something that kathleen said that i think most people in this room realize. i know you do, cokie. but 99.9% of the people that came to work at the federal government today came to do work for the american people. so somebody who gets a social security check today, somebody who gets a veteran's check today, somebody who took care of a problem for a congressman and the congressman took the credit deserves the credit for that. and there are so many good people that work in these agencies that we represent. we get a lot of the headlines and a lot of the credit. they deserve the credit. they'll never get the headlines. and every day that i can i praise people that work at d.o.t. and in the government. what we probably need, cokie, is more of the boggs-type families

in congress. i think most of you know that cokie comes from one of the most outstanding public service families maybe ever to serve in congress. her father and mother both served in the house and served with distinction. and in those days they came like many, like the people that i worked for as a congressional staffer, bob michael, tom railsbeck, came to actually do something. unfortunately, what we have in at least one house of the congress is people who came to do nothing. and that's basically what they've been doing for the last year and a half. and that's the reason that it's so difficult to get a transportation bill passed. when i was in congress, i served on the transportation committee for six years and we passed two five-year bills and they passed with over 400 votes in the house and over 80 votes in the senate. the senate has taken a different approach. they've taken the bipartisan approach and passed a bill with

74 votes. they've taken a page out of the history books when your parents served, when my former bosses served, about people who came here to solve problems and get things done. i saw two senators on a morning show, one democrat and one republican this morning, talking about how they're working in a bipartisan way on education and trying to reform education and trying to promote ways for kids to learn. some of it goes on, but a lot of it doesn't. and it's because we have people who were elected to these jobs to stop things from happening, stop good things from happening, prevent opportunities to solve problems. >> i'd like to point out that secretary lahood is the republican member of the cabinet. but it also is -- members of

congress have run against congress forever. i want to go serve in the body that i hate. it's always been mysterious to me. but -- >> you know what, cokie? i agree with you. when i ran in '94, i ran as a republican. and the people that were elected in my class ran against the institution. i have never trashed the institution of congress and i've never trashed federal employees because i know what good congress can do when they put their mind to it. >> but that's where i was headed. now what you have is in addition to running against congress it's running against all of government. >> right. >> and i mean, what does that do in terms of your -- you all doing your jobs? >> but we see that also unfortunately not only in congress but on the state level. so you have people who have sought public office to really dismantle government. anything involved with government has to be bad. so whether it's cutting off education funding or health

problems or immunization programs, things that again typically we're seeing as public good, public service, coming together to dot things we can't do one at a time, that attitude unfortunately has changed among some of the people who now are servinging in office and see that any progress made on anything by government is inherently wrong and they spend a lot of time and energy trying to convince folks that that direction is misguided. and i think it puts up so many barriers. there are things people can't do by themselves. i mean, they can't build roads by themselves. they don't put airports together by themselves. they don't run, you know, major health systems. you can't respond to a natural disaster by yourself. so government services are

critical. they are important life-saving research. pick an area. our food safety system. so having the resources to do that is essential to protecting the american public. >> i want to go to your questions, and we will do that right now. but secretary napolitano, will you speak to that question of how does this atmosphere affect your ability to do your job? >> well, there's a couple of things. the department of homeland security, the newest department of the federal government, was previously 22 agencies cobbled together under one roof. we have been putting together a department -- >> i was amazed that your roof wasn't in west virginia. >> i know. no comment about that. anyw anyway, but when congress created us they didn't also reform their committee structure to match the department. so we have over 100 committees

and subcommittees that somehow exercise jurisdiction -- we love them all, by the way. they're great. you know, the difference between working with congress and trying to defend yourself and your ability to do your job is -- we're right in that space right now in the federal government. we have 230,000-plus employees. and as ray said, they come to work because they believe in the mission, they want to work for the public good, they're dedicated employees, and yet the hearing structure is really designed to point out flaws as opposed to what has been accomplished and what is on the table to move forward. so one of our tasks as leaders in this kind of an atmosphere is to keep pumping up our people and tell them they're doing a good job, they're providing essential services. health, transportation, safety,

security, disaster response. the facilities and technology to enable us to do our job. these are all missions that going to and ultimately to help the american people. but the hearing structure itself right now is not designed to bring that out. >> it's a kind of gotcha. >> very much so. >> okay. questions from you all. this is really your meeting. anybody have a question? here we go. why don't you identify yourself, please? >> i'm tim mack with politico. this is for secretary napolitano. i wanted to press you a little more on details from the alleged plot that was revealed yesterday, if you have any more details that you can provide in particular whether the would-be bomber is still alive and whether or not body scanners would have picked up the explosive that would have been used in the plot. >> well, i'm not going to release more plots -- more

information about the plot than we have already released. for a variety of reasons. but i will say that -- at tsa and have been doing are designed to minimize the risk that any such person could get on a plane successfully. we're obviously analyzing -- but i think all things considered,er, in high likelihood it would have been detected he had boarded the flight in the united states. >> thank you. >> go ahead. >> hi. i'm laurel mcfarland -- >> can you talk a little closer to the mike? >> is this working? all right. hi. i'm laurel mcfarland. i'm executive director of naspa, the 280 graduate schools of public policy across the country. i'd just like to hear you address the next generation coming into public service, given how difficult it is at

this time, what you're doing in your agency to appeal to bring the next generation in. we have some new programs, the pathways programs, coming online very shortly here to create special opportunities. i'd just like to hear you speak to what it's going to take to bring the next generation of talent into the federal service. >> i think -- i appreciate the question. because i think it is incredibly important that we figure out ways that we continue to revitalize the entire core of the public service. i think the biggest challenge that new folks are going to find trying to come into the public service is the budget environment, is making it hard for agencies to be able to afford to hire new people. that having been said, i haven't seen any diminution of the interest of young people in making contributions to public service. i've actually seen that increase. so while this partisanship may make it harder for to us get things done, the desire for things to be done, the desire to

serve the government i see just continuing to increase. so that's our challenge-s really to find ways to strike the right balance between the resources we have and the interest and demand that people are showing to join and serve. >> we actually formed a higher education kind of engagement group, and it's chaired by the president of the university of maryland to say how do we outreach into the various universities across the country? find the new talent, recruit them. and then once we recruit them, give them a career path that makes sense. and you bring them in. internships. fellowships. all kinds of experiences. trying to then move people around our department so they see different things. but our chief challenge is, you know, finding the people that want to work in the security area, getting them in and training. >> i think in addition to the kinds of things janet's talking about to get folks into agencies, we are trying to

recruit young healthcare providers to serve in public capacities. so we've tripled the number, for instance, of health service corps members way kind of peace corps for members to say if you serve in an underserved area we'll help pay off tuition or give you a loan. we're recruiting new scientists to try and look at that pipeline. i think one of the very alarming things, and ned holland, our great assistant secretary for administration is here and reminds me about this every day-sday, is a snapshot of the federal workforce and how many people are really nearing or about it near retirement age, how we make sure there's not only a pipeline of new talent but that kind of trajectory so people can see themselves staying for a long period of time, gaining new skills, that kind of pathway up the ladder because i think we need to take sort of succession

planning very seriously and recruit that talent. >> but you know, one aspect of that is when you talk about graduate schools you're talking about women. 2/3 of graduate school graduates are female. more than half of undergraduate. so then you get to a workplace environment where, you know -- how comfortable is it for a woman throughout her life where she is likely to be spending a good bit of her time care-taking in one capacity or another, either as a mother or daughter or sister, whatever? how do you make the federal government a place that a woman can see herself in without having to abandon the care-taking roles that she feels are necessary? >> let me just tell you a few things that we've done. number one, once we put our people in place to run our different mode administrations, we tasked them with finding one

younger career person and mentoring them so that there can be a follow-on. early on we gave opportunities for internships at spellman college. we went there. we announced it. we announced 15 internships for young women to actually work in transportation. we signed an agreement with an organization called the women's transportation association. >> who knew? >> to -- they did. and they're very happy about it. and they've sent us and really helped us recruit women to be involved in transportation careers. look, we agree with you on this. we need many more women involved in what we do, and we're making a real effort to recruit women, recruit young women.

obviously, the stem program is one that has really i think -- >> science, technology, engineering, and math. >> exactly. but really, again, focused on women. and it'll take a little time, but i think the effort's worthwhile. >> related to that -- oh, i'm sorry. i was just going to say that gsa is pushing very hard ideas around telework, around flex work, bringing technology that allows you to take that work wherever you are to kind of create the flexibility that you can strike that right balance between home, life, and work. so that i think is what will expand the opportunities for everyone. >> absolutely. and i think having workplaces that recognize -- first of all, women are often caregivers, but so are men. i mean, that workers want to be good parents and good workers. so whether it's telework opportunities, flex time, job sharing, looking at work

schedules, which can be flexible around, a child's hours, both fathers and mothers, just figuring out strategies that recognize that you shouldn't have to choose and the more -- i think that's one of the things that actually government can offer sometimes ahead of the private sector. we may not have the kinds of salary competitiveness with the private market, but hopefully we can be a more family-friendly environment. and we have things like, you know, a lot of our employees have the opportunity for a proximate daycare in the adjacent building and they can literally drop off their kids and go see them at lunchtime and participate. those kind of strategies i think can make it a whole lot better to come to work, do your job, but also feel confident that you're taking care of your family. >> thank you. >> i'm don hagerly. i'm the director for information security policy, security

architecture, and focused operations at the department of homeland security. as a disabled veteran, one of many whose proven their heart for service by passing on higher-paying jobs in the private sector to work for the government, i'd like to note -- any of you to address -- exploit this proven resource. >> i'll start with that one. we have a very focused effort to recruit veterans. of our 230,000 employees, we have 50,000 veterans. we work with all the veterans groups. we go to the job fairs. we have special website postings for veterans. for the kind of work we do in many of our components veterans are ideally suited. they've already had training. they've already shown their dedication to protecting the american public. so it's a great resource for dhs. and we're doing everything we can to reach into the veterans

community. we have veterans now returning from iraq and afghanistan. we want to give them opportunities as well. so it's a big issue for us. >> is there still veterans' preference in civil service exams? >> yeah. >> anybody -- next question? >> hello griff jenkins from fox news channel, the greta van susteren show. my question is for mr. tangherlini. now that time has passed since the whaeshlgs have you learned in hindsight about how it happened, and how going forward do you plan to find real savings to earn back the public's trust? >> i appreciate the question. i think in the couple weeks since the hearings, in talking to the gsa employees, and i've been doing a series of virtual town halls.

i haven't been traveling. i've been using technology to go visit the agents. and in that way also modeling, frankly, for the employees that there are other ways that we can actually make those connections and relationship. what i've learned is there is as much anger, disappointment, and frustration with the gsa employees as there is in the american public and the congress over what took place. it really doesn't represent the values and the beliefs and the commitment of those employees to delivering services. and what's happened then is we've been able to spark a conversation. among employees with their supervisors, with our inspector general about great ideas, how we can save even more money for the american taxpayer. and that's really our challenge now, is to take those great ideas, convert them into action, and deliver great services to my agency partners here, who frankly need it now more than ever. >> just to follow up, you mentioned in the beginning the government savings agency, i think you said. is there one specific example that you're already looking at now that you can kind of get to

work and not deal with everybody in the media that you're like this is what we're going to do and we're going to save money with this -- >> he's already not on airplanes. >> so right now our three top priorities are budget, budget, budget. and it's really helping solve the budget problems of our agency partners. but we're looking at things about how the government travels. how we make our travel reservations. we're looking at talking to the agencies about the ones that don't have their fleet managed in a cohesive unified way. we're trying to find ways that we can provide strategic sourcing, that's procuring as one government, using the power and the size of the government to get the best possible price, and then doubling down on things like sustainability so that we can build buildings that actually reduce the cost of operations. that's the kind of work we found. there's a bunch of momentum that had already developed around it. the question is how do we just continue that momentum and,

frankly, speed it up? >> thank you very much. and i know, mr. tangherlini, you've taken a lot of heat. would either of the other secretaries like to weigh in on him and the job secretaries look to wade in -- >> when we got here this morning, we all said, we feel his pain. you know, but i think that, the important point is, we all have been engaged in ways of finding savings. we have been in budget, fiscal mode, since the administration started. and, so -- unfortunately, what happened, with the gsa because it is such a great media story, what its not, is how we saved money in other agencies and other ways. what other agencies have done, conferences, which, by the way way if you are running federal agency. you do have to get together. so that part of the equation. >> secretary, you talked how

angry people were at gsa about this, i expect you are seeing the same thing with the secret service? >> yeah, in fact, you know, really one of those things where the issue was the president's safety at risk, no. what can we do -- for the immediate disciplinary status, let's move quickly, we did. now, let's look at what happened. how it happened to make sure it doesn't happen again. but i will tell you the people who are most upset are the other secret service agents. >> another question? >> jason ryan with abc news. i am not going to ask about the secret service. i had a question for the secretary, regarding aqap bomb plot. wonder what measures, the tsa and federal marshals will be

taking in response to this. also in the department's communications with the public, yesterday, your spokesman said that, we have no specific credible information regarding an act or terrorist plot against the united states at this time. and also, comments by, by white house counterterrorism adviser john brennan when clearly there was a device that has been deemed to be a viable ied that was intercepted by the cia. how the administration can make these -- these assertions that there is no credible plot. >> no specific credible plot tied to the anniversary of bin laden's death. so, that was, and is an accurate statement. and was accurate when made. the key point its that we will be taking all appropriate measures now that the plot has become public to make sure aviation and traveling public remain safe. we will be working with

airlines. we will be working with foreign nations. remember, the tsa doesn't do passenger screening in foreign airports. they do that. so, there will be -- and are all appropriate measures being taken. >> sound like it was a parsed statement. >> it was. and it was for a good reason. it was because we needed to protect and are protecting how the plot was unveiled. excuse me. >> anybody else? >> good morning. my name is antoine it -- antoineete, i am not a reporter, i am executive director of the aspa, hopefully all of you are aware of aspa. one thing our society is interested in is, the whole area of intergovernmental cooperation and intergovernmental relations.

we feel particularly with the last challenges, in the last s recession, cooperation between the federal government and state and local government in solving some of the recent problems we have had, really had some positive outcomes. i am interested in hearing, do you think we need to take a new strategic look at cooperation between public servants, institutions of government, levels of government and emphasize more the importance of intergovernmental relations and cooperation in solving some of the seriousproblems that we have today. >> when it comes to transportation, the only reason we are automobile ble to do wha, have great partners in governors, mayors, people in the states. in two years we spent $48 billion we received from the economic stimulus, we created 65,000 jobs, 15,000 projects. we did it in two years. there have been -- very, very minimal negative stories

written. there were no earmarks. no boon dboondoggles. great partners, governors, mayors, dots, at dot there is tremendous intergulf mentovernm cooperation. professional, no politics. all done for the right reasons. to put people to work. and to fix up america's infrastructure. implementing high speed rail in three years we have been able to allocate $10 billion and almost s all of that money is because we have had great partnerships with governors. and it's just -- it's extraordinary the kind of intergovernmental cooperation that goes on at the department. >> i would say that's -- true, probably in lots of departments. there are two things going on. some of which i think is fairly

unique. having served as a governor. and now having -- watching the relationships that we have with governors and, and mayors, as ray said, one is departments working together across -- federal agencies, to solve problems. so, the secretary of education, and i, are working on early childhood education and what the people who tell me in that space has never happened before. so the head start people are actually at the table with, with early education folks at the schools with the child care people saying -- all kids should be in a safe, secure surrounding. we need emotional-social health and kcurriculum. we need to talk about this together. parents need information. that really doesn't happen. but the health care bill for instance is -- really a state strategy. run at the state level. put together. and is being developed. as a former governor, used to -- a lot of big sticks. a lot of mandates.

and no money. i think there has been a lot of effort, whether during the recovery act, all of us, ran programs. i mean that -- the reporters in the room, who want to talk about public service, looking at the two years of programs that were run at the federal level to really put incredible safety nets, new infrastructure, countercyclical plans in place. really no scandals, no boon doggles. billions that provided life savers to people in place as cross this country and had to be intricately involved not only with mayors and governors but a lot of times with community agencies running weatherization programs. i think that effort was very much under way. and still a lot of the part of the operation. as masters in public administration, a great background for public service. >> would you expand on what the

secretary said on, about, interagency cooperation. because some times that has been the biggest barrier to, efficiency, and savings. >> just going back one more stop and talking about intergovernmental relations. i think this panel is an example of the power of intergovernmental relations. we all took some tour of duty through state or local government. i think state, local governments have so much to offer the federal government in terms of dealing with -- fiscal constraint. dealing with managing limited resources. that's frankly one of the things they offer is smart use of -- of interagency cooperation. we are the intragovernmental agency at gsa and we have the, the ability to -- to bring together different services and focus on those administrative services that lou thallow the o agencies to focus on protecting the homeland.

delivering. >> do you see them operating in a discreet fashion or is there cooperation? >> the answer is yes. there goes operating in discreet fashion. for their mission, they should. we can do more. we should do more to find ways that we can work more closely together and eliminate duplication. that's the power and promise of, of the agency i am working for. >> let me just, maybe janet can pick up on this. i just had a briefing yesterday from the amtrak, head of the amtrak security. the extraordinary cooperation between homeland security, and, amtrak, when it comes to safety on trains, is, is really quite remark but. the same is true of airports. we have jurisdiction over airplanes and airports. they have jurisdiction over the screening and the safety. and there is extraordinary cooperation and coordination th