    [Senate Hearing 119-353]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                          S. Hrg. 119-353

                      NOMINATION OF HON. MARKWAYNE MULLIN
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                   HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                    NOMINATION OF THE HON. MARKWAYNE MULLIN
             TO BE SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                                   __________

                                 MARCH 18, 2026

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                           Printed for the use of the
            Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

                                   __________

                            U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    63-380 PDF                     WASHINGTON : 2026
    =======================================================================

            COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                         RAND PAUL, Kentucky, Chairman
    RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
    JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             MAGGIE WOOD HASSAN, New Hampshire
    RICK SCOTT, Florida                  RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
    JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri                JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
    BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  ANDY KIM, New Jersey
    JONI ERNST, Iowa                     RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
    ASHLEY MOODY, Florida                ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan

                    William E. Henderson III, Staff Director
                      Christina N. Salazar, Chief Counsel
                       Harry Kazenoff, Associate Counsel
               Megan M. Krynen, Senior Professional Staff Member
                   David M. Weinberg, Minority Staff Director
         Christopher J. Mulkins, Minority Director of Homeland Security
                  Claudine J. Brenner, Minority Senior Counsel
                         Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
                       Ashley A. Gonzalez, Records Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                     ------
    Opening statements:
                                                                       Page
        Senator Paul.................................................     1
        Senator Peters...............................................     2
        Senator Lankford.............................................     4
        Senator Moreno...............................................    14
        Senator Hassan...............................................    16
        Senator Johnson..............................................    19
        Senator Blumenthal...........................................    22
        Senator Kim..................................................    27
        Senator Scott................................................    30
        Senator Fetterman............................................    32
        Senator Ernst................................................    34
        Senator Slotkin..............................................    36
        Senator Moody................................................    39
        Senator Gallego..............................................    42
        Senator Hawley...............................................    44
    Prepared statements:
        Senator Peters...............................................    63

                                   WITNESSES
                           WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 2026

    Hon. Markwayne Mullin to be Secretary, U.S. Department of
      Homeland Security
        Testimony....................................................     6
        Prepared statement...........................................    66
        Biographical and professional information....................    68
        Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics.................    85
        Responses to pre-hearing questions...........................    93
        Responses to post-hearing questions..........................   112
        Letters of support...........................................   163

                                    APPENDIX

    Senator Hassan's QFR's for the Record............................   122
    Britt statement..................................................   166
    Senator Peters letter to Mr. Mullin..............................   171
    The chart submitted by Senator Moreno............................   173
    The chart submitted by Senator Blumenthal round 1................   174
    The chart submitted by Senator Hawley............................   176
    Statement from Iranian-American Defense Fund.....................   178
    The chart submitted by Senator Blumenthal round 2................   195
    Bio Questionnaire Minority Addendum..............................   197

                      NOMINATION OF HON. MARKWAYNE MULLIN

                                  ----------

                           WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 2026

                                         U.S. Senate,
                               Committee on Homeland Security
                                      and Governmental Affairs,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in
    room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Rand Paul,
    Chair of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Paul [presiding], Johnson, Lankford,
    Scott, Hawley, Moreno, Ernst, Moody, Peters, Hassan,
    Blumenthal, Fetterman, Kim, Gallego, and Slotkin.

                   OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PAUL

        Chairman Paul. The hearing to consider the nomination of
    Markwayne Mullin to be Secretary of Department of Homeland
    Security (DHS) will come to order, and I am assuming will
    commence when he arrives.
        [Pause.]
        Good morning, everyone. I entered the Senate the same year
    that Representative Gabby Giffords was shot. I knew then that
    the State of political rhetoric was encouraging violence. I
    think it is imperative now more than ever that the leaders in
    our country disavow violence and lead by example.
        Through the years, I have personally been exposed multiple
    times to political violence. I was in the right field batting
    cage when the crazed shooter unleashed nearly 200 shots at our
    congressional baseball practice. I will never forget Steve
    Scalise valiantly trying to drag his body away as the gunman
    continued.
        Later that year, a Trump-hating felon attacked me from
    behind in my yard. I was just straightening up from picking up
    a tree limb. I was wearing noise cancellation headphones. Never
    saw him coming, running pell-mell down the hill. I was struck
    in the back. The force of the blow sent us through the air
    nearly 10 feet, down the hill, until his shoulder impaled me as
    we hit the ground. Six of my ribs were broken. Three of the
    ribs were completely separated such that for weeks the ends of
    the ribs would grind upon each other. My lung was damaged. For
    weeks I could inhale but not have the rib strength to exhale. I
    developed two pneumonias. The pain was such that I could only
    sit up in bed by tying a rope to the foot of the bed and
    pulling myself up. But even then, the pain was that of a
    thousand knives.
        Over the year of recovery, I began to cough up blood. I
    underwent removal of part of my lung. Complications led to an
    infection in the space between my lung and chest wall. I spent
    a week in the hospital having the infection lavaged every six
    hours through a chest tube.
        Recently, Senator Mullin, if you have time to listen, you
    were confronted by constituents that were angry because you
    voted against my amendment to stop all funding for refugee
    welfare programs. Instead of explaining your vote to continue
    these welfare programs for refugees, you decided to transfer
    the blame. You told the media that I was a ``freaking snake''
    and that you completely understood why I had been assaulted.
        I was shocked that you would justify and celebrate this
    violent assault that caused me so much pain and my family so
    much pain. I just wonder if someone who applauds violence
    against their political opponents is the right person to lead
    an agency that has struggled to accept limits to the proper use
    of force.
        You might argue you were mad and upset about being
    confronted by your constituents. But Senator Mullin, your
    constituents are justifiably upset with you. By now, most of
    America knows that the Somali welfare fraud in Minnesota stole
    over $9 billion. But instead of defending your vote, you vote
    to continue these refugee welfare programs, you chose to lash
    out at me.
        You went on to brag that you had already told me, to my
    face, that you completely understood and approved of the
    assault. That is a lie. You have a chance today. You can either
    continue to lie or you can correct the record. You have never
    had the courage to look me in the eye and tell me that the
    assault was justified, so today you will have your chance.
    Today, I will give you that chance to clear the record. Tell it
    to my face. If that is what you believe, tell it to me today.
    Tell the world why you believe I deserve to be assaulted from
    behind, have six ribs broken and a damaged lung. Tell me to my
    face why you think I deserved it.
        While you are at it, explain to the American public why
    they should trust a man with anger issues to set the proper
    example for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and
    Border Patrol agents. Explain to the American public how a man
    who has no regrets about brawling in a Senate committee can set
    a proper example for over 250,000 men and women who work at the
    Department of Homeland Security.
        Senator Peters, you are recognized for your opening
    comment.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PETERS\1\

        Senator Peters. Thank you, Chair Paul, and thank you,
    Senator Mullin, for being here today. Congratulations on your
    nomination. I certainly appreciate your willingness to meet
    with me as well as my staff as we consider your nomination to
    serve as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Senator Peters appears in the
    Appendix on page 63.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I would also like to welcome your family who is joining us
    today, and to thank all of them for your commitment to public
    service. We do it as a family, as you know.
        The Department of Homeland Security is a complicated
    organization with challenging operational dynamics. As everyone
    is well aware, many components within DHS are currently
    operating without funding.
        Let's be clear. Democrats are committed to funding the
    Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Federal
    Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Cybersecurity and
    Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and the U.S. Coast Guard
    (USCG) while we negotiate much-needed ICE reforms. We tried to
    pass those bills by unanimous consent (UC) multiple times over
    the past two weeks. Unfortunately, Republicans have blocked
    those bills each and every time. Yesterday, the White House
    sent a letter laying out their latest offer, but the devil is
    always in the details.
        Administrative action is not enough. We need to pass real
    reforms into law. If Republicans really do agree with us that
    TSA and other personnel need to be paid, then they should join
    us and pass the bills to pay them today--we can do that--while
    we continue to negotiate needed ICE reforms.
        And let me be clear. These are very straightforward reforms
    that we are asking for. We just want ICE to follow the same
    rules that our local police and our local communities follow
    every day.
        But DHS has faced management challenges since the start of
    the Trump administration, and over the past year many of those
    challenges have unfortunately only increased. As soon as
    President Trump was sworn in, he made deep cuts to
    counterterrorism offices and programs, forced out or reassigned
    key personnel, and redirected the focus of limited remaining
    counterterrorism resources away from the serious threats that
    we face, and toward targeting the President's perceived
    political enemies.
        The Administration has also gutted our Nation's main
    cybersecurity agency, once again forcing out or reassigning
    highly talented personnel, slashing budgets, and limiting the
    agency's work to help private companies address significant
    cyberattacks, and protect Americans from criminal hackers, and
    support secure elections.
        The Administration has also taken an axe to FEMA, cutting
    staff, and freezing or delaying critical grant funding for
    everything from emergency food and shelter after a disaster, to
    flood mitigation programs and security grants for nonprofits,
    including houses of worship.
        All these cuts and reassignments have been made at the
    expense of vital missions, including the core terrorism
    prevention and response mission the Department was created to
    address. In doing so, the Trump administration has broken trust
    between law enforcement and the communities they are intended
    to protect, a break that will have a generational impact on
    public safety and security.
        And now, after President Trump's reckless war of choice
    against Iran, the threats to our Nation have never been higher.
    In my home State of Michigan, just last week, we saw both a
    major medical device manufacturer get hacked by an Iranian-
    backed group, and a horrific violent attack on Temple Israel, a
    metro Detroit area synagogue.
        President Trump's unilateral and unchecked executive
    actions have put Americans at risk, and we need a steady,
    qualified leader at the Department of Homeland Security to
    address these serious threats. How the Homeland Security
    Secretary responds to a crisis sends signals to everyone, from
    the Department's own personnel, to the American people, and to
    the entire world.
        It is not the role of the Secretary to be a cable news
    commentator in the wake of a crisis. The Secretary's role is to
    lead the response and work to ensure the Department that they
    are leading is not actually the cause of the crisis. A
    Secretary who jumps to conclusions without the facts, as we saw
    in the case of Renee Good and Alex Pretti's killings, only
    worsens the situation and actually makes us less safe. This is
    a role where temperament matters, where judgment matters, and
    where experience matters.
        We have seen under Secretary Noem's leadership how
    shortcomings in these traits can compound the challenges that
    already come with leading a large and complex department. And
    now more than ever, we need a DHS Secretary who is a steady
    hand, who will provide thoughtful leadership, follow the facts,
    tell the truth, and hold agency officials accountable when they
    need to be held accountable. We need a DHS Secretary who is
    committed to the rule of law and who will protect and cooperate
    with independent oversight, whether that is from the Inspector
    General (IG) or from Members of Congress. We need a DHS
    Secretary who is free from distractions and conflicts of
    interest that only undercut the Department's work, and also
    break trust with the American people.
        Senator Mullin, I appreciate you being here today to answer
    our questions about these concerns and your experience and
    qualifications for the job. While I am interested in hearing
    more about your vision for leading the Department, I do have
    reservations about your readiness to take on such a significant
    role at such a critical time.
        I hope you will provide us with substantive answers today,
    and candid recognition of where this Administration has fallen
    short on safeguarding our homeland security as you seek to lead
    the Department as our Nation faces ongoing security threats and
    war with Iran.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Mullin is to be introduced today by
    Senator Lankford. Senator Lankford, you are recognized for your
    introduction of our witness.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANKFORD

        Senator Lankford. Chairman Paul, thank you.
        Markwayne, I am proud that you are here. I get the honor of
    getting a chance to be able to recognize and introduce my
    friend, Markwayne Mullin, my fellow Senator from the State of
    Oklahoma and somebody that I have seen work incredibly hard to
    be ready for every single task you have ever taken on and to be
    able to not only do it, but do it well.
        There are a lot of folks that think they know you. I
    actually get to know you, and I have had the opportunity to be
    able to serve beside you for now over a decade and have seen
    your tenacity in your work effort.
        Folks may not know that the first time we really got to
    know each other, ironically enough, was around a natural
    disaster, a FEMA event. It was Briarwood Elementary in 2013,
    when a tornado came right through the heart of Oklahoma. You
    had literally just been elected a few weeks before that and had
    just taken the oath of office. The Oklahoma delegation all
    gathered together at the very tragic event there at Briarwood
    Elementary. While we were meeting with the principal and
    meeting with teachers and families and walking through the
    debris field that was that elementary school, we turned around
    to be able to look for Markwayne and for a minute we could not
    find him because in one of the debris piles there was water
    shooting out of the middle of it, and his plumber instinct
    said, ``I got to go find that and figure out how to solve
    that.''
        While everyone else was shaking hands and meeting people,
    he was digging through the debris field to find a way to be
    able to shut off the water that was shooting through the middle
    of that destroyed elementary school. I remember smiling and
    thinking he is a guy that does not mind getting his hands dirty
    to actually go solve the problem. Where there is a problem he
    can solve, he is going to do whatever it takes to actually
    solve it.
        Markwayne grew up in a very small town in far eastern
    Oklahoma, ironically named Westville, in the easternmost part
    of Oklahoma. Just 1,300 people call Westville home. He grew up
    in a family of modest means. I think that would be safe to be
    able to say, the youngest of seven children in a family that
    just didn't have much. His dad ran a very small plumbing
    company that then Markwayne took on and grew into being one of
    the largest plumbing companies in the entire State.
        He married his high school sweetheart, one of the smartest
    things he ever did, at just 20 years old, and he and Christie
    have developed a family that is a beautiful family of three
    children they had naturally and three children they chose, that
    they adopted and took them in. It is a remarkable family and a
    remarkable success that you have actually led through a lot of
    hard work and a lot of love and tenacity. He is a person of
    faith that is not afraid to be able to talk about his faith in
    Jesus Christ, but he is also a person who has deep respect for
    all people.
        Markwayne has served in Congress for 14 years, 11 years in
    the House of Representatives, three here in the Senate. He has
    passed legislation that he will now be charged with actually
    implementing it in the order that was actually passed. He
    served on the Appropriations Committee here. He has served on
    Armed Services (SASC). He has served on the Health, Education,
    Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee here, and he has done an
    incredible job in the work that he has done with Indian
    Affairs. He is somebody who has the rare gift of bringing
    people together on both sides of the aisle.
        The one thing I would say to every single person on this
    dais, regardless if you are a Republican or Democrat, if you
    want to sit down and talk about an issue, he is glad to be able
    to talk about it and to be able to work it out, and has very
    good relationships in the House and in the Senate, and he is
    not afraid to ask questions when he does not know the answer,
    and to be able to research things. He and I have often talked
    about being up late, both of us working on researching through
    an issue to try to be able to learn more about it, because the
    crazy thing about being in Congress is you do not know
    everything. You have to do the work, and Markwayne is not
    afraid to do the work.
        Over the past year and a few months, we have seen
    incredible progress on our Southern Border. Our Southern
    Border, 18 months ago, I think we forget what it looked like,
    12,000 people a day illegally crossing our border, just being
    waved in. No vetting, no background checks, 12,000 people a
    day. That is not happening anymore. Our numbers are down on the
    Southwest Border 96 percent.
        So you walk into an agency that has finally restored some
    order to our Southern Border, but there is a lot of work still
    to do with FEMA, with other areas of Homeland Security, and a
    very large agency with 250,000 people that are actually under
    your leadership there. I am confident that you will be able to
    take those things on.
        Not only am I confident, the National Border Patrol Council
    has already sent a letter in strong support here. Mr. Chair, I
    would like to ask unanimous consent to insert into the record
    the National Border Patrol Council,\1\ their letter of support,
    leadership of the Cherokee Nation, their strong support. Then
    my fellow Senator, Katie Britt, has an opening statement who I
    would like to also submit for the record, with unanimous
    consent.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The letter from the National Border Patrol Council appears in
    the Appendix on page 163.
        \2\ The opening statement of Senator Britt appears in the Appendix
    on page 166.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Chairman Paul. Without objection.
        Senator Lankford. Thank you. This is a person that actually
    lives what we affectionately call in Oklahoma, the Oklahoma
    standard, that when hard things actually occur, you step up and
    you serve your neighbor and you find ways to be able to help
    people to do the hard things that have to be done. Markwayne, I
    appreciate your leadership. I appreciate your willingness to be
    able to step up in a season where DHS needs a leader to be able
    to step into that role and to be able to help our Nation in so
    many different complicated areas, especially at a time when
    right now we cannot even get funding to DHS. We have to be able
    to have good solid leadership there.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Paul. It is the practice of the Homeland Security
    and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) to swear in
    witnesses. Would the nominee please stand and raise your right
    hand.
        Do you swear that the testimony you will give before this
    Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
    the truth, so help you, God?
        Senator Mullin. I do.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Mullin, you are recognized for your
    opening statement.

      TESTIMONY OF THE HON. MARKWAYNE MULLIN,\3\ TO BE SECRETARY,
                  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

        Senator Mullin. I think before I can start my opening
    statement I have to address the remarks that the Chair made,
    calling me a liar. Sir, I think there is everybody in this room
    knows that I am very blunt and direct, to the point, and if I
    have something to say, I will say it directly to your face. If
    you recall back in my House days, we actually did have this
    conversation because of remarks that I have made. You were in a
    room. I simply addressed that I said I could understand because
    of the behavior you were having, that I could understand why
    the neighbor did what he did.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ The prepared statement of Senator Mullin appears in the
    Appendix on page 66.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As far as my terms as the snake in the grass, sir, I work
    around this room to try to fix problems. I have worked with
    many people in this room. Seems like you fight Republicans more
    than you work with us. I did address those remarks. I did
    explain your gimmicks by the amendment you put forth. As far as
    me saying that I invoke violence, I don't. I don't think
    anybody should be hit by surprise. I don't like that. But if I
    do have something to say, everybody in this room knows I will
    come straight to you. I will say it publicly, and I will say it
    privately, but I will never say it behind your back. So for you
    to say I am a liar, sir, that is not accurate.
        I got proof to say that because you have spent millions of
    dollars in my campaigns against me because we just don't get
    along. However, sir, that doesn't keep me at all from doing my
    job. I can have difference of opinions with everybody in this
    room, but as Secretary of Homeland, I will be protecting
    everybody, including Kentucky, as much as I will my own
    backyard in Oklahoma.
        It is bigger than the partisan bickering that we have. It
    is bigger than the political differences we have. The truth is,
    I have a job to do, and I don't like to fail at anything, at
    all. So I can set it aside if you are willing to set it aside.
    Let me earn your respect. Let me earn the job. I won't fail
    you. I won't back down from a challenge, and I will also admit
    when I am wrong.
        I am not perfect. I don't claim to be perfect. I make
    mistakes just like anybody else. But mistakes, if you own them,
    you can learn from them, and you can move ahead, and I will
    make that commitment to you.
        Ranking Member Peters, Chairman Paul, I do thank you for
    this opportunity. It is a humbling experience, a kid from
    Westville, Oklahoma, that grew up with a dad that worked hard.
    He set the work example for all of us, and all my families and
    my siblings, we all work hard, and I am proud of the family we
    have. But to say that a kid with a bad speech impediment would
    one day sit up here in front of you, and be nominated to be the
    Secretary of Homeland, it was humbling enough to be selected by
    Oklahoma to be their U.S. Representative when I didn't even
    know how to tie a tie, and 10 years later to be able to be
    called a United States Senator and serve with all you guys.
        I respect every one of you guys. I do. Regardless of if I
    have an opinion about you or not, you were elected by your
    State, and I respect that. I may disagree with you but I
    respect it, because we all make decisions based on two things:
    the way we were raised, which never changes, and our life
    experiences, which constantly change.
        For me, to be able to have the love of my life behind me,
    somebody I literally fell in love with in third grade, I knew I
    was going to marry her in eighth grade. She didn't know that.
    We had to work through that process. But at 18 years old--and I
    was 19, she agreed to marry me--I didn't have anything. I was
    on a wrestling scholarship, living in a dorm. She was cheering
    at Northeastern State University. I think she fell in love with
    my truck, because my truck was pretty cool.
        But the truth is we didn't know what we didn't know, but we
    did know we loved each other. I haven't been perfect. I
    apologize to her quite often, send her flowers all the time.
    But I still am humbled by the fact that we have to enjoy this
    walk together. We have had God on our side and her right beside
    me. To our six children who have been on this adventure with
    me, what an adventure it has been.
        We have a saying in our family, you are never going to
    change anything you are willing to tolerate. That is how we
    live our life and that is how we move forward. Regardless of
    what is in front of us, we always take it on as a family.
        Now, I am not scared of a challenge. I am scared of
    failure. I will work hard, each day. I will work hard to make
    the 280,000 employees at DHS, with the 22 agencies that is
    underneath me, proud. I will show them somebody that no one
    will outwork. I will work beside them every single day, to not
    just secure our homeland, but to bring peace of mind and
    confidence to the agency.
        My goal, in six months, is that we are not in the lead
    story every single day. My goal is for people to understand we
    are out there, we are protecting them, and we are working with
    them. My goal is to make every one of you guys proud. My goal,
    for those that don't support me, will regret not supporting me.
        But we have to get DHS funded. We have to. My friends, we
    have to set the partisan side down, and we have to realize that
    we are putting our homeland and the peace of mind at risk for
    the American people. Sometimes it is political theater.
    Sometimes it is true differences. But what we do know is that
    we are playing with fire.
        We have 280,000 DHS employees right now that are on day 30
    without pay, and they are still showing up every single day to
    do their job. That is a dedicated group of people. We should
    all be proud of them. We should all be working together, and we
    should all be trying to fund them.
        I pray, that we can get past this, that once this hearing
    is over and once we go through this process--I get it. I guess
    some of it has to be political theater. I understand it. I have
    to really pray about my attitude. But I will say, once it is
    over, I hope we can work together and get them funded, so when
    I walk in, if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, if I walk
    in as Secretary, that these guys are ready to go to work day
    one.
        God bless you. Thank you so much for this opportunity, and
    I look forward to your questions.
        Chairman Paul. It is the standard practice of this
    Committee for the Chair to ask nominees the following question.
        Do you agree, without reservation, to comply with any
    request or summons to appear or testify before any duly
    constituted committee of Congress if you are confirmed?
        Senator Mullin. I do.
        Chairman Paul. We will now proceed to seven minutes of
    questioning.
        The record should show, and I think will show, a lack of
    contrition, no apology, and no regrets for your support. You
    completely understand the violence that was perpetrated on me.
    You are unrepentant. The only thing you quibble about is
    whether I met you somehow when you were in the House. I don't
    think we ever met when you were in the House. This idea that
    the only thing you are upset about is not that you were for
    violence, what you are upset about is that I called you a liar,
    because you said it to my face, which is really more about this
    machismo that you have.
        When in Oklahoma the media asked you about the refugee
    welfare programs, the programs you voted to continue funding,
    it was this whole idea that you were going to transfer it
    because you were uncomfortable. Your anger, low impulse
    control, causes you to then go after and decide that you are
    going to go after me as well. You say you completely understood
    that I was assaulted from behind, had six ribs broken, and part
    of my lung removed, and that was just fine. That is something
    that you, I guess, approve of as far as resolution of political
    problems.
        When I talked to you privately on the phone, there was no
    apology. You just said, ``We can let our political difference
    go by.'' And you said a few minutes ago, ``We can just set it
    aside.'' Well, political differences we can, but when you say
    that you agree with a felon, a Trump-hating felon who attacked
    me, somehow you think I am just going to set that aside. Oh, it
    is no big deal. I lay in pain for two months, had six ribs
    broken, three of them separated, grinding upon bone-on-bone for
    months, had part of my lung removed, and you think that is
    great and to be extolled. I mean, the sheer lack of any kind of
    self-awareness that you are going to be leading thousands of
    men and women who will have the use of force, and there have
    been great questions in our country about how that will be
    used, and you think a violent attack is just fine.
        I guess my first question is, do you think that justifying
    that kind of violence sets a good example for the men and women
    of ICE and Border Patrol?
        Senator Mullin. Mr. Chair, first of all, I did not know the
    extent of your damage. When the phone call was made, I made it
    to you and I tried to talk to you. You did not engage at all.
    In fact, you said, ``Get your paperwork in. It has to be three
    days in between me and you.''
        Chairman Paul. You offered no apology.
        And you offer no apology today and no regrets. Haven't
    heard the word apologize, haven't heard the word regret,
    haven't heard I misspoke and it was heated and I made a
    mistake. I haven't heard any of those words.
        Senator Mullin. Sir, actually it wasn't heated and I am not
    apologizing for pointing out your character.
        Chairman Paul. Good. So you are jolly well fine, and you
    want the American public and the people up here to vote, that
    may or may not vote for you, to know that you supported the
    felonious, violent attack on me from behind.
        Senator Mullin. I did not say I supported it. I said I
    understood it. There is a difference.
        Chairman Paul. So that means you really did not approve of
    it. Just completely understand it. What do you think most
    people would interpret, completely understand to be? Support
    for or a condemnation of the violence?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, as I said, we can have our
    differences. It is not going to keep me from doing my job as
    Secretary of Homeland Security. I am going to secure Kentucky
    and take care of Kentucky as much as I am Oklahoma.
        Chairman Paul. If this were a one-off, it would be one
    thing. If you just disliked me so much that you approved of
    violence against me, people could just write it off, ``well,
    maybe they hate each other.'' But really there is a pattern of
    this. Let's go ahead and roll the tape.
        [Video plays.]
        So no regrets. In fact, even after your anger had cooled,
    you were still bragging that if he had only been brave enough
    to stand up, you would have jumped over the dais and taught him
    a lesson because that is how men should settle their
    differences. Do you think fighting as a resolution for
    political differences is a good example for the men and women
    of ICE and Border Patrol?
        Senator Mullin. As you can notice over my shoulder here is
    my good friend, Sean O'Brien. Both of us have had
    conversations, both of us have shaken hands, and both of us
    agreed we could have done things different. Sean is someone
    that has become a close friend. We talk all the time. I have
    been on his podcast. We have talked through this. That is how
    you handle your differences. Not like this, Chairman.
        Chairman Paul. I am glad you guys are friends now and that
    you have reconciled, but really it does not get to the real
    point whether or not you think violence is the way we settle
    things. In the days after the fight, you said, and I quote,
    ``Sometimes people just need to be punched in the face.'' Is
    that still your opinion that political disputes can sometimes
    and often only be resolved by violence?
        Senator Mullin. No, I do not always agree with that. I do
    not believe in political violence. I have made that very clear.
    But sometimes people do need----
        Chairman Paul. Unless perpetrated on me.
        Senator Mullin. Theoretically speaking, sir, I get it. It
    is about character assassination for you. That is the way this
    game is played. I understand it. You are making this about you,
    which is fine, but that does not keep me, as Secretary of
    Homeland Security, from making----
        Chairman Paul. It is character assassination when you were
    the one lauding the assault. Who do you think started that
    character assassination? I am just repeating what you have done
    in character assassination. I am repeating your support for the
    assault. So that is somehow something I started?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir. What I am saying is you are adding
    a lot to it.
        Chairman Paul. In the days after the fight, you did many
    interviews in which you justified the violence as historically
    justified by precedents, such as caning and dueling. Is it
    today your opinion that the caning of Charles Sumner was not
    only justified, but argues still for resolving our political
    differences with violence?
        Senator Mullin. What I was simply pointing out is some of
    the rules that still apply to this body. For instance, dueling
    with two consenting adults is still there. I was pointing out
    what is still----
        Chairman Paul. It has been illegal for 170 years. There is
    no precedent for legal dueling. Even then they fled the
    country. Do you realize that the man that beat Charles Sumner
    with a cane, he beat him till he was unconscious. You know why
    no Senators intervened? Because his friend held a gun on the
    other Senators, and he kept beating him and beating him until
    he crushed his skull. That is what you are is the precedent of
    the Senate, and that is what you live by. That is a very
    dangerous sentiment.
        After a half a dozen victory lap interviews where you
    pointed out that the union guy was just lucky that fear kept
    him from standing up, Dana Bash asked you if you have any
    regrets about bringing violence to a Senate committee, and you
    replied that you have no regrets. Today you have said you have
    no regrets about being happy, being completely understanding
    why I was attacked from behind. You had no regrets about
    instigating a brawl in a Senate committee hearing. Are those
    still your opinions?
        Senator Mullin. Mr. Chair, you are going to have your
    opinion. I am going to have mine. As the Secretary of Homeland
    Security, I am going to bring peace of mind and security to
    this country, and I am going to stay laser-focused on that.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Peters.
        Senator Peters. Senator Mullin, you have made several
    public statements suggesting that you were involved in Special
    Security Forces or combat operations overseas. In 2023, you
    said in a Senate Republican Conference podcast, and I say, I
    will quote, ``There's another side of my bio that I don't ever
    talk about, nor will I. I had to go do something overseas.''
        On March 2nd of this year, you told Fox News interview,
    ``War is ugly. It smells bad. If anybody has ever been there
    and been able to smell the war that is happening around you and
    taste it and feel it in your nostrils and hear it, it is
    something you will never forget.''
        On March 3rd, in a podcast interview, you stated, ``I did
    special assignments outside of the Department of Defense (DOD),
    now Department of War (DOW). I never wore the uniform or the
    flag on my shoulder, but I might have been in the same area.''
        Your statements in public interviews and your responses to
    the Committee, are quite frankly, are confusing and they are
    inconsistent. I would like you to clear this up. You are under
    oath. We can clear it all up right now. First, I would like to
    ask unanimous consent to enter into the record my letter to you
    on March 11th,\1\ and your addendum to the Committee of March
    12th,\2\ regarding any overseas special assignments.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The letter from Senator Peters appears in the Appendix on page
    171.
        \2\ The Bio Questionnaire addendum appears in the Appendix on page
    197.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Chairman Paul. Without objection.
        Senator Peters. My question for you, sir, is before your
    time in Congress, other than on vacations with your family,
    have you ever traveled to a foreign country?
        Senator Mullin. No.
        Senator Peters. You have never traveled to a foreign
    country?
        Senator Mullin. Outside of vacation or mission work, no.
        Senator Peters. OK. Your Federal Bureau of Investigation
    (FBI) report does show some travel. I think it was to Georgia
    and Azerbaijan. You marked that that was not for tourist?
        Senator Mullin. Are you referring to August 2021, when we
    went to go get the Americans out of Afghanistan?
        That is what that travel was for, which we did clarify
    that.
        Senator Peters. OK. So you have traveled. You have traveled
    to Azerbaijan and Georgia. That was in your FBI report,
    although you just said you have never traveled.
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I thought you were referring to a
    different time, but in 2021, it was well documented. In fact,
    it was all over the news, and I actually did say that, and we
    put that down on the report. But that was us, which was all
    over the news, trying to go with an extremely experienced team.
        Senator Peters. OK. I have other questions. Thank you. You
    have traveled overseas, despite your previous comment. Were you
    ever an employee, volunteer, or otherwise involved with the
    Department of Defense, State Department, or other U.S. agency
    or contractor for any of those departments?
        Senator Mullin. No. Senator, I think there is a
    misunderstanding here that I could clear up if you want me to
    clear up for you.
        Senator Peters. Please.
        Senator Mullin. OK. So, which this is official trip and it
    is classified, but in 2015, I was asked to train with a very
    small contingency, and go to a certain area, which was
    scheduled for 2016. During that time, I had to meet certain
    training qualifications, and had to go through Survival,
    Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training. The training
    and stuff was kind of fun. The SERE training was absolutely
    awful.
        I have spoken generally about my experiences, but I have
    never spoken specifically on details, dates, or the mission.
    That was official, and there was nothing in the report to the
    Committee. Actually, it said, ``You do not have to claim any
    official trips.'' Like I said, that was an official trip that
    is classified.
        Senator Peters. This is an official trip while you were a
    Member of Congress?
        Senator Mullin. Yes. In 2015, 2016, I was a Member of
    Congress.
        Some of it may be public, but it would be very small. Most
    of it, because of my recollection, which we are going back 10
    years, I think there was only four people read in on it.
        Senator Peters. So, where was that trip?
        Senator Mullin. I just said, it is classified, sir.
        Senator Peters. It is classified. The letter that we sent
    to you said that we need to have information of any of these
    activities.
        Senator Mullin. It said not official trips. Your paperwork
    was very clear, excluding any official trips. This was an
    official trip as a Member.
        Senator Peters. We have more questions we are going to have
    to ask. In the FBI report, I asked, ``Is there anything in that
    report that is classified, that you were involved in any kind
    of classified operation at all?'' And there is none.
        Senator Mullin. It was also said, ``excluding official
    duties.'' It says that, and you guys have the paperwork in
    front of you and it always says, ``excluding official duties.''
    We had this Committee come to us and ask the same questions. We
    talked about doing mission work. We talked about doing
    mentorship, but they said, ``Official duties that was in your
    official capacity does not have to be talked about.''
        Senator Peters. So, where did you smell war?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I just said that this was classified,
    and that the dates, locations, and mission, I have never spoke
    specifically details about.
        Senator Peters. We can get that information. Mr. Chair.
        Senator Mullin. That is fine. You are welcome to get it.
        Senator Peters. We will want to find out more information
    about that.
        Senator Mullin. That is perfectly OK, Senator.
        Senator Peters. It is important to have the truth here and
    that you are portraying yourself in a truthful way.
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I am not portraying myself in any way
    other than you are asking the question, and I said I would try
    clearing it up for you.
        Senator Peters. Well, we will continue to work on that.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you.
        Senator Peters. After DHS officers shot and killed two
    American citizens this past January, you joined top
    administrative officials in publicly blaming and disparaging
    the victims. Following the killing of Renee Good, Secretary
    Noem called her a domestic terrorist. You, sir, you called Alex
    Pretti, ``A deranged individual that came in to cause max
    damage.'' Could we expect those kinds of quick responses if you
    are confirmed as Secretary? Would you be basically--well, you
    did, you responded as Secretary Noem. Are we going to just
    expect that same behavior all over again?
        Senator Mullin. No, Senator. I have a deep amount of
    respect for you. We have had our differences, but I do respect
    you. I think I said this privately when we had a conversation.
    Those words probably should have been retracted. I should not
    have said that, and as Secretary, I would not. The
    investigation is ongoing. Like I said, there is sometimes I am
    going to make a mistake, and I will own it. That one, I went
    out there too fast. I was responding immediately without the
    facts. That is my fault. That won't happen as Secretary.
        Senator Peters. So, you regret that statement?
        Senator Mullin. I already said that. Yes, sir.
        Senator Peters. Would you want to apologize to the family
    of Alex Pretti?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I just said I regret those statements.
        Senator Peters. Is that the same as an apology?
        Senator Mullin. I have not seen the investigation. We will
    let the investigation go through, and if I am proven wrong,
    then I will absolutely.
        Senator Peters. How would you characterize your
    relationship with President Trump?
        Senator Mullin. He is a friend.
        Senator Peters. How frequently have you spoken with him in
    the past year?
        Senator Mullin. Often. Most of the time about my family. If
    you want to explain the friendship, I will tell you. My wife
    will tell you the same thing. When someone loves your kids when
    they are going through a difficult time like we have, the
    amount of outpouring of support from the President and the
    friendship we saw going back to 2000, or 2020, was quite
    remarkable. And so I speak to the President from a friend level
    more than I do a policy level.
        Senator Peters. OK. I have more questions, but my time is
    up.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Peters. But we will be doing it in a second round.
    Thank you.
        Senator Mullin. OK. Thank you.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Moreno.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MORENO

        Senator Moreno. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Senator
    Johnson, Senator Lankford for letting me skip the line. I have
    to unfortunately go to Dover for the dignified transfer, so I
    appreciate taking the time.
        It is not often that I get to ask questions of somebody who
    I have known for a long time; in politics, 2\1/2\ years is a
    long time. I have gotten to know you as a friend, as a
    colleague. I have seen you interact as a dad. I have seen you
    interact as a husband. I just want the American people to know
    you are a good man.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you.
        Senator Moreno. That does not always get through all the
    political shenanigans. Maybe you are not going to replace
    Shakespeare as the next greatest orator on Earth. You talk from
    the heart, and that is OK. You are who you are. I think that is
    what you do not apologize for is just being yourself.
        Sometimes we are imperfect. You don't do the 20-person
    focus group every time you say a word, and I think that is what
    people like about you, Markwayne. I appreciate you being here.
    I honestly just have one question for you. Do you pledge to
    support and defend the United States of America (USA) nearly as
    much as you would protect and defend your family?
        Senator Mullin. Without doubt, sir, yes.
        Senator Moreno. I am going to ruin everything for the
    audience. You will be confirmed. You will have the job, and you
    are going to make this country safer and better. For that, I
    thank you and thank your family for supporting you.
        I will use the rest of my time now to make a little case to
    the American people. We have 260,000 families that have not
    received a paycheck in over a month, 260,000 American citizen
    families who have not received a paycheck in over a month. None
    of those people are in charge of policy. There is not one of
    those families that makes policy decisions, for the most part.
    That is on the people here. There is not a single human being
    on this dais that has missed a paycheck. Every single one of us
    has gotten a paycheck the last 30 days and before that, and yet
    we sit here and we do political theater.
        I said to my colleague, Senator Britt, the other day, that
    in my 14 months here I have only felt ashamed of this chamber
    once, and that was last Thursday, when you saw the ultimate
    political theater, colleagues going, ``Let's fund TSA.'' ``How
    about the Coast Guard?'' ``Oh, that's a different person that's
    going to talk about that.'' ``How about FEMA?'' ``It's a
    different person that's going to talk about that.''
        You cannot have it both ways, by the way. You cannot have
    Democrats saying, ``I can't believe the Trump administration is
    cutting government employee numbers''--by the way, over
    300,000, we haven't missed a beat--and yet at the same time,
    not pay people who are actually showing up for it. That seems
    decently incongruous. We cannot say President Trump is not
    defending the homeland. He is absolutely doing that every
    single day, and yet we are allowing these agencies to not be
    funded.
        I have tried really hard to learn how this place works.
    This is all very new to me. I remember many Democrats saying to
    me, ``We have the constitutional duty to fund agencies through
    appropriations.'' Then we have a separate piece where we argue
    policy differences. But we should never marry both together,
    because when you marry both together, you don't hurt us, you
    don't hurt the people here in D.C., you hurt the men and women
    who are going to work every day to defend this country, and
    that is a disgrace.
        I actually do not know how you would sleep at night knowing
    that you are hurting families like that. People cannot make
    their rent payments, cannot make their mortgage payments. Their
    cars are being repossessed. They are having to tell their kids
    they cannot send them to dance recitals because they did
    everything right in life except got a job with the Department
    of Homeland Security, so that a politician can make a 30-second
    video online and then use it to fundraise for the next
    election. That is disgusting.
        Let me just say this. What are we not talking about? The
    Ranking Member said, ``Oh look, we said we fund--.'' He is not
    paying attention right now, which is fine. We said we are going
    to fund FEMA. When you guys are done talking, I will continue,
    if you like. Are you done? OK, thank you. It is extraordinarily
    disrespectful.
        All right, so moving on. You have said you are going to
    fund all these agencies. Here are ones that you have not
    funded--U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), near
    and dear to my heart. That is how I became a U.S. citizen. We
    have defunded the agency that allows legal immigrants into this
    country? That is insane. Never hear the Democrats talk about
    that--3,300 employees go to work every day, trying to process
    legal immigrants. They don't need the paycheck.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The chart submitted by Senator Moreno appears in the Appendix
    on page 173.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I am going to skip the second one, go to the third one--
    Biological Nuclear Threat Prevention. That seems important.
    That seems like an agency we should fund. Two hundred employees
    not getting a paycheck. That is OK with the Democrats. The next
    one, 60,000 employees for U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP).
    People who are inspecting packages, they work with your
    teamsters, work with Customs, they are not getting paid. How do
    you look at those people in the face and know that you are
    doing that?
        Now let's talk about Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
    7,000 special agents that are stopping transnational criminal
    organizations (TCO), drug smugglers, and human traffickers. Are
    you, on the Democrat side, asking not to fund that? Because
    ultimately what this is about is defunding ICE and law
    enforcement. Are you suggesting that we not fund an
    organization that attacks transnational organizations?
        Be specific. Be specific when you say you do not want to
    fund ICE. I want you to say the words, ``We do not want to fund
    7,000 special agents that are in charge of stopping
    transnational criminal organization, drug smugglers, and human
    traffickers.''
        This job is not complicated. The American people send us
    here to get things done, and yet for the third time in six
    months we have shut down this government with total impunity.
    They will go home, and just make social media videos, and try
    to blame Republicans. It is a disgrace. It is even more of a
    disgrace, honestly, that you talked about the respect that
    Senator Mullin shares.
        You guys have side conversations, don't listen, and that is
    fine. You do not have to. But what I am going to do now is I am
    going to leave. I am going to go pay respects to three soldiers
    who died so that we can have the liberties that we enjoy here,
    and you guys continue with political theater, personal attacks,
    whatever you can do.
        I know that is a good man. I will vote for you. Our
    Republican colleagues will vote for you. You will get
    confirmed. You will do a great job, and you will make this
    country proud, Markwayne. Thank you. And thank you for standing
    by a great American.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Hassan.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HASSAN

        Senator Hassan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Before I start with
    my remarks and my questions, just with regard to Senator
    Moreno, who has left the dais, the American people should know
    this. ICE is right now funded with more money than it is had in
    past budgets. The partial limited shutdown that we have right
    now has nothing to do with ICE. Meanwhile, Democrats have
    consistently over the last week moved to fund the rest of the
    Department of Homeland Security, and the Republicans have
    blocked that funding. Let's just be clear about what is
    happening here.
        Now, I want to congratulate Senator Mullin and Christie for
    the nomination. I know your family is very proud, and I know
    how much you love them. I also want to thank Chair Paul for
    speaking so openly about a really difficult thing, which is the
    actual physical impact of violence, and in this case, political
    violence. It is a hard thing to do, but it is a really
    important thing to do at this time in our country's history, so
    thank you, Mr. Chair.
        The Department of Homeland Security was created in the wake
    of the September 11th terrorist attacks with a clear mission:
    to keep our country safe, secure, and free. The Department's
    work includes counterterrorism operations, disaster recovery,
    physical and cyber protection of critical infrastructure, and
    immigration enforcement. The stakes for the success of the
    Department of Homeland Security could not be higher, and that
    is also why Granite Staters and Americans of all stripes have
    been deeply concerned about what they have seen from the
    Department of Homeland Security under this Administration.
    People have been rightfully outraged about the lawlessness from
    the Department's leadership, which has not only resulted in the
    death of two American citizens, but has also led to the
    hollowing out of agencies like FEMA.
        To Senator Mullin and my colleagues, what happens here in
    this room today is not nearly as important as what happens at
    our border, on our streets, in our communities, and in our
    businesses tomorrow and every day thereafter.
        Senator Mullin, I am going to start with a question I have
    asked every one of the President's nominees. If directed by the
    President to take an action that would break the law, would you
    follow the law or follow the President's direction?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, thank you for the questions and
    thank you for the concerns. First of all, I have enjoyed
    working with you on several different issues. We have had very
    blunt conversations. To answer your question, the President
    would never ask me to do that.
        Senator Hassan. Certainly everyday Americans who have
    served on juries would disagree with you about that, and the
    example he has set calls into question that answer.
        Senator Mullin. Senator----
        Senator Hassan. Sir, I have limited time, as you well know.
        Senator Mullin. OK. Go ahead.
        Senator Hassan. In the past 14 months, Secretary Noem has
    fundamentally broken the American people's trust in the
    Department of Homeland Security. The top priority of whoever
    leads this Department next must be to rebuild this trust. If
    confirmed to lead the Department, how will you be different
    from Secretary Noem?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I think I have said this in a
    private conversation too. I love Secretary Noem's family and I
    consider them friends, but everybody has different leadership
    styles. Throughout my businesses, when I would have to transfer
    one manager to the next or one executive to another area, and
    now you bring in a different one, they all have different
    management styles. My management style is empowering people. As
    I said in my opening statement, I want to protect the homeland,
    I want to bring peace of mind, and I want to bring confidence
    back to the agency.
        I am not going to be the smartest guy in any room I walk
    into, but I know how to get talent and I know how to bring
    those people together----
        Senator Hassan. Let me interrupt you again. I am sorry,
    sir----
        Senator Mullin. That is OK.
        Senator Hassan [continuing]. Because our time is limited.
    But let's be really clear. What Secretary Noem did was give the
    green light to lawless behavior. Are you going to give the
    green light to lawless behavior?
        Senator Mullin. I will operate within the parameters and
    the policies and the laws that you guys set for me.
        Senator Hassan. And the Constitution of the United States?
        Senator Mullin. Of course the Constitution.
        Senator Hassan. The Fourth Amendment, among other things?
        Senator Mullin. Of course, the Constitution of the United
    States. I will swear to uphold that when I get sworn in. But be
    very clear, I do not get to choose the laws that I enforce. You
    guys pass the laws. I enforce those laws. The reason why we
    have not----
        Senator Hassan. Right, but shooting a protestor who was
    exercising his First Amendment speech and carrying a lawfully
    licensed gun is not a lawful behavior.
        Now, let's move on to another issue. Granite Staters pushed
    back hard against ICE's plan to build a detention center in
    Merrimack, New Hampshire, and despite poor communication from
    the Department, eventually Secretary Noem canceled the plans
    for this facility. Senator, will you ensure that the Merrimack
    plan remains off the table, or will you consider restarting it?
        Senator Mullin. Ma'am, I have not seen the facts behind it.
    As I stated when we spoke in your office, I will work with you
    on this. We want to be good partners in your State and in your
    community. I do not know the strategic purpose of it. I do not
    know what has happened, so it is hard for me to state something
    that I have not got briefed on. But I have made this very clear
    to you in private and here too, I will work with the community
    leaders and make sure that we are delivering for the American
    people what the President set out.
        Senator Hassan. I appreciate that. In followup
    conversations with my office, ICE refused to comment on opening
    new facilities elsewhere in New Hampshire. They have said they
    will not do it in Merrimack, New Hampshire. But will you commit
    to me that ICE will not open any new facilities in New
    Hampshire or elsewhere in the country without the support of
    the local community?
        Senator Mullin. Ma'am, I will work with the local
    community, and I will work with you and your office. I will not
    be able to speak to that until I understand the risk and the
    reason behind delivering the mission that is set in front of
    us. We got to protect the homeland and we are going to do that,
    but obviously we want to work with community leaders. We want
    to go be good partners. We are going to work in your State as
    hard to make sure we build relationships and work in that
    manner.
        Senator Hassan. Look, I will be here for a second round of
    questions because I have a lot more, but let me just point this
    out. Americans want to secure their country.
        Senator Mullin. I agree.
        Senator Hassan. We all love this country. We all know we
    need to be safe, secure, and we all want to be free together.
    The people of New Hampshire will take into consideration a
    request by ICE and the Federal Government to do its part, but
    transparency and local control and respect of local people
    throughout New Hampshire and throughout the country is an
    essential piece of our democracy. What I have been hearing from
    ICE and from other DHS folks is, ``The pushback's too hard.''
    You either can make the case for these facilities and explain
    how you are going to support the local community and deal with
    the fact that they will lose property tax dollars, for
    instance, or if you cannot make the case, it should not be
    built.
        I really would encourage the Department and all of us to
    remember that this is a government of, by, and for the people,
    and if you cannot make the case to the people, you should not
    be doing it. Thank you.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Johnson.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHNSON

        Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Markwayne, I am
    going to use my time completely different than how I was going
    to when I walked into this hearing. I cannot top what Senator
    Moreno, the comments he made about how unconscionable it is
    that we are not funding and we are not providing paychecks to
    those 260,000 men and women that you will be soon leading.
    Other than working with no labels, we do not serve on the same
    committees, have never gone on a Congressional Delegation
    (CODEL) together, and that is oftentimes how you get to know
    our colleagues. I do not know you as well as some of the other
    people on the dais here.
        Certainly within conference we have seen each other
    interact. We share a couple of things in common. I think we are
    both pretty passionate about our love for this country, about
    trying to fix the enormous messes left behind by President
    Biden and Democrats. We wear our emotions on our sleeves.
        But I will say that I have been here 15 years, and I have
    been through a lot of confirmation hearings, I have listened to
    a lot of nominees, I have heard a lot of introductions. If one
    of your first decisions as a nominee was to pick the person to
    introduce you, you could not have done a better job. The
    introduction from Senator Lankford was probably one of the most
    genuine and heartfelt I have ever heard. I will say your
    opening statement was probably one of the more genuine and
    heartfelt testimonies I have ever heard, if not the most.
        I am looking behind you at the people who have come here to
    support you, your former colleagues in the House, Chairman
    Smith, a former Speaker of the House, Senator Britt. But I see
    Josh Gottheimer there. He is not a Republican member of the
    House. He is a Democrat. I have seen you interact with him,
    trying to get some permitting reform.
        Please briefly, because I want you to tell another story
    here yet, but just talk a little bit about your relationship
    with Josh and other members of the House.
        Senator Mullin. Josh and I, we may not always agree on
    every issues, but he is a friend. Our relationship started back
    in 2017, when he thought I was a staff member running a workout
    group because I have been running a bipartisan workout group
    that started actually with Speaker Kevin McCarthy and Jason
    Smith 13 years ago. I still do that to this day.
        When he came in in 2017, Joe Kennedy, who is also a friend
    of mine, he approached me when I was on the House floor and
    asked me, ``Why is a trainer in the gym on the House voting?''
    And to which Joe Kennedy laughed and said, ``He's a member from
    Oklahoma.'' After that, we became friends. In fact, our
    daughters are writing a book together about bipartisanship.
        But when Josh asked me to join a bipartisan group called No
    Labels, that is when we really started seeing that there is a
    lot of common ground that we can work together.
        Yes, as I said in my opening statement that we all make
    decisions based on how we are raised and our life experiences.
    Josh and I was raised different, just like everybody on this
    dais is raised different than me, and we have had different
    life experiences. But we all believe in that flag right there
    behind you.
        What I say is, as long as you love that flag as much as I
    do and you are willing to die for that flag like I am, we can
    work together. We can set the differences aside, and we can
    work together. Josh represents that too. Just for him being
    here, you guys know, he has a primary in New Jersey. He is not
    a Senator who has six years. He is up every two years, and he
    is here. That is a friend, that says, ``Hey, my political
    differences are beside, I still like you.''
        I cannot tell you how many members on the Democrat Party,
    which I love and respect and I understand the politics, have
    came up to me since this nomination say, ``Hey, I love you, but
    I am running for this office, but I am running for this office,
    but I am up for reelection, I would be killed in my State. In
    most cases, I would support you, but--'' And it drives me
    crazy. But when you see a real friend like that, run through
    fire for the guy.
        Senator Johnson. Again, this is a nomination hearing. From
    my standpoint, when you are trying to select somebody to run an
    operation, you want somebody with integrity, somebody with that
    passion toward the mission, keeping this Nation safe, having
    this love for this country. It is also, I think, incredibly
    important that when you are serving the Administration, you
    have a good relationship with the President. It does not work
    so well. I know you have a good relationship with the
    President.
        You told me a story, and I want you to repeat that story,
    of your son who was grievously injured, and a visit that the
    President of the United States made to that hospital. I want
    you to tell the story, because I think it is important that
    people understand why you are loyal to President Trump. I would
    like them to hear a different side of President Trump as well.
    But I think also that will serve you well as his Secretary of
    Homeland Security. But just tell that story.
        Senator Mullin. Ron, I am going to try getting through
    without crying. It is not about President Trump. It is about my
    son. My son was a really world-class athlete, and January 17,
    2020, which mind you was an election year, he had a really
    serious brain injury. Woke up 26 hours later and he was a
    different kid. We almost lost him. For 26 hours, he had
    extremely low pulse. There was a time that they thought that
    they lost his pulse altogether.
        When he woke up, he was just different. Here you had a
    world-class athlete that wrestled all over the world since he
    was 12 years old and he could not touch his nose. He could not
    walk without shuffling his feet. He had short-term memory loss.
    He could not control his muscles. Could not add five plus
    three. He was in high school at that time. Had to learn how to
    read, walk, everything.
        The President found out about it and he gave me a call
    immediately, and one thing that the President joked about was,
    he said, ``Let me get this straight. He doesn't know who you
    and Christie are, but he knew I was?'' Because the only
    question he got right is who the President was, and he said,
    ``Trump,'' with his cocky grin on his face.
        The President didn't understand the severity of it, but he
    heard it in my voice and immediately he went to work. I told
    him we had to get to Bakersfield, California to the Center for
    Neural Skills, which was one of the best neural rehabilitation
    places in the world. The President offered to take us in his
    personal plane. This is the President of the United States. I
    said, ``Sir, we can't fly. We got to drive.''
        We get there and he called almost every day for two weeks
    checking on Jim. Then he says, ``I am going to come see him.''
    Now, this is the middle of the election. This is Bakersfield,
    California, really not an area he has got to go campaign. He
    took the time to come up there and see Jim. The center told us
    that the short-term memory loss, something would trigger it.
    Some big event would eventually trigger where he would start
    retaining stuff. Until then, he was still having issues.
        The President arrived. Of course, there was cameras and
    everybody around. Of course, no one in media ever talked about
    it, which was funny, because the President called him on stage
    and talked to him.
        Then we went to the back, and the President did not talk to
    me. He did not know I was in there. I mean, he did not even
    care if I was in the room. Here is a guy that is bent over, and
    his ties about as long as my son, because my son, it stunted
    his growth, and so he is 5'3'' the rest of his life. His team
    came to him twice and said, ``Sir, we got to go. We got to
    go.'' On the third time they came over to him, he looked at
    them and he says, ``Hey, I guarantee you that plane won't leave
    without me.'' For the next 15 minutes, he did nothing but love
    on my son.
        That one incident jogged his memory. From then on, he
    started retaining things. Jim's attitude went from this, ``We
    are going to get through it,'' to this, ``I am going to get
    through it.'' Every week, if not most days, the President would
    call and ask how he could help, ask is his buddy doing, how is
    Jim doing. He didn't do it for publicity. He didn't do it for
    any show. He was running one of the toughest elections he had
    been in, and the guy was still that concerned about my son.
        When we got released for a little bit--we had to go back--
    the President said, ``Come to Mar-a-Lago and see me.'' We go
    down there and it was amazing. When we are leaving--dang it. I
    hate getting emotional. See, if I talk about my kids, I get
    emotional. Other than that, you cannot make me cry. But my kids
    can make me emotional.
        Senator Johnson. That is actually a good thing.
        Senator Mullin. Yes. So anyways, he grabbed my son and he
    said, ``Do you know why I love your dad? Do you know why I love
    your dad?'' Christie tells the story better than I do. He goes,
    ``No, sir.'' He goes, ``Because he loves you. Because of you.
    Because of you.'' Man, he didn't do it for any other reason. I
    mean, here is the President of the United States, and he did it
    just because he cared. When you want to say why he is a friend,
    yes. We were acquaintances before that. We have been friends
    ever since.
        Senator Johnson. The American people needed to hear that.
    Thank you.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Blumenthal.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BLUMENTHAL

        Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, Senator
    Mullin. Thank you for being here today. Thank you to your
    family for your service and theirs. I hope that you will be as
    emotional about the children who are presently detained at
    Dilley and other camps in the United States of America, where
    they have been subjected to conditions that would outrage and
    have angered many Americans.
        We are here because of a lawless and reckless agency, that
    has broken into homes without judicial approval, shot United
    States citizens, detained them without any cause, and sometimes
    killed them. I am looking for real substantive reform in that
    agency, as you and I have discussed when you came to talk to
    me, a break with the past, with former Secretary Noem and with
    the White House, Steve Miller, and others who have used Kristi
    Noem, in effect, as a puppet to implement lawless policy.
        I welcome that you have stated you regret your statement
    after the killing of Alex Pretti. You said on Fox News,
    ``Unfortunately, an individual, a deranged individual that came
    to cause max damage with a loaded pistol, with an extra mag
    that was completely loaded, and shot and killed.'' And you
    regret that statement, do you not?
        Senator Mullin. I have already said that, sir, yes.
        Senator Blumenthal. What about what you said about Renee
    Good after she was shot and killed? You appeared on Cable News
    Network (CNN), and you were asked whether you believed the
    shooting was justified. And you replied, ``Absolutely.'' Do you
    regret that statement as well?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, it is very clear that an officer
    had to make a split decision in that case as a car was running
    toward him and did strike him. At that point, that car becomes
    a lethal weapon. There was another officer obviously giving her
    verbal commands to stop the vehicle.
        Senator Blumenthal. So you are saying, and I apologize for
    interrupting you, but you do not regret that statement?
        Senator Mullin. I am saying that the investigation is going
    on, but what we have seen--my understanding, Senator----
        Senator Blumenthal. There is no investigation, Senator. In
    fact, that was my next question to you. Don't you think there
    should be an investigation?
        Senator Mullin. My understanding is that there is. I will
    find out if I am able to get confirmed. But those are two
    different instances.
        Senator Blumenthal. In fact, the Department of Homeland
    Security and the Trump administration has blocked State and
    local investigation of the killing of Renee Good. I hope that
    you will permit that investigation to go forward.
        Senator Mullin. Senator, State and local investigation does
    not investigate Federal. FBI does that through the Department
    of Justice (DOJ). I believe the FBI is looking at this case.
        I do want to say something to you. What you said about the
    terrible conditions that this Administration is putting in
    kids, but what you left out is that they have actually
    recovered over 160,000 kids that were trafficked or lost during
    the Biden administration. What is inhumane is the 12,000 to
    13,000 individuals coming across the border every single day
    and we are not having tracked the kids. At one time the number
    was up to 385,000. And that is sad.
        Senator Blumenthal. Let me move on, Senator Mullin, because
    you said that you were going to be, and I am quoting you,
    ``blunt and direct and to the point.'' So I regret that you do
    not retract that statement about Renee Good.
        But I want to ask you about a statement that was made
    regarding the Pretti killing by Steve Miller in the White
    House. He said, that ``Pretti was a domestic terrorist'' who,
    ``tried to assassinate Federal law enforcement.'' Don't you
    think it was irresponsible and reckless for Stephen Miller to
    post that claim on X without any evidence, just as you have
    retracted your statement?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I believe that question is better
    asked to Stephen Miller, not myself. I cannot speak for him.
        Senator Blumenthal. Stephen Miller also said, again on Fox
    News, ``Under President Trump's leadership, we are looking to
    set a goal of a minimum of 3,000 arrests for ICE every day.''
    If you are confirmed, are you going to be directing ICE to
    arrest 3,000 people a day?\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The picture submitted by Senator Blumenthal appears in the
    Appendix on page 174.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Senator Mullin. Sir, once again, I cannot speak for Steven
    Miller, but I can say the President has tapped me to be the
    Secretary of Homeland. I will lead that Department, and I will
    lead it----
        Senator Blumenthal. So will you continue that arrest quota
    of 3,000 people a day?
        Senator Mullin. No quota has been set for me, sir.
        Senator Blumenthal. In effect, it is a quota if the White
    House directs the DHS Secretary to arrest 3,000 people a day.
        Senator Mullin. The President of the United States sets the
    policies, and I will be working with the President. If you have
    a question for Stephen Miller, please ask him.
        Senator Blumenthal. I really regret that you are going to
    stick to those same policies and practices and condone the
    statements of the White House that are so demeaning to someone
    who was a victim of lawlessness and recklessness by an ICE
    officer.
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I did not say that. You are
    putting words in my mouth.
        Senator Blumenthal. Let me ask you then a different
    question. ICE has been breaking into people's homes without any
    judicial warrant. The sanctity of our homes is absolutely
    critical. I think you would agree with that point. It is the
    law that a judicial warrant is required to forcibly enter
    someone's home.
        Kristi Noem acknowledged in her testimony, in response to
    my questions, that at least 28 break-ins have occurred. My
    Ranking Member leadership on the Permanent Subcommittee of
    Investigation (PSI) has produced a report that shows probably
    many more such break-ins have occurred, the result of a memo
    last May from the acting director, Todd Lyons,\2\ and it is
    behind me now, that instructed ICE agents to break into homes.
    I understand that during your staff interview last week you
    said that there would be no more such break-ins into people's
    homes without a judicial warrant.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ The ICE memo submitted by Senator Blumenthal appears in the
    Appendix on page 175.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        If confirmed, will you commit to me, the Chair and Ranking
    Member of this Committee and the American people that ICE will
    no longer instruct agents to break into people's homes without
    a judicial warrant?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, you are using the word, ``break into
    people's houses,'' very loosely. However, I have made it very
    clear to the staff, and I think when you and I spoke, that a
    judicial warrant will be used to go into houses and a place of
    businesses, unless we are pursuing someone that enters in that
    place. I have not mixed words with that and I have not changed
    my opinion about that.
        Senator Blumenthal. A whistleblower testified to our
    hearing that, in fact, ICE agents have been instructed as part
    of their training, to forcibly enter, I know you do not like
    the word break-in, but forcibly enter is breaking into
    somebody's home, bashing down the door, terrorizing children,
    instructed them to adopt this policy.
        Will you commit that no longer will ICE agents or CBP
    agents be instructed to forcibly enter people's homes without a
    judicial warrant?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I have already answered this question
    for you. I said we will not enter a home or a place of business
    without a judicial warrant, unless we are pursuing the
    individual that runs into a place of business or a house.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Lankford.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
        Chairman Paul. Thank you.
        Senator Lankford. Markwayne, right now, is FEMA currently
    funded?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Lankford. Is CISA currently funded dealing with
    cybersecurity?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Lankford. How about TSA?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Lankford. U.S. Secret Service (USSS)?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Lankford. Coast Guard?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Lankford. Customs and Border Protection?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Lankford. The Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
    Office?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Lankford. Customs Professionals?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Lankford. This is something we got to get resolved.
    We can complain all we want to about where things are, but we
    have an argument and a disagreement on policy areas, and a
    quarter million Federal employees and their families are the
    ones that are suffering because of our argument.
        There is a way to solve this. We have talked about it a
    lot. We should just stay here until we are done. Just keep
    arguing it out until we have actually solved the problem. But
    instead, we broke last weekend. Everybody flew home right past
    the TSA agents that are not getting paid while we flew home.
    Why didn't we stay to be able to try to get things resolved?
    That is my encouragement, and it has been my encouragement all
    along. We should not walk away from a disagreement when there
    are families all over the country that are the ones suffering
    for it.
        Unfortunately, the State of Oklahoma is pretty familiar
    with natural disasters, as you know well. You and I have been
    in multiple different natural disaster scenes. There is a lot
    of work that has happened at the border so far. The border has
    moved from 12,000 people a day illegally crossing the border
    and being released into the country, unvetted, unchecked, to
    now a handful of people even attempt to cross our Southern
    border. Those that are arrested and detained, as is the law.
        FEMA is still an undone project, and I am not blaming that
    on Kristi. There is a lot to get done on it. But you are going
    to walk in with a project going on with FEMA right now. Love to
    get your ideas and your thoughts. You are very familiar with
    this area and have great experience on it. What are your
    thoughts on how to be able to get FEMA into a better place so
    that people are not waiting forever for a response?
        Senator Mullin. FEMA was never designed to be the first
    responder. That is the states. FEMA was designed to be the
    assistance to the states when the disaster reaches certain
    levels. Which we need to discuss those too, because I think
    some of the levels are unrealistic, especially Senator Hassan
    and I have talked about this, that sometimes in rural areas,
    they are not able to meet those thresholds.
        But working with the State, allowing the State to have
    their emergency response, FEMA is simply helping write checks
    and assuring that they have the capability and the manpower if
    need be. But for the FEMA to walk in, like FBI walking in on a
    crime scene and taking over, no one is going to care more about
    their backyard than the people that live there in that State. I
    think there are a lot of good ideas. In meeting with so many of
    you all, there were so many great ideas on how to make FEMA
    work better.
        It has a great mission. I think people at FEMA want to do
    their job, but we can be more effective and be more direct and
    speed it up. Taking years to get reimbursed is not acceptable.
    Taking honestly months to get reimbursed is not acceptable.
    See, small municipalities, they cannot afford it. They do not
    have that tax base to do it. They are already going through a
    struggling time, which means they are probably losing tax
    revenue, especially if it hits their town.
        We have a lot of work there. I do believe that the
    definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over
    again and expecting different results. That means we are going
    to look at each one of the 22 agencies that fall underneath DHS
    and say, ``How can we deliver the mission better for the
    American people?''
        Senator Lankford. That is great. That would be a huge help
    to everybody. Talking about the length of time it takes to get
    a response, you have been a part of, as I have, on the
    nonprofit security grants that are out there. We have some
    locations that are higher risk than others. Synagogues and
    temples have been one of those very high-risk locations that
    are out there. Last week in Michigan, we had another situation
    where an absolute terrorist drove a vehicle packed with
    explosives into a Jewish daycare, intending to kill as many
    Jewish children as he possibly could. That was his intent, was
    to be able to do that. That location happened to be one of the
    locations where there has also been this nonprofit security
    grant to help harden that facility.
        We have multiple challenges here. One of them is when the
    decision is made, they make a request, go through the
    paperwork, get approval to be one of those locations that we
    say, ``Hey, we need to harden this location.'' Once the
    approval is done, it may take months to over a year just for
    the dollars to actually come on it because there are more
    bureaucratic hoops to go through.
        As you are dealing with things like contracts that are out
    there and the way decisions are made, or FEMA, that is one of
    the areas I would encourage you to take a look at, and I know
    you are very passionate about. How do you fix the issue where
    approval has been done and everyone is saying, ``Great, can we
    get to work?'' and the Federal Government says, ``No. No, you
    cannot actually get to work. You got to wait some more before
    the actual work can actually begun to be do that?'' How does
    that get fixed?
        Senator Mullin. We got to streamline the process and cut
    out the redundancies. The Senator from Michigan and I had a
    long conversation about the amount of paperwork, once you are
    approved, to get the funding flowing and then the paperwork
    that is followed up on it is way too cumbersome.
        There is a better way to do this. Some of these policies I
    have to work with you guys on. Some of these grants were
    written with checks and balances, which we all got to be very
    cautious on how we spend the taxpayer dollars. Things that I
    can change, things that I can cut out on the redundancy part of
    it, I will work with. Things that, as the Senator and I talked
    about, things that it may take you to make changes on, we will
    bring it to your attention. I will work with you and we will
    see how we can make it better.
        Senator Lankford. Great. As you know, Oklahoma has been one
    of the leaders in counter-drone. This is a big issue, of
    course, as a country. Every high school football game, every
    college football game, every gathering of people for every
    festival and gathering across the country has now become a risk
    location for drones and drone mitigation.
        FBI cannot be everywhere. We do not want them to be
    everywhere. We do have to figure out some process. As you begin
    to think about this issue--it is a tough one to be able to deal
    with, but it is a basic national security issue as well that is
    going to land on your desk pretty quickly, especially with the
    Olympics coming, with Federation Internationale de Football
    Association (FIFA) coming, all those things that are happening.
    We got to be able to figure out how to do counter-drone and to
    be able to not just identify, ``There it is,'' but to also
    mitigate the risk. What are your initial thoughts?
        Senator Mullin. Yes, and I would love to speak about that.
    With funding, talking to some of our agency heads, with a lack
    of funding right now we have people quitting because they got
    to go to work. Meeting these demands are even going to be
    tougher. We just talk about FIFA, for instance. Then you talk
    about 2028, which is going to be the busiest year of DHS in
    history because we have the Olympics and we have the
    Presidential election going on.
        It will take four months once funding comes in to start
    replacing those that we have lost for training before we can
    get them out in the field. We do not have four months with
    FIFA. How do we expect these people to stay on the job and
    work? We are losing institutional knowledge. We are losing
    people we have already trained. It is going to be difficult to
    deliver this mission.
        The way that I understand is we are behind in EOA
    Specialist (EOAS) and we are behind in FIFA right now on
    actually delivering the mission that we have to. We are also
    behind in reimbursing local communities that is also working
    with us. That is going to have to take a tremendous amount of
    focus and partnership.
        Like I said in my opening statement, failure is not an
    option, so we have to deliver. But sometimes when you have to
    rush like this, especially trying to get people on the job
    because we just quit funding them for the third time in less
    than a year, and we expect these people to keep working, it
    puts the mission at risk. We have a lot of work to do here.
        Senator Lankford. Yes. Thanks for stepping up. Christie,
    thank you. This is a strain on the family, and everything else
    right now. So thank you all for stepping into this role. I look
    forward to supporting your nomination.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Kim.

                    OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR KIM

        Senator Kim. Thank you, Chairman. Senator Mullin, thanks
    for coming out here. Secretary Noem said in a Cabinet meeting
    about almost exactly a year ago today that we should be
    eliminating FEMA. Can you commit to us here that you do not
    support that approach and you would not attempt to eliminate
    FEMA?
        Senator Mullin. As I said, I think it needs to be
    restructured, not eliminated.
        Senator Kim. I think there is going to be bipartisan
    support for reforms. I think we all understand that. We
    certainly saw a lot of problems when it came to Superstorm
    Sandy. I asked Secretary Noem to work with us, especially as
    they were going about their FEMA Review Council. I will be
    honest with you, that never materialized. We did not see the
    kind of engagement here that we are ready to have. We have a
    bipartisan group of Senators that want to come up with reforms.
    Is that something you can commit to working with us on?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I think all of us that has been
    either in the House or in the Senate always complain about the
    outreach of agencies. I will make a commitment to you that I am
    going to have the best. It is going to take a couple months to
    stand it up, but we are going to have the Leg Affairs shop that
    you are going to know who the person is. We are going to work
    with you. Most importantly, I think everybody on this dais has
    my personal cell phone. That cell phone is not going to change.
    If you call me, you are going to get a response. If you text
    me, you are going to get a response.
        Senator Kim. When we have this FEMA Review Council report
    finally come out, is that something you will come to us first
    and engage with us on, rather than just implementing it
    straight out from the Executive Branch on your own?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I am pretty sure that you guys set
    the policies and the mission for FEMA. For any serious changes,
    it may take actually policy changes, and I will be in your
    office talking to you about it.
        Senator Kim. Yes, I appreciate that. But we have seen a lot
    of significant problems happen. For instance, we saw about
    2,400 staff cuts at FEMA. Again, we are not talking about the
    reforms, but we are talking about those that are trying to
    respond to these disasters every single day. I wanted to ask if
    you are confirmed if you will stop these dangerous staff cuts
    that have reduced FEMA's disaster readiness?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I am not trying to play politics,
    but what has been the biggest disaster is not funding them
    three times in a year. However, some of these agencies
    underneath the current Administration, not some, all of them
    got very bloated with having too many employees in place.
        Senator Kim. Do you think there is still too many staff at
    FEMA?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I cannot answer that. When I get
    there, we will be adequately staffed to respond to our Nation's
    disasters.
        But it is going to take some time to get there, because
    like I said, people are quitting today because they are not
    getting paid for the third time in a year. We cannot allow that
    to take place.
        Senator Kim. I agree, and I hope that we can move forward
    on that. But one thing that has demonstrated a lack of priority
    by this Administration is the fact that we never actually had a
    full nominee for FEMA. I just wanted to ask, do you agree that
    we need an actual nominee to be a full FEMA Administrator that
    has real experience in emergency management?
        Senator Mullin. Absolutely. We are already looking at some,
    in the case that we do get confirmed, which I am hopeful we do.
    We are making that a priority in each one of our agencies. But,
    the confirmation also has to go through you and we know how
    partisan that can be.
        Senator Kim. I get it, but at least we can get a nominee
    before us. I think that that is something I hope to take away,
    that that is a commitment you will make.
        Senator Mullin. Honestly, by the experience that I have
    had, which has been an interesting experience, it is a lot to
    ask someone, and they got to be fully committed. If they go
    through this process, it is tough. So I would ask you, if I do
    do this, give them a fair shake. For me, a lot of you guys are
    not giving me a fair shake to even earn your support. if I
    bring somebody else in to you, maybe you will give them a fair
    shake and you will actually work with them. Because I am going
    to find somebody that is capable of doing the job, that is
    smarter at me at doing the job, that has experience doing the
    job. But when they come to your office and ask for your
    support, do not tell them it is politics. Do not say, ``I
    can't.'' Do not say that, ``Hey, I supported the previous one,
    but I got burned on that one so I can't support you. Just give
    them a fair opportunity and you might actually like the person
    we choose.
        Senator Kim. Look, it is not just about the person. It is
    about the policies writ large. And what we saw before, for
    instance Secretary Noem had this policy that required her
    approval for anything that was going out the door, grants,
    funding over $100,000. I will be honest with you, it was
    disastrous. It held up so much of the funding to FEMA and other
    parts of DHS.
        Senator Peters and I did a review of this. Over 1,000 FEMA
    contracts, grants, and disaster assistance awards were delayed.
    I wanted to ask you if you can commit to revoking this $100,000
    policy by Secretary Noem?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, we talked in your office about that.
    Absolutely. That is called micromanaging. I do not know if the
    Secretary put that in or someone else did. I am not a
    micromanager. We put people in. We empower them to make
    decisions. What is required to come up to my level, we will
    make decisions. We will have a very clear line of communication
    with every one of our agency's heads on their authority that
    you gave to them within their parameters, and we will discuss.
    But we are also going to be very responsible for the taxpayer
    dollars.
        Senator Kim. It is just adding so much red tape though.
        Senator Mullin. Yes. I agree.
        Senator Kim [continuing]. I mean, especially when it came
    to disaster response with the Texas floods.
        Senator Mullin. I agree.
        Senator Kim. I want to switch gears here. This is something
    that you remember we talked about, but we have this effort
    right now, ICE has purchased a warehouse in Roxbury, New
    Jersey. It is a facility the size of eight football fields to
    house over 1,500 detainees. Never once did an ICE official go
    and talk to the local mayor, talk to the local law enforcement,
    assess the situation alongside the locals. I just wanted to ask
    you, is that fair that DHS is imposing these types of large-
    scale detention facilities without local engagement and input?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, being from small rural Oklahoma, it is
    a big impact, and the community should be visited with.
    Especially when you start taking a warehouse off, it takes it
    off the tax roll which can make a huge impact, and you got to
    deal with impact aid if they are eligible for it. Then you got
    to talk about infrastructure. One thing I do know is
    construction. When you start talking about infrastructure on
    these places, a warehouse sprinkler system is much smaller than
    when you are housing individuals there. If you say, I think you
    said the town was 60,000 people, and I believe you said this
    was----
        Senator Kim. Smaller than that.
        Senator Mullin. Is it smaller than that?
        Senator Kim. About 22,000 people, of which the detainees
    and the staff there would constitute about 10 percent of the
    population of that town.
        Senator Mullin. Yes. And realistically, most municipalities
    do not have the capacity in their infrastructure for waste and
    water. It is important that we are talking to the communities.
    If we are having additional needs, we can work with the cities,
    we can work the municipalities. But we should always
    communicate with them.
        Senator Kim. I agree with that, and this town has only 42
    full-time police officers and a volunteer fire department. Does
    that sound like the kind of town that has the resources to take
    on a warehouse of this magnitude?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I do not know the circumstances behind
    this, other than what you and I talked about. I committed to
    you when I visited with you in your office, we will talk. I
    even said let's you and I get on the phone with the mayor. If I
    am confirmed, I will make a trip out there and see it for
    myself, because it is a big concern of yours and we want to
    address those concerns. Listen, if it is not practical, there
    may be a specific reason why it is there. If I cannot explain
    that to you, then that is a different story. But if there is a
    specific reason and I can explain it to you to make it make
    sense, let's talk about it. But if not, then maybe we can be
    better partners moving forward.
        Senator Kim. I am glad that you commit to talking about it.
    There are some documents I asked ICE to send us about their
    evaluations of the warehouse. We have still yet to get it. Will
    you commit that that is something that we can get?
        Senator Mullin. If the documents are available, yes. But I
    have also offered something much better. I will go with you
    personally and look at it.
        Senator Kim. That is something that the local community
    will appreciate. I hope that you will reassess this warehouse.
        Senator Mullin. As I said in my opening statements, we want
    to protect the homeland, but we also want peace of mind and
    bring back confidence to Department of Homeland Security. All
    this means that we got to work on that. I will work on that.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Scott.

                   OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR SCOTT

        Senator Scott. Senator Mullin, congratulations on your
    nomination. This is a great honor that you have. And you have a
    great background, so I know you will work your butt off in the
    job like you do everything else.
        President Trump was elected to secure our border, crack
    down on sanctuary cities, and keep our country safe. I want to
    thank the President for his leadership and Secretary Noem's
    help. Incredible progress has been made. Our streets are safer,
    our borders are respected, and the jobs we have created are
    going to people in this country legally.
        Now, as a result of Democrats' partial shutdown, in the
    fourth week TSA agents are not getting paid. Everybody in the
    Senate's getting paid. I have had a bill since I got up here,
    if we we do not pass budgets, we should not get paid. I have
    had one of my Democrat colleagues say, ``I have a mortgage. I
    have to get paid.''
        Think about all these people. TSA agents are not getting
    paid, airport lines are in gridlock, we got FEMA grants
    stalling, Coast Guard counterterrorism operations are shrinking
    amid rising Iranian threats to our homeland. My understanding
    is ICE agents are getting paid, but not ICE leadership is
    necessarily getting paid.
        Last week, two terrorists boldly and hatefully attacked our
    citizens right here on our home soil, killing at least one
    person. The President's decision to stop the nuclear weapons
    and the ballistic missiles was a reason. What he is doing is
    making sure we do not get these attacks on our soil. It was
    only as a result of brave actions of a class of future military
    officers, citizens, and law enforcement that stopped these
    tragedies. They could have been massacres.
        Still, even as Americans are losing their lives, my
    Democratic colleagues are refusing to fund DHS and give them
    what they need to uncover and stop plots like these and protect
    the lives of our families and neighbors. It seems like that is
    our job up here.
        Senator Mullin, how do you view Senate Democrats recklessly
    holding DHS funds hostage at the expense of our national
    security interests amid threats from Iran and its proxies?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, it is unconscionable. How can you
    sit there with a straight face and say that, ``We're trying to
    take care of the American worker,'' when you are choosing to
    not pay 260,000 people and you are affecting their families. We
    have heard the stories of families having to stand in terrible
    lines for basic needs or getting a loan. Like I said, this is
    not the first time. We are a month into this. They just came
    out of a 43-day shutdown that they were probably just
    recovering from. Yet, we are still going to sit there with a
    straight face and say it is not about politics?
        Senator Scott. So in sanctuary cities, local authorities
    can decline ICE detainers, which means that criminals are
    released back into the community rather than transferred safely
    into ICE custody. First off, I cannot imagine anybody elected
    that wants criminals back in their community, but that is
    happening. This creates opportunities for illegal fugitives to
    relocate or re-offend, like in the tragic murder of Kate
    Steinle. It also forces DHS officers to go into neighborhoods
    to root out violent criminals, which is way more dangerous for
    everybody. Not only does this cost the taxpayer more, but also
    increases the risk for everybody involved, including
    bystanders, DHS officers, and potential future victims.
        We are seeing this play out right now just a few miles
    away, where local officials in Fairfax, Virginia, are refusing
    to turn over an illegal immigrant who was arrested for groping
    12 underage students. The local elective wants to put that
    person back out in the community, that is not even here
    legally. Instead of turning him over to ICE, Fairfax County
    prosecutors are trying to get him released. This is just one
    example of how sanctuary city policies choose to put illegal
    aliens over American citizens. How do you plan to deal with
    sanctuary cities like Los Angeles and Chicago to remove
    criminal illegal aliens?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, it has been a difficult conversation
    that has been had with these sanctuary cities. As I said going
    on, we do not get to choose which laws we enforce. As elected
    officials, you should not choose which laws you enforce. We are
    not asking them to go out there and enforce immigration. We are
    just saying be good partners with us. If we have to serve
    judicial warrants, let us go serve the judicial warrants. If
    you pull over somebody that is wanted, that is in the country
    illegally and it is a municipality, we are saying just hold
    them. At least let us do a background check on them and see who
    they are.
        And working with the municipalities are going to be vitally
    important, but also you got to take a look at if they are not
    willing to enforce Federal law and work with us, then where is
    the taxpayer dollars going to? Ideally, I would like to go in
    there and talk to the mayors. I would like to go in there and
    talk to the sheriffs, talk to the police chiefs, say, ``What is
    your concerns? How can we get past this?''
        Because the President has made it very clear. He wants to
    protect the streets for every American. He wants to restore law
    and order to every city. I do not think that should be
    controversial, but some people have, for political purposes, or
    maybe they didn't like the tactics.
        Either way, I find it really hard to believe that law
    enforcement in those communities do not want to do their job.
    So maybe we sit down and we just work it out. It is like I tell
    my wife all the time, sometimes when she gets mad at me--and I
    am right, she is wrong, by the way--but sometimes when she gets
    mad at me, I have to apologize because I simply say--that was a
    joke by the way, for everybody that is married. But I have to
    apologize. Sometimes I tell her, I said, ``Honey, it is a
    misunderstanding. We still love each other. We still want the
    best for our family.'' And these law enforcement, and I would
    even say these mayors, they still love their community. They
    still love their cities. They still love this country. So maybe
    it is a misunderstanding we can work by.
        I am going to start with that. That is what I am going to
    start with. If we have to do something different, then we will,
    but that is where I am going to start at. It is a
    misunderstanding, but we are going to force the Nation laws and
    make sure we protect everybody in their city and hopefully work
    with them and never work against them.
        Senator Scott. Senator Mullin, as Secretary of Homeland
    Security, do you have any ability to ban funding to sanctuary
    cities that ignore the Federal laws meant to make citizens'
    lives safer, but then turn around and ask for Federal money for
    added protection?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, that would be a last option, but at
    the end of the day, taxpayer dollars have to be used for the
    right purposes. If people are refusing to enforce the Nation's
    laws, then I think it is really hard to justify why we are
    sending them taxpayer dollars that are coming out of Oklahoma,
    or coming out of Florida, or coming out of Kansas or Arkansas
    when they are making that decision. But I will say that is not
    going to be my first, or second, or even third approach, but
    that would be my last resort.
        Senator Scott. Congratulations to the nomination. Good
    luck.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Fetterman.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR FETTERMAN

        Senator Fetterman. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hello, Senator
    Mullin. Thank you for coming in today. Americans don't like
    chaos, you know. America definitely didn't like the kinds of
    chaos during the Biden administration at the border. As a
    Democrat, I was alarmed that there were up to 300,000
    encounters at our border once a month. That puts that in
    perspective. That is the size of Pittsburgh showing up at our
    border. That is not sustainable, and that is not manageable,
    and it is making it possible for us assimilate. Now if you care
    about immigration, as I deeply do, you cannot possibly provide
    the American dream for people when the size of Pittsburgh
    showing up at our border once a month. That needs to be brought
    under control. And that happened. I signed up that as a
    Democrat.
        The second part is rounding up all of the criminals and
    deport them. I cannot imagine why we cannot agree with that as
    well, too. That is another thing that I signed up.
        One name that often doesn't come from my side is Laken
    Riley. I grieve for Renee Good and I grieve for Alex Pretti,
    but I also deeply grieve for Laken Riley and their family. Now
    all three were failures of our government there in that
    circumstance. As I was proud to be the co-sponsor of the Laken
    Riley Bill, because we have to address that.
        Two things must be true here. We need to have a secure
    border and we have to round up and deport every single criminal
    in our Nation. I cannot imagine why that is critical or
    controversial for anybody. So that is what I am trying to find
    a way forward. Now you and I have had conversations on this and
    that is your commitment to focus on those things. I believe
    that is effective, accurate, correct?
        Senator Mullin. Yes, sir.
        Senator Fetterman. Yes. Now, another thing. I know there's
    a lot of hard, personal feelings here and absolutely, it is
    terrible what's happened. Political violence, it is rampant
    now. But also President O'Brien's here not for round two. He's
    here because he fully supports your commitment, correct? Yes.
    Round three. OK. Yes. So it is about letting it go and moving
    on. I have done that too.
        When I was in the hospital and things were touch and go, I
    know there were unkind things said about me, but I can just say
    that it is better to just let it all go and to find a way
    forward. That is the time that we are in right now, in our
    country on that.
        Now, people might describe you in those kinds of moments,
    but I am going to describe you. We got a chance to get to know
    better when we joined a CODEL to Turks and Caicos. Correct?
        Senator Mullin. Yes, sir.
        Senator Fetterman. Yes. We did that. We did that because
    Americans were looking at over a decade in prison because they
    had a couple random bullets in their luggage. Those Americans
    ran the gamut of a Black grandmother from Florida, I believe,
    Florida, and Pennsylvania that live in Western Pennsylvania,
    that I did, and I was able to welcome him at the airport when
    he returned there. That was about a commitment to working
    together. Imagine just because a couple random bullets,
    accidentally, they were looking at over a decade in prison. Now
    we worked together and now not one single American really faced
    that kind of thing. So that is about committed to working
    together, so now.
        Also as a Democrat, I made me the only Democrat that
    refused to shutting our DHS down. Some people might say that
    that does not mean I have any less commitment to reform ICE.
    That is just categorically not true. But it is a strange
    devotion. I don't understand why you would shut the entire
    agency down just because you want those kind of reforms on ICE
    that has absolutely no impact on ICE and does not force any of
    those things. I refuse to do that and I refuse to punish those
    union members that are working. Now especially parts of that,
    it is true, it is like the cybersecurity agency is part of DHS?
        Senator Mullin. Yes, sir.
        Senator Fetterman. Yes. That is currently that is on the
    shutdown. Now two of the top agents of cyberattacks come from
    Iran and China. They must be elated to know that that part is
    all shut down, because that is part of this shutdown that does
    not bring any reform to ICE, that I want any less than other
    Democrats here. The difference is I refuse to punish and make
    our Nation less secure part of that.
        For me, I came in here and I committed to come here with an
    open mind and I am going to continue to do that. It is not
    going to be about gotcha moments for me. It is about just
    saying my experience with you has been consistent kindness and
    professionalism. The first time I met, it was you and your wife
    behind you when I was here at the orientation here in the
    Senate. Even before you got the call for the big job, we were
    even discussing about getting together and having dinner as
    family. That is an ongoing relationship because that is also
    part of the fact here in this town. You got to get along and
    find a way to work together, and now we have to come at it and
    just let things go in the past for that.
        Finding a way forward, that is my responsibility to
    represent Pennsylvania. Now for you, I just want to thank you
    for showing up. Now I am going to engage and I am going to
    remain with an open mind throughout all this as I made to my
    friend here, and I am going to do that. Thank you for bringing
    your family here too, and I look forward to hearing for the
    rest of my colleagues' views on you.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you, Senator.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Ernst.

                   OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ERNST

        Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Christie,
    for being here as well.
        Senator Mullin, I have to say, I am just going to be blunt,
    very honest with you. I hope that the President is watching. I
    am going to say to the President, I am really upset that he has
    made your nomination. Why? Because I will be losing you from
    the Senate one of the best friends that I have here, truly. But
    in that same accord, I am so grateful to the President for
    making your nomination to Department of Homeland Security.
        We have had a lot of discussion here. I know just as
    Senator Fetterman said, there are a lot of differences and
    opinions on the politics surrounding DHS. Senator Fetterman
    mentioned that he grieves for all of those that we have lost.
    Those protestors, we grieve the loss of young women, young men
    that we have seen at the hands of those that have migrated
    illegally into the United States of America. We grieve them
    all, and I think we can acknowledge that, and it is important
    that we do that.
        We are in really trying times right now. One of the things
    that I want to focus on right now is the bipartisanship that
    you have had with so many members in the House, in the Senate,
    the relationships that you have outside of this body, because I
    think it is really important, because we get into political
    fights all the time, and we are all trying to score points back
    and forth. Bipartisanship is not very sexy, but I think we need
    a lot more of it.
        Josh Gottheimer was here today. I respect him so much. The
    fact that you remain friends today is incredibly important. I
    noticed you also gave Joe Kennedy a shout-out. I sent him a
    picture I took of you from the dais because I know Joe really
    well, as well.
        There are so many relationships that we have in this body,
    and I wish more people would see that we have those
    relationships, we carry them in our hearts. It means we are
    better people because we open our minds to listen. To that
    point, I want to thank you, Mr. O'Brien, for being here as
    well, because what started out as a very big difference between
    you and Mr. O'Brien, you found a way to both of you come
    together to share thoughts and ideas and turn something really
    good out of that discourse. I think more people need to learn
    how to do that.
        To all my friends sitting here in the dais and those that
    are watching, is that this is how America works, where we are
    able to take differences and come together and not just shout
    at one another, but come together and figure out a way forward.
    That is what makes this country such an incredibly brilliant
    country, is that we can recognize those differences.
        I want to talk a little bit about a trip that we took last
    year. So many folks know that you serve on Armed Services. I
    serve on Armed Services. We do congressional delegation visits.
    A little over a year ago or about a year ago, Senator Mullin
    led a congressional delegation visit into a country that had
    not been visited by an official delegation trip in 15 years.
    Along on that trip, I was also there. Chairman Smith was on
    this trip as well, as well as Democrat Jimmy Panetta of
    California. We went to Syria. We sat down with the President
    there, al-Sharaa, for his first official visit from the United
    States of America.
        Now, a lot of people will say, ``He was a member of al-
    Qaeda. What are you doing sitting down with somebody that was a
    member of al-Qaeda?'' It is the same reason we sit down with
    people that we have differences with, is to find a way forward.
        Senator Mullin, I would like you to talk a little bit about
    that trip and why you believed it was important that we do
    that.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. You are
    right. The President of Syria was not really somebody we should
    have a lot of common ground with, and we actually talked about
    that. Him and I talked about that. I had a very blunt
    relationship about it. But the fact is our world is different
    and there's different leaders for different countries and
    different places, and you have to understand the region and the
    area they are in.
        We are not in the business of necessarily picking the
    leaders, but when we do, hopefully there is a way that we can
    work it out. If you remember the President at the time, he
    said, ``When I was younger, I was fed a lot of propaganda.'' I
    am paraphrasing this. He says, ``But when I was in American
    prison in Iraq,'' he started looking at things different. Then
    he also went on to say, ``Yes, I was affiliated with al-Qaeda,
    but it is much like you guys being affiliated with Russia.'' It
    was interesting to me how he went through the history.
        He said, ``It's much like you guys being affiliated with
    Russia and China in World War II and look where you are at
    today. Sometimes in war, when we are fighting for our country,
    I left Iraq and came back and fought for Syria because that is
    my home. We had the most diverse population in the history of
    the world in Damascus, and I don't want the foreign influence.
    After I got out, I realized my fight is for my country, not for
    this necessarily organization, but for me to get resources, for
    me to get fighters, for me to be able to fight for my
    country.'' Hopefully, even though he said, openly, ``I never
    planned on being President of the country. I was just wanting
    to get my home back. I find myself here.'' He was very open. He
    says, ``I have made mistakes.'' I said, ``I have made mistakes
    too.'' I said, ``We're not perfect, but if we can work together
    to be a trust but verified,'' he says, ``I want a relationship
    with the United States. I want to have that relationship.''
        That is not common for somebody with al-Qaeda ties. That is
    somebody that says, ``Yes, my past is my past, but I am looking
    to the future.'' I think we all have past. In past, we can
    learn from. We learn from successes and failures in our past.
    But if we can grab the past that we made a mistake on and say,
    ``Yes, that's a mistake. I am not going to make it again,''
    that is a lesson. That is where wisdom comes from. If you can
    also learn from your successes, then that is also where wisdom
    comes from, and that is considered someone that has the
    potential to be a leader. I would rather work with those
    leaders like that than to continue to see the civil war that
    was going on, and in some cases still going on in Syria.
        Senator Ernst. Yes, and thank you. I just use this because
    my time has expired, just to demonstrate how we all have such
    significant differences. We can come from different
    backgrounds. But I have been on a lot of congressional
    delegation visits, folks, a lot in the 12 years that I have
    been here. But to watch Senator Mullin lead this delegation and
    to be able to speak to someone that is far different than we
    are and bring our countries that closer together, I know that
    he will do that with every one of us serving in Congress. I
    know you will represent us very well. You will represent the
    Administration very well. You will make our country safer.
        Thank you, Senator Mullin. Thank you, Christie, very much
    for your friendship as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Slotkin.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR SLOTKIN

        Senator Slotkin. Thank you. Thanks for being here. Thanks
    for our conversation yesterday. I want to just actually add on
    to what Senator Lankford was saying and just focus on the
    attack we had at a temple that is very close to my heart in
    Michigan, a place I know well. Last week, we had an antisemitic
    attack meant to terrorize not just that synagogue, but the
    entire Jewish community. I think the light is really blinking
    red, and that is the feeling for the Jewish community. Just as
    an objective statement, the Jewish community is 10 times more
    likely to be the victim of a hate crime than all other
    religious groups combined. That is not a political statement.
    That is a factual statement from FBI data.
        We talked about the need to work together. The Jewish
    community is spending about a billion dollars a year privately
    securing their own institutions. No religious group should have
    to spend that amount of money that could be going to lots of
    other things on their own security in the United States of
    America.
        I would just ask your help in reforming the Nonprofit
    Security Grant Program (NSGP) so it is agile, so you do not
    have to win the grant and then still do 100 pieces of paper,
    maybe even looking at a rapid reaction fund, but certainly
    asking for some sort of task force. I am thinking about the
    community in Australia that went to the Australian government,
    the Jewish community, and said, ``We are seeing just a real
    uptick in threats. We are terrified.'' Then we have Bondi Beach
    and a very horrible thing.
        Can we just agree in public again in a bipartisan basis to
    sit together to reform this program and figure out how we
    manage to the threat, because we are not hitting it right now?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, you have a wealth of knowledge
    from your service in the intel community, and you will know
    this issue probably better than me. I would welcome the
    opportunity to sit down and talk to you, figure out what we
    need to do. I know this is very personal to you, and that is
    great. We may have some differences on some political views,
    but this is not one. You and I will be laser-focused and get
    this resolved if it is possible. But yes, I would absolutely
    welcome an opportunity to work with you on this.
        Senator Slotkin. Great. I appreciate that. I think, in
    general, your position or your future position as Secretary of
    Homeland Security sits at the fulcrum of these big issues we
    are having as a country, just big cultural issues. The use of
    law enforcement in our streets and where our rights begin and
    end, and then our elections, our democracy. Given the
    importance of that, I think it is important that we state
    really clearly where you are on those two issues.
        I think first and foremost on the use of ICE, my State
    voted for Donald Trump in 2024. A lot of people supported the
    President's immigration agenda, but then they watched with
    their own eyes, not filtered through a news source. They
    watched with their own eyes, American citizens killed in their
    streets for protesting. They saw children caught in the
    crossfire and being teargassed. They saw people randomly being
    pulled out of their cars and walking down the streets because
    they happened to look like they could be an immigrant and
    checked for their papers, which for many of us has a real
    history. They have seen law enforcement go into people's homes
    without a judicial warrant, for a country that was invented
    because we were being oppressed by a foreign force that
    demanded entry into our homes.
        So you say you don't want ICE in the news, you say you want
    to rebuild trust. Your predecessor was fired because she could
    not manage that, and people had to go in and bring the
    temperature down. Can you, without other words, just state
    clearly what you would be willing to do to fundamentally reform
    ICE and put into law to do so since that trust is gone?
        Senator Mullin. Ma'am, as you know, I cannot make the law.
    You guys make that for me.
        Senator Slotkin. But you are going to be the Secretary.
        Senator Mullin. Yes, I agree, but I cannot make the law. I
    can work within the parameters----
        Senator Slotkin. No, but tell us what you would be willing
    to put into law.
        Senator Mullin. Right now, the law that I will work into is
    your guys' decision. We will work through that. But I do
    believe there is a better approach. I think working with
    municipalities, I would love to see ICE become a transport more
    than the frontline. If we can get back into just simply working
    with law enforcement, we are going to them and we are picking
    up these criminals from their jail. One, we are going to
    reimburse them for having the person there. A partnership is
    vitally important. I don't think there needs to be a law to
    change that. I think I can work within what is there, but there
    is an approach that can happen, but we got to have partners.
        Senator Slotkin. Yes, I understand. We are not going to
    agree to this here, but I would just say the trust is gone and
    not just with Democrats. That is why we are here. That is why
    your predecessor was fired. There needs to be fundamental
    reform of this law enforcement agency. I think that the public
    writ large is crying out for that. Let me turn to elections.
        Senator Mullin. Senator,
        Senator Slotkin. No.
        Senator Mullin. OK.
        Senator Slotkin. Let me turn to elections. The Department
    of Homeland Security has the mandate since the Obama era for
    securing our election infrastructure. That is an important job,
    and you will be Secretary. The President has continued to say
    that he won the 2020 election, even though there have been 60
    court cases saying the opposite. He has said he wants to
    Federalize the elections. He has said name check cities,
    including Detroit. He has said voting machines are inaccurate.
    He has said in the State of the Union, I was on the Senate
    floor, paraphrase that if his side does not win in November,
    then the elections were rigged, which is exactly what he said
    eight months before the 2020 election.
        You have your own history. You did not certify the 2020
    election. There are people at the Department of Homeland
    Security, three people specifically who are well-known election
    deniers now running election security functions. Who won the
    2020 election?
        Senator Mullin. Ma'am, we know that President Joe Biden was
    sworn into office.
        Senator Slotkin. Who do you believe won the election?
        Senator Mullin. I believe my job as Department of Homeland
    Security Secretary will be to make sure that we assure that the
    elections are fair and people can trust them.
        Senator Slotkin. Does the Federal Government run the
    elections process or do states?
        Senator Mullin. It is very clear in the Constitution that
    the states control State elections, and then there is some
    Federal oversight that is on it, but the Federal Government can
    set some standards. If you are talking about the Save American
    Act, requiring you, which is within the Constitution, by the
    way, to requiring individuals to be citizens of the United
    States, I do not think it is too much to ask somebody to prove
    they are a citizen of the United States if we are going to talk
    elections.
        Senator Slotkin. That is not what we are talking about. I
    am talking about administering the elections. If you are
    Secretary of Homeland Security, do you feel you have the
    authority to put uniformed officers at polling locations in
    2026?
        Senator Mullin. Ma'am, we said this in your office. The
    only reason why my officers would be in there if there was a
    specific threat for them to be there, not for intimidation, and
    I said we would be able to share that.
        Senator Slotkin. Even though we did not need it during
    World War II. We did not need it during Vietnam or the war on
    terror. We never had to put uniformed military there. Now, you
    feel that there is going to be a reason that there is going to
    be an armed threat to the United States that you need to
    potentially be there?
        Senator Mullin. No, ma'am. I cannot sit there and guarantee
    hypothetically of what threat would be and not. That is not
    within my purview.
        Senator Slotkin. Sorry, uniformed officers.
        Senator Mullin. Yes. But if there is a threat, a specific
    threat, say it is in a Jewish community and there is a threat
    that is specific to that polling area, then we will work with
    local law enforcement. There will be a reason for us to be
    there, and it will be known why we are there.
        Senator Slotkin. I think the reason you are here and not
    Kristi Noem is because Americans trust their local law
    enforcement now way more than they trust ICE. I would just say
    if we ever get to the point where you are being asked to put
    armed ICE officers at polling locations, we have lost the plot
    as a country. We have fundamentally lost it. Until I hear
    someone tell me that this man, President Trump, will actually
    allow us to have a free and fair election, there is zero trust
    here and I cannot trust that he will not try and steal it,
    again. I yield back.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Moody.

                   OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MOODY

        Senator Moody. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and congratulations on
    your nomination. Congratulations to your family. I cannot think
    of a better person at this moment in time to lead such an
    important agency.
        Talking about Americans trusting their local law
    enforcement, I think that is true. I think that is one of the
    reasons as the Attorney General (AG) in Florida, I worked so
    closely with our law enforcement, our local law enforcement, to
    make sure we were triaging our resources and going after really
    bad people that wanted to harm our community in a way to make
    our State safer. Part of doing that is we supported them. We
    made sure that they had resources, they had the support behind
    them, they knew that we had their backs.
        I am proud that Florida was the first State to have every
    single county sign up to work with the Federal Government,
    because we were dealing with an unprecedented situation
    following the last administration where you had people working
    with radicals in that administration to destroy the border,
    roll out a welcome map to everyone, and has left our Nation
    reeling from an unprecedented surge of people we do not know
    who are here, many of which before they even got here had
    committed crimes and have committed crimes since.
        The way to recover and shore up our communities is to work
    with, in partnership, local law enforcement who have an
    expertise in their communities. It is disheartening to me, not
    just as a former Attorney General or as a former prosecutor,
    but as the wife of a law enforcement officer and someone that
    worked very closely with them, it wrecks me to hear them refer
    to law enforcement, in general, especially some of the men and
    women that serve currently in the Department of Homeland
    Security, as breaking into people's homes and shooting
    Americans.
        I think we can all acknowledge that we want law enforcement
    to meet professional standards, to act with the public safety
    in mind, to comply with the law. But we do not have to
    disparage an entire profession of men and women who put their
    lives on the line for you and for everyone in this room and
    said that they were going to dedicate their professional
    careers to stand on that line and put their safety behind
    yours.
        When President Trump got in office, so many of these states
    on the Democratic side said, ``I will never work with that man
    to come in and correct and rid the communities of people that
    are going to do it harm. We won't.'' In Minnesota, the first
    thing they said, ``I will never help that person. I won't lift
    a finger,'' the Attorney General said. In Florida where you
    have 67 out of 67 counties signing up, tell me what I can do to
    help you. In Minnesota, they had like 7 of 87. Does that
    surprise anyone? No, because their State leader said, ``We will
    not help you. We will not go after the most dangerous in our
    communities. Have at it. See how it goes. We won't lift a
    finger.''
        When the Administration says we are dealing with an
    unprecedented situation, 11 to 20 million people that's never
    happened in the history of our country, how do we do this? We
    need to make sure we are focusing on triaging and getting
    people out that we know may do harm to our communities. They
    are like, ``What are you talking about? You can't have
    quotas.'' They won't talk about the quotas where they said to
    Border Patrol, push more and more and more and more in, however
    you need to do it. Don't tell us how we can stop this influx or
    this surge. Tell us how we can push more in. They will not talk
    about that. They want to tell you about focusing on children
    that are here, that are now here. Yes, you need to do that. As
    somebody that has pushed to protecting children and fought
    against trafficking with law enforcement's help, yes, you need
    to do that.
        But I loved how you said, let's talk about the tens of
    thousands of children that the Federal Government helped
    traffic under the Biden administration, that we lost. When they
    were made aware of it, they ignored it.
        You will now have to take over an agency that is charged
    with cleaning up a disaster, a danger. The Biden administration
    did that. I cannot think of a better person, someone who acts
    passionately and fiercely fights for the people he loves, and
    someone who loves this country and thinks of other people
    before himself.
        I am telling you, in Congress, there are all kinds of
    personality types, but this man came up to me, time and time
    again, as the newest United States Senator, and said, ``What
    can I do to help you? How can we make this place work? How can
    we get this done? ''
        I look over the course of your life, you left school when
    your father got sick, to go help your family business. That is
    the kind of person you are. The kind of person that stands up
    for every person in this office. That is the kind of person--
    passionate, fierce, a fighter, loyal--that is who I want now
    protecting this country at the head of the Department of
    Homeland Security.
        You said in your testimony, ``I'll fight for your family
    just as I fight for mine.'' Tell me about that personality
    trait and how you think that will help the Department of
    Homeland Security in this unprecedented time, where the last
    administration, the last President of the United States
    abandoned his role to secure this country. Tell me how you
    bring your personality and your character traits to this role.
        Senator Mullin. That is the way I was raised. It is the way
    my dad raised us, the way my mom raised us, the way they were
    raised. We love this country. I mean, think about it, I am
    getting to live the American Dream. You are telling me a kid
    from West Oklahoma with a speech impediment would ever be able
    to be here? That only happens in America. Only in America. We
    all probably have the same type of dreams, because none of us
    have royal blood. Maybe some of your parents might have served
    in public office or not. Mine most certainly did not. The fact
    that I am here, my goodness, that is why people want to come to
    our country, because they want the American Dream.
        I want everybody to have the same opportunity that I have,
    but we have to secure the homeland. We have to make sure that
    they feel safe stepping out and being in the public eye. We got
    to make sure that people can have a peace of mind and trust our
    government, and right now there is a mistrust in our
    government. I think we have an opportunity to maybe work on
    that.
        I meant it when I say that I hope in six months we are not.
    I cannot guarantee it, because the news chooses what they are
    going to run, but I hope that I am not on the news every six
    months, or six months from now, every day. I hope DHS is just
    able to be laser-focused on doing their job and it is not
    controversial about taking care of the homeland. I hope people
    have confidence in our agency again. I am going to work every
    day to restore that.
        Senator Moody. You will bring that same passion and zeal
    and protective instinct to protect every family and every
    community, working with local law enforcement because they know
    how to approach in a safe manner their communities.
        Senator Mullin. Nobody will take care of their backyard
    better than the individual.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Gallego.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR GALLEGO

        Senator Gallego. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hello, neighbor. How
    you doing? Easy day.
        Senator Mullin. Hey, brother. Good to see you.
        Senator Gallego. Some very specific questions. What is the
    primary mission of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI)?
        Senator Mullin. From the IG or from us?
        Senator Gallego. I am sorry, from Homeland Security
    Department. There's HSI within Homeland Security. What is their
    primary mission? It is not a trick question either.
        Senator Mullin. No, I understand that. Every agency, sir,
    we have specific missions that we are targeted to look at our
    aspect of protecting the homeland. Different directions have
    different paths, and in different agencies, reason why there
    are 22 of them there, we all need to be in the same boat,
    rowing the same direction, working for one common goal. As I
    said, that is protect the homeland, bring peace of mind, and
    secure the confidence of the American people.
        Senator Gallego. OK. HSI, and being from Arizona, we are
    very familiar with CP, ICE, and HSI. HSI specifically is very
    important because they specialize in dealing with human
    trafficking, human smuggling, counterfeit, bank fraud, things
    of that nature. Actually, I have a lot of friends that have
    worked for them forever.
        The reason I bring this up is because there is confirmed
    reports that the Secretary of Homeland Security has ordered HSI
    agents, pulled them off what I just told you were very
    important missions, to go to Arizona and investigate the 2020
    election results. Right? That is a very big concern of mine
    because these agents should be doing the work they are doing. A
    lot of them already are field ICE agents instead of actually
    doing these long-term investigations. But now, they are not
    even doing the ICE enforcement. They are literally going back
    and looking into conspiracy theories.
        From my experience and seeing you both on the House and the
    Senate, do you believe that Joe Biden won Arizona in the 2020
    Presidential election? The reason I ask is because, again, you
    are potentially deploying HSI agents to Arizona to check a
    result using our taxpayer dollars to followup on a conspiracy
    theory.
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I am not familiar with what the former
    Secretary did here, and nor am I here to debate what happened
    in 2020. I do know that there is an opportunity to look at
    2020, and make sure that anything that went wrong we can fix
    moving forward, because what we want to make sure is that in
    the next election, be it the midterms or in 2028, the American
    people trust our election system. Trust is vitally, vitally
    important.
        I want to always look at past mistakes and past successes,
    because I have addressed this multiple times, and I know
    everybody's busy here and I know you did not get to hear me
    earlier. But Senator, I think we can always do better and I
    want to do that. Just like you and I, we have worked on
    immigration issues before, because we both know we can do it
    better.
        Senator Gallego. But you are talking about perspective. I
    am talking about going back. The fact that we are using
    Homeland Security funds, investigators that should be using
    their time and value more to check into something that, by the
    way, had multiple independent audits, even one run by the
    Senate Republican and Senate State House representatives, that
    passed accuracy tests, hand counts, 14 court cases that were
    confirmed that Biden won in my State.
        When I have personal friends that are HSI agents, friends
    that I know are telling me they are now being diverted from
    their duties and what they are doing is they are, instead of
    investigating child sex trafficking, child abusers, drug
    traffickers, which I don't disagree, we have not been doing the
    best at and certainly I think a lot of that was under the Biden
    administration did not do that sufficiently. But now, instead
    of it not being done, now we have the opposite, where some of
    these best-trained people are being ordered by somebody,
    somebody within the chain of command in the White House, which
    I will get to in a question later, to go investigate this false
    conspiracy theory. Right?
        As much as, for me, a concern of mine, because I do know
    you very personally and we have gotten to work together. I
    think you are an upstanding guy and I reject this idea that you
    are not qualified for this job, 100 percent. But when it comes
    to something as existential as this, that is when I have to
    start questioning, are you going to be in charge of a
    department that is going to say, ``You know what? HSI should
    not be used for this. As a matter of fact, no one in the
    Department of Homeland Security should be used to do and
    investigate an election conspiracy.''
        That is what I want to communicate on this is, I really
    urge you just to end the investigation. There is no reason why
    we need to be really getting back to 2020. There certainly is
    not any reason why we should be using these highly trained
    professionals that should be going after some horrible people
    to be investigating conspiracy theories that have been
    litigated multiple times, and put them back where they were.
        Moving on from there, my other concern is something that I
    saw with the previous Secretary, and something that I have seen
    in myself in my time in the Marines, is that a chain of command
    is very important. I do not believe there was a real chain of
    command that was in the Secretary of Homeland Security. When I
    say that, it is because I think Stephen Miller personally was
    actually calling the shots there, and you could see the results
    of what occurred. You had men and women in ICE and CBP that
    felt that they were unaccountable, talking to actual ICE and
    CBP agents from Arizona that got deployed to Minnesota. They do
    not know who really was in their chain of command. They did not
    have operational orders. A lot of them did not understand how
    to actually engage with the public at all.
        When there was a point of who is responsible for making
    decisions, they could not figure out if it was Miller or if it
    was Secretary Noem and her deputies. They could not figure out
    if there were quotas versus there are quotas. Now we know that
    there are quotas. This is the problem, is I want to make sure
    that if you are there, you are in charge, and not Stephen
    Miller.
        Senator Mullin. Sir, the President has nominated me to be
    Secretary of Homeland, and I will take full responsibility for
    that. Chain of command is important. I believe in empowering
    people to make decisions, but I will still be talking to the
    President on a regular basis. Any policy that is within my
    realm of authority that you guys give us, if the President
    wants us to look at it, we will look at it, because I serve at
    his discretion.
        Senator Gallego. Yes. One thing, I don't know if it has
    been mentioned here, would probably be, what, the only second
    Native American in the history of the country to be a Cabinet
    member, which I appreciate. And you know that I also do a lot
    of work with our Native American communities, the 22 federally
    recognized Tribes in Arizona.
        The one concern I also have is that when it comes to
    building some of these installations on the border, there has
    been very little to no Tribal consultation, especially with
    some of our border tribes, the Tohono O'odham Nation, where we
    are building walls in areas that just does not have much, much
    like you, english as a second language (ESL), so I have
    problems with English once in a while too.
        There is a border wall that is going through Tribal land
    that is in very sacred land, that is not crossed and used
    significantly by human smugglers. It is important that DHS
    actually speak to these communities. They actually have
    programs that they do where they actually are working with DHS
    and local law enforcement to stop illegal smuggling, called
    Shadow Wolf Program, that DHS supports.
        But this last administration and DHS did not talk to them
    whatsoever, did not talk about, did not even give the vague
    idea of Tribal consultation, and now they are just building
    into some areas that has unfortunately some burials of some of
    the people from their Tribe. I think it is important that we
    reestablish Tribal sovereignty, and I hope because of your
    background, you will understand and appreciate that.
        Senator Mullin. I respect Tribal sovereignty and there is a
    lot of technology. Now, we do have a job to secure the border,
    but we will work with Tribal nations because there are other
    ways to have a physical barrier where you can have technology
    there too, and I do not think anybody would complain about
    that.
        But yes, you know my background. We have worked on Tribal
    issues a lot and I appreciate your passion. I have a lot of
    good friends in Arizona with Tribes that we have been able to
    have good relationships with.
        Senator Gallego. These Tribal nations would absolutely work
    with you as long as they felt that there was the respect and
    also respect for the land, because we have a history of that.
        Senator Mullin. Absolutely.
        Senator Gallego Mr. Chair, am I up?
        Chairman Paul. We are going to come back around if you have
    another question.
        Senator Gallego. Thank you.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Hawley.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HAWLEY

        Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Senator Mullin,
    welcome to the Committee. I see you have some supporters with
    you today. Chairman Smith, good to see you. My friend Sean
    O'Brien is here. I want the record to reflect that my money was
    always on O'Brien.[Laughter.]
        I just want that noted for the record.
        Senator Mullin, let me ask you this. In your own words,
    could you tell us, just in capsule form, what is DHS, what is
    the mission of DHS, as you understand it, as you would put it,
    as you would explain it?
        Senator Mullin. Quite simply, it is simple, to protect the
    homeland.
        Senator Hawley. Very good, to protect the homeland. OK, let
    me ask you this. Ten days ago, there was a shooting at Old
    Dominion University (ODU) that left one person dead, two people
    critically injured, the gunman had potential terrorist ties. Is
    this a good time for the Department of Homeland Security to be
    shut down and unfunded?
        Senator Mullin. It is the worst time. Keep in mind, we just
    came off a 43-day shutdown, as this is the third time in a
    year. It is devastating to the morale of the men and women we
    have tasked to take care of all of us, all the homeland.
    Regardless if it is a blue State or it is a red State, we have
    to look at it all the same and they have that mission mindset,
    but they do not have the pay to follow it up.
        Senator Hawley. A few days before that, two individuals
    attempted to detonate bombs in New York City (NYC) in a way
    that would cause mass civilian casualties. Both of those
    individuals have potential terrorist connections. In light of
    that, is it a good time for DHS to be shut down?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I think with the current conditions,
    this is the worst time we could possibly do it.
        Senator Hawley. A few days before that in Austin, Texas,
    three people were fatally shot outside of a bar there when a
    gunman opened fire in the early hours of a Sunday morning. That
    gunman also had potential terrorist ties, and yet DHS is shut
    down.
        Just a week ago, a gunman loaded his truck with incendiary
    devices and rammed it into the Temple Israel synagogue outside
    Detroit, Michigan. As I am sure you know, 40 law enforcement
    officers, 40, had to get emergency medical attention. It is a
    miracle by the grace of God nobody was killed, except for the
    gunman. But 40 individuals had to get medical attention, and
    yet DHS is still shut down.
        Let me just ask you this. Law enforcement dangers, I think
    I have a poster that will go up behind me here. In the last
    year alone, we have seen an 8,000 percent increase in death
    threats to law enforcement, a 1,300 percent increase in
    assaults, a 124 percent increase in vehicular attacks, attacks
    using a vehicle, against CBP law enforcement. Now in light of
    this, is it a good time for DHS to be shut down?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, it is a horrible time.
        Senator Hawley. Let's talk about children. Let's talk about
    the dangers to children. The National Center for Missing and
    Exploited Children (NCMEC) estimates that there are 20.5
    million reports of suspected online and child exploitation.
    That includes almost 20 million reports of child pornography,
    546,300 reports of online enticement of children for sexual
    acts, and 27,000 reports of child sex trafficking. Is it a good
    time for DHS to be shut down?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Hawley. Let me ask you if you have seen this
    poster\1\ that I am about to put behind me. Have you ever seen
    this before, Senator?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The poster submitted by Senator Hawley appears in the Appendix
    on page 176.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Senator Mullin. I don't believe so.
        Senator Hawley. There is no reason you should have. I was
    introduced to this material by Tim Tebow, the Heisman Trophy
    winner, who now spends a lot of his time trying to work with
    child victims of sex abuse. This poster reflects every
    individual Internet Protocol (IP) address in the United States
    in about a one-month period that was sharing, distributing,
    posting, or trading child sex abuse material or child
    pornography of some form. You want to guess how many points
    there are on that map?
        Senator Mullin. It makes me sick. I have no idea.
        Senator Hawley. There are 338,000. That is just a one-month
    period. Now, can you see any blue dots on that map, Senator
    Mullin?
        Senator Mullin. Yes, sir.
        Senator Hawley. Yes, there are. You got better eyes than I
    do. I mean, there are like very few of them. I would be
    surprised if anybody in the audience could see them. The blue
    dots are the number of investigations that are open. Look at
    the red dots--338,000. Look at the blue dots--you can hardly
    see them. Why would that be? Because in the best of times, the
    Department of Homeland Security has only 10 HSI agents who are
    fully dedicated to doing this. This is all Congress has given
    you, 10. Right now, none of those are funded. Is this a good
    time for the Department of Homeland Security to be shut down?
        Senator Mullin. I think any parent can look at that and it
    makes you sick, especially with teenage daughters like myself.
    That is scary. We have to focus on this.
        Senator Hawley. It is very scary. That is exactly right. I
    am glad to hear you say that.
        The Biden administration and your predecessor in this role,
    Alejandro Mayorkas, lost track of 450,000 children who were
    trafficked across our border over a four-year period--450,000
    children. It is the biggest child trafficking ring that was set
    up under the last administration in the history of this
    country. The President has been doing a tremendous job. They
    found in the last year over 145,000 of them, but that leaves
    almost 300,000 who are still missing, and yet the Department of
    Homeland Security is unfunded and shut down. Let me just ask
    you again, does it seem like a good time for that?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Hawley. Let's talk a little bit about the
    challenges that are being faced by people across the country
    who are facing natural disasters as we have in my home State of
    Missouri. We had major tornadoes rip through Missouri last
    spring, all across the State, particularly concentrated in the
    eastern part of the State, the St. Louis area, Southeast
    Missouri. We have thousands of thousands of people who were
    without power, who lost their homes, many who were injured. We
    have had much disaster aid approved by FEMA, but we are still
    waiting for some of that aid to get to us.
        Now, FEMA is shut down. I have thousands of people in
    Missouri who are awaiting the aid that the President has
    approved, by the way, and that FEMA has approved, but that is
    in the process of coming to the State. I have probably hundreds
    of people who are not able to go back to their homes and who
    are applying for individual assistance that has not yet been
    processed by FEMA. Now they are being told, ``Sorry, there's
    nothing we can do because FEMA's shut down.'' Does this seem
    like a good time for DHS and FEMA to be shut down?
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Senator Hawley. In any airport in the country right now, if
    you go and look, you will find hours, backups of four and five
    hours. You will find TSA agents--you alluded to this earlier,
    Senator, over 10 percent of TSA agents now are not able to come
    to the job. Why? Because they make on average $45,000 a year.
    They cannot afford their rent, they cannot afford to buy
    groceries for their kids. They have missed now two paychecks.
    This is endangering the security of our flyers. It is
    endangering the security of our airports. This is a terrible
    time for DHS to be shut down.
        Here is my point. Whether we are talking about children who
    are missing, whether we are talking about the situation against
    our law enforcement officers, whether we are talking about the
    dangers to the homeland, we are involved in a major conflict
    overseas. This nation's homeland needs to be secured, and yet
    my friends across the aisle have shut down the Department of
    Homeland Security. They have defunded every agency we just
    talked about. I just want to ask them, how long is it going to
    take? How long are these children going to have to wait in
    exploitation? How many more are going to have to go missing?
    How many TSA agents are going to be able to afford to put food
    on the table for their children? How long are the people of St.
    Louis and Southeast Missouri going to have to wait to get back
    into their homes before we can finally have a vote to reopen
    the Department of Homeland Security?
        It is long past time. I welcome your nomination. You are
    going to be a terrific leader of Homeland Security. I cannot
    wait to see you there. But it is time for this Congress to do
    its job and fund DHS and protect the homeland of the United
    States of America. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Chairman Paul. All right. Thanks, everybody. We are going
    to do another round of questions. I want to let anybody ask a
    question that wants to ask a question, but I really do not want
    to give everybody seven more minutes. I want to keep it to
    pressing questions. We will start on the Republican side. Does
    somebody have a pressing question they did not get to ask or
    would like to ask?
        Senator Hawley. I will yield back.
        Chairman Paul. Anybody else? Senator Ernst.
        Senator Ernst. Yes, thank you. Again, Senator Mullin, I
    truly appreciate you being here. I do want to ask some
    questions. I do want to followup. So many people have pointed
    out the various departments that exist and are not being funded
    under DHS.
        We have a really significant anniversary coming up this
    year. Most people will think it is our Nation's 250th, which is
    extraordinary, but the other significant anniversary that has
    impacted so many of us, especially those of us that have served
    in uniform, significant anniversary, the 25th year of September
    11, 2001.
        Right now, we are currently in our 32nd day of the
    Department of Homeland Security being shut down. We have men
    and women serving in TSA, in FEMA, in the Coast Guard, Secret
    Service, in the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security
    Agency, all of them under DHS, not being funded.
        Now, I just heard in the first round of questions, one of
    my colleagues on the left say, ``This has nothing to do with
    ICE. They are funded.'' If it has nothing to do with ICE, why
    are we not funding these agencies that protect Americans?
    Especially as we are coming up on the 25th anniversary of
    September 11th, this fall. It is a significant anniversary. I
    hope never to repeat it. But the fact of the matter is that
    there is a greater possibility of September 11th happening all
    over again because we are not properly funding the men and
    women that protect our homeland.
        I do not want to hear folks say it has nothing to do with
    ICE, because I do believe when we get into the politics of
    this, it is about ICE. It is about ICE. I would love for my
    friends on the left to acknowledge it is about ICE, but
    acknowledge that protecting our homeland is much more important
    than the politics of this.
        Senator Mullin, do you think it is time to set aside the
    partisan politics and partisan games and fund DHS as a whole so
    that the Department can be fully functioning to protect
    Americans, especially as we are approaching this fall, the 25th
    anniversary on one of the greatest attacks that we have ever
    seen on our homeland?
        Senator Mullin. Yes, Senator. I look at this as a political
    theater that we are playing games with and we are risking
    people's lives and we are disturbing people's lives. As I
    stated earlier, we have 260-, 280,000 employees in DHS that are
    still on the job, still working, still keeping us safe, without
    pay. I do not know how in good conscience you could sit there
    and think that is OK.
        Senator Ernst. It is not OK, and I look forward to your
    leadership at Department of Homeland Security. Thank you,
    Senator Mullin. I yield back.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Peters.
        Senator Peters. Yes. I have a couple questions for you.
        Senator Mullin. Yes, sir.
        Senator Peters Senator Mullin, but before that, I just want
    to clarify what we are hearing about funding for Homeland
    Security. I think the political theater has been on the
    Republican side, because there is really no debate with any of
    my Democratic colleagues that we need to fully fund FEMA, that
    we need to fully fund the Coast Guard, we need a fully fund
    CISA, to fund all of those other areas, the TSA folks all
    should be fully funded. But unfortunately, my Republican
    colleagues who control the floor, you are in the majority, you
    determine which bills go on the floor and which ones are up for
    a vote. The way we can do that so we do not have a floor vote
    is we can go and move by unanimous consent and move a bill and
    say, ``Is there anybody that objects to this bill?'' If they do
    not object, it immediately is passed. That is the procedure. So
    folks at home watching this, we have bills that will
    immediately pass and could pass today. We have put on the floor
    bills to fully fund TSA, and my Republican colleagues have
    objected.
        I heard all this support for TSA today, so I hope you tell
    your colleagues, do not object to the TSA funding bill. Please
    don't do not that. We could pass it today. God, that would be
    great. But we heard a lot of theater, all this stuff. FEMA,
    pass it today. Coast Guard, pass it today. CISA, cybersecurity,
    pass it today.
        So, as the nominee for Homeland Security, I would hope you
    would tell your colleagues, ``Boy, this is really important.
    Don't object to the bill that allows us to pay for this.''
        Now, granted, the CBP and ICE are not in there because we
    are around negotiating about making sure that there are
    guardrails in place so that Federal agents have to abide by the
    same rules as local police. When I go home and I say that,
    everybody says, ``Really? They don't have to do that now?'' I
    am like, no, but Republicans are going to hold TSA hostage.
    They are going to hold Coast Guard hostage. They are going to
    hold FEMA, CISA, they are going to hold it all hostage because
    they do not want to give any ground on making sure we just have
    commonsense guidelines.
        We have a solution for that. Pass the bills for all of
    these other agencies, pass them, it can happen today. We have
    tried for the last two weeks and my Republican colleagues
    object. Do not object anymore. Then let's focus on trying to
    come together, and I appreciate your comments about how we come
    together, let's come together and figure out how we put
    commonsense guidelines in place for Federal agents that are
    operating in our communities. You have expressed an interest in
    doing that today, and I take you at your word for that. So
    let's do that. But let's not make TSA a hostage in this whole
    thing. Let's pass the bills. We can do it.
        I have heard it. I heard HSI funding from one of my
    colleagues here. I want to be clear, HSI is funded because both
    CBP and ICE are fully funded because of the Big Bill that
    passed last year. That funding is not even in jeopardy. What is
    in jeopardy we can fix today. All the things that are not being
    funded, we can fund today, and every single Democrat is for it.
    There is only one Republican--it only takes one Republican to
    object, and apparently that keeps happening. I would talk to
    that one Republican and say, ``Stop objecting to this.'' If you
    truly all believe in that, stop objecting to it.
        HSI is getting money now because of the Big Bill, but what
    is the problem with HSI? I agree with my colleague with child
    exploitation. I am going to be at the top of the list when it
    comes to making sure we are doing as much as we can to stop
    that. But unfortunately, this Administration has actually
    transferred all those HSI people to immigration enforcement.
    They are not even doing what they were supposed to be doing.
        I would hope if you are confirmed, you will bring those
    folks back to their role that my colleague says is so
    important, which I agree with. But why did the Administration
    send them off to immigration work then? Apparently the
    Administration does not think this is as important as my
    colleague.
        I just want to wrap up here, questions that we had related
    to your bio. The biography is important, and it is important
    that we fully understand how you are presenting yourself, and
    if there are any ambiguities, we want to work that out.
        On March 11th, I sent you a letter asking for information
    about any activity related to any special assignment, which you
    talked about here today, that you have been involved in. There
    was no exception for official travel or any of that. We just
    asked any of these special assignments that you have talked
    about.
        You responded to the Committee in that letter by saying,
    ``My voluntary work included special assignments outside of
    DOD, was that I offered support and mentorship from a Christian
    perspective to both Afghans that supported our efforts and
    other personnel that served in war zones.'' You stated your
    special assignments occurred intermittently between 2006 and
    2011. My letter did not exclude official travel, and it also
    gave you explicit instructions in that letter for providing
    classified information, how we could do that, and do it in a
    way that protects that classified information. You did not
    provide any of that. Today is the first time that I am hearing
    about your classified activities from 2015 to 2016.
        Quite frankly, as we have had these conversations, you have
    not been forthcoming with me or this Committee. The story
    always seems to kind of change. As you know, candor, honesty,
    transparency are absolutely critical, particularly at this time
    to try to build trust as the Secretary of Homeland Security.
        We have to clear this up. We feel pretty strongly we have
    to understand exactly what this is, especially with all your
    public comments that have raised a lot of questions. We have
    checked. The Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility
    (SCIF) is available. We would love to have you come to the SCIF
    and tell us exactly what you are talking about. I think that
    will put my colleagues' mind at peace. Would you be willing to
    go to the SCIF this afternoon and tell us the classified
    activities you are talking about?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I think this Committee made it very
    clear with the paperwork they gave me that I do not have to
    disclose my official travel. That was part of the documents. I
    went over two or three times, I complied with exactly what the
    Committee said. There is no statement or no area for mission
    work and mentorship that was a volunteer basis that I did on my
    own time. It was very specific over and over again that you do
    not have to claim official travel.
        Senator Peters. We want to know what this supposed
    classified work was. We have real questions about it. I asked
    the FBI yesterday. I said, ``if someone had appeared in any
    classified document, any document, would that be in this
    report?'' They said, ``Yes.'' I said, ``I don't see anything
    for Senator Mullin. Why is that?'' They said, ``Nothing showed
    up. We queried the Department of State, the Department of
    Defense, other intel folks.'' So you are in no classified
    document that the Federal Government has according to the FBI,
    and yet you are telling me you did all this classified work. I
    do not understand how that----
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I did not say all. I was very clear
    with what I said. I get what you are trying to get to here and
    that is fine, but I complied with everything the document said,
    and it was official travel and it was a classified trip.
        Chairman Paul. Let me just chime in on this. I have agreed
    this is the fastest hearing anyone's ever had. This will be the
    fastest vote anyone's ever had, and that is despite my qualms
    and problems with your nomination. I am willing to do that. But
    when the FBI came to my office, I asked them if you had done
    any kind of work for the CIA, the DOD or any other----
        Senator Mullin. I have not.
        Chairman Paul [continuing]. Let me finish--any of these
    kind of agencies or any kind of classified work. They said the
    way it works is you would have a separate folder if you had
    been involved in classified missions somewhere, and we would
    get to see the folder and then we wouldn't talk about it. We
    would look at it privately and we would know what you are
    referring to.
        It is confusing to us because there may have been some
    papers that said, ``Your official trips were excluded.'' I do
    not know which ones were and were not, but you have now
    mentioned today that you have activities you have done. I think
    it would be easy and I am still willing to have the vote
    tomorrow, but I can cancel the vote tomorrow. I am still
    willing to have the vote, get this done and get it over with.
    But I think that just to make it clear, and it does not sound
    like it is a secret you are too concerned about divulging, if
    you would just spend an hour and go to this SCIF, or 30
    minutes, and just tell both the Ranking Member and the other,
    it would be private and it will not be revealed. I think we
    would get this over with and we would not have a complaint
    about going ahead with the vote tomorrow.
        Senator Mullin. I have no issue with that, if you guys get
    cleared on it. Because my understanding was there was only four
    people read in it and it was a special program inside the
    House. Just like I was not on Intel at the time, I am not
    saying I was, but I have no issue with that at all. I would
    welcome being brought up. It is very unique and it was fun.
        Chairman Paul. That would be on you. We are not going to
    try to figure out who the four people are and whether we can
    have approval to it.
        Senator Mullin. I do not choose----
        Chairman Paul. If you are doing something that important,
    really it probably ought to be revealed and discussed in a
    classified manner.
        Senator Mullin. Mr. Chair, it is not on me to--I do not
    have the authority to do that. This is why I said I was very
    clear, sorry, that I never talked specific dates or locations
    on this. And so I have zero issue with talking about it.
        Senator Peters. Do it this afternoon.
        Senator Mullin. I don't have clearance to talk about this
    this afternoon. I do not. It is not me to release it.
        Chairman Paul. This is a legislative program. This is a
    program that Congress assigned you to?
        Senator Mullin. Yes. This was within my official duties.
        Senator Peters. Who assigned it to you?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, that is not for me to talk to you
    about on this. I am sorry. This is not a classified--I am
    sorry. I am not trying to be ugly. You know how classified
    situations work in classified information.
        Chairman Paul. Which agency classified it?
        Senator Mullin. It was not an agency. It was done here,
    well, in the House on the time.
        Senator Peters. But the House classified it.
        Senator Mullin. I am assuming. I wasn't on Intel.
        Chairman Paul. We are just not really aware of how the
    House classifies them.
        Senator Mullin. I have no idea. I know every time we spoke
    about this, we had to go to the SCIF and visit about it. I know
    there was a paper that I had to sign before it even started. I
    may be wrong and there may be more than four, but I know it was
    only me and three other people that ever discussed it.
        Chairman Paul. If it is so secret that we cannot know about
    it, I would think that there would be some paperwork in the
    SCIF that they should show us saying, ``This is so top secret
    and this was made classified.''
        Senator Mullin. I have no problem. You are welcome to go to
    the House. This started in 2015. It ended in a little late in
    2016. I have nothing to hide on this. This is too easy. I would
    really enjoy sitting there and have a conversation with you
    because I do not want you to question or question my character
    on this. So that is very simple for me. But I cannot make that
    authorization. You guys know that.
        Chairman Paul. It is a little difficult for us to go ask
    about a program that has no name and we have nobody that we
    know to talk to about it. I do not know how we would begin
    doing this without your cooperation.
        Senator Mullin. I am willing to cooperate.
        Chairman Paul. We are willing to hold the vote tomorrow,
    but you brought this up that you were on a super-secret mission
    that you cannot tell us about it.
        Senator Mullin. No, I did not say super-secret, sir. I said
    it was classified.
        Chairman Peters. That only four people know?
        Senator Mullin. I only know that there was four people.
    There was maybe more people that understood it, but I know
    there was only three people plus me that was ever in the
    meeting. And so as far as I am concerned, only four people was
    read in on this.
        Chairman Paul. You were on the Intel Committee?
        Senator Mullin. No, not at the time. No, sir. I was on the
    Intel Committee after that.
        Senator Peters. What committee were you on at the time?
        Senator Mullin. You got to think about 10 years ago. Energy
    and Commerce.
        Senator Peters. So it was an Energy and Commerce top secret
    effort? I am just asking.
        Senator Mullin. Senator. What I am getting upset about a
    little bit here is that your tone that you are saying that in a
    condescending way. I did what I was asking you.
        Senator Peters. I am trying to find out who we would talk
    to.
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I told you exactly what happened here.
    I was not required to disclose this on any official travel.
    Your documents were very clear on that. I do not know what else
    you want me to say. You said you can go find out. Go find out.
    Then when you guys say it is good for me to talk to you, I will
    be happy to talk to you about it. I cannot talk specifics. If
    you want to talk about in general ideas, let's go down and talk
    in the SCIF. I am OK with that. But I cannot get into the
    necessary specifics or who made the decision to do it, but I
    can talk in general, and I will be very glad to do that with
    you. Even Senator Lankford, who I know is on Intel, he can come
    down with us and visit with us about it.
        No issues with that at all. Perfectly clear and OK with it,
    but it is not for me to release this. So if you guys want to do
    that, we can leave here, go down there and talk about it.
        Chairman Paul. Did this mission involve exchange of fire?
        Senator Mullin. It was not a mission. It was an official
    travel with specific deals or for specific fact finding, just
    like any official travel is, that they wanted clarification on.
    Like I said, I would be happy to talk to you about it if you
    guys want to.
        Senator Peters. It was in a conflict zone?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, once again, I am not talking about
    specific details or dates because we have revealed that this
    was a classified situation. Now I am not going to talk about
    any, because anything I have talked about in the past was not
    referencing any of this, but I am definitely not going to get
    into it now, talking about specific dates or details.
        Chairman Paul. We would have no way of exploring this
    unless you were willing to cooperate on who did this.
        Senator Mullin. I don't know. Mr. Chair, I do not know what
    else you said, or what else you want me to do. I said I will go
    down there and talk about this with you in a SCIF, but I cannot
    give all this specifics.
        Chairman Paul. There is no reason to think that somehow we
    are not qualified to look at classified information.
        Senator Mullin. There is a lot of programs out there, Mr.
    Chair, that you know, is based on a need to know.
        Chairman Paul. Right.
        Senator Mullin. Maybe you can talk to Senator Lankford
    about this too. Senator Lankford, would you like to talk
    about----
        Senator Lankford. I am glad to jump on. This feels, as my
    mom used to say, a mountain out of a molehill, where he has
    offered over and over and over again to say, ``Let's get into a
    classified setting.'' I just left the Worldwide Threats hearing
    where I had to run over to be able to run back there. And
    meeting with all the folks there, there were several questions
    that I asked there that they gave me a partial answer and said,
    ``I will give you the rest of this answer in a SCIF.''
    Everybody goes, ``Oh, OK. I get that,'' because there are some
    things that are sources, methods, or actions that we are all
    keenly aware of on this. I do not know what else he could say
    at this point other than let's get into SCIF and let's actually
    talk about this.
        Chairman Paul. Why don't we start with that initial meeting
    and see how that goes?
        Senator Peters. Yes. We will have initial meetings. That is
    what we ask for, Senator. He said he couldn't do that because
    he wasn't authorized----
        Senator Mullin. No, I did say that. I said, I cannot give
    you all the details to it because it is not for me to release
    it, but I can talk to you in general about it, but not in this
    setting.
        Senator Lankford. Yes. Let's get the information out and be
    able to talk it through and be able to find out what this is.
    All of us have been in classified settings before.
        Chairman Paul. Let's try to get it done this afternoon so
    we can proceed with that.
        Senator Mullin. I am available right after this. Mr. Chair,
    if you want to, we can go leave from here and go straight
    there.
        Chairman Paul. Yes, and let's try to get the hearing
    finished. So let's try no more speeches back and forth on all
    the ICE stuff if we can. You kind of just concluded that one.
    Can I come back to you in a minute?
        Senator Peters. Sure.
        Chairman Paul. All right. Senator Hassan. Let's try to get
    off of funding ICE and stuff and let's just try to stick to the
    nomination for now.
        Senator Hassan. I appreciate that, Mr. Chair. I do have to
    take a moment because during my first round of questions, I
    discussed the current impasse we find ourselves in over ICE
    reforms and DHS funding, and I did not speak clearly, so I just
    do need to clarify my comments now.
        ICE already has significant funding right now for the
    President's budget bill, from the President's budget bill last
    summer, which provided the agency with several times more money
    than its annual budget and gave ICE broad discretion about how
    to use that money. That means that the partial shutdown that we
    have right now has nothing to do with whether ICE has the usual
    levels of funding it needs to operate since the agency already
    has many times its annual budget. It is about, instead, the
    need for policy reforms to help ensure that ICE operates using
    the same kind of standards that State and local law enforcement
    in New Hampshire and around the country uphold every single
    day.
        Now, Senator Fetterman was right earlier when he pointed
    out that this shutdown is impacting other parts of DHS that
    handle cybersecurity and transportation security and other
    critical functions. We need to resolve it right now. As Senator
    Peters just described, we have been pushing to do that in the
    ways that the minority can. We need to reach agreement on ICE
    policy reforms or by funding the rest of the Department while
    we continue to negotiate on those reform, something I strongly
    support, but unfortunately Republicans have blocked.
        The reforms to ICE are critical. DHS is supposed to be
    prioritizing the removal of dangerous and violent criminals.
    Instead, we have seen DHS agents assault and even kill American
    citizens while wearing masks seeming without accountability.
        So now this is the question. Senator, if a masked ICE or
    other DHS agent kills an American citizen, should local law
    enforcement be allowed to investigate and hold that agent
    accountable?
        Senator Mullin. Unfortunately, local law enforcement is not
    supposed to be investigating Federal. That is what DOJ and FBI
    is for. Now, we will communicate with local law enforcement,
    but that is not their job. FBI, just same thing if in most
    municipalities, if there is a fatality shooting, there is
    another agency that oversees them. In this case, it would be
    the FBI who is set up inside the DOJ to investigate those.
        Senator Hassan. So you have answered no, and your answer
    would make ICE unaccountable, and that endangers not just the
    rule of law, but also the security of all Americans.
        I wanted to get to one other question. During the past
    year, DHS leadership cut CISA's expert workforce by nearly a
    third. Meanwhile, adversaries and criminal syndicates are
    accelerating their cyberattacks against the United States. How
    do you plan to restore DHS's cybersecurity force and better
    secure our critical infrastructure from cyberattacks?
        Senator Mullin. Ma'am, we have to recruit the right people,
    but the best and brightest individuals in those areas. I know
    the University of Tulsa has a great program. But recruiting
    individuals that want to be there, that want to deliver the
    mission is vitally important. And so we will work to make sure
    that happens.
        Senator Hassan. So you agree we need to add people back
    into CISA and pursue this critical function and they need to be
    nonpartisan experts with experience and commitment to the
    safety and security of our country wherever that leads them.
        Senator Mullin. Ma'am, no one in Homeland should be looking
    at this from a bipartisan perspective. Now, if you want me to
    talk about staffing numbers, I do not know what the mission
    requires, but we will be staffed adequately if we can find the
    right people to staff and to make sure that we are mission
    capable.
        Senator Hassan. OK. Thank you. Mr. Chair, out of respect
    for your desire to move things along, I will submit for the
    record a question on non-intrusive imaging at the border.\1\ It
    is supposed to be ready to do for every vehicle entering the
    United States, especially to detect fentanyl. I would like your
    answer on that and a couple of other questions as well, but I
    will submit those for the record. Thank you.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The questions submitted by Senator Hassan appears in the
    Appendix on page 122.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Chairman Paul. Without objection.
        Senator Lankford.
        Senator Lankford. Thank you. We talked before about just
    trying to get information on time and such. In the transition
    that happened between the Biden administration and the Trump
    administration, data fell behind, and it fell really behind. It
    was one of my complaints that I had with Mayorkas that was
    sometimes two or three weeks late on releasing normal data
    information, just how many encounters were happening at the
    border, how many arrests, some of those things on it. Last
    year, it wasn't weeks late. It was months and months and months
    late on getting data out.
        DHS has a really good story to tell. There are a lot of
    good things that are happening there. But my concern is that
    social media and some of the examples are coming out just to
    tell the story and DHS is not able to actually tell the story.
    Quite frankly, we have asked DHS several times, ``Hey, give us
    more information, more data on this.''
        One of the things I would love to know is just, you have
    been one of us for a long time in this. You know the importance
    of oversight and what that means on this, to be able to get
    data to Members of Congress and to the American people, and so,
    quite frankly, we can see the story as well. I am not asking
    for a pledge because I already know your heart on that, but
    want to just be able to open that up on how we can actually get
    more data and information.
        Senator Mullin. Our Leg Affairs Department, I am going to
    have to stand up and make sure that we are communicating and
    getting the information you need. It is not going to be fixed
    overnight, but it does frustrate me as a former member of the
    House and definitely a current member in the Senate that when
    we make a request, it is not seen. Now, there is a difference
    between making actual requests because you are wanting to get
    to a solution versus harassment.
        Senator Lankford. Badgering people.
        Senator Mullin. Yes. There is a tremendous amount that
    happens. Both sides play the game and I am just not going to
    play that game. I will work with any Senator. I will work with
    any committee to make sure that we are getting the information
    you need to do your job. But just for harassment purposes,
    please, I ask you if you want me to do my job and do it right
    and be transparent with you, do not play games with me either.
    If you have real concerns, like I said, everybody on this
    Committee, and really for our colleagues for that matter, have
    my personal cell phone, and that number, I have no intentions
    of changing it unless somebody leaks it.
        Senator Lankford. Yes, hopefully that would not occur on
    it. One of the quick question on this. Ali Mayorkas, when he
    sat at that desk before, he and I had a lot of conversations
    about what was labeled the special interest aliens. These are
    folks that come from known areas of terrorism, but we did not
    have any information on them specifically, and so the Biden
    administration just let them in. They may say, ``Well, we know
    somebody in your family as acts of terrorism, but it is not
    you.'' So they just labeled them special interest aliens and
    released them into the country, that we know of about 70,000 of
    those individuals.
        The Trump administration in the last year and a couple of
    months has picked up 50,000 of those. That is part of this
    enforcement that is out there to be able to identify folks that
    I have been ringing the bell on over and over and over again
    saying, ``Why are we letting people in?'' That we literally
    say, ``Yes, they could be a terrorist. They could not be a
    terrorist. We don't know. Somebody in their family is, but we
    don't know them if they are on it.'' So they were just released
    into the country on that and given that label.
        In fact, I was told, ``We will keep watching them.'' But
    when I went to the FBI and asked them directly, they were like,
    ``There's no way we can track 70,000 people.'' So there has
    been a lot of good work to be able to try to identify where
    those people went, who they are associating with here in the
    United States on it, and then removing them from the United
    States.
        There are still about 20,000 left. I would love to be able
    to get your promise to say we are not going to quit. We are
    going to continue to be able to find folks that were just
    allowed to come in the country that may be a terrorist and may
    not be a terrorist we don't know, but to be able to go identify
    those folks and make sure that American people are protected.
        Senator Mullin. Absolutely.
        Senator Lankford. Yes. Thank you.
        Chairman Paul. We are almost done. We have two people left
    who have not responded this round. We have had a lot of debate
    over ICE funding. I hope we can ask just some specific
    questions to the nominee. I cannot control what you ask, but
    that is my hope. Senator Blumenthal.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Senator Mullin, just
    months before the war with Iran began, the Trump administration
    negotiated a back channel agreement, a deal with the Islamic
    Republic to deport Iranian nationals, including asylum seekers,
    dissidents. There have been public reports about it, CNN, on
    January 26, 2026. New York Times reported it in a couple of
    articles in September and December that flights around that
    time deported tens of those kinds of Iranian nationals back to
    Iran as part of this secret agreement.
        I want to tell you about one husband and wife, Christian
    converts from Islam who were sentenced in absentia to 9-and 11-
    year sentences by the Islamic Republic. They fled to the United
    States seeking asylum, but they were detained by ICE on
    arrival. The wife was deported. She managed to take refuge in
    Turkey. The husband, I will call him Mr. H, is still here, but
    he is facing deportation despite showing scars from the beating
    he received by a government gang. I have both of their
    declarations. I would like them to be entered in the record.\1\
    There are Iranian American organizations like the Iranian
    American Legal Defense Fund that have further information.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The statement submitted from Iranian-American Defense Fund
    appears in the Appendix on page 178.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I have no doubt that you share my outrage about the
    treatment of this couple and other Iranian nationals who were
    deported possibly to torture and death in Iran. Will you agree
    with me and commit that we should stop deporting such people?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I do not know the specifics behind
    this. I think before I can talk about it in hypotheticals, I
    would need to know what the reasons behind it. But I do not
    want to deport anybody that is here illegally, or here legally,
    I mean, and most definitely not individuals that have done
    everything possible to be a contributor to society. But in
    these specific cases, I do not know. I am not familiar with
    them. I do not know if there is something else in the
    background that would cause the Administration to----
        Senator Blumenthal. I am talking in general about tens of
    people, as many as 55 on one flight, 15 or so on another, not
    just this couple. But in principle, we should not be sending
    Iranian dissidents and asylum seekers back to Iran. Wouldn't
    you agree?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, we do know that our enemies want to
    infiltrate us and use our rules and our generosity against us.
    I do not know the specifics of these. I do not know their
    background. I do not know what the reasons was, but I will be
    happy to look into it.
        Senator Blumenthal. Let me ask you about another topic. I
    am glad that you committed that there will not be the kind of
    review that Secretary Noem imposed on contracts above a certain
    amount uniformly by your office, but I would like your
    commitment that you will help us investigate another abuse of
    authority.
        Corey Lewandowski apparently was in charge of approving all
    contracts. One of them was a $220 million contract that was
    related directly to Kristi Noem being fired. They bypassed
    procurement rules to award that contract to a shell company
    that was created days before to benefit a Republican consulting
    firm with close ties to Secretary Noem and Mr. Lewandowski.
        Will you commit to cooperating with our investigation, the
    Permanent Subcommittee on Investigation, making documents and
    personnel available to congressional and other investigations
    into those contracts awarded by Secretary Noem and Mr.
    Lewandowski?
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I have heard these same reports. I
    know the IG, Joseph. I do not know him personally. That is why
    I say Joseph. Some people call him Joe. His open
    investigations, we will cooperate with him and----
        Senator Blumenthal. And provide all the documents and
    records that are requested to this Committee to do its work.
    That is what I am asking.
        Senator Mullin. I will leave that to the Inspector General.
        I will do everything that is required of me by law, but the
    IG will be doing the investigation, and we will let the IG
    decide what documents he is going to share and maybe you can
    bring that up with him.
        Senator Blumenthal. In fact, Secretary Noem obstructed the
    investigations underway by the IG. In fact, in at least 10
    investigations, they were the subject of a letter from the IG.
    Are you committing to immediately begin restoring the
    Department's working relationship with the IG?
        Senator Mullin. If confirmed, absolutely. I will do
    everything required of me by law and in the policies that you
    guys give me. There will not be any gray area with me. We want
    to have a good relationship with the IG. He has got a job to
    do, and every other agency that is underneath DHS and----
        Senator Blumenthal. And you will cooperate with the
    Committee in providing those.
        Senator Mullin. Sir, everything that is required of me to
    report and anything that you want the IG to do, that is between
    you and the IG.
        Senator Blumenthal. Senator Mullin, I do not think I need
    to tell you that the American people have been appalled and
    angered by what they have seen in the excessive use of force.
    We have had hearings before the Permanent Subcommittee on
    Investigation that have shown Aliya Rahman, a woman suffering
    from traumatic brain injury, yanked from her car in
    Minneapolis, dragged by her arms, leaving both of her shoulders
    to be torn.\1\ Javier Ramirez, a father of four from
    California, detained for four days and refused medical
    treatment for his diabetes. We documented these abuses in a
    report that we issued and in hearings that we conducted.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The picture submitted by Senator Blumenthal appears in the
    Appendix on page 196.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        One of them was Marimar Martinez, who was on her way to
    donate clothing at a local church when she came across agents
    in an unmarked car. Agents sideswiped her car. Three masked
    agents in camouflage stormed out and one of them pulled out his
    gun and fired at her moving vehicle, hitting her five times.
    The agent then bragged about it. He bragged about it in the
    text.\2\ He said, ``I have an MOF--'' I won't detail it. ``I
    fired five rounds and she had seven holes. Put that in your
    book, boys.''
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ The picture submitted by Senator Blumenthal appears in the
    Appendix on page 195.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Shouldn't we be disgusted by an agent that fires at a U.S.
    citizen, no criminal record? She was charged.
        Chairman Paul. Senator Blumenthal----
        Senator Blumenthal. The charges were dismissed. Would you
    not agree with me that that an agent should not be carrying a
    firearm?
        Senator Mullin. I am not familiar with the investigation,
    sir. I do not know if the investigation is completed. As
    Secretary, I am sure I will be briefed on this.
        Chairman Paul. All right. Time has expired. I know these
    are important issues, but we just have to move on. We are going
    to finish up with Senator Kim, then we are going to make a
    statement that hopefully can be agreeable for a meeting later.
    Senator Kim.
        Senator Kim. I will be concise here, Mr. Chair. Senator,
    There are just a couple last things here. A couple weeks ago we
    had a hearing here and I was engaged with the head of USCIS and
    I raised an issue that happened in San Diego of spouses of
    military members and veterans. They were going in to get
    interviewed for a green card and were arrested upon their
    arrival. I just wanted to get your reaction to that. Is that
    the kind of behavior you think is acceptable?
        Senator Mullin. Excuse me. Repeat that again.
        Senator Kim. It was spouses of military servicemembers as
    well as veterans. Their spouses were going for the purposes of
    a green card interview, but were at that point detained and
    arrested on arrival.
        Senator Mullin. I have not heard about this. I have heard
    of different reports, Senator. If people are going through the
    process and trying to obtain it legally, because we do have
    naturalizations ceremonies Monday through Friday in this
    country everywhere, we are going to continue working with those
    individuals. I do not know the circumstances.
        Senator Kim. I will pass you the details, but it is
    something that we can talk through. But just in general here, I
    guess what I am just trying to get a sense from you is what do
    you think is appropriate in terms of ICE agents being able to
    operate? For instance, do you think it is OK for them to
    operate and arrest people at hospitals?
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I will always support my law
    enforcement doing their job. I do not know the circumstances.
    If it is a felony warrant that the person is at a hospital,
    then they will go pick up the felony warrant. Just like local
    law enforcement does the same thing. And so in general, I think
    you need to be more specific on what you are talking about, but
    if you are talking about just doing everyday law enforcement, I
    think there is a better approach.
        Senator Kim. Senator, I just want to raise, I just hear a
    lot of this from my own community about concerns of these types
    of efforts in and around hospitals, schools, churches. These
    are things that I hope we can engage on. I know you talked
    about it with one of my colleagues about polling sites, but
    these are important discussions and we do not have clarity on
    what we are expected to see, and it is causing just enormous
    amount of concern and challenge within our communities.
        Senator Mullin. Senator, I do not understand what the
    concern about enforcing immigration at polling places is
    anyways, because honestly, if you are not a citizen, you should
    not be voting anyway. So technically there should not be any
    illegals at the polling spot. As I have said before, if we are
    at a polling area, it is because of a specific threat, not for
    immigration enforcement.
        Senator Kim. Yes. Look, what I will just convey here, it is
    not just about people who are undocumented. I am hearing from
    American citizens that are now feeling like they need to carry
    their passports around for fear of being stopped on the street.
    There is a chilling effect that is happening that is wider. I
    had to give my father-in-law specific instructions in case he
    was stopped upon reentry back into the United States. There is
    real concern out there, and I just wanted to express that to
    you.
        Just a couple last quick things here. At the detention
    facility in New Jersey, a different one called Delaney Hall, I
    was there right after a gentleman died there, and there was
    really no documentation, really minimal explanation of his
    cause of death. There were 32 deaths at detention facilities
    under ICE control last year, yet the oversight offices at DHS
    who do this, offices like the Office of Civil Rights and Civil
    Liberties, the Office of Immigration Detention Oversights, they
    have been gutted. I just wanted to ask, do you commit to being
    able to ensure that there is the proper oversight there
    internally within DHS, working alongside us in Congress to
    ensure that people are being kept at the dignified levels that
    they should according to a law?
        Senator Mullin. Each facility falls underneath different
    standards of operation that are in statutes. We will operate
    within those statutes. Everybody deserves to be treated with a
    dignified hand, and we will follow those procedures that are
    set for those facilities particularly.
        Senator Kim. I hope to work with you on that if you are
    confirmed, because we need to make sure we have that oversight
    as we have not been able to see it. In fact, some of our
    efforts have been impeded because we have not been able to have
    visitation at some of these sites, and I hope that that is
    something you will support us to be able to have.
        One last thing I just wanted to raise, with FEMA there was
    a number of employees that sent an open letter titled the
    Katrina Declaration. This is something that warned about some
    of the reversals that are being made when it comes to disaster
    response and recovery. Your predecessor, Secretary Noem, she
    suspended a number of these FEMA employees. I just wanted to
    ask, can you commit that if confirmed you will adhere to
    whistleblower laws and ensure that these whistleblowers do not
    face retaliation for their protected disclosure?
        Senator Mullin. So there are already laws in place to
    protect whistleblowers. I have said multiple times, I will work
    within the law and the requirements of me as Secretary.
        Senator Kim. I hope that means that you will ensure that
    these whistleblowers do not face unlawful retaliation for what
    they have done.
        Senator Mullin. It is against the law, as you said,
    unlawful, sir. I said I am going to work within the law and
    that is unlawful.
        Senator Kim. OK. With that, I will yield back.
        Chairman Paul. Thank you. As I said previously, we have
    scheduled a vote for tomorrow. I am committed to that. There
    are several Members on both sides of the aisle that would like
    a briefing in the SCIF. They have it from 1 to 2. If you are
    willing to do that, several Members would like just to walk
    over and do it. I think that makes it much more likely that we
    have the vote tomorrow.
        Senator Mullin. Sir, I would prefer to have the Ranking
    Member, yourself, James, and if you want to bring another
    Democrat member that is on----
        Chairman Paul. No, it is all or none. All the Members need
    to be able to hear it directly. The problem up here is too many
    things are siloed and it just looks like resistance that you do
    not want everything to come out.
        Senator Mullin. No, sir.
        Chairman Paul. If you would be much more forthcoming, if
    you let any Member of the Committee and classified staff into
    it, I think we can get this done in this afternoon.
        Senator Mullin. I think that is fine as long as it is in a
    classified setting.
        Chairman Paul. As long as what?
        Senator Lankford. Classified.
        Chairman Paul. Yes, that is fine. People classified,
    security, honor staff, and staff.
        Senator Lankford. Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented
    Information (TS/SCI) compliance.
        Chairman Paul. TS/SCI.
        Senator Mullin. TS/SCI, yes.
        Chairman Paul. All right. Thanks everybody for coming
    today. The nominee has filed responses to biographical and
    financial questionnaires answered prehearing questions
    submitted by the Committee and had their financial statements
    reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics (OGE). Without
    objection, this information will be made part of the hearing
    record with the exception of the nominee's financial data,
    which are on file with the Committee.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The information for Mr. Mullin appears in the Appendix on page
    68.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Due to the quick turnaround between this hearing and the
    markup tomorrow, the hearing will remain open until 4 p.m.
    today, March 18th.
        This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:42 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

                                  ----------

    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]