<DOC> [109 Senate Hearings] [From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access] [DOCID: f:26745.wais] S. Hrg. 109-513 NOMINATIONS OF GEORGE W. FORESMAN AND TRACY A. HENKE ======================================================================= HEARING before the COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON THE NOMINATIONS OF GEORGE W. FORESMAN TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR PREPAREDNESS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, AND TRACY A. HENKE TO BE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT COORDINATION AND PREPAREDNESS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY __________ DECEMBER 8, 2005 __________ Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 26-745 WASHINGTON : 2006 _____________________________________________________________________________ For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ÿ091800 Fax: (202) 512ÿ092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402ÿ090001 COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel Jennifer A. Hemingway, Professional Staff Member Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Counsel Adam R. Sedgewick, Minority Professional Staff Member Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk C O N T E N T S ------ Opening statements: Page Senator Collins.............................................. 1 Senator Lieberman............................................ 3 Senator Carper............................................... 5 WITNESSES Thursday, December 8, 2005 Hon. Jo Ann Emerson, a Representative in Congress from the State of Missouri.................................................... 5 George W. Foresman to be Under Secretary for Preparedness, U.S. Department of Homeland Security................................ 7 Tracy A. Henke to be Executive Director, Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness, U.S. Department of Homeland Security........................................... 9 Alphabetical List of Witnesses Emerson, Hon. Jo Ann: Testimony.................................................... 5 Foresman, George W.: Testimony.................................................... 7 Prepared statement........................................... 35 Biographical and professional information.................... 37 Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics................. 43 Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 44 Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 114 Henke, Tracy A.: Testimony.................................................... 9 Prepared statement........................................... 127 Biographical and professional information.................... 129 Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics................. 135 Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 136 Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 172 APPENDIX Prepared statements submitted for the Record from: Senator Warner for Mr. Foresman.............................. 23 Senator Warner for Ms. Henke................................. 24 Senator Bond for Ms. Henke................................... 25 Senator Talent for Ms. Henke................................. 27 Senator Allen for Mr. Foresman............................... 28 Hon. Emanuel Cleaver, II, Member of Congress from the State of Missouri, House of Representations for Ms. Henke........ 31 E-mail from Tracy Henke.......................................... 195 Memorandum from Deborah J. Daniels, Assistant Attorney General, Subject: Publication Clearance Process......................... 197 Press release from the Department of Justice submitted by Ms. Henke.......................................................... 198 Letters of support for Mr. Foresman from: Chief William D. Killen, President, International Association of Fire Chiefs............................................. 200 Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., Governor, State of Maryland.......... 201 Jerry Johnston, NAEMT President-Elect, National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians (NAEMT)................... 202 Assemblyman Lynn Hettrick, Nevada, CSG Chair, and Governor Ruth Ann Minner, Delaware, CSG President, The Council of State Governments.......................................... 203 Bruce Baughman, NEMA President, National Emergency Management Association (NEMA)......................................... 204 Letters of support for Ms. Henke from: Jo Ann Emerson, Member of Congress from the State of Missouri, House of Representatives......................... 206 Kenny Hulshof, Member of Congress from the State of Missouri, House of Representatives................................... 207 Wm. Lacy Clay, Member of Congress from the State of Missouri, House of Representatives................................... 208 Emanuel Cleaver, II, Member of Congress from the State of Missouri, House of Representatives......................... 209 Roy Blunt, House Majority Whip, Member of Congress from the State of Missouri, House of Representatives................ 210 Ken C. Nicolas, Executive Director, Criminal Justice Division, Office of the Governor, State of Texas........... 211 Sheriff Edmund M. ``Tex'' Sexton, President, National Sheriffs' Association...................................... 212 Chief William D. Killen, President, International Association of Fire Chiefs............................................. 214 James Burns, President, National Association of State Fire Marshals................................................... 215 Chuck Canterbury, National President, Grand Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police............................................ 217 R. Gil Kerlikowake, Chief of Police, Seattle Police Department, City of Seattle................................ 218 David A. Warm, Executive Director, Mid-America Regional Council (MARC)............................................. 219 Chief Steve Holle, President, Western Missouri Fire Chiefs Association................................................ 220 Chief Richard A. Dyer, Fire Director, Office of the Fire Chief, Kansas City, Missouri............................... 221 Thomas J. Charron, Executive Director, National District Attorneys Association (NDAA)............................... 222 ``Contacts between Police and the Public, Findings from the 2002 National Survey,'' Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, submitted by Senator Lieberman.......... 223 NOMINATIONS OF GEORGE W. FORESMAN AND TRACY A. HENKE ---------- THURSDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2005 U.S. Senate, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:32 p.m., in room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Susan M. Collins, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. Present: Senators Collins, Lieberman, and Carper. OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN COLLINS Chairman Collins. The Committee will come to order. Today, the Committee will consider nominations for two key positions at the Department of Homeland Security, George Foresman to be the Under Secretary for Preparedness, and Tracy Henke to be the Executive Director of the Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness. The Preparedness Directorate at the Department is new. It is part of the organizational changes that resulted from the Secretary's second-stage review completed this summer. This directorate will consolidate the Department's existing preparedness efforts, including planning, training, conducting exercises, and awarding grants. In addition, this new directorate will include the U.S. Fire Administration, a Chief Medical Officer, an Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection, and an Assistant Secretary for Cyber and Telecommunications Security. According to Secretary Chertoff, this new directorate will remove partitions among functions critical to our Nation's preparedness for catastrophic events. While I agree with the general concept of consolidating preparedness resources, I am reserving judgment on whether FEMA's preparedness assets should be removed from its core response capabilities. Preparedness and response are two sides of the same coin, and separating these functions seems unwise to me. The President's nominee, George Foresman, brings outstanding credentials to this new and challenging position. He is a highly respected veteran emergency management professional with more than 20 years of emergency preparedness experience, including his current position as Assistant to the Governor of Virginia for Commonwealth Preparedness. In addition to being Virginia's principal advisor and coordinator for homeland security and emergency response, he also serves as the Governor's cabinet-level liaison with the military commands and installations throughout Virginia. Mr. Foresman has served at the national level as well. He was Vice Chairman of the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities Involving Terrorism, which was established by Congress in 1998 and completed its work in 2003. The Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness is the Federal Government's lead agency responsible for preparing the Nation against terrorism by assisting States, local and tribal jurisdictions, and regional authorities. The office, now housed within the Directorate for Preparedness, provides a broad array of assistance to America's first responders through funding, coordinated training, equipment acquisition, and technical assistance. One of the office's primary responsibilities is implementing the Homeland Security Presidential Directive Number 8, which charged the Department of Homeland Security with establishing a National Preparedness Goal. This effort brings together experts from Federal, State, and local governments as well as the private and nonprofit sectors to create an integrated system of preparedness. In addition, the office distributes billions of dollars in grants to the States and territories, as well as to firefighters, law enforcement, emergency medical responders, ports, transit authorities, and other homeland security stakeholders. The Members of this Committee have worked tirelessly to strengthen the homeland security grant program and to include strong new accountability measures. It is my hope that Ms. Henke will pledge to work with the Committee to ensure the enactment of this legislation that is supported by 71 Senators. This legislation would stop the troubling and persistent decline in homeland security funding. It doubles the funds allocated according to the Secretary's assessment of risk, threat, and vulnerabilities, provides a meaningful baseline of funds to each State so that the Nation as a whole can achieve essential levels of preparedness, and holds State and local governments accountable for spending funds in ways that help to achieve specific preparedness goals. Leading this office is an enormously important job. The nominee before us, Tracy Henke, has considerable relevant experience working effectively with State and local governments. I would note that the Committee has received letters recommending her from a number of organizations, including the National Association of State Fire Marshals, the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Sheriffs' Association, and the International Association of Fire Chiefs, and without objection, all of those letters will be included in the record, as well as the letters that have been received by the Committee in support of George Foresman.\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The letters in support of Mr. Foresman and Ms. Henke appear in the Appendix on pages 200 through 222, respectively. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Henke currently is a Deputy Associate Attorney General for the Department of Justice. Prior to joining the Justice Department, she served as a Senior Policy Advisor for Senator Bond, where she worked closely with firefighters and the law enforcement community at the State and local levels. She is also strongly recommended by former Attorney General John Ashcroft, who described her to me as a ``faithful public servant, skillful and hard working.'' I welcome both nominees to the Committee, and I look forward to hearing their testimony. Senator Lieberman. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN Senator Lieberman. Thank you, Madam Chairman. It strikes me that I should say that though the Senate may be in recess, under your leadership, this Committee is not. Chairman Collins. We never rest. Senator Lieberman. Never rest, no. This is our second hearing of the day. Thanks for convening this one to consider these two nominees to two very important positions at the Department of Homeland Security, and I welcome both Mr. Foresman and Ms. Henke to this hearing. As the Chairman has said, these are the first two nominations for positions in the Preparedness Directorate, which has been newly created by Secretary Chertoff's second- stage review. I must report that I personally asked the Secretary to hold off on his reorganization of DHS's emergency preparedness and response structure until this Committee completes its investigation into the lack of preparedness at all levels of government exposed by Hurricane Katrina. The disarray surrounding that disaster has obviously shaken the confidence of a lot of people in our country and the capacity of our government to protect them. I am hopeful that our investigation, a hearing of which was held this morning, will produce recommendations that would be helpful to the Department of Homeland Security internal management structure. I have told the Secretary that this Committee may, therefore, write legislative changes after we have thoroughly reviewed the record and are confident we know everything about what went wrong during Hurricane Katrina. Nonetheless, I am pleased that the President has nominated Mr. Foresman for the position of Under Secretary for Preparedness at DHS. He is an experienced emergency manager, has been a first responder, a leader in homeland security in Virginia, Vice Chair of the Gilmore Commission, and is widely respected in the emergency management community. The Under Secretary for Preparedness will have a critical role to play helping our country prepare for all hazards, including everything from the next terrorist attack to the next major hurricane or other natural disaster. Earlier this week, as I am sure most of us saw, the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, formerly the 9/11 Commission, issued its final report card on our Nation's lack of preparedness as they saw it. Some of the grades, I thought, were fair. Some of them, I thought, were not fair. I thought some of the most significant accomplishments in which the Chairman and I, and Members of our Committee as well as the Senate and the House, had a lot to do with, I am proud to say, were not as highly noted. These accomplishments were, in fact, the top two recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, which was the creation of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Counterterrorism Center, which in the Commission's own estimate were functioning well. But the Commission does in other regards give us a clear message that we have not done enough yet, not as much as we should, to keep the American people as safe as they deserve to be. If confirmed, Mr. Foresman will obviously be in a position to address some of the outstanding problems the Public Discourse Project identified. Top among them, I would say, is the inability of our Nation's first responders to talk to one another across jurisdictional and disciplinary lines, and in this regard, I am pleased to note that under Mr. Foresman's leadership, Virginia was one of the first States to develop a strategic plan for interoperability, although obstacles, including inadequate and inconsistent funding, still remain as they do in most States. Mr. Foresman, if you are confirmed, you will be in a position to forge a national strategy to achieve interoperability, strengthen Federal leadership, and provide sufficient funding, all of which are components of legislation which Senator Collins and I have offered and which now awaits action on the Senate floor, after having been reported out of Committee. Madam Chairman, the Under Secretary for Preparedness and the Director of the Office of State and Local Coordination and Preparedness will also have the opportunity to address homeland funding. While debate has focused on the funding formula for homeland security grants, less attention has been paid to the fact that funding for first responders has, in the last 3 years, been dramatically reduced. That is unacceptable, and I hope we can work together to turn it around. Finally, I want to welcome Ms. Henke, thank her for her years of public service, and just express publicly some concerns that I have about your nomination. Those are allegations that while you were at the Department of Justice, some of the actions that you took there in the administration of your office may have undermined the office's reputation for objectivity and independence. In one incident earlier this year, the allegations are that you demanded that the Bureau of Justice Statistics delete from a press release\1\ information about significant racial disparities in the treatment of motorists stopped by police, that you insisted over repeated objections from the director of the office--and in fact, the release was never issued because he decided that it was misleading in the form that you ordered him to release it. Soon after, this man, whose name was Larry Greenfeld, who had been a civil servant for 23 years, was told without explanation that he was being dismissed from his position. I hope today you will take this opportunity to address the questions that I, and others, have about your involvement in this episode. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The press release appears in the Appendix on page 198. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I must say that my concerns occur in the context of recent disclosures that the Department of Justice political appointees overruled career staff in sensitive cases involving minority rights. In August, a team of lawyers and analysts at the Civil Rights Division recommended rejecting a Georgia voter identification law because it was likely to discriminate against African American voters, but they were overruled the next day by political appointees. And then this month, we learned that top Department of Justice officials had overruled a unanimous determination by civil rights staff at the Department that a Texas redistricting plan violated the Civil Rights Act. In this context, I am concerned that the considerable discretion that Congress has given the Department in the administration of homeland security grants will be exercised, if you are confirmed, in a fair and transparent manner. I hope that you will find it possible to give the Committee your assurances in that respect today. Madam Chairman, if confirmed, these two nominees will have to work closely with our nation's first responders, the private sector, and State and local officials to assure that we do a much better job of preparing for whatever may come. I thank you for holding the hearing, and I look forward to the witnesses' testimony. Thank you very much. Chairman Collins. Thank you. We are very pleased to be joined by the distinguished Senator from Delaware. I know he is often burning to share his views, so before calling on Congresswoman Emerson, I want to give the distinguished Senator a chance to make any opening comments he would like. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER Senator Carper. I just want to say to our witnesses, yesterday was Senator Collins' birthday---- Chairman Collins. That wasn't a burning comment. Senator Carper. And I was unable to reach her to wish her in person a happy birthday, but I have to say, she is looking great for 30, and we are honored to serve under her leadership, despite her youth. Belated happy birthday. It is always good to be with my friend, Senator Lieberman. He and I were both over in the Middle East about the same time. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. They are going to pull me out of here in a little bit, but I look forward to hearing you, and my staff is going to monitor everything else that takes place. Thank you very much. Senator Lieberman. I know Senator Carper knows this, but in case he doesn't, my birthday is February 24. [Laughter.] Chairman Collins. I am writing it down. [Laughter.] I am very pleased to welcome to the Committee Congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson, who is here to introduce one of our nominees today. We very much appreciate your coming over to this side of the Capitol, particularly since I know the House is in session, and we are very pleased to hear your comments. Thank you for being here. STATEMENT OF HON. JO ANN EMERSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI Ms. Emerson. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Senator Lieberman, and Senator Carper. You will have to forgive me because we are in a series of votes right now, and fortunately, I have about a 15-minute window. But I am honored to be here, and I do want to thank you for the opportunity to speak and introduce to you Ms. Tracy Henke as she is considered by your Committee for the position of Executive Director of the Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness. As a member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Appropriations, I am very pleased that we are filling these spots, I want to mention. But we should have only the highest standards for this position at the Department of Homeland Security, and Tracy Henke certainly meets these high standards. I have long known Tracy to be a dedicated, hard working, and extremely intelligent public servant. She shares your commitment and shares my commitment to enabling first responders at all levels of government to be prepared, well integrated, and cohesive in their response to any emergency. In her illustrious service to her fellow citizens, she has not yet encountered a challenge that she has not been able to meet. She is also intelligent, personable, flexible, and thorough. All of these great qualities have served her well throughout her career, and they would also be a great boon to our Nation and to our national mission of homeland security. As Deputy Associate Attorney General and Acting Assistant Attorney General at the Department of Justice, Ms. Henke has repeatedly demonstrated her regard for the law and her enthusiasm for law enforcement. She has guided programs of national significance, such as the Amber Alert program, in her efforts to make our Nation safer for our citizens. In addition to her extensive legal credentials, Tracy possesses a significant public policy background from her years of service as a senior staff member in the U.S. Senate, and I think she is able to approach decisions from both policy and legal perspectives, which I believe, is an invaluable combination. Also, she is familiar with the separate homeland security challenges faced in both rural and urban parts of the country. Ms. Henke's qualifications for this position are very clear from simply reviewing her resume, and we are certain to hear a great deal more in her testimony before the Committee today. But today is also an opportunity for you to see Tracy Henke and see in Tracy Henke what I know very well. She has sincere enthusiasm for her work, her stalwart patriotism, and her rare ability to work with people regardless of any difference between them. She is a leader, by example, because her character rings true. I welcome the Committee's consideration of Ms. Henke and the beginning of her service in this new capacity to the benefit of every American and the safety and security of our Nation. I am very honored to introduce to you Ms. Tracy Henke. Chairman Collins. Thank you very much, Representative Emerson. I appreciate your endorsement of the nominee. I know you do need to leave, and I am pleased to excuse you at this time. Ms. Emerson. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Chairman Collins. For the benefit of my colleagues, I also want to note that Senator Warner, who is a Member of this Committee, has submitted statements in support of both Mr. Foresman and Ms. Henke. Senators Bond and Talent have submitted statements in support of Ms. Henke's nomination, and Senator Allen has submitted a statement in support of Mr. Foresman. All of those statements will be included in the record.\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statements of Senators Warner, Bond, Talent and Allen appear in the Appendix on pages 23 through 31, respectively. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Both nominees have filed responses to a biographical and financial questionnaire, answered pre-hearing questions submitted by the Committee, and had their financial statements reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics. Without objection, this information will be made a part of the hearing record with the exception of the financial data, which are on file and available for public inspection in the Committee's office. Our Committee's rules require that all witnesses at nomination hearings give their testimony under oath, so would you please both stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give to the Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you, God? Mr. Foresman. I do. Ms. Henke. I do. Chairman Collins. Thank you. Mr. Foresman, you may proceed with your statement. TESTIMONY OF GEORGE W. FORESMAN\2\ TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR PREPAREDNESS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Mr. Foresman. Thank you, Chairman Collins, Senator Lieberman, Senator Carper. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss my qualifications to serve as the Under Secretary for Preparedness at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ The prepared statement of Mr. Foresman appears in the Appendix on page 35. The biographical information of Mr. Foresman appears in the Appendix on page 37. The pre-hearing questions for Mr. Foresman appear in the Appendix on page 44. The post-hearing questions for Mr. Foresman appear in the Appendix on page 114. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I truly believe that there is no higher honor than serving the citizens of America in positions of responsibility and public trust. I also want to extend my deepest thanks and appreciation to President Bush and to Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff for their confidence, as evidenced by this nomination. I am humbled simply by the nomination and recognize the enormous responsibilities that will be entrusted upon me if it is the will of the U.S. Senate to confirm me. I do not take lightly the expectations of me by President Bush, Secretary Chertoff, the U.S. Congress, and most importantly, the citizens of our great Nation. Let me begin by acknowledging my immediate family who could not be with me today. My wife and children are busy preparing lists and other things for a special visitor who is expected at our house in about 17 days. Now, in the eyes of a 3- and 5- year-old, Daddy's day before the U.S. Senate, while important, pales in comparison to getting the list just right. I am fortunate to have a partner in marriage whose prayers, sensibility, and tremendous support have allowed me to be a servant of the people for my entire professional career. She believes in me, she believes in the ideal of public service, and is an all-important anchor and the most important anchor in my life that keeps me from drifting. Public service is sometimes said to represent sacrifice. While there are sacrifices, I would offer there is no greater calling or honor for each of us as Americans. My father and mother instilled in my three brothers and me a deep and unwavering spirit of public service. My parents were phenomenal role models. They underscored each and every day that our most important duties in life are to God, family, and our great Nation. Both are no longer living, but our family keeps their spirit with us in how we conduct our own lives each and every day. My oldest brother has just returned from a second tour of duty in the Middle East as an Army officer. One has returned from the Gulf Coast where, as a Coast Guard employee, he assisted local governments distribute critical relief supplies after Katrina. And my third brother today is pulling duty as an officer in a fire department in Western Virginia. We are proud of each other and our respective roles to make America, its communities, and our citizens safer and more secure. Like my brothers, every day, thousands of men and women across America go to work in the public and private sector with jobs critical to the safety and security of communities, States, the Nation, and businesses. They help us manage the risks inherent in a Nation that is the centerpiece of a global economy and the beacon of democracy around the globe. Their work provides comfort and confidence to ordinary citizens and customers that someone is working every day to keep them safe and to meet their needs. It is important work and it is preparedness. Preparedness is not and cannot simply be a function of government or elements of the private sector. It must be the culture in a culture of government, business, and society. I would offer that we are at a rare crossroads in the history of this great Nation, where the hatred of enemies has combined with the ferocity of Mother Nature to underscore the importance for disciplines, professions, levels of government, and our citizens to do their part to better prepare for emergencies and disasters of all kinds, including terrorism. The tragic attacks of September 11 and the widespread devastation from Katrina have provided searing images of destruction seen around the globe and felt in some way by every American. These drive us to be better prepared. But we should also be reminded that thousands of crisis events are threatened or will occur today and every day across America, and most will require limited response and are not likely to receive widespread attention. However, to the people affected, many of these will represent the greatest calamity of a lifetime. These more limited events also drive us as a Nation to be better prepared. But wanting to be better prepared and actually doing it remains a challenge. Differing perspectives on how to best make advancements, limited resources, and the necessity of addressing the crisis of the moment have the potential to cause us to lose sight of the ultimate goal of enhancing preparedness. Two things are clear from more than 22 years of experience. First, I have not met anyone, anyone in America, who does not share a desire for a safer and more secure America. Second, we must provide a better structure for synchronizing the Nation's preparedness efforts. Our greatest challenge also is our greatest opportunity. We have a greater ability today than ever before to strengthen our systems and processes so that irrespective of the cause, size, location, or scope of a crisis, we improve our levels of preparedness. A strong focus on preparedness will allow us to better manage the risks that we face each and every day in our lives. Preparedness is that continuum of how we deter, prevent, respond to, and recover from the full range of hazards and risks as government, as our private sector, and as citizens. Those who are threatened or become victims of an emergency or disaster, irrespective of the cause, expect that the structure, strategy, management, and leadership of all of the organizations and people responsible for managing risk will operate in a harmonized and a synchronized manner. Our collective responsibility in unity is to ensure that we adhere to the opportunity, to make sure that we achieve this harmonization, while at the same time helping ordinary citizens become a stronger part of America's preparedness culture. Based on my more than 20 years of public service in wide- ranging front-line and executive-level experience at the local, State, and national levels, I believe that this is our moment in time and our moment in the history of the United States to make unprecedented advancements in our Nation's preparedness. I hope I am given the opportunity to contribute to these advancements as the Under Secretary for Preparedness. I thank you very much for the courtesy of this hearing, and I look forward to your questions. Chairman Collins. Thank you. Ms. Henke. TESTIMONY OF TRACY A. HENKE\1\ TO BE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT COORDINATION AND PREPAREDNESS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Ms. Henke. Thank you, Chairman Collins, Senator Lieberman, and Senator Carper. It is a pleasure to be here today. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Henke appears in the Appendix on page 127. The biographical information of Ms. Henke appears in the Appendix on page 129. The pre-hearing questions for Ms. Henke appear in the Appendix on page 136. The post-hearing questions for Ms. Henke appear in the Appendix on page 172. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I want to first say thank you to the President for the confidence that he has shown in me by nominating me as the Executive Director for the Office of State and Local Domestic Preparedness and Coordination--if I could even get the office straight. With the reorganization--it has changed on me. In addition, I would also like to take the opportunity to thank Secretary Chertoff for the confidence and trust that he has also shown in me. I have had the opportunity to know the Secretary for several years now, and if confirmed, I look forward to being part of his team at DHS. I also thank Congresswoman Emerson, and I know that Congressman Cleaver also wanted to be here, but I am certain the votes on the House side have interrupted his transportation and his appearance here today. I want to thank Congresswoman Emerson, though, for her kind words, her support, and her friendship. Additionally, I want to thank Senators Bond, Talent, and Warner. They couldn't be here today, but throughout the years, they have been strong advocates and supporters of me, and for that, I am grateful. I am blessed to have known, as well as to have worked with, all these great public servants. I am grateful for their mentoring and, more importantly, their friendship. In addition, I would be remiss if I didn't take the opportunity to thank my family and my friends, thank them for their support, their guidance, their love, and, sometimes most importantly, their patience. With September 11, Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, as well as other events from around the world, our national awareness of threats, terrorist threats, natural disasters, and other events has sharpened. As a result, all of us, especially those involved directly or indirectly in public safety, understand our collective responsibility to work to prevent but also to prepare and respond to those threats, as well as our duty to build a safer and more secure world. Throughout my years in public service, but specifically at the Department of Justice, I have been honored, but more importantly, grateful for the opportunities to support, to serve, and to partner with the public safety community, individuals who are on the front lines every single day, individuals who are making a difference. Working on issues such as September 11, Katrina, body armor, DNA, Medal of Valor, and countless others, I have been reminded and shown that our Nation's first responders put themselves--intentionally put themselves in positions where they will be called upon to show their courage, their dedication, and their selflessness every single day. Men and women in public safety have a perfect sense of the dangers they might face. Yet despite that, they raise their right hand, swear the oath, and they take the job anyway. If confirmed, I hope to be given the opportunity to raise my right hand, to swear the oath, and to continue the opportunity to serve with and for, as well as support and partner with the tremendous public safety community serving and protecting all of us and this great Nation. If confirmed, I commit to continuing the effort to build partnerships at and across all levels of government, with the private sector, and with everyday citizens as we work to provide and improve upon the capabilities necessary to better prepare and protect America. If confirmed, I commit to listening to and working with the first responder community, local, State, and tribal leaders, and all stakeholders, as we work toward the common goal of getting the best value and return for our homeland security investments. If confirmed, I commit to working on improving the preparedness of citizens across the country, knowing that an alert, informed, and knowledgeable public makes a tremendous difference. If confirmed, I commit to working with the Congress and others in the Administration to ensure a coordinated and informed effort to assist States, communities, and our Nation's first responders better prevent, prepare, and if need be, respond and recover from whatever hazards we might confront. If confirmed, I commit my energies to making a difference in this Nation's quest for preparedness. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. Chairman Collins. Thank you. I am going to start my questioning with the standard questions that we ask of all nominees. First, is there anything in your background that you are aware of that might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to which you have been nominated? Mr. Foresman. Mr. Foresman. No, ma'am. Chairman Collins. Ms. Henke. Ms. Henke. No. Chairman Collins. Second, do you know of anything personal or otherwise that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have been nominated? Mr. Foresman. I do not. Ms. Henke. No. Chairman Collins. And finally, do you agree without reservation to respond to any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted Committee of Congress if you are confirmed? Mr. Foresman. Mr. Foresman. Yes, ma'am. Chairman Collins. Ms. Henke. Ms. Henke. Yes, Senator. Chairman Collins. We will now start a round of questions limited to 6 minutes each for the first round. Mr. Foresman, in announcing the results of the second-stage review, Secretary Chertoff stated that we ``are not where we need to be as a Nation in the area of preparedness.'' While certainly the preparation for and response to Hurricane Katrina only underscores that fact, you have been an emergency management official at the State level. You have worked closely with Federal officials. What, in your judgment, went wrong with Hurricane Katrina in terms of preparedness? Mr. Foresman. Senator, thank you for the question. I do not have the specific level of first-hand knowledge in terms of the decisions as they were made at the local, State, or Federal level with regard to Hurricane Katrina. As we look at Virginia's perspective in the aftermath of Hurricane Isabel several years ago, preparedness must be a shared vision of what is it that different organizations are going to do in advance of a potential crisis event to be prepared to prevent, deter, and to respond and recover, and historically, what we have found in Virginia is shortfalls with regard to preparedness simply because organizations have not had a shared vision of what is it that we need to do to be stronger and more resilient in terms of our ability to deal with emergencies and disasters. Chairman Collins. As a State official, what has been your biggest frustration in working with the Department of Homeland Security? Mr. Foresman. Well, Senator, having watched the evolution of the Department of Homeland Security, I would say as a consumer out there that my first point is the organization continues to mature, and it is nurtured every day, and it is certainly a much stronger and better organization in terms of my interaction with them as a State official than when they were created. That is the natural evolution of when you would amalgamate 22 Federal agencies and 180,000 employees. That is an organizational issue. But I think, clearly, the big issue from my State perspective is we have got to make sure that there is a common identity within the Department, that there is a common direction forward, and I think, frankly, there are many components of DHS as well as the entire Federal family that work with States and communities on preparedness planning, training, and exercising--FEMA, Coast Guard, Secret Service, Health and Human Services, DOD. I think the biggest frustration with DHS is the biggest frustration that we see across our Federal interagency, is an inconsistent vision of what is preparedness and how do we go about strengthening preparedness. Chairman Collins. Thank you. Ms. Henke, there has been considerable controversy over actions that you took with regard to a Bureau of Justice Statistics report entitled, ``Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey.''\1\ According to information compiled by the Committee staff, you edited a proposed press release in a way that would have taken out specific information showing some disparities in treatment by police. First of all, please explain why you made those edits. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Report entitled, ``Contacts between Police and the Public: Findings from the 2002 National Survey,'' appears in the Appendix on page 223. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Henke. Of course. I thank you for the question, as well. Editing press releases is a regular part of the job of the principal deputy or the Assistant Attorney General or most leaders in the different components, I am certain not just at the Department of Justice, but also throughout other agencies, as well as when I worked in the Senate. And so it was something that I am very used to doing. The draft press release was potentially edited by several people before it even reached my desk, and when it reached my desk, it was edited by my deputy, who suggested some changes to the draft press release, which I concurred with, so therefore I take ownership of those changes. The edit that was made was--the reason for the edit was because it didn't accurately portray the information in the underlying report. As was pointed out, the report itself is contacts with police, and there are hundreds upon hundreds of statistics that could have been pulled from that report. But in this case, they tried to condense it down to a press release that is a page or two long, and so you can't get all the information in there. The sentences that were proposed to be stricken that I concurred with were misleading. The sentences did say that blacks and Hispanics were more likely to be searched once pulled over. The next sentence in the report itself, however, says that you cannot conclude that race is the factor. You can't conclude that race is the factor because these numbers didn't take into account behavior of the individuals that were pulled over. It didn't take into account potentially demographics of the areas. So the report itself says, you cannot conclude that race was the factor in the search. In addition to that, another fact, for instance, that was not in the press release is that over 90 percent of the individuals who were surveyed for this document said that the actions of the police were appropriate. That also includes 90 percent of the people that were searched concluded that the actions of the police were appropriate. So the sentences in the press release were misleading. You can't put in--the press release shouldn't contain every statistic in the report, and so, therefore, in conversations with the deputy and then in conversations with the Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, it was determined, and I did make a decision, that those sentences should be stricken and that the press release could go ahead and be issued.\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The press release appears in the Appendix on page 198. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Greenfeld had some disagreement with that, and it was a discussion that we had that more than 70 percent of the Bureau of Justice Statistics reports don't have press releases ever issued. In addition to that, the document is available online unedited and was distributed to over 600 media outlets. Chairman Collins. Did you make any changes in the underlying report? Ms. Henke. Absolutely not. Chairman Collins. Thank you. Senator Lieberman. Senator Lieberman. Thanks, Madam Chairman. I'm going to continue the line of questioning because as I said in my opening statement, I was concerned both by the news reports of this incident and then by what my staff informed me after the staff interview. I know you have said you wanted removed from the release the findings of racial disparity in the treatment of motorists because the report could not explain the reasons for the racial disparity, but you also wanted the release to include a finding that there were no racial disparities in the rate at which motorists were stopped. Can you explain the distinction between those two? Ms. Henke. Actually, it wasn't a statistic that I asked to be inserted. That statistic that you reference was part of the press release prepared by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, not a statistic that I asked to be added. Senator Lieberman. So you don't see any inconsistency in including the one but excluding the other? Ms. Henke. Considering that the report, once again, was available online, was distributed to over 600 media outlets, and that in the highlights of the report itself, concluded the statistic that you are currently referencing, it did not include the statistic that was stricken from the report. So I didn't necessarily view it as being inconsistent because even in the highlights of the actual report, it wasn't included. Senator Lieberman. The news release that Mr. Greenfeld's office drafted would have reported that the police searched white motorists 3.5 percent of the time, but black motorists more than 10 percent of the time and Hispanic motorists more than 11 percent of the time. It also describes how police were approximately three times more likely to use force or threaten to use force against Hispanics and blacks than against whites that they had stopped. My question really is to explain to me why you thought that those statistical findings, that is the 3.5 percent compared to the 10 and 11 percent, were not important or newsworthy and, therefore, should not have been included in the release. Ms. Henke. Oh, it is not that I don't consider them important, sir. They are included in the report, and the report which once again was distributed to over 600 media outlets and available online for all to see. The Bureau of Justice Statistics website gets over 20,000 hits a day, on average, and so that information is readily available. And once again, the majority of the Bureau of Justice Statistics reports do not have press releases associated with them. There is additional statistics in there that, once again, help complete or can help complete the picture a little bit, and once again, it goes back to, for instance, the fact that 90 percent of those, including those that were searched, whites, blacks, and Hispanics, believed that the actions of the police were appropriate. That information wasn't in the press release, either. And so having the entire information available, and once again, distributed to over 600 media outlets and available online, the information is readily available and it is important. Senator Lieberman. Let me ask this question so I have clarity on this myself. Do I understand correctly that you argued for a release to say that no significant racial disparities existed among individuals stopped by police? Ms. Henke. No. Senator Lieberman. You did not argue for that affirmatively---- Ms. Henke. Absolutely not. Senator Lieberman [continuing]. But you wanted to take out the contrary conclusion, is that right? Ms. Henke. The only thing I concurred with, so I take ownership of the proposed change in the draft press release that was edited by my deputy in the office, I did not propose any addition. All I proposed and all I concurred with was the striking of the sentences that were misleading without full or without complete information, without, for instance, the next sentences in the report or the additional statistics. Senator Lieberman. Why not include the next sentences in the report and the additional statistics in the press release? Ms. Henke. It is one of those things, and maybe it is from my time on the Hill and the fact that press releases--we were always told once you get off--once it is past page one, it is unlikely that people are even going to look at it, so a press release is supposed to hit the highlights. The press release isn't--it is supposed to hit the highlights and not include absolutely everything. It can entice people maybe to read the report. So I didn't view this as necessarily needing more information. The information, once again, was readily available and was available for all the media and the general public to see in the report. Senator Lieberman. Let me ask you a different kind of question. Do you agree that the matter, the problem of racial profiling, is an important public issue? Ms. Henke. I do concur with that, and I know that the President in the State of the Union, I believe the State of the Union a year or two ago, also stated that it is an important issue and that it must end. Senator Lieberman. Let me ask you a couple of questions about another part of this. I will try to be quick. Thanks, Madam Chairman. A few weeks after your disagreement with Mr. Greenfeld, as you know, he was called into the office of an Associate Attorney General Robert McCallum to discuss the incident. Actually, stop me if you disagree with anything I am saying. Ms. Henke. I have been informed. I was not informed that meeting was taking place---- Senator Lieberman. You didn't know about it, but you know now? Ms. Henke. Yes. Senator Lieberman. A few weeks later, Mr. Greenfeld was summoned to the White House Personnel Office, where he was informed that he was going to be relieved of his position as Director of the Bureau of Justice Systems. Ms. Henke. I was informed of that after the fact. Senator Lieberman [continuing]. Of that afterward. Ms. Henke. Yes. Senator Lieberman. And this is my point. In responding to the Committee's pre-hearing questions and during your staff interview, you said that you had no role in, knowledge of, or opinion about the decision to remove Mr. Greenfeld after 23 years with the Bureau of Justice Systems, and I guess the record shows that he consistently got outstanding evaluations through all the administrations he had served, both Democrat and Republican. So the question I have is, since the Director of the Bureau of Justice Systems, Mr. Greenfeld, reports to the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs and you were Acting Assistant Attorney General from January to June of this year, it is surprising that you were not consulted or notified that the director of an agency for which you were responsible was about to be removed. How do you explain that? Ms. Henke. I am not necessarily surprised by that. Mr. Greenfeld was a career public servant. Mr. Greenfeld became a Presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed individual in 2001 or 2002. He chose to take a political appointment, Presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed. As Acting Assistant Attorney General, I did not anticipate or expect consultation pertaining to other Presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed individuals at the Office of Justice Programs. They serve at the pleasure of the President, and as a political appointee myself, I didn't anticipate or expect, once again, having any role in the hiring or conversations of his employment. Senator Lieberman. Do you know why he was told that he would be dismissed? Ms. Henke. I have not had any conversations. Other than receiving a notification that he was told, I have had no conversations with anyone pertaining to the reasons why. Senator Lieberman. A final question on this, Ms. Henke. In earlier discussions with the Committee staff, you mentioned an e-mail that was sent to Mr. McCallum, who I have just cited is associate Attorney General. I understand that the e-mail forwarded a message from Mr. Greenfeld related to your dispute over this press release. I trust you know, but if you don't, we have requested a copy of your e-mail to Mr. McCallum from the Justice Department.\1\ Do you have a copy of the e-mail yourself? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Copy of the e-mail appears in the Appendix on page 195. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Henke. I am certain it is on my system, but I am confident that if the Committee is working with the Department's Legislative Affairs Office, that they will make a determination on its availability. Senator Lieberman. Have you looked at it lately? Ms. Henke. I have not, no. Senator Lieberman. You haven't. So it doesn't lead you to add anything more to the exchange we have just had about Mr. Greenfeld? Ms. Henke. I mean, the only thing that the e-mail did was forward--was just simply a forwarding of the communication exchange. There was no other information in it. Senator Lieberman. Then I would ask that, and I presume maybe in the process of your position in the Department you have to get approval, but I would formally ask that after this, you go back and ask if you can share the e-mail with all the Members of the Committee. Ms. Henke. I am happy to consult with the Department on that issue. Senator Lieberman. Thanks. Madam Chairman, I apologize for this. I am just going to wind this up with this general question. Obviously, the concern is if you are confirmed for the position for which you have now been nominated, which is a powerful position, giving out grants, I mean, to some extent, you oversaw activities like this in your earlier position, but usually with less discretion, and within formulas mandated by Congress, what can you say to us to assure us that you will conduct and carry out your responsibilities in a manner that is fair, transparent, independent, and nonpartisan? Ms. Henke. I can offer you my commitment today to doing just that, and I believe I have a track record of doing just that. If I may, once again, it was an editing of a press release that was never issued and a document that is available in its entirety, unedited, online. The information is important. I completely concur with that. And therefore, once again, it was made available. And I can assure you today, if confirmed, every single day that I am in the job, that I will act in a professional, impartial, and fair way and make certain that the Administration and the Department policies, as well as the direction by Congress and the law, is upheld. Senator Lieberman. Thank you. Thanks, Madam Chairman, for your indulgence in allowing me to complete that line of questioning. Chairman Collins. I am happy to do so. Mr. Foresman, one of the astounding facts that this Committee hears over and over again is that some 85 percent of our Nation's critical infrastructure is owned not by government, but by the private sector. How would you improve DHS's relationship with the private sector to strengthen the security of America's critical infrastructure? Mr. Foresman. Senator, thank you for the question. I would offer that as we look at critical infrastructure, this has been an area that we paid particular attention to in Virginia even prior to September 11, given the potential of natural disaster impacts on critical infrastructure. But I think there are a couple of key lessons that we learned. In kind of our visceral reactive state in post-September 11, I think there was a lot of focus on the physical protection of critical infrastructure and it was driven very much from a Federal-centric perspective. It is not right or wrong, it is just the simple reality of the environment that we were in in the post-September 11 environment. But I think that we have an opportunity to step back, if you will, and to engage with our private sector partners and to diffuse our critical infrastructure protection efforts to where we have more active roles with State Governments, local communities, stronger collaboration with the private sector, and frankly, what I would offer to you is critical infrastructure protection has got some tough policy issues. It has got some tough issues that are not easily understood. And I think that we have now reached the level of maturity in terms of our national efforts post-September 11 whereby bringing the private sector and our State and local partners, our Federal agency partners to the table in maybe a little more aggressive way than has been done before. Certainly, we have seen this in Virginia. I think we can advance our infrastructure protection efforts to the next level. The other piece that I would offer is there is great incentive for the private sector to protect that critical infrastructure. Customers demand service from their businesses. Insurance companies are looking to minimize exposure, a whole variety of issues. I will tell you, my experience in Virginia is there is no weakness in the commitment of the private sector to protect that critical infrastructure. Chairman Collins. Thank you. Ms. Henke, if confirmed, you will oversee the distribution of the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention program. We have heard a lot of discussion about homeland security grant programs and how the funding should be allocated. This is a program that gets far less attention and yet is vitally important. If we can disrupt, detect, and deter terrorist attacks before they occur, that obviously should be our highest priority. And indeed, in recent years, this program has distributed more than $400 million a year for the purpose of preventing a terrorist attack. The 9/11 Commission found that the terrorists conducted their activities, trained, transited, and hid in places like Stone Mountain, Georgia, Norman, Oklahoma, and Portland, Maine. We see the clear trend again with the London bombings, where the terrorists planned their attacks well away from the target in London, but rather in a small town called Leeds. Despite all this evidence, the clear bias within the Department of Homeland Security, when given discretion on how to distribute the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention funds, is toward large cities. Doesn't this strategy ignore what we have learned from where the September 11 terrorists trained? Doesn't it ignore the plotting that was done in Leeds? What would be your approach to distributing the funds that may well lead to the disruption or prevention of a terrorist attack? Ms. Henke. Senator, as you are aware, prevention is one of the core missions, one of the four main missions of the Department of Homeland Security, and it is extremely important. It is my hope that we would be able to prevent, instead of having to respond and recover from, an attack. It is my understanding that the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention program at this office, like most of the grant funding that this office distributes, is provided to the States and then the States are required to work with the localities, whether rural or urban, suburban, because they know, as you know and as I know, that for preparedness, there is no arbitrary boundaries. We need to be prepared as a Nation. That means rural, suburban, and urban. And so what I can commit to you, Senator, is that, if confirmed, if there is a better way to distribute resources, I commit to looking at that and working to ensure that our homeland security resources are providing us the best prevention as well as preparedness that we can get. Chairman Collins. There has also been extensive discussion in recent months on the need for increased border security. One cost-effective way that I hear about to increase border security is to use State and local law enforcement officials as a force multiplier. For a time, the Department did allow reimbursement for State and local law enforcement activities that assisted Federal officials in securing the border. That has changed, however, in recent months. Do you believe that it should be an allowable use of the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention program funding for reimbursement of support of border security activities? Ms. Henke. Chairman, it is my understanding that the office has reviewed this, and in the past, I know that funding was available under the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention program for Code Orange, if there was a Code Orange, that entities were allowed to have reimbursement. And then under the Urban Area Security Initiative, some areas that were high-risk, that had Code Yellow or Orange, were able to use funds to reimburse for State and local costs pertaining to the border. And I do believe I recall seeing that the Department has reviewed this and is working to ensure that there is some allowable cost for reimbursement for border security for State and locals. Chairman Collins. Thank you. Senator Lieberman. Senator Lieberman. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Mr. Foresman, I appreciated, in your written responses to the Committee, that you talked a lot about the importance of planning as a function of preparedness. You pointed out that a good plan repays the investment in time and effort in its development and rehearsal by shortening the time required to gain control over an incident and clarifying roles, responsibilities, tasks, and resources before an incident. This morning at a hearing in this room, we heard from three of the operational professionals of FEMA about their work in the days before and immediately after Hurricane Katrina hit landfall on the Gulf Coast. It spoke to a crying need for more training. It was a very informative hearing in a lot of ways. I certainly came out with a better understanding of the extent of the deprivation, for one, the denial of adequate funding to FEMA personnel for training to prepare them adequately for a Katrina-type disaster, and particularly, this roster of reserves they have that they call on in a crisis who rarely get a chance to train. So first question is, if you want to talk a little bit about the importance of planning and training? Two, do you believe that the Preparedness Directorate should work with FEMA to make sure that exercises, training, and response happen and are linked to one another? Mr. Foresman. Senator, thank you. I would offer that, historically speaking over 22 years in Virginia, the plan is not necessarily as important as the process of planning because with that, you are able to bring people together to mutually understand the nature of the crisis or the hazard that they are reading themselves to deal with and then intuitively provides an element of training, just as you are doing the functional planning process, but planning is absolutely critical. Now, one of the things that I would offer, Senator, is that we have got to get a greater degree of consistency in terms of how we go about planning. For instance, in Virginia, we are going to be working with FEMA on a day-to-day basis in terms of planning for natural disasters or other response and recovery activities. We may be working with the U.S. Coast Guard, planning for oil spills, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on nuclear power plant incidents, and I think that one of the key factors that we see is the necessity not only within the Department, but across the entire Federal interagency, and frankly, across States and communities and the private sector, a much greater degree of consistency in terms of the road ahead. And the National Preparedness Goal and the National Incident Management System are two critical elements that will help us achieve that. With regard to the issue of training, the one thing that I would offer is that we have a Reservist program in Virginia, individuals that we bring on board during emergencies and disasters similar to the Reservist program that FEMA has. All of us, I think, would agree that appropriate planning and training, or appropriate training and education for our personnel is critical. I would say that we also have to recognize that there is a great deal of training that occurs in a real-world event. And so we recognize that there is the necessity for classroom activity, but we also recognize there is value added from actually being out there and practicing what you need to practice on a day-to-day basis. But Senator, let me offer this. FEMA is but one component of the Nation's preparedness efforts, albeit a very critical, and if not the most critical component, because of their responsibility for looking in an all-hazards approach. But FEMA, the Coast Guard, HHS, DOD, EPA, a host of Federal agencies, elements internal to the Department and external to the Department, we are going to have to make sure that we do a much stronger and better job in terms of our coordination for planning, our coordination on training and exercise activities, and I would just say everybody is going to have to be at the table to make us stronger. Senator Lieberman. Well said. Let me ask you a few questions about interoperability based on your experience in Virginia and what you know generally as you think about going forward. What would you say are shortcomings in the current system of funding with regard to communications interoperability of first responders? Mr. Foresman. Senator, I think there are two critical issues. We do not have a consistent national definition of what are we talking about. Are we talking about interoperability, or are we talking about operability, or are we talking about the interoperability between disciplines, between levels of government? But it goes back to a conversation that you and I were fortunate enough to have in your office, and before we get to the technological and the funding solution, we need to decide who needs to talk to whom, when, and how, and that is good old-fashioned business rules in terms of how we want to do business on a day-to-day basis. We have been fortunate, in Virginia, in the development of one of the first interoperability strategies in the Nation. Does it solve all the problems? Absolutely not, but it gives us a clear indicator of where we are going to spend our critical dollars, whether Federal, State, or local dollars toward solving interoperability issues. And frankly, the one thing I would tell you is having that strategy, it allows us to use it as a tool. We don't use Federal grant dollars for interoperability projects unless it is consistent with that strategy, and we have an executive committee that reviews those proposals. Senator Lieberman. Good for you. I am not going to hold you to this, but in a general sense, what is a reasonable time table for achieving a reasonable level of communications interoperability among first responders nationwide? Mr. Foresman. Well, Senator, it is difficult to try to put a time frame on it. I come from the rural parts of Virginia where not only do the local governments own their own radio systems, the actual first responder organizations, and we are talking about thousands if not tens of thousands of systems across the country. I would be hard-pressed to give you an answer that had any modicum of accuracy, but please understand that having been a first responder in the early 1980s at an automobile accident in the middle of nowhere on the Interstate, driving an ambulance and not being able to talk to anybody and having people die is exceptionally frustrating. I have lived with interoperability, I understand interoperability, and I am committed to making sure that we work on interoperability. Senator Lieberman. Thank you. My time is up. Chairman Collins. Thank you. I do have some additional questions for both nominees, which I am going to submit for the record. Senator Lieberman, do you have anything else you would like to ask at the hearing, or---- Senator Lieberman. Just one quick question for Mr. Foresman, and this, though they haven't asked me, is on behalf of our two colleagues from California, who continue to ask Senator Collins and me to focus on San Francisco and the potential for an earthquake because we all hear that this is considered by natural disaster experts as one of their bigger fears, along with the two that tragically have already happened, a terrorist attack on New York and the flooding of New Orleans. I don't know whether you have been in a position to know whether the Department has existing plans with regard to responding to an earthquake in California, and if not, whether you would work with the State of California to conduct the kind of simulations, training, and planning exercises that we have just talked about. Mr. Foresman. Senator, with regard to the specific plans on the shelves at the Department, I am not aware of the specifics, but I would offer to you that in the early 1990s when we were developing what was then the first Federal Response Plan and States and the Federal Government working together, that grew out of what was then FEMA's Catastrophic Incident Earthquake Plan, and so we know that we have the core principles. We have to be careful that we don't try to develop a plan for every hazard or every scenario, but rather, we develop the framework that is expandable, adaptable to the specific situations that would occur. But I can say clearly, working with my counterparts from California over the years, the New Madrid fault, the L.A. basin, certainly San Francisco, those are the types of events that would occur with little or no warning. They would cause a widespread amount of devastation. And clearly, doing continuous planning, training, and exercise in preparation for those is absolutely critical. Preparedness is very much about progress, and we have got to continue to make progress every day in terms of continuously looking at all of the risks we face and manage them better. Senator Lieberman. Thank you both. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Chairman Collins. Thank you. I want to thank both nominees for appearing before the Committee today. Without objection, the record will be kept open until 5 p.m. tomorrow for the submission of any written questions or statements or other materials for the record. This hearing is now adjourned. [Whereupon, at 3:39 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] A P P E N D I X ---------- [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.003 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.004 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.005 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.007 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.008 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.009 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.010 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.011 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.012 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.013 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.014 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.015 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.016 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.017 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.018 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.019 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.020 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.021 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.105 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.035 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.036 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.037 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.038 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.039 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.040 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.041 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.042 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.043 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.044 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.045 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.046 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.047 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.048 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.049 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.050 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.051 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.052 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.053 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.054 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.055 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.056 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.057 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.058 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.059 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.060 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.061 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.062 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.063 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.064 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.065 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.066 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.067 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.068 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.069 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.070 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.071 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.072 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.073 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.074 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.075 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.076 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.077 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.078 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.079 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.080 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.081 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.082 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.083 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.084 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.085 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.086 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.087 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.088 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.089 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.090 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.091 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.092 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.093 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.094 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.095 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.096 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.097 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.098 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.099 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.100 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.101 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.102 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.103 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.104 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.022 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.023 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.024 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.025 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.026 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.027 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.028 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.029 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.030 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.031 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.032 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.033 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.034 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.106 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.107 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.108 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.109 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.110 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.111 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.112 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.113 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.150 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.114 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.115 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.116 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.117 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.118 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.119 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.120 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.121 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.122 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.123 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.124 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.125 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.126 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.127 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.128 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.129 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.130 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.131 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.132 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.133 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.134 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.135 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.136 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.137 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.138 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.139 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.140 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.141 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.142 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.143 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.144 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.145 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.146 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.147 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.148 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.149 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.151 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.152 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.153 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.154 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.155 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.156 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.157 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.158 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.159 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.160 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.161 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.162 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.163 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.164 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.165 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.166 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.167 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.168 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.169 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.170 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.171 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.172 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.173 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.175 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.176 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.174 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.177 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.178 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.179 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.180 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.181 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.182 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.183 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.184 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.185 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.186 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.187 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.188 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.189 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.190 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.191 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.192 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.193 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.194 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.195 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.196 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.197 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.198 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.199 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.200 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.201 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.202 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.203 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.204 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.205 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.206 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.207 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.208 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.209 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.210 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.211 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.212 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.213 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.214 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.215 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.216 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.217 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.218 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.219 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.220 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.221 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.222 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.223 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.224 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.225 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.226 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.227 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.228 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.229 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.230 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.231 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.232 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.233 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6745.234 <all>