offended americans and every stage of our history is when there are those who think the law doesn't apply to me. it applies to you, but it doesn't apply to me. i'm more important than you. i am a big shot or i am a powerful person or i'm a rich person. so the law doesn't apply to me. it applies to you. and there are always going to be those misdirected people in society that feel that way. but it's our duty when we see people who are taking that position or where a group of people are taking that position on behalf of an individual that they're above the law, they're above being treated the same as you might be treated or i might be treated, they're special, they should have special treatment, let me show you what the president said about that.

. president barack obama on february 3, 2009, said, i can't -- compaped on changing washington and bottomup politics. i don't want to send a message to the american people that there are two sets of standards, one for powerful people and one for ordinary folks who are working every day and paying their taxes. that's what the president of the united states said about the rule of law as it pertains to what he wanted in his presidency and there's lots of laws in the united states that pertain to all of of us. most of us don't feel pressure of most laws, the vast majority of american citizens are very law-abiding. they do what they are supposed

to do. they may speed every once in a while, that's a law they break. occasionally they get caught and expect to be treated like everybody else. and they may do some little minor things that they shouldn't do. but the truth is we are very law-abiding people, the american people. but there's one area that we are all affected by every day, and i would even argue that many of us in this country fear, and that is the area of the internal revenue and our taxes. quite frankly our tax code is just about fill this giant room we are in right here, and we all kind of wonder if anybody could possibly know everything that's in the tax code, yet we all are supposed to fill out a form and pay our taxes every year. so i think everybody kind of down deep, that's why they go to c.p.a.'s and others to help them with their taxes is because they are kind of worried they might not get it right, and they might

be punished for not getting it right. some of them even worry they might go to jailer for not getting it right. so americans very diligently spend large amounts of their income every year to make sure they get their taxes right. and that goes for the ordinary guy and to the ph.d. at the major university, the smartest guy in town. they all have to deal with the i.r.s. and deal with making sure they do things right. well, everybody makes mistakes. and sometimes somebody is going to make a mistake. some people do those -- make those mistakes unintentionally, and some people intentionally, it's not a mistake, they intentionally do something wrong. the tax code has punishments to fit those individuals. but what i want to talk about tonight is the fact that the man who is the secretary of treasury of the united states, he's the

man who is in charge of our money and in charge of our tax system. the i.r.s. reports to secretary geithner. secretary geithner did not pay some taxes he was supposed to pay. let me talk to you a little bit about that. first let me, plane to you what happened with mr. geithner. mr. geithner is a -- as a masters in international economics from johns hopkins university, director of policy development and review for the international monetary fund a. senior fellow, on the council of foreign relations. he's the u.s. treasury secretary, head of the internal revenue service. the specific tax violation he had was he failed to pay social security and medicare taxes on

the i.m.f. earnings for tax years 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004. total liability that he owed was approximately $43,200. now, so you understand what this is, the international monetary fund was paying him separately apart from other things he was doing. he has to be treated like he is self-employed. so he -- a self-employed person has to pay not only his share of payroll taxes, but he has to pay the employer's share of payroll taxes, too. because you are self-employed. self-employed people pay the employer's share of payroll taxes which payroll tax is basically social security and medicare, and they pay their own share. each of of you, if you look at your check, you'll see your payroll taxes and how much you pay every month to the government. well, when you're paid by the

international monetary fund, they give you a check every month -- every year, don't know which it is, that tells you how much you make. they tell you how much income taxes they paid on your behalf. they tell you on that document we are not -- you are responsible for paying your payroll taxes. so it's not like somebody didn't tell you. you read it when you get your check, you get your statement about your income, you read it it tells you you have to pay this. we didn't take this out. you got to pay it. and quite frankly mr. geithner signed off on that document every year. that told him that. and that part of the money he was being paid was for the purpose of paying these things. he has admitted that he made a shortfall in doing this and he

said it was a mistake. he made a mistake. he had a signed statement, he signed a statement acknowledging he owes the tax, he paid the taxes with the i.m.f. and education specifically dealt with issues of social security and medicare in the world economy. he paid his taxes but he didn't pay any -- i think he paid the interest on the taxes but he didn't pay any penalty on the taxes. if you or i had done the same thing that mr. geithner's done, he would have paid -- we would have paid penalties.

the united states 14th amendment is the equal protection clause, the united states constitution. it states, among other things, nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the of laws. equal protection of the laws. we are talking about property, money is property just like land is property. now, the i.r.s. has decided to establish certain back tax penalties that you have to pay for failing to pay your taxes. in fact, they have a program going on right now where they are saying to people who have made money off shore, if you'll come in and give yourself up, because you earned some money offshore, you should have paid taxes on, and paid pay those taxes, we'll make you a deal and

we'll set out in black and white what your interest and penalties are going to be. this is about penalties. amnesty offer they promised them, if you turn yourself in, we will only give you a 20% of the amount will be for penalties. offshore depositors without amnesty would pay 50% penalty. the standard taxpayer's negligent disregard, that means he was negligent and disregarded what he should owe is 20%. a standard taxpayer that defrauds the government, the pements are 75%. so that's the rules that are supposed to apply to every american and every american entity, including corporations, partnerships, and so forth.

secretary tim geithner paid zero on $47 -- $43,200 in taxes that he didn't pay. chairman rangel paid zero. it seems that some taxpayers appear to be more equal than other taxpayers. and that's what president obama told us, this administration is all about. no two set of standards, one for powerful people and one for ordinary folks. and that's what we are talking about in the rule of law. that's why i come down here and talk about the rule of law. quite frankly it's supposed to pertain to every one of us. every one of us is supposed to be treated equally. and quite frankly they may -- there may be individual citizens that can negotiate this out.

but we asked the question, we don't have the answers as to why they haven't paid yet. i wrote letters to chairman rangel asking him to pay the penalties and interest. got no reply. a good explanation would have probably permitted all this. i don't know. the same thing for mr. geithner. he's been asked in committee about this and he said they didn't assess any penalties. that's kind of like saying, the boss didn't punish himself for his malfeasance. i'm sorry, that's like the judge shouldn't punish himself if he did something wrong. that's not the way we operate in this country. people in authority should not be able to give themselves a break because they have authority over the agency that

regulates and should regulate their behavior when they violated the rules. that's not what the rule of law is all about. that's not what we are trying to teach people in iraq and afghanistan with our military forces risking their lives to establish for them the safety and the assurance that the individual citizen in those countries can be treated, will be treated fairly and will have somebody they can turn to to make sure they'll be treated fairly. this body, this congress of the united states should be about making sure that everybody is treated fairly. we should be about maintaining the oath that we took, that oath said we will preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the united states. it's also for the state of texas and the laws pertaining thereto. that's our job. when we see things like this, we should be concerned about it.

we should be be upset about it. we have introduced -- are going to introduce a bill in the congress, we are going to call the geithner penalty waiver act. this bill will -- is to provide the same penalty rate for taxpayers who voluntarily disclose unreported income from offshore accounts as was afforded timothy geithner with respect to his failure to pay self-employment taxes with respect to his compensation for the monetary fund. the law will be section -- the law pertaining to section 1401 of the internal revenue code of

1986. the key word, same penalty. this formally recognizes the legal precedent already established by the i.r.s. treatment of u.s. treasury secretary tim geithner. so what i'm saying to this bill that we are going to offer is basically to all these tax cheats that they seem to be talking about in the i.r.s. right now that are offshore, if they come in and voluntarily do what they said they should do, let's treat them like we treated the chief tax man of the united states. the top tax guy, just treat them like that. that's only fair. if he doesn't have to pay the penalties and interest, and he gets off from those penalties, i don't think any other people should have to pay penalties. because the truth is we want to do what the president says. we don't want there to be one

set of laws for important people in washington and another set of laws for the rest of the people in america. and those who earn income that are americans. it's only fair. it's like the rangel rule. if you haven't paid your taxes, you write rangel rule on your tax form and onet won't northern ireland penalty and interest until mr. rangel does, anyway. this is the same concept, the same indicator that there are those, and they are in positions of very high power related to our tax structural, that are being treated differently from the ordinary american. . the ordinary american that works in the oil field or the computer industry, if he fails to pay taxes or is late on the taxes, he gets penalty and

interest. and he pays them. when the inch r.s. says you owe penalty and interest, you might question them, but when they show you what you owe them, you pay them. we don't get, oh, we forgot who you were, you don't have to pay penalties and interest, didn't realize you were secretary of the treasury or the chairman of the ways and means committee. we don't get treated that way. i don't get treated that way. i would argue that no member of this house gets treated that way with certain exceptions and those exceptions are not right. and this political correctness we've got going in this country, there are things that are right and things that are wrong, you've got to stand up and say, that's not right. that's where we're supposed to be, that's what we're supposed to do here.

that's why we're here. i'm sure somewhere in this country today, as i'm speaking, there's some family that is almost sweating blood in their relationship with the internal revenue service, trying to figure out how they're going to meet the obligations. in some instances people messed up so bad and neglected paying their taxes that the penalties and interest are as much or more than the taxes owed. sometimes this can be so onerous on a family it can destroy that family because everything they have, just about is subject to a tax lien, to be seized by the government, to be sold. to force payment on these things. this is serious stuff that happens to american citizens when they don't pay their taxes. they all know this. everybody here knows that. everybody that's watching us, they understand. that failing to pay your taxes is a serious business.

it can be horrible for you and your family. i don't want anything horrible to happen to mr. geithner and i don't want anything horrible to happen to mr. rangel. but i want to be treated like everybody else in the united states that's out there today. i want them to have to meet their obligations to our country just like every american citizen has to meet their obligations and i promise you, there's probably thousands of americans right out there today that are worrying where the -- how they're going to keep their family under the roof with the tax burden and penalties and interest, penalties and interest that have fallen upon them as a result of their failure to pay taxes. this is -- it's just not fair. it's just not fair. more importantly, if you waive the rule for somebody because they're important, they have a

title, they are special, because you elected them or because somebody you elected appointed them to a job, this law affects every american in the country. the tax law. so do all the other criminal laws. the criminal laws. and the rules in this society. are you going to let them get away with waiving those other rule taos? we've talked some about this. we've had issues here in this congress about the president of the united states and the white house interfering with the rule of contract. that's making sure that certain laws don't count for certain people. that's not right. when we had the takeover of the automobile industry, when they said, the unions get their deal, but the holders don't get

their deal, that's circumventing the law. special privileges were given to special groups. that's wrong. we can't let this continue in this country. we can't let -- continue to let the powerful dictate outside the law. because where does it stop? where does it stop? i see that my friend mr. westmoreland is here to join me, i'm proud to have him here, i'll yield to any comments he has on this subject. >> i want to thank the gentleman for yielding and i have -- and for having this special hour. i did want to comment, you know, we're all supposed to be treated equally in this country, doesn't matter if you're a mayor, city councilman, state representative, state senator, whatever, whatever you're elected to or appointed to, you should be treated the same as every citizen in this country.

and you know, i guess it was back in february of 2009 that president obama made a statement, i don't know if the gentleman from texas has talked about this yet or not, but i think this is what the american people were looking for when they elected president obama, because of what he had said on the campaign trail and what i believe people believe to be the truth. i think he was sincere in sing that there would be hope and change. i think some of the change that people were counting on was to change politics as usual or how they had perceived politics in washington. because as the gentleman from texas knows, in politics, it doesn't matter what the truth is, it's what the perception is. right now, as i travel around the country and i'm sure as the gentleman travels through his state and across the country

and even into other lands, we hear that, that, you know, what's wrong with washington? why is it that, you know, you've got all these different people being accused of different things, of getting special treatment? and the president said, and i'll quote, i campaigned on change in washington and bottom-up politics. i don't want to send a message to the american people that there are two sets of standards, one for the powerful people and one for ordinary folks who are working every day and paying their taxes. that was a quote from president obama on february 3, 2009. i'm sure as the gentleman mentioned, i think in his previous slide, about the i.r.s. employees, these are the employees that are under secretary geithner. and what it says is, willful failure to file any return of tax required under the internal revenue code of 1986 on or

before the date prescribed therefore including any extensions, unless such failure to due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. we know from at least the testimony that we've heard that this was willful neglect that he had actually been reimbursed this money by the company that he was working for. so i think it was neglect. i think this needs to be looked at. i'm not sure, you know, what committee or jurisdiction or whatever that this would come through, maybe the gentleman from texas knows, but this should be something that we demand of somebody that holds an office like secretary of the treasury. because you know, we have people -- i have filed for extensions, as i'm sure many people have filed for extensions, and i have never yet had the same treatment or

had any constituents that had the same treatment as the secretary of the treasury the way his dealings have been with the internal revenue. i yield back to the gentleman. >> the i.r.s. restructuring and reform act of 1998, i.r.s. employees can and are terminated for, just what my friend from georgia told you, willful failure to file a return or willful neglect mr. geithner is arguably headed of the i.r.s., those beneath him from the director of the i.r.s. to the guy who answers the phone and helps you work on your tax return if any of those employees does what secretary geithner does, by law, he can't -- it says they can and are

terminated. for this action. should the secretary of treasury have to comply with the same law as the regular i.r.s. workers? some employees appear to be more equal than others. that is, you're the boss, you don't have to comply. and this mandatory fine doesn't pertain to you. recently, kevin brady of texas called upon the secretary of the treasury to resign. on this issue, i think if there was someone besides president -- i guess the president is above the secretary of the treasury, but based on following the same rules the employees follow, he would be term nate. under the law. of the i.r.s. restructuring and reform act of 1998 system of you want to know where that rule of law is, there's the rule. and there's what happens. terminated.

except mr. geithner. i yield back to my friend. mr. westmoreland: you know, the gentleman from texas, some people if anybody was watching us tonight, they might think this is a partisan thing we have, it's not. in fact, it goes well beyond that. the posting of november 17, 2009, the huffington post which is no conservative posting, had a comment that said, but for his personal tax problems, tim geithner would have been a consensus choice of wall treat for -- wall street for treasury secretary last fall. yet from the outset, his appointment compromised the obama administration's credibility on ethics. the treasury secretary has become a continuing liability for the president.

even the most liberal of the blogs and the webpages understand that this goes against the credibility of what this administration has said about, it was going to change washington. as the gentleman knows, it's not just disappointment -- not just this appointment, it was other appointments, where he had to issue waivers of what some of his administration rules or promises were to allow other lobbyists or people to be not only in his cab knelt, but appointments of his. so i think that it's not just the conservative world or have anything to do with partisan politics. i think everybody, especially those that voted for him are calling mr. geithner's credibility into account with the administration. so i think that -- the ultimate

bearer of responsibility on this is the president and the administration and i'd like to know if he's getting any advice as to why this secretary is getting special treatment and i just don't think that's what the american people felt like we were going to get after this last election. i'll yield back to my friend. mr. carter: i believe you learn from history, in the clinton administration and the george w. bush administration, there were prospective cabinet members who it was discovered had a domestic working for them that was possibly without papers to be in the united states and it caused them not to get confirmed for that position because, why? they were violating the law

that pertains to illegal aliens. the rule of law. those people, the labor secretary under the bush administration had a domestic from another country that didn't have appropriate papers and withdrew the name because the rule of law wasn't being followed in her household. inadvertently, i'm not saying he did this to be mean, vindictive, or cheat the american public. that's between him and the i.r.s. but i'm saying it happened, he admits it happened, yet for some reason, the rule of law is not an interference with him being secretary of treasury. yet two previous administrations, violating a rule of law has prevented people from becoming a cabinet member. i think we should be concerned as we look at the obama administration, which promised -- that gave us such glowing

promises about nobody was going to be treated differently for their position to start off and now have a whole year of people in positions where they violated the rule of law. and they don't think it applies to them. i'm sure that somebody sitting out there is saying, come on, this isn't a big deal. my question is, where do you draw the line? . you back out there at home and most of the members of congress and their wives and children here in washington, we know how scary the i.r.s. can be if they are calling you and sending you letters and talking about tax liability and talking about tax leans and -- liens and things like that, how scary it can be. it scares me and a whole lot of people i know. now, there's other laws even more serious. you say they could never be waived. they could never not pertain. how do you know? once you decide that there are

people that are above the law in a country, how far above the law do they have to go? can they commit embezzlement? maybe. if they're smart, swindle somebody a little bit. i don't know. how about murder? are you going to rule -- waive the law for murder? just pick a bad one. that's a pretty bad one, and say, does this pertain to everybody in the country equally? it certainly should. but if you're willing to excuse one law, whatever level, where do you stop excusing it? does somebody get so powerful and so important in this country when you set this kind of precedent, somebody gets so powerful and important that we waive those other laws on their behalf?

they can break our established laws and we will waive it because they are so important to our country. you got to have it. no matter what. i don't think so. i really don't think so. i really think that's the kind of precedent that you see starting in one of the most law and order places on earth, germany in the 1920's. and look what happened when they excused one law and then the other. and then another. and then another. and then if you were a certain party member, it didn't pertain to you. then if you were a certain official it didn't pertain to you. then they made the laws. that's not america. we have to preserve the rule of law. i think my friend understands this seems to be going way off. it's not way off. once you start saying it's ok to do something that's breaking the law, where do you draw the line?

it's not paying your taxes and not having the law apply to you here, does that mean that the next step is you might take stimulus money and stick it in your pocket or might do something else and we'll excuse that because they are really important and trying to do a good thing for the country? keep going and going and going. what do you have? lawless society. i yield back to my friend from georgia for a comment. mr. broun: thank my friend for yielding. let me say this there were several appointees that the president made after his election that was discovered that they had tax problems. one former senator that was looked at for the health and human services secretary excused his self because he had tax problems. there were other people that had been appointed that had tax problems that excused their self.

we need to point out, i think, to my friend from texas, that mr. geithner's problems were pointed out prior to his approval or confirmation by the senate. so this brings it to a whole new question. is it something we are going to acceptp? is this something that's supposed to be accepted? i don't think so. i think of our brother and i think it was a mistake on their part when they knew exactly what had gone on and they still went ahead with the confirmation process, whereas they should have continued to ask questions and got more information on this. but i think it talks about character when the people that were under nomination, let's face it, it's quite an honor to be nominated to serve in the cabinet of any president in this country. what an honor. but with that comes some

personal responsibility. i think some of these nominees realize that what they were going to be doing was going to be a reflection on the administration and not just the administration, but the rule of law. as you talked about and how it affects and applies to everybody. and so it's with that that i think the gentleman from texas has done a great job and i signed i think both of the pieces of legislation, the rangel rule and the geithner penalty waiver act. i think that's something that we can do to show the american people that we want to see some equal treatment. but i just wanted to bring into account this personal responsibility that people have to recognize that if they have done something wrong or gotten treatment that was unfair they just recuse their self from the nomination. mr. carter: let me be clear on this from what i previously said. by doing the rangel rule -- now,

by doing this bye basically says everybody else gets treated the same, it's to give you that equal protection under the law that we promised in our constitution. i'm not saying it's the right thing to do. i'm saying the right thing to do is for mr. geithner to pay the penalties that everybody else pays. saying the right thing to do is mr. rangel to pay the interest and penalties that everybody else pays. but if that's the precedent being established by this administration at this time, then everybody ought to be treated equally, it's only fair. i will tell you it's probably a bad precedent. i would argue that. i'll tell you, i don't expect this to pass. but i do expect us to raise the issue. that's a way to raise the issue.

to say to the american people, they are just what the president said, there's no two sets of standards. one for the powerful and one for the ordinary guy who pays their taxes. exactly what this is all about. this is just as simple as those words from our president of the united states. there's no two sets of standards. if we are going to reinforce and continue to reinforce and not call to account the secretary of treasury and chairman of the ways and means committee, when you continue to do that, at some point in time these two bills that i have offered and then my friend has joined me, that should become the law of the united states. because now we have that, decided this particular offense is no longer a violation of the rule of law. so from now on we pay our tax when is we get around to it, and there's no punishment. maybe that is fair. maybe we'd all be happy with

that. probably would. but i'm not advocating that as good policy. i'm advocating good policy that everybody be treated equally. that's what i'm advocating. mr. westmoreland: isn't it ironic that the chairman of the committee that writes the tax laws and the secretary who is head of the treasury that is really the boss of the i.r.s. are the two with the tax problems? mr. rangel being chairman of the ways and means committee, i felt it was interesting when he admitted that he didn't realize what the law was. i can't remember the exact quote, but basically he didn't realize that he was breaking the law. from the constituents that have called me, don't know about the gentleman what your calls have been like, they have told me that the internal revenue tells them that ignorance is no excuse.

that's right. that ignorance is no excuse. that it doesn't matter if you know that that was a tax law or not. if you don't pay and if you don't file correctly, you are going to pay penalty and interest. now, the chairman also made the comment that he got his accountant to figure up what he felt like he owed and send the internal revenue a check for that. here again i have had my constituents tell me that they have never had the i.r.s. tell them, look, you just figure up what you think you owe us. and send us a check. we are all square. they typically send a bill and tell you what you owe them plus what the penalty is plus what the interest is. now, it's up to the taxpayer to prove that they don't owe that. it's not the responsibility of

the internal revenue to show you why you do owe that tax or why you do owe that penalty or interest. it's up to the taxpayers. the taxpayers' responsibility to tell them why you don't. so talking about the double standards, when you find yourself in that situation and you say, well, i'll get my accountant to figure out what i think that i owe you and i'll send you a check and we'll all be square, that doesn't square with the typical taxpayer and how they are treated by the internal revenue service. so, we've got the gentleman that actually writes the laws and the rules that govern the i.r.s. and what our tax code is. that said, i don't understand it. but according to i.r.s. and every other citizen, ignorance is no excuse. mr. carter: reclaiming my time. that's exactly right. i agree with my friend from georgia. i'll say this. this all started chairman rangel

stood at that podium right there and told us about his problems. and actually i thought -- i took it as a very courageous, if i had been his lawyer it would have made me nervous, statement by mr. rangel that he was laying it all out in front of us. nothing about what he said really concerned me. i thought he was trying to work through the issues and let somebody determine whether or not what he had done had been a violation of our ethic rules or the law. but when he said -- he paid the taxes and he would pay penalties and interest if assessed. and it popped into my head, there is no option. i never, ever known anybody to have an option. they are going to be assessed. you might bargain your way out of something on the numbers of you might make a little bit of a deal with them. i have never known anybody that didn't get the letter. my friend from georgia just

described, that told you what the penalties are and what the interest is for what you have to pay. in fact, i think most c.p.a.'s are doing your work for you, you should have paid on the 15th. you are going to owe some penalty and interest. automatic. when i heard that, i waited to see if that was going to occur. when it didn't, that's how this all started. this is an easy solution. the easy solution is pay the money. these are not poor people. pay the money. or at least show the world the due process has something to do with this and everybody has this opportunity to have this due process. i certainly think at the minimum when you are talking about i.r.s. agents who is talking to you about the taxes you failed to pay, you should very politely say, can you explain to me how i go about getting treated the same way as mr. geithner and mr.

rangel got treated by the i.r.s.? don't be insulted. no telling what they'll do to you. might audit you. mr. westmoreland: if you yield. i was going to say at least mr. rangel said that he had forgotten that he owned this property or that this rental income had come in. so that was his explanation. mr. geithner i don't think had that same explanation because if i understand the information correctly and evidence correctly, he was actually told by that company that he was being paid this additional money to pay those taxes that was due from the money he had received. i'm not sure what the gentleman has got up there, but that -- mr. carter: at the bottom it says, this is something that mr. geithner signed when he got his money from the statements and all this stuff from the

international monetary fund. according to administrative order number 5, i wish to apply for tax allowance from the u.s. federal state income taxes in differences between self-employed and employed obligation of the united states social security and i will pay on my fund income. i authorize the fund or any of the staff members designated for the purpose of ascertaining from the appropriate tax authorities whether tax attorneys will receive. he certifies that he will pay those taxes. mr. westmoreland: is that called swearing? mr. carter: that is called swearing. mr. westmoreland: isn't that against the law? i think in georgia false swearing -- mr. carter: i learned a long time from court reporters talking on top of each other is a cardinal sin for court reporters. i worked with them for now going on 30 years of my life.

so let's don't talk over each other. seriously, that's exactly right. there is another crime in false swearing on a federal form. you know what? it may be a mistake. i'm not saying mr. geithner wasn't so busy. he's a busy man that he forgot. he forgot. it's convenient if you read the newspaper report when they caught him on 2003 and 2004, he took care of it. he should have had a memory jolt when he got caught in 2003 and 2004 that he really didn't do it in 2001 or 2002. he didn't have that memory jolt. he paid that and got ready to be secretary of the treshry. somebody said, wait a minute, what about 2002 and 2003? -- 2001 and 2002, went back and paid that. i don't know. it looks like special privileges to me. .

it's about the rule of law that keep ours society together. if we start waiving it for individuals or groups or whatever, once we start down that path, who makes that decision and what does it do to the rest of us? and do we ever want to get to a situation like was gotten to in nazi germany and communist russia where certain people, the rules didn't apply to at all. certain organizations, the law didn't apply to. do we want to go there? no. it's like that leak in the dike in holland we have that story about. once that little trickle starts, where does it stop? if you don't plug that hole, what happens next? what happens next is what americans need to be worried about. i yield back to my friend from

georgia. mr. westmoreland: i appreciate you taking the lead on this, i know this is not an easy subject for you to broach every week when you come down here. but we have to be serious about this. we are a country of laws. and regardless of whether some people think they can disregard them or not, that's not the way we operate. and we all fall victim to this, but i think it's our responsibility to continually point it out and to point the way we need to be going in this. i want to tell you how much i appreciate you doing this weekend and -- week in and week out and i feel honored to be able to join you tonight. with that, i yield back my time. mr. carter: i thank you for joining me, you're always loyal and come up here and help me out. i appreciate that and i appreciate the others who do

too. i think it's time to wrap up our time here today, may be a little early, saying that, you're right, there's nothing easy talking about your colleagues. i'm the first to say that people make mistakes. i've made mistakes, everybody -- every human being that's ever been around has made some kind of mistake, possibly with one exception. and i won't go into that. but the facts are that the rule of law is such an important part of keeping america what we are, you know, we brag about the land of the free and the home of the brave, we are only free and we only have the freedom to do the things we want to do, because we established rules that we're all willing to live by. when you go out and try to work on something, you know there are rules that pertain and if you follow those rules, you can go forward. that's the only restriction you have on your freedom to go forward in your life, is you've

alied to -- agreed to certain rules under the lusme you who abide by those rules should be horribly offended when some big shot, some politician, gets special treatment. i don't want to be part of a group that somebody is accused of getting special treatment. i don't think any member of the house wants to be in that position. difficult to talk about these things, but somebody's got to do it. i thank everybody for the time and i yield back my time at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. carter: i move that the house adjoush. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed. to accordingly, the house stands adjourned until 10:00 stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow. >> the house stands in recess until 10:00 a.m. wednesday. to date members encourage testing for ovarian cancer. members approved a measure to create an energy department program to improve the efficiency of gas turbines. tomorrow, they will debate monitoring that troubled asset relief program, and enhanced his security and exchange commission's ability to issue

subpoenas. live coverage when the house returns on c-span. >> this weekend on c-span2's booktv, we will to work arlington national cemetery. -- we will tour arlington national cemetery. see the comparisons and similar to tear -- and similarities of seemingly unrelated cultural situations and then join our 3 our conversation with joy hakim. for the entire schedule, the two our web site. >> today on world aids day, the federal government outlined a new five-year plan for combating hiv and aids internationally. u.s. global aids adviser to talk to reporters for about 25 minutes.

>> hello, how is everyone today? thank you very much. lovely to be here. good afternoon, ladies and gentleman, and welcome to the state department this afternoon. we are with the ambassador, the u.s. global aids coordinator. his duties include running the entire u.s. government's international aids efforts. he oversees the implementation of the u.s. president's emergency plan for aids relief as well as the u.s. government engagement with the global fund to fight aids, trichosis, and malaria.

with that, i give you the ambassador. >> thank you. it is a pleasure to have an opportunity to talk to you. i like to begin with acknowledging the efforts of many people, from the state department, usaid, and other agencies that all contribute their expertise at field headquarters to make this program work. it is a combination of people all over the world who support people in country to put the plants in place. it is really quite a nor denies -- organization -- orchestration. i would like to thank president obama for creating this program. i have been working in hiv-age for 25 years, both domestically and internationally, and i can remember the days before this program was in place. patients were three in a bed,

put under the bed, on the the -- and in the hallways. there were waiting for treatments that basically were not available. today the situation is markedly different. it has brought hope to millions of people across the world with the treatment and care programs. in 2009, we have supported life- saving antiviral therapy for more than 2.4 million people. the central character nearly a 11 million people. counseling and testing for nearly 29 million people. their efforts to prevent transmission, or prevention from mother to child, we're building upon the nearly 240,000 babies born hiv freed over the past five years. but unmet needs are still predominant.

we've gotten to approximately one-third of the population that is in need of care. and the millions who are participating in high risk behavior sunni prevention intervention. an estimated 33 million people living with hiv, 2.7 million new infections are occurring annually, approximately 2 million deaths annually, and for every two people we put on treatment, five more become infected. if we're sustain the gains that we have made against this epidemic, our work in close collaboration with governments and amassed a truly global response to the shared global disease. i am announcing the release of r five-year strategy which will be followed later in the week by the release of several annexes with specific areas of information within the document. first, we will begin transitioning from an emergency

response to a sustainable one for greater engagement with and capacity building of governments. we have already started this partnership framework activity, a five-year collaboration with governments, but we need to do more especially around supporting the creation of mid- level government capacity to oversee, manage, and eventually finance these programs. it is a good start. secondly, we're going to focus on prevention. we are going to ask a lot highly effective prevention interventions like the prevention of mother to child transmission, and let the country's determine not just how many people are infected in their communities and their countries, but where the new infections are occurring. geomapping allows you to make decisions around prevention programs and positioning said that you can put your programs

in front of that expanding movement of the virus through the population. with treatment, we looked and tenure of a strategic scale up to more than 400 million people. we focused on the sickest, pregnant women, pregnant women in general who are hiv- positive, and hiv individuals that are co infected. we continue to lower the price of commodities and distribute the cost of treatment among multiple funders. as we carry out the prevention, care, and treatment activities, we will do so with an eye toward how this strengthens the broader health system. we will work to continue our quality and delivery of services and expansion of both care and prevention and treatment services, but also look to create a durable response that can benefit the entire health-care system and continue the expansion and

capability of services for what are often hiv-positive population spirit of what board to looking closely with partner countries and other donors and our staff in the field to implement the concept of the strategy. i like to thank you and i am open to any question that you may have. dollar>> this shift to a sustaie approach is very controversial in the aids community. some say that it takes attention away from people who really needed and spreads it to people with other diseases. how do you answer that? >> i think that 60% or more of the infected people are women, and that person who normally shows up in the clinic visit --

visit our women, and our ability to access children comes through our ability to access women, and our ability to access their partners, their husbands, 90% of the time, that comes from an interface with the woman. man coming to care very late, usually with an opportunistic infection, when they're well into symptoms. and our best chance at changing the dynamic is to target women at the early stages of prenatal context and also as they bring their children and for visits -- wellness visits are immunizations. .

>> it is not an abandonment. it is an expansion of those services. so, the concern around and inattentiveness to what is a burden of disease that is about one-third addressed is not part of our strategy. we are actually trying to address on all fronts. >> the money that is spent would be apportioned differently, then? >> while, to say how much of the treatment and care dollars go from a 30,000 foot level loses a lot in translating down to the actual region, city, neighborhood within the city for

how and where your opportunities present themselves. it is always a prevention treatment continuum. some opportunities and prevention are always there. some treatment needs are always there. it is up to those who are in front of the epidemic to decide how they divide their resources at that level to address the needs in front of them. we are not saying we're going to put x amount into prevention, treatment, and care. we are going to expand services in all areas, but we're going to become more efficient in our ability to prevent vertical transmission from mother to child. we're going to start targeting high-risk populations as opposed to general public service announcements that have dominated pepfar 1. the absence -- abstinence be faithful type activity. we are linking family planning to prevention efforts because

they are more effective. those needs are going largely unaddressed and we are interfacing with population that need both. we should overlap them. the need for movement into services is also logical, easy, where the medical infrastructure that is in place for an trebek -- antiretrovirals should be the expansion of the platform for immunizations for the children that are coming into the clinic, for the mother that is coming into the clinic for the antiretroviral care. we should not be afraid of immunizing children in that some -- setting. looking for that kind of the synergy is what we should be doing with the core functional component that is already in place. this will identify inefficiencies are considerable in our ability to move from our general population based information system to high

targetting of high risk groups -- targeting of high-risk groups as a key shift in strategy. it is evidence based, effective, and cheaper. >> still along these lines, some critics are voicing fears that because of what they interpret as a funding shift, mainly driven interruptions in some cases, is the u.s. committed to preventing treatment interruptions where it is already involved? and what is the current idea of this universal access? are we no longer thinking about arv's something that can be universally accessible with u.s. help? we are looking to get those were most hill -- >> we are looking to get those who are most ill,

those who are infected with tuberculosis, those who are pregnant on antiretrovirals as early as we can meet them, states them, remove the and founder of options -- of opportunistic infections -- remove the can founder of opportunistic infections. we know we are about one-third of the way there. you got is one of the countries that we are in. uganda has about one-third of the people who are positive and are in need of on -- in need of antiretrovirals and are on antiretrovirals. we are a central component of that effort to get everyone who needs these drugs on these drugs. we remain committed to that. what we also realize is that the resources that will be needed for that need to converge at the country level to support full realization of universal

coverage. a bilateral program alone will not do that. but we are committed to working with our country partners to engage in that dialogue, to identify those resources to expand into that effort. >> yesterday, secretary clinton made a strong statement against efforts by some countries to criminalize a homosexuality. as you know, there is a bill pending in uganda. have you considered where you will do if that bill passes? more generally, how will you be working with some african countries that harbor homophobic attitudes and target dates? -- a target gays? >> that is a good question. we have had a similar evolution in our country. we had legislation that was put up every year during the elite -- during the early days of ryan white that anything that

"promoted", soetoro-ng behavior was unacceptable and anything that did fall into that large category, and tents were made to not have those things funded, within the ryan white context. the things that fund is a homosexual behavior. we are familiar with that type of mine said. from a public health perspective, it has no place in trying to engage and curtail the movement of the virus into the population. our collective experience globally in every country, both developing and recess -- and resources pour settings, has shown that every time you started a population in a negative way and put constraints on their ability to reveal themselves to the society, to the community, you push the peter further underground. when you push that further underground, individuals always come in later to care, a later

stage of disease, and continue in that timeframe off of antiretrovirals continuing to participate in high risk peters that spread the virus throughout the committee. i would hope that we could work in a respectful way with our colleagues in the country who are in policy-making positions to understand the science of how the virus moves through populations and how you need as the public health responsible entity to position yourself in front of each of those expanding waves of similar conversions. until you do that, that remains a conduit for the virus to re- enter the general not high risk behavior in population. our hope is that the science will lead the way and that dialogue can say on that level and that the government involved will realize that it is in the interest of their larger

population to develop strategies that address these populations. yes? >> as far as this disease is concerned, it also travels from [unintelligible] when the foreign ministers of other countries visit here, do you talk to them about this disease? and finally, what programs have you found in other countries, especially in india? how serious is this problem? >> we talk about policy positions that discriminate against populations, that the terror our ability to identify -- that deter our ability to identify patients in care. all of these things that differentiate, that separate,

that discriminate work against your ability to embrace and care for these and the individuals -- care for these individuals in a profound way. we do talk about that. india pose the incident is very low, but at the same time it competes with south africa and probably has more people infected than any of the country. the decentralization of health care in india as well as the state configurations of government have put the discussion in responding to the epidemic almost as a separate discussion for each state. but india has engaged in an effective strategy for prevention especially, and has moved well along the road to educating their physicians and especially the nurse populations and the private sector to create a cadre of health care worker relation back

up for health care workers and physicians that is working well with their services. india is well along the road of engaging to prevent and block the spread of the epidemic. >> you talk about sustainable country programs, is there a list of countries that are in the first role? you know, first party? there are about 30 countries altogether, i understand. >> yes, we are committed to engage in all countries in a dialogue that moves the country leadership, usually the ministries of health, ministry of education, the finance minister, into a position with the programs where they take over management of the program and eventually, we hope, begin to increase their qana -- their financial contributions to the

program. our commitment will not face it -- will not waver. we do not think that many of these countries will be in a position to put resources towards this for many years, but we do think the ability for the country to start to manage the program, to have a national office that oversees both the effort and the treatment efforts -- both the prevention and treatment efforts will be where our resources are most likely to have the largest impact at any given time. the country needs to manage these programs. the population that these programs are serving our in and of the country. the public systems need to be identified and supported and -- in expanding their capabilities as opposed to an ngo strategy where you are putting in parallel delivery systems. we now need to move into more public center to systems of care

in conjunction with ngo systems, kind of a hybrid. not just ngo parallel, but in amongst the public system of care that is there to deliver and serve the populations in front of them. the management shift and creation and expansion of mid- level management capability will save resources and will also better ensure that these programs are there for the 25 to 30 years that we need them to become a long after pat favre -- long after pepfar is a memory. putting these countries in the position of managing the programs is predicated on our desire to embed them in the country so that they are there for the duration. >> if you could talk just a bit about funding. i know that some people are saying that pepfar has been flat funded for the next two years.

could you talk us through how much has been given to pepfar to date? how much more money is the u.s. going to put into it? and you said after that is a memory. what you think they need -- when using the need for it will dissipate? and what will be the metrics that will allow us to say that? how will we figure out what we are successful? >> those are all good questions. and it will be a process. we will not stop looking at numbers of people that we have tested, that we have staged, that we have started on antiretrovirals. we will continue to look at numbers of prenatal women, patients that we have identified and tested and started on

antiretrovirals for vertical transmission purposes. we will continue to measure and better understand the high risk populations, the msm's, the drug users, the sex workers that are frequently the conduit into the low risk populations, the general population. those will continue to be in place. the movement in partner countries, ownership and management, that will be a central piece that we will not stop because of that. our strategy is to intensify the technical assistance that we give to countries to take over the role of both understanding through epidemiological systems there epidemic -- their academic and responding to it. we believe there is enough in

country experience now, and other self expertise that can be taught for technical assistance and mentoring relationships. we believe this is the correct way to go because we believe it will build a stronger medical delivery system that is more durable. it is not a turning away from our conviction or commitment to the burden of disease that hiv/aids has presented to the planet. in that same context, it is also important that we realize that there is a responsibility that is shared by all countries on the planet to respond to the burden of disease, not just hiv, but all disease. the more we work in this area, the moral issues around human rights have shown their heads. does a person's ability to not only prevent a disease process in themselves, but also for

preventing them from engaging in society, politics, and contributing in the larger societal sense? those efforts need to be -- a dialog needs to be created where we begin to acknowledge the burden of disease, the unmanned -- the unmet component of the burden and we need to converge our resources to look for synergies, cooperative coordination of those resources to meet that need so the universal aspects of care and hiv and other diseases can be addressed. >> we have time for one question. >> could you just tell us, you mentioned new inventioninfectio. where are they? >> they happen everywhere. within any epidemic, there are many, many epidemics

occurring. it is not one shoe that fits all, even in washington d.c. you have many populations that need different strategies to engage on the movement of that virus through the population torres that. in terms of a general -- to arrest that. in terms of a general sense, just to answer your question, the epidemic is moving mostly in eastern europe and southeast asia. eastern europe has a huge prevention opportunity. you have a population that is largely concealed in msm's and injection drug users and participating in the hitter's that may be illegal in their country and there are consequences for revealing yourself -- in behavior that may be illegal in their country and they are facing consequences for revealing themselves.

that has allowed this epidemic in those countries to move and check -- to move on checked. the most rapid rises we are seeing are in those regions of the world. >> ladies and gentlemen, that is all we have time for today. i am sorry if we did not get your question. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> ben bernanke has been nominated for a second four yes -- a second four- year term. >> the senate has started debate on the health care bill. majority leader harry reid has warned senators to expect we'd -- evening and weekend sessions. see it all live on our companion network c-span2. the only network unedited and

commercial free. to watch video on demand, go to c-span's healthcare hub. >> this evening, president obama went to the u.s. military academy at west point, you york to announce plans to send 30,000 more troops to afghanistan early next year. the president also discusses support for neighboring pakistan. this is 40 minutes. [applause] >> thank you, please be seated. good evening. to the united states corps of cadets, to the men and women of our armed services and to my fellow americans, i want to speak to you tonight about our effort in afghanistan. the nature of our commitment there, the scope of our interests, and a strategy that my administration will pursue to

bring the war to a successful conclusion. it is an extraordinary honor for me to do so here at west point where so many men and women have prepared to stand up for our security and to represent what is finest about our country. to address these important issues it is important to recall why america and our allies were compelled to fight a war in afghanistan in the first place. we did not ask for this fight. on september 11, 200119 men hijacked for airplanes and use them to murder -- on september 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder innocent men, women, and children without regard to their faith or race or station. if it's not -- if not for the wrote actions of passengers on board one of these flights, they

could also have struck at one of the great symbols of our country here in washington and killed many more. as we know, these men belonged to al qaeda, a group of extremists who have distorted anislam, one of the world's gret religions. al qaeda's base was in afghanistan where they were murdered by the taliban. this after it was ravaged by years of soviet occupation and civil war and after the attention of america and our friends had turned elsewhere. just days after 9/11, congress authorized the use of force against al qaeda and those who harbored them. an authorization that continues to this day. the vote in the senate was 98 to nothing. the vote in the house was 420 to one.

for the first time in its history, the north atlantic treaty organization invoked article 5, the commitment that says an attack on one member nation is an attack on all. the united nations security council endorsed the use of all necessary steps to respond to the 9/11 attacks. america, our allies and the rest of the world were acting as one to protect our common interests as one. and only after the taliban refused to turn over osama bin laden we sent our troops into afghanistan. within a matter of months, al qaeda was scattered and many of its operatives were killed. the taliban was driven from power and pushed back on its heels. a place that had known decades of fear now have reason to hope. at a conference convened by the

u.n., a provisional government was established under president hamid karzai and an international security assistance force was established to help bring lasting peace to a war-torn country. then in early 2003, the decision was made to wait a second war in iraq. the wrenching debate over the iraq war is well known and need not be repeated here. it is enough to say that for the next six years, the iraq war true the dominant share of our troops, our resources, our diplomacy and international attention and that the decision to go into iraq crossed central substantial risks between much of america and the rest of the world. today, after extraordinary costs, we are bringing in the iraq war to run it -- to a responsible and. will remove our combat brigades from iraq by the end of next summer and all of our trips by the end of 2011.

and we are doing so as a testament to the character of the men and women in uniform. [laughter] [applause] [laughter] [applause] thanks to their courage and perseverance we have given iraqis a chance to shape their future and we are successfully leaving iraq to with people. but while we have achieved hard- earned milestones in iraq, the situation in iraq -- in afghanistan has deteriorated. after escaping across the border to pakistan in 2001 and 2002, al qaeda's leadership established a safe haven. although a legitimate government was elected by the afghan people, it has been hampered by corruption, the drug trade, and underdeveloped economy and insufficient security forces.

over the last several years, the taliban has maintained a common cause with outright as they both seek an overthrow of the afghan government. -- with al qaeda as they both seek an overthrow of the afghan government. gradually, they have begun to control additional portions of afghanistan while engaging in increasingly brazen and devastating attacks of terrorism against the afghanistan people. -- against the afghani people. the troop levels there remain a fraction of what they were in iraq. when i took office, we have just over 32,000 americans serving in afghanistan compared to 160,000 in iraq at the peak of the war. commanders in afghanistan repeatedly asked for support to deal with the reemergence of the taliban, but these reinforcements did not arrive. that is why shortly after taking office i approved the longstanding request for more troops. after consultations with our

allies i have -- i then announced a strategy announcing the fundamental connection between our war effort in afghanistan and the extremist savings in pakistan. i set a goal that was narrowly defined as disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al qaeda and its extremist allies and pledged to better coordinate our military and civilian efforts. since then, we have made progress on some important objectives. hite winky al qaeda and taliban leaders have been killed -- high-ranking al qaeda and taliban leaders have been killed. in pakistan, the nation's army have got caught -- has gone on its largest offensive in years. in afghanistan, we have prevented the taliban from stopping our presidential election and although it was marred by a fall, that election produced a government that is consistent with afghanistan's laws and constitution. yet the huge challenges, remain.

afghanistan is not lost. but for several years it has moved backwards. there is no imminent threat of the government being overthrown, but the taliban has gained momentum. al qaeda has not reemerged in afghanistan in the same numbers as before 9/11, but they retain their safe haven along the border. and our forces lacked the full support they need to effectively train and partner with afghan security forces and better secure the population. our new commander in afghanistan, general mcchrystal, has reported that the security situation is more serious than he anticipated. in short, the status quo is not sustainable. as cadets you have volunteered for service during this time of danger. some of you fought in afghanistan. some of you will deploy their. as your commander in chief, iou

emission that is clearly defined -- i owe you a mission that is clearly defined and with your service. that is why after the afghan review was completed, i insist on a tour review of our strategy. let me be clear, there has never been an option before me that called for troop deployments before 2010. there has been no delay or denial of resources necessary for the conduct of the war during this review time. instead, the review has allowed me to ask the hard questions and to explore all of the different options along with my national security team, our military and civilian leadership in afghanistan, and are key partners. given the stakes involved, i owed the american people and our troops no less. this review is now complete. and as commander-in-chief, i have determined that it is in

our vital natural -- and the vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 u.s. troops to afghanistan. after 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. these are the resources that we need to seize the initiative while building the afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our forces out of afghanistan. i do not make this decision lightly. i opposed the war in iraq precisely because i believe that we must exercise restraint in the use of military force and always consider the long-term consequences of our actions. we have been at war now for eight years at enormous cost in lives and resources. years of debate over iraq and terrorism have left our unity on national security issues in tatters and created a highly polarized and partisan backdrop for this effort. and having just experienced the

worst economic crisis since the great depression, the american people are understandably focused on rebuilding our economy and putting people to work here at home. most of all, i know that this decision asks even more of you. a military that, along with your families, has already borne the heaviest of all burdens. as president, i have signed a letter of condolence to the family of each american who gives their life in this -- in these wars. i have read the letters from the parents and spouses of those who deployed. i have visited our courageous wounded warriors at walter reed. i have trouble to dover to me to the great caskets of americans returning home to their final resting place. i see firsthand the terrible wages of war. if i did not think that the security of the united states and the safety of the american people were at stake in afghanistan i would gladly order

every single one of our troops home tomorrow. so, no, i do not make this decision lightly. i make this decision because i am convinced that our security is at stake in afghanistan and pakistan. this is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by al qaeda. it is from here that we were attacked on 9/11 and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as we speak. this is no idle danger. no hypothetical threat. in the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here to commit new acts of terror. this danger will only grow if the region slide backwards. and al qaeda can operate with impunity. we must keep the pressure on al qaeda and to do that we must increase the stability and capacity of our partners in the region.

of course, this burden is not ours alone to bear. this is not just america's war. since 9/11, al qaeda as safe haven have been the source of attacks against london and iman and bali. the people of the government's of both afghanistan and pakistan are in danger. and the stakes are even higher with a nuclear arms pakistan because when al qaeda and other extremists seek nuclear weapons and we have every reason to believe that they would use them. these facts compel us to act along with our friends and allies. our overarching goal remains the same, to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat outcry in afghanistan and pakistan and to prevent its capacity -- al qaeda in afghanistan and pakistan and to prevent its capacity in the future. to meet that goal, we will pursue the following objectives within afghanistan. we must deny al qaeda a safe haven.

we must reverse the taliban's momentum and denied the ability -- to deny them the ability to overthrow the of government. and we must strengthen the afghan security forces and government so that they can take the lead and responsibility for afghanistan's future. we will meet these objectives in three ways. first, we will pursue a military strategy that will break the taliban's momentum and increase afghanistans capacity over the next 18 months. the 30,000 additional troops that i am announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010. the fastest possible pace. so that they can target the insurgency and secure key part -- key population centers. they will increase our ability to train competent afghan security forces and to partner with them so that more afghans can get into the fight. they will help can -- create the conditions for the united states to transfer the responsibility to the afghans. because this is an international

effort i have asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies. some have already provided additional troops and we are confident that there will be further contributions in the days and weeks ahead. our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in afghanistan. now we must come together to end this war successfully. what is at stake is not simply a test of nato's credibility, but the security of our allies and the security of the world. taken together, these additional american and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to afghan forces and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of afghanistan in july of 2011. just as we have done in iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. we will continue to advise and

assist afghanistan's security forces to be sure that they can succeed over the long haul. but it will be clear to the afghan government and, more and portly, to the afghan people -- more importantly to the afghan people, that they will be responsible for their own country. second, we will work with our partners, the united nations, and the afghan people to pursue a more effective civilian strategy so that the government can take advantage of improved security. this effort must be based on performance. the days of providing a blank check are over. president karzai's inauguration speech sent a message about moving in a new direction and going forward, we will be clear about what we risk -- what we expect from those who receive our assistance. we will support the ministries and governors and local leaders that combat corruption for the local people. we expect those who are ineffective or corrupt to be held accountable.

we will also focus our assistance in areas such as agriculture that can make an immediate impact in the lives of the afghan people. but the people of afghanistan have endured of violence for decades. they have been confronted with occupation by the soviet union and then by foreign al qaeda fighters that used afghan land for their own purposes. tonight, i want the afghan people to understand america seeks an end to this era of war and suffering. we have no interest in occupying your country. we will support efforts by the afghan government to open the door to those taliban who abandon violence and respect the human rights of their fellow citizens. and we will seek a partnership with afghanistan grounded in mutual respect. to isolate those who destroy, to strengthen those who build, to hasten the day when our troops will leave and to forge a

lasting friendship in which america is your partner and never york patron. -- and never your patron. third, we will act with the full recognition that its success in afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with pakistan. if we are in afghanistan to prevent the cancer from, once again, spreading through the country. but this same cancer has taken root in the border region of pakistan. that is why we need a strategy that worked on both sides of the border. in the past, there have been those in pakistan that have argued that the struggle against extremism is not their fight and that pakistan is better off doing little or seeking accommodation with those who use violence. but in recent years, as innocents have been killed across the country, it has become clear that it is the

pakistani people who are most endangered by extremism. public opinion has turned. the pakistani army has waged an offensive in swapped and south waziristan and there is no doubt that the u.s. anh pakistan share a common enemy -- enemy. in the past, we have often -- we have too often definedlt>5 our relationship with pakistan nearly. those days are over. we're moving forward with a partnership with pakistan that is built on mutual interest, mutual respect, and mutual trust. we will strengthen pakistan's capacity to target groups that threaten our countries and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists whose location is known and whose intentions are clear. america is also providing substantial resources to support pakistan's democracy and development. we are the largest international supporter for those pakistanis this place by the fighting.

and going forward, the pakistani people must know america will remain a strong supporter for security and prosperity long after the guns have fallen silent, so that the great potential of its people can be unleashed. these are the three core elements of our strategy. a military effort to create the conditions for a transition, a civilian surge that reinforces positive action, and if -- and an effective partnership with pakistan. i recognize there are a range of concerns about our approach. let me a break -- let me briefly address a few of the arguments that i've heard, and which i take very seriously. first, there are those that suggest that afghanistan is another vietnam. they argue that it cannot be stabilized and we are better off cutting our losses and rapidly withdrawing. i believe this argument depends on a false reading of history.

unlike vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43 nations that recognize the legitimacy of our actions. unlike vietnam, we are not facing a broad based popular insurgency. and most importantly unlike vietnam, the american people were viciously attacked from afghanistan and remain a target for those the same extremist were plodding along its border. to abandon this area now and to rely only on efforts against al qaeda from a distance would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al qaeda and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies. second, there are those with knowledge that we cannot leave afghanistan in its current state, but suggest that we go forward with the trips that we already have. this would simply maintain the

status quo in which we muddle through and permit the slow deterioration of conditions there. it would ultimately prove more costly and prolonged our stay in afghanistan because we would never be able to generate the conditions needed to train the afghan security forces and give them the space to take over. finally, there are those who oppose identifying a timeframe for a transition to afghan responsibility. indeed, some call for a more dramatic and open-ended escalation of our war effort, one that would commit us to in nation building project of up to a decade. i reject this course because it sets goals that are beyond what can be achieved at a reasonable cost, and what we need to achieve to secure our interests. furthermore, the absence of a time frame -- timeframe for transition would deny us and a

sense of efficiency in working with the afghan government -- any sense of urgency in working with the afghan government. it must be clear that america has no interest in fighting an endless war in afghanistan. as president, i refuse to set goals that go beyond our responsibility, our means, or our interests. and i must weigh all the challenges that our nation faces. i do not have the luxury of committing to just one. indeed, i am mindful of the words of president eisenhower, who in discussing our at -- our national security said kamal "each proposal must be weighed in the light of the broader consideration, the need to maintain balance and in and among national programs. over the past several years we have lost that balance. we have failed to appreciate a connection between [no audio] to

many of our neighbors and friends are out of work and struggle to pay the bills. to many americans are out of work and worry about the future of their children. in the meanwhile, the economy globally has become more fierce. we cannot simply ignore the price of these wars. all told, by the time i took office, the cost of the wars in iraq and afghanistan approached $1 trillion. going forward, i am committed to addressing these costs openly and honestly. our new approach in afghanistan is likely to cost us roughly $30 billion for the military this year. i will work closely with congress to address these costs as we work to bring down our deficit. but as we end the war in iraq in transition to afghan responsibility, we must rebuild our strength here at home. our prosperity provides a foundation for our power.

it pays for our military. it underwrites our diplomacy. it taxes the potential of our people and it will allow us to compete in this century as successfully as we did in the last. that is why our troop commitment in afghanistan cannot be open- ended. because the nation i am most interested in building is our own. let me be clear, none of this will be easy. the struggle against violent extremism will not be finished quickly and extends well beyond afghanistan and pakistan. it will be an enduring test of our free society and our leadership in the world. and unlike the great power conflicts and clear lines of division that define the 20th century, our effort will involve disorderly regions, failed states, diffuse enemies.

as a result, america will have to show our strength in the way that we end wars and prevent conflict, not just how we wage wars. we will have to be nimble and precise in our use of military power. where al qaeda and its allies attempt to establish a foothold, whether in somalia or yemen or elsewhere, they must be confronted by growing pressure and strong partnerships. and we cannot count on military might alone. we have to invest in our homeland security because we cannot capture or kill every violent extremist abroad. we have to improve and that record made our intelligence so that we stay one step ahead of scherwin networks. -- shadowy network. we will have to take with tools of mass destruction. that is why i have made a central pillar of our foreign policy to secure nuclear -- lucent nuclear materials from terrorists, to stop nuclear weapons, and to pursue the goal of a world without them because

every nation must understand that true security will never come from an analyst raised her for ever more destructive weapons. true security will come from those who reject them. we will have to use diplomacy because no one nation can meet the challenges of an interconnected world acting alone. i spent this year renewing our alliances and forging new partnerships. we have forged a new beginning between america and the muslim world. one that and recognizes our mutual interest in breaking the cycle of conflict, and promises a future in which those who kill innocents are isolated by those who stand up for peace and prosperity and human dignity. finally, we must draw on the strength of our values for the challenges that we face may have changed, but the things that we believe in must not. that is why we must promote our values by leaving them at home,

which is why i have prohibited torture and will close the prison at guantanamo bay. we must make it clear to every man, woman, and child on the world who lives under the dark cloud of tyranny that america will speak out on behalf of their human rights and tender for the light of freedom and justice and dignity of all people. that is who we are. that is the source, the morrill source of america's authority. -- the moral source of america's authority. since the days of franklin roosevelt and our grandparents and great grandparents, our country has borne a special burden in global affairs. we have this bill american blood in many countries on multiple continents. -- we have spilled american blood in many countries on multiple continent. we spent our money to develop

other countries. we have joined in the architecture of institutions from the united nations to nato to the world bank that provide for the common security and prosperity of human beings. we have not always been thanked for these efforts. and we have, at times, made mistakes. but more than any other nation, the united states of america has underwritten global security for over six decades, a time that for all its problems has seen walls come down and markets open and billions lifted from property, unparalleled of scientific progress and advancing frontiers of human liberty. for unlike the great powers of old, we have not sought world domination. our union was founded in resistance to oppression. we do not seek to occupy other nations. we will not claim another nation's resources. or target other people because

their faith or a net -- or ethnicity is different from ours. what we have fought for, what we continue to fight for is a better future for our children and grandchildren and we believe that their lives will be better if other people's children and grandchildren can live in freedom. and access opportunity. [applause] as a country, we are not as young, and perhaps not as innocent, as we were when roosevelt was president. yet we are still heirs to a noble struggle for freedom. now, we must summon all of our might and moral suasion to meet

the challenges of a new age. in the end of our security and leadership does not come solar -- solely from the strength of office. it derives from our people, from the workers and businesses who will rebuild our economy, from the entrepreneurs and researchers will pioneer new industries, from the teachers who will educate our children and the service of those who work in our communities at home, from the diplomats and peace corps volunteers to spread hold abroad, and from the men and in uniform who are part of an unbroken line of sacrifice that has made government of the people, by the people, and for the people in reality on this earth. -- a reality on this earth. [applause] this vast and diverse citizenry

will not always agree on every issue, nor should we, but i also know that we as a country cannot sustain our leadership, nor navigate this momentous challenges of our times if we allow ourselves to be split asunder by the same rank and cynicism and partisanship that has in recent times poisoned our leader -- leadership. it is easy to forget that when this war began we were united, bound together by a fresh memory of a horrific attack, and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear. i refuse to accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again. [applause] i believe with every fiber of my

being that we, as americans, can still come together behind a common purpose. for our values are not simply words written into apartments -- into parchment. they're a creed that has carried us through the darkest of storms as one nation, as one people. america, we are passing to a time of great trial and the message we send in the midst of these storms must be clear, that our cause is just come our resolve unwavering. we will go forward with the confidence that right makes might end with the commitment to forge an america that is safer, a world that is more secure, a future that represents not the deepest of fears, but the highest of hopes. thank you, god bless you. and god bless the united states of america. [applause] thank you very much. [applause]

♪ ♪

♪

but

♪

♪ [applause] [applause] >> tomorrow, secretary of state clinton, defense secretary robert gates and eberle like moylan testified about again --

and admiral mike mullen testify about afghanistan before the armed services committee. and have wondered p.m., the house foreign affairs committee. -- and at 1:30 p.m., the house foreign affairs committee. you can see both life on c- span3 or also at c-span.org. tonight on c-span, house republicans look into allegations of criminal activity by the group acorn. the state department details efforts to fight hiv/aids iran the world. president obama announces plans to send more troops to afghanistan. and a senate hearing on federal aviation administration rules on pilot fatigue. . .

>> the senate has started debate on health care bill. majority leader harry reid has warned senators to expect evening and weekend session. see it on our companion network, c-span2, the only network with people debate on edited. to watch video on demand, go to the health-care hub. >> house republicans held a forum today about allegations of corruption against a corn.

they also passed a law against acorn, and but the justice department's is that they can justiceacorn -- that they can pay acorn for contract started before the bill. >> i am going to recognize myself in an opening statement, and then others for opening statements, and we will proceed and looking for the having the testimony of our witnesses

shortly. we're here today to investigate the nature and extent of potential wrongdoing engaged in by the association of community organizations for reform now, otherwise no one -- known as acorn. for months we have been calling our democratic counterparts to investigate the very serious allegations against acorn. today is an opportunity to move toward on an issue of importance to the american people, to determine whether it taxpayer dollars have been allocated to an organization engaged in illegal conduct. i am pleased to hold this -- in conjunction with darrell heisei. -- issa. he has been leading the way in investing this conduct and i support -- i appreciate their support of this forum. for years they have been the subject of allegations of fraud, misconduct, and criminal

activity. they have been investigated with voter registration fraud in over a dozen states, and charged with 50 different counts of election- related fraud. in addition, acorn is paid over $1 million in restitution to avoid criminal prostitutions and has admitted to submitting 400,000 false or fraudulent voter registrations for in the 2008 elections. the following is just a sample of the conduct acorn has engaged in. in 2008, it was uncovered that approximately $1 million was embezzled from a corn by the brother of its founder. they failed to report the theft until the theft was made public by the media. in louisiana, the attorney general believes the amount embezzled might be as high as $5 million. a seattle prosecutors indicted seven acorn workers for the

worst voter registration fraud in washington state history. oddly nine were confirmed as bayou -- only nine were confirmed as valid, and 97% were fake. acorn employees fell -- pled guilty to election registration fraud there. one person was given crack cocaine in exchange for fraudulent registrations which included deceased individuals. one acorn employee was charged with perjury and identity theft. this summer, allegations against acorn reached prime time thanks to a now famous undercover video with short acorn employees advising a pimp and prostitute, the undercover du loup, on

trafficking girls for sex. they seemed all too willing to provide assistance on how best to avoid detection. but that is not all. the allegations against acorn continue to pour in. according to documents obtained by oversight staff, it appears that they directed an appellate the target republicans in the 2008 election. this type of political activity is a clear violation of the organization's non-profit status. with mountains of evidence, federal law-enforcement agencies can no longer ignore the shape the actions of acorn. because it appears to be organized and widespread, the fbi should look into whether this is a criminal enterprise. the president's close ties with acorn, dating back over 15 years, are of additional concern. president obama previously served as acorn's lawyer,

participated in acorn training programs in chicago, and sat on the boards of two organizations that provided funding to acorn's chicago chapter. just last year, his campaign misrepresented that it had paid more than 800,000 to an offshoot of acorn. the obama campaign initially said that they used this for polling. there really use the money for the same types of voter registration project that have mired acorn in criminal investigations in at least 12 states. the president's ties to acorn take any conclusion that the justice department may reach with regard to whether or not to investigate and prosecute acorn employees. that is why i requested date the attorney journal -- i have requested that the attorney general appoint a special prosecutor. congress also has an obligation to investigate the apostle -- the possibly illegal conduct of

acorn. acorn has received $53 million in federal funding. it is disappointing that that is a pat -- the democratic majority have taken no steps investigate the wrongdoing, even though the majority of the senator -- of congress people have voted to ban the acorn from federal funding. so far it has been all talk and no action. for years our colleagues on the other side of the aisle criticized us. in the face of clear wrongdoing, the same members have ignored congress's obligation to investigate acorn. members of the judiciary committee have a responsibility to look into allegations that acorn, and affiliated organizations and employees, are engaged in activities to undermine the integrity of our democracy. today, our republican colleagues began that process.

i will not turn to the gentleman from california, mr. issa, for his opening remarks. is the ranking member of the oversight and government reform committee. >> thank you. i want to thank you again for co hosting this form and continuing your leadership acorn to leadership accountable for its criminal activities. we enjoyed joint jurisdiction when it comes to ensuring that luck -- elections are fair, that our constitution be maintained, and that government be governed by the congress and not in fact determine who would be in the congress. i regret that this forum today is necessary because in fact the oversight and judiciary committee chairman have refused to do the type of oversight that should be done. the american people deserve an official hearing into a corn.

we have repeatedly asked for that and have not gotten it. today's government-sponsored forum will attend to -- i attempt to shed light on this abuse, in spite of the fact that it is by definition partisan. and it is necessarily partisan. we would like to have this committee appropriately non- partisan. partisan. we will show that acornno carri0 as they know about it on a corn. anyone having any information concerning further wrongdoings of acorn can go to our whistle- blower web site.

republicans.oversight.gov. write to us or call us. this the first that and having the needy in america, those needing to renegotiate loans, those maintaining -- those with problems maintaining their housing, and those who would like to take advantage of their rights as citizens to take advantage -- to use organizations that are not tainted with one party. we're grateful but the documents -- for the documents that we have today, it thousand pages provided by various states. my staff tells me that in fact these documents are likely only the tip of the iceberg, but page after page of this evidence shows that acorn officials have abused taxpayer money to enrich

themselves, and led lavish lifestyles in sharp contrast with those of the americans acorn purports to help. what other top acorn officials discovered an embezzlement, instead of acting to a cop -- all those responsible fully accountable, these officials covered up the wrongdoing. evidence also indicates acorn is engages in illegal partisan activities designed to help individual democratic members. but in the primary and in the general. this goes from city councilmen to state assemblyman all the way to president barack obama. rather than using taxpayer grants to help the poor communities, of home acorn was organized, it they enrich themselves in this criminal organization.

it can only be described today as a political machine. because light shed on their many misdeeds, including videos of numerous acorn employees and location across the country, which buys two posing as a pimp and prostitute on how to engage in illegal activities on september 14 -- on september 14, the senate voted to cut funding to acorn. days later, the house to the same. more importantly, on september 24, 2009, congress passed and the president signed a continuing appropriation resolution federal funding to acorn. several state legislatures have done the same. as americans were enjoying their thanksgiving holidays, they learned that the obama administration had released an opinion designed to overturn the very law congress passed and the president signed, that intended

to cut off federal funding to. acorn this decision raises obvious questions that now deserve an answer. is this barack obama's payback to the political machine that helped get him elected? did the president signed in good faith a lot an attempt to it here to it, or is he trying to circumvent his own signature? acorn has received money from hud and several banks and foundation, some of the largest banks and america, including those that received tarp money. congress was clear -- all federal agencies were to immediately suspend their contracts with acorn, even the ones that preexisting. now the office of legal counsel at the department of justice has told hud that it can honor those contracts. as a result, a corn will continue to receive taxpayer funding.

before begin, let me briefly go over a few conclusions that our investigations beginning in january have discovered. acorn makes $48 million a year from its membership dues. today we will hear how those dues are received and how often they do not properly reflect what most people would consider to be membership. prior to the justice department decision to partially restore federal funding, acorn was financially bankrupt and had begun closing offices nationwide. acorn is currently in the process of changing its name and has already translated -- transferred resources to several chapters of the service employees international union, and possibly to the working families party, changing to win, and the council and unity.

these organizations are less well known but they helped acorn survive and prosper in its political ambition. it reflects a business model in which money is taken from poor people and bottle to partisan political efforts. acorn corporations lack fire walls. they blend tax-exempt and taxable and political activities as though they were one. acorn's on the internal audit revealed severe abuse of tax- exempt and taxable accounts. acorn creates in shares with its tax-exempt affiliate's data targeting at state and federal representative districts to ensure votes for democrats. acorn has voter registration

material the specifically instruct members to tell people to vote for barack obama for president. acorn has mishandled the personal financial information of its members, and those it serves, putting them at great risk for identity theft. the purposes of this forum is to explore the scope of acorn's misdeeds. the organization -- the degree of concern that every american should have that the current administration is fast becoming in reality the war room for acorn's political machine. why did the department of justice approved the furtherance of taxpayer funds acorn? why has the president and his administration continued to dismiss growing concerns about acorn's criminal acts as a "distraction clause " and that

"he has not followed it closely?" perhaps they have not received answers to these important questions, because acorn is a wholly owned subsidiary of the democratic party. nearly two decades ago, the american people were told by another democratic president that the era of big government was over. what we now know is that it was not over with president clinton's administration. today we are witness to an era of big and bad government with the obama administration, a chicago-style tactics, and its cozy relationship with those to defraud the american people. i'm concerned that the era of construction, propagated by acorn and protected by the white house, is just beginning. the federal government has a duty to ensure that correct organizations are not given the

power to disenfranchise a our citizens and threaten our liberty. i look forward to our witnesses and i certainly hope that today's forum will be the beginning of a wake-up call to the majority -- for the majority to hold real hearings. and i thank the gentleman. >> thank you. some other members wish to make opening statements. we will turn to them now. the tillman from n.c. is recognized. -- that gentleman from north carolina is recognized. >> i think you have addressed the pertinent issues and not look for to hearing from the panel was the meeting progresses. i yield back. >> the gentleman from iowa, mr. kean, is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate you for holding this hearing together, this forum, more technically correct. but scan over the things that come out in my mind as i listen to the presentations that each of you have made and covered a

lot of the actual data. i have been watching acorn for four or five years. if anybody wonders about my dedication, i carried a constitution in my pocket every day, and end of my -- and in my other pocket i carry one of these, acorn. this is a threat to this constitution. of all the things that are guaranteed in this constitution, the rights that come from god to humanity that are enumerated in this constitution, the underpinning of the constitution itself, the very foundation, is the american people faith and confidence in the legitimate election process. and acorn, a criminal enterprise, has been engaged in many things. but the most dangerous to our republic is the corruption of the electoral process, but will fall and intentional submission of fraudulent voter registration forms. and some will say, nobody voted

fraudulently. we turned and a lot formed. acorn themselves admitted that 400,000 were fraudulent. but we have prosecution's going on in places like troy, new york for fraudulent votes 3 who would imagine that you would spend the millions of dollars that acorn has spent to produce all sorts of fraudulent voter registration forms and not have anything come out of that but a legitimate election? it defies any but a sense of logic. this is million of dollars spent. and the detroit -- and a fraudulent elections that come from false or fraudulent voter registration forms, what of their components? what is happened with the community reinvestment act? how is it that acorn was front and center, bragging about shaking down lenders to get them to make bad loans? acorn was it they came to this congress and asked us to lower standards for

fannie mae and freddie mac said they could pick off the loans that have party been shaken down by them? and a shakedown term is not mine. that is the chairman of the judiciary committee, john conyers, who put that into my years. a number of the appropriations committees, this congress needs to do it full court press. i'm interested in hearing from one of the witnesses to see if he has the resources to do way investigation of the national organization that are engaged in these things, including the of the small -- the embezzlement process, the coverup, the facilitation of false and fraudulent voter registration forms, and by the way, i will make a point also that i believe that when this investigation is finally finished, whether it is done with legitimate investigation

of state and federal authorities working in conjunction with congressional investigations and hearings, or whether it is finally uncovered by the historians, we are going to find out that these roads falling acorn to lead to the white house. we know that the president has worked for acorn, and he has been part and parcel of that, he has talked about it openly, project vote in particular, and i know he was a pro bono attorney. that entire network is something, the chicago organization, and the last point i will make is, the new white house counsel is the one who said -- set a seven-page letter to the attorney general urging him to investigate president bush and the mccain organization for alleging that acorn was promoting fraudulent voter registration activities and arguing that they should be

investigated and prosecuted if charges could be found. i think it is the exact opposite. now we can see what his job is in the white house, and historians will figure this out if we do not, but it is our congressional duty to get to the bottom of the acorn. >> let me get this right. there are roughly 100 acorns in the container. each one represents 400 fraudulent votes? >> that is a close estimate. >> can we of certain that none of the acorns were obtained fraudulently? dollars they may have all been obtained fraudulent. these came from the capitol grounds. that would be the acorns that belong to the american people. they represent the public's interest in investigating acorn. >> mr. gohmert is recognized for an opening statement.

>> thank you, mr. chairman, ranking members met -- i wish it were otherwise. and ranking member issa. i do think the witnesses for being here. this is such an important issue. for a government that wants to take over everybody's health care, where there are estimates of 50% of fraud, it really does same that we ought to be more interested in fraud. i know that there was he went right after the 2000 election right after the 2000 election issue from the other party?

i know that there are democrats they care about fraud and corruption. they are friends of mine. but apparently the leadership has not felt it was worth investing the time and effort on. this is critical. how can we run anything if we can i get this right and eliminate fraud when people have the courage to come forward and address it themselves. so i appreciate this hearing and the efforts that have already gone into this. i appreciate the efforts of the witnesses and i look for during your testimony. and as i looked down at the acorns, we know that from one acorn, many nets can grow. >> thank you, mr. gohmert. i recognize the gentleman from indiana. the former chairman of the government committee. >> let's get that right. i want to thank both the ranking

members for having this hearing. i wish we could have a complete hearing with the democrats being involved so we can get into some details in an efficient way, more efficient than this one today. all that they are secretary of state for being here. he is a real fighter. he works so hard to get the photo identification past, and also to make all the way through the supreme court, and they wonder if you are one of my theories and i really appreciate you being here today. i would like a lot of comments about what you have done but i will not still your thunder. let me just say that i do not think that there is any doubt that acorn is a corrupt organization. when you look at the things that they have done, they have evaded taxes, obstructed justice, engaged in self aided and abetted coverups about the brother of that organization, that convicted investment fraud,

deprive the public of its right to on a service is, committed conspiracy to defraud the united states, and as has been mentioned by my colleagues, the president was one of their " advisers and legal counsel brad the white house will do everything that they can to make sure that acorn continues to get federal funds. that is why this hearing is so important and we keep -- need to keep the pressure wrong. we need to keep the pressure on and make sure that we talk to our democratic colleagues so they don't try to sweep this under the rug. they've also submitted false filings to the irs and the department of labour prepared falsified and concealed facts concerning an illegal transactions between related parties in violation of the employment retirement income security act. that become embroiled in numerous voter fraud cases. the prostitution and all the things that we've heard about.

this is an organization that needs to be completely disbanded. it should not get a dime from the federal government and we need to be very vigilant in making sure we continue to pursue this. all this. i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you, mr. burton 3 does that gentleman from louisiana have an opening statement? >> thank you very much. i know that acorn had its inception in louisiana, so i want to thank the assistant secretary general for being here to testify. i want to get the details -- if the backs of the situation, to see whether or not acorn was involved in illegal activities in louisiana, because coming from new orleans, i note that the organization has done some good things in order to address

the issues of minorities as well as other issues that concern the african-american community. again, thank you for being here and i look for to your testimony. >> thank you, mr. cao. >> i thank you for holding these hearings. allegations against acorn keep growing and growing. the more that we look at this organization, the more it looks like a criminal enterprise -- nationwide criminal enterprise. most disturbing is that this criminal enterprise has at its tentacles at the most fundamental aspects of our democracy, voting. voting is sacred in this country for it is one of the reasons that we started this country, so that people would have a voice in our democracy. and have some organization come

and and flaunt their right to vote fraudulent voting procedures is something that we ought to be very concerned about because it is an attack that is the basic fundamental premise of our country, the right to vote. we get been attache in third world countries when they have voter fraud in their relations. all self righteous, not that we should not. but we talk about democracy is all over the world. we are quick to say that there is voter fraud in those elections. well, we ought to look at home and start dealing with our own issues. voter fraud comes up, i think, every two year's summer in the country. we talk about voter fraud and after the media goes on to the next event, it disappears and no one goes to jail. it is time that those coated jail for voter fraud in this country. and it needs to start where these people in acorn, if they are guilty, they need to go behind bars. then they lose their right to

vote. that is what happens to convicted felons in this country. i think it is imperative that we have an open dialogue and we find out the truth and get to the basis of what is taking place in this country, and in a taxpayer-funded organization that is supposed to help votes and denies other people the right to vote. that seems to be the worst of everything. the secretary of state for the state of washington recently said that acorn voter fraud is the worst case of voter registration fraud in history. of the state. of the 1800 names submitted by acorn in washington, 97% were falsified. and of course this is not unique to the state of washington. it is all over the united states, in missouri, ohio, and 12 other states. does it not seem like criminal enterprise is taking place here? are all of these acorn groups

organized to commit voter fraud against the american public? who knows? it is certainly time to find out. it is not an isolated problem. it appears to me acorn has systematically and purposely work to subvert the democratic process in this country and it makes me mad and it ought to make americans matt, too. people need to be held accountable. they are guilty of voter fraud, we should not just just -- we should not just talk about it. someone should be tried and go to jail. how would you back to the ranking member. >> thank you, mr. pope. but thank all eight members for their excellent opening statements today. we will not go to introducing our expert panel. our first witnesses secretary todd rookiquita. he has overseen indian oblations with the commitment to

innovation and technological advancements. his efforts to combat investment and mortgage fraud have led to the convictions of dozens of white collar criminals, over 300 years of jail time, and millions of dollars return to the victims. he went on to obtain a law degree from the indiana university school of law in in in the -- in indianapolis. he practice and an attorney before serving as general counsel to the secretary of state sewer and gilroy, and later as deputy secretary of state. our second witness is david caldwell. is the deputy director of the criminal division for the louisiana attorney general's office. he is also the head of these special corruption and prosecution unit. he graduated from louisiana state louisiana with a degree in english and russian. after graduating from tulane law school, he worked the attorney

general in the criminal law division. he is try and obtain convictions in white-collar cases in insurance fraud and vote rigging. he served as an advisor and coach for lsu law school, and for another program which began in 2003. our third witness is a senior legal fellow at the heritage foundation's center for zero legal and judicial studies where he manages civil reform initiative spirit before joining heritage in 2008, he severed two years as a member of the federal election commission. previously worked at the justice department as the council for the assistant attorney general for civil rights. a former litigator, and a senior

corporate officer, he worked on tort reform and civil justice issues for more than a decade in the insurance industry. he is a 1984 graduate of vanderbilt university school of law. he received his bachelor's degree in political science in 1981 from the massachusetts institute of technology. our final witness is a writer in washington, d.c., working with the american bar association acorn and association. she has partnered with a european organization as an election observer and macedonia. in 2008, she came for to expose the damage that acorn has done to the impoverished and marginalized communities. we appreciate all of you being

here today, and for your various perspectives, all useful and informative, and will begin with the secretary. >> thank you, ranking members met. -- ranking members smith and issa for holding this committee. representative burton, thank you for providing on the people of the fifth district of indiana. i share your concern. i am not sure why this is a partisan issue, quite honestly. when i talk to the indiana secretary of state about what we're doing, it is not just for republicans. it is democrats and everyone asking me. >> can you see if your green light is on? i can link closer. dollars this is an american issue. this is a constitutional issue,

as congressman king points out. as congressman poe points out, i think americans ought to be mad because we are in indiana. this is going on in our election process. we have worked very heart of the last several years to make sure that our process works. that it has the appropriate measure of a sensibility and integrity, and both are needed if we are to have a process that belief -- that people believe in. if people stop believing in the process, if they think their votes are deluded or stolen by zealots who would cheat the system in favor of the party or candidate or cause, then they stopped coming. and when we stopped coming to the polls, we lose the republic. that is why this is a fundamental matter. i am submitting written testimony along with two attachments. i will attempt to abbreviate them here now and make your points. i'm happy to take your questions.

i view my role as chief election officer for the state of indiana where i try to increase participation and maintain the cup -- the public confidence in the process by conducting a process that is a sensible and fair to all of those eligible to vote. in that sense, but registration fraud is voter fraud. this is a holistic problem -- process and that is one of the many ways that we as a state make sure that we have parameters in place, that we do not have chaos in the system, that we do have a process in fact. and voter registration is an integral part of that. i want to point out that in that same campaign, i think the third parties are very important to help us in voter registration. i do not think it would be a good idea to make the solely a government process. it is lost on most of us, but the distinction is there.

in a free society, we as people select to we want to send to government and then we'll let them to do that. that is why we basically have volunteers as poll workers. that is why it is acceptable and needed to have third parties responsible -- responsible for part is helpless in the -- responsible for party is helpless in the voter registration process. and i do not want to do away with that third party held, but the emphasis should be on the word responsible. as early as february 2008, in a work -- in a year that would be historic for indiana, we began receiving alarming reports from constituents in several counties throughout the state about fraudulent voter registration activities and the acorn chapter located in gary. they dropped approximately 5000 voter registration applications

at the office during the last few days and the hours of the voter registration period. apart from the chaos that this causes for election administrators to process all of that, and we are required to process those under law to make sure that no one is inadvertently disenfranchised. but many of these turned out to be suspicious, incomplete, or unverifiable. at that point i ask the lake county board to secure those applications, all the evidence associated with them, and sent as examples of what they were talking about. they did, and my office ended up sending copies of 1438 border registration application that had been flagged by the lake county board. evidence of a pattern of voter registration fraud was striking. for example, 61% of the applications had one or more critical defect observable on

the face of the application, rendering them in balladur useless 388% of that 1438 application number could not be verified the the in the end of voter mia -- vote -- the indiana motor vehicle registration. you should know that indiana law requires the identification on the application of anyone offering, completing, or updating voter registration information. only three of the altered applications identified the third party. 22% of the acorn applications appeared to be multiple applications prepared by the same individual. attorneys for acorn made several defenses. one of the main ones being that indiana law requires acorn and other groups to turn and all

voter registration applications. my opinion is that it is an absurd interpretation of indiana law. an analogy would be to our tax return. no one is required to turn in an knowingly fraudulent one. and the same holds true for indiana's voter registration law. the intent was not there that we turn in fraudulent voter registration applications, only that we did not want valid registration application sitting in someone's truck are turned in after the election or something like that. it is important to know that my office is not a law-enforcement agency. i have a great staff of attorneys that went in the heat of administering the election to secure this information, and we

got the statistics by doing a preliminary but informal investigation. in indiana, only a county prosecutor or the u.s. attorney can file criminal charges and the relevant law enforcement agencies have the investigative powers. imagine that we were able to find not having those powers and what could be found if further investigation was begun? i've been in contact with u.s. district attorney repeatedly for the last year. he assures me that an investigation is ongoing. but charges have yet to be filed. i was certainly encourage -- i would certainly encourage people here to enforce federal law when it comes to the 2008. there were federal candidate on the ballot which gives the federal government jurisdiction over this matter in indiana and elsewhere. i'll submit my testimony for the record.

>> without objection, the complete testimony will be made part of the record. >> thank you, congressman, and i appreciate the opportunity to be here today. the opinions i am expressing our mind on and not those of the heritage foundation. i would say that representative king was holding at heritage copy of the constitution. [laughter] acorn is a far-flung operation with numerous subsidiaries and affiliates. one person discovered 200 affiliate's, almost an under estimate, operating at a new orleans. it claims operations and 100 cities. some of these organizations engaged in political work, like its affiliate's citizen services which received more than $800,000 last year from the obama presidential campaign. others have a tax-exempt charitable status.

yet the $127 million in donations or tax dollars that acorn has reported to have taken in since 1993, and again that is an under estimate, are apparently moved around is that work of organization and coming but with no concern of the propriety or legality of doing so. congressman issa released a report that he talked about that found but structurally and operationally acorn hi behind the paper wall of non-profit corporate protection to conceal criminal conspiracy on the part of its directors to launder federal money in order to pursue a partisan political agenda and manipulate the american electorate. the report and other reports also show that acorn has been accused of evading taxes, obstructing justice, covering up of million-dollar embezzlement

submitting false filings to the irs, as well as violating the fair labor standards act. i think the million dollar investment may have been $5 million according to the louisiana attorney general who we will hear from. it was hidden by acorn for 10 years. senator grassley released a report which was a review of acorn's tax-exempt status. he found almost 50 such tax- exempt subsidiaries of acorn, mainly receiving charitable donations. he concluded that the flow of money among the acorn family of organizations is a big shell game. dollars raise for charitable activities appear to be used for impermissible lobbying and political activity. in 2008, elizabeth kingsley, acorn's own lawyer, prepared an internal report later leaked outlining their interlocking directorate.

its lack of documentation about transfers of money between acorn and its many affiliate's, the possible use of tax- deductible, charitable donations for political purposes, and the conflicts of interest acorn interest employees who have dual roles in the tax-exempt entities and the other affiliate's that engage in political activities. acorn even fired some of its own members on the border trusties after they started seeking information on that flow of money and the internal operations of the organization. acorn is a tangled mess where a small group controls the dozens of shell companies that routinely, and possibly illegal transfer of millions of dollars. that is the classic pattern used by criminals to launder money and control their operations. former arkansas acorn chaired

dorothy perkins says that acorn was "run right -- run like a jim jones cult, where all the money ended up under the control of the founder and longtime head of the organization." then we get to the undercover videos. they show five separate acorn offices providing assistance and advice to a couple posing as a prostitute and her pants on how operate an illegal business, commit tax and mortgage fraud, and money-laundering. the couple also admits they are smuggling and underage girls from south america for prostitution. not only do the employees not report human trafficking and sex slaves, they provided by some house successfully cover-up such an end -- such an operation from the authorities. acorn has had dozens of its employees convicted of voter registration fraud and numerous elections. there are many different third

party organizations batting cage in voter registration, but there is only one with a record of that kind of criminal activity, an obvious sign of problems within the organization itself. one former acorn employees said that there is no quality control on purpose. such voter registration fraud is a criminal violation of federal law, punishable by up to five years in federal prison. this criminal activity also interferes with the ability of regular voters to participate in the election. acorn has a habit, as the secretary has pointed out, of dumping huge numbers of voter registration forms on local election officials just before the deadline for voter registration for upcoming elections. so while officials are trying to process the registration of legitimate voters, they have to spend a disproportionate amount of limited time and resources

sorting through thousands of fraudulent and invalid forms submitted by acorn. one state audit alone in india not found that 83% of the registrations filed by a acorn and its affiliate, but private vote, were invalid. in the internal report, it said that the tight relationship between project but an acorn make it impossible to document that project vote boss money had been used in a strictly non- partisan manner. there appeared to be numerous violations of federal law by an organization receiving millions of federal tax dollars and may have abused its tax-exempt status. yet the department of justice in the fbi have been almost entirely silent and seemingly negligent in carrying out their duty to investigate and prosecute violations of federal law. as has the irs. credit goes to officials in states like louisiana and nevada for opening investigations, but

acorn is a sprawling, multilayer organization with offices all over the country. it operates in a multitude of different areas from elections to housing to even operating radio and tv stations. i'm sorry, is my time up? , could you summarize? >> the bottom line is that only the fbi and the justice department have the power to perform a nationwide investigation. and there is more than enough evidence for the undercover videos and all of these other reports to provide a basis for a federal investigation. the government has launched a major investigations of businesses and government contractors on much less evidence. what needs to happen is they need to act immediately -- the dumping of california of 20,000 documents in the trash by the san diego office only days

after the secretary of state -- the attorney general announced an investigation shows that they are willing to destroy evidence and perhaps obstruct the law enforcement investigations. oversight hearings need to be in -- conduct and not just a acorn but also of the justice department and the fbi so that they are not doing an investigation, they can explain why not. >> thank you. mr. caldwell. dollars thank you for holding this hearing. can you hear me? i will keep my comments very brief. i do not want to rehash any of the stock already talked about. i did want to answer a question mr. king had with regards to the massive investigation, whether we have the resources to do that, just in case i kick off. i would like to say no to start off with. but we are going to do what we

can with what we have. it is probably unusual that a number of law enforcement and the investigating agency is here to testify before a committee regarding an ongoing investigation. we are aware of that but in this case it is necessary, because this is a nationwide issue. acorn is based out of new orleans. there is an allegation of fraud in several different areas, particularly involving taxpayer money, which is what we are principally interested in. and the public nature of this has been very helpful to us through the committees here. we have seen a lot of information and witnesses have come forth. you have been a great help enlighten us on a lot of different issues to help us narrow bands -- the focus of our investigation. it is important to point out that as to the financial fraud,

it was those people who brought this forward. it is not a democrat or republican issue. you put people in jail -- the justice not ask them if they are democratic -- democrat or republican. this is important to everybody and since this occurred in louisiana, a legion -- a louisiana agency would be remiss to sit on their hands and not do anything about it. that is why our office is involved in particular. i did want to point out that it was covered in the media that we executed a search warrant on the acorn offices in new orleans. i believe it was friday, november the sixth. we did that because we had gotten information from acorn attorneys that some of the hard drives were turning up missing. a lot of us were concerned that maybe some more would turn up missing. unspent -- instead of spending years haggling about what was

going to be turned over and what would not, we went ahead and secured all of that. we've got a lot of it back to those offices and we have done what we said we were going to do. what that search warrant yielded were 178 hard drives, the servers, on massive amount of information. also documentation that we were looking for that we had subpoenaed and had not yet gotten up until that date. what our mission is, if there are violations of state law, louisiana state law, we will pursue those. but if there are other potential violations of laws of other state or the federal government, i think we would be remiss if we did not handed over to somebody. i do not want to stick that in the back closet. we put out the word to other state agencies, in contact with

california, their attorney general's office regarding some nonprofit issue, and to the extent that we can legally and ethically share and provide the affirmation that we have obtained, we are certainly willing to do that. the issues that we're running into now is the people reviewing those documents are myself and my investigator, scott bailey, and we're in the process of getting another accountant. we tried to enlist the help of the governmental accounting office, perhaps the hands -- the inspector general, and we're reaching out to other states. we got an estimate for the forensic review of these hard drive and servers. the targeted estimate that we got back was approximately $3.5 million. just for a targeted review of disinformation. the forensic people have to go in and determine what is

privileged and what is not, and we have to have lawyers involved. we know that all runs up the bill pretty well. that is what we're dealing with. to the extent that any of you are able to help with those agencies that are in your jurisdiction, to either provide manpower or financial assistance from the federal government, what ever we need to do to try and get back to wait that, we have asked our state government for funding and we will see how that turns out. but i wanted to let you know that if it's an issue for us. we're in the process of hopping around on one leg with this investigation. but we will keep hopping until it falls off. if we run across something that is pertinent to other states, we're going to be active in that regard. how would encourage anybody watching this or any witnesses -- if you have got something to say, and you have worked for

acorn, and you really were interested in doing the right thing, became disenchanted -- we as a law enforcement agencies stand in the middle, and all we want to do is find out what the truth is, whatever that may be. it involves the illegal use of taxpayer money or private donor funds, we are going to do the right thing. that is been very helpful so i want to thank each of you for being a part of this process. i wanted to note that in louisiana, after allegations of voter fraud, we actually have a statewide registration system so that of someone registers in one parish in north louisiana, you cannot go double dip with the same name down in new orleans are bad -- or wherever. -- or baton rouge or wherever. >> thank you, mr. cali.