Gary Peters Asks Trump Nominee: Will You Reinstate 'Illegally Canceled Funding'?

Forbes Breaking News

During a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing last week, Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) spoke about the Trump administration freezing congressionally appropriated funding.

Transcript

00:00Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Percival, on April 4th, the DHS announced that it was

00:07permanently cancelling the Building Resilient Infrastructure and

00:11Communities, or BRIC, program. It included cancelling funding for projects that are

00:18actually currently in progress, just basically pulled the plug from them.

00:23These projects are critical for communities to reduce their risk before

00:28disaster strikes. As a result, we have a tornado shelter, for example, in Salem

00:33Township, Michigan, that may not be finished. Construction's begun, but it's

00:37being just pulled out, which doesn't seem really thoughtful. Use of taxpayer dollars

00:42to do it halfway and then pull out and stop a project. And then if you look at

00:46resilience projects generally, they tend to save taxpayer money to build it

00:50stronger up front. It's a lot cheaper than fixing it later. So my question for you,

00:56sir, is if confirmed, do you commit to following the law, which I've heard you

01:01say that you will do many times, and reinstate these illegally canceled

01:06funding from Congress that's appointed to the BRIC program? Because following the

01:10law would reinstate that funding. Well, thank you for the question, Senator, and I

01:14know we've talked about this before. So I haven't been super involved in that in my

01:18role as Senior Counselor, but I would respectfully push back on the suggestion

01:22that DHS has violated the law. You know, I have a general understanding of the

01:25Impoundment Act and the various options that DHS has. If confirmed, I'd be happy

01:30to dig into that for you, but I don't have the same understanding that you do that

01:32DHS has violated the law. Do you believe that appropriations by Congress are law?

01:38Yes, Senator, I do. My understanding of the Impoundment Act is when you have an

01:42appropriation and a new administration comes in, if they want to revisit programs

01:46and change them within the scope of the existing appropriation, they have the

01:51right to do that. They can also, in some circumstances, do a reprogramming, and then

01:56the third option is to follow the procedures of the Impoundment Act that I'm

02:00sure you're aware of. So those are sort of the three options. That's my

02:02understanding. But just canceling outright is not following the law? That would

02:06depend, Senator, on whether there is some other plan to obligate those funds within

02:12the scope of the appropriation within the relevant fiscal year. I'm just... I'm not... I'm not aware of any.

02:16Just to basically pull in the plug on all these projects. It's very clear, Congress, we

02:22pass law... Appropriations are laws, and the president has to faithfully execute the

02:27laws of the land, and that's not happening. So my... Again, Senator, my

02:32understanding is that DHS is following applicable laws, and if confirmed, that's

02:35what I would do. Mr. Rhodes, reports indicate that agencies across the federal

02:41government have procured Planeteers technology to create a master database of

02:49Americans' personal data. I'm certainly alarmed by these reports to have the

02:55master database. I would suspect the chairman would be concerned about that as

03:00well. The potential disregard for the law, as well as the privacy and civil liberties

03:05of Americans to have this large database. My question for you is, do you think it's

03:10appropriate for the federal government to purchase technology for the purpose of

03:13consolidating massive data about Americans? Senator, I appreciate the

03:19question. I don't have any knowledge of that database by Palantir. I would have to

03:23look into that. And if confirmed, how would you... when you look into that, would you have

03:29concerns based on what I've just said? If confirmed, again, I would... I would take a

03:34look into that, and like my colleagues, I would follow all the laws that are

03:38applicable, but I would have to take a look. Another question for you. Companies of

03:44current and former DOGE members have received hundreds of millions of dollars in

03:51federal contracts. However, agencies have refused to share information about these

03:57individuals and their particular involvement in the federal procurement and acquisition

04:02process. This certainly leaves open the potential for fraud, ways to abuse. My

04:09question for you is, if confirmed, will you commit to reviewing and providing my... this

04:13committee information about DOGE's involvement specifically in federal

04:19procurement? Senator, thank you for the question. If confirmed, I will follow all

04:23conflict of interest regulations and laws. I've followed them my entire time in the

04:27military, and if confirmed, I will do the same. Well, specifically, what steps will

04:31you take to increase transparency into the acquisition process? Senator, I appreciate

04:37that question. I'm a transparent and direct individual, and so I believe that as we do

04:42contracts and federal procurement, those should be available to the public. What steps

04:46would you take, but specifically? So one of the steps, Senator, I would take is to

04:51ensure that the information is available following all regulations that are in

04:55place so that they get posted. There are systems that allow that information to be

04:59put out there that we have currently, and I would ensure that we continue to do so.

Category

Transcript

Recommended