Prepared Statement by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee
Executive Business Meeting
Thursday, April 26, 2012
 
Mr. Chairman,
 
On  the agenda today are three nominations ready for committee action -  Curiel, Shea, and Shelby.  I believe a roll call may be requested for  Mr. Shea's nomination.
 
Before  we consider the nominations, I would like to speak about yesterday's  hearing and a serious matter I raised with Secretary Napolitano.  I  asked Secretary Napolitano about the Department  of Homeland Security's failure to approve a single chemical facility  site security plan under the Chemical Facility Anti-terrorism Standards  (CFATS).
 
The  CFATS program was passed by Congress in 2006 to provide baseline  security for chemical facilities that store certain types of dangerous  chemicals.  Regulations were issued in 2007 that  required sites to submit security plans for approval.  To date, 4,200  sites have submitted plans to DHS.  However, DHS has not approved a single one despite operating the program for more than five years and spending nearly a half-a-billion taxpayer dollars.  As implemented, this program is a disaster.
 
Secretary  Napolitano admitted that the program is not operating as they would  like.  I think that is a major understatement and an internal review of  the failures of the program underscores  how this is an understatement.
 
This  memorandum, dated November 10, 2011, is one of the most candid  assessments of an agency's failure I've ever seen. The authors found,  among other things, that no site plans have been approved  and that even if they were, DHS is not prepared to conduct compliance  inspections.
 
Additionally, the memorandum paints the picture of an agency that has lost control.  Specifically, the authors found:
 
·         The Department had hired "people who do not have the necessary skills to perform key mission and essential functions."
 
·         "While the vast majority of employees are talented, hardworking people, there are numerous exceptions."
 
·         "There is a catastrophic failure to ensure personal and professional accountability" among agency employees.
 
·         The "lack of focus and vision has resulted in problems with how we have spent our money, and how we are managing those funds."
 
There  are other major problems, including car fleet management problems, lack  of oversight and accountability for purchase cards, travel cards used  for unauthorized expenses, property management  issues, and records management.
 
While  I appreciate the candor in this memorandum and the significant detail  included by those tasked with completing this analysis, it raises  serious questions about how DHS uses taxpayer  dollars.  It also raises questions about DHS's ability to implement the  policies Congress has entrusted it with.
 
I'm also concerned with what this entails for those who are currently seeking to give DHS more regulatory authority and hundreds of millions more in taxpayer money to oversee cybersecurity.
 
For  example, the White House issued a Statement of Administration Policy  last night on the cybersecurity legislation the House is currently  addressing.  One of the major reasons the statement  was allegedly issued was that the bill "fails to provide authorities to  ensure that the Nation's core critical infrastructure is protected."   In other words, the President won't sign the bill into law because it  doesn't give DHS the power to regulate the private  sector.
 
I'll admit I have been skeptical of giving DHS the power to regulate cybersecurity from the outset.
 
But,  I do believe the threat to our country from cyber-attacks is real.   That is why I have cosponsored S.2151, the SECURE I.T. Act.  This  legislation will enhance cybersecurity without creating  a new bureaucracy at DHS and without stifling innovation in the private  sector with burdensome new regulations.
 
After  reading this DHS memorandum, my initial skepticism against DHS's role  in cybersecurity has turned into outright concern.  Based upon the  failures of CFATS to date, such an approach would  surely lead to more wasted taxpayer dollars with nothing to show for  it.  Given the fiscal situation we face, this is an unacceptable  option.
 
Despite  the failures outlined by DHS's own internal review, Secretary  Napolitano did her best yesterday to say the program is moving forward.   I have my doubts, given the level of failures  cited in this memorandum.  I'd be surprised if DHS has been able to  turn this program around overnight.  So, I'll be requesting a briefing  from DHS to find out what is being done to fix these problems.
 
Regardless  of what DHS has done to address these problems, the fact remains that  the American taxpayers are out nearly a half-a-billion dollars with  nothing to show for it.  We have a duty  to conduct oversight on the failures and problems mentioned in this  memorandum.  We have a duty to our constituents and all taxpayers to  ensure these problems are fixed and that they don't continue.
 
Absent proof, and not just assurances, that the problems are fixed, we should not even consider giving DHS another ounce of regulatory  authority or additional layers of bureaucracy to deal with  Cybersecurity.  I believe Cybersecurity is an important topic that we  need to address, but not at the expense of throwing more taxpayer  dollars at an agency with the sort of problems this internal review  details.
 
Thank you.