<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>