<DOC>
[109 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:22193.wais]
S. Hrg. 109-197
NOMINATION OF HON. PHILIP J. PERRY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON THE
NOMINATION OF HON. PHILIP J. PERRY TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
__________
MAY 19, 2005
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
22-193 WASHINGTON : 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________
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 D. Tyrer, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Collins.............................................. 1
Senator Warner............................................... 12
WITNESS
Thursday, May 19, 2005
Hon. Philip J. Perry to be General Counsel, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security:
Testimony.................................................... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 15
Biographical and financial information....................... 17
Responses to pre-hearing questions........................... 23
Responses to post-hearing questions.......................... 67
NOMINATION OF HON. PHILIP J. PERRY
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 19, 2005
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m. in room
SD-562, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Susan M. Collins,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Collins and Warner.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN COLLINS
Chairman Collins. The Committee will come to order. Good
morning.
Mr. Perry. Good morning.
Chairman Collins. This morning, the Committee will consider
the nomination of Philip J. Perry to be General Counsel of the
Department of Homeland Security. This is a vitally important
position, and Mr. Perry brings impressive credentials to this
post.
If confirmed, Mr. Perry will serve as the chief legal
advisor to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland
Security. As General Counsel, he and his staff will help to
ensure that the Department's activities fully comply with all
legal requirements and that the Department's efforts to secure
America's safety also protect the civil liberties of the
American people.
As the chief legal officer of the Department, the General
Counsel oversees the legal work in virtually all DHS
Directorates and component agencies, such as the Secret
Service, the Coast Guard, Border and Transportation Security,
Emergency Preparedness and Response, and the Bureau of
Citizenship and Immigration Services. This is truly a
formidable charge and a great deal of responsibility.
Mr. Perry has already demonstrated his commitment to public
service, having served our Nation for nearly 3 years as General
Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget.
In that role, Mr. Perry oversaw White House clearance of
Federal regulations, addressed significant matters on the
Justice Department's civil litigation docket, formulated
Executive Orders, developed and implemented White House policy
initiatives, and advised the President and the Director of OMB
on regulatory and budget matters.
A key part of his job was to mediate interagency disputes.
I believe that experience will serve him well in his new
position because, as we all know, the agencies that comprise
the Department of Homeland Security often have disputes with
one another.
Prior to serving at the White House, Mr. Perry was Acting
Associate Attorney General at the Department of Justice, the
Department's third-ranking official.
While at Justice, Mr. Perry oversaw the Department's five
civil litigation divisions, and had a supervisory role in
important environmental, civil rights, and antitrust cases.
In the aftermath of September 11, 2001, Mr. Perry advised
the Attorney General on legal issues arising from the attacks
and the war on terrorism, including the 9/11 Victims
Compensation Fund.
And, of course, we are very proud of the fact that Mr.
Perry served this Committee in 1997 during our special
investigation of campaign finance abuses during the 1996
presidential election. That was when I first had the
opportunity to meet Mr. Perry for the first time.
So, Mr. Perry, we welcome you back to your old Committee
and we look forward to working with you. As you know, this
Committee's jurisdiction has been broadened since you worked
here. It now has responsibility for the Department of Homeland
Security, so we anticipate working very closely with you.
I know that Senator Warner is eager to introduce you. I am
going to proceed and then when the Senator comes, we will break
and have him introduce you and then resume the questioning.
Mr. Perry has filed responses to biographical and financial
questionnaires, answered pre-hearing questions submitted by the
Committee, and has had his financial statements reviewed by the
Office of Government Ethics.
Without objection, this information will be made part of
the hearing record with the exception of the financial data
which are on file and available for public inspection in the
Committee offices.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The biographical and financial information appears in the
Appendix on page 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know, Mr. Perry, that you are blessed to have your family
with you today and what a wonderful family it is indeed.
At this point, before I proceed to swear you in, I would
like to give you the opportunity to introduce your family to
the Committee.
Mr. Perry. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
My wife, Liz, is directly behind me and then our 5-year-old
Grace beside her, our 7-year-old Elizabeth, and our nearly 11-
year-old Kate is here. We also have a boy at home. He is 10
months. He is not quite ready for prime time.
Chairman Collins. Well, girls, we welcome you to this
hearing today. I know you must be so proud of your dad. He has
been nominated by the President for a very important position.
So I am really happy that you have the opportunity to see him
today. It is really nice to have you here. We also welcome your
mom.
When your brother is a little bit older, you can tell him
how exciting it was to watch your father go through his
confirmation hearing. Will you remember this day so that you
can describe it to your brother?
Mr. Perry. Thank you.
Chairman Collins. Mr. Perry, all of the nominees that come
before this Committee are required to give their testimony
under oath, so we would ask that you 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?
Mr. Perry. I do.
Chairman Collins. I would now ask you to proceed with any
remarks that you might have.
TESTIMONY OF PHILIP J. PERRY,\1\ TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Perry. Well, thank you very much, Chairman Collins. I
am honored to appear before you today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Perry appears in the Appendix on
page 15.
Pre-hearing questionnare of Mr. Perry appears in the Appendix on
page 23.
Post-hearing questions for Mr. Perry appears in the Appendix on
page 67.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also want to thank Secretary Chertoff and the Members of
the Committee, and in advance thank Senator Warner who I know
will be here in a little while.
I have known the Secretary for nearly 10 years. We are
partners in the same law firm and we were both working in the
Department of Justice on September 11. It would be my
privilege, if confirmed, to work with him and the many
thousands of other dedicated men and women in the Department to
preserve an America that is safe, secure, and free.
I agree with both the President and the Secretary that
winning the war on terror is the great calling of our
generation. I know that an effective Department of Homeland
Security is critical to that effort.
I had an opportunity first as Acting Associate Attorney
General and later as General Counsel of OMB to address homeland
security issues in the aftermath of September 11. I would be
honored to rejoin the effort now to protect our Nation.
I also recognize the Department's obligation to preserve
our freedom, to defend American liberty with courage and
determination. If confirmed, I would commit myself to
preserving our civil liberties while pursuing security and to
helping the Department address important issues of privacy.
Although the General Counsel is the Department's chief
legal officer, I believe that the role of General Counsel
extends beyond merely interpreting and applying the law. The
General Counsel must also create an effective and efficient
mechanism for promulgating Department regulations, addressing
bureaucratic hurdles, and speeding implementation of the
Department's programs.
The Office of General Counsel has the ability and the
obligation to pull separate Department components together to
address shared problems and to forge Department-wide solutions
that draw on the authorities and capabilities of each
component. The office should be a tool for unifying the
Department and for accomplishing its broad mission.
I am also committed to developing a close and cooperative
working relationship with this Committee and with the Congress.
As you mentioned, I had the privilege of serving as counsel to
this Committee in 1997, and I think the perspective I gained
from that service should help me create a constructive and
cooperative department approach to congressional oversight and
to the types of issues that sometimes divide us.
Finally, I would like to thank Joe Whitley who has served
since 2003 as the first General Counsel of the Department of
Homeland Security. When he took the job, he found a newly
minted Department with more than 1,400 lawyers spread out among
22 separate organizations. He has done admirable work in
pulling those disparate pieces together and creating a cohesive
legal organization.
If confirmed, I hope to build on the foundation he
established. Although I cannot promise perfection, I promise to
work tirelessly to help fulfill the Department's mission and to
serve the Secretary, the President, and the American people.
I would be very pleased to answer any questions you have.
Chairman Collins. Thank you very much for your statement.
You mentioned in your testimony the importance of working
closely with this Committee. And as I indicated to you, this
Committee does have new jurisdiction over the Department of
Homeland Security beyond what we had initially.
We have, however, had an uneven relationship with the
Department with regard to the provision of information in
response to the Committee's request.
Under what circumstances do you believe the Department of
Homeland Security may withhold information from Congress when
it is exercising its oversight functions?
Mr. Perry. Well, thank you for that question, Chairman
Collins, because it is an issue I want to address. I have given
it some considerable degree of thought.
And aside from the executive privilege issues and similar
issues, I think we ought to be able to cooperate and have a
constructive relationship.
And as I mentioned a moment ago, the fact that I have
served both with this Committee in its prior life in 1997 and
served as an Executive Branch General Counsel, I think, gives
me the perspective on how to accomplish an effective
relationship between the Committee and the Department, how to
work together to accomplish the ends that you are seeking to
accomplish and at the same time address the Executive Branch
concerns.
I have worked with your staff before and I think that we
ought to be able to work many issues out that have previously
been problems. And I hope to have an opportunity to do that.
Chairman Collins. It does give me a great deal of comfort
that you have experienced the difficulties in getting
information from the Executive Branch as a Member of this
Committee's staff. And I know that my Chief Counsel and Staff
Director, Michael Bopp, speaks very highly of you and has
assured me that you will bring a different perspective.
Our Committee has been investigating the naturalization of
suspected terrorists for about a year now. Yet, despite the
importance of that subject, we have had an exceedingly
difficult time in being allowed to interview DHS employees who
worked on one of the particular cases that we are examining as
a case study.
Do you believe that a Federal agency may refuse a
congressional request to interview a Department employee solely
on the grounds that the employee is, ``a line employee?''
Mr. Perry. Well, I am not familiar obviously since I have
not been serving as the General Counsel of DHS with the
policies DHS employs in that regard.
I can say that when I served at the Department of Justice,
I had some basic familiarity with those policies and know that
they principally relate to making sure that you do not have
political influence, whether from the White House or from other
Executive Branch agencies or even from Congress, in an ongoing
criminal proceeding, whether it is a criminal investigation or
prosecutorial proceeding.
I do not know exactly how that policy would translate to
the Department yet because I have not gone and done a review of
each of the Department's functions, CBP and ICE and so forth.
And I think I would need to do a review like that to articulate
a really clear answer to your question.
I think, though, calling back to my comments a moment ago,
I think we can find ways to work through these issues. And
given the fact that, as you mentioned, Mr. Bopp and I have some
experience working together in the past, I believe that we can
find some ways to address these things that are satisfactory
both to the Committee and serve our needs in the Department.
Chairman Collins. You know, in many cases, it is a matter
of just good will and negotiation. A lot of times, the issues
can be worked out. The information requests can be more
focused. Individuals can be provided who can give us the
information we need.
My point to you is that this has been a lingering concern
in this Committee, and I hope that you will take a close look
at it.
Mr. Perry. I certainly will.
Chairman Collins. We had another example just yesterday.
The Committee held a hearing on FEMA's role in responding to
hurricane damage in Florida last year, at which the DHS Office
of Inspector General released a report on this issue.
I mention this to you because at the request of the General
Counsel of DHS, the Inspector General redacted information
concerning some important issues. The General Counsel cited
executive privilege in requesting the redaction of the
material.
I know you were not involved at all in this decision, and I
am not asking your opinion on that or to comment on it
specifically. Instead, I want to ask you about the larger issue
which is of great concern to me, that the Department of
Homeland Security would deny Congress and the public access to
information ostensively on the basis of executive privilege
when we have no reason to believe that the standards required
to invoke privilege, namely invocation by the President
directly, have been met.
Therefore, I would like to get a sense from you under what
circumstances you think that executive privilege should be
invoked to deny Congress access to the information it seeks.
Mr. Perry. Well, I think you are right that the executive
privilege is the President's to invoke and it should not be
used in a liberal fashion. It should be used in a very careful
way. And I am obviously not familiar with the individual
circumstances you are addressing here in the predicate to your
question.
I would be very careful about making those types of claims.
I do not think they should be made often. I think they should
be made with great care. And as I mentioned a moment ago,
absent that type of legitimate claim, I think we ought to be
able to find solutions to many of those types of issues where
you need documents or testimony or other types of assistance,
and we have other collateral concerns that we can resolve with
you.
Chairman Collins. Speaking of the Inspectors General, that
is also part of this Committee's jurisdiction, to perform
oversight on the Inspectors General themselves and the act. We
work very closely with the Inspectors General of various
departments. Not every Department and not every General
Counsel's office welcomes the role of the Inspector General.
Could you tell us if you are confirmed what you will do as
DHS's General Counsel to make sure that the Inspector General
receives the support from the component agencies so that he or
she can perform the vital functions that Congress expects?
Mr. Perry. Sure. I have sat down with the Inspector General
nominee who was actually also the acting Inspector General at
that time, Mr. Skinner, and had a very nice chat. And I would
anticipate if confirmed having an open relationship with him
such that we share information and that I support his efforts.
To be more specific, it is my view that the Inspector
General's authority is a very important piece of our tool box
for managing problems in the Department and it allows you to
see into different areas of the Department, whether the
management structure, the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, and some
of the under secretaries, would not normally have a view.
So if you fail as leadership in the Department to have a
close working relationship, a cooperative relationship with the
Inspector General, you are going to lose one of the tools that
is necessary for managing the Department.
So to answer your question specifically, I would have an
open channel of communication and hopefully a close working
relationship with the Inspector General.
Chairman Collins. I am pleased to hear that.
Mr. Perry, earlier this year, the Committee began oversight
hearings on the Department. Our goal ultimately is to do a
reauthorization bill. I have had conversations with Secretary
Chertoff, and am awaiting the results of his review. I know
that he has already identified some issues that will require
changes in the underlying law.
We heard from experts from the Heritage Foundation, the
RAND Corporation, the Council on Foreign Relations, and The
Brookings Institution with differing views on the Department
and its performance today.
I think that even the Department's strongest critics would
concede that the Department has accomplished a great deal since
it was first operational 2 years ago. I think also, on the
other hand, that the Department's staunchest defenders would
concede that there have been some problems.
How do you plan as General Counsel to address the
challenges facing the Department? What are some of your
priorities as you take on this role?
Mr. Perry. Well, I would certainly follow the Secretary's
lead on many things. But personally I have three priorities
that I have identified to date.
We need to speed up our regulatory review process. We need
to get regulations out in a prompt way. We need to get the
process moving that relies on those regulations. And so as an
initial matter, there are a number of steps I think we could
take to make that process work better.
Also it has certainly been in the press recently that we
need, as a Department, to do a better job of responding to
Congress generally and specifically to congressional oversight.
There are reports that we need to be more prompt in delivering.
We need to respond better to requests for information. We need
to have more cooperative relationships. So that is item two.
Item three would be to improve the role of the General
Counsel's Office in unifying the Department across different
authorities and different components. Just in terms of serving
as a consultant to the Department so far, I have already seen a
couple occasions where an authority in one component could be
of great use to another component, but the components are not
speaking and have not begun to understand what could be done
with their sister components.
I think the General Counsel's Office is one place where you
could actually bring those types of unifying activities to bear
and actually make some progress.
So those are the three initial thoughts I would have. And
if confirmed, certainly I would study the office and the
Department more generally and follow the Secretary's lead.
Chairman Collins. One of the issues that this Committee is
focused on is the vulnerability of our Nation's chemical
facilities. One of our witnesses who formerly worked at the
White House said that this should be the No. 1 priority of the
Department, and that there has not been enough done to protect
chemical facilities.
Several witnesses testified at the first hearing that we
had on chemical security that strong Federal legislation was
needed to ensure security at chemical facilities nationwide.
The industry has a lot of voluntary codes and it has made some
great progress in some cases, but those codes are voluntary.
I want to ask you in your role as General Counsel whether
you believe that DHS has sufficient statutory authority now to
regulate the security of chemical facilities.
Mr. Perry. I don't have a firm conclusion on that yet, but
I can tell you what I would look at in order to reach a
conclusion.
First, of course, there is the U.S. Coast Guard's authority
under their MTSA which applies to certain plants located near
waterways.
Second, there is the Department of Transportation and TSA's
authority to regulate the transportation by rail or truck or by
other means which could apply in some circumstances in a way
that relates to chemical facilities.
And, third, there is, of course, EPA authority which has
been in the press off and on to address accidental releases.
And that might have some role to play in the broader picture,
too.
But the fourth thing I think I would need to do is
understand what progress we have made to date, meaning the
Department and particularly the infrastructure protection
people within the Department, to understand where industry has
gone with the Department's direction and to make sure that if
you were to proceed with a legislative package or even a
regulatory package, you would be building on the progress that
they have already made.
So those are the steps I would take. And I would have to
run through those steps and complete that examination before
reaching a conclusion.
Chairman Collins. This is an issue of great interest to
this Committee, so we look forward to working with you on that.
There are issues involving whether EPA has sufficient
authority.
I personally believe that when we are talking about
security that it is not a function that EPA should be involved
in but rather is a more appropriate role for the Department of
Homeland Security that does not ignore the important
environmental safety role that the EPA places with regard to
chemical security.
But we are talking about making these facilities safer from
a terrorism attack perspective. So we look forward to working
with you on that.
Mr. Perry. I would be pleased to.
Chairman Collins. I now would like to turn to the issue of
intelligence. As you know, Senator Lieberman and I authored an
intelligence reform bill that makes the most sweeping reforms
in our intelligence structures in more than 50 years. The
President signed that into law last December.
The legislation designates a National Counter-Terrorism
Center as the primary organization in the Executive Branch for
analyzing and integrating all intelligence concerning counter-
terrorism. As we all know, the 9/11 Commission identified
several serious communication gaps. The concept behind the
center is to bring together the expertise of 15 agencies to
work together to make sure that information is pooled and
expertise is shared.
How will you ensure that the Department provides the
necessary intelligence and otherwise works to ensure that the
National Counter-Terrorism Center fulfills its mandate under
the Intelligence Reform Act?
Mr. Perry. It is a fascinating topic. And I know the
Secretary has been very clear with the Department so far that
he is going to require strict adherence with his policy of
cooperation with the DNI. He has been crystal clear on that.
And part of my role would be to assist him in that effort.
I will note also that DHS is an interesting entity because
it is a source, many of the components are sources of
intelligence that are important, that as a member of the
intelligence community, we have to make sure we can share with
the intelligence community. And, of course, those include the
Coast Guard and CBP, ICE, TSA, Secret Service, and CIS.
So there is a critical role to play for the Department in
any intelligence effort. But I think it is critical to make
sure that we obey the Secretary's dictate and cooperate with
the DNI.
Chairman Collins. There has also been a lack of clarity
about the role of the Information Analysis Office within the
Department and how it relates as far as information sharing
with the FBI, with State, local, and tribal governments.
How do you articulate the roles, missions, and authorities
of the Information Analysis Office regarding other intelligence
offices within DHS and across the Executive Branch?
Mr. Perry. Well, there are two pieces, I think, to my
answer. First, it is clear in the Homeland Security Act that
the Secretary, and, therefore I, have the opportunity and the
power to gather information from other entities within the
government.
Now, focusing specifically within the Department, I think I
ought to have a coordinating role among all the entities we
mentioned a moment ago, Coast Guard, CBP, ICE, TSA, Secret
Service, and CIS, to produce a product for the intelligence
community generally, and for the DNI, that is helpful.
Chairman Collins. As we seek to expand information and
intelligence gathering across the Federal Government, we must
do so in a way that is ever mindful of civil liberties and
privacy.
I was very pleased to see the answer to your written
questions in which you indicated that vigilance in protecting
Americans' fundamental liberties and privacy is a critical
piece of the Department's mission.
In that regard, I want to bring to your attention that the
intelligence bill set up a new Civil Liberties and Privacy
Board, and we are having some difficulty in seeing that board
get underway, get funded appropriately. The President has yet
to appoint the chairman or vice chairman of that board.
How do you see the Department interacting with the new
Civil Liberties and Privacy Board?
Mr. Perry. Well, I am certainly not privy to how the White
House is addressing that now, and I know that they are working
on it. I am just not sure where it is in the process.
I have had some, I think, very productive conversations
with Nuala O'Connor Kelly who is the privacy officer within the
Department. And I think based on my understanding of how she
has operated in her role, that may be a model for how the
privacy operations generally across the government may work.
I would like to seek her counsel on how to deal with the
board. I think she has got terrific expertise and knowledge in
the privacy area. And so the first stop I would make if
confirmed to address issues that come before the board is to
talk to her.
Chairman Collins. I hope you will work closely because, for
example, as the Department develops its passenger screening
programs more, if you have the input from a civil liberties
privacy perspective, I think it will save a lot of problems
down the line.
I would now like to turn to two issues that are of
particular importance to the State of Maine.
Last month the Department of Homeland Security announced
plans to implement the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative
that requires DHS in consultation with the State Department to
implement a plan requiring U.S. citizens and aliens to present
a passport or document sufficient to denote citizenship and
identity for travel into the United States from western
hemisphere countries.
In developing this plan, it is absolutely critical that the
Department strike the right balance. I am from northern Maine
originally, so I know firsthand what this entails. Every single
day in border communities in Maine, people cross over to Canada
to shop, to work, and to visit families.
We even have situations in some parts of Maine where the
Americans' houses are on obviously our side of the border, but
all the services from hospitals to churches to grocery stores
are on the Canadian side of the border.
I have a Canadian sister-in-law whose family still lives in
Canada, and she takes her four children frequently to visit her
mother.
Since September 11, those ordinary daily back and forth
exchanges have become far more complicated for people living in
border communities. There is a lot of concern that the
Department is going to require passports for people who travel
every day back and forth.
We have Canadian nurses, for example, who work on the
American side in a Maine hospital who every single workday are
crossing the border.
To address those concerns, I was very careful to include in
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act provisions
directing the Department to take into account the interests and
concerns of people living in border communities and also to
expedite the travel of frequent travelers.
The Secretary has been given clear authority to develop
procedures for alternatives to passports. Yet, the initial
indications that we are getting from the Department suggest
that very few documents would be deemed acceptable in lieu of a
passport.
As you work toward implementation of this, I am going to
ask you to keep in mind the practical realities and that we do
not want to impede the legitimate flow of legitimate people and
commerce by imposing a system that is going to be burdensome
and costly.
Would you comment on that?
Mr. Perry. Sure. I have not been involved in this to date,
but I understand your point that we need to be sensitive to the
needs of the cross-border communities. And that is indeed what
I think the Department will have to do through its notice and
comment process, through its consultations, and through all the
other activities that it undertakes to evaluate what ought to
be the alternative forms of identification to a passport that
can be used.
I would commit to spending any time necessary to look at
this issue if I am confirmed.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. I do want to work closely to
come up with a practical solution, and I may drag you to
northern Maine and show you the realities if we cannot come up
with a good system. It is a lovely place to visit I hasten to
say.
Mr. Perry. I would be pleased to do that.
Chairman Collins. The second issue that is of great concern
to my State involves the manufactured housing industry. The
North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, permits Canadian
transportation operators to enter the United States as B-1
visitors in order to transport and deliver what is known as
international cargo such as manufactured or modular homes.
These workers are also permitted under Department policy to
take part in activities that are necessary incidents in the
term of this delivery. However, they are not supposed to be
performing building and construction work while they are in the
United States.
Now, what I am being told by the Maine manufacturing home
industry is that some Canadian workers are routinely given the
permit to enter as B-1 visitors, but then they are engaging in
activities that really cross the line and are not really a
function of delivery. They, in fact, qualify as construction.
That violates our immigration laws. It is unfair to workers
in Maine. And it places them in direct competition with
American workers.
My office has met with CBP officials many times about it.
We have brought together industry representatives, and as a
result, the agency has agreed to review its policy.
But this is an issue that I would again ask you to monitor
and to seek to clarify the scope of permissible activity for
Canadian workers who are coming in for this purpose.
Mr. Perry. I will.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. Mr. Perry, I appreciate very
much your being here today.
There will be some additional questions for the record from
other Members of the Committee. And without objection, the
record will be kept open until 5 p.m. today for the submission
of any additional materials.
Let me conclude this hearing by thanking you for your
willingness to once again step forward and serve your country.
I have a great deal of admiration for people who make
sacrifices and give up lucrative private sector work in order
to serve their country.
As you said at the very beginning of your statement, there
is no greater challenge that our country faces than the war on
terrorism and strengthening the security of our homeland.
So I very much appreciate your willingness to once again
step forward and serve, and I personally look forward to
working very closely with you.
Mr. Perry. Well, thank you very much. I am honored to be
nominated by the President. I am honored to appear before you.
I would be honored to work with you.
Chairman Collins. And, fortunately, Senator Warner has just
arrived right at the moment.
So, Senator Warner, we are very pleased to have you here. I
told Mr. Perry that your endorsement carries great weight with
this Chairman and with this Committee and we very much
appreciate it.
Senator Warner. Well, maybe we better stop while we are
ahead. [Laughter.]
But this is a pleasure for me. Sorry to be a little late,
but I think you changed your time and one thing and another.
Chairman Collins. I do not believe so, but we are happy to
have you here.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR WARNER
Senator Warner. Again, Madam Chairman, this wonderful
nominee has already served as General Counsel to the Office of
Management and Budget and in numerous positions at the
Department of Justice, including Principal Associate Attorney
General.
Professional experience also includes service in the
Executive Office of the President, as an attorney in private
practice, and even time as counsel to this Committee. So he is
a member of the Senate family and that is very important.
All of these roles have prepared him very well for the
significant new challenge ahead providing an understanding of
both the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch.
The post-September 11 world has changed the way the Federal
Government works. Mr. Perry's role both at the Department of
Justice and OMB were both during the new period of homeland
security we know so well.
I recently spent some time with Phil and we spoke about the
difficulty of continuing to advance the missions of the DHS at
a time when there will be some growing pains, particularly
under the new management.
So I applaud his willingness and applaud the President for
the nomination. I applaud his family most of all because we
know the heavy burdens of office that he will have in this new
position.
So I strongly urge that this Committee endorse him by
unanimous consent, and send his name to the floor, and let him
get to work.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR WARNER
Thank you, Madam Chairman. One of our greatest responsibilities as
Members of the U.S. Senate is to provide advice and consent regarding
the President's nominees for Executive Branch positions. Already this
year this Committee has seen two wonderful nominees to lead the
Department of Homeland Security. Today, I have the pleasure to
introduce the third.
The role of any agency's Counsel is to provide legal advice and
counsel to the Secretary in order to further the mission of that
Department. The nominee must be one with a strong legal background, the
ability to manage staff and myriad priorities, and ultimately hold the
agency accountable for responsible government. The challenge at the
Department of Homeland Security is heightened by the fact that this
Secretariat is still in its formative stages and the Congress continues
to mold the laws governing our Nation in the post-September 11 world.
Today, I have the pleasure to introduce Philip Perry as the
President's nominee to be the General Counsel of the Department of
Homeland Security. Today he has with him his family who I would like to
recognize at this time.
Wife: Elizabeth Cheney Perry, children: Katherine, 10; Elizabeth,
7; Grace, 5; and Philip, 9 months.
He has already served as General Counsel of the Office of
Management and Budget and in numerous positions at the Department of
Justice, including Principal Associate Attorney General. His
professional experience also includes service in the Executive Office
of the President, as an attorney in private practice, and even time as
Counsel to this Committee. All of these roles have prepared him well
for the significant new challenge ahead providing an understanding of
both the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch.
The post-September 11 world has changed the way the Federal
Government works. Mr. Perry's roles at both the Department of Justice
and OMB were both during the new paradigm of Homeland Security we now
know so well. I recently spent some time with Phil and we spoke about
the difficulty of continuing to advance the mission of DHS in a time
where there will be some growing pains--New management, a new Congress,
and the new laws and regulations that go along with those changes. He
is ready, willing, and able to get to work. I applaud his willingness
to serve this President, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the
American people and urge the Committee to quickly report his nomination
to the full Senate so that we are able to get him to work.
Chairman Collins. Thank you. And we very much appreciate
your taking the time to be here today.
Senator Warner. Certainly.
Chairman Collins. I want to thank our witness for appearing
before us, and I want to thank his family for being here.
And this hearing is now adjourned.
Mr. Perry. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 10:13 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2193.059
<all>