>> and how's my dash happy to start that one. that was really created to distinguish a from the paradigm of the day and the you could stay as long as you needed to. and to not have day clock ticking is a supportive recovery. the stress associated to know that you have to have cracked together in a certain period of time and go someplace else it was counterproductive to have a long-term stability.

lynch you get a job ben moved out but also the aging portfolio is a great example and the idea of home is it is a life changing event of hopelessness in the streets so whenever that is possible to have a severe disabilities glading queeney to presume for the rest of

their lives. so what year do is a for them the dignity to die in their own home instead of the streets. >> that happens frequently. >>. >> back couple of themes that are slightly different and maybe there could be of little dialogue. one is medicaid should pay for housing and it just needs to pay for services related to housing and homelessness is the diagnosis the other is to target for a relatively savvier needs pulling dash

severe needs. is there a way with that apparent contradiction? to represent a contradiction when is a pay for housing but the federal government is investing to have a health impact may be medicaid should be the same but that is prohibited so i found that to be a the unproductive strategy so as a result i talk about what it does pay for is a health care in the bay supports into a home of their own i don't think those are at odds that all. >> in colorado in a particular we have a population in dense front

range. with every have a large swath of rural communities that have individuals that experience homelessness though that flexibility to let local partnerships figure out what kind of resources are appropriate is the other piece two-room reflect the reality is the availability of resources. >> coming from a local perspective publishable together public them private and philanthropic and faith based and to this cannot go on in our community. that we are not providing for the most vulnerable on our streets.

so what we're saying to you is that we can all pull together. and to the supportive services to surround the person in the housing. >> touche follow-up with the question that was raised with the previous question and it involves a former administrator and someone asked him about the reasons

with the funding stream between housing and medicaid. that medicaid is already under all kinds of political pressure. to start to said that anything might benefit a medicaid beneficiary, that it ought to be covered by medicaid to open and a bottomless pit to make it more vulnerable to those who want to cut or eliminate it. >> i feel safe to say i could not disagree with that shortsighted perspective than the case studies say that. but from our perspective that hud medicated not pay for housing because the

whole history is to bring housing in institutional and horrible ways. everytime it thinks it will get better to figure out how to dance that san divest itself medicaid does not know how to provide housing. so it isn't a question should medicaid pay for housing but should the federal government invests in the discretionary power housing programs that have been remiss human benefits in order to deal with us at issues to deal with the aging of america and those with disabilities living on the streets. that isn't a slippery slope but a sound public policy

and to fix the of problems for mr. to a hundred 81 dash 280. >> it is unsettled with me. >> i note in one of our handouts there is a chart of the state initiatives. it did ask for medicaid money to build housing wife asking medicaid to do the very thing it cannot do? and medicaid said no. to include as a request everything it could have paid for but they pay for that on the state general operating fund instead of operating that federal match. i don't know why they did that.

>> is a house like technical assistance is in order. >> from families usa. i appreciate the focus on homeless issues but i would like to broaden that a little bit. that the federal government with the collaboration is unprecedented in our their conversations during on we were discussing improving housing conditions? for instance low income children who have a chronic condition with asthma often are increasingly going to the emergency room because of the of gold in their house. >> everything from the environment specifically in

day home it is there lead the when we do more hopefully we do well. also with in rent-controlled how to redo abatements or whole modification how can we partner with the health care system and the public health care system at scale? one of the challenges of highly mobile families to the rigo completely overhaul the unit then inviting that is great because it means to have more but we would love

to if we had the budget to do that but in the absence of those dollars will reduce some funding in this area we're trying to figure out how to do partnership. like hopkins university to do a targeted strategy in that community for parole in california to partner with the cities to do a concerted effort. it is a part of the work they're doing together. >> just that kind of thinking is great thinking so as part of the guiding principles from a public

health perspective we could win. so it is important reminder to us to the interagency group but it is said different place although it may be a net -- and nexis point. >> i am a commissioner with a local official tear represent hundreds of residents and receive medicaid and medicare. there is a plush for the housing of hundreds so many chronic illnesses with

issues but there is a big push to eliminate the housing that they're not having housing because they don't know what will happen in the future because people don't like to see hundreds of low income residents so my question is how do we secure housing and public housing units to work on health issues because they fear that they will lose the connections to their community estimate that is a terrific question.

we have learned a lot about community redevelopment over the last five decades. i think when we did it for the weekend to prepare the out of the building, and tore it down and would build nixon come committees then we didn't know we're the people were who had been sent away. i had an opportunity last year to visit a community in atlanta that just blue me away. it was in horrible shape it had a horrible unemployment rates in was one of the worst schools with one of the highest with that

demarcation around it because the single-family homes and communities around that the working with residents, that was a three-year process from which to do that engagement in a sustainable way. building by building, a unit by unit spent the community is beautiful they built the school one of the highest performing schools and in area for the people of all income want to move to this neighborhood so their kids can go to that school progress started as a charter school and they just built a high school. ywca.

to ever see young children of color of burning with such pride and a community that is the envy of the atlanta. we can do this the old ways we did not do well. people have a right saddam again wish we could take your community down. is of a testament to if we do it right. >> in terms of innovation. i work for congressman hastings but we are looking at telehealth not just

providing health over the internet but to keep people an underserved areas and new service to provide quality care for people. en to save a lot of money on mr. 280 it actually prevents people from going to the hospital if they need to go to the hospital. >> telehealth is in the emerging model that has a lot of promise arrears' seeing more and more of that opportunity but in a health center setting i think it

gives us an opportunity to access specialty care where it may not be available and public transportation is not adequate even feasible for a vulnerable population. so it is an intriguing idea to implement where we can and. but we may be overlooking there are lots of reasons why mr. 280 go to the hospital and it isn't always strictly out of medical necessity. no doubt they are acutely ill. but because there is a lack of stability sometimes and nurses know them by name because of a social connection they're looking for to be in the care environment where people actually touch you. and that quality of care

that they provide from a compassion perspective. sister adele can say the clients are never touched except violence or a anchor and if they put their hands on you in a loving and caring way for the first time in 25 years can be life changing. yes i am excited for telehealth of the social connectedness is really important and i will look to sister to add on to that. >> i agree. i know for people who have no access, what they really need is a specialist. budget i have that same concern.

just to go back to mr. 280 and i can tell you from the traumatic brain injury with four impulse control but every time he felt unsafe he would say to was a half to go to the hospital. because it was clean and sheltered and save can we do that with tellep -- telehealth? i would be careful about implementing it but it has its base. >> the clients need a group of so that compassion is born out of the realization.

>> i am with the national housing conference. with then efficacious services for the housing navigation services how difficult it is more vulnerable low income individuals to even think about how to find a home. and what role of a comprehensive accord nation. >> so what is the follow-up? >> what is the biggest challenge?

is a that it understands with housing navigation you cannot write playscript for housing to have it done especially given the affordable market. with fraud and small and to make good headway on that. it in this set a mark there is a 93 percent cut to the home investment program with the creation of more affordable housing.

looking at housing and health to to go to the housing units that our available to the people it is targeting to create more affordable housing stomach also for the national housing trust fund. >> that is how into homelessness. >> sunday to contemplate quickly for clear management so that is the opposite side of the question for those

who have housing available to them with the state department that we are being more understandable to think what does that mean. that is the first place say would have the chance to ask a question. so how do i get back and rolled? because it was difficult to contemplate as well. >>. >>. >> i would thank you for coming today for your attention to this message for river you can do to provide the collaborative effort.

>> debut. let me do a little bit here at the end. of the senate mark remise me we would like to endorse talk to ruth the appropriations and the veterans that each of you knows what is going on in the other damage in. so those that help is still dangling in in your hand so please fill that out before you leave. >> there doing amazing work. >> with organizational privilege, we have one more slide.

the entrance have done such a great job. [applause] but my apologies to those zero to very good questions that i was hoping to get to bed was not able to. but thank you for staying with us it is not an easy topic. there are a lot of good things to be done on a friday afternoon and we very much appreciated. [applause] they give the your support

to a point just to some good folks for this exceptional panelist that brings me to my final point with that multifaceted important topic.

. . with what we are focused on is that we are going to challenge them and we are not concerned about a corporate sponsorship or status because the fundamental

right in america is your right to vote and vote for the good. we get confused sometimes with the presidential vote thinking that the most important vote. if you go go down to the courthouse, the most important vote he's going is the di da he's going to decide if you're going to jail or not. then they come to court, same defense, one will get fingerprinted and handcuffed and that's all on the prosecutors so you tell me what's more important. you're talking about jury duty the vote in jury duty. just one person in that backroom, just one person and now we have six and now they

have 12. but one african-american who has the courage to say i'm going to be on this jury, i'm going to answer every question appropriately and i'm going to be fair and i'm going to go back in that room and decide the fate of this young black person, it makes the difference in the world. because your vote really does count when you're in jury duty. >> watch that event in its entirety tonight at eight pm eastern. on our companion network c-span. next, a hearing on human trafficking in the recent release to trafficking report. among those testified the senate form relations committee held this hearing last week, it's one and a half hours. >> son of relations committee come to order.

before i move into the business at hand, i know the settlers closed today, i just want to say how disappointed i was in the president's comments yesterday relative to iran. iran. i know we have questions about the tip report and trafficking and i wonder if, because because we have questions and concerns about trafficking it throws us into a category of being bad people. i thought the president's comments yesterday relative to iran, i just want to put things into perspective, before we had a 19 to zero committee vote here, though white house had a veto threat against us weighing

in on the iran deal veto threat. up until an hour and a half before that boat took place because they did not want a public debate on iran. obviously the committee chose otherwise and passed it out on a 19 to zero vote and everybody here voted for. but they did not want the issue debated. what the president did yesterday by saying that senator who had ranking member who had questions about the iran deal, senator mendez who had questions about the iran deal, by the way both of which voted and against the iraq war if i remember correctly. senator johnson who had concerns about the iran deal, we are being too compared to the hardliners in iran because we have concerns.

concerns that we are trying to have answered. just a few few months ago the president publicly was talking about what a thoughtful principle, person i was, but now because i have concerns, and i think everyone has concerns and people are going to have to make a decision, it's going to be one of the toughest decisions, he's trying to shut down debate by saying those who have questions, legitimate questions, legitimate questions are somehow unpatriotic, or somehow compared to hardliners. again if to shut down debate, it's to make this about something other than arguing it on the merit of the deal. i'm very disappointed, i know senators are meeting with the president last night i wish you would have been there to hear the discussion about perching.

about how that arrangement was working. i called her early this morning to ask her if she would at least come at a minimum, have heard notes when she was briefed by the iaea. i'm beginning to believe one of the reasons they do not want people to know, it's it's not about iran's confidentiality, i don't think it would stand the test of late-night comedy if people understood how the parking thing was named on. i just hope that today we have concerns about trafficking, again on a unanimous vote, we voted to end slavery of this

world. that somehow we will not be viewed as people who are on patriotic, be viewed as people that somehow people are not serious about this issue. today we are going to examine, recently release 2015 trafficking in persons report, the sears report has attracted significant interest because of controversy over p rankings were made over certain countries, including india, ghana, cuba, mexico. we thank secretary of state eight for testifying today so she can explain these tier rankings to the committee. if it is true that the administration politicize this report, there are questions about why they chose to significantly diminish a tool that tool that has been effective in buying slavery around the world. work if we are going to actually and modern slavery, we need to take on the hard questions and work harder.

how we make the tough calls matter, the integrity of the tip report matters for our country's credibility when we speak up for the powerless and the oppressed. the state department in our nation will be judged by how the state department leaders make tough calls on the reports to your ranking. state departments behind closed doors to your ranking process only muddied the water. we in congress and everyone in the state department and other parts of our government are responsible for implementing the trafficking victims protection act. each each year the tip report makes recommendations for progress and turn sleaze into tailored action plans for embassy. rigorously applied tips on tier rankings. in releasing the report secretary carrie said bottom line, this is no time for complacency, i am not convinced and i hope i won't be criticized for this, or ridiculed for this,

i am not convinced this report lives up to that statement. it 27 million human beings on modern slavery we need to be serious about this. at. >> thank you mr. chairman for holding his hearing and in regards to your opening comments i want you to know that you are and will continue to be a thoughtful principle person. i respect greatly your leadership on this committee and the manner that we have been able to work

together. >> hopefully if i disagree with you once, you won't compare me to the hardliners in. >> i want to, i'm still going through the review process, i have not reached a decision on the boat that will take place when we return in september. i want to underscore point that senator and i working toward leadership encouraged our leadership to abide, or debate on the floor of the united states senate that we think is befitting this critical issue. yesterday without any objection we moved onto the bill. when. when we come back on tuesday will not have to go back a kosher vote, or procedure hurdles, hurdles, will be on the bill. at that point i expect the majority leader will put forward the bill that we'll be voting voting on and we will be ready to debate and use that week and the hell have everybody make up

his or her mind on what they think is the best interest in this country. i did not interpret the president's remark that he is challenging any of our independent judgment on this. you are correct i voted against the iraq war, i do not see a comparison between this boat and the iraq vote. just a sidebar on this, i voted against the authorization to use military force in iraq, in my district, it was a congressional district district at the time, it was overwhelmingly unpopular, it was not a close call. it was one of the most consequential votes that i casted my career in the house. it was interpreted to have an impact on my reelection this is not the case when it comes to this vote.

this is not a clear situation where the popular view is oppose the president or not. they are very strong views don't get me wrong, that was a clear use of force here we are not authorizing use of military force. i disagree with the president's interpretation of this issue. having said that having said that i don't disagree with the president strong statement, he is clearly doing what we expect the president of the united states to do which is struck show strength and bringing issues to the people. >> one of the most important responsibilities of this committee is oversight, now we pass a lot of laws but are they being carried out the way they should. today's hearing is an oversight

hearing on an extremely important subject. we have a very distinguished witness today, our administrative spokesperson on this, she she has a long distinguished career in pahrump promoting human rights in dealing with trafficking. so i want you to know you come to this committee with great credibility and we thank you for your public service. trafficking is modern-day slavery. we have a moral, imperative to speak out against traffic. it involves labor servitude, trafficking, it involves financing criminal activities, estimated at $180 billion a year for illegal activities, it affects children who are victims of trafficking. the number of victims that are robbed of their future, the

chairman mentioned in the high 20 millions, we have estimates between 20,000,030 6,000,036,000,000 victims of trafficking. and they are victims. we on obligation to deal with this. i am proud of the leadership in this country, for a for a long time working with the u.s. commission we took the leadership to develop not only laws in america but to show international leadership in the osc countries. we now have special representatives and reports every year are trafficking, best practices. practices. why, because of the u.s. leadership, because of what we have done in this country. we've celebrated 15 years of the trafficking victims protection act this year, it was a tremendous victory.

as a result we have the trafficking in persons report which is the gold standard, it is on my desk, i look at it before i look at and a representative of another country so i can look at their trafficking issues. if they want to have the type of relationship with our country they have to make fighting trafficking a high priority in their country. we we take great pride in the leadership of our country. the 2015 report causes me concern. causes me concern. i want to get answers today about the 2015 report. their upgrades in this report that are hard to understand. i put malaysia number one on the list, malaysia has a very serious problem of trafficking of labor. we we know about it, we have documented it. in this report malaysia has been upgraded from tier three to tier

two watchlist. tier three is when they do not fully comply with the trafficking victims persons act, minimum standard and are not making significant efforts to do so. so what's changed between the 2015 report in the 2014 report malaysia? a couple of things have changed. they have enacted of amendments to their law but they have not carried them out. the number of number of prosecutions are ridiculously low, on convictions. they have not implemented the new law. just recently beyond the window for this report, one other thing is new from last year and that is congress passed a promotional authority. there is a concerned weather weather that had an impact on malaysia's upgrade. i hope it didn't, but i tell you

and we talk about before the report came out, i just hope we are using objective standards. there have been reports made there was high level discussions that disagreed with the staff level recommendations, i understand the decisions made at the high level as it should be. but how much politics would into this? i hope zero, the tip resort the tip report is the gold standard. chairman this is a very important hearing, which this committee needs to make sure the work we have done in this country, setting the the global example and our commitment against trafficking remains credible, and always improving. mr. chairman my staff was working with your staff, do we

need to strengthen the trafficking persons act? do we need to do things to have congressional direct oversight before you take a country off of tier 3? have we reached that point where we need to have a stronger law in this country? that's one of the questions that i hope will be addressed today so this country will continue to lead, and fighting modern-day slavery. >> senator i think most people have gone home i don't think were going to have a very full process here at the committee. i don't know if other committee members want to make opening comments, we don't typically do that but if it's okay with you i'd be glad for that to occur. >> i appreciate the opportunity of the issue in the interest i've had here and i want to start off by thanking you and the ranking member for supporting the call for hearings. all the concerns and

reservations that senator parton has expressed are mine and beyond, mr. chairman i would like to consent to enter some background documents to malaysia documents, one from the international ngo, one from united nations. >> objections the neck and their own words the trafficking persons report quote is the u.s. government's principal tool to engage foreign governments on human trafficking, we are here today because the integrity of this year's report has been called into question and that means our nation's commitment to our fundamental principles are called into question. secretary carey tells us quote justice is not just a matter of having the right laws on the books, we have to back those words with resources, strategies, and actions and actions to produce the right

response on quote and that is true here and that should be the aspiration of the countries in the report. sadly, i am convinced this year we have not met that standard. under your leadership mr. chairman, human trafficking was one of the very first issues we tackled. one of the first comprehensive pieces of legislation, it demonstrated it would be a priority priority to us and i salute you for that. other hearings in the house led by other senators led the top of our concerns. the same day legislation passed the senate 99 to zero the finance committee added my amendment the countries with the worst human traffickers were now tier 3. that is now law, signed by pres. obama's part obama's part of the trade authority. that can be no doubt the fight against modern-day slavery is a bipartisan commitment to put our principles in action.

several months ago we began to hear reports from sources close to this process that this year's tip report was under exceptional pressure to shape the rankings of political demands not the facts on the ground. i'm sorry to say the rankings in this year's report back up the hard facts of human trafficking and show the respected and authoritative sources about i asked that the rest of my statement be included in the record and i look for to the opportunity to ask questions. >> witnesses sarah the secretary of state for the civilian security and democracy and human right was sworn in on february 20, 2014. she serves currently in the

special coordinator for tibetan issues over the previous decade she taught at harvard kennedy school of government during the clinton administration she served as secretary of defense for peacekeeping and humanitarian assistant, i want to thank you for responding to the invitation today. i think everyone knows we tried to get the regionals and because we felt like much of the pressure came from regionals to carry out may be a different agenda, we are unable to do that but we thank you very much for coming in today and represented the administration's view on this. we thank you for your your service to our country and obviously there is a lot of passion around this issue because we have seen firsthand the effects of trafficking and slavery. we have seen young women who

could be coeds in our university system, we have seen them being sold into slavery and trafficked for, we have seen that. we have seen the effect on our families, we know what happens in bricktown's, we know what happened and drug manufacturing, these are human beings just like us and they are being depraved the freedoms. every sensibility that any human being cared about is threatened by this and the fact that this possibly, for other agenda items

our concern is being cast aside it obviously concerns us but we thank you for being here. we know know you are represented the administration and none of this should be is directed at you personally, as you can tell there is significant concerns. thank you we look for to your testimony. >> thank you chairman, and members of the committee, thank you for having me here today and thank you for your leadership on this issue. i know that trafficking in persons modern-day slavery is a significant concern for this committee and i look for to working with you closely to tackle this crime and human rights abuse. the release of this year's trafficking in persons report underscores the importance the importance that they have placed on combating modern slavery as noted by senator cardin this year marks the 15th

anniversary of the trafficking victims act. the report itself reflects one year of dedicated effort by the department of states office to monitor and combat the tips office, as as well as other bureaus and offices and our missions around the world. working year-round across offices incontinence the departments and gauges departments and civil societies, it collects date eta, it develops best practices and objectively obsesses each governments effort, including our own to comply with the minimum standards for the elimination established by the law. in this process we assess the process of laws in prohibiting trafficking, and we evaluate government actions to protect victims and prevent further trafficking. based on the assessment the tip

reports ranks countries in accordance outlined in the td pa. these two distinct require factual analysis and establishes criteria for the minimum standards for combating trafficking efforts here rankings for their efforts. let me walk through the four key elements of the standards. first three evolve around the adoption of adequate anti- traffic in law. this is seen as a hurdle for states because it establishes a comprehensive legal standard, to prosecute and penalize pratt perpetrators. the fourth element is whether or not a government has under taken serious steps to eliminate trafficking. the act includes additional

criteria, the ranking process builds on minimum standards but it also entails additional criteria pursuant to the td pa. eighteen or one country fully complies with the minimum standards, tier two indicates a government is not yet fully comply of minimum standards but is making significant efforts to bring itself into compliance. by contrast, a tear to watchlist country indicates the country is also making significant efforts to comply but in addition it meets one of these conditions. one the number of trafficking trafficking victims is high, to the government failed to provide

evidence from the previous year or three the government committed to make significant anti- trafficking efforts over the next year. a tier three ranking applies to a government that does not fully comply with the minimum standards and is not making significant efforts to make itself into compliance. the tier wrecking process further includes contextual factors such as the severity of the problem and the feasibility of progress even if available research resources and capacity. in some cases for the discussion among senior apartment officials is required to clarify information and assess the totality of government efforts pursuant to the td pa criteria. this ultimately leads to the tier ranking of each country and the approval of the report. it's helpful and important to underscore that the tier rankings do not assess the severity of a human trafficking

problem in a given country. the tier rankings assess the government's efforts in addressing human trafficking problems over the current reporting period compared to that governments own efforts in the prior year. determinations of the direction and quality of that progress in a given country are guided by the complex criteria outlined in the td pa itself and described on pages 45 to 50 on the tip report. the rigorous and comprehensive annual assessment process is what makes the tip report the gold standard in antitrafficking assessment. it is one of the most effective diplomatic tools our government has for encouraging a foreign government to improve. in the 2015 tip report 18 countries were upgraded and 18 were downgraded. in comparison 15 were upgraded

and 19 downgraded in the 2014 report. portugal and bahamas moved to tier one and others move from tier two law watchlist to tier one. the democratic republic on for countries that moved to the tier two watchlist this year the department evaluated the efforts those governments made during the reporting period as well as the commitments they made for the next year. we are already working with governments to encourage them, four months into this next year's reporting cycle to implement the recommendations outlined in this year's report and's report and the tip offices finalizing assistance strategies to help make those recommendations a reality. embassy personnel are having dialogues on how to better combat this crime and protects

citizens. the challenges are great even for a tier one countries like the united states, yet when i meet with trafficking survivors weather in uganda i am reminded of how crucial and how effective our work is by prioritizing this issue, the u.s. government has already changed the lives of millions across the globe. congress has put plato leading role in this effort. we can be very proud of u.s. efforts and encouraged by the progress today, we cannot rest until this modern slavery has ended and all of its victims are free to choose their own destiny. thank. thank you and i look for to your questions. >> thank you. i think it would be helpful for all of us for you to explain

your role and explain how that differs under the sec. political affairs, i think it would be good to set that contacts first and if you would may be elaborate a little on the friction that naturally occur between the political affairs component and your role in ensuring the integrity of a program like this. >> thank you for the question. the process we undergo within the department engages many voices throughout the department. as i noted, we work work year-round together to evaluate information that comes in and is processed through the tip office as well as through a variety of other departments through the bureau. working on the narrative for a hundred and 88 countries. the involvement of other officials would come to the

extent there are different perspectives presented to the secretary for his consideration and final decision-making on tier ranking. as with any reporting process, there are multiple views and the secretary takes them into account when making his final decision. beyond that the department doesn't talk about internal deliberations. >> by virtue of what you are saying, it's sort a different equities at stake. >> i think what's fair to say is this is a very complex process, with a number of different elements both in regards to the minimum standard and with regard to the separate criteria for the tier ranking, and that there are often gray areas and a need for further factual analysis and differences of opinions on how to apply the complex elements of the td pa itself.

as with any human rights process, any any state permit process there are multiple perspectives. >> at the end of the gay i guess going up the food chain if you will, that decision is going to be made. in other words someone above is going to decide which equities to stress more and ultimately someone at a much higher level will decide whether they believe someone should be ranked upwardly or downwardly, is that correct? >> the secretary of state is responsible for the trafficking in persons report and he is the one who makes decisions about tier rankings and i don't think there is anyone anyone who can question his commitment to the trafficking cause. it is something he carried with him as a prosecutor and certainly his strong and passion as secretary of state.

>> i think it is viewed he does care about it, i think the concern we have their other interests that tromped this. so let me move into that. i am a strong supporter of tpp, i want to see the final element, i am a little concerned about this last meeting and some of the things happening with intellectual property and other kinds of things, i think certainly establishing a good agreement is worthwhile. i think it would go without saying that many of us are concerned the upgrading of malaysia had more to do with trying to make sure tpp was innard into successfully then a care for people be in traffic.

i think that is sort of the reason we are having the reason this meeting right now along with cuba and a few other places where the administration's policy for those countries tromped any real regard for humans that are being traffic. we understand that obviously we've looked at the actual effective on people and i see very minimal, affect on human beings and malaysia i think again the reason we are here, let's face it, let's be outward about this many of us believe, to use a rhetorical phase, you sort sort of through the trafficking piece under the bus to ensure you are successful with tpp. i would like for you to do everything you can at this moment, you have an audience to

allay that concern and talk to us about the number of people that were actually positively affected by this new criteria in malaysia. >> thank you for sharing your views mr. chairman i think it's important to note the secretary himself spoke to the concern that you raised, yesterday in malaysia he conveyed he had zero conversations about tpp relevant to his decision related to the trafficking in persons reports and the tier rankings process. i hope that can satisfy your concerns. i am happy to talk about. >> all tell you what would satisfy my concerns, if, if you could just lay out that, does nothing to allay my concerns, if you would tangibly explain to us how young women, 16 years old

trafficked for, were positively affected by the government of malaysia's policy this year that cause them to go from tier three to tier 2. >> i'm happy to talk about the process by which we apply the law standards. >> no i don't want the standards, i want you to explain to me how people, real life people that have parents and brothers, and sisters are affected by the governments actual implementation and therefore cause them to move from tier three, to tier two which conveniently by the way causes the tpp process to work in a way that works very well. >> the tier two watchlist criteria pursuant to the td pa

law means the government does not fully comply with the minimum standards of the limitation of trafficking but that government is making significant efforts to do so. while malaysia tier two watch reflects the government's efforts and commitments to amend and and the trafficking laws the factory mains that they have major work to do on their antitrafficking efforts. we will continue to work with the malaysian government as the secretary said yesterday in malaysia to urge the government to make continued progress. in terms of of the application of the td pa law itself, and malaysia's upgrade is the malaysian's government efforts during the reporting period as well as its commitment to amend antitrafficking law in the year ahead, which was a course the number one recommendation from the 2014 tip report.

during the reporting period the government officials consulted with civil society and drafting amendments, the existing antitrafficking persons act to a draft malaysian slaw victim protection regime. a central concern of ours. the governors held cabinet meanings towards implementation of the law and committed itself to passage of the law. were encouraged by more recent progress on the amendments that occurred outside the 2014 reporting. but were consistent with the commitments the government made during the reporting period that have been made in moving the law forward. the parliament passed the amendments and they will enter into force in the near future. in addition to the progress the malaysian government authorities increase their antitrafficking efforts in each of the three key areas. they creased the investigations by more than 100%, they increase prosecutions by 67%.

on protection they experimented with a pilot program, very modest, very small, very small, but none the less a pilot program ended about one of our work concerns which is to lead. in the area of prevention, the authorities undertook campaigns to raise awareness, continue their efforts to publish informational brochures and train nearly 700 officials. having said all, these are the reasons that factored into the td pa criteria pursuant to the secretary's decision-making on the tier rankings. we still have enormous concerns about trafficking in malaysia and those concerns are detailed in the report itself. we hold no punches in terms of clarifying the extent of the problem, or the nature of the problem. we see this see this as the important work ahead to work with them malaysia government over the next year.

i can detail more concerns that they are fully documented in the report itself. >> i know that you have to be here today representing the department and i know you have to read the things that you just read, i would just say i don't think any person who i don't mean any person in malaysia that has loved ones who have been sold into slavery, i would be very comfortable by what you just said but i realize you have to do it you have to do and i don't want to make any personal attacks. if i could, i know you talked about percentages, the government convicted three traffickers for labor rate.

three, one for passport retention. a decrease from nine traffickers that it convicted in 2013 and you raised them from tier three to tier two based on those outcomes. let me say those one more time this is a country that has a massive trafficking, massive. i have met young ladies in the philippines that were trafficked to malaysia, sold into slavery, i hope they are not watching this. so the government convicted three traffickers first look for forced labor and one for

passport retention and our state department, for that record, less than what they did the year before, a country that is one of the worst in the world, and we raise them. i don't see the tangible outcome and i listen to all of your criteria but, i'm sorry, it just doesn't hit me in a place a place that causes me to believe there was integrity in this upgrade. i would like for you to respond and then i will move onto the next person. >> sure, i think whether it's nigh convictions were three convictions in the case of malaysia given the scale of the problem, it's an adequate. problem, it's inadequate. the report makes it very plain. that is not the basis on which the secretary would make a sole decision regarding the tier ranking. i've explained to you many of the elements that fit the criteria that are we are required to consider under the

law and look at the factual narrative and pursuant to presenting any information to the secretary's decision for tier ranking. as you well know, the the legislation itself is very complex, and assess to look at a huge variety of factors it asks us to weigh and balance a huge not all i'm going the same direction. the facts that contain in the narrative are something we should be very proud of and something we can continually use to try to achieve the very kinds of impacts on the grounds that you are talking about. secretary carey yesterday in malaysia raise the issue of prosecutions, offered to offered to have the fbi help malaysia and prove its invested to tory capacity, because it's our indus under strand understanding that it's

an area of concern. >> i will reserve my questions, my additional questions for later. i would just say that i would think he would raise them up after took him up on the offer of the fbi helping. i know your task is a tough job today and my heart goes out to you, senator cardin. >> the trafficking victims protection act is met for the ratings to be done based solely on the circumstances on the ground and meeting the criteria of the statute. as you point out we evaluate all countries including the united states. it's not meant to have any

considerations of political factors and other bilateral issues between countries. i know secretary carey has reported that was true in this case, the perception here is to the contrary and it may require us to look at changes in the statute to preserve the integrity of this report and i'm going to ask you to provide, to the the senator ways that we can strengthen the law to make sure that those closest to the ground, and understand what's going on you, using international standards have the most say about how the rankings are done. get to malaysia and i can get

other countries. what concerns me about malaysia, maybe you can give me other examples where this has happened, in 2014 we downgraded malaysia's standing from tier to watch to tier three. we were pretty specific as to what we wanted them to do in order to get off of that list, you point out the number one recommendation was to amend the anti- trafficking laws, and that's what it is. the the number one statement in the report. have we ever taken a country off tier three watchlist because they have pending but not enacted the changes, are there other examples you can show us that after one year of being on tier three we said they have made serious and sustained efforts and significant efforts, by proposing a law, not enacting

it, and not having any experience as to how well that law in fact has been implemented. which was our number one recommendation. seems to me taking them off the tier three takes the pressure off and therefore, what guarantees do we have that they in fact will follow up with the law that we intended. let me also mentioned a couple of of other factors in the 2014 report, we had prosecutor convict traffickers, that was based upon nine convictions, inadequate they went from tier to watch to tier three because they didn't convict.

you may have lost, you may have prosecutions but if you can't convict and hold people accountable they walked, they know they can commit the crime. that's unacceptable, in our 2014 report on acceptable. in 2015 they go from nine, to three. where is that serious and sustained, and significant progress? you then list in your report to justify this they said the government adopted a policy to allow the number of victims to work with outside companies, because one of the recommendations in 2014 was to work with the victims. my understanding is that it had four people participating in it. i don't even know why you listed it? it seems like you're trying to justify a result that is not there. what am i not seeing?

>> let me have a couple of responses to that. first of all as you all know the report itself judges not the situation of trafficking or the severity of a problem per se, the report itself judges the governments effort. it judges that effort in a dynamic way it judges the governments effort compared to the last reporting period the annual process of all of the different elements that come into play and evaluating most of a country's efforts in regard to the minimum standards articulated in the reports and and placement of a country on a watchlist. now in the case of malaysia, as i said, the report itself makes

the very points you made. it talks about the limited number of prosecutions and how that is a weakness. >> they are on tier three because of that, that is one of the reasons, they can get rewarded from tier 322 tier to watch from going from nine convictions to three. >> one of the things i have learned in working with the trafficking of persons office is how they specifically require the administration to look at a huge number of factors. >> and so you can always justify. >> they follow the law by upholding the exactly the provisions of the report and looking at all of these different pieces of information. they are in turn all reflected in the report. i think you'll see virtually in

any country we evaluate to include our own country, criticism, shortfalls. so the ranking process needs to be understood as one that evaluates the government, compared to its actions before and it will be reevaluated in a years time. there there are so many different elements that come into play that we include in the report both the criticism of prosecutions but we also included the re- port pursuant to the tdp a where the government has made progress in other areas. all of those go into the value and the narrative process it is that fact-based narrative process that in turn informs the secretary's decision on the tier rankings. >> i just want to call your attention to your own report of

2014. the recommendation is not very long it may ten recommendations for change, i don't see progress in any one of the ten in the 2015 report other than the recommend dated changes of the law that have not been passed yet. i look at each one of these and i look at the narrative here trying to compare where progress has been made, i don't see it. if the reports made anything, if recommendations mean anything but it seems to me they have to be, for going to upgrade their tier status, it status, it has to be based on concrete progress made on recommendations of the previous report. >> so let me ask linda recommendations them. the recommendations for a given country do not reflect the steps that need to be taken in order to jump to the next tier.

that's not the purpose of the next of the recommendation. our recommendation of each country asked them to stretch toward the minimum standard and asked them to stretch in ways that would take them far beyond the next tier ranking. we ask for more. so the recommendations are not linked to the next tier rankings, the recommendations are all of the different changes we would like to see, to, to be able to fulfilling the minimum standards. >> so that's what i would expect but to upgrade a rating, a tear, you would expect there would've been progress made and in this case going from three to two you have to have serious and sustained efforts, that the standard in the statute, so you have to have that. so your recommendations for them to meet the minimum standards are spelled out in the 2014 report where were there rated tier three. i'm going through those

recommendations for actions, then looking at your justifications for the 2015 report and don't see a linkage between serious and sustained, sit progress to reaching the recommendations that we put out here to justify an upgrade. >> there very few relative to the number of countries in the world that meet the minimum standard. i think that is perhaps part of the confusion. so minimum standards are something we aspired all 188 countries move toward. even the countries who meet the minimum standards the report still requires that we ask the countries to do better and we measure them by their own progress there. in the case you're raising specifically of malaysia, i've articulated several of the different elements of change the government made over the course of the year pursuant to the td pa criteria that have a bearing on tier ranking placements. those include the actions and

commitments what was a key concern of ours over recent years with malaysia pertaining to both the law and treatment of the victims and also included concrete actions in some areas such as prosecution, investigations and prosecutions but as you pointed out not convictions but there were positive efforts in that rig card. it is a complex equations with many different factors, i think what's really important is in all old cases, we are asking countries to do more. even in cases where countries meet minimum standards, but as i said those countries meeting the minimum priorities those countries are a minimum.

>> so if i asked you to give me examples of a country that was rated as a tear to country going down to a tier three country in the following year going from tier three back to tier 2, that got that based upon promises not action. because that's because that's what i think you're saying. promises not action. i'll make this last point, i would appreciate that information where you have seen that quick of a turnaround from tier three to tier two on promises, and i can tell you this, once the spotlight goes down and it does, once it's it's issued they know they have another year. the chances of getting the type of actions is just not there anymore based upon the tip ranking, that's a lot of pressure, believe me i can't tell you, the representatives talk about it and complain about it and i say look over the report and this is what you can do these are the minimum standards, this is how you can do better, we can all do better. the purpose of the reports is for all of us to do better because we believe trafficking is around us but in this

situation when you can get an upgrade on the cheap, and that's what it looks like by making a promise without action it diminishes the strength we have of this report. if there are other examples, please show me, show me where you have gone from such a quick turnaround based upon promises not actions. that appears to be what you have in malaysia today in the way you did this report. >> senator menendez. >> mdm. sec. year here in february before the committee, at the time i said to you now the trafficking in persons report we have all recognized as a significant tool in our efforts here and the chairman refer to the fact that we have no ambassador at large in that role. so i assume your answer to him is that you are personally going

to protect the integrity of the tip report overall and especially with regard to particular countries that may be subject to intense political pressure within the building, and your answer to me was yes. now before you answer my questions i want you to think about the following, i want you to think if there was an inspector general's investigation, or some other investigation, would your answers hold up in e-mails, memos, letters, any and all communications? so with that in mind which mr. chairman, i would urge urge the committee to seek all the documentation that was created in the context of devising this year's report because in the answers to you in the ranking

member, i surely am not satisfied. >> if i could, i think based on this presentation if that is not forthcoming immediately, my sense is the committee would take a very unusual step of subpoena that information. this is possibly the most heartless lacking of substance presentation i have ever seen about a serious topic. i don't see how anybody could believe that there is integrity in this process, i feel for our witness, i know she had to come

up and do what she does. this may be the worst day she is ever had in her service to have to say the things she is reading to us right now, but i would join in with others, if that information is not commie to subpoena that information because i think it should be done.

>> >> to provide additional support to victims but it is maya understanding that the malaysian cabinet did not introduce these amendments until april 3rd and these are not approved by the malaysian parliament until june? >> correct. i will refer you to the fact

to look at the watch list of the tier countries that includes the determination that a country is making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance. >> offering amendments before there ever passed in introduced for become part of all law even before implementation. is that significant? >> there are a variety of ways that malaysia made progress over the course over the last calendar year. >> i have heard that answer. but to date with refugees but the 2013 to report says malaysia's handling of the refugee crisis will only be

reflected in the 2016 report saudi reflect things that happened after the period that are positive but he will not reflect those that our negative after the reporting period? it seems to me you cannot have that both ways. >> el lot that i was referring to specifically states that country is making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance based on a first to take future steps is in the tier ii watch list criteria pursuant to the lot. it is a lot. looking at commitments. they're not necessarily solely for a decision related to the of ranking but there is a number of different elements of progress made pursuant to preparing for the law but also in other areas that

will factor into whatever decision the secretary makes it. >> be a river is partially based on actions that have not been implemented, not even passed, outside of the reporting period, but you didn't take into account the mass graves found dead may clearly those reflected many months of trafficking activity before their discovery. i don't get it. >> we are very concerned about trafficking. >> it is not your concern i am worried about it is your actions. not your concern. by presiding over your hearing is chairman of the committee i believe you were concerned. now i am concerned about your actions. but since you said you would be responsible, i have to pursue.

it has been answered here that there were nine convictions for trafficking in 2014. three in 2015. that is two-thirds decrease in convictions malaysia had over the reporting period. but the tip report mentions a pilot program that the victims to work after the holding facilities and the answer is there were four who participated. so you were telling as the upgrade was based on preliminary action, legal reform that took place after the reporting period on increase investigations and resulted in fewer convictions and a pilot program that granted a total of four victims some refuge? >> will share the secretary's comments on malaysia. he signed off on the tier

shrinking relative to malaysia read because of his belief that malaysia had taken the right steps to change. that includes a variety of factors that i have enumerated. there are other elements that are concerning that we both have been enumerated. the secretary said the rankings indicate the tier ii watch list the enormous room for approval not a gold seal of approval but to move in the right direction. >> i appreciate that the malaysian got what they wanted they got into tier ii that just happens to allow them to continue dpp negotiations of preferential access into the united states market assuming that they actually conclude to successfully be a part under dpp and under tier iii they would not have qualified. they could have been negotiated but did not qualify for preferential action.

here is what the groups on the ground tallis what is actually happening in malaysia. july 22nd press release'' match any upgrade at this juncture would be a hollow victory without substance and untold number of individuals bear silent testimony that malaysia has yet to earn any upgrades. the un special trafficking of persons to refer to the same time period covered by the 2015 tip report says the rate of prosecution of trafficking cases also remains very low. which perpetuates the impunity of traffickers to obstruct victims access to justice. from the alliance slavery and trafficking said recent press report suggests the state department is that secretary kerry take the on principled stand.

that the government of malaysia is making significant efforts is simply not sustainable. there is a whole host and i could go on one of those that have a different view. i have questions about cuba i hope there will be a second round. >> i have no objection to continuing but i do want to move to india i think everyone in the audience pretty well understands why malaysia was upgraded. i'm not sure i understand what the competing equities were on india. i think we have established what happened with malaysia for cry think there will be further investigations that will occur but i do hope we get to india is hard to understand how we could

possibly be that tier ii entity and i hope the secretary will explain what those competing equities were there but if you want to go on with cuba go ahead. >> madam secretary secretary kerry an ounce to have the primary supervisor responsibility. according to the reuters article published monday the tipoff disagreed with the bureau of 17 rankings and was overruled on 14 of the 17 with the worst ratio in the 15 year history of the tip report. is that accurate? >> we cannot comment on the internal deliberations senator. but i can tell you that the reporting that was done by the office m the team was thorough and fact based. >> so you are not saying it is accurate and not accurate so to the ranking member who last about possible reforms

reforms, it seems confidentially should be transmitted to congress to understand the deliberations that took place so if there waiter's article is true, now a 17 disputes that the office said these countries should not be elevated but they lost 14 times which is the worst ratio, that is something congress should know. did the tip office relend they stay on tier iii? to read the department does not comment on internal deliberations. >> let me ask you this. when did you begin to ring gauge with cuba since we did not formally establish relations until after march 31st of the end of the reporting period? >> let me get that information for you.

keelless sent to experts to participate in the leadership program june 2015. this is the first time any government of cuba officials participated in the program and to see the u.s. perspectives to observe how we fight trafficking. >> that was the informative process. >> over the course of the last two years the department has begun sharing information with cuba asking cuba for information regarding the anti-tip efforts but the significant of the engagement cannot be overstated that previously we had no information from cuba at all on the trafficking situation now we receive information from the government that has enabled us. >> providing of information is sufficient?

>> yes. >> did the white house communicate with the state department officials to urge a specific outcome on any of these rankings? >> not to my knowledge. >> e-mail will show this? >> to my knowledge that is correct. >> i have serious concerns about politics moving up to the tier iii. the report recognizes there has been no progress on issues of forced labor and we all know the castro regime is composite in near the of all cases. last year the cuban government constructed thousands of doctors to participate in foreign medical missions including combating ebola in africa ended grabs over 70 percent of the wages paid by the world health organization to participants there are more troubling considerations that did not make the 20 -

- 2015 tip report. reported that cuban doctors were forced to listen keeping government and not their families as beneficiaries to provided it to life insurance policies. and it states that cuba is a source country for adults and children subjected to sex trafficking and all information on the scope of this is limited but there are independent reports which indicate many prostituted children are second or third generation and in some cases as young as four years old. when a country where there is virtually no reporting data on human trafficking or the willingness to allow international human rights organizations to conduct investigations, how does the state department measure progress? how can you help us to understand how the administration quantifies any advantages given the

restrictions presented by cuba today? >> thanks for the question. you are absolutely right three remain concerned of labor trafficking in cuba and the report makes that clear. what is significant is the question of sex trafficking. the condition has been significant in the context of cuba's history and the region and a provision of services to victims that is extremely positive that we have seen on behalf of the cuban government. additionally they have made efforts to increase awareness with regard to sex trafficking to provide training to officials to recognize its and assistance u.s. federal prosecutors. >> given the fact the castro regime takes 70 percent of the wagers paid to doctors and they were forced to sign life-insurance policies to the government and in many

cases passports are taken away when they're sent abroad is the state compartment consults about the world health organization? >> i will have to check on that. >> back to meet formally for the committee. i will simply close by saying, i took to heart what secretary carey said when he released the report. we have to be true to the prince olav many baby use for many things we must never ever allow a price tag to be attached to the heart and soul of a fellow human being and i don't know that we did not perverts that lofty goal by a report that clearly seems to me has been politicized in a way that is not justifiable and cannot be justified. cabellas forward to being

gauged on this issue. >> i deeply appreciate your sincerity on this issue and your long held concerned to be a champion for human-rights. i just want to say to the secretary, i am putting you on notice. that any destruction of the mails, phone records or letters from 11:19 a.m. on could have significant consequences. we will discuss how we go forward to a understand where really has occurred. it is an understatement to say this testimony does not cause us to have a lot of faith with what is occurring. but the administration is not serious about carrying

out issues of this type type, certainly with other issues before us, certainly creates concerns. let me go to india. we all understand what happened with malaysia. talk to me a little bit about india. if you can. it is amazing. the government seizes the passports of trafficking victims and their families that were issued those unreserved for trafficking victims by the united states in other words, research trying to get to the victims here to safety. and we understand the government of india sees to their passports.

they denied international travel to others. can you tell made the other equity is that we fully understand malaysia that would have caused the department to not pursue india? >> indiana tier ii ranking indicates it does not fully comply with minimum standards but it is making efforts to do so and the significance is with shelter and rehabilitation services as well as training of prosecutors and judges and launching upon the order of the supreme court to trace the whereabouts of lost and

abandoned children. we remain concerned about the issue of the pieces. -- in july 2014 the government of india began to confiscate the passports of those who had received the visa provided by u.s. government to family members of victims. the indian high court has ruled in favor of the petitioners to have them confiscated as the policy as their violations of their rights under the constitution and they have not appealed the case but the disposition is affected by the policy that is pending at the close of the reporting period but it is a concern that we do repeatedly raised with the

indian government. >> by asking more questions i think it is clear until we get into the internal documents we will never know what truly is that he and. i gave a speech on the floor i don't do anything that matters most of the time speech why is. i went down, there is a lot of discussion right now about the presidential race and the anchor the american people have at the u.s. government and some of the anomaly is taking place as people make comments about certain candidates and why they're getting tractions double sides of the aisle. at the time when we passed the highway bill, in essence we engaged in generational tough to take 10 years of spending and three years of payout to create these

gimmicks because let's face it congress doesn't have the courage to deal with the issue, i said this is exhibit a why americans are so upset with government. i have to say anybody watching this this is exhibit a + why americans should be upset with government. this is a reflection on us. what we're hearing today is a reflection on us. i am very disappointed in the testimony. i know what to take it out on the person who is forced to read the comments that were put together by bureaucrats at the state department but i hope we will take action. obviously this is not something that reflects the great nation that we are i don't think anyone listening

could think america is really serious at least at the state department level regarding trafficking. we have a person that is nominated that i do think cares deeply about this issue and potentially could bring about some balance but the political side or the expedia thing is for our country especially involving money, money, that one out in the process over the human side. but i am disappointed and i do hope, i will not say any more but i do think we can all see that we have created something that is not working properly. this process has been extremely inappropriate

especially this year in other forward to working with you and others on this committee to figure out a way to rectify something that has gone amok and to pull back some balance so we can ensure that human beings lives can come into some kind of balance relative to other equities that our government has. thank to the witness for the willingness to come here but i will not ask any more questions because i will get bureaucratic answers that don't get to the essence of what the problem is. >> mr. chairman? the it tip report is a very valuable report their rankings have incredible significance not just here in the spotlight to shame nations to do better and

that is an important factor because it is not what you want to be on a watch list or tier iii but also has financial implications on our federal partnerships and ramifications on private companies with their participation economically and other countries so it is a very important to wall. countries hire lobbyists to try to influence this country and things such as of tip report that is one of the reasons why i am particularly concerned about the 2015 report. so to underscore the point, politics whether they played a role or not in the determination, the perception is that it did.

and it will be much more open season by countries to influence the rankings through the political process. that is not good. if the raiders report is accurate, i don't know if it is and i will not provide further but if the keepers were overruled their record number of times for those that our more politically and engaged them that also undermines the confidence this report will be done in the future based upon the objective standards in the statute which has ben why this report has been so valuable. so i come back to the point that i really do believe we need to visit the statute and i am afraid to take away some of the discretion at the higher level at the state department to make

sure there is a more objective analysis on how these reports are done. or at least putting more transparency all that interaction so we have a more accountable system for how the decisions are made. i regret that. i am not yet prepared to reach a conclusion other than there is a perception out there with the objective of a that played a role in these determinations and that is not healthy for the future of this report and my interest is to for checked the integrity of the trafficking report u.s. leadership globally as one of the great horrors of the current time and anything we can do to combat trafficking , we need to be aggressive in that area.

>> senator? >> thank you very much for allowing us to have this bin you and i do realize that's once he furnish all the emails and phone conversations and letters we may reach a conclusion the process was full of integrity. but that is not my thinking today but certainly i will wait to all of that information to come to us for quite agree with the ranking member per order know exactly what actions we need to take and no real will be done in a manner that is bipartisan in nature that only seeks to have integrity with this program but certainly this meeting raises major concerns if this is something that has run amok.

and sometimes when companies and countries realize they can affect the process to benefit them financially, it occurs. not just in congress but face it in the department so we a need to make sure you understand this fully to get all information voluntarily will be forthcoming and i will follow-up with the secretary on this is in one form or another. i guess the record will remain open until monday afternoon for people to ask questions and with that, would you like to say anything else? >> i think americans can be very proud of the reported has made a difference for millions around the globe and will continue in the

future as an american i am pleased to be a part of ted and i am proud we made this issue elevated on the global agenda to make a difference in so many lives. >> the meeting is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

. . and now joining us is kevin -- and the cleaner of the term internet of faith and is also the author of this bok