, with policy debated and decided with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. attorney general merrick garland testifying on the president 2025 budget request before a house appropriations subcommittee. he was questioned on a variety of topics, including holding china and mexico accountable for their role in a crisis, the new rule for firearm dealers, and the special counsel investigation into president biden's handling of classified documents. this runs just over two hours.

>> uses themes such as upholding

the rule of law and keeping our country safe. it is the job of congress to examine whether agency priorities line-up with these themes appropriately and accordingly. the department's budget underwhelm's and has not thoughtfully identified areas where strategic reductions could be made aside from aid to local law enforcement. i am not advocating for arbitrary, large-scale reductions that would make the department ineffective and our country less safe. however, i do believe that robust law enforcement and strategic reductions are not conflicting. it just requires hard work and thoughtful prioritization.

so let's examine the department's priorities. the department prioritizes combating drug trafficking and preventing drug overdose death and you know that the fentanyl epidemic accounts for some two thirds of the more than 100 10,000 drug overdose deaths each year. this submission rightly highlights defeating drug cartels and combating the drug poisoning epidemic in communities, the budget puts a departmentwide emphasis on equipping federal agents with body cameras. drug cartels and their crime syndicates in the u.s. must be decimated,.

the death and devastation cartels and gangs are inflicting on american families and bringing them to justice ought to be the department's top priority. whether agents have a camera attached to them is secondary by far. despite this administration's best efforts to push the issue to the back burner, the biden border crisis continues and shows no signs of stopping. people and drugs continue to flow across the southern border in blatant contravention of our laws. in an ever-evolving situation, last year, 50 times more chinese citizens were apprehended crossing illegally from mexico compared to two years ago.

50 times worse. when landowners attempts of her -- attempt to protect their life and property, they end up being arrested. when will this madness stop? perhaps when this administration ends -- takes off the cuffs from law enforcement and allows them to do their job. the department prioritizes combating violent crime and gun violence. in their 2023 violent crime survey, the major city chiefs association noted a decrease in homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault in american cities. however, these decreases were slight, and the numbers remain unacceptably high. nevertheless, i'm hopeful that

this change in direction signifies a lasting about-face by those who embraced the defined the police movement and vindication for those of us who decried it from the very beginning. with the trends now seeming to go in the right direction, it confounds me that the department seeks to cut law enforcement assistance, including reductions to state and local law enforcement assistance grants and the state criminal alien assistance program. another priority listed by the department is protecting national security by countering terrorism, cyber threats, and nationstate threats. to that end, i will command the national security division --

commend the national security division for acknowledging in their submission the october 7 terrorist attack on israel by the terror group hamas, noting that the attack has led to an increase in terrorism-related crime both domestically and overseas. such a warning has taken on greater importance in recent weeks as chance of -- as champ >> -- chants of death to america are no longer confined to middle eastern capitals but are now being heard on american streets. if they are not terrorism related conduct, i will tell you, it is pretty close. ose. i would like to hear if the attorney general agrees and what action the department might take regarding these us information

statements of condemnation. the department of justice over the last 40 years has picked sides in prosecuting and fails to hold the rule of law equally when it comes to american citizens and even american businesses. it is not surprising. are at odds with what we consider good government, we will respond accordingly.

recognizing that you have an incredibly demanding job, i appreciate you being here today. we look forward to working with the ranking member and all members of the subcommittee to appropriately fund the important missions of the department of justice as this year's appropriations process moves forward. at this time, i want to recognize mr. cartwright for any remarks he may wish to make. mr. cartwright: thank you. i would like to welcome merrick garland back to the subcommittee to discuss the department of justice's fiscal year 2025 budget west. ag garland, thank you for your continued leadership at the department of justice for leading the men and women who worked tirelessly to continue the pursuit of truth and justice. resources provided to the

justice department are and will continue to be under a microscope but the mission of the justice department remains unchanged. i look forward to working with you to ensure we are making smart investments, keep our communities safe. just last week fbi director ray was before us and we heard about the real challenges the fbi along with the state local and tribal law enforcement partners are facing, especially in keeping deadly sentinel off the streets. -- sentinel -- fentanyl. we are asking for more from fbi, not less, and i am sure that can be said for other bureaus as well. the defense of our national security and mitigation of emerging foreign and domestic threats including cyber is critical. i view it as the main mission, our power mount responsibility,

keeping americans safe in congress and the department's role in upholding the rule of law and preserving our democratic values of free and fair elections cannot be understated. your fiscal year 2025 budget request seeks 38 point $9 billion in discretionary funding, a 5% increase above the last fiscal year. you prioritize the funding for the over 100,000 employees at the department of justice and makes vital increases to every federal law-enforcement agency in the u.s. attorney's offices. you have requested a strong increase in the violence against women act grants as well as strong increases for cops hiring grants and formula funding for

state and local law enforcement and i look forward to working with chairman rogers and you, attorney general garland, on ensuring we sustain investments at our -- that our state and local law enforcement partners rely on. congress cannot ignore the challenges our communities at home face. once again, welcome, thank you for being here, i look forward to your testimony and working with you on ensuring that we provide what the department of justice needs for fiscal year 2025. i yield back, mr. chairman. >> mr. attorney general, you are now recognized for an opening statement. without objection, your written statement will be entered into the record. i ask that you keep your statement to around five minutes so we can have additional time for questions from the panel.

merrick garland: thank you, chairman rogers, ranking member cartwright, and distinguished members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to discuss the justice department's funding request for fiscal year 2025.

since i last appeared before you, the more than 115,000 public servants who make up the justice department have continued to work tirelessly to fulfill our mission: to keep our country safe, to protect civil rights, and to uphold the rule of law. we have worked to combat a disturbing spike of violence against those that serve the public, against judges them up peace officers, members of congress and even against our own employees. we have worked to aggressively investigate, prosecute and disrupt the hate crimes that aland only -- that not only harm individuals but strike fear across communities. in everything we do we have worked to ensure the equal protection of law that is foundational to our democracy. dges, police officers, members of

congress, and even our own employees. we have worked to aggressively investigate, prosecute, and disrupt the hate crimes that not only harm individuals, but strike fear across entire communities. and in everything we do, we have worked to ensure the equal protection of law that is foundational to our democracy. i am proud of the work we have done. and i am deeply proud of the way the department's public servants -- from our agents to our attorneys to our administrative staff -- have gone about their work. they have conducted themselves in a way that would make the american people proud. but we recognize that we have so much more to do. our fiscal year 2025 budget request reflects the difficult budget environment we are in, and the extremely difficult budget choices we have had to make because of it. it also reflects the resources that we need, now more than ever, to continue our work. when i became attorney general three years ago, i knew that grappling with the violent crime that surged during the pandemic would be one of the greatest challenges we would face at the justice department. i am glad to be able to report that last year, we saw a significant decrease in overall violent crime across the country compared to the previous year

-- including an over 13% decline in homicides. that is the largest one-year decline in homicides in over 30 years. and data indicates this decline is continuing. --as the wall street journal recently reported just this week, in the first three months this year, homicides dropped 20% across 133 cities compared to the same time period last year. but i want to be very clear -- there is no acceptable level of violent crime. too many communities are still struggling, and too many people are still scared. the hard-fought progress we are seeing can easily slip away. so, we must remain focused and vigilant. to continue our efforts to drive down violent crime, and to help keep our country safe from a range of threats, we are seeking

a total of $21 billion to support the efforts of the fbi, atf, dea, u.s. marshals service, and u.s. attorneys' offices, as well as the criminal division and the national security division. we will use these resources to continue our fight against gun violence, to prosecute illegal gun traffickers and straw purchasers, and to invest in advanced technological tools like ballistics analysis, firearms tracing, gun intelligence centers, and local fusion cells. we will also use these resources to strengthen our work to counter both foreign and domestic terrorism. as the fbi director has testified, we are facing an increasing threat of foreign terrorism since october 7. we will also use these resources to continue to counter the

threats that the governments of iran, russia, china, and north korea pose to our national security and our economic stability. and we will use these resources to continue our efforts to dismantle the global fentanyl supply chain and to break apart the cartels responsible for flooding poison into our communities. as we deploy our own prosecutorial and investigative resources, we also recognize that the department's partnerships have been and will continue to be some of the most powerful tools we have to battle violent crime. that is why we are seeking investments in the department's three grantmaking components: the office of justice programs, the office of community oriented policing services, and the office on violence against women. they provide direct support to community and law enforcement partners through more than 200 grant programs. our budget requests more than $4.3 billion to support the

public safety efforts of our state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement and community partners. of that amount, we are requesting $2.5 billion for our cops hiring program to support law enforcement agencies across the country in their efforts to hire full-time law enforcement professionals. and we are requesting $120.5 million as part of our new violent crime reduction and prevention fund to fund 940 detectives at the state and local level. as i have noted before, when the justice department was founded in 1870, one of its principal purposes was to protect civil rights. today, protecting both the safety and the civil rights of everyone in this country remains our urgent obligation. our budget seeks $201.3 million for the civil rights division to

continue its essential work, including its efforts to deter and prosecute hate crimes, to ensure constitutional policing, to enforce federal laws prohibiting discrimination in all its forms, and to protect the right of all eligible citizens to vote and to have that vote counted. the right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy. protecting that right also requires us to protect the citizens who we rely on to fairly administer voting. our democracy cannot function if officials, workers, and volunteers who administer our elections have to fear for their lives just for doing their jobs. the justice department is aggressively investigating and prosecuting those who threaten election workers with violence. and we will continue to do so.

as i said, i am extremely proud of the work the department's employees are doing to advance the department's mission. every day, their work brings them face-to-face with some of our country's greatest challenges. every day, many of them risk their lives to protect the public. i am grateful to them. i respectfully ask for your support for the president's fiscal year 2025 budget request so that we can continue our work on behalf of the american people. >> thank you, attorney general garland. we will proceed with the five minute rule with questions from the witness. we will begin by recognizing myself. you mentioned in your testimony

about being here last year at this time. this time last year there were 120,000 people who died because of our inability to stop the flow of fentanyl, especially. most recent data from cdc shows for may 2022 until may 2023, for the first time in american history, over 12,000 americans died from a drug overdose. 2200 of them from kentucky alone. fentanyl remains the primary

driver of the increase in overdose deaths and young americans have been particularly hard-hit. for teenagers, 84% of fatal overdoses involved fentanyl. almost all. director wray testified here last week and he said, the last two years in a row the fbi has seized enough fentanyl to kill 270 million americans. there can be no doubt that a tragically high amount of narcotics are slipping through our southern border and the border crisis created by this administration is a dream scenario for cartels. they have never had it so good. department's budget submission

has listed combating drug trafficking and preventing overdose deaths as a top priority. with multiple agencies and components within the department of justice implementing strategies to counter fentanyl, how are you assuring and ensuring that agencies do not silo their intelligence and that these efforts complement rather than inhibit each other? ag garland: a very important point. fentanyl is the deadliest drug threat the country has ever faced because it is extraordinarily cheap to make, profitable to sell, and how often it can be fatal. as the dea has said, just one pill can kill.

so justest department -- the justice department and the government as a whole, you are exactly right we have to prevent any kind of siloing so fbi, dea, marshalls, criminal division, civil division, grants to local and state government law enforcement are all combined to work together to battle discourage. it begins -- battle this scourge. it begins with the precursors in china. we have charged and indicted the precursor companies, the treasury department, at the precursors then move into mexico. i personally traveled to mexico three times and the deputy attorney general has also

traveled three times, other high government officials have traveled to persuade the mexican government to put controls on the precursors and stop them from coming in. in mexico, we are working with the mexican marines and mexican army to destroy the lands and take down the cartels and in particular to get assistance in the extradition of cartel members we have indicted in the united states. we have indicted dozens of members of the mexican cartels. we have successful extradition, like one son of el chapo, we got some support in bringing these people into the united states. the next thing as you say, it crosses our southern border. as the secretary of homeland security testified, most of it comes through the ports of

crossing the border. what is necessary at that point is more money for homeland security, i hate to be here asking for money for another department but if we are going to stop fentanyl from coming in, they need large fast x-ray machines to look at the trucks and these suvs and passenger cars as they come across the border. then fbi and dea in the united states picks up the traffickers once they enter the u.s. and in combined operations including work from the marshalls and u.s. attorney's investigates using the latest tools and prosecutes. the dea has the very end of the line a public affairs campaign. we have to cut off the demand as well. that is why we emphasize that one pill can kill. that is why i went to dea

headquarters and met with the kind of families you are talking about. young people who have died taking a pill. who had no idea it was fentanyl. >> what percentage of your drug trafficking work is tied to illegal smuggling from mexico? ag garland: i cannot give a number in that regard but as i said, the vast majority of fentanyl comes into the united states smuggled in trucks and cars coming across ports of entry, that is what homeland security has identified. >> to be more clear, would your counter drug efforts be more successful if we had complete control of our southern border? ag garland: if we had the x-ray machines and other investigative devices necessary to detect fentanyl as it was coming across the border, absolutely. cut off the flow, that would

vastly -- there are other ways people will try to get it in, through the mail, shipping, etc. but if we could cut off fentanyl crossing the border using the new technologies it would make an enormous dent in the dangerous poison flooding our streets. >> last week we had fbi director ray sitting in the seat you occupy. he noted he wished there was more cooperation from mexico about drug trafficking. from a department wide counter drug perspective, what is the level of cooperation we are receiving were not from mexico? ag garland: i would echo what the director said. i wish there was more cooperation. we are getting cooperation, we have had extraditions, they have destroyed some labs and reduced

precursors coming into the country, but we need much more cooperation. >> as i understand it, the current mexican government has severely constrained doj's ability to work alongside their mexican counterparts to disrupt the cartels. what is the department on this administration doing to restore full law enforcement partnerships with mexico? ag garland: the fbi has been successful in setting up teams. i have personally gone to mexico to speak with the attorney general to re-up the degree of cooperation that previously existed with the dea. i have not been completely successful in that effort yetg but i am persistent and will not give upi until cooperation with

dea is as fulsome as possible. >> there are people based on that lack of a border control who say the mexican government really is complicit with the cartels. would you say that? ag garland: i do not want to comment on that specifically. the cartels are enormously profitable. they have more money than some nationstates. there are places in mexico where it is difficult to deal with the cartels. when mexican law enforcement, particularly the naval forces, the marines, the army, have gone to arrest people we have extradited, it has come at an enormous loss to them as well. i called the secretary of the

navy to give my condolences after the deaths of marines in connection with the arrest of a video. they have a very difficult job, as we do. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it did not escape my notice that you commented on crime statistics a little bit in your opening statement. we keep track of crime statistics, not just federal crimes but all state and local crimes, we keep track of violent crimes, crimes against property, am i correct? ag garland: yes with fbi reports. >> and use said homicides dropped more last year than any other year in the last 30 years, right? ag garland: that is right. >> is not just limited to a drop in homicide, is it?

ag garland: no, the fbi shows it decrease in violent crime across the board. >> and it is not just limited to a decrease in violent crime. yesterday a report reviewed all the national information on crime and if you separate out violent crime versus property crime, take violent crime. violent crime is down a considerable amount. including murder is down, manslaughter, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, all of them are down a considerable amount. and then into property crime with the exception of motor vehicle theft, burglary is down, larceny theft, these are all down a considerable amount. am i stating that correctly? ag garland: you are.

obviously there is differences in different places in the country. some went up, some have gone down but those of the overall numbers. i think i understated the success on homicides, it is actually the largest reduction in 50 years. >> it is down more than any other year in the last 50 years? ag garland: yes. i think i said 30. but 50 is correct. >> thank you for the correction, good hard work, the solid police work and solid prosecutorial work done not only by the department of justice, but also by the state and local police and prosecutors. that is who deserves the credit for this. ag garland: they are the ones who deserve the credit. we support them and help them and deal with the most difficult crimes and provide them with tech support but the people who

are actually face-to-face with violent crime in their communities are the state and local police and law enforcement. >> you are here today before the appropriations panel and we are the ones that fund your efforts. one of the most important areas i look into are the cops hiring grants and as i mentioned in my opening statement the byrne justice assistance grants. i've been very proud to bring grants home in both of those areas to fund local police and also to fund efforts by our local district attorneys. these are the ones that deserve the credit for that huge drop in crime over the last year, aren't they? mr. garland: i quite agree with that, yes. mr. cartwright: don't let me put words in your mouth, but who else deserves the credit for this big drop in crime that america has experienced?

mr. garland: look, i'm -- we know and we've had experience over decades now with the right kind of strategies for reducing violent crime. these involve strategies from the federal point of view, require the cooperation that the chairman was speaking of all of our agencies. then creating joint task forces with state and local law enforcement who are enormous force multipliers for the department. our u.s. attorneys' offices who reach out to community, our grant programs to support community violence interrupters, who go out into communities and prevent the crime from happening in the first place, who are willing to meet with potentially violent people and talk them down. so the importance of our grants

to local communities to enhance good relationships between the police and the communities and because we don't get good policing and effective policing unless the community trusts the police, so it's a combination across the board of federal law enforcement, local law enforcement, community engagement. mr. cartwright: that's well said. i want to focus on hiring of attorneys to go into prosecution where, attorney general, what is the department of justice doing right now to prioritize creating efficiencies in its hiring and reducing the time to hire so that we have enough attorneys working for the department of justice and the prosecution generally? mr. garland: with respect to law enforcement reduction and time to hire, this is a significant issue with respect to retention, promotion, recruitment, law enforcement. sometimes both federal law enforcement and state and local law enforcement take so long to hire the person, to go through the whole background and vetting

process, the person already accepts another job before we finish that process. so our cops office has created a playbook for state and local law enforcement to increase and streamline that process. of course we are looking internally to do the same thing. mr. cartwright: my time is expired, attorney general. i yield back, mr. chairman. mr. rogers: mr. garcia. mr. garcia: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, attorney general garland, for being here today. i view these annual appropriations hearings as similar to an investor brief. we get to talk to you about what's going on in your organization, the money you're asking for, the past performance, the vision, the path forward. i don't think most americans know what the department of justice does. i don't think most americans know what the attorney general does. so i went on your website and just printed out the mission statement.

the mission statement of the department of justice is to uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe and to protect civil rights. pretty straightforward, pretty simple. you've been in office since 2021. you report directly to the president. and you know your mission. for your investors, the american taxpayers, how would you grade your performance over the last three years relative to that mission? mr. garland: i would grade the work -- mr. garcia: i'm talking about you, attorney general. with all due respect to you and your team, i have all the respect in the world for the agents in the field. they are doing god's work on a daily basis. so this line of questioning is specifically about you, as someone who is on the cabinet, reports directly to the president, and during a period of record high crime rates. before my colleagues across the aisle get offended, i am not talking about the agents in the field here. i think they're doing god's work, they're doing a + with the resources they have.

how would you grade yourself as attorney general of the united states? mr. garland: you asked about violent crime. i think what the attorney general does with respect to violent crime is set forth a strategy for fighting violent crime and makes sure it's carried out throughout the department and the country. it's what i did almost immediately after i came into office. mr. garcia: we're short on time. i'm just asking for a grade. a through f. how are you doing? mr. garland: i'm going to give myself an a but with room for improvement. mr. garcia: ok. let me explain to you why i would give you an f. and we just heard why mr. cartwright from pennsylvania was citing the decline in crime nationwide. your mission is to uphold the rule of law. and crossing the border is a crime. it is illegal per penal code,

crossing international border is a crime. we have 7.5 million people under your tenure who have come across our border. when you say there's a decline in homicides by about 20%, a decline in homicide in 50 years or whatever the number is, does that include the 75,000 people who were killed by fentanyl or poisoned by fentanyl, by in many cases dealers who knew they were selling fentanyl and the victims did not, does that decline in homicides of 20% include the 75,000 fentanyl poisonings? mr. garland: i'm sure it does not include the fentanyl poisonings. mr. garcia: those were american lives lost, though, right? why is that not considered a homicide? mr. garland: u.s. attorneys' offices do pursue fentanyl traffickers, including even the sale of small amounts where we can establish the trafficker is the one who caused the death. mr. garcia: do you charge them with homicide when that's the case? mr. garland: there's a narcotics statute that includes sentencing enhancement for death. we don't prosecute homicides,

those are state laws. mr. garcia: when we're putting the cape on and saying there's a 20% reduction in homicides, we are not counting the 75,000 americans that have been killed by this drug each year -- the second metric of keeping our country safe, we talk about the "death to america" chants in some of our cities. we heard wray's testimony last year that we're in one of the most precarious positions our nation has been in the last several decades. we have 10,000 people entering our border a day illegally. 7,000% increase in chinese immigrants coming across our border illegally. 10,000 people a day coming across the borders. and that's about a 40% increase since your watch began in fy 2021. 350 people on the known terror watch list, eight in 10 americans feel less secure than they did just three or four years ago per the pew research center so your assessment of yourself, i think someone who is

in your position, literally reports directly to the president, and attribute of a leader in that position has to be self-aware. they have to have the courage to tell the boss that the boss is screwing up, especially when it's leading to loss of lives at the level that is unprecedented and i think you're giving yourself an a under these circumstances demonstrates a lack of self-awareness, frankly. i think you've earned an f. i think you need to talk to your boss and tell him that the policies are killing us. not the lack of money. i respect the $37 billion investment request here, if i was in charge i'd give you more. but it's the policies that are broken. so with that, i'm out of time, i'm happy to discuss more things, but i will wait for the second round to talk about the treatment of law and the application of law to certain demographics and i yield back. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. rogers: mr. morelle.

mr. morelle: i'd like to give the attorney general a chance to respond to what he just heard. mr. garland: i didn't hear a question in that at all. and i disagree with almost everything that you've said. but i want to be clear that the border responsibility, you're talking to the wrong department here. the department of homeland security is the department responsible for preventing things from coming across the border. the president and the secretary of homeland security have proposed a bipartisan bill to protect the border and reduce the number of people who come across and to increase the money spent to prevent fentanyl from coming across the border. so that would be my recommendation in that respect. mr. morelle: thank you. i'll just editorialize, this is the second hearing i've been at, both with the director of the fbi and the attorney general, they've been personally attacked. i want to underscore, there was a bipartisan deal on the table. as i understand it, the former

president persuaded people not to participate in that because didn't want a political win and cared about the politics over the safety of the united state'' people and the american people. so i'm getting tired of these hearings, of listening to these attacks when they can be addressed. having said that, mr. attorney general, thank you for the time with us today and thank you for your long service to the country. i want to thank your staff and you for providing detailed feedback on a bill which i have re-introduced, preventing deepfakes of intimate images act. this is to prohibit the disclosure of nonconsensual deepfake pornography. a growing problem in the united states. 96% of all deepfakes involve pornography on the internet and as i work to pass this legislation into law, which i hope that i can continue to have lines of communication open to you and to the department and i want to thank you for that.

if i can, sir, there's obviously been a lot of public reporting on special counsel robert hur's report back in february this year. i'm not asking to you comment on the substance of the report, which has been talked about publicly, but as a member of the president's cabinet, someone who has regular contact with the president, would you like to comment on president biden's fitness generally? mr. garland: look, i'm -- i start by thank you for recognizing that i can't comment and won't comment about the special counsel's report at all. but if you're asking me about my own observations as a member of the national security council and a member of the president's cabinet, i have complete confidence in the president. i have watched him expertly guide meetings of staff and cabinet members on issues of foreign affairs and military strategy and policy in the incredibly complex world in

which we now face. and in which he's been decisive in instructions to the staff, decisive in making the decisions necessary to protect the country. like wise, with respect to domestic policy discussions, these are intricate, complicated questions that he's guided all of us through in order to reach results that are helpful and important and beneficial to the american people. i could not have more confidence in the president. mr. morelle: thank you, sir. i have a number of questions which i may submit in writing but one thing i did want to get some additional comment, you mentioned in your testimony, in addition to my role as an appropriator i'm proud to serve as the ranking democrat on the committee on house administration, which has jurisdiction over federal election reforms. in july of 2021, the department

of justice launched a task force to address the rise in threats against election workers and election officials. in addition to threats of violence and intimidation, our country's election workers face new and unique pressures driven by the rapid spread of misinformation by extremists. with less than eight months before the general election, can you provide an update on the activities of the task force and the department's plans to ensure the election workers are protected from threats? mr. garland: yes, thank you. as i said in my opening remarks, i think the threats to election workers, particularly the volunteer election workers, but obviously also secretaries of state and appointed administrators, this is a real threat to our democracy, to have the people who running our elections afraid to continue their work. and so we have -- i have personally spoken to all of our united states attorneys by video and in person during our conferences. the fbi has agents devoted to this issue and we have this task force that you're talking about. we have prosecuted more than --

around 20 cases now, many of which have yielded significant sentences and we have investigated many, many more and disrupted other kinds of threats. so we are completely seized with the importance of deterring and disrupting threats against our election workers. mr. morelle: thank you, sir. mr. chair, i yield back. >> the hatch act prohibits employees -- when the house was considering legislation to reform and re-authorize the foreign intelligence surveillance act, did you or anyone in your office make phone calls to members of congress urging them to oppose the biggs amendment to require the government to obtain a warrant prior to spying on american citizens through fisa section

702? yes or no will suffice. mr. garland: the hatch act in the constitution permit members of the president's administration to speak with members who are interested in questions about the effect of legislation just like you are asking me today about -- mr. clyde: if we asked, that's one thing. if you we don't ask and you reach out, that's a different thing. mr. garland: it doesn't violate any law of any kind. >> so will you answer my question? ag garland: yes i discussed the , vital united states' interests in extending 702 with members -- mr. clyde: how many members did you call? mr. garland: i'm not going to get into my conversations -- mr. clyde: i'm not asking about the conversations, i'm asking how many members did you call? mr. garland: i'm not going to get into that question. but i am telling you there's , nothing unlawful. this is the basic -- mr. clyde: on march 3, 2024, at a baptist church in selma, alabama, you made comments regarding our country's elections and elections laws passed by states. specifically, you claim democracy was under attack by

discriminatory, burdensome and unnecessary restrictions on access to the ballot. attorney general, do you believe requiring an i.d. to vote in a federal election is discriminatory? yes or no? mr. garland: i spoke at the -- mr. clyde: just yes or no. mr. garland: an iconic church for which the march for voting rights began. mr. clyde: just a yes or no would be fine. mr. garland: the answer is the supreme court's decision says that undue burdens on voting rights caused by voter i.d.'s can be unconstitutional, but that -- mr. clyde: what? ag garland: that is right, that is what -- mr. clyde: voter i.d. can be unconstitutional? mr. garland: it can be depending on the burdens and the discriminatory way in which they are taken. mr. clyde: ok, so do you think it's important to positively identify every voter, to ensure that they are a legal voter? i think as you called it, a legitimate voter. mr. garland: no. you have to be a united states citizen, you have to meet the qualifications for that to be a voter. it's important that only those people vote. mr. clyde: how do you prove that? if you don't require i.d.?

you require i.d. to get on an airplane. they are not going to let you on an airplane. [talking simultaneously] mr. garland: i have voted every year my entire life and i've never been asked to show an identification. mr. clyde: i've always been asked to show identification. wow. ag garland: somehow democracy goes on without that. mr. clyde: do you believe that illegal aliens residing in the united states should be allowed to vote in federal elections? yes or no? mr. garland: no. mr. clyde: all right, great, we agree on something. other than u.s. citizens, are there any other legitimate voters? mr. garland: you have to be a u.s. citizen to vote. mr. clyde: you must be a u.s. citizen. ok, great. i ask unanimous consent to add this to the record, mr. chairman. thank you, sir. this is a poster found in the city -- outside of city of matamoros. it was posted around the migrant camps and it is a poster from hias, the immigrant aid society,

and this particular poster says, the resource center is a six-unit complex that is the home of hias. at the very bottom it says, reminder to vote for president biden when you're in the united states. we need another year of your mandate to stay open. that's what this poster says. reminds illegal immigrants to vote for president biden. so, is the department of justice concerned about illegal aliens voting in federal elections? mr. garland: the department of justice is concerned about any illegalities with respect to voting. i've never seen that poster, never heard of that poster. that's the first time i've ever had anybody even mention that poster. mr. clyde: well, now you have. so if any noncitizens vote in federal elections, are you going to prosecute them at the federal level? mr. garland: anybody violates the voting laws, federal voting laws, we will investigate and prosecute as appropriate. mr. clyde: that's good to hear. i appreciate that. with the additional money you asked for the civil rights

division, i hope that you prosecute illegal voting. now, last year you promised to provide the prosecution crime statistics for the city of washington, d.c., for the last five years. there was a question that i asked you. i have not yet received them. so i'm asking you again today, do you commit to provide these statistics, prosecution of crime statistics for the city of washington, d.c., will you provide these in the next 30 days? mr. garland: i'll ask my staff to get in touch with yours. i don't know what the problem is with respect to providing those. it doesn't seem like there should be a problem. mr. clyde: thank you. i appreciate your commitment to provide them. my time is expired and i yield back.

mr. rogers: the committee will be in order. >> three julian assange. >> what are you doing? it's so important. what are you doing -- free julian assange. >> free julian assange. mr. rogers: the chair reminds our guests that disruptive demonstrations from the audience are a violation of house rules. any additional disruptions will require law enforcement to remove protesters from the room and restore order. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and ranking member cartwright. i thank you, attorney general garland, for appearing here today and thank you for your patience as you deal with this committee. i'm a co-chair of the bipartisan second chance task force. we are concerned about staffing

shortages at the bop. the bop is funded at 93% but are only staffed at 86%. what's happening is education, wrap-around services for mental health, etc., which could improve our outcomes, job training, get left behind. so we're all in agreement on that. we like to figure out how to implement the bipartisan first step act successfully. and to do that we've got to have the staffing. could you talk a minute about what this does to lead to lousy outcomes where we can't cut our prison budget because we don't give folks a second chance to win, succeed? mr. garland: i think -- thanks for the question. i think the act was extremely important. by focusing on education of inmates, it helps reduce recidivism after they leave, and if we can reduce recidivism

after re-entry, we drive down the violent crime rate. and prevent it from going up. the bureau of prisons makes every effort to ensure that the staffing shortages you're referring to don't impact the first step act programming, as well as the medication assisted treatment programming. but to be frank, if you're asking what we need most in order to protect the ability to have full staffing in prisons, we need the money for hiring and retention. being a correctional officer or being a first step administrator, these are dangerous jobs in facilities that are not -- that have not been kept up over decades and where there are adjoining facilities, sometimes state and local facilities that pay more money, so i'd say if you're asking me for the one thing that would give us a better chance here for the first step act,

and for the second chance act, it would be to give us the money which we're requesting which is $205.4 million for hiring more. mr. trone: so the dollars we give you, the proper amount of money will result in saving millions, tens of millions more down the line by cutting recidivism. mr. garland: we do think the money we have can provide more incentives for people to stay on the job and the bureau of prisons means the chances of reducing recidivism will increase. mr. trone: that sounds like a smart investment to me. second quick question. 75% of bop inmate do not have a photo i.d. when they leave prison and can't secure housing, apply for jobs, open a bank account, federal benefit programs, etc. the bureau's addressing this by providing i.d.'s to u.s. citizens now. we have a bipartisan bill, the bop release card act, that supports this effort at the

bop by ensuring new i.d.'s fulfill all the requirements and directs bop to work with the states to have a one-on-one exchange so we can work right with the states to move these folks into getting their new i.d. card and then successfully able to exchange that for state i.d. cards. we would appreciate your help in moving this bill forward, that makes sense to you? mr. garland: we would be happy to give technical assistance. our staffs may have already consulted on this. of course we'd be happy to give technical assistance. the bop has implemented their own id release program. there should be implementation by the spring. mr. trone: excellent, thank you. the dea has extended current telemedicine flexibilities for prescribing controlled medications through december 31, 2024. but there's not a revised proposed rule. many patients are at risk of losing access to prescriptions needed for mental health and

substance use disorder. last year my colleagues and i expressed concerns about the proposed dea rule that would have limited patient access to a drug and encourage evidence-based approach to make permanent the use of audio only or audiovisual telehealth technology foursquare -- for prescribing the drug. this is crucial to reach these patient populations, including unhoused, rural, tribal. so as a follow-up to that letter, we introduced the treats act which allows medication for opioid use disorder to be prescribed via telemedicine. what is doj's position on the continued use of telehealth flexibilities to ensure access to these medically necessary substance use disorder treatments and how is this supported in your budget request?

mr. garland: as you noted, the dea and hhs have extended current telemedicine flexibilities until december 31 of this year. dea has issued a proposed rule which would allow authorized providers to prescribe medicines for opioid use disorder via telemedicine. they are working to promulgate a final rule by the fall of this year. mr. trone: thank you very much. quickly, restrictive housing, otherwise known as solitary confinement. outdated and used way too far, too often. we believe the bop has been dragging its feet to reform this area of restrictive housing. in the past 10 years doj has conducted studies to approve restricted housing but we have failed to make progress. what steps can be taken to make this more effective.

and improve the restrictive housing policies? ag garland: the new bop director is very much committed to what you are talking about. the bop recently published a proposed rule on discipline designed to reduce the use of restrictive housing for disciplinary segregation. bop is trying to hire more psychologists and escalation training which would help reduce the need for the restrictive housing. mr. trone: i yield back. chair rogers: if you would please move the microphone closer to you. ag garland: i am sorry. chair rogers we are having a : little trouble hearing you. ag garland: i am not sure i can move the microphone. >> thank you, attorney general, for being here. i listened to interest with your opening statement. i have to say i'm concerned that your actions are speaking louder than your words. especially when you say there is one -- not one set of laws for democrats and another for

republicans. my constituents and many americans are watching your actions speaking louder than words. there really is a crisis of conscious in your department being created by the dual treatment of american citizens depending on their viewpoints on their political positions or their political offices. whether -- as your department is currently prosecuting a former president for handling classified documents, your office, i assume you personally, declined to take action against president biden for his willful mishandling of classified documents. i appreciate you making the report of special counsel robert mueller public -- robert hur

public as was done historically with every other special counsel. did you review the report prior to its release? ag garland: before i released it? yes. i read it before. mr. cline: did you approve of the -- obviously you approved of the recommendations because you have it within your power to prosecute. correct? ag garland: i'm not going to comment or editorialize on the special counsel's report. i promised i would release it. i did release it. the report speaks for itself. the special counsel sat for something like five hours' worth of testimony on the subject. any question about results he reached could have been asked. mr. cline: you won't say whether you concur with the conclusions. ag garland: i will say as i did at the time of the release would not editorialize or comment on the report. that's inappropriate for an attorney general. mr. cline: you wouldn't agree that biden would have come across to a jury as a sympathetic elderly man with a poor memory? ag garland: i said then and with respect to the report it's improper for the attorney general to editorialize.

i take that separately from the question you are asking. if you are asking me about my own observations about the president -- mr. cline: you testified to that fact. i heard you the first time. ag garland: i have deep confidence in the president. mr. klein have you ever seen : evidence of impairment in your meetings with the president? ag garland: i'm sorry. i testified and i'll repeat again. mr. cline: that's different from my question. ag garland: i have seen the president effectively guide the members of the department, of his cabinet, and his military through -- mr. cline: you won't say you have ever seen any impairment? ag garland: the president has no impairment. mr. cline: you have never seen any. ag garland: i don't know how many ways i can say this. i have complete confidence in the president and i reject your characterization. mr. cline: let's talk about the audio recordings special counsel hur's interviews with president biden's ghost writer. you are in possession of those? ag garland: the justice department is in possession of

them. mr. cline: has the white house been permitted access to those recordings? ag garland: i don't know what mr. hur provided. i expect the answer is yes. mr. cline: they have access. maybe you are aware. how many times did judiciary committee ask for those documents, those recordings? ag garland: i know that the judiciary committee has asked. we have sent a letter explaining our position with respect to the recordings. mr. cline: three times. ag garland: we have provided transcripts of the recordings. mr. hur has testified about his observations during his interviews. these are interviews of the witness. it is long-standing practice of the justice department to keep these kinds of documents confidential in order to not chill future investigations. mr. cline: confidential. but you provided copies to the white house. ag garland: this is the witness. the witness' own -- mr. cline: you normally provide witnesses in investigations access to their interviews? ag garland: sometimes we do. sometimes we don't. but here there are, as you well know, there are privileges to be

-- with respect to national security and other information that were addressed in those recordings and in the interviews, and the transcripts themselves had to be cleared through interagency process. you know that because we said that in the letter to the committee. mr. cline: in my 20 seconds i want to ask about something you answered congressman clyde. you said following the court's rulings that i.d.'s to vote can be an undue burden, do you know of an example or is there any case in which you would consider a photo i.d. to not be an undue burden? say if it's a free i.d. ag garland: you have a very good example there. that was the case in which the supreme court noted there was free i.d.'s. completely available to everyone without discrimination. those circumstances the court upheld the law, yes. mr. cline: you --

ag garland: i follow the law and the supreme court. whether i agree or not it's the law. the rule of law requires us to follow it. that's not what i'm talking about. mr. cline: i yield back. chair rogers: the committee will stand in recess subject to the call of the chair.