instrumental arts. and i -- by art here i mean power, the ability to do something. historically the instrumental arts in both our traditions were the language arts and the number arts. the -- the qualitative and quantitative reasoning and so in the language arts it was grammar, logic and rhetoric. there's a wonderful fresco of the students being led to the other arts by grammar and it's personified by a beautiful woman and overlooking them is wisdom and one of the things we don't realize is that language is incredibly complicate. when we speak -- i was in a hotel recently and somebody asked me what i wanted. i said an omelet with everything except the meat. and so the omelet came with

everything -- with nothing but the meat. and the reason was is the person's english was limited and the concept of an exception using except is actually a complicated concept in language. how they said no meat it's very clear, but to say except meat will confuse somebody if they're not a native speaker sometimes. so we don't realize how complicated language is and historically, st. augustine says you have to learn in order to read scripture. people are reading scripture without the liberal arts. if you don't know what a conditional sentence is you should not be reading scripture as other than a denotional practice, but if you can think you're going to derive knowledge or wisdom from it you're going to get in trouble. there are many things in t

thekoran. it's a two volume work just on the particles and prepositions in arabic and how difficult they are. there are just -- just fa has several possibilities. there's something called the causative fa. there's a fa that is related to it happens after time has transpired. it's a conjunctive that happens after time has transpired. so every sentence in the koran. they used to study the sentences. they studied this in seminaries for -- sometimes for ten years. this is a book of sentences because there's so much sophistication in great writing, especially inspired writing by great theologians and so we've lost a lot of this and our complex compound sentences are

diminishing in our writing. you can see this clearly in modern writing. we're losing the sophistication of language. many of our students are inca incapable of reading mehlville. i sometimes wonder if david foster wol las left the world because of a despair, because he's a -- you know, he's a very sophisticated writer that sometimes write sentences that last for a page and he was teaching students english literature and he said he would always begin with a crash course on grammar because the students couldnd read. and one of the things that i have done is give students the first sentence to the declaration of independence. out of 50 students on average, three or four actually get the main clause of that sentence because they're unable to identify the difference between a subordinate and a main clause. we've had a war on grammar for about 50 years. it's literally been a war on

grammar. let's eat grandma. without that pause we could become cannibals. so commas are a matter of life and death. >> well, we had some questions that were written down. we can take some more as well if you have them. please put them on the cards. someone asks, please continue to express your thoughts on how isis revives or leverages medieval muslim behaviors. >> first of all, they do not -- they are a real reflection of -- they're not -- they're much closer to kind of maliced orad cal marksists tradition. a lot of people are unaware of how profoundly impacted marksist thought has had -- i mean, even in our colleges and universities in the united states, critical theory which we can trace it

right back to karl marx and overall the end justifies the means is a marxist concept. it's not a religious concept. so the idea somehow that you can just enslave people, the prophet said that there's three people that he will be an advocate against on the day of judgment and one of them was, you know, the one who sells a -- a free person. you know, and he wrote about taking people as slaves in egypt. he said -- [ speaking foreign language ] . >> what right do you have to enslave people that their mothers gave birth to them in freedom. you know, they're free people

and so this idea, slavery to the islamic tradition, there is undeniably a component of endurden chured servitude which was a way of reintegrating war and refugees into a society. we have in our islamic law the ability of anybody who's in servitude to get money from the public funds to be freed. if they so desire. and so this idea of -- of modern slavery has nothing to do with islam at all and so what these people are doing is not medieval in dark ages. it is -- it is a gross distortion and i'm not going to deny that within -- i've spent enough time in premodern books to know there's some really weird stuff in premodern tradition, but i could take the jewish religion, numbers 31, if

you go into the city, kill every male, even the little ones, you know, the kill the girls who have known intimately men and take the girls who have not known men intimately for yourselves, right, so that's in the bible. there's things that are in -- in our premodern texts, but you'll find in the islamic scripture, you will not find -- there's nowhere where there's racism and i would argue that the prophet mohammed is the first human being in history to declare the quality of human beings. i have never found anybody prior where he said there's no preference over a black over a white or a white over a black. and i've never seen that articulated and the kora nsaid we made you not to hate one another. it is a sound interpretation. so i really feel that isis in no

way represents normative mid eel islam. there is a strain of radical islam even in the premodern tradition that gets pretty ugly. the idea that women who were taken as con cue biens so you'll find them talking about these things but those things are relative to past and they should not be revived in -- in the modern world. >> somebody asks, it's been said that muslims and blacks are people that have been oppressed here in the united states historically. and muslims are the target today. do you think there are currently any initiatives in which these two communities are two groups work together? >> first of all, i would say anybody that can make a statement like that knows nothing about black history in this country. the muslims have in no way any

comparison to what the african american people went through or the native americans. or even the chinese americans. so, you know, i just -- or japanese americans. i mean, i could go on, but you know, we're doing relatively well, let's face it. you know, i mean -- you know, so you get some rude remarks. welcome to america. you know, i mean, i'm sorry. like, we've got a front runner out there who just is as rude as can be and everybody loves him, so you know, americans like rude people sometimes i guess. i don't know. but i mean, i just think it's an odious comparison, personally. what's down the road? i don't know. like, i'm troubled definitely by the rhetoric, but i think there's still an incredible number of very decent americans that are troubled by what's happening and i'm also warry of polls.

i really am. because you know, i just -- my own experience, i've been the brunt -- i've had the brunt of anti muslim things but it's a good thing also to experience prejudice also. it gives you empathy. one of the things the bible says is do not vex the stranger because you too were the stranger in the land of egypt. we need to go what other people go through to be more appreciative. one of the things that the immigrant community failed to do is to help the african american muslim community. that was i think an egregious short sidedness ethically and pragmatically. >> here's a question to you personally. could you share the story of your own personal decision to convert to islam. >> for me, you know, i -- my mother raised me even though my great grandfather built the

greek orthodox church on valencia and there's a plaque with his name on it and i went to catholic schools. my father was irish catholic and -- but my mother did tell me that religion is largely arbitrary. you tend to have the religion that you were born into and so don't think just because you were born into this religion it's the only truth out there. so she raised us with that idea and she took us to various religious community. i went to a mosque when i was 12 years old in redwood city. she took us to a mosque to experience, you know, a mosque. i actually prayed with the congregation, so she took me to synagogues, she took us to a hindu temple, so i read the koran when i was 17 and after reading several different

scriptures and the koran that really resonated with me because one of the things i really liked about the koran is i got all the prophets that i grew up with and -- and you know, i definitely -- i think the -- the atonement story, i never fully got, you know, and -- but i have incredible respect for christian tradition. i've spent a lot of time in catholic theology. i'm kind of an arbitrary cath rick theologian. i've read a lot and joseph peeper is one of my favorite writers. i always think the catholics are just so bad at marketing. because they -- they really do have an incredible tradition. and in terms of ethics they are

the most advanced religious ethical tradition i think on the plant right now. i really believe that. they're just so ahead of all the other religions and really deeply dealing from a philosophical perspective a lot of the things we're confronted with. there's a lot of shallow thinking out there about what's going on and we're looking at transhumanism which is profoundly troubling. c.s. lewis who was kind of a closet catholic, he wrote a very good book called the abolition of man which was a troubling book and i would add to that a book called between two ages and we're moving into a new phase. i don't know if people knew this, but a law firm just hired the first ai lawyer, so it's happening, and it's happening at a very rapid pace and we're not really thinking about the

ethical implication of eliminating diseases. this was called eugenics, we had a jew eugenics movement in the 1920s where in this country they sterilized a lot of pour people and african americans, so it's -- you know, i think we really need ethicists and we need ethicists that can think met physically and philosophically and right now the catholic tradition is one of the few that i really feel is deeply rooted in a sound philosophical tradition to be able to grapple with these things in the way that they need to be grappled with. >> you had touched on this in your talk. can you provide some examples in history where muslim majority countries did in fact practice religious liberty? >> muslims were historically way ahead. and i'll give you an example.

this is a recent book. it's called when christians first met muslims. this is a very important book. the reason why it's important is because most western orientalism looked at sources and people forget that the muslims defeated the byzantines so most of those were -- and they would say horrible things about the muslims in the way we would say horrible things about the huns in world war i when they weren't like the nazis and the iraqis in kuwait, we know what they said about throwing the babies out of the -- and we found out that was a pr firm that coached the daughter of the ambassador to say that, that it never happened. the iraqis didn't pull any babies out but this is -- you know, the first casualty is the truth, they say, and so in reading this book i was struck by how the syrian christians

loved the muslims because they were liberated under them. because they were oppressed and they were saying how wonderful the muslims were and how incredible and also fred don nor which is a world class historian, showed in the believers there there's no historical evidence that muslims destroyed any churches in the conquest. there's no historical evidence and one of the things we have is a very sophisticated backward approach to a current situation so you look at precedent and how it affects the present, but there's also a way that jurists in islam look at the present and how it informs us in the past. the fact that these great churches existed in iraq and the christians precede the muslims in those places is proof that

the muslims always honored those. the muslims did not forget their religion for 1,400 years and then this enlightened group suddenly realized here's the true islam that we're going to implement it's just complete nonsense. so these great churches that have been destroyed, this is one of the greatest crimes in our history and unfortunately they are a sect of people that claim to be muslims and it's going to be a blemish on our history, just like the burning of the church, the accept -- but less people forget muslims immediately rebuilt that church and recently shed mohammed paid for the renovation of the -- of one of the great churches in jerusalem, so the muslims, you know, they honored the christians and i have a -- 200 years ago i have a book in egypt

where the author says it's sad to hear so many muslims saying i wish i was a christian because of the perks that the christians got. the armenians were called -- you know, before the armenian crises they were one of the most honored groups in the tradition. and the same is true with the jews. it was what we call a prime minister today, so christians and jews, and even buddhists were from a buddhist shrine keepers. the great buddhist traditions of central asia. so the muslims had multiculture, multiethnic civilizations. this whole idea that we're the first multiethnic organization in american history is just stupidity. it's a hallmark of our ignorance and they're undeniably, i would argue that america is probably the most progressive civiluation

in human history in terms of legislating nondiscriminatory law. i think that's -- that would be a fair thing to say. but the muslims for premodern records, nobody compared to the muslims and i say that objectively as a student of the history of that -- of that civilization. i don't think any society -- and others would also, i think, you know, make that point as well. >> in terms of the context of what we see today, both within many muslim countries as well as the tensions that exist in the united states and the -- the amount of islam phobia that continues to exist in this country and in many ways are getting worse, what are your thoughts about this context and are you hopeful for the future? >> i think islam phobia is -- is

a problem globally. i think it's a problem in muslim countries. there's a lot of fear that the rulers have of -- of kind of awakening that comes from islam because islam has a profound justice based element in its tradition, but as far as i'm concerned i think, you know, overall, the muslims are -- are doing relatively well in this country. i think we have dropped the ball. i think we dropped it after 9/11. i made arguments for preemptding -- you were in that meet weg had 16 years ago where i made these arguments about having a -- getting a national organization and to start dealing with the anti muslim rhetoric that's going to emerge in the coming years. and nobody listened to me at that time and so you know, cassandra was cursed with seeing the future but not being

listened to so it's kind of a bummer, but that's the way things are. so in terms of what i see, i see -- if -- if donald trump gets elected, i think it could -- could be very problematic for the muslims. i think if hillary gets elected abdean might end up being the chief of staff at some point so i -- i wouldn't say i'm hopeful. i know enough about history to know how bad it can get. but our religion is a religion of optimism. we're challenged to be optimistic and so i'm probably an optimist trapped in a pessimist body, let's hope for the best and expect the worst. >> as you know, we're taping this on c-span and so our time

is quite fixed and so i'll stop there. please join me in thanking you. >> thank you. [ applause ] >> democratic presidential candidate bernie sanders is releasing a statement to supporters this evening. we'll show it to you at 8:30 on c span. he has not yet conceded the nomination race to hillary clinton. >> tomorrow, gun owners of america executive director on gun laws after the orlando shooting. david stacy with the human rights campaign on the impact of the shooting at the orlando gay nightclub and the future holds for his country. and washington journal live tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern on c span. the democratic committee holds meetings on the democratic

convention platform. we'll have live coverage at 1:00 eastern as they decide policy positions for the dnc over the next four years. >> on american history tv on c span 3, this saturday starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern we're live from gettiesburg, pennsylvania for the angynual conference. reconstruction in the north and the post civil war career. at 10:00 with the approach of the 40th anniversary of the kmit soneian's air and space museum, real america will show case a collection of films. >> i think you ought to see a couple of our earlier models. here we have the al shepherd's

suit. this is the mercury suit. after the mercury is this and here we have -- >> oh, yeah. this looks familiar. >> this is a suit very similar to this. in fact, identical to was worn in his extra vehicular excursions. >> this does look quite a bit different from that suit that we saw. >> it is. this is a -- one of our earlier models of the apollo suit. >> trace the development of space suit from the mercury program to the apollo moon mission. and sunday evening at 6:00 we're taken on a cure of the air and space museum to show some of the museum's one of a kind art facts and the quest to go higher, faster and farther. >> this airplane in may, 1927 threw the 3,600 miles in 33.5 hours from new york to paris. flown by an unknown male pilot.

he was to take $25,000 for the first nonstop flight from new york to paris and so that was the impetus of this flight. so part of the telling of the airplane and this transformation of the airplane from what the wright brothers created to a transition to what we call the american airplane. white house international security advisory susan rice stressed again the administration's view that the two-state solution is the best option for peace in the israeli palestinian conflict. she addressed the jewish committee forum in washington, d.c. she spoke for about a half hour. >> when president obama appointed ambassador susan rice

her security advisor just three years ago. we praised the president's inspired choice. having consulted with her and provided platforms for her, in the course of her 4.5 years as america's ambassador to the united nations, we hailed the ambassador's powerful defense of our nation's vital security and humanitarian interests and the noble ideas of the u.n. charter and we pointed out that she had on so many occasions publicly and privately stood up for israel whenever needed, which in the united nations regrettably is too often. just a month after her appointment, david harris had conferred on ambassador rice, agc's distinguish publiced service award.

at a special luncheon in the u.s. delegation's. in our presentation we hailed ambassador rice as a staunch defender of human dignity and democratic values. three years ago, and more than a few foreign policy crises later, i respect and affection for ambassador sue son rice are at the same high level and really have grown. she knows a.j.'s steadfast commitment to american global leadership. the protection of human dignity is a unique link between the united states and israel. and to confronting in president obama's words, the rising rise -- ride of empty -- tired of anti-semitism.

at a time when america's engagement and leadership in world affairs is being tested and questioned, across the globe as well as on the campaign trail here in the united states. it is indeed an honor for ajc to be addressed this evening by a principle architect of our nation's foreign policy. indeed, it is my privilege, great privilege and pleasure to introduce the united states national security advisor, ambassador susan rice. [ applause ]

good evening, everyone. stan, thank you so much for that incredibly generous introduction. and for your extraordinary leadership of ajc. can we give stan yet another round of applause? [ applause ] >> it's not easy being president. i'm reminded of the time shortly after the establishment of israel when president truman and they were comparing their respective burdens of their office. truman said mr. president you're lucky to have such a little country. how would you like to be the president of 140 million people which was then the population of the u.s. wiseman replied, yes, but how would you like to be the

president of 1 million presidents? so mazel tov to ajc's incoming president and good luck. [ applause ] >> i also want to pay my respects to david harris, a deeply thoughtful and tenacious advocate, an excellent soundingboard, and a true friend who has stood by me during some difficult moments. it's also great to be here with so many other distinguished leaders from around the world including my fellow women of the world. high representative of the european union and foreign secretary of mexico. [ applause ]

>> as stan mentioned the last time i spoke to ajc was at the women's leadership board luncheon in new york of may of 2015. i was finishing up at the u.a. as our ambassador and i spent a good deal of time at ajc's headquarters. i had the privilege to join you several times and at that lunch i was deeply moved to receive ajc's distinguished service award. in recognition of the obama administration's staunch support for israel. david thanked me for standing tall, which i'm pretty sure he met metaphorically. so being here feels a little like being with family.

[ laughter ] [ applause ] >> now i don't know how many people know this, but i group in in shepherd park, a neighborhood in washington, d.c., which was then a predominantly jewish neighborhood, not very far from here. i watched worshippers walking to synagogue every week. our house had on the door frame and i attended many services with friending reading from those maxwell house labels. as we told the story of a people liberated from bondage. at a time when bar mits vas were still rare, i went to more than most girls at the national cathedral school. all my life i've been inspired

by the deep morality of the jewish faith. but the simplicity and urgency of the command in deuteronomy. justice, justice you shall pursue. [ applause ] . >> for 110 years now, ajc has answered that call. you've been america's conscience fighting for several rights, reaching out to other faith communities. comforting the stranger new to our shores. more and more as we recognize tonight you've become the world's conscience as. from battling apartide in stan's native south africa to aiding refugees in europe. i've been truly fortunate as

i've said to work closely with you at the u.n. and now as the president's national security advisor. i echo the assessment of my dear friend mad lynn albright who says and i quote, ajc remains indecember penceabi end spenceable. no one unders more the need for vigilance and the danger of silence. so on behalf of president obama, thank you for more than a century of doing the sacred work of building a better world for us all. if ajc were a person like stan, it would be the biggest frenin world. [ applause ] >> next week is the festival.

as jews do every year, congregations around the world will read from the book of ruth as ruth pledges herself to her mother-in-law and to israel, wherever you go, i will go. wherever you stay, i will stay. your people will be my people and your god my god. that profound expression of family and faith, that joining together of fate is the spirit animating the relationship between the people of the united states and the people of israel. it's an ironclad bond. it's a solemn promise that endures. from generation to generation. [ applause ]

ever since president truman recognized israel, just 11 minutes after it declared independence. that doesn't mean we always agree on every issue. like all of us, i'm sure the biblical ruth sometimes didn't see eye to eye with her in-laws. but as president obama told the people of israel, when he visited jerusalem, so long as there is a united states of america, you are not alone. [ applause ] for those of us who care deeply about israel, this is a time of some concern and some times of sorrow. i know our hearts ache for the victims of recent violence including ezra schwartz, an

american student and taylor force, a veteran and vanderbilt student who is tragic losses we mourn deeply. but know this. when hamas digs tunnels so they can kidnap and kill israelis, israel is not alone. when one country is singled out time and time again on the floor of the united nations, israel is not alone [ applause ] when angry voices attack israel's right to exist, israel is not alone. [ applause ] and by the same token, when palestinians are attacked by mobs shouting death to ar arabs

and palestinian homes or mosques are vandalized the palestinian people are not alone. [ applause ] president obama is deeply and fiercely devoted to israel and to the well being of the jewish people. i know it because i see it every day. i watched him as he slipped a folded prayer into the cracks of the western wall. i stood with him as we ran our hands over the charred remnants of rockets. president obama has met with prime minister netayu 16 times. last december president obama hosted as he lit hanukah candles at the white house. the first time an israeli president has done so at the

white house. vice president biden visited israel again for a series of high level meetings which he rightly called proof that our relationship is quote, strong in all areas. our commitment to israel as always, transcends partisanship. when israel was barraged by rocket fire in 2014, the vote in the house of representatives to support israel was unanimous. the vote in the senate was unanimous. now, that doesn't happen very much these days. but as the members of congress here tonight could tell you, israel's security isn't a democratic interest or a republican interest. it's an american interest. [ applause ] so when president obama calls

america's commitment to israel's security unshakable, that's not talk. it's the nearly $24 billion the united states has provided since president obama took office to help israel maintain its qualitative military edge. it's the f-35s, israel will receive later this year, the only nation in the middle east with this advanced aircraft. it's the billions we're investing jointly in developing and procuring iron dome and other missile defense technologies. when hamas was raining down 100 rockets a day on israel, those systems saved untold lives. so we're doing even more. a few weeks ago israel successfully tested iron dome aboard ships. as we speak, israel and our department of defense are developing anti tunnelling

technology, the so-called understood ground iron dome. [ applause ] so israel's enemies are on notice. if you come at israel by land, by sea, by air, or even under the earth, you will lose. [ applause ] >> the security cooperation between the united states and israel doesn't stop there. just ask israel's past two defense ministers who have each praised the closeness of our military ties. our special forces train together. our air forces and navies drill together. this month, american national guard troops are traveling to israel for a joint disaster response exercise. and is the person who briefs the

president every day on the threats we face around the world, including in the middle east, i can attest that our intelligence cooperation is at an all-time high. [ applause ] >> president obama is committed to ensuring israel's security not just for the remainder of his term in office, but for years to come. israel currently receives more than half of the united states entire foreign military assistance budget. [ applause ] >> and we're discussing a new agreement with israel that would guide our military assistance until the year 2029. even in these days of belt tightening, we are prepared to sign the single largest military

assistance package with any country in american history. [ applause ] >> it would constitute a significant increase in support and provide israel the funding to update much of its fighter aircraft fleet, substantially enhance the mobility of its ground forces and continue to strengthen its missile defense capabilities. that's what we mean when we say israel is not alone. [ applause ] >> this brings me to another critical piece of our support for israel's long-term security. the iran deal. we had a vigorous debate over this agreement. nuclear physicists, military

officials, experts in over one hundred countries ultimately supported it. others including in many israel opposed it. but whether or not you supported this deal, the results are undeniable. iran is dismantled two thirds of its installed centrifuges. [ applause ] >> they've shipped out 98% of their enriched uranium stock pile out of the country, enough for about ten nuclear bombs. [ applause ] >> the iraq plutonium we actor core is now filled with concrete, never to be used again. [ applause ] >> before this deal, iran's breakout time to gain enough material to build a nuclear

weapon was two to three months. today, it would take about a year. and if they cheat, we'll know. with this deal we've closed off every possible path to building a nuclear weapon. every single one. and subjected iran to the most comprehensive nuclear inspections regime ever implemented. yet we're under no illusions as we've said all along, our guide principle is distrust and verify. and as the president has repeatedly emphasized, this deal was never intended to resolve all of our differences with iran. that's why nonnuclear related sanctions on iran remain in place. hundreds of iran linked firms and individuals remain sanctioned on nonnuclear grounds. we have all the authorities

reneed to combat iran's destabilizing activities and we are. that includes new sanctions designations that target iran's ballistic missile program and support for terrorism. we will not let iran off the hook. [ applause ] our commitment to israel's security is also why we continue to urge israelis and palestinians to resolve what the president calls the tragedy that envel lops us all. as president obama has said, peace is necessary, just impossible. indeed, the only path to sustainable security for israel and to dignity and self-determination for the palestinians is two states for

two peoples living side by side in peace and security. [ applause ] >> that is why as we mark the 49th anniversary this week of the six-day war, we continue to strongly oppose israeli settlement activity. just like every administration since 1967, republican and democratic, just as we oppose counterproductive palestinian actions and strongly condemn incitement and violence, settlement activity corrodes the prospects for two states. it mauves oves us toward a one reality. israel's future as a jewish democratic state is at stake. secretary kerry has just returned from a gathering of

foreign ministers in paris where the united states and all other participants underscored that a negotiated two-state solution is the only way to achieve an enduring peace. a solution cannot be imposed on the parties. [ applause ] >> but we continue to urge them to undertake meaningful actions on the ground that our consistent with their rhetorical commitment to two states. children in gaza, children who are just like yours and mine, deserve a future that is not consumed by this conflict. as my cherishes friend and israel's national treasurer says, there are two things in

life you cannot achieve unless you close your eyes a little bit. love, and peace. so we will continue as the psalm says to seek peace and pursue it. at the same time we will stand up not just for israel's security, but for israel's very legitimacy. i want to be very clear, no country is immune from criticism. no country should be immune from criticism. the united states certainly isn't. but when one nation is targeted relentlessly, obsessively, bitterly as israel is time and again, that is just wrong. it's ugly. [ applause ] it's bullying in the guise

of diplomacy and it has to stop. [ applause ] for four and a half years at doing battle every day to defend israel from a drumbeat of hostility. i was proud to lead that fight. the united states fought tooth and nail against a deeply flawed gold stone report. we vigorously opposed the human rights council's unbalanced and counterproductive focus on israel. when the palestinians tried to short-circuit the path to statehood, president obama stood before the general assembly and said, peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the united nations. ultimately is the israelis and the palestinians who must live side by side. and when the security council pushed a divisive resolution

targeting settlements, even as the united states was pursuing a more constructive path forward, at president obama's direction i raised my hand and cast the first and only veto of this administration. my successor, ambassador power, continues to show that israel has no better friend at the united nations than the united states. [ applause ] including by pushing to integrate israel more fully into the international system. moreover, when israel's adversaries seek to isolate and boycott israel economically, we forcefully combat these efforts. we strengthen our economic ties more than ever.

the united states stands firmly against these attempts to delegitimize israel. [ applause ] and when iran holds an abhorrent holocaust cartoon contest, when violence and vile words lead jews to take down mizuzas in europe, when more than half of american jewish college students say they have witnessed or experienced anti-semitism on campus, we must call out and confront that ancient hatred for what it is, an absolute outrage. [ applause ] as president obama said earlier this year, when he became the first sitting american president to speak at the israeli embassy, an attack on any faith is an

attack on all faiths. we are all jews. [ applause ] and that's why we applaud and work closely with groups like ajc. your mayors united against anti-semitism advertisement in today's "wall street journal" made a powerful statement against hate. that's why last year the united states helped organize the first ever united nations general assembly meeting on anti-semitism. that's why we've appointed a special envoy to monitor anti-semitism, ira forman, and are urging other countries to appoint their own. we won't let up. the ugly hatred has to end.

[ applause ] that's our record. these are our principles. this is president obama's steadfast commitment. [ applause ] for me the warmth and strength of this relationship between the united states and israel will always be rooted in my very first trip to israel. i was 14 years old. my beloved late father was on the board of twa. some of you may remember that once great airline. and he took me and my younger brother to israel. we arrived on one of the first ever flights from egypt to israel.

it was just after the camp david accords were signed. and on that trip we bowed our heads in sorrow. we walked in the old city. climbed masada, floated in the dead sea, and picked fruit at a kibutz. i learned by heart the words of the prayer. like so many americans who visited israel, those memories are etched in my soul. there's another more recent memory that i will also never forget. it's actually a highlight in my time in this current job. it took place a few years ago when i had the chance to play basketball on the white house court with some young israelis and palestinians. they're a group you may know called the peace players and they use sports to bridge communities.

we were out on the south lawn not far from where begin and sadat made peace and where rabin and arafat shook hands. everyone was wearing shorts and t-shirts. boys and girls. israelis and palestinians. observant and less observant. and we played. israelis and palestinians on the same co-ed team, sweating, bumping each other, going for the ball, hustling across the lines of the court as if they've never been divided by lines on a map. they were very good players, by the way. much better than us, though that's not saying a great deal. but on that basketball court i saw what is possible. i saw what the future might hold if only we have the courage to reach for it.

i know these are difficult days. at times like these it's easy to give in to doubt and cynicism and despair. it's easy to be overcome by fear, to turn inward and to turn against one another. but as those young people remind us, as the anthem we'll sing later reminds us, even in our darkest moments there is hope. hope for peace. hope for progress. hope for sedek, for justice. no matter how distant these goals may seem, we can never forget the truth to hurtzel's magnificent words, if you will it, it is no dream. so, with god's blessing and

god's help, let us keep willing it. let us keep working for it. let us keep mending our broken world. together. thank you very, very much. [ applause ] >> i'm pleased that the senate as a body has come to this conclusion. television in the senate will undoubtedly provide citizens with greater access and exposure to the actions of this body. this access will help all americans to be better informed of the problems and the issues which face this nation on a day

by day basis. >> what brought us here is not partisansh partisanship, but the conduct of one man who happened hoob the president, who happened to be elected by the people and given the most solemn responsibility in the nation, to be the chief law enforcement officer of the land and he fails miserably and deserved to be impeached. >> i hereby appoint the honorable susan m. collins from maine to perform the duties of the chair. >> the majority leader is recognized. >> madam president, perhaps you've already noticed, my colleagues, that the senate seems to be extraordinarily well organized and effective today and there is a reason for that. with apologies from the chaplain and the majority leader, i think we should note that a significant milestone in the 210-year course of the united states senate's history has

taken place today. never before has a team composed entirely of women members and staff opened the day's proceedings. >> celebrating 30 years of coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span 2. >> the democratic party's platform committee is holding a forum in phoenix to hear testimony on what should be included in the party's platform ahead of next month's democratic national convention. they meet friday at 1:00 p.m. eastern. you can see that leave on our companion network, c-span. saturday, day two of the platform committee hearing in phoenix, starting at noon eastern on c-span. book tv has 48 hours of non-fiction books and authors every weekend. here are some programs coming up this weekend. on saturday night, from book expo america, the annual trade show in chicago, former nba

player kareem abdul-jabbar discusses his book, "writings on the wall." on sunday, at 2:30, a round table discussion about donald trump's book, "art of the deal." carlos lizada, michael kruse and monica langley will comment. then at 9:00 p.m. eastern, foe as gurgeis talks about his book, "isis: a history." he's interviewed as well. >> so the spectacular surge of isis was a direct result of the creeping sectarianism, the civil wars in almeshra, in the arab east, the vacuum that exists in iraq and other states and

somehow the perception the arab spring, the peaceful action could change the existing order. >> go to book tv.org for the complete weekend schedule. national park service director jonathan jarvis testified before the house oversight committee recently about allegations of sexual harassment at a national seashore in florida. utah congressman jason chaffetz chairs the committee. >> good morning. the committee will come to order. without objection the chair has authorized to declare a recess at any time. we'll have i hearing today about the oversight of the national park service. 2016 represents the 100th year since the park service was founded. should be a milestone, but we instead find an agency in crisis. we have a lot of good hard-working people, who do a good service for this nation. they serve, the public is

attending the parks in record numbers, but we're still having problems. we should be working to increase the visitation and providing recreational opportunities to the american people. the mission of the national park service is to preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. but that does not work when you have so many multiple cases of serious long-standing employee misconduct that is distracting the agency from its mission. there's no doubt that when you hire tens of thousands of people to work for the park service, there are going to be some bad apples. those bad apples are going to cause untold disruption and heart ache to a lot of people, but if they're not dealt with in a swift manner, if they're not dealt with appropriately, the problem becomes worse. that is the situation at least from my vantage point, that i see. during the last few months, the

department of interior, inspector general has issued numerous reports, revealing that the park service is failing to protect employees from a rash of sexual harassment. employees are discouraged by management from reporting it, and even retaliated against. just yesterday the inspector general released yet another report of sexual harassment showing a pattern of this behavior in yet another park, the canaveral national seashore. across the country, harassment at the grand canyon river district, it took a letter from 13 victims -- 13 victims -- directly to the secretary of interior before any action was taken. allegedly this behavior had been going on for about a decade. unfortunately, it doesn't stop there. the superintendent of the grand canyon himself, david unar aga had a history of inappropriate behavior. 2008, the inspector general

determined that he unethically profited on the sale of land to a park concession ear who he oversaw. he was also found to have misleading statements related to the sale. his supervisor was then superintendent jarvis who decided that a letter of reprimand was enough of a punishment. just a letter. sold the land to three times the value for somebody doing business with the park service. when it was brought to light, director jarvis offered him a cushy position and job in washington, d.c. over a decade they've field to meet the eeoc requirements. claims can take years on process and the service has consistently failed to maintain a functional program. in the case of grand canyon,

it's taken two years for the claims of harassment. two years. we're seeing it's a culture that tolerates sexual harassment and retaliation. failures multiplied by the park services and director jarvis's inability to hold manageable accountable for these transgressions. perhaps most troubling is the service suffers from failure to maintain ethical standards at the highest levels. director jarvis is appearing from us today. he was removed due to his own ethical failures. he failed to get a book deal approved by the ethics office, lied to the skreatd of the interior and afterwards, tried to cover up his tracks. when the person in charge isn't following the rules, we can't expect anybody at the agency as well. something needs to change and it needs to change fast. we can't keep continuing to turn a blind eye to misconduct or discourage employees from reporting this conduct. it erodes americans' faith in

their government, destroys morale for the hard-working dedicated employees who abide by the rules and they shouldn't have to work in a hostile environment. when they don't sense that management has their back, take care of them, and that they will hold the management responsible, it creates a culture that is hostile, and it should not be tolerated. there are ethical problems, backlogs of projects, lack of plans to deal with the backlogs. inconsistency enforcement of laws and rules are just some of the things that plague the park service and thus we're hearing the hearing today. appreciate the witnesses for being here. i bank the balance of my time. i recognize ranking member cummings for his opening statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. today's hearing involves a variety of allegations that the

national park service, unfortunately, spanning several years. i want to thank our witnesses for being here today, including national park director jonathan jarvis, deputy inspector general mary kindle, whose office has issued many of the reports we will be discussing today. for example, the inspector general's office has identified an instance of contract steering at the denver service center, the unauthorized purchase of automatic weapons at the mojave national preserve. and the improper use of government housing at yellowstone national park. as a result of the inspector general's work, we also learned

that director jarvis violated federal ethics rules when he wrote and published a book without clearing it through the department's ethics office. although he does not appear to have benefitted financially, he showed contempt for the government's ethics rules when he told the inspector general's office that he probably would do the same thing again. that is amazing. that he would do it again today, because he has, and i quote, always pushed the envelope, end of quote. you know, the chairman talked about morale, talked about the public's confidence in government. that kind of attitude is the very thing that leads to low

morale. it leads to a lack of confidence by the public. and so, as a result, the director has now been stripped of his authority over ethics at the national park service and is undergoing mandatory ethics training himself right now. most troubling of all have been the reports from the inspector general's office that detail, and i quote -- and this is very upsetting -- and i quote, a long pattern of sexual harassment and hostile work environment, end of quote, at the grand canyon river district. the grand canyon's former superintendent received a report in 2013, documenting multiple allegations of sexual

harassment, but that report did not determine whether further investigations were warranted or whether disciplinary action should be pursued. a year later, 13 current and former employees sent their allegations of abusive behavior to the secretary of the interior. the secretary referred these allegations to the inspector general for investigation, and the inspector general's office identified 22 -- 22 -- other individuals who, and i quote, reported experiencing or witnessing sexual harassment and hostile work environments, end of quote. the inspector general's office also found that previous reports of sexual harassment, and i quote, were not properly investigated or reported, end of

quote. in addition, within the last few days, the inspector general's office issued a new report, detailing, and i quote, a pattern of sexual harassment, end of quote, against three female employees by law enforcement supervisor at the canaveral national seashore. these reports obviously raise very serious issues. women have the right to work anywhere, including our national parks, without fear that they may be harassed by fellow employees, or ignored, or even retaliated against by managers when they report these abuses. the park service's equal employment opportunity program, the program directly responsible for handling complaints of harassment and retaliation does not meet some of the most basic

standards of a model program. these reports demonstrate how critical it is that the senate pass my bill, the federal employee anti-discrimination act, which chairman chaffetz co-sponsored and passed the house by a vote of 403-0. finally, i want to highlight one more issue that needs urgent attention. that's the funding for the rehabilitation of the arlington memorial bridge, which was built in 1932, across the potomac river, to connect the lincoln memorial and the arlington national cemetery. unfortunately, as inspection in february found that the bridge has second half deteriorated. if a complete overhaul does not begin by 2019, the bridge is slated to be shut down within five years. rehabilitating the bridge is

estimated to cost $250 million, while the national park service's entire transportation budget for 2016 is $268 million, which is an issue that congress needs to address and i hope our witnesses here today will be able to discuss this as well. with that, mr. chairman, i anxiously look forward to the testimony. i yield back. >> thank the gentleman. we'll hold the record open for five legislative days for any member who'd like to submit a written statement. we'll recognize the witnesses starting with mr. john jarvis, director of the national park service at the united states department of the interior. mary kindle from the united states department of the interior. we welcome you both. all witnesses are to be sworn before they testify. if you will rise and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the

whole truth, and nothing but the truth? thank you. you may be seated and let the record reflect that each of the witnesses answered in the affirmative. we have your written statements, but we'd appreciate if you'd limit your oral statement to five minutes and your entire statement will be part of the record. director jarvis, you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, members of the committee. i'm here today to discuss oversight of the park service. the national park service manages many of your nationas iconic and most beloved landscapes, historic sites and numerous programs that offer the american public access to open space and preserve our history and culture purpose we're seeing record-breaking visitation, more than 300 million last year, and the results economic activity created by the park's top 16

billion. we're accomplishing all of this on an annual budget that is less than the city of austin, texas. we're commemorating our 100th anniversary this year and asking more of our employees than ever before, as we use this milestone to promote all the work we do to inspire more, younger audiences. the national parks are supported and loved by the public because they are well managed, protected and maintained by a professional workforce. employees who take great pride in their work and hold themselves to high standards of conduct. but we are an organization of human beings, we make mistakes, individually and collectively. when we see improper situations, we can respond thoughtfully to implement changes and keep it from happening again. i would like to emphasize that the vast majority of the 22,000 employees conduct themselves with great integrity and passion for their work.

this makes it all the more disappointing when we find mistakes and wrongdoing in our ranks. and sometimes those mistakes happen at the top. last year, i wrote a book to celebrate the national park service centennial. my goal was to inspire and engage more americans in our national parks. i wrote this book in my personal capacity, and directed that any book proceeds benefit the nps, through the non-profit publisher of eastern national and the -- i donated and received no personal monetary benefit. that was never my goal. however, i wrote that without regard for my responsibility to follow established processes. as a result of my actions, i received formal reprimand and am actively participating in monthly ethics training. in addition, my duties have been removed and transferred.

i was wrong to not seek ethics guidance. i am sorry that i failed initially to understand and even accept my mistake. i have apologized to all nps employees through my memo distributed to the field and i urge them all to learn from my mistake and to ask for ethics guidance when it's needed. i offer my apology to the american people. i was held accountable for my mistake. holding employees accountable is essential to the national park service to uphold the public trust it enjoys. when mistakes and inappropriate actions are identified, we must follow due process and determine appropriate response. in some cases, the nps identifies misconduct and refrds the case to the office of the inspector general to investigate. we do that to ensure an impartial review. for instance, the nps referred a case involving the improper

purchase of firearms and weapons to the oig. together they ensured that the situation was thoroughly investigated and those involved were held accountable. in other cases, reports to the inspector general come from others. the national park service is committed to cooperating with the office of the inspector general and takes its reports very seriously. one example is the recent report on sexual harassment at the grand canyon river district. the national park service leadership is extremely disappointed in the situation here and we are acting quickly and thoughtfully to change the conditions that allowed this to happen. we have zero tolerance for sexual harassment. we are committed to fundamentally changing the culture that previously allowed such harassment to develop and occur. we take a comprehensive approach to addressing sexual harassment. we'll identify and fix the conditions that allow harassment to take place, build work environments where people are held with respect and dignity.

the superintendent at the grand canyon retired and we'll be selecting a new superintendent soon. the national park service is learning from other large organizations of reduced sexual harassment, including the department of defense and the national oceanic and atmospheric administration. we will conduct a survey of employees to understand the prevalence of sexual harassment and use that information to inform at every level of the organization. we are committed to ensuring that every employee can work in a safe and secure environment and they are treated with respect. thank you, mr. chairman. that concludes my oral statement and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> mrs. kindle, you're recognized for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, ranking member cummings and members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to testify today about a series of reports the office of inspector general has issued regarding

misconduct and mismanagement in the national park service. the office of inspector general serves a vital role as an independent objective body to investigate matters that ultimately violate public trust. the oig has a great deal of experience uncovering ethics and other violations by interior employees, high ranking officials and others whose positions of trust make their misconduct particularly detrimental to the operations of the department, the morale of its employees and the reputation of all federal employees. i remain convinced that as a whole, those who engage in wrongdoing are in the minority. unfortunately, misconduct by those few receives notoriety and casts a shadow over the entire department. that shadow looms large, especially over nps, following our recent release of investigative reports, including those that substantiated sexual harassment at grand canyon and canaveral national seashore,

ethics violations by director jarvis and misuse of using at yellowstone. our report from the grand canyon provided a glaring example of management failing to take action when employees reported wrongdoing. similarly after receiving investigative report on the chief rager of yellowstone national park violating the rules on the use of park housing, he was transferred to another park and named superintendent. a recent media article raised concerns about the leadership at cape canaveral national seashore. the oig has issued four reports in four years on alleged misconduct and/or mismanagement at this park. three of the four reports substantiated allegations against the park's chief ranger, including violation of federal procurement rules, conduct unbecoming an nps law enforcement officer and sexual harassment. last week, we issued a report to

nps about sexual harassment by the same chief ranger who continues to serve in that position, despite three substantiated allegations against him in less than two years. nps has not had time to respond to this most recent report. but with three other reports in four years, this is a profound example of a leadership problem that nps has failed to address at multiple levels. finally, the same superintendent has been at canaveral since 2010, was named as the subject in our 2012 report and was found by the merit system's protection board to have committed reprisal against an nps whistle-blower for contacting the oig. yet we have no indication that nps has taken disciplinary action against her. the department does not do well in holding accountable those employees who engage in mismanagement or misconduct. we see too few examples of senior leaders making the difficult decision to impose meaningful corrective action and

hold their employees accountable. often, management avoids discipline altogether and attempts to address misconduct by transferring or counselling an offending employee, which is viewed by other employees as condoning this behavior. nps, in particular, as a real opportunity to address employee misconduct and mismanagement more meaningfully. a pattern and practice of accountability must begin at the top. consistent messaging by senior leadership provides a clear message of what behavior is expected. we have encouraged leadership to demonstrate more support for those who serve in gate keeper roles such as contracting officers and human resource personnel. but many such gate keepers feel undue pressure from managers to make things happen, regardless of rules and regulations. such as that recently detailed in our report concerning allegations that the now former director of the nps denver

service center improperly directed a contract award. working with the chief of staff and office of the solicitor, we with have witnessed an increased effort to be more responsive and decisive in corrective actions regarding employee wrongdoing. we are encouraged by this at the department level, but we would like to see the same at the bureau level. taking prompt, appropriate, disciplinary action in response to oig reports of misconduct. this concludes my prepared testimony. i would be happy to answer any questions that members of the committee would have. >> thank you. thank you both. i'll recognize myself for five minutes. director jarvis, i would agree with you that people do make mistakes, but a draw distinction between mistakes and deception, which i view as a whole nother category of problems. on november -- i'm sorry -- june 11th of 2015, you wrote a handwritten note to sally jewell, the secretary of the

department of interior. it was four sentences long, barely two paragraphs. do you stand by that? was there anything wrong or deceptive about that hand-written note that you gave the secretary? >> so i wrote the note to let her know that i had published this book. it was her first, i think, awareness of the book. i said in that, that there were no ethics issues because i had written it on my own time. i had asked eastern national -- or i said in the note that eastern national had requested it of me, which is -- eastern national does publish a lot of books for the national park service and that all benefits are going to the national park foundation. when i wrote that note, i thought i was following the ethics rules, with the exception that i had not asked permission

to produce the book. >> why didn't you ask permission? >> i felt that the book would be subject to extensive review and probably would not get published in the centennial. >> so you made a conscious decision to not ask ethics, because you thought you wouldn't get the result that you ultimately wanted. so does eastern national request that you write the book, or did you request of eastern national that you write the book? >> the facts of the case are that i asked eastern national if they were interested in the book, and eastern national responded to say, let me ask you to write the book. >> and they had a multi million dollar contract with the park service, correct? >> no, they have no contract with the national park service. they are a cooperating association. >> well, the cooperation results in millions of dollars of business. here's my problem with what you

wrote. it was not true. it was deceptive. and it was intended to make the appearance to the secretary of the interior that there was no ethical problem and that you were doing this at the request of eastern national, neither of which were true, correct? >> i think that it was incorrect. >> why should the secretary trust you? why should we trust you? >> because i have served as a public servant for 40 years, in leadership roles for 25 years, with an impeccable record of service to the american people. >> i don't know that that -- i don't know that i -- i take issue with the idea that it's impeccable. when you give a handwritten note to the secretary of the interior, deceiving her on two key points. >> i apologized profusely. >> no, what you said when you were confronted by the inspector

general. miss kindle, i want you to weigh into this. you have a transcription? or what was this interview with the director? we asked jarvis whether looking back he would have done anything differently, and he said, and then it's quoted here, was that because it's transcribed or was that a recording? >> a recording. >> when you asked about this by the inspector general, this is it what you said. would i have done the same thing? probably. i think i knew going into this there was a certain amount of risk. i've never been afraid of risk. i've gotten my ass in trouble many, many times by the park service, by not necessarily getting permission, i've always pushed the envelope. and then you go on from there. that is your quote, correct? >> that is my quote. >> and now you're apologizing because we're essentially having a public hearing? >> no, i apologized a long time ago, long before this hearing. and i apologized directly to the secretary and to the leadership of the national park service. and that was a mistake.

and i fully own it. >> and you lied to her, you deceived her and i think it's wholly inappropriate. and now we look at the situation that's happening in cape canaveral -- or the canaveral national seashore. this chief ranger, this is a fairly small park in the big scream of things, right, 50 or so employees? >> it's a small park. i don't know what the staffing size is. >> so ranger korer, how do you prow announyou pronounce his name. >>? korea. >> three of the four i.g. reports have been highlighting this, and you, your office, the national park service is handing him out awards, safety awards. how does somebody who's getting on the one hand reprimands and highlights and sexual harassment problems -- again, there's only 50 people, and you got three documented sexual harassment

issues, you go to the superintendent -- the superintendent had allegations of reprisal that were found by the merit systems protection board and resulted in a settlement. you had to go into a settlement with the national park service. those were -- those were -- and the person is still in the job. >> his commission has been removed, but he is still in a -- in a -- he's still a federal employee, but his responsibilities have been removed. >> this becomes more than just an isolated incident where somebody makes a mistake. miss kindle, you've been looking at this. give us a perspective, first, if you would, on the note that was written by director jarvis to the secretary and then i want to ask you about canaveral. >> i would say that the note was -- >> sorry, move the microphone up a little tighter there. just pull it up. there you go. >> i would say that the note was not accurate and i agree with

your characterization, that it was deceptive. your other question was? >> how severe is the situation at canaveral? how often do you have to go back and write three reports on the same topic? >> i would hope we would never have to write another report on any of those topics at that park again. >> has it been resolved? >> not to my knowledge. >> my time has expired. let me go to the ranking member, mr. cummings. >> thank you very much. miss kindle, you've identified and i quote, evidence of a long-term pattern of sexual harassment and hostile work environment in the grand canyon river district. in addition, you issued a report just a few days ago finding that a law enforcement supervisor at the canaveral national seashore has, and i quote, shown a

pattern of sexual harassment, end of quote, against three employees at the seashore. do you believe that these are isolated incidents, or are they indicative of more pervasive problems within the park service? >> i cannot take these two examples -- >> can you talk a little louder, please? >> certainly. i would not take these two examples and paint the entire park service with that same brush, but it does cause concern that there may be a more pervasive problems when you have it at two different parks at this kind of level. >> so what else is your office doing to try to answer this critical question? because based on what you just said, it sounds like you have some questions yourself as to how pervasive it might be. and so what do you do to look beyond that? i assume that the i.g. would be

interested in that. in other words, if you keep seeing these things come up, the chairman has mentioned various things, and i'm just curious, what do you do? >> well, by publishing our reports, we're hoping that there's some deterrent effect to that. i do know that the park service is making some effort to make a determination as to how pervasive -- >> is it -- are they moving fast enough? i guess that's the question. there's no reason why a woman should, any woman should be -- or man, should -- they're coming to work, there are people watching this right now, from the park service, and they want to know that these issues are being resolved and i know that you do too. and so it seems like there is -- seems like there's a delay, and you used some words that were very interesting. you said they try to avoid disciplining altogether,

something like that. and what that says is that -- it reminds me of an old boys' system. where you say, okay, give you a wink, and you can get away with it, we'll transfer you and keep you on the same level as a supervisor. i mean, can you help us with, the question is, are they moving fast enough? because it's not -- it doesn't give anybody any relief to know that this stuff just goes on and mr. jarvis will tell us that he's doing things, but to be very frank with you, i don't think he's moving fast enough, but i want your opinion and what can be done better. >> quite frankly, i don't know what the status of what the park service has done or is doing right now. i agree with you, that people should in any environment be able to come to work free of sexual harassment and is hoping that the park service is taking the kind of action with the

survey they're talking about, to understand the breadth of the problem and then to come up with some corrective action. >> mr. jarvis, the same question. what steps is the park service taking to determine how pervasive sexual harassment is at its facilities? >> so, let's start with the grand canyon. there were 18 specific actions that the inspector general recommended. they had due dates of mostly by the 1st of may. almost every one of those have been implemented. there's a second set that's coming forward. but they range from personnel to change in field operations, to training to communication, and specifically to disciplinary actions on individuals that were either committed or omitted activities related to the canyon. so we are aggressively pursuing that at the canyon. >> whoa whoa whoa, staff tells

me most of them have not been addressed. >> well -- >> the chairman has already made it clear that he has some concerns about your being able to tell the truth. so i want to remind you, you're under oath. and would you answer that question again? >> yes, sir. so i have a summary of actions in response to the inspector general's report as of may 23rd, 2016, prepared by our intermountain regional director. i cannot go into the details of the disciplinary actions in this forum, but i can tell you that they are all under way. we've launched -- we've closed down the river district. all river trips are being done by third-party, private river rafters -- >> whoa, hey, hey. i want to help you answer my question. because i'm not trying to trip you up. director, how many of these

action items have been fully completed as of today? you said there were 22, right? >> 18. >> 18. and how many, director, have been completed as of today? >> um, aide have to count up. can i count? >> yeah. go ahead. >> there are seven of the 18 that are completed. >> well, you just said the majority of them were. isn't that what you said? did i miss something? >> seven are completed. there's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven that are actively under way but not finalized. the disciplinary actions take time to pursue, but they are actively under way. >> do you agree with that miss kindle? >> i know you said you don't know everything he's doing, but based on what he just said, do

you agree that, with regard to the things that should have been done, that they -- that they should take all of this timie? >> because i don't know the detail, i can't opine on that. i do know that disciplinary takes time. i'm happy that the national park service is taking disciplinary action. my recollection is we only had three or four specific recommendations. so i'm not completely familiar with the 17 or 18 items that he's talking about. >> my time has run out, but i want you to tell me what you've done, for the benefit of the entire committee. because i'mma tell you, i'm not sure you need to be in this position. but go ahead. >> so, service wide, i think the grand canyon is an indicator, as well as cape canaveral that we may have a significant problem of sexual harassment in the service in certain areas.

i want to state up front, the vast majority of employees have a safe work environment. however, in discussions with the department of defense office of sexual assault prevention and response, we engaged their leadership with our leadership, to talk about this for over three hours, at our last national leadership council meeting, and general nichols, who leads that office, indicated that if you have this level of perivation in one place, it's an indicator you may have it in others. >> when was that meeting? >> it was in may. so we have launched a team effort in my office specifically on how we are going to address this service wide. the second is, one of the general's recommendations, we need to do a prevalence survey, we need to look across the

entire system anonymously, to allow employees to report whether or not they have been, or are currently being subjected to sexual harassment or a hostile work environment. >> i yield to the chairman. >> just to quickly fll up on that, the superintendent at canaveral has been there since 2010, was named in the subject of a report to director jarvis in 2012, including allegations of reprisal that were found by the merit systems protection board to be accurate. they had to enter into a settlement. you' what you're telling mr. cummings is not a candid response. it wasn't something that showed up on your desk weeks ago. this happened years ago. and you're saying the majority of this has been dealt with, but when it was brought to your attention and there were reprisals for the whistle-blowers, you did not deal with it.

>> just one last thing. you just said you had this meeting in may, but keep in mind that the inspector general report goes back to november 16th 2015. why did it take so long? >> this was the first -- this was the first meeting of our national leadership council, where we could get all the senior leaders of the national park service to specifically address this. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> now recognize the gentleman from tennessee, mr. duncan for five minutes. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman, and there are very few people for whom i have higher respect than i do for ranking member cummings. he has a very difficult task at times and usually trying to defend administration witnesses, but it should send a message to director jarvis and throughout the park service that mr. cummings did not defend mr. jarvis today, and instead

pointed out several different types of problems that have occurred in the park service. i think that's very significant. i spent 22 years, up until about six years ago on the interior committee, and now i've served on this committee and another committee. but i heard years ago that there was a $4 billion backlog -- maintenance backlog, and then i heard it was $6 billion, and then i heard it was $9 billion, and now i get material here that says the maintenance backlog is $12 billion. i have great respect also for people, for education, and people who get advanced degrees. but i think the park service needs to stop hiring so many ph.d.s and masters degrees and historians and environmental activists and so forth, and start hiring more laborers to

chip away at this maintenance backlog, if it's not being exaggerated. i think we have at the park service, far too many chiefs and not nearly enough indians. but i also have been disturbed over the years by seeing that almost all or at least a great many of the federal contracts are awarded to companies that hire former high ranking and federal employees. we see that in the defense department. they hire all the retired admirals and generals. it just seems to be throughout the federal government. but i was disturbed, for instance, when i read from the staff, that the interior department solicitor's office had concerns when the denver office of the park service originally attempted to, it says, quote, originally attempted to steer the award

to -- of this big contract, to a construction firm mcdonald, bowyard, peg, even though their bid was much higher than others. they cancelled the solicitation and later hired the same company under a new solicitation created with the requirements that only that particular contractor can meet. director jarvis, do you have a system in place to question contracts when they're not awarded to the -- when they're being awarded to the highest bidders instead of the low bidders? or do you have a system in place to question contracts -- or to prohibit contracts being awarded to companies that hire former employees of the park service? >> thank you for that question, congressman. we do have an audit program over

our contracting officers, because they could lose their warrant for awarding contracts in some ways that you suggest. and we appreciate the audit and investigation by the inspector general that has revealed this case. this is new to us. and it is something we are going to pursue actively in term of both discipline and corrective action, in terms of ensuring this doesn't happen again. >> and on this book contract that you've been asked about, i understand that you said it was -- that the proceeds were to be donated to charity. can you tell us how much has been donated to charity at this point? >> i do not know that, how much has been donated. >> the staff tells us that none has been donated to charity. >> the book sales -- let me

clarify. the book is sold by eastern national, which is a cooperating association with the national park service, and it is required under its agreement to return to the national park service 12 to 17% of its annual profit. so that funding, whatever profit they get from the book, that can come back to the park service directly for projects, through the system. any decision for that can go to the national park foundation, but none of it comes to me. >> all right, my time is up. let me mention one other thing. i represent about half the great smokey mountains national park. that park is being overrun by thousands, many thousands of feral hogs, and i know that many people are anti-hunting, or some in this administration don't like hunting, but we've got very serious problems that are going to lead to very serious disease problems, if many more thousands of these feral hogs are not gotten out of the great smokey

mountains. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank the gentleman. we'll recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. cartwright for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i thank you for holding this hearing. miss kindle, i have some questions for you. i'm going to ask you to pull that microphone really close to your mouth. you're a low-talker and we need to hear you. i want to ask you about your office's investigation of the allegations a rirising from a february 2014 river trip that led to the discipline of two female grand canyon employees. the women were accused of inappropriate dancing and the use of a novelty drinking straw. they received 14-day suspensions and their contracts for employment with the park service were not renewed after their terms expired. both of them alleged retaliation, but your investigation included that, we found insufficient evidence to

prove or disprove the allegation of retaliation, unquote. have i read that correctly? >> yes, i believe you read it correctly. >> let's go over some of the facts in your report. is it true that one of the employees who complained about the two women was himself the subject of several prior complaints of sexual harassment? >> that's correct. >> did your investigation find that former grand canyon superintendent uberaga had any type of commonly known opinion about that person? >> i don't know about opinion. i think he had some knowledge. >> okay, you want to share that with us? >> pardon me? >> would you share that with us, please. >> he had launched an investigation himself internally about the conduct that was complained about earlier -- sexual harassment kind of conduct. and that report never seemed to make its way to anyone who could actually do something. >> and your report also notes

that the supervisor who conducted the internal investigation admitted that he did not feel responsible for determining whether the complaints against the two sexual harassment claims. he felt it wasn't part of his job and this supervisor did not even interview all of the people who were on that february 14 trip. but this supervisor's investigation was used as the basis of disciplinary action against the two women, ms. kendall your investigation found that several grand canyon employees and managers, including the superintendent, agreed that the internal investigation of the allegations against the two women employee s s were insufficient and incomplete. am i correct in that? >> i believe that's correct. >> did you find evidence that

men who had been accused of sexual harassment received less severe disciplinary action than that recommended against these two women? >> i believe we did. >> would you say that louder? >> i believe we did. >> ms. kendall, it's you our understanding from discussions with the office of personnel management that term employees have similar protections under the merit system as full-time employees. would it be unreasonable for somebody looking at the fact pattern here involving discipline against these women to conclude that these women did indeed suffer retaliation for their claims of harassment? >> our office was unable to conclude that they did, but i think we were unable to go either way. >> all right. well, director jarvis, i want to invite your attention to this matter. i understand that the two women filed eeo complaints against the

park service. are you aware of that? >> yes, i'm aware that they have filed. >> and what is the current stat you us of those complaints that the women filed? >> i'm not aware of those two specific. there were actually seven filings from women associated with the grand canyon and this incident. i believe several of them have been settled but i'm not aware of the details. >> my understanding is the national park service entered into settlement agreements with both of these women last week. were you not aware of that, director jarvis? >> no. this is being managed out of our intermountain regional office by regional director so i'm not directly involved. >> and ms. kendall, were you aware of that settlement last week? >> i was not. >> well, i'm happy to help. i yield back, mr. chairman.

yield to mr. cummings. >> just one question. wouldn't you want to know that? i mean, you've got a settlement, something that's controversial as this? i'm just curious. what kind of management is that? >> i do want to know -- >> you don't know it today? >> i don't know the specifics. i do not. >> did you know there were settlements? >> i knew the settlements were in negotiation, absolutely. >> but you didn't know the settlement took place. >> i did not hear that the settlements had been settled, no. >> thank you. >> i recognize the gentleman from michigan mr. wahlberg for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thanks to the panel. director jarvis, in december of 2011, you issued an mps memo establishing a ban on plastic water bottles, sales in the national parks. is it true that most if not all of the parks that have implemented the plastic bottled

water ban still sell other plastic packaged beverages, soda, enhanced water, juice, et cetera? is that still the case? >> yes, sir. they still do. >> do you feel it is safe and healthy to ban the sale of bottled water? >> when the public are provided an ample opportunity to get that water from a variety of sources which we've built in, that's a requirement of the policy. they have to have filling stations throughout the park in order for them to refill reusable bottles. >> can you say with absolute certainty that this ban on plastic water bottles has reduced the garbage in the national parks? >> yes, with certainty. absolutely. >> what analysis has been conducted? >> we collect data on our solid waste management. i don't have that in front of me, but i'd be glad to get back to you specifically on the reduction of waste in the waste

stream. >> well, i'd like to see that on reduced waste. i'd like to see it on decreased disposal costs, information on that. i'd like to see it on increased recycling implementation. those are issues i'd like to see because frankly the question still remains. we get rid of the water in bottles, and the sales of those water bottles, but we don't get rid of the sale of pop in the same bottles, energy drinks in the same bottles, juices in the bottles as well. my concern is that, i mean, we know that we need water. i've hiked enough of the national parks all across this nation to know that that's important. and the fact of the cost of putting in water filling stations leads me to concern

that there are contractual issue that's we ought to be concerned with as opposed to simply letting the sales take place to people who need the water. and, again, i'm not certain that the time that the necessary studies have been done to show that we've had an impact other than stopping the sale of water bottles, water in water bottles, in the state parks, for whatever -- national parks, for whatever reason that may be. i think there certainly ought too be questions that are raised about that subsequent to the needs of our visitors as well as contracting issues. let me go to another issue. an inspector general's report found that yellowstone's chief ranger breached the terms of an occupancy agreement with nps by failing to live full time as agreed in the contract in an

apartment on yellowstone's grounds. why is it important that chief ranger of yellowstone live in the park and not somewhere off the grounds? >> so in many of our national parks we have what's known as required occupancy so a certain portion of park housing were constructed by the federal government and provided, though the employees pay rent, so that there can be quick response for emergency situations, fire, emergency medical, and the chief ranger leads that effort at yellowsto yellowstone. >> so there's a potential of a loss of security, safety to park visitors as well as staff without the head ranger living on site. >> according to the superintendent, the chief ranger lived in a private quarters that still allowed him to have rapid response. it was right on the park boundary but outside the park. >> i understand that he didn't

rent out but he ayou lllowed ou visitors to live in that apartment instead of himself. is that true? >> that is correct. >> let me ask, what kind of discipline or reprimand did the ranger receive? >> he did receive specific discipli discipline. again, i can't talk about individual discipline in a public forum, but i'd be glad to come to your office and talk to you specifically about it. but he was disciplined in this case. >> is he still in the same place? >> he is not. he is a superintendent at devil's tower, which was a demotion. >> thank you. i yield back. >> director jarvis, you are not inhibited in your ability to give an answer about specific discipline on a case that's asked in this forum. you're holding back and not providing an answer to mr. wahlberg, there's no incouple rance here. if we ask you a question, we need you to answer it. if you know the answer to that

question, i need you to answer it. >> chairman, i have been told by my solicitors and i would ask that they -- that specific disciplinary actions are privacy act issues. >> we will follow up for the record with you on that to make sure mr. wahlberg that you get the answer to that question. now recognize ms. kelly of illinois for five minutes. >> director jarvisor, first and foremost, i just want to say thank you for all the help with pullman. i really, really appreciate it. we've talked about 18 action items dealing with grand canyon. why has the implementation of some of these action items been delayed? >> i don't believe that any of these actions have been delayed. in the disciplinary aspect of taking specific discipline on

employees, that is a slow process. there are laws established by the congress that are specific to federal employees. title 5, the merit system promotion board, the douglas factors all have to be applied in the disciplinary pieces. so that's why they have not yet been totally executed but are absolutely in process. but they all have to be reviewed at a variety of levels before we can actually take the disciplinary action. all the others, there are no delays in the other actions. >> what about some of your self-imposed deadlines? have you met those? >> i believe we have, yes. >> while all of these action items are important, several are particularly critical to ensure that the perpetrators of sexual harassment are not able to harass anyone else at the national park. one action item states and i quote, the oig report highlights that the majority of the incidents described by the

complaintant involve four employees of the river district at grand canyon. one of those four individuals remains an employee. in light of the oig report, it is appropriate to take appropriate disciplinary or personnel action to remove this individual from specific work environment of the river district. what is the status of the fourth individual? >> the fourth individual still is an employee of the national park service at the grand canyon but has no involvement whatsoever with river district operations and is in no position to continue any harassment. he is just being held in a position with his rights as a federal employees and will be be subject to discipline. >> so that's why he's still there, because you're just following a process? >> but he's been removed from any role that he might play on the -- >> besides being removed, has any disciplinary action been taken yet? >> i'm sorry? >> i know he was removed and put

into another position. but has any disciplinary action been taken yet? >> not yet, no. we're still working on that. >> director jarvis, another action item involved contracting out for, quote, logistical report for river trip involving park staff. has this item been completed? >> yes. so the regional director for the intermountain region has taken very specific actions at the park, one of which was essentially elimination of the river district, and commercial river rafters are now providing the river access for the kind of activities that the rangers were doing before. >> so how will contracting out the staff of river trips ensure this won't happen again in? >> we are meeting and providing training to those commercial operators who have been providing serves on the river. they are all under contract with the national park service to

provide these services and we can hold them accountable through those contracts. >> and how can we be ensured that the employees that did perpetrate this not be hired again? >> well, i can assure you they will not be hired again. this will be retained as a part of their record, and the disciplinary actions will become part of their official files. >> even if they come through contractors, you can ensure that? >> there actually has been discussion about that specifically so we're talking specifically to the contractors that they cannot hire these individuals. >> the inspector general also found that the grand canyon engaged in individual as a volunteer or previously worked at the park and resigned after being suspended for sexual misconduct during a river trip. what are you doing to ensure that boatmen who engage in harassment who have left the

park service employment cannot be rehired by or volunteer in any national park? >> well, again, i think it's up -- to float the river requires a permit from the national park service, whether they are volunteer, they are contractor, other federal agency. i think now that we are very, very aware of that, the river trip creates the potential for this kind of harassment, we are actively engaged in training, oversight, regular communications and post-trip evaluations so that folks that are coming off of these trips are interviewed within seven days to determine whether or not there were any issues. >> thank you. and i'm out of time. i yield back. >> will recognize the gentleman from florida mr. mica for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair man.

director jarvis, you have 22,000 employees, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> and i'm told you have over 400 sites that you manage and trust for the american people. i don't have a national park in my district anymore. i did have st. augustine. i have to tell the members and mr. jarvis that we have -- well, at least my experience has been we have some incredibly dedicated, hardworking individuals with the park service who day in and day out and weekends sometimes 24/7 do a wonderful be job. and we appreciate their service, and they're doing it sometimes with limited resources and with a great crew of volunteers, too. so we have a list that's a

pretty tough indictment of people who abused their responsibili responsibility, and i think you started to tell some of the problem. i've sat through -- today we have the national park service. we've had epa. we had irs. we've had secret service. we've had jsa. the list goes on and on. and we hear the same thing. you just said that you have a process that you must go through for discipline. it's almost impossible to fire a federal employee. i don't know if you'd agree with that, but it's very, very difficult, isn't it, director jarvis? >> yes, sir, i would agree with that very much so. i've done it a few times in my -- >> but it's very, very difficult. i chaired civil service for four years of. i found it almost impossible. that's part of the problem we face. civil service was set up as a

protection against political manipulation or misuse of authority over legitimate working civil servants. and it's gone far beyond that in providing cover for people who don't do a good job, and it puts barriers in the way. you could probably go through these cases and sicite awful th compliance that you had to do the due diligence by title 5, by other regulations, by other laws that constrain you from taking immediate action. is that correct? >> yes, sir, that is correct. >> it's hard. sometimes we can't get agency directors to come forward. but do you have any suggestions for anything that might speed up or improve the process to get rid of these poor performance or malfeasance employees? >> specifically, no, but i would

certainly appreciate the willingness of the committee to work with us on some reform in this area because i do think it is a significant problem for us to be able to deal effectively. if we do not follow the rules throughout the process, there's a high likelihood that the individual can be reinstated. >> but again, we hear this. you're not the only agency with these personnel problems. ms. kendall, you have manage -- do you see a lack of management? or do you see a similar pattern that we described or both with what you have observed with some of these cases? >> i would say both, sir. i perhaps disagree somewhat with you in terms of difficulty by which to remove employees. i think the failure comes in the unwillingness to take

progressive discipline and document. >> i like that. progressive discipline. maybe i'll have a new liberal approach to getting rid of people who have poor performance. i actually gave a certificate in transportation. i called for the firing of metro incompetent personnel and then the you new director came to the second meeting. he fired 20 people the day before. i presented him with a certificate of appreciation because i never hear of anybody firing poor performers. he did it. but you say it's a lack of progressive -- >> progressive discipline and documentation. >> maybe i could do an act for progressive discipline and documentation. but you think that could be something that we could do to get a better handle on this. >> i think it's something that good managers do do if they've got both problem employees in terms of -- >> maybe an executive order to that effect might help. thank you. i yield back.

>> thank the gentleman. now recognize the gentle woman from the virgin islands for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning, everyone. thank you first, director jarvis, for the work that the park is doing. i had a meeting with you and some other members about the reports and books that you've been putting out regarding reconstructi reconstruction, the underground railroad, and for the work that you have for opening the parks to young people, the fourth grade initiative. that's very important i think in the communities that the park is enlisted to be around. one of the concerns that i have and i think that is an underlying issue with the park is not just the misconduct of its employees but the misconduct from the employees' perspective is really related to a disregard i think for individuals that are not in senior management potentially or not even necessarily part of the park service itself. in the virgin islands as you

know the park plays an int will gr integral role in our community. it takes up large masses of land, particularly on the island of st. john, the entire buck island, the water way surrounding the virgin islands abut or are incorporated by the national park service. and so the relationship that we have with the park is very, very important, and one of the things that i hear continually from my constituents is a pervasive disregard and notable disconnect between the park and its local employees as well as the local government and, in fact, the people of the virgin islands. ayin and i wanted to talk with you about that. i've had some very substantive conversations with the regional director stan austin. i think that he's making headways in some of this regard. but i can't miss an opportunity with you being here to address some of these and maybe you can speak as well to this.

first of all, the national park receives funding for youth conservation corp, ycc, which is a source of income for the children in those communities, is an opportunity for young people to learn about the park, and potentially train them to be excited about careers that involve the national park. and this would then create a relationship between the park and its local people. and another reason why this is so important is because of the enabling legislation here in congress that created the virgin islands national parks. and one of the main components of that that i continually hear from our constituents is language that says that the secretary, meaning secretary of the interior, is authorized and directed to the maximum extent feasible to employ and train residents of the virgin islands to develop, maintain, and administer the virgin islands national parks.

i don't know if you're aware of this particular piece of language. are you aware of it, director jarvis? >> yes but not how it's been implemented. but i am aware of it. >> and reading that particular language, how do you, to the extent feasible, employ individuals and direct them to develop, maintain and administer the virgin islands national park if individuals that are from the virgin islands who are not part of the closed national park system can't apply for employment within the national parks? >> well, fortunately, congress has given us a couple of new hiring authorities, most recently, that give us a much greater ability to do direct hire at the local level into permanent employment. for a long time, it has been very difficult for local hires to sort of break into federal

service. but recently office of personnel management, the public land corps legislation has allowed us that young people working as seasonals for the national park service, which is a fairly easy bar to get in because we hire about 8,000 seasonals a year, or if you serve in a youth conservation corps position like a public land corps, you can obtain essentially career stat you us, noncompetitive status. >> that's an interesting point that you raise about the youth conservation corps because the virgin islands has used that in the past. and on the island of st. croix it's an active engagement but on st. john where the relationship with the park is much more intrinsic and much more involved there has not been an active youth conservation corps, although they have received the funding for it for a number of years. they he have stopped in fact utilizing this for the local kid that's are there on the island

of st. john. what's the reason for that? >> i think's a mistake. and i have talked to regional director austin specifically about it. and, you know, congresswoman, it's an issue in san juan, puerto rico. it's an issue as you mentioned in the virgin islands. it's an issue in alaska with native alaskans. it's also an issue in the west in working with young people. >> excuse me. if you would allow my indulgence, mr. chair marnman. you i don't care it's a mistake. it's a mistake that has had very severe consequences to people on st. john. on the island of the st. croix, you're employing -- on st. john you have hired no one for a number of years on the island of st. john. where this park is very important. that then affects the individuals who are at the park. the superintendent on st. john as well has had changes made on

to the national park in terms of access to land, construction plans, closure of fishing boundaries without community input and proper notification of the people of st. john or the local government as well. is this a mistake as well? and why are the people of the virgin islands being subjected to these continued mistakes by the park? >> it is something that we are addressing very specifically. and i apologize that to you. it is not our intent to disregard in any way, shape or form the people of st. onor any of the islands. we think that they know the islands better than we do. they know the resources. they know the history. they've lived it. and we need them to be a part of the national park service and this is something that we are addressing aggressively through the southeast region. >> mr. chairman, just so you're aware and i would love to hold the record open, when i talked about lack of access to private

properties, since 1989, with hurricane hugo from 1989 individuals living on the island of st. john have not had access to their own private property because that access is landlocked by the national parks. and repeated requests by our local legislature, our government and individuals have not afforded them the ability to even visit the land that they live on because they have not the parks, the management of the park, the superintendent, have not thought it's a priority to allow them to have public access to that. >> you have a great deal of sympathy prosecute from me. we have similar issues out west. we recognize the gentleman from arizona for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman. director jarvis, my state of arizona is no stranger to national parks. in fact, we're talking about one today. we're the home of 22 national park units including monuments, historical sites, parks and more. as a result of the outsized

impact national parks and mon sumts have on the land management economy and everyday lives of my constituents in arizona, the seemingly careless nature ever the national park service management of the deferred maintenance backlog really troubles me. it is reported that the growing tally of backlog infrastructure needs within the park service such as roads, bridges, visitors centers and campgrounds which need significant maintenance or repair has reached nearly $11.5 billion. is that number correct? >> yes, sir, that is correct. >> so one of the most significant projects in the backlog is the arlington memorial bridge just a few steps away from the national park service headquarters right here in washington, d.c. that bridge is in need of a $250 million overhaul, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> yet national park service officials who knew how dire the situation was dropped the ball and nearly lost out on significant department of transportation funding assistance because they couldn't get their application paperwork on time.

that's flat embarrassing. now, the national park service can't even manage what it has in its own front yard in washington, d.c., yet it expects the american people to trust it can manage hundreds of acres stretches across the american continent. on top of this, $11.5 billion heap of mismanagement and neglect, the administration continues to pile on millions of more acres of land through the national monument declaration using the antiquities act. certain special interest acts have pushed the president to move 1.7 million acres in northern arizona out of successful management agreements by other federal, station t state and private ent 'tis and into the park service as the grand canyon national monument. their intentions are clear. they want this designation in order to prevent hunting, mining, timber harvesting on this swath of land even if it means heaping more acres on to the queue of mismanaged acres.

director jarvis do you think it's wise to add millions of acres to the -- successfully overseen by other state and federal agencies? >> i think that the park service in its history has always grown both by act of congress and by the act of the president. i am a fiscal conservative, an i do not like taking on new responsibilities to the national park service that impact our financial house. >> well then let's get specific. is the administration currently working on an undesignated new national monument in arizona? >> that is a power of the white house. that is not -- >> let's get down to the dirties here. let's be even more specific. you have been approached in regards to the grand canyon watershed national monument by the administration? >> not byadministration. advocates have approached me, yes. >> any other areas in arizona?

>> no, not that i remember. >> let me be more specific. how about the snoren and southeastern western arizona? >> no. >> how did sedona/. >> no, sir. >> my office currently has i foia request regarding this proposal and the coordination between land agencies and environmental groups. will that request collaborate the information you shared here today? >> it will for the national park service. i cannot speak for the rest of the department. >> director jarvis, you and your agency mismanaged funding opportunities already right in front of you. you can't even maintain the infrastructure in your own backyard. the arlington memorial bridge is only 2,000 feet long and it's falling apart. you should not be handed over millions more ache irs via the antiquities act to lock up in your management. you may think that the national park has the capacity to control even more public land, but i have a list of 11.5 billion reasons why you are wrong. now, you said you were a conservative in that regard. you know, going back to the

gentle lady from the virgin islands, doesn't your appropriation process show a lack of leadership by making sure that the proper processes are appropriated and funded? >> no, sir. we make a request every year for appropriations to meet our needs and we get about half of what's -- >> no, no. let's go back. the gentle lady actually said the money actually went to those areas and they go to the west. why aren't they being appropriated to the proper protocols and having the proper oversight? >> well, i'm not aware specifically -- we're talking about ycc money versus maintenance backlog funding? sir, we have an $11 billion backlog in maintenance because we only get about half annually what we need to keep up. >> are you telling me there's no inadequacies within your process of oversight and adjudication of thosen monies? >> we are putting every dollar we have as a priority into our

maintenance backlog, including our roads and bridges through the federal transportation bill. but we did not receive adequate funding in the federal transportation bill to address the backlogs of even one bridge, arlington bridge. >> i thank the gentleman. >> thank the gentleman. now recognize the jept gentle w from the district of columbia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i do appreciate this hearing. i do want to say especially considering that i'm a former chair of the equal employment opportunity commission, it distresses me to hear that the park service has what appears to be a systemic problem of sexual harassment. it does seem to me it calls for action at the highest level, not simply to process complaints and make sure they are handled fairly. and i hope you will take that as your mission. it's interesting that my colleague asked about the

arlington national bridge. i was certainly going to ask you about that. then chastises you for not funding. i mean, how can congress really do this? the park service -- the bridge, the arlington memorial bridge, that is used to go to arlington cemetery. it is also the gateway from the south. that bridge alone needs to be rebuilt. the cost will be 2$250 million. everybody in this region is trying to get that money, $250 million, and yet the park service has appropriated by this congress in the fast act, the last bill, $268 million for 4,500 miles of unpaved road, 1400 bridges and i haven't exhausted the list.

it is time the congress stops beating up on agencies when the congress itself is at the root of the problem. you put $268 million in for the entire country and then you beat the park service about the head and shoulders for not keeping the memorial bridge up. my goodness it takes a lot of nerve not to look at ourselves and see where the problem also is. the arlington memorial bridge was not a case of mismanagement. it's a case of no funds to rebuild it. now, mr. jarvis, the federal highway administration says it's going to close this bridge that leads to the arlington cemetery within five years if it's not

rebuilt. do you think it will last five years? it gives you five years to rebuild the bridge. you've already shut down some traffic on the bridge. how much longer does this bridge -- is it one of the older of the busiest bridges in your inventory? >> we have a lot of old bridges throughout our inventory, but this is the most expensive and most complicated and highest use bridge in the national park system so it is our number one priority. it was our number one priority in the reauthorization to the transportation bill in terms of request for funds for these kinds of high-profile project that's are in serious condition. based on the federal highway administration's engineering

assessment which was being done regularly, the bridge is subject to eminent closure in 2021, but we did do some emergency stabilization on it with federal highway so it will last to -- >> director jarvis, with a lot of work with the senators from this region, we were able to get an application in. will that fully fund the bridge? and if not, where will the money come from? >> so we are -- thank you. it was the district of columbia that co-signed our application that was a requirement, and that was really what all of the effort was, was to get either the commonwealth of virginia or the district of columbia -- >> and mind you, this is a virginia bridge. but go ahead. >> i'll let you debate that with the virginia congressman. >> senator warner was very helpful. >> you were all very helpful and ultimately we did get an application if and we are currently discussing with the

federal highways administration a schedule for repair to this bridge that we'll -- >> where will the -- how much funds -- there's an application in to the park service. what will that fund? and will that take care of it? and if not, where will the rest come from? >> i do not know how much the federal highways is willing to put up for this bridge. there are various scenarios based on how much they can put up annually. there's a lot of applications out there for this money. all across the country. with a lot of bridges, as you know, the infrastructure in our nation has a lot of challenges. so there's a lot of competition. but i do think we have a very strong commitment from the federal highways administration to work with you us to come up with a schedule that will repair the bridge and minimize the impact to traffic. but i don't have the hard numbers yet. they haven't made the decision.

>> i want you to get this committee, mr. jarvis, the latest numbers on the funds, where they will come from and whether there will be any shortfall. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. now recognize the gentleman from georgia mr. hies, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think it's clear that the national park service certainly under the direction and action of director jarvis is desperately in need of some oversight. being a member of the natural resources subcommittee on oversight and investigations, we actually had a hearing last month on this very subject, and i want to thank ms. kendall for being a part of that and for being back here today. director jarvis, in your testimony you stated that you were held accountable for the book deal where you wrote it without approval from the ethics office and your punishment, as i understand it, is monthly ethics training for the remainder of your duration.

is that correct? >> yes, sir. that's one component. >> okay, personally i don't think that goes far enough, but that's not going to be the point of my questions here. you stated that you've been held accountable for the book debacle, but we also have seen in the hearing today other problems throughout the national park service, in yellowstone, in the canaveral sea shore, in grand canyon river district, sexual harassment and other issues. and these individuals were allowed to retire or they were transferred. you stated the need for people to be held accountable for their actions. do you believe that these people have been held accountable for their actions? >> i believe we are following the regulations related to federal employees and we are applying appropriate discipline. if they are eligible to retire, then they can do that at their --

>> so you think it's appropriate discipline. >> yes, sir, i do. >> okay. ms. kendall, let me ask you. do you think it's appropriate discipline? >> it's hard to say whether it's appropriate. i think it's more the appearance. i would use as an example the chief ranger who was then demoted, as i understand it, in terms of grade but took the position of superintendent which by appearances anyway seems to look like it was more promotion than demotion. >> all right, yeah. we've got people who -- i mean, egregious behavior, sexual harassment, for example. would you say that this is a pattern in the national park service? >> i don't have the data to say it's a pattern, but it certainly is a concern. >> back to you, mr. jarvis. when we hear that employees who engage in misconduct or mismanagement are not held accountable and that is precisely what we hear, when we hear that, it sounds like

leadership actually condones misbehavior at the park service. how do you think this affects morale? >> well, actually, i think the fact that i am being disciplined sends a message that no one is exempt in this agency. and i think that employees are being disciplined. appropriate action in accordance with the rules and regulations that govern federal employees are being applied poey eied app throughout the system. >> discipline and punishment is one thing. hand slapping is another. i would hardly call what's taking place as discipline. ms. kendall, back to you. in recent cases of misconduct that you've investigated, how many people have been fired? >> i'm not aware of any that have been fired, sir. >> all right. so they are retired perhaps but not fired. >> perhaps. >> perhaps. but you're not aware of any who have been fired.

director jarvis, do you find this disturbing? >> i find that it's -- it is the system in which we live. firing a federal employee is very, very difficult. >> that's not my question. is it disturbing that people who are engaged in this type of misbehavior, is it disturbing that they're not being fired? >> their behavior is scored marrily disturbing to me, but i am a federal employee, and i understand the rules and regulations that apply to them. and frankly, i don't have the power in most cases to fire these employees. >> all right. you still didn't answer my question. it's disturbing to us, too,s t behavior. but it's also disturbing that they're not being fired. real quickly, is there, ms. kendall, are you aware of nps employees who are afraid to report misconduct? >> i'm not specifically aware of precise nps employees that are afraid of reporting misconduct, but i do believe that across the

park service and throughout the department there is some fear by employees to report misconduct. >> why would people be fearful, director jarvis? and i'll close with this. >> well, i think that it's -- i don't believe it's fear. i believe they don't think action will be taken. and i think that what you're seeing today with these reports -- and i appreciate the reports from the office of the inspector general and the actions that we're going to take and are taking, we are going to see more reporting. actually, i think we're going to get more people to be willing to step up because they're seeing management actually taking action. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> will the gentleman yield before he yields back? >> be happy to yield. >> mr. uberunga, what happened to him? did you discipline him? >> he was going to be subject to

discipline. we were preparing a disciplinary actionor for mr. uberaga for his omission of action based on the reporting in 2013. in consultation with the regional director for the intermountain region who is his line supervisor and the dip director for operations here in washington who is the line supervisor for the intermountain region,s the three of us unanimously agreed that grand canyon needed new leadership immediately, at that mr. uberaga was incapable even though he has performed well in other issues, he was incapable of leading the change we needed at the grand cany canyon. so, as you a senior executive, he is subject to being transferred, and i told him ways transferring him out of the grand canyon immediately, and he chose to retire. >> so you did offer him a position, another position.

>> i did gentleman yields back. will now recognize the gentle woman from new jersey for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i really don't know where to begin here because the picture that seems to be be painted from the discussion and from the questions and answers is that this a dysfunctional organization with very little accountability and not very good leadership. i'm going to ask you a couple of questions regarding the park service as an employer. what percentage of women and minorities do you have employed in the park service? you have 22,000 employees i think you said. what percentage of them are minorities and what percentage of them are women? >> i don't have that data in front of me. i'd be glad to get it to you. i would say in terms of women -- i'm just roughing it here, i

don't know specifically off the top of my head -- we're probably 55% male/45% women. and i think in terms of representative minorities we are significantly low. we do not represent the demographic of the nation, and i will be glad to get you the hard statistics, though. >> so you're the director, is that your title? what is your title exactly? >> director. >> and under you are there a series of deputy directors or assistant directors? >> there are two deputies, both of them women. >> and under them? >> there are seven regional directors that serve in the fie field. and then we have associate direct rz heors here in washingr specific programs. >> are you familiar with the

requirements of eeoc in terms of the development of a plan and the responsibility and accountability for the implementation of that plan? >> yes, ma'am. >> who in your -- >> i am very familiar with the recommendations of oc in terms of a model program and how to implement it. >> who in your organization is responsible for that? >> our associate director of human resources. >> and to whom does that person report? >> to the deputy director for operations. >> so is that in violation of the guidance from eeoc? is that not supposed to be a function that reports directly to the director? >> the eeoc model program definitely recommends that the eo office report directly to the director. >> so why is that not the case with you? >> well, when i came on in 2009, it was actually buried three levels below that. we moved it up to directly report, but i agree with you that i think that it should be moved to report directly to the

director ever the national park service, and that's an action we're going to take. >> what kind of training and management development do your -- does your staff generally andrew teenly get? how do they get informed about the laws? how do they get informed about creating culture that would discourage sexual harassment or any other kind of discrimination? what is it that's done proactively, routinely and sustainably that would help create a better climate there? >> so when i came on in 2009, i actually created the first program for relevancy, diversity and inclusion in the history of the national park service. i specifically gathered individuals through the organization that represent the diversity of our nation creating the allies for inclusion, and they have been working directly with the leadership of the national park service to help us create an inclusive workforce,

one that reflects the diversity of the nation and has a work environment that is supportive of diversity, that being ethnic diversity, sexual orientation, women, young people, you know, the whole range. and so we use that information both to communicate -- i've done a number of web chats, specific videos out to the field on eo, on inclusion, and diversity as well. >> thank you. director jarvis, the information that i have is that the eeoc function or functionary still reports three levels below you. so when did you actually -- did you change that reporting level? and when? >> i moved it up. no, it has been moved up. but i agree with you and this is an issue that i've discussed with our hr, that i believe that in order to really meet the

standards expected of us in eeoc and particularly in light of these new issues that have come out that clearly there is the potential for sexual harassment to occur in other pockets in the national park service i think the eo office needs to report directly to me and to meet the standards which are regular reporting to me and to the leadership, having add rvocates that represent the gediversity the nation and a regular understanding at the senior leadership about these issues. so i think there's change afoot. >> may i just bring something to -- >> sure go ahead. >> of the report that was submitted on 4/20/15 indicates that each region has an eeo manager that reports to a regional director and that the o director is under the third level reporting structure. so i think that maybe there's a lack of communication within

your organization as to who reports where, which is sort of a red flag that we have some serious problems with accountability and responsibility there. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> now recognize the gentleman from texas mr. herd for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the national parks are awesome. i have the pleasure of representing seven. i get to represent big bend national park, which is headed by an amazing superintendent, and she really is a treasure for the federal government. y'all have a hard task, to make sure that these jewels of our nation are around for future generations and that future generations continue to interact with them in the ways that pa s generations have. it's been a real pleasure over the last 17 months that i've been in congress when i crisscross the district and talk throughout the country about encouraging americans to find

their park or his or her park. this is an important resource for our country. it's unfortunate that we're here today talking about sexual harassment, poor culture of management. and my question -- my first question to you, director jar s jarvis, is to piggyback on what my friend and colleague from new jersey has been talking about. what steps are being taken to ensure there's zero tolerance for sexual harassment within the national park service? >> well, clearly, zero tolerance was not the standard at the grand canyon or at cape canaveral, canaveral national sea shore. and that's just unacceptable. we at the senior leadership a discussion that i led in may and this is the regional directors, the associate directors and the senior superintendents of the

organization had a very open and emotional discussion about zero tolerance and why this agency has -- >> so why are you doing right now? what steps, concrete steps, have been taken to ensure this culture changes? >> so the first thing that we feel as recommended by the department of defense is a prevalent survey. and that is to get baseline, understanding of whether or not or how much harassment is occurring in the workplace in the service. so getting that survey done, we've committed to doing that by a third party as soon as possible. i can't give you a specific date because we have to go through a contracting process to get there. but that's the first step. we have reinforced a message to the field on zero tolerance and i think we're making very public the actions we're taking at the grand canyon, in particular about disciplinary actions and expectations of behavior to meet the zero tolerance policy.

>> so director jarvis, in your opinion -- and i know you're getting ready to do a survey -- what allowed this kind of culture to seep in in these two parks that we've been talking about today? >> i think one was the conditions of the particular activity create an environment that vulnerable individuals can be preyed upon. so this is an area the department of defense has made some -- within defense, they have sort of special unit -- in the park service, we have what we call special units, river districts, fire districts, fire crews, trail crews. these are places where individuals are thrown together in a tough environment and the potential is there. so this is an area we're folk you ustion on particularly right now. and we've made management aware across the system that these are areas that you need special

attention. we have to create an ombudsman, individuals that are subject to this harassment can call safely. i mean, if it's your supervisor that is harassing you, that's a bad reporting chain if you have to report this to the person who's actually harassing you. so we've created the opportunity for outside of that to be able to report this issue so that we can get -- and if we find it, we're reporting it to the ig and saying, we need to go in and investigate. >> well, you mentioned the fire crews. i also represent guadalupe mountains national park. i know that's one place you served over 14,000 acres on fire and what the fire crews are doing is heroic work. and ms. kendall, my last 30 seconds to you. what types of steps should be taken by the national park service to address the poor culture of management and lack of accountability and leadership? >> well, i think holding individuals accountable for

misconduct. mr. jarvis is correct in that you cannot always make public how discipline is imposed, but doing that, doing it regularly -- i mentioned progressive discipline, documentation -- it's something that can be done, and if it's done properly it's very effective. >> i yield back, mr. chairman. >> now go to the gentle woman from michigan, ms. lawrence, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and ranking member cummings. the deputy -- this question is to you, director jarvis -- secretary of interior reviewed the ig's finding and issued aco the department has reviewed the report of investigation carefully and come to the conclusion that director jarvis did violate federal employee

ethics standards. dow agree with that statement? >> yes, ma'am, i do. >> when asked by the inspector general if, quote, looking back you, quote, would have done -- would you have done anything differently, you replied, would i have done the same thing? probably. i think i knew going in that there was a certain amount of risk. why would you say that? that make it's look like you didn't care about the ethic rules. >> well, let me apologize for that. i was absolutely wrong in that statement. >> on may 27, you sent an e-mail to all park services employees that said, and i quote, i failed to initially understand and accept my mistake. that was wrong.

what part of the mistake did you initially fail to understand and what happened between your interview with the ig when you said you were probably would do the same thing again and then on may 27th in your e-mail that you stated that you were caused to accept that you had made a mistake. can you walk me through that? what changed? >> well, one of the requirements under my disciplinerary action is that i receive ethics training, and i have been spending that time with the departmental ethics office, and i have to say that i've developed a much deeper understanding and respect for and appreciation for the work of the office of the department of ethics. and i think that has resulted in me reconsidering and rethinking my position on this and saying that i was completely wrong, and

in doing so violated the enl icks standards for the department of interior. and i apologize for that. >> sir, how long have you been the director? >> since 2009. >> and that from 2009 until your ethics training you were unaware of the requirements, the ethical requirements of your job? >> no, ma'am. i served as the national park service ethics officer, and i was well aware but not at the level of detail that i have now. >> that's a very hard pill to swallow. if you're training others and you're not aware of what your ethical responsibilities were, how could you train others and be responsible for them and not be personally aware? >> so in the execution of the book i thought i was following all of the ethical standards that are required of me.

i was using a source that the park service normally uses. i was not personally benefiting. i was doing it on my own time. all of those are the ethics requirements. what i did not do was seek the advice of the ethics office, which would have clarified my mistakes right up front. and that was the ethics issue. and i think the discipline that i have received is appropriate to the action, and i think i've been open about my mistakes to everyone that has been involved. >> we all are human and make mistakes, but we're also hired to do a job that requires -- especially in leadership positions to set an example. i'm disappointed that your understanding, especially based on your previous requirements in this federal agency, did not allow you the depth of

understand i understanding and your failure to meet the requirements. >> before the gentle woman yields back, could she yield to me? the problem with the ethics particularly with the book deal is the documentation shows the opposite. you sent a letter or an e-mail to the person who would be the publisher. there's a follow-up e-mail asking for the conversation because essentially you knew you had to have them ask you to do it as opposed to what really happened because told them you wanted to publish the book and you compounded the problem ethically by writing a handwritten note to the secretary assuring her that it was of the highest ethical starntds by saying it was reviewed by ethics and that they had asked you to do it, which was a lie. this wasn't an innocent mistake.

it was a part. it was deceptive. and i think you knew you were creating an ethical problem. and as you said i think candidly to the i.g., i'm willing to take that risk, i many, many, many times have had these types of problems. i believe you when you write that. but the pattern, the documentation that ms. lawrence is talking about, is clear. you asked them to do this. they sell millions of dollars worth of stuff through the parks. they need you. you had a telephone conversation. and then they sent you a letter saying oh, yes, this is what we need from you. that's a pattern. and it's unethical. i yield back. now i recognize the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. >> i thank the chair. well, forgive me if i have a dissenting voice here. i'm not quite sure what the tempest is in a teapot with respect to the book. miss kendall.

so director jarvis wanted to surreptitiously publish a book and benefit from it, is that correct? >> that's my understanding, yes, sir. >> surreptitiously benefit? >> oh, i'm sorry. >> please speak up. we can't hear you. >> i'm sorry. what was your question? >> my question was your finding is director jarvis deliberately and surreptitiously engineered the publication of the book that he surreptitiously wrote in order to benefit surreptitiously personalitiesly. >> i don't believe we concluded he would benefit -- >> no, you didn't. he benefited not at all. >> that's correct. >> his motivation was to help the park service on its centennial. is that correct? >> i believe so. >> what a crime. what a terrible thing for the head of the park service to want to promote the park service on its 100th anniversary. and ethically we're going to

what, burn him at the stake and destroy his reputation because, all right, some rules were put aside. they were put aside if i understand it correctly because there was a deadline we were approaching and he had some legitimate concerns about that deadline, if we didn't expedite it it wasn't going to happen because no one else was doing it. fair enough? >> it was self-imposed deadline if it was a deadline. >> well, the centennial is not a self-imposed deadline. what's the centennial? >> you're right. >> right. >> that's what was on his mind. he wasn't going to benefit from th this. the proceeds he dedicated to the park foundation. you know, i must say to my colleagues, it's -- we might walk a little humbly in the face of the lord when we're a body

that's been accused individually of sexual harassment. we've had charges brought against members, including of this committee. we've had people involved in book deals, brought down two speakers. doesn't make it right. of course everyone should follow the strict letter of the law. but i will say, my own experience in this body dealing with an ethics committee, rules can be very arbitrary. and there are two approaches to life. one is a common sense kind of work it through approach and the other is a very law-driven, rule-driven approach to life and religion and politics. the latter may be a comfortable for some, but it's not really a practical approach to life. sexual harassment is a different matter. i have to say with respect to the book thing, shame on

everybody for making it such a big issue. i don't think it is. and director jarvis, i'm sorry you have to even put up with that, frankly. maybe you made some mistakes. maybe you cut some corners. but the motivation to me was to try to help the park service. and i don't share my colleagues' outrage or faux outrage about it. sexual harassment's a different matter. i've got to ask you, director jarvis. when did you become aware of the fact there was a problem with sexual harassment at canaveral and at grand canyon? >> so in the canyon case i became aware upon the letter that was sent to the secretary of interior that initiated -- >> you were unaware of any problems prior to that? >> absolutely awn ware. >> and when was that? give me just the date. >> i forget the exact -- >> quickly.

>> 2014. >> okay. 2014. was that before or after the subject david ubaragua was appointed as superintendent of the grand canyon? >> it was after. he'd been there for about four years. >> that was the sequence? you confirmed that, miss kendall? >> yes, sir. >> and miss kendall, when it was brought to director jarvis's attention there was a problem, did he take action? did he ignore it? did he punish whistleblowers? did he punish alleged victims? >> we received a request directly from the secretary in response to those letters, and we undertook the investigation at the secretary's request. >> but was there any -- i'm asking a different question. was there any evidence that director jarvis covered up, was complicit, turned a blind eye, ignored these allegations? >> no, sir. >> none. i thank you. my time is up. >> go to the second round.

i'm not going to recognize myself for five minutes. director jarvis, you write in your testimony, you said that you have zero tolerance for sexual harassment. what does that mean, zero tolerance? >> it means that when sexual harassment is identified within the organization at any level that there is an immediate response not only to the perpetrators but also to the victims of it, that zero means zero. >> does it mean you recommend that people be fired? >> again, chairman, these are federal employees. and jumping to firing is not an option that i have under the current laws of civil service. >> you can make the recommendation. you can push for it. you can -- can you not? >> i'm subject to those same laws just like any other

manager. i can't say fire that employee because that violates the whole title 5 rights. there's a process we need to go through. >> i understand they need to go through a process, but your recommendation does have some weight, does it not? >> it definitely has weight in terms of that we have zero tolerance. and that -- >> but what's that mean? zero tolerance doesn't sound like it means anything. we're not going to tolerate that, just don't keep doing it. so when you have an allegation of multiple sexual harassment issues happening i want to know what you're doing about it. >> we are aggressively pursuing appropriate disciplinary -- >> i want to know what you think appropriate disciplinary action is for sexual harassment. >> i think removal is one of those very much possible options. and it is definitely on the plate. >> so when did you make those recommendations either in the case of the grand canyon or in the canaveral situation? did you make any of those

recommendations? >> i have not made those recommendations as yet. >> how many women does it take? we've got dozens. so at what point do you make a recommendation that somebody be fired? how many times does somebody have to be sexually harassed for it to get on your radar screen to say enough's enough, now we're going to recommend firing? >> when that line supervisor for these employees brings to me the details of their proposed disciplinary action, i will at that time make my recommendation on what should be done. >> in none of the cases regarding sexual harassment in these two scenarios did you ever recommend somebody be fired? >> the process for their discipline is incomplete at this point. so i have not made a recommendation that anyone be fired. >> and that's the heart of the problem. that's the heart of the problem. >> let me go back to this. i want to read this. this is from the testimony from

ms. kendall, the inspector general. we're talking about the canaveral national sea shore. the chief ranger was disciplined for the procurement violation, but a particular concern was that in 2015 the chief ranger publicly disputed a media story about a former canaveral park employee who had provided information to the oiga about allegations of improper hiring and procurement irregularities. we had substantiated those allegations, and we reported our findings to director jarvis in 2012. but he has yet to respond to our office. to date national park service has also taken no action to address the chief ranger's unbecoming conduct. is that true or false? yeah, to you. you're the director. >> sorry. i thought you were asking -- >> no. she wrote. she wrote they provided you the findings in 2012 and is yet to respond to her office.

>> these local park issues are referred to the regional director. >> so when you get an oig report and you're referring it down to the person who created the problem, the chief ranger and the superintendent, right? >> no. to the regional director, not the park superintendent. >> you give it to the regional director, wash your hands of it, but there's no response. doesn't that get on your raidar? is that something you're worried about? >> i am worried about it. i don't know why -- >> but you got no response. did you get a response, miss kendall? >> to my knowledge, no. >> so you don't even respond to her. let me go on. last week again we, being ms. kendall, issued a report to the national park service on a pattern and practice of sexual harassment by the same chief ranger, who continues to serve in that position despite three substantiated allegations against him in less than two years. she says the national park service has not had time to respond to this most recent

report, but with three other reports in four years this is a profound example of leadership problem that the national park service has failed to address at multiple levels. what would you disagree with in her assessment there? >> we have taken action on the individual at cape canaveral. his commission has been removed. and he's been removed from the position of chief ranger. >> when did that happen? >> i do not know the exact date. >> i mean, is it in the last couple weeks? >> no. i don't know, honestly. i can get back to you, but i do not have that -- >> we're having a hearing about this. i mean, it's in our written testimony. you don't know the position of this person? >> i know that his commission's been removed. as all i know. >> when his commission is removed, does he still work there? >> he is still employed. >> where? >> at canaveral. >> so there's -- how many sexual harassments does it take to fire a federal worker or even get to your point where you even recommend somebody being fired? this is a group of 50 people.

there's three substantiated allegations. and he still works there. the guy should be arrested. he should probably be in jail. he should at least be fired. and you should at least try to fire him. but you don't do i of that. what does that say to the women there? how would you look them in the eye? i've got two daughters entering the workforce. i've got a daughter and a daughter-in-law evan terg the workforce, and i don't want them to go and deal with the scum that is in your department in your agency because that sexual harassment as a percentage of the workforce is so detrimental. and i put it on your shoulders to hold those people accountable and at least try. at least go down fighting. at least let them know, you know what, i've got your back. because sexual harassment, it ain't going to stand in my department, in my agency. but i don't see any of that. like i don't know. i have no idea. and you've had dozens of situations and you've made no

recommendation to try to do that. so don't complain that the system is failing you. you're failing the system. your leadership is lacking. my time's expired. i recognize the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> i want to just go back for a moment to my friend mr. connolly's comments. i was hoping he would stay around for a minute even though he has another hearing. the problem is not so much the book. you know, my pastor has a saying. he says, it's not what you do. it's what you do says about you. and it seems to me that you really had an utter disregard

for the ethics rules. it's not some -- you know, i can understand you're trying to get the book out. but when you talk about you don't mind taking a risk and that's how you -- i mean, i think you kind of laid it out very nicely. this is how you operate. you take a risk and you'd do it again. and i know you come in and apologize this morning and you apologized to your employees over and over again. but what do you think that says to employees? it probably is a link when they see the top person in the agency, the very person who is supposed to be making sure they

do the right thing, and when they say you're not doing the right thing. that has to affect morale. would you agree? >> well, it's -- i think my employees know who i am and have e-mailed me hundreds of e-mails of support because they look at me as a human being that makes mistakes, that i've owned up to my mistake. i've openly apologized. and admitted that i was wrong. and i'm being disciplined openly. no hiding of that discipline to anyone. and that is being applied appropriately. so i think that it may affect some people from a morale standpoint. but i think that this is -- i'm doing what i need to do as the director of the national park service to own up to my mistakes

and apologize for them. >> in my private life before i became a congressman one of the things that i did was counsel and work with lawyers when they had disciplinary problems. and we had lawyers who had stellar careers. stellar. and did one thing and got disbarred, weren't able to practice law forever. so when you talk about employees knowing you and what a great guy you are, you know, but when you say things like i think i knew going into this there was a certain amount of risk, i've never been afraid of a risk, i've gotten my ass in trouble many, many, many -- you got

three manys. times in the park service. by necessarily -- by necessarily getting -- by not -- listen to what you said. by not necessarily getting permission. and i'm trying -- i'm really, really, really bending over backwards trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. but when somebody says basically screw you, this is how i operate. then that makes me wonder, these people doing the sexual harassing. you said something else that really kind of got next to me. you said it's not that the women are afraid. they're concerned that something will not be done about the harassment. is that what i said? >> that's part of it, yes. >> well, if a young lady is sitting watching this right now

and she's thinking about coming into the park service and she knows that -- this pattern. she knows the top guy takes an attitude of it's rules, what the hell, and doesn't see much happening and sees things happening over and over and over again, what's that say to them? if it was your daughter, i'm just curious. would you feel comfortable? sending her to the park service. >> i do have a daughter who works on public health for women in africa. and she is a very strong individual. and probably watching this. as we speak. and i think she'd say she would work for the park service because we are aggressively addressing this issue. this issue has come out and it's incredibly disturbing to me that

we have tolerated sexual harassment within our organization. but i'll tell you this. the senior leadership, the senior women of our organization are committed to rooting this out. it's not going to be easy, and it's not going to be overnight. and frankly as we take this on aggressively you're going to see more. more going to come out. that's exactly what the department of defense told us, is that you're going to, as we aggressively pursue it, and women that have been harassed, who have not been willing to speak out in the past, will suddenly speak out. and probably will be back in here saying how come you've got now six cases or eight cases of harassment in the organization? and that's because we are aggressively pursuing it and individuals are finally feeling empowered and protected and willing to speak. that's a commitment i'm making and the senior part of my organization is also making backing me up on this, that we are going to root this out of the national park service.

>> miss kendall, this is my last question. he just said that we're going to probably hear more cases because women are going to feel more empowered. can you tell us to your knowledge whether you have confidence based on what you know that that would likely be the case? >> i don't really have any basis to say yes or no, sir. >> and your recommendations are what right now? >> we did not make specific recommendations. we usually don't with our reports of investigation except for two things that we did provide to the secretary and to mr. jarvis. one was to be careful about backgrounds of people that they hire because they did hire back or allowed back one of the

perpetrators as a volunteer. the other was to handle internal sexual harassment investigations properly, which was part of the problem in the grand canyon case. the initial investigation that they conducted internally did not proceed properly and it was also handled improperly because it was allowed to be distributed to more individuals than needed to know about it. >> mr. jarvis, you know, assuming you stay in the position, what can we do to hold your feet to the fire? what would you suggest? because we've got a problem here. we have women who want to be treated properly. i don't want the norm to be you come in and get harassed. that shouldn't be the norm. we're moving toward that if

we're not already there from what you've described to me. said more cases probably coming up. how would you hold your feet to the fire? because i think we have a duty to our constituents to protect them. i mean, you're a nice guy. but if people are coming into the workplace feeling threatened, i don't understand how they can do their job properly. if they're sitting there feeling afraid that somebody's going to say something improper to them or force them into a position that they don't want to be in. so how do we hold your feet to the fire in. >> sir, i think you hold my feet to the fire by requiring me to come back up here and meet with any individuals or group of individuals from this committee or any of the other committees that have jurisdiction and report to you specific actions that we are taking, both a

timeline, individual actions and response through the rest of this year and the coming years. i mean, we have been getting excellent advice from the department of defense and the national oceanic -- >> have you been taking it? >> yes, absolutely we have been taking it. we are actively engaged with them on this process. and i think you need to hold me accountable. you need to hold the agency accountable. and we owe it to the women and the men of the organization that we create an inclusive workforce, a respectful and supportive and safe workplace for all of our employees and we are absolutely committed to that and you should hold me accountable. >> do you have a plan? you have a plan, right? >> yes, we do have a plan. >> thank you. >> mr. jarvis, director, the i.g. dealing with the chief ranger in canaveral sent you a report in 2012. i guess i fundamentally don't understand why you can just dismiss that and send that off to your regional person to deal

with. there's a reason why they have the inspectors general give them directly to either directors or cabinet secretaries, so it can be on their radar screen. so they can take care of it. let me read to you another thing that ms. kendall wrote in her testimony. finally, this is again talking about canaveral. the same superintendent, not the chief ranger but this time the superintendent has been at canaveral since 2010. was named a subject in our 2012 report to director jarvis. are you familiar with that report? >> yes, i am. >> did you read it when you got it in 2012? >> i don't remember. >> the employee that reported the allegations of misconduct in her 2012 report made additional allegations of reprisal that were founded by the merit systems protection board and resulted in a settlement with the national park service.

the merit system protection board noted the sunt was aware of the employee's allegation of recurring misconduct, did nothing to address the issue and failed to process an administrative request made by the whistleblower as a reprisal against her for contacting the inspector general. additionally, based on our report the merit system protection board noted the superintendent showed "a lack of candor" when responding to investigators and the highlighted action she took to obstruct the investigation. yet we have no indication that the national park service is taking any disciplinary action against her. did you take any disciplinary action against her? >> i don't know. >> how do you not know that? you know, mr. cummings is asking if you get it, if you're responding, if you're paying attention, if you're learning. you've got an outside inspector general who comes in and says there's a problem here, there's a reprisal. and i tell you what. whistleblowers who step up and

do the difficult thing of saying hey, there's a problem here, we'll go to the mat for those people. and you know what? that happened in this case. and she's telling you that they had a lack of candor. they weren't candid about this. so much so it cost the american taxpayers -- i don't know how much we had to pay this person to get them right and whole. but that person still works there, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and you didn't do anything about it. so why do we believe that you will actually do something in the future? we had multiple reports going to you. these are years old. you purposely, intentionally mislead the secretary. you've got i.g. reports that you don't respond to. you have more than a dozen, two dozen sexual harassment cases. you say there's zero tolerance but not one time did you recommend somebody be fired, and guess what, nobody was fired. if you're going to -- you've

done a lot of good things in your service, i'm sure. but if you want a new direction, if you want there to be the type of park service that you claim that you want, it's going to require new leadership zprks it isn't going to happen with you. you've had more than seven years to get this right. and it's getting worse, not better. only later do we actually see all these things percolate up to the top. but i've got to tell you, if we're going to do right by federal employees we're going to have a different -- we're going to have to have a change. you say in your written testimony the thing you gave us last night, you've got zero tolerance, and then you just told mr. cummings a few minutes ago it's unbelievable to me that we tolerated this for so long. it has no tolerance. recommend these people be fired. talk to the prosecutors so there can be action. that's the kind of government that i want to see. that's what i think the employees of the park service, of which i've got two parks in

my district, that's what they want to see. because management's treated a whole lot different than that rank-and-file person and that cannot stand. i think it's been deception. i don't think it's been a mistake. yield back and recognize the ranking member, mr. cummings. >> just one last thing. there were some ladies who were dancing and they got 14-day suspensions, is that right? >> that's correct. >> can you tell us about that a little bit? >> so the situation at the grand canyon, once the information about harassment on the river district was made aware to the management at the park level, this would be superintendent ubaraga and his deputy, they instituted some specific policies about behavior. they eliminated alcohol use on the river trips.

and they met with the river rangers and the staff as they went down -- before they went down the river and said this kind of suggestive behavior, harassment will not be tolerated. and then there was an incident on the river that involved a number of individuals including the two women. so that's when they imposed the disciplinary action on the women. and frankly this was an enormous mistake. it was wrong. >> and why do you say that? >> well, zero tolerance is zero tolerance. it's not to be reinterpreted by the park superintendent in a way of setting new standards for behavior. it's he did not take action on when he was made aware that this

was going on in the park. he instituted a new set of policies to try to prevent it, and it didn't prevent, and then he took action on the two women. they have filed complaints with the national park service which are being adjudicated -- >> you know, as i listen to you, it goes back to some of the things the chairman was saying. i'm sitting here and listening to you. you told untrue statements to those above you, but yet you're sitting there and talking all of this strong talk. but when it comes to you it's a whole different thing. why is that? why should that be? >> i think i've been appropriately disciplined myself. and i've apologized for that. >> say that again? >> i said that in the -- if i

understand your question about holding myself accountable? is that the question? >> yes. >> i believe that for the ethics violation that i did in production of the book i have been held accountable by the department of the interior, by my superiors. >> basically you got a reprimand and told -- and the interesting thing is you were an iktds officer you told us but you had to go back and get the ethics training. >> that's correct. >> last thing, let me tell you something, one of the most important -- and mr. chairman, i think this is part of the problem. one of the most important things, one of them you that said many -- and it goes back to what you asked, mr. chairman. you said, miss kendall, that the

leadership tries to avoid taking disciplinary actions altogether. i'm paraphrasing what you said. so are you capable of doing what the chairman asks? yeah. of taking appropriate disciplinary action. >> yes, i am. >> the committee stands adjourned.

[ room noise ] the democratic party's platform committee is holding a forum in phoenix to hear testimony on what should be included in the party's platform ahead of next month's democratic national convention. the platform committee meets friday at 1:00 p.m. eastern and you can see that live on our companion network c-span. then saturday day 2 of the platform committee heerg in phoenix. that's also live on c-span starting at noon eastern. on american history tv on c-span 3 this saturday starting

at 1:00 p.m. eastern we're live from gettysburg college in gettysburg, pennsylvania for the annual civil war institute summer conference. as authors, historians, and professors examine topics such as free people's refugee camps, reconstruction in the north, and the post-civil war career of ulysses s. grant. also hear conversations on the return of the confederate veterans and the origins of the lost cause. at 10:00 with the approach of the 40th anniversary of the smithsonian's national air and space museum in july, real america will showcase a series of nasa films. this weekend we'll look at the 1966 film "science reporter: suited for space." >> a couple of our earlier models. here we have the al sheppard suit. this is the mercury suit. after themarkry suit is the gemini. and here you have -- >> this looks familiar. >> this is a suit very similar to this. in fact, identical to this. was worn by white in his extravehicular excursions.

>> this does look quite a bit different from the gemini suit we saw. >> it is. this is one of our earlier models of the apollo suit. >> tracing the development of spacesuits from the mercury program to the apollo moon mission. and sunday evening at 6:00 on american artifacts, curator jeremy kenney takes us on a tour of the smithsonian national air and space museum to show some of the museum's one-of-a-kind artifacts and the quest to go higher, farther and faster. >> this flew 3700 miles in 33 1/2 hours from new york to paris. flown by charles lindbergh, who was an unknown mail pilot. his goal was to win the orteg prize of $25,000 for the first nonstop flight from new york to paris. and so that was the impetus for this flight. but what it represents in the history of aviation was part of the telling of the air and the

transformation of what the wright brothers created and how it transitioned in the '20s and '30s to what we call the modern airplane. >> for the complete american history tv weekend special go to c-span.org. the state department's special envoy for libya testified recently before the senate foreign relations committee about the security and economic situation in libya and the continuing struggle of the libyan government to maintain control beyond the nation's capital. the foreign relations committee will come to order. we welcome everyone. thank you for being here. i want to thank our witness for testifying today. five years after u.s. -- the u.s. decision to italian veen in libya, which i think most of us including our witness would agree was a textbook case in

what not to do in foreign policy, if you look at where we are today, i'm still wondering what our libya policy is. i read through the briefings. i know senator cardin and others did the same. and you know, we spend most of our time on foreign policy issues obviously. and i have to tell you just looking at the committee memo that was put in place by crs, the countervetting forces on the ground in libya are really many and very, very tough, complex situation. that has developed there. i think our hearing today is an attempt to understand what is an achievable outcome in libya that is in line with u.s. interests and at what cost. and obviously if we can cause people to come together through the efforts that are under way at present, we'd really just be getting back to where we were in 2013. so there's been a lot of time and a lot of lives lost.

a lot of backward momentum. as different factions continue to compete across libya, as isis continues to use the chaos to establish an operating base outside syria, it appears that we are providing arms and training through some type libyan national security force. i hope mr. winer can explain to us what lessons the administration has learned from the failure of the last time we tried to develop libyan security forces and what political progress needs to occur in order for us to try again. to determine the way forward we need an accurate assessment of tripoli's ability to govern and what we are doing to help them and what can bring the rival administration on board with the new government. we have sanctioned libyan individuals who are hindering the formation of a unity government in the past. but are we prepared to do so in

the future? for a country with vast oil wealth and thankfully void of widespread sectarian tensions, libya should become a success story. i think we all are disheartened that nm ways the failure of u.s. policy following the fall of gadhafi has hindered libya's progress. with that i want to thank our special envoy for being here. who i know has concerns about the future of libya. we look forward to your testimony. we thank you for being here today to help us understand the way forward. and with that i'll durn to our distinguished ranking member senator ben cardin. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think this hearing is particularly important as to how we proceed in libya. and it's complicated. and i thank our witness for being here and your service to our country. but in order to counter isil and libya the united states and others have accelerated efforts to strike at the stronghold in sirltee while stepping up efforts to achieve libyan unity.

on a broad level this is the right approach. although i'm pleased to learn that isil is now physically on the run and stress that they continue to make inroads by inspiring people online to commit atrocities, as we've seen in our own country in orlando. but oftentimes in the rush to beat back the latest terrorist threats the expediency of counterterrorism actions far outpaces and exceeds our political strategy. and that's a matter of major concern. we want to take action but we need to know we can follow up that action with a workable strategy. a fear that if we're not careful we do not devote the same amount of time and resources to good governance, democracy, promotion of humanitarian support in libya, then we will simply be worsening the country's division and repeating past mistakes that we've made elsewhere. if we arm one militia to counter isil today, even a militia acting under the newly

recognized international unity government, who knows who will take up arms against us tomorrow? now, let me be clear. if the administration has information about a threat against the united states, then we have to act. we have to act and do what's safe for the people of our country. i know this administration is trying its best to support the national court. three months before i conveyed the urgency for libyan national unity. enhancing their legitimacy is critical to restoring security to the country, bringing prosperity to the people and helping libya take its place among the community of nations. gna control over all libya is critical to combating the extremist forces and resolving a migrant crisis that has tragically witnessed the drowning deaths of thousands. we've lost thousands of people that have been trafficked through libya. that's one of the casualties of the instability in that country.

and yet while the gna is doing its best to restore order the country's political division still festers as spoilers in the eastern part of the country continue to block a vote on approval of gna. as long as libya remains a fractured, terrorist groups like isil will thrive and the temptation for growing foreign intervention will only grow. the gna itself has not requested foreign intervention. and while we can provide training to gna hif controlled units we cannot fight this fight for them. i think that's a very important point. if and when the u.s. military decides to give military equipment and training to libyan forces it must be with the full cognizance whof we're giving the support to and the potential for that support later to be turned against the united states. we need to have a clear strategy in libya. as i've said repeatedly before this committee i'm concerned about the open-ended nature of this neverending war on terror that is pursued without congressional authorization, whether it's waged in libya,

yemen, syria, or iraq. what begins as a small mission to build partner's capacity can morph into something much larger. and all this is based on an authorization of u.s. force predating the upheaval in the arab world. predating the very existence of the islamic state. and even predating u.s. invasion in iraq more than 13 years ago. as i said earlier, our libya policy must strike a balance between achieving security and creating good governance. libya's core problem is that it's fracture add long regional, tribal, and religious lines between the old order and the new. we in the international community must continue our best to try to bridge these gaps. libyans are tired of having multiple competing governments. they deserve better. i want to compliment the u.s. leadership and security council working with the wlisht colleagues in getting the security council's actions. i'll be interested in hearing

whether that will have a major impact on our policy. the united states should help a country like libya achieve unity, security, and prosperity. it's my hope we pursue a balanced policy and not just an expedient one. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much for those comments. and mr. winer, we really appreciate you being here. as people know, you're the special envoy for libya. bureau of near eastern affairs at the u.s. state department. i think you know that you can summarize your comments, if you will, in about five minutes without objection. all of your written testimony will be entered into the record. again, thank you for being here, and if i would, please proceed. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, ranking member cardin, and distinguished members of the committee, i thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss u.s. foreign policy on libya. i've just returned from consultationed with regional and european partners to discuss our mutual support for the transitional government of national accord, or gna, in

libya whose challenges include ending civil conflict, promoting stability and addressing the ongoing terrorist threat. our strategic interest in libya is to support a unified accountable government that meets the economic and security needs of the lib yap people. we also seek a government with whom we can partner on bilateral and regional objectives including countering the terrorism and illegal migration which threaten security across north africa and europe. at the center of our policy has been support for the creation of the gna as a unifying bridge to help libyans move beyond the damaging period of political competition referred to by the chairman and ranking member and fragmentation until the country adopts a new constitution and long-term government. to do that we engaged last year with a wide range of libyans, international partners and with u.n. special representative of

the secretary-general martin kobl relative and his predecessor bernardino leon to support creation of the political agreement which was signed on december 17th, 2015 to bring about the gna. since entering tripoli march 30th, 75 days ago roughly, the gna has been able to demonstrate its commitment to inclusiveness and national reconciliation and has begun the critical work of rebuilding the libyan state. rather than fighting one another through the gna backed by the political dialogue, libyans have begun the hard work of addressing common challenges. our collective international support for the gna has already had practical impact on the ground. in recent days we've seen libyan forces aligned with the gna engaged in sustained fighting against daesh in the region around sirte and entering into the city. they have made impressive gains against a ruthless enemy. the gna has announced plans to form a presidential guard. it has established command

centers to combat daesh and sirte. prime minister fayez al saraj has stated he will seek international assistance to train and equip gna forces for this fierkts which will not be a fight that will be merely over in days or weeks. the libyans look to the united states for our help in combating daesh and we are prepared to provide it. the united states counterterrorism policy in libya is focused on degrading daesh and other violent extremist groups and reducing the threat they pose to our national security and to our interests in north africa and in europe. in libya as elsewhere the president has made clear his willingness to take action wherever our interests are in danger. in the past year the united states has conducted direct action against several terror targets in libya including a february 19th strike that took out a daesh training camp in the town of sabrata west of tripoli. we've also been working to disrupt connections between a daesh branch in libya and the core group in iraq and syria to

halt the flow of foreign fighters to libya, to shut off daesh finances there and to counter and defeat its destructive messages. as with our other policy priorities achieving our counterterrorism objectives depends on helping the libyans rebuild an effective state. while real progress has been made in recent months, much work remains to fully implement the libyan political agreement and to achieve a durable and broad political reconciliation. with our partners in europe and within the region we continue to urge all libyans to put aside their personal interests in the name of uniting libya under the gna. so libyans throughout the country, east, west, and south can rebuild their nation. we further urge them to support the integrity of libya's core economic institutions, in particular the central bank of libya and the national oil corporation, whose unity is vital to the country's recovery and long-term stability. u.s. assistantssistance has pla important part. we look to congress as the gna takes shape. the administration has requested

$25 million for assistance to libyan fy 2017. these funds would enable us to respond to libya's emerging needs, help the gna function and support increasing libyan security and counterterrorism capabilities. the administration is also planning to provide $35 million in fy 2016 and prior year funds to help libya's political transition produce an accountable and effective national government. as part of this assistance we intend to commit up to $4 million in support of the undp-4red stabilization facility for libya. mr. chairman and members of this committee as i described at the outset today the united states supports the as praigsz of the libyan people for united, inclusive, and responsible -- responsive national government capable of overcoming the country's significant national challenges and divisions. we remain deeply engaged with libya because flts part of our national security for north

afri africa, for europe and the interests we share. i look forward to taking your questions. thank you. >> i assume you believe it's reasonable that libya can be put back together as a unified state that can secure its border and maintain monopoly over the use of force. is that something that you believe can occur? >> i believe it can occur. there are several things in your statement that need to all be taken into consideration. a unitary state of libya is essential. any division of libya into parts will be disastrous for the people libya, for the country, for the region and bad across the board. border control is something that's going to require work by libya's neighbors as well as by libya. >> yeah. and based on the way things are progressing at present, how long into the future do you think that is? >> well, the government of national accord has made more progress over the last 75 days than most people ever expected it would be able to make in that period of time. the advances that they've made

against daesh in the sirte region are fruly impressive and involve a tremendous amount of sacrifice by libyan soldiers. >> is daesh the unifying force right now that's causing them to come together? >> samuel johnson, the british writer, once said that the prospect of a hanging concentrates the mind. i think that has been an element that's helped bring libyans together, is concern about their security as well as -- >> after isis is dealt with effectively, is there any sense that because this is a unifying force that's bringing people together citing historians, is there concern that after that is dealt with civil war can again break out? >> i think that the approach of having a government of national accord for a transition is designed to produce mechanisms for getting services provided and political support in east,

west, and south. for the government to succeed it has to be able to provide services at the local level. there has to be buy-in in municipalities throughout the country with real attention given to underserved areas from the past. that's a real part of the -- >> and are they capable of doing that? we don't have sectarian issues here, but we certainly have divisions within the country. so is it reasonable to believe in a period of time that matters they're going to be able to do that? >> i don't think it's easy for them to do it. i think they're working on it. the presidency council consists of nine people representing all three major regions. and i've seen them begin to work together and grow together into a working unit. and i think they're committed to that. the constitution athat the libyans still need to build out and the elections they need to carry out for a permanent government are going to have to be designed by libyans to address these core issues so they have a nation they can

build for the future. but given their potential oil wealth, past and future, they have the tools in theory to be able to do it. >> this was a case of -- i know that most of the committee were in a different place than i was on this, but i didn't understand what our national interests were in going in in the first place. i certainly didn't understand going in, decapitating the government and leaving as we have. you just laid out a series of numbers which certainly to most americans is a lot of money. but on the other hand as we know, as it relates to dealing with these kind of issues, very, very light amount of resources. i'm just wondering what role you see the u.s. playing right now. are we one of 30 countries? are we the lead country? it doesn't appear if you look at the resources being allocated, if we're the major force in helping this all come together

with as much effort that's happening on the ground, can you share with us your thoughts in that regard? >> yes, mr. chairman. the assistance money we're asking for are comparatively small amounts. by comparison to what we're doing in iraq, for example, or in many other places. there we're part of an international coalition to try to help libya through this. >> who's leading that coalition? >> the u.n. is essentially in the lead. the u.n. mission in libya. the european union is committing substantial amounts. as are individual -- >> are they taking more of a leading role in libya than the united states and european union? >> no, sir. but in the assistance area our requests are what they are. our core work over this past year has been political in the first instance. to get alignment amongst all libya's neighbors, important regional players beyond libya's neighbors. the europeans and us to work with the libyans to try to bring

them together, get them aligned instead of fighting one another. that's taken an immense amount of work, and it played a substantial role in the creation of a government of national accord. >> i think all of us on the committee have traveled through northern africa and just seen the havoc that the fall of libya has created. the amount of arms that's traveled through those countries. the support that's given for transnationalist terrorist groups to be able to do what they're doing. that's happened. that's water, if you will, under the bridge. i still am having difficulties seeing the progress. i'm glad we have someone like yourself there. but do understand that if we end up in a situation years from now where a country cannot maintain its borders, cannot, you know, have total control over what's happening militarily in the country, that havoc is going to continue. we thank you for your efforts and look forward to additional

questions. senator cardin. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. mr. winer, i certainly understand the u.s. participation with the international community in 2011. and it i think was well received in congress, although the administration chose not to submit a authorization for use of military force. and as i said in my opening statement i think we have to act when we have a reason to do it but we have to think about the consequences after those actions. now, today my understanding is we have a limited number of special op force that's are operating in libya. and i know that the great britain and france have also interjected some troops. are foreign nations considering sending in ground forces into libya? >> i'm not aware of anything

beyond training and equip missions, senator. >> and what is the intentions for u.s. additional personnel being used in libya? >> i think additional personnel being used in libya? >> i think that question needs to bedri addressed probably in another setting and participation of other parts of the u.s. government. >> can you tell us whether the administration is considering sending up an for use in the military campaign in libya? >> i don't know of a military campaign in libya being contemplated, senator. >> we have our people there. i understand the difference between combat and the lines that you're drawing. but so, is it anticipated that you will seek congressional action as part of the strategy

for a united front for u.s. participation in whatever is done in libya? >> i'm prepared to provide you any information i have in an appropriate setting at any time. >> one of the factors that you judge how well we are proceeding, and i acknowledged the progress you've made against the terrorists and that's been some major advancements. and we have yet to see the radification of the unity government, which is a major step that has yet to be taken and we know there are leaders in libya that are resisting that. so, we're not there yet by any stretch of the imagination and you gave a pretty optimistic account. one of the indicators would be the reopening of our embassy. is that likely to occur in the

near future? >> senator, we very much want to have our embassy reopen in libya. that's a policy goal. we think it's important we're present in libya. our ability to do that depends on the evaluation of the security situation and we have not evaluated it's time for us to do that. before we do that, we'll be back here to talk to you all about it. >> can you speak specifically what conditions will be necessary? >> diplomatic security is going to have to feel it's the right thing and other parts of the administration would have to concur and then we'd be down here talking to you about it. >> tell me the capacity of the libyan people taking on isil. what is that capacity with or without a gna? how do you see their ability to defend themselves against isil? >> under the period of divided government, when the government

that we recognized, whose house was based in toebric and whose government was based in beta in the extreme east of libya, when we had that period and there was a competing government no one recognized in tripally, that's the period of time when dash secured a presence in the far east of the country and a substantial geographic territory in the region around sert in the center of libya's coastal region. since the national accord was agreed on on december 17th and voted on favorably for the presancy counsel and the political agreement and by the house of representatives on january 25th, we have seen different libyan forces take on dash with some substantial success. dash has been -- was first

kicked out of durna. they didn't like being told what to do by foreign extremists and they have undertaken further efforts and in around durna and east and west of cert have collaborated through operations rooms to impressively push dash back out of cert. >> i don't want to disappoint the chairman and not mention my favorite subject of good govern governance and corruption. one of the challenges is traffickers trying to get people to europe. part of that is corruption of the libyan government and people in desperate need of humanitarian assistance and the institutions of government are so weak it's hard to get that

aid. what is the prognosis that we will have a functioning government that can stop the traffickers and be available to deliver the humanitarian aid that's needed? >> i can't offer a probability, senator. the government is working, initially, to counter -- >> is that a high priority for us? i understand we have a lot of political problems, but are we making, with our international partners, a high priority to make sure we can stop the tragedies that are taking place? >> just this week, senator, the un endorsed a resolution put forth by the united kingdom to inhans maritime oversight, from my point of view, the more vessels in the area of libya, the more likely we'll be able to combat the migrant flow. we talked to libyans about it. dealing with migrant trafficking in any country, as europe has demonstrated itself through any

number of national boarders is going to take a lot of work over a long time. in terms of the humanitarian crisis, we've been working with the central bank of libya, with the national oil company, with the presidency counsel on measures to try to reduce the risk of humanitarian crisis and get some traction or liquidity they've been facing during the two-government period and we're making progress in that area. >> thank you. >> thank you. and thank you for your service. i want to get to the arms embargo that the ranking member mentioned. but i want to get your opinion on this potential financial situation in libya, which i think is very critical as well. oil is right now almost 97% of their revenue and i know with the price of oil being down and also their annual production is

about a 1/3 of their capacity and i look at the reserves and depending on the amount of out take every year could be as short lived as three to nine years. that's shocking. the best situation, what's the outcome here? because you got a financial catastrophe sitting right here in the midst of this very distressed battle situation. so, i'm trying to get past the ceasefire and say what do we do to rebuild that country economically so you can stop the fostering of this radical element? so, would you address the potential collapse we're looking at here. >> you've just identified one of the core issues we've been concerned about and working on. they're at risk of eating all of their seed corn and being left with a disaster if they don't get their acts together to pump their oil. we're working right now to try and get abraham and his

petroleum forces to turn their forces on. >> and then that shortens the number of years before they actually burn it all out. >> i think the problem is not so much pumping it out and loseing it, there's still room for further development. as it is the problem of too much money going out and not enough coming in . there is no reforms they can take if they're not producing oil. they're in a very difficult economic situation as a result of pumping their oil. they've been pumping less than 400,000 a day. i talked to the head of the petroleum forces and said you have to turn the oil back on. he now supports the government of national accord. they've been fighting to get rid of dash. it's absolutely critical.

there are forces in the west. some of their concerns have not been met. >> and isis, since that's -- does isis pose a threat to that oil production, even if they could turn it up? >> to the production, yes, to exploitation, probably not. the pipelines run north-south, south-north and they're not really exploitable in libya in the way they've been exploitable in iraq. dash did attack the oil crescent area and destroyed some terminals, some areas where oil was being stored at the terminals and that's probably reduced their capacity some but it's quite limited damage at this point. one of the things that is really impressive is it's begun to push them away from their ability to threaten libya's future oil produksz. so, that's a significant development. the libyans need draw together

and address one another's grievances so everybody allows the oil to be pumped again, so they have less of a mismatch between the money going in and out. >> would you agree in the best case scenario, within a year or two of having a collapse? >> yes, sir. couple of years. >> thank you for that candor. relative to the un security counsel resolution, just yesterday, i believe. what do you think the impact of that will be? and will it have an impact on what's coming in to support dash? >> it's not clear to me where dash is getting its weapons from. what's important about the arms embargo is limiting the risk of different international players aligning themselves with different forces within the country and thus exacerbating the risk of internal conflict. we spent a tremendous amount of

time getting regional players aligned. there are three conditions for us to have success in libya. very briefly. one, negotiating process. we worked that out and got the government of national accord by having one un led process. secondly, having regional players with interests and relationships in libya agree on a common course. and press forces within libya that they have been working with to participate and agree with it. we have gotten tremendous success in that. that's the second. third, there has to be benefits. at the local level, at municipalities in different regions from the agreement and from the government so they have a stake in stability. we're working on that, senator. >> one last comment. i applaud all of that. my onliey ed admonition would b ad a fourth, what happens to the economy and the people and the economy we're talking about so

we can minimalize the danger of continued radical zasization th? >> ultimately we would like to see the libyans develop a revenue and get the basics down so there is greater accountability for their resources and spending. that would be very good for libya. >> of the money we're requesting from congress today would go to that. some of the money you've provided in the past will go to ad ministration. >> senator, marquee, are we squared away? >> is that sunonmoynonymous wit sitting down? >> it was your staff was in your ear, i wasn't sure if you were taking it all in. >> thank you for your service.

senator gardner, we were just saudi arabia about 10 weeks ago. and one of the highest ranking ministers said to us that libya was going to make syria look like a piece of cake. which was a very stark comment to come from that source. what would it take for that set of circumstances to unfold and what can we do to avoid it from ultimately transpiring? >> senator, regional competition supported different forces so that libyans can't come together to fight terrorists. potentially lead to a very bad scenario, and that's one of the things we've been working to counter over the last year, year 1/2.

having the terrorists destroy oil infrastructure and having the oil not continue to flow, to fund core government activities and salaries for government workers and for the people of libya would be another threat. if there's a humanitarian collapse due to the inability of libya to sustain its economy. the third element would be not taking on dash now. and allowing to gain a further foot hold. they don't produce anything, islamic state. they live off the land and in an extraordinarily ugly and ruthless fashion, as we all know. so, they need to grab more territory at all times in order to survive. so, when you push them back and take territory away from them, it's very difficult to continue because they need to be able to generate income to keep themselves going. so, ignoring that problem would create that kind of risk you're talking about. so, the risk of internal

conflict, economic and humanitarian collapse and the risk from dash. they're intertwined, which is why the strategy has been to get political alignment to get the libyans to undertake, as they want to do, countering the threat to all of them from the islamic state, which they detest. >> in your testimony you pointed out that in libya isis lacks the ability to use oil smuggling as a major revenue generating resource as it has in iraq and syria. in march, this committee held a hearing on libya and i expressed deep concerns that isis seemed to be expanding to the point they could have improved their longer term capability to move against oil production facilities in the interior regions to the south. but now the immediate risk appears to be greatly reduced thanks to the current offensive operations by militias loyal to

the government of national accord, which appears close to defeating isis in cert. i give great credit to the administration, our military forces and our international partners for what appears to be progress against isis in libya. if it were not for their efforts that i believe we could have faced a real risk of isis gaining revenue oil resources in libya as it has done in syria. that said, no single tactical success is sufficient to avoid this kind of strategic risk while militias loyal to the government of national accord, general hifter, who is align would the house of representatives is positioning his forces to the south of cert where they are watching and waiting. although, general hifter oppose isis, they have not agreed to support the government of

national accord. this appears to be a moment ripe for political intervention. our allies have a history of supporting general hifter. if he goes to war with the militias loyal to the government of national accord, there will only be further chaos and isis will have an opportunity to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat and will resume the expansion in libya. what are we, the un and eu doing to bring the general and the tobrook house of representatives together with the government of national accord? >> thank you, senator. i must say that each of you worry about the same things that i worry about. with the anxieties i've heard today are consistent with thing thes we're worrying about and thinking about every day when it comes to libya. >> could you specifically tell me if we're working with egypt

and the uae to push them towards a an agreement with the new government? >> egypt and the uae, like every other country in the region has signed on both expresly and in bilateral discussions as in multilateral forau on supporting the government of national accord and getting people they've been close to into the government of national accord. secretary kerry said in via that we see him as playing a significant role but not the only one. and it has to be under gna and within the context of a civilian led government. we're working on that. and we're consulting with the uae and egypt among others and i feel we have a very great degree

of alignment and a constructive fashion that could well lead to positive results as we've already seen positive results these past weeks in cert. >> thank you very much, senator gardner. >> couple of months ago, we had the opportunity to travel to saudi arabia and visit with the crown prince and others in the royal family as well as foreign minister and other members of the government and one of the questions to, i believe it was the crown prince i believe, was the situation in libya, the situation in syria, and when it came specifically to the situation in libya, the question was asked how do you think it compares to syria? and i believe the response was simply syria will be a piece of cake compared to libya, should this collapse occur. i believe perhaps you had

already mentioned that and i don't want to mischaracterize the statement. can you say whether or not that could be the case and you look at the crown prince's remarks that syria's a piece of cake compared to libya and could you perhaps compare that to comments made yesterday by the president isis morale is shrinking and is that consistent with what you're seeing on the ground in libya and what the crown prince was saying. >> you were there 10 weeks ago, roughly? >> roughly. >> the government of national accord has been placed precisely that amount of time and bit by bit the libyans have configured themselves to begin to take dash on. they have secured increasing support domestically. it's not complete, but i would note a majority of the house of representatives has been ready to support the cabinet. they hadn't been permitted to vote by a minority and so we do

have political limitations. but you have seen support for this government grow. libyan people expect more than they've gotten. that's normal and natural. they want more than they tend to get and there's frustrations with what the government can actually do. the government needs to do more but progress being made is being made on the ground, sir, every day, right now. so, i think a pessimistic snap shots in libya are absolutely legitimate. and there's grounds for optimism and real progress. if we were today, in a situation, where you had still competing governments, no government of national accord, no progress against dash, no prospect for getting oil turned on again and addressing the mismatch, we would be in a much worse situation, a much more threatening situation than the one we're in. now, could the advancements of

the past few months still get worse? yes, the situation is fragile. we can't say we're in a safe place. libyans are going to have to come together to address grievances for the common good and it's our job, as the united states to encourage them to do that, and encourage other countries to help them do that and be part of a unity building process. that's hard to do in any country. it's very hard in libya. but it is not futile. it is beginning to happen and we're seeing positive results as a consequence. >> and i apologize if i'm asking a question that's been addressed here. down to $20 million in 2016. in state department administered funds. why is that the case? >> the absorbative capacity of the libyan government in the past has been very limited. our focus is on delivering

sources to communities, is the kind of thing, for example we're doing. working with a constitutional drafting assembly to get that process completed. we're trying to act as -- sinnergize other activities, working with the irun and other countries, rather than to do it all ourselves. these modest amounts are there to help fill the territory where there are gaps and provide impulses to help them go forward. but the core of the work has been political first, political security and then it's development and all three of those things are go having to go together. if libya gets its acts together successfully, libyans continue to come together, they should again be able to finance these activities. but they have to begin pumping their oil again at least a

million barrels a day. and then they can begin to work through creating a national budget and starting to invest in their own infrastructure and projects again. we're trying to jump start things but the vast preponderance of the funding is likely to come from libya, as it should. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator. >> well, i'm encouraged by some of your comments. obviously, this is not an easy situation, particularly the three goals that you mentioned, including that the people seek benefit. i think that's a critically important part for stability in libya and you mentioned that the oil flow was part of that. you mentioned security was part of that. and the oil flow goes to help the people of libya, then they see the benefit of it. if it goes to fuel corruption,

they don't. if security is there to help the welfare of the general population, they see the benefit. if its there to preserve the corruption regime, they don't see the benefit. so, i want to underscore my just request and i know the administration is committed to democratic institutions in the countries that we work in and fighting corruption and dealing with those issues. but to me, unless that's in the priorities from the beginning, it gets lost as we go through the process. so, i just really want to underscore what i hope is your commitment, as our representative on this, that it will be clearer that as you go through the process of reconciliation and developing a unity government that there's accountability in there for the governance. so that the people of libya can

see the benefits of where it's going, that there can be the type of support for a unity government to succeed and we really can have a long-term stability in that very important country in the region. >> senator, the young people of libya are the country's future. at some level that's a cliche but it's such a profoundly true statement about these countries in north africa and the middle east that have such a preponderance of younger people, the degree to which they're interest saed in political diale is very impressive. the interim government, the government of national accord has to be successful enough to give the new libya a chance to be born and to build. and everything that we do in libya, as the united states needs to be consistent with the values you just expressed and the values of the american people at its foundation, which

are very similar to most libyans i've been exposed to. they say things that are similar to what you just said to me. >> thank you. >> senator, menendez. >> thank you, mr. chairman. want to thank you for your work in this regard. i think this is a particularly important hearing because we should be riveted on what if anything the united states can do beyond what it is doing to assist the libyan people and building a country that a mad dictator had systematically dismantles over the course of four decades and ultimately, how to bring libya into the community of nations with respect for human rights and a productive economy that contributes to global resource and other markets but this complicated reality on the ground is one that has been centuries in the making. it is a transactional society

with hundreds of militias competing ethnic and tribal affiliations, very competitive regional loyalties that on any single day can include home grown and foreign-born radical islamists seeking to spread jihad, neighbors seeking to defend their homes and families, gangs engaging in gratuitous violence. tribes and states of cold and hot wars against one another for generations. regional actors in three distinct region exploiting natural resources like oil. what could an intervening party, like the international community have been posed on these competing and conflicting groups to bring them to a resolution? we had a democratic prosacy that produced relatively free and fair elections in 2012

peacefully transition power from one elected body to an elected body. seated a national parliament that established legitimate government all in the anniversary of gaddafi's death. so, what can be done to impose upon these parties the ability to achieve the goal that we all collectively want? >> thank you, senator. all the problems are real. and they should not be glossed over and treated lightly. the challenges that any libyan government faces are substantial. but it also has a group of people who are patriotic, have some education, have some vision of what their country could be and are distributed in many different parts of the country. national dialogue and reconciliation, political mechanisms, political activities are central to the future of the country and having the country

emerge from this period of fragmanitatifra fragmentation that it's just gone through. our job is to align regional players, as well as europeans and us. in support of a common approach to strengthen national institutions so they can combat at least some of those threats that you've just articulated long enough for libya to evolve to its next phase. supported by the considerable wealth at 1.5 billion barrel as day. >> if our goal is to bring other nations in the region in harmony with that goal, then it seems to me that's a concern in so far as to support pledges in the

government of national accord, there have been reports that numerous u.s. allies including egypt, cutter and turkey have violated the un arms embargo supplying arms to both sides of the conflict and i understand now, and maybe you can respond to this that administration has expressed a willingness to consider loosening the embargo to arm the ga in its fight against the islamic state. how can you insure that its allies are abiding by law and not undermining the unity government and how can the united states ensure that government of national accord is strong enough to control any arms that are supplied? >> lots of questions embedded in that question, sir. let's start with the arms embargo. we've made no findings about violations. the un panel of experts in march, i believe, march or april

issued a report which described the issues that you've raised without making any final findings. i've talked to all the countries you've mentioned about the need not to support competing forces but to support a unified government of national accord and i believe we have very considerable alignment on that. i was just in the region last week on these very issues. the idea behind exemption to the arms embargo is to provide a uniform set of weapons that can provide relatively integrated counter terrorism capabilities to address the threat from islamic state and other terrorist forces near term and medium term and to do so in a way that's trackable and traceable and subject to oversight. so, it doesn't disappear, go to bad places, go to the wrong people. that's the idea and the idea would be for libyan government to ask that of the united states

and other countries at the same time and to have any exemption get notified through the un so it's visible, can be seen by the p 5 and other security counsel members and by the whole world and as a result of being transparent be more subject to oversight and accountability for the libyan people, for the region and the world. >> if i may, that takes a conditioned precedent, that ga is sufficiently strong and capable enough, even giving that process to ensure that it can control the arms that its supplied, have we come to that conclusion? >> yes, but it's also responsibility of any country providing those. it can be a shared responsibility and happy to brief further on that, senator. >> i would look forward to that. i used to hold up weapons sales

to some countries because i feared that in fact they did not have the where with all to do that and sure enough, we lost a lot of weapons to isis and other -- not libya, but in other locations and we need not to do that again. thank you, mr. chairman. >> what is occurring relative to dash or isis? we had estimated 5 to 6500 troops there and yet it seems they're falling away rapidly. are they just blending in with the rest of the country? what do we think is occurring with the rest of dash? >> mr. chairman, i still have a fragmentary picture because the situation is so dynamic. i've heard reports of elements of dash bleeding away to the south and to the west. both in connection with the current offensive by current of the east and west to cert. they've clearly lost 700

fighters. i was talking to a member of the presidency counsel late last night about the state of play. he told me that the forces of the government of national accord had essentially come into the city from the west and now had geographic control of the entire territory of the west and the south that they still not have control from 7 kilometers east of cert. that there were mines laid and improvised explosive devices which were impeding them getting the rest of the way into cert. so, i'm hearing from other cells and of substantial losses by the islamic state in cert to the forces align woued with the government of national accord. still trying to develop further information but that is the core of what we have seen so far. before this, we were already

seeing something interesting. i mentioned earlier that dash is predatory and doesn't generate income or wealth of its own. it haddall red a ebeen devastated in the dhofrs revolution. it was resource poor. there were grievances among ordinary people in cert that were legitimate because it never came back after the revolution to oust gaddafi. so, they were beginning to run into resource constrant in libya, which i think were beginning to affect its success. i fully expect that the successes of the past few weeks will be responded to by elements of dash. there's al qaeda, we should not forget them. there's sharia. two different elements they're still there. the fight against terrorism in libya is by no means over. it's going to required a sustained effort.

but the geographic control for the financial sustainment of isil is dropping away. there's core believers and people for whom it may be a better paycheck or opportunity this week and something else may be better next week. >> one of the things we have to expand a lot amount of resources on is building up military through training and making sure there's a unified force. what is happening in that regard in tripally throughout libya, either by us or by other governments to building up an actual trained military force that can in fact do the things we know need to be done there? >> mr. chairman, the presidency counsel has been in place for 75 days now in tripally. they have yet to ask foreigners for help. i suspect that is going to come.

and they began organizing the current effort which involved the creation of operation rooms to take them on, which, as we have seen, as been remarkably successful, though no one should be overly optimistic that it's all over. it's not going to be. and general supported by other elements of the libyan national army and undertaken efforts in derma were kicking out foreign extremis extremists. so, the picture is not a simple one. we're going to have to, collectively, not just the united states, support the creation of uniformed, uniform police and military that can provide security on a national basis that are still respectful of localities. and the fleed need for local

security as we have in our own federalist system. it will have to be on an interim basis for the next year, year 1/2, whatever the term of its existence and then by a successor of government under the new constitution that is right we hope they'll adopt. >> let me ask one last question. we, through i guess just the way we know things, we're aware that outside of cert, actually out away from the city, there were training camps that had thousands of dash people in them and they were, as i understand it, not near urban population but out in training camps and we were waiting for a unity government to be formed and didn't want to be involved there without that occurring. but was there an opportunity missed to do severe damage, if you will to dash while they were

out away from cert or was that ever the case? >> the united states has some criteria by which it evaluates when it can engage against terrorism. and a critical element of that criteria is imminent threat to americans. and there are some other components to it but that's a very important one. the president has demonstrated his willingness to take action as we did in february. as we did against the islamic state amir. earlier. and as we did against another terrorist figure before that. the administration continues to take action when that action is warranted and meets the criteria the president has set for that action. that's really all i can say.

>> i will say it sounds to me like yes, there was that opportunity; that yes, they were in training camps out away from cert and that at the time we didn't feel like those conditions that you just described existed and that in the interim, they moved back into the urban areas but the criteria was thought there for us to take action, if i'm hearing what you're saying. >> i can't address the issue further, senator, other than to note the islamic state has been very substantially pushed back from the geographic control it had as recently as a month ago. >> senator. are there any other questions? do you have anything else you'd like to say or feel like you might have left an impression you didn't want to leave because you were cut off?

>> senator, i think the most important -- mr. chairman, i feel we do have a strategy and the strategy's been to counter fragmentation, counter chaos, by working to get libyans and their neighbors and the region aligned in support of a government of national accord to operate in a transitional way and bring them together in a process of reconciliation that will allow them have function on the behalf of their people. i think the kbequestions have b to the point and welcome the opportunity to testify before you. >> we welcome you for your service to our country. if you would promptly respond to any written questions that will come by the close of friday, we'd appreciate it. you can respond before, of course. again, as i said in my opening

comments and this certainly isn't directed in you in any way. it's directed at our country. i felt our involvement in libya was very poorly thought out. and the basis was pretty unbelievable to me that we weren't involved in hostilities when we're bombing the country. so, that part to me was very difficult to digest and then for us to decapitate a government and just leave it there and here we are in the year 2016 after this occurring in 2011, i think speaks to what senator said and that is when we go into these engagements, we need to at least be thinking 30 days out after and in this case, certainly that was not what occurred and there's been lot of people tortured, a lot of lives ruined.

a lot of problems that have been created throughout the region that have been very destabilizing and has bled into europe now and i think we can learn from this. it still appears to me that we have a really light touch, very, very light touch in a country that, as senator gardner and senator marquee mentioned, could breed problems far greater than syria, by some onlookers in the neighborhood. so, it still doesn't appear to me that we've come together around something that has a sense of urgency or seriousness to it relative to the negativity that can occur if libya fails. so, i don't know if you want to respond or just agree with me and wish more was happening. >> senator, we're doing the best

we can. mr. chairman, i'm doing the best that i can. >> you know this isn't directed at you in any way. >> thank you, sir. >> with that, the meeting's adjourned.

[ room noises] the democratic party's platform committee is holding a forum in phoenix to hold time in what should be included ahead of next month's democratic national convention. the platform committee meets friday 1:00 p.m. eastern and you can see that live on our

companion network c-span, and saturday, day two of the platform committee in phoenix, live at noon eastern. after the surrender at apmattoc apmattocks, the united states faced more than a decade of challenges. in policies had a lasting impact on american history. this saturday starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern, american history tv on c-span 3 is live from g get gettiesbering, college for the annual civil war conference. freed people's refugee camps with abigail cooper assistant for fes professor in history. associate professor of history at east tennessee university .

>> professor of history at arizona state university and hear conversations on the return of the confederate veteran and the origins of the lost cause. the annual civil war institute summer conference live all day saturday beginning at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 3's american history tv. for the complete american history tv schedule, go to c-span.org. the house, homeland security subcommittee on border security recently held a hearing on people who stay in the country longer their their visas allow. and homeland security department, as well as immigration and kums customs enforcement.

the committee on homeland security, will come to order. subcommittee is meeting today to examine dhs's entry, exit and over stay efforts. before we begin today, i would ask that we observe a moment of silence for those killed and wounded during the terror attack in orlando. thank you. our thoughts and prayers go out the victims and families of this terrible tragedy. i now recognize myself for an opening statement. border security evoked images of dusty border roads, agents in green fencing and camera towers. but a broader view recognizes there's more to consider. time and time again, terrorists have exploited the visa system by legally entering america. for terrorists travel documents are as important as weapons.

the commission's focus on travel documents is not surprising. since the 1993 world trade center bombing, terrorists have abused the hospitality of the american people to conduct attacks here at home. abaaoud, an egyptian convicted of the world trade sinter bombing, worked illegally as a cab driver after his visa expired. four were out of status or expired. a missed opportunity that killed over 3,000 of our fellow americans. and the porous out of ring of border security. the hijackers passed through the u.s. border security a combined total of 68 times without arousing suspicion. more recently culeafy attempted to conduct a suicide attack in 2012. he had been in the country since 1999. on a tourist visa but never

left. another man arrested in the aftermath of the boston marathon bombing, who help destroy evidence was able to return to the united states despite being out of status on his student visa. certainly it's an important element of keeping the homeland secure. a widely sited 2006 hispanic study indicated that as many as 40% of all illegal aliens do not cross the desert in arizona, california, or texas but come through the front door at our land, sea, and armirports of ity with our permission. they released a demonstrating the visa over stay problem they be worse than previously thought. fewer people were apprehended than over stayed their visas and are suspected of still being in the country making the estimate closer to 68% of those illegally

in the united states. and we have a graphic up there, a little bit of math -- where did it go? it was up there. to show what we're talking about here. if you think about, we have a 54% effective rate. we have to do a little math. and then if you look at that. so, 223,000 got aways and visa over stays, 482,000. so, the unlawful presence is up to 705,000, just based on these two numbers. so, that calculates 68% unlawful presence. these are estimates. based on got aways. so, the point is we spend a lot of time focusing on the southern border, as we should but there is also another problem here. we have unlawful presence from the visa over stays and tlart

wh that's what we're focusing on today. i'm concerned there are population and security risks which has historically been the primary means into the united states. they have first identify those who oenver stay they visa. more than 20 years, a data base has been in place. and a plandate has been a requirement for 12 years. since 2003, we added biomettric and take finger prints of most visitors. they have made only marginal progress when it comes to exit. there are been project over the past 10 years but no plan has ever been implemented, none of it was seriously considered by the department. cdp is now engaged in a series of operational experiments, such

as designed to support a future biometric exit system. and to make it a priority was missing in the department. thankfully it appears the department has finally turned this corner. nation was p highest volume airports. an ambitious time line but long over due and congress has a new funding stream to bring this system online. putting a biometric exit system in place as the 9/11 dmicommiss noted. without that, visa holders can disappear into the united states, just as four of the 9/11 hijackers were able to do. we must dedicate resources

necessary to properly remove those in the country illegally, otherwise we put our citizens at risk unnecessarily. and up to 25% of this group was found to have already departed the united states after special agents kuconducted full field investigations. we're spending too much time chasing our tails. it allows our experts to focus their efforts on preventing terrorist attacks. it reduces the terrorist threat in the process. the american people need to know answers to these simple questions. how many more over stays are out there who pose a serious threat to our homeland and can they quickly identify and remove them to litigate substantial security risks? i look forward to discuss the challenge of visa over stays.

the gentleman from texas for an opening statement. >> i think chairman mcsally for holding today's hearing on visa over stays. i want to express my sympathies to the families of those lost in the tragedy in orlando. i expect to learn more at a house wide briefing with secretary jay johnson later today. but hope that the witnesses before us can touch briefly on the role of the department and its components related to this terrible incident. with respect to the topic before the subcommittee today, i am pleased we're addressing the over stay issue. while congress has, in recent years, paid a great deal of attention securing our southern border, less attention as the been focussed on addressing visa over stays. the approximately 527,000 over stays in 2015 is a far greater number than the 331,000

individuals who were apprehended along the u.s.-mexico border that year. illustrating the scope of the over stay problem. as a member of congress representing a district along our southern border. i understand the challenges. our nations airports and sea ports were not built for exit controls, nor were our land borders, certainly. overcoming the infrastructure chal lenges is an integral part of the task. i look forward to hearing what changes they have made towards addressing these challenges, as well as their plans for fulfilling the secretary's plan by 2018. i expect to hear how the department plans to address biometric exit at our land borders. unlike canada, mexico doesn't

have the processes necessary to share traveller information with the u.s. whatever the ultimate solution, dhs must insure it doesn't slow the travel and trade so important to communities i represent. i hope to hear from ice about how it prioritizes individuals who may pose a national security or public safety threat. with limited resources, we must first address those who may do us harm. deploying and addressing over stays is no easy task but it is a necessary part of insuring meaningful border security. i thank our witnesses for joining us today and yield back. >> he yields back. opening statements may be sub t submitted by the record. we're joined by four distingu h distinguished witnesses. office of field operations.

mr. wagner formally served as director of admissibility in passenger programs, with all policy related programs and the electronic system for travel authorization, the immigration advisory program and the fra fraujialant document unit. and ice's homeland security investigations division. mr. heely began in the united states marine corps and served as a u.s. customs officer before joining ice. he serve wouldd with the first entering iraq in support of iraqi freedom. he has served at ice headquarters in 2010. assistant of screening office at homeland security. she's responsible for developing and coordinating the screening policies, including the visa waver program and the real id program. is it before joining dhs, she

was focusing on identity management programs and federal personnel identity credentials. mr. bob burns, homeland security advance research agency for the science and technology directort. he manages the apex program and guides community out reach initiatives. he was previously the director for air reentry exit from 2013 to december 2014. he led them in a partnership to enhance both air entry by developing and implementing technologies for airport inspecting for travellers in the u.s. the full written statements will appear in the record. the chair recognizes mr. wagner for five minutes. >> distinguished members of the subcommittee. that c

thank you for the opportunity to come here and especially as it pertains to identifying travellers who may have over stayed their authorized stay in the u.s. in 2013, cbp has been actively moving forward on several initiatives i'll discuss today. i'd like to discuss how we discuss departure data from foreign visitors. they're are to provide manifests on all passengers which we run through automated targeting systems and address risk as far advance of travel as possible. when that traveller arrives, they present their pass port who confirms the validity of the document, the accuracy of the manifest information and fingerprints are collected and a digital photograph is also collected. if they have a visa we compare

the fingerprints to the one at the embassy to make sure it's the same person. under the visa waver program -- and previous visit. the cbp office also reviews all the results of the biometric vetting to make sure there are no other risk factors that will determine whether we need further inspection. we interview the traveller to determine the intent of travel. we stamp the pass port and write the period of admission into the pass port. when that same person leaves the united states, we again receive the mang fest information from the carrier and run this against the same data bases. this allows us to create a depand departure record. it's through this exit process that they apprehended the time square bomber who was planning to depart jfk in 2010.

they arrested as a result of manifests provided by the carriers. we use this information to generate over stay lists on a daily basis. the determining status can be more complicated. a person may receive a six-month admission period but then apply for and receive an extension which is important in determine if they're an over stay or not. so they need be carefully correlated against other systems. they're run through our automated targeting system. we apply ice to find criteria and prioritize these records and it's provided to ice for appropriate action. along with a comprehensive exit program includes biometrics into the exit of our system. it's actionable but it can certainly be enhanced with the

biometric upon departure to validate the information we're an alkting on. the challenge is not so much the technology as it is the infrastructure. our ports of intry were not designed to have departure control processing. international departures share gates with domestic traffic. so, where the collection takes place, it's critical. placing the technology too far in advance of the departure process such as a tsa check point would not fight assurances that person actually boarded plane and left. we would default to the same system we have today. we've launched several pilots that were mentioned earlier. we did a pedestrian pilot at california, and the hand held pilot at 10 airports across the

current country. and testing the ability of our information systems to compare facial images of travellers departing against previously provided images of those travellers. this is done in an automated fashion without impacting airport operations. this is the logical next step to build on the previous pilots. this is now integrating this data into our back end systems. it's not another layered on process. we can incorporate this into their existing business processes. this will provide the final set of spes fs and rekwooirmquireme the exit procurement to meet our neesds for the biometric exit system. law enforcement professionaprof has a critical layer of data

integration will continue our close culab wragz with the department of and ice and the implementation of the biometric concepts. it's essential. in development of these solutions. thank you again for the opportunity to appear today. >> thank you, mr. wagner. mr. healy. >> thank you ranking member sally and distinguished members. thank you for allowing me to discuss how we would benefit for the implementation of the biometric exit system. i recognize that visa over stay enforcement is an important issue for this subcommittee. i'd like to briefly outline my agency involvement by my colleagues and how we use that information. ice, homeland security

investigations or hsi through orexploitation unit is dedicated to identifying and initiating enforcement action on priority over stay violators. it's accomplished in close coordination and our primary objective is to vet generated leads to prioritize true over stay violators for over stay action. ice uses dedicated special agents, analysts and cysystems specifically address over stays who may pose a national security concern. in 2015, our agents and analysts devoted approximately 660,000 investigative hours. and the criminal exploitation unit received approximately 971,000 potential over stay leads received from entry, exit,

international student data bases and other government systems. the system generated leads are created using biographical and travel data stored in the arrival and departure system. this allows dhs to identify immigrants who have remained in the united states beyond their authorized periods of admission or have violated their veeisas. once received, ice conduct searches to determine if they require further review in which case a lead will be sent out to a field office. additionally, ice prioritizes nonimmigrant over stay leads through risk based analysis. a targeting framework consisting of 10 tiers was developed in close consultation with the intelligence and law enforcement communities to insure that our

national security and public safety consrntz are prioritized. we meet with interagency departments to make sure they're aligned with current u.s. government threat information, trends, and priorities. to better manage investigative resources, the counter terrorism and criminal exploitation unit not only relies on the previou previously discussed framework but incorporates removal operations on individuals who are threats to national security, border security, public safety, or who are convikted of significant criminal ofenlsces. in 2015, approximately 1% or roughly 10,000 leads were determineded to potentially pose a national security or public safety concern. fortunately, with further investigation, ice is able to determine that even many of

these leads were not in fact high risk. however, all of these leads were sent to hsi field offices for further investigation. of the 10,000 field referrals or 10,000 investigations that were sent out to the field.