to remain the leader in the world space
domain, but the outcome of that battle is not certain. It's
imperative that we continue to build upon the foundation, which
will ultimately move us beyond returning to the moon and on
toward new goals such as landing astronauts on Mars.
As we approach an Artemis II launch, I look forward to
hearing today an update on the mission and how the United
States, will maintain our leadership in space. NASA's influence
extends beyond space exploration. It drives innovation,
education, and economic growth, which can also be said for the
National Science Foundation.
A critical component of maintaining our Nation's aerospace
and aviation leadership is advanced manufacturing. And Dr.
Panchanathan, I appreciate the conversation we had just before
this hearing began.
I would highlight for my colleagues on the Committee that
the Chair of the Commerce Committee and I have introduced
education and workforce legislation dealing with advanced
manufacturing, and I bring it to your attention for your
consideration.
Advanced manufacturing combines technology and
craftsmanship to create economic growth and high-paying jobs,
while also helping us to outcompete China in terms of
efficiency and productivity. Institutions like Wichita State
and Pittsburgh State University, which the NSF director visited
last year, are at the forefront of advanced manufacturing and
material science, driving innovation and competitiveness.
This hearing, I hope, will explore how we maximize the
impact of Federal funding, encourage collaboration among
agencies, academia, and private sector, and importantly,
inspire future generations of science and technology to make
certain investments are robust and fiscally responsible.
I'm committed to working with both of you, both of our
witnesses, to ensure the Nation out competes all others in
exploration, discovery, and innovation. And I would say to both
of you, what you are doing is a noble calling. Our country
desperately needs your agencies to be successful.
Our Committee needs to do what it can do to be helpful in
that outcome. But we face tremendous challenges in our world
today, and what happens in your departments and agencies are
hugely important to have the success that we can have.
So, I wish you well, and we're here to help. But today,
we'll hear what your requests are and how we can be that
helpful.
Thank you both.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Moran.
And we will now hear from our witnesses. Administrator
Nelson, will you begin?
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And the fact that you are very legitimately an expert in
Heliophysics these times must be particularly exciting to you.
Not only the big solar storm that just occurred, but also the
alignment of the moon, and the earth, and the sun into a total
eclipse that a good part of America was able to see.
It's the first total eclipse that I had been in. I went to
Cleveland, and it's a phenomenon that you just don't forget.
Suddenly, the earth is turning dark in the middle of the day
and the temperature is dropping rapidly, and at total eclipse,
things are dark. And so, thank you for your expertise in
Heliophysics.
Senator Shaheen. Well, I appreciate that. I don't want
anybody to think I'm an expert. I believe in lowering
expectations, but I'm certainly an admirer.
Senator Nelson. And Senator Moran, as you were talking, I
want to recall that one of the finest space museums is located
in Hutchinson, Kansas. And I had no idea when I was out there
visiting with you. It's extraordinary.
And further to the south in Oklahoma, in Weatherford,
Oklahoma, is another extraordinary space museum. That one, as a
result of General Tom Stafford, the Gemini Apollo 10 and Apollo
Soyuz astronaut who just recently passed away. One of the great
treasures of America, and he has left a legacy there. Not
unlike your museum in Kansas, that is a great benefit to follow
the lead of the National Air and Space Museum here.
Senator Moran. Your comments are very, very welcome,
especially the first half of what you had to say. But I would
tell you that while you must have arranged a call for Senator
Shaheen, at some point in time, not too long ago, the
astronauts for Artemis called as a group. And the beginning of
that conversation was, ``You do know, Senator Moran, that you
have the best Space Museum in the world in Kansas.
[Laughter.]
Senator Moran. That was also a very refreshing call. Thank
you.
STATEMENT OF BILL NELSON, ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL
AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Senator Nelson. And I am delighted to be here with Dr.
Panch, and what the two of you said is absolutely true between
the two agencies. We have a good bit of the Federal
government's research and development. This is critical for our
future.
And we know what you've been through. The constraints that
you had to put on the budget for 2024 and 2025 as a result of
coming up against the artificial ceiling of a debt ceiling that
had to be raised so that the government would not go into
default. And in order to get the votes to pass that you had to
agree to compromises.
And some of those compromises were the reduced levels that
are now affecting our two agencies. So much so that it's almost
$5 billion less in NASA over those 2 years, 2024 and 2025. And
when you come into, as we both been talking here about science,
that is an effect of almost $2 billion, you know, over those 2
years. $1 billion a year just in science.
And so, Senator Kennedy and I were talking about southern
colloquialisms. When you've got a five-pound potato sack and
you got 10 pounds of potatoes that you want to have, but you
only got a five-pound sack, you can't get everything done. And
that's what we are facing on this fiscal year 2025, and what we
faced last year on fiscal year 2024 budget. We can't get
everything done.
And therefore, I've had to make some uncomfortable choices.
Some of those choices we can go into detail more' Mars Sample
Return, OSAM, those missions had to be scaled back because
something had to be scaled back. The rest of NASA with the
resources that you gave us, just we are very privileged.
I am very privileged to try to offer some kind of
leadership to a bunch of wizards, and they really do impossible
things. The James Webb Telescope, the hitting the asteroid and
moving it, thus grabbing, and sucking up the sample from
another asteroid, the needle nose jet that's going to fly the
end of this year, supersonic, and it's not going to have that
loud sonic boom.
I can go on and on the daily science that goes on the
International Space Station, going back to the moon in order to
be able to go to Mars. And that's what we're engaged in. And
thank you for the opportunity to come and share this with you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of The Honorable Bill Nelson, Administrator
Chair Shaheen, Vice Chair Moran, and Members of the Subcommittee, I
am pleased to be here to discuss the President's $25.4 billion request
for NASA for FY 2025. The President's FY 2025 budget request for NASA
expresses the continued commitment from the Biden-Harris Administration
to maintain and amplify America's preeminent place of leadership in
humanity's quest to know the cosmos. The President's Budget prioritizes
investments with a demonstrated return of value for the American
taxpayer--investments in the future of deep space exploration,
sustainable aeronautics, scientific endeavor, technological might, and
inspiring the next generation, the Artemis Generation.
As history has proven, as the present has shown, and as the future
will continue to demonstrate, to invest in NASA is to invest in the
power, the principles, and the global leadership abilities of the
United States. Investing in NASA benefits America and Americans.
We benefit America through NASA's Artemis campaign. The Artemis
campaign represents the most diverse and broad coalition in space
exploration. We are working with American companies and international
partners to return astronauts to the Moon and then land the first
astronauts on Mars.
Under NASA's leadership, humanity will make new scientific
discoveries, test new technologies, and explore more of the lunar
surface than ever before. Earlier this year, we witnessed the first
successful lunar landing by an American company carrying NASA and
commercial payloads to the Moon's South Pole region. The science and
technology payloads sent to the Moon's surface as a part of NASA's
Commercial Lunar Payload Services program will help lay the foundation
for human missions and creating a sustainable human presence on the
lunar surface. The Artemis II crewed flight test, fully funded in the
President's Budget, will, for the first time in over half a century,
fly astronauts around the Moon. The budget makes investments in the
long-term architecture for Artemis, including funding for human landing
systems and extra-vehicular suits; lunar transportation, habitation,
and fission surface power that will enable humanity's sustainable
presence on the Moon; and the Gateway lunar outpost, built with
international partners, that will help enable operations on the surface
of the Moon.
We benefit America through advancing our space technologies, which
support the growth and competitiveness of the U.S. space industry and
the creation of good-paying jobs and will enable future missions. By
developing lunar robotic missions, communications on and around the
Moon, in-situ resource utilization demonstrations, Commercial Lunar
Payload Services, and other key elements, NASA will deepen our
understanding of the Moon to prepare for humanity's long-duration stays
on the lunar surface, and later, Mars. Additionally, NASA is partnering
with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and industry to
develop and demonstrate advanced nuclear propulsion, one of several
technologies under study that could enable more effective
transportation in deep space.
We benefit America through our leadership in low-Earth orbit. Last
year, NASA celebrated 25 years of International Space Station (ISS)
operations, including 23 years with continuous human presence. This
year, we continue to use commercial services to safely transport cargo
and astronauts to the ISS to conduct critical research, science, and
technology demonstrations. These operations inform and reduce risk for
future missions to the Moon and Mars and provide insight and
breakthroughs that directly affect life on Earth, including NASA's
contribution to the President's Cancer Moonshot initiative. The
President's Budget supports NASA in maintaining critical operations in
low-Earth orbit while paving the way for a future sustained,
commercially enabled American presence in space to continue creating
scientific and economic opportunities.
We benefit America through our discoveries through the eye of
NASA's James Webb Space Telescope, discoveries that represent an order-
of-magnitude shift in our capability to see the universe. In 2023,
NASA's Webb Telescope continued to unfold the secrets of our universe
and inspire the world through breathtaking images taken during its
first year of operations. The Webb telescope pulled back the curtain on
some of the farthest galaxies, stars, and black holes ever observed;
found methane and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of a planet outside
our solar system; and more. The President's budget request for NASA
Science will continue supporting operations of groundbreaking missions
like Webb, Hubble, and Perseverance. The request also invests in new
missions and capabilities that will enable the next generation of world
class science, including the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, the
Near-Earth Object Surveyor, Europa Clipper, Dragonfly, and Habitable
Worlds Observatory Technology Maturation, to name just a few.
We benefit America through NASA's leadership in climate and Earth
science. Much of what we know about our changing planet is rooted in
NASA's more than 40 years of Earth observations. With over two dozen
instruments aboard the ISS complementing those in free- flyer orbits,
NASA uses its unique vantage point in space to better understand our
changing planet. With the President's Budget, NASA will continue to
bring critical, life-changing climate data back down to Earth. NASA's
new Earth Information Center at Headquarters in Washington DC, and
online, helps fulfill the Biden-Harris Administration's call to make
climate data more understandable and accessible for all people. Through
current and future Earth science missions like Landsat Next and
building out the multi-satellite Earth System Observatory, NASA will
continue to help all humanity understand and address the impacts of
climate change.
We benefit America through NASA's key role in improving air travel
and reaching net-zero aviation greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, by
accelerating research and development of aircraft technologies that are
cleaner, quieter, and greener. NASA is working with American companies
to develop next generation aircraft and engines that would make
commercial airliners 25 to 30 percent more efficient. That will benefit
our planet, the U.S. commercial aviation sector, and passengers around
the world. Through ambitious experimental projects like the X-66
Sustainable Flight Demonstrator and the X-59 Quiet Supersonic
Technology Low Boom Flight Demonstrator, NASA will continue to help
revolutionize the future of air travel.
We benefit America when NASA identifies, enables, and utilizes
talents from across all of humanity. This includes robust outreach
efforts to students of every background to pursue education in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics and then implement that
education through public service at NASA or within America's space
industry.
All of these benefits--for America, for humanity, and for the
planet--add up to this: To invest in NASA advances our Nation's
abilities and leadership in making the impossible possible, in making
the unknown known, and in inspiring the world through discovery while
creating competitive and good-paying jobs in all 50 states. The
President's Budget will help bring our Nation, our economy, and our
people deeper into a new era of American ingenuity, innovation,
imagination, and leadership.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Administrator Nelson.
Dr. Panchanathan.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SETHURAMAN PANCHANATHAN,
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you so much.
Good morning, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and
Members of the Committee. It's truly an honor to do this with
you and Administrator Nelson. And we always enjoy working with
each other, not only in terms of our partnership, but doing
this hearing together, too. So, I really appreciate your
partnership.
In 1950, the National Science Foundation was established to
continue the Nation's investments in science and engineering
that had begun during World War II to explore what Vannevar
Bush described as the endless frontier, so that we might
continue to unlock the secrets of our world and the universe,
and in doing so, strengthen our economic and national security.
74 years later, we are surrounded by advancements that have
been made possible by NSF investments in people and ideas. The
Internet, smartphones, wireless technologies, 3D printing,
doppler, radar, barcodes, nanoscale science, kidney exchanges,
robotics, CRISPR, and MRI technologies, even the Magic School
Bus, where all supported by NSF.
Hundreds of thousands of researchers, entrepreneurs, and
STEM educators are supported by NSF every year, and countless
startups have spun off from NSF's investments. Millions of
people from elementary school students who are inspired by the
promise of STEM to those already in the workforce, and are
looking to acquire new skills for jobs in emerging industries
are touched by NSF every year.
When we look at the early investment in an idea that
revolutionizes an industry and yields incredible profit, we
call that a wise investment. NSF continues to be an extremely
wise investment for the United States. Every single American
benefits every day from our commitment to unleashing the
American spirit of innovation.
However, while we benefited greatly from being the first
Nation to invest heavily in fundamental research and
innovation, our competitors are rapidly catching up. Other
governments, most notably the PRC, have copied our playbook,
and they're investing heavily today in hopes of controlling the
innovations of the future.
Take for example, semiconductor production. The offshoring
of this critical sector, which happened slowly over many years,
became a national security imperative when we felt the effects
of chip shortages in automobiles and other industries. Congress
and the administration acted quickly to invest in bringing that
capacity back to the United States.
However, we must ensure that we do not face the same
challenge in AI, in quantum information science, advanced
manufacturing, or other critical technologies. That is why
Congress did not pass just a CHIPS Act, but a CHIPS and Science
Act, which recognize the investments in research today are the
key to a more prosperous and secure future tomorrow.
The fiscal year 2025 budget, President's budget request for
NSF, includes $10.2 billion, an investment that is vital to the
United States, continued leadership in science, engineering,
and technology. NSF has worked quickly and with intentionality
to implement the CHIPS and science side.
Our flagship example of this is the regional innovation
engines, which are the largest broadscale investments in the
Nation's history to spur place-based innovation in critical
fields of R&D and economic and societal importance.
Earlier this year, we announced the first 10 full-scale NSF
engines, which will be the catalyst for the industries of
tomorrow, and build new powerhouses of innovation and high-tech
entrepreneurship in communities throughout our country.
In addition, NSF has funded 58 planning grants for future
engines in almost every State of our Nation. Chair Shaheen and
Ranking Member Moran, this includes two exciting projects in
New Hampshire and Kansas. In New Hampshire, a team led by the
Northern Forest Center is working on advanced forest ecosystem
management and forest product innovation to unlock new
opportunities in a circular bioeconomy for New England.
I can say that to all the Senators because every one of you
is a representative of regional innovation engines. I won't
have time. And in Kansas, Kansas State University is leading a
robust network of partners focused on biosecurity, biodefense,
and advanced manufacturing. Both projects are excellent
examples of the incredible potential for coupling the ingenuity
of our research enterprise, with the strength of our
communities to create opportunities everywhere.
But these investments must be sustained to be successful.
The fiscal year 2025 request includes $205 million for the NSF
regional innovation engines, which will be critical to the
continuation of the first 10 engines, and our ability to move
forward with any of the projects currently in development.
NSF is committed to inspiring and empowering the talent
that resides in communities throughout our Nation. We will
continue to be intentional in growing capacity in EPSCoR
jurisdictions, investing in minority, serving and emerging
research institutions, and in our community colleges.
I'm happy to report that NSF not only met, but exceeded the
CHIPS and Science EPSCoR funding targets for fiscal year 2023,
and we expect that to continue into the future, which I know
was a shared priority for NSF and for this Committee.
NSF has also keenly focused on protecting the integrity of
our investments. We have taken research security head on,
prohibiting funding for researchers that participate in malign
foreign talent program, developing analytics capabilities to
assess risks, providing training for the research community,
and working closely with law enforcement and the intelligence
community.
In the near future, we will begin piloting a risk rubric
that will guide the agency in making determinations about the
national security implications of projects in sensitive
technologies.
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
Committee, our country is at a critical moment. We must seize
the promise of technologies like AI while continuing to invest
in the curiosity-driven research that feeds the industries of
tomorrow and builds the workforce of the future.
In addition, we must invest in world-class research
infrastructure that makes discoveries possible. There is
incredible demand in the need for the next generation of
telescopes, research vessels, high performance computing, and
more. In addition, we face growing needs to recapitalize our
infrastructure in the Arctic and Antarctic, two regions that
are critical to not just scientific progress, but our
geopolitical priorities.
Curiosity-driven research use, inspired innovations, and
research infrastructure are all interrelated and are all
critical to our global leadership. A prime example in is NSF's
efforts to stand up the National AI Research Resource. The
NAIRR, is essentially democratizing AI research capabilities
and unlocking the potential of AI to transform fields from
healthcare to weather modeling.
Our leadership in AI, quantum advanced wireless is critical
to the economic and national security. These technologies must
be rooted and guided by core American values such as openness,
explainability, and integrity. I'm certain that our innovators
are ready to meet this challenge.
However, we simply cannot meet this moment without
investing significantly in the people who make this all
possible. NSF greatly appreciates the support of this
Committee, and I look forward to working with you to ensure
American leadership in science, engineering, and technologies
for generations to come.
Thank you for the opportunity.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan, Director
introduction
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the Committee,
it is a privilege to appear before you to today to discuss the U.S.
National Science Foundation's (NSF) Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 budget
request to Congress. This is an exciting time for science and
technology, and we are seeing new breakthroughs every day in industries
like artificial intelligence, quantum science, biotechnology,
microelectronics, advanced manufacturing, and other emerging
industries. For nearly 75 years, investments in the research enterprise
have fostered advancements in knowledge and progress in technology that
have made the United States a global leader in innovation. The FY 2025
budget request builds on that foundation to ensure that the nation will
remain at the forefront of science and technology into the future.
In the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-507),
Congress established the U.S. National Science Foundation and charged
it with supporting research ``to promote the progress of science; to
advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the
national defense; and for other purposes.'' Since then, NSF investments
have driven economic growth, contributed to technology that enhances
national security, strengthened the workforce, enabled breakthroughs in
health and medicine, led to countless new technologies and consumer
products, improved quality of life across the country, and sustained
the nation's role as the international leader in scientific discovery
and innovation.
In many cases, NSF investments in fundamental research led to
critical outcomes, sometimes decades later, which were not foreseen.
Many of today's transformational technologies, including artificial
intelligence, quantum information science, and biotechnology, are the
result of sustained investments going back several decades. Our future
success depends on our ability to continue to expand the foundations of
basic research, generate new knowledge and breakthroughs, and translate
those discoveries into innovative new technologies.
The President's FY 2025 budget request of $10.183 billion is an
essential investment in critical areas of research, education,
discovery, and innovation that will make it possible to accelerate our
progress, prosperity, and competitiveness. It builds on the historic
framework laid out in the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 for how we spur
innovation and entrepreneurship, foster educational opportunities and
enhance the workforce, and ensure that curiosity-driven exploratory
research and use-inspired, solutions-oriented innovation continue to
power the nation's growth, success, and leadership.
nsf's three pillars
NSF's vision for the future of the science and engineering
community is built on three key pillars. The pillars are essential to
how we achieve the ambitious goals of the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022
and ensure that investments like the FY 2025 budget request can realize
their full potential.
The first pillar is to continually strengthen NSF's core mission to
accelerate discovery and advance state-of-the-art research through
ongoing and sustained investments in every area of fundamental,
exploratory research. This is the engine that drives the nation's
advancement of knowledge and enables the translation of new ideas, new
information, and novel approaches into products, solutions, and
benefits for people, consumers, and society. The more we invest in this
engine, the more it will power growth, prosperity, success, and
leadership for the nation.
The second pillar is that we must inspire more people to join the
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) community, and we
must especially create opportunities and pathways for the Missing
Millions, the millions of people throughout the nation who have the
talent and ability to be part of STEM but are not making their way into
STEM careers. Only by building a strong, diverse, and broad workforce
of the future will we be able to capitalize on new opportunities that
are the foundation for our future success, competitiveness, and
international leadership.
The third pillar is accelerating the Nation's technology and
innovation enterprise by enabling researchers, industry, entrepreneurs,
and innovators of all kinds to translate research into solutions,
products, and benefits for society. This means fostering partnerships
and nurturing talent so that innovation ecosystems can contribute to
the economy and our nation's global competitiveness at speed and scale.
four strategic themes
There are four strategic themes in the FY 2025 Budget Request.
These themes are areas in which investments today are critical to our
success tomorrow, and in which failure to take action now will put
America's STEM enterprise and our international competitiveness at a
disadvantage in the near future.
1. Advance Emerging Industries for National and Economic Security
2. Build A Resilient Planet
3. Create Opportunities Everywhere
4. Strengthen Research Infrastructure
These themes align with the Administration's priorities of
expanding basic research to tackle grand national challenges and
empowering new approaches to applied research that spur technology
transfer. The themes, expanded upon below, span the broad portfolio of
fundamental research that is the heart of NSF's mission. They also
stimulate new efforts and connect existing efforts throughout the
research portfolio and implement requirements of the CHIPS and Science
Act.
Advance Emerging Industries for National and Economic Security
NSF's Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships
(TIP), the first new directorate at NSF in 30 years, sits at the
crossroads of exploratory, curiosity-driven research and use-inspired,
solutions-oriented innovation to drive translational research across
all fields of science and engineering. This new directorate is a
critical new approach in how NSF carries out its mission in today's
high-tech economy, and for FY 2025, $900 million is requested for the
TIP Directorate to support its work to ensure that the U.S. remains in
the vanguard of technology competitiveness for the foreseeable future.
TIP advances key technologies; accelerates the translation of research
results from the laboratory to the market and society; addresses
national, societal, and geostrategic needs; and cultivates new
education pathways leading to a diverse and skilled future technical
workforce comprising researchers, practitioners, technicians,
entrepreneurs, and educators. The TIP Directorate collaborates closely
with all of NSF's directorates and offices in its aims to usher in a
new era for American innovation, accelerating research to impact and
enhance job and economic growth and national security. Serving as a
cross-cutting platform that leverages, energizes, and rapidly advances
use-inspired research and innovation as well as workforce development
across all STEM fields supported by NSF, TIP helps to ensure that the
U.S. remains in the vanguard of technology competitiveness for the
foreseeable future.
A major achievement for the TIP Directorate is the NSF Regional
Innovation Engines (NSF Engines) program. In January of this year, NSF
was proud to announce the inaugural NSF Engines awards, which--if fully
funded--could represent one of the single largest broad investments in
place-based research and development in the nation's history. Spanning
more than 15 states, these initial NSF Engines will harness regional
talent and partnerships to spur innovation in areas such as
semiconductor innovation, energy, climate resilience, environmental
sustainability, textiles, agriculture, and regenerative medicine. These
innovation ecosystems will catalyze new business and economic growth in
those regions of America that have not fully participated in the
technology boom of the past several decades. They will advance
equitable and inclusive use-inspired research, entrepreneurship, and
workforce development to nurture and accelerate regional industries.
Collectively, they will contribute to long-term U.S. competitiveness.
$205 million is requested for the NSF Engines for FY 2025.
The NSF Engines program is but one example of the agency's approach
to spurring innovation, technological progress, and leadership in
innovation across the nation. Additional programs include:
--The NSF Convergence Accelerator program will regionalize its
approach to accelerate the translation of use-inspired research
by investing in regional cohorts of transdisciplinary, multi-
sector teams pursuing technology solutions to location-specific
challenges in food and agriculture, disaster response and
mitigation, and transportation, to name a few. $100 million is
requested for Convergence Accelerator for FY 2025.
--The NSF Accelerating Research Translation (ART) program, in
alignment with the CHIPS and Science Act authorization, will
support institutions of higher education that wish to build the
necessary infrastructure to boost their overall institutional
capacity to accelerate the pace and scale of translational
research. Importantly, ART will result in a network of
ambassadors who will champion translational research throughout
the Nation. $45 million is requested for ART for FY 2025.
--The NSF Experiential Learning in Emerging Industries (ExLENT)
program will support inclusive experiential learning
opportunities designed to provide cohorts of diverse learners
with the crucial skills needed to succeed in the key technology
focus areas and prepare them to enter the workforce ready to
solve the Nation's most pressing societal, economic, national,
and geostrategic challenges. $20 million is requested for
ExLENT for FY 2025.
--NSF Entrepreneurial Fellows, authorized in the CHIPS and Science
Act, will provide a diverse cohort of Ph.D.-trained scientists
and engineers with the resources they need to bring promising
ideas and technologies from the lab to market and society.
These NSF Entrepreneurial Fellows will forge connections
between academic research and government, industry, and
finance, leading the way in technology translation. $10 million
is requested for NSF Entrepreneurial Fellows in FY 2025.
Investments in Emerging Industries are especially important. These
are areas of science and technology that will have enormous impacts on
the economy and society and where U.S. leadership is critical to
establishing foundations for future development that reflect the
nation's values. By investing in our leadership today, we can ensure
that each of these areas will continue to serve the interests of our
economy, workforce, and communities into the future.
--Artificial Intelligence, including machine learning, autonomy, and
related advances, investments will bring together numerous
fields of scientific inquiry--including computer and
information science; cognitive science and psychology;
economics and game theory; education research; engineering and
control theory; ethics; linguistics; mathematics; and
philosophy--to advance the frontiers of trustworthy AI,
including advancing perception, learning, reasoning,
recommendation, and action in the context of specific fields
and economic sectors. NSF investments are needed to develop new
foundational AI theory and implementation techniques, advance
safety and security of AI systems, and foster novel AI methods
that are inspired by use cases in specific application domains
and contexts. NSF will play a key part in supporting
implementation of the President's Executive Order on the Safe,
Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial
Intelligence (AI E.O.). For example, NSF investments in efforts
such as the National AI Research Resource pilot will create
opportunities for more researchers to access the computational,
data, software, model and training resources needed to push the
boundaries of AI and apply AI across areas of science and
engineering. $729.16 million is requested for Artificial
Intelligence for FY 2025.
--Biotechnology, including genomics and synthetic biology,
investments will support fundamental and translational
research, infrastructure, and education to understand and
harness biological processes for societal benefit. It will
propel advances in genomics, bioinformatics and data analytics,
structural and computational biology, biophysics, synthetic and
engineering biology, tissue and metabolic engineering, medical
technology, the development of new types of biomaterials, bio-
inspired data storage and microelectronics, and
biomanufacturing, as well as accelerate the ability to harness
biological systems to create goods and services that contribute
to agriculture, health, security, manufacturing, and resilience
to climate change, including natural and anthropogenic disaster
prevention and mitigation. As part of the National Engineering
Biology Research and Development Initiative codified in the
CHIPS and Science Act, NSF investments in research at the
intersection of the biological, physical, chemical, data,
computational and information sciences and engineering, and
social, behavioral and economic sciences will accelerate
scientific understanding and technological innovation in
engineering biology as well as assure public acceptance of the
products of engineering biology. $421.18 million is requested
for Biotechnology for FY 2025.
--Advanced Manufacturing, including robotics and sensing
technologies, investments will accelerate breakthroughs in
manufacturing materials, technologies, and systems through
fundamental and translational, multidisciplinary research that
transforms manufacturing capabilities, methods, and practices.
NSF investments will further advance manufacturing through
advanced energy and industrial efficiency technologies,
resilient manufacturing strategies, novel methods in
engineering biology, next-generation materials, and the power
of data science, automation, robotics, and machine learning to
intelligently design and develop future approaches that are
secure, sustainable, and resilient to natural and anthropogenic
disasters. $386.67 million is requested for Advanced
Manufacturing for FY 2025.
--Quantum Information Science (QIS), including quantum computing and
simulation, will advance fundamental understanding of uniquely
quantum phenomena that can be harnessed for information
processing, transmission, and measurement in ways that
classical approaches do less efficiently, or not at all.
Current and future applications of QIS differ from prior
applications of quantum mechanics by using distinct properties
that do not have classical counterparts. The development of new
applications for QIS will lay the groundwork for one of the
major technological revolutions of the 21st century. NSF
investments are a key component of the National Quantum
Initiative (NQI), aligning with the Administration's focus on
critical and emerging industries. $294.37 million is requested
for Quantum Information Science for FY 2025.
--Microelectronics and Semiconductors, including advanced computer
hardware, investments will address the microelectronics and
semiconductor challenges facing our Nation due to technological
and global trends, such as the end of Moore's Law and
offshoring of semiconductor fabrication and manufacturing. NSF
will advance novel semiconductor design and manufacturing,
enabling future advanced computing systems, including quantum
computing and networking technologies. Investments will also
advance next-generation materials and highly parallel chip
designs that will improve the performance of AI algorithms as
well as integrate advanced energy efficiencies for low-power
and high-performance devices that will drive a mobile and
wireless future, and smart sensors that will interface between
biosystems and electronics. $174.97 is requested for
Microelectronics and Semiconductors for FY 2025. Additionally,
the CHIPS and Science Act provides NSF with $200 million over 5
years for semiconductor workforce development activities.
--Advanced Wireless, including communications and immersive
technology, investments will bridge knowledge gaps and advance
innovations in areas critical to future generations of
communications technologies, networks, and services, such as
novel wireless devices, circuits, protocols, and systems;
mobile edge computing; distributed machine learning and
inference on mobile devices; human-machine-network
interactions; ultra-low-latency connections; and dynamic
spectrum allocation and sharing, all while ensuring security
for all users. This investment will serve to advance both new
active spectrum applications and spectrum used for non-
commercial purposes, such as advanced receiver design and
interference mitigation techniques for radio astronomy and
atmospheric science. Additionally, NSF co-chaired the
formulation of a 2021 National Strategy to Secure 5G
Implementation Plan, which noted that fifth-generation wireless
networks will spur innovation and enable the development of new
markets, products, and services, thereby contributing to
economic growth and job creation. Of particular importance in
the Secure 5G Implementation Plan was the need to invest in the
security and resiliency of these networks; NSF's Resilient and
Intelligent Next-Generation Systems (RINGS) program, in
collaboration with two other Federal agencies and nine
companies, is directly aligned with this emphasis. NSF
continues to be a leader in the development of Open Radio
Access Networks (O-RANs); the FY 2025 Request will build upon
efforts initiated in FY 2024 to augment testing and validation
of O-RAN systems via the Platforms for Advanced Wireless
Research (PAWR) testbeds, which are jointly funded by NSF and
an industry consortium comprising more than 35 companies and
associations. Finally, through programs like RINGS and PAWR,
NSF will accelerate the lab-to-market translation of innovative
research outcomes in academic and government labs to successful
products and services for the benefit of society. $167.90
million is requested for Advanced Wireless for FY 2025.
Build A Resilient Planet
--U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).--($897.18 million)
supports research that contributes to the USGCRP goals to (1)
advance scientific knowledge of interconnected natural and
human systems and risks to society from global change; (2)
build global capacity to respond to global change through
international cooperation and collaboration; (3) enhance the
Nation's ability to understand and respond to global change by
expanding participation in the Federal research enterprise; and
(4) provide accessible, usable information to inform decisions
on mitigation, adaptation, and resilience. In FY 2025, NSF will
expand its activities related to risk and resilience, including
efforts that will improve climate hazard and disaster
resilience in communities, develop technologies needed to
advance resilience research, support research on the human
health implications of climate change, and grow the human
capital to take on the climate challenges of today and
tomorrow. NSF will also initiate activities for new approaches
related to design in extreme environments.
--Clean Energy Technology (CET).--($500.52 million) investments are
designed to identify and support transformative research to
advance U.S. leadership in the clean energy transition and meet
the U.S. Net Zero objectives for 2030 and beyond. NSF's
investments in integrated clean energy research and education
span longstanding programs as well as focused new solicitations
and will support high-risk, high-reward research ideas across
the science and engineering spectrum that create broad new
understanding and innovations to support energy efficiency,
enhance sustainability, support net-zero solutions for
decarbonization, adapt to and mitigate climate change, spawn
new industries and transform existing industries, and support
translation and partnerships for innovation, as well as
education and workforce development. NSF also will support
multidisciplinary research in areas such as affordable green
housing and sustainable systems for clean water, clean transit,
and other infrastructure. In FY 2025, investments will focus on
fundamental and convergent research, energy research
infrastructure, innovation and translation, and education and
workforce development.
--NSF will continue investments in greenhouse gas (GHG) research
($69.50 million), where NSF-funded projects will develop
measuring strategies as well as reporting and verification
systems with an emphasis on methane.
--Examples of other programs supported within the Build a Resilient
Planet Theme in FY 2025 include further development of the
National Discovery Cloud (NDC) for Climate ($30.0 million), a
resource that will federate advanced computational, data,
software and networking resources, democratizing access to a
cyberinfrastructure ecosystem that is increasingly necessary to
further climate-related S&E, and the Focus On Recruiting
Emerging Climate and Adaptation Scientists and Transformers
(FORECAST) ($15.0 million) program, which centers on
individuals from communities that have traditionally been
underrepresented in STEM, making resilience research relevant
to students and equipping participants with the broader skills
necessary to excel in their future endeavors inside and outside
academia.
Create Opportunities Everywhere
Today, ideas have been democratized in a significantly new way.
Only a few decades ago, cutting- edge information in science and
technology was largely confined to universities, research institutions,
and industry R&D. But today, even the most advanced research knowledge
is often only a click away online and the resources necessary for
developing high tech applications and products are more accessible than
ever to more people than ever. While ideas have been democratized,
opportunities have not. These investments represent NSF's strategic
commitment to developing the future-focused STEM workforce that enables
Americans from every demographic, in every part of the country, to
develop the skills and capabilities necessary to make the most of every
new idea.
This is a comprehensive approach for attracting, supporting, and
advancing opportunities for groups underrepresented in STEM. It is a
whole-of-NSF strategy that incorporates all directorates and offices
and surpasses prior efforts by striving to ensure equity in program
delivery. It focuses on expanding access and inclusion in STEM along
individual, institutional, and geographic lines.
To accomplish the essential goal of building the large, robust STEM
workforce necessary to rapidly capitalize on every new idea, NSF relies
on four guiding principles.
1. Address research equity
2. Build capacity
3. Foster collaboration and partnerships
4. Build in support for future generations
In FY 2025 we are building on existing investments to expand and
scale Broadening Participation efforts by incorporating them into NSF's
core research portfolio. For individuals, NSF will continue to make
investments in democratizing STEM education and workforce. For
institutions, NSF will be more intentional about how it engages
Minority-Serving Institutions and Emerging Research Institutions in its
formal and informal programs. For jurisdictions, NSF will expand
support in EPSCoR jurisdictions to ensure geographic diversity.
NSF's commitment to finding talent provides opportunities that
build strong STEM pathways that lead to a well-paid workforce and
support the U.S. economy. Key investments include these areas:
--Graduate Research Fellowship Program.--($341.11 million) will
support 2,300 new fellows in FY 2025.
--Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR)
Office.--($258.37 million) provides strategic programs and
opportunities that stimulate sustainable improvements to EPSCoR
jurisdictions' R&D capacity and capability. EPSCoR aims to
stimulate research that enhances jurisdictional competitiveness
in NSF disciplinary and multidisciplinary research programs,
especially those that drive economic growth and geographic
diversity. Also, pursuant to the CHIPS and Science Act, all NSF
research divisions will commit additional support for
meritorious proposals from EPSCoR jurisdictions.
--Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI).--($55.92 million) program
seeks to enhance the quality of undergraduate STEM education at
HSIs and to increase retention and graduation rates of
undergraduate students pursuing degrees in STEM fields at HSIs.
The HSI program seeks to build capacity at HSIs that typically
do not receive high levels of NSF grant funding.
--The Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation (LSAMP).--
($55.0 million) is an alliance-based program that works to
increase the number of STEM baccalaureate and graduate degrees
awarded to populations historically underrepresented in STEM
disciplines.
--Historically Black Colleges and Universities Undergraduate Program
(HBCU-UP).--($44.94 million) is committed to enhancing the
quality of undergraduate STEM education and research at HBCUs
to broaden participation in the Nation's STEM workforce. HBCU-
UP provides awards to develop, implement, and study evidence-
based innovative models and approaches for improving the
success of HBCU undergraduates so that they may pursue STEM
graduate programs and/or careers.
--Growing Research Access for Nationally Transformative Equity and
Diversity (GRANTED).--($40.0 million) will improve the Nation's
research support and service capacity at emerging and
underserved research institutions. GRANTED will use a variety
of mechanisms and programs to further NSF's reach in advancing
the geography of innovation and engaging the Missing Millions.
GRANTED activities will support the enhancement of research
administration and post-award management as well as the sharing
and implementation of effective practices that lead to
competitive proposal development for external funding in STEM
research and training.
--Eddie Bernice Johnson INCLUDES Initiative (NSF INCLUDES).--($37.35
million) is a comprehensive national initiative to enhance U.S.
leadership in STEM discoveries and innovations focused on NSF's
commitment to diversity, inclusion, and broadening
participation in these fields. The vision of this program is to
catalyze the STEM enterprise to work collaboratively for
inclusive change, resulting in a STEM workforce that reflects
the population of the Nation.
--Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology (CREST).--
($30.31 million) enhance the research capabilities of minority-
serving institutions (MSI) through the establishment of centers
that effectively integrate education and research. CREST
promotes the development of new knowledge, enhancements of the
research productivity of individual faculty, and an expanded
presence of students historically underrepresented in STEM
disciplines.
--National STEM Teacher Corps.--($30.0 million) aims to bring greater
attention and recognition to outstanding STEM teachers in
today's classrooms, reward them for their accomplishments,
elevate their public profile, and create rewarding career paths
in which all STEM teachers can aspire, both to prepare the
future STEM workforce and to create a scientifically literate
public.
--Historically Black Colleges and Universities Excellence in Research
(HBCU-EiR).--($26.13 million) program supports projects that
enable STEM and STEM education faculty to further develop
research capacity at HBCUs and to conduct research.
--The Tribal Colleges and Universities Program (TCUP).--($20.90
million) provides awards to Tribal Colleges and Universities,
Alaska Native-serving institutions, and Native Hawaiian-serving
institutions to promote high quality STEM education, research,
and outreach.
--Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP).--
($9.93 million) program aims to increase the number of African
American, Hispanic American, Native American Indian, Alaska
Native, Native Hawaiian and Native Pacific Islander (or AGEP
population) faculty in STEM at all types of institutions of
higher education. The program funds projects that increase the
understanding of institutional policies and practices to help
doctoral candidates, postdoctoral scholars, and faculty improve
their academic pathways to tenure and promotion in the STEM
professoriate.
--Build and Broaden (B2).--($8.36 million) is an innovative program
that supports research collaborations and partnerships between
scholars at minority-serving institutions (MSIs) and other
institutions or organizations. B2 supports projects that build
capacity and enhance research productivity in the social and
behavioral sciences at MSIs; contributes to more innovative
science by diversifying research and widening the STEM
pathways; and broadens participation of underrepresented
entities in STEM entrepreneurship and innovation.
--Analytics for Equity Initiative.--($1.25 million) builds on the
Evidence-Based Policymaking Act. Led by NSF with four
interagency partners, this program will fund researchers to
produce rigorous empirical research and actionable
recommendations in equity-related topics aligned to agency
Learning Agendas. Federal agencies and other organizations can
use the resulting recommendations to increase the impact of
equity-focused evidence-based strategies.
Strengthen Research Infrastructure
Support for Major Facilities operations and maintenance (O&M)
($1,120.33 million) continues to reflect a balance among multiple
priorities. NSF divisions carefully allocate resources between research
grants and O&M costs for research infrastructure. In addition to
regular O&M needs to keep a facility functional, support for upgrades,
significant periodic maintenance, and infrastructure renewal must also
be addressed within Facilities O&M, which accounts for over 10 percent
of NSF's total request in FY 2025. NSF continues to explore ways to
invest in research infrastructure, at all scales, to keep pace with
changing technologies, increased demand by users, and expanding
research opportunities.
The Mid-scale Research Infrastructure (Mid-scale RI) ($192.45
million total, comprising $134.42 in agency-wide Track 1 and Track 2
program investments plus $58.03 million in division level programs),
program supports research infrastructure with a total project cost
above the upper limit for the Major Research Infrastructure program
($4.0 million) and below the Major Research Equipment and Facilities
Construction (MREFC) threshold ($100.0 million). This dedicated funding
line implements a high-priority, agency-wide mechanism that includes
upgrades to major facilities as well as stand-alone projects.
The goals of the Mid-Scale RI program are to:
--Provide access to cutting-edge mid-scale research infrastructure,
including instrumentation.
--Enable agile development and implementation of frontier scientific
and engineering research infrastructure with a high potential
to significantly advance the Nation's research capabilities.
--Train early-career scientists and engineers in the development and
use of advanced research infrastructure.
In FY 2025, NSF investments will support Mid-scale RI Track-1 ($4.0
million to $20.0 million awards), funded through the Research & Related
Activities account, and Track-2 ($20.0 million to $100.0 million
awards), funded through the MREFC account. Both use an approximately
biennial funding opportunity; the third solicitation for Mid-scale RI-1
(NSF 22-637) was issued in FY 2022, with awards made in FY 2023 and
more anticipated in FY 2024. In addition, proposals have recently been
received in response to the Mid-scale RI-2 solicitation (NSF 23-570),
with awards anticipated in FY 2025.
The Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) ($82.82 million) program
is responsible for catalyzing new knowledge and discoveries by helping
STEM professionals acquire or develop the instrumentation needed for
innovative science and engineering research. MRI grants support
instrumentation in all NSF-supported research disciplines. In FY 2025,
NSF will continue the implementation of CHIPS and Science Act
provisions that began in FY 2023. These include waiving cost-sharing
requirements for new MRI projects and supporting projects for equipment
and instrumentation to conserve or reduce the consumption of helium.
Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MRFEC).--
Construction projects that require an investment of more than $100
million are generally supported in NSF's MREFC account. The FY 2025
Request includes funding for two projects: the Antarctic Infrastructure
Recapitalization program, an enduring effort that replaces the
Antarctic Infrastructure Modernization for Science or AIMS project, and
the Leadership-Class Computing Facility (LCCF). The MREFC account also
supports the Mid-scale RI Track 2 program, covering projects in the $20
million to $100 million range.
--The Leadership-Class Computing Facility ($154.0 million) is
envisioned as a distributed facility that will provide unique
computational and data analytics capabilities, as well as
critical software and services, for the Nation's science and
engineering research community to enable discoveries that would
not be possible otherwise. The project will deploy a
comprehensive range of education and outreach activities that
will expand and nurture our Nation's future STEM workforce in
data and computational science. Construction of the LCCF,
funded from the MREFC Account, is planned to begin in FY 2024
now that the development and design phases, funded from the
R&RA Account, are complete.
--NSF manages all U.S. Antarctic activities as a single, integrated
program, making Antarctic research possible for scientists
supported by NSF and other U.S. agencies. Impacts of the COVID-
19 pandemic on U.S. Antarctic Program (USAP) operations
required construction activities at McMurdo Station to be
suspended and caused a significant delay in the completion of
AIMS. In the meantime, other investments in facilities and
infrastructure on the continent have emerged as priorities that
cannot be deferred until after completion of AIMS. As a result,
the Antarctic Infrastructure Recapitalization (AIR) ($60.0
million) program was conceived as a portfolio of investments in
infrastructure across the USAP stations that will replace AIMS.
On- ice AIMS construction will continue in FY 2025 with a focus
on meeting near-term needs, and unfunded parts of AIMS will be
considered for incorporation into the longer-term AIR program.
--In FY 2025, no funding is provided for HL-LHC Upgrade ($0.0
million) as the project is being completed. NSF investments are
being used to upgrade components of the ATLAS and CMS
detectors. These upgrades are approximately 40 percent complete
and are anticipated to be finished in FY 2027.
--In FY 2025, no funding is provided for Vera C. Rubin Observatory
($0.0 million) as the eleven-year construction project is
completed. Rubin will be an 8-meter class wide field optical
telescope capable of carrying out surveys of the entire
southern sky.
--Mid-scale Research Infrastructure, Track 2 (Mid-scale RI).--See
discussion of Mid-scale RI above.
Design of Potential New Major Facility Construction Projects.--The
FY 2025 Request supports the continued design of a single telescope
within the U.S. Extremely Large Telescope (U.S. ELT) program.
Consistent with a recent statement by the National Science Board to
fund one telescope in the ELT program, NSF will initiate an external
expert panel to conduct a review of the two U.S. ELT projects that will
inform NSF's decision of which project will remain in the Major
Facility Design Stage. A future decision remains about whether to
advance that project to Construction, pending completion of the Final
Design Phase.
research security
NSF is expanding capabilities and competencies to protect the U.S.
science and engineering enterprise through its Research Security
Strategy and Policy activity. In January 2022, the National Science and
Technology Council's Research Security Subcommittee, co-chaired by NSF,
issued implementation guidance for National Security Presidential
Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33) on National Security Strategy for United States
Government-Supported Research and Development. The August 2022 CHIPS
and Science Act contained several research security provisions that NSF
is implementing. NSF participation in discussions with the U.S.
research community and with international colleagues and development of
common frameworks for understanding research security are major
components of the NSF Research Security activity, which is expected to
continue to grow in FY 2025. Specific activities include:
--As required by Section 10338 of the CHIPS and Science Act, NSF will
establish the Research Security and Integrity Information
Sharing Analysis Organization, to be known as the SECURE
center, which will serve as a clearinghouse for information to
empower the research community to identify and mitigate foreign
interference that poses risks to the U.S.-funded research
enterprise. The SECURE Center will share information and
reports on research security risks and provide training to the
research community. NSF aims to grant a SECURE Center award
through cooperative agreement(s) by the end of FY 2024,
officially standing up this Center in FY 2025.
--NSF will fund a Research on Research Security (RoRS) workshop on
May 23-24, followed up with a RoRS funding program in FY 2025.
The primary goals of the program will include assessment of the
characteristics that distinguish research security from
research integrity, improving the quantitative understanding of
the scale and scope of research security risks, developing
methodologies to assess the potential impact of research
security threats, and assessing the additional research
security risks in an innovation system that includes more use-
inspired research rather than staying well within the bounds of
fundamental research.
--NSF will continue to scale up its analytic capabilities to
proactively identify conflicts of commitment, vulnerabilities
of pre-publication research, and risks to the merit review
system in NSF proposals and the Small Business Innovation
Research due diligence process in FY 2025.
--Through a partnership with the Federal government interagency
community, NSF published research security training modules for
the research community in FY 2024. NSF will continue to fund
the delivery of these modules and assess if more are required
in FY 2025.
--As required by Section 10339B of the CHIPS and Science Act, NSF
will develop and implement a new framework and IT system to
begin to collect Foreign Financial Disclosure Requirements
(FFDR) from NSF recipient institutions of higher education in
FY 2024. NSF will refine the collection and analysis of these
reports to enable OCRSSP to identify potential threats in FY
2025.
--NSF will develop and implement a new policy to review NSF proposals
for national security concerns in FY 2024. As part of the new
policy, NSF will develop TRUST, Trusted Research Using
Safeguards and Transparency, comprised of risk-based indicators
to inform the basis of this decisionmaking process. NSF intends
to pursue and implement mitigation measures to address and
minimize risk. NSF will begin a pilot program in summer FY 2024
and will continue the pilot program through FY 2025.
sexual assault and harassment prevention and response
The success of the science and engineering enterprise depends on a
safe research environment free from sexual assault and harassment, and
NSF is dedicated to doing everything within the agency's power to
achieve that. NSF has taken several steps to ensure that the United
States Antarctic Program (USAP) is an environment that is free from
sexual assault and harassment, and this continues to be a priority for
the agency going forward. In 2022, NSF established a Sexual Assault and
Harassment Prevention and Response (SAHPR) office to serve as a single
focal point for this issue. We issued the Action Plan for Antarctica
and established the SAHPR Task Force who were tasked with carrying out
that Action Plan, which was implemented through a series of activities
over the next year; all Action Plan items were completed by the end of
that season. An on-ice victim advocate was deployed to Antarctica in
October 2022 and listening sessions with USAP participants were held
from December 2022 through February 2023. NSF established
[email protected] in January 2023 as a single resource line for the
NSF community who experienced sexual assault or harassment and all
physical safety upgrades were completed by the end of February 2023. In
April 2023, the NSF Antarctic 24/7 Helpline was added as an additional
resource for the community and a supplement to the advocate, counselor,
chaplain, and marshal stationed on the continent. These are only the
initial steps NSF is taking in Antarctica, and changes to address the
community's needs will continue to be made on an ongoing basis.
In parallel to these and other actions, NSF has used, and continues
to use, other levers available in the Antarctic Support Contract to
address this issue. NSF ensured that contractors understood the
expectation that they and their sub-contractors must adhere to the
codes of business ethics and integrity that are part of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation. NSF also made necessary contract modifications
clarifying the scope of required reporting of sexual assault and
harassment, increasing reporting requirements to a quarterly basis, and
expanding the level of detail to be reported. In September 2023, we
added a SAHPR Office contact for streamlining reporting, and more
recently, a Special Assistant for SAHPR Program Implementation was
appointed within the Office of the Director. NSF is continuing to work
to ensure that a range of support and reporting mechanisms exist so
that everyone in the USAP community knows how to reach the type of
support they need.
Many of these changes come directly from engagement with, and
suggestions from, the USAP community. NSF is grateful to the community
and hopes that they will continue to share their thoughts and ideas.
The agency knows that there is more to do and that this must be a
sustained effort, not just in Antarctica but throughout the research
enterprise. While the SAHPR Action Plan was designed for Antarctica,
and that continues to be its primary focus, NSF is also moving into a
broader implementation phase that goes beyond specific responsibilities
for the US Antarctic Program to ensure a unified agency approach.
Ensuring a safe, harassment-free environment for researchers will
continue to be a priority for NSF.
improve access to america's statistical data
Consistent with recent executive orders that highlight the
importance of objective and trustworthy data and in alignment with the
intentions of recent legislation, NSF is supporting efforts to
streamline secure access to Federal data and build capacity for all
individuals to use these data to inform critical policy and research
discussions. Key investments include continued leadership of
government-wide evidence-building activities and initiatives such as
continued management of the Standard Application Process portal for
applying to access confidential data from statistical agencies and
units. FY 2025 funding will support expansion of this portal in
features, usability, agency participation, and datasets. In addition,
this funding will support the National Secure Data Service
demonstration project. This demonstration project was authorized in the
CHIPS and Science Act of 2022. FY 2025 work will continue to support
the testing of a secure computing space as well as data concierge
services and privacy-preserving technologies to expand the utility and
use of Federal statistical data for evidence building.
conclusion
This is a critical moment for the Nation's leadership in science
and technology. Our ability to compete internationally, to power our
economy, to foster a dynamic workforce, and to enhance our national
security relies on sustained investments in the STEM enterprise and the
American people who make it successful. The President's Fiscal Year
2025 Budget Request affirms the Administration's commitment to
investing in the science and engineering research that makes that
possible. It is an investment in our nation's leadership, in the future
of our workforce and economy, and in the role our nation plays as an
international leader in discovery and innovation.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. With the
continued support of this Committee and Congress, NSF stands ready to
build on the CHIPS and Science Act and more than seven decades of
investments to continue to strengthen our nation's progress, support
our economic and national security, and foster opportunities everywhere
so that innovation can happen everywhere, at speed and scale.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you both very much for your
leadership and for your enthusiasm. We will now go to
questions. Each member will have 5 minutes for questions in
this round, and we will take members in the order of arrival
beginning with myself and Senator Moran.
Administrator Nelson, I really appreciated the opportunity
we had yesterday to talk about some of the challenges that NASA
has given the fiscal constraints we're under. As you pointed
out, we can't get everything done that we want to get done in
the current fiscal environment. And on a bipartisan basis, we
made the decision to prioritize the Artemis campaign because of
the importance to scientific exploration and national security.
But as we know, the decision came at the expense of a
number of other NASA directorates and as well as agencies
across the CJS Bill. So, one of the things that I hope you will
share with the Committee is what NASA is doing to hold
contractors accountable for cost overruns and for scheduling
delays.
Because as the NASA Inspector General estimates, that the
first four Artemis launches will cost $4.2 billion each, not
including $42 billion in formulation and development costs over
the past 12 years. So, I think it's important that Congress and
the American people know that we're doing everything we can
both to support those missions, but to make sure they're as
cost effective as possible.
Senator Nelson. Absolutely, Madam Chair. And as a matter of
fact, that was one of the reasons that, many moons ago, we
passed the NASA Act that set us off on the dual course with
commercial partners. And so, as we go back to the moon in order
to go to Mars, we go back with not only international partners,
but commercial partners.
And the lander for the moon is being done by two commercial
companies. The first competition was won by SpaceX, the second
by Blue Origin. And in each case, the estimated cost of the
lander was borne one-half by the commercial company, both
SpaceX and Blue Origin. In other words, that cost NASA half.
Senator Shaheen. And can you speak to the dollar savings?
Senator Nelson. Sure. In that, as a matter of fact, the
winning bid on the SpaceX was roughly--no, let me say this,
SpaceX had offered $3 billion. That would be NASA's cost. The
next two competitors offered $6 billion and $8.5 billion
dollars.
So, if you take a target of $6 billion, SpaceX is paying
for half of the lander. The same thing happened in the second
competition that Blue Origin won. And of course, SpaceX was not
a part of that. And basically, Blue Origin's part of the
lander. In their case, it was roughly $3 billion as well.
Now, but you're asking a question about all of the science
issues, and I'm happy to report to you that in the 2023, 2024
development projects, of the 16 major projects, excluding Mars
Sample Return, and we can talk about that of the 16, only 4 are
behind time schedule.
Senator Shaheen. Well, I was really asking about the space
mission, the Artemis Missions as a whole. And given the high
cost, has NASA considered an independent review board for
exploration? I came on late into the James Webb Telescope
development, but I know that when the independent review board
was set up, that that's when that project really started moving
and the cost stayed within the constraints that we had.
So, do you think that it would make sense to look at
something like that as we're looking at the space mission
overall?
Senator Nelson. We are constantly having other eyes come
in. There has been a GAO report. There has been the Inspector
General's report. The fact is that when you go to the moon in
order to go to Mars, it's hard. And that's what President
Kennedy said at Rice University. He said, we go to the moon,
not because it's easy, but because it's hard.
And I would call to your attention, since you're
specifically asking about Artemis, that Artemis, they're saying
it's $4 billion a copy, but that's all the development costs
are in there. The more that you fly out Artemis, then you're
going to amortize that cost and your costs are going to come
down.
We have done other things. There were 16 contracts on the
Artemis program. We are trying to consolidate that in just a
few contracts so we can get greater responsibility and cost
control.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. I'm over time, but we can come
back to this in the next round.
Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. As I walked in, Senator Shaheen apparently
was asking a question that I intend to ask, so I look forward
to that further conversation. Let me continue, though,
Administrator, with Artemis. Given the national security
implications of China and the South Pole of the Moon, do you
agree that Artemis is the priority of NASA as we go through our
appropriations process?
Senator Nelson. It is clearly one of the top priorities
because of the geopolitical situation that we are in a space
race. But it portends something else. The reason we're going
back to a different part of the moon, the South Pole, is we
know there is ice in the crevices of the rocks that are
constantly shattered. We have a probe on a commercial lander
going later this year that is going to dig and see at the South
Pole if there's water.
If there is, then there is rocket fuel; hydrogen, and
oxygen, and that becomes a very one valuable resource. That's
why China is going to the South Pole as well. And my concern,
as I've stated publicly, so this is nothing new, that if we let
China get there first, mindful of what China has done on terra
firma, namely, go to the South China Sea, the Spratly Islands,
saying this is now ours. Stay out everybody else, I'm concerned
that they might--you can tell where a fella's going by where he
is been, and that's my concern.
Senator Moran. Senator Nelson, let me remind you of your
days of being the United States Senator. The clock only gives
me 5 minutes. Let me add to the Artemis conversation. The
budget request indicates that there will be a further delay in
the launch dates on Artemis II, slipping to September 2025, and
Artemis III launching no earlier than September 2026.
How confident are you in those dates for Artemis II, and
III, and subsequent missions?
Senator Nelson. First of all, we don't fly until it's ready
because of the safety of our astronauts. We think that
September of 2025 for Artemis II is a realistic date,
obviously, September of 2026 for Artemis III, which as you
think about it, and I want this in the record, Artemis III, if
you compare it to the Apollo program, is a combination of
Apollo 9, 10, and 11, which was the landing on the moon and
part of Apollo 8 that orbited the moon 10 times.
And so, it is a difficult task, and if we land, it is
dependent on SpaceX having their lander ready. Now, they have
hit all of their milestones, and in a couple of weeks, they're
going to launch that huge rocket that has 33 Raptor engines in
its tail. And they're going to do more showing the space
worthiness of it. It is my hope that SpaceX will be ready with
their lander.
Senator Moran. Thank you. Dr. Panchanathan, I mentioned in
my opening statement that this week Senator Cantwell and I
introduced legislation to ensure that NSF is supporting
artificial intelligence education, particularly in rural areas
of the country.
Among other provisions, the NSF AI Education Act would
support scholarships for undergraduate and graduate students
who are studying artificial intelligence, including as it
pertains to education, agriculture, and advanced manufacturing.
It also supports the provisions of AI resources to colleges
and universities around the country with an emphasis on EPSCoR
universities, tribal colleges, historically Black colleges and
university, among other institutions. I just would like your
reaction for the record to that legislation.
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you so much, Senator Moran. This is
a fantastic opportunity for us to really scale rapidly the AI
workforce. Let me give you a concrete number. We would need 3
million AI workers trained as early as 2026 in our country. We
cannot wait. Our competitors are out competing and out
innovating. This is not the time to slow down. This is the time
to accelerate, and accelerate really fast.
These investments are very critical in AI because it
impacts every sphere of what we do, whether it's agriculture.
You mentioned agriculture. We launched 25 AI institutes in the
last 3 years, and let me underscore that with we invested, at
NSF, $300 million. We've got partnership investments of $200
million, including from the private sector.
This model of public-private partnership is how NSF is
advancing in these critical areas. So, I'm very grateful for
what you have done, and I think this is timely, important, and
I would say very urgent.
Senator Moran. I wasn't too concerned with you going over
time as I was with Senator Nelson since you were endorsing my
legislation.
[Laughter.]
Senator Moran. Thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran.
Senator Peters.
Senator Peters. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks to both
of you for being here as witnesses, but also all the great work
that you do each and every day.
Dr. Panch, I certainly share your belief that AI holds
incredible promise for economic opportunity and human
advancement, and that's why I want also want to applaud your
budget's planned investments in this technology. Certainly, you
are leaning in heavily, and it's quite apparent from your
testimony, you're quite enthusiastic and passionate about it as
well, which we appreciate.
It's also why, through last Congress, I championed the AI
Scholarship-for-Service Act which passed as part of the CHIPS
and Science Act back in 2021. My bill requires NSF to study the
feasibility of starting a scholarship-for-service program on
AI, and it found to be feasible to carry out that program.
So, my question for you, sir, is can you provide an update
on the status of the feasibility study and speak to the
potential positive impact of an AI scholarship-for-service
program similar to NSF CyberCorps Scholarship for Service that
you currently have?
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you, Senator. That's a very
important question. I just want to underscore that the
CyberCorps program has been hugely successful. Again, needing
scale, but hugely successful.
So, this model of doing that for AI is an excellent idea.
And to the point that you raised on the CHIPS and Science Act
about delivering the report, we are about to deliver the report
to Congress on the implementation and the feasibility of such a
program.
I would say that the initial conditions are extremely
favorable for us to engage in this kind of, you know, AI
scholars program, because I think our country needs AI in every
sphere, as I said, particularly in Federal Government, in
provincial government, State governments, as well as other
aspects.
We need a huge number of well-trained, skilled, technical
workforce, and advanced trained workforce. So, this is very
well placed, and you will have the report submitted soon to
Congress. So, we are on our way in terms of developing that in
response to the CHIPS and Science Act.
Senator Peters. Great. We'll look forward to looking at
that, and then making sure we're making the investments we need
to make it a reality. I appreciate that.
And my only ask for you is as you're working to implement
the Act, I would certainly like to invite you to Michigan to
see some of the amazing scientists we have. I know you have
some connections to the University of Michigan.
Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
Senator Peters. But we have a number of great universities
and really some amazing high tech innovative startups,
particularly in AI. And if you're willing to come, we would
love to host you.
Dr. Panchanathan. I would love to be there. There are four
AI institutes where Michigan universities are participating
just to put this over the 2025, which is very exciting. That's
what AI Institute do. They bring every part of our Nation. And
so, I'm excited to come with you, sir.
And there are many other investments, not only in the
University of Michigan, Michigan State, but all the
institutions in Michigan. We believe that it should be all of
the institutions building, bringing the capacity for our Nation
at this important time. Thank you so much.
Senator Peters. Great.
Dr. Panchanathan. And I accept the invitation.
Senator Peters. Excellent. Well, we'll be sure to provide
that shortly.
Administrator Nelson, great to see you again in the halls
of Congress. I certainly enjoyed immensely serving with you
here in the Senate. But I know you're incredibly happy where
you are. It's a lifelong passion of yours.
As you know, NASA and the space program success are
absolutely dependent on having a strong supply chain. And I'm
proud that Michigan is a top 10 State in aerospace
manufacturing, and it is home to over 900 aerospace-related
companies, and continuing to grow especially given how we know
how to make things in Michigan.
Advanced manufacturing is a key component of our
competitive success, globally. And that also includes
components for rockets in spacecraft that we're going to need
for missions like Artemis II and others. So, my question for
you, sir, is first off, will you come to Michigan to visit with
some of these amazing manufacturers? But also, would you talk a
little bit how NASA's dollars are supporting our small to
medium domestic manufacturers, not just the big ones we all
think about, and how we have to do more to have that incredible
innovation that comes out of these smaller companies?
Senator Nelson. As we discussed, I'm coming in July. Look
forward to it. Just on the Artemis program to the moon, you
have 44 Michigan companies that are suppliers. By the way, we
take very seriously the Buy American Act and the Executive
Order that is similar. And so, I'm looking forward now on small
suppliers.
I don't have the percentage in my head, but NASA has made a
real effort over the time of these big space contracts that a
certain percentage of that does go to small businesses. And I
can get the specific small businesses in Michigan that would be
a part of that, but overall, nationwide, it's a fairly sizable
percentage.
And that's why each year when the Small Business
Administration does their scorecard, you will see that NASA
comes out very well.
Senator Peters. Great, thank you. Thank you for your
continued efforts on that.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Peters. We could keep
both of you busy all the time visiting our States.
Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I have listened to each of you gentlemen with admiration.
Thank you for your intellect and your service. Mr.
Administrator, I know I don't need to tell you about the
Michoud Assembly Facility in Louisiana. We are NASA's rocket
factory. We're very proud of it. A few years ago, a hurricane
blew our roof off, and you helped us to get it repaired. And I
want to thank you for that, Mr. Administrator.
I want to ask for your help with our administration
buildings. Building Number 1 and Building Number 2, they were
built, I think, in 1943. We're spending about $1 million a year
in repair costs. We've certainly reached the point of
diminishing returns. Can you help us get some new buildings
there?
Senator Nelson. I can help you, but I need your help too.
We have $5 billion of unfunded infrastructure needs. Give you
an example. Last year, I was begging, and borrowing, and
stealing to get the money for a little old bridge between
Virginia and Maryland, so it wouldn't fall in the water. And we
couldn't launch our rockets from Wallops Island, Virginia. And
we shouldn't have to do that. I was trying to cut deals with
Senator Richard Shelby in order to get that because it was a
priority. But we've got $5 billion----
Senator Kennedy. You can cut a deal with me.
Senator Nelson. Well, let me tell you, you've got 2,600
NASA employees in Louisiana. You've got that machine facility.
You've got 13 companies that are directly working on Artemis.
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Senator Nelson. And need the body of that rocket is built
right there, outside of New Orleans.
Senator Kennedy. Well, if we get you some funding for the
infrastructure that we know you need, I hope you'll keep our
need in mind with respect to those two administration
buildings.
Let me ask you about your work on the Mars habitation and
life support systems. I know we talked about it in past
Committee testimony, and we had some language in the
Appropriations Bill. Basically, you've got a manufacturer, as I
appreciate it, mockup, and eventual habitats for your missions
to Mars. Is that right?
Senator Nelson. I think you're referring to where we put
people in an enclosure and try to simulate what it would be
like----
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Senator Nelson [continuing]. For a year----
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Senator Nelson [continuing]. On the surface of Mars?
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Senator Nelson. That is going on. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Can assembly centers like Michoud play a
role in that?
Senator Nelson. If I recall, is going on at the Johnson
Space Center in Houston.
Senator Kennedy. Yes, sir. We can do it better.
Senator Nelson. Well, I'm always for better, faster, and
cheaper.
Senator Kennedy. That's me, too. Let's look better, faster,
cheaper.
Senator Nelson. There you go.
Senator Kennedy. Let's sit down and talk.
Senator Nelson. Okay.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Finally, in the time I have left,
tell me about your SLS heavy-lift rocket for the Artemis
missions.
Senator Nelson. Well, the core of it is built right in
Louisiana.
Senator Kennedy. Yes, sir.
Senator Nelson. Then, they stack the engines on it. They
barge it up to not too far across the Louisiana-Mississippi
line to the Stennis Space Center. They test the rockets, and
then, the assembled core of the rocket is barged to the Kennedy
Space Center where then, vertically, it is stacked in the
vehicle assembly building.
This next Artemis II that will go next year will start to
be stacked this summer. The solid rockets first, and then, the
core stage that's made in Louisiana will be done this fall. We
tested it without a crew. The rocket performed flawlessly. It
was so good that we did a whole bunch of additional tests.
But now the test is to put four human beings in that
spacecraft on the top of the rocket. And that's the next
mission; to check out all the life support systems in the
spacecraft, which is the capsule on top called Orion.
And then, the third one is where we go into lunar orbit.
They transfer into a SpaceX lander. It goes down, they stay 6
days on the surface. We're only going to send two of four
astronauts down. They come back and rendezvous in lunar orbit,
and then come home.
Senator Kennedy. My time's up. Doctor, thank you for your
service.
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you.
Senator Kennedy. Don't forget Louisiana.
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you. I would love to come and visit
Louisiana.
Senator Kennedy. You welcome anytime.
Dr. Panchanathan. One of the 10 regional innovation
engines--Senator, last time you asked the question, if I can
just take a minute.
Senator Kennedy. Sure. Take all the time you need.
Dr. Panchanathan. You said to me, we need to make sure that
opportunities, ideas, talent is everywhere. We need to energize
it everywhere.
Senator, I'm very pleased to report that one of the 10
regional innovation engines, type-2, which is a large scale on
energy, is in Louisiana. And we have launched it, and we were
very happy to do it with the Governor in an event that happened
in Louisiana.
So, I just wanted you to know that in addition to that, we
have also got the national AI research pilots and University of
Louisiana at Lafayette is one of those projects. So, you'll be
happy to know that we are taking this message of the entire
Nation has got capacity to contribute and we should leverage
that. So, I just wanted you to know.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, sir.
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Kennedy.
Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Administrator Nelson, you and I have
talked about this before, but I am very concerned about the
NASA caused damage to New Mexico's groundwater at the White
Sands Test facility NDMA, TCE. And I've raised with this with
you in the past, but I want to be very clear that NASA needs to
get this wrapped up and compensate the State of New Mexico.
What's the status of your settlement negotiations with the New
Mexico Natural Resources Trustee?
Senator Nelson. We have spent $200 million, to date, to
investigate and address the groundwater issue. We continue to
investigate the sources of contamination, and NASA continues to
work closely with DOJ and your New Mexico scientific agency,
environmental agency, on what needs to be done to meet the
final settlement discussions.
Senator Heinrich. Okay. Before I was in Congress, I was the
New Mexico Natural Resources Trustee, and I've got a lot of
experience with Federal agencies really moving very slowly in
those negotiations. So, I would urge you to simply try to get
to yes, and make sure it's on a reasonable timeline because
there is nothing more valuable to New Mexicans than their
water.
Senator Nelson. Absolutely. We've done this in other
States, and I can tell you straight up that we will continue
this in New Mexico.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Administrator.
Dr. Panch, talk a little bit more about the National AI
Research Resource, and specifically, how important do you think
it is to pass things like the CREATE AI Act that will build on
that momentum?
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you very much, Senator, for the
important question. First of all, I want to express my
gratitude for your leadership as a co-chair of the AI Caucus
and the CREATE AI Act. And also thank you for being present in
the showcase that we had on the AI Institute.
You saw firsthand----
Senator Heinrich. It was incredible.
Dr. Panchanathan [continuing]. The 25 AI institutes, the
people, the ideas, the translation, the new companies that are
emerging. So, on the NAIRR, to answer your question on the
NAIRR, as you know, we had 90 days from the Executive Order of
President Biden, 90-day timeline that was given to us to launch
a NAIRR pilot.
And this is an inter-agency effort. All agencies working
together. I'm so proud to say, in 90 days, we got 12 Federal
agencies, NSF, DOE, NASA, and all of the Federal agencies
working together. And now on top of that, we have 25 non-
Federal, non-government agencies as part of the NAIRR pilot.
So, we put in $30 million as part of the pilot. We got, you
know, the who's who in AI, you know, Nvidia put in $30 million,
Microsoft $20 million, of resources, and $10 million from
Amazon, everybody. And so, this is a phenomenal accomplishment,
I would say.
But it also testifies to the fact there's so much interest
in wanting to have this done. Why is NAIRR important, to your
question, again? We cannot have where AI talent and ideas are
everywhere, that only the haves have the ability to be able to
exercise those ideas because they have access to resources.
It's got to be for everyone.
So, we unleash every possible idea and innovation all
across our Nation. That's why NAIRR is very, very important.
So, we need to go to full scale NAIRR very, very quickly. And
so, the CREATE AI Act, I'm so grateful for your leadership and
in Congress because that's also what's going to get us the near
investments in time.
And I can assure you, it'll not be just only Federal
investments. We will bring, like what you have shown in the
pilot, companion investments to make sure that we are
unleashing every possible idea, talent, and innovation across
our Nation.
Senator Heinrich. When you look at some of the co-sponsors
from across the aisle that have joined us on that CREATE AI
Act, it's that idea of democratizing this to every State that
is very appealing to them.
I want to touch on something that's related to that, and
that's the EPSCoR Track-1 Program, because it gave States like
New Mexico a fair shot at securing Federal research dollars.
And the decision to do away with EPSCoR Track-1 has been a real
blow to New Mexico in particular.
I want to see the New Mexico EPSCoR State Office funded.
And I want to ask you, will you work with me to get this done
with some sort of bridge funding while you sort out how to fill
the gaps that were created by doing away with EPSCoR Track-1.
Dr. Panchanathan. Senator, just I want to characterize this
right. What we have done with EPSCoR is not doing away with
EPSCoR. What we have done is, in fact, expanded, enriched,
empowered more, but we didn't want one.
Senator Heinrich. But it has resulted in the New Mexico
office not being funded.
Dr. Panchanathan. I'm happy to sit and talk about this, to
your request. I'm happy to do that any time because I just want
to make it very clear what we are trying to do is to expand
even more opportunities. I talked to Senator Reed about this
too. Even more opportunities, not just only one EPSCoR
jurisdiction funding, but through the E-CORE and E-RISE
programs, and EPSCoR Fellowship Program, that we are able to
have many institutions and many more such grants being made
possible to EPSCoR States. I want to make that very clear.
Senator Heinrich. That sounds great, but that's not been
our experience.
Dr. Panchanathan. So, I know that any transition, as you
can imagine, any transition--right now, we are already
announcing the next round of EPSCoR, the E-RISE, and E-CORE
programs. I understand that any transition may have some
challenges, which are individual, and I'm happy to address them
like, as Senator Reed, too. I'm happy to address them.
I'm happy to talk to you on the specific things and happy
to see what we can do. Because my objective, and I want to be
very clear about this, when I said this in my remarks, we
exceeded the--when I came into this office, in into this role,
EPSCoR percentages were about 13 to 14 percent of the NSF
funding.
This year, sir, our CHIPS and Science allocation was 15.5
percent. It's what we were supposed to meet. We exceeded. We
were at 15.9 in fiscal year 2023, and I expect that we're going
to continue in fiscal year 2025, it's going to be 16.5. I
expect that we are going to outperform because I am a firm
believer that talent and ideas are all across our Nation.
Everything that we do at NSF, you can test this, it's not
just words, it is actions, whether it is AI institutes, whether
it is EPSCoR, that we want to make sure that talent and ideas
are energized. So, any systemic issues that precludes this
principle of expansion, we are happy to take that and see how
we can be helpful.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.
Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Well, first welcome Senator Nelson. May I
call you that? But I want to follow up on Senator Heinrich's--
he asked you a very specific question. Are you going to build
in resources so that we can keep operating EPSCoR in New Mexico
and Rhode Island and not close the offices in August?
Dr. Panchanathan. The E-CORE Program, Senator, is about
capacity building. It is about exactly that. So, the two
flavors that we have, or E-CORE and ERIs, this was based on a
congressional report that was submitted by our Committee of
Equal Opportunity. It's a congressional report-based
recommendation.
There are two programs, I just want to be very clear. One
of them is capacity building continuing to have that kind of a
support for being able to have E-CORE successes. The other ERIs
is about the State SNT plans and how we might then have groups
incubated to expand the science and technology capabilities of
the region also. So, that's what these two flavors are, and the
fellowships are focused on individuals. So, all three are meant
not to close down, but expand and enhance. So, I just want to
make sure that it's not misunderstood.
Senator Reed. So, you've not answered Senator Heinrich's
question. You've not answered my question. Are you going to
make provisions so that the EPSCoR offices will not be forced
to be closed in August or so in----
Dr. Panchanathan. That is a transition----
Senator Reed [continuing]. Rhode Island and several other
places. This your rollout has not been successful, to be blunt,
because we're seeing now EPSCoR programs evaporate in the very
States that we placed them in because we don't want every
nickel from NSF going to MIT, and Stanford, and all the other
big research institutions.
Dr. Panchanathan. It is not happening, Senator, with all
due respect. In fact, when I talk about the EPSCoR percentages
increasing, it doesn't go to MIT. It in fact goes--we can, in
fact, share all the----
Senator Reed. That's because we wrote it, et cetera. And
you are eroding that base. When our office has to shut down in
New Mexico or Rhode Island, then the all the mechanisms to
apply for EPSCoR, to engage in EPSCoR are essentially gone.
Dr. Panchanathan. You have my word, Senator, that we will
work with you. You said, I have not answered the question. I'm
answering the question that we will work with the States. In
fact, yesterday had a conversation with----
Senator Reed. Well, I know you did, and it appeared to me
is just telling them how screwed up they were, which is not
what I expect the Federal agency to do to my State.
Dr. Panchanathan. No, it was not. I think the
specifications that we had about how the proposal should be
submitted was not followed and we are trying to see how we can
get that done. And as I said, I will make sure that we will not
back away from building the capacity in the EPSCoR States.
You know, you're saying I'm not answering the question. I
will go back and look at what the transition funding for those
offices to continue operating so that we might not lose this
bridge. And I'm giving you that.
Senator Reed. Let me go back to another question, is how
did you help these States to prepare for the new EPSCoR?
Because the results are less than encouraging. I mean, we have
a lot more time spending on administration figuring out the
programs, what's new, what's not. And that's taking away from
some of the substantive issues that you have to deal with in
EPSCoR. You know, I just don't see an improvement here at all.
Dr. Panchanathan. So, you asked about the help that we are
providing. We, in fact, have launched a new program called
GRANTED, which is focused on helping those States to be
successful by providing all the information that they need in
terms of putting successful grant proposals together.
So, in fact, even as of yesterday, we are having constant
conversations, and people, I'm sure, in your State, will
acknowledge the fact that we are having those conversations to
see how we can build this capacity and have those successful
proposals constructed.
Senator Reed. Well, from our perspective, what we're seeing
is these new awards are for less money and for shorter periods
of time. And fewer applications seem to be successful which to
me is not indication of a program that's being well-run.
Dr. Panchanathan. I'm happy to share the details of the
program. You'll see that it is about ultimately getting to have
a lot more investments in EPSCoR jurisdictions because if
you're going to follow the percentages of EPSCoR allocations,
clearly you can see as the budget scales, we have already
increased it to 15.9. And if you're going to 20 percent, it is
going to be more investments in EPSCoR States, not in non-
EPSCoR States, or the institution that you mentioned. It is not
about that. It is in fact increasing the investments. So, it is
not going to be about taking away from anything in EPSCoR for
anything outside of EPSCoR.
As I said, I'm happy to have further conversations with
your staff, with you, and share data to make sure that you feel
that this is not something that is minimizing or marginalizing
in any way. The EPSCoR focus----
Senator Reed. Well, Director, we will have those
discussions. But I'd like to see the results in the field, not
discussions over a conference table in Washington, or a phone
call to Rhode Island. Thank you.
Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Reed.
Let me just say Director Panch, I share the concerns about
EPSCoR. Under the CHIPS and Science Act, for fiscal year 2025,
the target is 16.5 percent of research funding and 20 percent
of scholarship and fellowship funding. And I don't know if you
know exactly where we are in trying to meet those goals and how
long it will take, but it is a real concern that I think we
need to discuss further.
Dr. Panchanathan. Happy to, Madam Chair. But, as I said, in
2023, we exceeded the goals, and in 2024, we are on track to
exceed the targets also.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Administrator Nelson, I want to
go back to the discussion about how we keep cost overruns and
scheduling concerns in check. Does NASA ever withhold payments
for contractors who are going over or don't meet the
requirements of the contract?
Senator Nelson. Yes, ma'am. An evaluation is done on their
performance. If they met the goal, then there's a certain
payment that they get. If they didn't meet the goal, then they
are docked.
Senator Shaheen. And as you're looking at Artemis V and
beyond, has NASA considered thinking about commercially
competing those launch services as well, given the success that
you've had to date?
Senator Nelson. They are already competed. As a matter of
fact, the schedule that is going on, Artemis III, is the first
landing. That's a SpaceX lander. Artemis IV, a taller, more
powerful rocket with more payload, but a landing as well.
That's SpaceX.
But Artemis V is Blue Origin, and that is as a result of
the second competition that I insisted on as I inherited NASA
with only one award. And so, yes, and that's where we got the
savings of approximately half the cost of the lander in both
competitions.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Director Panch, as I said in my
opening statement, the NSF in the President's budget request
would have your budget increase by more than 12 percent. Can
you talk about what you would like to do with that funding, if
it does in fact, get through the process?
Dr. Panchanathan. So, first of all, thank you so much for
that question. NSF's budget of 2023-2024, you know, this was
cut by 5 percent, but with the one-time allocations that we had
done, because of the kind of--I wanted to clearly state, it
ended up being an 8 percent cut for us related to 2023.
Now, if you look at the escalation of costs in terms of,
you know, salaries and other things that happens, this is
really a 10 percent cut to the budget, which we have been
trying to manage in 2023. So, when we talk about the 2025
budget, and I hope that you know, that it would be a minimal
investment that is made because we are essentially catching up.
The 10.12 would be just a marginal improvement over what our
'23 budget will have been. So, this is the real serious problem
that we're facing in our country today.
Now, at the same time, as we are having this going on,
China invested 10 percent more in their science budget with
fundamental discoveries and outpacing United States. So, this
is not a good thing for us. In fact, I would argue that we are
handing our competition in a silver platter to our competitors,
especially our adversarial competitors. So, this is not the
time for us to do that. So, that's the first point I want to
make.
Having said that, now to address your question, clearly, we
need to now make sure that our investments in the fundamental
core research programs which have been cut, you know, because
of this significant cut, as well as the Graduate Research
Fellowship Program, which has been scaled down, have to be
brought back to what it should be. In fact, it should be much
more than that. That's the first focus that we need to have.
Secondly, if you look at the regional innovation engine
competition, just as another example, the amount of proposals
that we're ready to actually launch and be successful with
partnership resources that we were not able to bring into play
is huge missed opportunity. That's a second problem.
Third, is when we talk about the advanced technologies like
AI, like quantum, like advanced manufacturing, wireless
biotechnology, we are not investing enough in these areas. And
that's what we are trying to do so that we can outpace, and
outcompete, and out innovate. So, every one of these. And
infrastructure is a very important--and I'm very worried about
the fact that we don't have enough resources allocated for
infrastructure also which is needed, because as we are trying
to outcompete other nations and look at the Antarctic and
Arctic program, and Senator, you are a strong supporter of
that, we are not able to keep pace with these things.
And we need to be outpacing. We are not even able to keep
pace and this is not a good recipe for us. So, there's a lot of
components here that, I think, we need to invest more in. And
some of that we will be doing, to address your question, in
fiscal year 2025 budget, but it'll be nowhere near where it
should be.
Senator Shaheen. So, how are you balancing the new
Technology, Innovation, and Partnership directorate with the
other needs of the agency?
Dr. Panchanathan. I think what we're trying to do is to
make sure that the needs of the agency, of the foundation, if
you want to think of it that way, is as vibrant as it should
be. And it can be because these are not two different things. I
just want to draw attention to that.
The new directorate is a crosscutting directorate which
actually works in close partnership with the science
directorate and engineering directorate. In fact, many of those
programs are jointly worked on so that it leverages what
happens in the directorates, and also energizes what should
happen in the directorates.
So, it's a two-way, kind of a symbiotic relationship. So,
it is not like this is a separate thing or something that's
happening that is taking away from something. In fact, all of
these are working together so that each one is able to--because
we cannot have AI innovations at the next level unless we are
able to work with industry through the partnerships that we
have in TIP, that then infuses newer ideas into our computing
directorate, or geosciences directorate, or biosciences
directorate, social behavioral, economic science directorate.
We need to have all of this. Mathematical physical science
directorate, education directorate, all of them working
together. So that's the model that we have at NSF, not like
this Balkanized kind of thinking that, you know, typically
might be how people construe this as if somebody gets this,
then somebody else doesn't get that.
The institute is about how do you advance science,
engineering technology and workforce development to outcompete.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Thank you very much.
Administrator Nelson, aeronautics, hugely vital, important
component. You've said the first day in NASA is related to
aeronautics. I appreciate that prioritization. How has NASA,
how do they collaborate with industry and academia at ensure
that the breakthroughs that NASA develops are successfully
integrated into the commercial, private sector available to
academia, increasing America's leadership in the aeronautical
aspect of NASA?
Senator Nelson. I'll give you two examples that are ongoing
right now. The X-59, which is the supersonic transport, but
this is an experimental needle-nosed jet that's going to fly.
It has this radical design. It is going to fly at the end of
the year, and to see if we can go supersonic and not have the
bam bam of the sonic boom. So, that you could fly overpopulated
areas, and it would be a muffled roar, so that you could fly
from New York to LA in two hours.
We do the research and that would eventually be turned over
to the commercial sector. The other project that's going on
right now called the X-66 is a joint project with Boeing on the
future, single-aisle, mid-range aircraft.
Think the Boeing 737 that would get 30 percent fuel
savings. By far the most trafficked airliner is that mid-range
single-aisle aircraft, if you can get 30 percent fuel. And the
design of this is a high on the fuselage, very long and thin
wing so much that it has to be supported with truss.
And the truss also give you a lift, by the way. And then,
these big, new improved fan jet engines, because it's higher
off the ground, you can get newer--between the wing and the
engines, we can save 30 percent of fuel. So, that is directly a
joint project with NASA money and Boeing money.
Senator Moran. I'm looking forward to seeing and hearing
more about both of those projects.
Administrator, would you ask someone in on your team to
visit with me and mine? I want to have a conversation about how
some of the capabilities we have in Kansas for testing
facilities of aircraft structures materials components better,
how we can better support the research and efforts at NASA. If
you just have somebody on your team, make sure that we have a
conversation.
Senator Nelson. It's done.
Senator Moran. Thank you. Got a minute and a half. I got
six questions, and let me pick between one of them. Let me just
say in passing, Doctor, that this report by JASON about
security of scientific research, there's a report that's due
today. I think the deadline is May the 24. I'm interested in
knowing what NSF has to say about that. I won't ask a question,
but if you can make sure that we know that.
And then NSF budget includes funding for leadership,
classic computing facilities. Again, I'm probably out of time,
so I just was going to raise the point about the growth in
computing capacity in the private sector. How much longer
should the government continue to build supercomputers that may
be relatively obsolete by the time the construction is
complete? Maybe that's a short answer.
Dr. Panchanathan. No, I can give you a very quick answer. I
mean, we work very closely with industry so that this problem
that you're talking about, the becoming obsolete, it's a
constant, you know, partnership with industry so that the
latest and in fact the more advanced technologies are what we
are deploying for the computing need.
As you heard, the response to the AI, the NAIRR pilot that
we talked about, there is tremendous computing need right now
on so many dimensions, whether it is, you know, climate
mitigation or whether it is AI, whether it is quantum. The
modeling needs are tremendous in every aspect of science and
engineering.
So, it's important that we invest, but we also, to your
point, we need to partner with industry very closely to
understand their roadmaps of technology development so that we
are, you know, integrating their future technology thinking as
we are planning our own computing facilities, and that we do as
we are looking at the future like the LCCF and others.
Senator Moran. So, government is always slower than the
private sector in these advancements, and we need to make sure
that we're getting on the same path and not doing things that
are obsolete.
Thank you, Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran.
Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chair, and welcome to
both of you. Thank you for your service.
Dr. Panchanathan, let me start by thanking you for all the
work that you're doing. I'm not going to have time to get an
answer to this question, but I look forward to getting together
with you for an update on a provision that I worked very hard
to include in the CHIPS and Science Bill on a bipartisan basis
to make sure that we engage all of our talent in order to move
our country forward in the areas of science and technology.
In Maryland, we have four HBCUs, including Morgan State,
which is a real jewel. In the United States of America today,
no HBCUs have R1, Research 1, status. Morgan is at R2 and the
provision that we included in the CHIPS and Science Bill was to
make sure that we engage your help among others to make sure
that we can move to R1.
Thank you for the efforts you're making there, and I look
forward to a full report later along with the progress report
on another provision that I included with Senator Blunt
ensuring that we don't get caught--the United States don't get
caught unprepared for what new technologies might arise in the
future. We need to be constantly looking over the horizon.
Administrator Nelson, great to see you. Let me just start
with some thank yous because I know that you recognize well
that just as Florida is an important space, hey, so is the
State of Maryland. And I want to thank you for confirming the
Dragonfly Mission led by APL in collaboration with Goddard.
Thank you for working with me and my colleagues on
recommissioning the Jedi Mission on the Space Station.
Thank you for the infrastructure investment at Wallops. I
believe you mentioned that, so I want to now ask you about a
collection of other things because you understand better than
anybody, this is all about the future. You and I met this week
to talk about a number of important projects, including OSAM-1.
And I want to thank the Chair, Senator Shaheen, for working
with us to insert in the most recent Appropriations Bill the
language on OSAM-1.
I'm not going to go into detail here, but OSAM-1, in my
view, will provide the United States government with a very
important capability, this robotic arm to refuel to service,
but also to move satellites from one area to another.
And we have language in the bill, you know, requiring that
you take a look at an updated plan for a scheduled launch in
2026. I also know that DARPA, among others, but DARPA may be
interested in this capability as well.
So, my question to you is a very simple one. Are you
committed to working with us to put forward the best good-faith
effort to keep this mission going so that we can achieve the
2026 launch date?
Senator Nelson. Within the budget constraints, we're going
to do exactly what you required in the 2024 Appropriations
Bill. In addition, as we discussed 2 days ago, I have already
initiated the visit with DARPA of what particular technologies
that have been developed in OSAM can be utilized as we have a
changing space environment than what OSAM was originally
designed for in low earth orbit has now changed.
And so, the answer is yes. I, again, am so bold as to say
Maryland is a very important State to NASA. You have 22,000
employees, you have $2.3 billion of NASA's $25 billion budget.
Just under 10 percent of the whole budget goes to your State.
In addition to what you have already mentioned, we've got
the next Landsat coming that's in Maryland, Dragonfly, you
mentioned, which is an exciting new one, as well as Nancy Grace
Roman, and the beginning of the planning of the technology
maturation office for the next iteration telescope, which is
the habitable worlds. So, there's a lot going on.
Senator Van Hollen. Let me, if I could, it's a one-word
question on habitable worlds. Thank you for ending there. Can
you confirm, again, that NASA Goddard will be the lead agency
on that program?
Senator Nelson. If you all concur, we have already
requested that for a technology maturation office.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Capito.
Senator Nelson. By the way, you missed my comments about
how much time and grief just to get that little old bridge
going to Wallop Island.
Senator Van Hollen. I wanted to make sure I acknowledge
that. And thank you for that effort. I know it's----
Senator Shaheen. Senator Capito.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
I'm going to address Dr. Panch, if I can address you that
way. You know, I've implored previous directors to not mothball
that Green Bank Telescope. And you and I talked previously
right before the new director, Dr. James Jackson, who started a
few years ago. I just think we ought to talk about and tell
everybody about the possibilities and the promise of radar
systems in the area of planetary defense.
National Academy of Sciences has written of the dangerous
effects of near-Earth objects. What role do you believe radio
astronomy and specifically Green Bank, which is the largest,
fully steerable telescope in the world located in West
Virginia.
What role do you see there, and where do you see the
future?
Dr. Panchanathan. Oh, GBT is a tremendous asset. You know,
just to put this in perspective, the $100 million GBT continues
to be the cutting-edge resource that we have got for advancing
science. As you know, that was part of the detection of the
gravitational waves.
Senator Capito. Right.
Dr. Panchanathan. And so, it's now 23 years old. And
Senator, I was just talking to you just before this hearing
that we are working on making sure that it's maintained well.
So, we are constantly investing in ensuring that it's
maintained well.
It's also being integrated into the next generation of
radio astronomy. You talked about radio astronomy observatory,
including the planetary defense objectives and so on. So, it's
the integral part of the planning of what we do with the next
generation, very large array, the ngVLA programs also. And in
the current VLBA, you know, we have got a good portfolio of
ground-based astronomy facilities for the work that we are
doing.
So, the GPT clearly will have a very critical part and it
will be a critical component of the ngGVLA. There's no question
about that, which is currently in the design phase. We've just
put that in the design phase. So, one way or the other, GPT
will have a significant role because it's, as you said, the
single largest dish radio telescope available for the U.S.
astronomy community.
Senator Capito. Great.
Dr. Panchanathan. So, we are working to make sure that
we're working very closely as we are thinking about the future.
Maintaining the current status of GBT and what it can do, but
also what its role is in the ngVLA thinking.
Senator Capito. I look forward to working with you on that,
and we're going to go set up that visit----
Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
Senator Capito [continuing]. To the beautiful part of our
State.
Dr. Panchanathan. I would love to come with you. Thank you.
Senator Capito. Well, it's good to see you, Senator Nelson.
And I'll never forget when we sat together with our spouses,
and you told me about your whole ride with NASA. And so, to see
you here today, as we've seen many times, is really, really
fulfilling.
We have the IV&V Center in West Virginia, which is critical
to every NASA mission. But we also have the EPSCoR program that
is important to institutions like our West Virginia University
and others, Marshall, I too believe.
Where do you see EPSCoR in terms of growing and being able
to get more and younger people interested in science,
particularly young women, and more diverse populations?
Senator Nelson. We take it very seriously. We are making a
direct effort beyond EPSCoR in order to get our space grants
out to parts of the country that you may not think would be the
recipients of space research grants. For example, the rural
parts of the country.
Senator Capito. Good.
Senator Nelson. And this is all a part of our trying to be
very inclusive with how we spend our research and development
money.
Senator Capito. Well, those are essential dollars,
particularly in rural America, as you said.
Let's go to the IV&V Center that does all the
verifications. And I don't know that I've been briefed on this,
or maybe you can help me with this. What kind of coordination
do you have with the private sector at IV&V? Obviously, it's
not the research, or the verifications are not all researched
by or all performed by NASA, or some of them are contractors.
Can you talk about the public-private partnership there?
Senator Nelson. Yes. There are 60 direct civil servants
matched with 364 contractors.
Senator Capito. Right.
Senator Nelson. And that's what we're doing. The economic
effect extends beyond that into 700 jobs.
Senator Capito. Right. And I will say, too, they do
internships and cooperative arrangements with the Fairmont, but
also West Virginia University, and whoever's in their
surrounding area, again, to spur the next generation workforce
onto this. So, when is Artemis going to go up?
Senator Nelson. September of next year, 2025.
Senator Capito. Can I come and bring all my four
granddaughters with me?
Senator Nelson. I wish you would.
Senator Capito. Good. That's a commitment. I'm going to
make sure it's kept.
Senator Nelson. We'll see if we can make it not like
Artemis I that was at 1:45 in the morning.
Senator Capito. Well, they may just have to stay up. Thank
you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Capito.
Senator Britt.
Senator Britt. Thank you so much, Chair Shaheen, and Vice
Chair Moran for having the subcommittee hearing to discuss NASA
and the National Science Foundation's fiscal year 2025 budget
request.
Certainly, appreciate the two of you being here in front of
us today. I want to take this opportunity to express my thanks
and appreciation to the civil servants, the suppliers, the
contractors, all of who work tirelessly to continue to support
the missions at Marshall Space Flight Center.
I want to note for the record that I have absolute full
faith and confidence in Marshall's newest director, Director
Joseph Pelfrey. He has done a tremendous job, and am excited to
continue to be able to work with him.
Administrator Nelson, I understand the budget realities and
fiscal constraints that you were under when formulating this
budget request. And I just want to say thank you. Thank you for
continuing to fund several of Marshall's key priorities that
are critical to carrying out so many of the missions there;
space launch system, the human landing system, and the nuclear
thermal propulsion. I am greatly appreciative and look forward
to working with you on each of those.
I know we must continue to invest in these important
programs, and I want to thank Chair Shaheen and Vice Chair
Moran for their commitment to making sure that these are
properly funded. Maintaining the Artemis mission schedule is
imperative to ensuring that we beat China back to the moon.
However, earlier this year, NASA revealed that because of
various safety and hardware issues, the Artemis II mission is
now delayed until September, 2025. So, nearly 1 year behind
schedule. I appreciate NASA's diligence in addressing these
issues, specifically the heat shield in Orion and spacecraft
where the crew will be housed. The safety and wellbeing of our
astronauts is of the utmost importance, and so I appreciate you
making sure that that is a priority.
Administrator, question for you. Are you properly resourced
to address the safety and hardware issues to ensure that
Artemis II can safely launch and is not further delayed?
Senator Nelson. I can assure you we will not launch until
it's ready. We have had to make tough choices, and in this
budget, for expiration, we are down a half a billion dollars.
We will make do with that. We are still on the schedule for
September of 2025. Artemis II is meeting all the milestones.
Senator Britt. Good.
Senator Nelson. We are doing extra examination of some of
the unusual things that happen on the heat shield.
Senator Britt. Good.
Senator Nelson. And, obviously, we're not going to fly that
until we're ready.
Senator Britt. Thank you. And Mr. Administrator, if there
is anything that is going to delay that further, we'd just love
a commitment from you that we can continue this conversation.
So, if there are things that we need to be doing for you, I'm
aware of that, and we can do our very best to make sure we put
safety first, and we also stay on time.
Another question in that vein, you know, I am the daughter
of two small business owners, and I understand how uncertainty
negatively impacts sometimes the little guy the most. And so,
as you consider the industrial base for SLS, many of the
suppliers are very small companies. And I would argue these
hardworking folks, many of whom are Alabamians, are the
backbone to continued success in missions all across our
country.
But, certainly, there with SLS, I just want to associate
myself, since I am almost out of time, with Senator Peter's
comments on just continuing to make sure that we place emphasis
on these small businesses. It's my opinion that in order to
maintain the industrial base capabilities and supply chains,
that these people have irreplaceable knowledge and skills.
And so, it is critically important that we think about this
as these delays occur, that there's continued work for them to
be doing.
I want to switch gears real quick before I'm finished to
NASA's Vision 2040. I believe it's important to bring NASA into
the 21st century and ensure that we retain a skilled workforce
while also continuing to recruit the best and brightest talent.
However, there are several aspects of Vision 2040 that do
give me some concern. It's my understanding that Vision 2040
recommends that the program managers who oversee many of NASA's
critical programs will now report directly to headquarters.
I strongly believe that our centers who are responsible for
the success of NASA programs, whether it be SLS, or spacesuits,
or exploration ground systems, should retain their direct
oversight and responsibilities of their program managers, their
workforce, and their program's long-term success.
So, Mr. Administrator, I would like for NASA to increase
transparency here, and would like to get a commitment from you
to just keep me informed of any additional Vision 2040
recommendations before they're implemented.
Senator Nelson. Well, of course.
Senator Britt. Thank you so much.
Senator Nelson. And I want to recommend that you talk to
Joseph Pelfrey about your concern that things are going to go
flying off to other States.
Senator Britt. Okay. I'll do it.
Senator Nelson. The program office is in Washington for
Moon to Mars. That was the same during Apollo. The program
office was where you can bring everything together. Now, in
your ask about suppliers for Artemis, you have 85 companies in
Alabama that are suppliers. The amount of money NASA sends to
Alabama is $2.7 billion each year. That's about 14 percent of
NASA's entire budget.
Senator Britt. And boy, we're grateful.
Senator Nelson. And that includes 24,000 direct NASA
employees. So, Alabama is a very big part of what is happening
and is inextricably entwined in the success----
Senator Britt. Thank you so much, Mr. Administrator.
Senator Nelson [continuing]. Of NASA and our Moon to Mars
Program.
Senator Britt. We are really proud of the work that has
done in our great State, and excited to continue to see it
happen here. And thank you for your commitment.
May I say just one more thing? I realize I am out of time,
Madam Chair. Director Panch, I just want to say--I am out of
time, and she's being so gracious to allow me to say this--I
would like to just associate myself with Chair Shaheen's
comments, Senator Reed's comments, Senator Heinrich's comments,
just when we're taking a look, obviously, at Track-1e, we're
looking at the--I have great concerns. And so, I am out of time
and I appreciate the grace, but if you will just associate me
with her comments on this and know that it is a concern that I
have deeply as well.
Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Britt. And
thank you both for your testimony this morning and for your
service to the country.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
If there are no further questions, Senators may submit
additional questions for the subcommittee's official hearing
record. We would request that NASA and NSF respond to those
within 30 days.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Administrator Bill Nelson, National Aeronautics
and Space Administration
Question Submitted by Senator Patty Murray
Question 1. In FY24, NASA was directed to establish a Biological
and Physical Sciences consortium with academic institutions for space
exploration research and technology development. Can you provide an
update on NASA's efforts to establish this consortium?
Answer. On May 17, 2024, NASA released the solicitation for
proposals from consortia with biological sciences expertise to carry
out research investigations and/or conduct activities that address
NASA's established space-relevant science interests in health, animal,
and plant sciences. The consortium shall consist of a team of
investigators from multiple organizations who have complementary skills
and work together to achieve overall research progress that is greater
than progress achievable individually. NASA is currently reviewing
proposals received. The selected proposal will be awarded $2.5M total
for the period of performance, with a maximum duration of 5 years. The
Agency expects to announce the consortium selection by late 2024.
Question 2. Can you explain the role you see Nuclear Thermal
Propulsion playing to achieve NASA's Mars ambitions?
Answer. Mars architecture studies show that nuclear propulsion is
one of several technologies that could be used for future crewed
exploration mission. Other candidate technologies include solar
electric propulsion and chemical propulsion. Each of these offers
various advantages in terms of propulsive efficiency, cost,
technological readiness, mass, and other parameters relevant to such a
mission.
2a. How do you see NASA expanding and partnering with companies and
universities in the Pacific Northwest to further develop Nuclear
Thermal Propulsion capabilities?
Answer 2a. NASA engages a broad spectrum of commercial partners
within the Nation's nuclear industry across the country. These
engagements include the Ultra-Safe Nuclear Corporation (USNC) based in
Washington State. NASA has been working with USNC to implement
innovations that could enable an advanced reactor design to achieve the
extreme operational temperatures that would be required for a Mars
transportation system. NASA plans to continue our engagement with USNC
and other industry reactor designers as integral partnerships to
leverage the contributions they can offer to achieve our nuclear
thermal propulsion development goals.
Question 3. The University of Washington has been selected for the
Earth System Explorers Program to monitor and understand the recovery
of the ozone layer. Can you explain why it's important for NASA to
conduct research on climate change and its impact on the earth?
Answer. NASA uses the unique global vantage point of space to
observe the Earth environment, including the drivers and impacts of the
changing climate. Scientific discovery provides the factual, unbiased,
and trusted means to document, understand, and forecast these changes
in the Earth system and allows us to help understand, mitigate, and
adapt to climate change. Leaders at all levels, from family businesses
to global suppliers, must have the best scientific insight and
knowledge to inform their actions. Through partnerships with a dozen
Federal agencies, as well as regional, state, local, and tribal
authorities, NASA Earth science helps advance the services that
citizens and businesses across the country count on to protect their
lives and livelihoods. From seaside towns who wish to know more about
their changing coastlines, to communities in wildfire-vulnerable areas,
to city-dwellers looking to track smog in their neighborhoods, everyone
around the world can benefit from research on climate change.
The Agency's constellation of space-based global observing
platforms has increased in capability in the recent decade due to
advancing technology and the increasing number of national and
international partners now active in the Earth science enterprise. NASA
continues to innovate through efforts such as the Earth System
Explorers Program, which aims at exploring additional capabilities
recommended by the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and
Medicine (NASEM) and thereby continuing the advancement of the
collective Earth-observing capability. Through these efforts, NASA has
become a leader and trusted partner in providing climate and Earth
system observations, research, applications, technology, and actionable
information to scientists, decision-makers, and the public. In
addition, NASA's free and open data supports research across the
Federal government, academia, and the private sector. The Agency is
committed to continuing to work alongside international, Federal,
state, tribal, and local partners to advance understanding of, and
response to, our changing planet.
Question 4. Blue Origin was selected last year as the second
provider for the Artemis Lunar Lander. Could you provide an update on
the latest developments regarding the Human Landing System?
Answer. NASA, in collaboration with SpaceX and Blue Origin, is
making steady progress in the development of the Human Landing System
(HLS) spacecraft to support the Artemis lunar exploration missions.
NASA's HLS engineers are working in tight collaboration with SpaceX and
Blue Origin, providing substantial subject matter expertise and access
to NASA test facilities. Despite the challenges of executing the
ambitious Artemis missions, NASA has confidence that, together with the
HLS providers, these missions will be safe and successful.
Additionally, to develop large cargo transportation capability by
leveraging the work on human landers, NASA initiated Human-class
Delivery Lander (HDL) development under the existing HLS contracts.
Since November 2023, both SpaceX and Blue Origin have begun to develop
special configurations of their landers that will be able to deliver
cargo to the lunar surface, such as a pressurized rover or habitat.
Development of SpaceX's HLS Starship (Artemis III and IV).--
Beginning in April 2023, SpaceX has conducted four flight tests of its
Super Heavy booster and Starship architecture, launching from its
launch site in Boca Chica, TX. During these tests, SpaceX has
demonstrated fundamental and critical capabilities for the HLS and
supporting spacecraft that will be needed to re-fuel the HLS in space
for Artemis III. These demonstrated capabilities include Starship
ascent and stage separation operations; booster stage boostback burns
and a landing burn just above the surface of the Gulf of Mexico; and
upper stage Starship operations including on-orbit cryogenic liquid
oxygen transfer between two propellant tanks, hypersonic re-entry
maneuvers, and a landing burn above the Indian Ocean.
Looking ahead, SpaceX plans to execute multiple additional Starship
flight tests, with the next one planned for October 2024. Before NASA
employs the HLS Starship for the crewed Artemis III mission, there will
be multiple in-space demonstrations of critical HLS capabilities such
as an in-space propellant transfer test between two Starship vehicles
and an Uncrewed Lunar Landing Test. These tests, as well as the
Critical Design Review, are planned in 2025, per the contract milestone
schedule. SpaceX is also developing infrastructure at NASA's Kennedy
Space Center (KSC) to enable Starship launches from KSC Launch Complex
39A.
SpaceX has completed technical milestones in the design and
development of multiple HLS subsystems including propulsion, life
support, and mechanical systems such as an elevator and a docking
adapter. For example, SpaceX completed its HLS Docking Adapter
Qualification Review milestone in December 2023.
The qualification campaign included testing of a SpaceX docking
system test article at NASA Johnson Space Center's Six-degree-of-
freedom Dynamic Test System (SDTS) facility.
Development of Blue Origin's HLS Blue Moon (Artemis V).--NASA
selected Blue Origin in May 2023 for a second Human Landing System
(HLS) award to develop and demonstrate Blue Moon Mark 2 lunar lander.
Blue Origin completed its HLS Preliminary Design Review in February
2024 and is working toward their Critical Design Review (CDR) Milestone
in 2025. The CDR is the point in a project development where the design
of the system is complete and meets NASA requirements. Blue Origin has
also conducted tests for the New Glenn rocket launch pad infrastructure
and launch countdown. Blue Origin continues development, qualification,
and production tests to mature the BE-7 lunar lander high-performance
engine. In FY 2024, the provider completed several milestones
including:
--Integrated Lander Design Analysis Cycle (DAC) 5a--May 2024
--Blue Origin New Glenn 1st Stage Engineering Development Unit
Tanking Test at Launch Complex 36--June 2024
--Blue Origin/Creare Cryocooler Preliminary Design Review (PDR)--June
2024
--DAC 5b--July 2024
--Blue Origin Research Engine (R1) Hot Fire for BE-7 testing at Air
Force Research Lab (AFRL)--July 2024
Upcoming steps include launch of Blue Origin's MK1 lander, an
uncrewed risk-reduction pathfinder mission to the lunar surface planned
for 2025. Also, the first New Glenn launch is scheduled for fall of
2024.
Question 5. The Space Technology Mission Directorate's budget
request includes a line that would enable NASA to fund one or more
commercial companies to perform close inspection of space debris
objects of interest to NASA, laying the groundwork for safe removal of
those debris objects from orbit in the near-term. Please explain how
this funding will assist NASA in demonstrating United States leadership
in domestic in-space servicing activities in the near-term?
Answer. The FY 2025 Space Technology budget request includes
funding within the Small Spacecraft, Flight Opportunities, and Other
Technology Demonstrations to support a technology demonstration named
Small Spacecraft Propulsion and Inspection Capability (SSPICY). SSPICY
is a system level demonstration of small spacecraft propulsion and
close inspection of multiple resident space objects (RSOs), which may
include debris. This investment will simultaneously advance U.S.
commercial in-space servicing capabilities while gathering key data on
the current conditions of debris that have spent decades in space.
Characterizing the potential docking surfaces and state, position and
orientation, and tumbling nature of these objects is necessary for
future safe capture and disposal and may help further the development
of debris remediation technologies.
Four industry partners were selected in FY 2024 to lead mission
concept studies ($200,000 each) using SBIR Phase III based contract
mechanisms with the potential to transition to a FY 2024- 2026 orbital
demonstration with a cost cap of $30.0M. On September 25, 2024, NASA
announced selection of Starfish Space of Seattle, WA to transition from
a mission concept study to an orbital demonstration.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Chris Van Hollen
Question 1. The FY 2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law
118-42) included report language directing NASA to establish a
Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO) project office at Goddard Space
Flight Center. In the hearing, Administrator Nelson confirmed that
Goddard will be the lead of the HWO program, but referred to the HWO
office at Goddard as the ``technology maturation office.'' Could you
define the scope and responsibilities of the ``technology maturation
office'' and explain why the HWO office at Goddard is not referred to
as the ``project office'' given that it is the program lead? Shouldn't
the Goddard office be called the HWO Project Office?
Answer. The Habitable Worlds Observatory Technology Maturation
(HWOTM) Project Office was established at NASA's Goddard Space Flight
Center (GSFC) on August 1, 2024. The Project Office will be responsible
for setting science requirements, informing mission architectures,
technology development, and leading down-selections of technologies for
a potential future Habitable Worlds mission.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
``Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s''
Decadal Survey (``Astro2020'') recommends that NASA should proceed to
mission design only after the successful completion of a technology
maturation program (designated as GOMAP). A decision to proceed with
formulation and subsequently, project execution, will depend on a
variety of factors, including the successful completion of the
independent technology review (ITR) recommended in Astro2020. Once an
independent technology review is completed and NASA has determined that
it is programmatically and budgetarily ready to initiate a new mission,
the Project Office would become the Habitable Worlds Observatory
Project Office.
Question 2. The intense solar activity earlier this month impacted
long-range radio telecommunications and highlighted how necessary it is
that we have a better understanding of heliophysics to accurately
predict solar weather and its impact on Earth. However, heliophysics
continues to be reduced in the budget request from prior year funding
levels, and the Geospace Dynamics Constellation mission is zeroed out.
Congress directed NASA in FY24 to provide a plan and funding profile to
launch GDC by the end of the decade. Does NASA intend on providing this
plan to us by October as directed?
Answer. NASA provided the requested GDC report to the Subcommittee
by letter dated September 10, 2024.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
Question 1. The US Federal government and State of Alaska have
jointly invested over $120M of capital improvements at the Pacific
Spaceport Complex--Alaska (PSCA), formally known as the Kodiak Launch
Complex, on Kodiak Island, Alaska. As only one of two US-based
spaceports that can launch into high-inclination and polar orbits, PSCA
is a national asset to provide critical resiliency for US access to
space launching from US soil. This FAA-licensed commercial spaceport is
a low-cost operation, capable of launching solid- and liquid-fueled
rockets and has supported numerous government orbital, suborbital, and
test missions since 1998. However, instead of utilizing a viable US-
based spaceport for polar missions, NASA has been funding launches in
New Zealand.
1a. What percentage of your Polar launches are accomplished outside
the US?
Answer 1a. NASA's Launch Services Program (LSP) is responsible for
the acquisition, management, and certification of reliable and cost-
effective launch services from U.S. commercial providers providing
access to space for civil missions including satellites, robotic
planetary missions and human space exploration requirements. LSP
achieves access to space through a competitive ``mixed fleet'' approach
utilizing the breadth of U.S. industry's capabilities.
LSP has procured 40 launches that placed spacecraft into polars
orbits since 1998. Of those launches, two were conducted outside the
U.S. (New Zealand).
1b. What commitments can you provide me that NASA will prioritize
launches from US- based spaceports for polar orbit missions, as we
readily have that capability domestically?
Answer 1b. LSP does not procure services directly from launch
sites. It is the responsibility of the U.S. commercial launch vehicle
provider to meet all mission requirements within the scope of the
contract including selection of the launch site, buildup and test of
launch site infrastructure, and execution of mission operations at the
launch site.
LSP's contracts include domestic source clauses establishing an
expectation that commercial launch vehicle providers use FAA-licensed
spaceports. Historically, more than 90% of LPS' polar orbit missions
have been executed from US-based spaceports.
Question 2. According to a 2023 FAA report--the National Spaceport
Policy--the number of launches will increase from 74 in 2022 to 186 in
2026, a nearly 300% increase. Meanwhile, according to the same report,
4 out of every 5 of these launches takes place either at Cape Canaveral
or Vandenburg. This increase in combination with the reduction in the
cost of access to space places a significant demand on Federal launch
ranges.
2. Administrator Nelson, could you discuss the opportunity to
expand NASA's use of state-owned or operated launch facilities in the
future?
Answer. NASA is a member of the FAA led National Spaceport
Interagency Working Group (NSIWG) along with the Departments of
Defense, State, and Commerce. The goals of the NSIWG are as follows:
--Maintain US leadership role in commercial space transportation
--Develop a strategy for a resilient, interoperable network of
spaceports to meet national objectives
--Collaborate on policies and standards for spaceport utilization
--Advocate for resources and programs to enhance and promote U.S.
spaceport infrastructure
Through the NSIWG, NASA is working with partner agencies to build
relationships with Federal spaceports, state/local spaceports, and
private spaceports in the hopes of identifying economic approaches to
increase launch cost-effectiveness while meeting NASA's mission needs.
NASA recognizes the potential the most heavily utilized ranges may
be overburdened by commercial missions in the near future with the
rapid increase of launch tempo.
The space industry has moved away from the business model of small-
lift, solid-fueled expendable launch vehicles with deployable mission
crews. Modern heavy-lift reusable launch vehicles with resident mission
crews amortize costs to the benefit of their launch customers.
Investments in these modern spaceports have lately been made by private
corporations. NASA has been working closely with these private
corporations to ensure NASA's mission needs are recognized.
Questions Submitted to Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan, Director
Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
As part of the CHIPS and Science Act, Senator Capito and I
collaborated to include language authorizing a NSF grant program to
support K-12 hands-on learning opportunities in STEM education, like
robotics competitions. I was motivated to do this because in New
Hampshire we've seen success in inspiring students to pursue STEM
careers through hands-on and experiential learning opportunities
outside of the classroom, including students who traditionally have
been underrepresented in STEM fields.
Question. How is NSF working to implement this program? When will
the agency begin to make funding available for experiential STEM
programs?
Answer. Through the NSF Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL)
Program, NSF was able to fund new awards and provide supplemental
funding to existing awards through the additional $16.0 million
appropriated to the AISL program through the FY 2023 Disaster
Supplemental for CHIPS & Science Act implementation. These awards
support a broad range of experiential STEM programs and activities and
aim to cultivate awareness and interest in STEM careers, particularly
in the areas of microelectronics, semiconductors, and cybersecurity
industries, through hands-on experiences, parental involvement and
family learning, mentors and role models, and training for volunteers
and professionals in informal STEM learning contexts. In addition, many
of the funded experiential STEM programs supported through the CHIP and
Science Act engage K-12 aged learners in out-of-school learning
experiences such as STEM competitions, camps during school breaks,
digital and analog games, and in-person and virtual immersion to chip
fabricating facilities.
The AISL Program is committed to funding research and practice,
with continued focus on investigating a range of informal STEM learning
experiences and environments that make lifelong learning a reality. The
AISL program also has an explicit broadening participation program
goal, with the majority of each award's budget allocated to broadening
participation activities often to K-12 students historically
underrepresented in STEM fields and could involve research on the
topic.
In addition, the ExLENT program will support inclusive experiential
learning opportunities designed to provide cohorts of diverse learners
with the crucial skills needed to succeed in emerging technology fields
and prepare them to enter the workforce ready to solve our Nation's
most pressing scientific and societal challenges. The Explorations
track aims to provide individuals with limited or no specialized STEM
education the inspiration and opportunity to explore the potential of a
career path in emerging technology fields. Proposed projects in this
track should provide participants with experiential learning
opportunities that build interest, motivation, and knowledge in
emerging technology fields and identify pathways to careers in these
areas. Proposals submitted to this track should focus on a wide range
of participants from diverse backgrounds and may include those enrolled
in traditional education pathways (e.g., secondary school, college,
and/or military). Alternatively, a proposal might focus on participants
who are not enrolled in a traditional educational pathway (i.e., self-
learners, members of incubators) who are inclined to explore hands-on
learning and development opportunities in emerging technology fields.
Question. You and I agree that, as a Nation, we need to do more to
develop our STEM talent. And that doing so is critical to the success
of the U.S. innovation economy and to future international
competitiveness. Is that correct?
Answer. The NSF 2022-2026 Strategic Plan states that science and
engineering are key to the Nation's economic progress, and people are
the core of America's scientific progress. To accelerate the
advancement of discovery and learning, prepare for a world in which
work is increasingly reliant upon scientific and technological skills
and ensure that all citizens share in the benefits that flow from
research, we must promote inclusion in the research community and STEM
workforce, access to STEM learning and training and widespread STEM
literacy.
Question. How do you see afterschool STEM programs contributing to
the cultivation of a diverse and skilled STEM workforce?
Answer. As reported by the National Research Council in 2015, after
school programs are often viewed as valuable opportunities to (1)
engage young people intellectually, academically, socially, and
emotionally; (2) respond to young people's interests, experiences, and
cultural practices; and (3) connect STEM learning across out-of-school,
school, home, and other settings.\1\ This report also acknowledged that
research and evaluation findings were ``not yet robust enough to
determine which programs work best for whom and under what
circumstances''. In the decade since this publication, the AISL program
has funded nearly 100 research and development projects that have
focused on STEM learning in afterschool contexts. These projects
contribute to the cultivation of a diverse and skilled STEM workforce
by exploring questions of what works, why, for whom, and how learning
STEM outside and beyond school is effective and implementing evidence-
based programs to support STEM exposure, interest, and often the STEM
workforce. One emerging explanation for why out-of-school time programs
are effective is the unique ways in which these programs support the
social and emotional development of youth, especially for youth from
historically underrepresented groups in STEM. A recent systematic
review mapped research being done at the intersection of social-
emotional learning (SEL) and STEM learning, finding five common areas
where youth skills were being assessed: Agency/Voice, Belonging/
Collaboration, Creativity/Resilience, Engagement/Self-regulation, and
Reflection/Understanding.\2\ In particular, it seemed that young
people's perceptions of belonging is later associated with positive
perceptions of STEM career preparation.\3\ The AISL program has also
funded investigations that examined how to design effective out-of-
school learning experiences for a wide range of diverse learners and
afterschool settings for whom there has been and continues to be
underrepresentation in STEM fields, e.g., girls and women, learners in
rural and urban areas, learners with disabilities, and learners who
identify as Black, Latinx, and/or Indigenous.
Question. Which other programs at the Foundation, like the
Advancing Informal STEM Learning program, support afterschool STEM
programs and how?
Answer. There are several programs in the Foundation that support
afterschool STEM programs. Of note, the Innovative Technology
Experiences for Students and Teachers (ITEST) program, funded through
H-1B visa receipts, supports afterschool STEM learning. The ITEST
program is an applied research and development program with goals to
advance the equitable and inclusive integration of technology in the
learning and teaching of science, technology, engineering, or
mathematics (STEM) from pre-kindergarten through high school. It
emphasizes workforce development, industry partnerships, and innovative
use of technologies for K-12 students and teachers.
The Research on Innovative Technologies for Enhanced Learning
(RITEL) program supports early-stage research in emerging technologies
for teaching and learning that respond to pressing needs in authentic
(real-world) educational formal and informal (e.g., afterschool STEM)
environments. The ITEST and RITEL programs follow the NSF gold
standard, merit review process to review, identify, and fund new
awards.
Question. I am hearing from afterschool STEM education programs
about the challenges they face in ensuring program providers have the
technical skills and expertise needed to provide high-quality STEM
education. How is NSF working to enhance professional development
opportunities for STEM afterschool program providers, to ensure they
have the necessary skills and resources to effectively engage and
inspire students in STEM learning outside of traditional classroom
settings?
Answer. As a way of addressing the how challenge of out-of-school
learning, the NSF has funded a number of research awards that actively
investigate how to structure the professional development of STEM
afterschool program providers. These projects have explored a wide
array of topics, from models of how professional development can be
conducted in a variety of settings like remote rural locations, to
methods for increasing the relevance of out-of-school education by
training practitioners to co-design educational experiences with
learners, to developing professional networks for continuing
professional development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
2015. Identifying and Supporting Productive STEM Programs in Out-of-
School Settings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://
doi.org/10.17226/21740. Funded via Award 1339083, Successful Out-of-
School STEM Learning: A Consensus Study.
\2\ Allen, PJ & Noam, GG (2024). A systematic review of STEM and
social-emotional development in out of school time programs: Executive
Summary. Institute for the Study of Resilience in Youth. Funded via
Award 2115868.
\3\ Zhao, Mengya et al. ``Promoting Diverse Youth's Career
Development through Informal Science Learning: The Role of Inclusivity
and Belonging'' Journal of Youth and Adolescence, v.52, 2023 https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10964-022-01694-2. Funded via Award 1831593.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Chris Van Hollen
Question. Preparing the next generation is key to maintaining the
U.S.'s role as a leader in cutting-edge technology and innovations.
That includes ensuring that HBCUs have equitable access to Federal R&D
funding and opportunities to achieve the highest research institution
status. I authored Sec. 10524(d) of the CHIPS & Science Act for NSF to
support the R&D capacity at R2 HBCUs to help advance them to R1 status.
There are currently no HBCUs that are R1. Could you provide an update
on the status of this provision and these efforts?
Answer. To grow the research capacity of HBCU's, NSF is using a
cross-agency approach to expand the funding opportunities as well as
the outreach and engagement activities to partner with HBCUs.
The activities supported by NSF that may lead to an HBCU obtaining
R1 status include:
--The HBCU-Excellence in Research (HBCU-EiR) program focuses on
improving the research capacity and competitiveness of HBCUs by
supporting new research opportunities at these institutions. In
FY 2024, the HBCU-EiR program released an innovative Ideas Lab
competition through a new funding opportunity, Advancing
Research Capacity at HBCUs through Exploration and Innovation,
(ARC-HBCU).\1\ ARC-HBCU supports collaboration among HBCU
faculty, research administrators, and academic leadership in
exploring innovative approaches for addressing the HBCUs'
research capacity needs. Project outcomes are intended to lead
to new models and practices that will further support the R&D
capacity at HBCUs, including advancing R2 HBCUs to R1 status.
--The HBCU-Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP) published the following
DCL: Advancing STEM Education, Training and Workforce
Development at HBCUs.\2\ Prairie View A & M University \3\ and
Florida A & M University \4\ are two R2 HBCUs that received
equipment awards.
--NSF's Eddie Bernice Johnson INCLUDES: Projects focused on
Microelectronics--At least two projects to R2 HBCUs were
supported in partnership with HBCU-UP.\5,6\
--Dear Colleague Letters (DCL) to inform HBCUs about funding
opportunities were prepared with the Directorates of
Engineering; Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences;
Mathematical and Physical Sciences; and Computer and
Information Science and Engineering were published. Proposals
were received in response to those funding opportunities. For
example, CHIPS and Science Act funding was used to support the
Morgan State University Center for Advanced Magnets and
Semiconductors. Other R2 HBCUs have been invited to submit full
proposals that are due in December 2024.
Outreach activities to R2 HBCUs will continue in FY 2025.
Question. To create good-paying jobs and strengthen our ability to
compete in a rapidly changing global economy, the United States must
stay at the forefront of innovation and technology. We must work
urgently to not only identify and address areas where we're falling
behind but also establish a blueprint for the future. That's why I
authored the bipartisan Sec. 10387(h) of the CHIPS & Science Act, with
Senator Blunt, directing NSF to enter into an agreement with the
National Academies to assess critical and emerging areas of science and
technology, Federal investments in these areas, and the relative
balance in leadership globally in these areas. The FY 2024 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (Public Law 118-42) included report language
encouraging NSF to collaborate with NAS to initiate this report and to
provide an estimate of the resources necessary to carry out and
complete the report. Could you provide an update on the implementation
of this report language and NSF's collaboration with NAS to proceed
with Sec. 10387(h)?
Answer. Thank you for your support of the U.S. National Science
Foundation (NSF) and the newly established Directorate for Technology,
Innovation and Partnerships (TIP).
As you well know, for nearly 75 years, NSF has supported cutting-
edge fundamental research across all scientific and engineering (S&E)
disciplines. These discoveries and innovations have powered numerous
technologies that have advanced our national and economic security and
established the United States as the world leader in science and
technology (S&T).
Other countries have recognized the importance of investing in S&T
and are now challenging U.S. preeminence in several critical
technologies such as microelectronics and semiconductors, advanced
communication, artificial intelligence, and high-performance computing.
Ensuring our nation's prosperity now and in the future demands robust
investment in S&E research, education, and infrastructure, with a
renewed focus on translating scientific discoveries as well as
innovations into new or improved products and processes in across
America. Such investments will transform existing industries and
establish entirely new ones, creating new jobs and opportunities in
every city and town in the country.
In recognition of both the challenge and opportunity facing the
nation, Congress and the Administration worked together to pass the
landmark CHIPS and Science Act of 2022. The Act formally established
TIP with the express purpose of advancing innovation across the United
States at speed and scale. Specifically, the Act charged TIP to:
(1) support use-inspired and translational research and accelerate
the development and use of federally funded research;
(2) strengthen United States competitiveness by accelerating the
development of key technologies; and
(3) grow the domestic workforce in key technology focus areas and
expand the participation of United States students and
researchers in areas of societal, national, and geostrategic
importance, at all levels of education.
Given the importance and urgency of securing U.S. S&E leadership
for the decades ahead, the Act charges TIP with advancing 10 key
technology focus areas as well as addressing an initial list of
societal, national, and geostrategic challenges. Given the realities of
appropriations as well as the continuing evolution of the S&E landscape
globally, TIP must chart a forward-thinking, strategic, and nimble path
for its activities. Furthermore, the success of TIP is predicated not
only on its ability to support the critical technologies of today, but
also in marshaling all of NSF, our Federal R&D partners, state and
local governments, tribal nations, higher education, and the private
sector to work collaboratively to make the investments that will
catalyze the yet-to-be-named industries of the future.
To this end, shortly after the CHIPS and Science Act was signed
into law, TIP engaged in informal conversations with the National
Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) on the review
of the key technology focus areas and the societal, national, and
geostrategic challenges called for in section 10387(h). TIP and NASEM
agreed that the TIP Roadmap mandated by section 10399(b) of the Act
would provide important background and context for NASEM's review.
In August 2024, TIP published the ``TIP Roadmap: An Investment
Strategy for the U.S. National Science Foundation's Directorate for
Technology, Innovation and Partnerships''.\7\ The roadmap describes the
directorate's strategic vision that will guide its initial investment
decisions; how it will increase funding for research and education for
populations and geographic areas underrepresented in STEM; and how the
directorate will protect federally funded S&T.
Currently, TIP and NASEM are in the process of scheduling a
briefing to discuss the roadmap and begin more formal conversations
around the scope of the review called for in section 10387(h). TIP
anticipates this briefing will take place in fall 2024. The anticipated
cost of the NASEM review is contingent on the project's scope, but
historically NASEM studies undertaken on behalf of NSF have ranged from
just under $1 million to roughly $2 million. NSF will have a clearer
sense of resources required once TIP and NASEM begin formal development
of a ``statement of task'' for the review. NSF is committed to entering
into the formal agreement with NASEM to undertake this review no later
than the deadline set forth in the Act (August 9, 2027).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/advancing-research-capacity-
hbcus-through/nsf23-626/solicitation.
\2\ new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/advancing-stem-education-
training-workforce.
\3\ www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2428761.
\4\ www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2429243.
\5\ www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2435570.
\6\ www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2436203.
\7\ nsf-gov-resources.nsf.gov/files/TIPRoadmap_WEB.pdf.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Martin Heinrich
Question. The Very Large Array in New Mexico is the most prolific
radio telescope in the world, and a big source of pride in my state. So
far, Congress and NSF have committed nearly $100 million for the Next
Generation Very Large Array. But we need $120 million more to complete
the design and prototype. You've only asked for $7 million of that in
fiscal year 2025. Will you ask for the remaining $113 million in fiscal
year 2026?
Answer. To date, the Next Generation Very Large Array (ngVLA) has
been approved for admission into the first step in the complete NSF
design process, the conceptual design phase, and funds have been
awarded to enable activity in this step. Contingent on a positive
review of the progress made during this phase, the team will be invited
to submit a proposal for the second step, the preliminary design phase.
Funding needs and timing of allocations for that phase will be decided
through a review of the proposal, potentially over the course of
multiple fiscal years. It is anticipated that the full design process
will also require multiple years of funding. The final step in the
process, the final design phase, must be completed prior to a
determination as to whether or not to continue with construction.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ public.nrao.edu/news/21-mil-nsf-ngvla-design-award/.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator John Kennedy
Dr. Panch, I know that I do not need to lecture you on the
importance of the NSF's EPSCoR program to underserved states like
Louisiana. However, I can't help but be concerned over the way in which
the program appears to be headed. Louisiana has worked hard to create
an NSF EPSCoR program that works for our state, and my people have
worked tirelessly to ensure that our research infrastructure remains
competitive. While the NSF's current Track 1 program has greatly
benefited my state over the past few years, it was recently brought to
my attention that the NSF plans to replace it.
Question. What is the NSF's intention with these new programs and
why weren't they tested prior to discontinuing the successful Track 1
program?
Answer. While the Research Infrastructure Improvement (RII) Track-1
funding opportunity has been in existence since NSF first established
the program in 1978, the nation's research ecosystem has evolved
drastically since 1978. NSF transitioned the EPSCoR RII Track-1 program
to support new programs that would enhance NSF EPSCoR investments in
creating a sustainable ecosystem for research, translation of research
outcomes, economic development, and workforce creation. The new EPSCoR
RII programs (i.e., EPSCoR Collaborations for Optimizing Research
Ecosystems (E-CORE RII) and EPSCoR Research Incubators for STEM
Excellence (E-RISE RII)) align with NSF's goal of growing new research
networks and partnerships in EPSCoR jurisdictions while also leveraging
existing ones to drive demonstrable and sustainable impact on the
jurisdiction-wide research ecosystem.
Given the traditional one-size-fits-all model for RII Track-1,
there has been limited flexibility for jurisdictions to expand
scientifical topical expertise or jurisdiction-wide research capacity
building at a speed and scale that fits the needs of today's research
ecosystem. The new E-CORE RII and E-RISE RII programs will allow for
(i) scaling up the breadth of networks of research teams across
jurisdictions in multiple research topical areas; (ii) maintaining
research cores while developing a critical mass of researchers across
institution types within the jurisdiction (e.g., research institutions,
emerging research institutions, two-year college, minority-serving
institutions, industry, non-profits) and?across STEM disciplinary
areas; (iii) supporting the development, implementation, and evaluation
of innovative systemic change strategies that promote greater research
and academic competitiveness for the jurisdiction; and (iv) supporting
sustainability of research infrastructure specific to the needs of the
jurisdiction and that undergirds jurisdiction-wide research activities
and workforce development.
Both E-CORE RII and E-RISE RII are designed to prioritize scaling
research capacity growth in EPSCoR jurisdictions by funding more
connected research teams, strengthening existing academic resources and
infrastructure, promoting more partnerships across various institution
types, and expanding human capital (e.g., workforce development,
economic development, faculty hires). With these increased investments,
EPSCoR jurisdictions are positioned to significantly increase their
research competitiveness and research outputs. Additionally, E-CORE and
E-RISE RII programs will enable jurisdictions to build a broader
framework for engaging partnerships across the entire research
ecosystem in a jurisdiction, including with state offices, business
chambers of commerce, and industry partners.
This directly addresses the provisions in the CHIPS and Science Act
for NSF to prioritize enabling sustainable growth in the
competitiveness of jurisdictions.
To further support EPSCoR jurisdictions' transition from RII Track-
1 to E-CORE RII and E-RISE RII, NSF delayed archiving the RII Track-1
program until 1 year after announcement of the E-CORE RII and E-RISE
RII programs. The intentional overlap of funding opportunities helped
to ease the transition from RII Track-1 to these new programs. The E-
CORE RII and E-RISE RII programs were launched in May 2023 and RII
Track-1 remained an active program through the FY 2024 cycle. However,
in FY 2024, only 30 percent of eligible jurisdictions opted to submit
to the RII Track-1 competition, with the remaining 70 percent having
submitted proposals to E-CORE RII and/or E-RISE RII.
Long-term, given the NSF EPSCoR program budget, the program is
unable to award both new RII Track-1 awards along with new E-CORE RII
and E-RISE RII awards. Doing so would limit NSF flexibility in funding
the most worthwhile awards across all other EPSCoR RII programs, along
with other program investment strategies (e.g., co-funding provided for
awards through other NSF Directorates and Programs, which makes
possible a broad portfolio of investment in S&E projects throughout
EPSCoR jurisdictions). New awards across all three programs would also
be a duplication of resources, potentially resulting in some
jurisdictions receiving the lion's share of the limited funds available
for new RII awards.
Question. What kind of individual stakeholder outreach, besides
internal studies or reports, did the NSF conduct prior to developing a
replacement for EPSCoR's current Track 1 program? Was there an open
comment period that allowed for all stakeholders to give feedback or
did your agency only solicit input from specific jurisdictions and
individuals?
Answer. In transitioning the EPSCoR RII Track-1 program to E-CORE
RII and E-RISE RII, NSF maintained the following critical guiding
principles: (i) keep alignment with existing NSF EPSCoR goals and
mission; (ii) position jurisdictions for success in EPSCoR funding
opportunities and in broader NSF funding opportunities; (iii) connect
all EPSCoR RII investments in a jurisdiction; (iv) expand support of
all EPSCoR-eligible institutions and organizations, including new
awardees and eligible institutions underrepresented in EPSCoR funding
portfolio; and (v) remove a one-size-fits-all prescriptive model for
building research capacity. E-CORE RII and E-RISE RII are intended to
connect the multiple RII investments in a jurisdiction through
expanding the role of jurisdictions' core coordination functioning
units.
In recent years, a number of external reports, assessments, and
visioning activities have been conducted to evaluate EPSCoR's
successes, highlight its significant challenges, and inform its future
directions. From these inputs, while RII Track-1 outputs and impacts
have shown some success, these successes have not been broadly scaled
for jurisdiction-wide impact in all jurisdictions. The E-CORE RII and
E-RISE RII programs were developed in response to common threads (e.g.,
build capacity across institutions, enable flexible and sustainable
program strategies, foster ecosystem approach to EPSCoR investment
strategies) across these inputs, including the CHIPS and Science Act,
Envisioning the Future of NSF EPSCoR report,\1\ GAO report on
EPSCoR,\2\ and a 2M Study of the NSF EPSCoR program \3\. Moreover, the
2M Study of NSF EPSCoR, which elucidated a conceptual framework to
explore, define, and measure academic research excellence and
competitiveness, illustrates the complexity and variability of the STEM
research and education ecosystems within and across jurisdictions. The
E-CORE RII and E-RISE RII programs allow jurisdictions to develop
proposals that will more effectively address their variabilities,
customizing solutions to address STEM needs in their respective
ecosystems.
The 2M Study of NSF EPSCoR was widely distributed across the
stakeholder community, and EPSCoR held sessions at its annual PI
meetings in 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 to address topics from the
report and solicit feedback from the PI community. Additionally, at the
2022 EPSCoR National Conference in Maine and 2022 EPSCoR Education,
Outreach, and Diversity Conference, EPSCoR held a session on critical
considerations and findings from 2M Report and the Envisioning the
Future of NSF EPSCoR report.
The Envisioning the Future of NSF EPSCoR report, specifically, was
generated by a group of EPSCoR stakeholders through a subcommittee of
the congressionally mandated Committee on Equal Opportunities in
Science and Engineering (CEOSE) advisory committee. This subcommittee
hosted six stakeholder listening sessions, which involved individuals
from the EPSCoR Research Infrastructure Improvement (RII) program's
Principal Investigator (PI) community, other NSF awardees including
those from Primarily Undergraduate Institutions, Minority Serving
Institutions, and Tribal Colleges and Universities, representatives
from industry, state government, and community organizations, experts
in research capacity and competitiveness, and university
administrators. Feedback from these listening sessions was incorporated
into the report's eight recommendations and nineteen suggestions. NSF's
response to these recommendations and nearly 80 percent of the
suggestions is directly reflected in the E-CORE RII and E-RISE RII
programs.
Before public release of the E-CORE RII and E-RISE RII programs,
NSF EPSCoR extensively engaged with its stakeholder community on
digesting recommendations from recent reports and legislation in
preparation for these new activities. NSF is committed to evolving
based on research, training, and education needs and priorities. Our
innovation and propagation of change will always engage our stakeholder
community. However, NSF does not advertise its new programs before
publication of the program solicitation or other official
announcements.
For decades, the NSF has chartered two U.S. ice-capable research
and supply vessels to support the U.S. Antarctic Program. The Office of
Polar Programs, which I know that you are familiar with, recently
announced its intention not to renew the contract for one of those
vessels, the Laurence M. Gould. It is my understanding that the NSF is
planning construction of a new Antarctic research vessel, but that
vessel won't be delivered for several years, assuming that Congress
provides the billion-plus dollars it will take to build the new ship.
Question. Dr. Panch, why has the NSF chosen to terminate the
Gould's charter well before a new vessel will be available to take its
place? [The Gould was built in Louisiana, so I know it's a reliable
vessel]. How can you continue to meet the needs of our Antarctic
mission while choosing to cut a vessel that is critical to the program?
Do you intend to charter foreign-built vessels to replace the Gould?
What's the plan, Mr. Director?
Answer. The Laurence M. Gould (LMG) was a vessel with limited ice
capabilities that operated between Punta Arenas, Chile, and Palmer
Station in the Antarctic Peninsula that provided logistics support and
served a critical science role. While the LMG supported the United
States Antarctic Program (USAP) for the past 27 years, with the
construction of a new, deeper-water pier at Palmer Station, more
efficient and economical options are now available in the region to
better support the logistical needs of the USAP. The science support
provided by the LMG will be supported by the remaining USAP flagship
icebreaking research vessel Nathaniel B. Palmer, a substantially more
capable science and icebreaking vessel than the LMG, as well as other
vessels from the U.S. Academic Research Fleet on an as-needed basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ new.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/epscor/future-nsf-epscor.
\2\ www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-105043.pdf.
\3\ nsf-gov-resources.nsf.gov/2022-06/
EPSCoR%20Base%20Period%20Final%20Report%20-
%20%28508%20Compliant%29.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Now, the subcommittee stands in recess until June 4, when
we will hold a hearing on the budget request of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation. Thank you all.
[Whereupon, at 11:07 a.m., Thursday, May 23, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025
----------
TUESDAY, JUNE 4, 2024
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:39 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeanne Shaheen (Chair), presiding.
Present: Senators Shaheen, Reed, Coons, Manchin, Van
Hollen, Merkley, Peters, Heinrich, Moran, Collins, Murkowski,
Capito, Kennedy, Hagerty, and Fischer.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN
Senator Shaheen. The Appropriations Subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies will come to
order.
Good afternoon, everyone, welcome to today's hearing to
review the President's fiscal year 2025 funding request for the
Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Our witness today is FBI Director, Christopher Wray.
Director Wray, welcome. It is nice to have you back before this
Committee.
Attorney General Garland was before this subcommittee in
April and we discussed the fundamentally different position we
are in now compared to what we were in last year. Our fiscal
year 2023 bill made notable increases to the Justice
Department's law enforcement components, but fiscal year 2024
was a very different outcome for the Subcommittee and for the
Department.
The significant cuts in 2024 came as a result of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act's discretionary spending limits. So our bill
faced a 3 percent cut compared to fiscal year 2023. That is
roughly 2.5 billion dollars less than we had in the prior year.
In each of our hearings this year, I have tried to raise
concerns about the ongoing constraints of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act, and the continued cuts to discretionary
spending. These cuts have real consequences. And I am hoping we
will hear more from you this afternoon about what those
consequences mean for the FBI, and how they impact the safety
and security of the American people.
The Bureau has already provided a good example of some of
these impacts. Despite what appears to be a relatively modest
cut of $32 million, or 0.3 percent, in fiscal year 2024 to the
FBI salaries and expenses, the amount needed for the FBI to
maintain just its current services is actually $484 million
more than what we funded.
The FBI's fiscal year 2025 budget request is $11.3 billion,
$661 million above last year. It includes program enhancements
for cyber investigative capabilities, mitigating threats from
foreign intelligence services, and to address the increased
volume of firearms background checks. The request would also
allow the FBI to fund critical national security and law
enforcement positions that were reduced as a result of the
fiscal year 2024 appropriations.
We also hope to hear from you about the FBI's ongoing work
to address escalating threats that face our country, including
how the FBI is working with its Federal, State, and local law
enforcement partners to fight illicit drugs coming into the
country, and how the FBI is working to protect children,
particularly from online threats and exploitation.
Now, before I close my opening remarks, I would like to
thank the employees of the FBI for their dedication and service
to our country, especially when we are asking them to do more
with less to keep us safe.
Director Wray, I look forward to your testimony and our
discussion today.
And now I will recognize the Subcommittee's Ranking Member,
Senator Moran, for his opening remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Senator Moran. Senator Shaheen, thank you for convening our
hearing.
Director Wray, welcome back to this Commerce, Justice, and
Science Subcommittee. I appreciated your time, as I indicated
just a moment ago, in your remarks at the University of Kansas
this past April at the Annual FBI and KU Cybersecurity
Conference. The quality of the speakers and the panel suggests
to me that this will become a premier annual cyber event, and I
hope you will continue to join us; and we will try to do it
during basketball season if you prefer.
The ability of our Nation, in both government and private
sector, to deter and neutralize cyber attacks from having their
intended effect is essential to our national security and to
our economy. These new challenges and dangers require a
capable, qualified, and well-trained workforce to combat the
threats. In addition to that, I want to discuss the national
security crisis at the southern border. President Biden signed
an executive order to limit claims of asylum for those entering
our country.
While action by the President is needed, I am doubtful that
this executive order will make the necessary changes to ensure
operational control of our border, and that we know who, why,
and where people are crossing into our country. Last month, it
was reported that a suspected member of ISIS had been freely
living in the United States after illegally crossing the
southern border. Nonetheless, it would take more than 2 years
before that person was arrested on April the 17th.
In another case, an individual on the terrorist watch list
was similarly released by the Border Patrol after crossing the
southern border. I recognize that these cases most directly
implicate failures at DHS, but the FBI also plays a major role
in national security screening, and facilitating the sharing of
information across our government.
Our world and our country have become more dangerous, our
adversaries are coordinating with the intention of doing harm
to the U.S., our allies, and our partners. The conflicts
overseas present clear threats here at home. As Russia wages
its illegal and unjust invasion of Ukraine, it is widely
reported that Moscow is engaged in asymmetric activities such
as sabotage in Western Europe.
I would like you to address if we are seeing signs of that
in our own country. The ongoing war in Gaza has the potential
to inspire terrorists around the globe, we cannot be complacent
in believing America will be immune, and Jewish Americans
should not have to live in fear.
And the Chinese regime continues its efforts to steal
intellectual property from threaten critical infrastructure,
and on this anniversary of Tiananmen Square, has established
police stations in the U.S. to harass Chinese dissidents who
find freedom in our country.
You recently said, Director, the PRC has made it clear that
it considers every sector that makes our society run, fair
game. It is clear the conflicts abroad present real challenges
at home. Compounding those challenges are distinct
vulnerabilities on our borders, our means of communication, and
our technology systems.
Director, you have a wide array of challenges in front of
you and the FBI. It seems almost insurmountable, the things
that we face today. I look forward to hearing from you how our
budget can help better support the work the FBI does to
mitigate these growing threats, address the crisis at our
southern border, and ultimately keep Americans safe.
Thank you, and the people who work at the FBI, for your
efforts in that regard. And I thank you also for being here
today.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Senator Moran.
Vice Chair Collins, would you like to make an opening
statement?
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
First, welcome Director Wray. Let me start by just saying
that I appreciate very much your efforts to warn policymakers
and the American public about the threat of a terrorist attack.
We tend to be very focused on the great power competition with
China, and Russia, and Iran, and North Korea, being major
threats to us, but in fact, in my judgment, the most imminent
threat that we face is that of a terrorist attack. And I share
your assessment that everywhere we look, ``the lights are
blinking red'', to quote you previously.
The withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan, the rise of
the Taliban once again, a reconstituted ISIS-K, Iran's
deployment of proxy forces in the Middle East, the chaos at our
southern borders, and indeed our northern border as well, has
allowed terrorists into our country, and surging anti-
Americanism have all combined to dramatically increase the
threat of terrorist attacks in our country and aimed at our
allies abroad. That is an issue that I will want to address
with you today.
The second issue, which we have talked about before, is the
absolutely stunning increase, the shocking increase, in illegal
marijuana-growing operations in rural homes in Maine that are
often run by Chinese nationals. I brought this up to you at the
Worldwide Threats Briefing a month ago, and I have raised the
issue with the Attorney General just this past Thursday. The
Somerset County Sheriff's Office shut down a growing operation
in a house that contained 1,500 recently harvested marijuana
plants, more than 30 pounds of processed marijuana, and the
illicit drug-related materials, all of which were seized. This
particular growing operation was located adjacent to a daycare
center.
The Attorney General has committed to having the Department
of Justice more actively involved, along with other Federal
agencies, in helping State, county, and local law enforcement
in Maine. I would note Maine is not alone in experiencing this
enormous increase. The estimates are that there are between 150
and 200 of these sites yet to be dealt with in the State of
Maine. But we are not alone. There are about 20 States.
And I will be asking you this morning your assessment, what
the FBI is doing, specifically, and whether you have
information about the involvement of transnational Chinese
criminal organizations. So those are two of my greatest
concerns, and I look forward to our dialogue today.
Thank you, and the members of the FBI for all you do.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Collins.
Director Wray, the floor is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER WRAY, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Director Wray. Good afternoon, Chair Shaheen, Ranking
Member Moran, and Members of the Subcommittee. I am proud to be
here today representing the 38,000 men and women who make up
the FBI. Every day, our people are working relentlessly to
outpace our adversaries and stay ahead of complex and evolving
threats. So I would first like to thank you for your support
over the years of our efforts to achieve our mission of
protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.
At the same time, I also realize the reality of the
environment we are in today, where so many agencies are dealing
with tightening budgets. And this year, the FBI has been one of
those agencies, with our fiscal year 2024 budget having now
come in almost $500 million below what the FBI needs just to
sustain our 2023 efforts. And while I very much appreciate this
subcommittee's efforts to blunt any cuts, candidly, this could
not come at a worse time.
When I sat here last year, I walked through how we were
already in a heightened threat environment, and since then, we
have seen the threat from foreign terrorists rise to a whole
other level after October 7.
We continue to see the cartels push fentanyl and other
dangerous drugs into every corner of the country, claiming
countless American lives. We have seen a spate of ransomware
attacks and other cyber attacks impacting parts of our critical
infrastructure and businesses, both large and small.
Violent crime, which reached alarming levels coming out of
the pandemic, remains far too high and is impacting far too
many communities.
China continues its relentless efforts to steal our
intellectual property and most valuable information. And that
is just scratching the surface.
When I look back over my career in law enforcement, I would
be hard-pressed to think of a time when so many different
threats to our public safety and national security were so
elevated all at the same time. But that is the case as I sit
here today. And while we have always found ways at the FBI to
innovate and make the most with what we have, this is by no
means a time to let up or dial back. This is a time when we
need your support the most. And I look forward to working with
this subcommittee to get things back on track, because right
now we need investments in our people and the resources
required to keep Americans safe.
Now, I will stack the FBI's workforce up against anyone,
anywhere, anytime. They are innovative, they are efficient,
they are relentless, they are patriots. And we have been
fortunate at the FBI in recent years that our recruiting has
gone through the roof. Americans are applying in droves to
devote their lives to a career with us, protecting others.
But we need more positions to be able to bring all the good
people we can to the fight, certainly not fewer. And as great
as our people are, we also need to equip them with the
necessary tools required to tackle today's threats. Now is not
the time for less. To fulfill our mission, the men and women of
the FBI need more.
Terrorism.--Just in the time that I have been FBI Director,
we have disrupted multiple terrorist attacks in cities and
communities around the country. We need funding to continue
protecting America from terrorism. I touched on this earlier,
but there was already a heightened risk of violence in the
United States before October 7, and since then we have seen a
rogues' gallery of foreign terrorist organizations call for
attacks against Americans and our allies.
And given those calls for action, our most immediate
concern has been that individuals or small groups will draw
twisted inspiration from the events in the Middle East to carry
out attacks here at home. But now, on top of that, increasingly
concerning is the potential for a coordinated attack here in
the homeland, not unlike the ISIS-K attack we saw at the Russia
Concert Hall back in March.
China.--We are up to something like 2,000 active cases
across all 56 FBI field offices, focused on the PRC's efforts
to try to steal our information and technology, and we need
funding to continue countering the threat posed by the PRC, a
Government sparing no expense in its quest to hack, lie, cheat,
and steal its way to the top as a global superpower, and to
undermine our democracy and our economic success.
Cyber.--We are investigating more than a hundred different
ransomware variants, each of them impacting scores of victims,
and that is just ransomware. We need funding to continue
disrupting all kinds of cyber threats, certainly those from
China, but also from a crowded field of sophisticated criminals
and hostile nation-states like Russia, Iran, and North Korea.
The fentanyl epidemic.--We have got between 300 and 400
investigations just into cartel leadership, and time and time
again, our folks are seizing enough fentanyl to wipe out entire
States. We need funding to continue thwarting the range of
threats emanating from the border; fentanyl, gangs like MS-13,
human trafficking.
Violent crime.--Last year, our Safe Streets and Violent
Crime Task Forces arrested something like 50 bad guys per day,
every day, all year long. We need funding to continue fighting
the violent crime that remains at levels in this country that
are still too high.
Child exploitation.--Our dedicated agents, analysts, and
professional staff working, violent crimes against children are
arresting hundreds of predators, and rescuing hundreds of
victims each and every year. We need funding to continue
protecting our most vulnerable victims from their tormentors.
Now, in all those areas that I just mentioned, we are
working closely with our partners at all levels of government
to achieve our shared goals of keeping our communities safe,
and protecting Americans from harm.
Every day, every day, FBI agents, analysts, and
professional staff are working shoulder-to-shoulder with
thousands of task force officers from hundreds of different
police departments and sheriff's offices all over the country
on our FBI-led task forces. On top of that, we provide
technology and expertise, valuable investigative leads, like
DNA matches, and cutting-edge training to law enforcement
nationwide to help them keep our communities safe.
So as I know this subcommittee recognizes, cuts to us are
cuts to our partners, State and local law enforcement agencies
and officers who are on the ground putting themselves in the
line of fire, often, quite literally. That is just one way that
cuts to us are going to have real impacts on the American
people.
So yes, despite best efforts, we took a hit in the 2024
budget, but 2025 is a chance to get back on track and provide
the FBI's men and women the tools and resources the American
people need us to have to keep them safe.
So thank you again for having me here today, and I look
forward to our discussion.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Christopher A. Wray, Director, Federal Bureau of
Investigation
Good afternoon, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of
the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today.
Each day, Federal Bureau of Investigation (``FBI'') personnel are
making a real difference in communities across the nation, tackling
some of the most complex national security and criminal threats with
perseverance, professionalism, and integrity--sometimes at the greatest
of costs. I am extremely proud of their service and commitment. On
their behalf, I ask for your support and pledge to be the best possible
stewards of the resources you provide. I would like to begin by
providing a brief overview of the FBI's FY 2025 budget request, and
then follow with a short discussion of key threats and challenges that
we face, both as a nation and as an organization.
fy 2025 budget overview
The FY 2025 budget request proposes a total of $11.3 billion in
direct budget authority to carry out the FBI's national security,
intelligence, criminal law enforcement, and criminal justice services
missions. The gross request includes a total of $11.3 billion for
Salaries and Expenses, which will support 37,083 positions (13,623
Special Agents, 3,337 Intelligence Analysts, and 20,123 professional
staff), and $61.9 million for Construction. The request includes
program enhancements under Salaries and Expenses, including $7.0
million to enhance cyber investigative capabilities, $17.8 million to
mitigate threats from foreign intelligence services, and $8.4 million
to address the increased volume of firearms background checks. The
request also provides funding to allow the FBI to fund critical
national security and law enforcement positions reduced as a result of
reductions in the FY 2024 enacted appropriation. Congress has long
supported these positions in years past, and the safety and security of
the American people would be well served by allowing the FBI to
continue filling these positions in FY 2025 through the requested
budget.
As described in this threat summary, our adversaries are not
scaling back their efforts because of the constrained budget
environment. In fact, threat actors may try to take advantage of
Federal budget reductions to conduct nefarious activities. The FBI
cannot afford to be playing catch-up to the People's Republic of China
(``PRC''), Hamas, and transnational organized criminals coming across
the border, and cyber actors. With the requested resources, the FBI
will have the talent, tools, and authorities to do more to protect the
American people and uphold the Constitution.
key threats and challenges
Over the past year, the threats facing our nation have escalated.
These threats emanate from myriad sources--nation-states, hostile
foreign intelligence services, and criminals. They range from homegrown
violent extremists (HVEs) to sophisticated cyber-attacks, from Internet
facilitated sexual exploitation of children to human trafficking, from
violent gangs and criminal organizations to public corruption and
corporate fraud. Keeping pace with these threats is a significant
challenge for the FBI, especially as technology evolves and allows
adversaries to use the Internet and social media to facilitate illegal
activities, recruit followers, encourage terrorist attacks and other
illicit actions, to spread misinformation, and to disperse information
on building improvised explosive devices and other means to attack the
United States. Cyber actors also exploit technology to infiltrate U.S.
networks, steal our intellectual property and secrets, spread malware,
hold our critical infrastructure at risk, and create chaos. The breadth
of these threats and challenges are as complex as at any time in our
history, and the consequences of not responding to and countering
threats and challenges have never been greater.
The support of this Committee in funding the FBI to do its part in
thwarting these threats and facing these challenges is greatly
appreciated. That support will allow us to establish strong
capabilities and capacities to assess threats, share intelligence,
leverage key technologies, and--in some respects, most importantly--
hire the best personnel to serve as Special Agents, Intelligence
Analysts, and professional staff. We have built, and are continuously
enhancing, a workforce that possesses the skills and knowledge to deal
with the complex threats and challenges we face today--and will face
tomorrow. We are building a leadership cadre that views change and
transformation as a positive tool for keeping the FBI focused on the
key threats facing our nation.
Today's FBI is a national security and law enforcement organization
that uses, collects, and shares intelligence in everything we do. Each
FBI employee understands that, to defeat the key threats facing our
nation, we must constantly strive to be more efficient and more
effective. Just as our adversaries continue to evolve, so, too, must
the FBI. We live in a time of acute and persistent terrorist and
criminal threats to our national security, our economy, and indeed our
communities. These diverse threats underscore the complexity and
breadth of the FBI's mission: to protect the American people and uphold
the Constitution of the United States.
national security
Top Terrorism Threats
Protecting the American people from terrorism--both international
and domestic--remains the FBI's number one priority. The threat from
terrorism is as persistent and complex as ever. As we saw in October
with the devastating attack in Israel, terrorist actors are still very
intent on using violence and brutality to spread their ideologies. We
are in an environment where the threats from international terrorism
(IT), domestic terrorism (DT), and state-sponsored terrorism are all
simultaneously elevated.
Over the past few years, the greatest terrorism threat to our
homeland has been posed by lone actors or small cells of individuals
who typically radicalize to violence online and who primarily use
easily accessible weapons to attack soft targets. In addition to this
threat, which has not diminished, we are also increasingly concerned
that foreign terrorist organizations will enable or direct attacks on
U.S, soil. We see the lone offender threat with both domestic violent
extremists (``DVEs'') and HVEs, two distinct threats, both primarily
located in the United States that typically radicalize and mobilize to
violence on their own. DVEs are individuals based and operating
primarily within the United States or its territories without direction
or inspiration from a foreign terrorist group or other foreign power
who seek to further political or social goals through unlawful acts of
force or violence. In comparison, HVEs are individuals of any
citizenship who have lived and/or operated primarily in the United
States or its territories, who advocate, are engaged in, or are
preparing to engage in ideologically motivated terrorist activities in
furtherance of political or social objectives promoted by a foreign
terrorist organization but are acting independently of direction by a
foreign terrorist organization (``FTO'').
Domestic and homegrown violent extremists are often motivated and
inspired by a mix of social or political, ideological, and personal
grievances against their targets, and more recently have focused on
accessible targets to include civilians, law enforcement and the
military, symbols or members of the U.S. government, houses of worship,
retail locations, and public mass gatherings. Lone actors present a
particular challenge to law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
These actors are difficult to identify, investigate, and disrupt before
they take violent action, especially because of the insular nature of
their radicalization and mobilization to violence and limited
discussions with others regarding their plans.
The top domestic terrorism threat we face continues to be from DVEs
we categorize as racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists
(``RMVEs'') and anti-government or anti-authority violent extremists
(``AGAAVEs''). The number of FBI domestic terrorism investigations has
more than doubled since the spring of 2020. At the end of FY 2023, the
FBI was conducting approximately 2,700 investigations within the
domestic terrorism program and was also conducting approximately 4,000
investigations within its international terrorism program.
The FBI assesses HVEs as the greatest, most immediate international
terrorism threat to the homeland. HVEs are people located and
radicalized to violence primarily in the United States, who are not
receiving individualized direction from FTOs but are inspired to commit
violence by FTOs, including the self-proclaimed Islamic State of Iraq
and ash-Sham (``ISIS'') and al-Qaida and their affiliates. The lack of
a direct connection with an FTO, ability to rapidly mobilize without
detection, and use of encrypted communications pose significant
challenges to our ability to proactively identify and disrupt potential
violent attacks by HVEs.
While we assist our Israeli colleagues and we understand the global
implications of the ongoing conflict in Israel, we are paying
heightened attention to how the events abroad could directly affect and
inspire people to commit violence here in the Homeland. Terrorist
organizations worldwide, as well as individuals attracted to violence,
have praised Hamas' horrific attack on Israeli civilians. We have seen
violent extremists across ideologies seeking to target Jewish and
Muslim people and institutions through physical assaults, bomb threats,
and online calls for mass casualty attacks. Our top concern stems from
lone offenders inspired by--or reacting to--the ongoing Israel-Hamas
conflict, as they pose the most likely threat to Americans, especially
Jewish, Muslim, and Arab-American communities in the United States. We
have seen an increase in reported threats to Jewish and Muslim people,
institutions, and houses of worship here in the United States, and we
are moving quickly to mitigate them.
Presently, we have no information to indicate that Hamas has the
intent or capability to conduct operations inside the United States,
though we cannot, and do not, discount that possibility, but we are
especially concerned about the possibility of Hamas supporters engaging
in violence on the group's behalf. As always, we are concerned with any
FTO that may exploit the attacks in Israel as a tool to mobilize their
followers around the world. In recent years, there have been several
events and incidents in the United States that were purportedly
motivated, at least in part, by the conflict between Israel and Hamas.
These have included the targeting of individuals, houses of worship,
and institutions associated with the Jewish and Muslim faiths with acts
of physical assault, vandalism, or harassment. Anti-Semitism and anti-
Islamic sentiment permeate many violent extremist ideologies and serve
as a primary driver for attacks by a diverse set of violent extremists
who pose a persistent threat to Jewish and Muslim communities and
institutions in the United States and abroad. FTOs have exploited
previous conflicts between Israel and Hamas via media outlets and
online communications to call on their supporters located in the United
States to conduct attacks. Some violent extremists have used times of
heightened tensions to incite violence against religious minorities,
targeting both Jewish and Muslim Americans.
The FBI remains concerned about the intent of FTOs, such as ISIS
and al-Qaida and their affiliates, to carry out or inspire large-scale
attacks in the United States.
Despite its loss of physical territory in Iraq and Syria, ISIS
remains relentless in its campaign of violence against the United
States and its partners--here at home and overseas. ISIS and its
supporters continue to aggressively promote its hate-fueled rhetoric
and attract like-minded violent extremists with a willingness to
conduct attacks against the United States and our interests abroad.
ISIS' successful use of social media and messaging applications to
attract individuals is of continued concern to us. Like other foreign
terrorist groups, ISIS advocates for lone offender attacks in the
United States and Western countries via videos and other English
language propaganda that have specifically advocated for attacks
against civilians, the military, law enforcement, and intelligence
community personnel.
Al-Qaida also maintains its desire to conduct and to inspire large-
scale attacks. Because continued pressure has degraded some of the
group's senior leadership, we assess that, in the near term, al-Qaida
is more likely to continue to focus on cultivating its international
affiliates and supporting small-scale, readily achievable attacks in
regions such as East and West Africa. Nevertheless, propaganda from al-
Qaida leaders continues to seek individuals inspired to conduct their
own attacks in the United States and other Western nations.
Iran and its global proxies and partners, including Iraqi Shia
militant groups, attack and plot against the United States and our
allies throughout the Middle East. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard
Corps-Qods Force (``IRGC-QF'') has also provided support to militant
resistance groups and terrorist organizations. And Iran has supported
Lebanese Hizballah and other terrorist groups. Hizballah has sent
operatives to build terrorist infrastructure worldwide. The arrests of
individuals in the United States allegedly linked to Hizballah's main
overseas terrorist arm, and their intelligence-collection and -
procurement efforts, demonstrate Hizballah's interest in long-term
contingency planning activities here in the Homeland. Hizballah
Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah has also threatened retaliation for
the death of IRGC-QF Commander Qassem Soleimani.
While the terrorism threat continues to evolve, the FBI's resolve
to counter that threat remains constant. We continually adapt and rely
heavily on the strength of our Federal, state, local, Tribal,
territorial, and international partnerships to combat all terrorist
threats to the United States and its interests. To that end, we use all
available lawful investigative techniques and methods to combat these
threats while continuing to collect, analyze, and share intelligence
concerning the threats posed by violent extremists who desire to harm
Americans and U.S. interests. We will continue to share information and
encourage the sharing of information among our numerous partners via
our Joint Terrorism Task Forces across the country, and our legal
attache? offices around the world.
In addition to fighting terrorism, countering the proliferation of
weapons-of-mass- destruction materials (``WMD''), technologies, and
expertise, preventing their use by any actor, and securing nuclear and
radioactive materials of concern are also top national security
priorities for the FBI. The FBI considers preventing, mitigating,
investigating, and responding to WMD terrorism a ``no-fail'' mission
because a WMD attack could result in substantial injuries, illness, or
loss of lives, and yield significant social, economic, political, and
other national security consequences.
The FY 2025 budget request will allow the FBI to invest resources
in counterterrorism programs previously funded prior to the FY 2024
appropriation. In a rapidly evolving threat environment, now is not the
time to reduce resources against international terrorism threats.
Cyber
The FBI has seen a wider-than-ever range of cyber actors threaten
Americans' safety, security, and confidence in our digitally connected
world. Cybercriminal syndicates and nation-states continue to innovate,
using unique techniques to compromise our networks and maximize the
reach and impact of their operations. Those techniques include selling
malware as a service or targeting vendors to access scores of victims
by hacking just one provider.
These criminals and nation-states believe that they can compromise
our networks, steal our property, extort us, and hold our critical
infrastructure at risk without incurring any risk themselves. In the
last few years, we have seen the People's Republic of China (``PRC''),
the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (``DPRK''), and Russia use
cyber operations to target U.S. research. We have seen the PRC working
to obtain controlled dual-use technology, while developing an arsenal
of advanced cyber capabilities that could be used against other
countries in the event of a real-world conflict. And we have seen the
disruptive impact a serious supply- chain compromise can have through
the SolarWinds-related intrusions, conducted by the Russian Foreign
Intelligence Service. As these adversaries become more sophisticated,
we are increasingly concerned about our ability to detect specific
cyber operations against U.S. organizations. One of the most worrisome
facets is their focus on compromising U.S. critical infrastructure,
especially during a crisis.
Making things even more difficult, there is often no bright line
that separates where nation-state activity ends, and cybercriminal
activity begins. Some cybercriminals contract or sell services to
nation-states; some nation-state actors moonlight as cybercriminals to
fund personal activities; and nation-states are increasingly using
tools, such as ransomware, typically used by criminal actors.
So, as dangerous as nation-states are, we do not have the luxury of
focusing only on them. In the past year, we also have seen
cybercriminals target hospitals, medical centers, educational
institutions, and other critical infrastructure for theft or
ransomware, causing massive disruption to our daily lives. Incidents
affecting medical centers have led to the interruption of computer
networks and systems that put patients' lives at increased risk.
We have also seen the rise of an ecosystem of services dedicated to
supporting cybercrime in exchange for cryptocurrency. Criminals now
have new tools to engage in destructive behavior--for example,
deploying ransomware to paralyze entire hospitals, police departments,
and businesses--as well as new means to better conceal their tracks. It
is not that individual malicious cyber actors have necessarily become
much more sophisticated, but that they can now more easily rent
sophisticated capabilities.
We must make it harder and more painful for malicious cyber actors
and criminals to carry on their malicious activities. As the lead
Federal agency for threat response, the FBI works seamlessly with
domestic and international partners to defend their networks, attribute
malicious activity, sanction bad behavior, and take the fight to our
adversaries overseas. We must impose consequences on cyber adversaries
and use our collective law enforcement and intelligence capabilities to
do so through joint and enabled operations sequenced for maximum
impact. And we must continue to work with the Department of State and
other key departments and agencies to ensure that our foreign partners
are able and willing to cooperate in our efforts to disrupt
perpetrators of cybercrime.
An example of this approach is the coordinated international
operation announced in April 2023 against Genesis Market, a criminal
online marketplace offering access to data stolen from over 1.5 million
compromised computers around the world containing over 80 million
account access credentials. Genesis Market was also a prolific initial
access broker (IAB) in the cyber-crime world, providing criminals a
user-friendly database to search for stolen credentials so they could
easily infiltrate a victim's computer. As part of this operation, law
enforcement seized 11 domain names used to support Genesis Market's
infrastructure pursuant to a warrant authorized by the US District
Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. A total of 22
international agencies and 44 FBI field offices assisted the FBI
Milwaukee Field Office investigating the case. And on April 5, 2023,
the U.S. Department of Treasury announced sanctions against Genesis
Market.
In January 2024, the FBI announced an operation where the FBI and
its partners identified a network of hundreds of compromised routers
used by the PRC sponsored hacking group known as Volt Typhoon. The
botnet enabled China to hide, among other things, pre-operational
reconnaissance and network exploitation against critical infrastructure
like our communications, energy, transportation, and water sectors. The
PRC took these steps to find and prepare to destroy or degrade the
civilian critical infrastructure that keeps us safe and prosperous. To
be extremely clear, cyber threats to our critical infrastructure
represent real-world threats to our physical safety. Working with our
partners, the FBI ran a court-authorized, on-network operation that
significantly disrupted this Volt Typhoon botnet and the access it
enabled.
This operation was an important step. But there's a lot more to do.
To quantify what we are up against: the PRC has a bigger hacking
program than every other major nation combined. In fact, if each one of
the FBI's cyber agents and intelligence analysts focused exclusively on
the PRC threat, the PRC's hackers would still outnumber FBI cyber
personnel at least 50 to 1. The appropriations this Committee decides
on this year will dictate what resources can apply to counter the
growing PRC cyber threat, especially as 2027, the year that the Chinese
Communist Party (CCP) has targeted for a potential invasion of Taiwan,
approaches.
The FBI is doing everything in its power to combat these threats.
In total, we took over 1,000 actions against cyber adversaries in 2023,
to include arrests, criminal charges, convictions, dismantlements, and
disruptions, and enabled many more actions through our dedicated
partnerships with the private sector, foreign partners, and with
Federal, state, and local entities. We also provided thousands of
individualized threat warnings and disseminated 78 public threat
advisories by way of Joint Cybersecurity Advisories, FBI Liaison Alert
System (``FLASH'') reports, Private Industry Notifications (``PINs''),
and Public Service Announcements (``PSAs'')--many of which were jointly
authored with other U.S. agencies and international partners.
Along with our partners in the interagency, the FBI has devoted
significant energy and resources to partnerships with the private
sector. We are working hard to push important threat information to
network defenders, but we have also been making it as easy as possible
for the private sector to share important information with us. For
example, we are emphasizing to the private sector how we keep our
presence unobtrusive in the wake of an incident, as well as how we
protect identities and other information that the private sector shares
with us. We are still committed to providing useful feedback and
improving coordination with our government partners so that we are
speaking with one voice. But we need the private sector to do its part,
too. We need the private sector to come forward to warn us and our
partners when they see malicious cyber activity. We also need the
private sector to work with us when we warn them that they are being
targeted. Our collective response to significant cyber threats--the
SolarWinds campaign, Russia's Cyclops Blink botnet,, and the Colonial
Pipeline incident-- only emphasize what we have been saying for a long
time: the government cannot protect against cyber threats on its own.
We need a fully resourced whole-of-society approach that matches the
scope of the danger. There is no other option for defending a country
where nearly all of our critical infrastructure, personal data,
intellectual property, and network infrastructure sits in private
hands.
In summary, the FBI is engaged in myriad efforts to combat cyber
threats, from improving threat identification and information sharing
inside and outside of the government to developing and retaining new
talent, to examining the way we operate to disrupt and defeat these
threats. We take all potential threats to public and private sector
systems seriously and will continue to investigate and hold accountable
those who pose a threat in cyberspace. The FY 2025 Request includes an
additional 12 positions (including 4 Special Agents and 8 Professional
Staff) and $7.0 million to enhance cyber response capabilities.
Foreign Intelligence Threats
Nations such as the PRC, Russia, and Iran are becoming more
aggressive and more capable than ever before. These nations seek to
undermine our core democratic, economic, and scientific institutions,
and they employ a growing range of tactics. Defending American
institutions and values against these threats is a national security
imperative and a priority for the FBI.
With that, the greatest long-term threat to our Nation's ideas,
innovation, and economic security is from PRC foreign intelligence and
economic espionage. By extension, it is also a threat to our national
security. The PRC aspires to reshape the international rules-based
system to its benefit, often with little regard for international norms
and laws.
When it comes to economic espionage, the PRC uses every means at
its disposal, blending cyber, human intelligence, diplomacy, corporate
transactions, and other pressure on U.S. companies operating in the
PRC, to steal our companies' innovations. These efforts are consistent
with the PRC's expressed goals of becoming the preeminent power on the
world stage through technology-enabled economic and military
development.
To pursue this goal, the PRC uses human intelligence officers, co-
optees, and corrupt corporate insiders, as well as sophisticated cyber
intrusions, pressure on U.S. companies in China, shell-game corporate
transactions, and joint-venture ``partnerships'' that are anything but
a true partnership. There is nothing traditional about the scale of
their theft. It is unprecedented. American workers and companies are
facing a greater, more complex danger than they have dealt with before.
Stolen innovation means stolen jobs, stolen opportunities for American
workers, and stolen national power.
As the lead U.S. counterintelligence agency, the FBI is responsible
for detecting and lawfully countering the actions of foreign
intelligence services and organizations as they seek to adversely
affect U.S. national interests. The FBI recognized the need to
coordinate similar efforts across all agencies, and therefore
established the National Counterintelligence Task Force (``NCITF'') in
2019 to create a whole-of-government approach to counterintelligence.
The FBI established the national-level NCITF, in the National Capital
Region to coordinate, facilitate, and focus multi-agency
counterintelligence operations, and to programmatically support local
Counterintelligence Task Force (``CITF'') operations in each FBI field
office. Combining the authorities and operational capabilities of the
U.S. Intelligence Community, Federal, state, and local law enforcement,
and local CITFs, the NCITF coordinates and leads whole-of-government
efforts to defeat hostile intelligence activities targeting the United
States.
The Department of Defense (``DoD'') has been a key partner in the
NCITF since its founding. While the FBI has had long-term collaborative
relationships with DoD entities such as the Air Force Office of Special
Investigations, Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and Army
Counterintelligence, the NCITF has allowed us to enhance our
collaboration with each other for greater impact. We plan to emphasize
this whole-of-government approach moving forward as a powerful formula
to mitigate the modern counterintelligence threats.
In recent years, we have seen a rise in efforts by authoritarian
regimes to interfere with freedom of expression and punish dissidents,
political opponents, and others abroad. These acts of repression cross
national borders, often reaching into the United States. The
governments of China, Russia, and Iran, and their proxies stalk,
intimidate, and harass expatriates or dissidents who speak against the
regime from within the United States and elsewhere, as well as other
individuals these governments view as threats to their regime.
Transnational repression can occur in different forms, including
assault, kidnapping, and murder. Governments use transnational
repression tactics to silence the voices of their own or former
citizens, U.S. residents, and family members living abroad who are
critical of their regimes. This sort of repressive behavior is
antithetical to our values. People from all over the world are drawn to
the United States by the promise of living in a free and open society
that adheres to the rule of law. To ensure that this promise remains a
reality, we must continue to use all of our tools to block
authoritarian regimes that seek to extend their tactics of repression
beyond their own shores.
In addition, our Nation is confronting multifaceted foreign threats
seeking both to influence our national policies and public opinion and
to harm our national dialogue and debate. The FBI and our interagency
partners remain focused on foreign malign influence operations,
including subversive, undeclared, coercive, and criminal actions used
by foreign governments in their attempts to sway U.S. citizens'
preferences and perspectives, shift U.S. policies, increase discord in
the United States, and undermine the American people's confidence in
our democratic institutions and processes.
Foreign malign influence is not a new problem, but the
interconnectedness of the modern world, combined with the anonymity of
the Internet, have changed the nature of the threat. The FBI is the
lead Federal agency responsible for investigating foreign malign
influence threats. Several years ago, we established the Foreign
Influence Task Force (``FITF'') to identify and counteract foreign
malign influence operations targeting the United States. The FITF is
led by our Counterintelligence Division, and comprises agents,
analysts, and professional staff from the Counterintelligence, Cyber,
Counterterrorism, and Criminal Investigative divisions. It is
specifically charged with identifying and combating foreign malign
influence operations targeting democratic institutions inside the
United States.
The domestic counterintelligence environment is more complex than
ever. We face a persistent and pervasive national security threat from
foreign adversaries, particularly the governments of China, Russia, and
Iran, who conduct sophisticated intelligence operations using coercion,
subversion, malign influence, cyber and economic espionage, traditional
spying, and non-traditional human intelligence collection. Together,
they pose a continuous threat to U.S. national security and our economy
by targeting strategic technologies, industries, sectors, and critical
infrastructure. Historically, these asymmetric national security
threats involved foreign intelligence service officers seeking U.S.
government and U.S. Intelligence Community information. Now, however,
the FBI has observed foreign adversaries employing a wider range of
nontraditional collection techniques, including the use of human
collectors not affiliated with intelligence services, foreign
investment in critical U.S. sectors, and infiltration of U.S. supply
chains. The FBI continues to adjust its counterintelligence priorities
to address this evolution.
The FY 2025 Request includes an additional 44 positions (12 Special
Agents, 18 Intelligence Analysts, and 14 Professional Staff) and $17.8
million to help combat the threats posed by foreign, and potentially
hostile, intelligence services and other foreign government actors.
criminal threats
The United States. faces many criminal threats, including financial
and healthcare fraud, transnational and regional organized criminal
enterprises, crimes against children, human trafficking, and public
corruption. Criminal organizations--domestic and international--and
individual criminal activity represent a significant threat to security
and safety in communities across the Nation.
A critical tool in protecting the Nation from those who wish to do
harm is the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS.
The goal of NICS is to ensure that guns do not fall into the wrong
hands and ensure the timely transfer of firearms to eligible gun
buyers. Mandated by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993
and launched by the FBI on November 30, 1998, NICS is used by Federal
Firearms Licensees (``FFLs'') to determine whether a prospective buyer
is eligible to buy firearms. NICS receives information from tens of
thousands of FFLs and checks to ensure that applicants do not have a
criminal record and are not otherwise prohibited and therefore
ineligible to purchase a firearm. In the first complete month of
operation in 1998, a total of 892,840 firearm background checks were
processed. By contrast, in 2023, approximately 2.4 million checks were
processed per month, for a total of 29.9 million processed last year.
The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), signed into law in
June 2022, requires enhanced NICS background checks for any person
under the age of 21. These enhanced background checks are more labor-
intensive but have prevented ineligible persons from acquiring
firearms. As provisions from the BSCA continue to be implemented, the
FBI expects the volume of NICS transactions to continue to grow.
Ensuring the timely processing of these inquiries is important to
ensure law abiding citizens can exercise their right to purchase a
firearm and to protect communities from prohibited, and therefore
ineligible, individuals attempting to acquire a firearm. To ensure the
FBI maintains this capability, the FY 2025 Request includes an
additional 27 positions (including 1 Special Agent and 26 Professional
Staff) and $8.4 million.
Violent Crime
Violent crimes and gang activities exact a high toll on individuals
and communities. Many of today's gangs are sophisticated and are well
organized. They use violence to control neighborhoods and boost their
illegal money-making activities, which include robbery, drug and gun
trafficking, fraud, extortion, and prostitution rings. These gangs do
not limit their illegal activities to single jurisdictions or
communities. The FBI is able to work across such lines, which is vital
to the fight against violent crime in big cities and small towns across
the Nation. Every day, FBI special agents work in partnership with
Federal, state, local, and Tribal officers and deputies on joint task
forces and individual investigations.
FBI joint task forces--Violent Crime Safe Streets, Violent Gang
Safe Streets, and Safe Trails-- identify and target major groups
operating as criminal enterprises. Much of the FBI criminal
intelligence is derived from our state, local, territorial, and Tribal
law enforcement partners, who know their communities inside and out.
Joint task forces benefit from FBI surveillance assets, and our sources
track these gangs to identify emerging trends. Through these multi-
subject and multi-jurisdictional investigations, the FBI concentrates
its efforts on high-level groups engaged in patterns of racketeering.
This investigative model enables us to target senior gang leadership
and to develop enterprise-based prosecutions.
By way of example, the FBI has dedicated tremendous resources to
combat the threat of violence posed by MS-13. The atypical nature of
this gang has required a multi-pronged approach--we work through our
task forces here in the United States. while simultaneously gathering
intelligence from and aiding our international law enforcement
partners. We do this through the FBI's Transnational Anti-Gang Task
Forces (``TAGs''). Established in El Salvador in 2007 through the FBI's
National Gang Task Force, Legal Attache? San Salvador, and the
Department of State, each TAG is a fully operational unit responsible
for the investigation of MS-13 operating in the northern triangle of
Central America and threatening the United States. This program
combines the expertise, resources, and jurisdiction of participating
agencies involved in investigating and countering transnational
criminal gang activity in the United States and Central America. There
are now TAGs in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Through these
collaborating efforts, the FBI has achieved substantial success in
countering the MS-13 threat.
We are committed to working with our Federal, state, local, and
Tribal partners in a coordinated effort to reduce violent crime in the
United States.
Transnational Organized Crime (``TOC'')
More than a decade ago, organized crime was characterized by
hierarchical organizations, or families, that exerted influence over
criminal activities in neighborhoods, cities, or states. But organized
crime has changed dramatically. Today, international criminal
enterprises run multi-national, multi-billion-dollar schemes from start
to finish. Modern-day criminal enterprises are flat, fluid networks
with global reach. While still engaged in many of the ``traditional''
organized crime activities such as loan-sharking, extortion, and
murder, modern criminal enterprises are now also involved in
trafficking counterfeit prescription drugs containing deadly fentanyl,
conducting stock market fraud and manipulation, committing cyber-
facilitated bank fraud and embezzlement, illicit drug trafficking,
identity theft, human trafficking, money laundering, alien smuggling,
engaging in public corruption, weapons trafficking, kidnapping, and
other illegal activities. TOC networks exploit legitimate institutions
for critical financial and business services that enable the storage or
transfer of illicit proceeds. Preventing and combating transnational
organized crime demands a concentrated effort by the FBI and Federal,
state, local, territorial, Tribal, and international partners.
As part of our efforts to combat the TOC threat, the FBI is focused
on the cartels trafficking dangerous narcotics, like fentanyl, across
our borders. The FBI has over 350 cases linked to cartel leadership,
and 91 of those are along the southern border. Additionally, the FBI
actively participates in 18 Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task
Forces (``OCDETF'') Strike Forces across the United States,
investigating major drug trafficking, money laundering, and other high-
priority TOC networks. On top of that, through our prescription drug
initiative we are pursuing healthcare fraud investigations against
medical professionals and pill mills, through our Safe Streets Task
Forces, investigating the gangs and criminal groups responsible for
distributing dangerous substances like fentanyl, and through our Joint
Criminal Opioid Darknet Enforcement team disrupting and dismantling
DarkNet marketplaces for prescription opioids and drugs like fentanyl.
While the FBI continues to share intelligence about criminal groups
with our partners and combines resources and expertise to gain a full
understanding of each group, the threat of transnational crime remains
a significant and growing threat to national and international security
with implications for public safety, public health, democratic
institutions, and economic stability across the globe. TOC groups
increasingly exploit jurisdictional boundaries to conduct their
criminal activities overseas. Furthermore, they are expanding their use
of the Darknet to engage in illegal activity while exploiting emerging
technology to traffic illicit drugs and contraband across international
borders and into the United States.
Crimes Against Children and Human Trafficking
Every year, thousands of children become victims of crimes, whether
it results from kidnappings, violent attacks, sexual abuse, human
trafficking, or online predators. The FBI is uniquely positioned to
provide a rapid, proactive, and comprehensive response. We help
identify, locate, and recover child victims. Our strong relationships
with Federal, state, local, territorial, Tribal, and international law
enforcement partners also help to identify, prioritize, investigate,
and deter individuals and criminal networks from exploiting children.
But the FBI's ability to learn about and investigate child sexual
exploitation is being threatened by the proliferation of sites on the
Darknet and end-to-end encryption. For example, currently, there are at
least 30 Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) sites operating openly and
notoriously on the Darknet. Some of these exploitative sites are
exclusively dedicated to the sexual abuse of infants and toddlers. The
sites often expand rapidly, with one site obtaining as many as 200,000
new members within its first few weeks of operation. End-to-end
encrypted apps allow offenders to form groups of like-minded
individuals to trade files of CSAM and trade tips for how to exploit
children--all with no fear of detection.
Another growing area of concern involving the sexual exploitation
of children and adults alike is the explosion in incidents of children,
teens, and adults being coerced into sending explicit images online and
being extorted for money. Known as financially motivated
``sextortion,'' between October 2021 and March 2023, law enforcement
received over 13,000 reports of this type of crime, resulting in at
least 12,600 victims here and abroad, and more than 20 suicides. A
large percentage of these sextortion schemes originate outside the
United States, primarily in West African countries such as Nigeria and
Ivory Coast. The continued development of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
has made this crime even easier to commit. Perhaps the most difficult
part of a successful sextortion is convincing the child to initially
share a sexually explicit depiction. Now, with AI, offenders can create
the sexually explicit depiction from innocent images available on
social media--and then use that created image to extort the child into
creating actual depictions or making a financial payment. The FBI
continues to collaborate with other law enforcement partners and the
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to mitigate this
criminal activity and provide the public with informational alerts and
victim resources regarding these crimes.
The FBI has several programs in place to arrest child predators and
to recover missing and endangered children. To this end, the FBI funds
or participates in a variety of endeavors and constructs, including the
Innocence Lost National Initiative, the Innocent Images National
Initiative, Operation Cross Country, Child Abduction Rapid Deployment
Team, Victim Services, over 80 Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking
Task Forces, over 74 International Violent Crimes Against Children Task
Force officers, and numerous community outreach programs to educate
parents and children about safety measures they can follow. Through
improved communications, the FBI collaborates with partners throughout
the world quickly, playing an integral role in preventing crimes
against children.
The Child Abduction Rapid Deployment Team is a rapid-response team
with experienced investigators strategically located across the country
to quickly respond to child abductions. Investigators provide a full
array of investigative and technical resources during the most critical
time following the abduction of a child, such as the collection and
analysis of DNA, impression, and trace evidence, the processing of
digital forensic evidence, and interviewing expertise.
The FBI also focuses efforts to stop human trafficking of both
children and adults, including both sex trafficking and forced labor.
The FBI works collaboratively with law enforcement partners to disrupt
all forms of human trafficking through Human Trafficking Task Forces
nationwide. Over a two-week period in 2023, the FBI and its Federal,
state, local, and Tribal partners, executed approximately 350
operations to recover potential survivors of human trafficking and
other forms of exploitation, and to disrupt potential trafficking and
exploitation crimes. These operations identified and located 59 minors
who were potential victims of child sex trafficking, child sexual
exploitation, or related state or Federal offenses and located 59
actively missing children. Furthermore, the FBI and its partners
located 141 adults who were identified as potential victims of sexual
exploitation, human trafficking, or related state or Federal offenses.
In addition to identifying and recovering missing children and
potential victims, these law enforcement actions led to the
identification or arrest of 126 suspects implicated in potential child
sexual exploitation, human trafficking, or related state or Federal
offenses.
While many potential victims of human trafficking encountered or
recovered by the FBI are adult U.S. citizens, foreign nationals,
children, and other vulnerable populations are disproportionately
harmed by both sex and labor trafficking. In 2023, the FBI initiated
efforts to develop specialized strategies for identifying and
investigating crimes involving forced labor and transnational
trafficking of foreign-national victims into the United States. The FBI
and its partners take a victim-centered, trauma-informed approach to
investigating these cases and strive to ensure the needs of victims are
fully addressed at all stages. To accomplish this, the FBI works in
conjunction with other law enforcement agencies and victim specialists
on the Federal, state, local, territorial, and Tribal levels, as well
as with a variety of vetted non-governmental organizations. Even after
the arrest and conviction of human traffickers, the FBI often continues
to work with partner agencies and organizations to assist victims and
survivors in moving beyond their exploitation.
key cross-cutting capabilities and capacities
Operational Technologies
As criminal and terrorist threats become more diverse and
dangerous, the role of technology becomes increasingly important to our
efforts. We are using technology to improve the way we collect,
analyze, and share information. We have seen significant improvement in
capabilities and capacities over the past decade; but keeping pace with
technology remains a key concern for the future.
The FBI Laboratory is one of the largest and most comprehensive
forensic laboratories in the world. Operating out of a state-of-the-art
facility in Quantico, Virginia, laboratory personnel travel the world
on assignment, using science and technology to protect a Nation and
support law enforcement, intelligence, military, and forensic science
partners. The Lab's many services include providing expert testimony,
mapping crime scenes, and conducting forensic exams of physical and
hazardous evidence. Lab personnel possess expertise in many areas of
forensics supporting law enforcement and intelligence purposes,
including explosives, trace evidence, documents, chemistry,
cryptography, DNA, facial reconstruction, fingerprints, firearms,
digital forensics and WMDs.
One example of the Lab's key services and programs is the Combined
DNA Index System (CODIS), which allows 200 law enforcement laboratories
throughout the United States to compare over 20 million DNA profiles.
In the last 20 years, CODIS has aided over 675,000 investigations,
while maintaining its sterling reputation and the confidence of the
American public.
Statutory requirements and recent regulatory changes have
significantly expanded the DNA processing requirements of the FBI. For
instance, enacted in 2005, the DNA Fingerprint Act (in 34 U.S.C.
Sec. 40702(a)(1)(A) and (B)) authorized the Attorney General to collect
DNA samples from individuals who are arrested, facing charges, or
convicted, and from non-U.S. persons detained under U.S. authority. The
law mandates Federal DNA collection agencies submit their arrestee
collections to the FBI Laboratory for analysis and entry into CODIS. In
April 2020, the Department of Justice amended the DNA Fingerprint Act's
implementing rule that now precludes the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) from waiving DNA collections. As a result, during the
past twelve months, the FBI received an average of 146,000 DNA samples
per month, which is more than quadruple the average monthly submission
rate for FY 2021 of 36,300 samples. This substantial increase has
created massive budget and personnel shortfalls for the FBI. While the
FBI has worked with DHS components to automate and streamline
workflows, a backlog of over 1.6 million samples (as of April 2024) has
developed, increasing the likelihood of arrestees and non-U.S.
detainees being released before identification through investigative
leads. The Administration requested $204 million in its national
security supplemental to address this backlog.
Investment in additional DNA expansion capabilities and technology
is critical to maintaining and enhancing the FBI's ability to address
emerging threats and help mission critical information reach partners
and investigators in an expeditious manner.
conclusion
In conclusion, the threats we face as a nation have never been
greater or more diverse and the expectations placed on the FBI have
never been higher. Our fellow citizens look to the FBI to protect the
United States from all of those threats, and the men and women of the
FBI continue to meet and exceed those expectations, every day. I want
to thank them for their dedicated service. I also want to pledge to
this Committee to be good stewards of the resources provided.
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am
happy to answer any questions you might have.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Director Wray.
Senator Manchin, I understand you have to leave to chair
another hearing, so would you like to begin the questioning?
Senator Manchin. First of all, thank you, Madam Chair. I
appreciate that very much.
And to Director Wray, to you, and to all of the 35,000-plus
members who protect us every day, and put their lives in harm's
way for us, I want to thank each and every one of them too.
Sir, real quickly, I want to thank you for coming in 2022
to our Clarksburg, West Virginia FBI Center, which is your
largest, I believe, installation that does all the background
checks. And my concern there is the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act, making sure you have the necessary funds and
budget to enact that properly, that we can continue to grow and
protect the people of America from those who want weapons for
the wrong reason, and shouldn't have them, that we can do the
background checks properly.
So if you feel that this has been done adequately there and
if there is any help that you are needing; please let me know.
Director Wray. So I certainly appreciate your strong
support for the men and women of CGIS. As we have discussed, I
think before, in my view, the folks at CGIS are the folks that,
in some ways, have the greatest impact on the American people
but that the American people know the least about. And one of
those services, of course, is NICS, and the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act, provided an important boost to our authorities
in that space, and additional funding.
Now, on the funding part, though, here is the key.
Senator Manchin. I understand, and I heard----
Director Wray. Here is the key, we are very grateful to
this subcommittee and to Congress for the 170 positions that
were provided to NICS to implement BSCA, the problem, the
problem is that was a one-time funding.
Senator Manchin. Yes.
Director Wray. And so if this Congress doesn't
reauthorize--doesn't re-appropriate, I should say, that funding
we lose those 170 positions. So we need to get those positions
funded, you know, in sort of going forward, and not just one-
time funding, and in addition to that, in the 2025 budget, we
have asked for an enhancement, it is not a huge enhancement,
but it is an enhancement with more positions because right now
what is happening is the sheer volume of the new checks that we
have to do is going to draw people away from the traditional
background checks.
Senator Manchin. If you notice we are running out of time.
If I can get a couple more in, sir, I would appreciate it very
much.
Director Wray. Yes.
Senator Manchin. But if you want go ahead and brag on the
people in Clarksburg, West Virginia, all the good work they do.
I appreciate that very much, and I am very proud of them too.
The border, the southern border, I think you have touched
on that, how absolutely horrendous that is, and what we have
got to do and all the threats that we are facing there. And we
are hoping today's announcement by the President will give us
some light of hope, no matter how much, but any improvement at
all is going to be much appreciated. So I know you are watching
that very closely.
What I want to talk to that is bothering me more than
anything else, is basically the attack on the judicial system,
we have in this great country. The rule of law, and I am
speaking as a layman. I am not speaking as an attorney. I am
not an attorney.
But I keep trying to explain to people, my State is an R-40
State, if that gives you an idea how strongly the President--
former President Trump, has been supported. And I want to make
sure I am accurate when I tell them. They come to me and they
say: Well, it was a kangaroo court, this and that happened, and
it wasn't fair and everything.
And I said, Well, I understand the process was, that there
was a jury of peers, 12, that went through the process, but by
no means does it mean it is over. The rule of law, the way I
understand it in America, no matter what State you are in, I
have a right to cure. If I think I have had a misjudgment or
basically someone who ruled and maybe took liberties they
shouldn't have taken, that judge can be reprimanded, can go
through another Appeal process, an Appellate Court, or can even
go up to the State Supreme Court, and then the United States
Supreme Court.
I think people have to understand the checks and balances
we have in the rule of law. There is no other country like us.
A lot of countries: One and done. They say you are guilty, you
are gone. Not in America.
So for people--so the President--former President is going
to be on the ballot, in any way, shape, or form, as I see. I
don't think anything could happen that is going to prevent him
from being on the ballot. And if you think that whether the Ds
or the Rs or who is playing favors. I have got to put that to
rest, because I am concerned, if we lose the rule of law, and
the faith and confidence in the judicial system that we have,
then we have lost America as we have known it.
And your fears on that, or concerns, am I correct in saying
that everyone has ability to cure, if they think they have been
misjudged?
Director Wray. So of course I am not going to discuss
anything about the case.
Senator Manchin. Yes. I know that. I am sorry, I just--you
are the most----
Director Wray. But I most certainly believe deeply in the
rule of law.
Senator Manchin. Yes.
Director Wray. And I do think that is one of the things
that distinguishes the United States and our allies from
counties, authoritarian countries like China, you know, whether
it is redress, whether it is appeals.
Senator Manchin. Sure.
Director Wray. You know, the way I have sometimes put it
is, when have charged--take China, for example, when we have
charged folks acting on behalf of the Chinese Government, that
is us saying, we are so confident in the facts that we are
willing to prove them beyond a reasonable doubt, in front of an
independent court, with all the redress, and everything else
you have talked about, and we lose cases.
Senator Manchin. Sure.
Director Wray. The prosecutors don't like me to remind
people of that, but we lose cases in this country. The Chinese
don't lose many cases, and it is not because they are better. I
can assure you.
Senator Manchin. I have got you. I got you.
Director Wray. So respect for our--just in general, I am
not speaking about any specific case, or any specific
criticism, but respect for our institutions, respect for our
processes is something that I think we need to try to hold
dear. Just, again, I am speaking in general terms, not about
any specific case.
Senator Manchin. And that is the greatest threat, I think,
you know, at the border, and then basically, losing the respect
that we have and the faith that we in the judicial system. That
is my concern. And the more you can do to educate the process,
and all the curing elements I have, if I think I have been
treated wrong, I have got other ways to handle it in America,
nowhere else does that happen. Thank you, sir.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Manchin. Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chair, thank you very much. I will leave my
time in this round to the Senator from Maine.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much. It is very kind of
you.
Director Wray, I want to follow up on my opening statement,
about proliferation of the illegal marijuana operations in the
State of Maine, in rural houses, all over the State. This is a
serious problem, and our counties, State, and local law
enforcement have been work with Federal officials, but they are
overwhelmed by the magnitude of the task. Barely a day goes by
that our sheriffs another operation to close down one of these
growing operations.
And by the way, the houses are full of black mold, and will
never be habitable again. So that is also of great concern.
What is the FBI's theory about why Chinese nationals--or
Chinese transnational criminal organizations are setting up
these illegal marijuana growing operations in States like
Maine?
Director Wray. So it is something we have a number of
investigations into, as you might imagine. I guess speaking in
my sort of Intelligence Agency leadership role, we don't yet
see--but we are obviously investigating--any direct ties
between these growers and, say, the Chinese Government itself.
But we are starting to see, as we unpack this more, more
ties between a lot of these growing operations and Chinese
organized crime. And as to why they might be viewing the United
States rural communities, etc., as an attractive market for
this kind of activity, at the moment, our assessment is that it
is a combination of the fact that it is activity that can be
done relatively cheaply, and with, by comparison to, say, other
drugs in the United States, the consequences that they face,
from a legal perspective, are not as severe, or that they might
be in other countries where they might also want to operate.
So it makes for an attractive business proposition, if I
can speak that blandly about it. So we think that is what is
going on. We are continuing to investigate this. I am very
sympathetic to our State and local partners. You are right that
we are seeing it in rural communities. We are even starting to
see some of this creeping into, say, Tribal lands, for example,
around the country. So it is an emerging concern for sure, but
that is what I can say on it right now, I guess.
Senator Collins. Thank you. Just one theory that I have
heard is that these Chinese transnational criminal
organizations are using it as a money laundering operation to
bring more fentanyl into the country, which is, of course, the
last thing that we need. So I hope the FBI will continue its
cooperation in the State of Maine, with State, local, and
county officials, as well as with your other Federal partners
like DEA, DHS, IRS, et cetera.
I mentioned my concern about a terrorist attack because I
think the lights are blinking red. There is a related issue
that I want to bring up in the time that I have left, and that
is, just this past Friday, the FBI issued a joint intelligence
bulletin that noted that anti-Semitism will likely continue to
drive calls for violence against Jewish individuals and
institutions in the United States. Could you comment on the
threat to the Jewish community, which may originate,
organically, here in the United States, or may be driven by
Hamas and other anti-Semitic groups?
Director Wray. So we see, and we have seen for quite some
time, an elevated threat to the Jewish community in the United
States. That was true even before October 7. So you know, we
saw last year a significant increase in hate crimes, overall,
and then within that, a significant increase of hate crimes
against--threats and other types of violent activity directed
at the Jewish community.
And then since October 7, you know, the increase just went
up dramatically. I think in the first 4 months after October 7,
we saw about a 60 percent increase in the number of hate crimes
investigations we were opening. And while not all of those were
targeting the Jewish community, some were targeting Muslim-
Americans, Arab-Americans, and others, but the vast majority
were targeting the Jewish community.
To put that in a little more context, the Jewish community
represents about 2.5 percent of the American population, and
yet within religiously motivated hate crimes, about 60 percent
of them, close to 60 percent of them, are directed at the
Jewish community. So you can see the reason why we think it is
such a significant concern.
They are targeted by foreign Jihadist-inspired terrorists,
whether it is ISIS, al-Qaeda, or others. They are targeted by
Shia terrorists, Iran and its proxies. They are targeted by
domestic violent extremists, you know, White Supremacists, and
others, as well as anarchists, and some of the folks who are,
you know, pro-Palestinian and so forth.
So they have the tragic distinction of really being
targeted by almost every type of terrorist organization there
is out there, foreign and domestic, across the spectrum. And so
they desperately need our help. And we are going to give it to
them.
Senator Collins. Thank you so much.
Senator Moran. [Presiding] Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Well, thank you very much, Senator Moran.
Director, thank you for your service. And please convey my
deepest thanks to the men and women who serve with you.
You indicated in your opening remarks that last year you
took a hit in your budget. This year, if you don't get what the
President asked for, how many personnel do you estimate you
will have to lay off?
Director Wray. Well, we don't know yet how many because, of
course, we don't know what will happen. I think at the moment
the effect of the 2024 budget is that that is about 1,000
positions that we can't fill, and we are kind of muddling our
way through the impact of the 2024 budget. But if Congress were
to, in my view, make the mistake of doubling down on that, then
the consequences would be very significant.
I mentioned the work we are doing to protect people from
terrorism, that is fewer tips and leads followed, fewer
terrorist attacks detected, that is a significant concern in a
heightened terrorist threat environment.
I mentioned violent crime; arresting 50 bad guys per day
every day, the kind of cuts that you are alluding to means more
violent gangs terrorizing neighborhoods, more bad guys on the
street to hurt people. I talked about the threat from China:
the scale of the China threat is massive. Cyber alone, they
outnumber the FBI 50 to 1. So scaling backwards means that many
more cyber attacks at a time when they are trying to target our
critical infrastructure, among other things, so it makes the
environment safer for hackers.
I talked about the border. We have got between 300 and 400
investigations into the cartels. We are seizing enough fentanyl
in FBI field offices and our task forces, single seizures,
enough fentanyl to wipe out an entire State. So cuts to our
budget in 2025, there is going to mean more fentanyl on the
street, more overdoses, more deaths, more violence.
So when people ask me what is the effect of these cuts, the
people it hurts are State and local law enforcement, and the
people working together, working with them trying to protect.
The people it helps are the terrorists, the cartels, the
violent gangs, the Chinese government, the hackers, the child
predators, and I can go on and on.
So I would implore Congress. And again this subcommittee, I
think has always been very responsive, but I would implore
Congress: please don't make the mistake of thinking that you
can make cuts like this and not have real consequences to
public safety and to our State and local partners.
I think that is the part that keeps getting lost. Our State
and local partners, and I can say this with the perspective of
having been in law enforcement since the mid-90s, State and
local law enforcement these days depends on the FBI more than
ever. Not just for all the things I just listed off, but for
training, technical assistance, fingerprints, DNA. I mean, you
could just go right on down the list.
NCIC, and Senator Manchin, if he were here, I am sure would
be glad that I was bringing up NCIC. When an officer does a
traffic stop, they are running the person's identifiers through
the FBI databases back in West Virginia. That information tells
them whether the person they pulled over is dangerous. So it
just goes straight to officer safety. That is just another
example. All this stuff is put at risk when we start talking
about cuts of the sort that we had in 2024, and we just cannot
have happen in 2025.
Senator Reed. One of the ways we think around here, and I
might be exaggerating the ``think'' part, is domestic defense,
domestic side, defense side, you are actually a National
Security Agency, but you are lumped in with the domestic side.
And we can't, I think, continue to think that way.
Your operation is just as valuable to our National Defense
as the Department of Defense. And I happen to chair the
Services Committee, so I think that point should be made.
I don't have much time left. But you could quickly
characterize the domestic terrorist threat, particularly in the
context of the election.
Director Wray. The domestic terrorist threat?
Senator Reed. Yes.
Director Wray. So we have certainly--we view the domestic
terrorist threat as being pervasive--persistent, I should say,
and significant, and the biggest concern is lone actors, or
maybe small groups, acting against soft targets with easily
accessible weapons, often with very little notice. And it
covers the waterfront. We have seen a lot of racially motivated
violent extremism. We have seen anti-government, anti-authority
violent extremism that covers a variety of perspectives. And it
is a threat that year after year continues to be a real
concern.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Moran. Senator Reed. I think our number in this CJS
Appropriation is $890 billion that is defense spending. So you
can't make a clear distinction, as sometimes people try to do.
Senator Reed. Well, I am all for that. Thanks.
Senator Moran. I am just trying to point out that you are
right.
Senator Reed. Thanks.
Senator Moran. I may not have made that clear because you
seem to want to argue with me.
Director, you are talking about salaries and reduced
financial support for the FBI, and fiscal year 2024 budget. It
was really effectively held flat, which is a challenge in
inflationary times. You request $85.4 million for the
restoration of 270 positions related to National Security and
law enforcement. Is this your highest priority?
Director Wray. The restoration of positions is our highest
priority, yes.
Senator Moran. And if that was accomplished, if we were
capable of doing that, that would, the benefit of that is just
what you described to Senator Reed, correct?
Director Wray. Right. That the goal would be to allow us to
sustain the pace that was set with the 2023 budget, because
what is happened is the net effect of the 2024 budget is it set
us back $500 million, because of the factors that you listed.
So the key is to restore our operations so that we can continue
to hum against all the things that I was listing off to Senator
Reed, and not set us backwards. And if that doesn't happen,
then we start falling even further behind is the problem.
Senator Moran. Do you have a significant number of vacant
positions already?
Director Wray. We have some positions that are vacant. Our
fill rate is actually higher than historically it has been at
the FBI, which is a good thing. It is good news for America.
But between--so we are trying to kind of manage our way through
the 2024 cuts through a combination of attrition and how fast
we are filling the vacant positions we do have. But again if it
lasts, if what happened with '24 is replicated, then we are
going to be in a real world of hurt.
Senator Moran. Is the FBI workforce, what is the age
category? Is it aging? Or is it young, are the people nearing
retirement that work at the FBI, or?
Director Wray. Well, we had--we are coming off of the heels
of, you might call it a bit of a retirement bulge when you just
look actuarially. So in other words, if you went back 20-plus
years, there was a big hiring spree, if you will, post 9/11,
and 1811s, armed law enforcement agents in particular, in other
words, the way the system works if they have 20 years in
service and they are 50 years or older, they are eligible to
retire. So whenever you are looking at retirement age of the
workforce, you have got to go back 20 plus years and see what
was happening then.
And so there was--we are coming off of a bit of a bookend
of that group, so it is starting to level off, as the last time
I looked at it. So we are not in a big retirement bulge right
now anymore, so that is part of why it is an issue.
Senator Moran. Director, I mentioned in my opening
statement the southern border and the challenges that we have
had at the border. I mentioned a member of ISIS, I mentioned an
NBC news report about an individual who was on the terrorist
watch list that was released. I recognize that the primary
responsibility implicates the failures of the Department of
Homeland Security, but the FBI Terrorist Screening Center is
the primary Federal entity responsible for national security
screening and for facilitating the sharing of information
across government.
Do these cases reflect a breakdown in our efforts to ensure
that all government partners have full actionable information
they need to protect our citizens from terrorism?
Director Wray. So I am not sure I can discuss specific
examples, but let me try to get at your question this way. So
certainly, we have seen over the last five to 6 years, an
increase in the number of known suspected terrorists, in other
words watch-listed subjects attempting to cross the border. And
that is of concern, and that is where there is a lash-up
between the TSC and CBP at the border that I think, in general,
works pretty well.
The bigger problem, the big problem in my view is twofold.
One, individuals who when they come in are either armed with
fake documents or snuck in, in some way or; or, and this is
very important, individuals for whom there is not enough
derogatory information in the intelligence community to watch-
list them yet.
So let me just unpack that a little bit, because this is an
important point, because it kind of goes to what Senator
Collins was asking me about, and it may relate a little bit to
your other hat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
So as we collect collectively across the intelligence
community and with our partners, less information about foreign
terrorists overseas, there is less information to be had about
who the people coming into this country are, which that means--
--
Senator Moran. Would you say that sentence again? I missed
the first part of the sentence.
Director Wray. So the way I look at it is as we have less
collection overseas against foreign terrorism, there is less
sources of information to inform people about people coming in.
So in other words, somebody could be coming in who should be
watch-listed, but isn't. And it is not because of a breakdown
between CBP and the TSC, it is because the information that
should have told everybody that this person is a threat has not
yet been unearthed by whatever intelligence agency it is out
there.
Because it is not just the FBI that puts people on the
watch-list we are getting information from lots of other
agencies. So as we pulled out of Afghanistan, for example, you
get less and less information about whether somebody from
Afghanistan is actually a threat. And so some of the cases that
I have seen that concern me, are situations where somebody
comes into the United States, it is not because there was a
breakdown between CBP and the TSC, it is because they weren't
watch-listed at the time, but in hindsight they should have
been watch-listed because information was later developed that
says, oh-oh, this person is a problem.
Do you see what I am saying there, right? That is that is a
much bigger concern, in my view. And so we really need to be
focusing on how we can try to address that with the rest of the
intelligence community, with our partners, and so forth.
When that happens, when we find somebody who is here in the
United States who we now then know this person needs to be put
on the watch-list, then we use our Joint Terrorism Task Forces
to go out and try to find the person, work with our State local
partners, we have the backstop of 800,000 sworn law
enforcement, et cetera. But that, to me, is a bigger concern
than the number of KSTs we----
Senator Moran. Director, just a brief, brief follow-up. Is
there a delay in timing once someone is known, is it is known
that they should be on the watch list, is there a delay before
it is known across government agencies?
Director Wray. I don't know about delay. I mean, there is
an interagency process----
Senator Moran. How long does it take?
Director Wray. I think it varies, is a short answer. I
mean, it is not just, the FBI can snap its fingers and put
somebody on the list, there is an interagency, very rigorous
process to protect civil liberties, and other things, to put
somebody on the watch list, but once they are on the watch
list, there is pretty much instantaneous notification to the
relevant parties.
Senator Moran. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Moran. I would just
point out to the Members of the Committee that the second vote
has started. So anybody who hasn't voted, you have your
opportunity now.
And I know there are a number of other hearings going on,
so I understand, Senator Van Hollen, you are hoping to get back
to another hearing, so Senator Heinrich said it is fine with
him as long as he is next. So we made a deal, he is going to be
next.
Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Thank you both. Yes, sorry, I
have Secretary Yellen in front of my subcommittee.
So Director Wray, it is great to see you, and I do want to
start by----
Senator Shaheen. You are not suggesting that she has
precedent over Director Wray?
Senator Van Hollen. No, no. Of course not, but I am sharing
that one.
So I want to thank you for your efforts on combating
domestic terrorism and commend the Bureau for its work on that
front in Maryland, this time last year, as a result of an
investigation led by the FBI's joint terrorism task force, two
individuals affiliated with Neo-Nazi groups were charged with
conspiring to attack Baltimore's Power Grid facilities. Their
motivations stem from violent extremists, White Supremacist
beliefs, and in recent developments, just last month, the FBI
Field Office and the U.S. Attorney's Office announced that one
of the individuals pled guilty to conspiring to damage or
destroy electrical facilities, and will be sentenced in the
fall, facing up to 20 years for that crime. So again, thank you
for your team in action.
Also, I am sure you are aware of the fact that the Attorney
General was testifying in the House today in front of the House
Judiciary Committee. As you know these crazy conspiracy
theories continue to fly, so I wanted to ask you just to take
this opportunity to once again put a nail in the coffin of this
idea that somehow the FBI was complicit in, you know,
organizing, instigating the January 6 attacks, you said in July
of last year, so a little under a year ago.
Quote, ``This notion that somehow the violence at the
Capitol on January 6th was part of some operation orchestrated
by FBI sources and agents is ludicrous, and is a disservice to
our brave, hardworking, dedicated men and women.'' unquote.
Director Wray, can you confirm just how outrageous, and
frankly, dangerous these kinds of assertions are?
Director Wray. Well, first off, I stand by my prior
testimony. I think the men and women of the FBI work their
tails off every day to protect the American people from a whole
range of threats, and I think irresponsible, inaccurate
allegations like that are a disservice to these people who are
putting themselves on the line every day to protect others. And
I think it is ``unfortunate'' would be the kindest word I can
use.
Senator Van Hollen. That is kind, and diplomatic. But thank
you for reaffirming your testimony from last year.
Speaking of the men and women of the FBI, we agree that
they deserve our thanks, and they also deserve a new
headquarters worthy of their work, and as you know last year,
the GSA selected Green Belt, Maryland for a new suburban
consolidated FBI Headquarters.
Two months ago, the GSA submitted a report to Congress
requesting approval for use of previously appropriated funds
for site acquisition and design of this new facility. The GSA
report notes that, quote, ``Final facility size will be driven
by updated FBI requirements,'' unquote.
Director Wray, is the FBI developing the necessary updated
requirements for the new facility?
Director Wray. So we are working closely with GSA. I think
the short version of the process is that the report that was
submitted in March, I believe it was, was intended to get
Congressional feedback on that, because I understand it GSA
needs that needs that feedback in order to then do the much
more detailed, more labor-intensive, and even expensive work
that is required to build out the rest of it.
So we are continuing to work with GSA, but I think we are
waiting to hear back from Congress, or at least I know GSA
feels like they need to hear back from Congress about the
reactions to that, the higher level plan that you--I think it
is the same one that you referred to in March.
Senator Van Hollen. Well, let me just ask you this. Are
you, the FBI, fully cooperating with all the GSA requests in
order to prepare for the building of the New FBI Headquarters?
Are you fully cooperating with all of GSA's requests?
Director Wray. I believe we are working closely with GSA in
cooperation with them in full compliance with the law.
Senator Van Hollen. Okay.
Director Wray. The specifics of exactly what conversations,
what meetings, that part I couldn't tell you right here right
now, but my understanding is that we continue to work closely
with GSA on the project as contemplated.
Senator Van Hollen. I only ask, Mr. Director, because we
have not heard from GSA about need for feedback from Congress
before they move forward in cooperation with the FBI. So that
would be news to me, but I will follow up with GSA about.
Director Wray. Again I think the way it was described to me
was that the report that we worked on with GSA that was
submitted, again, I think it was in March was intended to tell
Congress the direction we, or GSA, are headed to get feedback,
was the word that was given to me, from Congress, and I think
in effect, to make sure the word in the right direction because
the next steps are significantly more labor-intensive, and even
expensive. And so before we start doing too much of that GSA,
it felt like they needed, in effect, a steer, I suppose it is,
from Congress on that.
Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank
you, Senator Heinrich.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you Senators Van Hollen and
Heinrich. Now, Senator Heinrich when I said you would be next,
I did not anticipate that we would have Senator Kennedy coming
in, and he was here first.
Okay. So in fairness; Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Sorry, Martin.
Mr. Director, welcome. I bet you just love talking about
where to put the FBI building, don't you; probably one of your
favorite topics. I have got two questions. Number one, if you
took the major Mexican drug cartels, which also traffic people
into the United States, and turn them upside down and shook
them, President Lopez Obrador would fall out of their pockets,
wouldn't he?
Director Wray. Well, I don't know that I can comment on a
specific individual's corruption, other than through cases that
we bring, but I understand the point that you are making for
sure.
Senator Kennedy. We are not getting much cooperation out of
Mexico, are we?
Director Wray. Let me put it this way, while we have had
some successes here and there, in terms of extraditions, and so
forth, and I appreciate those, and I am grateful to our Mexican
partners for those, especially at the working level, we need a
whole lot more from Mexico than we have gotten, in terms of
shutting down the cartels and stopping the flow of the
precursors. I mean, I could go on and on.
So I am grateful for the success as we have had, but we
need a heck of a lot more, is the way I would answer that.
Senator Kennedy. Why don't we use leverage, of what I call
NAFTA-2 to try to encourage the President of Mexico to
cooperate more?
Director Wray. You know, NAFTA, of course, is a trade
agreement, and I am not really an expert on trade relations,
certainly, from an FBI perspective, we welcome every tool in
the toolbox to try to improve the relationship and the
cooperation. And I am hopeful that the Mexican Government will
see the value of building on the successes we have had and take
it to the level that it needs to be, because it is not where it
needs to be.
Senator Kennedy. Here is my second question. We know that
Jeffrey Epstein, who is now deceased, and Ms. Maxwell, his
associate, who is in prison, were engaged in a conspiracy of
sex trafficking with minors, so were others, it has been widely
reported. What is the FBI doing to investigate the other people
that were involved in these sex trafficking rings?
Director Wray. Well, I am not sure that I can confirm any
specific individuals----
Senator Kennedy. Let me put it this way. Let me give you
some facts, widely reported. Jeffrey Epstein had video
surveillance in all of his homes, and on his private island,
and there have been articles after articles from witnesses who
have said he videotaped sex acts with prominent people because
he was trying to--with young girls that he had procured to try
to incur favor with those prominent people, and potentially, to
be able to blackmail them.
Now, that is a fact. And the FBI and other Federal agencies
have raided his houses. Do you have those tapes?
Director Wray. Again, I can't discuss the specifics of our
law enforcement operations related to Mr. Epstein or Ms.
Maxwell, but obviously, we had a very active investigation
related to both of them. But whether it extends to other
people, I am not sure that is something I can comment on.
Senator Kennedy. But here--a suit was filed yesterday
against one of those prominent people by one of the young women
sex trafficked, allegedly, said he was part of the ring. So on
the front page, I don't know--was The New York Times, The Wall
Street Journal, and we keep seeing article, after article,
after article, and we keep hearing about prominent person,
after prominent person, after prominent person.
I just want to know if these prominent people are above the
law, and are going to be--and aren't being investigated? Or is
the FBI investigating?
Director Wray. Well, no one is above the law, number one.
As to whether specific people are being investigated, that is
not something that I, as I am sure you can appreciate, can
engage on here. We have devoted significant resources to the
investigation----
Senator Kennedy. Is it ongoing?
Director Wray. I am not sure there is anything I can share
with you on that, but let me see if we can get back to you and
provide a little more information----
Senator Kennedy. Well, for example, these allegations in
this lawsuit, the civil action, is it----
Director Wray. I haven't seen the article.
Senator Kennedy. You ought to read it, it will trigger your
gag reflex. Is the FBI going to investigate that?
Director Wray. Well, again, I haven't seen the article, but
I would be happy to take a look at it, and take it back and see
if it is part of something that we are already working on.
Senator Kennedy. I would just like to know----
Senator Kennedy. I share your----
Senator Kennedy [continuing]. Yes, is the FBI still
investigating this? Or are these prominent people going to go
scot-free?
Director Wray. I am not sure that I can tell you whether or
not there is ongoing work being devoted to this, I would be
happy to take a look at the specific article. I share your
disgust, at Mr. Epstein's conduct, and Ms. Maxwell's conduct.
Senator Kennedy. And others.
Director Wray. The whole operation.
Senator Kennedy. Okay, thanks Madam Chair.
Sorry, Martin. You are a fine American anyway.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Kennedy.
Senator Peters, Senator Heinrich has kindly consented to
give you time to prepare for your round of questioning, and he
is going next, because I made a deal with him.
Senator Heinrich. We have done some musical chairs here. I
apologize.
Director, I wanted to ask you a little bit about the
Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, and specifically how that
engaged in the business language may have broadened your
ability to perform background checks, and what impact that then
has on other agencies' ability to successfully prosecute things
like the straw purchasing and gun trafficking provisions in
that law?
Director Wray. So certainly, BSCA was an important piece of
legislation that has added to our authorities at NICS, in
particular, in a number of ways, in terms of additional
background checks for the so-called U-21 Group in particular.
And I think that is important, because as I go around talking
to State and local law enforcement, and I have been, and talked
to law enforcement in all 50 States, I believe, easily, in this
job, one of the two recurring themes you will hear on violent
crime, is the role of juveniles and the role of mental health.
Senator Heinrich. Um-hum.
Director Wray. Almost every group, no matter what State I
am talking to. And so the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act
does, I think, take an important step in the right direction in
terms of addressing that specific part of the threat.
The part that you are asking about is more in ATF's lane,
but we work very closely with ATF on our Safe Streets and
Violent Crimes Task Forces, and we are always looking for the
strongest violation to disrupt the threat. And so whether it is
straw purchaser cases, or things like that, I know when I was a
line prosecutor, I prosecuted, tried a number of straw
purchaser cases, those are important tools, and so often, that
is one of the best violations to dismantle a violent crime
threat.
Senator Heinrich. One of the other things that we have, and
I don't think adequately addressed in the law yet, but which is
skyrocketing, is these ghost guns or privately made firearms.
Law enforcement has seen 1000 percent increase in recoveries
between 2016 and 2021.
In 2022, we had a ghost gun was used to shoot and kill a
16-year-old, at West Mesa High School in Albuquerque. And I
wish that were a completely isolated case. What is the FBI
doing to recover and prevent assembly of ghost guns, and what
tools, and maybe even more importantly, do you need from the
Congress to be able to get your hands around this challenge?
Director Wray. So I would say ghost guns, as you say,
represent a real challenge for law enforcement because the kits
are cheap, and widely available, and undercut the ability to
trace the firearm and, in effect, end up undermining the
background investigation process. And unfortunately, we are
seeing ghost guns more and more in violent crime and gang
investigations.
Now, as to authorities, you are really talking more ATF in
terms of regulation or even legislation, but we do coordinate
closely. Whenever we seize ghost guns as part of a takedown, we
are obviously working closely with ATF on that. As to other
things that Congress can do to help, at the risk of answering
every question with the same answer, we need Congress to
restore the progress that was made in 2023, so that we can
sustain our efforts against violent crime, and sustain our work
in terms of denials of firearms to the people who are legally
prohibited from having them.
Senator Heinrich. Yes, absolutely. On that note, and I
suspect it will be a similar answer, you know, we made some
progress recently with the FEND Off Fentanyl Act that was
really designed to prevent fentanyl from getting inside the
United States in the first place. But you have to deal with it
once it is already here.
You mentioned funding and the potential impact that the
budget could have on your ability to disrupt that flow. Feel
free to reiterate the importance of that and then also touch on
other tools that you may need that--to address the sort of
crisis that we are seeing in communities all across this
country.
Director Wray. So we are finding most of the fentanyl that
we seize at the FBI is fentanyl that is already here in the
United States. And what we are finding is that something like
70 percent of it is coming up in violent gang takedowns. So
that shows you kind of firsthand the nexus between the fentanyl
problem, and the violent crime problem, and some of the most
dangerous offenders.
And it is not unusual, not unusual for the FBI, for any
given field office, to seize enough fentanyl in one takedown to
have wiped out an entire State, and so if you start thinking
about the impact of the cuts that we have been talking about in
this hearing; that is fewer seizures, that is more pills on the
market that is more people dying. I mean, just put it as
bluntly as that.
And that is just looking at it that way. And of course, we
also have all these investigations into cartel leadership, and
again, the cuts impact that, if we are going to be serious
about going after the cartels. Among the other things that we
are doing to try to tackle the fentanyl problem, we have an
initiative called JCODE that aggressively targets darknet
trafficking of fentanyl.
We just last year had an operation called SpecTor that was
the largest ever, I think, takedown of darknet trafficking
marketplace of fentanyl and other dangerous synthetic opioids.
So that is an important part of our work. I know in your home
state of Albuquerque, I just remembered off the top of my head,
there was a great takedown that they did where they were
seizing enough fentanyl to wipe out, like an entire State,
along with, again, back to the nexus with violence, along with
hand grenades, ballistic vests, you know, the whole nine yards.
So the fentanyl problem, and the violent crime problem are
inextricably linked, and of course, the fentanyl problem is
directly tied to the problems from the other side of the
border.
Senator Heinrich. So not a great time to cut his budget.
Senator Shaheen. Certainly, it is not. It is unfortunate we
have another year of the Fiscal Responsibility Act.
Senator Peters, thank you for your patience.
Senator Peters. Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
Director Wray, good to see you again, and as always, thank
you for your service to our country. Director Wray, last year
as chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs
Committee, I released a report on the watch-listing and
screening processes at airports, and the report raised concerns
about the watch list, including who it is shared with, its
implementation, its oversight, as well as the redress process.
In particular, the report found insufficient transparency,
lack of a holistic approach to screening, and no meaningful
options to resolve concerns for Americans who believe that they
were misidentified, or the subject to discrimination.
Certain communities, such as Muslim, Arab, and South Asian
Americans, report disparate screening during their travel and
the breakdown in trust over the inability to redress the
process. Certainly, I think you agree the administration,
including the FBI, must effectively target our resources to
protect our country from terrorism first and foremost, but we
also need to respect the rights of innocent Americans as well.
So my question for you, sir, is I believe you are familiar
with this report, and what steps have you taken to ensure that
there is more transparency, especially to Congress, about the
watch list and other datasets maintained by the Terrorist
Screening Center, as recommended in the report that my
Committee published?
Director Wray. So certainly, I agree, as you stated, that
it is important that the database be used to protect our
national security and at the same time, respect civil
liberties. And no one is placed on the watch list solely
because of race, ethnicity, national origin, religious
affiliation, or any First Amendment-protected activities.
And there is a rigorous interagency process. There are
continuous review and quality control measures. We are
constantly taking advantage of new methods and technologies to
strengthen those processes. And while the FBI and the TSC, as I
know you know because of your other role, are not responsible
for the actual travel screening, we do work diligently with the
interagency to try to make sure we are maintaining a current
and accurate watch list.
Recently, the TSC published a comprehensive document about
the watch list process, which includes everything from the
process for nominations, the use of the list, quality assurance
measures, and to the heart of your question, the redress
procedures. And so, our hope is that that document strikes the
balance of the two issues that you mentioned in terms of
providing more transparency about all those processes so that
people know how it works, know how they can challenge, if they
have something they want to challenge, while at the same time
not compromising our national security.
Ironically, some of the transparency around this process
could itself infringe on people's privacy and civil liberty
because of, you know, who it identifies in a way that maybe
they wouldn't want being identified.
Senator Peters. Right. It is always a careful balance. So
we have to continue to work with, we have been working with
your team. We hope we can continue to do that. And it is been a
particular issue in Detroit Airport, for example, for reasons
you and I have discussed many times.
Director Wray. Right.
Senator Peters. Director Wray, we have seen historic spikes
in anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, and anti-Arab-American hate
incidents, certainly driven by the war between Israel and
Hamas. We are also seeing rising anti-immigrant rhetoric, which
in the past has inspired domestic terror attacks in Pittsburgh
and El Paso, for example. DOJ has also announced it is
investigating dozens of violent threats against election
workers, and has already convicted 13 individuals. And as you
said earlier, you are increasingly concerned about the
potential for a coordinated foreign terrorist attack here in
the homeland.
So the threat of a terrorist attack is high, and we don't
know what will inspire the next attack, or where it will
happen. But my question for you is, given all of these threats,
how is the FBI now prioritizing resources to protect these
communities from these varying threats?
Director Wray. Well, you covered a waterfront because there
is a waterfront to threats. So to start with, on the terrorism
side, terrorism, which includes both foreign terrorism and
domestic terrorism, remains our number one priority. That has
not changed, and that drives prioritization within all the
field offices for one thing.
Second, we, a couple years ago, we elevated civil rights
specifically, including hate crimes, to what we call a national
threat priority. And the effect of that is to drive
prioritization in all the field offices.
In addition, I created a few years ago, something that we
call the Domestic Terrorism-Hate Crimes Fusion Cell, because
what I found was that sometimes the same act of violence could
be considered either a hate crime or an act of domestic
terrorism. In many ways, it is the same type of attack; it is
just two different legal structures.
And in the FBI, the Criminal Investigative Division, you
know, we have people who focus on hate crimes, and then we, of
course, we have people who focus on the national security side,
on terrorism. And so, this Fusion Cell that I created brought
the two groups together to ensure both that nothing slips
through the cracks, but also maybe more importantly, to try to
see if we can better anticipate, and to be more proactive to
prevent these attacks in the first place, as opposed to solely
responding after they tragically occur.
And I am proud of some of the work that was done,
including, I think, for the, first time ever, a couple years
ago now, a proactive hate crimes charge that disrupted an
attack against a synagogue. I believe it was in Nevada, but it
could have been in Colorado because there is one of each.
Senator Peters. Great. Thank you. Appreciate that. And I
look forward to continuing to work with you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Peters. Senator
Fischer.
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for
being here today, Director Wray. I continue to be concerned
about the threat that the Chinese Communist government poses to
critical infrastructure in the United States, especially when
it comes to cybersecurity. In Nebraska, this presents distinct
vulnerabilities for our agriculture industry and the Nation's
food supply. For instance, malicious code contained in planting
data can harm crop yields.
It also can be used by foreign actors to steal our AG
innovation. What internal mechanisms is the FBI relying on to
counter cyber threats to the agriculture industry, from China
specifically?
Director Wray. So we are specifically concerned not just--
as you are about the China threat more broadly, but about the
China threat as it relates to agriculture, in particular. I
have visited our Omaha Office a couple of times, met with our
partners there, and I know from first-hand experience and
contact with them that they are acutely focused on specifically
the threats to agriculture. And in fact, they are holding, I
think, a big summit soon that I was hearing about, that is
bringing people from all over the State in the region, again,
very much focused on this issue.
We have seen in the past the Chinese Government, or people
from China, acting on behalf of China attempting to steal
cutting-edge agricultural research, even to the point of--I
know in Senator Moran's home State of Kansas, we have stopped a
guy trying to fly out of the country with cutting-edge
agricultural research. In Iowa, I can remember we had guys out
in the fields digging up genetically modified corn seed, and we
prosecuted--worked with the DOJ to prosecute them.
So there is the theft, the IP theft part, and we know that
China has specifically identified agriculture as one of its
areas that it wants to target. It is quite explicit about that.
So that is a concern.
You also brought up, I think, the critical infrastructure
dimensions of this, and we have seen the Chinese Government
attempting to target multiple sectors, civilian sectors, to
preposition, to potentially cause havoc at a time and place of
their choosing. And so that is something that we are really
trying to focus on.
Senator Fischer. Can you tell us that in this setting
specifically what sectors and where that is happened? Or should
it be in a closed session?
Director Wray. There are some sectors I could share
publicly, whether there is anything I could share about
agriculture specifically on that, I am not sure. I know that
what I can say publicly, but it gives you a flavor of what we
are dealing with. We conducted, with our partners, a court-
authorized operation that took down and exposed a Chinese
Government effort to preposition on civilian critical
infrastructure that included water, telecommunications, and a
variety of others.
And again, there was no legitimate purpose to be on the
parts of the networks they were on, other than to be in a
position to wreak havoc at a time and place of their choosing.
Senator Fischer. Right. You know we are, in addition to
cybersecurity, we are also worried about communications
network, that infrastructure there that the Chinese are looking
at, and it has been a challenge to be able to fund FCC, the Rip
and Replace Program, that is out there. So we know that the
Chinese have that telecom equipment there. We know the security
risks that are involved.
Are you able to share any updates today from the FBI's work
to evaluate the Chinese network gear that is located especially
next to U.S. Military installations? Again, if you could do it
here, if it would need to be in a closed setting, Western
Nebraska's assets, in other words----
Director Wray. Yes, on the communication side, and the
whole Rip and Replace issue, that is probably something better
reserved for another setting. What I can tell you is that we
have a number of investigations underway that relate to
allegations concerning buying up of land near installations
that would be of concern. And it is not that there is anything
inherently unlawful about foreign purchase of land, but we get
concerned when the purchaser may have ties back to a government
that doesn't share our values, and it is positioned near some
critical plant.
Senator Fischer. And that is what we follow as well. Do you
have enough availability; is there enough transparency in these
transactions to easily discover if there is a connection to the
Chinese there? As I said earlier, we have concerns in Western
Nebraska about some of these.
Director Wray. So it is a challenge. We are, on Farmland in
particular; we are working with USDA to try to look to some
kind of mandatory reporting regime that might be helpful there.
And so we are--that is a relationship that continues to grow
between the agencies.
I would say that the Chinese Government, now that more and
more businesses, states, countries are, are wise to what they
are up to, are making it harder to trace transactions and they
are, you know, they are not just sort of looking at the
combined efforts of us, and our partners, and just saying never
mind. They are doubling down and trying to figure out how to be
more creative to try to hide the hand of the Chinese Government
in some transaction. So we are having to work that much harder
with partners to try to be--to sleuth out the involvement of
some state nexus.
Senator Fischer. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Fischer.
Senator Merkley.
Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And good to see you, Director; Director, I wanted to
explore a little bit the challenge of the plot to murder a Sikh
activist here in the United States. The Department of Justice
unsealed an indictment and the individual, I gather, is in the
Czech Republic, and that we have established there are
extradition possibilities. Is that progressing?
Director Wray. I can say that I am very aware of the case
you are talking about, and I do feel the case is progressing.
There is probably not a whole lot I can say about it for that
reason, but yes, the case is progressing.
Senator Merkley. But we are actively pursuing extradition?
Director Wray. We are, I believe, I can confirm that much,
yes.
Senator Merkley. Thank you. The Washington Post reported
that U.S. officials have identified the individual in the
Indian Intelligence Agency who was the crafter of the plot, and
that the plot was approved by the Chief of Research and
Analysis Wing, which is the Indian Spy Agency. I have not seen
that we are pursuing indictments. But are we pursuing
indictments against individuals who, not just the hired
assassin, if you will, but those who planned and plotted the
assassination?
So that is a question that I can't answer here. What I
can't tell you, just because it is an ongoing, a very ongoing
investigation. And what I will tell you is that we feel quite
strongly, as I think you do, that individuals cannot attempt to
conduct lethal plotting in the United States even if they feel
strongly that somebody is somebody they view as a bad actor.
That is not a recourse that they have available to them to
engage in lethal plotting.
Senator Merkley. I raised this particular case because I
have previously raised, and really tried to put a spotlight on
the growing problem of transnational repression. And as the
chair, the Senate side chair of the Congressional Executive
Commission on China, we hold a lot of hearings in which people
are testifying. Many of those folks have been subject to
transnational repression by the Chinese Government.
This morning we had the anniversary, the hearing on the
anniversary of Tiananmen Square, and the individuals again
spoke about the challenges they have faced. In fact, one
individual testified with an assumed name and a mask in order
to protect herself from repression.
Previously I have raised the issue of having a better
gateway for people to talk to the FBI about transnational
repression, because in the past the FBI had said, well, just
tell people to call the general tip line. That is not something
hardly anyone does, of those that I am aware of who have been
subject to this. They are not sure it is a crime. They are not
sure it will be confidential. They are not sure there will be a
Chinese speaker.
So in our fiscal year 2024 bill, we had report language
that directed the FBI to ensure that its tip line is staffed by
people with cultural and linguistic ability to communicate with
the Diaspora, and knowledge of the tactics of transnational
repression. Has the FBI accomplished that assignment?
Senator Merkley. What I can tell you is that we have a
transnational repression cell that is focused specifically, not
just on how we analyze the intelligence related to
transnational repression, but how we feed that into outreach
and engagement with the targeted communities. And that includes
everything from translations into the relevant languages, to
supplying it to field offices for Community engagements with
dissident and Diaspora communities sprinkled around the
country, with the whole goal of being trying to address the
very concern that you are alluding to, which is to recognize
that these are folks who, in many case, the transnational
repression is at the hands of law enforcement from these other
countries, so they are understandably a little bit reluctant,
to turn to law enforcement here. So it is an effort to educate
them on what transnational repression is, how they can reach
out to us to show them that we are there to help.
Senator Merkley. And that is valuable. And thank you for
having your outreach teams engaged in that manner. I am still
not hearing that they are presenting an opportunity to those
communities in which those communities feel comfortable sharing
their experiences. So I want to continue to raise this.
I think from your response the specific assignment of
having the tip line staffed with people with the linguistic
ability specific to the population most affected may not have
happened yet, but I will follow up with you in that regard.
We have seen the--and I am--how quickly 5 minutes pass. So
I am out of time, but I will just close with noting that this
challenge is growing, some of folks that we work closely with,
India included, and Turkey are now engaging in transnational
repression. It is particularly important that nobody gets a
pass on this. Here in the United States, people it should not
should not be possible for foreign governments to threaten them
or threaten their families back home, it is such a direct
attack on freedom of speech and freedom of association. Thank
you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Senator Merkley. Senator
Hagerty.
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome, Director Wray. Director Wray, we are in the midst
of a critical election year, and the American people need to be
able to count on a fair process. Are you concerned about
election interference this year? A yes or no answer will
suffice.
Director Wray. Am I concerned about election interference?
Yes.
Senator Hagerty. I would like to talk about one specific
threat, one specific concern that I have. Several Federal laws
prohibit using governmental authority to interfere in Federal
elections, and the FBI would be in charge of investigating such
a violation of Federal law, were it to occur; is that correct?
Director Wray. I would have to think about the specific
examples, but certainly, there is a range of types of
interference in elections that we have authorities to pursue.
So I guess it depends on the facts, the specific factual
scenario.
Senator Hagerty. Certainly happened. I know the FBI has
investigated extensively in the past in this arena. Here we
have a situation that is unprecedented, no former President, no
major candidate for President, has ever been prosecuted
criminally in American history. Yet now we have a situation
where the incumbent president, is major candidate--a major
opponent is being prosecuted in five separate jurisdictions
by--all by Democrat partisan prosecutors, and all of this
culminating right in the middle of an election season. Does
that sound to you like coordinated election interference, or is
that just a coincidence?
Director Wray. Well, I am not going to discuss State,
pending State criminal prosecutions. That is not something I
would ever do, the----
Senator Hagerty. I am talking about utilizing governmental
authority to interfere in an election. Let me get more
specific. What we saw happen last week was Alvin Bragg, who ran
on a platform of getting Trump, do just that with a flimsy
made-up theory, and a criminal conviction. Just this weekend,
the leader of the Soros Organization came out and advised
Democrats to repeat the slogan, ``convicted felon'' so it could
be imprinted on voters' minds. Alvin Bragg facilitated that
imprint, and did just that. Is that coordinated election
interference, or is that just a coincidence that that would
happen?
Director Wray. Again, with all due respect I am not going
to talk about--you are talking about a State--a criminal case
that----
Senator Hagerty. Well, let me get--I will go to a--I will
go to a Federal level then. If you look back to April 2022, The
New York Times reported that President Biden had told his
advisers that he wanted Donald Trump prosecuted that was
printed in The New York Times, just days after President Trump
announces that he was going to enter the election process,
Merrick Garland appoints Jack Smith to prosecute Trump,
President Biden's opponent. Is this coordinated election
interference to go after your opponent in a Federal election
using the Justice Department to do it?
Director Wray. You are asking about a special account,
special counsel appointment by the Attorney General, in a
pending Federal case that is in front of a Federal judge, and
it is not something that I can appropriately discuss here.
Senator Hagerty. Well, here is another situation, when
Letitia James was running for New York Attorney General she
campaigned to get Trump. In fact, Representative Dan Goldman,
called it an individualized political vendetta. Does it seem
that using the criminal justice system for a political vendetta
is election interference, or is that just a coincidence too?
Director Wray. Again, I am just not going to weigh in on
pending State criminal cases. It is not an appropriate role for
the FBI to address----
Senator Hagerty. If the FBI has the duty to investigate
violations of Federal law, and Federal law prohibits the use of
governmental authority to interfere in elections, particularly
a presidential election of this consequence the FBI is not
investigating it, I presume, who is going to investigate it?
Who is going to look into this?
Director Wray. Well, again, I am not going to talk about
who we are or are not investigating, because that is not
something that is appropriate for me under DOJ rules. I can
tell you that we are going to do our part, and we have up one
part in protecting our elections from the threats that we have
jurisdiction to investigate.
Senator Hagerty. Well, the way the legal stars have aligned
in this circumstance is deeply concerning, not only to me, but
to the American people. And I just stepped through a number of
situations where it certainly appears that there is a
coordinated effort to go after the President's main political
rival. And it is happening, all of these are convening right at
the same time, right in the middle of an election year, they
are using facts or theories from years past, but all of it is
coming together right at this point in time. It certainly looks
like a coordinated effort to me, and it certainly looks like
the type of thing that the FBI should be investigating.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you Senator Hagerty. I would just
point out that I think there are a number of people who do not
support that conspiracy theory. So I appreciate that you have
that view, and the----
Senator Hagerty. If it is a conspiracy the way this
aligns----
Senator Shaheen. And others don't have that view.
Senator Hagerty [continuing]. Is the most incredible thing
I have ever seen, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. And I share the Director's view that that
is not appropriate for the Director of the FBI to comment on.
Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you,
Director Wray.
Director, I have had the chance to work with you in an
oversight role both during the Trump administration and the
Biden administration and I admire the ways in which you have
worked. Do you think it is important that the FBI maintain its
independence from any efforts to politicize the Federal law
enforcement system?
Director Wray. Very much so. I think the FBI has a unique
role to play in American society and in our legal system, and
we need to be able to call balls and strikes no matter who
likes it. And unfortunately in today's world it is a reality
that with everything we do there is going to be somebody who
doesn't like it. But we can't get hung up on that. To me, that
is what independence means. We are going to call it without
fear about who is going to be angry, or upset, or alternatively
joyous or happy about something we do. We just can't go down
that road.
So my commitment to my focus, as was stated I think very
clearly to you and the rest of the Judiciary Committee when
President Trump nominated me, was that we are going to focus on
doing the work in the right way. We may not get the results
that people want in this case or that case, but I will do my
best, and I have continued to do my very best, to make sure we
do our work in the right way.
Senator Coons. I appreciate that. We have known each other
a long time, and I respect the way you conduct yourself, as
Director.
We have recently gone through an important process around
FISA Reauthorization, in your both written and spoken
testimony, you said that the FBI is principally focused on the
protection of the American people from terrorism, both domestic
and international, this is a top priority, and there are
significant threats. And I think that there were some
significant reforms codified in the reauthorization of section
702, and the surveillance authorities. I would be interested in
hearing what you are doing to implement them to ensure that the
civil liberties of the American people are protected, under
your directorship and any potential successor? And how you
strike that balance appropriately given the urgency of also
protecting the American people from terrorism?
Director Wray. So as you know the law that was passed
recently, as the most significant rewrite of FISA since--I
think since its passage, and there were not--there was no kind
of on-ramp period, so we implemented it, you know, sort of day
one even though there weren't resources that were provided to
do it, and even though it came in an environment as I have
already testified where we are dealing with effectively a $500
million cut.
But we are going to comply with all the requirements. They
are resource intensive in their own way, because you are
talking about pre-approval requirements for one thing,
prohibition on certain queries, again that have to be detected
and audited, like one of the things that I did even before the
law passed, is I created an Office of Internal Audit at the
FBI, which did not previously exist, whose sole focus was on
FISA compliance.
And we achieved great strides in FISA compliance, as is
confirmed by the--independently by the court. But it is a
significant change in how we operate, and my message to the
troops is twofold: one, you have got to make sure you are doing
it in the right way, and number two, given how critical this
tool is to protecting the American people from foreign threats,
terrorists, China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, cyber, especially
foreign cyber, we need to make sure that we are using it in the
way that Congress and I think the American people expect us to
do to protect them because it is an indispensable tool. I don't
use words like ``indispensable'' often; it is indispensable.
Senator Coons. Well, thank you, and it is a 2-year
reauthorization, and I intend to follow it closely as we
reconsider it 2 years from now. As you know, I have long been
concerned about intellectual property theft. Senator Hatch and
I passed the Defend Trade Secrets Act, I think back in 2016,
and one of the areas that I think is an important priority for
us nationally, is to protect American invention and innovation,
particularly from the CCP, because they intend to be a peer
competitor or to exceed our capabilities, largely by stealing
our innovations in areas like artificial intelligence, and
precision biology, and other areas.
What are you doing to address threats to American
innovation, and how would the additional resources you are
seeking for fiscal year 2025 bolster those efforts?
Director Wray. So first off, we are laser-focused on our
adversaries' efforts to steal American intellectual property,
and there is no country, I have been consistent on this for, I
think since early in my tenure, and maybe even in 2017 itself,
there is no country that presents a broader, more severe, more
comprehensive threat to our economic security, our ideas, our
innovation, ultimately our freedom, than the Chinese
Government.
I want to be clear, I am talking about the Chinese
Government, not the Chinese people and certainly not Chinese-
Americans, and what makes the threat from the PRC so pernicious
is that they combined multiple tools. So everything from: human
efforts, whether it is traditional intelligence officers, co-
optees, corrupted insiders, et cetera, with a cyber program
that dwarfs, that dwarfs anybody else's, combined with what
would otherwise be legitimate business activity, joint
ventures, different kinds of mergers and acquisitions,
partnerships that are in effect just a vehicle to enable the
other stuff. So you put all those avenues together, it becomes
particularly challenging.
We have north of or around 2,000 active investigations that
are just into the PRC's efforts to steal our information at
technology. It is up like 1300 percent from where it was not
that long ago, all 56 field offices. So from an investigation
perspective, we are incredibly active, and the resources are
indispensable to do that.
But investigations alone aren't enough. We are much more
engaged over the last several years with the business
community, trying to work with them so that they can figure out
how better to harden their--because they are the attack
surface. So there is a lot of outreach.
Cyber.--The Chinese cyber effort is gigantic. If you took
all of the FBI's cyber resources and said, forget Russia,
forget Iran, forget ransomware, just do nothing but China, the
Chinese Government's hacking program would dwarf ours 50 to 1.
So the idea that Congress would set us back instead of
launching forward on that boggles my mind. And so I would
implore--and I know this subcommittee has been a great ally on
this stuff, but I would implore Congress, more broadly, to make
sure that we don't do that, because I can guarantee you the
Chinese government ain't cutting its budget.
Senator Coons. Well, thank you, Director Wray. I am the
chair of the Intellectual Property Subcommittee, Senator Tillis
and I, have a number of pieces of legislation we are trying to
advance to strengthen the tools to protect our IP, but you also
need the resources.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Coons. Senator
Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Director, welcome to the Committee. Thank you for your
leadership. Talking about fentanyl just for a moment; Alaska
continues to outpace the other States, unfortunately, this is a
position and place that we would never ever want to be. Between
2022 and 2023, we saw the largest percent increase in drug
overdose of any State, by far. We are referred to, and I quote,
``One of fentanyl's deadliest frontiers''.
Just from last year, the drug overdoses increased by 40
percent from 2022 to 2023, fiscal year 2022 to 2023, and of
these overdoses, three-quarters were from fentanyl. And so we
are seeing our cities under attack. But even more troubling is
the very, very remote small, oftentimes Alaskan Native
villages, villages of 800 people, where the cartels, those who
are moving these drugs, know that they can get ten times more
for this poison than anywhere else. And so they are targeting
our smallest of small communities.
So we are seeing this, this awful increase. And yet, if we
look at what is happening in other areas, many States have seen
reductions in overdose death rates during this same period.
What are they--what are you doing there that is allowing for
greater levels of success? What are the obstacles to doing the
same in places like Alaska? It was somewhat gratifying to see a
recent announcement that the U.S. Attorney's Office there in
Alaska had announced new charges against this ring where there
had been 53 defendants named.
Now, there are additional charges. This is good. This is
positive, but we are looking at what we are up against. And we
are a State where the stuff is coming in by air, it is coming
in a little bit by vessel, that and the mails. So we know where
the points of entry are. And we are still not able to do the
interdiction that is making a difference to turn this around.
Have you got any words that you can share with people who
are really very, very anxious about what we are seeing with
fentanyl?
Director Wray. Well, certainly I am acutely aware of what a
big problem it is up there, and some of the challenges that law
enforcement in your home State have to contend with. I have
been up to visit, as you know, a couple of times.
Senator Murkowski. And we appreciate you visiting.
Director Wray. And on one of them in particular, the Alaska
State Troopers, with whom we have a great relationship, took me
up in a helicopter to be able to kind of get a better sense of
just the sheer sprawl and remoteness of some of the communities
that you are talking about. We are working through the Alaska
High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Initiative, and that is a
big part of it, not just on the investigations, enhancing
those, but promoting interagency partnerships, increasing
awareness.
Part of that effort, in addition to big cases, like the 53-
person one you mentioned, and the seizures that came with that,
is to try to make sure that people, including in some of these
more remote communities, kind of know what behaviors to be on
the lookout for, how to report, who to report it to, that kind
of thing.
You mentioned some of the reduction in overdose deaths and
that you are seeing in some other States. The one thing I would
say about that is that overdose deaths, as a metric for
progress I think is in some ways frustratingly misleading,
because first response is getting so much better in some
States. So that what you are having is, the same--you might
have the same or maybe even more overdoses. But because there
is wider availability, faster availability of Narcan, the
people who were overdosing who before would have died, aren't
dying.
And so it has the pernicious effect of making people feel
like they are making more of a dent in the problem than they
are. Don't get me wrong, it is great that the people aren't
dying, and it is great that there is emergency care to keep
them alive. But overdose deaths in some other State may not be
as successful as it might appear to you by comparison.
Senator Murkowski. And I absolutely get your point, and
what we need to be doing is basically choking the poison off in
the first place so it doesn't get to my State, or any others. I
am out of time here, but I want to ask one final question here.
And this relates to the Not Invisible Act Commission, this is
related to Missing and Murdered Indigenous Peoples. They got
their report to Congress and the Federal agencies back in
November of last year.
It recommends that law enforcement, including FBI, are
trained in MMIP, violence, crime, and human trafficking,
coordinate with BIA, and all of that. And I am hoping that we
have got some good progress that is being made by the FBI in
implementing the provisions of this report.
The concern that I have here is, I just mentioned the
fentanyl crisis in the State, we have got a stepped-up
initiative that we must do when it comes to those vulnerable
people, missing, murdered, and particularly our indigenous
women, but we have got one field office in Alaska for the FBI.
We have two satellite offices, one in Fairbanks and one in
Juneau.
Do you think that that is sufficient resourcing to cover a
State, that you have acknowledged is huge, it is one-fifth the
size of the rest of the country. But to be dealing with these
issues that are impacting us in disproportionate ways, do we
need more resources up north?
Director Wray. We clearly need more resources, although I
will tell you we need more resources just across the board. And
that the--I say sometimes, but it applies very much to this
context. Everywhere I go somebody has a really good, and I
don't mean that sarcastically, a really good idea of someplace
the FBI needs to be devoting more resources. And I have----
Senator Murkowski. And I must confess----
Director Wray [continuing]. Not yet found anybody who can
tell me in any responsible way where the FBI can be devoting
fewer resources.
And so, this is a time for Congress to lean forward in this
next appropriation. I am very aware of both how small our field
office at the Anchorage Division, which as you say, includes
not just the Headquarters, say, in Anchorage, but the other two
RAs as well, by comparison to just the sheer immense area that
they have to cover.
And it always strikes me every time I am talking with them
about the challenges that that presents. It is not just the
sprawl, but how few roads there are, and how that people have
to get around, and all the things that does to complicate law
enforcement work in that area. So Anchorage needs more
resources, but the FBI needs more resources.
Senator Murkowski. The FBI needs more resources. The
question that I didn't ask you was about the northern border
and what we are seeing with those on the terrorist watch list
coming through, because we are anxious about that. So we have
got all kinds of issues and again, how we are resourcing,
regardless of where it is, is a challenge.
So thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. Senator
Capito.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair, and Ranking Member.
And thank you, Director Wray, for being here with us. It looks
like I might be your cleanup batter here, so that might be
good.
I want to go to something that Senator Murkowski was
talking about, she talked about her State. You are well aware
of West Virginia, unfortunately, leading the way, and our
numbers went up a little bit over the last year, which was very
discouraging because we have a lot of communities, and
community involvement. And the FBI has been involved with this
on the law enforcement side but all kinds of issues to try to
lower those numbers. So it was a bit disappointing to us.
But I want to ask what the FBI--the drug cartels, the
transnational criminal organizations that see along our
southern borders, mostly, I would imagine, what kind of
additional resources, or different strategies can the FBI
employ, because obviously fentanyl is still coming streaming
across the southern border. They are obviously pressing a lot
of the pills as they--before they come over, that the whole
thing with the chemicals coming from China. What are you seeing
in this in terms of targeting the transcontinental criminal
organizations?
Director Wray. So certainly, the vast majority of the
fentanyl in this country comes from the cartels in Mexico,
sourced from precursor chemicals from China.
Senator Capito. Right.
Director Wray. And then is trafficked here, or distributed
here primarily by violent gangs. And so I think to be effective
against the threat, which is really an epidemic, we need to be
trying to hit all of those different choke points. The FBI
plays a role, some role in almost all of them, but not
uniquely. This is way bigger than any one government agency.
Frankly, it is bigger than Government itself.
So we are, through our Safe Streets Task Forces, going out
after the gangs that are distributing this stuff on the
streets. We are through our Transnational Organized Crime Task
Forces and working on OCDETF, Strike Forces going after the
cartels, and the cartel leadership, which are the source of
supply.
We are trying to push, in our own way, the Mexicans, and we
do have good relationships with our Mexican law enforcement
counterparts. But, this sort of onsie-twosie effect of a great
extradition here, a takedown there, those are things to be
celebrated, but they really aren't enough to affect the problem
at scale.
Senator Capito. Um-hum. To make it----
Director Wray. And then the China piece, the precursor
chemicals, is a huge part as well. One of the things we are
trying to do now, and I am very pleased about this, the
Director of National Intelligence, Avril Haines, has convened
and we have been doing an Intelligence Community Sprint on the
fentanyl problem, to try to figure out how we can better ensure
sharing of information between the different intelligence
agencies who are not law enforcement, and law enforcement to
have the information flowing.
We clearly have to go after the money. After all, this
whole thing is profit-based, right?
Senator Capito. Right.
Director Wray. So we need to figure out better ways to go
after the money. So some of those are some of the things that
need to be done, but it is incredibly frustrating. I know that
our offices in West Virginia who are dealing with, as you say,
on the receiving end of so much of this problem, and I continue
to be blown away, frankly, by how high-performing those
offices, some of the takedowns they have had----
Senator Capito. Yes, they have.
Director Wray [continuing]. In West Virginia, for you know,
comparatively small footprint, is really something that is
inspiring.
Senator Capito. I guess that is a plus and a minus. The
minus being they are there, the plus being they are being
disrupted and caught. So that is congratulations to them. I
know there is been some big busts.
I want to ask you about the NICS system, because the
question I have is, and thank you for the visit, and I thought
it was a really good visit, I am trying to understand your
budget where you have a technical adjustment of $43 million
proposed in your budget regarding implementation of the
Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. We are being told that this
could impact the 170 people that are at the NICS facility that
are working in that. How is that going? And can you explain a
little bit the anomaly that you have here, as one of the
program changes for 2025?
So there, I can see why it is confusing a little bit. There
is two things going on. One is the 170 positions that Congress
gave us with BSCA----
Senator Capito. Right.
Director Wray [continuing]. Was one-time funding. And so,
one of our requests, which I think is $43 million tied to the
170 positions, is designed to make sure that one-time funding,
because we have largely filled almost all of those 170
positions, if we don't get that reappropriated, that is gone.
So that is incredibly important that we get those 170 positions
and that $43 million reauthorized. So that is part of it.
Then on top of that, though, because of the pace and the
volume, we have asked for a smaller but nonetheless an
enhancement. So the bottom line is, restore the--well, not
``restore'', but maintain----
Senator Capito. Maintain the 170?
Director Wray [continuing]. The 170, which was one-time
only.
Senator Capito. And then add?
Director Wray. And then add a little bit with the
enhancement that we have asked for.
Senator Capito. Some of this--and I will stop here--but the
statistics that we--this was early on when the bipartisan bill
was being discussed at NICS, there had been some disruptions
where the information showed that if you knew what had happened
pre-18-years-old, you would have fallen into that category, and
there were disruptions where people were unable to secure a
weapon, and because of mental health, or whatever. Is that
continuing? I mean, is that trend continuing, if it is
disrupting, or?
Director Wray. We are definitely seeing that. I am struck
by the number of times when we have that, you know, because
there is the mental health piece, there is the juvenile piece,
then there is the contact with law enforcement about the
individual piece, and the number of times when the
conversation, the exchange with law enforcement and whatever
State it is, is saying: Whoa.
Senator Capito. Yes.
Director Wray. We know who that is. And that would not be a
good thing. We have significantly improved the timeliness of
those, you know, you and I were there.
Senator Capito. Yes, that was supposed--yes.
Director Wray. It is still kind of a work in progress, but
it is--I think it is up like tenfold how much faster it is
happening, which is great. But part of the reason we asked for
the enhancement on top of the original part is that, because of
course we are going to conduct the congressionally mandated
checks, but the----
Senator Capito. We need more resources, yes.
Director Wray [continuing]. We are very proud, as you know,
and as I know you are, of how quickly NICS can turn things
around, so that the giant majority of people who are law-
abiding citizens----
Senator Capito. And who can prove quickly----
Director Wray [continuing]. Who have a Second Amendment
right to buy their weapon can get it timely and not have it be
held up. But the problem, if we don't get the funds
appropriated is it is going to have an impact on how much we
can cover and how fast we can cover it.
Senator Capito. Yes, I mean just for context I saw that the
statistics that came that I have, just last data point is in
2023 there were 29 million NICS firearm background checks in
the country, that go through the office in West Virginia. So
thank you very much.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Senator Capito.
I have not yet asked questions, so I will do that. And then
I know Senator Moran has one more question.
But I wanted to go back to the issue of disinformation and
election security. You talked about China having a 50 to 1
cyber advantage in terms of their cyber operations. We saw
before the New Hampshire Primary earlier this year a domestic
actor who used artificial intelligence to voice clone President
Biden and target voters in New Hampshire, as part of a robocall
scam.
How are we responding? I mean, this was a domestic issue,
but it points to the potential challenges from AI, and the
threat that that can present to our elections. So how are we
responding to what we are already seeing from Russia and China
in terms of the disinformation? And how are we sharing--how is
the FBI sharing what you know with local law enforcement and
election officials so that everybody is aware of what the
threat is?
Director Wray. So we are, of course, seeing, and I have
been warning about this for some time, the role of AI to
enhance efforts that our foreign adversaries have already been
engaged in. And one way to think of that is just like social
media when it first really came of age was this gigantic
bullhorn that took something that has been happening for
decades, namely Foreign Disinformation Warfare and just scaled
it in a way that was particularly challenging.
I think that is the right way to think about AI, it is not
that it changes fundamentally what it is our adversaries want
to do, or why we need to be worried about or what authorities
the FBI has, and our role in combating it, is it allows them to
amplify to do it, to make it more sophisticated, more
deceptive, cheaper, faster, all the reasons people love AI for
good things they can use for bad things.
And so our approach is in many ways much the same, which is
to make sure that we are engaging with our partners, sharing
what we are seeing, and hearing, where we have authorities that
apply to us, taking action. But information sharing is the key.
I will say that when it comes to AI, specifically, there is an
increasingly important role for the private sector, because if
you are going to detect AI at scale, certainly it is going to
be the American private sector that is going to be the key to
doing that.
So we are trying to partner up with the business community
to make sure that they are doing their part on that, because AI
is actually pretty good at detecting AI. And there is a role
America leads the world in AI innovation, which is why the
Chinese are trying to steal it by the way. And that is why we
need to make sure that American companies are using their
innovation to help protect our democracy.
Senator Shaheen. So is there more that we should be doing
in Congress to make it in the interest of some of those
companies that they do a better job of policing what is on
their sites?
Director Wray. Well, that is probably a longer discussion
for another day. I will just say for right now, because this is
important, and I know it is something you both care about, when
it comes to these companies there is this broader phenomenon of
how important it is for them to take some kind of ownership for
the way in which their products and services are used.
And that applies not just in this context but in sub in a
subject that you will hear about from law enforcement not just
all over this country, but all over the world, is the way in
which these companies are implementing warrant-proof
encryption, which basically means that child predators,
terrorists, fentanyl traffickers, et cetera, can find a space
where they can go and communicate and act, and law enforcement,
no matter how Rock Solid your legal process is, and how
independent the judicial approval is, won't be able to have
access to this information.
The threats won't be gone, the kids will still be
victimized, the predators will still be out there, but now the
companies knowing that this is happening are moving in this
direction, so it is a business decision that these companies
are making.
And so I don't think it is unreasonable for us to expect
these companies to take some ownership of this process and if
we don't do something, collectively, as a country we are going
to wake up and find that we are blind in a way that is really
going to put people's lives at risk.
Senator Shaheen. Well, that is an excellent segue into my
next question, which is we are hearing about a new and growing
threat where individuals have been using content manipulation,
so AI, to create sexually explicit photos and videos that
appear to be real, it complicates investigations because it is
difficult to tell what is real and what is not.
So I know that the FBI has released a public service
announcement earlier this year warning about this. But can you
talk about how we are also asking private companies to look at
that issue, and do a better job of policing what is on their
sites?
Director Wray. Certainly, we share your concern about
online targeting of kids, it has not just magnified the
problem, but it has created a whole new set of actors and
globalized the problem, so you have financially motivated
extortion for example which has started to get more notoriety.
And AI is just one more tool, a weapon in that context to
enhance those efforts. But while the technology may change
whether it is AI-generated or not, child sexual abuse material
is illegal, and we are going to aggressively go after it.
I would like to continue to work more and more closely with
companies to try to see how they can be part of the solution.
And I think there is a lot of opportunity for that.
Our folks in that program, the Violent Crimes against
Children Program, are some of the hardest working people in the
entire FBI, dealing with some of the worst that humanity has to
offer. And I think we, last year, had something like 3,000
arrests, and rescued, for all intents and purposes, something
like 700 kids.
So again I come back to the budget discussion, what is
going to happen to those kids if Congress makes the mistake of
going backwards like they did in 2024 with the budget?
Senator Shaheen. I think you won't get any argument from
Senator Moran or me about that. I just want to close with one
question, a final question, and that has to do with anomalous
health incidents, also known as Havana Syndrome, because the
FBI has been one of those agencies that has been working to
establish policies and procedures to provide help for people
who are affected.
Can you give us any kind of an update on where you are in
that process, and whether people are beginning to see support
that they had hoped for, for treatment?
Director Wray. So as you know there is nothing more
important to me than the health and safety of my workforce and
their families, and the benefits provided for, required DOJ to
issue regulations to allow us to start to make the payments. I
am pleased that those regulations finally went into effect last
month, May 20, we didn't sit around just waiting for that
though, we put in place all kinds of procedures and mechanisms
so that the minute the regulations went into effect, we could
kick into high gear and start the payment process.
And so I know we have--I can't give you the exact number--
but I know we have people already, because we have been trying
to improve our communication with the workforce too about this.
So I know that we already have some people whose payment,
applications, and so forth, are now already under the rules now
in process. And so I am hopeful that it will now flow quickly
because we didn't have to then build on additional delay after
the time the rules went into effect.
Senator Shaheen. Great, thank you. I am pleased to hear
that.
Senator Moran.
Senator Moran. Chair Shaheen, thank you.
Director, just almost every day, certainly every week, I
have a conversation with someone in Kansas, or I read something
in the newspaper, or hear on television or radio news about a
ransomware, a cyber attack. I mean, it is just its prevalence,
it is more than prevalent, it is dominant. And it is, you know,
a small business, it can be the courthouse, our State's court
system, the County Treasurer's Office; what is it that we could
be doing, perhaps just as public servants, to try to minimize
the chances that somebody is attacked, or that they take the
necessary steps to prevent it?
And you talked about the private sector in the conversation
with Senator Shaheen, is there a chamber of commerce, a
business organization, are there steps that a business can
take, a county commission, a city office that can take to
prevent this from happening? And are there tools that need to
be provided to local law enforcement to assist in this?
I think this is so common, but I don't know how the
solution can rest with law enforcement, or the FBI in
particular, and my guess is that any kind of effort to
prosecute, or to shut down those who are committing the cyber
attacks, ends in not a significant amount of results?
Director Wray. So for all the reasons you said, ransomware
is one of our top, certainly one of our top cyber priorities. I
think there are a few things I would say, with a glimmer of
some good news buried in there. So the first is that we are
very heavily engaged in private sector outreach, specifically
to try to build resilience and harden the private sector's
infrastructure from ransomware attacks.
There are basic things that can be done, you know, for
example, in terms of having appropriate backups and things like
that. I think you would be surprised to learn how often
ransomware attacks are enabled, not by some really
sophisticated, you know, black-belt-level intrusion but by
somebody somewhere at a business who didn't engage in proper
cyber hygiene, you know, they clicked on the link that they
shouldn't have clicked on. It happens way more often than you
would expect, including in very sophisticated places.
Or the company or the business didn't upload the
appropriate, you know, those patches and updates that we all
get. And those things matter. So things like that, if every
victim or victim-to-be took some of these basic cyber hygiene
steps, we wouldn't stop ransomware, I want to be clear, but we
would significantly make it harder for ransomware actors to be
successful. So that is one. And so the more everybody can help
us spread that message, we will build some greater level of
resilience that way.
The second thing that is just incredibly important is we
need the victims to reach out to us as quickly as possible when
they are hit. I think sometimes people are worried because we
discourage paying the ransom that if they tell--our position is
we don't think you should pay the ransom and we are happy to
explain why, but whatever you decide to do make sure you
contact us, because there have been times when businesses have
contacted us quickly where we are able to help them figure out
we have--they have had cases where we have been able to obtain
decryption keys so they can get their systems unlocked, protect
their information, and not pay the ransom. But that can't
happen if they don't contact us.
There are times when we can chase the money with working
with the victim, and basically claw back the ransom before it
gets to the bad guys, so things like that that we can do, but
none of it we can do if the company doesn't contact us right
away, that is what is so important. There is lots of things
that can happen.
The last part that I would say, is we are starting to
figure out, not just the FBI, but collectively with our
partners what success against ransomware could look like, and
that is joint sequenced operations, campaigns, sustained
campaigns against particular ransomware actors, where we go
after not just the administrators of the ransomware group and
their affiliates, but their whole ecosystems, their money
launderers, their service providers, you know, their
bulletproof hosters, all that stuff.
So we are going after all the people that are related to
the ransomware group, we are going after their infrastructure.
So we are seizing their servers, shutting down their domains
things like that, so we are going after the people, we are
going after the infrastructure, and then of course ransomware
is a--you know, is a for-profit crime, we are going after their
money, we are chasing their cryptocurrency, which is invariably
the way the ransoms are paid. And we are getting better at
disrupting the flow of the ransom back to the ransomware
actors.
We are not where we need to be, but we are starting to see
signs. We have had situations where we will knock down a
particular ransomware group, and they are flailing around, and
out of business for, you know, months and months at a time. So
we started to get a taste of what success could look like. And
it is again, it is a joint--it is a team effort, FBI, some of
the other intelligence agencies, foreign law enforcement, the
private sector itself, all kind of working together.
And so we have had some successes. I think about the Hive
Ransomware group where we had basically hacked the hackers, and
gotten into that, and they didn't know we were in, and so they
kept trying to conduct ransomware attacks, we kept getting the
decryption keys, and providing them to the victims, and then it
wasn't working. Eventually we dismantled the whole thing, but
we are getting more innovative creative in using court
authorized operations, not just to try to arrest people,
although we definitely want to do that, but to essentially shut
down the operation itself.
Senator Moran. That is more encouraging than I expected. If
someone is subject to ransomware and cyber attack they would
call their local police department, their county sheriff, and
those local law enforcement officials would know what to do; is
that a true statement?
Director Wray. Would not know?
Senator Moran. Would know what to do? The local law
enforcement knows what the next step is?
Director Wray. Well, I think we try to engage with local
law enforcement as you know, because you have seen it firsthand
in Kansas every day. My hope would be that the local law
enforcement would tell them contact the local FBI Field Office,
but really they should be contacting us, because there are
things that we can do that probably the local police chief or
sheriff, you know, can't.
But of course, again, I am going to sound repetitive here,
all these things take resources, and in particular in the cyber
arena, we need to be able to make sure we can pay and train the
most sophisticated cyber talent. And that is an issue within
the Federal Government to make sure that pay authorities, and
of course the funds that are appropriated behind it, are even
across the Federal Government, so we don't have a situation,
which I am concerned about, where other Federal agencies start
cannibalizing each other for the cyber talent that we all need.
So we do need to make sure that there is pay authorities
and pay funding to ensure that real black-belt talent who makes
all the difference in some of these cases, is kept.
Senator Moran. The FBI will have those pay authorities? Do
you have those pay authorities?
Director Wray. Our authorities are not where they need to
be, so it is a combination of both the funding and the
authorities. It is a mix.
Senator Moran. And I wonder if insurance, private insurance
is a component of addressing this problem, more businesses or
entities that get insured against a ransomware attack, I assume
the insurance companies then are going to insist on different
behavior by their insured.
Director Wray. I do think insurance, you know, cyber
insurance is an important part of all this. Now, I will say we
see ransomware actors researching victims and researching
insurance to try to figure out, you know, it is kind of like:
Well I want to figure out how much they have in their wallet
before I rob them, you know, kind of thing. So there is a
little bit of that going on. But I would not discourage people
from getting the insurance.
And we do have our own engagements with the cyber insurers
as well to try to make sure we are working with them so that is
another important piece to all this.
Senator Moran. I would compliment you on your capability of
being repetitive today. Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. We got the message. Thank you,
Director Wray.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
If there are no further questions, Senators may submit any
additional questions for the subcommittee's official hearing
record until June the 11th. We would ask that the FBI respond
within 30 days to any of those future questions.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
No questions were submitted for the record.
CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS
Senator Shaheen. And now, the subcommittee stands in recess
subject to the call of the chair. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:49 p.m., Tuesday, June 4, the hearings
were concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]
COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025
----------
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
[Clerk's note.--The subcommittee was unable to hold
hearings on nondepartmental witnesses. The statements and
letters of those submitting written testimony are as follows:]
Prepared Statement of All Rise
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and distinguished members of
the subcommittee, I am honored to have the opportunity to submit my
testimony on behalf of All Rise, the training, membership, and advocacy
organization for justice system innovation addressing substance use and
mental health at every intercept point. Given our country's ongoing
substance use disorder crisis and fentanyl overdose deaths, I request
that Congress provide funding of $95 million for the Drug Court
Discretionary Grant Program and $35 million for the Veterans Treatment
Court Grant Program at the Department of Justice for fiscal year 2025.
My name is Trevor Jacobs, and I am a proud husband, stepfather,
small business owner, counselor, and government employee. I am also a
grateful drug court graduate who will celebrate 16 years in recovery
this summer.
My life looked very different back in 2007. I was in active
addiction, with little hope of change. In high school, I had no desire
to use drugs, even when I was offered the opportunity. But in my
thirties, a few doses of Oxycontin that I thought would be harmless
turned into a $100-a-day habit that I supported by stealing and forging
checks. My life spiraled out of control, and soon, I was facing felony
charges.
The trajectory of my life balanced on one question my attorney
asked me: ``Do you want to beat the charges, or do you want to get
better?'' I wanted to get better. But all my past efforts to do so had
failed. I had tried treatment multiple times, but recovery never stuck
because I had no accountability. Luckily, my family never lost hope in
me, and neither did the drug court team. That program is what finally
made the difference in my life.
Drug court was initially intimidating. It was much harder than I
expected it would be. The court held me accountable in a way I'd never
been before, balancing toughness with support and encouragement. Judge
Childers had high standards for her court's participants--but she was
also fair. And I had a whole team behind me; not just the judge, but
the attorneys, probation, law enforcement, treatment providers--
everyone was on my side.
Participation in drug court also includes giving back to the
community. Distributing food boxes, raising money for Relay for Life,
and picking up trash in public spaces were just a few ways I gave back
to my community through the program. Service like this helps those in
recovery take pride in themselves and it is something I continue to do
to support my own recovery.
Drug court helped me find sustained, long-term recovery--I've been
sober since August 2008 and graduated from the program in 2009. Thanks
to the drug court team, I was able to mend my relationships and focus
on my family again. I became a SAMHSA-certified peer recovery support
specialist, and for a number of years, I worked in the very same drug
court that saved my life. In 2016, I married my wife Tonya and gained
not only a life partner, but a whole family through the blessing of
her--now our--three kids. I currently work for the county housing
authority, managing 81 households, and have a small food truck business
on the side with my wife. My life in recovery has allowed me to
reconnect with my passion for woodworking and put me in a position to
help others who are struggling. After 16 years, it feels good to say
that now I have been a strong asset to my community for longer than I
was in active addiction.
I am just one example of how funding treatment courts, like drug
courts and veterans treatment courts, not only helps one person, but
uplifts a whole community. Drug courts offer a ripple effect of hope.
Support from the Department of Justice has helped start thousands of
courts over the years, while ensuring they follow evidence-based
standards that maintain fidelity to the proper model. The largest and
most comprehensive, independent, multi-site study to date found that
drug courts reduce crime by up to 58% and save, on average, up to
$6,000 per participant. Additional benefits were found to include
increases in employment, education, family functioning, and financial
stability.
Drug courts and veterans treatment courts are vitally important as
our Nation continues to battle the addiction crisis and its impact on
communities like mine around the country. Investment in these programs
helps State and local leaders increase their capacity to address the
crisis from a public safety and public health standpoint. This funding
will help thousands of individuals break the cycle of crime and
addiction, begin a life in recovery, and become productive members of
their communities.
I strongly urge this committee to recommend $95 million for the
Drug Court Discretionary Grant Program and $35 million for the Veterans
Treatment Court Grant Program at the Department of Justice for fiscal
year 2025, so these programs can continue help people break cycles,
find long- term recovery, and become healthy members of their
communities.
______
Prepared Statement of American Bar Association
Chair Shaheen & Ranking Member Moran:
My name is Mary Smith, and I am the President of the American Bar
Association (ABA), the world's largest voluntary association of
attorneys and legal professionals. Thank you for the opportunity to
submit this statement to the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, Science & Related Agencies (CJS), in support of
increased funding for the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) in the
Fiscal Year 2025 (``FY2025'') budget.
I would like to begin by thanking you, Chair Shaheen and Ranking
Member Moran and the other subcommittee members, for your continuing
support of civil legal aid programs around the Nation and for giving us
an opportunity to discuss the legal services that LSC-funded programs
provide to low-income Americans. A part of my testimony will summarize
the Corporation's report that contains information on the ``justice
gap,'' an urgent and complex challenge to our Nation and its promise of
ensuring equal access to justice for all.
For fifty years, LSC has funded legal aid attorneys to deliver
critically important civil legal aid, which today benefits more than
1.8 million low-income Americans in every State and territory
throughout the country. The demand for these services, however,
continues to exceed the resources appropriated to LSC by a wide margin.
To protect the promise of ``Equal Justice Under Law"-the foundational
principle that underpins the U.S. legal system-the ABA urges Congress
to significantly increase Federal funding to LSC to close the justice
gap in our Nation.
the aba has a long history of support for nationwide legal aid
The ABA has been an outspoken advocate for the Nationwide
availability of civil legal aid for over 100 years. In 1920, under the
leadership of future United States Supreme Court Chief Justice Charles
Evans Hughes, the ABA created what is now known as the ABA Standing
Committee on Legal Aid and Indigent Defense (SCLAID), which, since its
inception, has advocated for the establishment of civil legal aid
services to the poor throughout the country.\1\ In 1965, this advocacy
took a significant step forward when another future United States
Supreme Court Justice, Lewis F. Powell, in his role as ABA President,
led the ABA to formally support the creation of the first federally-
funded Legal Services Program (LSP). The ABA and SCLAID were steadfast
supporters of LSP but recognized the need for the creation of a new
independent entity to administer Federal funding for legal aid services
nationwide. To that end, the ABA advocated for the enactment of the
Legal Services Corporation Act of 1974,\2\ that created the Legal
Services Corporation.
current funding for lsc falls far short of demand for services
The ABA has supported robust funding for LSC throughout its fifty-
year history because of its critically important mission to provide
high quality legal assistance to those who would be otherwise unable to
afford adequate legal counsel.\3\ This funding, however, has not kept
up with the high demand for civil legal aid services. Accordingly, LSC
has requested $1.797 billion for FY2025; by comparison, the FY2024 LSC
appropriation was $560 million. While the current request represents a
significant increase, this increase is necessary for LSC to fulfill its
mission and is in line with historical funding for LSC. For instance,
LSC's FY 1980 appropriation was $1.13 billion in 2024 dollars, at a
time when the United States population was 110 million fewer than
today.
As thoroughly documented in LSC's 2022 study, The Justice Gap: The
Unmet Civil Legal Needs of Low-Income Americans (The Justice Gap), the
Nationwide need for civil legal aid continues to grow, accelerated in
recent years by the COVID-19 pandemic and its lingering long-term
effects on society. Nearly 50 million Americans-16.3% of the
population-currently qualify for legal assistance from LSC-funded
programs. This includes more than 15 million children and nearly 8
million seniors. This year, nearly three-quarters of low-income
households will experience at least one civil legal problem that will
substantially affect their lives, and yet 92% of low-income Americans
will be unable to obtain adequate legal assistance or, in fact, not
have access to a lawyer at all. At the current funding level, LSC
grantees can serve only about 1.8 million low-income clients per year;
the same number will be turned away due to lack of resources. This
includes one million children in poverty, 1.1 million individuals and
families facing eviction, 140,000 veterans, and 550,000 victims of
domestic violence, all of whom, when seeking desperately needed legal
aid, will not be able to receive it from an LSC grantee solely due to
inadequate funding. Another nearly 18 million other low-income people
will not even seek legal help and simply forego the legal assistance
they need because they know they cannot afford a lawyer. The result is
that only 28% of low-income Americans believe that our Nation's legal
system is fair, which deeply undermines the fundamental principle of
``Equal Justice Under Law.''
robust lsc funding is necessary to provide representational equity in
the justice system
Our system of justice promises every citizen that the rule of law
will be applied impartially and equally regardless of circumstance,
national origin, gender, skin color, creed, wealth, or other factors.
But our civil justice system is simply not designed for those without
legal help. The law is a complex web of technical terms and procedures
that can be exceedingly difficult for the average person to understand.
Assistance from a legal professional is a necessity for even seemingly
routine matters, but millions of Americans lack the resources to afford
counsel even as they seek to protect their most basic and fundamental
rights. Legal aid attorneys funded by LSC ensure that low-income
litigants enter court on a level playing field with the opposing party
and have the best possible opportunity to receive due process and a
fair outcome.
lsc funding must be increased to address growing legal problems
affecting the disadvantaged and vulnerable
Case closing data from LSC grantees in the past few years
illustrate the dramatic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the demand
for legal aid. While the aftereffects of the pandemic have been felt in
every community throughout America, the brunt of this disaster has been
absorbed by low-income Americans.
--Housing and Eviction.--Case closing data from LSC documents a 55%
increase in housing and eviction cases between 2020 and 2022.
These issues are driven by a lack of affordable housing and
exacerbated by rising rental costs nationwide. Despite the work
done by legal aid programs across the country to address the
housing and rental crisis, 97% of tenants facing eviction still
lack legal representation at eviction hearings. Increased LSC
funding to address this crisis will not only ensure that more
families have a fair opportunity to retain housing and avoid
homelessness, but it will also prevent landlord-tenant issues
from snowballing into other legal problems for these
households. The Justice Gap found that low-income households
who have the burden of high-cost housing or the threat of
eviction tend to also have higher incidences of other types of
civil legal problems than those who do not.
--Domestic Violence.--Low-income women experience higher rates of
domestic violence than those in higher-income quartiles, and
reported cases of domestic violence have been consistently on
the increase over the past decade, rising even more
dramatically since the onset of the pandemic. LSC grantees
report serving these types of cases at a rate 54% higher today
than 10 years ago: one out of every five cases closed by an LSC
grantee now involves domestic violence. Increasing LSC funding
to provide more representation to domestic violence victims
will have a real and quantifiable effect. When domestic
violence victims have legal representation, their success rate
in obtaining legal orders of protection is 83%. Without an
attorney, that rate plummets to 32%. More funding for legal aid
representation is critically important for protection and harm
prevention to domestic violence victims, which often includes
children affected by that violence.
--Addiction.--The nation has experienced an explosion in opioid abuse
rates and resulting deaths, again growing substantially since
the pandemic. Over three million Americans have, or have
experienced, opioid use disorder, and more than 112,000 have
died from drug overdoses in the 12 months ending in May 2023.
It should be no surprise that opioid addiction leads directly
to a number of other civil legal problems, such as housing
insecurity, debt issues, and domestic violence. Limited LSC
funding has been available for grantees to stand up projects to
address this epidemic in the hardest-hit jurisdictions, but
much more funding is necessary to replicate the successes of
these projects across the country to help families recover from
the devastating effects of this ongoing crisis.
--Disabilities.--Low-income Americans tend to be disproportionately
impacted by disabilities: More than 10.7 million disabled
persons live in poverty, 33% of people aged 65 and older have
at least one disability, and 25% of children in poverty have a
disability. Of those disabled persons living in poverty, over
500,000 of those are veterans, and in 2022, 28% of disabled
veterans experienced homelessness. The Justice Gap finds that
91% of all disabled persons having civil legal issues do not
get the necessary legal help they require.
lsc funding is critical to filling nationwide gaps in the availability
of civil legal aid
Federal funding for legal aid through LSC has had a significant
impact in addressing the lack of available legal aid lawyers in many
parts of the country where other forms of funding to provide these
lawyers are not otherwise available. Nonetheless, significantly
increased LSC funding is still necessary to close this justice gap
affecting millions of low-income Americans.
The ABA conducted its first nationwide survey of civil legal aid
attorneys in 2023 as a part of its annual Profile of the Legal
Profession report. The unambiguous findings of this exhaustive survey
demonstrate that during a time when the demand for legal aid services
is rising, there are nowhere near enough legal aid lawyers to provide
necessary services. Even though there are 1.3 million lawyers in the
U.S., only about 10,000 of these are paid civil legal aid lawyers, or,
in other words, there are only about three legal aid lawyers for every
10,000 people in poverty. Even more significantly, the survey found
vast disparities among the States in the number of legal aid attorneys
within those States. Regardless of the average number of legal aid
attorneys per State, their distribution within any given state is often
uneven, with higher numbers found in urban areas and few, if any, in
rural communities.
This situation is a direct consequence of the wide variation in
funding provided for legal aid at the state level. The ABArray Legal
Aid Funding Report, issued annually by SCLAID, has nearly 20 years of
legal aid funding data collected nationwide that clearly demonstrates
that, while some States prioritize funding of legal aid services
through a variety of sources, other States fail to provide much-if
anything-in the way of State-based legal aid funding.
Federal funding through LSC is the only way to directly address
this imbalance in available legal aid among the States. There are LSC
grantee attorneys in every congressional district in the Nation,
sometimes resulting in a situation where there may be only one legal
aid attorney working within a vast, rural service area. While Federal
funding may ensure at least some kind of legal aid presence across
every district, there are simply not enough legal aid attorneys
available as one attorney cannot possibly meet the needs of a potential
client population of 10,000.
conclusion
In order to effectuate equal justice under law, every low-income
American facing a civil legal problem who is unable to afford a private
attorney would have access to adequate and appropriate legal aid
assistance. The ABA acknowledges that fiscal constraints and other
legislative considerations make the level of funding necessary to
achieve that goal a challenging prospect. Despite the difficulty, this
remains a worthy goal that Congress should aspire to achieve, as the
foregoing demonstrates.
We thank this subcommittee for its commitment and historical
support for increased funding for LSC to help protect the rights of
low-income Americans, and we urge Congress to support a significant
increase in LSC's FY2025 funding to help uphold America's pledge to
every citizen that they can access equal justice under the law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_aid_indigent_defense/.
\2\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-bill/7824/
text/pl?overview=closed.
\3\ https://www.lsc.gov/about-lsc/what-we-do.
[This statement was submitted by Mary Smith, President.]
______
Prepared Statement of The American Foreign Service Association (AFSA)
Congress's continued efforts to support the role of commercial
diplomacy are of great importance to AFSA's nearly 17,000 members, who
are dedicated diplomats on the front lines of our Nation's security and
prosperity. As you begin your work on the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies appropriations bill,
AFSA respectfully requests that Congress provide robust funding for the
International Trade Administration's (ITA) Foreign Commercial Service
(FCS)--a part of Global Markets within the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Specifically, AFSA requests funding of at least $775 million to make
the mission-critical investments in Global Markets, which will pay
dividends for the U.S. economy and America's foreign policy priorities.
Located in 80 strategically selected countries, 240 FCS Foreign
Service officers engage in commercial diplomacy to reduce barriers to
foreign markets, win foreign government procurements for U.S.
companies, and attract investment into the United States. Commercial
diplomats and their dedicated teams have brought more than $200 billion
in investment, bolstering domestic industries of strategic importance,
such as critical technologies and clean energy, thereby creating over
200,000 American jobs, and increasing national supply chain resiliency.
Additionally, the Foreign Commercial Service helps U.S. companies
compete against foreign firms to win foreign government contracts,
helping American businesses grow globally. Commercial diplomats have
also successfully advocated for over $787 billion in U.S. exports which
has supported approximately 4 million U.S. jobs. These are Federal
programs that work directly to grow the economy, support U.S.
businesses, and create American jobs. However, this can only happen
with sufficient funding.
With this testimony, AFSA wanted to bring to your attention
budgetary concerns that are negatively affecting our members and their
safety and security. While the budget for Global Markets has remained
relatively flatlined in recent years, expenses beyond the Agency's
control have vastly increased. AFSA recently conducted a survey to see
how budget challenges are impacting FCS officers serving overseas. The
results were shocking as members cited 30%+ reductions in staffing,
100%+ increase in demand for services, and a lack of strategic
organizational direction. This has led to a decline in the physical and
mental of health of our members, and an inability to effectively
compete against the People's Republic of China (PRC), which has 10
times the number of officers in some markets than the United States.
Select survey results are below:
--96% of officers indicated that budget constraints have impacted
their ability to perform their primary duties.
--96% of officers indicated that budget constraints have negatively
impacted team morale at their post.
--93% believe that the budget cuts have led to a decline in the
quality of the organization's impact.
--56% of America's commercial diplomats are considering leaving the
service due to budgetary constraints.
--Basic training, including tradecraft and security, is no longer
offered for officers, locally employed staff, or spouses.
Economic security is a national security priority, and the Foreign
Commercial Service is critical to advancing U.S. economic and
commercial engagement abroad and in the United States. The FCS has a
tangible effect on the U.S. economy, leveraging global opportunities
for American workers and businesses. Not only does FCS work grow the
U.S. economy, but it is pivotal to confronting the PRC, which
increasingly targets economies in Latin America, Africa, Europe, and
the Indo-Pacific. Given the ever-rising demand for services and a
significant reduction in staffing overseas, FCS requires adequate
resources to effectively carry out its mission. Doubling the funding of
FCS will ensure that this proud and dedicated service is adequately
resourced to help American businesses grow their presence overseas, to
advance American strategic interests abroad, and to compete against
China.
We urge Congress to prioritize this request, so FCS can continue to
help America compete effectively in FY25 and beyond. Thank you very
much for your leadership on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Tom Yazdgerdi, AFSA President
______
Prepared Statement of American Geophysical Union
The American Geophysical Union (AGU), a non-profit, non-partisan
scientific society, appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony
regarding the fiscal year (FY) 2025 appropriations request for the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the National Science
Foundation (NSF). AGU, on behalf of its global community of half a
million in the Earth and space sciences, respectfully requests that the
118th Congress appropriate the following:
--$9 billion for NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD),
--$157.8 million for NASA's Office of STEM Engagement,
--At least $7.2 billion for NOAA, and
--$11.9 billion for NSF.
national aeronautics and space administration
AGU requests that Congress appropriate $9 billion in FY25 for
NASA's Science Mission Directorate. This ambitious request will support
world-class Earth and space science research and ensure U.S. science
leadership despite the emergence of many new international space
agencies. This request will allow NASA to continue to steadily advance
existing and new decadal missions across all divisions and provide
unique opportunities for the next generation of STEM professionals.
earth science division
Strong investment in Earth Sciences will support the development of
the next generation of missions and satellites that will transform our
understanding of the Earth's systems. This includes continued
development of Earth system observatory missions and Landsat Next, a
reimagination of the Landsat mission that will create new user
applications, such as water quality assessments, mineral mapping, and
soil conservation. Increased funding will also enable NASA to continue
developing the tools and resources users need in their planning and
decision-making, from helping farmers predict precipitation changes
resulting from our changing climate, to enabling cities to develop
hazard resilience and adaptation plans, to aiding our allies across the
world when large scale natural disasters occur.
planetary science division
Strong investment in Planetary Sciences will allow NASA to pursue
several high-profile decadal missions and priorities, including Europa
Clipper, Mars Sample Return, and planetary defense, without inhibiting
the budgets of other science mission areas. The pursuit of a robust
fleet of missions in this division will help to ensure a thriving
planetary science workforce and prevent additional layoffs at NASA
space flight centers, which would represent a loss of key U.S. human
capacity that we may not be able to re-attract. Furthermore, increased
funding will allow NASA to robustly fund research and analysis, key to
developing the next generation of space science leaders.
heliophysics division
Increased investment in Heliophysics will enable deeper
understanding of the space environment, which is needed to protect
existing terrestrial and space assets and is key to achieving our
future space exploration ambitions. Specifically, increased investment
in Heliophysics will allow NASA to continue developing the flagship
decadal Geospace Dynamics Constellation (GDC) mission. GDC will fill
critical observational gaps in our understanding of space weather and
aid space weather forecasting capabilities performed by NOAA.
Additionally, increased funding will encourage an ambitious 2024
decadal survey, ensure a robust research and analysis program to
maximize the return of large missions, and foster a thriving
heliophysics community through the support of early career scientists.
office of stem engagement
AGU requests that Congress appropriate $157.8 million for NASA's
Office of STEM Engagement. Increased funding for the office will allow
NASA to increase engagement of K-12 students and increase strategic
partnerships to broaden NASA's STEM impact across the United States.
Specifically, additional funding will support more unique, evidence-
based K-12 learning experiences through the Next Gen STEM program,
expand the number of internships offered through Space Grant, and
increase MUREP programming at community colleges and for those not
pursuing 4-year degrees.
national oceanic and atmospheric administration
AGU requests that Congress appropriate at least $7.2 billion for
NOAA in FY25. From weather forecasts to fisheries data and
groundbreaking research about the world around us, NOAA's products and
services are critical to the Nation. Robust funding is imperative for
ensuring NOAA's continued ability to protect American lives and
strengthen the U.S. economy.
Last year, the U.S. experienced 28 billion-dollar weather and
climate disaster events-the highest number ever recorded for the U.S.-
costing a total of $94.2 billion and more than 492 lives.\1\ These
disasters continue to increase in frequency, severity, and cost to the
Nation, especially in rural, agricultural, and disadvantaged
communities. NOAA's scientists and funding programs have enabled us to
understand the causes and impacts of these extreme events and increase
the lead time for predictions needed to save lives and property. NOAA
needs strong financial support to be able to bolster climate research,
mitigate and prepare for worsening weather conditions, and build
national and economic resilience.
NOAA's work to understand, protect and manage oceans and coasts is
also essential to our economy, ecology, community resilience, public
health, and safety. NOAA-sustained ocean research and observations,
such as the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS), are integral to
understanding coastal climate impacts, including sea level rise and
related hazards, blue carbon ecosystems, harmful algal blooms, ocean
acidification and much more. However, a budget that deprioritizes
extramural partnerships during times of fiscal austerity ignores
constituent priorities, which are best addressed by strong regional
programs that regularly engage with communities to understand and
deliver information that meets their needs. For example, the impact of
the proposed FY25 funding reduction to the IOOS Regional Associations
will be the loss of the long-term data and real-time services that
local decision makers need, and which also improve Federal models and
forecasts.
Additionally, investments in NOAA's research and management
programs must be matched by investments that address the workforce
needs of the agency, including its numerous long-standing vacancies.
Fellowships, internships, and extramural programs, like Sea Grant and
the Cooperative Institutes, engage the next generation of scientists
from around the Nation, helping to expand the agency's capacity and
prepare for the future. Smart and robust investments in NOAA's current
and future scientific community are critical to building a workforce
capable of sustaining the agency's ability to fulfill its vital mission
effectively.
national science foundation
AGU requests that Congress appropriate $11.9 billion for NSF in
FY25. This ambitious funding request will enable NSF to continue to
drive American innovation and competitiveness despite the almost $500
million cut in funding the agency received in the final FY24
appropriations bill. Ambitious funding for NSF is critical if the U.S.
hopes to maintain its leadership in science and technology and reap the
economic and national security benefits of that leadership.
Increased funding will allow NSF to meet the ambitions set by
Congress, including further developing the Technology, Innovation, and
Partnerships Directorate, expanding access to STEM education for rural
and underserved communities, and funding the Regional Innovation
Engines--without sacrificing core NSF research and STEM education
programs. NSF currently supports almost a quarter of all basic research
and funds more than fifty percent of basic environmental research done
at U.S. colleges and universities. Increased funding will allow NSF to
expand support for STEM programs for K-12 students and teachers, as
well as undergraduate and graduate students, which are essential for
our future STEM workforce.
Increased funding will also allow the Office of Polar Programs, the
manager of all U.S. activities in the polar regions, to continue
maintenance and improvements for Antarctic facilities and ensure these
facilities are made available for scientific use as soon as possible.
The diminished opportunities to conduct science in Antarctica has
impacted a wide swath of the scientific community from space to climate
sciences and has been especially detrimental for graduate students who
are having to reimagine their career plans. Additionally, robust
funding for NSF in FY25 will enable NSF to properly plan for the next
phase of the U.S. scientific ocean drilling program following the
retirement of JOIDES Resolution this year.
conclusion
With our Nation facing critical and interconnected challenges
affecting our economic strength, national security, and health and
well-being, strong investments in science and innovation--specifically
the work done by NASA, NOAA, and NSF--are vital for a stronger, more
secure, and better future for America. AGU appreciates the
subcommittee's leadership in these areas, as well as the opportunity to
submit this testimony. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of
our requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information.
Calculating the cost of weather and climate disasters. https://
www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/calculating-cost-weather-and-climate-disasters.
[This statement was submitted by Brittany Webster, Manager, and
Michael Villafranca, Senior Specialist, Science Policy & Government
Relations.]
______
Prepared Statement of American Governance Institute
Dear Chairman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
committee:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify concerning improving
Executive branch accountability by directing the Justice Department to
make final opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel available to
Congress and the public. Thank you also for including strong language
concerning OLC opinions in the Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying
the FY 2024 Appropriations bill, and in legislation from FY 2020
forward.\1\ My name is Daniel Schuman and I am Executive Director at
the American Governance Institute.
We urge you to include stronger language in the report accompanying
the FY 2025 appropriations bill concerning OLC opinion transparency
because the Justice Department still has not complied with your
directions on this matter.
background
The Office of Legal Counsel's core function is to provide
``controlling advice to Executive Branch officials on questions of law
that are centrally important to the functioning of the Federal
Government.'' \2\ Its opinions ``may effectively be the final word on
the controlling law.'' \3\ The OLC treats its opinions as a body of law
with precedential value, citing prior opinions as authority for new
opinions. Executive branch officials also treat OLC opinions as binding
and precedential.
OLC opinions are intended to reflect the best possible reading of
the law.\4\ Nonetheless, the non-publication of OLC opinions creates
space for OLC attorneys to lean towards a legal opinion that a given
administration desires--not the legal opinion that best reflects the
law. There are high profile examples of this occurring.\5\ This
includes instances where OLC ultimately withdrew its own legal opinions
when they came to light and at least one instance where OLC secretly
concluded explicit statutory language was unconstitutional and,
therefore, inapplicable to the Executive branch.\6\
OLC opinions are used to make decisions of great consequence,
including to interpret the meaning of laws enacted by Congress, to
resolve interagency disputes, and to forebear from prosecution when an
individual was acting pursuant to guidance from OLC. Even opinions on
prosaic issues can significantly impact people's lives. Yet, there is
no comprehensive list of all final OLC opinions and OLC practices do
not embrace the presumption of disclosure for its opinions.
A number of legal experts, including attorneys who served at the
Office of Legal Counsel, have made public statements that the
preference for secrecy must be transmuted into a policy of
transparency. In 2020, for example, an array of legal experts and
former OLC attorneys endorsed: a strong presumption in favor of
publishing final OLC opinions; disclosing OLC advice deemed classified,
privileged, or sensitive to congressional committees when an agency
relies upon that advice to justify a major policy decision or executive
action; and releasing a public index of its memoranda.\7\ ``OLC
exercises a form of public trust, and because its views of the law's
meaning shape executive action and policy, Congress and the public both
have compelling interests in understanding the legal basis of executive
action.''
A similar statement was released in December 2004 by 19 former
senior DOJ officials in a document entitled Principles to Guide the
Office of Legal Counsel.\8\ One principle was that ``OLC should
publicly disclose its written legal opinions in a timely manner, absent
strong reasons for delay or nondisclosure.'' \9\ They explain that
``disclosure helps to ensure executive branch adherence to the rule of
law and guard against excessive claims of executive authority.'' Public
scrutiny would create an invisible but persistent pressure for the
promulgation of responsible, high quality, objective legal opinions.
The OLC's disclosure policy falls far short of this goal. That
policy is articulated in a 2010 memorandum that creates a presumption
that ``formal'' OLC opinions will be withheld unless an arduous process
is followed, with multiple consultations and veto points, and no end
date.\10\ It requires that the official publication committee
affirmatively decide to publish an opinion. Under pressure, OLC has
published on a website a number of opinions ``that have not been
selected for official publication'' but are released pursuant to
repeated public requests under the Freedom of Information Act.\11\ OLC
has also begun publishing formal legal opinions from the period of
1933-1977.\12\
It is important to note that OLC legal opinions are rendered both
as ``formal opinions'' and ``informal advice.'' Both are binding legal
advice within the Executive branch, follow a formal approval process,
have precedential value within OLC, and are tracked in an OLC database.
The distinction is only the format in which the advice is rendered: a
``formal opinion'' is turned into a carefully formatted, written
document, of which some are published online. ``Informal advice'' may
be rendered as an email or verbally, then reduced to a memo for the
record.
Civil society organizations are using the Freedom of Information
Act to force the OLC to change its publication practices. For example,
taking advantage of a change in the FOIA that established a 25-year
limit for the executive branch to withhold information it classified as
deliberative, a lawsuit brought by the Knight First Amendment Institute
at Columbia University, Francis v. DOJ, resulted in a 2021 settlement
requiring the DOJ to disclose an index of unclassified OLC opinions
written between 1945 and February 15, 1994; to disclose 230 opinions
selected from those indexes; and to disclose an index of all classified
OLC opinions issued between 1974 and 2021 except those classified above
Top Secret.\13\ Parallel litigation, Campaign for Accountability v.
DOJ, sought the affirmative disclosure of all final OLC opinions under
FOIA's reading-room provision; thus far, the District Court for the
District of Columbia has concluded that OLC opinions resolving
interagency disputes are final opinions that fall within FOIA's
proactive disclosure provision, and ordered the DOJ to ``disclose all
formal legal opinions that resolve disputes between executive
agencies.'' \14\ The Project on Government Oversight is in litigation
concerning a request for OLC to publish an index of more recent
opinions.\15\
This litigation illustrates that the Justice Department can
implement proactive disclosure directives that require disclosure of a
large tranche of opinions and an index of all existing opinions.
Unfortunately, litigation is time-consuming, slow, and expensive for
taxpayers and civil society. There is a significant lag between the
legal remedy and when it can be invoked. Moreover, available legal
remedies may not reach all OLC opinions. We believe disclosure of final
OLC opinions should occur on a regular basis, as a matter of policy,
and on government websites.
Appropriators have been patient with the Justice Department,
stating repeatedly that ``the Attorney General is again strongly urged
to direct OLC to publish all legal opinions and other materials that
are appropriate for publication--in particular those materials that are
the subject of repeated requests or that may be of public or historical
interest.'' As the litigation has shown, the DOJ has not met that
directive.
recommendations
We respectfully request that you direct the Office of Legal Counsel
to make its opinions publicly available upon issuance, except in narrow
circumstances, and to fill in the gaps in availability. In addition, we
request direct the Office of Legal Counsel to release an index of all
current OLC opinions and to update that index on a regular basis. To
accomplish this, we recommend adoption of language similar to that
included in House Report 116-455 \16\:
Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinions.-To serve the public
interest, and in keeping with transparency and the precedent of
public reporting of judicial decisions, the Committee asks the
Attorney General to direct OLC to publish on a publicly
accessible website all legal opinions and related materials,
except in those instances where the Attorney General determines
that release would cause a specific identifiable harm to the
National defense or foreign policy interests; information
contained in the opinion relates to the appointment of a
specific individual not confirmed to Federal office; or
information contained in the opinion is specifically exempted
from disclosure by statute (other than sections 552 and 552b of
title 5, United States Code). For final OLC opinions for which
the text is withheld in full or in substantial part, the
Attorney General should provide Congress a written explanation
detailing why the text was withheld.
In addition, the Attorney General should also direct OLC to
publish on a publicly accessible website a complete index of
all final OLC opinions in both human-readable and machine-
readable formats, arranged chronologically, within 90 days of
the enactment of this act, which shall be updated immediately
every time an OLC opinion or a revision to an opinion becomes
final. The index shall include, for each opinion: the full name
of the opinion; the date it was finalized or revised; each
author's name; each recipient's name; a unique identifier
assigned to each final or revised opinion; and whether an
opinion has been withdrawn.
Thank you again for your half-decade long effort to increase
transparency for OLC opinions and accountability for the Department of
Justice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2024 (Public Law 118-24). See Congressional Record,
March 5, 2024, S1403, https://www.congress.gov/118/crec/2024/03/05/170/
39/CREC-2024-03-05.pdf.
\2\ Department of Justice, Memorandum for Attorneys of the Office
re: Best Practices for OLC Advice and Written Opinions, July 16, 2010,
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/legacy/2010/08/26/olc-
legal-advice-opinions.pdf.
\3\ Id.
\4\ See supra, Justice Department Best Practice Memorandum, p.1.
\5\ See, for example, a Statement by Sen. Patrick Leahy at a
February 26, 2010 hearing before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary
entitled The Office of Professional Responsibility Investigation into
the Office of Legal Counsel Memoranda. ``The fundamental question here
is not whether these were shoddy legal memos. They were shoddy legal
memos. Everybody knows that . . . . It failed to cite significant case
law; it twisted the plain meaning of statutes. The legal memoranda were
designed to achieve an end.'' (emphasis added). See also a letter from
select members of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary to Attorney
General Garland urging the Department of Justice to not appeal D.C.
District Judge Amy Berman Jackson's May 3, 2021 decision ordering the
release of an OLC memorandum (May 14, 2021), https://
www.durbin.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2021-05-
14%20Letter%20to%20AG%20Garland.pdf. ``Given the gravity of the
misconduct underlying OLC's March 2019 memo and DOJ's apparent
misrepresentations when attempting to conceal the memo from the public
. . . .''
\6\ ``Report on the President's Surveillance Program,'' by the
Offices of the Inspectors General of the Department of Defense, the
Department of Justice, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National
Security Agency, and the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence (July 10, 2009), at 14, https://oig.justice.gov/reports/
2015/PSP-09-18-15-full.pdf.
\7\ ``The Office of Legal Counsel and the Rule of Law,'' American
Constitution Society (October 2020), https://www.acslaw.org/wp-content/
uploads/2020/10/OLC-ROL-Doc-103020.pdf.
\8\ ``Principles to Guide the Office of Legal Counsel'' (Dec. 21,
2004), https://scholar
ship.law.duke.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=2927&context=faculty_scholarship.
\9\ Id.
\10\ See ``Best Practices for OLC Legal Advice and Written
Opinions,'' Office of Legal Counsel (July 2010), https://
www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/legacy/2010/08/26/olc-legal-
advice-
opinions.pdf.
\11\ See OLC FOIA Electronic Reading Room, https://www.justice.gov/
olc/olc-foia-electronic-
reading-room.
\12\ See Secrecy News (July 2013), https://sgp.fas.org/news/
secrecy/2013/07/073013.html.
\13\ ``The Office of Legal Counsel Discloses List of Classified
Opinions in Important Step for Transparency,'' Justice Security
December 21, 2023, https://www.justsecurity.org/90808/the-office-of-
legal-counsel-discloses-classified-list-of-opinions-in-important-step-
for-transparency/.
\14\ ``Office of Legal Counsel Ordered to Release Many of Its Legal
Opinions,'' Knight First Amendment Center, https://knightcolumbia.org/
content/office-of-legal-counsel-ordered-to-release-many-of-its-legal-
opinions.
\15\ See Project on Government Oversight v. Justice Department, No.
1:20-cv-01415 (D.D.C. filed May 28, 2020), https://
www.courtlistener.com/docket/17201259/project-on-government-oversight-
v-us-department-of-justice/.
\16\ The report language included by the CJS Appropriations
subcommittee in the House of Representatives addressed these issues
with a high level of detail, however, the superseding Joint Explanatory
Statement language on OLC opinions provided a level of discussion to
the DOJ beyond that which is appropriate. See Joint Explanatory Report,
FY2023, Congressional Record S7918 (December 20, 2022), https://
www.congress.gov/117/crec/2022/12/20/168/198/CREC-2022-12-20.pdf; See
Report, Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations
Bill, 2021, H. Rpt. 116-455, p. 59, https://www.congress.gov/116/crpt/
hrpt455/CRPT-116hrpt455.pdf, superseded by Joint Explanatory Statement,
p. 61, https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20201221/BILLS-116RCP68-
JES-DIVISION-B.pdf; see Report, Commerce, Justice, Science and Related
Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2020, H. Rpt. 116-101, pp. 45-46, https:/
/www.congress.gov/116/crpt/hrpt101/CRPT-116hrpt101.pdf, superseded by
Joint Explanatory Statement, p. 30, https://appropriations.house.gov/
sites/democrats.appropriations.house.gov/files/HR%201158%20-
%20Division%20B%20-%20CJS%20SOM%20FY20.pdf.
[This statement was submitted by Daniel Schuman, Executive
Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium
On behalf of the Nation's 35 accredited Tribal Colleges and
Universities (TCUs), which collectively are the American Indian Higher
Education Consortium (AIHEC), we thank you for the opportunity to share
our Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 funding requests. The following is a list of
recommendations including the Department, programs, and funding
requests.
National Science Foundation (NSF)
Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR)
--Tribal Colleges and Universities Program (TCUP): $26,000,000
Tribal Colleges & Universities: Raising and Training the Nation's
Native STEM Workforce.--Currently, 35 accredited TCUs operate more than
90 campuses and sites in 16 States. Three emerging institutions,
located in California (two) and Arizona (one), are on their way to
seeking accreditation. These institutions serve students from over 250
Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and embody a vital component of
Tribal higher education.
Over 80 percent of Indian Country is served by TCUs. Tribal
colleges not only serve students, but they also serve over 160,000
American Indians, Alaska Natives, and other rural residents each year
through a wide variety of academic and community-based programs.
Despite funding challenges, TCUs are responding to the STEM workforce
needs across the country. In fall 2022, 2,244 TCU students were
enrolled in one of 240 STEM programs at TCUs. TCUs have established
programs in high-demand fields: 14 TCUs offer pre-engineering or
engineering programs, five TCUs offer STEM teacher education programs,
and 14 TCUs offer nursing programs. These efforts are preparing
American Indian and Alaska Native nurses, engineers, and science and
math teachers who contribute to a robust pipeline of STEM professionals
in Indian Country. TCUs also train professionals in other high-demand
STEM fields, including agriculture, information technology, and natural
resource management.
Funding cuts of any amount to even one TCU program would force TCUs
to scale back vital programs and services that students rely on to
complete degree and certificate programs needed to succeed in their
chosen career paths. Any reduction in funding will threaten TCU
accreditation status and further stretch overtaxed faculty and staff or
result in cuts to faculty and staff. The following are justifications
for TCU FY 2025 funding requests.
national science foundation (nsf)
Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR).--Tribal Colleges
and Universities Program (TCUP): AIHEC requests the subcommittee to
provide $26,000,000 for the NSF-TCUP grants. The NSF-TCUP, administered
by the NSF Education and Human Resources Directorate, is a competitive
grant program that enables TCUs and Alaska Native Serving/Native
Hawaiian Serving Institutions to develop and expand critically needed
STEM education and research programs relevant to their Indigenous
communities.
Since the program began in 2001, NSF-TCUP has become the primary
Federal program for building STEM programmatic and research capacity at
TCUs. For example, NSF-TCUP funding supported Navajo Technical
University (Crownpoint, NM) in the development of its electrical and
industrial engineering programs, which received accreditation from the
Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) in 2018. This
marks a significant milestone, with NTU leading the way as the first
TCU to receive ABET accreditation.
Community-Based Research
TCUs use NSF-TCUP funding to provide students with valuable
research experience in STEM fields. Through these opportunities,
students conduct place-based research that serves their communities and
can have national and international impacts. At Northwest Indian
College (NWIC) (Bellingham, WA), students are conducting complex
research related to food security focused on salmon, shellfish, and
indigenous sea cucumbers. Through a partnership with Western Washington
University, NWIC graduates continue to pursue their academic and career
goals through WWU's master's degree programs. Aaniiih Nakoda College
(Harlem, MT) faculty and students monitor streams for contaminants and
are investigating West Nile virus vectors; and Sitting Bull College
(SBC) (Fort Yates, ND) has established a water quality monitoring
laboratory serving the Standing Rock Sioux and surrounding communities.
SBC studies show that students participating in the college's research
have retention rates that are double the rate of students who are not
engaged in research.
Aaniiih Nakoda College (ANC)--Tribal Climate Resiliency
The environmental science program at Aaniiih Nakoda College
(Harlem, MT) is based on an effective model of place-based instruction
that combines rigorous coursework, internship placements, and
undergraduate research experiences focused on student learning. ANC
students are using their education and research skills to help combat
the looming climate change crisis and its effects on their Fort Belknap
Indian Community.
For over a decade, ANC environmental studies students have been
studying the 23 miles of river that pass through Tribal lands to
monitor changes in water temperatures, impact on life in the river, and
the quality of local drinking water. Student researchers collect
samples of small bottom-dwelling aquatic insects and freshwater algae.
The specimens are brought back to ANC's laboratory to be sorted,
identified, and analyzed. Next, the specimens are transported six hours
away across the State to a private laboratory in Missoula, Montana for
advanced testing and further analysis. Until additional resources are
available to build out the required research infrastructure, ANC and
other TCUs will continue to work with similar limitations in conducting
vital research necessary to support Tribal communities in preserving
health, environment, and traditional ways of life.
These success stories notwithstanding, American Indian and Alaska
Native students are disadvantaged from pursuing STEM-centered careers
from an early age. American Indian and Alaska Native youth have the
highest high school drop-out rate of any ethnic or racial group in the
country. Those who do pursue postsecondary education often require
developmental classes before taking on a full load of college-level
courses. Placement tests administered at TCUs to first-time entering
students in the academic year 2022-2023 showed that 22 percent required
remedial math. Our data indicates that while 34 percent will
successfully complete the course, many will take more than 1 year to do
so.
Through NSF-TCUP grants, TCUs and Alaska Native Serving/Native
Hawaiian Serving Institutions are actively working to address this
problem by developing strong partnerships with their K-12 feeder
schools to engage students in culturally appropriate STEM education and
outreach programs. Salish Kootenai College, located on the Flathead
Indian Reservation, created a 2-year STEM Academy to prepare junior and
senior high school students for college. Participating high school
students engage in collaborative work with STEM researchers, conduct
culturally relevant research, and take courses to earn college credit.
While a number of TCUs have achieved significant advances and
success, only a portion of the TCUs have been able to benefit from this
transformative program due in part to limited funding. This program was
intended, and named, to be TCU-specific, but NSF allows Alaska Native
Serving/Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions to compete for funding
under NSF-TCU. This allows funds intended to address disparities in TCU
STEM programming to be used by larger state-supported institutions that
are not resource-challenged. AIHEC requests that Alaska Native Serving/
Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions be removed from the NSF-TCU
program and instead, that a separate program be established for these
institutions.
We urge the subcommittee to expand the competitively awarded NSF-
TCUP grants to a minimum of $26,000,000.
conclusion
TCUs provide thousands of American Indian and Alaska Native
students with access to high-quality, culturally appropriate,
postsecondary education opportunities, including STEM-focused programs.
The modest Federal investment in TCUs has paid significant dividends in
employment, education, and economic development. We ask you to renew
your commitment to help move our students and communities toward self-
sufficiency and request your full consideration of our FY 2025
appropriations requests. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of American Institute of Biological Sciences
The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) appreciates
the opportunity to provide testimony in support of fiscal year (FY)
2025 appropriations for the National Science Foundation (NSF). We
encourage Congress to provide NSF with at least $11.9 billion in FY
2025.
AIBS is a scientific association dedicated to promoting informed
decision-making that advances biological research and education for the
benefit of science and society. AIBS works to ensure that the public,
legislators, funders, and the community of biologists have access to
information that can guide informed decision-making.
importance of biological research
Biological research is in our National interest. It advances our
understanding of the living world and provides solutions to important
problems. Increasing our knowledge of how genes, cells, tissues,
organisms, and ecosystems function is vitally important to efforts to
improve the human condition. Food security, medicine and public health,
national security, economic growth, and sound environmental management
are all informed by biological sciences. Notably, biological research
helps to sustain biodiversity and healthy ecosystems that underpin the
livelihoods of communities. The knowledge gained from NSF-funded
biological research also contributes to the development of new research
tools and industries.
Biological research strengthens our economy. Research funding from
NSF powers the expansion of the bioeconomy and has given rise to
successful companies, such as Genentech, Ekso Bionics, and Ginkgo
BioWorks, as well as new industries that provide more robust food crops
or disease detection tools and techniques. The translation of
biological knowledge into formal and informal education programs
fosters the development of the scientifically and technically skilled
workforce needed by employers. Data show that employers continue to
seek workers with scientific and technical skills. Over the past
decade, the U.S. science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM) workforce grew both in number and in the percentage of the total
U.S. workforce--from 22% to 24% between 2011 and 2021. In fact, in
2021, the U.S. STEM workforce comprised 36.8 million people in diverse
occupations that require STEM knowledge and expertise, making up 24% of
the total U.S. workforce.
importance of nsf-funded biological research
The cornerstone of NSF excellence is a competitive, merit-based
review system that underpins the highest standards of excellence.
Through its research programs, NSF invests in the development of new
knowledge and tools that solve the most challenging problems facing
society.
--Combating emerging diseases.--NSF-funded research played a crucial
role in our response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Fundamental
research supported by NSF led to the development of critical
diagnostic tools and medical devices to combat the outbreak.
NSF supported the discovery of bacteria from thermal pools at
Yellowstone National Park that contain thermostable enzymes
that allow for the rapid copying of genetic material through a
process called Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). This process
was integral to manufacturing a widely used clinical test for
determining whether a patient has been infected with the virus
that causes COVID-19.
--Mobilizing big data.--Access to and analysis of vast amounts of
data are driving innovation. NSF enables integration of big
data across scientific disciplines, including applications in
the biological sciences. Digitization of biodiversity and
natural science collections involves multi-disciplinary teams,
which have put nearly 140 million specimens and their
associated data online for use by researchers, educators, and
the public.
--Enabling synthetic biology.--DNA editing has become more advanced
and targeted with techniques such as CRISPR-CAS9, allowing
scientists to rewrite genetic code and redesign biological
systems. NSF funds research on how these techniques can be used
to bio-manufacture new materials, treat diseases, and
accelerate growth of the bioeconomy.
Other examples of federally-funded research that have benefited the
public are chronicled in the AIBS report, ``Biological Innovation:
Benefits of Federal Investments in Biology,'' which is available at
https://www.aibs.org/assets/pages/policy/AIBS-Biological-Innovation-
Report.pdf.
NSF is the primary Federal funding source for biological research
at our Nation's universities and colleges, providing 65 percent of
extramural Federal support for non-medical, fundamental biological and
environmental research at academic institutions.
strengthening biological research infrastructure
NSF is also an important supporter of biological research
infrastructure, such as field stations, natural history museums, and
living stock collections. These place-based research centers enable
studies that take place over long periods of time and variable spatial
scales to provide insights into our Nation's most pressing issues.
Scientific collections are an important component of our Nation's
research infrastructure. Recent reports have highlighted the value of
mobilizing biodiversity specimens and data in spurring new scientific
discoveries that grow our economy, improve our public health and well-
being, and increase our National security. In 2019, the Biodiversity
Collections Network released their report, ``Extending U.S.
Biodiversity Collections to Promote Research and Education,'' outlining
a national agenda that leverages digital data in biodiversity
collections for new uses and calling for building an Extended Specimen
Network.
A 2020 report by the National Academies of Science, Engineering and
Medicine (NASEM), ``Biological Collections: Ensuring Critical Research
and Education for the 21st Century,'' argued that collections are a
critical part of our Nation's science and innovation infrastructure and
a fundamental resource for understanding the natural world. The NASEM
report's recommendations for establishing an action center for
biological collections and requiring specimen management plans for
research proposals generating new specimens, underscore the importance
of biodiversity collections and have been supported by the CHIPS and
Science Act.
Both reports articulate a common vision of the future of biological
collections and define the need to broaden and deepen collections and
associated data to realize the full potential for biodiversity
collections to inform 21st century science. This endeavor requires
robust investments in our Nation's scientific collections, whether they
are owned by a Federal or state agency or are part of an educational
institution, free-standing natural history museum, or another research
center.
While many Federal agencies have a role in supporting the
establishment of an action center for biological collections and the
development of the Extended Specimen Network, NSF has a central role to
play. The agency has been a leader in this space through the Advancing
Digitization of Biodiversity Collections program, and is now supporting
critical advancements through the Infrastructure Capacity for
Biological Research: Biological Collections program.
building the stem workforce
NSF supports recruitment and training of our next generation of
scientists. Support for undergraduate and graduate students is
critically important to our research enterprise. Students learn science
by doing science, and NSF programs engage students in the research
process.
NSF awards reached 1,900 colleges, universities, and other public
and private institutions across the country in FY 2023. Initiatives
such as the Graduate Research Fellowship and the Faculty Early Career
Development program are important parts of our National effort to
attract and retain the next generation of researchers. Since 1952, the
number of students supported by NSF Graduate Research Fellowships has
grown to more than 70,000. In FY 2023, nearly 353,000 people, including
researchers, postdoctoral fellows, trainees, teachers and students,
were supported directly by NSF.
investing in nsf is critical for u.s. global leadership in science
Unfortunately, Federal research and development investments are
shrinking as a share of the U.S. economy. The U.S. is still the largest
performer of research and development globally, but our share of
worldwide scientific activity has declined considerably over the past
two decades, while countries in East and Southeast Asia, especially
China, have been rapidly increasing their investments in science.
According to the National Science Board, the annual rate of increase of
China's R&D, is almost double that of the U.S.
To remain at the global forefront of innovation and to fully
realize the benefits of NSF-supported research, the government must
make bold and sustained investments in NSF. Unpredictability in funding
disrupts research programs, creates uncertainty in the research
community, and stalls the development of the next great idea.
Enacting robust funding increases for NSF will allow for critical
Federal investments in scientific and educational research, as well as
support for the development of the scientific workforce. These
investments will allow NSF to increase the number of new graduate
research fellowships it awards to nurture the human capital needed to
ensure U.S. leadership in scientific innovation. Such increases will
also enable NSF to expand support for important new initiatives, such
as the Biology Integration Institutes program, which supports
collaborative research on frontier questions about life that span
multiple disciplines within and beyond biology.
conclusion
Providing NSF with at least $11.9 billion in FY 2025 is necessary
to undo the harmful effects of the slow growth in research funding in
recent years that has hurt America's research productivity. The
requested funding will grow and sustain the U.S. bioeconomy and enable
NSF to accelerate work on important initiatives at the frontiers of
science and engineering. This investment will enable NSF to support
research in a number of important priority areas such as biotechnology,
artificial intelligence, climate change, and advanced biomanufacturing.
Importantly, these increases will advance research on infectious
disease emergence and transmission, prevent future pandemics, and fill
gaps in our knowledge about the spread and evolution of biological
threats.
We are disappointed that NSF received only $9.1 billion in FY 2024,
an 8% cut compared to its FY 2023 budget. This is the first time that
funding for NSF has decreased in a decade. The reduced allocation in FY
2024 hurts research and undermines the Nation's ability to address
societal challenges. Further, this cut ignores the CHIPS and Science
Act, which demonstrated bipartisan commitment to our Nation's
scientific and technological enterprise and provided an exciting
framework for growing Federal investments in research. We urge Congress
to follow through on its promise by funding NSF as close as possible to
the levels authorized by the law.
Please continue supporting increased investments in our Nation's
scientific capacity by providing NSF with at least $11.9 billion in FY
2024. This request aligns with the FY 2023 authorization for NSF in the
CHIPs and Science Act. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of
this request and for your prior efforts on behalf of science and the
National Science Foundation.
[This statement was submitted by Jyotsna Pandey, Ph.D., Community
Programs Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of The American Physiological Society (APS)
The American Physiological Society (APS) thanks you for your
sustained support of science at the NSF and NASA. In this statement we
offer our recommendations for FY 2025 funding levels for these two
agencies.
--The APS urges you to fund the FY 2025 NSF budget at a level of at
least $16.7 billion to prevent further erosion of program
capacity and meet the goals of the bipartisan CHIPS and Science
Act.
--The APS urges you to increase NASA's life sciences research budgets
and to increase funding for the Human Research Program.
NSF and NASA support scientific research and technology development
programs essential to the future technological excellence and economic
stability of the United States. Federal investment in this research is
critically important because breakthroughs in basic and translational
research provide the foundation for new technologies to fuel our
economy and make it possible for the United States to remain a global
leader in science, technology and engineering. According to the 2024
Science and Engineering Indicators, other countries including China
continue to increase basic research funding at a rate that outpaces the
growth of U.S. investments.\1\
nsf funds outstanding research and education programs
NSF provides support for 24% of all federally funded basic
scientific research, including 65% of the support for non-medical
research in biology. NSF invests in basic biological research across a
broad spectrum of sub-disciplines along with the equipment and other
infrastructure that scientists need for their work. Time and time again
we have seen that knowledge gained through basic biological research
provides the foundation for more applied studies that sustain the
health of animals, humans and ecosystems. Moreover, NSF-funded research
has led to countless new and unexpected discoveries that could not have
been envisioned when the research began. These unforeseen applications
have had enormous impacts on science, health and the world's economy.
94% of the NSF budget directly funds research and education. Most
of this funding is awarded through highly competitive grants, which
support over 300,000 researchers across all 50 States.\2\ The NSF is
the only Federal agency that supports basic research across all
disciplines of science and engineering, and its continued funding is
critical for the development of the next generation of scientists. NSF
has an exemplary record of funding research with far-reaching
potential. Since its inception in 1950, NSF has supported the work of
248 Nobel Laureates, including the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for
the development of CRISPR gene editing technology. While there are now
many promising applications of CRISPR technology, such as rapid
diagnosis of diseases like COVID-19 and the correction of genetic
defects that cause disease, its discovery resulted from curiosity-
driven basic science.
In addition to funding innovative research in labs around the
country, the NSF education programs foster the next generation of
scientists. The APS is proud to have partnered with NSF in programs to
provide training opportunities and career development activities to
enhance the participation of underrepresented minorities in science. We
believe that NSF is uniquely suited to foster science education
programs of the highest quality, and we recommend that Congress
continue to provide Federal funds for science education through the
NSF.
Additional funding is necessary to meet the goals of the CHIPS and
Science Act and strengthen U.S. competitiveness in science and
innovation. Provisions of the CHIPS and Science Act allow NSF to
support the scientific workforce through scholarships, fellowships, and
traineeships, as well as through improving research infrastructure and
combating sexual harassment. The act also supports economic and
technology development initiatives through the NSF's new Technology,
Innovation, and Partnerships Directorate. As of FY24, Congressional
funding for research agencies is $7.5 billion below the levels
authorized by CHIPS and Science.\3\ Recent budget cuts to NSF hinder
the agency's ability to support scientists and threatens the success of
its mission. Therefore, the APS joins the Federation of American
Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) in recommending that the NSF
be funded at a level of at least $16.7 billion in FY 2025.
support for life sciences research should be increased at nasa
NASA sponsors research across a broad range of the basic and
applied life sciences, including gravitational biology, biomedical
research and the Human Research Program (HRP). The gravitational
biology and biomedical research programs explore fundamental scientific
questions through research carried out both on Earth and aboard the
International Space Station, which provides an environment for the
conduct of experiments in space. NASA's HRP conducts focused research
and develops countermeasures with the goal of enabling safe and
productive human space exploration. The program funds more than 300
research grants that go to academic researchers in more than 30 States
around the country.
During prolonged space flight, the physiological changes that occur
due to weightlessness, increased exposure to radiation, confined living
quarters, and alterations in eating and sleeping patterns can lead to
debilitating conditions and reduced ability to perform tasks.
Scientists are actively engaged in research that explores the
physiological basis of these problems with the goal of contributing to
the identification of therapeutic targets and development of novel
countermeasures. One of the most well-known studies of these
physiological changes is the NASA Twin Study which compared identical
twins and fellow astronauts Mark and Scott Kelly to see what changes
occurred following Scott Kelly's 1 year mission aboard the
International Space Station.\4\ The knowledge gained from this research
is not only relevant to humans traveling in space, but is also directly
applicable to human health on Earth. For example, some of the muscle
and bone changes observed in astronauts after prolonged space flight
are similar to those seen in patients confined to bed rest during
periods of critical illness as well as during the process of aging.
NASA is the only agency whose mission addresses the biomedical
challenges of human space exploration. Over the past several years, the
amount of money available for conducting this kind of research at NASA
has dwindled. In the past, appropriations legislation specified funding
levels for biomedical research and gravitational biology, but ongoing
internal reorganizations at NASA have made it difficult to understand
how much money is being spent on these programs from year to year. The
APS recommends that funding streams for these important fundamental
research programs be clearly identified and tracked within the NASA
budget. The APS also recommends restoration of cuts to peer-reviewed
life sciences research to allow NASA-funded scientists to conduct
research that will be critical in not only supporting the success of
future long-range manned space exploration but also leading to
innovative discoveries that can be applied to Earth-based medicine. As
highlighted above, investment in the basic sciences is critical to our
Nation's technological and economic future. This innovative engine of
research fuels our world leadership and our economy. The APS urges you
to make every effort to provide these agencies with increased funding
for FY 2025.
The APS is a nonprofit devoted to fostering education,
scientific research and dissemination of information in the
physiological sciences. The Society was founded in 1887 with 28
members and now has over 8,500 members, most of whom hold
doctoral degrees in physiology, medicine and/or other health
professions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20243/key-takeaways.
\2\ https://www.nsf.gov/news/factsheets/
Factsheet_By%20the%20Numbers_05_21_V02.pdf.
\3\ https://fas.org/publication/fy24-chips-short-7-billion/.
\4\ https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/nasa-twins-study-confirms-
preliminary-findings/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of American Psychological Association Services, Inc.
The American Psychological Association Services, Inc. (APA
Services) is the companion organization of the American Psychological
Association (APA), which is the Nation's largest scientific and
professional nonprofit organization representing the discipline and
profession of psychology, as well as over 157,000 members and
affiliates who are clinicians, researchers, educators, consultants, and
students in psychological science. APA Services urges Congress to
provide the following funding levels for programs within the National
Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Census
Bureau, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
in FY2025.
national science foundation (nsf)
APA Services joins the scientific community urging Congress to
provide at least an $11.9 billion appropriation for the National
Science Foundation (NSF) in FY2025. As other nations continue to make
dramatic increases in their investments in science, robust funding for
NSF in FY2025 can help the United States maintain its global leadership
and competitiveness in science and engineering. Increased support for
NSF will also provide funding for the more than $2 billion in high-
quality proposals submitted to NSF each year that cannot be funded.
APA Services urges continued investments in core psychological
science research supported by the Social, Behavioral, and Economic
Sciences (SBE) Directorate at NSF. NSF is the only Federal agency whose
primary mission is to support basic non biomedical research and
education across all fields of science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics. Although psychological science receives funding from
various directorates within NSF, most core psychological research is
supported by the Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE)
Directorate. SBE supports research that focuses on variables that
influence human behavior across all ages, interactions among
individuals and groups, and the development of social and economic
systems. While SBE funding accounts for more than 60% of the Federal
funding for basic social and behavioral science research at academic
institutions, SBE has historically received the lowest funding level of
the seven NSF Directorates. In addition to the core behavioral research
in cognitive neuroscience, human cognition and perception, learning and
development, and social psychology, SBE continues to invest substantial
funds to participate in special initiatives and cross-directorate
programs that address vital national priorities, including emerging
technologies in society.
In addition to the SBE Directorate, APA Services encourages
continued support for the Biological Science Directorate (BIO) and
Computer Science and Information Systems Engineering Directorate
(CISE), both of which provide important support for psychological
research at NSF. BIO provides support for psychologists who study the
principles and mechanisms that govern life from the level of the genome
and cell to the whole family, individual, or species. The work of CISE
is of particular importance given the emphasis from Congress and the
Administration on emerging technologies and artificial intelligence
(AI). Knowledge derived from psychological science is essential to the
work in many of the CISE divisions, as human behavior plays a key role
in the design and implementation of new technologies. Human factors
psychology is relevant for the development and advancement of automated
systems in autonomous vehicles, essential for the creation of fair,
trustworthy, and explainable AI, and necessary for research on the
future of work.
APA Services urges the Committee to help curb the potential loss of
research talent likely to occur if early-career researchers are forced
from scientific pathways due to economic or social circumstances which
attenuate career progression and threaten their professional futures.
While scientists across career stages have been upended by this
monumental shift, early-career scientists, such as graduate students,
postdoctoral fellows, and junior faculty, are particularly vulnerable.
Early-career scientists are often just beginning to establish research
independence and the negative impacts of the pandemic may be
significant and long-lasting. Destabilizing fluctuations in research
productivity, faculty positions in academia, and funding opportunities
will impact early-career scientists in the immediate and late phases of
their careers.
APA Services applauds NSF's investments in climate science and
sustainability research. NSF has developed crucial funding mechanisms
for climate and clean energy-related research over the past several
years that must continue. An increased focus must also be placed on the
role of behavioral and mental health research in efforts to mitigate
and adapt to climate change. NSF's broad portfolio of research related
to climate science and clean energy includes research into the social,
behavioral, and economic research on human responses to climate change.
Nearly all subject areas and approaches within psychology (including
environmental, cognitive, social, community, developmental,
educational, school, counseling, clinical, neuroscientific, health,
psychodynamic, humanistic, industrial and organizational, human
factors, and other subfields) offer concepts, methods, and tools that
can be applied or elaborated to address climate change. Psychology, and
the mental health workforce, will play an essential role in adaptation
efforts in the face of increasingly prevalent impacts of climate
change. NSF's efforts to understand the role of mental health in
adaptation efforts is another essential part of efforts the Federal
Government is taking to avert the most disastrous outcomes.
department of justice (doj)
APA Services is committed to reforming policing and the criminal
justice system, supporting those with mental illness within the system,
meeting the needs of victims of violence, and ensuring that high-value
research is funded, and the best scientific evidence is used to improve
programs and policies.
Within OJP, APA urges the Committee to provide at least $42.5
million for the Bureau of Justice Statistics; at least $35.4 million
for the National Institute of Justice (including at least $1 million in
dedicated funding for gun violence research); $125 million for the
Second Chance Act including $5 million to support Children of
Incarcerated Parents demonstration grants; $35 million for Justice
Reinvestment; $12.5 million for Delinquency Prevention Program. APA
Services recommends: $443 million for the Comprehensive Addiction and
Recovery Act related activities including $95 million for Drug Courts;
$35 million for Veterans Treatment Courts; $45 million for Residential
Substance Abuse Treatment; and $190 million for the Comprehensive
Opioid Abuse Program. APA Services supports $10 million for Crisis
Stabilization and Community Re-entry Grant Program; $82 million for
STOP School Violence Act; $45 million for Mentally Ill Offender
Treatment and Crime Reduction Act; and $45 million for the Justice
Mental Health Collaboration Program. Within BOP, APA Services
recommends $409.4 million for the First Step Act. APA Services supports
$10 million for grants to support Training to Improve Police-Based
Responses to the People with Mental Illness.
Though rates of domestic abuse have declined significantly since
the enactment of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), exposure to
violence remains common, with one in three women in the U.S.
experiencing rape, physical violence, or stalking at some point in
their lifetime. Flat funding for the Office on Violence Against Women
(OVW) would imperil progress made over the last three decades,
especially now that the risks are even more severe. The stay-at home
orders necessary for public safety during the COVID-19 pandemic
seriously increased the risk of intimate partner violence, domestic
violence, and child maltreatment. When Congress thinks about VAWA,
transgender and gender non-conforming people need to be considered.
According to the Human Rights Campaign, at least 38 transgender and
gender non-conforming people were killed in 2022, the overwhelming
majority of whom were Black and Latinx transgender women. These figures
are suspected to be incomplete because too often these cases go
unreported--or misreported. The National Center for Transgender
Equality reports that the toxic anti-trans rhetoric and efforts to
weaponize disinformation about trans people have contributed to a
deeply unsafe environment for trans people and their families.
According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration, research has shown that traumatic experiences are
associated with both behavioral health and chronic physical health
conditions, especially those traumatic events that occur during
childhood. Substance use, mental health conditions, and other risky
behaviors have been linked with traumatic experiences. Crime victims
may experience trauma, and APA Services strongly recommends fully
funding the Victims of Crime Act Fund to ensure adequate resources for
direct victim services.
APA Services urges the Committee to increase FY2025 appropriations
for OVW and prioritize the prevention of violence across the lifespan-
including domestic and sexual violence, dating violence, and stalking,
as well as children's exposure to family violence. Of the FY2025 funds
made available to the OVW, APA Services specifically requests: $255
million for Services, Training, Officers Prosecutors (STOP) Grants; $12
million for Education and Training to End Violence Against Women with
Disabilities; $9 million for the Enhanced Training and Services to End
Violence Against and Abuse of Women in Later Life Program (Abuse in
Later Life Program); $25 million for grants to assist Tribal
governments in exercising special domestic violence criminal
jurisdiction; $52.5 million for Rural Domestic Violence and Child Abuse
Enforcement; $16 million for the Consolidated Youth Oriented Program;
and $25 million for grants to reduce violent crimes against women on
campus. These programs are crucial in preventing further violence,
helping victims find safety and support, and starting them on the path
towards recovery.
APA Services urges the Committee to support FY2025 funding for the
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) to support
federal, State, and local activities as well as fully funding the
programs and initiatives included in the recently enacted Law
Enforcement De-Escalation Training Act of 2022. This includes $20
million for Training on Racial Profiling and De-escalation, and Duty to
Intervene Program. APA Services requests at least $45 million for
Community Policing Development/Training and Technical Assistance and at
least $15 million for the Training to Improve Police-based Responses to
the People with Mental Illness program. To address the current crisis
in law enforcement suicide and PTSD, APA Services strongly urges the
committee to increase funding for the Law Enforcement Mental Health and
Wellness Program to at least $15 million.
census bureau
APA Services urges the Committee to provide $2 billion in funding
for the Census Bureau in FY2025, which represents a $430 million
increase above the President's request, and a $620 million increase
from the agency's FY2024 enacted level. The Administration's request
supports important initiatives, but it does not include sufficient
additional funding to fully support priorities identified by
stakeholders. Funding above the Administration's request is necessary
not only to implement initiatives outlined in the Census Bureau's
proposed FY2025 budget request, but also to support other priorities
identified by stakeholders-especially 2030 Census preparations and the
ACS.
national institute of standards and technology
APA Services strongly supports the $10 million allocated to the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish a
U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute. Helping ensure that
technology shapes the future for the better requires understanding the
psychology of human-technology interaction. An important area of
psychological science involves the development, use, and impact of
artificial intelligence. We encourage Congress and NIST to continue to
invest in this area of research and to ensure that psychological
scientists continue to be consulted, referenced, and included in task
forces seeking to understand more about this new set of technologies.
[This statement was submitted by Katherine B. McGuire, Chief
Advocacy Officer.]
______
Prepared Statement of American Rivers
My name is Tom Kiernan, I am the President and CEO of American
Rivers. Since 1973, American Rivers has protected wild rivers, restored
damaged rivers, and conserved clean water for people and nature. With
headquarters in Washington, D.C. and 355,000 supporters, members, and
volunteers across the country, we are the most trusted and influential
river conservation organization in the United States, delivering
solutions for a better future. On behalf of American Rivers, I would
like to thank Chair Jeanne Shaheen, Ranking Member Jerry Moran, and
Members of the subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies for your leadership to support healthy rivers and fisheries,
advancing research and development, improving coastal resilience
infrastructure, and protecting communities from climate change.
American Rivers is pleased to submit our full requests (see the
full River Budget here and at https://www.americanrivers.org/wp-
content/uploads/2024/02/FY25-River-Budget-Combined-with-Letter-and-
Programs-Sheet-01.30.2024.pdf) as part of the written testimony for the
record. We address the funding and programmatic needs for Federal
agencies' programs to make sure they are effective and efficient.
Today, rivers across the country face daunting challenges on the road
to recovery. From algal blooms in the Great Lakes to water scarcity in
the Southwest, we must use every tool at our disposal to ensure heathy
rivers have a fighting chance to bounce back. Our critical water
supplies are at risk if we fail to fund these key programs that enhance
our ability to improve river health and grow our economy. These topline
figures are backed by our River Budget Partners, a partner network of
156 partner organizations including utility and state agency
associations, fishing groups, small businesses, rural communities,
public health organizations, environmental justice leaders, and more.
We respectfully request the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Program FY25 Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOAA......................... Community Based $100,000,000
Restoration
Program.
NOAA......................... National Oceans 40,000,000
and Coastal
Security Fund.
NOAA......................... Pacific Salmon 80,000,000
Recovery Fund.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*For more detail, see https://americanrivers.app.box.com/s/
bckpye51yq8zfbf8law2sa6zd6euc9bg.
support more on-the-ground projects to aid pacific salmon recovery
The iconic coasts and rivers of the Pacific Northwest are the
backbone of the region's economy and cultural heritage. Investments
from NOAA are critical to upholding Tribal treaty rights, pulling
federally listed species like pacific salmon and steelhead back from
the brink of extinction, and safeguarding human wellbeing in our
communities in the face of climate change. The returns on these
investments are significant--every $1 million spent on watershed
restoration results in about 17 new or sustained jobs, and as much as
$2.5 million in total economic activity across a wide variety of
sectors, including food, hospitality, sustainable forestry, shellfish
aquaculture, the maritime industry, international trade, tourism, and
oil transportation safety and spill prevention. We urge the committee
to fund the Pacific Salmon Recovery Fund at $80M because current
funding is still woefully insufficient to recover salmon. The total
need across the Pacific Northwest is $4.7 billion.
In addition, we would like to further support for NOAA programs
including:
--$43.5 million for the Department of Commerce (through NOAA-Salmon
Management Activities) to fully implement the terms of the
Pacific Salmon Treaty. This modest increase in funding (the
same amount we requested last year) is critical to meeting the
provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA),
upholding Tribal fishing rights, and maintaining sustainable
commercial and recreational fisheries.
--$91 million for the Pacific Salmon line item within NOAA's
Protected Resources Science and Management program. We
specifically recommend that $7 million of that amount be
directed to implementing federally approved Hatchery and
Genetic Management Plans (HGMP) and improve the timeliness and
overall efficiency of the approval process. Separately, we also
recommend that $7 million of the overall amount be directed
towards accelerating habitat consultations in NOAA's West Coast
Region, including backfilling open positions to conduct that
work.
Progress in recovering salmon is being made in some parts of the
Pacific Northwest region, but far too many fish species are dangerously
close to extinction. Seven species of Pacific salmon, steelhead, and
bull trout live in Washington State. This funding has not met the need
of what communities need on the ground to implement habitat-related
projects and programs to aid salmon recovery. Since 2005 in Washington
State, more than 4,000 barriers have been repaired, retrofitted, and/or
removed to open nearly 5,000 miles of habitat for fish. This
improvement allows wider river openings and stream flows which salmon
and steelhead need. Yet, there are at least 18,000 barriers still
partially or fully blocking fish passage in the state. More support is
needed to overcome the salmon struggles and recent declines due to
climate change, habitat degradation, poor water quality, fish passage
barriers, impacts of hydropower and dams, and scarcity of food.
enhance coastal resilience and infrastructure
In Georgia and Virginia and many parts of our Nation's coast, we
are already experiencing sea-level rise which means States and local
governments have to make resiliency part of their planning process to
mitigate the impacts of flooding and climate change. Since the
establishment of NOAA's National Coastal Resilience Fund and the
National Ocean and Coastal Security Fund, more than 300 projects
focused on restoring, increasing, and strengthening natural
infrastructure have been funded to help coastal communities manage
storm and flooding impacts as well as enhance their ability to protect
fish and wildlife habitat.
We urge the committee to provide the National Ocean and Coastal
Security Fund with the opportunity to scale coastal and community
resiliency projects by specifying percentages for how National Oceans
and Coastal Security Fund should be used for a block grant program and
a national competitive grant program, and detail specific eligible uses
for the Fund's grant programs. At a minimum, the committee must fund
this program at $40M in FY25 for communities to be ``storm ready'' and
allowing them to efficiently adapt to changing economic, social, and
environmental conditions and effectively respond to existing and
emerging threats to infrastructure, fisheries, and national security.
direct cost recovery funds back to noaa to support its hydropower
programs and improve fish migration initiatives
Improving fish passage at hydropower sites can prevent further
declines in migratory fish populations and support sustainable
commercial, Tribal, and recreational fisheries. Fish such as the
Pacific and Atlantic salmon and other migratory species, such as shad,
river herring, American eel, lamprey, and sturgeon need access to both
the ocean and freshwater habitat to complete their life cycles. But
barriers like hydropower dams block migration patterns and access which
lead to steep population declines and potential loss of species. NOAA
Fisheries Hydropower Program is a vital program that partners rely on
to identify and implement solutions to reopen rivers for migratory fish
while preserving hydropower generation in smart and sustainable way.
With more than 1,600 hydropower projects regulated by the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, NOAA needs more funding for staffing and
science to upgrade and retrofit our Nation's hydropower infrastructure.
Over the next 10 years, we will see a rise in hydropower
relicensing with over 440 scheduled to start the licensing process by
2035. We request the committee support reporting language that makes
cost recovery for agencies at NOAA Fisheries Hydropower Program more
explicit and efficient so they can continue providing technical
assistance, staffing, and capacity for the relicensing process that are
in the pipeline. Specifically, we ask the committee to support language
on the disposition of charges arising from licenses. Currently, during
the relicensing process charges are returned to the U.S. Treasury
instead of to NOAA Fisheries Hydropower Program which could then use
the funds dedicated for hydropower to support workloads for upcoming
relicenses. We must do more to empower NOAA Fisheries Hydropower
Program to keep their funding for future projects, so they can better
prepare and provide the much-needed expertise for the wave of
relicenses that are incoming. Direct cost recovery would be a major
benefit to the hydropower programs, however additional funding is
likely necessary for the programs to work with the full suite of
hydropower projects to conserve and restore the migratory fish affected
by them.
conclusion
Thank you for your consideration of these funding requests, and for
your leadership on appropriations. We look forward to working with you
to support these opportunities to restore and protect rivers across
America. Please contact Jaime D. Sigaran, Associate Director, Policy
and Government Relations ([email protected]) with any
questions.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society for Microbiology
The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) urges Congress to
increase funding for the National Science Foundation (NSF) to $11.9
billion in fiscal year (FY) 2025. This is consistent with the Coalition
for National Science Funding, of which ASM is a member. The Biden
Administration's FY25 Budget Request proposed $8.045 billion for
Research and Related Activities within NSF. ASM requests that Congress
allocates at least $8.045 billion for Research and Related Activities
at NSF for FY25. We also request Congress support funding of at least
$863 million for the Directorate for Biological Sciences, in line with
the FY25 PBR. We also request full funding for the White House Office
of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
ASM appreciates the opportunity to submit outside witness testimony
for the Fiscal Year 2025 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related
Agencies appropriations bill. Established in 1899, ASM is the home for
microbial scientists from around the globe to connect, learn, discover,
and prepare for the future. ASM is one of the oldest and largest single
life science societies with 36,000 members in the U.S. and around the
world, whose mission is to promote and advance the microbial sciences.
We connect with millions of experts and harness their science to serve
humanity to solve the world's most pressing problems. This includes
utilizing microbes to create goods and services that contribute to
agriculture, health, security, manufacturing, and resilience to climate
change, including natural and anthropogenic disaster prevention and
mitigation.
supporting the microbial sciences at nsf
The National Science Foundation is a key supporter of microbiology
research, including foundational research supporting ecosystems and
biodiversity, mapping the microbiome, and discovering emerging
pathogens. NSF-funded researchers across the country are working to
improve lives through research on human and animal health, agriculture,
energy and the environment, and biothreats. Fundamental research
supported by NSF will enable new discoveries and solutions using
biotechnology to promote the bioeconomy, forecasting and mitigating the
impacts of global warming on essential ecosystem services, and
predicting and preventing the emergence and spread of infectious
diseases. Basic research funded by NSF advances our understanding of
70% of emerging human pathogens that have non-human origins, which pose
serious threats to human health and global health security. To continue
to achieve its goals, it is critical that the FY2025 appropriations
bill funds NSF at $11.9 billion.
The Directorate for Biological Sciences at NSF supports fundamental
research and infrastructure that promotes a unified understanding of
all forms of life and at all scales. It is crucial for Congress to
support all divisions within the Directorate for Biological Sciences,
including the Division of Integrative Organismal Systems (IOS) and the
Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences (MCB). The IOS supports
fundamental research and training on phenotypic characteristics of
diverse organisms, prioritizing an understanding of the processes that
build and maintain diverse organisms. The Developmental Systems program
within IOS supports research on the interactions of organisms including
plant, fungal, and microbial development. An increased understanding of
the developmental processes of microbes in plants is vital to building
resilience to a changing climate.
The MCB supports research to uncover the basic principles of
cellular function at the molecular level, including how information
content in cells is maintained and transmitted to the next generation
and guides expression of cellular characteristics. As well as how
energy is absorbed, transformed, and flows through biological systems.
The Cellular Dynamics and Function program within MCB supports research
aimed at mechanistic understanding of the structure, function, and
evolution of cellular and subcellular systems. This includes research
into the fundamental biology of microbes. Microorganisms, including
bacteria, archaea, viruses, fungi, prions, protozoa and algae play
important roles in everything from human growth and development to food
production and climate change. An increased understanding of the
characteristics of organisms through the IOS and MCB has a profound
positive impact on the key emerging industry of biotechnology. This
includes harnessing the microbiome to foster human, animal, and
planetary health.
NSF funding is also critical to ensure our scientific workforce is
prepared to lead the world in the emerging technologies that are key to
our health, safety, and security. ASM was pleased to see the bi-
partisan CHIPS and Science Act authorized $15.7 billion for the NSF in
FY2024 and helps to address various STEM initiatives including
Combating Sexual Harassment in Science Act, the Bioeconomy Research and
Development Act, the Department of Energy Science for the Future Act,
and the NSF for the Future Act. The legislation also directs Federal
agencies to support research in core areas of interest identified in
ASM's policy principles, including:
--Bioenergy, bioproducts and new energy technologies.
--Research to combat the climate crisis.
--Foundational functional systems biology research.
--Microbiome and microbial communities.
--The development of a national genomic sequencing strategy.
The CHIPS and Science Act also addresses growing workforce gaps in
emerging technology areas by expanding its efforts in STEM education
and broadening participation programs and advancing many priorities in
foundational research and infrastructure programs. Prior to the
enactment of the CHIPS and Science Act, NSF was unable to fund more
than $2 billion worth of research proposals rated ``very good or
higher'' each fiscal year. It is imperative that the rest of NSF see
sustainable growth. New efforts can only be successful when built on a
strong foundational research enterprise that supports research,
education, and infrastructure to sustain our science and technology
ecosystem.
Federal research agencies like NSF must focus on supporting
programs to better recruit, develop, and sustain the microbial sciences
research workforce. Congress has a role to play by providing the
funding necessary to support training and early-career opportunities at
NSF. To alleviate shocks in the microbiology workforce that is so
critically needed, as the next public health scare could be right
around the corner, we must support all individuals who wish to enter
the microbial sciences workforce.
support ostp's role in advancing the microbial sciences
ASM supports full funding for the White House Office of Science and
Technology Policy to strengthen and advance the American science and
technology enterprise. This includes working with Federal departments
and agencies and with Congress to create unified strategies and
effective programs to advance science and technology. Formerly, the
Microbiome Interagency Working Group (MIWG) within OSTP provided
overall guidance and direction for microbiome research across the
Federal Government agencies. The Interagency Strategic Plan for
Microbiome Research FY2018-2022, developed by the Microbiome
Interagency Working Group, provided recommendations for improving
coordination of microbiome research among Federal agencies and between
agencies and non-Federal domestic and international microbiome research
efforts. The 5-year Strategic Plan coordinated microbiome research
activities across 21 government agencies, describing the interagency
objectives, structure and operating principles, and research focus
areas.
ASM is grateful for the inclusion of language in the final FY24
Commerce Justice, Science, and Related Agencies report regarding the
continuation of the MIWG and an updated strategic plan. With the
requisite Federal support, we can further scientific understanding of
the microbiome and its functions and lead to the diverse application of
discovery in biomedical, agricultural, built environment, atmospheric
sciences, and national defense. Microbiome research aims to advance
understanding of microbial communities and how they interact with the
world around us. Today it is understood that microbial communities
exist on, in, and around people, plants, animals, and the environment
and have symbiotic relationships that support immunity and protect
against disease.
Initiatives of the OSTP impact microbiology overall, including
implementation of oversight of Dual Use Research of Concern and
Pathogens with Enhanced Pandemic Potential. ASM recognizes the
importance of cutting-edge research on human, animal, and plant
microbes. As well as our responsibility as scientists to minimize the
risks associated with our experiments, ensure the safety of the
facilities in which they take place and the confidence of the public in
the scientific community. The guidance expands the scope of research
subject to enhanced oversight and outlines a risk-based approach to
DURC/PEPP policy; without adequate funding for OSTP, implementation of
the guidance is at risk.
OSTP is also tasked with reports and implementation of the
bioeconomy Executive Order to advance biotechnology and
biomanufacturing towards innovative solutions in health, climate
change, energy, food security, agriculture, supply chain resilience,
and national and economic security. In late March, the OSTP announced
the creation of the National Bioeconomy Board to work with partners
across the public and private sectors to advance societal well-being,
national security, sustainability, economic productivity, and
competitiveness through biotechnology and biomanufacturing. Microbes
serve as the ultimate organisms for research that generate breakthrough
technologies from recombinant DNA technology, CRISPR gene editing, and
more. ASM asks Congress to fully fund OSTP to support their ongoing
work in advancing the bioeconomy and harnessing the role of microbes in
growing American biotechnology and biomanufacturing.
conclusion
Fully funding research within the Commerce, Justice, Science and
Related Agencies appropriations bill drives discovery, spurs
innovation, and improves the health of animals, humans, the
environment, and the economy. This includes supporting research at the
National Science Foundation to advance the understanding of microbes.
ASM asks Congress to fund the National Science Foundation at $11.9
billion for FY25. ASM also requests full funding for the White House
Office of Science and Technology Policy to advance the microbial
sciences to strengthen the United States science and technology
enterprise.
[This statement was submitted by Amalia Corby, Director of Federal
Affairs.]
______
Prepared Statement of American Society of Agronomy
Dear Chairman Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran:
The American Society of Agronomy (ASA), Crop Science Society of
America (CSSA), and Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) represent
more than 8,000 scientists and students, 13,500 Certified Crop Advisers
(CCA), and more than 700 Certified Professional Soil Scientist (CPSS).
We are the largest coalition of scientists and professionals dedicated
to the agronomic, crop, and soil science disciplines in the United
States.
In the coming decades, our agricultural system must sustainably
produce food and fuel for a rapidly growing global population. The
Nation's economic prosperity and security depend on our dedication to
developing innovative, science-based solutions to address the
challenges facing our food system. We appreciate the appropriations the
National Science Foundation (NSF) received in fiscal year (FY) 2023.
Yet, as our Nation's producers face increasing extreme weather, limited
resources, and market uncertainty, NSF's programs become even more
important providers of the science they need to stay in business. In
order to leverage NSF's core programs, cross-directorate initiatives,
and support for the future STEM workforce, increased investments are
required.
We support $11.9 billion for the National Science Foundation for
the fiscal year 2025. Recognizing the need for a renewed focus on
competitiveness and national security, Congress passed the historic
CHIPS and Science Act with bipartisan support. The legislation
authorizes major growth for NSF's new Technology, Innovation, and
Partnerships (TIP) Directorate, expanded workforce programs, and
emerging priorities across the foundation. Congress must now deliver
funding for NSF to meet the ambitious goals that the law envisions.
Proposed as a new mechanism for advancing use-inspired and
translational research, the TIP Directorate was created to address our
most pressing national challenges from climate change to national
security to STEM workforce development. However, NSF requires
substantial new resources to meet the growing demand for technology
development and expanding the geography of innovation. TIP has the
potential to transform regional economies around critical technology
areas, but it needs major growth to meet demonstrated demand.
Within the TIP Directorate, the Convergence Accelerator program
puts systems thinking into research practice. Agriculture researchers
are uniquely aware of the multiple disciplines, technologies, and
expertise necessary to produce realistic and useful information for
producers working in large, multi-faceted outdoor systems. From water
management to precision agriculture, this program provides support for
exactly the kind of systems-level research successful agriculture
requires.
NSF's core programs, especially the Biology and Geoscience
Directorates, provide the critical research foundation upon which
innovations of the future are built. Robust support for scientific
disciplines, such as biology, plant science, chemistry, and soil
science will empower our Nation's farmers, ranchers, and landowners to
make informed decisions grounded in science-based knowledge and support
technologies and innovations of the future to meet productivity and
sustainability goals.
Science is essential. A strong commitment to federally funded
scientific research will boost the Nation's capacity for innovation,
productivity, and economic prosperity.
Thank you for your consideration. For additional information or to
learn more about ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, please contact Luther Smith,
[email protected].
Sincerely,
Jim Cudahy, CEO
______
Prepared Statement of American Society of Plant Biologists
On behalf of the American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB), I
submit this testimony for the official record to support $11.9 billion
for the National Science Foundation (NSF) for fiscal year (FY) 2025.
ASPB recognizes the difficult fiscal environment our Nation faces, but
we believe that sustained investments in scientific research are a
critical step toward economic recovery and continued global competitive
innovation for our Nation. ASPB would also like to thank the
subcommittee for its consideration of this testimony and for its strong
support for the research missions of NSF.
ASPB, founded in 1924 as the American Society of Plant
Physiologists, was established to promote the growth and development of
plant biology, to encourage and publish research in plant biology, and
to promote the interests and professional advancement of plant
scientists in general. ASPB members educate, mentor, advise, and
nurture future generations of plant biologists; they work to increase
the understanding of plant biology, as well as science in general, in
K-16 schools and among the general public; they advocate in support of
plant biology research; they work to convey the relevance and
importance of plant biology; and they provide expertise in policy
decisions world-wide.
food, fuel, environment, and health: plant biology research and
america's future
Plant biology research is at the foundation of a robust American
bioeconomy. Plant science has become the backbone of agricultural
innovation, and a thriving agricultural sector is a cornerstone for
America's economic success. Agriculture and related industries comprise
6 percent of the U.S. GDP, contributing nearly $1.530 trillion and 19.6
million jobs the economy.\1\ In fact, despite persistent U.S. trade
deficits, there has been a surplus in agricultural trade since 1960.
Steady and dramatic increases in yield have made these surpluses
possible, even in the face of sustained global population growth. These
increases were not due to increasing areas of farmland. On the
contrary, they are directly tied to improvements in crop seeds and
agricultural innovations that rely on sustained research in crop
science and plant biology. For these yields to continue, critical
investments are needed in basic biological sciences, as well as the
translational science that brings the fruits of basic science to real-
world applications.
Plant biology is at the nexus of numerous scientific breakthroughs.
The NSF has supported high throughput experimental approaches that
facilitate extraordinary syntheses of information, and plant biologists
are using computer science and bioinformatics to make tremendous
strides in our understanding of complex biological systems, ranging
from single cells to entire ecosystems. Ultimately, understanding how
plants function will enable biotechnological and synthetic biology
approaches toward better and more productive crops, new sources of
fuel, and the development of novel medicines to treat diseases like
cancer.
Despite the significant positive impact plants have on our Nation's
economy and in addressing some of our most urgent challenges, including
mitigating the climate crisis and maintaining food and energy security,
Federal investments in fundamental plant biology research are modest.
Nevertheless, scientists have maximized and leveraged this funding to
discover many of the basic functions and mechanisms of plants,
providing a foundation for vital advances in practical applications in
agriculture, health, energy, and the environment.
robust funding for the national science foundation
ASPB encourages strong support for the Directorate of Biological
Sciences (BIO) and proportional funding increases across all the
scientific disciplines NSF supports. As scientific research becomes
increasingly interdisciplinary, a diverse research portfolio at NSF is
needed to maintain transformational research and innovation. NSF
funding for plant biology specifically enables the scientific community
to address cross-cutting fundamental and translational research
questions that could ultimately solve grand challenges related to a
sustainable food supply, energy security, and improved health and
nutrition.
NSF BIO is a critical source of funding for scientific research,
providing most of the Federal support for non-medical, basic life
sciences research at U.S. academic institutions and beyond. BIO
supports research ranging from the molecular to the biosphere levels.
These investments have significant payoffs, both in terms of the
knowledge directly generated and in deepening collaborations and
fostering innovation among communities of scientists.
BIO's Plant Genome Research Program (PGRP) is an excellent example
of a high impact program that has laid a strong scientific research
foundation for understanding plant genomics as it relates to energy
(biofuels), health (nutrition and functional foods), agriculture
(impact of changing climates on agronomic ecosystems), and the
environment (plants' roles as primary producers in ecosystems). ASPB
asks that the PGRP be funded at the highest possible level and have
sustained funding growth to address 21st century challenges.
Without significant increases in support for BIO and NSF, promising
fundamental research discoveries will be delayed and vital
collaborations at the leading edges of scientific disciplines will be
postponed, thus limiting our Nation's ability to respond to the
pressing scientific problems that exist today and the new challenges on
the horizon. Addressing these scientific priorities also helps improve
the competitive position of the U.S. on the global stage. Considering
the increased investiture in agricultural research in China, Brazil,
India, the EU, and other major trade partners, the U.S. cannot afford
to cede its premier position in the basic research that underpins
advances in our agricultural sector.
ASPB supports the new Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and
Partnerships (TIP) and its goal to advance science and engineering
research and innovation. This Directorate is accelerating basic and
translational research to solve national and societal problems. TIP is
supporting use-inspired research in biotechnology, among other areas,
and is propelling NSF's discoveries to new levels of innovation. TIP is
also funding activities in priority areas such as climate resilience
and energy sufficiency, advanced wireless research, biotechnology,
microelectronics and semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, AI, and
quantum sciences. Programs that broaden participation in STEM would
also see major growth, and ASPB strongly supports NSF programs that
build research capacity at emerging research institutions.
continued support for nsf education and workforce development programs
As discussed above, among the challenges brought by a changing
world, many will be addressed specifically by plant scientists. For
example, a significant increase in crop productivity will be needed to
match the demand for food expected from global population growth.
Climate change will present new challenges for crops and other plant
ecosystems. Fuels and biomedical chemicals will need to be obtained
from renewable sources. Addressing these challenges requires that we
deploy all available tools and information and must involve a strong
and diverse community of plant scientists, with increased involvement
from underrepresented scientists, including women and those from
historically excluded groups, who often bring innovative perspectives.
However, current training pathways do not appear prepared to ensure
the availability of this workforce. The number of Ph.D. degrees awarded
in the U.S. in the biomedical sciences in the last two decades has
increased substantially,\2\ but the number of plant science doctoral
degrees, both basic and agronomy-related, has remained stagnant during
this period.\3\ Students gravitate towards fields with reliable and
robust career and earning opportunities. The academic plant sciences
are bleeding talent because grants are small and unreliable and
salaries uncompetitive. Increased funding for the NSF will allow for
increased salaries that will retain talent.
What is necessary to change these trends is a strong investment in
plant science research, basic and applied; renewed efforts to transform
public perception of plant biology and plant biologists; and a push to
increase the number of students on plant science training pathways.
Developing the workforce that will solve future challenges is urgent.
NSF is a major source of funding for the education and training of
the American scientific workforce and for understanding how educational
innovations can be most effectively implemented. NSF's education
portfolio impacts students at all levels, including K-12,
undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate, as well as the public.
ASPB urges the subcommittee to support expanding NSF's fellowship
and career development programs--such as the Postdoctoral Research
Fellowships in Biology, the Graduate Research Fellowship (GRF), the
Research and Mentoring for Postbaccalaureates in Biological Sciences
(RaMP), and the Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) programs--
thereby providing continuity in funding opportunities for the country's
most promising early career scientists.
ASPB urges support for NSF to further develop programs aimed at
increasing the diversity of the scientific workforce by leveraging
professional scientific societies' commitment to provide a professional
home for scientists throughout their education and careers and to help
promote and sustain broad participation in the sciences. Focused
training and infrastructure support programs for Hispanic Serving
Institutions, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Tribal
Colleges and Universities remain vitally important, because they foster
a scientific workforce that better reflects the demographics of the
U.S. population.
ASPB urges support for research that enhances our understanding of
how educational innovations can be sustainably and effectively
implemented. NSF Education and Human Resources (EHR) programs provide
opportunities to expand NSF's research and evaluation efforts to
address scale-up and sustainability. ASPB encourages continued support
for education research programs within NSF EHR portfolio with a focus
on understanding how previous investments in educational strategies can
be made most effective.
Additionally, ASPB supports the Space Biology Program in the
Biological and Physical Sciences program at NASA. NASA supports
fundamental plant research that improves crops on Earth even as it
pushes the frontiers of space. For example, NASA funding to support the
smaller stature of plants suitable to grow in the confined spaces of a
spaceship are also useful in Controlled Environment Agriculture and
vertical farming. Separately, NASA's Thrive In DEep Space (TIDES)
initiative will fund nine plant biology experiments to determine how to
efficiently grow crops in lunar dust, which is crucial as humans move
toward moon habitation but also applies to crops grown in marginal
lands on Earth. ASPB requests the subcommittee's support for continued
investment in NASA for plant biology research that will grow our
Nation's agricultural sector and extend our reach in space.
Grand research challenges will not be solved in a year, an
administration, or a generation. Addressing them require sustained
attention and investment at Federal research agencies, such as the NSF,
over decades.
Thank you for your consideration of ASPB's testimony. For more
information about ASPB, please visit www.aspb.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-
charting-the-essentials/ag-and-food-sectors-and-the-economy/.
\2\ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
2018. The Next Generation of Biomedical and Behavioral Sciences
Researchers: Breaking Through. Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25008.
\3\ National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, Survey
of Earned Doctorates. https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/builder/
sed?type=chart&convert=1.
[This statement was submitted by Crispin Taylor, PhD, Chief
Executive Officer.]
______
Prepared Statement of Animal Welfare Institute
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on Fiscal Year
2025 funding priorities for the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) and
the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).
u.s. department of commerce
North Atlantic Right Whales $65 million
In 2020, North Atlantic right whales were designated critically
endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN). Elevated mortalities of the species from entanglements in
fishing gear and vessel strikes have been declared an Unusual Mortality
Event (UME) by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) since 2017. The annual documented rate of anthropogenic
mortality and serious injury due to both entanglement in gear and
vessel strikes has exceeded the population's potential biological
removal level (PBR) since 1995.
With only about 360 North Atlantic right whales left as of 2023,
and of those fewer than 70 reproductive females, this species could be
effectively extinct within our lifetime. Right whales are extremely
vulnerable to being caught in the vertical buoy lines used in lobster
and crab trapping gear. Entanglement can lead to drowning, reduced
mobility, and, in some cases, a long, painful death from starvation.
Collisions with vessels of all sizes can also cause serious injuries,
such as blunt force trauma, propeller cuts, and broken bones. On March
30, 2024, a dead North Atlantic right whale, identified as 35-year-old
female #1950, was discovered 50 miles off the coast of Virginia. Her
death marks the 40th mortality in the ongoing UME. Her dependent three-
month old calf was the sixth calf she had produced during her life and
is unfortunately also presumed dead, unable to survive without its
mother. This mother and her calf mark the sixth and seventh presumed
North Atlantic right whale deaths over the first 3 months of 2024, a
total that includes other calves who haven't been spotted with their
mothers. The best available science also shows that two-thirds of right
whale deaths go undetected, meaning that these observed deaths and
injuries are a dramatic undercount of what the population suffers.
Studies have shown that mortalities from known entanglements have
continued to increase from 21 percent (1970-2002) to 51 percent (2003-
2018).\1\ Entanglements caused as many as 85 percent of diagnosable
deaths from 2010 to 2015. In February 2021, a study co-authored by
leading North Atlantic right whale scientists found that from 1990-
2017, observed carcasses only accounted for 36 percent of North
Atlantic right whale mortalities.\2\ These ``cryptic mortalities,''
i.e., deaths caused by human activities without an observed carcass,
represent a larger proportion of the total mortality than previously
believed.
The FY24 appropriations minibus included $4 million above the FY23
enacted level for North Atlantic right whales within the Marine
Mammals, Sea Turtles, and Other Species line item. Within this funding,
the Committee supports the use of supplementary funds previously
provided to NOAA for purposes including innovative gear research,
acoustic monitoring, and satellite tracking. NOAA was further directed
to continue to support disentanglement, stranding response, and
necropsy activities. Another $30 million was provided to States through
the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) to cover costs
associated with testing or voluntary implementation of innovative gear
to inform future Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (ALWTRP) (FR-
210827-0171). We are immensely grateful for the subcommittee's concern
for this species and the substantial increase in funding but remain
deeply concerned with the effectiveness of the 2021 rule, in that it
falls significantly short of the risk reduction needed to save this
species from extinction.
Within our proposal of $65 million, we believe funding should be
appropriated to NOAA to develop and implement new rules aimed at
reducing the mortality rate of North Atlantic right whales by vessel
strikes, fishing-gear entanglements, and other threats. There must also
be an investment in reducing vessel-strike risk in high-traffic areas
and transitioning to whale-safe fishing gear. We believe the pilot
program to refine and field tests innovative fishing gear technologies,
such as ropeless gear, should be expanded, including developing
geolocation technologies. We recommend $9 million be appropriated
towards this. Lastly, surveys and monitoring, enforcement,
disentanglement, stranding response, and plankton recorder surveys are
crucial to the conservation of this species.
We encourage Congress to direct investment to the development of
ropeless technologies instead of expensive, short-term investments in
``weak rope.'' The use of 1,700-lb breaking strength lines (known as
``weak rope'') may decrease the severity of entanglement injuries
suffered by right whales but does not reduce the likelihood of
entanglement in the first place nor the sub-lethal impacts of
entanglement on whales. This gear also does not reduce the risk of
serious injury or mortality for right whales who are less than 2 years
old.\3\
If we are to save this species, it will require investment and
cooperation among Congress, agencies, scientists, and industry to find
long-term solutions. We appreciate the subcommittee's recognition of
the urgency of this situation and the funding it continues to provide
for the protection of North Atlantic right whales.
Unusual Mortality Event Contingency Fund $6.5 million
Marine mammals are important indicator species of ocean health.
Monitoring the health of marine mammals, especially during an Unusual
Mortality Event (UME), can reveal emerging threats, potential impacts
of human activities, and the effectiveness of management actions. A UME
is defined as ``a stranding that is unexpected; involves a significant
die-off of any marine mammal population; and demands immediate
response.'' There are currently four active UMEs--Atlantic Florida
Manatee, Atlantic Minke Whale, North Atlantic Right Whale, and Atlantic
Humpback Whale. In the 2021 declared UME, the Atlantic Florida manatee,
over 2,455 manatees have died. Rescue organizations are hampered by the
lack of facilities and funds for responding to overwhelming numbers of
live manatees in need of rescue and rehabilitation.
Since 1991, 72 marine mammal UMEs have been declared. The UME
Contingency Fund was established through the Marine Mammal Protection
Act to enable the National Marine Fisheries Service to reimburse marine
mammal stranding network partners for costs related to caring for and
treating live animals that strand as part of UMEs; collecting,
preparing, and sending biological samples to the National Marine Mammal
Tissue Bank and other diagnostic laboratories to investigate the causes
of UMEs; and collecting important marine mammal health data to inform
and improve future UME responses and marine conservation. Although
Congress created this fund in 1992, it has only appropriated funds in
2005; all other contributions to the Fund have been through voluntary
contributions. In the FY23 House Appropriations CJS Bill and Report,
$2M was allocated to this Fund, while the Senate CJS subcommittee, via
report language, encouraged NMFS to request funding. In the FY24
appropriations minibus, the joint explanatory statement included
language that encouraged NMFS to request the funding. Considering the
significant number of active UMEs, $6.5 million should be allocated to
the Unusual Mortality Event Contingency fund to enable robust marine
mammal stranding response efforts.
John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program $10
million
The John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program
(Prescott Grant Program), a program under NMFS, provides competitive
grants to marine mammal stranding network organizations to do the
following: (1) rescue and rehabilitate sick, injured, or distressed
live marine mammals, and (2) investigate the events surrounding, and
determine the cause of, the death or injury of marine mammals. Over the
past 23 years, the Prescott Grant Program has been vital to protecting
and recovering marine mammals across the country while also generating
critical information regarding marine mammals and their environment. As
the sole source of Federal funding for the National Marine Mammal
Stranding Network, which is comprised of over 120 member organizations
in 26 States, the District of Columbia, two territories, and three
Tribes, robust funding is required for the Prescott Grant Program to
enable it to continue its vital work.
Enforcement and Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) $13 million
The Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) was established in
2016 to require U.S. importers of certain fish and fish products to
provide and report key data, with the aim of uncovering illegal,
unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and/or seafood fraud and
preventing it from entering U.S. commerce. The program oversees imports
of 13 species groups (which are comprised of more than 1,100 unique
species), including sharks and sea cucumbers, two marine species that
are increasingly threatened by IUU fishing. The 2019 addition of shrimp
has had implications for the critically endangered vaquita, of which
only about 10 remain. The use of illegal gillnets for catching shrimp
in the Gulf of California, and the subsequent bycatch of vaquitas, has
been a major factor in the species' decline.
A 2021 report, ``Seafood Obtained via Illegal, Unreported, and
Unregulated Fishing: U.S. Imports and Economic Impact on U.S.
Commercial Fisheries,'' compiled by the U.S. International Trade
Commission, found that $2.4 billion worth of seafood imports derived
from IUU fishing was imported in 2019 (11 percent of total seafood
imports). Over 13 percent of the U.S. imports caught at sea were
estimated to be caught using IUU fishing practices. Top species
included swimming crab, wild-caught warm water shrimp, yellowfin tuna,
and squid. The report noted that IUU-sourced seafood is a threat to the
livelihood of U.S. fishermen. These practices also pose risks to marine
ecosystems, public health, and human rights.
In January 2020, the U.S. government allocated $8 million to fight
IUU fishing and bolster SIMP as part of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade
agreement (USMCA) approved in January 2021. As part of the agreement,
funding will go to NOAA to help it cooperate with the Mexican
government in fighting illegal fishing through 2023. In FY22, SIMP
received a $5.2M appropriation, and in FY23 and FY24, funding increased
to $6.2M. As NOAA works to expand the Seafood Import Monitoring Program
to additional at-risk species, additional funding of $13 million is
necessary to ensure full implementation in FY25.
Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) $9 million
The Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) is an independent Federal agency
established by Congress in 1972 under the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA). It is responsible for overseeing the proper implementation of
the MMPA and provides comprehensive, independent, science-based
oversight of all Federal and international policy and management
actions affecting marine mammals. The MMC's work is crucial to
maintaining healthy populations of marine mammals, including whales,
manatees, dolphins, seals, sea otters, walruses, and polar bears, and
ensuring their survival for generations to come. Additionally, the MMC
seeks to ensure that Alaska Natives can meet their subsistence needs
through hunting of marine mammals.
Each U.S. taxpayer annually contributes just over 1 center to fund
the MMC and its work. Between FY15 and FY21, the MMC was flat-funded at
$3.43 million. In FY 2022, funding for the MMC was slightly increased
by $300,000, and in FY23 and FY24, the MMC funded at $4.5 million.
Unfortunately, however, due to rising fixed costs, the MMC has absorbed
significant essential costs (salaries, rent, etc.), thereby reducing
its discretionary funding. In order for the MMC to fully fulfill its
obligations and mission work, we ask that $9 million be appropriated
for FY25.
u.s. department of justice
Environment and Natural Resources Division/Environmental Crimes Section
Additional $2 million
AWI asks the subcommittee to provide an additional $2 million, over
and above the amount that would otherwise be appropriated, to the
Environmental Crimes Section of the Department of Justice's Environment
and Natural Resources Division, to be designated for the Section's work
on animal cruelty crime.
In the last decade, Congress has taken significant steps to
strengthen Federal laws to protect animals from cruel treatment. For
those efforts to be meaningful, it is imperative that the Federal
Government's enforcement efforts be robustly supported. The attorneys
in the Environmental Crimes Section are tasked with ensuring that
justice is served when the Federal statutes and enforcement regimes
that provide for the humane treatment of captive, farmed, and companion
animals across the country are violated. These laws include the Animal
Welfare Act, the Horse Protection Act, the Humane Methods of Slaughter
Act, the 28-Hour Law, the animal crush video statute, the Animal
Fighting Venture Prohibition Act, and, since 2019, the Preventing
Animal Cruelty and Torture Act.
This is a tremendous amount of responsibility, and it is a
responsibility that both Congress and the American public expect to be
executed vigorously. The resources available to bring criminal
prosecution under these laws have not kept pace with the improvements
made in the laws. Given the increased workload the Section has taken on
in just the last couple of years, a $2 million increase in its funding
for its work on animal cruelty crimes is warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sharp, S, et.al (2019). Gross and histopathologic diagnoses
from North Atlantic right whale Eubalaena glacialis mortalities between
2003 and 2018. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 135(1), 1-31.
doi:10.3354/dao03376)
\2\ Pace, R. et al. (2021). Cryptic mortality of North Atlantic
right whales. Conservation Science and Practice. 3. 10.1111/csp2.346.
\3\ Knowlton et al. (2016).
[This statement was submitted by Ericca Gandolfo, Policy Advisor,
Government Affairs.]
______
Prepared Statement of Artie Ann Bates, MD, Psychiatrist
I am requesting that you rescind the $506 million in funding
reserved for the Bureau of Prison's (BOP) planned Letcher County, KY
facility in the Department of Justice-Buildings and Facilities, Federal
Prison System, Justice account because this prison will be placed in a
mental health manpower shortage area. It will overload local mental
healthcare services and place incarcerated people and prison staff at
higher risk of depression, substance use and suicide.
The BOP does not appear to plan for this. They released their Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for FCI/FPC Letcher 2024 on March
1, 2024, but, other than a brief reference to the First Step Act, BOP
does not mention the mental health needs of incarcerated people, prison
staff, or the Letcher community. This massive Federal project wherein
the ground clearing alone will cost $466,203,000 of the appropriated
$506 million, offers no discussion of how BOP will approach the vast
and severe mental health needs within its walls or in the Letcher
community.
With a price tag more expensive than any other United States
Federal prison, it would be placed in a geographic area where,
according to a 2018 report by the American Psychiatric Association
(APA) ``Appalachians have disproportionately higher rates of mental
health problems, compared to the U.S. population.'' Yet, ``the number
of mental healthcare professionals per 100,000 residents was 35% lower
than the National average. In the southern and north central sub-
regions of Appalachia, it further decreases to 50% fewer mental
healthcare professionals than the National average.''
But within Federal prisons, there already exists a mental health
manpower shortage. Director Collette Peters' testified in a recent
hearing that, ``Systemwide, clinical healthcare professionals are
staffed at approximately 80%. At individual institutions, healthcare
staffing rates range from fully staffed to less than 50%,'' thus, the
BOP has difficulty maintaining a healthcare manpower team for medical
and mental illness treatment. Why then place a Federal prison somewhere
the mental health manpower shortage exacerbates the rates of mental
illnesses?
In areas like Letcher County in rural Central Appalachia there is a
``lower supply of mental health providers than the National average,''
per the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC). As the ARC report
States, ``most mental health professionals practice in metropolitan
counties,'' yet, BOP has placed Federal prisons in three of the 5th
District's distressed southeastern Kentucky counties. FCI Letcher would
be yet another prison in a ``distressed'' county, and the ARC reports
that the ``supply of mental health providers in the Appalachian
Region's distressed counties is six percent lower than the supply in
non-distressed counties.'' In fact, ARC States, ``There are 130 mental
health providers per 100,000 population in the Appalachian Region,
which is 35 percent lower than the National average of 201 per 100,000
population.'' And ``All five Appalachian subregions have a lower supply
of mental health providers than the National average.''
Director Peters has no magic wand, therefore seeking services from
outside providers will likely be necessary, yet these at-risk
individuals will be placed where, per the APA, ``The region's suicide
rate is 17% higher than the National rate, and residents in
Appalachia's rural counties are 21% more likely to commit suicide than
those living in the region's large metro counties.'' In fact, a recent
General Accounting Office report, submitted to the Senate Homeland
Security Committee, listed the eight Federal prisons with the highest
rates of staff suicides for 1997-2019, and Manchester FCI, in nearby
Clay County, Kentucky, is on that list. It, like Letcher County, is in
Kentucky's 5th Congressional district.
And within Federal prisons, BOP Director Collette Peters' testified
in September 2023 in an address to the Senate Judiciary Committee, that
``As corrections professionals, we have known for decades that we are a
health care organization.'' She says, ``For instance, of those under
our care 27.6% experience mental health conditions compared to 22.8% of
the U.S. general population . . . individuals in our care meeting the
clinical criteria for one or more substance use disorders is
significantly higher in the FBOP population, at 31.8%, when compared to
16.5% in the general U.S. population.'' With those statistics, the BOP
must seriously address, up front, how they will provide treatment for
mental illness and substance misuse, including for its staff, while in
a mental healthcare shortage area, as these conditions lead to higher
rates of suicide.
A DOJ OIG report in February 2024 States that from FY 2014-2021,
``inmate suicides . . . accounted for just over half of the 344 inmate
deaths we reviewed.'' That's over 172 suicides in Federal prisons in a
seven-year period. The OIG found ``potentially inappropriate Mental
Health Care Level assignments for some inmates who later died by
suicide.'' Further, this OIG report States that ``one or more other
longstanding operational challenges-staffing shortages; an outdated
security camera system; staff failure to follow BOP policies and
procedures; and an ineffective, untimely staff disciplinary process-
were contributing factors in many of the inmate deaths . . . These
challenges continue to present a significant and critical threat to the
BOP's safe and humane management of the inmates in its care and
custody.''
The APA attests that ``According to the Prison Policy Initiative,
over 40% of people in jails and prisons have been diagnosed with a
mental health disorder . . . (and) incarceration is associated with
subsequent depression and bipolar disorder. Additionally, placing
individuals in solitary confinement, particularly if they have severe
mental illness, can be very detrimental psychologically.'' And
racially, ``Black people make up only 13% of the U.S. population but
38% of people in prisons and . . . are more likely to be arrested than
white Americans with mental health disorders.''
In fact, the American Psychological Association quotes a US
Department of Justice (DOJ) 2017 report that also exceeds Director
Peters' quote, saying that approximately ``37 percent of people in
prison have a history of mental health problems . . . More than 24
percent have been previously diagnosed with major depressive order, 17
percent with bipolar disorder, 13 percent with a personality disorder
and 12 percent with post-traumatic stress disorder.'' And that the
``percentage of (incarcerated people) with mental illness . . .
increased, with rates more than quadrupling from 1998 to 2006.'' The
increase is due, in part, to the ``Deinstitutionalization of mentally
ill individuals, which began in the 1960s . . . as mental hospitals
across the country closed their doors.''
Chair of the Department of Psychiatry at George Washington
University, James Griffith, M.D. says of Central Appalachia that it is
`` . . . a region that was literally raped by coal and lumber
companies while the rest of the country stood by and did nothing.''
This history of exploitation was not limited to coal and timber.
Central Appalachia was targeted by opioid manufacturers such as Purdue
Pharma. The APA's Health Disparities report references that there was
``deliberate targeting of Appalachia by the pharmaceutical
manufacturers of opioids with increased advertising and provision of
samples,'' particularly oxycontin. This opioid was eventually limited,
after many deaths by overdose, or as the ARC calls it, ``Poisoning
Mortality,'' but then fentanyl emerged, as described by the KY Office
of Drug Control Policy (ODCP).
Published in its 2021 Overdose Fatality Report, the ODCP reports
that of the 2,250 drug overdose deaths in Kentucky, that an ``opioid
was involved in 90%'' of the cases, fentanyl was ``identified'' in
``72.8%'' and methamphetamine was ``identified'' in ``47.8% of the
total drug overdose deaths.'' By county, while Letcher was not one of
the five ``with the Highest Rates of Drug Overdose Deaths in 2021,''
two of the five are adjoining counties: Knott and Perry. In fact, four
of the five counties with the highest rates of death by drug overdose
are in KY's 5th congressional district, the location of FCI/FPC
Letcher.
Addressing how community addiction disorders affect prisons,
Director Peters States in her Senate Judiciary testimony in September
2023 that ``Opioid Use Disorder (OUD), in particular, affects
approximately 2.7 million Americans and thus presents a significant
challenge within our facilities. From a security perspective, dangerous
substances like illicitly made fentanyl can pose a health risk to FBOP
employees and those in our custody . . . (thus)we have incorporated
evidence-based treatments like Medications for Opioid Use Disorder
(MOUD) and substance use disorder treatment programming.'' But the OIG
report States ``Our site visits to three different institutions also
yielded evidence of understaffing, particularly in the critical areas
of Health Services and Psychology Services . . . Separately, another
Staff Psychologist who administered the Medication Assisted Treatment
(MAT) Program there told us that he could not administer MAT to every
inmate who qualified for the program because there were not enough
clinicians or medical staff to prescribe and administer the
medication.''
A Marchall Project report in December, 2022 found that ``Forty-
seven (47) incarcerated people died of overdoses in Federal prison from
2019 through 2021 . . . The data does not specify how many of these
overdose deaths were caused by opioids and could have been prevented by
medications like Suboxone. However, . . . During the same period,
correctional staff administered Narcan--a drug that reverses opioid
overdoses--almost 600 times in Federal prisons.'' This same report
says, regarding First Step Act implementation, that the BOP is
``treating only a fraction-less than 10%-of the roughly 15,000
prisoners who need it.''
If the BOP examined the data in Kentucky and Letcher County, they
don't say so in their DEIS. The ARC in their Creating a Culture of
Health in Appalachia studies, with data from the National Center for
Health Statistics, reports that ``The poisoning mortality rate in the
Appalachian Region is 37 percent higher than the National rate. All
five Appalachian subregions have higher poisoning mortality rates than
the National rate. The poisoning mortality rate in Central Appalachia
is 146 percent higher than the Nation as a whole.'' ARC affirms the
``struggle of many Appalachian communities in addressing drug
dependence and other related issues-especially in southern West
Virginia and eastern Kentucky-has been well-documented by the National
media.'' While Kentucky's 2021 Overdose Fatality Report reported that
Letcher County had ``16'' overdose deaths for that entire year, our
local weekly newspaper, The Mountain Eagle, (ME) documents that in the
first 7 months of 2023 we had ``19'' deaths which the county coroner
attributed to drugs.
In conclusion, as a physician in Letcher County, my concerns
include those incarcerated, prison staff, and our local population. Has
BOP considered that locating a prison in Letcher County will likely
worsen the county's drug traffic as contraband and illicit drugs are
traded both inside and outside its walls? If so, this increased drug
traffic will increase the overdose deaths both inside the prison and
outside. Further, if the BOP cannot provide adequate mental healthcare
staffing, and must further burden local community mental health
services, the transport itself can allow contact with local dealers.
Would it not make more sense, if such a prison facility is
necessary, to locate it in areas with adequate mental health services
and substance misuse treatments? Would it not make sense to keep these
vulnerable individuals close to family and community?
Why bring a prison with distressed individuals to an area with such
mental health service shortages? Is this a wise use of taxpayers'
dollars?
For these reasons, I am respectfully requesting that you rescind
funding allocated for the Letcher County prison project from the
Buildings and Facilities account, as this project would add strain to
an already strained mental health care system.
______
Prepared Statement of the Association of Science and
Technology Centers,
the American Alliance of Museums,
the Association of Children's Museums, and
the Association of Science Museum Directors
Dear Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee:
Thank you for accepting this statement submitted by the Association
of Science and Technology Centers (ASTC), the American Alliance of
Museums (AAM), the Association of Children's Museums (ACM), and the
Association of Science Museum Directors (ASMD).
We appreciate the opportunity to present the views of our
associations to the subcommittee for its consideration as it prepares
to write the Fiscal Year 2025 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies Appropriations bill, particularly regarding the National
Science Foundation (NSF), the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA).
Our associations represent more than 5,000 member organizations in
every State and district in America, including science centers, museums
of all types, nature centers, aquariums, zoos, planetariums, botanical
gardens, and natural history and children's museums, as well as
companies, consultants, and other organizations that share an interest
in science education and public engagement in science.
Taken together, our National reach is a vital resource for
fostering rich public engagement in the importance of science and many
other subjects and disciplines towards building a bright future and
opportunity for all. Our place-based organizations are leading
institutions in the efforts to promote education in science,
technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM), developing
rich, innovative, and effective science-learning experiences. We are
helping to create the future STEAM workforce and inspiring people of
all ages about the wonders and the meaning of science in their lives.
Our members are trusted and valued by their communities-and a recent
national public opinion poll showed that museums are among the most
trusted sources of information across the political spectrum, second
only to friends and family-above nonprofit organizations, local and
national news organizations, government, business, and social media
(Museums and Trust, AAM and Wilkening Consulting, 2021).
As trusted place-based institutions, our members serve essential
roles in convening their communities, advancing action on issues of
local and national concern, and engaging individuals of all ages in
science and technology.
requests for fiscal year 2025 appropriations
We appreciate the support that the subcommittee has provided for
the Nation's science and education agencies, including support for
programs of particular interest to ASTC, AAM, ACM, and ASMD.
In general, we stress the need for inclusive programs that include
support for informal education, as much STEAM learning-including but
not limited to school-aged youth-happens outside of formal schooling.
Research has consistently shown that learning experiences outside of
the formal classroom are vitally important to youth's future interest
and capacity in STEAM (National Academies, 2009, 2010, 2015, 2016).
National Science Foundation (NSF)
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is one of our Nation's most
important sources of support for STEM education, including many of the
programs centered in the Directorate for STEM Education (EDU), which
supports STEAM education at all levels and for all audiences to help
develop a diverse and well-prepared workforce and a scientifically
well-informed citizenry.
Of particular interest to the museum community is the Advancing
Informal STEM Learning (AISL) program in the Division of Research on
Learning in Formal and Informal Settings, which advances new approaches
to and evidence-based understanding of learning in informal
environments. However, current funding levels have limited the ability
of the program to support the range of informal STEM education programs
that have been ranked highly competitive. We ask you to provide at
least $75 million for the Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL)
program.
NSF also supports STEAM education, informal learning, and the
public's engagement with science through its research directorates, and
we urge the subcommittee to provide increased funding for the NSF
Directorates for Biological Sciences; Geosciences; Mathematical and
Physical Sciences; Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences; and STEM
Education to continue to support museum research, collections, and
programs that are key to lifelong STEAM education. We also support the
focus on the intersection of science and society in NSF's new
Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships-including
several opportunities to promote public engagement with science.
Finally, we support continued analysis and refinement of the
broader impacts criterion on which all NSF proposals are evaluated,
including efforts to enhance training for merit review panelists and
NSF program officers-and the development of tools for evaluating and
documenting the societal impacts of research.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) supports
informal STEM education and engagement in a variety of ways. The Teams
Engaging Affiliate Museums and Informal Institutions (TEAM II) program,
within the Office of STEM Engagement, provides support for museums and
planetariums to enhance programs related to space exploration,
aeronautics, space and earth science, or microgravity.
We request at least $150 million for NASA's Office of STEM
Engagement, including at least $20 million for the Teams Engaging
Affiliate Museums and Informal Institutions (TEAM II) program.
In addition, NASA's Science Mission Directorate supports museums
and museum networks through its Science Activation program, which
connects competitively selected teams across the country with NASA
infrastructure teams. This program has engaged tens of millions of
learner interactions in all 50 States. To continue the program's
evolution and strong reach nationwide, we request at least $48 million
for the SciAct Program.
Finally, we applaud the ways that the agency continues to make its
data available to the public, allowing museums to engage their
audiences with current observations and information.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
NOAA's Office of Education offers two grant programs to advance
education in areas relevant to NOAA's mission, including support for
museums, zoos, aquariums, and science centers. These programs help
enhance the understanding and use of environmental information to
promote informed decision-making by educators, students, and the
public.
--The Bay Watershed Education and Training (B-WET) program promotes
place-based experiential learning for K-12 students and related
professional development for educators.
--Environmental Literacy grants support activities that inspire
people to use Earth system science to improve ecosystem
stewardship and increase resilience to environmental hazards,
such as wildfires, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, and
earthquakes. For more than 15 years, these grants have
supported museum exhibitions, K-12 curricula, online education
resources, citizen science activities, out-of-school programs,
and professional development for educators.
As the need for enhanced education about our changing climate and
community resilience increases, there is a need for a concurrent
increase in the budget for the Office of Education. We request at least
$38 million for NOAA's Office of Education.
We also underscore the important ways that NOAA promotes public
engagement with science through other offices and programs, such as its
support for citizen science.
In closing, we continue to thank the subcommittee for all its
support for a robust science and education budget. You have
demonstrated your support for crucial programs that promote STEAM
education for our Nation's students. Like our organizations, you
recognize these are vital investments in our future, and we thank you
in advance for taking action accordingly.
Our organizations stand ready to be of service to your work. We are
always happy to provide examples of the ways that museums are
contributing to their communities and helping to advance local,
regional, and national priorities. With our networks of thousands of
community-based institutions, these examples can be in or near each
Congressional district.
[This statement was submitted by Christofer Nelson, President and
CEO, Association of Science and Technology Centers (ASTC); Marilyn
Jackson, President and CEO, American Alliance of Museums (AAM); Arthur
G. Affleck, III, Executive Director, Association of Children's Museums
(ACM); and Bonnie Styles, Executive Director, Association of Science
Museum Directors (ASMD).]
______
Prepared Statement of Association of State Floodplain Managers
The Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) appreciates
the opportunity to provide testimony on the Fiscal Year 2025
appropriations for the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration.
While ASFPM supports the overall Administration's discretionary budget
request, we encourage Congress to consider additional appropriations to
address concerns with Coastal Zone Management Program with an
appropriations of $64.7 million, fund the Coastal Services Centers with
an appropriation of $51.2 million, support the Digital Coast with an
appropriation of $4 million as per PL 116-223, and provide at least
$3.5 million for the Atlas 15 Precipitation Frequency Atlas.
For over half a century, the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) has
been the cornerstone of our coastal stewardship strategy, fostering a
powerful alliance between Federal and State entities via the National
Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS) and Coastal Zone Management
(CZM) Programs. These initiatives are pivotal in deciphering and
confronting the escalating challenges besieging our coastal regions,
from surging water levels and inundation to pollution, habitat
degradation, and the wrath of extreme weather events.
The 34 federally sanctioned CZM Programs across States and
territories are at the forefront, tackling the Nation's most urgent
coastal dilemmas head-on. From grappling with the escalating hazards
like sea level surge, intensified storms, and erosive tides to coping
with ecological upheavals such as coral bleaching, toxic algal blooms,
and dwindling fisheries, CZM stands as the bulwark safeguarding our
coastal equilibrium.
In recent years alone, CZM Programs have spearheaded over 2,500
projects, bolstering the resilience of coastal communities against
looming threats. They've collaborated with more than 2,500 localities,
fostering balanced development while safeguarding the intrinsic essence
and resources of our coastlines. Moreover, they've facilitated the
establishment or enhancement of over 2,700 public access points along
our shores. CZM efforts have further shielded or revived nearly 150,000
acres of coastal habitats, while equipping over 200,000 coastal
decision-makers with vital education and training on management
strategies, public access initiatives, hazard mitigation, and community
development.
The allocation of requested funding is imperative to empower CZM
Programs, whose matched investments nearly mirror Federal funding, to
substantially amplify their impact. Their mission, as mandated by
Congress, encompasses the holistic management, judicious utilization,
safeguarding, and sustainable advancement of our coastal domain.
With the substantial investments in coastal infrastructure through
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, it is crucial that
investments are made in the CZM Programs, which play a critical role in
the planning and approval processes and long-term sustainability of
many of these projects.
The Digital Coast was developed to meet the needs of coastal
communities. This NOAA-sponsored website helps communities address
coastal issues from development and planning to emergency management.
The website includes 37 terabytes of imagery, 5.5 trillion points of
LiDAR, 800,000 miles of land cover, over 70 tools with over 140 use
examples and more than 100 training opportunities. Sustained funding
for Digital Coast will ensure access to the data portal for communities
to influence decisions.
The passage of the FLOODS Act in 2022 authorized NOAA to establish
the NOAA Precipitation Frequency Atlas, being referred to as Atlas 15,
currently and into the future. This program will compile, estimate,
analyze and communicate the anticipated frequencies of precipitation
all across the United States. This data is fundamental to providing
accurate and reliable flood risk information and flood maps for all
U.S. communities, vital for planning and guiding community development,
and used in the design of the majority of the Nation's local, State,
Tribal and national infrastructure, to avoid crippling and costly
damages from the adverse impacts of floods, and to save lives. Timely
completion and maintenance of the Precipitation Frequency Atlas should
be viewed among the highest priorities as a foundational tool for water
resources engineers, planners, and designers for assembling virtually
all the Nation's underlying infrastructure. These water investments
have an extremely high ROI, and can make the difference between viable
infrastructure and plans that will stalwartly serve our society for
decades or centuries, or not.
The Association of State Floodplain Managers is a national
association of over 22,000 members who are State and local officials
and private sector planners, engineers, mappers and academics who
support the work of State and local floodplain managers. All of our
members are committed to reducing loss of life and property due to
floods.
We appreciate the opportunity to share our recommendations with you
and thank you for considering our suggestions.
Sincerely,
Chad Berginnis, Executive Director
______
Prepared Statement of Boys and Girls Club of America
Boys and Girls Club of America (BGCA) would like to thank the
subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies for
soliciting the views and recommendations of public witnesses on Fiscal
Year (FY) 2025 funding. The following testimony expresses our strong
support for the Youth Mentoring Grant program managed by the Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP).
For over 160 years, Boys & Girls Clubs have provided safe places
where young people can learn and grow. We believe every young person
deserves a great future, meaning every youth that enters our doors
graduates on time and is college or career ready while living a healthy
lifestyle and demonstrating good character and citizenship. Clubs offer
young people an environment to build resiliency by developing the
social and emotional skills that make them ready for work and life.
This out-of-school time programming is carried out at more than 5,400
Boys & Girls Clubs including over 2,400 school-based Clubs, over 1,150
Clubs in rural areas, 256 Clubs in public housing facilities, 470
affiliated youth centers on military installations worldwide, and over
250 Clubs on Native lands.
As you develop the Fiscal Year 2025 Commerce, Justice, Science and
Related Agencies Appropriations bill, we respectfully request at least
$130 million in funding for the Youth Mentoring Grant, which is the
only mentoring-specific line item in the Federal budget. This important
program supports the implementation, delivery, and enhancement of
evidence-based mentoring services to improve outcomes and ensure that
underserved youth have the supports they need to thrive academically,
personally, and professionally.
Youth mentoring is an evidence-based prevention and intervention
strategy that enhances life outcomes for young people and mentors. It
is a powerful way to reduce the number of youths disconnected from
school and work, increase social and economic mobility, and create a
more productive and prosperous nation. A recent meta-analysis found
that mentoring, across all studies included, had a positive effect on
all youth outcomes included in the research, including mental and
physical health, academics, and career planning and preparation.
Unfortunately, even with these benefits, one in three young people
in the United States will grow up without ever having a mentor during
their childhood, constituting a ``mentoring gap'' that demonstrates the
need for collaborative investment in mentoring services. In fact,
recent research suggests that this gap is growing, with 40% of today's
young people saying they have never had a mentor and almost 70% saying
there were times growing up where they wanted a mentor but could not
find an adult to support them in this way. Disadvantaged youth are more
likely to turn to formal programs to access highly impactful mentors.
In the United States, of the young people served by mentoring programs,
51 percent are low-income, 36 percent are academically at-risk, 14
percent are first generation to go to college, and 8 percent have
incarcerated parents or family members.
Quality early interventions like mentoring prevent youth from
entering the juvenile justice system and often divert youth from
recidivism. Recent research funded by OJJDP even found that mentoring
programs could potentially provide a benefit of three times the public
expenditure, for every day in jail that program participants avoid.
Notably, however, programs that serve more children with adverse child
experiences require additional funding to recruit and train high-
quality mentors. A recent study showed that in programs where 90% of
mentees were pregnant or parenting, the average cost-per-youth
increased by nearly $2,500. As programs continue to support as many
young people with the highest need as possible, funding for the Youth
Mentoring Grant program must increase.
Mentorship promotes positive social development and behaviors in
young people. With youth in America continuing to face serious
challenges related to substance abuse, mental health, and the effects
of trauma, a trusting relationship with an adult can help them manage a
myriad of complex and difficult issues. Mentoring programs save Federal
dollars over the long-term by reducing rates of incarceration,
bolstering student academic achievement, and enabling positive health
and psychosocial outcomes for young people. The positive impact
mentoring programs have on a number of issues makes it uniquely
valuable for increased public investment:
--Mentoring and Mental Health.--Youth mentoring programs of all types
can prevent and help youth cope with depressive symptoms. It
can also reduce mental health stigma and increase treatment
entry and adherence. A recent study by MENTOR found that for
youth who said they wanted a mentor while growing up but never
had one, 25% of them specifically wanted a mentor to help them
with a mental health need. That study also found that mentored
youth reported stronger mental health when they were growing up
and stronger mental health today as adults.
--Mentoring and Education.--Young people, who were at risk of not
completing high school but had a mentor, are more likely to
enroll in college, participate in extracurricular activities,
hold a leadership position, and volunteer. School-based
programs can have a positive impact on a variety of outcomes,
including reducing truancy and absenteeism rates and school-
related misconduct and increasing scholastic achievement and
peer support.
--Mentoring and Youth Violence Prevention and Intervention.--
Mentoring can be integrated into multi-component violence
prevention efforts and offer comprehensive support to youth at
risk for committing violence or victimization. It serves as one
of the few prevention and intervention strategies that can
effectively address multiple risk and protective factors
simultaneously and has also been found to reduce aggressive
behaviors such as fighting, bullying, and delinquency.
--Mentoring and Career Exploration/Workforce Development.--Mentors
support youth in career exploration and early employment
experiences by providing social-emotional support and hands-on
skill development. Building intentional mentoring relationships
with young employees has led to higher retention rates,
direction in building a career or educational journey, wage
increases, and employee satisfaction. It can also help offset
feelings of exclusion that prevent marginalized youth from
considering certain career paths.
--Mentoring to Address Loneliness and Isolation.--There may be no
more direct way to help reduce isolation and loneliness for a
young person than providing them with a relationship that is
tailored to their needs and circumstances. Mentoring programs,
by definition, are focused on connecting youth to not only
individual relationships, but deep engagement with program
staff and other participants. Relationships with supportive
adults are considered a key developmental asset; trusting
relationships create a nourishing environment for adolescents
to explore the world around them and engage in healthy risk-
taking.
--Mentoring for Military-Connected Youth.--Mentoring offers a
practical approach to supporting military youth and their
families and has been shown to improve academic performance and
decrease symptoms of depression, while improving social support
and parental ratings of stress in the home.
--Mentoring for Youth in Rural Communities.--Low-income rural youth
report some of the lowest rates of mentoring of any demographic
group in the country. This presents an important directive for
expansion, as studies show many acute benefits to young people
in rural communities, such as health improvements, mental
health gains, academic achievement, and externalizing negative
behaviors.
--Mentoring and Identity Development.--Research has found that
fostering a sense of belonging and forging a sense of personal
identity were among the most meaningful forms of support
offered by mentors. Too many American youth are growing up
without these core aspects of human development and can drift
into antisocial or even violent behaviors in their isolation.
Mentoring relationships are a cornerstone of a healthy society
that allows all parties to contribute and find their positive
path.
--Mentoring and Substance Misuse.--Access to caring adult mentors is
a protective factor for young people, lowering the likely
incidents of drug use and other harmful behaviors. This is
especially true in youth who have a parent, caregiver, or other
loved one struggling with or dying because of drug misuse.
Further, because mentoring programs can offer support at all
three prevention levels (primary, secondary, and tertiary),
practitioners are important resources in combating the opioid
crisis. While the primary prevention work is the most critical
from a public health perspective, research demonstrates that
caring relationships can bolster treatment and recovery.
The impact of the Youth Mentoring Grant for our Clubs is best
exemplified by the Boys & Girls clubs of Washington County (MD).
Utilizing its FY2023 funding, the Club will provide critical education,
career, and healthy lifestyle skills to ensure the 36-youth identified
to benefit from the youth mentoring grant program funding will receive
the necessary support to become responsible, caring citizens.
Similarly, the Boys & Girls Club of Appalachia, Harlan Teen Club
(KY) continues to demonstrate the vial role the Youth Mentoring Grant
plays in achieving great futures for youth. As mentioned previously,
the negative impacts of opioid addiction on children are tremendous.
Children living with an addicted parent experience family dysfunction,
neglect, abuse, and emotional pain. In the small town of Harlan,
Kentucky, 13 children lost a parent to an opioid overdose over a six-
week span, and eight of those children witnessed their parent's death.
The Boys & Girls Club of Appalachia provided those youth with support
as they grieved and struggled to rebuild their lives. The MBGC-Opioid
Prevention program seeks to bring much needed resources to communities
like Harlan, through a multi-component mentoring program featuring
innovative practices and substance use prevention strategies that
engage youth, families, and communities in healing and building hope
for the future.
The Boys & Girls Clubs of Appalachia (KY) and Boys & Girls of
Washington County (MD) are just two examples of the clear benefits
provided by an out-of-school time youth mentoring program.
Unfortunately, today the average mentoring program has 63 young people
on their waitlist and recent reports and studies have found that
inflationary costs, workforce shortages, and reduced charitable giving
have continued to plague the nonprofit sector. This increase in funding
for the Youth Mentoring Grant Program will help close the mentoring gap
and create meaningful relationships that will put them on track to
academic, personal, and professional success.
As a youth-serving organization committed to ensuring young people
are loved, supported, and set up for success in life, we recognize the
unique capabilities of the Youth Mentoring Program grant to improve
outcomes for young people facing risk, and its capacity to scale
effective evidence-based practices and support. To that end, we
respectfully request at least $130 million in funding for the Youth
Mentoring Grant program.
Thank you for your consideration of this critical request to
support our at-risk youth. Please contact Pam Yuen, Boy & Girls Clubs
of America's Director of Government Relations with additional
questions.
[This statement was submitted by Missy Dugan, Senior Vice President
of Government Relations.]
______
Prepared Statement of CAST
Dear Chairman Rogers, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Cartwright and
Ranking Member Moran,
CAST is submitting recommendations to support Fiscal Year (FY) 2025
investments in the National Science Foundation (NSF). Our
recommendations are in direct alignment with the stated goals of the
NSF including the August 2021 goal ``to increase the engagement of
persons with disabilities in Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) fields and STEM education.'' \1\
Since 1984, CAST has worked relentlessly to ensure that our Nation
is one where learning has no limits for all individuals. We pioneered
Universal Design for Learning (UDL), a framework for the intentional
and inclusive design of learning and training environments that harness
technology, the learning sciences, and instructional practices to
remove barriers to learning in all settings: physical, digital, or
blended. UDL is now incorporated into key Federal education, career
training, and workforce laws.\2\ It encourages the design of flexible
learning environments that anticipate learner variability and provide
alternative routes to success; UDL acknowledges that variability across
all learners is the norm rather than the exception. UDL also
incorporates a responsive framework to support educators in their
professional learning and application of new skills in any teaching
environment.
With grants provided by the NSF, the U.S. Departments of Education
(ED) and Labor (DOL) as well as the private sector, CAST works to
ensure the full power of UDL is utilized to create a level playing
field where all learners have equitable opportunities to succeed. To
that end, we make the following recommendation to the subcommittee:
--STEM Edu Directorate.--$1.95 billion. Within this amount, $20
million should be provided to support the Centers for
Transformative Education Research and Translation as authorized
in the CHIPS and Science Act. This funding will help NSF to
address vital challenges facing the U.S. talent pipeline,
strengthening our National competitiveness in STEM education
and beyond.
Currently, through public-private partnerships, including funding
provided by NSF, CAST is working to increase equity, diversity,
inclusion, and access to all school-age youth, young adults and adults
in STEM including English Learners, individuals with disabilities, and
those who may struggle due to low literacy. We do this by developing
accessible STEM educational resources and making them more widely
available to teachers and learners; increasing engagement in STEM
education/STEM careers; and ensuring STEM teachers have opportunities
to be trained and receive a credential in the use of UDL. Increased
investments in STEM Education as led by NSF is essential to expanding
and developing a diverse and well-educated science and engineering
workforce that can assure national competitiveness in a global world
and economy.
Examples of UDL funded in the NSF portfolio:
Take Flight: Using Drones to Get Rural Middle School Girls
Interested in STEM Careers.--NSF has funded Take Flight, a multi-year
project to explore and study the use of drones to teach rural middle
school girls about STEM and the potential of STEM careers for women.
Designed to confront society's messaging and girls' own perceptions
about what STEM skills are, Take Flight is being conducted in rural New
Hampshire, Maine and Montana, where access to female role models in
STEM careers is limited.
STEM Pathways for Rural Youth: Developing STEM Identity Through the
Outdoors.--NSF has funded OR Youth, an exploratory project designed to
identify the ways outdoor recreation activities and the outdoor economy
can be used to develop STEM identities and STEM career thinking for
rural youth. This project focuses particularly on STEM as a career
pathway in ``amenity decline regions'' where traditional jobs such as
mining and timber collection are disappearing. This project builds off
of work CAST did to support the adoption of Outdoor Recreation
Competencies and the development of an Outdoor Recreation pathway in
CTE, now used in New Hampshire.
BioFab Explorer: Designing a Dual Enrollment Pathway to Careers in
Biofabrication.--NSF has funded BioFab Explorer to help broaden the
participation of underrepresented populations in biofabrication and
biomanufacturing by embedding career guidance into Career and Technical
Education (CTE) classrooms that provide options for dual enrollment
(i.e., taking college-level courses for credit while enrolled in high
school). The project leverages the e-folio technology developed with
NSF funding (see below, STEMfolio), customizing it for use by students
and teachers in this emerging field as a way to document and share
competencies with educators and potential employers.
STEMfolio.--With funding from NSF and DOL, the Career Exploration
and Readiness Environment for Science, Technology, Engineering and
Mathematics (CEE-STEM) project developed an e-portfolio called
STEMfolio, which supports non-traditional high school students to
collect, reflect and record information regarding STEM careers of
interest; chronicle their STEM learning in both classroom and job
sites; and take actions to connect with STEM postsecondary and
employment opportunities. By partnering with YouthBuild USA in the
design and piloting of this tool, CAST ensured that STEMfolio can
effectively support STEM learning and career pathways for young adults
who are members of ethnic minority groups and who are economically
disadvantaged-many of whom have dropped out of traditional high school
and may also be justice-involved or be young parents-helping these
young adults see the relevance and achievability of STEM careers. The
e-folio software is customizable and is being used by education and
workforce leaders in a Manufacturing Innovation Institute funded by the
Department of Defense as well as in two NSF projects.
Stepping Up with OASIS: Opening Access to Science Instruction and
Support (OASIS).--With NSF and ED funding, this initiative empowers
science teachers with research-based instructional tools and skills.
OASIS grew out of an NSF-funded project (now complete) which created a
digital UDL science notebook teachers of students with learning
disabilities can use to support students in active science learning: a
project that achieved statistically significant effects on students'
science performance and motivation for science learning. The focus now
expands access to tools and resources for teachers so that more
students will successfully engage in science learning and the science
inquiry process.
Multi-Gen STEM Makerspace Project is a Makerspace initiative that
is increasing access to STEM engagement, multi-disciplinary learning,
and opportunity by residents of low-income communities. Makerspaces
have cropped up in schools, libraries, museums, and other settings, but
low-income communities have not had the same access to these resources
and their learning opportunities as have more affluent ones. CAST is
changing that by partnering with a national affordable housing
provider, the NHP Foundation, at an affordable housing complex in
Stamford, CT. With NSF funding, CAST has co-designed a makerspace in
affordable housing, created makerspace guidelines, workshops and a
Multi-Gen Makers Playbook to support affordable housing complexes
across the country in hosting their own self-sustaining makerspaces to
provide an engaging, accessible route to embed STEM learning in
families' lives. The resources support caregivers, children, young
adults, and neighbors to gather and share their knowledge and skills,
and to collaborate authentically to build on those skills, using STEM
to meet personal goals, or to pursue a STEM career pathway.
Advanced Technological Education: Making Community College
Technician Education More Accessible for Everyone (AccessATE).--Through
support from NSF, this project supports the ATE community and provides
ATE grantees with the tools and knowledge to increase the accessibility
and usability of their resources and activities. CAST provides
technical assistance on accessibility and UDL to ATE Centers and
recipients of ATE research grants. Partners include Internet Scout, the
Accessible Education Materials Center, DeafTEC, Human Engineering
Research Laboratories and the National Center for Accessible Media. The
AccessATE work specifically supports STEM technician education programs
at community colleges which provide workforce development and
technician training in response to growing industry needs.
REsource Collaborative for Immersive TEchnologies (RECITE) is a
partnership between St. Cloud State University (KY) and CAST to support
ATE National Centers' and Projects' utilization of immersive
technologies in technician education across the Nation. A recent search
of the ATE Central database revealed 28 funded ATE projects relating to
immersive technologies, 17 of which are active today. Most of these
projects revolve around the development of immersive curricula for
specific fields. Only a few organizations have had a focus on
dissemination of content beyond their institution. RECITE seeks to
capture and disseminate the efficacy, best practices, successes, and
failures of using various types of immersive technologies in technician
education. This research will contribute to the broader body of
knowledge for the tools, resources, and training required to
effectively use immersive technology to advance technician education.
Immersive technologies or extended reality (XR) include augmented
reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), mixed reality (MR), and 360
photography and videography (360).
CAST urges further investments in STEM Education via NSF to ensure
expansion and development of a diverse and well-educated science and
engineering workforce that can assure national competitiveness in a
global world and economy.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide recommendations to the FY
2025 Labor-HHS appropriations bill. Please contact Tara Courchaine at
[email protected] if we can provide additional information or answer
any questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Dear Colleague Letter: Persons with Disabilities, National
Science Foundation (August 5, 2021), at: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2021/
nsf21110/nsf21110.jsp?org=EHR.
\2\ See: Public Law 110-315, Public Law 113-128, Public Law 114-95,
Public Law 115-224, National Education Technology Plan 2024, U.S.
Department of Education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sincerely,
Lindsay E. Jones, Esq., Chief Executive Officer
______
Prepared Statement of Chugach Regional Resources Commission
regarding accounts within the national oceanic and atmospheric
administration
This testimony is about accounts within the Department of
Commerce--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
including the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)--Protected
Resources Science and Management--Marine Mammals, Sea Turtles, and
Other Species on behalf of Chugach Regional Resources Commission
(CRRC), an inter-Tribal organization in southcentral Alaska that
provides crucial natural resource management and subsistence support to
seven Tribes and nearly 3,000 Alaska Natives in a region whose lands
and waters encompass more than 48,000 square miles.
We request that this subcommittee: (1) exercise fiscal oversight to
ensure that NOAA's spending of its allocated funds aligns with
Congress's intentions; and (2) fully fund the line item for Marine
Mammal Co-Management, with a requirement that NOAA/NMFS set aside a
portion of that line item for agreements to cover species/regions that
have no existing agreements.
CRRC is an inter-Tribal fish and wildlife commission authorized as
a Tribal consortium under the Indian Self Determination and Education
Assistance Act (ISDEAA). For forty years, CRRC has provided essential
natural resource management and subsistence support for Alaska Native
villages in the Chugach region: the Native Village of Eyak, Qutekcak
Native Tribe, Valdez Native Tribe, Native Village of Port Graham,
Native Village of Chenega, Native Village of Nanwalek, and Native
Village of Tatitlek. To support our mission, we operate the Alutiiq
Pride Marine Institute (APMI) to conduct research, produce high-quality
hatchery technology, and repopulate our subsistence plants and animals
in the wake of the Exxon-Valdez oil spill. APMI is home to several dry
and wet labs which examine climate conditions, ocean chemistry, harmful
algae, and shellfish biotoxin levels to provide comprehensive data on
ocean conditions in southcentral Alaska. APMI also houses a pilot kelp
farm program and a newly-completed molecular laboratory to store
sampled tissues and conduct genomic evaluations for research on marine
mammals and other species.
fiscal oversight
Federal agencies must be required to have systems that implement
Congress's budget appropriations in the ways they are intended. Our
experience shows that these systems are not properly functioning. We
ask this subcommittee to include report language directing NOAA to
assess its application requirements for grants to non-federal entities,
reduce unnecessary requirements, and report back to you on its efforts
to provide low-burden applications and implement Tribal and minority
population set-asides.
First, we note that any Tribal set-aside should require that awards
be made to a Tribe or Tribal organization (defined in 25 U.S.C. Section
5304 (e)). Non-Tribal organizations should not be permitted to compete
for funds designated for Tribes and minority populations by simply
claiming ties to a Tribe or making a token subaward. Unfortunately,
NOAA has allowed this as a general practice. For a concrete example, in
the FY24 Coastal Habitat Restoration and Resilience Grants for Tribes
and Underserved Communities program \1\ NOAA permitted applicants who
could ``demonstrate'' a ``connection'' to a Tribe or Tribal entity. The
``demonstration'' took the form of a Statement by the applicant--not
the Tribal entity itself. Our organization has been approached more
than once by a non-Native entity who offered token involvement in a
project in order to claim that they served a Tribal community. NOAA
should be required to honor the Federal trust responsibility to Tribes
by awarding Tribal funding to those Tribes instead of non-Tribal
entities.
Second, although Tribes across the country have considerable
scientific and practical expertise, Tribal involvement in NOAA research
is woefully inadequate. This is the case even when a specific tranche
of funding has been designated for Tribal communities at the
Congressional level. NOAA's practices in this area result in inequity
and undermine Congress's policies of encouraging public-private
partnerships. Research proposals submitted by non-federal applicants,
for a fund designated for non-federal entities, are evaluated by NOAA
staff--against the research proposals of other NOAA staff.\2\ This
creates the appearance of a funding system that allows internal
nepotism.
The disparity between NOAA's rate of awards to Tribal organizations
as compared to other agencies demonstrates that there is a problem with
how NOAA designs grant programs and assesses applications. To
illustrate: over the past 4 years, CRRC has a success rate ranging from
74% to 94% for competitive applications to Federal agencies aside from
NOAA.\3\ But our success rate for NOAA in the same period is just over
one half of one percent. When coupled with the fact that NOAA allows
non-Tribal entities to receive Tribal set-aside funds, a disturbing
picture emerges. Allocated funds are not being implemented in the way
that Congress intends when it sets the budget and funding guidelines.
Third, we ask that you encourage NOAA to reduce the barriers and
bureaucracy in its grant application process. This squanders the
resources so carefully planned as needed in the Federal budget, because
it wastes the time and energy of agency staff in formulating and
policing those requirements. It also discourages qualified applicants
from applying. For example, in a recent opportunity, the notice of
funding was 48 pages long, but applicants were only permitted 20 pages
to respond to those requirements.\4\ Applicants had to comb through the
application and figure out what the requirements were within the short
time allotted for the application response. NOAA applies a strict 60
day deadline for every funding opportunity from the day it is announced
publicly (another situation ripe for conflict of interest where NOAA
staff who are part of a competitive application may get a head start
through advance access to grant information). This is a very short time
to gather information and apply, especially if the project contemplates
stakeholder involvement. This especially hampers Tribal consortia,
because each Tribal government in the consortium must be contacted and
consulted before an application can be submitted. Grant application
deadlines for related funds are often released at the same time,
meaning that organizations that do not pay professional grant writers
must choose between opportunities. This plethora of bureaucracy creates
circumstances that are particularly stacked against Tribal
organizations. This means that NOAA grants are conducted, and data
produced, in an echo chamber that misses out on the meaningful
involvement of Tribal organizations who possess invaluable Traditional
Ecological Knowledge and local expertise.
co-management of marine mammals
We support the current requests for marine mammal co-management
funding in NMFS's Protected Resources Science and Management--Marine
Mammals, Sea Turtles, and Other Species line item. We request, however,
that the subcommittee make right a historic oversight by specifically
allocating funding for regions or species for which there are no
current arrangements. There are vast areas of Alaska that are not
covered by existing co-management agreements, including our own Chugach
region. Yet no funding has been allocated for those gaps, and funding
has stayed relatively flat for existing agreements.
Section 119 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) \5\ allows
NOAA/NMFS to establish agreements with Alaska Native organizations for
co-management of marine mammal populations to conserve marine mammals
and provide for subsistence uses. Yet, contrary to the MMPA, this
subcommittee's 2023 guidance \6\, and the Secretary of Commerce's 2022
Order \7\, NOAA has not agreed to any new co-management or co-
stewardship agreements for the species they manage. NOAA/NMFS has not
entered any agreements with new Native organizations since the early
2000s. Meanwhile, two commissions that existed and were funded pursuant
to MMPA at that time have since become inactive or disbanded. This has
left a gap in species and regions covered. We have had difficulty with
NMFS staff when requesting new agreements because they state that they
have no budget to support those agreements.
These agreements facilitate the exchange of information regarding
the conservation, management, and utilization of marine mammals in U.S.
waters in and around Alaska. This information is necessary for informed
management decisions--both by NOAA/NMFS and by Alaska Native
organizations. Since--because of budget reasons--some regions or groups
in Alaska have access to co-management while others do not, the current
situation is simply inequitable.
This means that Alaska Natives in Alaska's southcentral region have
no ability to co-manage species that are critical to our people's
cultural, spiritual, economic, and nutritional sustenance. Without such
agreements, there is no direct channel for compiling and sharing
information that we have with NOAA about species and the changing
climate and effects on the ecosystem. Failing to maintain co-management
agreements that cover every species and region doesn't just result in
unequal treatment of different populations of Alaska Natives, it also
squanders Federal dollars. Federal efforts to gather data, produce
reports, and manage species are less effective, more expensive and more
duplicative than they can and should be.
Co-management arrangements are sound fiscal management, because
every dollar provided to a Tribal organization for natural resource
management at the local level results in far more savings to the
Federal Government in terms of staffing, project costs, travel,
research, data collection, and duplication of efforts. It also results
in better data by incorporating local knowledge and leveraging other
funds and resources. We have been able to conduct surveys and stock
assessments that Federal and State agencies have neglected in our
region for many years. Yet there are no existing communication channels
to exchange this type of information between Tribes and Federal
partners. This is a prime opportunity for co-management agreements to
bolster collaboration and create a better result through cooperation
between Federal agencies and Tribal organizations who possess the local
knowledge and expertise.
Marine mammal species--most of which are federally managed by
NOAA--are vital to our cultural practices and subsistence way of life.
As the original managers of the lands and waters in our region, our
people have an unparalleled knowledge base and strong cultural ties
that have been developed through systematic observation over thousands
of years. These observations have been honed and refined as our Native
people developed and adapted their subsistence practices. Our Federal
partners should be able to share the knowledge from our efforts, rather
than duplicating or overlooking them.
Thank you for the opportunity to inform you about issues related to
the fiscal oversight of NOAA. We hope you keep the unique complexities
of the Alaska Native context in mind as you form the budget for FY2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NOAA-NMFS-HCPO-2023-2008173 at page 13 (funded by the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act).
\2\ See, e.g., Notices of Funding Opportunity for NOAA-NMFS-HCPO-
2023-2008173 at page 13 (``federal agencies or employees may serve as
unfunded collaborative project partners''); NOAA-NOS-NCCOS-2024-2008101
at page 16 (``An eligible U.S. entity may propose Federal agency
researchers as funded or unfunded collaborators.'').
\3\ Success rate is measured by the dollar amount of funds awarded
compared to the total applied for at the following agencies: National
Institutes of Health, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, and National Science Foundation.
\4\ NOAA-NOS-NCCOS-2024-2008101.
\5\ Public Law 103-238, codified at 16 U.S.C. 1388.
\6\ Senate Committee Report 118-62 at 36-37.
\7\ Joint Secretarial Order 3403: Fulfilling the Trust
Responsibility to Indian Tribes in the Stewardship of Federal Lands and
Waters (JSO 3403).
[This statement was submitted by Willow Hetrick-Price, Executive
Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in
Washington
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony
regarding the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) and
Congressional oversight of the Executive Branch.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a
non-profit, non-partisan organization committed to promoting ethical
governance, ensuring the integrity of our government institutions, and
protecting our democracy. We firmly believe that an open and
transparent government is necessary to address the threats our
democracy faces today. To advance this mission, CREW has taken legal
action to shed light on OLC's secret interpretations of the law and has
supported efforts to compel OLC to proactively disclose records
memorializing those opinions.\1\
Since 2016, CREW has filed 9 FOIA requests to obtain OLC documents,
but to date has only received a third of these records. CREW has yet to
receive any OLC memoranda we requested years ago on presidential
pardons,\2\ executive orders,\3\ and other consequential matters. These
examples are only a fraction of the many unanswered FOIA requests for
OLC documents filed by individuals and organizations around the
country.\4\ Furthermore, because OLC rarely discloses memoranda as a
result of a FOIA request, when organizations like ours are successful
in getting OLC materials it is only after extensive FOIA litigation, a
process that can often take years and requires significant
organizational and government resources.
It is in the long-term interest of all citizens to have access to
the legal advice given to the executive branch, irrespective of which
political party is currently in power. It is also essential that
Congress have access to OLC opinions in order to provide effective
oversight and serve as a check on potential overreach by the executive
branch. When Congress makes laws, the courts issue decisions or the
president takes executive action, each almost always does so on the
record. So too, binding legal guidance issued by OLC should be made
public in a timely manner.
We are pleased that in recent years both House and Senate
Appropriators have included strong language regarding the disclosure of
OLC opinions, including most recently in the Joint Explanatory
Statement of the FY 2024 Appropriations bill.\5\ However, given that
OLC has not responded by beginning the process of proactive disclosure
it is clear that stronger language is needed to ensure that OLC is
compliant with these reporting requirements.
Accordingly, we urge the subcommittee to adopt language similar to
the provisions on OLC opinions in House Report 117-97.\6\
Recommended Report Language:
Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinions.-The Committee is aware that
in 2004, 19 former senior OLC officials authored a document entitled
''Principles to Guide the Office of Legal Counsel,'' which included a
principle that ''OLC should publicly disclose its written legal
opinions in a timely manner, absent strong reasons for delay or
nondisclosure.'' The signers noted that such disclosure '' . . . helps
to ensure executive branch adherence to the rule of law [and] . . .
.promotes confidence in the lawfulness of governmental action. [It]
also adds an important voice to the development of constitutional
meaning . . . and a particularly valuable perspective on legal issues
regarding which the executive branch possesses relevant expertise . . .
.'' The Committee agrees with this argument for transparency, and its
alignment with the precedent for the public reporting of judicial
decisions. While the Committee understands that some OLC advice should
properly remain confidential, it also agrees with the views of the OLC
signers noted above that OLC should ''consider the circumstances in
which advice should be kept confidential, with a presumption in favor
of publication.''
The Committee therefore directs the Attorney General to direct OLC
to publish on a publicly accessible website all legal opinions and
written OLC communication of non-legal guidance, except in those
instances where the Attorney General determines that release would
cause a specific identifiable harm to the National defense or foreign
policy interests; information contained in the opinion relates to the
appointment of a specific individual not confirmed to Federal office;
or information contained in the opinion is specifically exempted from
disclosure by Section 552 of Title 5 United States Code. For final OLC
opinions for which the text is withheld in full or in substantial part,
the Attorney General should provide Congress a written explanation
detailing why the text was withheld and, to the extent possible,
release that explanation to the public.
In addition, not later than 180 days after the issuance of this
report, the Attorney General should submit to the Committee and publish
online a report that lists each OLC opinion currently in effect that
has been: designated by the Attorney General or his/her designee as
final; followed by government officials or contractors; relied on to
formulate current legal guidance; or cited in another OLC opinion. For
each such opinion, with information withheld only as provided by
Section 552 of Title 5 of the United States Code and with due
consideration to the presumption in favor of disclosure, the report
should indicate the title and date of issuance, the signer, and the
recipient identified in the opinion. An update of this list should be
submitted to the Committee with its future annual budget requests.
Thank you for your ongoing efforts to increase transparency of the
DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel. If CREW can provide any additional
insight into questions regarding OLC reform and transparency, we are
always happy to assist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CREW gets secret Barr memo on Trump obstruction, CREW (August
24, 2022), https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/press-releases/crew-
gets-secret-barr-memo-on-trump-obstruction/.
\2\ FOIA Request by CREW, to the Office Legal Counsel (July 1,
2020), https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/
2020-7-1-Presidential-Self-Pardons-1.pdf.
\3\ FOIA Request by CREW, to the Office Legal Counsel (January 31,
2017), https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/
2017-1-31-OLC-FOIA.pdf.
\4\ See, e.g., FOIA To OLC For Communications And Directives About
Events At Capitol During Congressional Certification Of 2020 Election
Results, American Oversight (January 11, 2021), https://
www.americanoversight.org/document/foia-to-olc-for-communications-and-
directives-about-events-at-capitol-during-congressional-certification-
of-2020-election-results and Exhibit A, Knight First Amendment
Institute (March 15, 2019), https://knightcolumbia.org/documents/
1552c902e4.
\5\ Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2024 (Public Law 118-24), https://www.congress.gov/
118/crec/2024/03/05/170/39/CREC-2024-03-05.pdf.
\6\ H.R. Rep. No. 97, 117th Cong. (1st Sess, 2021), https://
www.congress.gov/117/crpt/hrpt97/CRPT-117hrpt97.pdf.
[This statement was submitted by Debra Perlin, Policy Director,
Gabriella Cantor, Senior Policy Associate.]
______
Prepared Statement of Coastal States Organization,
Integrated Ocean Observing System Association,
National Estuarine Research Reserve Association,
National Marine Sanctuary Foundation, & Sea Grant Association
Chair and Members of the subcommittee, this joint statement is
submitted on behalf of the nonprofit organizations listed above who
share a deep concern for the resilience of the Nation's oceans, coasts,
and Great Lakes. The members of our organizations work as partners to
assist our coastal communities and enhance their resilience by
leveraging each other's contributions and strengths to ensure we
maximize the use of our resources towards synergistic outcomes i.e., a
whole that is greater than the sum of the parts.
America's coasts are highly desirable places to live, with growing
populations. Over 126 million residents--40% of the population of the
United States--live in coastal counties. These counties employ 56
million people, resulting in $3.4 trillion in wages annually, and
produce more than $8.3 trillion in goods and services. The ocean,
coasts, and Great Lakes are experiencing a unique set of challenges
from dramatic changes as a result of sea level rise, increasing coastal
storm frequency, coastal flooding, erosion, hypoxia, harmful algal
blooms, ocean acidification, biodiversity loss, and more.
Weather and climate related hazards, and the resulting loss of life
and negative impacts to our coastal environments and economies have
increased at an alarming rate. Since 1980, the Nation experienced 378
weather and climate disasters where overall damages reached or exceeded
$1 billion for a total exceeding $2.695 trillion. Over the last 5 years
(2019-2023), there were 102 events that resulted in nearly 1,996 deaths
and damages over $600 billion. These weather and climate coastal
hazards threaten critical coastal infrastructure, water and food
supplies, and lives and livelihoods. NOAA has recorded record high
global sea levels and some regions across the country are seeing up to
1,100% increases in high tide flooding. Additionally, warming waters
are changing ocean circulation and chemistry, sea levels are rising and
increasing storm intensity are changing the diversity and impacting the
abundance of marine species, including corals. These impacts weaken the
marine ecosystem's ability to provide critical ecological services and
natural infrastructure for climate resilience. This threatens the
physical well-being, economic prosperity, and food security of
communities along our coasts and businesses that rely on marine
resources and transportation.
This interface of coastal change and increasing coastal populations
is driving the need to enhance coastal community adaptation,
mitigation, and resilience capacity. The members of our organizations,
in partnership with NOAA, play leading roles in addressing these
continually evolving ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes challenges.
Coastal resilience is a complex and continuously evolving challenge
that requires a collaborative framework of federal, State, and local
partners. NOAA's partner programs, which are embedded in States and
communities--Coastal Zone Management Programs, Sea Grant Programs,
National Estuarine Research Reserves, National Marine Sanctuaries, and
the Integrated Ocean Observing System--work together to provide
tailored information, planning resources, protected land and water
areas, science, and science translation that provide comprehensive and
integrated services to address national priorities effectively at the
local, State, and regional level. Each of these partners provides a
critical tool in the toolbox needed to support communities in
addressing coastal resilience. If any of these tools are missing, or
Federal investments do not adequately support each of these tools,
efforts to address coastal resilience and adaptation will be hampered
and less effective. The immense challenges facing our coastal
communities and ecosystems are much too large for any one organization
to be able to solve alone. To ensure coastal communities are prepared
to address increasing coastal hazards, a robust investment in a
networked resilience initiative is necessary.
Coastal communities are looking at multi-billion dollar price tags
to bolster themselves from rising seas and associated coastal hazards.
The investments made under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and
the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), have made impressive strides to
advance ocean and coastal resiliency. However, these investments are
not a replacement for sustained annual funding which supports many NOAA
programs' and partners' core activities, which are not covered by the
BIL/IRA. For example, the immediate and long-term success of these
investments depend on sustained resources to increase capacity for
community engagement, long-term observation, planning, analysis of
options, implementation, stewardship and management of restored areas.
Furthermore, many of these programs have significant educational,
outreach and training mandates that complement the development of
coastal infrastructure and improve community resilience through
planning and preparedness, but which were not funded under the BIL or
IRA.
Our organizations strongly support the following investments in FY
2025 appropriations to ensure robust investments in advancing coastal
resilience, complementing, building upon, and supporting the
implementation of the BIL and IRA:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$145.7 million for the National Sea $108.5 million for Coastal
Grant College Program and $18 Management Grants and $64.782
million for Sea Grant Aquaculture million for Coastal Zone Mgmt. and
Research. Services
$87 million for National Marine $47 million for National Estuarine
Sanctuaries operations, research, Research Reserve System operations
& facilities and $8.5 million for and $10 million for procurement,
procurement, acquisition & acquisition & construction
construction
$56 million for the Regional $34 million for National Ocean and
Integrated Ocean Observing Program Coastal Security Fund
$11.2 million for Regional Ocean $45 million for the Coral Reef
Partnerships Conservation Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Sea Grant College Program.--A joint federal, State, and
local investment, Sea Grant works in the Great Lakes; Gulf of Mexico;
and on the Atlantic, Caribbean, and Pacific coasts and islands--
yielding quantifiable economic, social, and environmental benefits.
With a mission to enhance the practical use and conservation of
coastal, marine, and Great Lakes resources to create a sustainable
economy, a healthy environment, and resilient communities, Sea Grant
has benefitted from bipartisan congressional support since its creation
in 1966. Sea Grant funds peer-reviewed research and provides science-
based expertise and education that responds to local needs. Sea Grant
fosters cost-effective partnerships, leveraging nearly $3 for every $1
appropriated. In 2022, Sea Grant created or sustained 9,569 jobs and
1,601 small businesses, helped restore or protect over 2.1 million
acres of habitat, engaged 970,976 people in education, and helped
24,288 seafood industry personnel adopt responsible fishery practices.
The Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS).--The IOOS Regional
Associations (RAs) work with Tribal, State, local, and Federal agencies
to design and operate regional observing systems that provide
actionable information to a variety of stakeholders. IOOS links
observation to modeling and tools via data management in order to
improve weather forecasts, increase maritime safety and efficiency,
protect and restore healthy coastal ecosystems, reduce public health
risks, and mitigate the effects of coastal hazards including flooding
and harmful algal blooms. The IOOS regional network enables NOAA to
more efficiently achieve their goals by increased access to non-federal
data sources and by developing tailored information products that
address the unique needs of users around the Nation. The FY 2025
request supports the core operation of these regional systems allowing
them to continue critical real-time observations and data services.
Funds from BIL and IRA to the IOOS Regional Associations will help to
modernize the systems and build coastal resilience by increasing the
reach and utility of IOOS data for more user groups, particularly those
who are underserved in relation to their vulnerability to changes in
the coastal environment and marine resources. The benefits these
investments will bring are only possible because of the existing core
infrastructure.
Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Programs.--The 34 State and Territory
CZM Programs, in partnership with the National CZM Program, advance the
effective management, beneficial use, protection, and development of
the coastal zone. The demands on CZM Programs have steadily increased,
requiring greater balancing of coastal zone uses and needs for
conservation, while increasing weather and climate related hazards
threaten the lives and livelihoods of coastal communities. While BIL
and IRA funds provide support for habitat restoration projects and
other efforts, these funds address only a limited scope of coastal
resilience. This leaves critical gaps--such as vulnerability
assessments, long-term resilience planning, community engagement and
risk communication--that rely on annual appropriations for Coastal
Management Grants. The requested investment in Coastal Management
Grants will ensure comprehensive management of the coasts to address
all facets of coastal resilience and will enhance the implementation of
BIL and IRA funds managed by State and Territory CZM Programs.
National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS).--The NERRS is a
time-tested network of 30 coastal sites with a proven track record of
delivering the essential information and solutions communities need to
address climate change and other 21st century challenges. Over 50
years, and through many crises, Reserves have become trusted members of
their communities. They serve as living laboratories, support jobs,
contribute to the economy, help sustain fisheries, protect natural
infrastructure, and create access to nearly 1.4 million acres of land
and waters that provide outdoor experiences that enhance public health.
An increase in NERRS funding will send more dollars to States, add two
new Reserves in FY 2025 (in Louisiana and Wisconsin) and advance the
designation of a USVI site. It will strengthen the ability of Reserves
to put BIL funding to work where it's most needed and provide
stewardship to protect these investments for the future. It also will
broaden the impact of NERRS national programs that deliver in-demand
education, technical assistance and training, and community-informed
science and data, including the System-Wide Management Program, Coastal
Training Program, Science Collaborative Funding Program, and the
Davidson Graduate Research Fellowship.
National Marine Sanctuary System.--The National Marine Sanctuary
System encompasses over 620,000 square miles of marine and Great Lakes
waters protecting ecologically and culturally significant habitats.
National marine sanctuaries are sources for solutions. They protect
biodiversity, provide habitat for countless species of fish and
wildlife, and safeguard coastal communities from flooding and storms by
increasing resilience to the impacts of climate change. They are living
laboratories, outdoor classrooms, and tourism and recreation
destinations. There are six new national marine sanctuaries in our
Atlantic, Pacific, and Great Lakes waters undergoing the public
sanctuary designation process. Providing robust funding to the Office
of National Marine Sanctuaries is an investment in the growing
sanctuary communities to ensure public engagement and public-private
partnerships that are the hallmark of sanctuaries. Funding also
supports replacing and repairing vessels that are mission-critical to
operations and enforcement as well as improvements to visitors centers
and signage, which anchor tourism, and engagement in communities,
strengthening the impact of investments for sanctuary facilities. This
FY 25 request is an opportunity to invest in America's waters and the
communities and businesses that depend upon them.
The Regional Ocean Partnerships (ROPs).--The four ROPs play a
unique role in facilitating collaboration across State coastal
agencies, including State and Territory CZM Programs, Tribes, Federal
agencies, and other stakeholder groups, to manage the Nation's coast
and enhance coastal resilience by tackling complex issues at a regional
scale. BIL provided annual funding for the ROPs consistent with the ROP
Act. However, it is important to recognize the need for this funding to
be supported through annual appropriations not just supplemental
funding.
National Ocean and Coastal Security (NOCSA) Fund.--The NOCSA Fund
provides grants to nonprofit organizations, academic institutions, for-
profit organizations, and State, Territory, local, municipal, and
Tribal governments for the purpose of investing in conservation
projects that restore or expand natural coastal features that minimize
the impacts of storms and other naturally occurring events on nearby
communities. Increased resources under BIL and sustained annual
appropriations will enable coastal communities to tackle the vast need
for coastal habitat restoration and community resilience projects
across the Nation's coasts.
Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP).--Coral reefs are critical
ecosystems, which provide numerous environmental, economic and
resilience. The CRCP supports coral reef conservation in the 7 U.S.
jurisdictions that are home to the United States coral reefs: Florida,
Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and
the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as reefs internationally. This funding
supports priority areas, including coral reef restoration activities
and infrastructure, local capacity building, and site-based efforts to
enhance reef resilience to climate change through the reduction of
local-level stressors including land-based sources of pollution and
sustainable fisheries.
in conclusion
Ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes research, education, conservation,
and resource management programs funded by this subcommittee are
investments in the future health, resiliency, and well-being of our
coastal communities, which will result in improved quality of life, as
well as beneficial environmental and economic outcomes many times over
the Federal investment.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this joint statement.
______
Prepared Statement of Concerned Letcher Countians, LLC
addressing: federal bureau of prisons, department of justice
As the Senate Committee on Appropriations, subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies begins the process of
crafting Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) appropriations bills, we strongly urge
you to rescind the $506 million in Federal funding for FCI/FPC Letcher
to prevent its incalculable environmental, cultural, and demographic
damage. Instead, the money can be reappropriated for positive projects
in Letcher County.
If funded, FCI/FPC Letcher would be the 5th Federal prison in
eastern Kentucky and the 6th Federal prison in Kentucky overall.
Eastern Kentucky' 5th District alone houses more federally incarcerated
individuals than the entire state of New York yet remains economically
distressed. Further raising the risks, FCI/FPC Letcher would sit on an
abandoned surface coal mine.
Our group, Concerned Letcher Countians, LLC (CLC) is a non-profit
group of citizens centered in Letcher County and working to protect the
future of the county, particularly for our youth. We want them to have
a place to live, thrive, work, enjoy and be safe. We seek a sustainable
community that provides education, healthcare, senior care, and
environmental growth and protection. None of these goals includes a
Federal prison. In fact, a prison will adversely affect the future of
the county, particularly its youth, thus it is of grave concern for
Letcher County that we request rescission and transfer of this funding.
While the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has professed in their Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) that there has been ``consistent,
continuous, and unwavering support expressed by Letcher County's
elected representatives, community leaders, members of local
institutions and businesses, and the general public,'' their claim is
unfounded. A growing number of concerned residents of Letcher County
and Kentucky's 5th District are expressing opposition to this proposed
Federal project.
Here are several reasons CLC opposes Federal funding for FCI/FPC
Letcher prison:
1. The chosen site is an abandoned strip mine, of which the BOP
says: ``Outside the mining industry, there are few projects
involving the nature and scale to the site preparation required
to develop the proposed FCI/FPC.'' In fact, site preparation
alone will cost 92% of the total budget, or ``$466,203,000'' of
the $506 million, and that's not including the cost for the
building itself. BOP is overbudget in the site preparation
alone; they will be asking Congress for more money.
BOP predicts soil and rock excavation of over 10 million cubic
yards, and ``structural fill'' of over 9 million cubic yards
which includes valley fill into streams, hollows, wetlands,
which increases the risk of future flooding. In short, this
will be a federally funded strip mine.
BOP has not adequately addressed the risk of hazardous materials
unearthed by the previous surface mining (arsenic, lead,
selenium, chromium, mercury, manganese, among other heavy
metals) nor does it adequately describe the pollutants left
there including petroleum, diesel fuel, electrical transformer
fluids, gasoline, antifreeze, among others. These are toxic to
humans and wildlife as they contaminate surface and drinking
water and will be dug up again in the extensive excavation of
this site.
2. Letcher County suffered a devastating flood on July 28, 2022,
from which we have not fully recovered. Local services and
funds would be used for the prison construction but are needed
for houses, road and bridge repairs, water, sewer, garbage
pick-up, and for flood reconstruction.
3. Housing is sorely needed in Letcher County, both in flood relief
and even before the flood. Though the BOP says that the influx
of workers in construction, operation, and permanent operation
will live elsewhere and not worsen the housing crisis, local
housing leaders say it will.
4. Warehousing incarcerated people to count them in the local
decennial census to gain funding for local communities should
never be the work of the Federal Government or Congress. The
BOP States that this is advantageous because funding can be
obtained without the need to house them. This is egregious and
strongly alludes to chattel slavery. It is cruel and inhumane
to use people and tax dollars this way.
5. Letcher County and Central Appalachia are in a health manpower
shortage for mental health and substance misuse services, and
so are BOP's facilities. The federally incarcerated population,
by some accounts, has up to 40% with mental illness and
substance use disorder. It is unacceptable to place them in a
county which is lacking those services for its own population.
6. Coal production was the mono-economy of Letcher County and
southeastern Kentucky for the last 150 years, but as it wanes,
and many jobs lost, the citizenry is vulnerable to a
devastating proposition like another prison. This is a false
promise that has not shown growth in any of the 3 other
southeastern KY counties with Federal prisons. Conversely,
Ashland, KY in Boyd County has had a Federal prison since the
mid-1970's but also has a more vibrant economy from oil,
railroad, and proximity to the Ohio River. Letcher County and
the southeastern Kentucky counties do not have that. Nor will
another Federal prison ever replace the jobs lost to coal.
Other ideas with lasting valence are offered later in this
testimony.
7. Economic promises of hotels, jobs, restaurants have not occurred
because of the 3 other nearby Federal prisons. Appalachian
Regional Commission (ARC) says those counties, Clay, Martin,
and McCreary remain ``distressed.'' Communities in those
counties have continued to see depressed economies,
outmigration, and decreases in school populations since those
prisons were built in 1997, 2003 and 2004, respectively. ARC
says Letcher County already is ``distressed.''
8. Jobs are being touted by the proponents despite the BOP's total
contradiction in the DEIS. These false promises only serve to
mislead residents as we try to process the consequences of a
prison to our home community. Case in point, one local leader/
proponent said at the recent BOP Public Comment meeting (March
28, 2024) that this prison will provide ``a few hundred jobs
for Letcher County'' yet the DEIS says the hires from Letcher
County in construction, operation, and permanent workforce will
be ``small.'' Can Congress, in good faith, fund such
contradictory public statements?
9. Traffic will be unmanageable on those small roads leading to and
from the prison, Hwy 588 and 160. Kentucky's Annual Average
Daily Volume for 2020, as quoted in BOP's DEIS says that those
roads will go from less than ``50 vehicles'' per hour to ``276
total vehicles'' from 3:30 pm to 4:30 pm, when kids are on
school buses going home. Those roads are one or two lanes,
curvy, and already dangerous before increasing their volume by
more than 5-fold during school let-out. How does Congress
justify this risk to local school children?
10. Letcher County people are voting with their feet on the proposed
FCI Letcher because the DEIS States that of the 3 other Federal
prisons in southeastern Kentucky, there are ``90'' vacancies
and only ``one'' Letcher County resident works there. BOP says
this indicates that Letcher County residents lack ``interest''
or have an inability to meet ``hiring requirements.'' This
finding alone shows that Letcher County residents do not want
another prison.
11. Understaffing is a major problem across Federal prisons in the
United States, and especially in southeastern Kentucky, as the
BOP States in their DEIS. Understaffing makes the inherent
dangers of prisons even more dangerous for those incarcerated
and for the staff. USP McCreary has 36 vacancies; FCI
Manchester has 27 and USP Big Sandy has 27 unfilled positions.
At the time of the public comment meeting on March 28, 2024,
both USP Big Sandy and FCI Manchester were on lockdown, as
stated on their websites. A recent General Accounting Office
report says that of the 8 Federal prisons with the highest
rates of staff suicides, FCI Manchester is one of them. Since
those three prisons in southeastern KY cannot remain fully
staffed, why misuse tax dollars by building another
understaffed dangerous prison in Letcher County?
12. There is no documented need. The Federal prison population has
declined since its peak in 2013, and the aging current prisons
already have infrastructure, water, and sewage that supports
them and could be upgraded. There is no need, thus Congress
should not fund it.
13. The BOP fails to provide adequate studies of the effects of this
prison on the local population. Case in point, their DEIS says,
``Given their small population size, detailed demographic
statistics for Whitesburg and other communities in Letcher
County are unavailable.'' If BOP doesn't have these studies,
then how can predictions of consequences be accurate? Until
such information is available, this prison should not be
funded.
14. ``Outsiders'' is a word applied to anyone opposing this prison,
but a conscientiously minded person will recognize that all who
pay Federal taxes deserve a say in how the money is spent.
Further, since only a ``small'' number of Letcher Countians,
according to the BOP, will be hired at this proposed prison,
then most of the employees will be ``outsiders'' from other
counties and regions. Those incarcerated will be ``outsiders''
from a 500 miles radius, or anywhere in the Mid-Atlantic Region
which spans from Delaware to North Carolina and includes
Washington, D.C. They will be far from family and home
communities, a factor that worsens recidivism outcomes and
diminishes reentry programming.
15. The prison's sewage treatment plant will endanger the health of
the nearby river, the North Fork of the Kentucky, as well as
the Kings Creek tributary. Prison wastewater systems have about
a 10-year shelf-life, and that depends on the staff running
them. This is too great a risk to the residents downstream as
well as wildlife habitat which depend on the North Fork of the
KY River.
Concerned Letcher Countians requests, instead of a Federal prison,
that Congress rescind the $506 million appropriated for FCI/FPC Letcher
and any future requested funds for it. We recommend Congress
reappropriate all or part of the funds to Federal accounts across
relevant agencies that our community would be eligible for, and that
could address the economic distress and the variety of issues Letcher
County faces.
Concerning these appropriated Federal tax dollars, we believe
better uses would be to prevent incarceration by reappropriating the
money, or at least some of it, toward Federal programs that support
education and employment training for adolescents and youth, and early
childhood and family education, both of which have overwhelmingly shown
a reduction in later corrections system involvement.
In conclusion, we recommend Congress reappropriate all or part of
the $506,000,000 funds to Federal programs that represent progress for
eastern Kentucky and a future for Letcher County youth, and that do not
depend on incarceration.
[This statement was submitted by Artie Ann Bates, Secretary.]
______
Prepared Statement of Consortium of Social Science Associations
On behalf of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA),
I offer this written testimony for inclusion in the official committee
record. For fiscal year (FY) 2025, COSSA urges the Committee to
appropriate:
--At least$11.9 billion for the National Science Foundation
--$2 billion for the Census Bureau
--$60 million for the National Institute of Justice
--$75 million for the Bureau of Justice Statistics
First, allow me to thank the Committee for its long-standing,
bipartisan support for scientific research. Strong, sustained funding
for all U.S. science agencies is essential if we are to make progress
toward improving the health and economic competitiveness of the Nation.
COSSA serves as a united voice for a broad, diverse network of
organizations, institutions, communities, and stakeholders who care
about a successful and vibrant social and behavioral science research
enterprise. We represent the collective interests of all STEM
disciplines engaged in the rigorous study of why and how humans behave
as they do as individuals, groups and within institutions,
organizations, and society.
Social and behavioral science research is supported across the
Federal Government, including at the National Science Foundation and
the Department of Justice. Further, Federal statistics produced by the
Census Bureau and other Federal statistical agencies provide data
needed to conduct social science research to inform policy decisions.
Taken together, Federal social and behavioral science and statistical
data help provide answers to complex, human-centered questions
affecting all Americans.
national science foundation
COSSA joins the broader scientific community in support of at least
$11.9 billion for the National Science Foundation (NSF) in FY 2025. The
U.S. scientific enterprise, including NSF, requires stability,
predictability, and sustainable funding growth, as well as Federal
policies that are patient and can tolerate a reasonable amount of risk
in order to achieve the greatest payoff.
NSF is the only U.S. Federal agency tasked with supporting basic
research across all fields of science. NSF supports about a quarter of
all federally funded basic scientific research conducted at colleges
and universities nationwide and serves as the largest single funder of
university-based basic social and behavioral science research. Though
NSF's Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences Directorate (SBE)-one
of eight research directorates at NSF-represents less than five percent
of the entire NSF research budget, it supports around two-thirds of
total Federal funding for academic basic research in the social and
behavioral sciences. As the primary funding source for the majority of
our disciplines, stagnant or reduced funding for SBE has an outsized
impact on the social and behavioral science community. As increased
investment is made in NSF, we are hopeful the social, behavioral and
economic sciences will see commensurate increases.
Further, while by far the smallest of the research directorates,
SBE's impact is huge. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering
and Medicine stated in its 2017 consensus report, The Value of Social,
Behavioral, and Economic Sciences to National Priorities \1\, that
``nearly every major challenge the United States faces-from alleviating
unemployment to protecting itself from terrorism-requires understanding
the causes and consequences of people's behavior. Even societal
challenges that at first glance appear to be issues only of medicine or
engineering or computer science have social and behavioral
components.'' We all observed first-hand the importance of
understanding behavioral and social systems over the last several years
as the world collectively worked to gain control of the COVID-19
pandemic. From mask mandates to vaccine hesitancy, the social and
behavioral sciences have been shedding light on this uniquely human
challenge and informing policy solutions at all levels.
census bureau, u.s. department of commerce
COSSA requests that the Committee appropriate $2 billion for the
Census Bureau in FY 2025. Social scientists across the country rely on
the Census Bureau for accurate, timely, objective, and relevant data to
better understand the U.S. population and to produce findings that help
us shape policies that better serve the American people.
With sufficient investment, the Census Bureau can transform its
data collection and processing systems, expand its data storage and
analysis capabilities, continue its work to improve linking of data
from administrative records and big data sources, and ensure that the
Bureau continues to set the standard in data security and privacy
protection.
In addition, COSSA calls on Congress to fully fund the American
Community Survey (ACS) and maintain its status as a mandatory Federal
survey. The ACS is the only source of comparable, consistent, timely,
and high-quality demographic and socio-economic data for all
communities in the U.S. As a component of the Decennial Census, the ACS
is a ``mandatory'' national survey. The Census Bureau needs additional
funds to expand the ACS sample size (which has not been expanded since
2011) to produce more timely, granular data for a significant number of
geographies and sub-populations than currently achievable.
national institute of justice, u.s. department of justice
COSSA requests that the Committee appropriate at least $60 million
for the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) within the U.S. Department
of Justice's (DOJ) Office of Justice Programs (OJP). NIJ provides
funding for research, development, and evaluation projects at
institutions across the country to shed light on the most pressing
issues facing our Nation's criminal justice system today, including the
drivers of domestic radicalization, addressing the drug epidemic,
reducing violent crime, improving school safety, and fostering positive
relationships between law enforcement and the communities they serve.
Despite the Nation's growing need for objective, science backed
solutions, NIJ's budget has been on a gradual decline for more than a
decade. Funding shortfalls limit NIJ's ability to disseminate critical
findings to law enforcement agencies and other stakeholders who need
the most up-to-date information to improve policies and practices that
promote public safety and equitable access to justice. The justice
system of the future requires sustained investment in cutting-edge
research.
bureau of justice statistics, u.s. department of justice
As the Department's principal statistical agency, the Bureau of
Justice Statistics produces high-quality data on all aspects of the
United States criminal justice system, including corrections, courts,
crime type, law enforcement personnel and expenditures, Federal
processing of criminal cases, Indian country justice statistics, and
victims of crime. COSSA urges the Committee to appropriate at least $75
million for the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
Despite growing demand from policymakers, researchers, and other
stakeholders for high-quality criminal justice data across an expanding
array of variables, BJS has also faced significant budgetary challenges
over the past decade. Since FY 2010, the BJS budget has decreased by
42%, not accounting for inflation. Steady declines in funding have
resulted in antiquated systems and, especially, staffing shortfalls,
which can only be resolved through sustained investment. Increased
funding would allow BJS to modernize data collection and dissemination
systems, hire the necessary experts, and begin to develop the next
generation of statistical products to keep pace with the ever-changing
criminal justice landscape and fill critical knowledge gaps.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer this statement. Please do
not hesitate to contact me should you require additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24790/the-value-of-social-
behavioral-and-economic-sciences-to-national-priorities.
[This statement was submitted by Wendy A. Naus, Executive
Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of Court Appointed Special Advocates Program/
Guardian ad Litem Association for Children
Chairman Murray, Chair Shaheen, Vice Chairman Collins, Ranking
Member Moran, and Members of the Commerce, Justice, Science, and
Related Agencies subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit
remarks on the Department of Justice (DOJ) FY 2025 budget including
funding for the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) Program
through the Office of Justice Programs, State and Local Law Enforcement
Assistance Account.
CASA/GAL advocacy is a well-established model strongly associated
with improved long-term outcomes for child victims, for which the need
continues to be critical. With Congressional support at the requested
level of $15 million, the same as the President's FY 2025 budget
request, the CASA/GAL network in 49 States and the District of Columbia
will enhance and advance specialized training, tools, and resources to
continue delivering vital one-on-one best-interest advocacy that
addresses the complex and ever-evolving needs of traumatized children
who have been victimized by their caregivers.
Emerging issues such as the commercial sexual exploitation of
children and our Nation's ongoing opioid epidemic--for which children
account for an increasing number of victims--both necessitate a greater
specialization within one-on-one advocacy, with a keen and deliberate
focus on progressing toward the call within the Victims of Child Abuse
Act to serve every child victim. As we enrich CASA/GAL advocacy to
encompass evolving direct service needs, our National network will
further strengthen its capacity to serve over 250,000 child victims of
abuse and neglect.
Child victimization and maltreatment remains all too prevalent in
our country and the negative impact on children, their families and
society are significant. Traumatized victims of child abuse and neglect
face significant and multiple risk factors, most notably, juvenile
delinquency, adult criminality, and poor educational performance that
affects future employment and stability. These issues result in a hefty
impact on federal, State and local spending--at least one-quarter of
the DOJ budget is dedicated to our Nation's prison system, and at the
same time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
estimates the economic and social costs of child abuse and neglect to
total $124 billion nationwide per annum. Local CASA/GAL programs offer
an effective service to child victims of abuse and neglect that
improves outcomes, increases the efficient functioning of our court
systems, and saves millions in Federal and State taxpayer dollars
annually in the process.
CASA/GAL programs are, at the heart of their operation, a highly
effective leveraging of community-based resources to provide dedicated
and sustained one-on-one advocacy for child victims and advise the
courts of the child's best interests and needs throughout abuse and
neglect proceedings. Research has shown that the presence of a caring,
consistent adult in the life of a child victim is associated with
improved long-term outcomes. These efforts, which focus on helping the
child find a safe, permanent home where they can both heal and thrive,
require thorough background screening, specialized training, and
resources to promote a nationwide system of programs that adhere to and
assure the highest quality of services and care for the child victim.
CASA Program funds through DOJ achieve and uphold national standard
setting, assessment, accountability, and evaluation across 939 local,
State, and Tribal programs to promote improved child outcomes and
effective stewardship of public investments in victim advocacy.
Evidence-based practices, intensive technical assistance, direct
program guidance and partnerships, and national program standards and
quality assurance processes all lie at the foundation of effective
CASA/GAL program service delivery in communities across the Nation.
Given the nature of the CASA/GAL advocates' intensive work with
child victims of abuse and neglect, standards of rigorous screening,
training, supervision, and service are implemented nationwide, with
Congressional support, to ensure consistent quality for victims who
directly benefit from having their needs and rights championed in the
courtroom and in the community. Comprehensive pre-service, in-service,
and issue-focused training curricula--including training in
disproportionality, cultural competency, and working with older youth--
ensures a cutting edge approach to victim services centered on the
child thriving well into the future as a member of the community.
Federal support is foundational to the solid and high-quality
functioning of a national child advocacy network for child victims of
abuse and neglect.
As the needs of children who have experienced abuse and neglect
grow and change, so must the specialization of one-on-one advocacy and
services by CASA/GAL programs. Since the Victims of Child Abuse Act was
passed, the landscape of victims' services for children has evolved
significantly. Researchers and practitioners know more now than ever
about trauma, and its associated impacts on child development, as well
as the significant and multiple risk factors and issues faced by
children who have experienced abuse and neglect, such as mental health/
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), commercial sex trafficking,
overmedication, and the growing effects of substance use disorder and
the opioid epidemic in particular. Further, we know that youth of color
in particular face very significant challenges--in addition to
victimization--on their path to a thriving adulthood.
CASA/GAL advocates bring one-on-one attention and a dedicated focus
to each of the issues that the child victim faces, but additional
resources are needed to enhance and build their knowledge base as part
of a continuous advocacy development process.
These complex issues warrant adaptive and responsive training,
technical assistance, and resources, while continuing on a trajectory
of maintaining quality advocacy and services within current CASA/GAL
caseloads and also simultaneously building the capacity to take on
additional cases when appointed by the court. National CASA/GAL
Association is committed to continuous improvement of training,
technical assistance, and resource delivery to strengthen and support
local CASA/GAL programs and state organizations to help advocates
remain at the forefront of emerging child welfare issues.
FY 2025 funding of $15 million will be targeted to providing
subawards, on a competitive basis, to local and State CASA/GAL
organizations, and fortifying resources and training for CASA/GAL
programs and their staff and volunteers based upon existing best
practices and models. In addition, this Federal funding will be used to
target resources to serve over 250,000 child victims of abuse and
neglect and continue efforts toward the development of strong state
CASA/GAL organizations and local programs that will enhance support of
quality service delivery in local communities. Additional projects may
include sustaining development of training on best practices in
addressing the needs of children impacted by the opioid epidemic and
other forms of substance use disorder, child sex trafficking, children
of incarcerated parents, young people aging out of the foster care
system and addressing racial disproportionality in child welfare and
increasing diversity, equity and inclusion in our member staff,
volunteers and governing bodies.
According to the most recent government data available, the number
of substantiated child abuse and neglect cases was 588,000 in 2021.
This remains a significant population with equally significant and
complex issues and risk factors. Without the benefit of a specially
trained CASA/GAL advocate that is able to devote dedicated time and
attention to the needs of children, those children face a complex court
process and child welfare system that is often overwhelmed, under
resourced and challenging to navigate. Our ability as a national
network to serve every child who has experienced abuse or neglect is
directly tied to strengthening and expanding a foundational and
interwoven program of advocate training, technical assistance,
standards, tools, and resources that are funded with DOJ support.
While children who are the victims of maltreatment have suffered
significant trauma, these experiences do not have to be their only life
story. Juvenile detention and adult incarceration do not have to be the
path to their future. Substance use disorder, PTSD, homelessness, and
joblessness do not have to be the basis of their experiences. We can
change their trajectory, together, with Congressional support.
Caring, dedicated, and extensively trained CASA/GAL advocates bring
about positive changes in the lives of child victims. Full funding is
needed to continue expanding the advocate pipeline, enhance the
training, resources, and services provided to and through CASA/GAL
programs, and strengthen outcomes for future members of our Nation's
workforce.
We urge the subcommittee to allocate $15 million, the President's
FY 2025 budget request, for the Court Appointed Special Advocates
Program in FY 2025 to address the overwhelming need for dedicated
advocacy on behalf of children who have experienced abuse or neglect.
Thank you for your consideration.
[This statement was submitted by Tara L. Perry, Chief Executive
Officer.]
______
Prepared Statement of Daughters of Penelope
fy25 funding: vawa, voca programs & crime victims fund
Chair Jeanne Shaheen, Ranking Member Jerry Moran, and distinguished
members of the Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations
subcommittee, the Daughters of Penelope (DOP), an international service
organization for women of Greek heritage and Philhellenes, which is
dedicated, in part, to supporting survivors and their families of
domestic violence, is requesting meaningful support for Victims of
Crime Act (VOCA) (Office of Justice Programs--OVC) and Violence Against
Women Act (VAWA) (Office of Violence Against Women--OVW) programs at
the Department of Justice.
We sincerely thank Congress for taking important measures recently
to strengthen Federal programs that address domestic violence and that
provide the lifesaving services needed for survivors and their
families. These measures included the passage of the VOCA Fix to
Sustain the Crime Victims Fund Act of 2021, which is beginning to help
stabilize the Crime Victims Fund, and the passage of a strong
bipartisan-backed VAWA reauthorization through 2027. Now, these
programs must be properly funded.
To continue funding the essential and lifesaving services to crime
victims, Congress must provide a Crime Victims Fund cap for FY 2025
that is set at $1.9 billion; and as the President's FY 2025 budget
rightfully proposes, work toward a long-term solution to steady restore
VOCA funding and stabilize the CVF. We also support $1.15 billion for
VAWA programs but to truly meet survivors' needs.
voca programs & crime victims fund
The Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) created the Crime Victims Fund,
which serves as a mechanism to fund compensation and services for the
Nation's victims of Federal crime. The Fund is comprised of money from
criminals, and by law, the Fund is dedicated solely to victim services.
For example, the Fund is used to help pay for state victim compensation
and assistance programs and grants to victim service providers. A
considerable amount supports victims' out-of-pocket expenses such as
medical and counseling fees, lost wages, and funeral and burial costs.
The Fund provides formula grants to over 11,000 local victim assistance
programs.\1\ These agencies provided services to more than six million
victims of crime, including victims of murder, assault and sexual
assault, domestic violence, child abuse, stalking and elder abuse, and
others.
The Crime Victims Fund is financed by fines, forfeitures, or other
penalties paid by Federal crime offenders. Therefore, the Crime Victims
Fund is not funded by taxpayer dollars. However, it is unfortunate that
in the past Congress carved out funds from the CVF to use as offsets
for other government programs. Because CVF is comprised of non-taxpayer
dollars, it should not be considered available for use for non-VOCA
programs in the Federal budget. Therefore, we recommend to the
subcommittee that the Fund be used only for programs authorized under
the VOCA statute.
Finally, we recommend setting the Crime Victims' Fund cap to at
least $1.9 billion, which is $400 million more than the President's
recommendation, to address the urgent needs of victims of crime. From
FY2023 to FY2024, VOCA funds suffered a 30% cut--an approximate $600
million reduction. State programs are drastically impacted, and the
local services providers--such as the ones we support (see further
below)--are suffering from the cuts. According to one executive
director, Alabama ``was hit hard.'' At the recommended cap level,
Congress will not only ensure the continuation of enhanced services to
victims to meet their needs, but it also does not contribute or add to
the National debt or deficit because these are non-taxpayer funds.
Moreover, we support the President's two part FY2025 budget proposal
that provides a roadmap to stability for the Fund and VOCA, starting in
FY2026, by allocating $7.3 billion to the Fund and by requiring an
annual distribution of $2 billion in VOCA.
vawa programs
Domestic violence is a pervasive, life-threatening crime affecting
millions of individuals across our Nation regardless of age, gender,
socio-economic status, race or religion. The statistics are alarming.
According to the National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV) \2\:
--More than 1 in 4 women have experienced rape, physical violence,
and/or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetime.
--Approximately 8 million women are raped, physically assaulted, and/
or stalked by a current or former intimate partner each year.
--1 in 5 women and 1 in 38 men have experienced rape in her or his
lifetime.
--Nationwide, an average of 3 women are killed by a current or former
intimate partner every day.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
and The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS)
2015 Data Brief:
--In the United States, intimate partner contact sexual violence,
physical violence, and/or stalking was experienced by 36.4% (or
43.6 million) of U.S. women during their lifetime.\3\
--Almost 1 in 2 women and more than 2 in 5 men reported experiencing
contact sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking
victimization by an intimate partner at some point in their
lifetime.\4\
Also, of concern, are the following stats:
--On average, nearly 20 people per minute are physically abused by an
intimate partner in the U.S. During 1 year, this equates to
more than 10 million women and men.\5\
--Approximately 26% of children under the age of 18 are exposed to
domestic violence in their lifetime.\6\
Our nation's response to intimate partner and domestic violence is
driven by VAWA programs. Each of these programs is critical to ensuring
that victims are safe, that offenders are held accountable, and that
our communities are more secure. Thanks to VAWA, steady progress has
been made, however, there are many victims who still suffer in silence.
A 2023 24-hour survey of 1,626 domestic violence programs across the
U.S. found that a staggering 76,975 victims were served in one day.
However, 13,335 requests for services (such as emergency shelter,
transportation, or legal representation) went unmet because programs
lacked the resources to provide them, an increase from the previous
year.\7\ An estimated 54% of the unmet services were for Housing and
Emergency Shelter. The extreme gap between need and resources is clear.
daughters of penelope's work to support domestic violence shelters
Why are VAWA and VOCA programs important to the Daughters of
Penelope? In addition to our chapters supporting domestic violence
shelters in their respective local communities, the Daughters of
Penelope is a national sponsor and stakeholder of two domestic violence
shelters--Penelope House in Mobile, Alabama, and Penelope's Place in
Brockton, Massachusetts.
Penelope House was the first shelter established in Alabama when it
opened in 1979.--Since then, Penelope House is recognized as a model
shelter for others to emulate. VAWA and VOCA grant funding has been
critical in helping Penelope House to meet its mission of providing
safety, protection, and support to victims of domestic violence and
their children through shelter, advocacy, and individual and community
education. Penelope House has been awarded VAWA and VOCA grants from
the following programs: Shelter Services, Court Advocate Program, and
Transitional Living Program. Portions of these grants help to fund the
case managers, case and court advocates, and children's counselors and
program coordinators, among other employees who help to provide life-
saving support to domestic violence victims and their children.
statistics | effectiveness and importance of vawa and voca grant
funding
--Historically, VOCA/VAWA grants have funded more than 35% of
Penelope House's budget.
Penelope House's Court Advocacy Program is funded by VOCA and VAWA.
Its 2023 stats for clients served were:
--Adult Clients: 6,916
--Children: 5,812
--Court Appointments with Clients: 6,263
--Clients Assisted to obtain protection from abuse or no contact
orders: 1,439
VOCA supports the salaries and benefits for seven Court/Victim
Advocates who provide services to victims of domestic violence
throughout Mobile, Washington, Clarke, and Choctaw Counties of Alabama
as they navigate within the court system. (VOCA has become increasingly
important to Penelope House because its services were expanded to
include more counties.)
VAWA supports a full-time Court Advocate Administrative Assistant
and a portion of the salary for a Court/Victim Advocate for the Court
Advocacy Program. The Court Advocate Administrative Assistant provides
administrative support to Court/Victim Advocates and assistance to the
Court Advocacy Supervisor. The assistant also collects and compiles
program data needed for the evaluation of the Court Advocacy Program.
The Court Advocate Administrative Assistant is dually trained to serve
as a Court/Victim Advocate, when necessary, in case of illness or any
other absence of court advocates. Thus, a survivor will not have to be
alone as he/she attempts to navigate within the court system.
Penelope House's Emergency Shelter Program is funded by VOCA--
although the shelter is not fully staffed due to funding reductions and
therefore not able to fully meet the community's needs. It's 2023
service stats:
--Adults sheltered: 239
--Children sheltered: 252
--Total Client Service Hours: 7,441.5
--Total Nights of shelter provided: 4,611
--Crisis calls: 1,558
--Meals Served: 13,909
Penelope's Place, a five-bedroom shelter, is the only emergency
domestic violence shelter in Brockton and one of only 26 in
Massachusetts. It is often the first stop for the region's most
vulnerable families and the last chance for trauma survivors who have
nowhere else to turn.
--In Fiscal Year 2023 (July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023), it housed 58
survivors of domestic violence, including children, who were
fleeing imminent danger. 100% of the residents were low-income
as determined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
--Since FY 18, the shelter has seen a 31% increase in the number of
survivors served.
--In FY 23, half of the survivors were adults while the other half of
the survivors served were children of whom 34% were infants
(under 1 year of age) and 55% were children under the age of
10--both increases from FY 22.
VOCA and VAWA funding is equally vital to Penelope's Place. VOCA
funding supports a rape crisis center and domestic violence support
programs including ``SAFEPLAN'' court advocacy that aids residents with
restraining and harassment orders. According to Penelope Place's
president and CEO, ``In fact, 75% of people who call a Statewide
shelter for DV shelter are turned away every day. That's why VAWA and
VOCA funding is so important-the more supports/resources we can provide
survivors, the safer they are, and the more people we can serve as we
are able to help them move into affordable housing more quickly.''
recommendation
The Daughters of Penelope is requesting support for Victims of
Crime Act (VOCA) and Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) programs, which
are vital to DOP programs that serve its mission. Specifically, we
request a Crime Victims Fund cap for FY 2025 set to at least $1.9
billion and without any transfers to programs not authorized under the
VOCA statute. The CVF is not funded by taxpayer dollars. Therefore, the
cap can be sustained or raised without adding to the National debt or
deficit and a roadmap for stability must be in place. We also support
$1.15 billion for VAWA to meet survivors' needs. As the missions of
domestic violence centers nationwide, such as Penelope House and
Penelope's Place, expand into jurisdictions due to the unfortunate
increased need to provide services, the viability of VOCA and VAWA
grants have become ever more important to meet the survivors' needs.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit our written testimony to
the subcommittee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.justice.gov/jmd/page/file/1489521/download, Page
144.
\2\ NNEDV Domestic Violence Fact Sheet, accessed https://nnedv.org/
wp-content/uploads/2022/07/DVSA-Fact-Sheet-Updated-71222.pdf.
\3\ https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/2015data-
brief508.pdf.
\4\ The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey |
2016/2017 Report on Intimate Partner Violence, P.5, accessed https://
www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs/NISVSReportonIPV_2022.pdf.
\5\ https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-
a.pdf.
\6\ NNEDV Domestic Violence Fact Sheet, accessed https://nnedv.org/
wp-content/uploads/2022/07/DVSA-Fact-Sheet-Updated-71222.pdf.
\7\ 18th Annual Domestic Violence Counts Report, accessed https://
nnedv.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/18th-Annual-DV-Counts-Report-
National-Summary-FINAL-EN.pdf (nnedv.org).
[This statement was submitted by Marianthi Treppiedi, National
President.]
______
Prepared Statement of Entomological Society of America
The Entomological Society of America (ESA) respectfully submits
this statement for the official record in support of funding for the
National Science Foundation (NSF). ESA joins the research community by
requesting a robust fiscal year (FY) 2025 appropriation of $11.9
billion for NSF, including strong support for the Directorate for
Biological Sciences (BIO). Through activities within BIO, NSF advances
the frontiers of knowledge about complex biological systems at multiple
scales, from molecules and cells to organisms and ecosystems. NSF BIO
is the Nation's primary funder of fundamental research on biodiversity,
ecology, and environmental biology. In addition, the Directorate
contributes to the support of essential research infrastructure,
including biological collections and field stations.
For nearly 75 years, the NSF is the only Federal agency that
supports basic research across all scientific and engineering
disciplines, outside of the medical sciences. Each year, the Foundation
supports over 350,000 researchers, scientific trainees, teachers, and
students, primarily through competitive grants to nearly 2,000
colleges, universities, and other institutions in all 50 States. NSF
also plays a critical role in training the next generation of
scientists and engineers through programs like the Graduate Research
Fellowship Program (GRFP), ensuring that the United States will
maintain its global leadership in science and engineering research.
NSF-sponsored research in entomology and other basic biological
sciences, primarily supported through BIO, provides the fundamental
discoveries that advance knowledge and facilitate the development of
new technologies and strategies for addressing societal challenges
related to economic growth, national security, and human health.
Because insects constitute two out of every three species, fundamental
research on their biology has provided foundational insights across all
areas of biology, including cell and molecular biology, genomics,
physiology, ecology, behavior, and evolution. In turn, these insights
have been applied toward challenges in a wide range of fields,
including conservation biology, habitat management, food and livestock
production, pest management, and policy.
NSF BIO has supported crucial work to understand vector-borne
diseases, directly relevant to the nearly 500,000 Americans infected
with a tick-borne disease annually \1\. In a recent needs assessment
survey of vector control specialists from the Southeastern United
States, respondents highlighted an underinvestment in vector control
activities focused on ticks, with the majority of professionals focused
on mosquitos.\2\ This is one reason why vector control agencies are
largely unaware of where tick populations are highest, preventing
formal tick control and yielding continued disease transmission. In
2020, NSF awarded a $5.8 million grant to the University of Idaho to
leverage big data to improve the prediction of tick-borne disease
patterns and dynamics \3\. With this support, the research team
conducted investigations on the integration of tick environment,
ecology, human behavior, and socioeconomics using advanced mathematics
to identify hotspot areas for targeted tick control activities. Their
work has the potential to create a paradigm shift in how limited
datasets can be utilized to better inform vector control response.
Research supported through NSF's Center for Environmental
Sustainability through Insect Farming (CEIF) will be critical to
developing new methods to enhance and accelerate the feasibility of
using insects as feed for livestock, poultry, and aquaculture.\4\ CEIF
brings together leading industry and academic experts from across the
United States to address research gaps that are necessary to explore in
for insect-based products to become a sustainable alternative for feed
and food production. This work, which is being conducted through a
partnership between Purdue University, Indiana University, Texas A&M,
and Mississippi State University along with private sector partners,
not only plays a critical role in workforce training but also has the
potential to transform the global food system.
NSF also supports the development of technologies and methods that
directly impact economic sectors that are highly dependent on
entomology. For example, recent GRFP recipients have explored
innovative approaches to managing pest-induced agricultural damage to
commodity crops and insects' behavioral responses to external stimuli,
with significant economic and human health implications. A recent study
led by an NSF GRFP recipient investigated the effectiveness of post-
harvest cold storage in spotted-wing drosophila control. Spotted-wing
drosophila is a uniquely devastating pest of small fruits like
blueberries, raspberries, and strawberries owing to its ability to lay
eggs in ripening fruit. The estimated revenue losses of wild
blueberries due to spotted wing drosophila amounted to nearly $7
million in the State of Maine alone.\5\ The study found that storing
fruit at or near freezing temperatures for 3-5 days resulted in
decreased pest survival. After accounting for slight daily cost
depreciation from holding the crop and the initial investment of
purchasing a cold storage system, farmers could realize individual net
profits of $88,000 to $483,000 over 20 years by utilizing these post-
harvest cold storage protocols.\6\ This practice also has the potential
to reduce the need for pesticides and could prevent unintentional
spread of the pest through shipment and trade.
NSF has also supported work directly relevant to biodiversity
conservation. Monarch butterflies, renowned for their stunning
migrations, are in urgent need of protection and conservation efforts
due to increasing parasite infections threatening their populations.
Monarch caterpillars feed on milkweed, which contain toxic cardenolides
that not only protect monarchs from vertebrate predators,\7\ but which
have also been found to provide protection from the virulent protozoan
parasites.\8\ However, the concentration and composition of
cardenolides needed to effectively reduce protozoan parasite infections
is unknown. A new study, funded in part by support through the National
Science Foundation GRFP, found that diverse mixtures of cardenolide
compounds even at low concentrations performed better than individual
cardenolides at high concentrations to reduce parasite infections in
monarch butterflies.\9\ This breakthrough suggests that selecting and
planting milkweed species that produce diverse cardenolides can better
protect monarch butterflies from protozoan parasite infections.
In addition to funding research, NSF BIO plays a critical role in
the curation, maintenance, and enhancement of physical-biological
collections. These collections and their associated data sets serve a
variety of purposes, and while they are particularly important to
entomology, their value to the broader scientific enterprise cannot be
overstated. Physical collections enable the rapid identification and
mitigation of costly invasive pests that affect agriculture, forestry,
and human and animal health. This is only achievable because such
collections are continuously being updated to reflect environmental
changes, evolutionary developments, and shifting migratory patterns of
invasive species around the world. Furthermore, new and emerging
technologies enable scientists to gain novel insights from physical
historic samples in an ongoing manner.
While collections-focused awards are encouraging, ESA is concerned
by the inconsistent Federal support for biological collections. Recent
advancements in imaging, digitization, and data collection and storage
technologies have caused some to question the necessity of continued
support for existing biological collections. ESA recognizes that
technological development is spurring substantive discussion about the
future of biological collections. However, while these new developments
and advancements will hopefully yield new benefits for biological
research, they are not a replacement for physical biological
collections. Furthermore, new and emerging technologies enable
scientists to gain novel insights from physical historic samples in
previously unanticipated way. Given their continuing relevance and
broad application to domestic homeland security, public health,
agriculture, food security, and environmental sustainability, ESA
firmly supports continued Federal investment in programs supporting
collections such as NSF's Infrastructure Capacity for Biological
Research.
Given NSF's critical role in supporting fundamental research and
education across science and engineering disciplines, ESA supports an
overall FY 2025 NSF budget of $11.9 billion. ESA requests robust
support for the NSF BIO Directorate, which funds important research
studies and biological collections, enabling discoveries in the
entomological sciences to contribute to understanding environmental and
evolutionary biology, physiological and developmental systems, and
molecular and cellular mechanisms.
ESA, headquartered in Annapolis, Maryland, is the largest
organization in the world serving the professional and
scientific needs of entomologists and individuals in related
disciplines. As the largest and one of the oldest insect
science organizations in the world, ESA has over 7,000 members
affiliated with educational institutions, health agencies,
private industry, and government. Members are researchers,
teachers, extension service personnel, administrators,
marketing representatives, research technicians, consultants,
students, pest management professionals, and hobbyists.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer the Entomological Society of
America's support for NSF research programs. For more information about
the Entomological Society of America, please see http://
www.entsoc.org/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Trends in Reported Vectorborne Disease Cases--United States and
Territories, 2004-2016, available at: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/
67/wr/mm6717e1.htm?s_cid=mm6717e1_w.
\2\ Dye-Braumuller, K.C. et. al. Needs Assessment of Southeastern
United States Vector Control Agencies. Trop. Med. Infect. Dis. 2022,
7(5), 73; https://doi.org/10.3390/tropicalmed7050073.
\3\ https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2019609.
\4\ Center for Environmental Sustainability Through Insect Farming,
available at: https://iucrc.nsf.gov/centers/center-for-environmental-
sustainability-through-insect-farming/.
\5\ Yeh, D. A. et al. The Economic Impacts and Management of
Spotted Wing Drosophila (Drosophila Suzukii): The Case of Wild
Blueberries in Maine. Journal of Economic Entomology, 6 Jun. 2020,
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31943106/.
\6\ Kraft, L.J. et al. Determining the effect of postharvest cold
storage treatment on the survival of immature Drosophila suzukii
(Diptera: Drosophilidae) in small fruits. Journal of Economic
Entomology, 11 Sept. 2020, https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toaa185.
\7\ Brower, L., and C. Moffitt. 1974. Palatability dynamics of
cardenolides in the monarch butterfly. Nature 249: 280-283.
\8\ Lefevre, T., L. Oliver, M. D. Hunter, and J. C. de Roode. 2010.
Evidence for trans-generational medication in nature. Ecology Letters
13: 1485-1493.
\9\ Hoogshagen, M., A. P. Hastings, J. Chavez, M. Duckett, R.
Pettit, A. P. Pahnke, A. A. Agrawal, and J. C. de Roode. 2023. Mixtures
of milkweed cardenolides protect monarch butterflies against parasites.
Journal of Chemical Ecology: 1-11.
[This statement was submitted by Jennifer A. Henke, BCE,
President.]
______
Prepared Statement of Environmental Solutions International
Chair and Members of the subcommittee, in this testimony we address
appropriations and directions for the agencies listed above for the
recovery of great whales and the climate while enhancing fisheries, and
for the protection of our elections, as they will determine the rest.
We have spent much of our careers in wildlife conservation and
science, election protection and responsive government. Some of us
worked with Senate champion Joe Biden and House sponsor Barbara Boxer,
to enact the Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act (the dolphin-
safe labeling act of 1990) (Public Law 101-627). We also helped improve
the Endangered Species Act in 1988 and recently suggested recovery
steps for the North Atlantic Right Whale (NARW).
A Win-Win Solution for Whales, Lobstermen and the Climate: Speed
limits, technology, and whale-safe marketing and Greenhouse Gas Removal
(GGR). There are several ways that nature removes methane (one of the
most powerful climate pollutants) and CO2. One is through natural ocean
iron fertilization, a process that we can enhance, with co-benefits in
increased populations of phytoplankton, lobster larvae and great
whales. A related method uses similar iron aerosols added just over the
ocean to oxidize methane out of existence. These are covered below.
The Committee should ask the relevant agencies for capability
statements estimating the cost of the recommended programs and several
options for offsetting reductions in the budget in time to include
appropriations and authorizing language, while accounting for the
increases in productivity and thus, tax income, likely to flow from
these enhancements. We ask that you:
(1) Direct NOAA, in consultation with the EPA and Justice, to
conduct further research on GGR including but not limited to
that recommended by the National Academy of Sciences to assess
and deploy ocean-based methods of removing CO2, methane, and
other greenhouse gasses (GHG), and by directly restoring great
whales and other ocean life to perform what even the
International Monetary Fund reported would provide billions of
dollars in climate services. (https://www.imf.org/en/
Publications/fandd/issues/2019/12/natures-
solution-to-climate-change-
chami#: :text=We%20estimate%20that%2C%20if%
20whales,whales'%20CO2%20sequestration%20efforts.) A previous
study by Schmitz found rewilding nine species groups--marine
fish, whales, sharks, gray wolves, wildebeest, sea otters, musk
oxen, African forest elephants, and American bison-could
sequester 6.4 billion more tons of carbon, nearly the annual
carbon footprint of the U.S.
(2) Direct NOAA to collaborate with the DOJ, the EPA, The
International Maritime Organization and others to propose
regulations to ensure the full and proper deployment of Ocean-
based GGR and sea life restoration. The methods recommended by
the NAS for further testing include methods that could increase
and enhance the food supply of baleen whales, like the NARW, as
well as lobster larvae, creating a win-win for the fishing,
conservation, and scientific communities. (https://
nap.nationalacademies.org/read/26278/chapter/5#99; https://
nap.nationalacademies.org/read/26278/chapter/8 and https://
www.nationalacademies.org/event/40025_10-2023_atmospheric-
methane-
removal-needs-challenges-and-opportunities https://
www.nationalacademies.
org/event/40025_10-2023_atmospheric-methane-removal-needs-
challenges-and-opportunities) The NAS sets out budgets for this
research, for example Table 3.4 at page 100 in the Ocean CO2
Report--https://nap.
nationalacademies.org/read/26278/chapter/5#99.
(3) Direct the U.S. Trade Representative and the International Trade
Commission and Administration to assess and propose options for
improving the standards and incentives adopted by all parties
under the Global Methane Pledge and the Montreal Protocol
(which may have jurisdiction over some climate interventions)
and for using trade (tariffs, embargoes, etc.) and aid to
expedite and scale up GGR. And direct OSTP and all of Commerce
to cooperate in this work.
(4) Direct the Administrator of NOAA to report to the Committees of
jurisdiction on options for governing GGR domestically and
internationally to ensure that such methods are neither
underdone, overdone nor improperly done. These should include
and assess the governance recommendations received by the OSTP
regarding its 5-year plan and a draft Executive Order to
assess, test, expedite and govern climate interventions here
and abroad.
The death of any whale by preventable human causes must be avoided,
but the deaths of 3 female NARWs in the first 3 months of 2024, means
that we have also lost all the calves they could have borne had they
not been killed by ship strikes or fishing gear entanglement. Mothers
with calves are especially vulnerable as they spend more time at the
surface. Near the Statue of Liberty, a cruise ship carried a dead sei
whale on its bow as if to say ``This is the welcome we give to
whales.'' (https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-68980345). In
2019 over 100 shipping companies and conservation groups wrote the IMO
urging them to adopt speed limits for ships to reduce pollution and
increase efficiency. https://www.transportenvironment.org/wp-content/
uploads/2021/07/Joint%20industry_NGO
%20speed%20letter%20to%20the%20IMO.pdf.
We ask that you direct NOAA to:
(a) implement mandatory ship speed limits for vessels 35 feet and
larger, and
(b) aggressively pursue development, refinement, and implementation
of ropeless fishing gear for fixed trap fisheries; and
(c) propose a whale-safe marketing program for lobster caught with
ropeless gear and for ships equipped with effective, automatic
speed controls that can be overridden but take effect when
whale warnings are in effect.
Suggested Bill Language--Under National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Operations, Research, and Facilities (Division B--
Commerce)
add: Provided further, That of the amount appropriated for the
Department, an increase above the amount requested by the
Administration for FY2025 of no less than $10,000,000, of the funds
made available each year, through the Inflation Reduction Act or
otherwise, be used, via reprogramming or otherwise, to establish and
enforce mandatory boat and ship speed limits to protect great whales,
including but not limited to NARW, from ship strikes, provided further
that mandatory enforcement may include fines that may be retained and
used for the salaries and expenses associated with such enforcement;
Provided further, That any proceeds from seizure and sale of ships
violating such mandatory speed limits, and the cargos thereof, may be
retained and used by the NOAA for enforcement of speed limits, such
proceeds to remain available until expended. An increase above the
amount requested by the Administration of no less than $20,000,000 is
hereby appropriated to be used by the Administrator to establish a
program for the development, assessment and field testing of methods of
GGR through the use of ocean fertilization and enhanced atmospheric
methane oxidation using iron and, as the Administrator may determine,
other micronutrients in areas found to be lacking. This complements $36
million awarded by ARPA-E for marine CO2 removal in 2023. The
Administrator shall report quarterly on the progress and results of
such program and recommend changes to enhance the program.
Under Coast Guard (Division F--Homeland Security) in the full
Committee or as a pass-through in the CJS bill add: Provided, That of
the amount appropriated for the Department, for FY2025 or from the IRA,
no less than $10,000,000 above the amount requested shall be available,
in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, to enforce
mandatory boat speed limits and other regulations to protect great
whales from ship strikes, provided further that such enforcement may
include fines that may be retained and used for expenses associated
with such enforcement; Provided further, That proceeds from seizure and
sale of ships violating such mandatory boat speed limits or other
regulations for NARW conservation, and the cargos thereof, may be
retained and used by the Coast Guard in cooperation with NOAA for
expenses associated with enforcing such boat and ship speed limits,
proceeds to remain available until expended.
Division B--Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies--Title
I--Department of Commerce--Under Scientific and Technical Research and
Services, within the support for Climate and Energy Measurement, Tools,
and Testbeds: The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
shall direct such funds from the amounts appropriated as necessary to
expand its research on ocean-based destruction and removal of the
greenhouse gasses including but not limited to methane and CO2. NIST
shall report to the Committees on its progress within 6 months and
annually thereafter.
Under Division JJ--North Atlantic Right Whales: Given the recently
documented deaths and injuries of NARWs due to lobster rope
entanglement, we recommend that Congress direct the Administrator to
provide a buy-out option for each of the years up to 2029. We suggest
bill language here in a new Subsection (c):
To the previously enacted provision beginning with ``SEC. 101.
NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALES AND REGULATIONS.'' add a new subsection ( c
) below:
(a) IN GENERAL.-Notwithstanding any other provision of law except
as provided in subsection (b), for the period . . . the Final Rule
amending the regulations implementing the Atlantic Large Whale Take
Reduction Plan (86 Fed. Reg. 51970) shall be deemed sufficient to
ensure . . .
(b) EXCEPTION.- . . .
(c) Compensation for Voluntarily Ending or Suspending Rope Use: The
Administrator is hereby directed to provide a buy-out option for each
of the years up to 2029 to pay lobstermen and Jonah Crab fishermen
their average net annual profit from their fishing operations as
reported to the Maine and Federal revenue services, made using roped
gear for the previous 3 years if they remove their gear from the water
for that full season, or to pay in proportion to the part of the season
not so fished when great whales are likely to be present, if the
Administrator confirms throughout that period in consultation with
state authorities that they have complied and that there is a parallel
reduction in the fleet using ropes and that the number of ropes in the
water of or off each State used by NARWs has been reduced accordingly.
The Administrator shall assess fines for violating the agreements at
treble damages. The Administrator is hereby authorized to provide, in
consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, a refundable tax
credit in lieu of direct payment, for documented compliance with such
buy-out terms as the Administrator may prescribe. In exchange for such
payment, the Administrator shall require fishermen accepting the buy-
out to participate in a program of testing ropeless fishing gear which
allows them to keep and sell such lobster or crab as they may catch
with only a 50% reduction in the payments they have received for each
dollar of net profit from the sale of that catch and prepare to market
such seafood as ``Whale Safe'' under a program the Administrator shall
prepare. Administrator of NOAA shall within 30 days of the date of
enactment implement its proposed mandatory speed limit, making it
applicable to all boats 35 feet and longer in any areas and times where
great whales are likely to be present. The Administrator and the
Commandant of the Coast Guard shall enforce the speed limits through
means such as fines, confiscation of vessels and cargo, and suspension
or, upon a second violation, permanent loss of captains' and pilots'
licenses. NOAA Fisheries shall use such FY2025 or IRA funds as
necessary but no less than $5,000,000 more than requested to expand its
Gear Lending Library and training program for fixed trap fisheries, and
award grants to address any existing technological deficiencies of
ropeless technology that discourages adoption.
Protecting Elections--Direct the Census Bureau, the Election
Assistance Commission and the Attorney General to report jointly to the
Committees on Appropriations, Oversight, and Administration and the
public within thirty days, to the extent possible, every month
thereafter in 2024 on the extent to which the right to vote has ``in
any way'' been abridged by any state or jurisdiction by changes in the
law, the administration thereof, and court decisions since 2012. The
report should apply the stipulations of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment
to the delegations to the House of any state that has adopted de jure
or de facto measures that are likely to abridge, limit or impede ``in
any way'' voting age residents, including but not limited to racial and
ethnic minorities, the elderly, handicapped, those without drivers'
licenses, those stationed or enrolled for a limited time in state, and
others, from exercising their right to vote. The report should provide
for each State the number of Members of Congress, and thus electors,
who would no longer be eligible to serve after the 2024 election if
Section 2 were to be fully implemented and a list of States that would
receive those redirected House seats and electors.
Direct the DOJ and Election Assistance Commission, in consultation
with the Cyber Security and Infrastructure Security Agency's Project
2024 (https://www.cisa.gov/topics/election-security/protect2024) to
report within 30 days of your request, on:
(a) the extent to which each State and jurisdiction managing its own
elections has installed or instituted state of the art physical
and technical security and transparent auditing procedures,
such as preserving ballot images to help avoid the need for
expensive recounts;
(b) recommendations for legislation and other steps to incorporate
by statute (amending 52 U.S.C. Sec. 10701), the specific
requirement that electronic election records, including
original digital ballot images, be preserved for 22 months
(like all other election records) and that they be posted
online (as is already done in some jurisdictions) as issued in
the July 19, 2021, DOJ directive that all electronic voting and
election records must be preserved just as paper records must,
and
(c) recommendations for legislation and other steps to provide a
private right of action to enforce the election laws with
awards of reasonable attorneys and expert witness' fees to
substantially successful plaintiffs so that voters need not
rely on any Department of Justice that may not have the
resources or the inclination to enforce the law.
[This statement was submitted by Sandra Scholar, Esq., John
Fitzgerald, Esq., Albert Manville, Ph.D., Christine Real de Azua,
Carmella Mazzotta & Christopher Croft.]
______
Prepared Statement of Federation of American Societies for Experimental
Biology
Chair Jeanne Shaheen, Ranking Member Jerry Moran and Members of the
Committee, FASEB FY 2025 Recommendation: at least $16.7 billion for
NSF. With a mandate to support fundamental research across all fields
of science, engineering, and mathematics, the NSF is the cornerstone of
our Nation's scientific and innovation enterprise while also advancing
our security and economic interests. Through the recently created
Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP), it will
be better able to collaborate with other stakeholders to translate
fundamental research into commercially viable products and services
enhancing our competitiveness on the global stage. However, NSF must
have enough funds to enable steady, sustained increases across the
entire agency.
In FY 2024 the enacted level was $9.06 billion for NSF. The Fiscal
Responsibility Act, (Public Law 118-5), reduces FY 2024 nondefense
discretionary (NDD) spending to $704 billion which is below the FY 2023
level. The bipartisan top line agreement between the House and Senate
raises NDD to $773 billion for FY 2024. However, there is no guarantee
that with this increase, NSF will receive enough to reach the CHIPS and
Science Act (Public Law 117-167) authorized level for FY 2024 of $15.65
billion.\1\
In FY 2023, NSF benefited from over $1 billion in emergency
supplemental funding and was appropriated a total of $9.9 billion. With
$335 million of that directed towards implementation of the CHIPS and
Science Act, $9.5 billion was left for more traditional use which still
required the agency to make cuts to priority areas when they developed
their FY 2023 spend plan. NSF faces additional challenges should
Congress fail to provide the agency with its authorized level in the
final FY 2024 appropriations bill, including being unable to meet the
urgent needs in emerging industries, building a resilient planet, and
supporting workforce efforts to scale our science and innovation
ecosystem to meet our competitive needs. These include scaling the
Regional Innovation Engines program supporting innovation in
geographies that have not received the full benefits of technology
advancements in decades; increasing work in artificial intelligence;
and expanding programs in other emerging areas such as biotechnology
and scaling the science ecosystem.\2\
Among Federal science agencies, NSF has the unique capacity to:
Support multi-disciplinary research.--By leveraging its portfolio
across the sciences, NSF funds cutting-edge research at the interface
of the physical, biological, and social sciences to tackle challenges
in creative ways, including climate change, biodiversity loss, and One
Health.\3\
Organize and lead research partnerships at speed and scale.--The
NSF coordinates and leads interagency research endeavors, including
partnerships with NIH and DOE SC. These collaborations advance public
health and clean energy, the development of artificial intelligence,
and other national priorities.\4\
Train the next generation of scientists from diverse backgrounds.--
NSF plays a key role in creating educational pathways and supporting
the accessibility of scientific education, training scientists from
diverse backgrounds to increase inclusivity in science, advancing AI,
and promoting national security. These scientists--some of whom will
become entrepreneurs--will work across different scientific disciplines
and broaden participation in science and engineering among
underrepresented and diverse groups.\5\
There is also a pressing need to expand our scientific enterprise
across all disciplines as well as diversify the STEM workforce. Recent
data demonstrates that NSF was able to fund only 29 percent of the
high-quality research proposals that were submitted, rather than the
National Science Board recommendation of 30 percent.\6\ While the trend
in NSF awards is improving, there are still deserving proposals that do
not receive funding, leaving a rich portfolio of research opportunities
to explore.\7\
Meanwhile, according to the National Science Board's Science &
Engineering (S&E) Indicators 2022 report, the U.S. is falling behind at
10 percent compared to China's 49 percent of international patents
received from 2010 to 2020.\8\ The publication of research in peer-
reviewed literature--the primary mechanism for disseminating new S&E
knowledge--grew at an annual average rate of 3 percent for high-income
countries such as the US compared to 11 percent for upper middle-income
countries such as China, Russia, and Brazil over a 10 year period.\9\
Our recommendation of at least $16.7 billion for NSF is $6.8
billion (68% increase) above the FY 2023 enacted level of $9.9 billion,
which includes one-time emergency supplemental funding.\10\ This will
allow NSF to further attract highly qualified early-career researchers,
fund more high-quality research proposals, and increase NSF's average
award size.\11\ In addition to supporting the Biological Sciences, this
funding level will support NSF's new TIP Directorate, which will work
with all of NSF's directorates and offices to advance the impacts of
NSF-funded research by accelerating the translation of fundamental
science and engineering discoveries into innovative new technologies
and solutions to address the country's societal, national, and
geostrategic challenges. TIP will also grow the domestic workforce in
key technology focus areas which includes biotech, data storage and
management, high performance computing, and expanding participation of
researchers at all levels of education to build infrastructure for use-
inspired and translational research, support mentoring, identify the
drivers of innovation to enable advances, and develop beneficial
partnerships with Black and Tribal colleges, minority serving
institutions, and nonprofits, among other groups.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CNSF+FY24+NSF+Letter+to+OMB+&+OSTP.pdf (squarespace.com).
\2\ NSF FY 2024 Budget Request to Congress.
\3\ NSF's 10 Big Ideas, National Science Foundation, Alexandria,
VA.
\4\ NSF Collaborations with Federal Agencies and Others, National
Science Foundation, Alexandria, VA.
\5\ Education and Human Resources Directorate, National Science
Foundation, Alexandria, VA.
\6\ NSF by the Numbers.
\7\ NSB's NSF FY 2021 Merit Review Digest.
\8\ https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20221/u-s-and-global-science-and-
technology-capabilities#invention-and-innovation Figure 25--Shares of
international patents granted to inventors, by selected country or
economy: 2010 and 2020.
\9\ https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20221/u-s-and-global-science-and-
technology-capabilities#
invention-and-innovation.
\10\ CJS FY 23.pdf (senate.gov) NSF in CJS bill and NSF FY 2023
budget of $9.5 billion.
\11\ CHIPS and Science Act, 2022, Sec. 10601 Early-Career Research
Fellowship Program, page 268.
\\ CHIPS and Science Act, 2022, Sec. 10381 Establishment of TIPS,
page 212 and Key Technology Focus Areas, page 216.
[This statement was submitted by Ellen Kuo, Associate Director
Legislative Affairs.]
______
Prepared Statement of Federation of Associations in
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee:
The Federation of Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences
(FABBS) is grateful for the opportunity to submit testimony for the
record in support of the National Science Foundation (NSF) budget for
fiscal year 2025 (FY25). FABBS represents twenty-nine scientific
societies and nearly 60 university departments whose members and
faculty share a commitment to advancing knowledge of the mind, brain,
and behavior. FABBS urges the subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and
Science to fund NSF with at least $11.9 billion in FY25. This request
is consistent with the broad scientific community as represented by the
Coalition for National Science Funding (CNSF)--an alliance of over 140
professional organizations, universities and businesses supporting the
goal of increasing national investment in NSF--of which FABBS serves as
a cochair.
Adequate funding for NSF is critical to ensure the health and
productivity of our American scientific and innovation ecosystem. While
aware of the difficult fiscal climate, FABBS argues that NSF-funded
research pays long-term dividends in technologies and advances driving
our economy, national security, well-being, and other areas of
significant importance to our Nation. In addition, NSF research and
programs provide the tools to develop a workforce equipped for the
challenges and technologies of the future and foster the next
generation of scientists--with a commitment to broad participation--
whose work will keep this country at the forefront of discovery.
In 2022, Congress passed the bipartisan and bicameral CHIPS and
Science Act (Public Law 117-167), reauthorizing NSF for 5 years,
including $16.7 billion for the agency in FY25. And yet, the FY24 level
was cut by more than five percent (almost $500 million) from FY23. When
including FY23 supplemental funding, the cut is even more significant
further interrupting the Congressional vision for the NSF necessary for
the U.S. to remain competitive internationally.
directorate for social, behavioral, and economic sciences
FABBS scientists have a particular interest in the Directorate for
Social, Behavioral and Economic (SBE) Sciences. SBE provides an
estimated 63 percent of the Federal funding for fundamental research in
SBE sciences at academic institutions across the country. Thus, our
fields are heavily dependent on the NSF to enable advances from
expanding our understanding of the mechanisms of memory underlying
brain activity, to contributing to the design of and assessing the
social and ethical consequences of new technologies.
Findings from the brain and behavioral sciences have extensive
reach and applicability. For example, SBE funded researchers studying
violent extremism delivered new insights that the National security
community is now using to develop more effective strategies to disrupt,
recruit, and counter radicalism.
SBE houses the National Center for Science and Engineering
Statistics (NCSES), a Federal agency that provides statistical
information about the United States' science and engineering (S&E)
enterprise. NCSES collects, analyzes, and disseminates data on research
and development (R&D), the S&E workforce, the condition and progress of
science, STEM education, and U.S. competitiveness. Science and
Engineering Indicators, the most comprehensive source of this high-
quality Federal data in a global context, depends on NCSES data. The
National Science Board is currently considering new and improved ways
to share key data with policymakers, educators, and the public
including an interactive dashboard and more timely thematic reports.
In addition to receiving support from SBE, FABBS members appreciate
critical funding from the Directorate for STEM Education (EDU).
Research in the Directorate focuses on increasing America's human
capital through effective education in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics. EDU is especially vital to expanding
participation in science through programs such as S-STEM, which
provides scholarships to enable low-income students with academic
ability, talent, or potential to pursue successful careers in promising
STEM fields. The Directorates for Computer and Information Science and
Engineering Directorate (CISE), which funds research on topics such as
human-technology interaction and cyber-assisted learning, and the
Biological Sciences (BIO), which conducts research on topics such as
sleep and circadian rhythms and sex differences in responses to stress
also provide valuable resources for our disciplines.
technology, innovation, and partnerships
When NSF officially launched the Directorate for Technology,
Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP) in March of 2022, the community
viewed it as an exciting cross-cutting approach to translate basic
research to make a difference in American's lives. By building on
existing multidisciplinary programs, such as the Convergence
Accelerator, TIP aspires to integrate the expertise of all NSF
directorates to advance new use-inspired research. However, the
enthusiasm for TIP was informed by the promise and expectation that the
NSF budget would see a growth trajectory. Congress has the opportunity
to help NSF recover from the cuts in FY24 and to deliver on meaningful
budget increases in FY25.
FABBS is grateful for language in the FY24 appropriations report:
``In developing the spending plan, the agreement encourages NSF to
equitably distribute funding to support all basic research directorates
within R&RA, as well as the Technology, Innovation and Partnerships
Directorate.''
It is imperative that the rest of NSF see sustainable growth to
continue the forefront research to meet key national challenges. Even
before the launch of the TIP and other new programs authorized in CHIPS
and Science NSF was unable to fund more than $1.7 billion worth of
research proposals rated ``very good or higher'' each fiscal year. New
efforts can only be successful when built on a strong foundational
research enterprise that supports education, programs, and
infrastructure to sustain our science and technology ecosystem.
Substantial, sustained funding increases will allow NSF to realize the
full potential of the TIP directorate by investing in critical new
programs while bolstering the existing investments in basic research--
including in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences--which
underly future societal, economic, and technological advances.
Increasing Federal investment in fundamental scientific research
across all sciences is essential to ensuring the future prosperity,
security, and health of our Nation and its people. We urge you to
provide NSF with at least $11.9 billion for FY25. Along with the
broader scientific community, we believe that increased funding for
fundamental scientific research would set the NSF on a path to yield
transformative benefits to the country. We thank you in advance for
your commitment to robust funding in FY25 and efforts to complete the
budget in a timely manner.
Thank you for considering this testimony.
FABBS Member Societies:
Academy of Behavioral Medicine Research, American Educational
Research Association, American Psychological Association,
American Psychosomatic Society, Association for Applied
Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, Association for Behavior
Analysis International, Behavior Genetics Association,
Cognitive Neuroscience Society, Cognitive Science Society,
Flux: The Society for Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience,
International Congress of Infant Studies, International Society
for Developmental Psychobiology, National Academy of
Neuropsychology, The Psychonomic Society, Society for
Behavioral Neuroendocrinology, Society for Computation in
Psychology, Society for Judgement and Decision Making, Society
for Mathematical Psychology, Society for Research in
Adolescence, Society for Psychophysiological Research, Society
for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, Society for
Research in Child Development, Society for Research in
Psychopathology, Society for the Scientific Study of Reading,
Society for Text & Discourse, Society of Experimental Social
Psychology, Society of Multivariate Experimental Psychology,
Vision Sciences Society
FABBS Affiliates:
American University; Arizona State University; Binghamton
University; Boston College; Boston University; Carnegie Mellon
University; Duke University; Drexel University; East Tennessee
State University; Florida International University; George
Mason University; George Washington University; Georgetown
University; Harvard University; Indiana University Bloomington;
Johns Hopkins University; Lehigh University; New Mexico State
University; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Michigan
State University; New York University; North Carolina State
University; The Ohio State University, Center for Cognitive and
Brain Sciences; Pennsylvania State University; Princeton
University; Purdue University; Rice University; Southern
Methodist University; Syracuse University; Temple University;
Texas A&M University; Tulane University; University of Arizona;
University of California, Berkeley; University of California,
Irvine; University of California, Los Angeles; University of
California, Riverside; University of California, San Diego;
University of Chicago; University of Cincinnati; University of
Delaware; University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign;
University of Iowa; University of Maryland, College Park;
University of Michigan; University of Minnesota; University of
Minnesota, Institute of Child Development; University of North
Carolina at Greensboro; University of Oregon; University of
Pennsylvania; University of Texas at Austin; University of
Texas at Dallas; University of Virginia; University of
Washington; Virginia Tech; Wake Forest University; Washington
University in St. Louis; Western Kentucky University; Yale
University
[This statement was submitted by Juliane Baron, Executive
Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of Foundation for American Innovation
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the subcommittee:
My name is Robert Bellafiore, and I am Research Manager at the
Foundation for American Innovation, a think tank focused on promoting
innovation, strengthening governance, and advancing national security.
I am writing to recommend that the subcommittee direct the National
Science Foundation (NSF) to improve its reporting about the outcomes of
its education research and development (R&D) programs.
The mission of NSF's Directorate for STEM Education is to ``develop
a well-informed citizenry and a diverse and capable workforce of
scientists, technicians, engineers, mathematicians and educators.'' \1\
NSF's Technology Innovation and Partnerships Directorate (TIP)
``creates breakthrough technologies; meets societal and economic needs;
leads to new, high-wage jobs; and empowers all Americans to participate
in the U.S. research and innovation enterprise.'' \2\ According to the
FY2025 budget request, NSF has requested $1.3 billion for the STEM
Education Directorate and $900 million for the TIP Directorate.\3\
These are significant expenditures on programs that should be
improving students' learning opportunities and our National
competitiveness. However, a 2023 review by my colleague of NSF-funded
STEM education R&D programs found that NSF did not have transparent
reporting about R&D outcomes or consistently identify best practices or
ways that educators and others could learn from or implement research
findings.\4\ Furthermore, another review of Federal education R&D
activities to improve STEM and computer science found that they have
little evidence of success, often because such projects have not been
effectively analyzed to identify and promote best practices.\5\ Many of
these programs simply have little to show for them-both because the R&D
activities themselves are often ineffective, and because useful
insights are often not implemented in the classroom.
There is widespread recognition within the Federal Government of
the need to improve the transparency and accountability of STEM
education initiatives, which are dispersed throughout the Federal
Government. For example, the Committee on STEM Education (CoSTEM),
established in 2011, has the mission to ``coordinate Federal programs
and activities in support of STEM education.'' \6\ Last month, the
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)'s progress report on the
implementation of the Federal Government's STEM education strategic
plan noted that ``sharing performance outcomes enhances public trust,
supports coordinated policymaking, and promotes efficient use of
resources.'' \7\
To improve the return on investment on NSF's R&D efforts, the
subcommittee should recommend that Congress commission the Government
Accountability Office to audit these R&D programs to determine which
are fulfilling their mission and which are wasting taxpayer funds.
Congress should then eliminate any programs found to be ineffective. As
the research cited above shows, some R&D initiatives are ineffective
simply by virtue of not accomplishing anything valuable; however, other
initiatives are likely to be ineffective by virtue of their duplication
of efforts in other parts of the Federal Government. A priority of
GAO's audit should therefore be the identification of redundant R&D
efforts across agencies. NSF is one of 19 member agencies listed in
CoSTEM's recent report; any collaboration with this many members, no
matter how well coordinated, is likely to have significant
inefficiencies and repetition.\8\
The subcommittee should also recommend that NSF address GAO's 14
open recommendations for NSF, which, while not narrowly tied to
education R&D, offer important nonpartisan opportunities to improve
governance, operations, and efficiency at NSF.\9\
Furthermore, to improve transparency, the subcommittee should
include in its report accompanying the FY2025 funding bill language
requiring NSF to publicly report on its website the outcomes of its
education R&D projects, identify what has worked, and promote best
practices for parents, teachers, schools, and other education
stakeholders. This recommendation is in line with CoSTEM's objective to
``Make Program Performance and Outcomes Publicly Available.'' \10\
Education R&D is only of value if it is ultimately carried into the
classroom and used to inform how children are taught. However, aside
from a database of past grant awards and current grant funding
available, there is limited information on NSF's website about the
outcomes of most of its funded R&D projects. NSF could help inform
Congress and the public by providing an annual review of past and
future STEM research projects funded, identifying lessons learned and
best practices or tools that education stakeholders may use.
Additionally, the subcommittee should require the STEM Education and
TIP Directorates to submit to Congress and publish on NSF's website an
annual report detailing all of its funded R&D projects and identifying
any lessons or best practices.
Improving transparency and reducing redundancy in education R&D
programs are likely to be mutually reinforcing steps to improve these
programs' return on investment. When it is clearer what programs are
accomplishing, it will be easier to identify duplicated efforts; and
with less overlap, it will be easier to track what each R&D program is
doing individually. As OSTP's recent report notes, ``Sharing
investments can limit duplication and identify overlap.'' \11\
* * *
Although the longstanding challenges facing U.S. K-12 would already
make it important to improve the Federal Government's STEM education
R&D efforts, the alarming trends precipitated by the pandemic-including
declining scores in the National Assessment of Educational Progress and
record truancy rates-only make this task more vital. Improving the
transparency of and accountability for Federal education R&D will be
essential for helping the Nation's students. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Directorate for STEM Education (EDU),'' NSF, accessed April
16, 2024, https://new.nsf.gov/edu.
\2\ ``Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships
(TIP),'' NSF, accessed April 16, 2024, https://nsfpolicyoutreach.com/
resources/fall-2022-gc-directorate-for-technology-innovation-and-
partnerships-tip.
\3\ National Science Foundation, FY2025 Budget Request to Congress
(2024), Summary Tables, https://nsf-gov-resources.nsf.gov/files/
03_fy2025.pdf?VersionId=xz.6KFnzQXDWCa5zyQmZNwpxUw.f9i9m.
\4\ Dan Lips, ``The Case for Reforming and Strengthening Federal K-
12 Education R&D,'' Lincoln Network (March 23, 2022), https://
cdn.sanity.io/files/d8lrla4f/staging/
fa0b87517c7c459842bf37afb3b33c225368c577.pdf.
\5\ ``STEM and Computer Science Education Reforming Federal K-12
Education R&D Activities to Strengthen American Competitiveness,''
Lincoln Network and Federation of American Scientists (April 4, 2023),
https://cdn.sanity.io/files/d8lrla4f/production/
264f2a62b29276528f24ec3787a0c16eed71fbdc.pdf.
\6\ ``NSTC Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math
Education,'' Office of Science and Technology Policy, accessed May 1,
2024, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ostp/
nstc/committees/costem.
\7\ OSTP, 2023 Progress Report on the Implementation of the Federal
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education
Strategic Plan (2024), p. 17, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2024/04/2023-CoSTEM-Progress-Report.pdf.
\8\ Ibid., iii.
\9\ ``Recommendations Database,'' GAO, accessed April 16, 2024,
https://www.gao.gov/reports-testimonies/recommendations-
database?processed=1&topic=all&agency=National%20Science%20
Foundation&agency_id=78981&subs=1.
\10\ OSTP, ``2023 Progress Report,'' p. 17.
\11\ OSTP, ``2023 Progress Report,'' p. 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Foundation for American Innovation
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Samuel
Hammond, and I am Senior Economist at the Foundation for American
Innovation, a nonprofit organization focused on promoting innovation,
improving governance, and strengthening national security. I am writing
to respectfully request that the subcommittee provide full funding to
the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS),
which requested $223.4 million for FY2025 (an increase of $43.11
million), to fulfill its mission of ``ensuring an effective export
control and treaty compliance system and promoting continued U.S.
strategic technology leadership.'' \1\
The authorities vested in the BIS are mission-critical to the
United States' technological competition with the People's Republic of
China.\2\ Most notably, export controls were introduced on advanced AI
chips and semiconductor equipment in 2022, denying Beijing access to
technologies necessary to power innovations in artificial intelligence
and supercomputing.\3\ While the controls have already taken a toll,
there are serious gaps in BIS's capacity to enforce semiconductor
export controls at scale. Between chip smuggling and other evasion
tactics, the BIS is in urgent need of additional resources to keep up
with China's game of cat and mouse.\4\
According to a report from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, as
of last year, the BIS had only one in-house Mandarin speaker (recently
upgraded to two \5\), and at one point ``only employed one member of
staff who could maintain and operate the Federal Register system.'' \6\
Given this severe lack of capacity, it is no wonder that a recent
analysis of procurement records showed China's military and state-run
research institutes have acquired significant numbers of AI chips
crucial for developing modern AI systems in spite of the controls.\7\
The BIS's export controls on AI chips are benchmarked to the
performance density of state-of-the-art AI chips circa 2022-2023. As
chip performance continues to improve, the number of chips produced
above the current performance threshold will balloon. This means that
the controls will bind increasingly over time, but also become
substantially more challenging for the BIS to monitor and enforce.
Indeed, production of Nvidia's H100 chip alone is forecasted to triple
this year.\8\ As the volume of chips under control continues to grow,
any existing leaks in BIS enforcement could soon turn into a roaring
torrent of illegal exports.
Funding constraints hurt all the more given the unusual range of
skills BIS analysts need to do their job effectively. Crafting sensible
controls on AI chips demands staff with deep technical knowledge of the
semiconductor supply chain, while enforcing the controls requires
analysts with expertise in China's economy and evasion tactics. Yet
what the BIS needs more than anything is better technology. As it
stands, BIS agents enforce export controls with what amounts to Google
searches and giant spreadsheets. By fulfilling this appropriations
request, BIS will have the resources it needs to modernize its data
management systems, paving the way for its enforcement capacity to be
supercharged with the aid of machine learning and proprietary data
sources to process license requests and spot supply chain anomalies
automatically.
Given the importance of BIS's mission in the United States's
national security and economic strategies, fully funding the BIS
request is prudent, particularly given Congress and the Biden
administration's recent focus on improving American competitiveness.
The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 provided the Commerce Department with
more than $50 billion for the CHIPS for America Fund to promote the
American semiconductor sector.\9\ Fully funding the administration's
budget request for BIS, which reflects less than one percent of the new
fund's expenditures, is reasonable given the Bureau's mandate to
protect American technological leadership. The subcommittee should also
include report language requiring Commerce and BIS to report to
Congress about its current capacity to enforce export control laws and
to monitor and deter violations, including policy options for closing
any identified gaps.
The subcommittee could reallocate funding from other activities
within the Commerce Department that are less critical to national
security to offset the proposed funding increase for BIS. Moreover, the
Committee and Congress could conduct additional oversight to require
the Commerce Department to implement currently open watchdog
recommendations from the Government Accountability Office and the
Inspector General, which should result in cost savings that could be
used to increase funding for BIS.\10\
In addition, the subcommittee should require the Department of
Commerce and BIS to report to Congress on its current capability to
deter export control violations, smuggling, or third-party transactions
of advanced chips and other technologies and present potential options
for closing any identified gaps. The administration's national security
strategy of denying the People's Republic of China technology critical
to advancing artificial intelligence and supercomputing will not be
achieved if U.S. export laws are evaded or third parties smuggle or
sell certain chips to China. Research and historical experience show
that the outcome of policies to increase or deny market access to
foreign firms is highly sensitive to the implementation procedures
used. This will be especially true of semiconductors, as China has
already begun efforts to skirt export controls through sophisticated
third-party and subsidiary arrangements.\11\ A Commerce Department
assessment should provide recommendations for improving its ability to
enforce export control laws under conditions of adversarial evasion
tactics. This should include evaluating the extent of China's access to
controlled chips via cloud services (the ``remote-access''
loophole),\12\ and an assessment of the potential for on-chip
mechanisms to bolster end-user controls.\13\
Export licenses were a key tool for containing Soviet access to
U.S. military technology during the Cold War, but ebbed in relevance
following the end of the Cold War. The pendulum has now begun to swing
back in light of China's state-backed effort to dominate critical
emerging technology categories, as demonstrated by the BIS's annual
requests for export licenses doubling to 40,000 over the last 10
years.\14\ Unfortunately, funding for the agency has failed to keep
pace with this new reality, to the detriment of U.S. export industries
and national security alike.
In conclusion, the Bureau of Industry and Security has a critical
mission for U.S. national and economic security. Fully funding BIS to
fulfill its mission should be a priority within the Commerce
Department's budget. Moreover, additional reporting by Commerce and GAO
about BIS's current capacity to fulfill its mission and recommendations
for potential policy changes to deter export control violations would
help Congress and the administration determine if additional resources
and authorities are needed.
Yours sincerely,
Samuel Hammond, Senior Economist
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget Request (2024), https://
www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/2024-03/BIS-FY2025-Congressional-
Budget-Submission.pdf.
\2\ Samuel Hammond, The Scramble for AI Computing Power, American
Affairs Journal. (Summer, 2024) https://americanaffairsjournal.org/
2024/05/the-scramble-for-ai-computing-power/.
\3\ Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce,
``Implementation of Additional Export Controls: Certain Advanced
Computing and Semiconductor Manufacturing Items; Supercomputer and
Semiconductor End Use; Entity List Modification,'' October 13, 2022,
https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2022-21658.pdf.
\4\ Sujai Shivakumar, Charles Wessner, and Thomas Howell, Balancing
the Ledger: Export Controls on U.S. Chip Technology to China, Center
for Strategic & International Studies. (February, 2024) https://
www.csis.org/analysis/balancing-ledger-export-controls-us-chip-
technology-china.
\5\ Based on conversations with a former BIS official familiar with
the matter.
\6\ House Foreign Affairs Committee, Bureau of Industry & Security:
90-Day Review Report (December 7, 2023) https://
foreignaffairs.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/12.4.23%20BIS%
20REPORT--FINALDRAFT.pdf.
\7\ Eduardo Baptista, ``China's military and government acquire
Nvidia chips despite US ban,'' Reuters, January 15, 2024. https://
www.reuters.com/technology/chinas-military-government-
acquire-nvidia-chips-despite-us-ban-2024-01-14/.
\8\ Anton Shilov, ``Nvidia to Reportedly Triple Output of Compute
GPUs in 2024: Up to 2 Million H100s,'' Tom's Hardware, August 24, 2023.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-to-reportedly-triple-output-
of-compute-gpus-in-2024-up-to-2-million-h100s.
\9\ U.S. Department of Commerce, A Strategy for the CHIPS for
America Fund (2022), https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2022/
09/13/CHIPS-for-America-Strategy%20%28Sept%
206%2C%202022%29.pdf.
\10\ For example, as of April 7, 2023, the Government
Accountability Office listed 72 open recommendations for the Department
of Commerce, including nine priority recommendations. ``Open
Recommendations,'' Government Accountability Office, accessed April 7,
2023, https://www.gao.gov/reports-testimonies/recommendations-database.
\11\ Eleanor Olcott, Qianer Liu, and Demetri Sevastopulo, ``Chinese
AI Groups Use Cloud Services to Evade U.S. Chip Export Controls,''
Financial Times, March 8, 2023, https://www.ft.com/content/9706c917-
6440-4fa9-b588-b18fbc1503b9.
\12\ Eleanor Olcott, Qianer Liu, and Demetri Sevastopulo, ``Chinese
AI Groups Use Cloud Services to Evade U.S. Chip Export Controls,''
Financial Times, March 8, 2023, https://www.ft.com/content/9706c917-
6440-4fa9-b588-b18fbc1503b9.
\13\ Onni Aarne, Tim Fist and Caleb Withers, Secure, Governable
Chips, Center for a New American Security (January, 2024) https://
www.cnas.org/publications/reports/secure-governable-chips.
\14\ Samuel Hammond and Erich Grunewald, ``Spreadsheets vs.
Smugglers: Modernizing the BIS for an Era of Tech Rivalry,'' Foundation
for American Innovation, April 29, 2024. https://www.thefai.org/posts/
spreadsheets-vs-smugglers-modernizing-the-bis-for-an-era-of-tech-
rivalry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Humane Society Legislative Fund and
The Humane Society of the United States
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to offer testimony on
matters of importance to our organizations and to our millions of
supporters. We thank you for the support and investment in animal
protection in the subcommittee's Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations bill.
We appreciate your continued consideration for the following requests
in the Fiscal Year 2025 Departments of Commerce, Justice, Science, and
Related Agencies budget:
--NOAA Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act: report language
--DOJ Animal Welfare Act enforcement: report language
--DOJ Environmental and Natural Resources Division: $1.6 million for
ENRD's AWA enforcement per Fiscal Year 2024 President's Budget
request
department of commerce--national oceanic and atmospheric
administration--shark fin sales elimination act implementation
The Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act (SFSEA) was signed into law in
December 2022. It prohibits the commercial trade of shark fins or
products containing shark fins, thereby removing the United States from
the international shark fin market. The policy builds on the Shark
Finning Prohibition Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-557) and the Shark
Conservation Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-348), which ban shark finning
and the possession at sea of shark fins not ``naturally attached'' to
the carcass.
Shark fins are often obtained through shark finning, a brutal act
in which sharks' fins are sliced off and the mutilated animals are
tossed back into the ocean, leaving them to die. As apex predators,
sharks play a key role in maintaining balance in marine ecosystems,
contributing to the wellbeing of coral reefs, seagrass beds, commercial
fisheries, and more. The United States has not only served as an end
market, but also a transit hub for shark fins obtained in countries
with weak policies or on the high seas where no nation's laws apply.
Despite the act becoming law, NOAA has yet to finalize a proposed
rule regarding implementation of the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act.
It is past time that the Department of Commerce honor Congress's will
and act expeditiously to implement the SFSEA in a timely manner that
allows for the full implementation of this bipartisan law.
That is why we urge the inclusion of the following report language:
The Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act became law on December 23,
2022, as part of the James M. Inhofe National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117-263).
The Committee directs NOAA to expeditiously issue its plans and
regulations for implementing this important law. NOAA is
further directed to provide a report to the Committee no later
than 90 days after enactment of this act describing any
resource needs required to fully address this issue,
coordination with other Federal agencies, State and local law
enforcement and key stakeholders, and plans to raise public
awareness on how to report violations.
department of justice--animal welfare act enforcement
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) requires research facilities and
animal exhibitors, breeders, and dealers to meet basic standards of
animal care. The law is crucial to protecting over one million animals
from inhumane treatment, yet many facilities get away with egregious
abuse. Without strong enforcement, facilities such as puppy mills and
roadside zoos have no meaningful deterrent to violating the law.
The entire U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which enforces
the AWA, has only three Administrative Law Judges. This severely limits
how many enforcement actions go through the system. However, foreseeing
that USDA would need help, Congress included a provision in the AWA
that allows the Department of Justice (DOJ) to bring cases in Federal
court. Over the last few years, DOJ has brought several cases against
exhibitors and dealers with serious animal care violations under the
AWA.
On March 9, 2024, following congressional appropriations requests
in both FY 2023 and FY 2024, the USDA and DOJ announced a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) to help better prepare for and coordinate potential
civil enforcement actions relating to AWA violations provided through
Animal and Plant Health Service (APHIS) reports. This MOU will ensure
USDA provides DOJ with information about the most severe animal welfare
violators promptly. We therefore urge the inclusion of the report
language below, which encourages DOJ to continue strengthening its
enforcement of the AWA to protect animals.
In May of 2022, DOJ filed a lawsuit detailing shocking AWA
violations at a breeding facility owned by a company called Envigo.
Government inspectors found beagles being killed instead of receiving
veterinary treatment for easily treatable conditions; nursing mother
beagles denied food; the food that they did receive contained maggots,
mold and feces; and over an eight-week period, 25 beagle puppies died
from cold exposure. Other dogs suffered from injuries when they were
attacked by other dogs in overcrowded conditions. DOJ sought action
through an injunction against Envigo and a Federal court enjoined
Envigo from conducting activity at the Cumberland facility. Envigo
entered into a settlement agreement leading to the transfer of roughly
4,000 beagles to animal adoption organizations.
Additionally, in July 2023, the DOJ brought a case against Zachary
Keeler, doing business as Even Keel Exotics, alleging AWA violations of
and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), seeking preliminary and permanent
injunctive relief. Keeler had various violations, including failing to
provide access to USDA inspectors and maintain complete and accurate
records; failing to provide potable water, veterinary care, safe and
sanitary conditions, and to meet minimum standards for handling
animals; and placing the health of certain animals in serious danger.
Keeler also allegedly violated the ESA by unlawfully separating a lemur
prematurely from its mother and forcing the baby to interact with the
public, continuing to possess the unlawfully taken ring-tailed lemurs,
and attempting to sell a taken lemur. In August 2023, consent decrees
were issued in the case brought by DOJ and in the USDA administrative
case with Keeler agreeing to surrender the animals in his possession to
USDA and permanent revocation of his AWA license, respectively. Without
the consent decree, DOJ may have only been able to seize the endangered
ring-tailed lemurs covered by the ESA instead of all of animals in
Keeler's possession.
Even if the department only brings a handful of animal cases
annually, it sends an important signal to the regulated community. As
such, we urge the inclusion of this report language:
The Committee supports the Department's and the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's (USDA) Memorandum of Understanding and joint
commitment to enforcing the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). The
Department is directed to continue coordinating and
collaborating with USDA on AWA enforcement cases to ensure the
Department receives necessary information regarding AWA
violators, who have multiple citations that seriously or
adversely affect the health or well-being of an animal, in a
timely manner.
The Department shall report to the Committee within 90 days of
enactment of this act on its AWA enforcement actions.
department of justice- environmental and natural resources division
The Department of Justice's Environment and Natural Resources
Division enforces the Federal Government's civil and criminal
environmental laws and defends against challenges to government
environmental action. It has demonstrated serious commitment to animal
welfare and wildlife protection cases since its establishment,
particularly in relation to the AWA's animal fighting prohibitions.
We strongly support the FY 2025 President's Budget request for the
Environment and Natural Resources Division with a particular interest
in fully funding the Environmental Crimes Section and Wildlife and
Marine Resources Section. This funding level will help address the
growing AWA and Endangered Species Act caseloads.
[This statement was submitted by Tiffany Mendoza-Farfan, Senior
Legislative Specialist.]
______
Prepared Statement of Insights Association
On behalf of the Insights Association (IA), the leading nonprofit
trade association for the market research and data analytics industry,
I am respectfully submitting testimony on the U.S. Census Bureau's
``Census Household Panel'' program and the bill language and committee
report language we are seeking. The program is funded through the
Bureau's Current Surveys and Programs account, under Current
Demographic Statistics.
The subcommittee may recognize the Census Household Panel as an
insourced version of the Ask U.S. Panel, a controversial project on
which Congressional appropriators required a report in the Fiscal Year
(FY) 2023 omnibus funding law.\1\ The same language was included in the
report for the FY24 omnibus funding law, but not updated with the new
name for the Bureau's project.
The project's contract, justification and management were also
criticized by the Commerce Department's Inspector General (IG) on
February 27, 2023,\2\ in which the Bureau revealed it had failed to
produce a working online panel and would insource the project, renaming
it as the Census Household Panel.
The Bureau requested $1.713 million for the project in FY24.\3\
Sources have suggested the Census Bureau seeks $1.6 million for the
panel project in FY25, and the FY25 budget justification said that,
``The Budget also includes an initiative to design, build, and maintain
an online panel to support collection of data for production and
research purposes.'' \4\
about the insights association
IA defends and promotes the indisputable role of insights in
driving positive impacts on society and consumers. Our more than 8,000
company and individual members are the world's leading producers of
intelligence, analytics and insights defining the needs, attitudes and
behaviors of consumers, organizations and their employees, students and
citizens. With that essential understanding, leaders can make
intelligent decisions and deploy strategies and tactics to build trust,
inspire innovation, realize the full potential of individuals and
teams, and successfully create and promote products, services and
ideas.
ia's concerns about the census household panel
IA's concerns in FY25, like those in prior fiscal years, include:
1. Federal agencies can (and already do) purchase such services from
the private sector
Hundreds of insights companies and organization provide research
panel services. Further, insights providers such as Dynata, Gallup,
Ipsos, NORC at the University of Chicago, SSRS, the University of
Southern California, and others maintain probability-based research
panels (a specialized kind of panel which was the original goal of the
Ask U.S. Panel project). If the Bureau's plan no longer requires the
panel to be probability-based, the number of for-profit and non-profit
providers in the open market is likely in the hundreds. Whether
probability-based or not, insights providers offer these services
commercially on the open market; absent justification to Congress of
the uniqueness of their needs, the Census Bureau should acquire panel
research services with full and open competitions. Private sector
options would potentially cost a mere fraction of the Bureau's
insourced program.
2. The Panel is a potentially unnecessary financial burden on Federal
taxpayers
It is hard to assess the veracity of the Census Bureau's fiscal
plan for the Census Household Panel because so little detail has been
revealed, even after multiple years. Besides just the cost and
expertise involved in establishing this presumably duplicative service,
the Census Bureau appears to not have considered the immense expertise
in data quality, incentive management and delivery, fraud detection,
attrition mitigation and management, and privacy and permissions
management required to successfully maintain a high-quality research
panel.
Since 1955, Federal agencies have been charged with avoiding
``activities conducted by the Government that provide services or
products for its own use which could be procured from private
enterprise through ordinary business channels''.\5\ The policy required
the head of an agency to make any exception to such restrictions ``only
where it is clearly demonstrated . . . that it is not in the public
interest to procure such product or service from private enterprise.''
This policy was reiterated by every Administration following, including
in OMB Circular A-76 \6\ and other policies specifically requiring
competitive sourcing. According to the IG report, the Bureau provided
no documentation of any such sourcing analysis.
3. The Census Bureau should prioritize its core Constitutional mission
The Bureau is responsible for many surveys, but none are more
important than the decennial headcount and the ongoing American
Community Survey (ACS), which are responsibilities authorized by the
U.S. Constitution. As we ramp up to the 2030 Census and the ACS cries
out for further investment to maintain its accuracy,\7\ the Bureau
should focus its energy and resources on responsibilities authorized in
law and in its mission-critical functions.
In response to these concerns, IA recommends bill language and
report language in FY25.
IA recommended FY25 CJS bill language.--``No funds in this bill may
be spent in support or development of the Census Household Panel, or
any similar effort to develop a survey, opinion or market research
service that could be competitively sourced from the private sector.''
IA recommended FY25 CJS report language.--``Census Household Panel.
The Committee is concerned about the lack of transparency related to
the Census Bureau's Census Household Panel program, particularly given
the lack of congressional authorization, the expanding scope, and the
Commerce Department IG's February 2023 findings (OIG-23-011-1). The
Committee is also concerned about the use of taxpayer dollars for the
development of a panel survey given the wide range of options that
currently exist in the private sector for these types of activities.
The Committee directs the Census Bureau to provide a report to the
Committee within 60 days about the panel's methodology, data collection
processes, implementation, incurred and projected costs, interagency
agreements with other Federal entities, and procurement strategy to
allow the Committee to evaluate the panel's use of Federal resources.''
conclusion
The bill language would require a thorough competitive sourcing
analysis before the Bureau develops new services, while the report
language will provide an opportunity for the subcommittee to ensure the
Census Bureau and its projects remain transparent and used for their
intended purposes.
The Insights Association dedicates much of our daily advocacy to
supporting the decennial census and the American Community Survey
(ACS), the two essential Federal data sources underpinning statistical
sampling/representativeness in almost all U.S. research studies, so we
applaud the Census Bureau's ongoing service as the leading source of
the highest quality and most representative data for America's people
and economy. However, that does not mean that the Census Bureau is the
only provider of information in the U.S.
We simply ask that the Bureau focus on its core authorized
functions and do them well.
IA remains worried that the Census Bureau still intends to use
taxpayer dollars, possibly from multiple agencies and funding sources,
to develop a service that already exists in the private market. The
Bureau's attempt to fund a private entity to learn how to build a
probability-based online research panel (the Ask U.S. Panel) failed, as
we predicted it would, since it is a specialized area of expertise.
Rather than wasting even more scarce Federal resources (millions of
dollars) by trying to insource the failed panel and attempting to build
the Census Household Panel program in-house from scratch, the Census
Bureau should save a ton of time and money by simply purchasing the
service from one of the many existing insights providers (thousands of
dollars).
Thank you for allowing IA to testify on the Census Household Panel
program, an important under-the-radar issue in the FY25 CJS
Appropriations legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Ask U.S. Panel Survey.-The Census Bureau is directed to
provide a report to the Committees, no later than 90 days following
enactment of this act, on the Ask U.S. Panel Survey's methodology, data
collection processes, implementation, incurred and projected costs,
procurement strategy, and plans to address any recommendations made by
the Inspector General.'' (p. 8) https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/
imo/media/doc/Division%20B%20-%20CJS%20State
ment%20FY23.pdf.
\2\ ``The Census Bureau Can Improve Processes to Promote
Transparency of Cooperative Agreements.'' OIG-23-011-I. https://
www.oig.doc.gov/OIGPublications/(REDACTED)%20OIG-23-011-
I%20(REDACTED).pdf.
\3\ ``Census Household Panel ($1,713, 10 FTE/14 Positions) The
Census Bureau will enhance staffing to design, build, and maintain an
online panel to support the timely and efficient collection of high-
quality data for production and research purposes. This will be a
probability-based nationally representative survey panel that leverages
the Master Address File and population data from the American Community
Survey, Current Population Survey, and other survey and non-survey data
sources. The Panel will be a resource for supporting research and
development work by speeding up and increasing the quality of
methodological research associated with surveys. The benefits of a
predominantly online longitudinal panel survey compared to a
traditional survey is that a panel may provide faster turnaround and
lower cost. The panel will be longitudinal, meaning that the same
individuals will be surveyed over an extended time frame. A
longitudinal panel allows for the examination of changes in household
characteristics and analysis of how events impact households
differently over time. The panel will consist of a pool of pre-
recruited individuals, including historically undercounted populations,
and will meet standards for transparent quality reporting of the
Federal Statistical Agencies and the Office of Management and Budget.
The panel will improve existing data collection and sources with a
focus on gaps in coverage, ensuring that survey content is relevant and
accessible to all respondents and yields representative outcomes. In
this context, the Census Bureau considers the panel an essential tool
for advancing data equity. The Census Bureau also intends for the panel
to be used to conduct methodological research on privacy and
confidentiality concerns across time, to test alternative contact
timing and sequence, improve online questionnaires and procedures,
reduce respondent burden, and ultimately increase the quality of data
collected in censuses and surveys of the public.'' (Pages 66-67)
https://www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/2023-03/Census-FY2024-
Congressional-Budget-Submission.pdf.
\4\ FY25 Department of Commerce Budget Justification. Page 25.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2025-APP/pdf/BUDGET-2025-
APP-1-6.pdf.
\5\ Bureau of the Budget Bulletin 55-4. January 15, 1955. https://
www.govern
mentcompetition.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/
Bureauof_the_Budget_Bulletin_55-4_
January_15_1955.pdf.
\6\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/
circulars/A76/a076.pdf.
\7\ ``America's Essential Economic and Social Data at Risk.'' The
Census Project. May 2023. https://thecensusproject.org/wp-content/
uploads/2023/05/census-acs-report-2023-v4.pdf.
[This statement was submitted by Howard Fienberg, Senior VP
Advocacy.]
______
Prepared Statement of IOOS Association
Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee,
This testimony supports fiscal year 2025 appropriations to the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Ocean
Service to ensure sustained ocean and Great Lakes observation to
improve the resilience and economic prosperity of the Nation's coastal
communities. It is submitted on behalf of the IOOS Association, a
nonprofit organization representing the 11 federally certified Regional
Associations (RAs) of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS)
located around our coasts and Great Lakes, including U.S. territories
in the Caribbean and Pacific. IOOS is the Nation's premier coastal and
Great Lakes observing program. The RAs are tasked with filling critical
gaps in the Federal system as required to provide information that
helps protect lives, economies, and our environment.
We are deeply concerned by the Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget,
which reduces funding to the IOOS regions by more than 76%. If enacted,
the proposed $10 million in funding would completely shut down the
regional observing networks, cutting off critical data that impact
local, national, and global economies including search and rescue,
shipping, fishing, coastal resilience, coastal tourism, and more.
Forty percent of the United States population lives in coastal
counties, and the population in coastal areas continues to increase.
These coastal and Great Lakes communities are experiencing dramatic
changes from coastal flooding, sea level rise, increasing coastal storm
frequency and intensity, erosion, hypoxia, harmful algal blooms, ocean
acidification, biodiversity changes, and more. These impacts threaten
human lives and critical coastal infrastructure, homes and livelihoods,
water and food supplies, and weaken the ability of marine ecosystems to
provide essential ecological services and natural infrastructure for
resilience. Coastal communities and businesses that rely on marine
resources and maritime safety need information and forecasts about the
ocean environment to make decisions that protect lives and ensure
safety, security, and economic prosperity.
IOOS is the Nation's leading resource for community-driven coastal,
ocean, and Great Lakes information. This vital program supports a vast
network of buoys, gliders, high frequency radars, and other sensors
that monitor U.S. waters. IOOS provides critical, publicly accessible
data and data products that enable coastal and Great Lakes communities
to protect their people, economies, and ecosystems. This efficient,
reliable, and cost-effective system supports emergency preparedness,
underpins a thriving blue economy, and bridges the gap between
scientific research, federally certified data, and timely informed
management.
Our priority is to provide robust funding for IOOS and its national
network of 11 IOOS RAs to further understanding of our dynamic and
resource-rich coastal areas, and to prepare communities for risks
associated with floods, extreme weather events, harmful algal blooms,
hypoxia, and other hazards. We respectfully request that the Committee
provide $56 million for the IOOS Regional Observations line under
NOAA's National Ocean Service in the fiscal year 2025 appropriations
legislation.
Sustained, reliable, and accessible data are the foundation for
understanding and making decisions about our coastal oceans and Great
Lakes. The 11 IOOS RAs underpin coastal economies by generating and
delivering information tailored to the needs of local forecasters,
shippers, fishermen, emergency and resource managers, public health
officials, aquaculture farmers, coastal communities, and
recreationalists, while simultaneously providing data to improve
Federal models, forecasts, and other tools. The RAs deploy, operate,
and maintain more than 1,000 observing assets (buoys, water level
gauges, estuary and coastal stations, web cameras, underwater gliders,
and high frequency radars) in partnership with local universities and
marine technology industries, and integrate and serve data from Federal
and non-federal sources through federally certified regional data
centers.
IOOS is a single system that supports many needs, making it a cost-
effective investment for American taxpayers. In fact, a recent study by
the Center for the Blue Economy \1\ concluded that the value of the
IOOS regional observing system, just to initial users (i.e., an
underestimate of the broader value), lies between $192 million and $233
million per year, creating an economic value approximately five times
greater than the current annual investment in the system. Further, IOOS
data and information products and services support decision-making and
innovation for the more than $360 billion (GDP) ocean-based economy.
The IOOS program was reauthorized unanimously by Congress in 2020
in a bill that was signed into law by former-President Trump. This
appropriations request is at the program's authorized funding level as
outlined in that law. The $56 million request for the Regional IOOS
program includes $50 million for core support for the sustained
operation and maintenance of the system at the regional level. Like any
business, the IOOS RAs are feeling the impact of inflation on their
ability to provide the services that their users and stakeholders have
come to expect. We are thankful for the maintained funding enacted in
fiscal year 2024 ($42.5 million), but it does not keep up with
inflation and the costs associated with the many services provided and
enabled through the IOOS RAs. Increased support for IOOS to authorized
levels will continue and enhance service delivery to users across the
regional network and the 17 Federal agencies whose missions IOOS
supports. This funding will provide the sustained operational backbone
for the regional systems to support safe and efficient maritime
transportation and commerce, U.S. Coast Guard search and rescue
operations, offshore energy development and operations, resource
management and protection, environmental prediction (e.g., marine heat
waves), improved understanding and notification of hazards (e.g.,
hurricanes, flooding), and more.
Additionally, $6 million of the total IOOS regional request will
support competitive grants for innovations and partnerships, including
sensor development, autonomous sampling, and coastal modeling, as well
as other priority initiatives, such as building capacity for detection
and forecasting of harmful algal blooms, through projects that Congress
has supported since fiscal year 2020, toward an operational National
Harmful Algal Bloom Observing Network.
If the Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget request is enacted,
taxpayer dollars, through appropriations to build and sustain this
critical and cost effective network, as well as through investments
made to IOOS through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and the
Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), would be wasted as the core functions of
IOOS, essential for the proper management of both initiatives, would
essentially go away overnight. The IOOS RAs have proposed activities to
recapitalize their systems (funding from the BIL) and increase the
reach and utility of IOOS data for more user groups and to meet the
growing needs of frontline coastal communities (funding from the IRA).
The benefits these enhancements will bring are only possible because of
the existing infrastructure. Further, these activities are based on the
specific requirements from NOAA and the intent of the laws; these funds
do not support the basic ongoing maintenance of the observing systems
supported by the program.
We are grateful for the Committee's support of IOOS in the fiscal
year 2025 appropriations bill, and again emphasize the importance of
maintaining funding to a network that provides crucial information
about our coasts and waterways to millions of Americans. Continued
investment in the Nation's sustained observations is key to protecting
our coastal communities and unlocking the economic potential of our
oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. The annual appropriations to the
Regional IOOS program are the funds that sustain the infrastructure,
data collection, and data product delivery on which our uses have come
to depend. A well-funded IOOS furthers understanding of our dynamic and
resource-rich coastal areas and prepares communities for risks
associated with environmental impacts, such as damage from floods,
extreme weather events, harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, and oil
spills and other hazards.
Twenty years ago in its landmark report, the U.S. Commission on
Ocean Policy, chaired by Admiral James D. Watkins, USN (ret), called
for the establishment of a US Integrated Ocean Observing System. The
report stated, ``the United States simply cannot provide the economic,
environmental, and security benefits . . . , achieve new levels of
understanding and predictive capability, or generate the information
needed by a wide range of users, without implementing the IOOS.'' Many
Regional Associations saw their beginnings in those early years. In
2009, Congress showed strong bipartisan support, establishing IOOS in
law, paving the way for the realization of the IOOS vision. This body
has supported the strengthening of U.S. IOOS through successive
Congresses, including reauthorizing IOOS in 2020, to serve the
economic, health, and security needs of our Nation. Therefore, we
respectfully request that the Committee provide $56 million to the
Regional IOOS program under NOAA's National Ocean Service.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Colgan, Charles S. and Castelletto, Anthony 2021. The Economic
Value of Ocean Observing Systems in the United States: A Prototype User
Valuation. Monterey, CA: Center for the Blue Economy, Middlebury
Institute of International Studies at Monterey.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Gerhard F. Kuska, Chair.]
______
Prepared Statement of Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe
On behalf of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, I am pleased to submit
this written testimony on our funding priorities and requests for the
Fiscal Year 2025 Department of Justice and Department of Commerce
Budgets.
Tribal Priorities for the Department of Justice
1. Fully Fund the Tribal Law and Order Act
2. Fully Fund Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)
3. Increase Funding for the Tribal Set-Aside for Victims of Crime
Act Funding
Tribal Specific Requests--The Department of Commerce
1. $70.0 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (NOAA/
NMFS)
2. $43.5 million for the Pacific Salmon Treaty Salmon Agreement
(NOAA/NMFS)
3. $33.5 million for the Mitchell Act Hatchery Program (NOAA/NMFS)
justification--tribal priorities for the department of justice
Fully Fund the Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA)
The Tribal Law and Order Act was a crucial step in empowering
Tribes to better address the unique public safety challenges and reduce
the prevalence of violent crime in Indian country. However, effective
implementation of TLOA is contingent upon adequate Federal funding.
Funding is needed to implement the comprehensive and improved measures
that were enacted to address the public safety crisis in Tribal
communities. The entire Tribal justice system is dependent on this
funding to conduct law enforcement, court, and detention functions, and
to provide rehabilitation and preventive services. Increased and
targeted funding in these areas will have a positive impact on the
health and well-being of our Tribal citizens, Tribal communities and
surrounding non-Native communities.
Fully Fund Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)
The statistics on violence against Native women show that outside
law enforcement has proven ineffective in addressing these crimes of
violence. Between 2005 and 2007, U.S. Attorneys declined to prosecute
nearly 52 percent of violent crimes that occurred in Indian country;
and 67 percent of cases declined were sexual abuse related cases. It is
unconscionable to force Tribes to submit to a system of justice that
declines to prosecute over half the criminal cases brought before it
and leaves our Native women without judicial recourse.
Equally disturbing is the fact that the Justice Department has
found that when non-Native cases of domestic violence go uninvestigated
and unpunished, offenders' violence escalates. As a result, on some
reservations, Native women are murdered at a rate that is 10 times the
National average. In 2016, $2.5 million was appropriated for Tribes to
implement the new VAWA provisions. While Federal funding for VAWA 2013
has enhanced collaborative responses to domestic violence related
crimes and the provision of services to victims, additional resources
to exercise this new jurisdictional authority are critical.
Increase the Tribal Set-Aside for Victims of Crime Act Funding
Crime victimization rates on Tribal lands have been estimated as
much as 250% higher than the National rate and the rate of murder of
American Indian/Alaska Native women on some reservations are 1000%
higher than the National average. Tribal governments, like State
governments, are responsible for addressing the needs of victims in
their communities. Congress created a Tribal set aside under the Crime
Victims Fund which has proven effective in increasing resources for
Tribal communities to address crime in Indian country. Given the rate
of crime in Indian country we urge Congress to increase the Tribal set
aside for the Victims of Crime Act.
justification--tribal priority requests for the department of commerce
Provide $70.0 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund
(NOAA/NMFS)
Request $70.0 million for PCSRF, which is an increase of $5.0
million over the FY24 enacted level of $65.0 million. It is worth
noting that this request is a significant departure from the PCSRF peak
level of $110.0 million in FY02 or subsequent years in which
appropriations were maintained upwards of $80.0 million through FY11.
The PCSRF was established to reverse the decline of salmon and
steelhead in the Pacific Northwest. Jamestown uses the funds to restore
wild salmon populations and to protect and restore important habitat in
the Puget Sound coastal plains. These funds also support our policy
development and help to build the technical capacity of our Natural
Resources' staff charged with planning, implementation, and monitoring
recovery activities.
Provide $43.5 million for the Pacific Salmon Treaty including the
additional $6 million for the 2008 Chinook Salmon Agreement
(NOAA/NMFS)
The Pacific Salmon Treaty provides the framework for international
collaboration and cooperation to conserve and manage Pacific Salmon.
The Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC) works together to establish fishery
regimes, develop management recommendations, assess each country's
performance and compliance with the Treaty, and is the forum for all
entities to work towards reaching an agreement on mutual fisheries
issues.
Provide $33.5 million for the Mitchell Act Hatchery Program (NOAA/NMFS)
Jamestown hatchery operations have elevated our success and
generated a substantial return on our investment in our aquaculture
business. The Tribe operates three hatcheries, two in Washington state
and one in Hawaii that produce shellfish and sablefish seeds. The
seedlings help to replenish fish and shellfish stocks that have been
depleted due to loss of ecosystems and natural habitats. Tribes depend
on hatcheries to support Treaty fishing rights, protect our culture and
traditional ways of life, and to bolster our commercial fishery
operations at home and trade abroad.
national tribal appropriation priorities for the department of justice
1. Provide Direct Recurring Base Budgets for Public Safety and
Justice
2. Allow all Public Safety and Justice Funding from Across the
Federal Government to be Distributed through Self-Governance
Compacts
3. Increase and make mandatory funding for all aspects of public
safety and justice programs and services from all Agencies with
public safety and justice responsibilities
4. DOJ Transparency Regarding Available Programs and the
Effectiveness of CTAS
1. Provide Formula Driven Direct Recurring Base Budgets for Public
Safety and Justice
There has been a growing trend across Federal agencies to fund
Tribal programs and services with grant dollars rather than providing
formula driven direct recurring base budgets for public safety and
justice. Grant funding is incongruent with the government-to-government
relationship, Self-Governance, and the trust and treaty obligations.
Tribal governments experience challenges accessing Federal grants for
numerous reasons. Grant funding requires extensive administrative and
reporting requirements, makes Tribes compete with each other and other
entities for limited dollars, and prevents under-resourced Tribes from
being able to access these opportunities. Although agencies have taken
steps to reduce some of the administrative burdens, there is no way
even the best resourced Tribes can take advantage of every opportunity
because the sheer number of grants across the Federal system is a
structural barrier. Public Safety and Justice across Indian Country is
at a crisis level due to inadequate funding and diminished Tribal
jurisdictional authority. The Federal Government should not be creating
additional barriers for Tribes to access these funds that they so
desperately need.
2. Allow all Public Safety and Justice Funding from Across the Federal
Government to be Distributed through Self-Governance Compacts
When Congress passed the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act (ISDEAA) in 1975, it ushered in a new era of Self-
Determination for Tribal governments that has improved the lives of
American Indians and Alaska Natives. The recent pandemic has
demonstrated the need for more coordinated funding, better
communication and coordination between all Federal departments and
agencies, and more equitable funding for all Tribes. Under Self-
Governance, public safety and justice programs and services would be
better designed and operated with better results, safer communities,
and better social outcomes for Tribal citizens, their families, and
communities. Tribal public safety and justice programs would benefit
from reduced administrative costs and the elimination of onerous and
duplicative reporting requirements. Tribally-driven programs that allow
for greater flexibility in the use of funds to support local needs are
an essential aspect of being able to keep our Tribal citizens and
communities safe.
3. Increase and make mandatory funding for all aspects of public safety
and justice programs and services from all Agencies with public
safety and justice responsibilities.
The Federal obligation to provide mandatory funding to Tribes in
perpetuity for public safety and justice is solidified in numerous
treaties, statutes, and court decisions yet the Federal Government
continues to appropriate funding for Tribes through discretionary
appropriations. There needs to be a shift in the paradigm surrounding
the way Tribes are currently funded.
Tribes are Sovereign Nations with a special political status and
relationship with the U.S. government. The provision of mandatory
funding for Tribal public safety and justice strengthens the Nation-to-
Nation relationship, respects Tribal sovereignty and upholds the
Federal trust and treaty obligations. Funding for public safety and
justice must be substantially increased and made mandatory.
4. DOJ Transparency Regarding Available Programs and Effectiveness of
CTAS
In FY2010, DOJ launched the Coordinated Tribal Assistance
Solicitation (CTAS). The CTAS program was intended to streamline the
application process encompassing available Tribal government grant
programs. While CTAS grants can be used for a variety of justice
programs and services in nine different areas, the application process
is highly competitive, tedious, and complex and there are many
restrictions imposed on how the funds may be utilized. It has taken
numerous Tribal staff members several weeks to fill out and apply for
the CTAS program with no guarantee that funding will be awarded. The
CTAS is currently structured with the Federal Government determining
categorical priorities for Tribes instead of a Tribally-driven process
whereby Tribes determine their public safety and justice priorities and
needs. There is also a lack of transparency, coordination, and
communication with respect to the programs and services that are
available for Tribes to access through CTAS, or other programs Tribes
are eligible to apply for at DOJ. In compliance with E.O. 14112, the
DOJ needs to provide an accurate accounting of all of the programs,
services and funding that is available for Tribes; how the funds are
being distributed; the percentage of the dollars that have been
received by the Tribes; steps DOJ has taken to coordinate with other
agencies and Tribal governments to implement Tribal priorities and
practices that bolster Tribal justice systems and an analysis on the
effectiveness and deficiencies of CTAS.
National Requests and Recommendations.--The Jamestown S'Klallam
Tribe is a direct beneficiary of the collective Tribal efforts and
continues to support the requests and recommendations of the Affiliated
Tribes of Northwest Indians, Northwest Indians Fisheries Commission,
Pacific Salmon Commission, and the National Congress of American
Indians.
I would like to extend my thanks to the subcommittee for an
opportunity to submit testimony on the FY2025 Appropriations.
[This statement was submitted by W. Ron Allen, Tribal Chairman/
CEO.]
______
Prepared Statement of Kentucky Resources Council
Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony before your
subcommittee. This statement is regarding the Bureau of Prison's (BOP)
planned construction of Letcher County, KY facilities and its related
unobligated $504 million funds in the BOP's Building and Facilities
account, which I respectfully request the subcommittee rescinds. Please
find below my statement in my capacity as Executive Director of
Kentucky Resources Council, Inc. (KRC). KRC is a Statewide public-
interest environmental law and advocacy organization. We work to
protect Kentucky's natural resources, promote policies for healthy
communities, and assure that those who pollute our land, air, or water
are held to account. Our members and constituents live and work in
areas potentially impacted by this project and its impacts.
FCI Letcher would pose a serious disturbance and destruction to
numerous habitats and nearby wetlands, threaten to overwhelm wastewater
treatment, threaten endangered species, would create considerable light
pollution, and would sit just over a mile from one of the few remaining
old growth forests in the state. This new prison could subject
surrounding communities to the prison's wastewater discharges and
likely expose prisoners to contaminated water. It would destroy habitat
for wildlife, including habitat for federally endangered bat species
and dozens of state protected species--impacts which were not
adequately considered.
FCI Letcher will be built on a mountaintop removal site, and a mile
down-stream from a multi-million gallon coal slurry impoundment. The
construction of FCI Letcher may release harmful chemicals and heavy
metals under the surface of the MTR site into the surrounding
environment, with the potential to negatively impact residents,
correctional staff, and prisoners alike. These impacts were also not
adequately studied or considered. Eastern Kentucky, including Letcher,
was devastated by floods in 2022, which killed 44 people and damaged
9,000 homes. The county still is at high risk for floods. Letcher
Countians need housing, infrastructure, employment, and climate
strategies, not a prison.
The proposed site for FCI Letcher has many wetlands with forested
canopies. These wetlands do exist and regardless of their 'quality,'
they still provide habitat to all animals that would normally use a
wetland area for drinking, spawning, feeding, habitat, and foraging.
The wetland (WET006), that appear as a mud hole in a service road was
reported in the wetland delineation form as full of frogs. Because this
area has been mined previously, it is being assumed that the quality of
wetlands is low. This is a short-sighted opinion and does not address
the fact that valuable wetlands have prevailed in this area despite the
impacts of mining.
A property that has been impacted by mining and contains wetlands
is considered an ecological uplift of the property's aquatic resources.
All wetlands on this property, regardless of Jurisdiction
determination, provide economic and ecological services that are
valuable to this property and the people of Letcher County.
The most economically valuable services that wetlands provide have
been studied thoroughly and reported by government agencies. Wetlands
soak up rain runoff, hold water, and slowly release it, reducing the
frequency and intensity of flooding. Maintaining only 15% of the land
area of a watershed in wetlands can reduce flood peaks by as much as
60%, saving enormous costs on flood damage (EPA publication 843-F-06-
004). After peak flood flows have passed, wetlands slowly release the
stored waters, reducing property damage downstream. One reason floods
have become more costly is that over half of the wetlands in the United
States have been drained or filled. Most of these wetlands have been
drained and filled with the Army Corp of Engineers approval and did not
require mitigation measures, despite the known cost of property damage
that will occur in the future.
Furthermore, studies have shown that wetlands can remove a quantity
of pollutants equal to that of a water treatment plant (EPA publication
832-R-93-005). It has been proven over and over that wetlands improve
water quality to the point that they are now being constructed for the
purposes of improving water quality and for wastewater management.
These studies do not exclude wetlands that will be excluded by the Army
Corp of Engineers for the purposes of mitigation. It needs to be noted
that ALL wetlands that are on this property will continue to exist and
continue to provide this valuable economic service for the foreseeable
future if they are left alone. They will require little to no upkeep
and will serve the county by providing improved water quality and
reduced flooding.
With consideration of this information, I urge you to consider
rescinding the funding allocated to construct FCI Letcher. This prison
is not needed and will adversely impact the region's ecology.
[This statement was submitted by Ashley Wilmes, Esq., Executive
Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of Learning and Education Academic Research Network
On behalf of the LEARN Coalition, we urge support for increased
funding for several key Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics
(STEM) related research programs that your subcommittee will debate as
part of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 appropriations process. LEARN, a
coalition of 41 leading research colleges of education across the
country, supports critical investments in research aimed at advancing
the scientific understanding of learning and development. We advocate
for greater funding for these priorities across all Federal agencies,
including the National Science Foundation (NSF). Specifically, LEARN is
recommending $11.9 billion be allocated to NSF overall and $1.53
billion for the Directorate for STEM Education (EDU).
First, while grateful for the funding NSF was appropriated in
FY2024, we were concerned that the FY2024 appropriated level
representing a cut of more than 5 percent from what NSF was provided in
FY2023. We respectfully assert that more funding is required to address
the effects of historical underinvestment in fundamental research in
the United States. According to the results of the 2023 National
Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP), there was a nine-point
decrease in math scores for age 13 students. This decline, the first
score drop in mathematics to date, highlights the need for more
research opportunities to close gaps and make up for lost instructional
time. Without the funding necessary to support high-quality research
opportunities, many of these disparities will be unaddressed as
students fall further behind.
In addition to our call for a $11.9 billion funding level for NSF,
LEARN supports funding for NSF's EDU directorate at $1.53 billion in
FY2025. EDU works to prepare the next generation of STEM professionals
by conducting rigorous research and evaluation of STEM education. If we
are to compete globally, the U.S. must recommit itself to improved STEM
education such that we can attract and retain the next generation of
STEM professionals. Critical investments are needed to ensure we have
effective programs to prepare and support STEM teachers and faculty.
Over the past 20 years, the share of U.S. research and development
funded by the Federal Government has declined; this decline has
disproportionately impacted the higher education sector by reducing
resources that drives the most innovation in this area. Stagnation in
these key U.S. talent development programs come as our National
security leaders are sounding alarm bells over foreign talent
recruitment programs which are effectively siphoning STEM capacity from
the United States and elsewhere to countries that are strongly
investing while we remain complacent. As Congress considers making a
large investment in STEM education, we urge you to first invest in EDU
which has been successfully supporting STEM education research and
dissemination to ensure the creation of an adept and diverse STEM
workforce.
The LEARN Coalition believes strongly that collectively these key
investments will advance scientific learning and development to ensure
a globally competitive, STEM-educated workforce in the long run. Thank
you for considering these requests and please contact us if we can be
of any assistance.
Members of the LEARN Coalition: Auburn University, College of
Education; Boston University, Wheelock College of Education and Human
Development; Boston College, Lynch School of Education; Florida State
University, College of Education, Health, and Human Sciences; Georgia
State University, College of Education & Human Development; Indiana
University, School of Education; Iowa State University, College of
Human Sciences; Johns Hopkins University, School of Education; Lehigh
University, College of Education; North Carolina State, University
College of Education; University of Oklahoma, Jeannine Rainbolt College
of Education; Penn State University, College of Education; Purdue
University, College of Education; Syracuse University, School of
Education; Texas A&M University, College of Education and Human
Development; The Ohio State University, College of Education and Human
Ecology; University of Arizona, School of Education; University of
California--Santa Barbara, Gevirtz Graduate School of Education;
University of Central Florida, College of Community Innovation and
Education; University of Connecticut, Neag School of Education;
University of Florida, College of Education; University of Georgia
School of Education; University of Houston College of Education;
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, College of Education;
University of Kansas, School of Education; University of Maryland
College Park, College of Education; University of Minnesota, College of
Education and Human Development; University of Missouri, College of
Education; University of Nevada-Reno, College of Education; University
of North Carolina, School of Education; University of Oklahoma, College
of Education; University of Oregon, College of Education; University of
Pittsburgh, School of Education; University of Southern California,
Rossier School of Education; University of Texas at Austin, College of
Education; University of Vermont, College of Education and Social
Services; University of Wisconsin, Madison School of Education;
University of Wyoming, College of Education; Vanderbilt University,
Peabody College of Education and Human Development; Virginia
Commonwealth University, School of Education
______
Prepared Statement of MENTOR
On behalf of MENTOR, our network of Affiliates, and youth mentoring
programs across the country, I thank Chair Shaheen and Ranking Member
Moran for the opportunity to provide testimony in support of a critical
Federal investment in America's young people. I write this on behalf of
MENTOR's Affiliate Network, thousands of mentoring programs, and
millions of volunteer mentors that serve our communities each day. I'm
also writing on behalf of the millions of young people across the
United States still waiting to find the supportive relationships they
need to thrive--including an average of 63 youth per mentoring program
on wait lists. My testimony will focus on the Part G Youth Mentoring
Program managed by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP) within the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) at the
Department of Justice (DOJ). MENTOR and our youth-serving coalition of
partners are calling on your committee to continue the strong
bipartisan support of the Youth Mentoring Program with an investment of
at least $130 million in Fiscal Year 2025. This investment will make it
possible for more mentoring organizations to use evidence-based
practices to better meet the mentoring needs of the most vulnerable and
disadvantaged youth in communities across the Nation.
MENTOR is the unifying national champion for expanding quality
youth mentoring relationships. At a time when 1 in 3 young people are
growing up without a mentor--a data point that has grown in recent
years among our country's youngest generation--MENTOR seeks to close
this ``mentoring gap'' and ensure that all young people have the
support they need to succeed, everywhere they are. We seek to leverage
resources and provide the tools and expertise that local programs--
whether in schools, nonprofits, faith-based institutions, or the
private sector--require to provide high-quality mentoring for young
people who need it most, build greater awareness of the value of
mentors, and positively inform public policy to bring opportunity to
young people in need.
Quality mentoring through structured programs and relationships
that form naturally with teachers, coaches, faith leaders, and other
caring adults can have a profoundly positive impact on educational
success, healthy development, and overall wellbeing. It is an
innovative, evidence-based practice that is one of the few prevention
and intervention tactics with the potential to support young people of
all demographics and backgrounds in all aspects of their lives. We
believe that this critical time in our Nation's history requires an
approach that considers the inextricable linkage between a young
person's academic achievement, mental, social, and physical health. For
us to meet this moment, Federal investment into evidence-based programs
that support positive youth development is required.
the benefits of quality youth mentoring
Youth mentoring is a simple, yet powerful concept: a caring adult
or near-peer mentor provides guidance, support, and encouragement to
help a young person achieve success in life. Research confirms that
quality evidence-based mentoring relationships have positive effects on
young people in a variety of personal, academic, and professional
situations:
--Social-Emotional Development and Mental Health.--Mentoring provides
young people with a sense of belonging and promotes positive
social attitudes and relationships. In fact, research has shown
that the strongest benefit from mentoring is a reduction in
depressive symptoms. It can also help reduce mental health
stigma and increase treatment entry and adherence. Ultimately,
mentoring provides pro-social activities, increased positive
relationships, life skills training, and access to networks--
helping lead young people to productive futures.
--Educational Achievement.--Many students find meaningful
relationships during the school day. In fact, analyses of one
prominent national data set from Applied Developmental Science
suggest that teachers and other school personnel, such as
counselors, coaches, or front office and cafeteria staff, are
among the most cited sources of naturally occurring mentors.
Further, students who are chronically absent are more likely to
drop out of school, exhibit behavioral issues, and lack a sense
of belonging. Mentoring can increase school engagement, improve
scholastic efficacy, and prevent misconduct.
--Reducing Unsafe or Risky Behaviors.--As protective factors for
young people, mentors serve as positive role models to help
young people make healthy decisions and avoid high-risk
behaviors. For example, young people who meet regularly with
their mentors are less likely than their peers to use illegal
drugs and alcohol. Mentoring can also be integrated into multi-
component violence prevention and intervention efforts, as it
can reduce aggressive behaviors--such as fighting and
bullying--and provide comprehensive support to youth at risk
for committing violence or victimization. Recent research
funded by OJJDP even found that mentoring programs potentially
provide a benefit of three times the public expenditure for
every day in jail that program participants avoid. Mentors help
provide guidance to productive activities that support growth
and development in a young person, such as sports and
extracurricular activities.
--Workforce Development.--Mentoring helps develop the talent pipeline
for our economy. Mentors prepare young people for the workforce
through career exposure, skill-building, social-emotional
support, and goal setting. Mentoring can also lead to higher
retention rates, wage increases, and professional development.
Through their mentors, young people are introduced to resources
and organizations they may not be familiar with, introducing
them to new networks as well as methods to find jobs and
internships. Mentors in workplace settings are particularly
impactful for marginalized young people, such as youth with
disabilities, youth of color, and youth identifying as female,
who are often underrepresented in certain industries, such as
science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM).
--Special Populations.--Mentoring also offers a practical approach to
supporting military-connected youth and youth in rural
communities. Mentoring for these populations has been shown to
improve academic performance and symptoms of depression,
improving social support and parental ratings of stress in the
home, and improvements in their health.
the national mentoring resource center
Mentoring programs can effectively and safely provide these
benefits when they are fully trained on the most up-to-date evidence-
based mentoring practice and training. In 2015, through funds from the
Part G Youth Mentoring Program, the National Mentoring Resource Center
(NMRC) was created to improve the quality and effectiveness of
mentoring. MENTOR, its Affiliates, and other technical assistance
providers supply tools, program and training materials, and no-cost,
evidence-based technical assistance to mentoring programs, school
districts, workplaces, and faith-based institutions across the Nation
through the NMRC. This important resource has bolstered the ability of
mentoring programs to serve young people from vulnerable populations,
including young people at-risk of entering the juvenile justice system,
youth in foster care, and victims of commercial sex trafficking.
The NMRC has proven to be both popular and effective in achieving
its mission. The NMRC completed 759 requests with over 17,000 hours
provided in FY23 (an average of over 20 hours of dedicated help per
program.) After receiving services, over 96% of programs reported being
satisfied or very satisfied with their provider's effectiveness and
knowledge, and the average program changed over 3 policies/procedures
and created 4 new program materials (such as curriculum, databases,
recruitment fliers, etc.) as a result.
closing the mentoring gap
While mentoring is clearly effective, mentoring organizations
across the Nation still face barriers in providing high-quality
services. Thousands of young people remain on waitlists at
organizations because of limited resources, funding for programs, and
the lack of capacity to recruit and train quality volunteer mentors.
Further, inflationary costs, workforce shortages, and reduced
charitable giving have prevented many nonprofit youth-serving
organizations from the ability to fully recover from the pandemic.
These issues combined provide many hurdles for mentoring programs. But
with the support of both private and public investments, many mentoring
organizations have been able to increase their capacity to meet their
community's unique relational needs.
One of the ways that mentoring programs have succeeded in expanding
quality services is through support from the Federal Youth Mentoring
Program. The program, which touches every State, focuses on prevention
and interventions for youth facing risk and helps to close the
mentoring gap. These funds provide direct support for young people, who
could otherwise become involved in negative behaviors and activities
causing harm to themselves and their communities. It is also popular
with the public; in a recent survey, more than 80% of adults reported
that they support at least some investment in youth mentoring.
In a 2016 study conducted by MENTOR, it was found that 75 percent
of programs have a budget of under $100,000. Costs for groups of young
people with adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), such as those who
have encountered traumatic events, teen parents, or victims of
commercial sexual exploitation require more resources and expertise,
which increases the program's cost per youth in order to fully address
their unique needs. Mentoring programs work far beyond their financial
capacity to serve young people, but with additional resources, their
reach expands exponentially, and the quality of their services can
strengthen through improved training. Mentoring programs utilize
Federal support in part to better serve the large number of young
people who could benefit most from evidence-based mentoring.
the youth mentoring program
The Youth Mentoring Program continues to be the only Federal grant
exclusively dedicated to providing funds for evidence-based mentoring
activities. Youth Mentoring Program funds have been awarded to
national, multi-State, and collaborative mentoring projects and
programs who serve suburban, rural, and urban populations. The
flexibility of the grant has allowed organizations to use these funds
to specifically tailor programs to their community's unique needs. This
provides local control and specialized concentration on results that
work best for each young person and their community. These funds also
invest in research to learn what is most effective, bridging research
to practice, and driving quality and impact through hands-on community-
based capacity building. They are simply invaluable in the ways that
they support youth development, educational achievement, and safe
communities.
In the most recent data available, from FY22, an estimated 85,475
new mentor-mentee matches were made with funding from the Youth
Mentoring Program. Further, 29,785 new trained mentors were recruited,
including adult volunteers, college students, law enforcement officers,
military, athletic coaches, peers, teachers, and corporate
professionals.
MENTOR's request of $130 million for the Youth Mentoring Program in
FY25--supported by over 400 direct service programs from every State in
the country--will allow more young people to access to the important
social, professional, and academic opportunities we all hope to provide
for America's youth. The Youth Mentoring Program demonstrates a sound
and effective investment in evidence-based programs that work. Strong
mentoring programs weave together our communities, foster greater
understanding, enrich the lives of both mentors and mentees, and
efficiently leverage volunteers to drive impact backed by quality
programs and practice.
Thank you again for this opportunity to provide testimony on this
critical Federal resource supporting young people and for this
subcommittee's long-standing, bipartisan support for the Part G Youth
Mentoring Program.
[This statement was submitted by Abbie Evans, Chief Policy &
Advocacy Officer.]
______
Prepared Statement of National Association of Marine Laboratories
On behalf of the National Association of Marine Laboratories
(NAML), I am writing in support of increasing FY 2025 funding levels to
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the
National Science Foundation (NSF), and the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA). As you draft the Commerce-Justice-Science
appropriations bill, NAML respectfully requests no less than $7.5
billion for NOAA and $16.7 billion for NSF. These agencies, including
specific programs identified below, are essential to the health and
future of our Nation and to the research and education ongoing at our
member laboratories.
NAML is a network of 104 place-based marine and Great Lakes
laboratories across the Nation with a mission to promote excellence in
research, education, and public outreach in the marine and freshwater
sciences. NAML also seeks to provide a forum for the resolution of
challenges common to nonprofit marine laboratories in the United States
and to inform the wise use and conservation of marine and coastal
resources.
The need to understand, sustainably manage, and conserve our ocean,
coasts, and Great Lakes only grows. Coastal counties in the United
States are home to 40% of the population, and if they were their own
country, their GDP would rank third in the world, following only the
United States and China. Not only is the marine and Great Lakes economy
an important part of our National economy, but it also often
outperforms the National economy. For example, in 2021, America's
marine economy saw a 7.4% growth in its contribution to the GDP, while
the National economy grew by only 5.9%.
The role of the ocean and Great Lakes extends far beyond our
economy. It is critical to our Nation's prosperity and security,
impacting everything from global commerce and national defense to food
security, resilient ecosystems, the Blue Economy, and the economic
health of coastal and Great Lakes communities. To ensure our security
in these areas, the United States must invest in and support agencies
and programs that both help us better understand and observe our
changing ocean. These agencies will also need to ensure that we will
have a trained workforce that enables us to maintain our international
competitiveness.
The Administration's Budget Request for FY 2025 proposes drastic
cuts to many NOAA programs due to the reduced amount of Federal funding
available in FY 2025 under the caps in the Fiscal Responsibility Act
(Public Law 118-5). NAML respectfully requests that the committee
reject these proposed cuts and instead support funding at no less than
the levels that were appropriated in recent years, as is provided below
for extramural ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes research, conservation,
observing, and education programs.
noaa
NOAA plays a key role in our Nation's security, stability, and
prosperity. NAML labs operate on the frontline of a constantly changing
environment. Thus, we understand more than most how much our Nation
depends on healthy marine and freshwater resources, how weather and
climate hazards challenge the resilience of coastal communities, and
how research and education enterprises provide the knowledge and
training for decision-makers in our coastal communities. NAML
respectfully requests the funding of NOAA at no less than $7.5 billion.
Additionally, within NOAA's Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF)
Account, NAML requests no less than the listed amounts for the
following programs:
--The National Ocean Service ($679.4 million, FY 2023 enacted level)
enables the safe, sustainable, and efficient use of marine and
coastal resources across sectors including maritime commerce
and transportation, fishing, aquaculture, energy development,
recreation, and inland export/import.
--Integrated Ocean Observation System Regional Observations ($56
million) benefits the economy, public safety, and the
environment through its network that collects real-time
observing data, develops tracking and predictive tools, and
delivers tailed products to stakeholders and decision-
makers.
--Competitive Research ($22.5 million, FY 2023 enacted level) uses
a competitive, external grant process to fund regional-
scale and targeted research and assessment activities that
support NOAA's coastal mission areas, including the only
national grant programs dedicated to research topics in the
HAB and Hypoxia Research and Control Act.
--National Estuarine Research Reserve System ($33.3 million, FY
2024 enacted level) is a federal-state partnership that
uses research and education to protect and understand
estuarine resources, while functioning as sentinel sites
within a changing environment.
--National Marine Sanctuaries and Marine Protected Areas ($86.2
million, FY 2025 Budget Request) conserves and facilitates
sustainable use of seascapes, wildlife, and maritime
heritage resources.
--Within funding for the National Marine Fisheries Service, NAML
requests the amounts below for the following programs:
--Prescott Grant Program ($4.5 million, FY 2024 enacted level)
provides competitive grants to stranding network
organizations to rescue, rehabilitate, or investigate sick,
injured, or distressed marine mammals and to determine the
cause of death or disease of dead marine mammals.
--Aquaculture ($24.0 million, FY 2024 enacted level) provides
science, services, and policies to support the significant
expansion and sustainability of U.S. marine aquaculture.
--Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research ($661.3 million, FY 2023
enacted level) included in the Senate report, including no less
than the:
--National Sea Grant College Program ($80 million, FY 2024 enacted
level) turns research into actions that support science-
based sustainable practices around resilient communities
and economies, sustainable fisheries and aquaculture,
healthy coastal ecosystems, and environmental literacy and
workforce development.
--Sea Grant Aquaculture Research ($14 million, FY 2024 enacted
level) is the largest, most comprehensive government grant
program dedicated to supporting marine aquaculture
development with grants addressing some of the top
challenges to marine aquaculture.
--Ocean Exploration and Research ($46.0 million, FY 2024 enacted
level) is the only Federal program dedicated to ocean
exploration.
--National Oceanographic Partnership Program ($2.5 million, FY 2024
enacted level) is a unique catalyst for participation by
nongovernmental organizations and industry in Federal ocean
research and education projects in the areas of data,
resources, education, and communication.
--Sustained Ocean Observations and Monitoring ($52.9 million, FY
2025 Budget Request) is a global system for observations
and analysis of marine and ocean variables to support
operational ocean services worldwide.
--Office of Education ($35.6 million, FY 2025 Budget Request)
provides leadership on education matters, promotes NOAA
products, and services to the public, and provides support
for education activities across the agency.
-- Bay Watershed Education and Training (B-WET) Regional Programs
($8.7 million, FY 2024 enacted level) is an environmental
education program for K-12 students and educators that
promotes locally relevant, authentic experiential learning.
-- Jose E. Serrano Educational Partnership Program with Minority
Serving Institutions ($20.8 million, FY 2024 enacted) uses
a competitive process to provide financial assistance to
students and Minority Serving Institutions that train
students and conduct research in NOAA mission sciences.
nsf
NSF plays a key role in our Nation's security, stability, and
prosperity and provides global leadership in advancing research and
education.
NAML respectfully requests Congress fund NSF at no less than $16.7
billion, the congressionally authorized level. With this increase, NAML
requests no less than the listed amounts for the following programs:
--Research and Related Activities ($8.0 billion, FY 2025 Budget
Request) invests in both early-stage research and development
of a future-focused science and engineering workforce that can
accelerate progress in basic science and engineering research
as well as support the private sector.
--STEM Education ($1.4 billion, FY 2023 enacted level including
disaster supplemental) advances equity, builds a future
workforce for the needs of today and the industries of the
future, and expands STEM opportunities to everyone, everywhere.
nasa
NASA's Earth-facing missions, which help us understand our planet
on both a large and a small-scale, are of particular interest to NAML.
NAML requests no less than $7.8 billion for Science (FY 2023
enacted level) and $2.4 billion for Earth Science (FY 2025 Budget
Request), respectively.
concluding remarks
Investing in the programs and agencies at no less than the levels
highlighted above will enable us to understand our changing ocean,
coasts, and Great Lakes, which in turn will help ensure our economic
stability, national defense, food security, and resilience. To ensure
our National security-as it relates to economic, food, homeland, and
environmental security-we request that the subcommittee reject any
proposed reductions to extramural science programs included in the
Administration's Budget Request and instead fund these programs at the
levels provided above. These programs should be adequately funded now,
not in response to the next disaster, and we fear these programs will
not recover from the impacts of such drastic proposed cuts.
Thank you for your work on FY 2025 appropriations and for your time
and consideration of this request. NAML would be happy to answer any
questions or provide any additional information.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Terry Donaldson, President.]
______
Prepared Statement of National Estuarine Research Reserve Association
Chair and Members of the subcommittee, my name is Mike De Luca. I
am the director of the Jacques Couteau National Estuarine Research
Reserve, which is administered by Rutgers University. I submit this
testimony in my capacity as president of the National Estuarine
Research Reserve Association (NERRA). NERRA is a nonprofit
organization, dedicated to advancing the understanding and protection
of our Nation's estuaries and coasts by supporting the work of the
National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS). The NERRS is a
time-tested, mission ready, state-federal partnership that focuses the
expertise and resources of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) on the needs of coastal communities and States.
On behalf of the special places Reserves protect and the
communities we support, thank you. Farsighted legislation in the
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) designated the NERRS in 1972. Fifty-
two years of congressional investment have helped us become a powerful
network of 30 protected sites, encompassing nearly 1.4 million acres of
coastal lands and waters. Our Reserves are living laboratories where
scientists, communities, educators, and state partners come together to
understand, protect, and enhance the societal and economic benefits of
coastal and estuarine resources.
We protect places, but people are the heart of our System. State
and local support was essential to the designation of every Reserve,
and today, more than 36,000 people support the work of the NERRS in 24
States and Puerto Rico. Communities throughout the U.S. Coastal Zone
recognize Reserves as ``go to'' places for high quality environmental
data; locally-relevant science guided by community needs; training and
technical assistance for decision makers and businesses; science
education for teachers and students of all ages; and innovative
approaches to managing the natural infrastructure that safeguards
people and property.
Reserves also provide great economic benefit. According to a 2020
study by NOAA's Office for Coastal Management, Reserves enhance local
and State economies through job creation and revenue contributions. For
example, in 2019, Florida's Reserves increased local revenues by $45M
through investments in staff salaries, facilities maintenance,
operations, and partnerships. Nationwide, Reserves sustain more than
10,000 jobs, provide training to more than 13,400 people, and assist
approximately 2,500 communities and 570 businesses.
Reserves also steward places that provide many valuable benefits to
industries, communities, and States. Our nation's coastal wetlands,
like those Reserves protect, are natural allies in efforts to mitigate
the impacts of climate change, providing $23 billion in storm
protection and absorbing 8.1 million tons of carbon dioxide each year.
Lands and waters protected by the NERRS also support the Nation's
multi-billion-dollar shellfish and seafood industry, recreational
fishing, and other coastal and ocean industries valued at tens of
billions of dollars. In addition, every Reserve leverages their annual
Federal grant to bring additional funds to their communities. On
average, Reserves leverage $22 million of Federal and State matching
funds each year.
State and community demand for new Reserves is a testimony to their
success. In FY 2025, the Atchafalaya Reserve in Louisiana will be
designated and a site in Wisconsin's Bay of Green Bay will be
designated in FY 2026. Additionally, the U.S. Virgin Islands is in the
designation process, and the governors of Michigan and Florida have
requested NOAA to designate new Reserves in their States.
Similarly, recent Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) funding for
the NERRS is a recognition of the Reserve role in supporting the
coastal natural infrastructure that is essential to community
adaptation and resilience to the impacts of climate change and other
coastal hazards. NERRA thanks Congress for making a significant, one-
time investment of $77 million through the BIL for NERRS restoration
and acquisition of lands. This will position Reserves to make
impressive strides in their work to advance ocean, coastal, and Great
Lakes resilience.
However, these funds are not a substitute for the annual funding
needed to sustain NERRS operations. While investments through the BIL
will support community-supported restoration and acquisition projects
throughout the Reserve System, the success of these efforts depends on
operations budgets that facilitate the healthy functioning of each
Reserve and its programs.
Through the NERRS, coastal States work with NOAA to deliver
science-based programs to help communities prepare for extreme storms,
rising seas, and changing lake levels; sustain habitats essential to
our fisheries; keep waters clean; and protect people and places on
America's coasts. NERRA requests a robust operations budget that will
support the growth of this highly valued program and ensure it has the
capacity to put BIL funding to the highest possible use for coastal
communities:
--NERRS Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF): $47 million
--(With report language to ensure each Reserve receives increases)
--NERRS Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction (PAC): $10 million
--NOAA Coastal Zone Management and Services: support robust budget
Since Congress created the NERRS through the CZMA 52 years ago,
Reserves have exceeded expectations. Today, they serve the Nation and
coastal communities with the essential science and services they need
to manage our rapidly changing coasts. Demand is high for Reserves and
their programs-and it's growing, as new Reserves are pursued in
different coastal areas. At the same time, existing sites are
responding to increasing local needs for coastal access, land
protection, trusted science, education, and training services.
NERRA's request for the FY 2025 NERRS ORF and PAC budgets will
support this local and national growth and build Reserve capacity to
work with our NOAA partners to maintain and enhance the following:
--Nationally significant monitoring programs that integrate community
needs and provide standardized observations of how coastal
conditions are changing over time;
--Collaborative science programs that deliver knowledge and tools
where and when they're needed most to address local, State, and
national priorities;
--Scientific training, technical assistance, and tools to help
thousands of coastal decision makers enhance community
resilience;
--Science, technology, engineering and mathematics-focused education
programs that deliver field training, curricula, local data,
and other resources to more than 54,000 students and 4,300
teachers each year;
--The NERRS/NOAA Margaret A. Davidson Graduate Research Fellowship
Program, which provides science to address near-term, community
needs related to nationally significant issues and training for
the next generation coastal science and management workforce;
--Public access for hunting, fishing, boating, hiking, wildlife
watching, and passive recreation on more than one million acres
of land and water.
NERRA's $47 million request for an FY 2025 NERRS ORF budget is a
$13.7 million increase over the FY 2024 program baseline. This increase
will support the NERRS in the following ways:
1. Increase direct funding to Reserve sites for operations. The
requested NERRS ORF budget would send $1 million (minimum) to each
Reserve. This will empower Reserves to meet rising inflation and
increased community needs, address the impacts of climate change,
improve equity for underserved people, and build the resilience of
natural infrastructure. Each dollar spent on Reserve operations
enhances the state economy and leverages more dollars.
2. Increase investment in national programs with local and
national impact, as recommended by the congressionally-initiated NERRS
Blue Ribbon Panel. (See bullets list above.)
3. Support expansion of the National System from 30 sites to 35.
FY 2025 funding will facilitate designation of the Atchafalaya Reserve
in Louisiana and the Bay of Green Bay Reserve in Wisconsin in FY 2025
and FY 2026, respectively. Funding also will support the designation
process for the U.S. Virgin Islands site, as well as the proposed
Reserves in Michigan and Florida.
NERRA's requested report language for FY 2025 NERRS ORF funding.
NERRA requests that the FY 2025 appropriations bill contain the
following report language to ensure funding goes out the door to States
and communities on the frontline of coastal management:
With acknowledgement of the NERRS Blue Ribbon Panel
recommendations, NOAA shall distribute all increases above
current level funding directly to the Reserve sites in order to
enhance resilience and local impact. Increases to Reserves
require each to meet Federal match requirements: Reserves that
cannot meet the federally required match will be awarded the
maximum amount for which they can provide match. Any non-
Reserve directed funding increase remaining shall be provided
for NERRS specific national programs.
NERRA's $10 million request for an FY 2025 NERRS PAC budget is a $1.5
million increase over the FY 2024 program baseline.
NERRS PAC funding advances conservation through the strategic
acquisition of priority lands and the construction and upgrades of
essential facilities. PAC funds enhance the climate resilience of
Reserve infrastructure with sustainable, energy efficient materials and
designs that reduce the risks associated with storms, rising waters,
and flooding. These improvements serve as models for communities
seeking to mitigate carbon emissions and reduce the impacts of climate
change through more resilient design. PAC funds also are critical to
ensure that Reserve research, education, and outreach programs continue
to meet community needs. Reserves compete for PAC funding, and the need
for construction funds that generate jobs is more than $36 million.
Moreover, Reserves have identified $166.5 million in future needs for
restoration, construction, and essential facilities upgrades that would
create approximately 2,390 local jobs.
NERRA supports a strong budget for NOAA Coastal Zone Management and
Services.
NOAA's Office for Coastal Management (OCM) provides national
leadership to guide, coordinate, and leverage the work of State and
Territory Coastal Zone Management programs, the NERRS, the Digital
Coast Partnership, and the Coral Reef Program for maximum impact. It
also provides science, data, and tools that benefit communities, as
well as leadership and support for training and mentoring the next
generation of coastal management scientists and professionals.
In conclusion, and with appreciation
NERRA is deeply grateful for the support this subcommittee has
demonstrated for the NERRS. Our FY 2025 request of $47 million for
NERRS ORF and $10 million for NERRS PAC will enhance NERRS ability to
work with States and communities to address climate change and other
natural resource challenges, while supporting the economic viability of
coastal businesses and industries. Thank you for the opportunity to
present these remarks. On behalf of NERRA, I would be happy to answer
questions or provide additional information.
______
Prepared Statement of National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding FY 2025
funding that impacts the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF).
We respectfully request your approval of funding of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) budget and particularly
for the National Ocean Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to
allow for continued and expanding partnerships that deliver high
quality ocean and coastal conservation and resilience.
NFWF and NOAA have been strong partners since 1996 and the
Foundation continues to administer programs with NOAA that address
ongoing and emerging issues. We believe that NFWF is a sound investment
because of our proven track record for leveraging Federal funding with
private contributions to maximize the impact of Federal resources. We
appreciate the subcommittee's past support and respectfully request
continued funding for the following programs and partnerships.
national coastal resilience
Resilient communities are better prepared to adapt to changing
natural resource conditions, infrastructure threats and impacts to
local economies. NFWF and NOAA working together through the National
Coastal Resilience Fund (NCRF) provide communities with invaluable
resources for restoring, enhancing, and strengthening natural
infrastructure--the natural features that help reduce the impacts of
coastal storms and floods--protecting communities while also enhancing
habitats for fish and wildlife, addressing climate change, and
sequestering carbon. In addition, NFWF also leads significant
monitoring and evaluation efforts that measure the enhanced resilience
of the restored coastal systems which helps improve our understanding
of which activities provide the greatest and most cost-effective
reductions in storm risk and storm damage.
Through the NCRF in 2023, NFWF awarded approximately $144 million
in competitive grants to support planning, design and implementation of
nature-based resilience projects. The 109 grants announced will
generate more than $97 million in matching contributions for a total
conservation impact of nearly $242 million. These investments will
support the restoration or expansion of natural features such as
coastal marshes and wetlands, dune and beach systems, oyster and coral
reefs, coastal rivers, and barrier islands that minimize the impacts of
storms, flooding and other coastal hazards. In addition to NOAA, 2023
partners included the Department of Defense, TransRe, Shell USA, Inc.,
Oxy, and Salesforce. These partners pooled resources to promote
projects that advance innovative approaches to protect communities
against regional threats resulting from climate change.
The demand for this program's financial resources continues to
significantly exceed the amount of annual funding available. For
example, in the calendar year 2023, NFWF received 395 proposals seeking
more than $633 million in funding, with approximately $144 million in
available resources to meet this need. Demand continues to exceed
available funding significantly.
fisheries electronic monitoring and reporting
Since 2010, NFWF has invested significantly in fisheries around the
U.S. to implement projects that are modernizing the way vital fisheries
data are collected, shared, and analyzed. High quality, timely, and
accurate fisheries information is critical to maintaining sustainable
U.S. fisheries. Fishermen and seafood marketers are increasingly using
information about their fishing activity to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of their operations and to satisfy their customer demands
for legally and sustainably caught seafood.
From 2015 to 2023, the Electronic Monitoring and Reporting (EMR)
grant program has awarded more than $32.9 million across 112 projects
that modernize U.S. fisheries data collection. The awards leveraged
nearly $50 million in matching funds and generated a conservation
impact of $82.2 million. Innovation and technology have the potential
to reduce the cost of fishery monitoring; increase the speed,
reliability, and transparency of fisheries data; and enable managers
and fishermen to address fisheries management challenges more
effectively. EMR isn't one size fits all and NFWF projects represent a
cross section of the advancements being made around the U.S. in
fisheries management to address the unique of regions and fisheries.
coral reef conservation
Since 2000, NFWF has partnered with NOAA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to respond to the alarming
decline in both the quantity and productivity of the Nation's coral
reef ecosystems through multiple coral conservation initiatives that
aim to improve management, increase public awareness, and reduce
threats to coral reefs. NFWF works with local, State, territorial,
Federal and regional partners to achieve its goals in coral
conservation and bolsters multi-agency initiatives like the U.S. Coral
Reef Task Force Watershed Partnership Initiative. The program supports
reef resiliency by reducing local stressors from unsustainable harvest
and land-based pollution. In 2020 the program added a new funding
priority to build capacity for direct reef restoration efforts and
launched a separate emergency funding solicitation to respond as
quickly as possible to mitigate damaging events like Stony Coral Tissue
Loss Disease.
Since the creation of NFWF's coral program in 2000, the program has
awarded $23 million across 417 projects, leveraging more than $31
million in conservation resources. Funds have assisted broad-scale
coral reef management by establishing new techniques for assessing and
monitoring reef health and new fishery management models. Site-specific
initiatives have developed and implemented watershed management plans,
reduced sediment erosion through stream bank stabilization, provided
incentives to encourage adoption of best practices on agricultural
lands, and supported capacity-building of management and conservation
organizations to sustain conservation outcomes.
killer whale conservation
NFWF partners with NOAA's Office of Protected Resources, FWS, U.S.
Navy, SeaWorld Entertainment and BNSF Railway on the Killer Whale
Research and Conservation Program (KWRCP) to aid in the recovery of the
Southern Resident killer whale population in the Pacific Northwest. The
program prioritizes the highest impact activities recommended in the
recovery plan as more funding is sought to deliver additional actions
beyond traditional management and conservation measures.
In 2024 the KWRCP awarded 10 grants totaling more than $1.8
million, drawing an additional $1.7 million in grantee match for a
total conservation investment of more than $3.5 million. These awards
will foster collaborative efforts in the following areas: increase prey
availability through restoration of important salmon runs; improve
water quality and reduce disturbance in critical habitat; fill research
gaps in health, demographics, and stressors; and increasing habitat
quality. All these strategies work to partner science with management
action and restoration activities. NFWF has taken a comprehensive
``food-web'' approach to recovering this apex predator and works with
state and transboundary managers to implement recovery actions.
papahanaumokuakea research and conservation fund
NFWF's and NOAA's partnership of the Papahanaumokuakea Research and
Conservation Fund provides coordinated and collaborative research and
conservation in support of effectively managing the species and
habitats in the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument (Monument).
One of the key challenges for NOAA and its partners managing this
expansive area is its remote location in the Pacific Ocean. Past agency
funding only allowed for a single voyage per year to the Monument to
address multiple needs and locations, making it difficult to conduct
the in-depth studies managers need. NFWF and NOAA initiated a new model
for investments to go deeper, learn more and further expand the
existing program and research dollars that are currently invested to
maximize the conservation impact.
The partnership supports collaborative research and conservation
actions to galvanize funders and funding around a critical management
strategy or pervasive threat. One example is the expanded effort to
reduce a direct threat to the habitats and wildlife in the Monument
from marine debris. The partnership has launched a 5-year effort to
remove 500 tons of marine debris in the monument and increase capacity
and efficiency in the program and reduce the need for annual removal to
sustainable maintenance levels. Throughout all investments, the program
seeks to maximize conservation impact, management capacity and cultural
and outreach opportunities.
marine debris
NFWF and NOAA have developed and implemented strategies to combat
the problem of Marine Debris. Starting over two decades ago, NFWF
administered a Marine Debris Program to assist NOAA's new program in
understanding the scope of marine debris across the Nation by advancing
science around sources of debris and impacts to both habitats and
wildlife. These early efforts transitioned into the Fishing for Energy
program which prioritized removal and prevention of derelict fishing
gear as one of the most pervasive and destructive types of marine
debris. This programmatic funding and disposal infrastructure has
helped to expand and institutionalize marine debris removal and
disposal efforts in several coastal States and port communities.
Building off this extensive experience, in 2020 NOAA asked NFWF to
assist in administering approximately $10 million in 2019 supplemental
funding to remove damaging marine debris from coastal areas of
communities impacted by hurricanes Florence and Michael, and Typhoon
Yutu and again in 2021 to administer supplemental funding for hurricane
damage that occurred in 2020-2021 seasons. The Hurricane Response
Marine Debris Removal Fund is a partnership between NFWF and the NOAA
Marine Debris Program that awards grants to assess, remove and dispose
of the resulting marine debris. Grants are awarded based on the
targeted debris' existing or potential impact to coastal communities
and resources, and to prevent further harm to sensitive marine habitats
and species listed under the Endangered Species Act. We anticipate
continuing this partnership as needed based on the success of these
initial investments.
nfwf background
NFWF was established by Congress in 1984 to leverage Federal funds
with private investments to conserve our Nation's fish, wildlife and
their habitats. Every dollar directly appropriated to NFWF by Congress
goes to on-the-ground conservation projects and NFWF charges no
administrative costs. NFWF raises private funds not only to leverage
Federal dollars, but also to support the associated management costs of
implementing the Federal funds. Since its creation, NFWF and its
grantees have invested more than $10 billion through more than 22,100
grants while partnering with more than 6,800 grantee organizations.
NFWF remains fully transparent and is required by law to notify
Congress 30 days in advance of every grant that exceeds $10,000 in
Federal funds. Details of all projects awarded during FY 2023 can be
found in NFWF's annual investment guide and all NFWF's grants can be
found on our website: https://www.nfwf.org/grants/grants-libary.
NFWF is audited annually by an independent accounting firm and for
our most recent audit for FY 2023, NFWF received an unqualified report
with no material weaknesses and no deficiencies. This is the FIFTEENTH
consecutive year of unqualified audits. In addition, NFWF has
continually qualified as a low-risk auditee under OMB guidelines.
In FY 2023, through discretionary cooperative agreements, NFWF
partnered with 15 Federal and State agencies or departments and 52
corporations and foundations to support implementation of Federal
conservation priorities. These efforts focused on working landscapes,
private lands, natural resource conservation, coastal resilience and
community-based restoration.
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee, we appreciate your continued support and stand ready to
answer any questions you or your staff might have.
[This statement was submitted by Will Heaton, Director, External
Relations.]
______
Prepared Statement of National Legal Aid & Defender Association
NLADA is America's oldest and largest national organization whose
resources are exclusively dedicated to excellence in the delivery of
legal services. Our comments concern the Legal Services Corporation
(LSC) and various U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) programs.
legal services corporation
Equal justice is one of our country's most firmly held values.
Every year, civil legal aid helps American families to secure fair
resolutions to legal issues affecting their basic needs, but millions
more have to handle them alone. This is because civil legal aid
organizations do not have the resources they need to serve their
communities fully. The Legal Services Corporation (LSC) is the largest
single source of funding of legal aid in the United States, and our
analysis indicates that an investment of at least $2.09 billion in LSC
is necessary in FY2025. Civil legal aid helps low-income people at risk
of losing their home or income, parents navigating the family court
system, older Americans experiencing abuse or neglect, consumers who
are victims of fraud, and many others with serious legal problems.
The help that LSC grantees provide is highly consequential. The
most common issue they provide assistance around is housing. Unlawful
evictions and unsafe living conditions destabilize families and put
them at risk of homelessness, but legal assistance can help people
avoid these outcomes. The difference this makes is clear. For example,
tenants who have access to full legal representation in housing court
have been found to be four times less likely to subsequently use a
homeless shelter. This impact is limited by the availability of
resources. Tenants are represented by counsel in just 13 percent of
cases, compared to landlords who are 76 percent of the time.\1\
Family law is the second most common type of issue with which LSC's
grantees provide assistance, and their work in this area is similarly
impactful. Women who have experienced domestic violence and receive
legal help have better mental health outcomes,\2\ increased income, and
decreased use of government benefits \3\ than those who cannot access
civil legal aid. Unfortunately, although legal aid organizations will
prioritize providing assistance to help a victim escape their abuser,
resource constraints mean they are often unable to provide the extended
services that create long-term stability.
The current insufficiency of resources is a direct result of the
chronic underfunding of civil legal aid; it has kept pace with neither
the level of need nor increases in Federal discretionary spending in
recent years. LSC reports that with its current budget, its grantees
can fully resolve only 29 percent of eligible legal problems brought to
them. A further 22 percent receive limited assistance, and 49 percent
of people seeking help cannot be served at all.\4\ LSC's own budget
request suggests that the corporation would need a budget of $718
million just to prevent this situation from deteriorating any further
next year. The Corporation estimates that fully resolving every problem
would require $1.797 billion. This estimate is based on analysis of
grantee intake data, with a small upwards adjustment to account for the
doubling of the child poverty rate since that data was collected. NLADA
supports the methodological approach behind LSC's analysis. However,
the appropriation level we recommend exceeds the amount suggested by
LSC because as the corporation's budget request itself explains, it
underStates the funding needed by excluding a number of important
factors.\5\
Expiration of Pandemic-Era Supports
The grantee data used by LSC in its analysis was gathered at a
point in time when demand for services was suppressed by temporary
Federal programs that helped low-income Americans meet their basic
needs, including under the CARES Act, which lowered the number of
people meeting the income-eligibility criteria for receiving services.
This is partly captured by LSC's adjustment on the basis on the
increase of the child poverty rate, but pandemic programs had other
impacts not directly captured by measures of poverty. For example,
measures aimed at preventing evictions depressed the need for housing
related legal help. The CARES Act (and subsequently, the American
Rescue Plan Act) also supported civil legal aid organizations
themselves, providing additional resources for the delivery of legal
services that no longer exist. LSC's analysis therefore does not go far
enough in accounting for the expiration of these programs.
Consequences of Chronic Underfunding
Given the scale of the need for legal help, legal aid organizations
direct the maximum amount of resources possible to serving clients.
This has come at the expense of maintaining human and physical
infrastructure, which has now reached a crisis point. Attorneys at
legal aid organizations are paid salaries that are the lowest in the
legal profession, and organizations are increasing reporting that an
inability to recruit and retain staff is a primary barrier to
delivering services, particularly in rural areas. This problem is both
historic and growing, as wages in legal aid are neither keeping pace
with inflation nor with wage growth across economy overall,\6\ and is
compounded by rapidly rising law school debt amounts.
The other serious consequence is the closure of physical office
locations, which multiple programs report having been forced to do.
This prevents legal aid organizations from being present in
communities, particularly in rural areas, and causes fewer people to
know there are resources available that could help them. Further losses
would widen a disparity that is also the result of the concentration of
private funding sources, pro bono assistance, and non-LSC legal
services organizations in urban areas. This disparity would be far more
severe were it not for LSC's commitment to ensuring that legal
assistance is available in every ZIP code in America.
u.s. department of justice programs
Tribal Civil and Criminal Legal Assistance, Training and Technical
Assistance
We request that Congress expands funding for the Tribal Civil and
Criminal Legal Assistance, Training and Technical Assistance grant
program (TCCLA). In recent years, TCCLA grants have totaled up to
around $2 million, but for multiple, overlapping reasons, there is an
acute need for dedicated help for Tribes that necessitates an increased
level of funding. Native American communities experience far higher
rates of poverty than other groups,\7\ and consequently a higher number
of routine civil legal needs on average. There are also many issues
unique to organizations serving Native Americans, such as Indian Child
Welfare Act cases and navigating Tribal sovereignty. Additionally,
Indian legal services programs often also handle criminal legal
assistance work, further diluting the limited resources available to
them.
An increase in funding would enhance the work done on behalf of
Native Americans by Indian Legal Services programs. A consortium of
such programs operating in 23 States provides legal representation to
thousands of American Indian and Alaska Native individuals in Tribal
and State courts, and assists more than 160 Tribal governments and/or
Tribal judicial systems to enhance or develop their justice systems. In
at least 46 Tribal courts, these programs provide the only public
defender services available. TCCLA has helped many of these programs
deliver direct civil and criminal legal assistance, including for
example, representation of children as guardians ad litem. It has also
enabled these programs to help develop legal infrastructure in their
jurisdictions, such as by supporting revisions to Tribal codes,
policies, and procedures, and to build partnerships with other
stakeholders, such as Tribal domestic violence and crime victims'
advocates, prosecutors, and other community services to increase the
effectiveness of their programs and to build awareness about the
availability of services.
Whether the committee includes a line item for TCCLA under
assistance for Indian Tribes within the State and Local Law Enforcement
Assistance account, or to provide funding within a Tribal set-aside
percentage of Office of Justice Programs accounts, it is important that
both the bill and report language recognize the urgent need to expand
access to justice for Indian Tribes by increasing funding for civil and
criminal legal assistance under the Indian Tribal Justice Technical and
Legal Assistance Act.
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and Victims of Crime Act (VOCA)
Programs
More than a third of women in America will experience sexual
violence, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner
during her lifetime,\8\ and as described above, civil legal aid can not
only help survivors to escape their abuser but also obtain long-term
stability for themselves and their children. We urge the committee to
provide at least $60 million for legal assistance for victims under
VAWA. We also ask that you increase the availability of resources from
the Crime Victims Fund (CVF), and act to protect its long-term
stability. The VOCA Fix to Sustain the Crime Victims Fund Act was
passed in 2021 by an overwhelming majority of the House and unanimously
in the Senate, demonstrating the depth of bipartisan concern about this
issue. Data from 2021 suggests that legal aid organizations accessed
approximately $97 million from the fund in that year, which
organizations used to not only employ advocates dedicated to supporting
survivors but also fund entire domestic violence units within their
programs. We are however aware of organizations that have subsequently
been forced to significantly scale back this work as a result of the
depletion of the fund and the lowering of the cap on distributions from
it. We urge the committee to raise the cap to its FY2023 level at a
minimum, and to provide an appropriation to replenish the fund. This
would enable legal aid organizations to reinvigorate their work to
protect survivors.
Office for Access to Justice (ATJ)
ATJ is the government-wide authority on access to justice, and its
functions enhance the ability of civil legal aid and public defender
organizations across the U.S. to deliver services effectively. The
office leads innovation in the field, most recently around expanding
access to help in Federal administrative proceedings, language access,
and the simplification of Federal forms and processes, which can reduce
the need for legal help. ATJ also hosts the Legal Aid Interagency
Roundtable (LAIR), which convenes 28 Federal agencies to improve
coordination around access to justice. Civil legal aid often enhances
the effectiveness of Federal programs, for example by helping veterans
correctly navigate resources administered by the Department of Veterans
Affairs. By developing and strengthening the connections between
Federal priorities and legal services, LAIR helps numerous Federal
programs operate more efficiently. The $10.5 million requested by the
President for ATJ will provide sufficient resources for the office to
continue this work. Additionally, the committee should break out ATJ as
a standalone account within the bill, in order to increase transparency
and accountability in the funding of the office.
State and Local Public Defender Funding
The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is the cornerstone of our
adversarial system of justice, but public defenders across the U.S. do
not have the resources they need to handle workloads that have reached
extreme quantities. This limits the amount of time they can spend on
any particular case, prevents them from hiring investigators or experts
that can prove a defendant's innocence, or even being present at
critical court hearings. Americans understand this and a large majority
of public agree that more taxpayer dollars should be used to fund
public defense.\9\ Fortunately, there is bipartisan legislation that
would provide these resources while implementing reasonable workload
limits. H.R. 3758 would provide $250 million per year in grants to
support State and local public defenders, and we request that the
committee provide this funding.
John R. Justice Student Loan Repayment Assistance Program (JRJ)
Our country's legal systems could not function without the
individuals who choose to obtain a law degree. Unfortunately, the cost
of this education has risen considerably and average salaries for
public defenders and prosecutors have not kept pace. This has made it
unaffordable for many to take these critical roles or to remain in them
for more than a few years. JRJ offers vital financial support that
makes it possible for recipients to continue providing these essential
functions, but the program has been badly underfunded in recent years.
We ask that you finally appropriate the full $25 million authorized
under 34 USC Sec. 10671.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Grundman, L. and Kruger, M. 2018. Legal Representation in
Evictions--Comparative Study.
\2\ Renner, L. M., and Hartley, C. C. ``Psychological Well-Being
Among Women Who Experienced Intimate Partner Violence and Received
Civil Legal Services.'' Journal of Interpersonal Violence 36, no. 7-8,
(2021).
\3\ Hartley, C.C., and Renner, L.M. ``Economic Self-Sufficiency
among Women Who Experienced Intimate Partner Violence and Received
Civil Legal Services.'' Journal of Family Violence 33, (2018).
\4\ Legal Services Corporation. 2022. The Justice Gap: The Unmet
Civil Legal Needs of Low-income Americans. Prepared by Mary Slosar,
Slosar Research, LLC.
\5\ Neither LSC's request nor this recommendation account for the
larger population of income-eligible people who have legal problems but
do not seek help. An estimated 92 percent of low-income Americans
receive no assistance with their legal problems, often because they do
not know help is available or that their problem is legal in nature.
\6\ Between 2008 and 2022, the median salary for entry-level legal
aid lawyers rose by 43 percent, compared to 52 percent for all jobs.
(Author's calculations. See: NALP. June 22, 2022. New Public Service
Attorney Salary Figures Show Growth Since 2018, But Remain Considerably
Below Private Sector Salaries, and Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis,
Median Personal Income in the United States.)
\7\ In 2022, the poverty rate for children designated American
Indian or Alaska Native (not in combination with one or more other
races) by the U.S. Census Bureau was 25.9 percent, almost four times
the 7.2 percent poverty rate for white children. See: Ismael Cid-
Martinez and Stevie Marvin, Native American Child Poverty More Than
Doubled in 2022 After Safety Net Cutbacks Posted, Working Economics
Blog, Economic Policy Institute, November 30, 2023.
\8\ Smith, S.G., Chen, J., Basile, K.C., Gilbert, L.K., Merrick,
M.T., Patel, N., Walling, M., & Jain, A. (2017). The National Intimate
Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010-2012 State Report.
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.
\9\ New Report Reveals Urgent Need to Educate Americans on Right to
Counsel, American University School of Public Affairs, 2017.
[This statement was submitted by Radhika Singh, Vice President,
Civil Legal Services & Strategic Policy Initiatives.]
______
Prepared Statement of National Marine Sanctuary Foundation
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony
regarding appropriations for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025. As supporters,
stakeholders, and partners of America's National Marine Sanctuary
System, we strongly urge the committee to:
1. Appropriate at least $91.5 million for Sanctuaries and Marine
Protected Areas, within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's Operations, Research, and Facilities (ORF)
account; and,
2. Appropriate at least $8.5 million for Marine Sanctuaries
Construction, within NOAA's Procurement, Acquisition, and
Construction (PAC) account.
3. Direct NOAA to prioritize conservation, education, mapping, and
research efforts across the agency in the National Marine
Sanctuary System.
4. CAP NOAA and National Ocean Service corporate fees to no more
than 5 percent of the annual appropriations.
office of national marine sanctuaries
NOAA's Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) serves as the
trustee for a network of 15 national marine sanctuaries and two marine
national monuments that encompass over 620,000 square miles of marine
and Great Lakes waters. The National Marine Sanctuary System conserves
some of the Nation's most critical natural, historic, and cultural
resources. Sanctuaries are home to millions of species, preserve our
Nation's maritime and cultural heritage, and promote public access for
exploration and world-class outdoor recreation and enjoyment. Sanctuary
visitor centers, vessels, and facilities are key assets for
communities; stimulate public-private partnerships on emerging
technologies, cutting edge science, and hands-on education, and attract
millions of visitors each year.
National marine sanctuaries are sources for solutions. They are
living laboratories, outdoor classrooms, and tourism and recreation
destinations. The conservation and sustainable use of marine ecosystems
is vital to maintaining a healthy ocean and Great Lakes, sustaining
productive coastal economies, and addressing climate change. According
to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), the marine economy
accounted for $432 billion of US gross domestic product in 2021, with a
7.4% growth over 2020 that outpaced the National economy. Tourism and
recreation accounted for the most significant portion, $153 billion of
the gross output, and marine living resources accounted for $18 billion
in gross output. Both sectors depend on a healthy ocean. Sanctuaries
drive the growth of the blue economy through fishing, diving,
recreation, hospitality, and tourism.
Climate change is disproportionately impacting the ocean and its
impacts threaten the physical well-being, economic prosperity, and food
security of communities along our coasts and businesses that rely on
marine resources. Marine protected areas are a key part of the solution
to ocean climate impacts. They protect ecosystems that remove
atmospheric carbon and store it in marine sediments and habitats,
safeguard coastal communities from flooding and storms and reduce non-
climate stressors to support ecosystem resilience. Scientists are
increasing our understanding of the climate drivers, conditions,
trends, and predictions affecting our ocean through research conducted
in sanctuaries.
For Sanctuaries and Marine Protected Areas ORF account, we urge
Congress to provide at least $91.5 million.--This is the minimum level
of funding necessary to advance conservation and restoration in U.S.
waters, conduct scientific research, effectively manage sanctuaries,
enforce regulations, and engage the public in stewardship. The
requested increase is an investment in the growing number of
communities seeking to nominate new national marine sanctuaries. There
are currently six new national marine sanctuaries in our Atlantic,
Pacific, and Great Lakes waters undergoing the public sanctuary
designation process. Providing increasing and robust funding to the
Office of National Marine Sanctuaries is an investment in the growing
communities, both existing and in designation, to ensure public
engagement and public-private partnerships that are the hallmark of
sanctuaries.
Engaging communities as stewards of these waters makes sanctuaries
unique and provides a comprehensive, highly participatory approach to
managing and conserving marine ecosystems and the Great Lakes for
current and future generations. Public participation is a hallmark of
sanctuaries and underscores their dedication to civic engagement and
leadership. From nomination to day-to-day, communities are at the core
of national marine sanctuaries. NOAA tailors each sanctuary's
management plan to the specific goals of each national marine
sanctuary, which in turn reflects the unique resources and needs of
each sanctuary's respective community. Decisions about how to best
manage each of these special places continue to be made using the best
available scientific data, as well as extensive public input, including
through Sanctuary Advisory Councils, community-based advisory groups
established to provide advice and recommendations to superintendents.
With additional funding, NOAA will increase engagement with communities
of color, underrepresented groups, and Indigenous and native peoples,
in conservation, planning, and outreach across the system.
For Marine Sanctuaries Construction (PAC) account, we urge Congress
to provide at least $8.5 million.--The National Marine Sanctuary
Program has a prestigious history of science and research expeditions,
including a half-century of new discoveries--such as shipwrecks,
artifacts, species, habitats, and natural processes--that inspire,
amaze, and awe. Sanctuaries act as living laboratories for stewardship,
education, restoration, and science to address climate impacts. To
continue on-the-water science and conservation programs that strengthen
the management of our ocean and Great Lakes, investment in
recapitalizing aging vessels across the National Marine Sanctuary
System in addition to upgrades, retrofits, and life-cycle extensions is
critical. Increased PAC funding would support the replacement or repair
of vessels and allow managers and partners to better assess, monitor,
research and protect national marine sanctuaries. These efforts include
responding to entangled whales, conducting scientific missions,
maintaining mooring buoys, testing new technologies and tools, and
enforcing regulations. Funding would also support improvements for
visitor centers, facilities and signage, and ADA compliance that anchor
tourism and recreation in communities and enhance equitable access to
nature.
prioritizing national marine sanctuaries
National marine sanctuaries protect nationally significant areas in
our ocean and Great Lakes akin to national parks and national wildlife
refuges. Because of their special designation and NOAA's responsibility
to hold them in trustee, the Department of Commerce and the agency
should prioritize investment in these areas. We appreciate Congress
recognizing the importance of sanctuaries and including report language
in the FY 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act ``the Committee directs
NOAA to prioritize conservation, education, mapping, and research
efforts across the agency in the National Marine Sanctuary system''. We
greatly appreciate this and request the subcommittee again include this
report language for FY 2025.
cap for noaa and nos administrative costs
We urge the subcommittee to cap NOAA's and NOS's corporate and
administrative costs at five percent of total ORF appropriations for
the account. In FY 2024, ONMS paid over $9 million in administrative
overhead costs to NOAA. This includes a NOAA wide direct bill
assessment, NOS Assessment, facilities assessment, and a $1 million
deobligation. ONMS shoulders a disproportionate share of corporate
expenses and direct bills because other programs are exempt from such
fees. Rather than ONMS and other non-exempt programs shouldering these
costs, we urge the subcommittee to cap costs and require NOAA to budget
for these expenses directly. Direct accounts for NOAA's and Line
Offices' Administration, management, and corporate services would be
transparent and allow Congress to appropriate actual costs for these
expenses. More importantly, it ensures NOAA has the necessary and
deserved budget for administration and management without impacting
program and mission delivery.
National marine sanctuaries connect people and communities through
science, education, U.S. history, recreation, and stewardship and
inspire community-based solutions that help individuals understand and
protect the spectacular underwater habitats, wildlife, archaeological
resources, and cultural seascapes of the United States. This is an
opportunity to invest in America's waters and the communities and
businesses that depend upon them. Robust funding will ensure sound
management of these treasured places through community stewardship;
support of mission critical tools, like small boats; active restoration
of marine environments; preservation of maritime resources; and
improved understanding of marine and Great Lakes ecosystems. Funds will
allow NOAA to strengthen its research, monitoring, restoration,
permitting, community engagement, and interagency partnerships, better
informing NOAA's locally-driven management decisions, and advance
designation and protection efforts for the 6 proposed national marine
sanctuaries.
Thank you for this opportunity to provide written testimony. We
strongly encourage you to invest in America's community-based national
marine sanctuaries by supporting the Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries at no less than $100 million in Fiscal Year 2025. Your
support for marine sanctuaries will send a powerful message about the
benefits of a healthy ocean and Great Lakes and underscore the
continuing ecological, economic, and historical value of America's
underwater national treasures. We thank you for your consideration of
this request. We look forward to working with the subcommittee during
the FY 2025 appropriations process.
[This statement was submitted by Ms. Shannon Colbert, Senior Vice
President of External Affairs.]
______
Prepared Statement of National Security Counselors
Chair Shaheen, Vice Chair Moran, and members of the Commerce,
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to submit this written testimony.
The tiny Department of Justice (``DOJ'') Office of Legal Counsel
(``OLC'') is probably the most powerful legal office in the entire
Executive Branch, with the possible exception of the White House
Counsel's Office, and it exercises that power in almost total
secrecy.\1\ It is the force behind Special Counsel Robert Mueller's
decision not to recommend the indictment of President Trump, Acting
Director of National Intelligence (``DNI'') Joseph Maguire's initial
refusal to release the Ukraine Whistleblower's complaint to Congress,
and the Central Intelligence Agency's torture of enemy combatants
shortly after 9/11, among myriad other legal decisions which are often
never adjudicated in a court of law.
The reason for OLC's outsized power is relatively straightforward:
many agencies treat OLC opinions as binding. As in, if OLC makes a
pronouncement that a certain action, practice, or policy is legal (or
illegal), many agency officials throughout the Executive Branch
maintain that they are bound by that decision, whether they agree with
it or not. For instance, Mr. Mueller publicly stated that his office
was ``bound'' by ``long-standing department policy'' holding that ``a
president cannot be charged with a Federal crime while he is in
office'' and that indicting Trump was ``therefore not an option we
could consider.'' \2\ The policy Mueller ``was bound by'' was an OLC
opinion,\3\ first written in 1973 about Watergate.
Likewise, the Intelligence Community Inspector General informed
Congress that he could not provide the Ukraine Whistleblower's
complaint directly to the appropriate committees because he is ``bound
by the determination reached as a result of the acting DNI's
consultations with'' OLC, even though he ``respectfully disagree[s]
with that determination, particularly DOJ's conclusion.'' \4\ Mr.
Maguire, for his part, described this belief succinctly and
unequivocally: ``As you know, for those of us in the Executive Branch,
Office of Legal Counsel opinions are binding on all of us.'' \5\
It is unclear, however, how many agencies adhere to this
interpretation of OLC opinions. While senior officials such as Messrs.
Mueller, Maguire, and Atkinson are claiming that OLC opinions are
binding on Executive Branch agencies, OLC itself is arguing exactly the
opposite whenever anyone attempts to obtain copies of such ``binding''
opinions through discovery or the Freedom of Information Act
(``FOIA''). In those cases, OLC consistently asserts under oath that it
only ``serv[es] an advisory role as legal counsel to the executive
branch ... in a special relationship of trust with the Attorney
General,'' and that the relationship between OLC and any other part of
the Executive Branch is the same as the relationship between any
attorney and any client.\6\ If you accept this argument, the most
formal and detailed OLC opinion becomes simple ``advice'' that the
purported client can follow or ignore at their leisure. OLC makes this
claim because, under FOIA, binding agency decisions are not exempt from
disclosure, while predecisional deliberations and advice from attorneys
to clients are exempt. This is how it maintains its secrecy.
This dualism is best exemplified by a line from an internal OLC
memo: ``OLC's core function, pursuant to the Attorney General's
delegation, is to provide controlling advice to executive branch
officials on questions of law that are centrally important to the
functioning of the Federal Government.'' \7\ The problem is,
``controlling advice'' is an oxymoron, since advice is something the
recipient is free to disregard, which is the opposite of controlling.
The two competing interpretations given by Executive Branch lawyers,
depending on the context, are completely irreconcilable: An opinion
cannot both be binding on the Executive Branch and also legal advice
from an attorney to a client.
There are many ways to fix this problem, but they all fall to
Congress to act, since DOJ has no interest in resolving an uncertainty
which only redounds to its benefit. Congress could legislate that OLC
opinions are binding, which would mean that no privilege would apply to
their release (although they could be withheld for other reasons, such
as classification or law enforcement considerations). Congress could
legislate that OLC opinions are not binding, which would free up
agencies to ignore them and perhaps ensure that bad opinions are weeded
out. Congress could mandate that OLC opinions must be released to
lawmakers so they can evaluate whether they agree with OLC's
interpretation of the law. Congress could add a caveat to FOIA that a
court must presume that an agency which acted in accordance with an OLC
opinion fully accepted the reasoning of the opinion, thereby triggering
an exception to any claim of privilege.
However, before Congress can even consider any avenues for reform,
it must first understand the scope of the problem, and that is why this
is an appropriations matter. I have personally dealt with several
senior Executive Branch officials who take the position that OLC
opinions are not binding, and I have also dealt with senior officials
who treat an OLC opinion as the gospel truth. What Congress-and the
public-needs is a comprehensive, definitive accounting of how OLC
opinions are viewed across the Executive Branch. A simple survey that
agencies are required to complete, sent to every General Counsel at
every agency or agency component: ``Are OLC opinions binding on your
agency/office?'' A survey which will force agencies to state a position
on the record, and which will provide hard data which can be relied
upon in future Congressional deliberations.
To that end, I recommend that this subcommittee include report
language directing an appropriate agency to perform this survey and
compile a report accounting for the results for Congress and the
public. The Government Accountability Office would be best suited for
this work, but it could also be reasonably assigned to the DOJ
Inspector General or even OLC itself, as long as the report language
makes clear that the final report will include only the responses and
no editorializing or characterizations. This simple research project
will yield informational dividends far beyond its cost in funds and
manpower, and it will finally clear up a decades-old deliberate
obfuscation of the truth. Only then can Congress make an informed
decision about which interpretation it endorses and legislate
accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Kel McClanahan, How one secretive Justice Department office can
sway the whole government, Wash. Post (Sept. 26, 2019), available at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/09/26/how-one-secretive-
justice-department-office-can-sway-whole-government/.
\2\ Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III Makes Statement on
Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential
Election (May 29, 2019), at https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/special-
counsel-robert-s-mueller-iii-makes-statement-investigation-russian-
interference.
\3\ A Sitting President's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal
Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. 222 (2000), at https://www.justice.gov/file/
19351/download.
\4\ Letter from Atkinson to Schiff of 9/17/19, available at https:/
/www.scribd.com/document/426585487/Sept-17-letter-from-Intel-Inspector-
General-to-House-Intelligence-on-whistleblower-complaint.
\5\ Testimony of Acting DNI Joseph Maguire (Sept. 26, 2019),
available at https://www.c-span.org/video/?464509-1/acting-director-
national-intelligence-maguire-testifies-whistleblower-complaint.
\6\ See N.Y. Times Co. v. DOJ, 915 F. Supp. 2d 508, 544 (S.D.N.Y.
2013).
\7\ Best Practices for OLC Legal Advice and Written Opinions (July
16, 2010), available at https://www.justice.gov/olc/pdf/olc-legal-
advice-opinions.pdf.
[This statement was submitted by Kel McClanahan, Executive
Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of Natural Science Collections Alliance
The Natural Science Collections Alliance appreciates the
opportunity to provide testimony in support of fiscal year (FY) 2025
appropriations for the National Science Foundation (NSF). We encourage
Congress to provide the NSF with at least $11.9 billion in FY 2025.
The Natural Science Collections Alliance is a non-profit
association that supports natural science collections, their human
resources, the institutions that house them, and their research
activities for the benefit of science and society. Our membership
consists of institutions that are part of an international network of
museums, botanical gardens, herbaria, universities, and other
institutions that contain natural science collections and use them in
research, exhibitions, academic and informal science education, and
outreach activities.
Scientific collections, and the collections professionals and
scientists who make, care for, and study these resources, are an
important component of our Nation's research infrastructure. These
collections and their associated experts contribute to the expansion of
our bioeconomy. Whether held at a museum, government managed laboratory
or archive, or in a university science department, these scientific
resources form a coordinated network of specimens, samples, and data
(e.g. genetic, tissue, organism, and environmental) that are a unique
and irreplaceable foundation from which scientists are studying and
explaining past and present life on earth.
Natural science collections advance scientific research and
education, and that informs actions to improve public health,
agricultural productivity, natural resource management, biodiversity
conservation, and American economic innovation and productivity.
Current research involving natural science collections also contributes
to the development of new cyberinfrastructure, data visualization
tools, and improved data management practices. This work also ensures
critical input into policy development and implementation by several
U.S. government agencies. A few examples of how scientific collections
have saved lives, enhanced food production, and advanced scientific
discovery include:
--Scientists used museum specimens in U.S. collections to gather data
on the distribution of the mosquito Culex quadrofaciatus, which
is known to carry West Nile Virus and other pathogens. They
then modeled the distribution under different scenarios of
changing climates to predict regions where the species may
expand in the future. Predicting the spread of disease vectors
such as these mosquitoes helps the health care community
prepare for disease outbreaks and where they will happen.
--Researchers from Boston University documented Tau proteins in the
brains of fluid preserved museum specimens of Downy Woodpecker.
These proteins are also found in traumatic brain injuries in
humans. Because of the life history traits of woodpeckers, the
researchers argue these birds may have evolved a level of
resistance to traumatic head injuries that could have
implications for treatments for humans.
--Citrus bacterial canker disease wreaks havoc on fruit crops in
Florida. Using plant specimens collected a century ago,
scientists have analyzed the bacterium and traced its source.
Knowledge of how the bacteria spreads allows scientists to
develop effective control methods and to protect the U.S.
citrus industry.
--When the 2001 anthrax attacks happened in the United States,
specimens collected decades earlier allowed researchers from
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to quickly
identify the strain involved.
Scientific collections enable us to tell the story of life on
Earth. There are more than 1,600 biological collections in the United
States. These resources are the result of more than 200 years of
scientific investigation, discovery, and inventory of living and fossil
species. Scientists have collected and curated more than one billion
specimens within those collections, many of which have now been
digitized with continued funding from NSF and the resulting data stored
in easily accessible online databases that contribute heavily to
research.
The institutions that care for scientific collections are important
research infrastructure that enable other scientists to study the basic
data of life; conduct biological, geological, anthropological, and
environmental research; and integrate research findings from across
these diverse disciplines. Their professional staff members train
future generations with the tools and expertise required to move
science forward. In-house institutional staff expertise is vital to the
development and deployment of this critical research infrastructure.
According to the U.S. Interagency Working Group on Scientific
Collections (IWGSC), ``scientific collections are essential to
supporting agency missions and are thus vital to supporting the global
research enterprise.'' A 2020 report by the IWGSC presented a framework
for estimating and documenting the long-term benefits, both monetary
and non-monetary, generated by Federal institutional collections. More
recently, a 2023 report from the IWGSC enumerated the many ways Federal
scientific collections have served the Nation in diverse areas,
including with the COVID-19 response and improving national health,
climate change research and mitigation, ensuring the Nation's food
security, as well as environmental health and safety.
Additional recent reports have highlighted the value of mobilizing
biodiversity specimens and data in spurring new scientific discoveries.
In 2019, the Biodiversity Collections Network issued a community-
informed call for the development of an Extended Specimen Network. The
report, ``Extending U.S. Biodiversity Collections to Promote Research
and Education,'' outlined a national agenda that leverages digital data
in biodiversity collections for new uses. This endeavor requires robust
investments in our Nation's scientific collections, whether they are
owned by a Federal or state agency or are part of an educational
institution or free-standing natural history museum or another research
center.
A 2020 report by the National Academies, ``Biological Collections:
Ensuring Critical Research and Education for the 21st Century,'' argued
that collections are a critical part of our Nation's science and
innovation infrastructure and a fundamental resource for understanding
the natural world. The report's recommendations for establishing an
action center for biological collections and requiring specimen
management plans for research proposals generating new specimens
underscore the importance of biodiversity specimen collections and have
been supported by the CHIPS and Science Act. A recently published white
paper, ``Envisioning a Natural History Collections Action Center,''
summarizes the features and functions of an action center and
underscores the essential role that collections play in medical
science, human health, food security, pathogen-borne disease,
biosecurity, a strong bioeconomy, mitigating the effects of climate
change, and conserving ecological services for human use and
subsistence. Such a center will provide leadership, support, and
coordination for federal, non-federal, and private collections and
enable transformative research to address grand societal challenges.
All of the above reports articulate a common vision for the future
of biological collections and emphasize the need to broaden and deepen
these collections and associated data to realize their potential to
inform 21st century science. Because NSF is the only agency that
supports research in all fields of science, it is ideally suited to
lead a national effort to establish the action center and build the
Extended Specimen Network, which will require the engagement of
computer and information scientists, geoscientists, life and
environmental scientists, and anthropologists.
Collections are a critical resource for advancing the knowledge
needed to address current global challenges such as climate change,
biodiversity loss, and pandemics. The COVID-19 crisis has illustrated
how inextricably linked humans are to nature. Biological collections,
their extended data, and the experts who build and study them are
globally important for understanding where viruses such as SARS-CoV-2
exist and when they cross from their current hosts to humans.
The United Nation's Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services has warned that about one million
species of plants and animals worldwide face extinction within the next
few decades. This would not only be an unprecedented loss of global
biodiversity but also a loss of valuable genetic diversity that has
implications for human health and well-being. Robust investments must
be made to support efforts to grow and digitize natural history
collections and conduct critical collections-based science that can
help prevent this loss.
The NSF plays a unique role in protecting and expanding access to
our Nation's scientific collections. It supports research that uses
existing collections as well as studies that gather new natural history
specimens. NSF's Directorates for Biological Sciences, Geosciences, and
Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences support research and student
training opportunities in natural history collections. NSF is also an
important supporter of national research infrastructure that houses
natural history collections, such as living stock collections and field
stations.
The NSF funds evolving work to digitize high priority specimen
collections. The result of this effort is that irreplaceable biological
specimens and their associated data are now accessible through the
Internet to researchers, educators, and the public. Nearly 140 million
specimens are now online, with millions more awaiting digitization.
Many of these specimen records also include high quality images of the
specimens that facilitate high quality, detailed analyses. This project
involves biologists, computer scientists, and engineers in multi-
disciplinary teams who develop innovative imaging, robotics, and data
storage and retrieval methods. Resulting new tools and approaches
expedite the digitization process and contribute to the development of
new products and services of value to other industries. Museum
specimens and associated data also represent an extraordinary resource
for teaching core concepts in science.
An example is the multi-institutional openVertebrate (oVert)
project, which creates high-resolution 3D anatomical data for
scientific specimens of amphibians, reptiles, fishes, mammals, and
birds held in U.S. museums. Through its NSF-supported partner
MorphoSource, an open-access online repository, these data have been
downloaded more than 100,000 times and viewed over 1 million times by
faculty, veterinarians, exhibit designers, K12 teachers, and artists
resulting in more than 200 scientific publications. In addition, more
than 2,000 undergraduate students have learned from these data and
visualizations while studying zoology, veterinary science, art, and
design.
In addition to supporting research, NSF's science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs enhance the
ability of museums, botanic gardens, zoos, and other research
institutions to provide science learning opportunities for students.
NSF's Advancing Informal STEM Learning program furthers our
understanding of informal science education outside of traditional
classrooms. The program makes important contributions to efforts to
make STEM more inclusive of historically underrepresented groups.
conclusion
Investments in NSF have always been in the National interest.
Scientific collections contribute to improved public well-being and
national economic security. It is not possible to replace this
important documentation of our Nation's heritage. Specimens collected
decades or centuries ago are increasingly used to develop and validate
models that explain how species, including viruses, parasites, and
pathogens have dispersed around the world, as well as how and when they
might infect humans now and in the future. NSF is the primary funding
source that provides support to institutions that preserve at-risk
scientific collections. These small grants help ensure these
collections are not destroyed and their data lost.
We were encouraged by the passage of the CHIPS and Science Act,
which recognized biological collections as a research priority and
authorized critical increases in NSF's budget. However, we were
disappointed by NSF's FY 2024 appropriation, which was 8% below its FY
2023 budget. This cut ignores the CHIPS and Science Act, which
demonstrated bipartisan commitment to our Nation's scientific and
technological enterprise. We urge Congress to follow through on the
promise of this historic law by funding NSF as close as possible to the
authorized levels.
Please support funding of at least $11.9 billion for NSF in FY
2025. This aligns with the FY 2023 authorization for NSF in the CHIPs
and Science Act. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this
request.
[This statement was submitted by Gil Nelson, Ph.D., President.]
______
Prepared Statement of The Nature Conservancy
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the fiscal
year 2025 (FY25) appropriations for the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is a
nonprofit working around the world to conserve the lands and waters on
which all life depends. TNC appreciates Congress's work to pass the
bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and Inflation
Reduction Act (IRA). Those bills' investments complement but do not
supplant the need for ongoing program funding through the
appropriations process. The subcommittee acknowledged that when it
rejected proposed funding cuts and provided moderate but necessary
program increases for NOAA in the FY24 omnibus spending bill.
Unfortunately, the FY25 NOAA budget request includes many
additional proposed cuts, mainly for grant funding. This funding
supports many state, territory, Tribal, university, industry and non-
governmental organization partnerships with NOAA to collaboratively
deliver necessary programs and services. Many of these partnerships are
ongoing efforts such as the State and territory cooperative agreements
to manage coral reefs. Others fill critical gaps in the agency's
science capacity, such as the fisheries cooperative research with
industry that helps address the shortfall in NOAA's fishery survey
vessels' available days at sea. These efforts are not new projects that
could be deferred. The proposed cuts to these programs would undermine
ongoing science and management efforts at the core of our coastal
economies. Each year, ocean and coastal economies contribute $304
billion to the Nation's GDP and support 3.3 million jobs, some of these
jobs are directly funded by the programs proposed for funding decreases
or termination.
NOAA's funding helps catalyze local and regional action to reduce
risk and save money based on tangible economic and societal benefits of
natural resources. We recognize the significant fiscal constraints
under which the Committee is operating. Our requests below were
developed with this in mind and represent prudent investments in our
communities.
national ocean service
Title IX Fund--National Coastal Resilience Fund Grants.--We urge
Congress to reject the Administration's proposal to terminate this
funding and provide no less than $34 million. This would restore the $2
million cut made in FY24 appropriations. We appreciate that this cut
was made in a constrained fiscal environment and the program received
supplemental funding from Congress in IIJA. However, demand for this
funding far exceeds available funding at a time when the country is
facing an increase in billion-dollar, climate-related disasters. The
2022 combined competition generated requests for five times greater
than the available funding. Reducing this funding would leave
communities vulnerable to flooding and other disasters. The National
Coastal Resilience Fund provides the resources and tools to help reduce
the need for costly Federal disaster assistance later while also
sustaining healthy fisheries, maintaining robust tourism and supporting
other coastal industries.
Coral Reef Conservation Program.--We urge Congress to reject the
proposed $14 million decrease to the program and support no less than
$34.5 million, a modest increase over the FY24 enacted level. Congress
recognized the need for increased capacity by the States and
territories to address ongoing decline in coral reefs when it provided
for an increased authorization of appropriations in the recently passed
Restoring Resilient Reefs Act. The proposed cut would eliminate the
longstanding cooperative agreements with the States and territories
that enable the partnership approach to coral reef conservation and
management, including the new requirements enacted by Congress.
Additionally, NOAA has recently announced that we are experiencing a
global coral bleaching event and the proposed decrease would cut the
National coral reef monitoring program in half just when we need it the
most. This will help NOAA, States and territories, as well as
community, research and non-governmental partners, address the
continued decline of coral reefs. Cuts to this program would undermine
these critical efforts.
National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS).--TNC supports
no less than $35.3 million, a small increase over previously enacted
level. NERRS partners with States and territories to ensure long-term
education, stewardship and research on estuarine habitats. This funding
would maintain the capacity of NERRS to conduct research and
monitoring, and incorporate this research into training and technical
assistance for local communities. It is important to not erode base
funds for the existing reserves in order to fund the launch of the new
Louisiana, Wisconsin and the U.S. Virgin Islands reserves.
Sanctuaries and Marine Protected Areas.--TNC supports no less than
$68 million, restoring the small cut enacted in FY24. We urge Congress
to continue the funding necessary to support not only the current
sanctuaries but also the community-led nominations for new sanctuaries
that are being considered for designation through inclusive public
processes. National marine sanctuaries support economic growth and
hundreds of coastal businesses in sanctuary communities, preserve
vibrant underwater and maritime treasures and provide critical public
access for more than 42 million visitors annually.
Coastal Zone Management and Services.--TNC supports funding of no
less than the FY24 enacted level of $51.22 million. This level of
funding will provide for continued capacity to provide coastal
resilience technical assistance to communities across the country,
including additional emphasis on under-resourced and underserved
communities. Continued funding for the Digital Coast Partnership, at no
less than the $3.5 million previously enacted, will support new and
improved products, services and technical assistance to communities.
Part of this effort will also support the development of the next
generation of coastal managers through the Coastal Management and
Digital Coast Fellows. Providing competitive salaries and expanded
recruitment efforts will enhance the ability to reach underrepresented
communities.
Coastal Management Grants.--TNC supports funding of no less than
the FY24 enacted level of $81.5 million for coastal zone management
grants. TNC collaborates with State and territorial coastal programs
around the country to meet multiple goals for coastal communities,
including economic development, enhancement of public access and
recreation, coastal resilience and conservation of coastal resources.
IIJA provided temporary funding to support State and territorial
coastal zone management projects. Continued funding for core grants is
necessary to address the full suite of activities in the approved
coastal programs and not reduce this critical state capacity.
national marine fisheries service (nmfs)
Fisheries Management Programs and Services.--TNC urges Congress to
reject NOAA's proposed cuts within this budget line and provide no less
than $154.487 million, a modest increase above the FY24 enacted level.
With a $214 billion fisheries and seafood sector, U.S. fishing
communities rely on information from NOAA to make the most informed
decisions on where, how and when to fish. Support for these efforts is
necessary to recover overfished fish stocks so they can provide food
and jobs. Due to fiscal constraints, the agency has unfortunately
proposed offsetting an $2.812 million increase for management analyses
and assessments needed to support critical offshore wind deployments
with cuts of $2.875 million in bycatch engineering and reduction
efforts and $1.850 million to electronic monitoring and reporting
efforts supported by Congress in prior bills. We strongly support the
agency's investment in offshore wind, but it must not come at the
expense of necessary ongoing management efforts needed for sustainable
fisheries.
Fisheries Data Collections, Surveys and Assessments.--TNC urges
Congress to reject NOAA's proposed cuts within this budget line and
provide no less than $215.841 million, a modest increase above the FY24
enacted level. NOAA has reported to Congress and the Regional Fishery
Management Councils on the shortfall of available days at sea to
conduct surveys and support stock assessments. NOAA has also reported
on the need to conduct scientific survey mitigation efforts to support
the necessary deployment of critical offshore wind installations.
Unfortunately, due to fiscal constraints, the agency has proposed to
offset the offshore wind survey mitigation by decreasing cooperative
research with industry. These ongoing efforts to collect fishery-
dependent data were initiated to fill some of the existing survey gaps
and the proposed $9.831million cut would undermine the effectiveness of
fisheries management and erode community support for necessary
conservation measures. The other offset proposed by the agency would
eliminate $1.2 million in ongoing efforts related to electronic
monitoring and reporting that has been supported by Congress in prior
appropriations. We strongly support the agency's proposed increase of
$9.99 million for offshore wind scientific mitigation surveys, but it
must not replace equally critical science to support fisheries.
Habitat Conservation and Restoration.--TNC urges Congress to reject
the agency's proposed reduction of funding of $7.0 million and provide
no less than $56.684 million. While habitat restoration activities did
receive a temporary increase through IIJA, demand for this funding far
exceeds even this increased amount. The second round of competitive
transformational habitat grants received proposals asking for more than
10 times the available funding. These supplemental funds cover
projects, but base program funding is necessary to support the timely
implementation of those awards and the other critical core functions of
the program including consultations under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and
National Environmental Policy Act. This funding is also a reinvestment
in our coastal economies as on average every $1 million invested in
coastal restoration projects results in 15 jobs. For more complex
projects that increases to 30 jobs.
Fisheries and Ecosystem Science Programs and Services.--TNC
supports no less than $170.648 million, consistent with the FY25 NOAA
request. There is a high correlation between good information about the
status of a fish stock and the effectiveness of management for
sustainable and profitable fisheries. Outdated data systems are slow,
expensive and prone to errors and gaps. Congress has recognized the
need for NOAA to modernize its fisheries data management systems and
has required the agency to develop a national strategic plan to advance
these efforts in previous bills. This work will enable more complex and
complete analyses for fisheries management and its intersection with
increased efforts to deploy needed offshore wind energy. The NOAA FY25
request provides a modest increase to address funding shortfalls needed
to support this work.
Observers and Training.--We recommend supporting funding for
Observers and Training at no less than $59.067 million, consistent with
FY25 requested level. We recommend that within this amount you ensure
coverage of industry and agency costs for 100% at-sea monitoring in the
New England multispecies fishery. We appreciate Congress' continued
support of this funding, however, recent report language that set aside
$5.5 million to cover industry costs has led to the unanticipated
situation where there was a surplus of funds to cover the industry
costs but insufficient funds to cover agency implementation at the 100%
monitoring rate. We request you include report language that makes
clear that any funding available after industry costs are covered can
be used for agency implementation to get to that 100% coverage rate.
Marine Mammals, Sea Turtles, and Other Species.--TNC urges Congress
to reject NOAA's proposed cuts within this budget line and provide no
less than $182.654 million. NOAA has reported to Congress on the need
for increased funding for reviews and assessments related to marine
mammals to support the deployment of offshore wind efforts. We support
the agency's proposal to increase funding by $5.545 million for this
purpose, however, we do not support the proposed offsets within this
budget line. We ask you to reject the proposal to eliminate the $4.5
million for Prescott marine mammal stranding grants at a time when we
are seeing multiple strandings and entanglements. We ask you also to
reject cutting $2.69 million for ongoing efforts that aim to avoid
harmful interactions and support rebuilding depleted marine mammal
populations.
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF).--TNC supports no less
than the FY24 enacted level of $65 million. PCSRF has funded hundreds
of successful on-the-ground salmon conservation efforts, but habitat
project needs exceed available funding. PCSRF has catalyzed thousands
of partnerships among federal, State, local and Tribal governments as
well as conservation, business, and community organizations.
Thank you for this opportunity to share TNC's priorities. Please
contact me if you have questions or would like additional information.
[This statement was submitted by Stephanie Bailenson, U.S. Federal
Water Policy Team Lead.]
______
Prepared Statement of New England Innocence Project
Thank you, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee. My name is Stephanie Roberts Hartung, and I serve as a
Senior Staff Attorney at the New England Innocence Project (NEIP).
Prior to joining NEIP's staff in 2022, I was a law professor in Boston
for 19 years, studying the causes of wrongful convictions and the
procedural barriers that make remedying them so challenging. On behalf
of NEIP and as a member of the Innocence Network, a coalition of more
than 70 local innocence organizations that work to exonerate the
innocent and prevent wrongful convictions nationwide, thank you for the
subcommittee's critical funding increases and strong support for
innocence and forensic science programs in FY24. Thank you also for
allowing me to submit written testimony for the record as you consider
appropriations requests for FY25. I urge you to please increase funding
for the following programs at the Bureau of Justice Assistance at the
Department of Justice and at the National Institute of Standards and
Technology at the Department of Commerce, including:
--$15 million for the Wrongful Conviction Review Program at the
Department of Justice's (DOJ) Bureau of Justice Assistance
(BJA) (the Wrongful Conviction Review Program is part of the
Capital Litigation Improvement Program)
--$15 million for the Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing
Program at DOJ/BJA
--$25 million for the Department of Commerce's National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) to support and conduct
foundational forensic science research, including $2 million
for technical merit evaluations.
The innocence programs at DOJ and forensic science programs at NIST
increase the fairness and accuracy of the criminal legal system;
highlight racial disparities and inequities; provide the strongest
possible forensic science tools to legal system stakeholders; and
generate greater public safety for our Nation.
Data from the National Registry of Exonerations show that the
number of exonerations has significantly increased since Federal
innocence programs--the Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing and
Wrongful Convictions Review programs--began receiving funding in 2008
and 2009, respectively. This dramatic increase is in part a result of
the Federal decision to support these programs to help ensure the
accuracy and integrity of the criminal legal system.
2023 set the record for the highest number of years individuals
lost to being wrongfully convicted--an average of 14.6 years per
exoneree. Almost 32,000 life years have been lost to wrongful
incarceration. The National Registry of Exonerations currently lists
more than 3,500 exonerations since 1989. More than half of the people
exonerated are Black, and innocent Black people spend approximately 45%
longer wrongfully imprisoned than innocent white people. This racial
disparity holds true across different types of convictions.
The New England Innocence Project (NEIP), headquartered in and
serving Massachusetts, is the only innocence organization serving
Vermont, Maine, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire. Federal DOJ innocence
grant funds have helped expand its reach into States that have had
insufficient resources to meet their needs. In fact, as a direct result
of a grant supported by FY21 funding, NEIP has begun litigating its
first case in New Hampshire, a State that has not experienced robust
post-conviction litigation to date. This grant funding has been
extended through June of 2024 and has provided critical support for
ongoing litigation efforts, most recently with the State's Attorney
agreeing to post-conviction DNA testing last month, on the eve of a
scheduled week-long evidentiary hearing with multiple defense experts.
With the support of Federal funds, NEIP has provided direct
representation and/or support that has resulted in 18 exonerations over
the past 18 years. Five recently released exonerees collectively spent
almost 200 years in prison. Additionally, NEIP has: (1) been able to
provide more significant support to exonerees upon their release from
prison through our Exoneree Network, a reentry support project lead and
run by exonerees, including establishing a new peer-to-peer mentor
program and providing housing upon release; (2) conducted numerous
trainings and presentations throughout New England for prosecutors,
defense attorneys, law enforcement, judges, and the public to raise
awareness and prevent causes of wrongful conviction; and (3) expanded
our staff to include a social worker to support exonerees upon reentry
and an attorney to work on pre-trial issues that will prevent wrongful
convictions from occurring.
Cases without DNA evidence are difficult and often take many years
to complete. It is a long, arduous, and resource intensive process to
prove an individual's innocence after he/she has been wrongfully
convicted. An average case at NEIP requires significant work and
thousands of hours and dollars to adequately investigate and litigate.
During this time period in which innocent people are languishing behind
bars, they are losing precious time with their families and communities
that can never be recovered, and also costing the state tens of
thousands of dollars per year for each person who is wrongfully
convicted and incarcerated.
Freeing innocent individuals and preventing wrongful convictions
also highlights the ways that the criminal legal system fails to
provide public safety. Every time DNA identifies a wrongful conviction,
it enables the possible identification of the person who actually
committed the crime. Such true perpetrators have been identified in
more than half of the 375 DNA exoneration cases. Unfortunately, many of
these individuals went on to commit additional crimes while an innocent
person was convicted and incarcerated.
The value of Federal innocence programs and forensic science
research is not only for exonerated people, but for all stakeholders in
the criminal legal system. Significant funding cuts and caps to non-
defense discretionary programs ultimately would increase costs,
compromise public safety, and undo efforts to improve system accuracy,
equity, and accountability to all stakeholders. Deep cuts to innocence
programs and forensic science research would significantly reduce the
identification, remediation, and prevention of wrongful convictions.
wrongful conviction review program
We know that wrongful convictions occur in cases where DNA evidence
may be insufficient or unavailable to prove innocence. The National
Registry of Exonerations currently lists more than 3,500 exonerations
since 1989, the vast majority of which did not have the presence or
benefit of testable DNA. The Wrongful Conviction Review Program
provides critical support to ensure that experts are available to
navigate the complex landscape of post-conviction litigation, as well
as oversee the thousands of volunteer hours local innocence
organizations leverage to help investigate these complex non-DNA cases
and support the significant legal work they require.
For example, in 2019, Darrell Jones, who was wrongfully convicted
of murder and served 32 years, was freed as a result of the work of the
Committee for Public Counsel Services Innocence Program. The Wrongful
Conviction Review Program provided funding that enabled his team to
hire an investigator who identified exculpatory witnesses as well as
two forensic experts. In 2020, Arturo Jimenez, who was wrongfully
convicted of murder and served 25 years, was freed because the Wrongful
Conviction Review program funded an investigator who uncovered key
evidence that helped the Northern California Innocence Project secure
his exoneration.
The Wrongful Conviction Review Program provides funding to local
innocence organizations, such as NEIP, so that they may provide this
type of expert, high quality, and efficient representation for innocent
individuals. The program's goals also are to help alleviate burdens
placed on the criminal legal system through costly and prolonged post-
conviction litigation and to identify, when possible, the person who
actually committed the crime.
In previous years, only a few local innocence organizations
received Wrongful Conviction Review funding during each grant cycle.
Even with the FY23 funding increase, there is still a need to expand
this program further to resolve the long waiting lists of wrongfully
convicted individuals--lists that are often hundreds of individuals
long for just an individual local innocence organization. These cases
require evaluation, investigation, and often representation, which
helps to improve the fairness and reliability of the criminal legal
system. We urge you to provide $15 million for the Wrongful Conviction
Review Program in FY25. (Please note that the Wrongful Conviction
Review grant program is a part of the Capital Litigation Improvement
Program.)
I also urge you to include in the FY25 report for the Commerce,
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill the final
FY24 report language for the Wrongful Conviction Review program. It
described the need for legal representation and investigation services
for individuals with post-conviction claims of innocence. It also
directed at least 50 percent of funds appropriated to the Capital
Litigation Improvement and Wrongful Conviction Review grant programs
support Wrongful Conviction Review grantees providing high quality and
efficient post-conviction representation for defendants in post-
conviction claims of innocence. It also clarified that Wrongful
Conviction Review grantees shall be nonprofit organizations,
institutions of higher education, and/or State or local public defender
offices that have in-house post-conviction representation programs that
show demonstrable experience and competence in litigating
postconviction claims of innocence. Finally, the report language
directed that grant funds shall support grantee provision of post-
conviction legal representation of innocence claims; case review,
evaluation, and management; experts; potentially exonerative forensic
testing; and investigation services related to supporting these post-
conviction innocence claims.
the bloodsworth post-conviction dna testing program
The Bloodsworth Program supports States and localities that want to
pursue post-conviction DNA testing in appropriate cases, and grantees
range from State and local prosecutor offices to law enforcement
agencies and crime labs. These grantees can collaborate with local
innocence organizations when appropriate. For example, a grant to
Arizona allowed the State's Attorney General's Office to partner with
the Arizona Justice Project to create the Post-Conviction DNA Testing
Project. This effort canvassed incarcerated individuals in Arizona,
reviewed cases, located evidence, and filed joint requests with the
court to have evidence released for DNA testing. In addition to
identifying the innocent, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard noted
that the ``grant enable[d] [his] office to support local prosecutors
and ensure that those who have committed violent crimes are identified
and behind bars.'' The Bloodsworth program is a powerful investment for
States seeking to free innocent individuals and identify the
individuals who actually committed the crimes. The success of this
program has been both generating individual exonerations while
supporting broader system review and reforms when problems arise.
For example, Virginian Thomas Haynesworth, who was wrongfully
incarcerated for 27 years, was freed thanks to Bloodsworth-funded DNA
testing that also revealed the person who actually committed the crime.
The culpable person in that case went commit many additional violent
offenses, most occurring while Mr. Haynesworth was wrongfully
incarcerated. Given the importance of this program to both innocent
individuals and public safety, I urge you to provide the $15 million to
continue the work of the Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing
Program in FY25.
forensic science improvement
To continue the critical work to improve forensic science, and help
prevent wrongful convictions, I urge you to provide $25 million for
NIST to support foundational forensic science research, including $2
million to conduct technical merit evaluations.
As the Federal entity that is both perfectly positioned and
institutionally constituted to conduct foundational forensic science
research, NIST's work will improve the validity and reliability of
forensic evidence, a need cited by the National Academy of Sciences
2009 report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A
Path Forward. NIST's reputation for innovation will result in
technological solutions to advance forensic science applications and
achieve a tremendous cost savings by reducing court costs posed by
litigating scientific evidence.
Additionally, some forensic science methods have not yet received
an evaluation of their technical merit and NIST needs additional
support to conduct these vital reviews. The forensic science activities
and research at NIST will help to improve forensic disciplines and
propel forensic science and the criminal legal system toward greater
accuracy and reliability, and as a result, help prevent wrongful
convictions and improve system equity.
conclusion
Thank you for your leadership in the identification, correction,
and prevention of wrongful convictions. If you have questions or need
information, please contact Jenny Collier, Federal Policy Advisor to
the Innocence Project, at [email protected].
______
Prepared Statement of The Nez Perce Tribe
The Nez Perce Tribe (Tribe) appreciates the opportunity to provide
written testimony to the Committee as it evaluates and prioritizes FY
2025 appropriations for the Department of Commerce and the Department
of Justice. This testimony addresses spending allocations for the
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund and Salmon Management Activities
within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and
funding or set-asides for the grants provided to Tribes within the
Department of Justice.
The Tribe is a Federally-recognized Indian Tribe with Treaty-
reserved fishing, hunting, gathering, and pasturing rights in the Snake
River and Columbia River basins. In its 1855 Treaty, the Tribe
reserved, and the United States secured, ``the right of taking fish at
all usual and accustomed places in common with citizens of the
Territory; and of erecting temporary buildings for curing, together
with the privilege of hunting, gathering roots and berries, and
pasturing their horses and cattle upon open and unclaimed land.'' \1\
The Tribe desires that all species and populations of anadromous
and resident fish and their habitats be healthy and harvestable
throughout the Tribe's usual and accustomed fishing places. The Tribe
has long had an interest, and played an active role, in restoring
anadromous and resident fish runs-including fall and spring Chinook,
steelhead, sockeye, lamprey, bull trout, and white sturgeon-throughout
all of the areas where the Tribe reserved Treaty fishing rights. The
Tribe is involved in these efforts to protect implementation of Treaty
rights, to restore species and conditions consistent with the Treaty,
and to protect the long-term productivity of their natural resources.
The Tribe's Department of Fisheries Resources Management (DFRM) is
one of the largest and most successful Tribal fisheries programs in the
United States,\2\ with offices located at Lapwai, Sweetwater, Orofino,
McCall, Powell, and Grangeville, Idaho, as well as Joseph, Oregon. The
DFRM has an annual operating budget of over $22 million and employs 190
Tribal and non-Tribal employees, 150 of whom are full-time.
The DFRM manages its own salmon fish hatchery at Cherrylane, Idaho,
as well as 10 acclimation sites in Idaho and Oregon. In addition, the
DFRM manages Kooskia National Fish Hatchery and Dworshak National Fish
Hatchery. The DFRM also coordinates with the Idaho Department of Fish
and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on production from
other salmon and steelhead hatcheries throughout Idaho. The Tribe is
committed to this work and requests that the United States properly
fund the programs that are an instrumental part of the overall work on
fish recovery.
pacific coastal salmon recovery fund
The Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF) was established by
Congress in FY 2000 to protect, restore, and conserve Pacific salmonids
and their habitats across rivers, watersheds, and coastal habitats in
western States. The congressionally-authorized activities that were
funded under the PCSRF program are focused on maintaining populations
necessary for exercise of Tribal treaty fishing rights or native
subsistence fishing. Since 2000, this program has compelled effective,
collaborative approaches to salmon recovery across federal, State,
local, Tribal, and private sector partners. In Washington, Oregon,
Alaska, Idaho, California, and Nevada, PCSRF investments have
contributed to over 15,942 projects and have helped restore more than
12,043 miles of streams and over 1.2 million acres of fish habitat. An
increased Federal investment of $70 million in FY 2025 is crucial to
maintain this progress and to achieve the goal of full recovery and a
healthy, sustainable Pacific salmon fishery.
PCSRF has been used by the Tribe to restore coho (silver) salmon to
the Tribe's Reservation in the Clearwater River, 500 miles from the
ocean. Coho were extirpated from the Clearwater River over 40 years ago
and most of these fish returned only as far as the lower Columbia
River. Through the PCSRF (and Mitchell Act funds) the Tribe was able to
rear and release almost one million coho into the Clearwater River,
restoring their presence in the Snake River Basin. The Tribe views
these returns as a tremendous success.
In 2017, the Tribe worked with the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
to also have the first release of coho in the Lostine River, a
tributary of the Grande Ronde River. After decades of extirpation,
these fish are being restored to some of the best habitat in the
Columbia River Basin. Continued funding for the operation of these
hatchery supplementation efforts through PCSRF funding is needed to
maintain the populations of most species of salmon and steelhead in
this ``breadbasket'' of salmon habitat, located upstream of eight
Columbia River dams.
salmon management activities
The Mitchell Act provides for the conservation of the fishery
resources of the Columbia River and is administered by NOAA's National
Marine Fisheries Service. Funding for the Mitchell Act component of
NOAA Fisheries supports the operations and maintenance of Columbia
River hatcheries through grants and contracts to the States of
Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, and to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, to mitigate the loss of salmon on the Columbia and Snake
rivers.
The Tribe believes that an increase of $10 million over FY 2024 for
FY 2025, as recommended in the Administration's budget request for
Salmon Management Activities, is justifiable. The Mitchell Act allows
Federal agencies to work with Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and the lower
Columbia River Treaty Tribes to operate and maintain a series of fish
hatcheries and passage facilities focused on improving declining and
imperiled salmon and steelhead runs in the Columbia Basin, ensuring
conservation of these critical natural resources, maintaining
economically viable Tribal, commercial, and recreational fisheries, and
providing prey for endangered Federal and State listed Southern
Resident orcas.
The Mitchell Act currently funds 60 programs that produce
approximately 40 million fish annually, nearly 30 percent of the total
salmon and steelhead production in the Columbia River Basin. The
proposed FY 2025 increase is necessary to make up for over a decade of
flat funding during a high inflationary period. As a result of this
flat funding, the region's hatcheries have accrued a significant
deferred maintenance problem. To address this and restore
functionality, we are requesting an additional $220 million to address
deferred maintenance. Without full funding of the Operations and
Maintenance budget, hatcheries in the Pacific Northwest will begin
closing and this mitigation obligation will go unmet. We also suggest a
five percent limit on administrative costs from this line item.
In addition, the Pacific Salmon Treaty is critical to meeting the
provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act, addressing Tribal
fishing rights, and maintaining sustainable U.S. fisheries. This
Treaty, signed by United States and Canada in 1985, provides a
framework for the two countries to cooperate on the management of
Pacific salmon. The Tribe supports $43.5 million for implementation of
the Pacific Salmon Treaty.
The importance of this funding cannot be overstated as the
comprehensive, geographic nature of its application in the Pacific
Northwest provides an integrated infrastructure for fish management. In
addition, these funds allow for fish to be grown at other facilities
that are used at Nez Perce Tribal production facilities. Other regional
agencies also use the funds to grow fish that enhance Treaty fishing
opportunities for Nez Perce Tribal members on the Columbia River.
The Tribe recommends that pacific salmon in the National Marine
Fisheries Service be funded at $96 million, with no less than $5
million for a new line item for pinniped removal. Congress amended the
Marine Mammal Protection Act to provide States and Tribes more
flexibility to control pinnipeds like/including sea lions that are
having a significant negative impact on ESA-listed salmon, steelhead,
and sturgeon in the Columbia Basin. Federal funding is needed to
augment State and Tribal funds to fully implement the program and
reduce predation on ESA-listed species. This program also funds salmon
and steelhead hatcheries and habitat restoration in the Columbia Basin.
department of justice tribal assistance grant funding
Providing law and order is one of the fundamental requirements of
any functioning government. However, Tribes are limited in the
resources available to commit to these programs as the United States
has historically underfunded such programs in Indian Country. The Tribe
relies on the grant programs of the Department of Justice to help grow
the capacity of our Tribal Law and Order system.
In order to provide law enforcement, victims services, and Tribal
justice systems to Indian and non-Indian residents on the Reservation,
the Tribe has relied on programs such as the Coordinated Tribal
Assistance Solicitation grants program, the Tribal Juvenile Healing to
Wellness Court program, the Comprehensive Tribal Victim Assistance
Program, the Tribal Justice Systems Infrastructure Program, Violence
Against Women Act programs, the Justice Systems and Alcohol and
Substance Abuse program, and the Children's Justice Act Partnership
program. These programs need to continue to be funded at the most
robust level possible in FY 2025, given spending constraints.
The Tribe recommends full funding for programs authorized under the
Tribal Law and Order Act. The Tribe also recommends either continuation
of funding for ``assistance to Indian Tribes'' at the level of $50
million that was enacted in FY 2024 under the State and Local Law
Enforcement Assistance account in the Office of Justice Programs (OJP),
or inclusion of the President's requested seven percent Tribal set-
aside of OJP funds. The set-aside would provide a substantial increase
for these programs and is the preferred method of funding. Under either
funding scenario in FY 2025, there needs to be flexibility provided in
program funding so that the funding is not narrowly allocated to Tribes
solely through competitive grant programs.
The Tribe strongly supports the continuation of bill language
contained in Section 510 of the FY 2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act
that provided five percent from the Crime Victims Fund for grants to
Indian Tribes through the Office for Victims of Crime to improve
services for Native American victims of crime.
Finally, the Tribe urges this Committee to fund the Tribal
Resources Grant Program under the Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services programs at $37 million and to maintain a level of $6 million
for the Tribal Access Program. Both amounts are proposed in the
Administration's FY 2025 budget request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Treaty with the Nez Perces, June 11, 1855, 12 Stat. 957. The
Treaty with the Nez Perces, June 9, 1863, 14 Stat. 647, preserved the
off-Reservation rights that the Tribe reserved in its 1855 Treaty.
\2\ The Nez Perce Tribe's DFRM received the 2015 Honoring Nations
award with high honors from The Harvard Project on American Indian
Economic Development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran and Honorable Members of the
subcommittee, my name is Ed Johnstone, and I am the Chair of the
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC). The NWIFC is composed of
the 20 Tribes that are party to United States v. Washington, which
upheld the Tribes' treaty-reserved right to harvest and manage various
natural resources on and off-reservation, including salmon and
shellfish.
On behalf of the NWIFC, I'm providing testimony for the record on
the natural resource and fishery management program funding requests
for the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) appropriations.
These programs support the management of salmon fisheries, which
contribute to a robust natural resource-based economy and the continued
exercise of Tribal treaty harvest rights. Given the onslaught of
pressures we face, it is now more important than ever for the Federal
trustee to support management, supplementation, and restoration of
fisheries--vital to the Tribes physical, cultural, and economic
wellbeing, as well as an important link in our Nation's food supply
chain.
summary of fy25 appropriations requests
--$70.0 million for NOAA Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund
--$7.0 million for NOAA Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans
--$43.5 million for NOAA Pacific Salmon Treaty
--$33.5 million for NOAA Mitchell Act Hatchery Programs
The member Tribes of the NWIFC ceded much of the land that is now
western Washington in exchange for reserving the continued right to
harvest and manage various natural resources including salmon and
shellfish. Salmon are the foundation of Tribal cultures, traditions,
and economies in western Washington. To ensure that Tribal treaty
rights and lifeways are protected, it is essential that the Federal
Government provide support to all aspects of salmon management,
including harvest planning and implementation (e.g., Pacific Salmon
Treaty), hatchery production, (e.g., Mitchell Act Hatchery Programs and
Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans) and habitat protection and
restoration (e.g., Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund).
justification of requests
Provide, at a minimum, $70.0 million for NOAA Pacific Coastal Salmon
Recovery Fund (PCSRF) and preferably restore funding to FY02
levels ($110.0 million)
We respectfully request, at a minimum, $70.0 million for PCSRF,
which is an increase of $5.0 million over the FY24 enacted level of
$65.0 million. It is worth noting that this request is a significant
departure from the PCSRF peak level of $110.0 million in FY02 or
subsequent years in which appropriations were maintained upwards of
$80.0 million through FY11. We would like to see PCSRF funding fully
restored to FY02 levels. This level of funding would help carry out the
original congressional intent of these funds to support the Federal
Government's obligations to salmon recovery and the treaty fishing
rights of the Tribes. However, we understand that budget restrictions
may require Congress to take a more incremental approach toward this
end goal.
The PCSRF is a multi-State, multi-Tribe program established by
Congress in FY00 with a primary goal to help recover dwindling salmon
populations throughout the Pacific coast region. Through PCSRF, Tribes
work collaboratively to help protect and restore salmon habitat to
increase natural salmon productivity. To accomplish this, Tribes
implement scientifically based salmon recovery plans developed for each
watershed in concert with federal, State, and local partners. Tribes
also participate in sustainable harvest management activities such as
monitoring fish abundance, which is then used to forecast adult returns
and subsequently develop annual harvest rates that achieve conservation
objectives and provide for Tribal and non-Tribal harvest opportunities.
Since its inception, PCSRF has been the primary salmon recovery
response. The program has restored and created 1.2 million acres of
salmon habitat and has made over 11,800 stream miles accessible to
salmon and steelhead in our region.
Provide $7.0 million for NOAA Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans
(within NOAA--Pacific Salmon)
We respectfully request $7.0 million to support review, approval
and implementation of Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans (HGMPs). We
also respectfully request report language to ensure that this funding
is set-aside within the Pacific Salmon account and that a portion of it
continues to pass through to Tribes to develop--and importantly--
implement approved HGMPs. We recommend that the overarching Pacific
Salmon subactivity be funded at $91.0 million to accommodate this
request, ensure maintenance of existing programs and support agency
requests. This recommendation for the Pacific Salmon subactivity is
$16.0 million above the FY24 enacted level of $75.0 million.
Review and approval of HGMPs is necessary to provide hatcheries
with Endangered Species Act (ESA) coverage and implementation of the
plans is necessary to accomplish their conservation goals. NMFS uses
the information provided by HGMPs to evaluate the impacts of State and
tribally operated hatcheries on salmon and steelhead listed under the
ESA and recommends improvements to operations to meet conservation
objectives. With the lack of improvement in salmon stocks, hatchery
operations have become even more important to achieving recovery goals
and maintenance of salmon fisheries. However, the lack of improvement
in natural origin salmon has also resulted in scrutinizing hatcheries
for their potential genetic impacts on natural spawning populations.
This has resulted in increasingly specific performance standards and
management expectations included in Tribes' HGMPs.
Implementing the activities described in the HGMPs includes
biological monitoring and evaluation of hatchery programs. Monitoring
and evaluation assess whether the goals of the program are being met
and ensures the compatibility of the program with regional and co-
management salmon recovery plans. These monitoring and evaluation
programs generally involve various methodologies to monitor the
juvenile fish released by the hatchery, sample the returning adult
fish, and evaluate the interactions of hatchery and wild fish.
Tribes need help addressing the escalating costs of hatchery
management associated with the monitoring and adaptive management
practices called for by HGMPs. For example, requirements to closely
monitor natural and hatchery produced salmon interactions on the
spawning ground are costly and time intensive. Therefore, it is
essential that HGMP funding is increased to address these rising costs
and that flexibility is provided to ensure that funding can be used by
the Tribes to implement the plans' recommendations, which federal,
State and Tribal governments have extensively invested in.
Provide $43.5 million to implement the National commitments in the
Pacific Salmon Treaty agreements (within NOAA--Salmon
Management Activities)
We support the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC) U.S. Section's FY25
request of $43.5 million for the Pacific Salmon Treaty line within
Salmon Management Activities, which is an increase of $2.5 million over
the FY24 enacted level of $41.0 million.
The FY25 request would support implementation of the National
commitments in the renegotiated Pacific Salmon Treaty (PST) Annex
Chapters. Funding will also decrease the litigation risk to Federal
Biological Opinions that provide coverage for our fisheries under the
Endangered Species Act (a lawsuit regarding the National Marine
Fisheries Service Biological Opinion for Southeast Alaska has been
filed in Federal court).
Adult salmon returning to most western Washington streams migrate
through U.S. and Canadian waters and are harvested by fishers from both
countries. For years, there were no restrictions on the interception of
returning salmon by fishers of neighboring countries. Eventually, the
U.S. and Canada agreed to cooperate on the management of salmon by
developing and ratifying the PST in 1985. The PSC was created to
implement the PST and is responsible for developing management
recommendations and assessing compliance with the treaty. Negotiations
to revise the provisions of the Annex Chapters were successfully
completed in 2018 and 2019. These chapters contain the specifics for
implementing the treaty for each species in each geographic area. These
revised chapters represent the combined efforts of the participants to
ensure healthy salmon populations for the next 10 years, and as such
include commitments from the U.S. to improve current management
strategies.
Provide $33.5 million for NOAA Mitchell Act Hatchery Programs (within
NOAA--Salmon Management Activities)
We respectfully request $33.5 million for the Mitchell Act Hatchery
Programs consistent with the FY25 President's Budget Request, which is
an increase of $10.0 million over the FY24 enacted level of $23.5
million. The request for this additional increase in Mitchell Act funds
is needed to ensure that mitigation hatcheries operate at full
production level to meet Federal obligations. This program is funded
through the Salmon Management Activities subactivity.
Mitchell Act hatchery production is intended to mitigate fish and
habitat loss caused by the Federal hydropower dam system on the
Columbia River. Funding for these programs supports the operation and
maintenance of hatcheries that release around 42 million juvenile
salmon and steelhead in Oregon and Washington. This represents about 30
percent of the total hatchery salmon and steelhead released in the
Columbia River Basin. Adequate funding for Mitchell Act hatcheries is
of particular importance to us because it supports salmon production
for Tribal treaty harvest along the Washington coast. Additionally,
adequate funding to ensure full production from the Mitchell Act
hatcheries dampens the impact of Canadian and Alaskan ocean fisheries
on Washington and Tribal fisheries under the terms of the PST.
conclusion
The treaties between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, as
well as the treaty-reserved rights to harvest, manage and consume fish
and shellfish, are the ``supreme law of the land'' under the U.S.
Constitution (Article VI). It is, therefore, critically important for
Congress and the Federal Government to provide continued support in
upholding the treaty obligations and fulfilling its trust
responsibilities. An important component of these obligations is to
fully fund the sustainable salmon fisheries management programs that
provide for improved harvest planning, hatchery production and habitat
management. We respectfully urge you to continue to support our efforts
to protect and restore our treaty-reserved rights and natural resources
that in turn will provide for thriving ecosystems and economies for
both Indian and non-Indian communities alike. Thank you.
[This statement was submitted by Ed Johnstone, Chairman.]
______
Prepared Statement of Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP)
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee, my name is Derrell Frazier. I am a child of an
incarcerated parent and in my professional position I serve as a
Next100 policy entrepreneur at The Century Foundation.
Decades of research have shown that incarcerating parents creates
poor outcomes for children, with negative impacts spanning social and
emotional development, health, education, changing caregivers,
involvement in the foster care system, financial hardship, and housing
instability. Yet more than 2.7 million children in the United States
have an incarcerated parent. Fortunately, there are now successful,
evidence-based alternatives to incarcerating parents, which provide
children with greater stability and sense of belonging, ensure family
success, reduce crime, and improve community health.
To accomplish this goal, Advocates of carceral reform seek $10
million for family-based alternative sentencing, currently funded
through the Byrne Grant Program at the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) in the Department of Justice. Continued
and expanded funding will enable State, local, and community agencies
to replicate successful parenting sentencing alternative programs.
Children of incarcerated parents represent one of the most
vulnerable and marginalized demographics in our society. The trauma and
stigma associated with parental incarceration can have profound and
lasting impacts on their emotional, psychological, and academic well-
being. Studies consistently demonstrate the increased likelihood of
these children experiencing adverse outcomes, such as poor educational
attainment, involvement in criminal activities, and intergenerational
cycles of incarceration.
The U.S. Dream Academy exemplifies the kind of values that should
be the governing policy on the issue. The transformative power of
intervention and support for children of incarcerated parents. By
offering a safe and nurturing environment, mentorship, educational
enrichment, and emotional guidance, organizations like the U.S. Dream
Academy play a pivotal role in breaking the cycle of incarceration and
empowering these children to realize their full potential. However, the
scope and reach of such initiatives are often constrained by limited
resources and funding. I have personally been impacted by the benefit
of the services the U.S. Dream Academy offers as a child of an
incarcerated parent. The U.S. Dream provided me with a safe space where
i could naturally be myself and develop as a young person interested in
education, the arts and social-emotional development.
It is currently time to end unnecessary family separations by the
criminal justice system. The United States incarcerates the parents of
2.7 million children at this very moment. Over 10 million children and
adult children have experienced parental incarceration in their
lifetime. We know the following to be true:
--Incarcerating parents creates poor outcomes for children and
communities.
--Parental incarceration disproportionately affects marginalized
populations: Black children are seven times, and Latino/a
children are two times, more likely to have a parent in prison
than white youth.
--Incarceration of parents creates substantial drops in income for
families, increases anxiety, mental health difficulties, and
reduces educational achievement.
It is imperative to recognize the efficacy and importance of
family-based alternative Sentencing programs in addressing the needs of
children with incarcerated parents. Therefore, I propose that the
subcommittee increase the allocation to $10 million to sustain and
expand these initiatives under the Byrne Grant Program administered by
the OJJDP. This funding would enable State, local, and community
agencies to replicate and scale successful parenting sentencing
alternative programs, thereby extending support to a larger number of
families in need.
Fortunately, we already know that programs like this one contribute
significantly to ameliorating the problem. California, Illinois,
Massachusetts, Tennessee, Oregon, and Washington have created
successful programs that divert parents from receiving sentences. These
programs provide eligible parents with community custody, including
extensive programming and treatment, by providing stability to
children, ensure family success, reduce crime, and increase community
vibrancy. Washington State's program has a 71-percent successful
completion rate. Only 8 percent of participants who successfully
complete the program return to prison, compared to 30 percent for the
overall offender population.
By expanding access to supportive services and resources, we can
break the cycle of intergenerational incarceration, promote positive
outcomes for vulnerable youth, and build stronger, more resilient
communities. As a beneficiary of the U.S. Dream Academy, I urge
policymakers and stakeholders to prioritize the needs of these children
and families by endorsing this proposal and ensuring the continuation
of vital funding support.
I want to thank the subcommittee for its past funding of family-
based alternative sentencing programs. With the increase of interest
from States, the time is ripe for Congress to offer guidance and
support to States currently offering parental sentencing alternatives,
as well as to invite States interested in offering new parental
diversion programs to participate. We urge the subcommittee to support
$10 million in funding for the program to help families stay together
and ultimately to assist communities, children of incarcerated parents,
and their families to have better, more successful outcomes Thank you
also for your time and consideration of my testimony, and please do not
hesitate to contact me at [email protected] if you have questions
or need additional information.
______
Prepared Statement of Pacific Salmon Commission
Mr. Chairman, and Honorable Members of the Committee, I am W. Ron
Allen, the Tribal Commissioner and Chair for the U.S. Section Budget
Committee of the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC). I am also the Tribal
Chairman/CEO of the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe located on the Olympic
Peninsula of Washington State. The U.S. Section prepares annual budgets
for the implementation of the Pacific Salmon Treaty. The implementation
of the Treaty is funded through the Departments of Commerce, Interior
and State. Our US Delegation urges the following continued support:
Department of Commerce funding in support of implementing the
Pacific Salmon Treaty is part of the Salmon Management
Activities account in the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) budget. The United States and Canada completed
negotiations of revised Annex Chapters to the Treaty in 2019.
Funding in the Department of Commerce budget is for the
programs to fulfill national commitments created by the revised
Treaty Annex Chapters. The U.S. Section recommends FY 2025
funding of $43,500,000 to implement national commitments
created by the Treaty. This represents no change from the FY
2024 request.
The Department of Commerce principally funds programs conducted by
the States of Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Alaska and the NMFS.
However, the cost of programs conducted by the States to fulfill
national commitments created by the Treaty continue to be substantially
greater than the funding provided in the NMFS budget. Consequently, the
States have supplemented the Federal Treaty appropriations from other
sources, including State general funds. Many of those funding sources
are limited or no longer available.
Recent increases in funding are greatly appreciated, however
current funding still falls short of what the U.S. Section estimates is
needed to fully implement the revised Annex Chapters to the 1985 U.S./
Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty.
The U.S. Section recommends that the Pacific Salmon Treaty line
item in the Salmon Management Activities section of the NMFS budget be
funded at $43,500,000 for FY 2025. This line item includes $21,400,000
to provide base support for the States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon,
and Idaho. NMFS activities to implement the Treaty's conservation and
allocation provisions for Coho, Sockeye, Chinook, Chum, and Pink salmon
fisheries is funded through overhead fees. Effective, science-based
implementation of negotiated salmon fishing arrangements and abundance-
based management approaches for Chinook, southern Coho, and Northern
Boundary and Transboundary River salmon fisheries.
The U.S. Section recommends annual operational costs of $3,060,000
for hatchery conservation programs and $5,650,000 for habitat
restoration for Puget Sound critical stocks, $750,000 for Southeast
Alaska Chinook Salmon Fishery Mitigation, and $3,946,000 to increase
prey availability for Southern Resident Killer Whales. The recommended
funding includes $6,370,000 for sound science initiatives to fill key
science gaps and improve fishery management effectiveness. The
recommended funding helps meet requirements of the biological opinion
for species listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered
Species Act.
The sound science funding includes recommends restoring the funding
for the Chinook Salmon Agreement line item in Salmon Management
Activities to $1,800,000. This funding supports research and stock
assessments necessary to acquire and analyze the technical information
needed to fully implement the abundance-based Chinook salmon management
program provided for by the Treaty. The States of Alaska, Washington,
Oregon, and Idaho, and the twenty-five Treaty Tribes conduct projects
selected in a rigorous competitive process.
The International Fisheries Commissions line, under Regional
Councils and Fisheries Commissions in the NMFS budget is funded at
$475,000 and provides the U.S. contribution to bilateral cooperative
salmon enhancement on the transboundary river systems, which originate
in Canada and flow to the sea through Southeast Alaska. This project
was established in 1988 to meet U.S. obligations specified in the
Treaty and annual funding should continue at $475,000 annually.
The core Treaty implementation projects included in the Pacific
Salmon Treaty line, and the U.S. Chinook Agreement line under Salmon
Management Activities, as well as the International Fisheries
Commission line under Regional Councils and Fisheries Commissions
consist of a wide range of stock assessment, fishery monitoring, and
technical support activities for all five species of Pacific salmon in
the fisheries and rivers between Cape Suckling in Alaska to Cape Falcon
in Oregon. The States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and the
NMFS conduct a wide range of programs for salmon stock abundance
assessment, escapement enumeration, stock distribution, and fishery
catch and effort information. The information is used to establish
fishing seasons, harvest levels, and accountability to the provisions
of Treaty fishing regimes.
Prior to FY 2020, the base annual Treaty implementation funding
remained essentially flat since the inception of the Treaty in 1985. In
order to continue to fulfill the Federal international commitments
created by the Treaty, as costs and complexity increased over time, the
States had to augment Federal funding with other Federal and State
resources. However, alternative sources of funding have seen reductions
or, in some cases, have been eliminated. The increases for the last
several Federal fiscal years to implement the revised Annex Chapters
were a welcome change.
Negotiations to revise the provisions of the Annex Chapters to the
Treaty, except for the Fraser River Chapter, were successfully
completed in 2018. The revised provisions will last for 10 years. These
chapters contain the specifics for implementing the Treaty for each
species in each geographic area. The provisions for a revised Fraser
River Chapter were completed in 2019. The revised chapters represented
the combined efforts of the participants to ensure healthy salmon
populations. The current Annex Chapters require commitments to increase
efforts to improve upon current management strategies for numerous
salmon populations. The United States and Canada are entering
negotiations to revise the Annex Chapters to the Pacific Salmon Treaty
with the intent of continuing to provide for fishing opportunities on
healthy salmon populations, while conserving underescaped populations,
in the face of challenges in a changing environment.
Finally, it is important to consider that the value of the
commercial harvest of salmon subject to the Treaty and managed at
productive levels under the Treaty, supports the infrastructure of many
coastal and inland communities. The value of the commercial and
recreational fisheries, and the economic diversity they provide for
local communities throughout the Pacific Northwest and Alaska, is
immense. The Pacific Salmon Commission recently funded an economic
study of these fisheries and determined that this resource creates
thousands of jobs and is a multi-billion-dollar industry. The U.S.
Section estimates these fisheries support 26,700 full-time equivalent
jobs and generate $3.4 billion in economic value annually. The value of
these fish to the twenty-five Treaty Tribes in Washington, Oregon,
Idaho, and Alaska goes far beyond their monetary value, to the cultural
and religious lives of American Indian and Alaska Native peoples. A
significant monetary investment is focused on salmon due to the
listings of Pacific Northwest salmon populations under the Endangered
Species Act.
Given these resources, the U.S. Section will continue to utilize
the Pacific Salmon Commission process to develop recommendations that
help with the development and implementation of solutions to minimizing
impacts on listed stocks. We will continue to work towards the true
intent of the Treaty, and with your support, we will manage this shared
resource for mutual enhancements and benefits.
This concludes the statement of the U.S. Section of the Pacific
Salmon Commission submitted for consideration by your Committee. We
want to thank the Committee for the support given to us in the past.
Please let us know if we can supply additional information or respond
to any questions the Committee Members may have. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Population Association of America/Association of
Population Centers
Thank you, Chair Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran and other
distinguished members of the subcommittee, for this opportunity to
express support for the Census Bureau, National Science Foundation
(NSF), National Institute of Justice (NIJ), and Bureau of Justice
Statistics (BJS). These agencies are important to the Population
Association of America (PAA) and Association of Population Centers
(APC), because they provide direct and indirect support to population
scientists and the field of population, or demographic, research
overall. In FY 2025, we urge the subcommittee to recommend the
following funding levels for these agencies: Census Bureau, $2 billion;
NSF, $11.9 billion; NIJ, $60 million; and BJS, $75 million.
The PAA and APC are two affiliated organizations that together
represent over 3,000 social and behavioral scientists and the over 40
population research centers that receive Federal funding and conduct
research on the individual, societal, and environmental causes and
consequences of population change. Population scientists, including
demographers, economists, sociologists, epidemiologists, and
statisticians, conduct scientific and applied research, analyze
changing demographic and socio-economic trends, develop policy and
planning recommendations, and train undergraduate and graduate
students. Their research expertise covers a wide range of issues,
including adolescent health and development, aging, health disparities,
immigration and migration, marriage and divorce, education, social
networks, housing, retirement, and labor. They compete for funding from
the NSF and NIJ and rely on data produced by the Nation's statistical
agencies, including the Census Bureau and BJS, to conduct research and
research training activities.
the census bureau
The Census Bureau is the premier source of data regarding U.S.
demographic, socio-economic, and housing characteristics. While PAA/APC
members have diverse research expertise, they share a common need for
access to accurate, timely data about the Nation's changing socio-
economic and demographic characteristics that only the U.S. Census
Bureau can provide through its conduct of the decennial census,
American Community Survey (ACS), and a variety of other surveys and
programs.
As you know, the U.S. Census Bureau received $1.382 billion in the
final FY 2024 appropriations measure, an amount below both the agency's
FY 2023 enacted level and the President's FY 2024 request. We are more
than a third of the way through the lead up to the 2030 Census, which
means funding should be trending upwards. Census stakeholders are
concerned that the funding trajectory is moving in the wrong direction
if we want to ensure an accurate, inclusive, cost-efficient 2030
Census.
PAA and APC urge the subcommittee to provide the Census Bureau with
$2 billion in FY 2025 as recommended by The Census Project. In FY 2025,
Congress has a unique opportunity to initiate multi-year funding for
the Bureau, providing the agency with resources that it needs to not
only sustain and strengthen its mission, but also to recover from years
of postponed enhancements and pursue numerous necessary operational
improvements. The ambitious FY 2025 funding recommendation that census
stakeholders are supporting would enable the Bureau to purse
initiatives not only in the President's budget, but also additional
activities recommended by census stakeholders, including:
--American Community Survey.--The American Community Survey (ACS)
represents one of the most significant innovations in the
history of the Census Bureau. When launched in 2005 it replaced
the once-a-decade decennial ``long form'' with an annual survey
providing estimates for every community in the country every
year on measures of ancestry, citizenship, educational
attainment, income, language proficiency, migration,
disability, employment, housing characteristics, and more.
These data are extensively used by those in public, private,
and not-for-profit sectors to allocate funding, measure
shifting demographics, plan for local services, and to inform
investments by businesses large and small. Sent to roughly 3.5
million addresses annually, it is the largest household survey
that the Census Bureau administers.
Census stakeholders and data users believe the ACS needs an
immediate infusion of substantial funding to pursue other long
overdue enhancements to the survey. These enhancements include
increasing the survey's sample size, improving its non-response
follow up operations, addressing steadily declining response
rates, revising content, and making other methodological and
operational improvements. A 2022 independent report (revised
and reissued in 2023 and 2024) from The Census Project urges an
infusion of $100 to $300 million to protect the ACS from
further data quality deficiencies and take up a long list of
activities to ensure the survey is accurately capturing data
about the Nation's increasingly complex population and
households. PAA and APC support the report's recommendations
and urge the Committee to provide the Bureau with additional
funding to pursue necessary innovations to the survey's
content, operations, and data products.
--2030 Decennial Census Preparations.--The President's Budget
proposes $654 million, an increase of $29 million from FY 2023
enacted levels, to support 2030 Census preparations. FY 2025 is
a pivotal year, marking the midpoint in the decade-long
planning process for the 2030 Census. In FY 2025, the 2030
Census will complete its first major milestone, the selection
of an operational design. Further, important progress must be
made towards planning the 2026 Census Test. To ensure the 2030
Census is conducted in an inclusive, accurate, and cost-
effective manner, the Census Bureau needs robust funding now.
Funding shortfalls at this point in the last decade forced the
Bureau to scale back strategic field tests-a decision that may
have contributed to the less accurate counts of racial and
ethnic populations, rural areas, and young children in the 2020
Census. Investing in the 2030 Census now will allow the Bureau
to sustain essential capabilities and schedules and reduce the
risk of requiring unplanned, additional funding in the peak
planning years later in the decade. While the President's
request proposes an increase to support 2030 preparations, our
organizations urge the subcommittee to scrutinize the Bureau's
recommendation to determine if the funding level is sufficient
to fully support activities that the agency must pursue in FY
2025 to ensure the future success and cost-efficiency of the
2030 Census.
--Prioritizing the Survey of Income and Program Participation
(SIPP).--Policymakers, particularly in this volatile economy,
need high quality, accurate data to assess the impact of
government assistance programs on families and communities.
SIPP is designed to achieve that goal, yet its funding has
fluctuated routinely. In 2023, the Census Bureau announced its
intent to cut the SIPP sample size permanently by 34 percent,
alarming data users and stakeholders alike who believed this
action would degrade the reliability and utility of SIPP data
and impede their ability to make meaningful comparisons between
demographic or geographic subpopulations. Data users and
stakeholders argued that the Bureau should reverse course by
restoring the survey's sample size and tackling the other big
challenge facing the survey: declining response rates. PAA and
APC are pleased that the President's budget proposes additional
funding to restore the SIPP sample size. We urge the
subcommittee to ensure this funding emerges in the FY 2025 CJS
bill and to provide additional funding to that would enable the
Bureau to pursue other necessary innovations, such as improving
the accuracy of month-by-month data and creating an Internet
response option.
In sum, PAA and APC join other census stakeholders in urging the
subcommittee to provide the Census Bureau with $2 billion in FY 2025 to
not only fund initiatives outlined in the President's FY 2025 budget
request, but also to support additional activities that would benefit
the ACS, 2030 Census preparations, and SIPP.
national science foundation (nsf)
For over 75 years the mission of NSF has been to promote the
progress of science; to advance the Nation's health, prosperity, and
welfare; and to secure the National defense. NSF is the funding source
for about 27 percent of all federally supported basic research
conducted by America's colleges and universities, including basic
behavioral and social research. The NSF Directorate of Social,
Behavioral, and Economic (SBE) Sciences funds approximately 65 percent
of basic, university-based social and behavioral sciences research in
the Nation.
Understanding the implications of complex population dynamics is
vital to the agency's mission, and in particular the SBE Directorate,
which is the primary source of support for the population sciences
within the NSF. Within its Research Infrastructure in the Social and
Behavioral Science Program, the SBE Directorate funds critical large-
scale longitudinal surveys, such as the Panel Study of Income Dynamics
and General Social Survey, which inform pressing policy decisions and
provide empirical evidence to help policymakers formulate effective
decisions. The Directorate also participates in cross-cutting,
interdisciplinary initiatives of interest to population scientists,
such as the Confronting Hazards, Impacts, and Risks for a Resilient
Planet initiative and the Centers of Research Excellence in Science and
Technology program.
PAA and APC, as members of the Coalition for National Science
Funding (CNSF), are concerned that the FY24 level of funding for NSF
fell far below our Nation's competitiveness needs, leaving the agency
to contend with an almost 8 percent cut in funding as compared to FY
2023. We urge the subcommittee to restore strong support for the agency
and provide NSF with $11.9 billion in FY 2025. This amount, which is
approximately $1.7 billion above the President's FY 2025 request,
aligns with the FY 2024 authorization level mandated in the CHIPS and
Science Act of 2022 (Public Law 117-167).
The overall funding level we are recommending will enable the NSF
SBE Directorate to continue its support of social science surveys and a
robust portfolio of population research projects. Increased funding in
FY 2025 will also allow NSF to continue funding the most promising
grant applications and reduce the number of high caliber proposals that
are rejected solely for lack of sufficient funds.
bureau of justice statistics and national institute of justice
After years of declining budgets, PAA and APC are participating in
the Friends of Justice Research and Statistics coalition to raise
awareness about the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and National
Institute of Justice (NIJ). Both agencies are important sources of data
and funding for population scientists conducting research on topics
such as prisoner reentry, the social and environmental dynamics of
health and crime, and the effects of incarceration across the lifespan.
The coalition's recommendations, which PAA and APC support, would
provide BJS with $75 million and NIJ with $60 million in FY 2025.
Thank you for considering our requests and for supporting Federal
programs that benefit the population sciences under the subcommittee's
jurisdiction.
[This statement was submitted by Mary Jo H. Mitchell, Director,
Government and Public Affairs.]
______
Prepared Statement of John Snook, Chief Policy Officer Meadows Mental
Health Policy Institute
Thank you, Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee for this opportunity. My name is John Snook, and I am the
Chief Policy Officer for the Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute. I
am pleased to provide this testimony in support of robust funding for
Law Enforcement De-Escalation Training Act activities within the
Department of Justice's Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS)
office and the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne-
JAG) program.
Established in 2014, the independent, nonpartisan Meadows Mental
Health Policy Institute works at the intersection of policy and
programs to create equitable systemic changes so all people in Texas,
the Nation, and the world can obtain the health care they need. With
offices in Austin, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio, and projects in
every region of the State of Texas, the Institute has become Texas's
most trusted source for results-oriented information and analysis of
effective and efficient mental health policy and programs. The Meadows
Institute's Center for Justice and Health specifically is focused on
justice, safety, and wellbeing for people with complex behavioral
health conditions. One of the Center's areas of focus is transforming
the culture of crisis response. This effort seeks to develop, deploy,
evaluate and expand mental health emergency response to ensure that
mental health crises can be safely and swiftly identified at the point
of call, reducing the likelihood of arrest and incarceration.
Police are often on the front lines of behavioral health crises.
Studies estimate that as many as seven to 10 percent of law enforcement
encounters involve persons experiencing serious mental illnesses,\1\
while officers spend one-fifth of their time responding to and
transporting people with mental illness.\2\ Too often, those encounters
end in tragedy; people with mental illness are nearly 11 times more
likely to be injured \3\ and 16 times more likely to be killed in an
encounter with law enforcement than other members of the general
population.\4\
Navigating an encounter with a person experiencing a behavioral
health crisis can be challenging, but there are solutions that can
protect the safety of people in crisis, law enforcement officers, and
bystanders. De-escalation tactics; alternatives to use of force;
trainings on safely responding to mental, behavioral, and suicidal
crises; and engaging people successfully prior to the point of crisis
can fundamentally reshape crisis response and the ultimate outcomes.
The statutory definition of de-escalation comes directly from the
National Consensus Policy and Discussion Paper on Use of Force,\5\
which was developed by the FOP and IACP, and endorsed by nine other
major law enforcement organizations. As the 988 Suicide and Crisis
Lifeline approaches the 2-year mark since its nationwide launch, and
communities across the Nation embrace new strategies to respond to
mental health crises, it is more important than ever to ensure law
enforcement has access to the training and resources they need when
encountering persons experiencing mental illness and that those efforts
are well coordinated with behavioral health agencies.
The Law Enforcement De-Escalation Training Act (Public Law 117-325)
codified a collaborative approach to provide appropriate training for
law enforcement personnel. Specifically, the act:
--Requires the Department of Justice, through the Community Oriented
Policing Services (COPS) office, to collaborate with State and
local law enforcement agencies, professional law enforcement
organizations, law enforcement labor organizations, and mental
health organizations in the local community develop or identify
and distribute existing curricula
--Creates and authorizes funding for a new Law Enforcement Training
Program for de-escalation training, including scenario-based
exercises and evaluative assessments, through the Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program, and
distributes funding to the States on a formula basis
--Requires the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to evaluate program implementation
and impact, and identify possible improvements
The first phase of implementation following the bill's enactment in
December 2022 has been focused on developing and identifying curricula.
Beginning in FY2025, in addition to continuing to build the curricula,
funding can be distributed to States through Byrne-JAG to begin the
actual training of law enforcement personnel.
I respectfully request that the FY2025 bill include $10 million for
COPS to continue to identify best practices in de-escalation training,
develop appropriate training curricula, and to support nationwide
train-the-trainer trainings; and $40 million for Byrne-JAG to implement
the Law Enforcement Training program through the States.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to provide this feedback as
part of the subcommittee's FY2025 process, and thank you for your
service to our Nation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Stephanie Franz & Randy Borum [email protected] (2011) Crisis
Intervention Teams may prevent arrests of people with mental illnesses,
Police Practice and Research, 12:3, 265-272, DOI: 10.1080/
15614263.2010.497664.
\2\ Treatment Advocacy Center (2019). Road Runners. The Role and
Impact of Law Enforcement in Transporting Individuals with Severe
Mental Illness. A National Survey. Retrieved from
www.TreatmentAdvococayCenter.org/Road-Runners.
\3\ Laniyonu, A., Goff, P.A. Measuring disparities in police use of
force and injury among persons with serious mental illness. BMC
Psychiatry 21, 500 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-021-03510-w.
\4\ Fuller, D. A., Lamb, H. R., Biasotti, M., & Snook, J. (2015).
Overlooked in the undercounted: The role of mental illness in fatal law
enforcement encounters. Treatment Advocacy Center, 1-27.
\5\ https://www.theiacp.org/resources/document/national-consensus-
policy-and-discussion-paper-on-use-of-force.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Project On Government Oversight (POGO)
Dear Chair Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran:
The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) is a nonpartisan
independent watchdog that champions reforms to achieve a more
effective, ethical, and accountable Federal Government that safeguards
constitutional principles. POGO submits the enclosed requests for
funding and report language to be included in the fiscal year 2025
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies appropriations bill.
Thank you for considering these proposals to strengthen government
accountability and oversight.
requesting $2 billion to fund the u.s. census bureau in fy 2025
Appropriations Committee: Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies
Agency: U.S. Census Bureau
Type of Request: Funding request
Background:
In addition to congressional apportionment, data from the decennial
census helps direct trillions of dollars in Federal assistance to
States and communities.\1\ Those funds are used for building and
maintaining hospitals, roads, schools, and housing; supporting
veterans; feeding children and families; fostering economic
development; and more.\2\ The census needs to be adequately funded--
every year--to ensure an accurate and complete count of those served by
these investments. Fiscal year 2025 is the first year of the
development and integration phase of the 2030 Census, when initial
tests of field operations are conducted.\3\ These operations are
essential to a successful Census in 2030.
The Census Bureau's Post-Enumeration Survey found 14 States had
statistically significant errors in the statewide populations counted
for the 2020 decennial census.\4\ The implications of miscounts are
wide ranging. Undercounts can mean that States and communities receive
insufficient funding for Federal programs, and overcounts could result
in communities being misclassified and missing out on Federal programs
entirely.\5\
Critically, there is real overlap between the target communities
for many Federal programs and the populations that the Census Bureau
has historically found hard to count, which include people of color,
people in low-income communities, people experiencing homelessness,
immigrants, people with disabilities, and LGBTQ+ people.\6\ Adequately
funding the Census Bureau in the years between each decennial census
will allow it to ensure the count is accurate, reduce government waste,
and appropriately assist the communities Congress intends to support.
Proposed Funding:
To fulfill its mission and pursue other essential operational
innovations, the Project On Government Oversight recommends Congress
provide the U.S. Census Bureau with $2 billion in fiscal year 2025.
data collection on facial recognition technology use by state and local
law enforcement agencies
Appropriations Committee: Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies
Agency: Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance
Type of Request: Report Language
Background:
The proliferation of facial recognition technology alongside rapid
advancements in artificial intelligence raises concerns about the
disparate impact of the deployment and use of this technology,
particularly in historically marginalized communities around the
country. On May 25, 2022, President Biden signed Executive Order 14074
on ``Advancing Effective, Accountable Policing and Criminal Justice
Practices to Enhance Public Trust and Public Safety,'' which included
provisions requiring the Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland
Security, and Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP) to jointly develop a report assessing law enforcement agencies'
use of facial recognition technology, other technologies using
biometric information, predictive algorithms, data storage, and access
regarding such technologies.\7\ The scope of the forthcoming report is
anticipated to only address Federal law enforcement use of these
technologies. For a full examination of the use of facial recognition
technology, it is important to acquire data on the State and local law
enforcement agencies that use Department of Justice funds to deploy and
use the technology.
Proposed Report Language:
Not later than 180 days after the enactment of this act, the
Department of Justice shall provide a detailed public report on the use
of Department of Justice funds by State and local law enforcement
agencies to purchase and use facial recognition technology, as well as
contracts with entities that provide access to facial recognition
technology. The report shall also include a list of agencies that have
used Department of Justice funds on facial recognition technology. It
shall include the aggregate total of Department funds, as well as
individual total costs by State and local law enforcement agencies used
to purchase and use the technology as well as cost of any contracts
providing access to the technology.
death in custody reporting act implementation
Appropriations Committee: CJS
Agency: Department of Justice
Type of Request: Report Language
Background:
Congress reauthorized the Death in Custody Reporting Act (DCRA) in
2014, directing the Department of Justice to collect data on deaths
that occur in the custody of local, State, and Federal law enforcement
and corrections agencies.\8\ DCRA also instructed the Attorney General
to submit, within 2 years, a report to Congress analyzing that data and
proposing ways to reduce deaths in custody, and it allows the Attorney
General to reduce the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant allocations to
noncompliant States. The following language was enacted in the fiscal
year 2023 CJS explanatory statement:
Death in Custody Act [DCRA] Reporting.-Within 90 days of
enactment of this act, the Attorney General shall submit a
report outlining the Department's plans to implement the DCRA.
The report shall address the quality of the data the Department
has collected to date and consider ways to improve the quality
and transparency of future data collected, including
implementing DOJ's 2016 proposed collection plan. It shall also
include a timeline for the public release of the report
required by the DCRA.\9\
In September 2022, the Government Accountability Office found that
the Justice Department's fiscal year 2021 data on state deaths was
missing nearly 1,000 deaths that were reported in public sources, and
that over two-thirds of all records collected under DCRA were missing
required information.\10\ There has been no public update on data
quality and compliance since then. However, reporting has suggested
that deaths in custody are frequently miscategorized in ways that
obscure the true series of events leading to those deaths.\11\ It is
crucial for Congress to continue engaging with the Justice Department
to ensure that DCRA is fully complied with and yields accurate
information to facilitate efforts to prevent deaths in custody.
Proposed Report Language:
Death in Custody Act [DCRA] Reporting.-Within 90 days of enactment
of this act, the Attorney General shall submit a report outlining the
Department's progress in implementing the DCRA. The report shall
include an assessment of the compliance rate in fiscal years 2022 and
2023 for both the Bureau of Justice Statistics and Bureau of Justice
Assistance DCRA reporting programs. It shall also report on the
Department's efforts to ensure the accuracy of data submitted under the
DCRA, with particular attention to measures to ensure that causes of
death are properly categorized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sean Moulton, Project On Government Oversight, Dollars and
Demographics: How Census Data Shapes Federal Funding Distribution
(September 11, 2023), https://www.pogo.org/reports/dollars-and-
demographics-how-census-data-shapes-federal-funding-distribution.
\2\ U.S. Census Bureau, ``Census Bureau Data Guide More Than $2.8
Trillion in Federal Funding in Fiscal Year 2021,'' Press Release CB23-
102, June 14, 2023, https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/
2023/decennial-census-federal-funds-distribution.html; Moulton, Dollars
and Demographics: How Census Data Shapes Federal Funding Distribution,
[see note 1].
\3\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2020 CENSUS: Lessons
Learned from Planning and Implementing the 2020 Census Offer Insights
to Support 2030 Preparations, GAO-22-104357 (February 2022), 4, https:/
/www.gao.gov/assets/720/719018.pdf.
\4\ America Counts Staff, ``2020 Census Undercounts in Six States,
Overcounts in Eight,'' U.S. Census Bureau, May 19, 2022, https://
www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/05/2020-census-undercount-
overcount-rates-by-state.html.
\5\ Moulton, Dollars and Demographics: How Census Data Shapes
Federal Funding Distribution, [see note 1].
\6\ Moulton, Dollars and Demographics: How Census Data Shapes
Federal Funding Distribution, [see note 1].
\7\ Executive Order No. 14074, 87 Fed. Reg. 32945 (May 25, 2022),
https://www.
federalregister.gov/documents/2022/05/31/2022-11810/advancing-
effective-accountable-policing-and-criminal-justice-practices-to-
enhance-public-trust-and.
\8\ Death in Custody Reporting Act, Pub. L. 113-242, 128 Stat. 2860
(2014).
\9\ Senate Appropriations Committee, ``Explanatory Statement for
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill,
2023,'' 79, https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/
CJSFY23RPT.PDF.
\10\ Government Accountability Office, Deaths in Custody:
Additional Action Needed to Help Ensure Data Collected by DOJ are
Utilized, GAO-22-106033 (September 20, 2022), https://www.gao.gov/
assets/d22106033.pdf.
\11\ Tirzah Christopher, ``There is little scrutiny of 'natural'
deaths behind bars,'' NPR, January 2, 2024, https://www.npr.org/2024/
01/02/1219667393/there-is-little-scrutiny-of-natural-deaths-behind-
bars.
[This statement was submitted by Faith Williams, Director,
Effective and Accountable Government.]
______
Prepared Statement of Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS)
Program
For more than 50 years, law enforcement and public safety agencies
have turned to the Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS) Program
for secure, cost-effective, innovative, trusted, and evidence-based
services and resources. Some agencies, especially small, rural, and
Tribal agencies, cannot obtain the types of support and services
provided by RISS anywhere else. RISS helps connect officers across
jurisdictions to identity new investigative leads and links, solve
crimes, promote officer safety, and aid in successful case resolution.
The RISS services and resources are needed now more than ever as our
Nation witnesses an unprecedented and elevated threat from terrorism
with increased rhetoric and calls for attacks from foreign terrorist
organizations. At the same time, cities and towns across the country
are grappling with increased incidents of hate crimes, threats from the
border, violent gangs, human trafficking, the ongoing fentanyl crisis,
and the persistent threat from cybercriminals. RISS must be not only
sustained but expanded so RISS can continue to meet the ever-changing
needs of law enforcement and help safeguard our communities. RISS is a
proven resource for law enforcement. It is respectfully requested RISS
be funded in FY2025 at $55 million.
RISS is composed of six regional centers and the RISS Technology
Support Center (RTSC). RISS is locally managed by policy board members
consisting of police chiefs, sheriffs, and other law enforcement
leaders in each RISS Center's multistate region. An executive director
operates each RISS Center. The RISS Centers work regionally and
nationwide to respond to each region's unique criminal problems while
working together on a nationwide basis to strengthen and advance
criminal justice priorities. The RTSC maintains, operates, and enhances
the RISS secure infrastructure and applications.
RISS supports law enforcement in investigating all types of crime,
including violent and gun crimes, hate crimes, domestic terrorism,
human trafficking, cybercrime, drug trafficking, and other regional and
emerging priorities. RISS accomplishes this goal by focusing its
efforts on three priorities: Investigative Case Support; Secure
Information and Intelligence Sharing; and Officer Safety,
Deconfliction, and Law Enforcement Wellness. RISS receives hundreds of
shared success stories from agencies and officers showcasing how RISS
services and resources are used to solve crimes and keep officers safe.
To read real-life stories from each State, visit www.riss.net/Impact.
investigative case support
RISS provides professional, accurate, and effective products and
services that combat crime, help resolve criminal investigations, and
successfully prosecute offenders. RISS offers law enforcement agencies
and officers a full range of critical support services and resources
and provides expertise and technical assistance to the field. Below are
highlights of results and productivity in FY2023. RISS:
--Developed 30,961 analytical products, such as case-related maps,
link charts, and 2D and 3D crime scene diagrams.
--Loaned 2,713 pieces of specialized investigative equipment, such as
cameras, recorders, and other devices, to agencies, including
small and rural agencies.
--Sponsored or co-sponsored 1,574 training opportunities and helped
train 65,640 individuals.
--Responded to 61,205 requests for research and technical assistance,
which helped identify suspect addresses, monikers, criminal
associates, and other investigative information.
--Provided opportunities to share information with more than 10,200
law enforcement agencies and more than 137,000 authorized law
enforcement personnel.
--Provided one-on-one support through the RISS field services staff
and field-based solutions.
--Developed law enforcement-sensitive publications and briefings.
Each year, agencies and officers report that they were able to
seize millions of dollars and remove dangerous contraband from the
streets using RISS services and resources. In FY2023, law enforcement
agencies reported that by using RISS services, their officers seized
more than $59 million in narcotics, property, and currency. In
addition, there were more than 4.5 million inquiries to RISS resources
with more than 861,300 hits.
secure information and intelligence sharing
RISS provides law enforcement and the criminal justice community
with an unprecedented level of collaboration among officers and
agencies while ensuring that privacy and civil liberties are protected.
RISS prioritizes security, adheres to nationally recognized standards,
and constantly ensures that its assets are protected.
The RISS Secure Cloud (RISSNET) connects systems, provides
bidirectional information sharing, and offers a single search of
connected systems. RISSNET provides access to hundreds of resources and
millions of records. Many of these systems are owned and operated by
RISS partners who use RISSNET to securely share information with a
broader and vetted law enforcement community. RISS has also developed
and maintains resources accessible via RISSNET, including the
following:
--RISS Criminal Intelligence Database (RISSIntel)-a modern, user-
inspired, and flexible system which provides a real-time online
federated search of more than 60 systems containing millions of
records.
--RISS Money Counter Network (RISS MCN)-stores currency serial
numbers and compares them to currency submitted by officers in
previous cases via a secure RISS-designed application.
--RISS Property and Recovery Tracking System (RISSProp)-houses pawn,
secondhand, and other shop transactions and helps agencies
identify and return stolen property.
--RISSLeads Investigative Website-generates investigative leads,
enables secure collaboration, and facilitates
multijurisdictional information sharing.
--RISS Master Telephone Index (RISS MTI)-compares and matches
telephone numbers in law enforcement investigations.
--RISS Drug Pricing Reference Guide-enables officers to search for
comparable prices on narcotics and serves as a price guide when
assessing the value of seizures and contraband.
officer safety, deconfliction, and law enforcement wellness
Officer safety, deconfliction, and law enforcement wellness are
cornerstone priorities for the RISS Program. Event deconfliction is an
essential component of agency operations as it protects law enforcement
officers and citizens, supports operational integrity, strengthens
information sharing, reduces risk and liability, and enhances
investigative efforts. Officers involved in high-risk operations can
enhance their personal safety and the safety of those around them by
using an event deconfliction system. Each day, law enforcement officers
face new and emerging threats that not only challenge their physical
well-being but also their mental wellness. RISS provides resources and
training to enhance officer safety and law enforcement wellness.
The RISS Officer Safety Event Deconfliction System (RISSafe)
maintains data on planned law enforcement investigative events
submitted for inclusion to identify and alert affected agencies or
officers of potential conflicts. RISSafe is used in conjunction with
mapping software to verify data on event locations when an event is
entered into the system. A conflict results when certain elements are
matched between two or more events. Immediate notification is then made
to the affected agencies or personnel regarding the identified
conflict. Since the inception of RISSafe, more than 2.9 million
operations have been entered, resulting in more than 581,550 identified
conflicts. Without identifying these conflicts, officers may have
interfered with another agency's or officer's investigation, or
officers or citizens may have been unintentionally hurt or killed.
RISSafe is accessible on a 24/7/365 basis and is available at no cost
to all law enforcement agencies. Currently, 29 RISSafe Watch Centers
are operational, 23 of which are operated by organizations other than
RISS.
The RISS Officer Safety and Wellness Website provides secure access
to vetted, trusted information and materials on topics, including armed
and dangerous individuals and situations, concealments, officer safety
videos, law enforcement wellness, and training.
making progress
Below are highlights of specific and unique RISS accomplishments in
FY2023 that continued moving RISS forward in its three focus areas.
--Continued to advance the RISSIntel features and functionality and
connected additional partner systems.
--Expanded the number of available RISSNET resources to more than
300, most of which are databases or systems owned by partner
entities that use the RISSNET secure platform.
--Through the critical resources available via RISSNETand other RISS
resources, more than 78.3 million records are available to
authorized users.
--RISSProp, which contains more than 28 million records, continued to
help officers solve burglaries, home invasion robberies,
organized retail crime, and other crimes while identifying and
recovering stolen items. Since its inception, RISSProp has
helped officers recover more than $13.9 million in property.
--The RISS MCN continued to help officers deconflict and manage
information about money used in criminal activities. More than
571 agencies in 47 States (plus Guam) use MCN.
--The RISS Drug Pricing Reference Guide continued to help officers
assess the value of seizures and contraband and identify trends
in the drug market.
--Continued to develop School Action Response Plans, which contain
data, photographs, and floor plans critical for officers to
effectively navigate an active shooter or other situation.
--Supported Federal efforts and nationwide partnerships to expand
information sharing and available resources to law enforcement.
--Completed the transition of the RISS Collaboration Websites, the
RISSLeads Investigative Website, and the RISS Officer Safety
and Wellness Website to a new platform that provides authorized
users advanced information sharing capabilities and enhanced
collaboration abilities.
--Launched an effort to develop a RISS mobile application and engaged
subject-matter experts in the field to help identify needs and
develop a mobile strategy.
riss fy2025 needs and proposed activities
Funding will support the six regional RISS Centers, including
current operations and the technology component, as well as the
following efforts:
Investigative Case Services
--Provide additional investigative support for violent and gun
crimes, extremist activities, human trafficking, hate crimes,
narcotics trafficking, cybercrimes, and other emerging crimes.
--Invest in software, applications, and other resources to support
analytical services, including audio/video clarification and
digital forensics.
--Replace and obtain new specialized equipment.
--Develop, promote, and deliver trainings and other educational
resources, including regional and nationwide conferences in the
areas of human trafficking, narcotics, and homicide.
--Expand the development and distribution of School Action Response
Plans and expand support for organized retail crime
investigations and initiatives.
Information and Intelligence Sharing Solutions
--Expand and further strengthen authentication and security
protocols, including multilayered approaches and standards-
based solutions.
--Integrate RISS resources to expand deconfliction capabilities,
streamline officer access to RISS resources, and enhance
resource accessibility, such as developing mobile applications.
--Onboard and connect additional systems to RISSIntel and continue to
educate partners on its features and functionality.
--Expand RISSProp throughout the RISS Center regions.
--Increase the number of agencies utilizing the RISS MCN.
Officer Safety and Wellness Efforts, Including RISSafe
--Enhance and further expand RISSafe and the RISS Officer Safety and
Wellness Website.
--Develop focused campaigns to educate officers and leaders on the
critical importance of deconfliction, officer safety, and law
enforcement wellness.
--Work with deconfliction partners to enable target deconfliction
capabilities.
RISS provides critical investigative services, resources,
information and intelligence, officer safety, training, and more to law
enforcement. RISS has continued to be a force multiplier for half a
century, helping law enforcement agencies save time and money as they
protect and serve our Nation's citizens and communities. RISS is
grateful for the opportunity to provide this testimony at your request
and appreciates your ongoing support. For additional information, visit
www.riss.net.
[This statement was submitted by David Hall, Chair.]
______
Prepared Statement of Sandy Hook Promise
I would like to begin by thanking Chairwoman Shaheen, Ranking
Member Moran, and the members of the Commerce, Justice, Science, and
Related Agencies subcommittee for the opportunity to submit testimony.
I am grateful for the subcommittee's continued bipartisan and
longstanding support for children's safety in and outside of school.
Sandy Hook Promise's (SHP) mission is to educate and empower youth and
adults to prevent violence in their schools, homes, and communities. In
Fiscal Year 2025, we are supportive of the following requests in the
CJS bill that will help support and protect the children of our Nation.
We support increased funding for the Student, Teachers, and Officers
Preventing (STOP) School Violence program and request $86 million for
the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and $55 million for Community
Oriented Policing Solutions (COPS) to reflect increased demand for
school safety solutions. Further, we support $200 million for the
Department of Justice's (DOJ's) Community Violence Intervention and
Prevention Initiative (CVIPI). Each of these programs has a role to
play in helping to keep kids safe at home, at school, and in their
communities.
I am submitting this request on behalf of Sandy Hook Promise, an
organization of which I am a co-founder. On December 14, 2012, the
youngest of my three children, my sweet little Daniel, was murdered in
his first-grade classroom at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Following
the shooting, I began working with other family members whose loved
ones were killed that day to find a way to prevent others from
experiencing the senseless, horrific death of their child due to gun
violence. The result was Sandy Hook Promise, a national nonprofit
organization dedicated to honoring all victims of violence by turning
our tragedy into a moment of transformation. By empowering youth to
``know the signs'' and uniting all people who value the protection of
children, we can take meaningful action in schools, homes, and
communities to prevent violence and stop the tragic loss of life.
To date, over 22 million youth and adults have participated in our
life saving Know the Signs programs. As of April 2024, Sandy Hook
Promise's National Crisis Center, has saved more than 653 lives and
prevented 16 school shootings.\1\ We work every day to ensure that our
Crisis Center responds to messages from concerned students and connects
those students in crisis or at risk with help. Students must have
resources and training to ensure that when they observe warning signs,
they can be upstanders and receive help from a trusted adult.
Millions of acts of youth violence, including suicide, threats,
bullying, and homicide occur every year, affecting all urban, suburban,
and rural schools. In 2021, 9 percent of high school students reported
not attending school because of safety concerns at least once in the
previous month.\2\ Further, an August 2023 poll found that 38 percent
of parents fear for a child's physical safety at school and 14 percent
of parents say a child has expressed safety concerns to them.\3\ For
students to learn and grow, they need safe, inclusive, and proactive
steps towards improving their physical and mental wellbeing.
The rates of suicide and instances of poor mental health among
young people continue to be of concern too. In just the past year 22%
of high school students seriously considered attempting suicide--18% of
students made a suicide plan, and 10% of high school students attempted
suicide.\4\ These rates continue to underscore the need for programs
designed to prevent suicide and violence like those funded by the STOP
School Violence grant program to ensure resources are available for
school personnel and students.
The STOP School Violence Act was signed into law in 2018 following
the tragedy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland,
Florida. Sandy Hook Promise worked with bipartisan members of Congress
to craft this legislation based on the research and lessons learned
following the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary that took my son,
Daniel. Ensuring strong funding for the STOP School Violence Act
continues to be Sandy Hook Promise's priority to honor our commitment
to students, teachers, parents, and communities across the Nation to
help prevent school shootings and keep kids safe. The continuation of
bipartisan support and deep investments in the STOP School Violence Act
is a testament to Congress' dedication to children's safety at school.
Research shows that youth often display warning signs before
harming themselves or others. In fact, 75 percent of school shooters
and 70 percent of youth who complete suicide told someone of their
plans or gave another warning sign.\5\ Students, teachers, and school
staff need tools and trainings to empower them know how to reach out
for help when concerned about violence toward themselves or others.
Increased funding for STOP School Violence grants will help additional
States, school districts and Tribal organizations bring evidence-based
safety programs and strategies to schools on topics including suicide,
bullying, and violence prevention. In addition to the funding made
available through the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, for Fiscal Year
2025, we support $86 million for BJA and $55 million for COPS for STOP
School Violence Act grants. We also support the following report
language as it relates to the STOP School Violence Act to be included
in the FY 2025 CJS report:
STOP School Violence Act--The recommendation provides a total
of $201,000,000 for the STOP School Violence Act (Division S,
title V of Public Law 115-141) grant program for the fiscal
year 2025. Of this amount, $60,000,000 is derived from the
Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, and funding of $141,000,000
is provided for in this act. Of the amount provided in this
act, $86,000,000 is provided to the Bureau of Justice
Assistance (BJA) for evidence-based school safety programs
outlined in the act and $55,000,000 is provided to the
Community Oriented Policing Service (COPS) program. The
Committee directs BJA to prioritize evidence-based programming
to train students and school personnel on the warning signs of
interpersonal violence and suicide, to prevent the root causes
of student violence, and to deliver mental health crisis
intervention, as permitted under the act. The Committee directs
the offices to work with other Federal agencies to notify
States, localities, Tribes, and school districts of funding
availability upon release, increase training and technical
assistance for school district applicants, and provide
microgrants for school districts, including rural, Tribal, and
low-resourced schools. The Committee directs BJA to prioritize
applicants from rural and low-resourced school districts and
applicants incorporating crisis centers and evidence-based
trainings for students and staff within their anonymous
reporting systems.
Through the COPS STOP School Violence Act program, school
districts should use funds for trainings for local law
enforcement on best practices to protect the mental and
emotional health of students in high-risk communities.
Additionally, both BJA and COPS should encourage applications
that prioritize the use of mental health professionals and
resources in their school safety plans.
Children deserve to feel safe at home, at school, and in their
communities. Some students feel safer in the school building than they
do outside of school. Violence continues to be a leading cause of death
and nonfatal injuries among adolescents and young adults with over half
of US homicides occurring among people ages 15-34 in 2020.\6\ We must
invest in our communities to keep children safe from gun violence.
Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative grants at the
DOJ should prioritize funding for areas with higher rates of gun
violence and ensure grants allow for participation of community-based
entities. These grants should help to fund strategies that are informed
by public health models and provide culturally competent, trauma-
responsive services to individuals and communities most impacted by gun
violence. In Fiscal year 2025, we support $200 million for the DOJ's
Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative.
Violence does not exist in a vacuum and investments to keep kids
safe at school and in their communities will not only improve
children's lives but save them. We know that funding for school safety
resources and programs and funding for community violence intervention
work have key roles in supporting child safety and preventing gun
deaths. We must commit resources to keeping our schools safe from
shootings, increase suicide prevention and mental health programming,
and invest in community violence intervention work to help stop this
leading cause of death of children. Thank you to the subcommittee for
its continued bipartisan commitment to keeping kids safe and for the
opportunity to submit testimony today on this critical issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.sandyhookpromise.org/who-we-are/our-impact/.
\2\ https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/
yrbs_data_summary_and_trends.htm.
\3\ Gallup Inc. (2023) ``School Parent Safety Concerns Remain High
in the U.S.'' .
\4\ ``Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS).'' Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, April 27, 2023. https://
www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/.
\5\ United States Secret Service. Lina, Alathari. (2020) MASS
ATTACKS in PUBLIC SPACES -2019.
\6\ https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/communityviolence/
index.html.
[This statement was submitted by Mark Barden, Co-Founder and CEO.]
______
Prepared Statement of Sea Grant Association
The Sea Grant Association (SGA) recommends Congress appropriate
$163.7 million to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
Sea Grant Program (Sea Grant) in FY 2025, which includes $145.7 million
for the National Sea Grant College Program and $18 million for the Sea
Grant Aquaculture Research Program. Sea Grant is funded through
appropriations to NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research in
the Operations, Research, and Facilities account.
Sea Grant consists of a network of 34 university-based programs and
has supported coastal and Great Lakes communities through research,
extension, and education for nearly 60 years. SGA is a nonprofit
association made up of the academic institutions participating in the
program dedicated to furthering Sea Grant's vision, mission, and goals
and advocates for greater understanding, use, and conservation of
marine, coastal, and Great Lakes resources.
The SGA recognizes the caps put in place by the Fiscal
Responsibility Act (Public Law 118-5) only increase Federal
discretionary spending by less than one percent in FY 2025.
Unfortunately, local costs and requests for assitance and expertise are
increasing, making it clear that Sea Grant needs more funding to assist
the local communities each program supports across the Nation. The SGA
recommendation of $145.7 million for the Sea Grant College Program is
based on the $111.7 million authorized in law by the National Sea Grant
College Program Amendments Act of 2020 (Public Law 116-221) for FY 2025
and $34 million to provide each program with an additional $1 million
to invest directly in their coastal communities and economies. The SGA
recommendation of $18 million for Sea Grant Aquaculture Research would
allow the program to continue the development of sustainable marine and
Great Lakes region aquaculture businesses to create or sustain
aquaculture jobs and to assure food security for communities across the
Nation.
During all times--especially those of fiscal constraint--it is
critical that Congress be good stewards of taxpayer dollars. The Sea
Grant Program provides a remarkable return on the public's investment,
leveraging more than $3 for every $1 appropriated by Congress and
investing those funds directly in support of local needs.
The SGA thanks the committee for their steadfast, bipartisan
support of the Sea Grant College Program and the Sea Grant Aquaculture
Research Program each fiscal year. We were disappointed to see the
president's budget request for FY 2025 proposed a 24.5% overall cut
(10% reduction for the Sea Grant College Program and the termination of
the Sea Grant Aquaculture Research Program). Such cuts would have
deleterious impacts on coastal communities around the country. The
proposed cuts are inconsistent with the demand for Sea Grant to expand
their community-based work in four areas: healthy coastal ecosystems,
sustainable fisheries and aquaculture, resilient coastal communities
and economies, and environmental literacy and workforce development, as
described below.
justification for fy 2025 request for sea grant college program
The 2022 Federal appropriation of $89.5 million was leveraged with
non-federal funds by Sea Grant's 34 university grant-based programs and
resulted in $802.3 million in economic benefits.
Additionally, in 2022, Sea Grant created or sustained 9,569 jobs
and 1,601 small businesses, helped restore or protect over 2.1 million
acres of habitat, engaged 970,976 people in education, and helped
24,288 seafood industry personnel adopt responsible fishery practices.
Increasing the capacity of each program in the Sea Grant network
will provide a measurable difference in the program's already
significant impact and will enable more work to address constituent
priorities. As an on-the-ground partner, Sea Grant works directly with
constituents and local businesses to ensure a sustainable economy and
environment on our coasts. Examples of this work include:
--Collaborating with partners to investigate nearshore water quality
and reef health after the devasting Maui wildfire that
destroyed more than 2,200 structures (Hawai`i Sea Grant)
--Supporting regional lobster research and funding research to
improve predictive capacity for coastal storm erosion impacts,
to identify ecosystem services and climate vulnerabilities of
salt marsh ecosystems, to support adaptation in marine
fisheries and fisheries management in a changing ecosystem, and
to understand composition and transport of forever chemicals
(PFAS) in Maine estuaries (Maine Sea Grant)
--Assisting with planning and programming the Aldo Leopold Festival,
which generates over $50,000 in direct spending in Michigan's
Upper Peninsula, which is significant economic activity for the
region's small communities (Michigan Sea Grant)
--Partnering to create the DE-PLANS hub, which helps inform planning,
outreach, and services for the growing and underserved older
adult population in Delaware (Delaware Sea Grant)
--Creating a curriculum and providing funds to help middle school
students construct remotely operated vehicles as part of a
science class project (Alaska Sea Grant)
--Jointly funding research to calculate how long it may take roads
and bridges to reopen after an earthquake and tsunami (Oregon
Sea Grant)
--Spearheading the Fisheries & Seafood Leadership Program to develop
new leaders in the fishing and seafood industry (Louisiana Sea
Grant)
--Supporting the Coastal Storm Modeling System to help planners,
managers, and resident understand the impacts of coastal
flooding to county property, homes, and businesses (Washington
Sea Grant)
--Awarding Federal funding for research on water quality restoration
tools, algal bloom monitoring, urban community access to
coastal spaces, living shorelines, and soft-shell clam
aquaculture (Maryland Sea Grant)
justification for fy 2025 request for sea grant aquaculture
research program
From 2018-2022, Sea Grant's average annual Federal investment of
$16.3 million in aquaculture resulted in a yearly average of $69.6
million economic impact, 572 businesses created or sustained, 1,147
jobs created or sustained, and 71 publications.
Sea Grant responds to requests from aquaculture producers, resource
managers, scientists, and consumers and helps ensure the safety and
quality of sustainably cultured seafood products by conducting research
and providing technical assistance and outreach. Sea Grant also
provides aquaculture literacy programs for the next generation of
farmed seafood producers through K-12, university and technical
training, and education programs.
An increase for the Sea Grant Aquaculture Research Program would
increase research, education, and extension activities that train a
skilled work force and support the development of new aquaculture
technologies. Examples of this work include:
--Funding a research project to look at the feasibility of rearing
sea urchins to diversify the State's aquaculture and to
establish a network that could sustain a regional sea urchin
aquaculture industry (Rhode Island Sea Grant)
--Facilitating shellfish industry economic resilience from the
devastating effects of the pandemic by purchasing portable
refrigerated storage units to enable eight companies to adapt
their business plans to include direct marketing of clams,
oysters and kelp to consumers (Connecticut Sea Grant)
--Working through an alliance to provide curriculum and training the
helps seafood processors and importers meet Federal food safety
regulations (Florida Sea Grant)
--Holding an Oyster Farming Resilience Index Workshop Series, based
on needs identified by oyster farmers, to provide resources to
improve resilience for the oyster farming industry
(Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium)
--Working with partners to document the potential benefits of
increasing shellfish mariculture production in the state (South
Carolina Sea Grant)
community partnerships
Sea Grant supports local communities and has long-standing, trusted
relationships with tens of thousands of partners in the public and
private sectors. These partnerships--with industry and businesses,
Tribal and Indigenous communities, nonprofits and academic
institutions--help strengthen communities by advancing common
priorities related to coastal and marine issues. These partners rely on
the services their local Sea Grant provides; the owner of a woman-owned
business, speaking at a recent congressional briefing said, ``when my
business encounters a problem, my first call is to [our State's Sea
Grant Director].''
concluding thoughts
The SGA's FY 2025 request for the Sea Grant College Program and Sea
Grant Aquaculture Research reflects coastal communities? increasing
requests for the services Sea Grant provides. Leveraging nearly $3 for
every $1 appropriated by Congress, Sea Grant remains a good steward of
taxpayer funds and clearly shows their value to partners and the
broader communities they support.
The SGA is grateful for the long-standing consistent support this
subcommittee has provided the program. Our ``on the ground'' efforts in
coastal resilience, sustainable aquaculture, and other key Sea Grant
objectives could not happen without the guidance and support this
subcommittee and the rest of the Congress has provided over the years.
Thank you again for your time and for your consideration of this
request. SGA would be happy to answer any questions or provide any
additional information.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Darren Lerner, Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Summary.--This written testimony is submitted on behalf of the
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) to ask you to
support the National Science Foundation (NSF) in fiscal year (FY) 2025
by providing NSF with at least $11.9 billion. We urge you to reverse
the cuts to NSF in FY 2024 and dramatically scale emerging technology
investments to meet our National security needs. This includes strong
funding for the Research and Related Activities Account (R&RA) that
supports key applied mathematics and computational science programs in
the Division of Mathematical Sciences and the Office of Advanced
Cyberinfrastructure as well as the Directorate for STEM Education (EDU)
that addresses fundamental challenges in mathematics and STEM education
and workforce development.
Full Statement.--On behalf of SIAM, we submit this written
testimony for the record to the subcommittee on Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations of the
U.S. Senate.
SIAM has over 14,000 members, including applied and computational
mathematicians, computer scientists, numerical analysts, engineers,
statisticians, and mathematics educators. They work in industrial and
service organizations, universities, colleges, and government agencies
and laboratories all over the world. In addition, SIAM has almost 500
institutional members, including colleges, universities, corporations,
and research organizations. SIAM members come from many different
disciplines but have a common interest in applying mathematics in
partnership with computational science to solve real-world problems,
which affect national security and industrial competitiveness.
First, we would like to emphasize that SIAM appreciates your
Committee's recognition of the critical role of the National Science
Foundation (NSF) and its support for mathematics, science, and
engineering in enabling a strong U.S. economy, workforce, and society.
We understand the difficult fiscal environment that we all face.
However, we are deeply concerned by the cuts to NSF in FY 2024, which
will harm NSF's critical research, infrastructure, and workforce
investments and damage our research ecosystem.
Today, we submit this testimony to ask you to reconfirm Congresses
support of NSF in FY 2025 and beyond. In particular, we join with the
research and higher education community and request that you provide
NSF with at least $11.9 billion in funding for FY 2025. NSF needs bold
growth to protect U.S. competitiveness as countries such as China are
rapidly increasing their science and engineering investments. At least
$11.9 billion in funding is needed to ensure NSF can meet Congress's
vision for the agency, launch new programs in priority areas such as
Regional Innovation Engines to transform regional economies in critical
technology areas, invest in revolutionary breakthroughs to address
resilience and catalyze clean energy innovation, and provide
sustainable growth to the core research and education activities
undergirding our science and technology ecosystem.
As we are reminded every day, the Nation's health, economic
strength, national security, and welfare are being challenged in
profound and unprecedented ways. Many of these challenges are fueled by
gaps in our understanding of complex systems such as biologic
processes, the energy grid, cyberspace, terrorist networks, or the
human brain. Mathematics and computational science play a foundational
and cross-cutting role in understanding these systems through advanced
modeling and simulation, developing techniques essential to designing
new breakthrough technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), and
providing new tools for managing resources and logistics. Progress in
computational sciences and applied mathematics also underpins advances
across an array of fields and challenges in computing, materials,
biology, engineering, and other areas.
national science foundation
NSF serves a unique and critical function supporting all areas of
science and engineering to further innovation and seed the knowledge
and technologies for a strong future America. NSF provides essential
Federal support for applied mathematics and computational science,
including more than 57 percent of all Federal support for basic
academic research in the mathematical sciences. Of particular
importance to SIAM, NSF funding supports the development of new
mathematical models and computational algorithms, which are critical to
making substantial advances in such fields as neuroscience, energy
technologies, genomics, and nanotechnology. In addition, new techniques
developed in mathematics and computing research often have direct
application in industry. Modern life as we know it--from search engines
like Google to the design of modern aircraft, from financial markets to
medical imaging--would not be possible without the techniques developed
by mathematicians and computational scientists using NSF funding. NSF
also supports mathematics education at all levels, ensuring that the
next generation of the U.S. workforce is appropriately trained to
participate in cutting-edge technological sectors and that students are
attracted to careers in mathematics and computing.
SIAM supports NSF's efforts to expand its mission towards
transforming innovation ecosystems with the Directorate for Technology,
Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP) and encourages Congress to give NSF
the resources it needs, in line with the amounts authorized in the
CHIPS and Science Act, to fully carry out programs such as Regional
Innovation Engines and enabling support for NSF priorities in
artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies, resilience,
and broadening participation. Even before the launch of the new TIP
directorate and other new programs authorized in CHIPS and Science, NSF
was unable to fund more than $2 billion worth of research proposals
rated ``very good or higher'' each fiscal year.
It is imperative that the rest of NSF see sustainable growth, such
as programs funded by the Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) and
the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC), which have stagnated
in recent years and whose foundational investments underpin advances
across many science and engineering challenges. New efforts such as the
National AI Research Resource (NAIRR) can only be successful when built
on a strong foundational research enterprise that supports research,
education, and infrastructure to sustain our science and technology
ecosystem.
SIAM urges strong investment in the Research and Related Activities
account (RRA) to enable robust funding for the Division of Mathematical
Sciences (DMS), the Office of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC), and
other core programs and crosscutting initiatives for essential
mathematical and computational science research, workforce development
programs, and early career researcher support.
nsf division of mathematical sciences
The NSF Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) in the Directorate
for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) provides core support for
all mathematical sciences. DMS also funds national mathematical science
research institutes; infrastructure, including workshops, conferences,
and equipment; and postdoctoral, graduate, and undergraduate training.
The activities supported by DMS and performed by SIAM members, such as
modeling, analysis, algorithms, and simulation, underpin advancements
across science and engineering and provide new ways of obtaining
insight into the nature of complex phenomena, such as the power grid,
software for national security applications, and the human body.
Investment in DMS is critical because of the foundational and
cross-cutting role that mathematics and computational science play in
sustaining the Nation's economic competitiveness and national security,
and in making substantial advances on societal challenges such as
energy and public health. NSF, with its support of a broad range of
scientific areas, plays an important role in bringing U.S. expertise
together in interdisciplinary initiatives that bear on these
challenges. DMS has taken a leadership role in promoting partnerships
with other agencies and foundations to leverage Federal funding for
maximum impact. In addition, DMS funding supports a broad array of
activities in artificial intelligence, digital twins, modeling,
analysis, algorithms, and simulation that underpin advancements across
science and engineering. Agencies such as the Department of Defense
(DOD) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) depend on the NSF-
supported applied math and computational sciences ecosystem to fulfill
their missions as they build on NSF-funded modeling, algorithm, and
simulation breakthroughs and leverage the workforce trained using NSF
support. Both agencies and foundations partner with NSF thereby
leveraging Federal funding for maximum impact, such as new programs
recently launched in Digital Twins with the Air Force, NIH Office of
the Director, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
nsf office of advanced cyberinfrastructure
Work in applied mathematics and computational science is critical
to enabling effective use of the rapid advances in information
technology and cyberinfrastructure. Programs in the NSF Office of
Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (OAC) in the Directorate for Computer and
Information Science and Engineering (CISE) focus on providing research
communities access to advanced computing capabilities to convert data
to knowledge and increase our understanding through computational
simulation and prediction. SIAM endorses OAC's effort to create the
NAIRR pilot as well as OAC's broader role advancing high performance
computing to meet critical national security needs, fully leverage
computing technology for economic competitiveness and scientific
discovery, and positioning the U.S. for sustained technical leadership.
The full NAIRR has potential to transform and dramatically scale AI
innovations, but must be paired with robust research and workforce
funding to reach its full impact and enable a robust ecosystem.
supporting the pipeline of mathematicians and scientists
SIAM supports EDU and its programs like Improving Undergraduate
STEM Education (IUSE) and Graduate Research Fellowships, which are key
to advancing STEM professional development and developing the next
generation of mathematicians, scientists, and engineers. EDU also plays
a critical role developing a STEM literate citizenry through its K-12
focused investments. SIAM notes that mathematical education is
foundational to STEM learning across disciplines, and NSF should
continue to fund development of mathematical and computational skills.
SIAM supports CAREER awards and other workforce programs crucial to
early career faculty professional development.
conclusion
We would like to thank you again for your support of NSF that
enables the research and education communities it supports, including
thousands of SIAM members, to undertake activities that contribute to
U.S. health, security, and economic strength. Congress needs to revers
ethe FY 2024 cuts and provide NSF with sustained growth to maintain our
competitive edge in science and technology. We ask that you provide
robust support of these critical programs in FY 2025 and put us on
track to dramatically scale emerging technology investments as
bipartisan majorities have emphasized are critical to our National
security and competitiveness. We appreciate the opportunity to provide
testimony to the Committee on behalf of SIAM.
[This statement was submitted by Alejandro Aceves, Vice President
for Science Policy, and Suzanne L. Weekes, Executive Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology
On behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology (SIOP), we are pleased to provide this written testimony to
the House Appropriations subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and
Science, and Related Agencies for the official record. In this
testimony, SIOP urges the subcommittee to consider five requests:
--Provide the requested amount of $11.9 billion for the National
Science Foundation (NSF), including strong support for the
Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE)
and the Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and
Partnerships (TIP);
--Provide robust support for NSF graduate education programs,
including industry career exploration, as outlined in the CHIPS
and Science Act of 2022;
--Encourage NSF to explore next steps for the agency's Future of Work
at the Human-Technology Frontier initiative;
--Invest in research at NSF on workforce participation of individuals
with disabilities and neurodiverse individuals; and
--Support workforce evaluation and technical assistance at the
Department of Justice's Community Oriented Policing Services
Office.
Appropriations Support for NSF.--SIOP is an international community
of scientists, academics, practitioners, consultants, and students of
industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology, which examines how to
enhance human well-being and performance in organizational and work
settings. I-O psychologists are helping to address critical challenges
such as implementation of AI-based systems in workplaces, rapid scaling
of the workforce key technology areas, recruitment and training for law
enforcement, and burnout among healthcare professionals.
Through SBE, NSF supports basic research to develop a scientific
evidence base for improving the performance, effectiveness, management,
and development of organizations and the workforce. The findings
developed through this Federal investment enhance business practices,
policymaking, and collaboration. SBE has been highly responsive to the
transformative events of the past few years. For instance, NSF SBE has
provided the foundation for I-O psychologists to understand how
technologies like AI affect American workers and ensure the workforce
is prepared to fully realize the possibility of AI while mitigating
potential harms. Other applications of I-O psychology include
transitioning veterans and service members to civilian jobs,
identifying individuals with capacity for high-stress jobs in law
enforcement or cybersecurity, and developing preventative sexual
harassment workforce interventions, among many others.
SIOP applauds NSF and Congress for their increased investments in
the TIP Directorate. Continued integration of social and behavioral
sciences into the TIP Directorate's activities will ensure that NSF and
the Nation remains on the cutting edge of scientific advancement.
Given NSF's critical role in supporting fundamental research and
education across science and engineering disciplines, SIOP supports an
overall FY 2025 NSF budget of $11.9 billion. SIOP requests continued
and robust support for the NSF SBE Directorate, which funds important
research studies, enabling an evidence base, methodology, and
measurements for improving organizational function, performance, and
design across sectors and disciplines. SIOP also requests the TIP
Directorate continue to use their increased funding to support
innovative research, including in the social and behavioral sciences.
Graduate Student Education.--SIOP requests that Congress encourage
NSF to robustly support graduate education support programs,
particularly as they relate to mentoring, innovative career
exploration, and work-based learning opportunities. SIOP's professional
membership spans academia, industry, government, and military.
Additional funding and opportunities for graduate students to explore
career paths in industry and government and participate in work-based
learning experiences are critically important to grow the Nation's
scientific workforce and industrial base.
As acknowledged by its inclusion in the CHIPS and Science Act of
2022 (CHIPS+), NSF encourages a stronger STEM workforce among Americans
if we are going to outpace our global competitors and tap into the full
potential of American ingenuity. To this end, it is critical that NSF
receive funding increases in order to fully implement the authorized
programs supporting graduate STEM education in Section 10313 of CHIPS+.
The programs authorized through CHIPS+ will allow NSF to provide much
needed additional support for STEM graduate students and broaden the
pipeline of who receives a graduate degree in STEM. CHIPS+ authorized
programs in mentorship, research, professional development, and support
for innovative career exploration and work-based learning opportunities
that are essential to ensuring our STEM graduate students persist
through graduation and enter the American STEM workforce.
requested report language
Graduate Education.--The Committee recognizes the important role
advanced degree holders play in our innovation ecosystem and urges NSF
to robustly support the graduate education programs authorized by
Section 10313 of the CHIPS and Science Act (Public Law 117-167). In
making awards through current and new programming, NSF should
prioritize inclusion of career explorations opportunities for graduate
students supported by the program.
Future of Work.--In addition to considering in which technology
areas to invest or how to accelerate technological development, SIOP
encourages the TIP Directorate to take additional actions to
holistically address potential societal challenges across emerging
technology areas, especially as they pertain to the workforce and
workplace. SIOP appreciates TIP's recent efforts that begin to get at
this issue, including the launch of the Responsible Design,
Development, and Deployment of Technologies (ReDDDoT) and Experiential
Learning for Emerging and Novel Technologies (ExLENT) programs, but
programs like this have been a small part of the TIP portfolio that has
largely focused on technology translation and the creation of new jobs.
To this end, there should be more dedicated programming for
research on end-users of these technologies to identify and mitigate
disruptive impacts, especially in the workplace. This research should
seek to relieve job loss and achieve a productive, augmented workforce
with high levels of employee wellbeing. I-O psychologists have been
heavily involved in research to address the impact of new technologies
in the workplace, including robotics and artificial intelligence (AI).
For example, to address the unique challenges and considerations that
arise when using AI-based assessments and hiring procedures, SIOP
released Considerations and Recommendations for the Validation and Use
of AI-Based Assessments for Employee Selection, a report that includes
measurement suggestions to address bias and other core issues.\1\
NSF could make significant progress toward these goals by launching
a revitalized version of the Future of Work at the Human-Technology
Frontier initiative (FW-HTF).\2\ FW-HTF was one of NSF's ``10 Big
Ideas'' for cross-disciplinary investment that had a vision to
``support multi-disciplinary research to sustain economic
competitiveness, to promote worker well-being, lifelong and pervasive
learning, and quality of life, and to illuminate the emerging social
and economic context and drivers of innovations that are shaping the
future of jobs and work.'' \3\ While there have been a few one-off
solicitations in recent years, the program as a largescale investment
priority largely sunset just when global competitiveness trends and
complementary Federal investments in new technology areas made its work
even more pressing. Congress should encourage NSF to redouble their
commitment in this space by evaluating scientific needs for the next
phase of FW-HTF and developing a plan to launch this new effort.
requested report language
Future of Work.--The Committee encourages the TIP Directorate to
collaborate with other Directorates to increase dedicated investments
in research that holistically addresses disruptions to the workforce
and workplace brought on by emerging technologies. This could include a
revitalized version of the Future of Work at the Human-Technology
Frontier Initiative to harness multi-disciplinary research on the
adoption and broader impacts of key technology focus areas in the
workforce and workplace.
Research on Individuals with Disabilities and Neurodiversity.--
While NSF has made great strides in ensuring that the benefits of its
funded research impact all our Nation's individuals and communities,
there still exists research gaps around participation of individuals
with disabilities and neurodiverse individuals in the workplace.
Ensuring full participation of all individuals in the workforce will
help the Nation address critical workforce shortages and expand
perspectives considered when developing new advancements. I-O
psychologists have expertise in recruiting, training, and supporting
these individuals to maximize strengths and ensure equitable treatment.
Despite this pressing need, NSF has not fully invested in research
on how to best support these communities. Much of NSF's prior support
for research on neurodiversity was through the now-sunset Future of
Work at the Human-Technology Frontier initiative. SIOP requests that
Congress encourage NSF to prioritize research on neurodiversity and
individuals with disabilities' participation in the workforce via new
offerings, Dear Colleague Letters, and other mechanisms.
Department of Justice (DOJ) Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS) Office.--DOJ's COPS Office is responsible for advancing the
practice of community policing by the Nation's State and local law
enforcement agencies through information and grant resources. COPS
grant programs target important policing needs, such as the Hiring
Program (CHP), which has grown substantially in recent years and will
provide $156.6 million for law enforcement agencies in FY 2024.
Hundreds of law enforcement agencies have benefited from CHP, but
little is known about recipients and the unique issues they face in key
areas like recruitment and retention. Collectively, COPS recipients
make up an ideal study group to explore important questions over
factors that drive people toward careers in policing, as well as what
may drive people away.
COPS has made progress toward addressing evidence--based solutions,
signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SIOP in September
2022. The MOU is the first COPS has signed with a scientific society to
increase the knowledge and application of I-O in law enforcement and to
help cultivate more safe and effective law enforcement workplaces.
Congress should encourage COPS to build on this momentum to support the
development of studies to help COPS awardees better understand what
works and how to more effectively leverage Federal funding to support
their communities. This should include funding for COPS to support an
evaluation study of its largest program, CHP, to help COPS better
understand common recruitment, hiring, and retention practices and
leverage the findings to target future Federal assistance.
requested report language
Workforce Study.--The Committee recognizes the importance of the
COPS Hiring Program, but is concerned that little is known about
specific challenges facing grantees. The Committee encourages COPS to
carry out a voluntary assessment of COPS Hiring Program recipients to
understand workforce challenges facing police departments, identify
best practices, and collect other findings to better target future
technical assistance programming. In carrying out this study, the COPS
Office shall enter into a partnership with qualified organizations with
extensive expertise in workforce and workplace sciences, such as I-O
psychology.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer SIOP's support for NSF
social and behavioral sciences research, the future of work, research
on neurodiverse individuals, and workforce studies via the DOJ COPS
Office. Please do not hesitate to contact SIOP should you have any
questions.
Additional information is also available at www.siop.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.siop.org/Research-Publications/Items-of-Interest/
ArtMID/19366/ArticleID/7327/SIOP-Releases-Recommendations-for-AI-Based-
Assessments.
\2\ https://www.nsf.gov/eng/futureofwork.jsp.
\3\ https://new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/future-work-human-
technology-frontier-core.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Alexis Fink, President.]
______
Prepared Statement of Society for Neuroscience
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and members of the
subcommittee, on behalf of the Society for Neuroscience (SfN), we are
honored to present this testimony in support of robust appropriations
for biomedical research at the National Science Foundation (NSF). SfN
urges you to provide at least $11.9 billion, an increase of
approximately $2.8 billion, in base-level funding for NSF in FY25. For
researchers nationwide, the ability to make life-changing advancements
in neuroscience depends on significant and sustained Federal funding.
One area of my lab's research at the Department of Psychiatry at
Yale School of Medicine focuses on the role of single molecules and
circuits in complex behaviors related to learning and motivated
behavior. We are also interested in the relevance of these processes to
addiction and mental health processes. With key Federal funding, my lab
recently discovered neurons that respond consistently to a primary
reward, and that the response of these neurons scale with the size of
the reward. Our research is now clarifying the role these neurons and
others play in behavior and motivation. Basic research, like my own,
provides understanding about the brain at a deep level, which paves the
way for the development of novel therapeutics that will prevent and
treat debilitating medical disorders. Continued progress depends on
sustained Federal funding at a level that at a minimum, keeps pace with
inflation.
the importance of the research continuum
SfN believes strongly in the research continuum-a pipeline, in
which basic science leads to clinical innovations, which leads to
translational uses impacting the public's health, reducing long-term
medical costs and generating new jobs across the country. Basic science
is the foundation upon which all health advances are built. For
example, the first mRNA vaccine to receive FDA approval, which likely
saved millions of lives during the COVID-19 pandemic, were made
possible due to decades of prior research by chemists and chemical
engineers on lipid nanoparticles. To cure diseases, we must first
understand them through fundamental discovery-based research.
SfN is grateful to Congress for its support of the important
mission of the NSF, which includes a focus on promoting the progress of
science and advancing the National health, prosperity, and welfare,
through increased appropriations in recent years. NSF funding for basic
research is not only critical for enabling groundbreaking discoveries;
it is essential for building our scientific workforce. For the United
States to remain the world leader in biomedical research and to
maintain and grow opportunities across areas of science, Congress must
continue to fund the training pipeline of the scientific workforce.
Young trainees today are the ones who will make the key discoveries of
the future. The deeper our grasp of basic science, the more successful
those focused on clinical and translational research will be.
Neuroscientists use a wide range of experimental, animal, and human
models not used elsewhere in the research pipeline. These opportunities
create discoveries--sometimes unexpected discoveries--expanding
knowledge of biological processes. This level of discovery reveals new
targets for research to treat all kinds of brain disorders affecting
millions of people in the United States and beyond.
NSF basic research funding is also a key economic driver of science
at universities and research organizations across the country and
generates jobs in all States across the Nation. Federal investments in
scientific research fuel the Nation's pharmaceutical, biotechnology and
medical device industries. The private sector utilizes basic scientific
discoveries funded through NSF to improve health and foster a
sustainable trajectory for America's Research and Development (R&D)
enterprise. Basic science generates the knowledge needed to uncover the
mysteries behind human diseases, which leads to private sector
development of new treatments and therapeutics. Industry typically does
not fund research on this important first step given the long-term path
of basic science and pressure for shorter-term return on investments.
Congressional investment in basic science is irreplaceable in the
pipeline for development of drugs, devices, and other treatments for
brain related diseases and disorders.
The Understanding the Brain project is an example of NSF's success
by enabling scientific understanding of the full complexity of the
brain through targeted, cross-disciplinary investments in research,
technology, and workforce development. NSF's strategic investments will
support research and infrastructure designed to transform our view of
who we are and SfN appreciates Congress' ongoing investment in NSF to
continue this work. Additionally, a recent exciting advancement in NSF-
funded neuroscience research includes the following:
Researchers Find Deep Brain Stimulation During Sleep is Linked to
Memory
With an aging U.S. population, memory is becoming an ever more
important area to study. Using funding from NSF, researchers at the
University of California, Los Angeles and Tel Aviv University used a
novel system to deliver electric pulses that activated part of the
brain and were synchronized with brain activity recorded in the
hippocampus where memories are stored. Importantly, these researchers
found evidence that targeted deep brain stimulation during a critical
time during sleep improves memory consolidation. This critical finding
provides new insights into memory consolidation during sleep and can be
used to create new therapies for memory disorders such as Alzheimer's
disease.
Funding in Regular Order
SfN joins the biomedical research community in supporting an
increase in NSF funding to at least $11.9 billion in FY25. This
proposed increase is necessary to provide certainty to the field of
science, allow for the exploration of new scientific inquiry, train the
next generation of scientists, and foster increased economic growth and
further improvements in the public's health. Further cuts to
discretionary investments would have a devastating impact on NSF-funded
research and would hurt the country's ability to maintain its
international competitiveness in this space. Equally important is
ensuring that funding is enacted in a reasonable time frame. Long-term
continuing resolutions have significant consequences on research,
including restricting NSF's ability to fund grants. For some of our
members, this means waiting for a final decision to be made on funding
before knowing if their perfectly scored grant will be realized or
operating a lab at a diminished capacity until appropriations are
final. These delays can be devastating for trainees seeking to begin
their careers. All the positive benefits research provides in this
country are negatively impacted by these real time considerations. SfN
strongly supports the appropriation of NSF funding in a timely manner,
in order to avoid delays in approving new research grants or reductions
in funding for already approved research funding.
SfN thanks the subcommittee for your strong and continued support
of biomedical research and looks forward to working with you to ensure
the United States remains the global leader in neuroscience research
and discovery. Collaboration among Congress, the NSF, and the
scientific research community has created great benefits for not only
the United States but also people around the globe suffering from
brain-related diseases and disorders. On behalf of the Society for
Neuroscience, we urge you to continue this critical cooperation and
support of biomedical research.
[This statement was submitted by Marina Picciotto, Ph.D.,
President.]
______
Prepared Statement of Stronger America Through Seafood
Dear Chair Shaheen and Ranking Member Moran,
Stronger America Through Seafood, a coalition of industry partners
representing the seafood supply chain, is working in support of
increased U.S. production of healthful, sustainable, and affordable
seafood. We are writing today to request that you support $25 million
for NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Office of
Aquaculture and $14.08 million for NOAA's Ocean and Atmospheric
Research (OAR) for the Sea Grant Aquaculture Research program in the
fiscal year 2025 Commerce, Justice and Science (CJS) Appropriations
Act. We also request the language below be included in the related
Explanatory Statement:
``The Committee recognizes the significant potential for
development of American offshore aquaculture to increase U.S.
production of healthful, sustainable and affordable seafood. As
the fastest growing food production sector in the world,
responsible aquaculture development presents opportunities for
meaningful economic growth in coastal communities and among
their supply chain partners, while ensuring that Americans have
access to responsibly farmed local seafood. The National Marine
Fisheries Service Aquaculture program's 5-Year strategic plan
for aquaculture will support a U.S. aquaculture industry as
part of a competitive domestic seafood sector. The Committee
fully supports the activities of the Aquaculture Program and
includes $25,000,000 to implement this strategic plan,
including continued work on Aquaculture Opportunity Areas,
environmental assessments, science-based tools and modeling and
increased economic development programs.''
Aquaculture is the fastest growing food production sector in the
world and is responsible for nearly all global seafood supply growth
since the 1990s. With half of all seafood consumed today being farm
raised, aquaculture presents a unique opportunity to build an American
seafood industry that can support a diverse workforce, enhance
sustainable ecosystems and guarantee healthful, locally sourced protein
for American consumers.
Today, the U.S. lags far behind the rest of the world in farmed
seafood production, resulting in the U.S. importing up to 85% of its
seafood. The single biggest reason is the lack of a clear regulatory
pathway for permitting new projects, particularly offshore. This
challenging reality has forced many American businesses to invest in
other countries.
As you may know, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)'s
Aquaculture Program is implementing a 5-year strategic plan laying out
a framework to ``help achieve a robust, thriving, and diverse U.S.
aquaculture industry as part of a resilient seafood sector.'' They
continue to actively coordinate across agencies towards a comprehensive
regulatory foundation for aquaculture. This process includes siting
analysis for future Aquaculture Opportunity Areas (AOAs) in Federal
waters, interagency coordination on National Environmental Protection
Act (NEPA) review and Environmental Impact Statements (EIS),
development of science-based tools and modeling, and associated
economic development programs like workforce training and community
planning that will ensure the economic benefits of aquaculture are
realized across all stakeholder groups. Further, the Fiscal Year 2024
CJS Appropriations bill provided for a new Cooperative Institute (CI)
to support the sustainable development of aquaculture in the U.S. to
address the seafood import deficit and benefit the economy. The CI will
help the agency fulfill the tenets of the NOAA Aquaculture Strategic
Plan.
The program needs additional funds to adequately fulfill its
mission, and we believe a funding level of $25 million will meet these
needs.
In addition, we seek $14.08 million in funding for Sea Grant
Aquaculture Research. The President's Fiscal Year 25 budget request
zeroes out this important program that provides marine aquaculture
research and development. SATS supports this program for its important
work to develop and commercialize new technologies for finfish
aquaculture and to engineer ocean-based infrastructure.
By prioritizing domestic aquaculture, you will support the growth
of an American seafood community that is resilient to economic and
climate changes and is part of a holistic approach to a greater
sustainable food strategy.
We appreciate your consideration of this request and look forward
to working with you to ensure domestic aquaculture production is a
priority now for a secure future.
[This statement was submitted by Drue Banta Winters, Campaign
Manager.]
______
Prepared Statement of U.S. Census Bureau
We write as demographic industry leaders and leading experts on
demographic and census data to call your attention to an opportunity to
mitigate the 2020 Census undercounts of rural residents, young
children, various racial and ethnic groups, and the States of Arkansas,
Florida, Illinois, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Texas.
While we do not underestimate the difficulty you face in funding
the Nation's conflicting needs, this is an opportunity to improve at a
minor cost fully achievable in the current fiscal landscape: an
increase of $6.2 million for FY 25 for the ``Intercensal Estimates''
budget line will help rightsize the distribution of $2.8 Trillion in
Federal funding for States and communities.
This is a compelling opportunity which should enjoy broad support.
As the Wall Street Journal editorial board noted in 2022 following the
release of the Census Bureau's measure of census accuracy, ``It's too
late to change the reapportionment, but the Administration should take
the new data into account in Federal funding formulas.''
Congress did well to reverse decades of reductions in FY 24 and
begin to invest in modernizing the Population Estimates. After the 2020
Census, funding for the estimates was down 20% in real dollars from the
2003 level, and staffing was down by a third--at a time the estimates
staff had to produce updates to a flawed decennial. Continued
investment in the estimates will allow the Census Bureau to produce
better intercensal estimates--and provide more accurate measures of
American life, from disease prevalence to regional unemployment rates:
all the practical everyday things that an accurate census supports.
We also support preparation for a successful 2030 Census, and an
increase in the sample size for the American Community Survey. To do
so, we endorse the Census Project's recommendation to increase the
Census Bureau's FY 25 funding level to $2 Billion.
Sincerely,
Rachel Cortes, Chief Demographer Claritas
Andrew A. Beveridge, CEO, Social Explorer
William H. Frey, Senior Fellow, Brookings Metro
Bill O'Hare, President, O'Hare Data and Demographic Services, LLC
Christopher Dick, Founder, Demographic Analytics Advisors
______
Prepared Statement of University of Illinois System
The University of Illinois System appreciates the opportunity to
provide testimony in support of Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 appropriations
for the National Science Foundation (NSF). We encourage Congress to
provide NSF with at least $11.9 billion in FY2025.
The U of I System is a world leader in research and discovery, and
the largest educational institution in the state with more than 94,700
students, and about 28,000 faculty and staff. Our universities in
Urbana-Champaign, Chicago and Springfield have produced about 445,000
alumni living in Illinois. The U of I System awards more than 27,000
undergraduate, graduate and professional degrees annually.
The U of I System has long been a leading recipient of grant
funding from NSF, with more than $164 million in NSF research
expenditures in FY2023. The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign is
the top university recipient of NSF funding in the country and leads
many large-scale NSF-sponsored research projects that are addressing
grand challenges, including an Engineering Research Center (POETS), a
Quantum Leap Challenge Institute (HQAN), a Materials Research Science
and Engineering Center (I-MRSEC), a Science and Technology Center
(QCB), and three AI Institutes (focusing on agriculture, STEM learning,
and molecular synthesis). The University of Illinois Chicago is leading
an NSF grant to develop theories, research methods, and tools to help
expand and tailor the field of STEM education to support Black
students.
Having spent 4 years as assistant director for geosciences at NSF,
I can personally attest to the fact that the agency is the cornerstone
of America's basic research enterprise. By supporting merit-based
fundamental research across disciplines at universities throughout the
Nation, NSF plays a major role in ensuring that the United States
remains at the forefront of science and innovation. NSF-supported
research has enabled groundbreaking discoveries and novel technologies
throughout the agency's nearly 75-year history. This fundamental
research provides a wide range of societal benefits and economic
impact, and often establishes the knowledge base and training to
advance U.S. innovation.
Congress recognized the crucial role that NSF plays in advancing
innovation and competitiveness when it passed the CHIPS and Science Act
in 2022. Unfortunately, funding for NSF is far below the levels
authorized in that legislation. While the CHIPS and Science Act
authorized $15.65 billion for NSF in FY2024, Congress appropriated just
over $9 billion. Along with many other institutions of higher
education, the U of I System was deeply concerned about the 5% cut that
was imposed on the NSF budget for FY2024 and the impact that this cut
will have on our Nation's research ecosystem.
We appreciate the challenging fiscal environment that your
subcommittee faces. As you draft your FY2025 appropriations bill, we
hope you will support a much-needed funding increase for existing NSF
programs.
Thank you for your consideration of this request and for your prior
support for the NSF.
[This statement was submitted by Timothy L. Killeen, President.]
______
Prepared Statement of Vera Institute of Justice
Chair Shaheen (D-NH), Ranking Member Moran (R-KS), and
distinguished members of the subcommittee; on behalf of the Vera
Institute of Justice (Vera), I write to urge you to ensure a strong
investment in immigration legal services in Fiscal Year (FY) 2025. It
is imperative that we address the urgent need for legal representation
for all people facing removal who are unable to afford it. Such funding
is an essential step to help fix an inefficient, outdated, and unjust
immigration system.
Our budget request urges the allocation of $400 million to the
Department of Justice to enhance the availability and quality of legal
representation for adult noncitizens in removal proceedings. This
funding will support the provision of counsel for indigent noncitizens
facing deportation and its devastating consequences, including for
lawful permanent residents, DACA recipients, and various visa and
immigration status holders. It addresses a critical gap in our
adversarial immigration system, as most individuals facing deportation
lack representation.\1\ This funding will also reduce the harsh
consequences for mixed status families (including United States
citizens) and Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs), who are often
separated as a result of deportation.
Funding for legal representation is essential to supporting the
rights of noncitizens during deportation proceedings and is especially
critical given the large and growing immigration court backlog. The
consequences of losing a case in immigration court can be devastating,
including permanent separation from family and community, exile to an
unknown country, long-term detention, and the prospect of persecution,
torture, and death. Having a lawyer helps people understand their
rights and access forms of immigration relief for which they may be
legally eligible.\2\ Legal representation is thus critical in
empowering eligible noncitizens to successfully obtain the relief and
protections that our laws provide for them. Having legal representation
also reduces the need for immigration judges to continue cases so that
unrepresented people can find representation, helping to reduce long
immigration court case times and reducing government spending.\3\
Additionally, noncitizens in removal proceedings who have legal
representation nearly always appear for their immigration court
hearings, reducing in absentia removal orders and helping bring more
cases to conclusion.\4\
But despite the dire consequences of deportation and the critical
role of representation, people in 63 percent of all immigration court
cases are unrepresented by counsel, and detained people face
proceedings without counsel in a staggering 83 percent of cases.\5\ Our
immigration system is nearly impossible to navigate without counsel,
and lack of financial resources should not be a cause for lack of
representation. Federal funding is critical to addressing the financial
barrier to legal representation in removal proceedings so that all
immigrants have a chance to defend against deportation, remain rooted
with their families and communities, and contribute to the stability
and prosperity of their communities.
The president's FY24 budget request included $150 million to
provide access to representation for adults and families in immigration
proceedings, recognizing the importance of enhancing fairness and
equity in case processing. Because of the substantial and growing need
for legal representation, we urge you to allocate an additional $400
million to the Department of Justice in the FY25 funding bill, ensuring
sufficient resources to improve the accessibility and quality of legal
representation for people facing deportation. Additionally, we request
that $50 million of this funding be made available to address immediate
staffing shortages of legal services providers and to enable States,
local governments, and community organizations to build the
infrastructure necessary to meet the increasing need for immigration
legal representation and help address the urgent immigration court
backlog.
Our estimates indicate that this funding would enable legal
representation for approximately 27,000 people on the detained and non-
detained immigration court dockets, while also investing in a strong
foundation for future representation needs. While this will not meet
the full need for representation, it is an important investment in a
future where the United States has an immigration system that is fair,
just, and efficient-enabling the safety, stability, and prosperity of
communities across the country.\6\
We extend our gratitude to Representative Norma Torres (D-CA 35)
and Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) for their leadership in spearheading the
Dear Colleague letters advocating for increased funding for legal
representation for FY25. Their dedication to ensuring access to justice
for all is greatly appreciated. Additionally, we are proud to have led
an organizational letter in support of this funding request, which
gathered more than 100 signatures from local and national
organizations.\7\
In conclusion, we urge the subcommittee to prioritize funding for
legal representation for adults facing removal proceedings. This
investment is crucial to protecting the due process rights of
immigrants facing deportation, enhancing fairness in immigration
proceedings, maintaining family unity, and alleviating the strain on
our overloaded immigration system.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Annie Chen, Initiative Director
Advancing Universal Representation Initiative
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), ``EOIR Case
Data (March 2024),'' database (Falls Church, VA: EOIR, 2024), https://
www.justice.gov/eoir/foia-library-0.
\2\ Ingrid V. Eagly & Steven Shafer, ``A National Study of Access
to Counsel in Immigration Court,'' University of Pennsylvania Law
Review 164, no. 1 (2015), https://scholarship.
law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9502&context=penn_law_review.
\3\ Ibid., 60.
\4\ Nina Siulc and Noelle Smart, Evidence Shows That Most
Immigrants Appear for Immigration Court Hearings (New York: Vera
Institute of Justice, 2020), https://www.vera.org/downloads/
publications/immigrant-court-appearance-fact-sheet.pdf.
\5\ EOIR, ``EOIR Case Data (March 2024),''.
\6\ See, for example, Fwd.us, ``Immigration Facts: The Positive
Economic Impact Of Immigration,'' July 21, 2020, https://www.fwd.us/
news/immigration-facts-the-positive-economic-impact-of-immigration.
\7\ Vera Institute of Justice and National Partnership for New
Americans, ``Over 100 Immigrant Rights Organizations Urge Congress to
Fund Legal Representation for People Facing Deportation,'' press
release, April 22, 2024, https://www.vera.org/newsroom/over-100-
immigrant-rights-organizations-urge-congress-to-fund-legal-
representation-for-people-facing-deportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Voice of the Experienced
Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony before your
subcommittee. This statement is regarding the Bureau of Prison's (BOP)
planned construction of Letcher County, KY facilities and its related
unobligated $504 million funds in the BOP's Building and Facilities
account, which I respectfully request the subcommittee rescinds. Please
find below my statement in my capacity as General Counsel of Voice of
the Experienced (VOTE). VOTE is a membership-based organization that
works to restore the full human and civil rights of those impacted by
the criminal justice system. We have members who (1) have been
incarcerated in the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP); and (2) have had
or currently have loved ones incarcerated in the BOP. Many of our
members specifically have experiences of incarceration in Kentucky and
the BOP's mid-Atlantic region. VOTE is opposed to the construction of
FCI Letcher and wishes to specifically reference a 2023 economic study
conducted by the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy called ``Facts
Don't Support Economic Argument for Proposed Federal Prison in Letcher
County.'' See https://kypolicy.org/letcher-county-prison-will-not-help-
economy/.
This study specifically States the following:
In the wake of last year's devastating eastern Kentucky floods, the
Federal Government reintroduced a previously-defeated proposal to build
a new Bureau of Prisons (BOP) prison and ``prison camp'' in Letcher
County.\1\ If implemented, the project would add a fourth Federal
prison to southeastern Kentucky--which already has one of the highest
concentrations of Federal correctional facilities nationwide--and would
direct a nearly $500 million Federal investment in prison beds at a
time when the region desperately needs substantial investment in flood
recovery efforts.
While proponents claim the Federal prison project would bring
countless economic benefits to Letcher County, research and data do not
support this argument. Nearby Clay, Martin and McCreary counties remain
among the poorest in the state, and within one of the poorest
congressional districts in the Nation, despite Federal prisons
operating in these counties for two to three decades. Eastern Kentucky
has the opportunity to improve economically with Federal investments
that don't perpetuate the harms of mass incarceration, which already
has a vicious hold on Kentucky.
If Kentucky was a country, it would already rank seventh-highest in
the world for its incarceration rate, including those in county jails,
state prisons and Federal prisons.\2\ The state also incarcerates 40%
more people per capita than the U.S. average.\3\ And the eastern
Federal judicial district of Kentucky already has more Federal prisons
than any of the other 93 such districts in the country.\4\ Adding
another Federal prison would only further entrench mass incarceration
in Kentucky at a time when many places are beginning to reverse
course.\5\
The original discussion of a high-security Federal prison in
Letcher County formally started in 2006 when Congress authorized a
study for the facility. The proposal was approved for a site in Roxanna
in 2018, but was withdrawn in 2019 after a lawsuit on behalf by a local
landowner, 21 individuals incarcerated in Federal prisons, concerned
local citizens and other Kentucky residents. The plaintiffs asserted
that the prison was unnecessary given BOP's own projections about a
falling prison population, that there would be environmental harms
caused by the construction of the proposed prison and that people
incarcerated in the prison would be exposed to toxic chemicals from
coal extraction that had previously occurred on the land.\6\
The new iteration of the Federal Letcher County prison officially
began on Sept. 28, 2022, just months after devastating flooding in the
area, when BOP filed a notice of intent to prepare a draft
environmental impact statement (EIS) for the facility.\7\ At a
subsequent public meeting in Whitesburg, a representative for
Congressman Hal Rogers stated that BOP prisons already in three eastern
Kentucky counties have had a positive economic impact, ``boosting the
tax base and strengthening our local workforce,'' and that the new BOP
proposed prison was an economic opportunity for Letcher County.\8\
Southeastern Kentucky already has three Federal prisons, and
several more state prisons, yet continues to see out-migration of the
population and remains among the poorest regions in the country.
We examined economic indicators for nearby Clay, Martin and
McCreary counties from before and after a Federal prison opened in each
locality (1992, 2003 and 2004, respectively). Our analysis of county-
level economic data shows that rather than economic improvement,
longstanding problems have continued or even worsened two to three
decades after the Federal prisons opened in these counties. Total
employment has continued to fall, poverty remains among the highest in
the country, and median household incomes have remained low.
Clay, Martin and McCreary Counties have continued to see steep
declines in employment and population numbers. Since the respective
year each prison was opened, Clay County has seen an approximate 20%
drop in number of people employed, Martin County has seen a 43% drop,
and McCreary County has seen a 14% drop.\9\ Residents have also
continued to move out. Since the prisons opened, Clay County has lost
11% of its population; Martin County has lost 13%; and McCreary County
has lost 3%.\10\
In addition, poverty rates did not improve in these counties after
the prisons opened up. Poverty in Martin and McCreary counties remains
high and did not decline after Federal prisons opened there. Poverty in
Clay dropped in the 1990s after the prison opened but then rose again,
but that temporary drop was later reversed and mirrored what happened
in other counties and statewide during the 1990s.
In the period since the prisons were built, median household income
has remained relatively flat in Clay, Martin and McCreary Counties.
Clay County saw a small increase in the 1990s, but so did the other
counties that did not have new prisons at the time as well as the state
as a whole. Median household income in these eastern Kentucky counties
has remained very low as well--around $30,000 a year.
In addition, Clay, Martin and McCreary counties remain among the
most economically distressed localities in the entire country:
--The poverty rate in Clay County is 35.9%, in Martin County it is
40.5% and in McCreary County it is 33.5%.\11\
--Of all 3,143 counties in the United States, Martin County is the
5th poorest, Clay County is the 14th poorest and McCreary
County is the 32nd poorest.\12\
--The median household income in Martin County is only $29,387, in
Clay County $30,700 and in McCreary County $32,938.\13\
--Of all 3,143 counties in the United States, Martin County has the
8th lowest median household income, Clay County has the 15th-
lowest and McCreary County has the 30th lowest.\14\
There is a significant amount of literature finding no relation
between prison building and positive economic effects, and some
evidence that it can actually harm economic development. For example, a
study of prison building in central Appalachia found that, although
unemployment rates are lower in counties with a prison, per capita
incomes are lower and poverty rates are higher.\15\ A study of rural
counties found that in those with low levels of education in
particular, such as those in eastern Kentucky, new prisons can do more
economic harm than good.\16\ There are a number of reasons for a lack
of economic benefits from new Federal prisons. First, many of the jobs
from a Federal prison come from outside of the community. Federal
prisons must be operated with trained staff experienced in the system
that typically must be brought in from elsewhere. There are significant
criteria for BOP employees, including requirements for age, drug
testing, credit checks, and criminal legal system record checks as well
as education and experience preferences that many local residents would
not meet.
Additionally, there are significant local costs accrued by
communities operating prisons. Prison building requires local spending
on infrastructure, including highways and roads, water and sewer
systems, and electricity infrastructure. Taking privately owned land
off the local tax rolls would also mean less money for public schools
and local governments. Local community members can end up competing
with individuals incarcerated in the Federal prison for jobs in the
community due to the lower costs of employing incarcerated people for
public works and other jobs.
There are also harmful crowd-out effects from prison building, and
little to no positive spin-offs. By reducing quality of life and
harming the reputation of a community, a prison can make it less
attractive to future outside investment or in-migration, and can induce
out-migration. Prisons can make communities less attractive for tourism
and amenity development that attracts visitors and investment. Prisons
lack strong linkages to the local economy, resulting in few positive
economic multiplier effects from their operation. There are also
opportunity costs associated with investing in a prison, resources that
can be better spent elsewhere.
Finally, although prison proponents often describe them as
``recession-proof,'' in fact relying on prison building is an
increasingly risky bet in this political environment. The original
Letcher prison proposal was cancelled in part because Federal criminal
justice reform resulted in a reduced prison population that no longer
made it necessary.\17\ Increased advocacy efforts and actions to reduce
the extremely high levels of U.S. mass incarceration raise serious
questions about the long-term viability of any new Federal prison.
Rather than an investment of $500 million for a Federal prison,
eastern Kentucky communities need significant investments in flood
recovery, in addition to other infrastructure needs and community
services and supports--all of which would have a much better economic
payoff, including:
--Providing housing and other supports for people impacted by recent
storms
--Investing in flood resilience and prevention
--Remediating and reforesting degraded land
--Funding child care, drug treatment, public health and other needs.
With consideration of this information from the Kentucky Center on
Economic Policy, I urge you to consider rescinding the funding
allocated to construct FCI Letcher. This prison is not needed and will
adversely impact the region's economy and not provided the jobs and
economic growth claimed by its proponents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Federal Bureau of Prisons, ``Proposed Federal Correctional
Institution and Federal Prison Camp,'' Letcher County, Kentucky,
https://www.proposed-fci-letchercountyky.com/.
\2\ Emily Widra and Tiana Herring, ``States of Incarceration: The
Global Context 2021,'' Prison Policy Initiative, Sept. 2021, https://
www.prisonpolicy.org/global/2021.html.
\3\ Prison Policy Initiative, ``Kentucky Profile,''https://
www.prisonpolicy.org/profiles/KY.html.
\4\ WEKU, ``Rise,'' Episode 7, March 30, 2023, https://
www.weku.org/podcast/rise/2023-03-30/rise-episode-7.
\5\ Nagzol Ghandnoosh, ``Ending 50 Years of Mass Incarceration:
Urgent Reform Needed to Protect Future Generations,'' The Sentencing
Project, Feb. 8, 2023, https://www.
sentencingproject.org/policy-brief/ending-50-years-of-mass-
incarceration-urgent-reform-needed-to-protect-future-generations/.
Carmen Mitchell, Pam Thomas, Ashley Spalding and Dustin Pugel, ``In
Decade Since Major Criminal Justice Reform, the Kentucky General
Assembly Has Passed Six Times as Many Laws Increasing Incarceration as
Decreasing It,'' Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, Dec. 9, 2021,
https://kypolicy.org/kentucky-general-assembly-has-passed-six-times-as-
many-laws-increasing-incarceration-as-decreasing-it-since-2011/.
\6\ Judah Schept, ``Coal, Cages, Crisis: The Rise of the Prison
Economy in Central Appalachia,'' New York University Press, 2022.
\7\ Making Connections News, ``Scoping a Letcher County KY
Prison,'' Dec. 21, 2022, https://www.makingconnectionsnews.org/2022/12/
scoping-a-letcher-county-ky-prison/. KyPolicy submitted public comments
via email: Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, ``Comments re: Economic
Implications of Federal Prison Proposal in Letcher County, Kentucky,''
Nov. 30, 2022.
\8\ Federal Bureau of Prisons, Scoping Meeting, Letcher County
Central High School, Nov. 17, 2022.
\9\ Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.
\10\ U.S. Census, Kentucky State Data Center population estimates.
\11\ U.S. Census, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, 2021.
\12\ Id.
\13\ Id.
\14\ Id.
\15\ Robert Todd Perdue and Kenneth Sanchagrinm, ``Imprisoning
Appalachia: The Socioeconomic Impacts of Prison Development,'' Journal
of Appalachian Studies, 22:2, Oct. 2016, 210-223.
\16\ Gregory Hooks, Clayton Mosher, Shaun Genter, Thomas Rotolo and
Linda Lobao, ``Revisiting the Impact of Prison Building on Job Growth:
Education, Incarceration, and County-Level Employment, 1976-2004,''
Social Science Quarterly, Jan. 2010, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
doi/full/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00690.x.
\17\ John Gramlich, ``Under Trump, the Federal Prison Population
Continued its Recent Decline,'' Feb. 17, 2021, https://
www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/02/17/under-trump-the-federaI-
prison-population-continued-its-recent-decline/.
[This statement was submitted by Emily H. Posner, Esq., General
Counsel.]
______
Prepared Statement of Western Governors' Association
Chair Shaheen, Ranking Member Moran, and Members of the
subcommittee, the Western Governors' Association (WGA) appreciates the
opportunity to provide testimony on items within the jurisdiction of
the subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies,
including the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), U.S. Department of
Justice (DOJ), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA),
and National Science Foundation (NSF). WGA is an independent
organization representing the Governors of the 22 westernmost States
and territories. The Association is an instrument of the Governors for
bipartisan policy development, information sharing, and collective
action on issues of critical importance to the western United States.
Western Governors underscore the importance of a close and
productive working relationship between States, territories, and the
Federal Government and understand that more effective cooperation
depends on Federal recognition of States as co-sovereigns and partners.
The promotion of greater partnership between States and the Federal
Government is central to the mission of WGA and is reflected in the
Governors' Policy Resolution 2024-01, Strengthening the State-Federal
Relationship. Given the numerous Federal programs, policies, and
regulations directly affecting States and territories, Western
Governors encourage the subcommittee to direct Congress and Federal
agencies to improve their internal processes and coordinate with States
and territories on Federal policies and procedures, as well as
integrate State and territorial data into Federal programs, including
for policymaking purposes.
WGA also commends your attention to other Western Governors'
resolutions that articulate policy positions relevant to the
subcommittee's work. These include Policy Resolutions 2023-06, Rural
Development; 2023-07, Broadband Connectivity; 2022-05, Cybersecurity;
2023-09, Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons; 2024-04, Combating
the Opioid Crisis; and 2021-08, Water Resource Management in the West.
The Economic Development Administration (EDA) plays a critical role
in rural economic development. Communities across the West are
envisioning transformative and systems-wide solutions to meet their
unique needs, and EDA should be responsive to these community-led
approaches. Western Governors urge increased flexibility in the
allowable uses of EDA funds so that rural communities can prioritize
the investments that work best for them.
Western Governors recommend an increase in the proportion of
economic development and infrastructure funding that goes toward
capacity building, and Congress should allow EDA to negotiate the
percentage of financial versus technical assistance within
appropriations. Strengthening local capacity by providing ample and
consistent Federal funding for institutions, training, and technical
assistance is essential to maximize the effect of State and Federal
resources and ensure that assistance reaches the communities that need
it most. The Governors believe that assessment metrics based solely on
the absolute number of jobs created do not reflect the important
economic benefits of investments in community assets that improve
quality of life and amenities and make rural communities attractive
places to live, nor do they account for the relative effect of job
creation in small communities or areas with high unemployment or
poverty rates.
Western Governors note that shifts in our economy, labor force, and
technology require fundamental changes and new economic development
strategies. They request that the subcommittee support small businesses
and entrepreneurs; education and training that can be tailored to the
needs of rural communities; economic diversification; and tax
incentives, grants, and other financial incentives to spur innovation
and attract businesses and manufacturing enterprises to rural areas.
Western Governors are supportive of efforts to facilitate improved
coordination across agencies and streamlined, one-stop application
processes for rural customers.
Many western communities, especially rural and Tribal communities,
do not have access to broadband internet due to the high cost of
infrastructure and the economic challenges of serving low customer
densities in rural areas. When communities do have access to broadband,
download and upload speeds are often insufficient to meet bandwidth
demands or individuals lack the skills, technology, or capacity to reap
the benefits of our digital economy. Such realities have left many
rural businesses at a competitive disadvantage and citizens without
telework, telemedicine, and distance learning opportunities. Western
Governors look forward to addressing this digital divide by
implementing the significant broadband funding allocated to States
through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act's (IIJA; Public Law
117-58) Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program; State
Digital Equity Planning Grants; and Digital Equity Capacity Grant
Program.
Despite this progress, Western Governors emphasize the need for
continued Federal investment to close connectivity gaps and backfill
IIJA funding. Western Governors urge Congress to consider additional
funding for broadband deployment, including innovative and flexible
ways to repurpose existing resources in alignment with State and
territorial BEAD plans, and call on the subcommittee to identify and
invest in unmet and ongoing digital equity needs after funds are
expended in 2026. In addition, the subcommittee should support fiscal
opportunities to improve broadband connectivity on Tribal lands.
Cybersecurity is another priority of Western Governors. The
increasing complexity and frequency of cyber threats pose significant
risks to States and territories, economic stability, and national
security. Countering these threats effectively requires a well-trained
and experienced cybersecurity workforce. Therefore, Western Governors
request long-term and sufficient funding for developing and expanding
high-quality cybersecurity education and workforce development
programs. These programs should include efforts to target
underrepresented populations, retain personnel through rotations, and
increase work-based learning opportunities. The subcommittee should
expand the CyberCorps: Scholarship for Service Program and provide
continued support to educational initiatives, such as the National
Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) National Initiative for
Cybersecurity Education and National Centers of Academic Excellence in
Cyber Defense.
The Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons (MMIP) crisis continues
to deeply affect western communities. Western Governors recommend that
the subcommittee provide ample funding for Tribal courts and justice
systems to ensure communities have the tools to address these crimes.
Western Governors acknowledge the outsized harm caused by the
opioid epidemic, which has become increasingly lethal and devastating
to public health and safety. Reducing the epidemic's effects involves
stemming the supply of illegally produced opioids and limiting
inappropriate and nonmedical uses of prescription opioids. Western
Governors urge the subcommittee to continue financially supporting
State interdiction activities. The Governors appreciate past
allocations to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to reimburse
States for cleaning up and safely disposing of illegal substances.
Western Governors believe that the subcommittee should expand
opportunities for early intervention and law enforcement diversion,
including community reentry programs and resources and training for law
enforcement and emergency service providers, to prevent entry into the
justice system for individuals with behavioral health conditions.
Western Governors also call for designations to enhance access to harm
reduction strategies at low costs for both teens and adults.
Opioid education and awareness campaigns, such as those managed by
DEA, are necessary tools to foster public dialogue and mobilize action
across communities. The subcommittee should support DEA in further
developing its campaigns and dedicate funding to States and territories
for targeted and culturally specific opioid awareness and education
efforts, especially efforts focused on youth awareness and education,
which are complementary to those at the Federal level.
Finally, western States rely on basic information on the status,
trends, and projections of water resource availability to make sound
water management decisions. This information allows water users
throughout the West and decision makers at all levels of government to
assess drought conditions and respond effectively with drought
mitigation measures to reduce the risk of wildfires, ecosystem
impairments, agricultural production loss, and degradation of municipal
and industrial water supplies.
For these reasons, Western Governors support strong and dedicated
funding for the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS),
under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which
performs a valuable role in western water management and drought
response. Western Governors also support Federal programs dedicated to
the improvement of data on snowpack, streamflow, soil moisture, and
forecasting, including the NASA National Land Imaging (Landsat)
Program, and Federal efforts to coordinate water data gathering and
information programs across multiple agencies. Western Governors
recognize the need for improved predictive capabilities for extreme
weather variability and urge the subcommittee to place a priority on
improving the sub-seasonal and seasonal precipitation forecasting
capabilities that could facilitate water management decision making.
Western Governors recognize the enormous challenge you have in
balancing competing funding priorities, and we appreciate the
difficulty of the decisions the subcommittee must make. These
recommendations are offered in a spirit of cooperation and respect, and
WGA is prepared to assist you as the subcommittee discharges its
critical and challenging responsibilities.
[This statement was submitted by Jack Waldorf, Executive Director.]
______
Prepared Statement of Woodwell Climate Research Center
prioritization of arctic research (earth system models), office of
polar programs of the national science foundation
On behalf of the Arctic Research Program at Woodwell Climate
Research Center (``Woodwell Climate''), I am pleased to provide this
written testimony to the U.S. Senate subcommittee on Commerce, Justice,
Science, and Related Agencies for the official record. Woodwell Climate
respectfully requests that the subcommittee adopt the following Report
Language for fiscal year (FY) 2025:
``National Science Foundation--Directorate for Geosciences--
Office of Polar Programs--'Arctic Research--The Committee
supports the continued investments in Polar Programs research
funding pursuant to Federal priorities set forth in the Arctic
Research Plan and National Strategy for the Arctic Region.
Recognizing the relevance of Arctic research for national
mitigation responses, the Committee directs the National
Science Foundation to fund research of Earth System model
development that prioritizes improved representation of Arctic
feedbacks, including permafrost carbon, on global climate at
not less than $10 million annually.' ''
As a leader in Arctic research with expertise in underrepresented
climate feedbacks that inform national carbon budgets and policy
interventions relevant to greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation, Woodwell
Climate is uniquely positioned to recommend the above language to this
subcommittee.\1\ The following testimony seeks to further illustrate
the justification and urgent need for this subcommittee to support a
directed effort by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and
specifically, its Office of Polar Programs (OPP), to solicit research
and development of enhanced Earth System Models (ESMs) that include
improved representation of permafrost thaw, boreal wildfires, and other
Arctic ecological feedbacks on the global climate.
the need for predictive climate models and implications of missing
arctic feedbacks
Woodwell Climate's Arctic program examines the impacts of climate
change in the circumpolar North, where temperatures are rising three to
four times faster than the global average.\2\ These rising temperatures
are exacerbating a host of natural disturbances and hazards across
Alaska and the greater Arctic, including permafrost thaw--i.e., the
loss of perennially frozen soil that underlies roughly 15% of the
exposed land surface in the Northern Hemisphere. Permafrost is
estimated to contain 1.5 trillion tons of carbon, or more than twice
the amount of carbon as is currently in the atmosphere. Based on our
current climate trajectory, loss of permafrost could release GHG
emissions, including carbon dioxide and methane at levels rivaling the
highest-emitting countries over the next century.\3\
ESMs are instrumental for better understanding these climate
scenarios and informing U.S. government interventions designed to
mitigate the most extreme global impacts. The 2022-2026 Arctic Research
Plan developed pursuant to the Arctic Research Policy Act of 1984 (15
U.S.C. Sec. 4108), for example, recognizes computational models as
``foundational'' to all research activities concerning the Arctic
region and beyond.\4\ The Research Plan specifically notes that ESMs
provide a framework for understanding interactions among components of
the Arctic and between the Arctic and the global system across a range
of scales and complexity. The National Strategy for the Arctic Region
further confirms the U.S. Federal Government's commitment to advancing
monitoring and predictive capacity via improved global climate models--
tools that enable the U.S. government to make science-informed
decisions.\5\
Yet to date, most ESMs that are used to inform government decision-
making are missing critical disturbance processes arising from the
Arctic region. Physical and biochemical processes, including surface
hydrology, snow cover, soil decomposition and vegetation changes are
largely underrepresented in the simulations. Most notably, permafrost
thaw, including abrupt thaw, and interactions between permafrost and
high-latitude wildfires are not adequately considered. The IPCC 6th
Assessment Report (AR6), published in 2021, noted with high confidence
that permafrost will continue to thaw and will lead to carbon release
to the atmosphere--however, only two of the 11 models available to the
IPCC included representation of permafrost carbon. Neither of those
ESMs included important processes such as abrupt thaw or interactions
between permafrost and vegetation cover change or wildfire.
The subcommittee should recognize the significant implications of
this ESM phenomena: Without fully accounting for feedbacks that
accelerates carbon loss in high latitudes, the U.S. government cannot
accurately predict the magnitude and timescale of global GHG emissions,
including carbon dioxide and methane.\6\ This uncertainty means that
the efforts of the Federal Government to set reasonably achievable GHG
emission reduction targets and adhere to global carbon budgets are not
based on the best available science.
directing nsf to prioritize funding for esm research and development
Woodwell Climate recommends that the subcommittee recognize the OPP
within the Geosciences Directorate of NSF as well-positioned to address
these modeling gaps and to stimulate proposals for ESM research and
development with a focused attention on missing Arctic processes. OPP
is mandated to promote scientific research about the polar regions, and
specifically, research that advances understanding of polar systems and
their global interactions as it pertains to the Nation.\7\ The
integration of permafrost-carbon dynamics and other Arctic feedbacks
into ESMs aligns with this mission.
While Federal policy informing OPP operations, including frameworks
previously mentioned, recognize the value of ESMs in predicting future
Arctic change, the current Federal funding landscape is not conducive
to ESM development. For example, most Federal grant-funded science
projects have a duration of 3 years--a cycle that is proven too short
for early-career researchers to complete meaningful ESM development and
research before transitioning to a new project or position. Moreover,
government agencies traditionally prefer to fund research projects that
directly answer headline science questions; model development grants
are more nuanced, as they are generally non-hypothesis driven and aim
to achieve many intermediate steps.
Woodwell Climate has therefore recommended report language to this
subcommittee that would effectively indicate a tonal shift in the
Federal ESM funding priorities. With a directive to emphasize and
allocate requisite funding for ESM development projects, Woodwell
Climate expects that NSF will receive an influx of ESM development
proposals, particularly those that seek to incorporate missing global
climate feedbacks such as permafrost thaw. The funds may also help to
support longer-term investments in training members of the ESM and
modeling community and provide the time needed for additional
benchmarking and evaluation that is required to trace performance of
more complex models.
The ongoing efforts of Woodwell Climate and experts in both the
U.S. Federal Government and independent institutions confirm that there
is already sufficient knowledge, expertise, and computational capacity
to increase the accuracy of ESMs. Support from this subcommittee is
necessary, however, to ensure that ESM development--and particularly,
the inclusion of permafrost carbon dynamics--is recognized as a Federal
research and policy priority. By adopting the requested report language
and directing NSF to dedicate no less than $10 million per year per
model to advance the integration of missing Arctic processes in ESM
models, this subcommittee would signal recognition that ESM development
is foundational to national climate security and hazard mitigation in a
changing world.
conclusion
Woodwell Climate strongly urges the subcommittee to recognize the
importance of the Arctic region in enhancing the Nation's climate
security and mitigation response. Accordingly, Woodwell Climate
respectfully requests the adoption of report language that supports a
directed effort by NSF to fund ESM development that prioritizes
improved representation of Arctic feedbacks, including permafrost
carbon, on global climate at not less than $10 million per year
starting in FY2025. Such investment will ensure that the U.S. research
community is able to more accurately predict future climate scenarios
and better inform policy decisions.
On behalf of Woodwell Climate, I would like to thank you for the
opportunity to provide this testimony. Please do not hesitate to
contact me should you have any questions about Woodwell Climate or the
Arctic Program's scientific research.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Arctic, Woodwell Climate, https://www.woodwellclimate.org/
research-area/arctic/; in 2022, Arctic scientists at Woodwell Climate
Research Center launched ``Permafrost Pathways'' which leverages
expertise of leading institutions to address climate mitigation
strategies, including enhanced monitoring and modeling of permafrost
thaw processes across the Arctic. See https://
permafrost.woodwellclimate.org/.
\2\ Rantanen, M., et al. (2022). The Arctic has warmed nearly four
times faster than the globe since 1979 (2022). Commun Earth Environ 168
(3). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-022-00498-3.
\3\ Natali, S. M., Bronen, R., Cochran, P., Holdren, J. P., Rogers,
B. M., & Treharne, R. (2022). Incorporating permafrost into climate
mitigation and adaptation policy Environ. Res. Lett. 17 091001. https:/
/doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac8c5a.
\4\ See Arctic Research Plan 2022-2026: A Report by the Interagency
Arctic Research Policy Committee of the National Science and Technology
Council (December 2021), https://www.iarpccollaborations.org/uploads/
cms/documents/final-arp-2022-2026-20211214.pdf.
\5\ U.S. White House, National Strategy for the Arctic Region
(2022), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/National-
Strategy-for-the-Arctic-Region.pdf.
\6\ Natali, S. M., Holdren, J. P., Rogers, B. M., Treharne, R.,
Duffy, P. B., Pomerance, R., & MacDonald, E. (2021). Permafrost carbon
feedbacks threaten global climate goals. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, 118(21). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2100163118.
\7\ Office of Polar Programs, NSF, https://www.nsf.gov/div/
index.jsp?div=OPP.
[This statement was submitted by Melissa Shapiro, J.D., Arctic
Policy Lead.]
LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS
----------
Page
All Rise, Prepared Statement of.................................. 233
American:
Bar Association, Prepared Statement of....................... 234
Foreign Service Association (AFSA), Prepared Statement of The 237
Geophysical Union, Prepared Statement of..................... 238
Governance Institute, Prepared Statement of.................. 240
Indian Higher Education Consortium, Prepared Statement of the 243
Institute of Biological Sciences, Prepared Statement of...... 245
Physiological:
Association Services, Inc., Prepared Statement of........ 249
Society (APS), Prepared Statement of..................... 247
Rivers, Prepared Statement of................................ 251
Society:
for Microbiology, Prepared Statement of the.............. 253
of Agronomy, Prepared Statement of....................... 256
of Plant Biologists, Prepared Statement of............... 257
Animal Welfare Institute, Prepared Statement of.................. 259
Artie Ann Bates, MD, Psychiatrist, Prepared Statement of......... 262
Association of:
Science and Technology Centers, the American Alliance of
Museums, the Association of Children's Museums, and the
Association of Science Museum Directors, Prepared Statement
of the..................................................... 264
State Floodplain Managers, Prepared Statement of............. 266
Boys and Girls Club of America, Prepared Statement of............ 268
Britt, Senator Katie, U.S. Senator From Alabama, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 122
CAST, Prepared Statement of...................................... 270
Chugach Regional Resources Commission, Prepared Statement of..... 272
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Prepared
Statement of................................................... 275
Coastal States Organization, Estuarine Research Reserve
Association, Integrated Ocean Observing System Association,
National Marine Sanctuary Foundation, & Sea Grant Association,
Prepared Statement of.......................................... 276
Collins, Senator Susan M., U.S. Senator From Maine:
Opening Statement of......................................... 185
Questions Submitted by
Concerned Letcher Countians, LLC, Prepared Statement of.......... 279
Consortium of Social Science Associations, Prepared Statement of. 281
Court Appointed Special Advocates Program/Guardian ad Litem
Association for Children, Prepared Statement of................ 283
Daughters of Penelope, Prepared Statement of..................... 285
Entomological Society of America, Prepared Statement of.......... 288
Environmental Solutions International, Prepared Statement of..... 290
Federation of:
American Societies for Experimental Biology, Prepared
Statement of............................................... 294
Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Prepared
Statement of............................................... 295
Fischer, Senator Deb, U.S. Senator From Nebraska, Questions
Submitted by
Foundation for American Innovation, Prepared Statement of
Garland, Hon. Merrick B., Attorney General of the United States,
Department of Justice:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 6
Questions Submitted to....................................... 44
Statement of................................................. 4
Hagerty, Senator Bill, U.S. Senator From Tennessee, Questions
Submitted by................................................... 118
Heinrich, Senator Martin, U.S. Senator From New Mexico, Questions
Submitted by
Humane Society Legislative Fund and The Humane Society of the
United States, Prepared Statement of........................... 301
Insights Association, Prepared Statement of...................... 303
IOOS Association, Prepared Statement of.......................... 305
Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, Prepared Statement of................. 307
John Snook, Chief Policy Officer Meadows Mental Health Policy
Institute, Prepared Statement of............................... 347
Kennedy, Senator John, U.S. Senator From Louisiana, Questions
Submitted by
Kentucky Resources Council, Prepared Statement of................ 310
Learning and Education Academic Research Network, Prepared
Statement of................................................... 311
Manchin, Senator Joe, III, U.S. Senator From West Virginia,
Questions Submitted by
MENTOR, Prepared Statement of.................................... 312
Moran, Senator Jerry, U.S. Senator From Kansas:
Opening Statement of
Question Submitted by........................................ 108
Murkowski, Senator Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska, Questions
Submitted by
Murray, Senator Patty, U.S. Senator From Washington, Question
Submitted by................................................... 171
National:
Association of Marine Laboratories, Prepared Statement of.... 315
Estuarine Research Reserve Association, Prepared Statement of 317
Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Prepared Statement of.......... 319
Legal Aid & Defender Association, Prepared Statement of...... 322
Marine Sanctuary Foundation, Prepared Statement of........... 325
Security Counselors, Prepared Statement of................... 327
Natural Science Collections Alliance, Prepared Statement of...... 329
Nature Conservancy, Prepared Statement of The.................... 332
Nelson, Honorable Bill, Administrator, National Aeronautics and
Space Administration:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 137
Questions Submitted to....................................... 171
Statement of................................................. 137
New England Innocence Project, Prepared Statement of............. 334
Nez Perce Tribe, Prepared Statement of The....................... 337
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Prepared Statement of..... 339
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP),
Prepared Statement of.......................................... 342
Pacific Salmon Commission, Prepared Statement of................. 343
Panchanathan, Honorable Dr. Sethuraman, Director, National
Science Foundation:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 141
Questions Submitted to....................................... 175
Statement of................................................. 139
Peters, Senator Gary, U.S. Senator From Michigan, Questions
Submitted by
Population Association of America/Association of Population
Centers, Prepared Statement of................................. 345
Project On Government Oversight (POGO), Prepared Statement of.... 349
Raimondo, Hon. Gina M., Secretary, Department of Commerce:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 60
Questions Submitted to....................................... 92
Statement of................................................. 58
Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS) Program, Prepared
Statement of................................................... 351
Sandy Hook Promise, Prepared Statement of........................ 354
Sea Grant Association, Prepared Statement of..................... 356
Shaheen, Senator Jeanne, U.S. Senator From New Hampshire:
Opening Statement
Questions Submitted by....................................... 175
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Prepared
Statement of................................................... 358
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Prepared
Statement of................................................... 361
Society for Neuroscience, Prepared Statement of.................. 363
Stronger America Through Seafood, Prepared Statement of.......... 365
U.S. Census Bureau, Prepared Statement of........................ 366
University of Illinois System, Prepared Statement of............. 366
Van Hollen, Senator Chris, U.S. Senator From Maryland, Questions
Submitted by
Vera Institute of Justice, Prepared Statement of................. 367
Voice of the Experienced, Prepared Statement of.................. 369
Western Governors' Association, Prepared Statement of............ 371
Woodwell Climate Research Center, Prepared Statement of.......... 373
Wray, Hon. Christopher A., Director, Federal Bureau of
Investigation:
Prepared Statement of........................................ 188
Statement of................................................. 186
SUBJECT INDEX
----------
Page
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Additional Committee Questions 92
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Britt, Senator Katie..................................... 122
Collins, Susan M......................................... 101
Fischer, Deb............................................. 129
Hagerty, Bill............................................ 118
Heinrich, Martin......................................... 98
Manchin, Senator Joe, III................................ 92
Moran, Jerry............................................. 108
Murkowski, Lisa.......................................... 104
Peters, Gary............................................. 99
Van Hollen, Chris........................................ 94
__________
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Introduction..................................................... 6
Keeping Our Country Safe......................................... 7
Protecting Civil Rights.......................................... 12
Additional Areas of Departmental Focus........................... 13
Additional Committee Questions 44
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Collins, Susan M......................................... 49
Fischer, Deb............................................. 51
Kennedy, John............................................ 50
Manchin, Senator Joe, III................................ 44
Peters, Gary............................................. 48
__________
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Conclusion....................................................... 198
Criminal Threats................................................. 194
FY 2025 Budget Overview.......................................... 188
Key:
Cross-Cutting Capabilities and Capacities.................... 197
Threats and Challenges....................................... 189
National Security................................................ 189
__________
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Additional Committee Questions 170
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Murkowski, Lisa.......................................... 174
Murray, Patty............................................ 171
Van Hollen, Chris........................................ 173
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Additional Committee Questions 170
Questions Submitted by Senators:
Heinrich, Martin......................................... 178
Kennedy, John............................................ 179
Shaheen, Jeanne.......................................... 175
Van Hollen, Chris........................................ 177
Conclusion....................................................... 150
Four Strategic Themes............................................ 142
Improve Access to America's Statistical Data..................... 150
Introduction..................................................... 141
NSF's Three Pillars.............................................. 142
Research Security................................................ 149
Sexual Assault and Harassment Prevention and Response............ 150
-