nih are not a nice to do, they are a must do. we don't appreciate basic science and all these folks in lab coats until there's a real problem, and we say, well do we have a cure for that? or can we fix it? and if we haven't made those investments, if we've neglected them, then they won't be there when we need them. so as we transition into a new phase in this fight make no mistake, america is as committed as ever. i am as committed as ever to getting to zero, and i know we can, and i know this because of the people who stand behind me and the people out in the audience. i know this because of people like dr. william alters. william, you here? >> sir. >> thank you. dr. walters is the director of operational medicine at the state department.

last summer he was called to remove dr. kent brantly back to the united states for treatment. dr. walters said the first thing he did was to google dr. brantly. little plug for google there. i know we got some -- [ laughter ] and the first pickture he saw was of kent and his family. now remember, the decision to move kent back to the united states was controversial. some worried about bringing the disease to our shores. but what folks like william knew was that we had to make the decisions based not on fear, but on science, and he knew that we needed to take care of our heroes, who had sacrificed so much to save the lives of others in order for us to continue to get people to make that kind of commitment. they had to know we had their backs in order for us to effectively respond, and so as williams said, we do the work we do to impact something bigger

than ourselves. we do the work we do to impact something bigger than ourselves. that's the test of american leadership. we have this extraordinary military. we have an extraordinary economy. we have unbelievable businesses, but what makes us exceptional is when there's a big challenge and we hear somebody say, and it's too hard to tackle and we come together as a nation and prove you wrong. it's true whether it's recession or war or terrorism. there are those who like to fan fears fears, but over the long haul, america does not succumb to fear. we master the moment with bravery and courage and selflessness and sacrifice, and relentless, unbending hope. that's what these people

represent. that's what's best in us and we have to remember that because there will be other circumstances like this in the future. we have three weeks in which all too often we heard science being ignored and sensationalism, but you had folks like this who were steady and focused and got the job done. we're lucky to have them. and we have to invest in them. i want to thank all of you, for proving, again, what america can accomplish. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. thank you.

the president will also have remarks at about 3:30 this afternoon. he'll be making a statement on the use of force against isis. the president sent congress legislation today to authorize military force against islamic state militants. we'll cover his remarks again scheduled for 3:30 eastern time today on the c-span networks. the government accountability office today presents its high-risk list looking at government waste and inefficiencies. gao's gene dodaro will be testifying before the house oversight and government reform

committee. members will also question the irs commissioner and nasa's associate administrator. that hearing is scheduled to get under way right about now. could be delayed for a while or interrupted by house votes that is on the house of representatives 'floor. we plan live coverage on see spoon3 as soon as the hearing gets under way. until then a short portion of a house veterans affairs committee hearing from earlier today as va secretary robert mcdonald was questioned about va construction projects in colorado. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, in the budget submission for the office of general counsel, you list as recent accomplishments and this is a quote, "defending against complex litigation such as the construction projects in orlando, in denver." how is that a success? you lost that case on every

single point for the hospital in my district, that is hundreds of millions of dollars overbudget and years behind schedule and the only way that construction could continue was that the general contractor demanded that the va construction management personnel be kicked off the project and that the army corps of engineers come in and take over the project. and so you know, i think that that's just characteristic of your glossing over the extraordinary problems confronted by your department. this is a department mired in bureaucratic incompetence and corruption and i got to tell you, i think the public relations is great today but there's no substance. there is no substance, and -- >> i'm highly offended by your comments, senator kaufman. >> receipt me finish first because i fundamental believe that, as unfortunate as it is that at the end of the day, at

the end of this president's term, that you will not have made a difference in changing the culture of this organization, by virtue of the fact you continue to gloss over its problems. [ gavel pounding ] >> i'm offended by your comment. actually i've been here six months. you've been here longer than i have. if there's a problem in denver i think you own it more than i do. i found it ironic that when i went out to l.a. to solve a 4-year-old lawsuit you were busy calling for a hearing to discover what happened five years ago. i'm working on the future, sir and i'm going to correct the past, but i'm working on the future because that's what our veterans want. >> for you to say that you're going to the army corps of engineers to advise you as to how to correct the extraordinary problems let me tell you, i think what you need to do is focus on providing the health care benefits and other benefits

veterans have earned and get out of that construction management business and to cee it to the army corps of engineers. >> we know that's your point of view. >> each major construction project is hundreds of millions of dollars overbudget, and years behind schedule. that's a problem. >> i think we work very closely with the corps of engineers. general bostwick is a good friend. he's also been very helpful. he has told us he does not want total responsibility for all of va's construction. we're going to work with him. we're going to find out the right balance of that. we're doing it in denver, as you know, and we appreciate your help to get that building finished, and get it finished for a good value for taxpayers. >> i hope, i hope you can make a difference. >> senator, i will just say maybe if you want i'll give you my cell phone tonight and you can answer some of the calls and see if i'm making a difference for veterans and see what they say or go on the websites see what the veterans are saying on the websites.

ask the vsos in the next group. >> the fundamental challenge -- >> i run a large company sir. >> the fundamental challenge is for this organization to reflect your values and i'm not sure that that's going to happen and i hope that it does. >> i want your help to do that. >> i yield back. >> i need your help. >> we're waiting for a house oversight and government reform committee hearing this afternoon on government waste and inefficiencies. we understand the start of that hearing could be delayed for a while with votes on the house floor upcoming. we do plan to bring you the hearing live here on c-span3 as soon as it begins. until the end, the president of morehouse college who joined us on today today's "washington journal." >>. >> host: taking a look at historic black colleges and university this is the university system in conjunction with our c-span bus, we started in washington d.c., with how yard university, a total of eight colleges on our list. today we make a stop in atlanta

at morehouse college, visiting with us there, there at the c-span bus on campus and on board our bus, john sylvanis jr. who serves as president of morehouse college. president wilson, thank you for joining us. >> good morning, pedro thanks for having me on. >> host: president wilson, part of your background includes working with the white house on something called an initiative on hbcds. could you talk about that effort and what you learned about the white house's intention through that body and what the house policy is doing or if white house policies are affecting historically black colleges and universities? >> guest: yes, i served under president barack obama as the executive director of the white house initiative on hbcus. the office was established by jimmy carter, and i happened to have been president obama's appointee. the purpose of that office and

the job of the executive director is to do whatever you can to increase the funding from the federal government to the 105 at that point hbcus, and so we just worked with the federal agencies. we worked with the private sector, all in an effort to strengthen the hbcu sector. i thought we got some pretty good results in my time there the first term of barack obama just before barack obama took office office, the federal government was channeling about $3.6 billion in hbcus, and that's from all sources federal, financial aid, to research funding from the agencies and by the time i left, we were at roughly $5.3 billion. so that was significant progress. >> if i understand it correctly it was your time at that body when the president instituted

some changes when it comes to pell grants. was that the case and has that affected historically black colleges and universities? >> guest: the pell grants were greatly, greatly increased on our watch. as a matter of fact that increased from 3.6 billion to 5.3 billion, was largely in the area of financial aid with pell grants and loan programs. i think most of your viewers will recall there was a big change in the policy the federal policy wherein we took the banks out of the loop on loans and did direct lending. that yielded a lot of money for the administration, and we channeled that money across higher education, and hbcu's having a lot of financial aid recipients got a large chunk of it. >> tell us go moreabout morehouse college. how much of its operating budget

comes from the federal government in terms of grants or research and development, this kind of thing? >> like most hbcus, and really most smaller colleges, a lot of our students are recipients of financial aid. so we're talking 60% or 70% of our budget comes from students who are assisted by federal loans and grants and support from private sources as well. so we care a lot about the federal posture toward these institutions, but the interesting thing pedro, is morehouse is has really proven its worth, its value proposition. the obama administration recognized very early on and i should say arnieound arne duncan recognized the nation can't be as competitive as it needs to be in this world without the

contribution from hbcus. morehouse has certainly done its part having so many distinguished graduates but all hbcus are doing a very good job of contributing to the nation's competitiveness, and that's why the obama administration channeled a lot of support to hbcus. it was really a good thing for america. zblst more >> host: morehouse is an all-male college. why is that is that so? >> guest: we the founders made it sew. we are cross the street from spellman. it is a coed indicational environment. i'm a graduate of morehouse and disproportionate number of my classes were spellman women there. we focus on the african-american male. we've been well rewarded for that focus having distinguished

graduates as martin luther king jr. obviously, and then spike lee, my classmate, jeh johnson, secretary of homeland security my classmate, martin luther king iii, my classmate, robert mallett, former secretary of commerce, deputy secretary of commerce in my class. so we have a number of distinguished men who have made an impact across the world. morehouse's value proposition could not be clearer and on my watch it's going to get a lot better, too. >> host: the president of morehouse college joining us as we talk a look at historically black colleges and universities. he's on our c-span bus in atlanta today visiting with the college. if you want to ask questions we divided the lines on two fronts, 202-748-8000, if you attended an hbcu. 202-748-8001 for all others. if you want to send us e-mail you can do so at journal@

journal@cspan.org. we've been talking with presidents about the majors they offer. talk about your majors and is it a combination of humanities and sciences or do you see a shift in what majors you offer as job markets get tighter and people are looking for work as soon as they leave college? >> guest: well we have three divisions, three main decisions. one is the business division and we have a number of distinctive graduates who have come out of that division. we happen to be channeling many business graduates into the top business schools. i think we have two or three at harvard business school any given time and the other top business schools so we have a strong business division. i was a business major at morehouse. we also have a strong humanities division. out of that division have come our, a lot of our political

science graduates, as well as our religious, our religion majors. i would say the three top pulpits in this country are all headed by morehouse men, calvin butts at abisenian in new york, otis moss iii at trinity in chicago, and right here in atlanta is rafael warnock, who is head of the famed church that martin luther king used to head up ebenezer baptist church. so our humanities division is very strong, and then our s.t.e.m. division is also strong. that's going to be an emphasis for me. i brought on kai campbell from swathemore to be our pro vos and he's a mathematician from swathemore to strength enour s.t.e.m. division. we're spending significant time in silicon valley on my watch as president, for the past few

years, and looking for great relationships there, pointed at our s.t.e.m. division and pedro pedro, i should tell you and your audience we are even considering requiring all students who attend morehouse to know how to code by the time they graduate. so s.t.e.m. is a real focus for morehouse college, and you'll see evidence of that as we strengthen that division. >> president john sylavnis wilson jr., joining us the president of morehouse college. christina from washington, d.c., you attended an hbcu good morning. >> caller: good morning, i'm watching from my desk on ka capitol hill where we work on the issues. i attended harvard university and our chief of staff is a morehouse grad and all over the campus so first, great, great job. i this i my question is, i have a daughter getting ready to grad ate with a and we're looking at hbcus and other colleges. my frustration is since i

graduated from howard the only information i get back from the hbcus is on attending dinners and receptions and i have friends and other hbcus that have that alumni disconnect from the university and i received an education far better than my ucla before that education, and but i don't see the reach-back and the other issue is leadership. we've had several presidents, morehouse has had a better reputation but that affected the alumni's relationship with the school. can you talk a little bit about more, how you're dealing with the leadership level beyond just the actual education and how you're reaching out to alumni, to kind of keep that cycle and keep that passion in the community for the hbcu going? >> host: thanks, christina. >> guest: thanks christina. that's a great question, and i just want to acknowledge your question as part of my own experience. as i've said i'm a graduate of

morehouse college, and i attended morehouse for four years, and then spent six years at harvard university getting to masters and a doctorate from harvard, and i echo what you've just said. i have moved from atlanta to boston to d.c., and i think i had mail waiting at my home when i moved, whenever i've made my moves from harvard, by the time i got there, by the time i relocated, so they know how to do that well. on my watch at morehouse, we are strengthening that. i'm bringing that experience the morehouse and we're strengthening our advancement office in general and our alumni outreach in particular. it is a priority. now i happen to know your current president at howard university, wayne frederick. i think he is determined to make it a priority too. this is something that we as hbcus, can do something about.

i'm not sure how general the criticism is but i know that we have evidence of it at morehouse, and i know there's some evidence of it at howard, so i think, christina the issue is leadership and i think we have the right leadership in place right now to do something about it. >> host: ft. lauderdale, florida, jonathan, you're up next hello. >> caller: hi, yes. how are you doing, sir? i actually have two comments. i know that at morehouse you guys do a great job of stressing key king and going about his legacy. with regards to that why don't you guys use i don't know have a community or a college-wide like movement to like do like an anti-war movement or the american system of economics, bring that back to the fold because that's what king stood for, uniting the people and i see more like i see more like

people like on the divide, like everything being more divisible as far as like using the, like black culture against the police while it should be more of unifying anti-war movements which is what is going on in russia and ukraine to unite the union movements and unite education movements, there needs to be like union for nationalizing the federal reserve and using that to prop up black communities and making sure that those who are in poverty can raise their standard of living up. >> host: okay, caller, thank you. >> guest: well, okay so that was a little complex. i think i've got the gist of it but what you need to know about morehouse on that issue is we have, for many many years, for decades, basically from the start emphasized servant leadership,er is vand lead er isservant leadership. we don't have a narrow concern.

we have concern about the experience of the african-american male. we believe the image of the african-american male is distort distorted and skewed to a broken narrative so we're always going to be xwernd that and want to do something about it but we've never been narrow. i mean dr. king obviously wrote about chaos or community. that was not a local viewpoint. it wasn't a georgia viewpoint or regional or american viewpoint. it was global. it was concern about the global community. so we have sent out graduates all over the world who have concerns for social justice, and who weigh in to servant leadership. so i think your question about that kind of thinking and that kind of reach may be appropriate for other institutions, but morehouse, i think we're doing quite well in that area.

>> host: president wilson there was an op-ed piece by david knight out of harvard university talking about the black male issues. he writes this, he says, "many black males get this message, they are in danger, they are vulnerable or at risk when they are much younger. they hear it in middle high school and sometimes early in third and fourth grades. think about the effects any young words could have on any young person's psyche, no matter race. your fate is tied to a long history of racially fraught struggle and worse you're told you're on the losing side, the side where blackness connotates limitation." what do you think about that? >> guest: well it's sobering and it is grounded in some data. we know that 86% of african-american boys are below reading proficiency by fourth grade. that ramifies for the rest of

many of their lives and then you combine with that kind of devastating educational statistic, the perceptual challenges that we have, where we are perceived as negative then that compounds the problem. so i understand where the writer is coming from. morehouse is the antidote to that. morehouse is the answer to that. you're going to begin to see that narrative begin to shift from a negative narrative, a problematic narrative into a positive narrative where more african-american males are automatically perceived as forces for good. we know who we are at morehouse college, and we have evidence of great work here in the many graduates we've put into the

world. whereas the writer summarizes a skew toward the negative narrative, the brokenness narrative, we are hard at work on the opposite narrative and you're going to see that amplify on my watch as president of morehouse college. >> host: to add to that, sir you have a program called faces of manhood. what is that? >> guest: faces of manhood is the work done by our professors and staff to convey the range of african-american males in this country. believe it or not, there is while we are all african-american and all male there is significant diversity, and there is not a saneness to african-american males. we have some in the arts. we have some in business. we have some in the sciences. the number one actor, number one highest grossing actor of all-time is a morehouse man that

happens to be samuel l. jackson. we have a number of graduates who are in the s.t.e.m. areas so the face project is meant to convey to the students at morehouse as they arrived and to the graduates of morehouse and to the world that there are a number of ways to be a morehouse man. the key is to be distinctive and productive in whatever field you choose to be an pert from. >> host: next call from mel ba, houston, texas. >> caller: i'm a 1969 graduate of faceisk university. i thank you for bringing your talents to your stewardship and leadership at morehouse. you have a fine history and legacy to maintain and i'm confident your successes will continue. thank you very much.

>> guest: thank you. well, thank you for that statement of support. thank you. >> host: huntsville alabama, this is michael hello. >> guest: good morning, mr. wilson. how are you, sir? >> i'm well, how are you? >> guest: i am well sir. i am a proud graduate of alabama a&m university. i have a younger sister who is a proud graduate of alabama state university in montgomery. our father is a proud graduate of miles college in fairfield so as you can see, historically black colleges run deep within mire phammy family. my question what do you see is the biggest challenge facing historically black colleges and universities in the 21st century and what do you see is a solution or the best solution for said problems going forward? >> guest: great question. i want to let you know that i visited all three of those institutions alabama state, alabama a&m, as well as miles

college while i was at the white house. i think there's solid hbcus, especially miles with president george french there, great leadership. the biggest challenge for hbcus, in my view, is capital, what i call capital impairment. we need to be, most of us are undercapitalized. there is not an hbcu with an endowment that is more than four times what it spends every year to operate, and state-of-the-art in the business is at least five times and when you get talking about harvard and yale and places like renell and swathemore, you're up to ten times, so they have endowments that are $1 billion plus of the strongest hbcu on that measure

is spellman, with an endowment expense ratio of four, that is their endowment is four times the amount of money they spend every year. most of the other hbcus are below one. that is a problem. that keeps us from being as competitive as we need to be. but what i will always say is that if we can do this much great work with this kind of capital base, imagine what more we could do for this country and for this world if we had a larger capital base. so what i'm doing, and what we are doing at morehouse is we are changing. we are making a change in the way we talk about morehouse putting the emphasis of our value proposition on the more positive story that we have, and talking about it in a different way, and we believe we're going to attract more investors at morehouse college and you'll see evidence of that, actually

there's already evidence of that, but you'll see more on the road ahead. >> the annual budget for morehouse college about $91 million. the endowment standing at about $140 million. 16,000 alumni and this is the president of morehouse college joining us today. from new baltimore michigan robert, hello, go ahead. >> caller: good morning, gentlemen. nice to talk to you. i was wondering, mr. wilson how many white students you have at your institution, and if there are none i was wondering why not. nice talking to you. i'll take my answer offline, thank you. >> well thank you for that question. we have always, since i graduated in 1979, we've had a handful of white students at morehouse college and we have a handful now. the percentage is pretty small, but and the percentage will actually grow.

back in '07 the valedictorian of morehouse college was a white american his name is josh packwith. i became president in 2013 and within a few months i visited with josh who is doing quite well on wall street, and he is as much a morehouse man as any other morehouse man i could ever visit. whul we while we have been historically black and we are now majority african-american, our doors have always been open. all students from all backgrounds, all male students from all backgrounds have always been able to apply, and they have, and those who have come have been quite well served. so morehouse man is not a racial designation. it's just a designation that ties to their distinctiveness in this world and josh packwith is distinct tough and a number of

the white students we have now are destined for the same kind of distinctiveness. i appreciate that question. >> host: president wilson is your teaching faculty all african-american? >> guest: not even close. we have had -- we have large for a long time, for years had a diverse faculty. i don't know what the percentage is, but it's been upwards of a quarter to 40% non-african-american. we've always had diversity on the faculty, and that's been the case from the start when most of the faculty were white teachers from the north. >> host: deidra from marietta "washington journal," attending an hbcu. hi. >> caller: good morning, mr. president wulson. i'm from spellman under under the reign of dr. tatum. how are you working on the

community? there's been a lot of violence as i'm sure you're aware a lot of violence toward your students and other students in the atlanta university center, and i would like to know how you are training your young men to stand up and promote non-violence, like dr. martin luther king and how they're going to support each other for the community around them, the women of spellman, the brothers and sisters at clarke atlanta, and of the community and the west end that live with every day. >> guest: well that's a great question, and i appreciate it. let me just say three things about that. first and foremost, i want to say i have a great relationship with spellman. i was, in fact on the board of trustees at spellman for a couple of years, working with berle danielle tatum and she

invited me onto the board first morehouse man to do that and the only reason why i had to step down, i had to take the job at the white house. spellman is a great institution, and i am so sad that beverly danielle tatum will be stepping down as president after 13 wonderful years, and i applaud her, and wish spellman well. the second response i have to your question is safety is a number one concern here, i think for all of the center institutions we are working together with some of the more powerful people in this city to make the surrounding environments a lot safer, when you do not feel safe, you cannot learn. we understand that quite fully. the third response i have to that is, i am quite proud about the advance we're going to make in the area of security because

we just hired a new police chief, and guess what? her name is valerie dalton. she was working for apd, atlanta police department, for many years, assumed the position of power there, and we got her away from apd and she is the police chief at morehouse college, the first time in our history we've had a woman as police chief and i could not be prouder. she was absolutely the best choice we could have made. so she just started just a couple of weeks ago, and we're already benefiting from her presence so i believe your question about security is going to get the best investment of positive force right now from our new police chief and you'll see the security scene change at morehouse and around morehouse, and that includes spellman. >> host: we will speak with the head of spellman tomorrow on

this program at 9:15. columbia south carolina, mark is up next. >> caller: hey pedro. great show today and thank you, dr. wilson, for taking my call. my mom attended friendship junior college. i was surprised the colleges are not around anymore. right now south carolina is facing -- south carolina state is facing $100 million deficit and talking about closing the school for one year. is that a good idea or are we about to lose another historically black college? thank you. >> guest: there is a lot of disruption in higher education now today so i think what is happening at south carolina, it's happening in a number of places where there's a lot of stress and where there is this kind of stress in the larger environment, it's going to take some leadership, some effective leadership to make a difference.

i want to say this about that. i do think that the hbcu sector is going to experience some shrirngage. you've been saying that since i was at the white house and before. there were when i was a student at morehouse there were over 300 women only colleges in the country. there are now less than fewer than 50. so that whole sector contracted. there were at one point over 300 hbcus in the couple of decades after slavery ended. many of them went by the wayside, and i think we've had 117 for the longest time and now we're down to 100. so i think you're going to see some close their doors just like a lot of predominantly white institutions are now closing their doors and what's going to differentiate those that are around for years from

now and those that aren't is solid governance, that is the board of trustees and solid leadership in the president's office and the senior staff. it's unfortunate what's going on at south carolina state right now. we'll see what happens there. i wish the best i wish them the best. i have a relative who used to teach at south carolina state. his name is professor nix, and he taught benning line elijah mays. so i a lot about south carolina state. it is unfortunate but leadership will make the difference for them and others. >> host: a viewer on twitter is asking if affirmative action is affecting those who attend historically black colleges and universities. >> guest: affirmative action has been around for a long time, and if, by that the writer means if affirmative action in terms of

the opening of the doors of predominantly white institutions and the fact that those institutions are aggressing to get the same students that have tradition enrolled at hbcus, i want to say that pressure was immediate in '69 when the doors opened. that was at a point when over 80% of the african-americans who were in higher education were in hbcus. now now, 8% or 9% of the african-americans in higher education are in hbcus. there's been some shrinkage. of course that's had an effect but we're still enrolling and graduating some very distinctive graduates. i know i can say that about morehouse college. while there is competition for sure, that is a good thing. there are hbcus in a have heldthat have held their own in the face of

the competition. morehouse is at the top of the heat. >> host: president wilson what is your dwrad wags rate? >> guest: our six-year graduation rate is about between 55% and 60%. it is my intention to do something about that. the main reason why a lot of students have to leave is financial, so we're back to your other questioner asking about the main challenge, that is the financial challenge. i'd like to do something about that by providing more aid. >> host: new orleans louisiana gale, up next. hello. gale from new orleans, hello. >> caller: hi, how are you? >> host: hi, you're on, go ahead, please with your question or comment. >> caller: okay my comment is i am a senior citizen. i was raised but my mother and grandmother. they did not raise me as a color. right now we have a lot of racial tension going on.

i'd like to request to the universities, to the high schools, to all schools upper grade levels that we as a race, i'm talking about a human race, must separate ourselves from color, because we are not colors, we are deeply pigmented. pigmentation is scientifically and is dna specified. it gives historical facts geographical facts. >> host: okay, caller, thanks. >> guest: i want to take that as a statement about diversity and i just want to say that morehouse is more than just an institution bound by color. it's bound by history, we were born at a time when african-americans needed an education, so a number of institutions were formed but morehouse and other hbcus

contribute to the diversity that is in american higher education. morehouse is a special purpose institution. i want to say byu predominantly mormon is a special purpose. notre dame catholic. wellesley for women, brandeis for jews. morehouse and other hbcus for african-americans. they spend four years and go out and contribute to america and the world and that is a good thing. >> host: art lives in pennsylvania attended an hbcu. you are on art, go ahead. >> caller: thank you. john, this is art haywood, class of 1979 pennsylvania state senator. is there any class superior to the class of 1979? >> guest: oh man, what a question. art. art haywood, art haywood and i -- thanks for calling in, art

god bless you, man. he is one of our more distinguished graduates, again, in the class of '79, and he's right there in the line-up. i got michael cox. there are a number of people i could naum.me. we just had a special class. art there's only one answer to that question, we are the best class but now that i'm president i have to acknowledge all the other classes and i'm proud to do that because we have so many young men who have gone out into the world more recently and done a great job. art, i think you'd be proud because we have the number one court team in the country now is from morehouse college. patrick henry college held that for seven straight years and this is better than the ivy leagues and we won it. the number one moot court team in the country is from morehouse. the number one debate team, that is we just won a championship

panamerican championship, morehouse won that and we had two teams to enter and both made it to the finals. i know art haywood was on the debate team at morehouse when he was here so we're still doing quite, quite well. thanks for your call, art. >> host: just a quick google search, art haywood is a new state senator from pennsylvania. is that the same one? >> guest: that's the same one and he is a morehouse man and we're proud of him. >> host: norb from mercer, wisconsin, on our others line. good morning. >> caller: good morning. john, thank you very much. i really appreciate what you're doing, and i think it's up to the individual to make it or break it and you're doing a great job, and keep up the good work and let's all get along. thank you. bye. >> guest: all right, thanks for

the love. always good to get some love. thanks for the love. >> host: president wilson there's a story going back to 2011, morehouse college was one of several historically black colleges and universities that participated in a summit taking a lock atoking at gay lesbian and transgender issues. do those discussions still take place today on your campus? >> guest: they do. as a matter of fact we just hired a new vice president for student development. his name is tim sams. he comes to us from rpi, and tim and i, tim hasn't been on board for long but we've already had discussions about that together, he and i, and with students about how to ensure that our campus is the most enlightened campus in america or in the world where those den ger diversity issues are concerned. >> host: what led -- >> guest: you have a general -- sure? >> host: go ahead. >> guest: we have a general

embrace strategy under way that dr. samz is executing right now, but gender diversity is certainly a part of that, and that's intentional. >> host: tell me what led you to take these steps. >> guest: what led me to take these steps i don't think you can be an enlightened president in this day and age and not have a progressive attitude about that. it is just a statement. my inaugural address is called "the world of our dreams" and that means we are intending to have on this camp us the most productive undergraduate experience you can have, and you can't have an enlightened and productive undergraduate experience and be archaeic on those issues with respect to

gender diversity. so what led me to do that is our aspiration to have an extremely powerful undergraduate experience. it's already powerful but it can be more powerful and it will not be unless we're enlightened about that. >> from houston, texas, pat is next. hello. >> guest: hello. president wilson, i congratulate you on continuing the tradition of the historically black colleges. i was a proud graduate of a&m, amp prairie view a&m. at the time i graduated we were one of the best engineering colleges around. at the first job i met an engineer, never seen him before because they made them work in

an entirely different building. so congratulations. i wish my grandchildren could have experienced the same thing that i did. i just retired after 43 years with one company. so we have been productive, excuse me, i'm kind of nervous. >> host: it's okay caller we'll leave it there and let the president respond. >> guest: well thank you for your call. i am familiar with prairie view a&m. it's a strong institution. i'm aware of their prowess in engineering. i want you to know that morehouse has in our s.t.e.m. division we developed a great dual degree program with georgia tech, so we're in the business of creating engineers as well and i want you also to know that we're going to get a boost in engineering at morehouse in our

strength in s.t.e.m. in general but engineering in particular because i happen to be married to an engineer as well, her name is carol espy wilson, born and raised here in atlanta, educated at stanford undergraduate and mit, two masters and a ph.d. in electrical engineering. she'll be coming to atlanta very shortly to be on the faculty at georgia tech and to be the first lady of morehouse college, a different kind of first lady. emphasis on engineering. and we are very happy about that. and i am certainly proud of that. host: we are running to the end of the segment, serve you can make your statement or question quickly. caller: yes, my question was about what he was saying about the from of action. first of all, i'm a democrat. i was born in 1953, but i like -- but affirmative action had --

has done more damage. the on the, i have two sisters here graduated from fam u. and a friend of mine who graduated from morehouse college. out of all those people, the one argument we have had with each other is that i grew up as a block mason, a brick mason, and i sent money to some of these colleges. but out of all of them, they don't send anything to t i grew up. your que >> okay. i want to respond to the first part of your question. i want to say i disagree. i don't think affirmative action was -- was devastating. for hbcus. let me just speak for morehouse. at morehouse, we're trying to --

we have been quite effective in to the face of the competition spawned by affirmative action.gnet and guess what? we're looking to be can as magnetic as we possibly can be whether the forces of competition are a lot stimulated by affirmative action or anything else. i know there was a lot of noise made about the notion of community colleges being free. and what we say at morehouse is, that's a good thing because 1.3y coll million african-americans are int moreho community colleges. but we're trying to be as -- so in the powerful at morehouse that if every other institution in the d. country is free, you will pay to come to morehouse. we want to be that good.t >> and that is the president of nior morehouse college, john wilson jr., joining us on the c-span an bus bus from iatlanta georgia, as severa part of our c-span tour of hbcus. several colleges in the mix. and we'll have more next week.

president wilson, thank you for your time today. >> thank you. a live look inside the house off capitol hill where the government accountability office will be presenting its high-risk list looking at government waste and inefficiencies. the gao's comptroller general will be testifying, among others, before the house oversight and government reform committee. members will also hear from the irs commissioner, nasa's associate administrator and other witnesses. the hearing has been delayed for a bit bity votes now happening on the house floor. we'll have live coverage when it gets under way on c-span3. today's white house briefing with press secretary josh earnest. >> good afternoon, everybody. >> i don't have anything at the top, darlene so we can go

straight to your questions, if you're ready. >> thank you. >> two questions on kayla mueller. has the white house learned any details since you reported on the circumstance of her death specifically timing and manner? >> i don't have any additional intelligence to share. >> is the u.s. still trying to figure out the circumstances of her death or trying to find out what exactly happened to her? >> there is certainly -- continues to be some ongoing work, but i don't have any results of that work to share at this point. >> there also were some reports today that she was apparently in captivity, married off to an isis fighter. do you have anything on that? >> i have seen those reports as well, but i don't have anything to share in that manner. >> thank you. moving on. >> i might have more to say. >> with the president request any additional spending with that or any costs associated

with that? >> there are no specific requests administration is making of congress with regard to our ongoing campaign against isil. last year the president did make a specific request to congress and we were gratified that that request for additional resources to execute our strategy to degrade and ultimately destroy isil. we hope we'll see that bipartisanship as congress continues in the important role they play. >> there are democrats who have expressed concern about the scope of the authority the president is asking for. john boehner said this morning he didn't think it gives military commanders next flexibility and authority to do what they would need to do in order to -- excuse me -- in order to defeat isis. is there any reaction to comments from, you know, both parties on that? and how do you think this will affect getting passed in

congress? >> the president has laid out the goal at the very beginning of this process of wanting democrats and republicans to support this authorization to use military force. so, it's going to require democrats and republicans on capitol hill to do something that they have not done with a lot of success over the last several years, which is actually to work together to make progress on something that's pretty important for the country. so, we are hopeful that democrats and republicans will be able to sit down and take a look. i think in some of these situations democrats and republicans have a genuinely -- have a genuine difference of opinion about how to proceed. and those differences are understandable. i wouldn't want to leave you with the impression we consider them to be insignificant. we're talking about rather weighty matters of national security. but what we'll need is we'll need democrats and republicans in both the house and the senate to take seriously their responsibility to weigh in on these weighty matters of national security.

after all, it was the founding fathers of our country who envisioned a legitimate role for congress to play when it comes to matters of national security like this. and we hope that congress will assume that responsibility and act in bipartisan fashion to lend their support to the strategy that the president has laid out. after all, the president, our men and women in uniform, are certainly fulfilling their responsibility to keep the country safe. it's time for congress to step up to the plate and fulfill their responsibility and do the same thing. >> thank you. >> jillian. >> thanks. in the interview the president did, he criticized staples for not -- for cutting hours and creating more part-time workers who wouldn't qualify for health care. sense then, the ceo, ronald sergeant, has shot back and said their policy for part-time workers has been in place for over a decade and this had nothing to do with obamacare.

does the president stand by his comments? >> well we've often seen opponents of this law, republicans, trying to cite the experience of some workers at companies like staples as evidence that the affordable care act was somehow bad for the economy and bad for job creation. it sounds as if the -- i haven't seen the comment from this staples executive you're cite but i think it would be a pretty good indication that he disagrees with those republicans who indicate that the affordable care act is responsible for a large number of employees having their hours cut back. this is something that we've -- we've seen some anecdotal evidence this is the case. republicans have tried to make the case this is widespread but there has not been evidence of that. >> so, when the president shamed staples for -- or and companies who would have cut back hours, that's not necessarily -- if, in

fact, they actually cut back hours independent of obama care, that would actually not be a criticism of these companies? >> well, yeah, what i'm suggesting is the reason that -- i suspect the reason the interviewer asked the president the question about staples is because he had noted that there were republicans who have criticized the affordable care act and said that it is having a negative impact on job creation. and they cited the experience of companies like staples and others as having to cut back on worker hours because of the affordable care act. so, that's why you can imagine that i'm in a position where i'm feeling gratified that the executive at staples has come forward and said that the decisions they're -- the policies they're putting in place as it relates to the number of hours that their employees are working is entirely independent of the affordable care act. that's consistent with the case we've been making for years now and undermines probably the chief republican criticism of

the law. >> all right. on yemen on the u.s. and the uk closing their embassies there, is that to change our counterterrorism strategy there? and what will remain of the presidents in yemen? >> i can tell you our counterterrorism operations in yemen are ongoing. those operations continue to be coordinated with national security officials in yemen. as we have said since the beginning of this latest round of turmoil that the united states would be focused on monitoring the security situation in yemen and in sanaa in particular, mindful to protect u.s. personnel operating at embassy there. over the last several weeks the united states has taken steps to draw down the number of personnel that were operating at that facility in sanaa. overnight the united states did

make the decision and carried out the decision to temporarily relocated american personnel out of that -- out of the u.s. embassy in sanaa. i should note that we are certainly grateful to the country of oman that ensured that temporary relocation was executed safely and we are grateful to the oman government for stepping up and playing an important role in that government. that said, there are -- there continue to be department of defense personnel, u.s. department of defense personnel on the ground in yemen, coordinating with their counterparts in yemen, in the yemeni government. and continuing to carry out the kinds of actions, the counterterrorism actions necessary to protect the american people and our interests around the world.

jim? >> reporter: back to the at m-- to the amf. since the president laid out where ground forces would be used, in terms of what he's asking, is the president going to be asking for more u.s. forces to be deployed? >> not at this point. >> reporter: but that's possible? >> jim, we have been pretty clear. the president's been pretty clear about what he envisions for our strategy. it is codified in the language committed to congress today. it notes or places a limitation on the ability. commander in chief to order enduring offensive ground combat operations in iraq and in syria. in the cover letter the president submitted to members of congress, the president noted that that is consistent with the strategy that the president has pursued so far in that the president does not believe that making a long-term large-scale commitment of u.s. ground combat

troops into iraq or syria would be in our best interest. there are a variety of reasons for that. the first s we are still dealing with the consequences of that large-scale, long-term commitment made by the previous administration when they were pursuing the previous administration in iraq. those consequences, some of them are fiscal and some of them are human. and that is something that our country will continue to deal with in years to come. in addition to that, the president believes that a more successful strategy will involve building up the capacity of local forces to take the fight to isil extremists on the ground in their own country. that's why there are american military personnel that are operating in iraq, that are training and equipping iraqi and kurd kurdi security forces.

we've seen that's been successful in blunting the offensive that isil mounted in the middle of last year and even in some cases rolled back some of the offensive gains she the made. there is a similar strategy in place in syria to train a syrian opposition fighters that work is not as far along as the effort to support iraqi ground forces. one of the reasons the iraqi security forces failed is because they weren't backed up by unified central government. so, to deploy a large-scale long-term commitment of u.s. ground troops in iraqi would be contrary to the wishes of the very central government that we're trying to support.

finally -- this is important too. finally, it's also important to the cohesion of our international coalition. there are 60 countries that have made a substantial commitment alongside the united states to take the fight to isil. and many of those countries -- that includes countries in the region. at least some of those countries would not be entirely comfortable with a large-scale long-term foreign military deployment in their neighborhood. >> but operations would be authorized for rescue missions taking out isis leaders calling in air strikes and intelligence. how is that not mission creep? >> well, because, jim, the president has been clear about this, i think from the very beginning, that this kind of large-scale, long-term commitment of u.s. ground troops is not a successful strategy. >> but short of a large-scale, long-term operation, you can expand the authorization under this authorization? >> well, what we -- >> the language is fuzzy, is it not? >> intentionally so. >> intentionally so. >> the intentionally fuzzy?

>> yes. because we believe it is important there aren't overly burdensome complaints put on the president who deals with -- in chaotic military conflict like this. the fact of the matter is we do need the united states and commander in chief, this one and the next one to have the ability to respond to specific contingencies. if there is the need to order military action within these con strait strants but clearly in the best interest of the united states or safety and security of military personnel, then the commander in chief needs to have the ability to order that military action and to do it quickly without seeking additional specific authorization from the congress. >> in the three-year time limit does tie the hands of his successor successor, does it not? >> if the next president wants to go longer than three years, than 018, he's going to have to go back or she's going to have to go back to congress. >> it is true this authorization

to use military force would expire based on the way that this draft reads would expire three years after congress passes it. and the president believes that that is an appropriate period of time for -- for our military to implement a strategy and for us to measure what kind of progress is being made and whether or not the national security interests of the united states are being appropriately advanced. and if after three years, the strategy is continuing to succeed and we're seeing the results we would like and we believe it is necessary for that strategy to continue to be implemented, then yes, then congress can take up additional legislation to -- to approve the continued use of military force. again, if the strategy is demonstrating continued progress, and it is determined that that strategy needs to continue to be implemented in the same way, then congress

should certainly be able to pass that authorization to use military force as well. that is, after all, the appropriate role for congress to play in all this. and it is not appropriate for congress, frankly, to try to side-step the responsibilities they have in this matter. >> just to quickly follow up on yemen, there are reports including from cnn that they did not allow the marines to take their weapons with them when they were departing and there were cars and other assets, i guess, of the embassy personnel that were seized. that inside the embassy the documents were steroid and other items were steroid inside the embassy. is that your understanding of how things unfolded? it sounds like this was a close call. >> well, jim, this was a delicate situation. and we noted that we were -- that the administration was carefully monitoring the security situation on the ground

in sanaa to ensure the safety and security of the american personnel there. obviously, the u.s. government determined the situation in sanaa was serious enough that it required the relocation of american personnel operating in that country and that city. i think it is fair for you to assume that this was a pretty serious situation. i know there are some conflicting reports on the ground about what has happened since the facility was -- was emptied. and i can't speak to those specific reports. and i can't confirm them. but we certainly -- i certainly would use this opportunity to reiterate the responsibility that the yemeni government and the rebels have in ensuring the protection of diplomatic property and equipment that was left behind. margaret? >> thanks, josh. i first wanted to ask you on two

other small items. one is, has the president been briefed on the situation in chapel hill with the shootings and the deaths of those muslim students? and does he have any reaction -- the white house have any reaction? >> there's no specific reaction from the white house. this is something that local law enforcement is investigating. i know that they -- based on published reports, they have a suspect in custody. and i know part of that investigation will include the circumstances that may have led to this act of violence and that will also include the investigation of questions about what motivation this individual may have had. so, you know, this is the very beginning of an ongoing local law enforcement investigation. we'll await the results of that investigation before we say anything. [ inaudible ] >>, no he has not.

>> yesterday -- i believe today actually, the u.s. brought a case before the world trade organization over china's subsidy program and the challenge to it. i'm just wondering whether that came up yesterday in the call with the chinese leader, to give him a heads up it was coming and whether there was any discussion or reaction to that? >> i don't know whether or not the president brought it up in the context of the call but i'm glad you brought up this case with me. because it is an appropriate time for me to remind all of you of this administration's strong record of going to the wto to protect the american economy and american businesses and american workers. throughout this presidency, 18 different times this administration has taken specific cases to the world trade organization, raising concerns about the trade practices of other countries. 18 times the united states come away victorious in resolving those claims. resolved in the favor of u.s.

businesses and workers. i think that is a testament to the kind of commitment this administration and this president has made to ensure as we engage in global economy the president will make sure, both, that we are protecting american workers and american businesses and we're hold other countries actable for playing by the rules. as we consider taking additional steps to enter into trade agreements with other countries particularly in the asia-pacific, that as people evaluate whether or not the president is this is a pretty good example that he's committed to protecting american interests and he's been successful in doing it. >> if you can clarify on what we discussed yesterday. on amf, it sounds obvious, but is this now the package you believe does have enough

bipartisan support to be passed by congress? how competent are you that the amf is going to be a go get a green light? >> margaret, the text that was sent up to capitol hill today and sent to all of you today does reflect the results of hours of conversations between administration officials and democrats and republicans on capitol hill. and it does reflect committed effort to the part of this administration to find common ground on some of these complicated and significant issues. at the same time, i'm not at all going to be surprised if there are members of congress who take a look at this legislation and decide, there are things we should tweak here. i think it is fair for you to assume this reflects a starting point in conversations, but this

starting point was arrived at after extensive consultations between senior members of the president's national security team and democrats and republicans on capitol hill in both the house and the senate, okay? >> i'm wondering -- if you can define the word enduring and what enduring means in the context of this amf. >> well, i wouldn't have a specific number to assign to that word but i do think that it is an apt way to describe what the president envisions and what he doesn't. what the president does not envision is a long-term, large-scale commitment of ground combat troops that is -- that we saw in the context of operations in both iraq and afghanistan in the past. that's not what the president has in mind. there's no question that u.s.

military personnel, who served in those countries were there on an enduring basis. they were there for years, in afghanistan for a decade now. that is not at all what the president envisions as part of the strategy for degrading and ultimately destroying isil. for the reasons i admittedly went on at length to convey to mr. costa, the president -- not only does the president believe that should not be part of our strategy, he believes if we were to make those commitments and undermine our strategy for success. >> i guess what i'm trying to figure out is why that word was inserted because as you've already discussed there are already all these provisions to explain instances where ground forces could be used for rescue missions or whatever else they might need to be used for. so, that already exists in the amf. what is the point of the word enduring ahead of all types of

ground operations? >> right. well, i think that -- again, the reason this phrase was put in there in the way that it was, it is to be what the president does not envision. he does not envision any large-scale, ground combat operations like we saw in iraq and afghanistan previously. what he does want to preserve is the ability to to con sin againcies and it may require -- may require combat boots on the ground. the most easily imagined examples are examples in which the president could order military operation involving combat troops to try and rescue u.s. hostages. the president's already done that once. and that was -- that put u.s. combat boots on the ground in

syria, in an offensive operation. right? they were running toward a target, firing at -- at isil fighters right? >> that's already set aside in the amf. >> well, not really. again, this phrase is to try to codify exactly what we're envisioning, right? so enduring offensive ground combat operations means not doing what was done under the previous administration in iraq but yet preserving the ability to order military operations like the one the president has already ordered to try to rescue u.s. hostages. that is the way it's described in the aumf. >> so the amf does include separate language about rescue operations or about -- >> i see where this is -- it does not include that. the president -- this aumf text does not itemize specific contingencies that would authorize the president to do

certain things. and the reason for that is pretty straightforward. when we're dealing in a chaotic situation like a military conflict, particularly like this one, it would be difficult for even a group of really smart, experienced people to come up with a comprehensive list of the kinds of contingencies. there will -- there certainly is the possibility that contingencies that none of us could imagine would arise. . -t important there not language in the aumf that would limit the president's ability to react quickly. there have been previous proposals by some members of congress that did envision some sort of checklist that would carve out some specific loopholes, if you will, that would allow the president to respond to contingencies they were able to imagine. and it is the view of this administration that an approach like that doesn't sufficiently preserve the needed flexibility for the commander in chief. john?

>> the authorization of military force, just to make sure i'm reading it properly,there is nothing in this authorization that would prevent an expansion of this war effort beyond iraq and syria to other countries? >> well,there are no geographic limitations included in this specific draft legislation. >> so it would offer this president or the next president -- this president or the next president to engage in an air campaign against isil targets that were in lebanon or if they were in afghanistan or pakistan or if they had moved elsewhere? >> well, if necessary, it would preserve the ability of the president -- of the commander in chief to order military operations against isil or isil affiliated groups in other countries. let me explain to you the reason why. simply we don't want to send a signal to isil that they may be able to establish a safe haven somewhere else. if we pass a piece of legislation that says, you know congress has authorized the president to carry out the use

of military force in iraq and syria, we don't want anybody in isil to be left with the impression if they move to some neighboring country, that they will be essentially in a safe haven and not within the range of united states military capability. so, that is why we've been clear about not including a geographic limitation in this proposal. it does it does not authorize large-scale in afghanistan and iraq, you would acknowledge there is a lot of daylight between what's going on now and having 100,000 troops on the ground in iraq or afghanistan, at one point in both of those countries.

>> it was authorized here because it clearly authorized what's going on now, but it would also authorize, based on that language a rather dramatic expansion of the current operation. >> well i -- >> because we are nowhere near 100,000 ground troops in -- like we were in iraq or afghanistan. >> that's for sure. >> based on policy decisions by this commander in chief. >> this is going to apply to the next commander in chief. >> it will. hillary clinton, ted cruz, whoever, it this apply to the next president. >> it will. and the president's been very clear about the strategy he's envisioned here. he's been very clear i think about what he believes is in the best interest of the united states. you are right that the next commander in chief, when that person is elected by the american people, will have to pursue their own strategy but they will face the same limitations and constraints under the authorization to use

military force that the president is. >> you can't conduct an operation on the scale that we saw in iraq or afghanistan under the previous administration. >> well, it's something that could be described as an endure enduring combat operation. >> a fuzzy term as you pointed out. >> i acknowledge what it does is preserve the ability of the commander in chief to make the kinds of decisions that he or she believes is in the best interest of the united states. that said the president believes we should state clearly up front the kind of commitment of ground troops we saw in iraq or afghanistan, under the previous administration, was not in the best interest of the united states. >> the president also talks about the places combat troops, ground troops could be used under this authorization. he mentions rescue operations that could be done. there are things i believe that haven't been done yet. correct me if i'm wrong. special operations personnel on the ground isil leadership combat operations on the ground

to gather intelligence or to enable kinetic strikes presumably by or partners on the ground or by our pilots. are those things the president is currently contemplating in addition to ground combat troops for intelligence gathering or to go after isil leaders on the ground? >> the president has indicated in the past, and we went through some questions about this when general dempsey testified before congress last fall, that it was on the table for the president to adopt a recommendation when it was made. it does not yet base on the last update i've gotten on this -- let me start over. if the president's senior military leaders recommended to him that it would be beneficial to our strategy and this overall operation to forward deploy some troops to assist in kinetic air strikes, that is something the president would consider. i think what general dempsey

testified before congress is that he had not yet made that recommendation to the sdmroot or to go after isil leaders which is mentioned here. that was not part of -- >> and i think that's a different -- that is a different scenario. i don't know that anything like that has been floated at this point. i think what the president -- or at least what some of us envision in this description is the raid president obama order against bin laden. that was a scenario where there were u.s. combat troops on the ground in pakistan, in this case, to bring osama bin laden to justice. you can imagine a scenario where the president might find it would be beneficial to our strategy to order a similar raid against a high value target that was a member of the isil leadership. >> and one other topic quickly. the counterterrorism chief for the fbi in prepared testimony for congress today said that one of a new waive of extremism --

homegrown violent extremism with foreign terrorist organizations and he said, individuals inspired by foreign terrorist groups could be covertly arming themselves with expertise and tools to carry out an attack on the homeland. does the white house agree with the counterterrorism chief of the fbi? >> well, i haven't seen his entire testimony. based on what you read and whooef seen in the past, the president has directed has team including homeland security and law enforcement to vigilant about the kind of threats posed both by foreign fighters, individuals with western passports and have traveled to the region to fight alongside isil and may have returned home and considered carrying out acts of violence here. we're mindful of the need to try to counter efforts by isil to use social media to radicalize people and inspire them to carry out acts of violence. that's one of the reasons the president is convening a summit next here at the white house on countering violent extremism to

make sure -- committee on oversite and government reform would come to order. we have an important hearing today. we appreciate the many people that are here to participate in that. we also appreciate the patience with votes on the floor that get called a little bit later. that always has -- serves as the primary thing we do in the afternoon around here. so we appreciate your patience. nevertheless we do have a very important hearing highlighting the general accountability office, 20 years of problematic practices. this year marks the 25th anniversary of the gao's high-risk list. i have a full statement but in the essence of time i'm going to insert those comments into the record and would invite other members to do the same. i would like to recognize ranking member mr. cummings feshgs has any opening

statements. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i'm going to do the same. i want to thank all our witnesses. and i'll submit my statement for the record. i want to always as usual, thank you, mr. denarro, and all the on other gao employees who do a great job. with that, i yield back. >> thank you. i'll hold the record open for five legislative days. we would like to recognize our first witness. comptroller of the united states government accountability office. on behalf of both of us and this whole body, we thank the thousands of men and women who serve in the gao who really work hard to create a work product and present it here today. so, we welcome all. pursuant to committee rules the witness will be sworn in before he testifies. we will also swear in the panel behind him, should their input

be needed during their question questioning. so, if you could all rise, please. thank you. rise and raise your right hand. do you sell lemly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. thank you. let the record reflect all the witnesses answered in the affirmative. now recognize. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. good afternoon to you. ranking member cummings, all members of the committee. i'm very pleased to be here to discuss gao's latest high-risk update. we do this with the beginning of each new congress to identify areas we believe are at highest risk of fraud waste abuse and

mismanagement or need of broadbased transformation. our reported today discusses solid steady progress in most of the 30 high-risk areas we've had on the list since our last update in 2013. of all the areas we rate according to five criteria to get off the high-risk list. you have to have leadership attention, capacity, resources and people with the right skills to be able to fix the problem. have you to have a good corrective action plan that addresses root cause, good monitoring effort to gauge progress, and have you to demonstrate that you're actually fixing the problem. you don't have to be 100% fixed but we have to be convinced that we're on the right path to rectifying the problem and reducing the risk and eliminating waste and improving government services.

of the 30 areas, 18 have partially met criteria. 11 of those 18 have at least fully met one or more of the criteria and partially met the others. in two areas we're recognizing progress so we're narrowing the scope of the high-risk area. first is on fda's oversight of medical devices. we're pleased with their efforts to get the recall process under better control and discipline. and also to have a good process to review the applications for new devices in a more risk-based approach. we're still concerned about their need to oversee the global marketplace for medical products and drugs. 80% of the ingredients of active drugs come from other countries. about 40% of finnish drugs, about half of medical devices. they need to do more there. and also to address drug shortage issues. second area is contract

management. we believe the department of defense is focused more attention of top leadership on contracting tools and techniques and reducing the risk associated with undefinitiveized work where they start contract work without having a clear agreement with the contractor or they're using time and materials which is a risky contract approach rather than having deliverables. they still have to prove their areas in their acquisition workforce, service acquisitions and improve their use of contracting and-n operational environments to support military operations in theater. we are adding two new areas to the high-risk list this year. first, is va's provision of health care service for veterans. we're very concerned about this area. there are five fundamental problems that we've identified ambiguous policies inconsistent processes, inadequate oversight and monitoring of the

activities. i.t. challenges inadequate training of staff and unclear resource needs and allocations. congress has passed legislation recently to give them additional $15 billion to help address this problem that legislation has to be implemented properly. we have over 100 recommendations that we've made to va have that have yet to be fully implemented. this area needs congressional oversight and continued attention. second are i.t. acquisitions and operations across the federal government. too often the federal government government and we enumerate this in our report, there's a litany of efforts that have failed after spending hundreds of millions of dollars, in this case billions of dollars over many years, they're terminated. there's a longer list of problems where cost overrun schedule slippages or they fail to deliver the promise functionality and make

improvements in the programs that they're supposed to and delivery of services. here again, the congress has passed legislation late last year. this committee was instrumental in passing the legislation of federal information technology reform act to give cios additional authority, put in place better practices. they have more disciplined approaches to i.t. management. here again just in the last five years alone, we've made 737 recommendations. only 23% have been fully implemented. so, we believe this is a critical area. we're also expanding two areas in the administration, the tax area. we've been focused on tax gap, which at last count was $385 billion. we're expanding that to include identity theft and the irs was able last year to stop about $24 billion in fraudulent returns potentially. but they missed by their own

estimates about $5.8 billion. we've got some fixes to this we can talk about in the q&a. we're also expanding cyber security and critical infrastructure protection to include privacy issues. initially we designated computer security across the entire federal government, first time we ever did that, in 1997. we added critical infrastructure protection because most of the computer assets are in the private sector hands in 2003. now there's a lot more incidents involving personally identifiable information and number of incidents have doubled over the last five years. privacy law was passed in 1994. it's sorely in need of updating. we have a number of recommendations to protect this sensitive information. the american people deserve for their information to be protected properly while we're addressing the cyber security issues. i thank you for the opportunity to be here today. and look forward to answering

your questions. >> thank you. i appreciate that. we'll now recognize the gentleman from georgia, mr. heist, for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. quick question for you and thank you for joining us this afternoon. since the enactment of the veterans access choice and accountability act i have a number of veterans in my district who because of their location, where they live, they've not been able to utilize va medical centers and so they have opted to use non-va doctors and so forth. and one of the issues they are facing are significant delays from the va paying those medical providers. is there anything that you -- that the gao plans to do in the future to evaluate this issue and to report on it in the future? >> actually, we've already addressed that issue and issued a report talking about the

problems they were having in paying providers in a timely manner. we're also concerned about the fact that the va doesn't always have information enough to make sure that they're making the right decisions in terms of whether they should be providing the care or going to a nonhealth care provider, both for access purposes and for making sure this cost effective approach. our expert in this area, i'll have her talk about the efforts in this area. we plan to follow up sir. >> yeah. we actually conducted work about a year or so ago. we made a number of recommendations around the infrastructure surrounding the non-va care. a lot of issues were not paying claims promptly. so dwoeshgs have concerns about non-va care. we have concerns that it may not be the panacea that people envisioned it could be. because there is not really the infrastructure in place, or it wasn't in place, you know, when we took a look at the work. so you know, you are talking about putting people -- the va

system is a very difficult system to navigate. now you're also asking them to navigate another system outside of the va. there's just a lot of issues around non-va care. other issue is that wait times for non-va care does not really tracked. so no one really knows how long people are waiting to get care in the community. there's just a lot of issues. it is something we'll be looking at. and the choice act does have several mandates for gao to look at non-va care. >> thank you. obviously, the concern is if these payments are slow and being received, i'm fearful our veterans will receive diminished health care across the board. that is the concern. i thank you. i yield my time. >> i'm concerned too, congressman. we'll stay on top of it. >> thank you, sir. >> we'll resume live coverage of this hearing in a few minutes. we take you live to the white house and a statement from the president. >> good afternoon. today as part of an international coalition of some 60 nations including arab

countries, our men and women in uniform continue to fight against isil in iraq and in syria. more than 2,000 coalition air strikes have pounded these terrorists. we're disrupting their command and control and supply lines, making it harder for them to move. we're destroying their fighting positions. their tanks, their vehicles, their bare raction, training camps and oil and gas and infrastructure that fund their operations. we're taking out their commanders, their fighters and their leaders. in iraq local forces have largely held the line and in some places have pushed isil back. in syria isil failed in its major push to take the town of kobani, losing countless fighters in the process. fighters who will never again threaten innocent civilians. we've seen reports of sinking morale among isil fighters as they realize the futility of their cause.

now, make no mistake, this is a difficult mission. and it will remain difficult for some time. it's going to take time to dislodge these terrorists, especially from urban areas. but our coalition is on the offensive. isil is on the defensive and isil is going to lose. barbaric murders of so many people, including american hostages, are a desperate and revolting attempt to strike fear in the hearts of people it can never possibly win over by its ideas or ideology because it offers nothing but misery and death and destruction. with vial groups with vile groups like this, this is only one option. we will degrade and ultimately destroy this terrorist group. and when i announced our strategy against isil in september, i said we are strongest as a nation when the president and congress work together. today my administration submitted a draft resolution to

congress to authorize the use of force against isil. i want to be very clear about what it does and what it does not do. this resolution reflects our core objective to destroy isil. it supports the comprehensive strategy we've been pursuing with our allies and our partners. a systematic and sustained campaign of air strikes against isil in iraq and syria, support and training for local forces on the ground including the moderate syrian opposition preventing isil attacks in the region and beyond, including by foreign terrorist fighters who try to threaten our countries. regional and international support for an inclusive iraqi government that unites the iraqi people and strengthens iraqi forces against isil. humanitarian assistance for the innocent civilians of iraq and syria, who are suffering so terribly under isil's reign of horror. i want to thank vice president biden, secretaries kerry and

hagel and general dempsey for their leadership in advancing our strategy. even as we meet this challenge in iraq and syria we all agree that one of our weapons against terrorists like isil, a critical part of our strategy, is the values we live here at home. one of the best anecdotes to the hateful ideologies that try to recruit and radicalize people to violent extremism is our own example as diverse and tolerant societies that welcome contributions of all people, including people of all faiths. the resolution we've submitted today don't call for deployment of u.s. ground combat forces to iraq or syria. it is not the authorization of another ground war like afghanistan or iraq. the 2600 american troops in iraq today largely serve on bases. and, yes, they face the risk that comes with service in any dangerous environment but they do not have a combat mission.

they will-r focused on training iraqi forces including kurdish forces. as i've said before, i'm convinced that the united states should not get dragged back into another prolonged ground war in the middle east. that's not in our national security interest and it's not necessary for us to defeat isil. local forces on the ground who know their countries best are best positioned to take the ground fight to isil and that's what they're doing. at the same time this resolution strikes the necessary balance by giving us the flexibility we need for unforeseen circumstances. for example, if we had actionable intelligence about a gathering of isil leaders and our partners didn't have the capacity to get them, i would be prepared to order our special forces to take action because i will not allow these terrorists to have a safe haven. so we needflexibility but we also

need. as commander in chief,ly only send our troops into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary for our national security. finally, this resolution repeals the 2002 authorization of force for the invasion of iraq and limits this new authorization to three years. i do not believe america's interests are served by endless war or by remaining on a perpetual war footing. as a nation we need to ask the difficult and necessary questions about when, why and how we use military force. after all, it is our troops who bear the costs of our decisions and we owe them a clear strategy and the support they need to get the job done. so, this resolution will give our armed forces and our coalition the continuity we need for the next three years. it is not a timetable. it is not announcing that the

mission is completed at any given period. what it is saying is that congress should revisit the issue at the beginning of the next president's term. it's conceivable that the mission is completed earlier. it's conceivable that after deliberation debate and evaluation, that there are additional tasks to be carried out in this area. and the people's representatives with a new president should be able to have that discussion. in closing i want to say that in crafting this resolution, we have consulted with and listened to both republicans and democrats in congress. we made a sincere effort to address difficult issues, that we discussed together. in the days and weeks ahead we'll continue to work closely with leaders and members of congress on both sides of the aisle.

i believe this resolution can grow even stronger with thoughtful and dignified debate this moment demands. i'm optimistic it can win strong bipartisan support and we can show our troops and the world that americans are united in this mission. today our men and women in uniform continue the fight against isil and we salute them for their courageous service. we pray for their safety. we stand with their families who miss them. and we're sacrificing here at home. know this, our coalition is strong, our cause is just and our mission will succeed. le and long after the terrorists we face today are destroyed and foregotten, america will continue to stand free and tall and strong. god bless our troops and god bless the united states of america. thank you very much, everybody.

>> the president, along with the vice president, secretary of defense and defense secretary, a statement on the president's request for the u.s. of force against isis. we return you now to live coverage of a hearing by the house oversight and government reform committee. members of the hearing looking at government waste and inefficiencies. hearing from representatives from the government accountability office today. live coverage on c-span3. >> that's why i think the legislation of this committee was instrumental in passing fatar, which strengthened cio authorities which is going to be instrumental in going forward so we can manage this $80 billion more appropriate. >> the krichlt os need to be more involved and held accountable for these efforts and more uniform across the government. if this legislation is successfully implemented, we should be successful. >> how long have you been with gao? >> this june 40 years. >> have you seen anybody in the

federal government fired for cost or time overruns? >> i'm trying to think. i'm sure people have been in big trouble as a result of it. i can tell you that. i know about that. i can't think of any specific personnel actions offhand. there have been people who have been under a lot of scrutiny and have suddenly retired in that process. so, yes there have been people that have been moved out. >> thank you. i yield back my time. >> would my colleague yield just for a second? >> yes. >> i thank my colleague. you brought up two very important points on cios and on legacy systems. and data center consolidation. the fatara bill, does address all three things and mandates status on consolidation also requires there are 250 people with the title cio spread out

over 24 federal agencies. imagine that. so, our bill says, there ought to be one primary cio for every agency who's accountable and has authority. that's what mr. dodaro is talking about, hopefully with the implementation of that bill we'll see real progress. it's something i hope we'll monitor. i know mr. meadows and i intend to do that in the subcommittee. thank you. >> the gentlemen yields back. we recognize the gentle lady from the district of columbia, ms. norton forks five minutes. >> my colleague asked about cost overruns. if people got fired for cost overruns, half the defense department would be fired. i'm very interested in this high-risk list because i've been obediently listening to this list for a long time. and i never knew much about how you get on it and how you get off it. so, i'd like to drill down a

little about it, particularly considering that gao must look at what must be hundreds of thousands of agencies in order to draw its list. and i must say, whenever there's good news it seems to me this committee ought to be the first to note it but i did note that -- highlighted almost on your first page it says solid, steady progress. has been made in the vast majority of high-risk areas. i don't believe i've seen that kind of language before in your reports. you say that more than one-third of the areas previously designated as high-risk have been removed. so i'd like to know, you know, how do you get on it and how do you get removed? >> first of all we have published criteria that we vetted with the executive branch years ago about how you get on and how you come off. how you get on is we look at the

significance of the risk, both in quantitative terms, in other words, there has to be at least $1 billion in risk. there has to be issues, it's either a public safety issue like oversight of medical products and food safety we have on the list has to be important to national security economic security for the country has risk of program failures, programs actually not achieving their objectives because they're on the high-risk list. so there is a long list of factors that we consider. and we also look as to whether or not the agencies have corrective action plans in place. if they do have a plan it looks like it is going to be a good plan and it may be successful, we may hold off on putting them on the list and give them an opportunity to fix it. you come off by five criteria. top leadership commitment, there has to be a commitment by the top leaders in the agency sustained, they have to have the capacity, the people and the number of people and the right skills and the right numbers in

resources to be able to fix the problem. they have to have a good plan, a corrective action plan that addresses the root causes of the problems. they have to have a monitoring effort with interim milestones and metrics. you have to then actually demonstrate that you are fixing the problem. if you meet those five criteria, you come off the list. if you do that in part of the high-risk area, we narrow the high-risk area to those areas that you haven't. like we mentioned this year we did in two areas. that's how you do that. >> i notice the second -- i think the second criteria mentioned the word resources. would it be fair to say that a significant challenge for getting off the list would be the scarcity of funding these days since that's one of your criteria? >> well, by resources we mean the skills necessary -- >> doesn't mean funding at all.

is funding a significant challenge for agents implementing your recommendations and getting off the list? >> it could be. but it could be that they're not using the funding that they have very well. it does not necessarily mean they need more funding. >> accepted. could i ask you what congress can do -- assuming that congress is not going to do much about resources, i'll take an area of specific interest to me -- real estate. that is the area the federal government's handling of its real estate portfolio has been under constant criticism from the gao. would you tell me how considering the billions of dollars involved in leasing and construction how real estate portfolio is doing. >> yes. first i would say in the high-risk list we have asterisk

areas where congress needs to take action in order to address the area. so there is a substantial number of the 32 areas that we've already designated for congress. postal service reform is one. cyber security is another. the need to finance the nation's transportation infrastructure system is another one. so we've designated major areas where congress needs to be part of the solution to the problem. in the real property area one of the areas that's on the list is the overreliance on leasing. we've tried to convince the agencies particularly gsa, to put forward a case to the congress that says, look, we would be -- it would be cheaper to own this particular property rather than lease these properties, but they've been reluctant to do so so we think the congress ought to mandate that they do that in that area. they're also underutilized properties that congress could give additional authority in pilot areas to try to provide

these things. there is a lot of barriers that we've identified that congress could help alleviate for the agencies to do this. but they need a good strategic plan. they have not yet presented the congress with a good strategic plan on how to address this area. we've recommended it. they're working on the plan right now for the first time. and so we're hopeful to see it this year. hopefully it will provide a good road map for them and for the congress. >> thank you. very useful. >> thank you. now recognize the gentleman from texas for five minutes. meant to say florida. florida. florida. >> where it's warm. >> don't mess with texas. >> texas is a great state but i'd rather be from florida right now. have you ever seen the movie "ground hog day"? >> yes. over and over. >> yeah.

>> well, i'm sitting here and i swear, a lot of the recommendations are the same recommendations you brought us before. i segue from your comments -- in fact i just read the chairman, myself mr. denim we've been interested in excess property. and you can't get people to move on dealing with excess property. i think we found 14,000 in gsa and we did the first hearing at the old post office and i put an "x" through and i put 13999. we've done about six more in vacant properties, some of them moving. but i'm only going to be here so long. even this guy's young. we can't do a hearing on every property. what concerns me and you just said it in your report, omb in conjunction with land holding agencies could improve its

capacity and action by implementing -- this is dealing with excess -- or under uteilized properties -- to develop a strategic plan. em omb has not done that. >> that's correct. >> one thing i've discussed briefly, in the bill that -- there were two bills offered. mr. chafis offered one, mr. denim offered another. but we need a requirement that this he have a plan, and then there be some annual action on the plan and the recommendation some triggering mechanism. wouldn't i agree? >> yes. >> none of them will make a decision. the stuff just sits there. it sits there. so i come back again and we're having ground hog day on excess property. finally on the administration -- this is -- the administration released the results of a freeze on footprint policy which they indicate a freeze reduced the

government's office and warehouse space. they gave you that report. you analyzed that report. and they claim they reduced the federal warehouse space by 1. -- i'm sorry, 10.2 million square feet. but then you said they didn't. >> that's correct. >> can you elaborate? >> yes. phil is our leader on that. >> hi. yeah. one of the things we like to do is go behind some of those kind of estimates, take them apart, try to see where some of the flaws are. in looking at the freeze the footprint data, we saw some things that were miscounted, also some thangsings that were vacant, also counted separately in gsa's database. something we've testified before your subcommittees previously is the real problem is with the data on the property. >> that's right. one, in fact they didn't know what property they can behad, they didn't know the condition of the property they had, they didn't know the status of it or being

eligible for either future utilization or keep a current inventory. right down the line, they did not know. in fact, they gave us lists that we clekdhecked and you checked that showed that what they were giving us was totally incorrect. is that not correct? >> that is correct. >> well, this is something else we've got to get as some requirement for these agencies. if omb won't do it we can do it statutorily. i know mr. chafis is committed to get a bill through the house and the senate that will get a handle onl this this but we have to have triggers milestones we have to have some measure of them achieving a goal or performance. am i wrong? >> i agree. any major management reform that's been successful over time has a statutory underpinning. and that transcend

administrations and congress. >> coming soon. thank you. >> gentleman yields back. now recognize the gentleman from virginia for five minutes. >> thank you, from chairman. this is maybe -- i actually really look forward to this hearing every year. i congratulate gao for the intellectual underpinning of identifying these risk categories. i think it is an incredible helpful public policy document and i hope a useful management tool. it also guides us, especially this committee. so much of what you're talking about is all about our agenda. so hopefully we will also take it to heart and respond accordingly. you actually endorsed our bill, also known preferably as issa-connelly. how important is that to you that it get implemented?

>> that's very important. that's a critical -- that's one of the reasons actually we put i.t. acquisitions and operations on the list, is in order to elevate attention to make sure that the bill is implemented effectively. but if it doesn't have attention -- i'm also concerned because we're coming to the last two years of this administration, it's got to be sustained in the next administration. having the statutory underpinning is critically important and it gives us and the congress means to hold people accountable over time. so it's absolutely critical to rectifying this problem that we've identified. >> and there are real potential savings if we can make this work. is that not correct? >> oh, yes, absolutely. absolutely. in the billions. >> yeah. in the billions. >> yes. >> mr. chairman. so i know we're going to work on a bipartisan