look at. we know it is not going to get the headlines unless something goes wrong. so many things go right. that's why you don't see that many headlines about it. because a lot of stuff goes right. >> that's right. >> i think we should needlepoint that, you know? a lot of stuff goes right. >> that's great. >> hi, my name is dave kitross with lrp publications. i have been to a number of events where federal officials have talked about the need to do more with less. and i guess what i am wondering is sort of a two-part question. first, are there specific things your agencies are doing, and i mean, obviously you are trying to motivate people, are there sort of specific activities you have been automobile ble to do that. second part -- are we reaching the point, especially if some of the proposals, let's say to

reduce the federal work force become law. where we are just, that is not going to be possible. agencies are just going to have to say look. if you still want us to do y, we are not going to do x anymore? we, at dhs from the beginning we formed something-- the efficiency review. it was kind of an intradepartmental effort to ferret out redundancy, waste. to figure out better, cheaper ways of doing things. and they literally have been able to find billions of dollars of things that -- that cost avoidances that we could have and then redeploy the monies into the mission. i think one of the questions we all have, one of the difficulties from a management perspective its the budget. because often times we are operating without one. we are trying to guess what it is going to be. and -- there is no ceo in the

country that has the to deal with the sort of uncertainty. we have about budgets. coming up to the edge of closing down the government. that is not a morale builder for the federal work force. that is a difficulty. >> no member of congress that operates without a budget either. by the way. >> our efficiency review efforts. we'll be happy to provide you more detail. it has been employee generated ideas. finding redundancies and cost avoidances. >> one of the really exciting things that i think that is going on. not only the kind of efficiency area. we are all sharing strategies. we get together regularly. i want to know where janet has found savings and ray and others. but i think the innovations phase is really exciting. we have had a -- an effort under way for really the last three years to -- to figure out -- new and better ways to deliver services. using technology and innovation.

and often, is at greatly reduced costs. so we knew for instance one of the challenges, that we were looking at, in the health space was around -- getting -- good -- prenatal care, particularly, to vulnerable women in -- in -- low -- income neighborhoods. partnership, public/private partnership with cell phone companies. we initiated text for babies. low income women are given a cell phone. yet regular text updates about everything from vitamins to prenatal checkups. to care strategies. and easy to access fashion. and now a couple hundred thousand women. seeing results of those women following up with care.

and making sure babies get off to a healthy start. strategies that are low cost, no cost. involve the public sector. and the groups of employees who said, we should do this, and smoking cessation strategies again, texting them. kids don't talk to one another. and they text. that could be a good thing. and having raised a few, yes. that could be a good thing. yeah, figuring out, how to connect that. and 30, 40 employees, innovative strategies and idea and innovation award. have told them that kind of energy and effort we welcome from any place in the department. we want people to -- to be a work in progress and -- creative, and that has been a very exciting adventure.

>> hi. my name is christine west. i'm from the u.s. senate subcommittee on the federal work force and oversight of government management. my question is about reframing the discussion around -- the federal work force. as you have heard even today at an event meant to celebrate -- public servants, a lot of the questions are from the media. a lot of them are about headlines. while important. we are here to celebrate workers. how do we reframe the discussion so that we talk about headlines in terms of what the federal work force has done to uncover terror plots. or the igs office to uncover ways to save taxpayer money. how do we reframe the focus so it is sustained on the federal work force and all the good things the federal government is doing. >> that sound like our initial question. and the problem is, equivalent of saying. 500 planes took off today. and landed safely. you know?

that's your -- expectation. >> that is the news. >> should we throw up our hand. as long as nothing is going wrong. let's assume the federal government is functioning great, and when it isn't, let's pounce on everyone, slash federal benefits and pay. is that what we do? how do we, and you as leaders, make sure the message gets out that all of the good things your agency does and the federal government is capable of is because of your people? >> one of the reasons for this week. these are the things that you fry to do. i mean that's what the partnership for public service's mission is to both, both -- reward people who do good work in the federal government. advertise the fact that they do good work in the federal government. but also to make the federal government better. >> is there anything, as department heads or agency heads that you folks are doing to make

sure that your folks are recognized for the good work that they do. i know it is important, i would assume, having only worked in the senate, but i would assume it is important for your leaders. >> what do you see in the senate what do you see the attitude being on the subcommittee? next question. i would honestly look to hear from agency heads. >> you know, sometimes it is easier, i find to get outside of d.c. and shine a bright light on -- on regional office work and on work that's going on. i think that -- often times -- the press is cynical inside the beltway. and end up on a gotcha kind of media. so regional press. local press is often delighted to print good stories, follow -- worthwhile employee adventures. you know, deliver service.

news. and so we fry try to do that. send our leaders out. make sure we are. part of it is shining a light on what is going on and making sure that people know the good work that is going on and at a very minimum, making sure employees know we know. so it's -- if it never gets headlines at least having the internal effort to say we are doing terrific work each and every day. some of that involves travel. some of that involves going to places. visiting work sites. people are working hard and think nobody knows what i am doing. nobody cares about what i am doing. just having somebody show up say, we do know, we do care, it is terrific. often. >> thank you. >> thank you. you bet. >> and look at -- the disclosures that were made -- were about federal employees who did their job. that work for dhs or other

agencies at dhs. that's why these, that's why what happened in the last few days. because the we have good people who show up every day. protect our airports. and all of the disclosures were about good work. and the first thing that i remember the president saying about the secret service is -- 99.9% of the people that he came in contact with at the secret service show up every day, put their life on the line to protect the first family or other government officials. and you know, i think -- things are said. and i think we have all said them here today. i think the week is about -- good public service. about people who work hard. you know? there is going to be a hearing on capitol hill today. about tsa because the a few members of congress are irritated about it.

but think of the good work that has gone on for more than ten years, by tsa, federal employ s employees. well trained to make sure that people don't board trains to hurt one another. and there is a lot of those stories. hopefully some will come out in this hearing. rather than just trashing an organization that is actually protected people that have been flying now for a decade. since 9/11. and, not one plane has been brought down by a terrorist. i, i think we would all lock to have a good track record like that. and that's what we are celebrating this week. look at, we can all tell these stories. and i think we have tried to tell some of them. and, we will continue to do it. because we believe in -- in the people that -- that believe in public service and serving the american people. and doing it in a way that is honorable and -- and, and, with

honesty. now, you need, did i answer the question about the senate. don't be walking away. all right. we answered your question. >> i work for the senator. we are having a hearing this week to celebrate public service recognition and focus on human resources. >> congratulations. >> we always celebrate folks. >> thank you. thank the senator. >> good. >> good morning. my name is kathleen murphy. i work for the national park service. i am a federal employee. i actually have 30 years in working for various branches. >> congratulations. >> yeah. >> good for you. >> there are many places i would no longer say i have had a full career in the federal service based on a lot of what we just heard. >> although the park service is the agency everybody loves.

>> well, they do. it would be nice if they funded it better. >> there is that. >> but, we -- we, every day, face what you are facing today. and my question was, to talk about, the aging work force and how we are going to find creative ways to let people retire and still have a credible exit where they can contribute their knowledge to the next generation. i think i am going to change that to the press questions and the fact that even at my level which is relatively low, probably five levels away from the director of the park service. we face the same questions from the public. we don't know why in the press we don't see stories every day of what we did right. we spend too much of our limited time on these, sound bite issues. but, back to my question. as we age out of the federal work force, i really do encourage you to look at the part time retirement options and the fact that people will gracefully leave the park service and every other agency, because they like to think it is

intact and all the 30 years of work they have seen remains viable for another generation do. any of you have programs looking at the transition of the work force? >> a very good interesting question. >> yeah. we actually have begun looking at that. and it affects different components in different ways. but i think kathleen, nail the it when she said we know, we are about ready to hit a big bubble where a lot of people are going to be eligible for retirement. we don't want to lose all those resources. they have -- a very strong contribution to continue to make. so, yes, we are looking at what, what are available -- options. working with the office of personnel management on that. what can we do to keep that talent alive and at the same time keep bringing in new talent that is properly mentored. and properly incorporated into the federal service. >> what about the question of some part time involvement? its that something? >> there are some complicating

rules as you know about what you can do in addition to a part-time work and still -- still collect pension. meeting those rules, we have tried, and we currently have a number of people who serve, exited, and now are contributing as consultants or on project by project basis. so we really, we hate to lose talent. at any point. and along the way. and, you know are frying to find various strategies. but it is, sometimes, it is the xigt person who, you know if nay want to choose an occupation that would have a conflict, possibility. it's very difficult then to continue a relationship. it isn't i think from the agency point of view that -- that, we're not trying. but it is really their choice to -- to be in a situation. take that expertise elsewhere. but i think that all of us are

looking at strategies and ways that we don't lose that institutional knowledge. we don't lose that expertise. we have ability -- but i, i also think it is well before a person decides to exit that that conversation need to begin. and think about -- then what kinds of options they might have -- they've want to continue a relationship and not find out, six months later that they have made themselves ineligible. going out the door. >> the state department does a lot of it. they bring people back in for half a year. >> that's right. >> this next question has to be our last. because our -- these are busy people here. >> awful these are busy people. a -- all of these are busy people. all of them. >> i would ask after you get your answer, please stay seated as our guests leave, and then you all can enjoy yourselves. go ahead. next question. >> good morning.

my name is robert weid. i became a public servant, 22 years age i work in human resources, at architect of the capitol currently. my question is about ethics. over the years, the, the idea of, and the culture of official business only and the culture of ethics and behavior in the government has always been there. but i think with the degree of relevance today, as we change over, people retiring, a lot of newcomers in the federal government. i would like to know as. >> could you get closer to the microphone? >> as senior leaders, what new things, new approaches or new idea have you thought about regarding ethics training? in addition to the traditional policy and classroom training, what new ideas are you -- thinking about, or looking to implement in your agencies? >> interesting question. >> yeah, it is a great point. and you know -- the theme of ethics has to run through public

service they go together. one of the things, we are doing, nuts and bolts. is there anything more boring than the entry video you have to watch? when you come to federal service? not much. so, we are really looking at how can we reshape that and make it interesting and relevant. more rel vanevant and direct. so that employees once they're on board, aren't immediately hit with this, this, two-days of, stuff. then how do we incorporate that into, ethics training, public service, how do we incorporate that into how we -- bring in new employees, train them and mentor them. >> i am working really hard to not make a secret service joke here. >> we also, i think the initial training is one thing. but we have created sort of a -- public integrity council across the department. i think it is more than just --

the ethics rules. it also deals with how you approach conflicts. how you make sure there is an appropriate oversight. as, as money is being sent out the door. the ethical kind of conduct. employees has to drill all the way down. so we have representatives -- every agency and department. doing risk strategies. trying to look at areas. where there might have been gaps, focus. and redone a lot of guidance, and documents for our emmyies, downstream employees. looked at areas in the field that might have had gaps and strategies. i think it is kind of a culture of how you take great care not only with your own personal conduct. and, and actions, but with -- with taxpayer dollars. how you make sure that, we are responsible up and down the stream. how you would instill that into

folks. not in a gotcha fashion. it becomes part of the culture of doing business. >> when you refer to an entry video. is it something that everybody sees? >> uh-huh. >> pretty much. >> it's really awful? >> yeah. >> yeah. >> that's something we can help with. that really is something the partnership could help with. >> we should hire some 20-year-olds to make a cool, youtube like. we shouldn't do it at the federal level. or maybe a 14-year-old maybe. they're good for something. not a lot. but something. >> that kind of stuff they're great. >> a great point. in many cases, some of the stuff hasn't evolved beyond where it was. 10, 20, 30 years ago. we have made investments in billions in technology. we haven't fully leveraged it yet. we are trying to talk every moment that we have a chance to get people together to premind them, of the importance and significance of ethics, particularly important at gsa right now, building a clear partnership and so people

recognize that is not an installed member of the opposition. they're a partner. they can help us identify fraud, waste, and abuse. using technology. finding ways to speak to people the way they are speaking to each other now. that is one of the big challenges. >> an action item coming out of here. thank you. >> we tried to catch people's attention for a long time around emergency preparedness and thinking about it. again had pretty boring, awful, strategies. and one of the innovations that came out recent leap wly was ge ready for a zombie attack. it went viral. the best training video for families. so we need that kind of thing for an ethics -- getting ready for the zombies to come. >> since we have abraham lincoln is a zombie now. y'all, i know the reason you came its because you feel such, strong devotion off to the public servants in your agencies and across the government.

and it is a testament to that that you have taken time out of your very busy schedules to come here and be with them. so, thank you, very, very much, all of you. >> thanks a lot. [ applause ] >> thank you. thank you, all of you.

>> coming up next on cspan 3, a discussion on the role of nato and its priorities. after that, a heritage foundation forum on u.s. veterans and their families. >> i thought it was important to write a book that took peoples movement seriously. the movements that elected obama houc how did they build over time. '03, '04. what happened? and the tea party, came out of nowhere. what was its origin? and occupy wall street. to look at a social movement, we, the people perspective. >> on after words, van jones on social movements in america today. saturday night, 10:00 p.m. eastern. book tv. and the am spectator, r. emmett tyrrell, and "the death of

liberalism." sunday night at 11:00. part of book tv this weekend on cspan 2. nato will hold its summit in chicago later this month. next, u.s. ambassador to nato talks about the role of nato and some of its pry or teaiorities. >> welcome to the council on foreign relations meeting. i want to go through our standard stuff here. but remind you to, please completely turn off all of your, not just put them on vibrate, but turn everything off, your cell phones, blackberries, all wireless devices to avoid interference with the sound

system. i remind you that this is an on the record session. and before we begin with the program, the council is pleased to announce the rollout of a report of the -- of the council sponsored independent task force on turkey. and copies of the task force's report will be released at a meeting in new york tomorrow. and here in washington -- this wednesday. may 9th. also. for more information on upcoming events and please refer to the insert in the back tonight's program. i -- i also, tomorrow night in new york -- our guest is going to be on "the daily show." so you can tune in there if you would like. anyway this is another -- well-timed, council session. not only dupe we have the -- the u.s. ambassador to nato with us, just two weeks before the nato summit gets under way in

chicago. but we have a newly elected president of france, who may well become a factor in nato's future both in brussels and in afghanistan. y'all have ambassador's biography, and i am sure, many of you that are here this evening have met him or heard him. on one occasion or the other. he has been a prominent figure not only in -- in u.s. government and international affairs, but also with the council. and equally important to those of us outside of government, he has been and remains even in his official capacity, an important public voice. a frequent writer, explainer, and debater on issues of great importance to american national security and global security. so, mr. ambassador, we will of course all want to know this evening, your sense of whether nato, like everyone else, will manage to lose the blues in

chicago. but first, let me go straight to the news of the day. this is actually, a couple of stories that are news worthy today about -- about our topic this evening. and ask your views about the election in france. the french president has suggest he ed he was not happy with predecessors taking france back into nato. he said he would be likely to withdraw france's 2,500 combat troops from afghanistan this year. rather than next. and even though he has tilted towards lessausterity, he talked about defense be t furth. so i know you are going to probably say, or i think you might say, we will have to wait and see what the post election relts a realities are. since we are here on stage and you are such a good source, how

do you analyze this? >> of course, we have to wait and see. but i think -- one of the -- one of the unique features of sna tsna -- of nato it is 28 democracies. this is hardly the first time a government has changed while, while i have been there or indeed which is happening all the time. 17 governments have changed in the time i have been here. and this is just the latest. the french socialists -- are not strangers for -- for the united states. they shouldn't be strangers. it's been true that, it's been 17 years since the socialists were in power, had the presidency. of course, they ran the government. about a decade ago, when another was in power. we have always had a very good relationship with any government that, that is there in france. i am confident we will have a good relationship with this

government. in france. why do have to see how this government has, is going to -- deal with the issues of the day. it is one thing to be campaigning. it is always something different to be governing. it is not up to me. certainly not my job to predict -- how this will evolve. but i would note that -- that during the campaign he did say that he would remain, keep france integrated in the military command structure. that was a remarkable decision by president sarkozy. after so many years to come back into the command structure. i think france learned in the libya operation that being integrated into command structure gives you a voice and a say over what happens in the internal affairs of a military operation. that is important. and learn that there are benefits from being fully integrated. and i would suspect that this is

a benefit that will remain -- even if there may be differences of degree as, as policies go on. that's what elections are about. it is to enable the people to express themselves and vote in new governments. but on the big foreign policy issues i expect more continuity than change. >> so he takes office very soon. the nato summit is very soon. do you see any risk that the program in afghanistan, both in terms of troop levels and in terms of financial support for the afghan army. that that could erode before you're at finish line here? >> no, i don't actually. what's remarkable about afghanistan and the last, last three years, its t