perceived that it's coming from this part of the world that the people who others look to whether they're self-designated or anled by the united states government, the state department, are, in fact, pushing people. they are first of all leading these perceptions and i think that's very important. i think the point you made is exactly right. which is that these perceptions don't come from nowhere. the challenge, though is how you operationalize. this is where i really want to press on what you said. this has become extremely popular to idealize. this is an idealonlial fight. you don't win those with bullets bullets. some part of it, i think you do win with bullets. but that being said the challenges that this really isn't like communeism in so many ways. first of all this was an all out defense against ideology.

it's uncomfortable to say we want to defeat islamism. it is much more difficult the take on allege ideal logical question. there isn't a government in the world, right, left democrat republican that has to do that kind of thing. >> too bad. >> well, i would argue that that is extremely kournts productive. the last thing -- look and i say this. i don't want to sound flippant. but if we're going to dispute iraqi freedom with iraqi salvation, it's not a good plan. the u.s. government has no business -- this is -- in policy, we have no business involving ourselves in things we're not experience on. we're not experts on reforming religion. we didn't do that in this country as a government.

we shouldn't be doing that in other places. something that dana talked about is crucial. this idea of we can't reform islam as the u.s. government, but we certainly are experts on addressing the ecosystem in which these kinds of movements can find followers supporters people to fund, etcetera, etcetera. what are those? they're different in every country. a lot of the reality you described is more of a reality of, let's be honest, the persian gulf. in north africa, governments are not promoting a an ideology that promotes this. they've done the same thing. they have state funded, state mandated religion. whether that is a heavy minded royal family somewhere, whether it is a regime somewhere, whether it's a military dictatorship somewhere in the middle east, it's a bad idea. it's not sustainable and it's

not going to work. so as the u.s. government we shouldn't be a part of that process. that is something those countries need to figure out on their own. >> i think the united states can help on that. there's millions of dollars spent every year to nuris which we call for reform. and i think many years ago in the 1996 1997 going to the arab spring, a lot put into democracy education in the middle east. and i think the arab spring was a result of -- -- >> but wait a minute. critics will say -- you know how i feel about this. critics will take how did that turn out? and doesn't movement towards democracy advantage the very islamists who then come to power? and we should talk about egypt. >> not just that. it created an environment where these people are basically suspect because they are now -- sorry. i do too, absolutely.

>> we need that. >> go ahead. >> i don't disagree with you in terms of how it turns out. but i'm talking about the mechanism that's being used. and we can use the same thing to help the population in these countries to make that that kind of reform. and i think dictator ship, oppression, lack of human rights has a major effect on what we are seeing these days. and, of course given the liberty to all of the religious political leaders to interpret the way they wish on their political agenda that's a big harm not only for the societies and for the muslim community or muslim countries, but also for the worldwide nations they are suffering from this. >> yeah. i definitely -- we agree more

than we disagree. as policy making let's focus on what we're experts on. from my perspective, this is what we're experts on here in the u.s. jobs, tragz, inclusion of young people outside the classroom. engaging young people in contexts where they can develop their skills that go jan what next job are you going to find. believing and developing in people over the human resource. those are all things that touch on what you talked about. they have nothing to do with reforming islam. and in our public opinion research are things that the number one muslim majority countries say this is what would improve our condition it's what would improve our relationship with the west, jobs and commerce. >> i have one point to tell you here that i don't disagree on that and also you can see that a lot of young people who are joining isis these days come from families well educated and so on. so how is that related to -- >> that's a great -- that is so

important. i'm sorry. that is such an important question. no you put your finger right on it. that's a source of the confusion. pofrts creates terrorism. well not everywhere. mow ham he had elpata wasn't in poverty. videos of people being tortured to death, a lot of those people are probably not super wealthy and from ivy leave schools. i'm coming to you right now. there's an underlying narrative of those grievances that people tap into. some of those actors are the kid down the street that's going to do something crazy. that all is part of the problem. our challenge is instead of creating a poster child of this is the problem, we need to be more nuanced in our approach, take a more localized approach and say what is causing this group of people to join and that group of people to join and i think the answer to those

questions are different in different places. >> now we actually are the greater part of -- yes, exactly. and so we need to be heard, as well. you have your set of problems and your issues. we actually have a working democracy in indonesia. we have a working democracy in malaysia. there are -- why is it? here is the reason. in india, in muslim disnants, a muslim scholar who has a new outlook on theology. a person who says i don't believe in bahari for the following reasons. i have this argument or that. he cannot be eliminated easily. he cannot be shut down. he appears on some division or another. his voice is heard, he can give us so many. in most of the middle east, that cannot happen for one reason or

another. eshths the state or the mob won't let him do it. so when i had there is a role, i cited david cameron, look, this argument that you know what america really does good is give jobs and provide university jaeld education etcetera is something if you go back a little in time the muslim brotherhood took tremendous advantage of. it came here in the '60s and '70s, created and prints thousands of copies of books and actually radicalized people more by taking advantage of this openness and that's why you have awl of these people here a lot of them. my argument is quite different. i think what the western government can do and in the only government, but foundations, individuals, think tanks can do is actually to give

a voice to the voices in the muslim world that are being shut up. people who can't be heard there. if saha had been able to escape sudan, been in the ooudz, he could have written spoken given speeches in modern time, youtube messages. one idea is to protect and provide an opportunity for those voices of muslim pluralism that are being shut up within the muslim world. second, the real radicalization comes from three factors. you call them grievances, i call them partly grievances and mrart conspiracy theories. and the governments times encourage them. ee gupt is one example. they had that famous television show and that actually is -- it

makes people feel, oh god everything that -- for example, the muslims feel what is good about the west is anling we should be trying to get ahead in technology instead of just trying to drag the west down which is what the islamist idea is. all the islamic texts i've read and by the way, as a child, i was part of the islamic movement in pakistan. all the books that the young people read, they're making an argument that the west corrupts morals, that the west is controlled by the jews. it's not about you know what? they are superior in technology. now we need the advance in technology and take over. it's not about let's enhance our liberties to get there. i accept the argument that that's how people perceive. but it is internally flawed. and so the three things that

should be a priority for west government is to fight the conspiracy theories, to oppose the anti-semitism that is deeply rooted and to also now fight sectarianism. and to say, you know what? you want our kind of lifestyle, it's not that we will give you a job if you come here. you can built that prosperity there by having the liberty and diversity. if you believe shias are going to hell let them go to hell on their only. don't make the effort of killing them to get there quicker. what is this fight? it's a disagreement that goes back into history. what relevant does it have in the 21st century? let the shias be shias and let the sunnis be sunnis. i don't know, but i feel a feeling that it is believed --

is the rightful prophet to mohammed. we can did it agrees on that and still sit on the same panel, live in the same sewing and acquire the technology and build the institutions of liberty that we need. that argument is not efficiently being made in the muslim world partly because the entire structure of state, of the government, of politics does not allow people to make that argument. and dare i think the west does have a role to play. >> i think there's a lot a lot to discuss here and i know there's a lot of disagreement about the legitimacy of the grievances you tend to hear about. but in the interest of advancing the conversation and thinking about policy options if we agree that a lot of the problem centers around systems of government, rule of law, and leadership, then -- and we agree

that, in fact, the united states and western governments actually do have a role to play here it's not -- you know, it's not as this administration appears to believe as sarah palin appears to believe, a fight that goes on in the region where everybody kills each other and let god sort it out, but, in fact we have a constructive role to play. then the question becomes, okay how? so there are two examples here that i think are of interest to everybody. one is the government and we do a disservice by not talking about shia extremism. eye toll la cue mainny didn't come out because of the disagreement in afghanistan. >> agreed. >> so we have shiaism which is spreading and now we have the problem in syria and elsewhere. and then we have the our extremism. but then on the other side, we

have many who are suggesting we need to embrace the new and better. not much better. and i'm not sure how that works and i'd really like to hear your impressions about where these are the right approaches. >> well, i would definitely address that. but i want to make clear that i'm not proposing that all muslims who believe in diversity come here and hide in the u.s. i think we're actually saying the same thing. on the issue of, you know, whether or not we should support a particular lead erer, i think a lot of the cc focus now is really about a coincidence. it just happens to be that you have a new president in egypt who has been consolidating power and he is focused on creating a counternaif narrative to -- all

hues and they're not all the same and definitely there's a huge distinction between civilals trying to pursue a civilian approach and people who are terrorists. for the u.s. to go in and sort of give added support is going to do two things. one thing, whether you like what he's doing or not, it completely delegitimizes what he's trying to accomplish. i highly counts he wants the u.s. lawmakers to say, look at cc he's awesome. and you can see from my previous comment, says sustainable religion, i don't think that's a viable option. it's been proven that that's not a sustainable option. when power has tried to co-op that process, the process loses credible and the power makes bad decisions. that's been consistently the case. what we should do is focus more

on the ecosystem. what are the things that push people in egypt to reach a conclusion that i want to join the muslim brotherhood to go to heaven? well, i'll tell you, in their neighborhood for most of their lives, if they are 50 or younger, the only people showing up in their neighbors to address the issue is that movement. so unless you start addressing those issues, and focus on the fact that the average muslim needs to understand that they don't need to join the muslim brotherhood to go to heaven because it's not taught that they need to -- that's not islam. that's a complete fabrication. >>. >> we have two mixed things here. one is that we need to tell them they don't need to join the muslim brotherhood. >> no. the literacy question needs to be addressed by muslims based on their terms in their society. if we can notice people speaking out against that, that is great.

for us to advocate completely cuts their knees out from underneath pem. that's one issue. we shouldn't touch that with a 10-foot pole. >> but there is no freeway come to discussion that issue among muslims. >> my aurm is there will be less freedom as soon as the state department starts ear tagging money. he actually took on -- and we saw what happened because of it. imagine if it was funded by an ngo here in washington. actually, a lot of the anxiouses against him was that was exactly the case. >> which is why it's so important to transform the whole environment in which conspiracy theory is tried. >> how? >> let me set something right on the historic explanation. the truthism that is history, the rulers, they are approaching religion has almost -- it was

his inquisition that ended up finishing off that. it was the fact that -- attract to islam in the muslim world and -- >> no, you're not. the way we are understanding it is state sanctioned religion is what ended up prevailing everywhere. for example, saudi arabia and its em bragz of -- >> so my argument is let's not support more state sanctioned religion. >> no, hold on hold on hold on. first, let get the history right. you see that islamic history, the state sanction has not -- and my argument is that state sanction is what has created a domination of a certainly point. >> you're misunderstanding my argument. my argument is state sanctioned religion produces unviable outcomes. we should not support state sanctions. >> that's a different thing than saying in islamic history

state -- >> i didn't say it hasn't prevailed. i had it has consistently produced -- outcomes. >> my argument would be the real problem comes from a narrative that is rooted in total misunderstanding of the rise and fall or rise and decline of islam. it is a historic argument. if you read fundamentalist literature a lot of it is actually a very sort of fast explanation of why we are where we are. over limb myfycation such as the -- for example, those found in milestones and this oversimplification that a young man feels that islam is under threat or islam is in danger and, ore, i need to do something to protect it. so that the space for making the counter argument cannot come in the present environment, at least in the middle east.

in indonesia, you can have mumt many. in bangladesh occasionally a person will get stabbed for his views, but the state will be trying to protect people. in the middle east, that's not the case. in the middle east it's state sanction which can be cc version or the -- version. and then there is all these counter movements to these, can flourish only if they have -- that's a good question. it's a very good point that in the present environment, anybody who has support from the outside will not have. i have 100% agreement with you on that. but that said, i think that in terms of allowing the pluralist ideas to cross pollinate bearing in the middle east and middle easterners for once saying a deep breath and saying, you know

what? we are not the only in the world just because we were born into the arabic language does not make us superior. and, therefore, there are other voices on islam it's not just -- there are more modern islamic that exist in the nonarabic world and we need to start getting their voices. and this facilitation can be provided and i'm not talking about the state dorpt any u.s. government doing that because the u.s. government generally tends to do things inefficiently and incompetently. we are talking about policy options for the u.s. which means a broad range of access. i think delegitimizing and countersing the narrative of anti-semitism, the narrative of conspiracy theories and the narrative of -- and the distorted explanation of muslim history, we were great until the controlanists came. not true. the fact is we did not become ek

weak because we were colonized. we were colonized because we were weak. this line has to be understood by muslims. i think there is a role for american academia, there is a role for foundations and think tanks. and if the government can facilitate any of that there is a role for government. that's what i think. >> i think to turret to the audience, but i want there to be a chance for you to expand on what you were alludeing to. you were talking about the fact that while there may be plenty of opposing voices to the challenges that we face we're really not capable okay? so we need to invest in rule of law, we need to invest in human rights. but how do we do that without fall into the same trap that we've fallen into so many times? >> we need to diversify the voices. and by diversifying, we're not

listening to -- they claim that they are presenting muslims and this is what we are missing. and we see the best example of it here in the u.s. and this is also sort of i think overseas. >> what do you think? be specific. >> certain organizations or people who claim that they are speaking on behalf of the muslim community in the whole united states. first of all they don't present the majority of the muslim voices in america. and our governments here listen to them. and all over the i'd and that's not true. also, there are many different options that we need to take into consideration and we need to tackle the -- we need to tackle that issue of extremism and radicalism from many directions. if it's through grassroots then it would be one option. the second one, if we need to use military option to overcome

the ral cad extremism groups such as isis and al qaeda and many other people, then this is another option that we need to elimination that because we cannot be always the victims and peeg people's lives and talking their ideology. this is showing us as a week people and not taking a strong stand against all of these ral cad groups. i think muslim res now realizing that these groups are their first enemies and the u.s. is watching and the conspiracy, again, and i degree with hussein here, it's looming around that because america is now supporting all of these radicals by just watching and not taking any strong actions to overcome this problem. >> let's open it up to questions. i'm sorry there is so many to talk about.

i'll call on you. you know what the drill is. wait for the mike. put your brilliant statement in the form of a question. young man back here right next to the mike. >> thank you. gerard robinson with aei. in the 1990s, those who were against say we shouldn't putly fund kkk. after 9/11, they had we shouldn't use public schools money to fund radicalized schools. what recommendations do you have for us to broaden the discussion about how muslim schools can be a part of solution of educating american students and expanding opportunities for others? >> i mean i'm not an expert on education, but one thing we haven't mentioned here and it

has been alluded to to some degree is the american muslim community. they are one of the most effective voices i think from at least within the united states that could address some of these issues. the good news both in the polling of gallon and other organizations, the good news is that the community socioeconomically speaking educationally speaking and sort of perception wise in terms of local issues current policy issues, they're actually a very successful group of people. the challenge with this successful group of people is they don't necessarily have the structures within their community that have been effectively able to sort of bridge from their local experience to the national conversation. certainly that's not to disparage muslim american sorgzs. but the reality of it is that you're dealing with a diverse community and the two or three acronym organizations don't effectively i think raelz

represent aupt users. >> the problem that we're seeing in the curriculum that we have is we have the freedom to publish what we want. a few years ago, we looked into the curriculum of some of the schools. this is -- we're not talking about something happening overseas. we're talking about something happening here in the u.s. and this is a great danger. also, other than the, what we are seeing and noticing in college campuses these days, and it's been many of the claumic groups are taking places and they have their own organizations and clubs in college campuses, actually what they do is encourage muslims who are native muslims to convert to islam but which teaching of

islam the extreme way of teaching that and encouraging many young people to go overseas and join many radical extremist groups. this is a problem we are noticing and seeing. and these problems that we are detecting in many campuses here and we see a lot of young people being harassed by these groups on campus and not being able to practice their life just like any ordinary american youngsters. >> over here. >> ivan. i'm glad we've moved toward muslim s muslims in the -- prime minister cameron in his speech yesterday and others have spoken increasingly about being more proactive. i write a lot about radicalization and recruitment. about the idea lonelial sxoent

of countering regraduatement by extremist grooums groups and so on. i think there is a consensus disagreement on the panel that it's difficult for government to enter that fear, especially when it's dealing within its own boarders. so law enforcement certainly has a role to play. but what in the panel's opinion is the role of government, the stens extent of the government's ability to work with its own citizens on the idea logical stage? >> yeah. i think -- look, i think it's different -- no, he's not a citizen so you can't call him. look there is -- there is a lot of debate now about the cve

program, obviously. >> countering violent extremism. and just for those that aren't familiar, the debate really is you're not being as specific as you can about the fact that it is muslims who are committing the acts we're trying to stop. on the other side, people are saying, well, only inviting muslim toes a summit that is just plainly called the -- it sends the message that they are. so i think that debate is holding. because it conditions this sort of back and forth about where are the condemnations on one side which is ludicrous because if you go to any muslim organization's website in 2014 there's nothing but condemnations on it that date back probably a decade. this has nothing to do with islam. leave the muslims alone. look, it's different in different places. i would say local more than federal. that is the real issue how does a kid like the young person we

had in chattanooga who tragically murdered, you know, innocent civilians, how does that person create an environment in their vote, how do we as a mayor, as a school how do we create an environment where that person has somewhere to go? that person has somebody who knows something about juris prudential, it's not just as night on twitter figuring it out or dealing with what we're going to figure out with this kid and connecting that to what's happening with isis. so local more than federal and the food fight fight is that terrorists know they're really innocent is treatmently unhelpful. >> from cameron's speech yesterday, he said we have to show that if you say yes, i condemn terror, but -- or violence in london cyst junt

fight by suicide bombs in israel are a different matter than you, too, are part of the problem. and i think that approach certainly needs to be adopted north side united states. >> unfortunately, we see on websites and tv and all of that, the realize is that when there is a maul group or there is meeting in a mosque or somewhere else, you see people all of this does not apply to all the condemnation. while we are about being here in the u.s., we are against, we have that impact, as muslims living in america, we have all the rights just like any other citizen and begin doing whatever we want. but when you hear these incrossed conversation you hear dehumanizing of the west dehumanizing people who are not muslims because they are not

believing in the same religion or ideology, then they deserve to be killed or to be destroyed or beheaded. this is a problem and an issue that we need to be focusing more on as is -- the problem. also, tenl now has become another threat. social media, recruitment of young people, men and women have been brain watched by all of these different websites individuals who are working very hard to recruit people from the west specifically highly greated to go and fight alongside with all of these -- in the middle east. these are issues that we have not find any solution for it yet, nor the government is paying that close attention to. >> no, in fact they have defunded almost all the efforts that have been going towards going after people who are

looking to go to syria or to yemen. so it's even worse than simple ignorance. this is the one thing that i want to sort of leave us with. and i wish i understood our government better in this regard. we embrace certain values. david cameron talks a little about liberal values. it is the fight we see every day, not about terrorism but about women's rights or gay rights. when we look overseas, it is as if those ideas have been suspended. >> with our money we don't have to be respectful. these are our vaugs and we can stand by them and i've never understood why that, the bill of rights is not ow plan. for how we manage foreign assistance to other countries

and other groups. as usual, as the moderator, i stole the last word. let me thank our panelists. this conversation is so much bigger than the hour. they were wonderful. and let me just say a word of thanks to katie who did so much work to make this happen. i hope the conversation can continue. thank you all for being here. sunday a road to the white house interview with former riry governor and senator lincoln chafe fee. he'll talk about the 2016 race his life and his decision to

leave the republican party. at 6:35 eastern on c-span. it's almost as if they were matter and anti-matter. >> say that again. >> freedom breeds inequality. >> anything complicated confuses him. >> filmmakers robert gordon and morgan veville talks about their documentary, "best of enhe please" on the debate between conservative william f buckley and gore vidam over liberals, politics god and sex. >> very unlike today. you know today i believe there's someone saying you know, the numbers are dwindleing, talk about hot topics, hot, salacious topics number two.

>> i don't think that was the norm at the time. >> and howard was the distinguished newsman who was embarrassed by this. he was moderating, but he disappears for sometimes five or more minutes at a time. today you wouldn't have a moderator not jumping in every 30 seconds you know? so i think, really, everybody at abc just stood back and let the fire burn. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's q&a. >> agency secretary tom vilsasc testifies before the house agriculture committee wednesday. this is two hours, 15 minutes.

>> good morning. this is a hearing on the committee of agriculture for oversight by the u.s. department of agriculture will come to order. i've asked rick crawford to open us with a prayer. >> thank you mr. chairman. father, i bow humbling before you. thankful for this country you've given us and, father, mindful of the great responsibility that you've charged us with. father, just ask that everything that is said and done here today be pleasing in your sight and we ask that you help us to be civil in our discourse and discerning in our comments and dialogue. father, i just pray it all in jesus' name. amen. >> thank you, rick. i want to thank the secretary vilsack for coming to be with us this morning. he has a horde stop at 12:15.

he has cabinet responsibilities to do. mr. secretary, thanks very much for being here this morning. be careful on your knee there on your -- on the table. >> i want to say at the start of this, he and his staff have worked really hard to fulfill the multitude of committee requests for oversight information that we've flooded them with over the last several months. and i appreciate their cooperation and effort to do that and work with our team on that. it's the -- responsibility under the constitution and explicit and house rules that each of the authorizationing committees conduct oversight over the xrve branch areas of their jurisdiction. the american people demand that we hold our government accountable for the stewardship of our taxpayer dollars holding us accountable as well. as identified by the department's inspector general. phyllis fong and the government accountability office.

i'd like to say a few word about the inspector. she's served the department since 2002. our office works hard in conducting audits each year all aimed at making the department more efficient. i want to thank the inspector for working with our committee over the last several months. government employees must remember that each time they are awarded a grant or a contract, it's the taxpayers' money that they're spending. today, we'll examine a few of the programs the department manages and executes over the course of our oversight efforts this year. we've focused on the farm service agents midas information technology program and the office of advocacy and outreach grants and cooperative agreements awarded 2010 and 2011. fsa is ledded for the might y'allace program to modernize his delivery programs with farmers and ranches.

unfortunately it's been mismanaged as evidenced by the fact that it's $140 million over budget and only contains two of the five planned core budgets. mr. secretary, you signed a memorandum ceasing further development on midas. gao agrees with that and that makes sense. this maintenance of midas alone is costly. i.t. management across government has deemed a high risk area by gao, the committee wants to see the department of agriculture implement and they identified best practices and hold responsibility parties accountable. this meeting will continue to monitor the work of both the us did i a chief and information officer as well as the fsa's chief information officer. also i want to discuss today as i mentioned the office of advocacy and outreach, the award of grants and cooperative agreements under that program. between 2010 and 2011, that office under the direction of pearly s. reed awarded

approximately $40 million in grants and cooperative agreements on a noncompetitive basis. and as mr. secretary he gave taxpayer dollars away and this is alarming. i know it's alarming to you, as well. the inspector general noted as well, that those accountable for those be held accountable. based on the public outcry that has occurred over other scandals involving the misuse of waste of taxpayer dollars, the american people want you to hold responsible those individuals accountable for egregious conduct in violation of that trust. mr. secretary we thank you and your staff again for the cooperation and look forward to continuing the work on oversight. thank you for being here and i yield the ranking member for any opening comments he has to make. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and welcome, mr. secretary. appreciate you being here. oversight of the usda is the responsibility the committee takes seriously. having an open dialogue with the department is important not just to ensure that usda is operating

in the best interests of our constituents, but implementing programs as congress intended. a few areas that we are specifically looking at today include the operation of the office of advocacy created by the 2008 farm bill. awarding portion in section 2501 grant, 2010, 2011 and the review of the family room initiative and the long delay in development of midas, fsa feels is at issue. since the secretary joining us today, i wouldn't be surprised if members use this opportunity to address others that may be happening in their district, such as the avian flu situation which is impacted many of my producers and others across the region. i've appreciated the department's efforts in this regard. thus far they have been doing a good job and i'm looking forward to an update on the future plans within the department their response if we have another outbreak that occurs this fall. again, mr. chairman, i thank

the -- thank you for holding today's hearing. usda has a large department which can make adequate oversight a difficult task. and we might have a different ideas about how to get there but i think that we all want the department to be running effectively and efficiently as possible and the secretary has a big job. we had a discussion yesterday and he was telling me that they do 7.5 billion transactions a year in the department. am i right about that? that's pretty astounding. they're bound to have a couple of clichs here and there. >> anyway, thank you, mr. chairman. and i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. excuse me secretary vilsack. thank you forebaggy here. the microphone is yours, sir. >> mr. chairman thank you very much for the opportunity to be here and for the ranking member, as well. given the number of members who are going to participate in this committee meeting, mr. chairman i wonder if i could defer my

opening remarks and perhaps maybe use a bit of my time that i'm saving to extend an answer if that becomes necessary so that everyone gets a chance to ask the questions that they need to ask. >> well i thank you, mr. secretary. i appreciate that. >> thousands and thousands of great employees at your department get up every single day, go to work, try to do the best they can for the taxpayers they serve and the access of a few who voipt violate that trust hurt everybody and our conversations this morning will be about those few as opposed to brag on the rest of the folks who do a good job. so let's talk a little bit about pearly reed. i believe he was the under secretary in charge of spending a lot of money. the special agents that

conducted that investigation discovered in addition to the 40 million in grants that appear to have been granted without competition that mr. reed also was able to direct either by himself or through some other folks a relatively significant amount of money, 275,000 plus dollars to an individual in which he had a fiscal relationship with. mr. reed resigned, i guess, 2012. did you ask for his resignation or did he do that on his own? >> mr. chairman i became aware of concerns about mr. reed's handling of the incidents and the accounts that you just addressed. by virtue of a hot line tip that we received. based on that tip, i asked immediately for the oig to investigate. the oig produced what is called a fast report, which indicated some concerns that they had, not a comprehensive report. i shared that report with mr. reed indicated to him that obviously we were disappointed

in what we had initially learned about this and following that conversation mr. reed left the employment of the usda. >> thank you. i believe that the overall investigation led to a recommendation by the agency to refer to justice department. can you visit with us about that and why, if you know why, justice chose not to pursue a criminal actions? >> mr. chairman following the -- mr. reed leaving the office, then the oig continued its review of activities involving 2501 and strike force involving mr. reed. and they took a good deal of time, obviously, to complete the report. when the report was completed, we basically requested the department of justice to take a look at this. i believe it was referred down to the department of justice in arkansas. and the u.s. attorney in arkansas chose not to -- not to prosecute. i can't share with you today

because i don't know the specific reasons for why he chose not to prosecute. but that decision makes it difficult if not impossible for us to take any further actions with reference to mr. reed because of the code of federal regulations. specifically, 180.21.10 and 470.2110 that basically outlines processes that we could take if there is a criminal judgment or a civil judgment. obviously, there is neither in this case. and so as a result we are where we are today. we focused our attention frankly, mr. chairman as we received the fast report and after we received the full report on fulfilling the recommendations at oig outlined in terms of improvements to the programs and i can tell you that today they are different than they are in 2010 and 2011. >> all right. those processes could -- could this individual be -- what's the phrase -- suspension or disbarment so i understand under

the administration he was a consultant to the government. can he be prevented from coming back under any kind of a contract? >> under the code of federal regulations that i cited, mr. chairman, in order to take that action, that specific action there has to be a criminal judgment or a civil judgment. in other words a course of law has to make a determination that something inappropriate occurred and, based on that judgment and determination, you're then empowered under the code of federal regulations to take steps. we don't have that in this particular circumstance. >> okay. i -- >> and mr. reed, to be fair to mr. reed, he did serve the nrds in a capacity for a number of years to the federal government before he came back as the assistant secretary of administration. and the reason i asked him to do that in 2009 was because our department had a very serious concern and problem with civil rights generally, which we wanted to aggressively address. >> appreciate that. i believe you mentioned that this came to your attention on a

hot line tip. a whistleblower tip. can you walk us through the attitude at the department toward whistle blowers and how the function is available to people who see something goes on that they disagree with? >> obviously, we encourage folks who are seeing activity that is inappropriate to notify us notify their supervisor november people in charge of concerns that they may have. that's why we have the hot line process to be able to do that in a way that doesn't necessarily compromise your ability and your relationship with other coworkers. and we take these things very seriously by virtue of the fact that when that hot line tip occurred, it came to my attention immediately and my first action was to ask the inspector general to look into it. we're not -- i've said to my folks, i'm not concerned about people making mistakes, but i want to know what they are and i want to be able to fix them if there's a problem i want to do whan and i want to do it as soon as i can because we are very interested in the job that we have.

you didn't take very seriously what you had at the outset which is we have a responsibility to taxpayers to make sure these resources are being spent appropriately and it's unfortunate and disappointing when that accidents occur. >> thank you, mr. secretary. >> you know, back in -- when i was chairman, i had meetings with some of your computer people. i thought at the time, you know, they brought in a couple new people, that they were on track to get this thing straightened out. you know but they were having funding challenges and, you know, as i understand it i think that there's been an uneven kind of deal going on with the funding of that. how much of that uneven funding and not being able to plan had to do with the problems that happened there in the midas situation? >> well, congressman, i would -- you know i was reading the good book the other day and in prove

verbs, there's a couple of suggestions that a wiseman measures his steps and a wiseman has many conferences. with reference to midas, we didn't measure our steps and didn't have as many counselors as we needed frankly. when this thing was started in 2007, 2008 i think the vision was pretty grand, but i don't think people fully appreciated the difficulty of basically implementing that in the context of a 1980s system which is what we basically have at fsa offices. this is a huge undertaking and involves 11 million customers, 5 million farmers, and 38 million tracks of land. is he it's a huge undertaking. and frankly, we didn't have at the outset what we have today which is a process of review and many hands and many eyes basically watching this and doing this in an incremental way. so subjecting was an issue, no question about that. but also the way in which it was originally structured and the way in which we failed to

recognize that there was a different vision in kansas city where some of these work was going to be done and a different vision in d.c. and as a result of that conflict things didn't get set up as they should have. a farmer can walk into an fsa office today in any county in the country and facilitate and see all the records regardless of where that land might be located. that was not the case before. he had to go to individual offices if he had land in different counties. we also installed our business integrity efforts which will allow us to reduce errors and mistakes and we're now working collaboratively with nrcs on their gateway program to take the next step which is to allow people to do the work they want to do at home without the necessity of even coming into an office. so progress has been made, but it clearly wasn't implemented in the way that i think people envisioned at the beginning. and we have addressed those

issues by establishing a process within the cio's office for review, a more functioning keyboard and weekly and now biweekly reports to me directly about the status of midas, about the status of the gateway program and about the status of the next step. >> have we gotten rid of the as 4 let you know consistent of 36s? are they gone? >> well i don't think that -- i don't think that they're totally gone and that's one of the complication that's essentially we've meshed and merged systems. which may explain why we're going to have to continue to patch and put resources into the system. this gets back to the different focus of folks in d.c. which we have addressed. >> thank you. >> as you know, first of all, i want to thank you and the department, dr. clifford, for the work that you have done and continue to do helping us with

our avian influenza situation. which hit my district probably harder than anybody's. and, you know, there's concerns out there and you have done pretty good, i think in addressing those as they come along. it wasn't a perfect situation, but whenever you get in a crisis, you know, it's not going to be perfect. but one of the concerns i'm hearing now is that there's inconsistencies and indemnity payments that, you know, we appreciate what you're doing and i think you have been doing it out of the ccc and the omb has been supporting you and so that seems to be working. but apparently there are different endimty payments for high pass avian influenza versus lopan avian influenza. this goes back to when we did legislation when we had the lopath in virginia, i guess. so under the regulations, apparently egg layers are compensated for future egg production according to the lopath regulation, but the high path regulations are silent in

that aspect. so the turkey folks, you know are wondering, you know, why they're not compensated for what would be the full cost of the bird kind of similar to what is happening with the egg production under the low path. and so are you looking at that? is there a way to bring consistency and constantsy to the situation? >> well the quick answer is we are looking at it. we recognize that there is a difference between low path and high path and there ought not to be. we also are taking a look at whether or not we could create some kind of more uniform system that would be based on the size of the operation in terms of cleaning and upkeep expense, as well, because there is obviously some confusion about precisely would gets paid to do what relative to disinfection and cleaning. now, this is a process that i think that we are looking at and we are hopeful that we get this thing in a better place and a more consistent place before the

fall. that's why we have set up a task force which i instructed could be set up for ways we could be better prepared if this emerges in the fall. >> thank you. >> thank you, gentlemen. mr. lucas. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and mr. secretary, i have to echo the comments of the chairman and the ranking member about the challenges that you and the department have faced in implementing your other dramatic change in policy in the 2014 agriculture. i think in most areas it's been fundamentally amazing how successful that has been. but like anything i have a few questions, the secretary and one of the things i'm curious about, the $100 million that was provided for the implementation of title one, due to the increased workload from arc and plc, loum of that money was used and, if you could, perhaps a follow-up is necessary, but provide the committee with a written breakdown of how that

money was spent. can you touch on that mr. secretary? >> i can mr. -- well i -- >> by the way, your county office folks have worked very diligently to get all this done. they're good people. but they face some challenges out there. >> there's so many chaires and former chairs on this committee i'm probably going to -- >> exactly. >> congressman, we are using this resource in a planned and strategic way, $100 million. we didn't use it all at once. we're going to be mrafk ramping up as work requirement are required and facilitated. i can't tell you today the exact amount that has been allocated, but i can tell you that the staff and temporary staff has been hired in offices and that we are in the process of determine where best to locate additional staff based on workloads. we will provide you with a breakdown as you've requested in terms of where the money has been spent and what we've purchased with it & as soon as this hearing is over. >> i very much appreciate that, secretary. it's one of the things that i

and the other members of this committee promise those folks out in the field when they were going through the challenges of implementing this was that they would be help. normally, staff funding is normally handled by the provisions in this staff committee. the offer has a committee. >> i would point out that overall usda staff is down by somewhere in excess of 10,000 ftes since i became secretary and fsa has been disproportionately hit with those reductions. >> absolutely. and this just shows how much more effort folks in the field are shouldering. that said mr. secretary, i've visited with you and a number of the other officials about a slightly different area. the way in which it appears the usda is implementing a net effect that's tantalizing growers who plant cover crop for producers who certified acreage plant and covered crop generic base particularly in the '14 and

'15 crop cycle. the question i get with them is why can't you have used your discretion to allow those crops to be eligible for arc and plc. congressman, i think that the concern we had was the way in which the statute or the bill was crafted in terms of the flexibility that we had or don't have. be happy to continue to work with you on this.