but none of us will soon forget what we have gone through over these last seven years in this recession. huh? it seemed like our entire economy was hanging by a thread. and yet, instead of giving up, we push back we came together, we elected a new president to make tough choices and not a single one of them was popular. but they were necessary for our common good for our national interests. and we have battled back. and as we've battled back, every state had a decision to make. in our state we cast aside the failed, worn out trickled down, exclusive economic policies of our past that drove us in to that recession. and instead we embrace the economics and the politics of inclusion. instead of doing less, we did more to educate our children at higher and better levels.

instead of doing less we did more to make college more affordable. going four years in a row without a penny's increase to college tuition. we invested more in infrastructure, water, waste water, broadband, as well as our highways and our mass transit infrastructure. and because we understand that a stronger middle class is actually the cause of all economic growth. we became the first state in the nation to pass a living wage law. we raised the minimum wage. we extended prevailing wage to more public projects like school construction than we ever had before. we expanded collective bargaining. made it easier to have their voices heard. and we also recognize the important truth that no economy

and hoping eventually the clouds would burst. that's not the way our nation was built. an economy's built from the middle out and from the middle up. we made we passed marriage equality. we passed the dream act. we made it possible for hard working new american moms and dads to actually get a driver's license so they could get to and from work and take care of their family. we affirmed in other words that the truth we're all in this together. and that we need each other. and the more people included in the state, the better we're all able to do. and the proof, really, was in the results. number one median income in america, eight years in a row.

not only a aaa bond rating defended through the recessionary years with fiscal responsibility and tough choices. than our neighbors were able to achieve north and south of us. at a time when our entire nation is wondering what we must do in order to strengthen and grow our middle class again. you see, the choices that we made were not things we did by chance. they were things we did because we understood we had the power to make that american dream true. at least in our own part of this great country. let me share with you what i've been hearing as i've traveled

around the nation. and i might ask you this question. audience participation. show of hands, how many of you believe very firmly that you have enjoyed a better quality of life than your parents and grandparents have enjoyed? raise your hands. okay. second question. how many of you believe just as firmly that your children and grandchildren will enjoy a better quality of life than you have. raise your hands. that is the great question at the center of the kitchen table of our democracy. it is true that because of tough choices, our country did not sink into the second great depression. we have been coming back there

are many signs we're doing better as a nation than we were seven years ago. get this, 60 months in a row of positive job creation. that's like five years of consistent month over month job creation. and that is the good news. why is it, then that more of us today feel more pessimistic about our children's opportunities than we did four years ago? it is because wages in america for the vast majority of moms and dads and their families have actually been going down over the last 12 years. and not up. and until wages start going up until we make the american dream

true again around the kitchen tables of america, we can't let up. we have to continue to look to one another for answers to solve this problem. get this 50 years ago 50 years ago, the average employee at gm could send a child to college on two week's wages. two week's wages. that's not true anymore. not true anymore. and we need to figure out we need to draw lessons about what we must do today. there's a despondency out there. there's a darkness that has crept deep inside the soul of our country. and we need to acknowledge it and reject it for what it is. the washington times, and i

quote. it said the american dream is dead dead. well, to these headline writers and pundits who would declare a premature obituary for the american dream, we must all say, not on our watch. not on our watch. we have better choices to make. and we still have the time to be the great americans our parents and our grandparents were. we're going to have to make the choices that are consistent with the truth of how our economy works. this means we have to make the american dream real. just as they in a bipartisan way raise the minimum wage so that a family that worked hard could take care of their kids above the poverty line. we must do that. we must raise the threshold for overtime pay. you know back in the 70s 2/3 of households were able to earn overtime pay. but we haven't raised the threshold. now the only people that qualify

for overtime in this country are people working at the poverty line. we have to make the investments to educate innovate and rebuild and, yes just as teddy roosevelt did, we have to stand up to powerful, wealthy special interests wherever their prerogatives and their narrow perspectives threatens the national interest. threatens our national economy and threatens to wreck the homes, the livelihoods and the hopes of americans. i was on the front lines and so were you. the activity that led to this crash might have happened far from our states. but the damage happened in every neighborhood. millions of jobs millions of homes. and instead of following through on the reforms that the american people expected of us, we backed

off. seems like one party's entirely owned by i big money and the other party is nearly intimidated by it. people expect better. people expect better. they play by the rules and they work hard, and they expect wall street to play by the rules and they expect their government to be on their side and stand up for us, for our national interest. you know, the great american poet laureate, bruce springsteen asked the question, is the dream alive if it don't come true? or is it something worse? we have the ability to make that dream come alive again.

to make it true for not just a few of us, but all of us. how do we make our economy work again? for all of us? and we do that by bringing forward the lessons of our parents and grandparents who understood that the stronger we make our country, the more our country can give back to us, our children and our grandchildren. and we must realize in the search for these answers and in understanding one another and the problems we face and the reality we share and the promise we hold for our children if we step up to the plate. we have to realize is the power of our principles. the principles that say that, yes, there is a national interest. there is a common good. and our government is created to

defend and protect it just as lincoln understood. the principles that say that the stronger we make our country the more she gives back to us just as eisenhower understood. when he built the highways that connected us. we have to realize that in fact, we are all in this together. that discriminating against any people by race or gender or sexual orientation is wrong. that the way we build a strong america is for everyone to be included. that's why marriage equality is a human right not a state right. and when refugee kids from central america risk death and starvation to come here to the united states for refuge, we don't pen them up and turn them away at the border. we welcome them as the generous and compassionate people that we have always been.

because the enduring symbol of our country is not the barbed wire fence. it is the statue of liberty. these are our principles. we are americans. we make our own destiny. not time or chance. and we do it for one important reason. and that is to give our children a better future. this is what it means to be free. this is what it means to be americans. and in is the story we have the ability to write together. i'll leave you with the words of frederick douglass also one of my favorite republicans. he said that we are one, our cause is one. and we must help each other if we are to succeed. thanks very, very much.

. >> we have time for a couple of questions. >> thank you very much, kevin. for coming in. i am very excited about what you said about social security. part of the baby boomer generation i've sometimes been called part of the silver tsunami. so we are concerned with strengthening social security for us as well as protecting it for our children and our grandchildren so they can enjoy what we've come to accept.

>> the question is social security and making sure that we strengthen it and also that we expand it. one of the big changes that's happened over 30 years of following this failed economic model of concentrating wealth at the top, keeping wages low and systematically deregulating wall street is we've managed to systematically dismantle pensions for millions of americans. used to be, and some of you i know talked to some people in banking and investment. used to be requirement was a three-legged stool. personal savings pension, employer pension and social security. well, now that three-legged stool for far too many has become a one-legged stool. and you talk about a silver tsunami we can handle these changes in demographics. yeah, the baby boomers coming

through creates some challenges for social security. but nothing like the challenges we'd experience as a nation if we resigned ourselves to the fate of so many millions of our senior citizens, ending their years in abject poverty. we need to strengthen and expand social security. we need to pass immigration reform we need to revive the engine of our country where wages are going up. so the programs like social security are able to be sustained sustained, and especially in these times, expanded. >> ted? >> thanks. governor, great to see you, glad to be here. >> thank you, ted. >> loved your question about the next generation. i worry about my daughter and my daughter's generation. the thing i worry about is the national debt. what's your view on how we can handle that monster and how do we get it under control? >> national debt. you've probably had a number of other governors coming through

this forum, right? one of the things that governs are fond of saying is in our state we had to balance the budget every year. our national government sometimes does run up deficits and sometimes does have a debt. and it's often times out of necessity necessity. the debt, the best way to bring down the debt and continue to bring down annual deficit spending is to grow our economy. we can't cut our way to prosperity. you can try. they've tried in other states and they were routinely downgraded in their bond rating because that's not the way you actually create wealth. whether it's in a state or a

country country. getting wages. to continue another 12 years where wages decline instead of going up in the united states of america. first and foremost, we have to return to the economic principles. able to manage our debt down. and also to continue to reduce our deficit. it's kind of counterintuitive given the noise and the rhetoric out there. in terms of average spending increases percentage wise, there has not been a time in modern times under a president where there were -- where average

annual spending increases were smaller. the problem is though we're not making the average annual increased investments in the things that matter that make our country stronger. it's all about balance. the greatest threat i believe the greatest threat is not the debt. the greatest threat is a declining middle class. when we turn that around we'll turn the other arrows in the right direction, as well. >> governor, today as you know is the deadline, a deadline in the iran talks about nuclear power. and i wonder what are the key elements that should be in any agreement without which the united states should walk away? >> the question was about iran and the negotiations underway to prevent iran from obtaining

nuclear weapon or the capacity to build one. look, i think all of us all of us hope for positive resolution of those negotiations. i'm not sure if your state did this, our state passed some of the toughest sanctions back in 2008. credit to all of those that work so hard, including john kerry at this very moment to assemble that coalition to force iran to the table and prevent them from having a nuclear weapon. so that's the bottom line is that the -- any deal needs to prevent iran from developing a nuclear weapon. it needs to be verifiable and it needs to be open so that the international community can police it and those are the elements that i think are most important. >> governor, thank you for being with us. i work with federally qualified down in massachusetts. happy to say a son of one of

those general motors workers you referenced earlier in your comments. one of your former colleagues governor pence is in the news recently regarding the religious freedom act signed in his state. i'm interested in hearing your thoughts on that specific he continues to defend. and how you would approach it as governor as a former lawmaker. >> yeah, i think the wave of anti-gay anti-lesbian legislation is reprehensible and it's counter to everything we stand for as a people. it's wrong. it is a thinly vailed -- it is a thinly veiled well, it's not thinly veiled. i think the gig is up. i mean look, you have people like apple and all sorts of other businesses leaders stepping up and saying not only is this wrong not only is this counter to who we are as

americans, it's also really bad for business. in our states we adopted policies of respect anti-discrimination laws to protect transgendered people and as well as making marriage equality a civil right that's enjoyed equally in our state. there's a reason and i think some of those things contributed to why the united states chamber of commerce, hardly a mouthpiece for the maryland democratic party named our state three years in a row number one state in america for innovation and entrepreneurship. because economic inclusion. yes, part of that is making wages go up so that workers earn more and can be better customers for business, but part of it is also about creating an open society where the talents of all are respected needed, welcomed and people can feel at home and contribute to the innovative the creative life of an economy and of a state.

so let us hope. my mom's from indiana. i know there's a lot of really good people in indiana. and this sort of ugly legislation is not consistent with the truer spirit of the people. >> i want to say let's go os and thank you for being here. >> all right. >> and as a parent of young children in school, one of my big concern it is the damage that no child left behind has done on the educational system in our country. and the forced testing that has essentially created a bare minimum rather than encouraging innovation and some of the programs that allow for much more experimental education and creativity. how would you incorporate that into your campaign? >> yeah, thank you. well, you were speaking from the back. but in case somebody listening at home, the question was about

how we restore public education that respects the creativity and innovation and develops the whole child, i think is a way to paraphrase your question. we have to have accountability in all of our public institutions. back in 2002, i think perhaps 2003, our city and the mayor's here. who is also a pioneer in this performance measurement effort sweeping across the country, building from cities out. we received the innovations and government award from the kennedy school. and this was our innovation and government. we started measuring outputs. we started measuring outputs, we started holding ourselves accountable. not for what the budget is this year or might be next year but we held ourselves accountable for the things we were, we were

achieving for the outputs not only in terms of potholes and crime reduction and cleaning up the illegal dumping, but we also have to hold ourselves accountable, especially in public education. so as difficult as this transition has been sometimes oppressive as the standardized test appears to be we have to be able to measure our performance without it killing our creativity. and we're capable of doing that as a people. in our state, what we did was to create a polling instrument that every year asked all of our teachers in the classroom how are we doing? what are we doing well? and how can we do it better? in other words, what is the learning environment in the classroom? we also put forward some requirements to keep art and music in our schools because it

becomes such an easy excuse when principals feel pressure to make the achievement levels go up that the first thing they do is kill the programs that make a child look forward to going to school. that doesn't seem to have worked well. i think our kids learn better when we understand, yes, it's about stem. no state has more kids taking and passing more stem courses than our state does. vp it's about art and hallucinogenic, wellness and well being environmental literacy. and making the whole person. i think we have the opportunity to do it. with the advancements in digital learning, the ability of the ipad to deliver material, consistent with what cognitive science tells is the best way an individual child learns. and to do it in a more wholistic way. but we have, but we can't treat teachers like they're the enemy.

we have to respect teachers, talk with teachers and work collaboratively to work to raise a whole child. we did more in school construction than we ever had and our kids didn't let us down and neither did the teachers. >> the 2016 presidential election. many other people have been voting, two, three, four five presidential elections. your thoughts on how to get young people back into the process of being engaged in politics and eventually, hopefully, voting in the election. >> yeah. i believe you're going to see a

huge turnout among young people in this next election. i don't buy that they were all disappointed and checked out in the democracy or republic. what i see is a generational shift afoot in our country. people under 40 and especially younger people understand that our better days are more prosperous and secure days are going to come from being more closely connected to one another. not from running away from the problems, but from addressing our problems. not only the problems of affordable college, which hits them directly and immediately, but the problem making our economy work for all of us and also being leaders of this indispensable nation. and embracing opportunities out there in this world. the other thing i notice about younger people unlike some of us older people. i count myself as the older people.

understandably for the last 14 years, we have been focused on the threats of this world as americans and the threats posed here in the homeland. young people also see the opportunities. and if we can bridge to that better balance and salespeople to it. the aspirations still in the heart of every american, to be engaged in this world in the healing and giving and compassionate way, you'll see a turnout of young people in the next election. i have no doubt of that. but we have to speak and give voice to that optimism they innately feel in their own hearts.

>> just want to first thank you for coming in today, governor. >> thank you, tom. do you get extra credit for raising your hand and asking a question? >> i wish. >> i too am the oldest of six kids. so i was wondering what your plan would be for student loan for tuition. i'm a freshman here my sister is planning on going to college next year and my parents are like really struggling to find how they're going to send all of their kids to college. i was wondering what your plan would be for student loans and how to help parents pay for tuition in the future. one of the great questions i'm asked around the country. how do we make college more affordable again for all families? i think there's several aspects of it. it's absolutely outrageous you

can buy a home for lower interest than you can go to college. 7% compounded interest that built up before a kid's out of college, makes it impossible to do the things that make our economy go and grow.p÷

. . . . . . . . . . . . . a little long winded, but an important question. >> thanks very much. >> thank you. thank you.

come back again. >> i will. thanks a lot. >> thanks. >> you brought me an egg? >> i did. >> i haven't figured out a good way to find these. tell me your name again. >> spell it? >> m-e-z-j -- >> d? >> november echo. >> pretty name. >> thank you. my mom thought it was cool. >> there you go. >> thank you. >> sure. happy easter. >> i actually have two. one for me and my professor.

>> what's your name? >> stephanie. >> stephanie, and who is this? >> this is for wayne. >> do you get extra credit for signing an egg? >> i hope so. >> hi, stephanie. >> thank you what's your name? >> martina. >> we met before. >> we did.

what's your name? >> kevin. >> good to meet you. >> what do you do,en kevin? >> i'm a teacher. >> what do you find? >> more than you think. more than you think. this is one of my students edwin. e-d-y-w-n. >> e-d-y-n. >> i agree with you. we anticipate. >> no, i don't think so either. i think older people are more disappointed than they were. >> i'm looking at it very seriously. >> thank you. stay tuned. >> thank you.

>> hi, what's your name? >> state director of aarp new hampshire. >> hi, how are you? >> good. appreciate the irish comments very much. with a name like fahey. >> we all have our crosses to bear. so we're going to be talking -- >> you've got to be talking about the check off on employers or -- >> we're going to talk about any solution. >> mandatory options. universal options. talking about 401(k)s. >> something the employer doesn't contribute to on a payroll deduction. >> right. we did push back. we're going to come back. >> very good. thank you. >> thank you, todd. >> hi, very well done. >> thanks. tell me again your name.

>> barry eller. >> hey, barry. >> yeah. interest in social security side of things. that's -- >> were you at the aarp table? >> yeah. >> one of the -- you hit right on the head with the generation we've done better than our parents, our grandparents. >> little concerned with kids. >> yeah. >> college education prices. >> yeah. >> that was an eye opener right, i thought of it that way. that's good. >> thank you. >> governor. >> i'm going to do two eggs for a colleague. >> r-e -- >> r-e-e. >> okay. >> i agree with a lot of your p comments. the one i was a little concerned

about is -- or a lot concerned about is around immigration. i get the fact that we don't want our image to be a chain link fence or barbed wire, but on the other hand, we have a lot of people coming here that are just capping our social services, education system and not coming here with a job and a way so what's the plan to really control people coming in? >> well, it becomes easier for us to be effective and controlling our borders. they work paying full taxes, by the rules. a lot of focus on p kind of hard

to find the needle. >> the hay stack. path to the sipt senship. citizenship. it's in our national security interest. to create an underclass challenge where pretty nefarious and bad things can happen. especially in the age of terrorists. that's what i think. it's not unlike public safety where sometimes a lot of us are figuring out. the key is to focus. >> all one word. >> did your mother name you that? >> she's the only one that

doesn't call me that. >> oh, did you? also helping small business. >> kevin? you got a card? one of my colleagues teaches at the school. and he's a public administration guy.

>> i said absolutely. >> to andy smith. andy. >> i tell you. primary polls are actually, became the ones at the very end. you don't have the party i.d.. >> andy thank you, hope we see each other again. where are you from, sam? >> from mass. i'm a big baseball fan.

i'm pretty excited about that. >> did you? >> yeah. got to love the orioles. they've got talent. >> thank you. >> they had a good run last year. definitely, definitely kansas city was on fire. >> yeah, the chemistry. >> thank you so much for your time. >> hope we meet again. >> i had a question for you too. >> oh.

i think that. >> i do. a friend of mine there's so many young people that do want to. >> it's pretty well established. they're taking a year between high school and college, makes it much more likely to complete. the road scholars figured this out a while ago. and there's such a need over -- not only teaching but help in restoring the environment and other things.

i think you see a robust subscription to it. i think it would help on the college completion rates. and i think it would be very, very good for our countries set to share purpose. you could have probably also tied it into the college affordability thing, too. maybe kids give kids longer options of service and be able to do something more on college tuition. >> thank you. >> sure. >> appreciate it. >> do you mind taking a quick picture? >> not at all. >> thank you. >> sure, man. >> thank you. >> hi. >> nice to meet you. i'm a sophomore, as well. >> tell me your name. >> ashley. >> there were two ashleighs in the back. >> the other ashley. >> i was happy to see you my first year at the dinner, as well. >> it was fun. >> it's a very good time. one of my first events.

i'm from rhode island as well. >> rhode island. >> some of your team working with our governor now. >> yeah. steve there. >> yeah. >> can we get a picture patrick? >> yeah. >> okay. >> thank you. thanks a lot. there's another woman here from rhode island. ashley also, a-s-h -- >> l-e-y. yep, spelled the regular way. i enjoyed the speech. thank you. >> thank you. i enjoyed being with you guys. thanks for coming up bright and early. >> can we also get a quick picture? >> yep. >> thank you. >> there you go. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> governor, great speech. >> thanks, man. thank you. >> dan. >> dan. >> yep. >> now, if you decide to run, i'm going to grad school.

just let me know. >> good man, thank you. i'll need you. if you see the player, come running down. >> thank you. >> thank you. where are you from? >> i'm from new york. what you have to say about college affordability. >> thank you. >> was that you that asked that question? >> no. >> yeah, we can do better, right? >> oh, yeah, definitely. >> what year are you in? >> i'm a sophomore politics major. >> you going to run? >> hopefully. >> thank you, governor. >> thank you, patrick. >> hi, we met earlier. i wanted you to do one for my kids. it's all about my kids. >> all about the kids. >> amne. >> yeah and my other one is gerard. but i had just actually talked to daniel and kevin about you

visiting a help center? we'd love to have you. and, you know -- >> yeah. >> the health center record. >> yeah. we would love to. i wanted to ask you a question about health care reform. >> sure. how do you spell gerard. >> g-e-r-a-r-d. >> some of these sound silly. but -- >> no. >> there's so many different spellings to names. >> no but i would love to talk to you more at some point. >> yeah we did, we're doing some cool things in maryland. >> yeah. >> there was an article that said there's a revolution going on in health care. business insider. there are hospitals, it's a global payment. we have a common platform for help i.t. that's working very

well. and you actually are set a goal to be exceed eded by 10%. >> i work also in vermont and we're looking at the maryland model. so i really -- >> thank you. and it's working? >> yes. >> thank you. hello, again. from new england. right? >> how do you spell? >> f-a? >> i just wanted to know what your policy stands on? and the war on -- >> yeah, i think we need to do everything in our power in

coalition with the other regional powers to contain and degrade isis cut off their funding and support the regional effort to respond to this. it's a regional fight. and we need to support the regional coalition to combat this evil. >> so do you think the united states should join in the fight with other nations such as jordan? >> i do. and i think we're already very much joined in the fight. not only in terms of air support but also humanitarian support. and these giant refugee camps in turkey and jordan. and we need to continue to be engaged. in terms of putting boots on the ground, i think that could well be counterproductive to the goal of containing and degrading isis. so i'm not in favor of that at this point but i am in favor of supporting the coalition. >> thank you. nice to see you, again. >> okay. >> hello again.

>> thank you so much. >> thank you. where are you from anthony? >> worcester, massachusetts. originally from when i was in her womb and stuff. and then she had me in new jersey. she came from ghana to america to give me a better opportunity. i'm a sophomore in college. my sister's been at college next year. so really, thank you for the tuition talk. >> you're the american dream. >> i'm trying. i'm trying. >> you're doing it. thank you. >> hi. very nice to meet you. >> good to meet you too. are we doing a picture? >> oh yeah. >> i really like what you said on student loans. >> thank you. >> cara with a c or a k or -- >> k. k-a-r-e-n. >> oh, karen. i thought you say kara.

i never signed so many eggs. >> thank you so much.i >> thank you. >> hi, i'm clair. nice to see you. >> good to see you. >> i'm really excited to be here. i thought it was great everything you were saying about optimism and the american dream. it's lovely to hear. >> how do you spell your clair? >> c-l-a-r-e. the irish way. county clare. that's where my family's from. >> a long way from flare to here. >> oh, yeah. that's for sure. >> more expensive to go to a red sox game at camden yards than fenway park. >> that's why i see so many of you. i was there with menino once, god rest his soul, and people kept saying mayor, mayor, mayor. i thought they were talking to me. the whole place was filled with boston people. >> thank you. >> thank you, clare. thank you, karen.

thank you. thank you for your question. where are you from, tom? >> i'm from dorchester in boston. >> good place. >> what part of family is your -- >> my people are up in the mountains of galway. near the mayo border. not far from where mayor walsh's people are from. >> yeah. i think my family's kind of connected to his -- it's boston. >> have you been over there? >> once. yeah. when i was 11. rossmont. >> my people aren't far from rossmont. my people are from the meme valley. mayor walsh, my family's that way, his people are that way. >> do you mind if i get a parkt? >> sure. what's your name, tom? >> mannion. >> good to see you, tom mannion. >> hi, governor. thank you for coming to new

hampshire. >> tell me your name again. >> stephen. >> did we see each other before? >> we did. i have to get another one, too. i also had a question. -- >> s-t -- >> e-f-a-n. but i had a question on foreign policy. i've seen a couple candidates come through. i just always ask what do you think is the biggest threat to america right now? >> the biggest threat is the twin threat of a nuclear iran and violent jihadist extremism. and they're both connected and related. that's the biggest threat. threats always change but that's the biggest threat. >> okay. and can you sign this for me? >> what do you think? >> i agree with you on that. i think a nuclear iran is very dangerous. and i also believe that isis is very dangerous to this country. we need to make sure we contain them and they don't come over to america. >> we support the region in addressing its own problems.

is this to anybody? >> to my professor. i don't know how to spell his name. >> you just said that on c-span. >> he's going to watch it later. can i get a picture as well? >> sure. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> have a good one. >> hi there. >> how are you? >> good. kathy? >> that's kathleen king. >> kathleen king. my maiden name was king. it's good to see an irishman. >> thank you. >> anyway. >> to kathleen or kathy? >> kathy. anything you're comfortable with. my son just moved from california to houndsville. he and his wife are teachers. >> right. >> but don't ask me where they're teaching. >> in anne arundel county. >> thank you very much for being here. >> thank you kathy.

thanks a lot for coming. >> nice to see you again. >> i saw you beforehand. >> now as a catholic theologian i was very impressed with your facility with common good discourse. he i wish i could come have you talk to my class. >> that's a problem. >> it is. it seems like that's a nice deep well that you're drawing from there. >> that's what keeps me going. tell me your first name. >> nicole. n-i-c-h-o-l-e. >> so who's your favorite theologian? >> carl rohner probably on the -- >> me too. >> no way. >> honestly. i was in iowa last weekend and a woman said this is a get to know you thing. she wanted to know who's your favorite president what's your favorite ice cream, and who's your favorite theologian. and i said carl ronner. >> another good one to bring up

that i think is not analogous but i'm sure you've heard of dietrich bonhoffer. you're talking about tough choices. and i mean he -- he's a very complicated example to think about. but what role his conscience played in hak his choices. as you know we still have so many ahead of us. really disconcerting for leaders but also for professors. >> yeah. >> you want to us on your side -- >> i've got that big bonhoffer book. one of my favorite teachers from high school gave it to me. i haven't read it kretyet but it's on my flight deck. maybe i'll go find it. >> thank you. good job. >> thanks a lot. hi. >> hi. i'm paul. >> hey, paul. >> so -- >> you want me to sign that? >> yes. and i'd like -- >> which side? >> the blank side. >> blank side. >> this is actually my second politician's signature. the first one i got obama's

signature a couple years ago. >> collect the whole set. >> yeah. i'll work on it. >> paul, thank you. >> you it. and have a great day. >> thanks. you too. >> i'm david. >> hello david. >> with rob byrner. oh, sorry. i gave you a slippery egg. yeah. through go. i'm actually from virginia. i was there at the jefferson jackson dinner when you spoke a few years ago. it was. i was back there. it's been a pleasure sharing a border with you guys for a while. >> thank you. long may it wave. >> yeah. are you here for the rest of the day? >> yeah, i'm here for the rest of the day and then i'm heading to boston. seeing some friends tomorrow night. is that -- >> yeah, it is. i think it is. >> i've got that same day.

>> you should have worn it today. >> thank you, david. >> yeah, have a good day. >> hi. >> are you a teacher? >> i was. i taught in colombia for years. >> hail colombia. >> but i lived in baltimore when you were councilman o'malley. i remember you playing on city hall with your band. and i lived on able avenue up in charles village and rung into you at the farmer's market on a regular basis. >> l-a-u? >> it's actually l-o-r-e-n. >> baltimore's doing so -- when have you last been back to baltimore? >> it's probably been four years. >> it continues to grow and regenerate. >> i appreciate what you did for the city and for the state. >> thank you for remembering me. >> it's my pleasure. and i live in durham, new hampshire now. so we get to register kids to vote on a regular basis. >> good. >> it's a great city. come visit it. >> i will. thank you. thanks, loren.

>> rob werner. excited to hear you speak. >> thank you. >> and martin o'malley here just greeting some of the supporters signing eggs at this eggs and breakfast event. that was up in new england. we're going to take you now live to capitol hill. the whistleblowers at the v.a. testifying before a house subcommittee on problems at va hospitals, veterans health system doctors and officials who've reported wrongdoing and say they've since faced retaliation for reporting those problems. we'll also hear from the u.s. special counsel, caroline lerner, on the record number of claims made by people who say they too are whistleblowers who faced -- who faced punishment. there are currently 120 active investigations into retaliation with more than 25 whistleblowers receiving legal settlements. i'll just let you know the chair of the subcommittee, mike hoffman of colorado and the

ranking member ann kes ter.

good afternoon. this hearing will come to order. i want to welcome everyone to today's hearing titled "addressing continued whistleblower retaliation between va." i would like to ask unanimous consent that honorable martha robie from the state of alabama be allowed to join us at the dais as she has been very active in this case in the case of one of our witnesses here today. seeing no objection. additionally i would like to ask unanimous consent that three statements be entered into the hearing record. two from whistleblowers and one from the project on government oversight. hearing no objection, so ordered. the hearing will focus on the treatment of whistleblowers within the department of

defense -- sorry, within the department of veterans affairs. particularly the types and levels of retaliation they experience when reporting problems. this will serve as a follow-up to the hearing conducted by the committee on july -- in july 2014 where we will address what progress the department has made since then to correct its retaliatory culture and where va has failed to protect conscientious employees who seek to improve services for our nation's veterans. the three whistleblowers we will hear from today come from va facilities across the country. the hostility they received for their conscientious behavior shows the retaliatory culture, whistleblowers are castigated for bringing problems to light, is still very alive and well in the department of veterans' affairs. the truth of the matter is the

congress needs whistleblowers within federal agencies to help identify problems on the ground in order to remain properly informed for the development of effective legislation. for example, the national wait time scandal that this committee revealed at a hearing just over a year ago, which resulted in the secretary of the department -- secretary of the department resigning, simply would not have occurred without responsible va employees stepping forward to fix problems. in the years since that scandal originally came to light, a new secretary has come to the department and he has stated that one of his primary missions is to end whistleblower retaliation within va. the congress also passed legislation that makes it easier for the secretary to fire poor-performing and bad-acting senior executive service

employees. and who in some cases perpetuate and encourage retaliatory behavior. despite these efforts retaliation is still a popular means used by certain unethical va employees to prevent positive change and maintain the status quo within the department. in january full committee chairman jeff miller introduced legislation which i co-sponsored that would improve protections provided to whistleblowers within va. it will also discourage supervisors and other managerial employees from attempting to retaliate against whistleblowers by imposing more strenuous penalties for engaging in retaliation including suspension, termination, and loss of bonuses. it is very simple. if you retaliate against or stifle employees who are trying to improve va for our nation's

veterans, you should not be working for va. and you certainly should not receive a bonus for despicable actions. to that end, i encourage members to join with numerous vsos and whistleblower protection groups in support of hr 571, the veterans affairs retaliation prevention act. along with the whistleblowers here today we will hear from the office of special counsel regarding the efforts va has made since our last hearing to improve its treatment of whistleblowers and where improvements remain absent and needed. i was very pleased to learn the office of special counsel recently took action on behalf of a whistleblower in the va from the eastern colorado health care system. this employee was removed from her nursing duties and assigned to a windowless basement after

reporting the misconduct of a co-worker. thanks to the efforts of osc this whistleblower has returned to her nursing duties at another clinic while her reprisal claims are being investigated. representatives of va will also be here to address why whistleblowers continue to have their livelihoods jeopardized for attempting to make va a better service provider for our nation's veterans. i look forward to the discussion we will have here today on this important issue. with that i now yield to ranking member kuster for any opening remarks she may have. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you to our witnesses for being with us today. this afternoon the subcommittee on oversight and investigation is holding a follow-up hearing to the hearing that our full committee held last july. i believe that some of the most effective hearings this

subcommittee holds are follow-up hearings. they enable us to examine progress that has been made and current problems that still exist at the va. that is the core of our work here, to identify problems and work together to fix them and ensure the highest quality of care is being delivered to every veteran. today's hearing will focus on va's treatment of whistleblowers, who play a crucial role in ensuring the va is held accountable for providing quality care for our nation's veterans. whistleblowers were instrumental in helping this committee uncover the wrongdoing in phoenix, arizona, which helped inform our drafting of the veterans' choice act. we must ensure that no one is afraid to come forward to report instances of mismanagement or wrongdoing that hinders our veterans' ability to receive care. in terms of the department of veterans' affairs and its treatment of whistleblowers, a great deal of progress has been made. va has established the office of

accountability review and has reorganized the office of the medical inspector. the va is also the first cabinet-level agency to satisfy the requirements for the office of special counsel's whistleblower certification program. in addition, the va and the osc have implemented and expedited the review process for whistleblower retaliation claims. i'm pleased to hear that the va has taken these steps moving forward. however, there are still too many problems that exist regarding how the va treats and handles whistleblowers. osc is responsible for whistleblower complaints from all across the federal government. yet it estimates that 40% 40%, close to half of its incoming cases in 2015 will be filed by va employees. osc reports that the number of new whistleblower cases that va employees remains overwhelming, quote unquote, and that its monthly intake of new va

whistleblower cases remains high at a rate of 150% above historic levels. according to osc these alarming cases include disclosures of "waste, fraud, abuse, and threats to the health and safety of our veterans. the large number of complaints received from va employees is to some extent a reflection of the size of the va but it also raises serious red flags as to the continuing problems that are systemic throughout the va system and the treatment of va employees. the osc testimony highlights some troubling concerns that the va sometimes investigates the whistleblowers themselves rather than investigating allegations raised by those whistleblowers. the osc also references several cases where the medical records of whistleblowers were improperly and unlawfully accessed in what seems to be attempts to discredit some

whistleblowers. as a "new york times" article last year outlined there is a, quote, culture of silence and intimidation and a history of retaliation at the va. according to the whistleblowers testifying before us this afternoon, this is still the case today. they will testify about this environment of intimidation and retaliation and the use of sham peer reviews and investigations in order to silence whistleblowers. as i stated before i believe that the va has made some progress in this area. but clearly, more remains to be done. va's culture of retaliation and intimidation did not happen overnight but it's a cull minc of problems that are deeply engrained in the va system. we must also not forget that the vast majority of va employees are involved in health care and industry that also has been seen by many to be intolerant of whistleblowers. this culture of intimidation and fear for va employees cannot be

changed overnight, but for the sake of our veterans and the sake of ensuring that the va's providing the highest quality of care, this culture must be changed. . of the va's problems we will discuss today highlight the lack of accountability and the absence of collaboration to seriously address whistleblower complaints. this afternoon let us begin the process of identifying what steps the va needs to take going forward as the va works toward the secretary's goal of "sustainable accountability." i'm hopeful that this subcommittee can continue to work in a bipartisan fashion to find ways to assist the va in its monumental task of changing this long-standing culture and reform the manner in which whistleblowers are treated by improving the process whereby all va employees are working toward the common goal of helping and serving our veterans. mr. chairman, again, i thank you for holding this follow-up

hearing and before i yield back i want to take a moment and thank our whistleblowers for appearing before us today. it takes real courage to put your careers at risk for coming forward and calling attention to these problems and concerns. it's my hope that we move forward creating a culture at the va that welcomes whistleblowers and acknowledges your importance in better serving our veterans. i hope that in the months and years ahead the va will be known as an organization that welcomes and encourages all employees to work together to solve problems. and i yield back. >> thank you, ranking member kuster. i ask all members to waive their opening remarks as per this committee's custom. with that i invite the first and only panel to the witness table seated at the witness table. on the panel we will hear from miss megan flans director of the va's office of accountability review. the honorable caroline lerner

special counsel. dr. christian head md associate director, chief of staff legal and quality assurance for the greater los angeles va health care system. dr. marilyn hooker, md, neurologist and president of afge local 342. at the wilmington va medical center. and mr. richard tremaine associate director of the va central alabama health care system. all of your complete written statements will be made part of the hearing record. miss flants, you are now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman coffman ranking member kuster, and members of the committee. va exists to serve veterans.

that service takes place in interactions between veterans and front line va employees. doctors and nurses claims processors, cemetery workers and countless others upon whom va depends to serve veterans with the dignity, compassion and dedication they deserve. we depend on those same employees to have the moral courage to help us serve veterans and taxpayers better by helping to make our processes and policies better, safer, more effective, and nor efficient. the department's responsibility to protect whistleblowers is an integral part of an obligation to provide safe high-quality health care and other benefits to veterans in legally compliant and fiscally responsible ways. it is important to keep in mind the underlying purpose of the whistleblower protection rules is to encourage candid disclosure of information so problems can be quickly identified and corrected. va is fully committed to correcting problems in va programs and to ensuring fair

treatment for employees who bring problems to light. secretary mcdonald talks frequently about his vision of sustainable accountability which he describes as a workplace culture in which va leaders provide the guidance and resources employees need to successfully serve veterans. and employees freely and safely inform leaders when challenges hinder their ability to succeed. we need a work environment in which all participants in which front line staff and supervisors to top va officials freely share what they know whether good news or bad, for the benefit of veterans and as good stewards of the taxpayers' money. to reach these goals the department has taken several important steps. last summer the secretary reorganized and assigned new leadership to the office of the medical inspector. he also established my office, the office of accountability review or oar, to ensure leader

accountability for serious misconduct, including whistleblower retaliation. in addition to its ongoing work, investigating leader misconduct, o.a.r. is also work og to improve the department's ability to track whistleblower disclosures and actions taken in response to those disclosures across the entire va system. va has also improved its collaboration with the office of special counsel. last summer va requested and received certification under osc's 2302 c certification program. that certification reflects the department's commitment to educating employees and supervisors about the whistleblower protection rules. the va has also negotiated with osc and expireded process to speed corrective action for employees who are experiencing retaliation. more recently we've asked osc to help us expand that collaborative process to facilitate more efficient accountability actions against

supervisors who engage in retaliation. we are also working with osc to create a robust new face-to-face training program to ensure all va supervisors fully understand their roles and responsibilities under the whistleblower protection rules. since secretary mcdonald was confirmed last july, he and other va leaders have made it their practice to meet with whistleblowers as they travel across the va system and to engage with those who have raised their hands and their voices to identify problems and propose solutions. they do that both to acknowledge the critical role whistleblowers play in improving va programs and to model to supervisors throughout the va the engaged, open, and accepting behavior they expect them to exhibit when subordinates step forward to express concerns. the department deeply appreciates the assistance of this committee and other congressional offices in supporting whistleblowers and identifying problems va needs to

address. last month i had the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee to provide the department's views on several pending bills including two related to whistle ploeers. at that time i acknowledged and i reiterate today that the department still has work to do to ensure that all whistleblower disclosures receive prompt and effective protection and all whistleblowers aprotected from retaliation. i acknowledged then and i reiterate today that notwithstanding significant efforts on our part va is still working on the full culture change we must achieve to ensure all employees feel safe disclosing problems and that any supervisor who retaliates is held accountable. on behalf of the department i am committed to continue to work with osc and with this committee to get things right. i am honored that secretary mcdonald and deputy secretary gibson have asked me to assist them in this critical effort. this concludes my testimony. i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> miss lerner, you are now

recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. chairman coffman ranking member kuster and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today about the u.s. office of special counsel and our ongoing work with whistleblowers from the department of veterans affairs. last july i spoke to this committee about osc's early efforts to respond to the unprecedented increase in whistleblower cases from the va. since then there has been substantial progress. for example, the osc and the va started an expedited review process for retaliation claims, as has been noted. this process has resulted in relief for many va whistleblowers including landmark settlements on behalf of phoenix va employees. in total osc has secured relief for over 45 whistleblowers. these settlements are putting courageous public servants back on the job and serving veterans. these settlements are also sending a message to other va

employees that if they come forward and report problems they will be protected from retaliation. in my earlier testimony i also addressed several serious problems with investigations by the va's office of medical inspector, or o.m.i. in response to my concerns and this committee's concerns the va directed a comprehensive review of all aspects of omi's operations, and this review has led to positive change. a recent whistleblower case is demonstrative. the case concerns a whistleblower disclosure from an employee at beckly west virginia. in response to osc's referral the medical inspector determined that the beckly facility was trying to save money by substituting medications with older, cheaper drugs. the substitutions were made over the objections of mental health providers. and the decision was driven solely by cost concerns without any legitimate medical basis. this was a clear violation of va

pomss. omi's investigations found the substituted medications created medical risks to veterans, and it called for review of all patients who were impacted to determine if there was any harm caused as a result of the drug substitution. o.m.i. also recommended that discipline be considered for beckley leadership and others who are responsible. while the facts of this case are very troubling the o.m.i. response say sign of progress from where we were just nine months ago. in an organization the size of the va problems are bound to occur. therefore, it's critical when whistleblowers identify problems they are addressed swiftly and responsibly. a properly functioning o.m.i. is key to doing so. finally, since last year the v.a. became the first cabinet-level department to complete osc's whistleblower certification program. in addition to fulfilling the basic certification requirements the va is working with osc to conduct additional trainings for managers supervisors, and

lawyers at the regional level. the commitment we are seeing from va leadership to correct and eliminate retaliation has not consistently filtered down to the regional facilities. so additional training for regional employees may help address this issue. i want to close by flagging one additional and ongoing area of concern. often where a whistleblower comes forward with an issue of real importance the va's investigation focuses on the whistleblower instead of their disclosure. there are two main problems with this approach. first, by focusing on the whistleblower, the health and safety issue that was raised may not receive the attention that it deserves. second, instead of creating a welcoming environment, it could chill future whistleblowing if employees believe that by reporting problems their own actions will come under intense scrutiny. the va's focus should be on solving systemic problems and

holding accountable those who are responsible not on going after whistleblowers. we look forward to working with the va and the committee to further address this important issue. in conclusion we very much appreciate the committee's ongoing attention to the issues we've raised. i thank you for the opportunity to testify today and i look forward to taking your questions. >> thank you, miss lerner. dr. head you are now recognized for five minutes. can. >> thank you mr. coffman miss kuster, and other members for inviting me again to a very important meeting. since my last testimony july of 2014 when i returned back to west l.a. va hospital in my position as associate director my leadership my direct leader was essentially resigned. i basically was assigned to a

chief of staff outside los angeles, to long beach hospital, who i'd never met and still have never met. i started to notice my patients were being reassigned mid-therapy to other surgeons. when i questioned this, senior leadership at my hospital, essentially the chief of staff said "if you don't like it you're a whistleblower, take it to congress. there's nothing they can do to me." i reported this statement to congress and also the office of special counsel. following that i was presented from going in the operating room when i had i patient under anesthesia. i was told my credentials to go in the operating room had been revoked. when i questioned that an hour later they were told oops we made a mistake. it's okay dr. head. unfortunately, veterans and other hospital officials have overheard that conversation.

i've since been removed from my office in the chief of staff suite, transferred to the fourth floor. the cleaning crew told me they belief it used to be a nursing storage unit. there's a hole in the floor. the computer monitor was cracked, non-functional along with some of the other equipment in the room. a group of the janitors got together and said this is a shame, let's get together and clean this office for dr. head. when 24 was reported to the chief of staff a piece of plastic was placed over a hole in the floor. the janitorial service said it was a trip hazard and i shouldn't go to that office. so essentially i've been functioning without a real office since i testified to congress. there have been vergd that cameinvestigators that cam out to the hospital. but others reported it seemed to be an investigation more into me

than my actual complaints. when donald bider was questioned about this turns out the va submitted court records saying the reason why i was removed from the chain of command was because i testified in congress. there's a sworn affidavit submitted by donald bider that said i questioned her authority and that's why i was transferred out of the chief of staff offices because i questioned her authority in congress. i don't remember actually mentioning donna bider's name personally during my original testimony. through all of this of a always placed veterans ahead of me essentially. and today i think we should focus on the veterans. because of the way i was brought up i will always take a stand for this population's extremely vulnerable at this time. you remember i made reference to

the e-mail in november of 2012 that's part of the pact i submitted where i questioned the irregularities of the consults. i also noticed that there was a number of patients at the review of the number of colon cancers that were entering the system but later appearing with advanced cancer. i did this as a team player asking for a briefing to all of the chief of staff. i was rebuffed. i want to go on the record to be more specific. one, i witnessed the systematic deletion of 179 consults. two, the systematic deletion of these consults' review most of them were done by non-medical staff. three, i witnessed the direct batch deletion, the order given by my immediate supervisor of 40,000 consults. the number of deletions, three

to four times what happened in phoenix. the other thing i want to go on record, and i realize this will probably result in me losing my job, but i think the veterans deserve better. $25,000 was given to our va. where is it? it was reported as being given for informatics. i'm sorry if i've run out of time. >> could you review that number with us again? >> i'm sorry. $25 million. was appropriated over a two-year period to our hospital to improve access for veterans. >> thank you. dr. hooker. i'm sorry. >> mr.

other. my written statement speaks of va as a house divided with power and resources for the va itself gained at the expense of care provision to the veterans we serve. for example, i had the honor of meeting an 88-year-old world war ii veteran several weeks ago. he arrived in an electric wheelchair as he was unable to walk due to injuries many years prior that were not related to military service. same for the loss of use of his left arm and hand, as well as

the loss of use of his right shoulder. he was unable to see out of his right eye due to glaucoma causing near blindness. he related he was living in a room at the ymca in downtown wilmington, delaware. that being all he could afford on $500 a month social security and $500 a month non-service-connected pension. he was sent to the y after a stay at our medical facility as an answer to homelessness. years ago he could have called our facility's extended care section his home. but due to yearly mandates progressively reducing the percentage of beds in the facility's community living center earmarked for extended care in favor of more rapid turnover and hence more billables and collections, this 88-year-old world war ii veteran was sent to live at the ymca. because he's not service connected va feels no obligation to provide long-term care to him. whose community is the community living center, and what type of living is being provided?

true to this 88-year-old world war ii veteran's generation, he believed that a bed in our community living center must be needed for someone in worse shape than he. this from a man with no effective use of his legs, no effective use of his arms and almost no sight. what do we look at when we evaluate success? are efficiency and expediency the only measures of a productive day? what is the most important thing thing? there's a spirit that enters the body at birth and a spirit that leaves the body at death. our nation was founded on spirit. the spirit of liberty and justice for all. our veterans defend our nation with their body, their mind and their spirit. when they come to the va for care of the their body and mind must they have their spirit crushed? and when health care providers advocate for veterans' needs, must they suffer abuse? whistleblowers are passionate people who care about veterans and the true mission of va.

va for veterans not va for itself. thank you for the honor of representing them. >> thank you dr. hooker. mr. tremaine, you now have five minutes. >> thank you, chairman coffman, committee members and our representative robie. i'm here with you today to testify about the unacceptable, vicious, and retaliation against sheila use and myself at the health care center where the director james dalton became the first senior executive service member in history fired for neglect of duty. the chief of staff also under investigation was on paid leave for six months and quietly retired in december 2014. with disingenuous claims of improvement, there remains an atmosphere of exclusion and retaliation against those who did not support dalton or subsequently the dangerously inexperienced leadership and ineffectual management of mr. robin jackson, the deputy network director over dalton

during his tenure and who was immediately planted as interim director by charles sepich, the visiting director. dr. mousse and i were two seasoned and experienced yet idealistic newcomers to the leadership team in march of 2014. although we both identified scheduling manipulations, illegal hiring practices, continued use of paper wait lists, severely delayed consults, critical levels of understaffing, fraud, and a complete breakdown of human resources and the business office directly to dalton we quickly concluded he won support our efforts to hold staff accountable. in june of 2014 we were forwarded an e-mail send to talton in april of 2013 alerting him to critical scheduling manipulations from a staff position. since talton was publicly claiming no prior knowledge of any scheduling manipulations, we became seriously concerned about his integrity. and on june 11th raised those concerns directly to robin jackson and charles sepich. we also informed him we have been contacted by representative martha robie on june 10th

regarding her face-to-face meeting with talton. immediately after our june 11th disclosures to sepich and talton.severe retaliation escalated ex-po northwesterntially. we later learned it was because accept ich and talton had communicated every word of our conversation to talton that very same day. june 24 rth i sent an emergent e-mail plea to sepich informing him of continued violent outbursts and management -- mismanagement by talton. the very next morning i was forced off the montgomery va campus by order of robin jackson. i was devastated to realize that i had been betrayed. i was constructively removed from my leadership responsibilities and prevented from acting in any leadership capacity by talton and subsequently by jackson in humiliating all-employee e-mails. although sepich had promiseed me he would immediately begin a fact finding to help us in fact four days earlier he had already chartered a fact finding to investigate fabricated allegations by talton and jackson against us. that fact finding was chaired by a sbord that of sepic mvp as a

result sepich and jackson requested an a.i.v. from vaco without any specific changes. the aib was kokted by o.a.r. the week of october 27th with results due on january 19th, 2015. instead they requested additional on-site testimony citing a new allegation put forth by a union president who was not selected for a promotion thus extending the investigation. one of thea i.b. members a sitting director was also a former subordinate and friend of charles sepich. inkrejsly during my first year i had been under the weight of investigations for 305 out of 365 days without a single charge and beginning within my first 45 days of work. it's difficult to describe the level of disrespect harassment and retaliation we endured from talton, sepic sxhchlt jackson as he removed hospital services from my authority initiated major realiemths adversely impacting my position and without my impact. my direct reports bypassed me

reporting directly to him at his request. i was excluded from key information a.m. resources blocked from critical reports on major program assessments and important site reviews. in fact, when i asked for the complete administrative assessment done by jackson himself, a month before he arrived he told me if you want to see it request it through a freedom of information act. an amazing failure of leadership, sepich and jackson actually detailed dr. muse out of the state for 90 days in the middle of this crisis. i speak with you today with a heavy heart disgusted by the continued cover-ups and a discrediting campaign through open-ended investigation and the attempted destruction of my career by the va that i've always loved serving and being a part of. so many va employees are closely monitoring this issue and hoping va leadership at all levels will demonstrate a commitment to true excellence and transparency by creating an environment free from whistleblower reprisal and retaliation. if the retaliatory actions from cavis and visen against a

dedicated veteran executive and a brilliant careerwoman executive whoeth of whom have committed their lives to serving veterans is tolerated in the least it will certainly have a chilling effect on any others stepping forward to protect the organization we all love serving veterans through. i have feared the loss of my job and career and we both fear a further loss of our personal and professional reputations. but mr. muse sat and i sat in disbelief a year ago and agreed at that moment in time that we didn't have a choice because it was more important to protect our veterans than protecting either one of our own careers. we respectfully request you that immediately address the overt whistleblower retaliation that co cf1 o has become rampant in our va. again, thank you for your commitment to our veterans and i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank the panel so much for your testimony today. particularly too the whistleblowers. as a combat veteran, my heart is out to you. i think you're fighting for our nationing veterans today who

have made tremendous sacrifices in defense of this country. and i would like to ask the whistleblowers a question first, all three of you. and that is to your knowledge has there been any disciplinary action taken to those that have intentionally created the kind of hostile workplace that you've testified today in terms of retaliation against you? start with mr. tremaine. >> chairman, there has been none. >> dr. hooker. >> none. >> dr. head. >> none. >> okay. question. miss lerner, if you look at the number of cases from the va that have gone before the o.s.c., compared to other agencies of the federal government, this seems substantially higher. i think a simple comparison would be to the department of

defense i relieve that has doubled the number of civil service employees and yet there are more cases last year i think that came forward from the department of veterans affairs than the department of defense. can you explain just the nature of the volume of cases coming from the va? >> we do get more retaliation cases and disclosures from the va than any other federal agency, any other department in the government, and the numbers are increasing. just for comparison, as you said, the complaints we get that the va are higher than the d.o.d., which has double the number of employees. so you know we know that people come forward when they you know feel that they have to to protect the life of a veteran or the health and safety. and so the fact that people are coming forward is a very positive sign.

all the numbers are bad, and they're increasing and that has to stop. i personally am encouraged that more people are coming forward because, a we need to know the problems exist. we can't fix them until we do. i'm encouraged people feel confident they will get some relief when they come to our agency and they will get some results. the number one reason whistleblowers come forward is they feel an obligation. the number one reason they don't come forward is because they feel they're not going to get any results. nothing will happen if they come forward. it's a double-edged sword. on the one hand we're not happy the numbers are increasing and our staff is completely overwhelmed by the work. on the other hand we're glad that they feel comfortable and confident coming to us and so that's a positive thing. >> miss frantz. >> i would certainly echo what ms. lerner has said. we are encouraged to know that people feel comfortable raising disclosures, whether it's to members of this committee,

members of congress -- >> ms. flants. i don't know if they feel comfortable. i think they're ready to take a risk. >> i would agree with that. i also want to thank the whistleblowers who have come forward today to provide their stories. it is an act of courage and it is something that we in the department need to learn to celebrate because disclosures about problems give us an opportunity to fix those problems. if we don't know about them don't learn about them, then we are not able to improve service. to ms. lerner's point, we do need to understand what it is that is driving these numbers continuing to drive these numbers, and to be careful not to assume either bad or good things about the numbers. the fact that people are coming forward with their concerns is an indicator we continue to have some issues that require attention. but again, the fact that they are bringing them forward means we have the opportunity to

identify those problems and move forward with solutions. >> can you comment to me about about -- can you give me some idea -- we just had testimony from the witnesses here that are whistleblowers that no disciplinary action has been taken against those who have retaliated against them. can you give me any data in terms of actions that the va's take nen terms of disciplining those who have retaliated against our whistleblowers? >> absolutely. i cannot speak to the cases of the individuals at the table here as i understand it from my colleagues at the office of special counsel, their issues remain pending. so i'm not going to speak to -- >> how many pending cases can you -- >> we currently have in my office 80 ongoing investigations of which 15 involves among other things whistleblower retaliation. we also keep a data base of

employee disciplinary actions taken across the department. until the late summer of last year we did not have any particular data base that showed discipline across the va. we began to collect that data. among the things that go into that data base are general descriptions of the charges that are used to support the discipline. one of the charges is something having to do with prohibited personnel practice. that's a generic term that includes whistleblower retaliation among other things. another charge is retaliation. the information that i have is that in the approximately one year we've been collecting information we have 22 actions in our data base that include charges related to prohibited personnel practices or retaliation. it's not a large enough number. i will see that right now. we have more work to do to

ensure that the individuals who have retaliated against whistleblowers, as ms. lerner and her staff bring cases to us to provide corrective remedies to the employees who've been subjected to retaliation, we need to be able to move -- >> i'm running over my time. i just want to say this seems like such a typical hearing when you're giving us a lot of great news. we have three individuals here who have testified not just -- who have testified before that no disciplinary action is taken against those who have retaliated against them and that situation remains unchanged. ranking member kuster. >> thank you mr. chairman. i want to address my remarks to ms. flants and ms. lerner. but i do want to thank the whistleblowers for bringing your individual cases and encourage you to work with our good colleagues. i know representative robie is on the case for you, mr.

tremaine. and encourage you to work with the office of special counsel as well to make sure you get the protection you deserve we don't have any other tragedies. >> absolutely. the office of special counsel has been a lifeline working with page kennedy and nadia piunta throughout this ordeal for the last year made a huge difference. i don't think there's any question they're totally understaffed. but the opportunities i had to speak with them made a huge difference in my ordeal. >> good. and i hope your situation will get resolved. and it sounds like we've got 45 settlements of va whistleblower cases which hopefully did bring some relief to those people. and i know there have been reinstatements with back pain and such. and it's important to send that signal to others. one of the issues that i wanted to get at is this issue of va

culture because it seems to me the idea it's gone to the osc is sort of a recognition that this issue has blown up to a place where it wasn't resolved at a lower level. and i want to make sure that we have a collaborative workplace throughout the agency. i did note of the chart that we received of the top agencies providing case work it is true that the va is higher than the d.o.d. what's interesting for me, and i don't know if they can get this on the camera, but that the v.a. and the d.o.d. are right at the top and then it drops dramatically down for any other agency in the cabinet. and i'm curious about sort of the hierarchical nature and structure of those organizations and whether it is a greater challenge to change the

environment. but i'm also curious, and this is to ms. flanz, what steps are being taken to foster a more collaborative workplace? and in the interest of time i'll just combine this with my follow-up question. we hear about steps that are taken here in d.c. for improvement but how are these -- what are the specific steps that are being taken to improve va culture and ensure accountability font front line at the visens, step by step with the people that can protect the lives of these whistleblowers and protect the quality of service to all veterans? >> i want to speak to both of those questions. i think i heard two of them. one, with respect to improving the culture at the front line across the va system. the veterans health zrirns has an office called the national center for organization development. and that office is looking at an issue of psychological safety

and how psychological safety can be improved in va workplaces. psychological safety is a larger term of which i think protecting whistleblowers is very definitely a component. the head of the national center for organization development speaks in terms of four cornerstones of the just culture that is required to ensure that patient care is provided in an environment in which people feel safe and the workplace is as we want it to be. those four cornerstones are transparency accountability psychological safety, and risk taking and innovation. those four things need to be in balance. to the extent that transparency perhaps is stressed above all other things you may get people feeling less safe and/or less willing to engage in risk-taking and innovation. similarly if accountability is

overly stressed, you may sacrifice some of the other issues. so the experts are focusing on tools for employees and supervisors across the va system within the framework of those four corner stones. with respect to accountability for whistleblower retaliation, we are working on a number of things. first we need to capture the attention and understanding of medical center directors regional office directors, and regional counsel right there at the facility level. ms. lerner's staff are coming to give a training program to our regional councils, who are coming to town later this month. we will address them and then we will begin with some new training we're going to roll out to supervisors. training first regional council attorneys and regional supervisors from the facility level and then having them serve as the trainers.

we really need to get at two things. we need to make sure that the environment and the workplace is appropriately safe, and we also need to improve understanding on the part of supervisors and attorneys as >> thank very much. >> just a quick question. on april 9th, 2014 the story emerged about the time scandal in the phoenix v.a. how many since that time, how many disciplinary actions have been taken against those who retaliationed against whistleblowers. not pending actions? but how many cases have been finalized? >> i apologize. the numbers i brought i didn't break down by month or year. >> how many cases have you -- you talked only about impending cases. how many cases have been finalized? >> i am aware through my office

of three. but as i said the numbers from the facility level are kept in our data base, and i could -- i would love to provide you specifics, which i just don't have at my fingertips. >> you're here to testify before the congress on this issue and you don't have specifics. >> i have the specifics that -- >> how convenient. i will ask you for those on record for you to submit those to this committee. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> frankly, i kind of agree with the chairman. i'm a little bit frustrated by this. doctor, i think you testified earlier that you're not familiar with his case. >> i am actually quite familiar with it, but given ongoing litigation i'm not free to speak to the the specifics of it here. >> are you familiar with all the cases? >> i am. >> are you familiar with all the cases that are in your department? >> those that involve senior leaders, in terms of cull

ability, yes. >> are there 80 active cases? is that the number? >> we have 80 active investigations investigations. of which approximately 15 involve some element of whistleblower. >> so how many cases have you closed? >> my office has been operating since july of 2014. we have closed dozens. i could get you that. >> only three cases of those dozens have there been disciplinary action. is that what you're saying? >> each of our cases results either in a specific finding that the alleged misconduct couldn't be substantiated, or it results in a recommendation around discipline yes. >> let me ask you a question concerning mrs. lerner's written testimony. there's all kinds of cases here she's documented. you know specific cases. are the people -- miss lerner you don't want to get involved in the person of the person who

did -- who retaliated against the whistleblower. you're primarily concerned that the whistleblower is restored. is that correct? >> generally, our intention is on relief for the whistleblower. >> do you then report these issues to her department then so she can act on those? >> sure. yeah. we are working with her in the office of accountability review to expedite their identification of cases where disciplinary action is appropriate. i also just want to mention we know of at least 40 disciplinary actions against employees who were complicit in the the wrong doing identified by whistleblowers. so on the disclosure side, where people come to us and make a disclosure, it's part of our review of the agent's investigation. we look to see if they've taken disciplinary action. on that side of the equation we know of at least 40 since about two years ago. that's a little bit encouraging.

>> i'm a little disappointeded that you're only aware of three case. in all, three cases of disciplinary action being taken amongst all the cases in the last year. it seems surprising to me. especially in view of the fact that dr. head was here last summer. and it's still under investigation. let me ask dr. head. dr. head, what have you been doing in the last you know, since your last testimony here. what actions have you taken? because it seems like you're still having trouble. >> well, i continue to report each and every retaliatory event. zbr has anybody come to you, like from miss flan's department asking questions about what has been going on? >> from the office of special council, they have communicated with us. more recently the investigative

unit. >> does the office of accountability review talk to you? >> they have, but it's been disappointing. >> mr. trumane i heard you ef testify early you were in contact with miss lerner's department. department. >> no, other than the aib, after 16 hours of grilling, over two days. i'm sorry. over three days. >> they were talking to you? >> they weren't talking. they were grilling. >> what do you mean grilling? what were they doing? >> they were investigating. i thought and i told them i clearly thought it was a sham. and i expressed that to them on multiple occasions during the investigation. i mean one of the most interesting questions. one of the questions they wanted

answered the most dealt with the fact that i identified a vehicle that was driving -- a government vehicle on friday night at 8:30 in the evening after i left the office at 8:30, didn't have taillights on it at all. i i stopped the vehicle and notified there weren't any taillights on be ever the driver got on a darkened highway. and then the next monday i inquired about what the vehicle was doing out at 8:30. we had vehicles destroyed by staff. and we had vehicles used to take staff to crack houses. and i had a concern about why that vehicle was out. the oar -- aib investigation was more concerned, excuse me more concerned about why i stopped the vehicle. i was born in ohio. i suspected maybe it was a good samaritan. all three of the members advised me they would have never done

anything like that. i thought that was incredulous. then they questioned me why i questioned the employee on monday without a union representative. and i told them, well, i'm still number two in the organization at the time. i felt i had the responsibility to ask what the vehicle was doing out there at 8:30 at night. so that's my -- >> i'm out of time here i guess, mr. chairman. thank you. >> i just wanted to say one thing. i also felt a lot of time these investigations are more about us. they're not necessarily about the facts of what we have complained about. and my experience is very similar to that. >> miss rice, you're now recognized for five minutes. >> i'm going to try to organize this. i'm at a loss. for words. first of all, i don't understand your attitude, miss flans, the fact that you can sit here and come here with literally no

information and you can't answer a question with any specificity is very, very disturbing. what i don't -- so, i don't understand how any -- the two of you, miss flans and miss lerner, can say that there has been progress. when we have miss lerner saying she says people are more comfortable coming forward. at the same time that miss flanz is admitting that there has been literally no accountability on the part of the people retaliating against whistleblowers. can either one of you explain that to me? >> i would like very much to try. >> great. >> we are committed to ensuring that supervisors who retaliate against whistleblowers are held accountable. >> let me stop right there. i just have to interrupt you. it seems to me that and maybe

this is my prosecutorial background. if you want to send a message that people wrongdoers are going to be held accountable, you actually have to hold at least one accountable. and if you look at the numbers of complaints they far outweigh any level of accountability. so please explain that. >> again, i would like to. very much. we have ongoing investigations right now that will provide us with the evidence necessary to hold employees supervisors accountable. until very recently, we have not had the collaboration with osc that we have now that allows us to use the evidence that they have pulled together to give us a jump start so we don't have to start fresh with our investigations. we will whenever the evidence shows that retaliation has been engaged in -- >> okay.

>> we will hold people accountable. >> so let me ask you this. why is it that a determination that a whistleblower was not giving accurate information is a much easier determination to make than retaliation against a whistleblower. you answer that question, because what i'm hearing from the three whistleblowers here is, you guys have no problem saying this whistleblower was wrong. but you have no ability to hold a wrongdoer accountable. explain that. >> with all due respect that's not really how the process works. >> no, no, no, no. i have to stop you because i have very limited time. this is a very simple question. why is it that you are able to come to the conclusion that whistleblowers have made allegations that were not based on fact, and you can do that pretty expeditiously, it seems to me. and you can't do