its government is under some pressure and probably is unable to negotiate completely and with total credibility. do i think we ought to break it off? no. i think we need to continue to pressure, continue to accelerate it, continue to work towards some agreement in the medium or longer term. host: ambassador william milam, and for a massacre to pakistan, thank you for being with us. -- former ambassador to pakistan, thank you for being with us. and we also want to thank former ambassador ronald neumann. that is all for "washington journal" today. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

ç>> all this week at 8:00 eastern, a rare glimpse into the nation's highest court. tonight we talk withñr justices anthony kennedy and samuel alito çthat discuss how the supreme court works, their role in decisions. interviews with supreme court justices all this week at 8:00 p.m. here on c-span3 for more information, go to c-span.org /supreme court. you will find a virtual tour of the building, a photo gallery on its construction, as well as interviews with the justices. tonight on c-span2, notable books of 2009, as listed by a number of publications.

tonight, but tv features ron paul and the end of the fed. from david wessel, "in said we trust co that is at 8:00 eastern. >> c-span thursday, a look back and tributes paid to u.s. and world leaders, including the dolly llama, ted kennedy, ronald reagan, walterç cronkite, colin powell, and robert byrd. then, newç year's day, a look ahead to the new year. vladimir putin discusses his future from his annual call-in program. presidential adviser ostend rules be on the economy. the creator of the segue, and guitar hero on of entrepreneurship. >> fox news contributor michelle malkin is our guest this week on "in depth," the author of "

the culture of corruption." she takes your calls. three hours with michelle malkin, sunday on "book tv." >> there is less than a month left to enter c-span's 2010 student cam contest. top prize, $5,000. just create a 5 to 8 minute video on one of our country's greatest strengths or a challenge the country faces. xdi]it mustç incorporate c-span programming and show varying points of view. interred beforew3 midnight, january 20. cannot wait another minute. -- do not wait another minute. >> how has military strategy changed? the house committee look into how military strategy is taught at u.s. war colleges. arkansas representative vick snyder chairs the armed services oversight subcommittee. the hearing is an hour and 50 minutes.

>> good morning. we are going to go ahead and began. mr. whitman will be joining us shortly. this is a subcommittee on oversight investigation, second hearing on professional military education, specifically today, officer in residenceç pme. institutionalizing what we called joined us. we also discussed the efforts of the 1989 skeleton panel to review pma to insure that it became part of the culture. today we are looking at the six senior schools in the pme enterprise. the schools are meant to focus

on developing strategies and a teaching strategy, natural -- national, military and resources. today we will hear the -- we will invite combatant commanders, those who employ to these institutions, and they should also be involved in this discussion. there are joined by their academic deans. we will now hear from mr. whitman. >> thank you, chairman snyder. i appreciate the opportunity. good morning to our witnesses. we deeply appreciate you being here today and service to our nation. our opening hearing featured outside experts who offered a range of thoughtful suggestions. while it is always useful to hear suggestions from intelligent observer is undone by current operations, we must also learn from those faced with

day-to-day realities in our professional military education systems. we have such people here today, the commandants of the military service, in joint senior war college's bread these institutions are the top of the pme system. the road to your position as lies predominantly with operational assignments rather than academic posts. as successful officers come from the operational part of their respective services is no surprise, but i wonder how each of you would adjust to the challenges of running an academic institution where faculty has the right to exercise academic freedom and students are encouraged to be creative. in short, to the witnesses believe there careers prepare them to be nurturing educators? i'm also interested in your recruiting and retaining the

best faculty? do you have the tools you need to retain such teaching? can you offer an academic environment attractive to the high caliber faculty who you see that your institutions? finally, i have to ask if military services are sending the best students to our military senior service colleges. the military services each have their own unique service culture, and part of the culture is a view of the value of professional military education. is that culture reflected in the quality of students? the department contortion of senior military -- is a distinguished collection of academic excellencew3 in all aspects of national security, diplomacy, and strategy. we provide experienced, talented military officers a year to read and think it at their expense at these fine schools. is the investment worth it to them and the nation? i believed it is the with like

to get your thoughts on the record. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. whitman. we are pleased to be joined again by our committee chairman, ike skelton, formerly the chairman of the skelton panel in the late 1980's. he has already broken a microphone. >> it has happened. and i will hold the. >> mr. skelton, i'm going to hold this for about an hour. [laughter] we could use this whole book to prop it up with. ike skelton's book. still ahead, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman,

thank you very much for the opportunity to sit in on this hearing. i want to complement dr. snyder and the ranking member on holding hearings on this subject, which, as you may know, is near and dear to me through the years. a bit of history. backxd inq 1982, richard white,a member of the armed services committee, held a series of hearings in hisç subcommittee, which was the predecessor of this subcommittee. onç what david jones, airforce chief of staff, later the joint chiefs of staff share, says that the joint chiefs of staff is that the advice. he was critical, and the list to say he became a pariah among the

military folks in the pentagon. sadly, he was very, very right. after richard white did the hearings, he retired and was one of those meant dust is where staff members who should be the blaze -- was one of those rare staff members who should be able emblazoned in stone. after passing legislation three times in the house over four years, the chairmanship and the senateç changedç from john tor to barry goldwater, barry goldwater into sam nunn, and the old legislation that we ended up in congress,ç they're passing e

goldwater/nichols act, which was not receive very well among most officers, with a few exceptions. following that, at the behest of march barrett, i chaired a panel working on joint education, and we ended up with a series of yearlong hearings and we came up with these one, phase two, and you know all of that. we found that the various war colleges varied in complexity and difficulty. marines were way behind, and he

the air force had a long way to go, and that came around. the army was a good b or b- plus. the best was the navy by far. he did not have to go there to get promoted, but it was for somewhere -- you did not have to go there to get promoted, but it was for someç reason the premir of 1988. well, fast-forward to today as the war colleges -- have they fulfilled their main purpose in life? what is the main purpose? well, cousin and snyder mentioned it. it is to create strategists, strategic thinkers. everybody graduates from your school -- everyoneç who graduas

from the school will not be a strategic thinker, but they will understand it, hopefully. but i also think that there should be a great deal of rigor. they should study every bit as hard as i did in law school, and of course being a product of the law school, and the case method, i think that might not be a bad idea for battles, campaigns, conflicts, to be studied on a case-by-case basis, and hopefully you do at least some of that. but i question whether you are turning out the strategists, and whether theyç are being recognized and taking care of and put in the right slots or not. i have a deep concern about that, and i have expressed that at the highest level in the

military. and i hope that those magic people who are great strategists can be guided by you to the right positions on staffs and in commands where they can use their strategic thinking rather than being shunned aside and caused to be discouraged. i have seen instances of this, and needless to say, it bothers me a great deal. we are and have been blessed through the years without standing thinkers, but we have more who are not being utilized as they should be. i think that is up to you to identify those rare breeds and to make sure that they follow on assignments that allow them to

do, be encouraged, and to make contributions to the best of their abilities. this is a serious time. these are very serious times, and we knew -- a year off from your family at school -- you should turn out, and later, to make sure that they are in the right spots in the military. i cannot stress that any stronger than i am right now. so thank you for your hard work and your intellectual abilities3 and again, let me compliment you, dr. snyder, for the series of hearings. it is timely, dire need for our

country. >> thank you for your comments and for all your work through literally decades, for all the importance of this to our nation. our witnesses today are rear admiral jerry hough, united states navy. major-general robert steele, general admiral james -- major- general robert williams, united states army, but that you were college. colonel michael belcher, united states marine corps director at the marine corps war college. we will put the timer on you gentlemen. çyour witness statements will e made part of the record. when you see the red light go on, we are not going to shoot you. you should feel free to continue your statement if you needi] to. the challenge that we have with six of you come with decided we wanted to have allç of you

together here. we thought that would be good for all of us. if you go 10 minutes instead of five minutes, it will be an hour before we get to any questions. admiral, we will begin with you. thank you all for being here. the staff already has that. thank you all. >> good morning, chairman skelton, mr. chairman, dr. snyder, mr. whitman. thank you for the opportunity to be here today. based on your opening statements, i know that you really get it and what we're trying to accomplish that our schools. çi have observed two classes 60 students are fellows, worked with just under 100 faculty members. i am extremely proud of the institution. my written statement is part of the record. there are three take away from the statement i would like to make. the first one, the point is

that we are unique. we are the only senior service school that teaches economics. this translates into an appreciation of resource constraints. students learn to develop a national strategy while considering the realities of resources. this is recently highlighted at our joint air/land/sea simulation where the students are recognized for bringing all elements of power to bear, diplomatic informational -- diplomatic, informational, military, and economic. they really understand resources. point two, chairman skelton, you spoken navy flags well before i was appointed, and i remember clearly a statement as you what your students to work as hard as you did in law school. that resonated with me, as well as your story about the shoeshine -- what is the difference between a $3 shine and a $5 shine?

it is attitude. i express both of those comments to the class. it is a challenging and rigorous academic program. it is not your old general's -- many senior officers say that when you are sent there, it is a great time to work on your handicap. students find out it is a lotçf ribbi'!hp'd you're going to do it. there is no time to work on your handicap, so this is not your old school. çour students are graded rigorouslyç thisç onçç clasm çcontribution, not participati, but classroom contribution to class. fatimid -- faculty members evaluate all students through every exercise. this gives us the ability to hand out another record award and also to recognize about 12% of our graduates as distinguished records based on gpa and leadership contributions. anecdotally,ç the department of

homeless security education officer came in, look at our curriculum, saw how it was being presented, and she said it was equal to her phd program that she is completing right now. also, the stanford university professor, after examining our curriculum,ç said it is perhaps the finest senior executive development course in the nation,-çthe findings. we teach economic houses, but wo not teach finance. i have watched senior executives, after being interviewed or having had discussions with our students, say, boy, these guys know more about us than we know about us. our folks ask tough questions in a very polite manner. so there is rigor. point number three, we are still true to our charter. we are still true to being in touch with industry, but we are not adverse to change or growth.

we are constantly evolving. icaf provides a strategic environment. german skelton, you are always ask about the comfort -- not all of them are going to be that unique strategic leader, but i think overnight% of my graduates not only can have the conversation with general marshall but can understand that conversation. they can politely challenge him, and they could continue to help him develop his strategic thought. w3in the end, they could capture that thought, but it being clear, conciseñr writing, and communicated to us, something i think is important to our commanders. again, an example of that conversation -- each for the past 15 years, we have had the national security strategy exercise, where our students look forward 10 years and create a national strategy. at the conclusion of two weeks

of the exercise, go before this is the arme-- before 60 uniform. in summary, i am proud to be the common done. i am energized by the students, inspired by the faculty, and i am a strong believer that one person can make a difference. one week from today we will read 3320 individuals who will immediately go out with the sophistication needed to operate at a strategic level. the first female four start in government, dr. kaminski, who has been a leader for decades been in business industry, chess huber is the ceo of onstar.

and mr. snyder, you asked about a preparation for our commandants. i would said that -- i would say that president obama used a " that the life of what is experience. it is my experience operationally that we get a new set of eyes. it is easy to operate in an environment of academic freedom because that comes down to moral courage and moral leadership in doing what is right. so i feel that i am prepared to be the commandant, and i am proud to become a dog. i will be happy to answer any of your questions. -- to become a commandants. i will be happy to answer any of your questions. we make sure they are placed within the right environment, and also my biggest concerns is

more with the government employees who often go back to their original jobs. i talk to all leaders that come through about placement in the next job. i will be happy to take any further questions. thank you very much. >> thank you. general steel? >> chairman skelton, chairman snyder, congressman whitman, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to address the occasion of the men and women protecting and representing our country. in my written testimony, i address my vision for the national war college, the quality of its faculty, the composition of its student body, and the rigor of its curriculum. i would like to note a few key points from it. it is an honor and privilege to serve as commandant of the national war college. the national war college prepares future generations of america's top military and civilian leaders through a course of study that enhances student knowledge of the national security issues, sharpens their analytical

abilities and focuses specifically on the successful formulation and execution of grand strategy. we also stress the habit, breadth and depth of mine needed by senior policy-makers and military commanders. above all, we encourage students to hone their critical thinking skills. in my opening remarks, i would like to emphasize three points. first, it is important to recognize and preserve the unique mission of each war college. second, national war college is focused on grand strategy, critical to producing leaders who can deal with the national security challenges of today and tomorrow. third, the leadership and organization of our senior service colleges are not broken, as some would suggest. and all the work -- it should not be tracked for the specialized excellence that each provides.

when chairman skelton stressed criticality of join this in jpme years ago, he was careful to ensure that -- he recognized that join misfunctioned best when it is -- when synthesized the best each service but to the table. while we look for ways to improve jpme, i ask that you preserve each mission that each war colleges targeted to accomplish. for the national war college, it is the national security strategy mission that must be preserved. each of the three critical components of the cause, faculty, student body, and curriculum, has unique joint combined interagency composition. there is no particular service or agency lens through which problems are viewed. equally important are washington --, our washington,

d.c., location means we can't attract top students and faculty. it also means that our students have tremendous access to the highest echelon of our three branches of government, are most renowned as think tanks, and the entire washington diplomatic corps. with the exception of our sister college, icaf, i know of no other institution that has these critical assets. i challenge those the suggest the leadership and organization in our senior service colleges are broken. leading the college decided -- requires the same leadership skills required in a large complex institution dedicated to the mission and ability to integrate the very depth that we can offer our students, and a vision to anticipate the challenges of tomorrow. the commandant must remember that these of the hybrid

organizations, a mix of military, civilian government, and economic environments whose strength flows from their diversity. i would be concerned by any line of thinking that fails to take into account our unique strengths as an institution that combines the best of the civilian academic world with senior government and military expertise. we bring together the next generation of our country house military and civilian leaders along with their international peers for a program of study that has the unique capacity of allowing them to interact intensively with one another over a 10-month period. and comes at risk with the key issues -- and comes to grips with the key issues as they rise to businesses of greater responsibility. this unique experience is the central added value that institutions like the war college bring to the education of future leaders.

it is not replicated in private sector universities. the critical essential element in achieving our unique mission is professional diversity, diversity in leadership, our faculty, in our student body, and in our curriculum. while our academic professionals helped guide critical bellmen, help understand -- our critical development, and can be applied to the series we teach. leading these institutions requires a careful blending, a balance of these two forms of education, under which we will find the success that chairman skelton, you and your subcommittee, chairman snyder, and we, will lead the schools. thank you for the opportunity to testify on our national security issues, the education of our future national security leaders. >> good morning, mr. chairman.

chairman snyder, mr. whitman. and gentlemen and ladies of the oversight investigations committee. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. and professional military education and the work that the team of the naval war college of providing for one occasion opportunities related to the mission of the navy in serving the people of this nation. united states naval war college will celebrate its 125th anniversary in october. from its humble beginnings in the structure which was the kxp founder said a true course for educational success by choosing an approach based on focus and ballistic study of war as prevention in this is much involved with both. he envisioned active learning by students and faculty on several strategic issues in a collegial

environment. 125 years later, the traditions remain at the center of the college approach to education. we carefully apply a wide aperture of perspectives and the disciplines, and cultures to the study of war and its prevention. we continue to seek to prepare senior levels since for the challenges and responsibilities of higher command and staff and an uncertain, in the u.s., and often surprising world. we aim to prepare them tfor strategic leadership, not simply the next to the station. we inculcate disciplined habits of thought through a strategic level wednesday and help them hold their ability to critically think and write about the associated complex issues. we are confident our approach, which highlights in executive perspective, in a seminar center environment, requiring an appreciation for alternative viewpoints, and the synthesis of complex ideas using multidisciplinary tools, is precisely on target. we expect application of

principles to case studies of realçt( events and issues, and require our students to provide written analysis of complex, open-ended[çç issues. grading system is the academic rigor. we believe we canç well judge f our students and -- çthe college of new warfare isa 10-month senior-level pme program to produce broadly educated leaders who possess a strategic perspective underpinned by key political framework. graduates will be able to apply discipline of a strategic-minded critical thinking to challenges in the multi service, multi agency, multinational environments. about 20% of our student body is made up of international officers handpicked by their services. students study 313-week courses in our core academic program. the bus 3 -- 313-week courses in

our core academic program. to appreciate the political uses of military power and to become familiar with the roles of both military and political leaders in policy formulation of military planning, and the conductxd of war a' peace. the national security decision making course aims to prepare our officers and governments do to change in large organizations boys to be national security challenges and uncertain national security environments. the joint military operations course refines creative thinking skills under the umbrella of military problem-solving, especially the ability to evaluate a range of potential solutions, through bill structure problems and in complex environments. these courses, along with three elective courses complemented by

two complem-- a form the framewf national security and strategic studies. over the last two decades are educational approach and methodology has stayed on course. however, much else has changed. first, we amendedç the recommendation by the panel on military education of the 100th congress. today we have distinct curriculum for our senior an intermediate level courses. they are discreet courses with differing focuses and outcomes. since we have a single faculty to teach both levels, i am confident the distinction will remain at these courses will complement each other very well over the longer term. as our recent jpmeç certificatn showed, though this places a greater workload on our distinguished faculty, they have told me personally they are proud of the end result. our culture is one of constant reassessment. second, our educational outreach has expanded along with our mission as a result of decisions made by myw3 direct sr., the chf

of naval operations. and i can tell you, the admiral is four square behind us. the college is responsible for all military education in the navy. the number ofç students we touh has grown from 1500 in 1989 to over 27,000 today. çthe in-residence programs from almost 300 to 600. in my short time as president, seven months on saturday, i have found the war college to be if professional graduate institution of the highest quality with faculty and staff members who are satisfied they are doing meaningful work that makes a difference. the students areç highly motivated professionals, many of çthe front lines overseas. okwe invite them in as we learn about the serious business of war. thank you, mr. chairman. i am happy to take any questions. >> thinking. >> chairman skelton, a german snyder, a distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.

my name is general bob williams, come about of the united states army war college. our soldiers have the good fortune of the associate with egyptian and training of cadets and soldiers for more than 34 years. i have served as the instructor oil and assistant professor at west point, commander of two of the army combat training centers as well as the -- additionally, i've had the great privilege of serving in the operational army in peacetime and in war. i feel well prepared for the duties associated as commandant. it is an honor to be here today to discuss the professional development of our nation's strategic leaders that the war colleges. as has already been said, the mission of the war colleges to shape and develop senior leaders our nation will require. the army war college's unique contribution is to prepare students to deal effectively with complex, unstructured problems in strategic security

environments and render some military advice when the application of land power is part of a policy option. we do this recognizing fully military activities are often only a part of the solution to complex problems. as we review the ever-changing security landscape, particularly since 9/11, i believe that we will best and do best serve the country through these men and women that we educate by achieving appropriate balance with faculty and student body and the curriculum. i would like to speak briefly to these three areas that i believe are the key to assuring the rigor and responsiveness of professional military education at the senior service level. to begin with, faculty. it is the center of gravity for the army war college, and i am pleased to report ourç faculty meets standards set by law, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff education policy. our faculty achieves, i believe,

a powerful synergy between the melding of two cultures. first, our military officers have 22 to 30 years of professional expertise and a lifelong experience of training and mentoring. second, our academic professors, with their academic professionals with their academic credentials -- with their academic credentials. representative join u.s. forces and recruitment of high-quality academic professionals. çwe recognize the value of assuring stability in key faculty positions and have instituted the united states armyç were college to create hybrid professionals. çto return to the army war college faculty. even as we seekqxd continuity, e

are willing to give up the back of the to support ongoing operations for periods of six months to a year. those faculty members return with valuable experience that enhances our curriculum and helps us stay current, challenging our operational forces in the field. the balance is equally important within the student body. we are to meet the expectations of future strategic leaders. the war college experience works best, as we have all found, with a cross-section of those military officers who will lead our nation's future operations. we know that a joint student body representing all the services is important, and equally important is a mixture of the brands is that -- the branches that make up the core of the army possibility to execute its missions across the broad spectrum of conflict. we also blend civilians from an essay, cisa, and other branches of government, -- from nsa, cia,

and other branches of government. we have embarked on a program to request -- to increase the number of international fellows in the student body. we will increase that number by 25% this next year. he has asked me to look at increasing it at 100% over the course of four years. this is not only important for u.s. officers to understand how to fight together, it is a board to prepare them for effective coalition operations. therefore, we need the diverse perspectives that come from international fellows. wmçç sponsor the same international dialogue and challenges in the seminarxd. w3stern's to be exposed and challenged -- students ought to be exposed and challenge about other nations point of views. it is large dividends as former students are often promoted to the highest ranks of our

military and civilian governments. for similart(ç reasons, we bele we should be stronger with a greater interagency representation in the student body. it is our businessç to prepare students to understand how military power works in concert with other national elements of power. our seminars duplicate interagency dialogue, explore the distinct culture, skills, and attributes of other agencies. students learn perspectives of the policy, economics, and informational elements of power. i understand of the u.s. government agencies do not have the depth of personnel to allow them to divert manyçç ofç the graduate level of education. that makes it tougher to recruit interagencyw3 students, and that makes it all the more importantçç toçó incorporate interagency representatives in professional military education. it is a smart investment in our nation possibility to provide what is commonly referred to asç

government strategies. çin the face of accumulated demands to add toç the curtain, we sometimesç rest of diluting our focus. w3i will admit that to you here. reviewsç are marked by continus çdebate over threatç verses d. hard decisions about the time çdevoted to each subject, contt time with faculty, time to read and reflect have to be made. i feel the mechanisms are in place for me as a come and gone to push back on those things, the army war college has transitioned the program of instruction to incorporate the study of strategy as the central aspect of the curriculum. army war college students study classical theorists, but they also study new strategies as well. the army war college must adapt to the needs of the current and future fight, and reassess and

ship the curriculum on an annual basis. how we seek to achieve a balance between case studies and military history, emerging doctrine such as the regular warfare doctrine. while providing a broad in strategic level at the ethics and cultural intersection with national strategy. in closing, i can tell you that today's army were college is different than the one of the late 1980's. it is a dynamic institution that plays a significant role in preparing selective leaders for the responsibilities of leadership. the advent of jpme2 set high standards. because the nation needs agile cumbrous forceful, and shell each of leaders, our senior service colleges must themselves be added -- agile, forceful, and

creative spirit we know that a division is an adaptive process, in an adjustment to ensure we are still getting it right. i am confident that we are on that path. chairman's letter, i requested that my written statement be provided. thank you for the opportunity to discuss this fundamental issue with the subcommittee, and i look forward to your questions. >> general forsyth? >> chairman skelton, chairman snyder, ranking member whitman, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify about the war college. this morning i would like to try to capture the essence of our vision for the war college in a senior professional education version of the three r's -- relevance the relationship, renewal. first of relevance. i have spent my career as a pilot, command officer, not an academic point i can identify with with the needs of the students and the needs of the

general officers who employ our graduates. like my other colleagues here today, i have witnessed some of the past illinois and strategic choices that are graduates have faced. if our program is to remain relevant, the war college education must prepare our graduates, meet the needs of the joint interagency and multinational operation and not only in today's fight but also tomorrow's, as unpredictable as that may be. our curriculum is properly balance the presentation through the study of history and a personal experience, and the experience of others to produce strategic thinkers and leaders. likewise, relevance demands balance faculty the most distinguished academics and -- many of whom are coming to school right off of the battlefield. finally, the relevance requires that as a complement to our credit and join curriculum, each school devotes some part of the educational experience to service competencies'.

in our case, at the air war college of the competency of the air component. the highly qualified jessalyn creek and shapes the relevance of our program, the students hold the keys to build an all important relationships. the air war college thrives on building relationships in and out of the classroom between faculty and students, and most importantly on building relationships among the students who come from different backgrounds, different services, a different agencies, and different nations. in addition to the academic growth, the relationships forged during the shared common experience of war college can and to have lasting impact. oftentimes that impact is manifested in a phone call away complex issue. even more significantly, at a deployed location. perhaps the most important of these relationships are those forged among the international

officers from 45 different countries to make up almost 20% of the integrated student body. while some aspects of the air war college are for u.s. students, dedicated another graduate school studies, this one cannot. the chance to meet, in iraq, and build lasting relationships with officers 7 -- me, interact, and build lasting relationships with officers. many of these international fellows go on to hold the most senior positions in the nation's military and government, and cultivating these religious and have never been moreñr important today's interconnected and interdependent security environment. the importance of relationships is difficult to quantify, but hard to deny. similarly difficult to quantify, but just as important, is the opportunity for renewal. the air war college and spirits must build energy, strength, in the enthusiasm for the students and their families.

other students have overcome similar difficult leadership dilemmas in their careers. renewal comes from intense discussion on the role of leadership, the man, integrity, and ethics. renewal comes from the student'' confidence in their ability to craft strategy's in international agency environments that the strategic level. renewal comes from -- the predictability that allows students to reflect, synthesize them and discuss the material they study. in the time to reconnect with the vital support network refinement, renewal comes from developing a clear understanding of the importance of the contributions of graduates as senior leaders to the success of their units and their nation. i think you again for the opportunity to testify and the chance to outline the important contributions of relevance, relationships, and renewal, the air war college's success and success for our graduates. i look forward to your questions. >> thinking, in general.

>> good morning this the was members of the committee. i appreciate this opportunity to address the subcommittee today and discuss the achievements of your marine corps war college. the 29th commandant of the marine corps ignited a renaissance in marine corps' professional military education in the 1980's that still burns today. in august of 1990, he directed the elite group of six lieutenant colonels to conduct an intensive one-year study of the art of war plan the profession of arms. in titled the art of war studies program, it was a precursor of the's marine corps college. it remains true to its original charter. now as then, the college remains committed to preparing the next generation of strategic leaders.

to do so, it employs the rigorous multidimensional curriculum presented by first rate faculty through a small elite group of high-caliber, highly competitive senior military officers and government officials. focus on the to teach a level of war, the curriculum examines both traditional and a regular mode of warfare -- and a regular modes of warfare. it employs historical analysis and derive lessons from history, and apply them to the critical issues existing in today's operational environments as well as those emerging on the strategic horizon. the curriculum also reflects the culture of the service in which it is born. specifically, the agile, adaptable the expedition remind said, land, sea space and cyberspace spectrum. it also reflects the world of

general james t. conway, or his commitment that we believe in the human dimension of war being the most critical element, and the boldness, creativity and intelligence, and açóç warriorç spirit are prime attributes. w3çthe college employs active, adult learning methodology to include highlyç personalized i- class instruction, local, domestic, international field studies, practical application exercises, selected scholarly research, andi] professional tie for reading and reflection. to remain current and coach and, to theok curriculum undergoes a vigorous, continues, then multilevel review and validation process. season'sç faculty comprised of military,w3çxd government, and civilianç professors, some qoperators, somei] academics, bt

all professionals in their fields of endeavor. the instruction is enhanced by expenses at some faculty of experts, regional experts come and interagency experts, as well as visiting guest speakers. due to the college's proximity to the national capital region, and our small size, students are afforded an messed access to senior military come interagency, industry, and leaders whom they meet with on a one-to-one personal basis, which promotes open, intimate, an informal discourse. our guest speakers rival those of the most prestigious civilian universities. we have been in the classroom on a routine basis. it is and has by the quality and diversity of the college's student population itself. while small, the student body consists of top performers, and selected by their respective service or agency where their

exceptional, operations, an academic performance, as well as theq crucifuture potential for service. the united states coast guard, several government agencies, multiple ethnic groups, as well as a myriad of occupational specialties. thanks to this mixture, the students learn joint and interagency operations not just through instruction butçç also through personal observation and daily interaction. our vision for the war college is to retain the economic advantages inherent in being a small, elite college. specifically, the academic access, agility, excellence we currently enjoy, while progress of the growing into a more robust educational institution. to achieve this institution, we have instituted a program to expand the size and diversity of our student population, to expand the size, capability, and

diversity of our faculty. most important, to expand our academic outreach efforts. while the college costs educational experience cannot be replicated by any civilian -- while the college's educational expense cannot be replicated by any civilian university, as well as collaboration with the other military educational institutions here today -- mr. chairman, our graduates will face a world dramatically different from that of their predecessors. consequently, at the marine corps war college, we are dedicated to intellectually arming them for these challenges ahead. to mentally reset the force for the fight yet to come. i am convinced we are achieving thisç objective, and with the continued advocacy and support of this subcommittee, we will do so far into the future. thank you for this opportunity to address the panel. i look forward to your question. thank you. >> thank you, general belcher.

admiral, you said at the beginning that every question will come to him first. we are not going to do that. we will move in and around so you can all have the experience of saying i am so glad i am not the first one asked. we are going to start with you this time and go around this way. i want to ask the following question. this morning, president obama about 7:00 eastern time -- i did not see the whole speech, but i saw excerpts of it. he gave what seemed to be a very well-received speech, certainly a much anticipated speech, calling for a new beginning in terms of the relationship between our nation and the world of islam. how will that speech impact what occurs on your campuses and classrooms this week? >> sir, thank you for that question. i watched part of that this

morning. i will tell you, knowing the faculty like i do,çi] this will full been to our constant çreassessment. with faculty members who are very well connected. they are always out and about. a faculty member, for example, who teaches in strategy and policy, is also our area specialist in the indian ocean, pakistan, india. he will, 1, know about this speech. two, he will have the tax. 3, he probably knows people connected with it. when the faculty does their curriculumç review, which in fact, they are in the process now for the next academic year, those kind oqç ideas will factr intow3ççqçç holidayç>mçw3çe curriculum. imagine if you can -- into holidaow they retork their

curriculum. they do what they call bootstraps' sessions. ast( they review the curriculum for the next trimester's teaching, week by week, a class by class. so these faculty members will sit in a room, for example, and have oftentimes a heated debate over what is going to go into the curriculum. that is when this kind of information, this kind of context, can be provided and factor into the development of the curriculum, write up to just a few weeks before they actually go before the students on the podium, which really think -- which really keeps things current. >> sir, i would echo what the admiral said. what i would add to it is, even

while his speech was ongoing, the blogging network was already alive with our network of graduates throughout the region there. çalready communicating witht( faculty here at the war college what they were receiving the receipt of this speech was. so i anticipate that network to be alive and well here throughout this week. the discussions that we had, we will roll all transcripts, other discussions that think tanks come out with into our faculty, for curriculum review here during the summer. when we get to this particular phase in our curriculum, with next year's class, i am sure there will be even new information to roll into our classrooms here, as much

progress is made in the months ahead from his speech here. >> yes, sir. i think this is a perfect time of year to have this take place in the academic environment several of you have graduation coming up, don't you? -- to lie in the academic environment. >> several of you have bad news in coming in, don't you? >> yes, it is coming up at the right time of the year, where we have 20 international fellows right now at icaf, and i just listed them off. at the beginning of the year, they might be hesitant, but now, as i said, academic freedom and the policy of non attribution, as we go through the year, not only is their mind expanded, but they are comfortable in the

environment. they have the speed -- they have the freedom of to speak openly about their opinions, and the u.s. students have learned to accept these. it is a very fascinating process to see this awakening happened. so they have fertile minds to process this. today is a picnic for the international fellows. i will ask them what they think about the comments. .

>> bill changing of the government and changing of the strategy, the national shoe 30 strategy that will roll down to the national military strategy and how all takes place has been

an incredible epidemic classroom in and of itself. this is one other piece -- academic classroom in and of itself. quite frankly, not just this speech, but the way we have gotten to where we are from the bush administration to we are in the obama administration throughout the entire year has been an incredible academic groundwork. >> i believe the president had a number of major themes -- to that i took note of was a diplomacy and willingness to listen and also a willingness to assist. but it also confirmed that this administration will protect the american public. i believe for us it will perhaps push our desire as we have had for some time now in the

education of our strategic leaders to focus on an emphasis of all elements of national power, including diplomacy, economics, information, as well as the parts we are expert in -- the military component. it clearly signals for us an emerging national security strategy. as we and our course on saturday, we will take the board and adjust our curriculum as appropriate. >> as a follow-up from that, i want to ask -- in context of what we see today, which is a very dynamic time in our history nationally and internationally with things changing constantly, how do you see your challenge of making sure that your schools can change in relationship to the external

changes but also remain true to making sure this fundamental subject matters are being taught and instilled in the graduates from your institutions. also, how you take the lessons learned under current operations and incorporate them with the whole context of making sure your graduates come out with that rounded strategic knowledge to be the leaders are nation needs going into the future? >> you are right to highlight the challenge of the school in protecting some of the core elements in our educational requirements. for example, at the national war college, we try to stay at the strategic level. i have only got 10 months to work with. we have a lot of ground to cover. our students, when they first show up, have all been

operating at the operational level. their minds are fixed and it takes several months to unlock that and make progress. we constantly get challenged with things that commanders in the field would like to see in graduates so that they are ready to go as soon as they get into their new job. most of these requests are at the tactical and operational wobble. i work with my faculty regularly to resolve how to best approached requests of the combatant commanders, senior leadership, other agencies that this particular new, dynamic environment be incorporated into the curriculum somehow. we usually find a way where it

is either already being discussed. it's not a soul centerpiece in the curriculum. but if it could find how to best read the new dynamic environment into our curriculum, we will do so and we will find the best course to put it in. also, it like this turned out to be pretty good option -- it electives turn out to be a pretty good option for students to get a focused study on a particular concept. so use a selective opportunities to take on some of these new fields that are being asked for the colleges to invest in. >> thank you. >> i think the best way to answer your question is to go back to the question posed about

the obama speech. the mechanism i outlined for you -- how we can roll things into the curriculum. this is a function of faculty. i will give you an example. at this point, we're going into the nuclear posture review. so the time is right for people who can talk these issues about nuclear deterrence in a new world. the interesting thing is we have people who have been constantly working those issues, like the christian monks in ireland to preserved the sacred texts during the middle ages. we have this expertise that has not been permitted to atrophy. now that it is needed, we have been able to provide the expertiseçó to a variety of agencies and government folks have been asking for it and

searching out. the other thing is, looking at how the faculty gets out, one of our faculty members visited north korea about a month and a half ago with a private visit of a major foundation. he works research. our faculty is constantly publishing, they're contributing constantly, and these are the same faculties that will roll into the bootstraps and talk about the curriculum. when i was strike group commander, the ronald reagan strike group, before i knew i was going to be president of the war college, i knew the expertise of some of these professors and ask them to come out to my strike group and talk to us about the region of the indian ocean. so they got the benefit of coming out and talking with on scene commanders but the current situation and then flew off to visit their contacts in different places in the region.

we got the benefit of their knowledge. these are the same people who will rule this information into the bootstraps and into the curriculum development. >> thank you for the question. our curriculum is found in the injuring tens of war which has not changed in many, many years. that said, we look to capitalize on new and novel approaches coming out of the current operations that we can apply within our curriculum. specifically, we look back into history, identified as principals, then apply them in modern some areas in the current study our student is operating in or will operate in as graduates. to drive this, we go to multiple sources. first and foremost is the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. the learning objectives he establishes, the yearly special be the most critical elements of

the upcoming year would begin to integrate into our curriculum to ensure we're dealing with a topical issues, but not with the curriculum all-around and chasing the topic of the day. the other ways we do this are to the hiring of faculty coming directly from operational backgrounds. myself, having just come out of a regimental command to your, bringing experience from that and previous combat tours, write to the schoolhouse. second is the continual scanning of the strategic horizon by the professors are reading, research, and directing the think tanks and study groups such as the strategic vision group, the war fighting centers, to see what it is on the strategic horizon we'd to prepare students for and incorporating that in a coherent method synchronized with our curriculum. other ways include routine interviews with combatants,

component commanders, and service leaders. i had the opportunity yesterday to sit down and talk with the deputy commander at cent, regarding his most critical issues as well as the critical capabilities he is looking for from graduates from my work college. continuing to interview graduates and their supervisors to see the curriculum at the needs when they came into force. finally, we also allow academic white space. we have a series called issues in modern warfare which we do not fill at the beginning of the year knowing that critical issues will pop up during the year we would like to craft a class war. having a small faculty, have the organizational ability to put class together, find leading- edge experts, and fill them. such topics in the past have been the repeal of don't ask don't tell, what would be the

implications for the military. the effects of a pandemic which happens to be timely because several weeks later a swine flu began to reach the headlines. a variety of topics we can then add in and make sure the student, as he walks out the door, is as up-to-date as he can be before he begins his next job. thank you. >> i appreciate the question. i think i don't have a problem with staying current. that's a tactical and operational level, with most of them coming in with experience. if anything, it's a challenge to push them to the strategic level. in terms of staying current at the strategic level, we have always been like some of my colleagues here, a think tank for a lack of a better description, for the department of the army and various other

agencies in the united states. there is enormous intellectual talent in the faculty and they are often called for their expertise. in fact, this last year, i have had members of the faculty serve on the brigadier- general's team building a new strategy for afghanistan as well as answering a call for a strategist where i sent my director of national security and strategy for six months to assist in the building of a strategy for afghanistan. by the way, when his six months was over, we sent the no. 2 man for that department and he is downrange right now. at any given time, we look for opportunities to take our faculty and offer our faculty up to work on some of the hardest problems of the nation is facing at the strategic level. when they come back, they see the faculty, the informal curriculum. that is enormously in powering. the other part of your question

is how we protect the core from the whole list of requirements that often time look like training as opposed education? sometimes those things come through the cjcs military education committee and we are in attendance at those as well as our teens and we have the opportunity to push back on those items so that we are not required to put them into the curriculum. sometimes we win, sometimes we lose. i feel confident the mechanisms are in place for us to do what we need to do or i need to do as a comment on. i do not get that many requirements from the army i would call training requirements apart from those kinds of things we would want to do anyway. recently, suicide training. we take the time, it's important to absolutely require it and

we're proud to do that. i hope i have answered your question, but i think we have the mechanisms in place to stay current, which is to say the strategic level, we are in the business of allowing the students to master the strategic heart and we have to stay focused at that. -- master the strategic part and we have to stay focused at that. >> everybody has touched on board and start it -- or danced around a little bit or i would like to go which is the balancing act of the tension between the current topic of the day and the foundations of leadership, ethics, strategy, and those things that need to be the bedrock of what we do. i think that in many instances comes to the people at this table to make sure we have an advocate for both. the faculty at the air war college is a third civilian,

one-third military, air force military, and about one-third of joint military and interagency and coalition as well. that mixture allows us to span the spectrum between the basic foundation and current events. add into that a student -- many of them just came from the war and you try to extract them from either the tactical level or operational level and bring them up to the strategic level. it makes for a great dynamic within the classroom. with respect to making sure the foundations are there and the balance is there, i think that is to my level. >> i heard the question is does the president's speech affect your curriculum and how we maintain our core courses. this is a dynamic.

and it is a very compelling speech, but we want to develop strategic leaders, people can formulate strategy, analyze strategy, but not chase strategy. this will become a case study to be in our national security studies and strategic leadership courses as we've worked students for the socratic method and challenge assumptions. we're constantly reviewing our curriculum. we're going to the formal process right now and see what is relevant. i see it becoming part of a teaching package -- as an example, to use in a case study but not changing the curriculum. you do not want us to chase policy speeches, but learn how to challenge and develop policy. >> thank you to all of you for your comments and openness. we appreciate it. i have a few questions -- and

you mentioned the six month turnaround in terms of deployment and bringing people back into school. has that been a problem, a major problem in terms of deployment and does that mean we might have fewer officers who are trained in advanced professional education? >> whenever i get a request from the theater for assistance that might involve the pulling of one of my faculty for that purpose, i immediately go to the dean who is sitting directly behind me and i asked him can we support the united states army or this theater commander wherever the requirement comes from, and not degrade our primary mission, which is the education of the student we are charged with?

if he comes back to me and says yes, we can do that, then i believe it is part of my mission to support the operational and institutional army. i think it is important that we do that. by the way, to your real question, do i have trouble with that, i usually have faculty members lining up in the hallways volunteering to do this. and they fully understand that as great educators, they're adding additional tools to their kids for the audience -- tools to their kits for the audience and constituencies that have to talk to. i do not have a personal problem and so far we have not had to say no. we have gotten close a couple of times, but i hope i have answered question. i have not had a problem with this. >> does anybody else want to weigh in from that? >> i think the question goes to

deployments and expectations. the deployments affect all aspects of military life, including family life. back when senator john mccain and his classmates went to national defense university and said you're coming back from being prisoners of war, this is an opportunity to relax and get back in touch with your family and regroup and work on your health. our programs no longer allow that. as i referred to in my opening statement, it's a rigorous academic program. we bring folks in right from the field, army, navy, air force and marines. many of our deployed civilians are told to get their breath, when really it is a very rigorous academic year and they don't often get to catch their breath. many, if they're coming from out of theater, they may be their families in previous duties stations. now you have a situation of ngo batching -- geographically isolated from your family.

so what we do? we're always talking about posttraumatic stress and we look for that in our students. we have medical, psychological help. we have health and fitness, so we do work on that basis of healing any wounds seen warren scene. we have both types of wines -- seen or unseen. we have both types of loans come through. you work with families and its eight rigorous course of study. overall, the military everywhere is going to find challenges in all the plants. >> -- a challenge in all the deployments. >> our schools and faculty are sought after globally because of their expertise. whether they are being asked to go and deployed to support the army or combat and commander or

just to come help with some research aspect, quite often the schools and here at national as well, the first thing we look and see if we can support it with our ongoing activities at the college. if we can do that, and it enhances the faculty's expertise, we will do everything we can to support it because the faculty member will return with value added. >> if i could go quickly, i think general williams mentioned you like to enter -- and look at it -- you would like to increase the general officers by 100% over four years. what percentage are they now? >> we have 40 in a question of 340. i have not figured out that percentile. we'll go to 40 next year and chief of staff of the army has asked me to look at how we could go to 80.

currently everyone of our seminars has to for an international students and we would go to four. -- foreign international students and would go to four. we would open the aperture and as part our cultural training at the senior level, there is no better vehicle to do that than to bring these very successful officers from around the world, all nominated to come through and in some cases, the army staff and then they're sent to us based on the decision of who will make it. >> are their barriers to bringing more international officers in question are is it a matter of having the seats essentially or are there other

constraint that get in the way? >> you are hitting on an issue for us. it is a matter of facilities. and faculty. i'm ok for this next year to go to 50, but the dean and the academic board have reported to me that be on that we have to look at some other ways before we increase any further. there are no barriers beyond that. i think i need legislative help for sure. >> thank you very much. >> how often do you all get together formally or informally as a group? >> i'm new to this process. and if the meeting we recently had. >> i have been doing this for 14 months now. i believe i would be correct in saying i've seen these guys

about 34 times this last year in various forums. about eight months ago, the board of visitors sponsored a symposium in washington and oral invited to discuss pme. we all collectively decided to get together prior to the joint staff meeting and general caldwell hosted a meeting at fort leavenworth where we sat down and discussed issues, ideas before we would go to the meeting in washington d.c. i believe, there's going to be a meeting of just those of us you see at this table. that would be this coming fall. i hope i have answered question. >> some of us have talked about this before, but we have heard since we started doing this that there is variability among

services both in where the students are at with in their career -- some branches of service, the students clearly see as being a career-enhancing move and others are not so sure. i will pick on the marine corps. the marine corps seems to get the best kudos for both looking at students before they get their, but also figuring out where they go afterwards in terms of yes, we know this will help your career both as a faculty member and as a student. i may be wrong, these are just anecdotal things. would each of you respond whether you think there is variability among the services in terms of how they go about selecting students in faculty and how they look at where the carters will go after the

students have graduated -- i'm talking about military faculty -- after they have completed their career. >> i go through this topic often because i say there are service cultures. speaking from the naval service, there are times in your career where you need expertise tactically, whether in the cockpit, amphibious ships, or submarines. you do not need somebody to be thinking strategically at that point. you need to excel in leadership positions at sea and that is part of our service culture in the navy. that is how you are evaluated and promoted through challenging leadership assignments at sea. other services might not have the same requirement, their culture is different, as you alluded to. the marine corps is more difficult to get in the senior level school than it is to make colonel. it is a smaller subset. i do not think you can ever get uniformity across all the services as to the right timing

and the right measurements of career enhancement. i know that all service is going to be career enhancement to go to and resident senior level school, but you're not going to change the service cultures to get a uniform answer that you can step across the board. i looked at my distinguished graduates and it is uniformly spread amongst the services, whether army, air force, navy, marine corps. once they get here, they do excel uniformly as far as promotion goes is a disservice culture. >> i would say at the national war college we rarely see a military's didn't show up that does not meet our criterion. -- we rarely see military's didn't show up that does not meet our criterion. they either show up on a

promotion list or get promoted at the national war college. i don't see the experience coming to the national war college as anything but a positive benefits to the military member way are competed -- when they complete the national war college. the quality of students' services are providing as high. as i shared with you yesterday, this being my second class experience, the only thing i have seen struggle in filling the student lists has been sometimes, on our army side, due to the tempo, their late getting their slate in. but they always felt it and the quality is extremely high. -- they always fill it and

equality is extremely high. >> how about the faculty? >> for faculty, we're very selective. the services nominate to the national warçó college who they would like toñiñr contribute for faculty. the faculty is interviewed, ñrscreen,çóñr and eliot. the recommendation is made!uñri through the faculty hiring committee as to whether they meet the standards are not. >> my question is about within the service. the people come to you and have a dead end career on the faculty -- is there variability among the services -- i know you go through the selection process, but do they perceive their career is enhanced by being a faculty member for a couple of years? >> most of them have had a teaching backgrounds or experience. they know they're getting into

and seek out. the war college as a way to broaden their teaching credentials. they come to the college fully aware of what their experience is going to be at the national war college. xpii do not think a look down ot as something negative. they know that they're getting into a teaching realmñi and most of them will already have at the phd level, so they are rather senior in their service careers already. i think a look at as set of years to spend in the remaining times they're going to serve with their service. >> i think it is viewed as positive. the people come to the naval war college as military faculty may not have sought it out, but at

some point in your career you get to a point where there's a lot of individual input into where you are going with your life. for example, one of our military faculty was just selected to be at a carrier air group commander. i view that as a positive sign. everyone is not going to go on to be chief of naval operations, but the people i talk to all viewed as positive and feel like they're doing meaningful work. here is the way we can help the person coming right off the flight line. in our strategy and policy, we can put a very experienced civilian professor in with the newer strategy and policy professor. the point is -- remember i have only been here seven months, but i have talked to a lot of military faculty. they almost all view it as a positive.

>> i think we have to -- i will speak for the army war college -- our kernels are in a unique way to enter your question. the people who come to teach at the army war college are between 25th and 30th year of service. they do not come back to get promoted to general officer. i think that's very important to say. i would welcome lieutenant colonels, a senior lieutenant colonels, and gore jr. colonels who are competitive for brigadier-general -- one of the effects of cold water nicholses that when a student finishes at the war college, it is hard for him or her to have the discretionary time to serve a tour of duty as an educator in the war college and still remain competitive. in part because they need to go

and getñiñr jointed quite often. we have had students we would like to keep butçó if we kept them, they would not be competitive for general officer. having said that, i believe the girls who do serve, i do not think we have had to drag anyone back to do this -- the colonels who do serve, i do not think we have had to drag anyone back. there a point in their career where they want to be outstanding and a reputation in the institution is such that they're very pleased to come back. they have great maturity, they have experience, and they've that this job particularly well at this particular time in their career. ñri think the quality of my faculty and particularly the military faculty is outstanding. they are terrific educators.

i hope i have answered your question. >> i would agree completely with general williams that the quality of the faculty is fabulous. i would say the expectations of the faculty, the military faculty, are different in that they run the full spectrum. there are those who come there knowing it is probably their last assignment. sometimes because they wanted to be, sometimes because of the timing in their careers. i have one datapoint -- we losé she got a great joint assignment here in the d.c. area. it was what she wanted, so was looked upon favorably. we have five volunteers to get their ph.d. to come back and teach at the air war college. it spans the entire gamut.

in the last brigadier-general nomination board, one of the people had been a faculty member. maybe in the past it will look at a dead end assignment, but i think it looked at as a valuable assignment to the service. they can contribute still, no matter where they are in the spectrum, whether it is their last assignment or whether they want to continue on. >> of the president of the marine corps university has made it his policy that he is willing to sacrifice continuity for capability. it has been the policy of the university throughout all the services to select the best and brightest to construct or direct at various colleges. there is some risk in that in that you have an officer for a year or maybe two years before he is selected for command or

promotion, but that is a risk we're willing to assume to get the confidence he brings from his past operational experience. for myself as director, i competed and got selected for this. the other marine that will be coming on board this year, similarly, coming out of the national war college was and selected for this bill it and as a bright potential for future service and promotion. in fact, among my sister colleges at the expeditionary workers cool, last few director there were selected for brigadier-general duringg tour, showing the value the marine corps put in education batch among the other services we have on staff, the u.s. forces have said -- u.s. air force has sent his top officers. right officer was selected for command at wright-patterson air force base.

air force officer is sitting behind me and decided to become the de of academics because of his academic proficiency and support for the school. the army, similarly, has given me operational experts and practitioners. my current army officer was selected after a tour in afghanistan where he worked at the current operations shop. he was an active pilot. i have been very impressed with the staff we have from all services and could not ask for a higher quality faculty to go forward with. >> i want to take it to another step in the chairman's question. how do we go about attracting the top tier civilian faculty? what are the things we need to be looking at to address that? is it in light tenure, -- is

that things like tenure, copyright pay, can they keep their government retired research or administrative assistance? what we need to do to attract and retain the best and brightest on the civilian side of the faculty? >> i may call my being here to speak up, but let me start by saying we work very hard to bring in talented civilian faculty as well. many are former military officers who have received their terminal degree and so they served us very well. we have a program at the united states army war college where we bring in colonels in the 25-30 year area that a pension for academics and being an outstanding educators. we set them off to work on their doctorate. i currently have 10 officers

that have received their ph.d. in my faculty. i have five that are working on it, and i have five civilian professors who are in product of that particular program. we advertise throughout the united states for openings that, and we do very well -- is for openings that come up, and we do very well for planners and those kind of leadership. but we're not competitive in a number of certain areas. as an example, economists, behavioral scientists, a military sociologist says -- we did not pay competitively. i would ask dean johnson if he would like to add to that and offer any insight into what we can do differently. >> one of the things we find it is given the nature of our

curriculum and the professional nature of it, we sometimes have difficulty convincing standard traditional academics from a more liberal arts background that this is the place for them to come teach. like many of the other schools, if we can get someone to an interview at our institution and demonstrate to them we are open and have academic freedom, equality are students in particular, the faculty, the ability to influence policy on occasion, we have a strong possibility of bringing those people to our faculty and retaining them. it is doing the proper advertising and that working within the various disciplines that will allow us to do that. >> on the list you read off, i would echo that there should be some work done on the copyright issue.

the discussion out there, i know it affects some of the faculty we hire. we do need to do some homework there. we are fortunate again in the washington area to have a bit of a draw on some of the high talent that is out there just because it like to live and work around this city. teaching at national defense university is a pretty good job if that is what you like to do. that's a drop and we don't have any problems -- that is a drop and we don't have any problems getting people to apply for faculty at national defense university. we usually end up wiggling that down and we have a solid dozen every time to draw from. i believe we're getting top tier

talent with their civilian hires. as i shared with you yesterday, one of the things i would like to see considered for the national war college was an endowed chair position to try to draw on the high rate policy -- the high policy, national security talent that when they leave the position, they have an opportunity to come over and teach at the national war college and we can tap into their recent experiences and that would add to the college as far as becoming a preeminent national security strategy institution. a look into that kind of endowed chair possibility would be helpful. >> we have many similarities with the national war college --

our location gives us a great pool of faculty to pull from. but one thing not mentioned is accreditation. both our schools are accreditation and want to maintain our accreditation. while a faculty member in d.c. want to work in a school that does not give an accredited master's degree because they can go to george mason, george town, or george washington? there's always concern if we're paying them equivalent if they could go to george washington and things of that nature. so we're working on the pay. tenure, i don't think i want to go down the tenure route because we don't want our institutes become stale and not have the ability to keep currency. factly members are about 92 members, giving as a 3.5 ratio. i have an additional 17 or 19 civilians that are interagency

faculty chairs, including industry shares. right now is from ibm and it's a competitive process. american express is sending their next industry share. we have 20 chairs that come from interagency, everything from fema to the state department. we have a very dynamic civilian faculty. our title 10 will be accreditation, pay, and all the other points. >> thank you very much. that has been a topic of debate within our faculty and is very timely. let me begin by telling you what it is not -- it is not high salaries. it is competitive salaries that are important. i have not had a professor at a salary has been the deciding point when it is in the competitive rage with other solid -- other salaries in the

area. it is first the ability and opportunity to teaching get in the classroom. professors want to be in there with the students are routine basis. to assess that, we try to remove as much administrative overhead from the faculty as possible. move away from documenting each course to death and allowing more freedom of how they develop their syllabus, how they run classis, and avoid micromanaging their work in the classroom and bringing them up to spend time entering and working with the students. secondly, it is the opportunity to research in their fields. they love their fields of endeavor and want to go deeper and broader into them. the more we can give them opportunities and time to that, whether it is sabbaticals, short-term research opportunities, involvement in symposium and panels, lectures, expanding faculty development, it is to our benefit.

also, having top-notch research facilities as we do it the war college's is a very beneficial. expanding beyond reach between research centers would be beneficial. so that they get timely information from their field. research assistance program -- we're currently looking at that to free them up and go deeper and broader into the field of study for research. two items that like to address that i think this track for our recruiting efforts. first, to some degree, folks looking at the war college ourselves selecting. they have perceptions about the war colleges are and lack of academic freedom or lack of a topic matter they will be able to cover, they're still looking at our fathers were colleges, not the war colleges of today. we need to broaden our strategic communication. the more civilian institutions,

academic institutions, and think tanks, so they know what they are out and we have a broader pool to report -- to recruit from. it is then up to us to broaden the pool. when job announcements go out, they did to a broader perspective and broader reach. professors we may not consider otherwise will come in and challenge the curriculum, challenge other professors with new and old pots and thereby make us all better -- new and bold and thoughts, and thereby make us better. that way, i think we also broaden the educational opportunity for our students. >> it has not always been easy to hire folks who come to maxwell alabama. i have only been there one year, but i have not seen push back with respect to that. i've seen exactly the opposite. i don't know that has to do with the economy or what have you, we

are in the process of hiring a political economist coming to us from london who has a harvard ph.d. we get those kind of people in our faculty -- we are littered with that kind of talent. i cannot be more pleased with the folks we have and the people that we get. part of what we can offer at maxwell that is not necessarily available everywhere else, say -- save for maybe washington, is that we have all the schools there. we have the air force research institute where people can go do research and publish and do those kinds of things that many of them what to do. i have not seen it as an issue. i'm very pleased with what we have. >> i benefit from changes the admiral put in place in the early '70s.

we have a very vibrant civilian faculty as well as our military folks. for example, are teaching side, we have 78 civilian faculty and 64 military. as an example -- we have 276 total, some of which are doing research working in analysis and they might teach an elective. of the 22 strategy and policy faculty, all our ph.d. from some of our most prestigious universities. i have the option of tenure put in place by the admiral, we are certified by the new england association of schools and colleges. other schools have taken our strategy curriculum -- yale has a grand strategy course there's guarding. duke, princeton, all based on the newport strategy policy model. i am trying to hire an academic dean right now and we're down to about last six candidates. any of them could do this --

strong ph.d. academic leader who can help us with faculty. a vibrant series of shares we have in place and we are establishing regional chairs. the faculty tell me it's also the need student body. they know they're not going to have toñr deal with a lot of nonsense from our students. theseñi are mid career, motivatd students who are going places and coming right off the front lines. there is also a faculty development aspect to this which one of my colleagues alluded to. we're on a trimester system. one of those trimesters, our faculty has the opportunity to go to their own research and to curriculum development. we have a budget of -- i think we have spent over $600,000 on the faculty development over the last couple of years. i am aware of the copyright issue. i think it is a question of good

policy. we have to watch that carefully. i think we are ok on that. the fact that we just recently what to .edu on the web tries to dispel what is going on and turn a light on the academic work we're doing. those are the attractors for goods billion, qualified faculty. >> thank you. >> we're trying real hard to miss this vote, but we have an abundance of questions left. we have kept your for almost two hours and will almost certainly have questions for the record. questions go slower because we have six of you. we appreciate you being here today and appreciate testimony. we are adjourned.

>> the nature of most human enterprise is to ask yourself as an introspective way, am i doing this right way? >> all this week, a rare glimpse into america's highest court threw unprecedented, on the record conversations with 10 supreme court justices. tonight, associate justices anthony kennedy and samuel toledo. interviews with supreme court justices at 8:00. -- justices anthony kennedy and samuel alito. it is part of a three disc set

including programs on the white house and capitol, one of many items available at c-span.org a number of publications have listed their best books of the year. "book tv" looks at a number of them this week. "book tv" tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. you can find a full list on- line. >> c-span thursday -- a look at tributes paid to u.s. and world leaders, including the dalai lama,ed kennedy, ronald reagan, walter cronkite, colin ñrçópowell, and robert byrd. russian president vladimir putin discusses his career from hisñi program. austan goolsbee talks about the economy. the founder of "guitar hero" on

the art of innovation. plus, political cartooning. >> michele malkint( is a guest n "book tv" sunday at noon eastern on "book tb." -- "book tv." >> our available -- "abraham lincoln." is a need -- is a unique, contemporary perspective on abraham lincoln from 56 scholars and writers from its early years to his life in the white house. now it is in digital audio to listen to any time, available for digital audio downloads are sold. learn more at c-span.org. >> this spring, congress is

expected to take the child nutrition act overseeing school lunches. the agriculturalñrñi department report this month that 62% of public-school students who participate in the national school lunch program cannot afford the average price of the average lunch -- $2.95 per day. xdthe agricultural committee wih the program. this hearing is about 2 1/2 hours. >> of the senate committee on agriculture and forestry will come to order. we welcome everybody here. looks like there is a little bit of interest in the topic we're on this morning. today's hearing continues the committee's ongoingxd effort to address issues of child metrician and health. in the first hearing in december of last year, iñi spoke bluntly about the real and damaging long-term health problems we face in this country. our children have reached epidemic proportions among

children, raising the specter of our children will have let -- will have shorter life spans for the first time in our history. compounding this problem is a health-care system ill-equipped to prevent disease. i feel we must reorient our health care system so that focuses on preventing diet- related illnesses and promoting good nutrition and wellness. as the witnesses in our last hearing allied clearly, the child and attrition program is a tremendous opportunity to make a lasting impact on -- the child nutrition program is a tremendous opportunity to make a lasting impact on the eating habits of our children. it must be part of a comprehensive federal response to poor nutrition among children. our witnesses today will present us with some of the particular challenges and opportunities we face in improving child nutrition both when kids are in school and when they are not. i emphasize we must start early. the wic program has been one of

our nation's most effective public health programs and has proven itself time and time again. our child care settings also present us with a unique and often overlooked opportunity to reach children before they enter kindergarten and expose them to the right kinds of food and eating habits. with over 30 million kids eating beverly assistant lunches, the national school lunch program is perhaps our best opportunity to improve child metrician and health. research has shown -- child nutrition and health. research has shown that vitamins and minerals in children that consume lunches from other sources. while the quality of school meals has improved over the years, much work remains to be done to bring in line with the dietary guidelines. we know for example two-thirds of elementary schools offer meals that exceed the standards for saturated fats, which is strongly linked to heart disease. one of the solutions is to

improve school meals. offering foods that have more of what i call the good stuff, vitamins and minerals, and less of the bad stuff like sugar, sodium, fat. that means more low and no fat milk, grains, and low-fat products, fruits and vegetables, particularly fresh fruits and vegetables. .

we will hear testimony today from one of those, from my home state of iowa and in knoxville. perhaps the most important question it raises is how congress can help communities like not to continue what they're doing and help others to emulate what they are doing. when a welcomeç sign came from the president's recently released budget in which the president proposed $1 billion a year in additional funding for child nutrition. this is a strong indication of how serious the new administration is about ending childhood hunger and teaching healthy eating habits at an early age. on this proposal by dedicating a new resources and budget. a significant investment in the

child nutrition reauthorization by congress would be its own down payment on comprehensive health care reform. that would abolish the budget difficulties that school districts, day care centers, and other providers face while also ensuring kids are getting the most balanced nutritious meals possible. i have said many times and will keep saying that if we are going to have meaningful health reform in this country, what our kids in and how they exercise and whether they exercise is a big part of health reform in this country. so i look upon our challenge this year in this committee to reauthorize the child nutrition bill as being a part of the whole health care reform in america by getting to these kids early in life and making sure they get the best possible foods and exercise. i look forward to move working with my ranking member and good friend saxby chambliss and all the members of this committee to

get a good child nutrition bill that both does the right funding levels but also perhaps the some redirection and guidance and support for healthier meals in our schools and our child care centers and our adult care facilities, and also in the women, infants, and children's supplemental feeding program. with that, i turn to our ranking member, senator chambliss. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. let me first of all thank our witnesses for being here to help us deal with this critical issue of real authorizing the child nutrition program. i want to particularly welcome by school nutrition folks from georgia who are here and do such a great job of making sure that georgia's children are prepared to be educated. mr. chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today. i appreciate the bipartisan approach we have taken and nutrition issues in the past and look forward to continue working

together as we reauthorize the child nutrition program. i would like to think today's witnesses for their thoughtful testimony regarding school meals, the summer food service program, the supplemental feeding program for women, infants, and children, and the child and adult care feeding program. these programs have a proven track record of not only alleviating hunger in the united states was also improving the nutritional intake of children and their families. given the current state of our nation's economy, we're seeing increased demand for these programs. many times the school breakfast and lunch programs are the only source of food for many students. today's witnesses will shed important light on the challenges that that program faces in providing healthy meals on a day-to-day basis. as we strive to improve the safety net, it depends on the testimony from experts on the frontline of -- good nutrition

is not only important for good health but also for proper cognitive development. according to the georgia department of education, over 1,177,000 lunches and 499,000 breakfasts are served each day in georgia's schools. our quality dedication of school nutrition providers and their efforts to feed kids healthy meals and recognize the early and significant influence they have in developing good nutrition habits and schoolchildren. as the agriculture committee moves forward in the reauthorization process, my goal is to ensure that all eligible children can easily access these important nutrition programs. i believe that all of us on the committee share the goal of better utilizing these programs as tools to improve nutritional intake as well as combat hunger. just in closing, let me say that we made a number of changes in the school lunch program in

our farm bill, and we tried to make sure that we could take advantage of a lot of local situations and providing fruits and vegetables at the local level for our school nutritionists, and we hope that with the implementation of that program, that all of our child nutrition folks across the country, both in schools and out of schools, are going to be able to take advantage of that and make sure that not only children benefit but when the children benefit from that program, farmers benefit from it. so it is simply a win-win proposition that we have inserted in the farm bill, and we look forward to the implementation of that as we move ahead. mr. chairman, i look forward to hearing from our witnesses. >> thank you very much, senator chambliss. do you have anything, senator? if you want to --

>> mr. chairman, thank you. i want to say thank you for having me and telling me how much as a former and school superintendent, the father of three school-age kids, i know how important this is. kids cannot learn if they are hungry during school. so i feel like it is very appropriate that this is my first hearing with you. i asked my opening statement included in the record. >> thank you and welcome to the committee. it is going to be a good year, and we are on something that you can help us a lot because of your experience of being a former superintendent, on this issue of school lunches at school breakfasts. we turn to our first panel. dr. katie wilson has a bachelor's degree in dietetic, a master's degree in food science

and nutrition, and a ph.d. in food service. she recently served as the chair of the school nutrition superintendent of the task force. dr. wilson is presently serving as president of the school nutrition association, and she hails from alaska, a wisconsin. next will be dr. susan bartlett , who has over 30 years experience with national and state programs designed to assist low income individuals and families. she has directed numerous studies of usda's food and nutrition assistance programs, including the national school lunch and school breakfast programs, supplemental nutrition assistance programs, the food stamp program, and the wic program. she holds a ph.d. in regional studies from mit.

next, connie boldt, who served as the food service sector in knoxville, iowa, for the past several years. right to that, she was the director of catering services at central college in ohio. graduated from central college and received her graduate degree from iowa state university in 1986. so we welcome you here. your statements will be made as part of the record in their entirety, and we ask -- the clock probably says five minutes, but if it goes to seven or eight, that is fine. but keep it between five and 10 minutes. i would appreciate it, so we can have a give and take. we will start with you, dr. wilson. welcome, and thank you for your service as president of the school nutrition association. >> think the pri chairman harkin, senator chambliss, and members of the committee, i am dr. katie wilson, chairman of the exclusion association and the school and attrition, a director in wisconsin. with me today is our executive

team, legal counsel, and as you see, a number of my colleagues. we are meeting here at a time of unprecedented economic challenge for our country. the school food programs are a key part of the vital safety net for a growing number of our school children. for some students, school breakfast is the first meal they had eaten since the day before. their students to come to school on monday not having eaten since friday. as a country, we have gone from discussing millions to billions to trillions of dollars simply overwhelming for most of us. yet at the same time, each of us in the child nutrition program struggle to balance pennies. the average cost of producing a school lunches to $92 cents, based on our internal study. currently, -- is $2.92, based on our internal study. on average, our reimbursement for a free meal is 35 cents less than it costs to produce it.

it is hard to believe, but many families cannot afford the 40 cents for lunch or the 30 cents for breakfast and discharged for a reduced price meals. we see checks of just a few dollars returned for insufficient funds. there are no federal guidelines for foods and beverages sold by schools outside the cafeteria. this can take the emphasis off nutrition. we are adding more fruits, vegetables and whole grains to both reimbursable and competitive food operations, but this further increases the cost of preparing them. we need the money to offset these costs. school administrators are short of funds and other for charging school nutrition programs more of the overhead cost of running the entire school. this is an indirect cost of the program. in short, money that you prefer school meals may be used for energy, telephones, or other costs. either -- neither a statute of regulations but any cap on the costs.

reduced yields in addition is used for many services provided in the school, including title 1 funding. the school food service account is the full cost of keeping that affirmation. mr. chairman, as you approach reauthorization, we ask the congress to take a comprehensive look at the federal child assistance program. we support a consistent national interpretation of the dietary guidelines for two reasons. science and cost consideration. all children need the same nutrients to grow, no matter where they live in this country -- iowa, georgia, or california. why would we allow 50 or more different interpretations of dietary guidelines when it comes to the national school lunch and breakfast program? when usda changes the new guidelines, all vendors change their specifications to accommodate the latest science. if there are 50 different markets and not just one, it greatly increases the cost of doing business.

that increased cost is passed on to my program. lastly, for each opera -- 10 cents for each breakfast program is needed. we receive about 20 cents in commodities for each school lunch, but there is no commodity for breakfast. we would also like to see, first and foremost, the increased reimbursement for all lunches served by 35 cents. and 20 cents for breakfast. reimbursement rate that it needs to beç updated twice a year to çkeepçt(ç pace withok inflats opposed to the current annual çadjustment. çmanyw3çç vendors escalate tr pricesçtd monthly. the freeç meal program shoulde expanded to include all children who fall below the wickedç income guidelines or 1% with a famy çqualifies for wic, they should qualify for free meals. considering nutrition standards, whenever the standard is, it must be appliedç consistently throughout the school environment.

students must not be allowed to buy something in the gym that we cannot9 sell in the cafeteria. thisç is a conflicting message about what is healthy. inçç addition, we ask that you require usda to implement the dietary guidelines forç>ç ameriç in a practical and consistent mannerw3 all over the country. we know we are asking for a lot, and we realize it makes your life more complicated, but our children need this in order to be well nourished and prepared to learn. in closing, we would like to think the senate for its leadership in providing recent equipment assistance funding. while school nutrition personnel are great innovators concerning wholesome food, they cannot efficiently serve meals if our equipment is obsolete or in need of repair. mr. chairman, when an attendant and other priorities today -- we i tt)jtsissues another paris i]today. we have administrative changes. we greatly appreciate this hearing and your commitment to our children and child nutrition.

the time to act is now and the funding is imperative. thank you. > >> thank you, mr. chairman, for the opportunity to address this committee. my name is and is in bartlett, and via a senior associate -- it is a public policy research and consulting firm that applies scientific research, consulting and technical expertise to a wide range of issues to social and economic health policy. under contract and the food and nutrition service in the department's agriculture carries out -- and it was designed to estimate the national average cost of producing reimbursable meals and the national school lunch program and the school breakfast program. w3çw3t(çççóçthe study, whict during the school year 2005 to

2006, provides a detailed examination of the cost to produce in reimbursable meals in it was designed to allow an assessment of adequacy of reimbursement rates. i would like to present key findings from the study today. the study was carried out in a nationally representative sample of 120 school authorities in the united states. we selected a representative sample from approximatelyç 350 çschools and collected extensie data on the costs and revenues associated with producing school meals. through reviews of financial statements, milk production records, recipes,ñr invoices, observation of meals taken by students, and interviews with fsa and school officials. thei] studyç examined the costf i]çmeals charge to the fsa's account or the reported cost. it also examined the unreported costs, the costs incurred by the school district in supportç of

togetherçç the reportedi] coss [çthe unreported cost represens theç fullçñr costç of mealu! production. çone point about the methodoloy that should be noted hereçóç -e methodology allocates the fsa administrative costs and overhead to all production, including lunch and breakfast, and none reimbursable meals. key findings from theç study -- number one, in most fsa's, the reported cost of producing ledges were less than the federal subsidy. çthe national mean cost of producing a reimbursable lunch in 20ç to 2006 school year wask $2.36. the subsidy for free lunches at the time, which?;ñ includes the cash as well as commodity assistance, of $2.51. as ai] result, in almost 86-80%f

fsa's, the reported cost of reproducing reimbursable breakfast was greater from the federal subsidy. the national mean cost of a reimbursable breakfast was $1.92, again in 2005 to 2006. compared to the severe need reimbursement rate for $1.51. as a result of this, in almost 2/3 of the fsa's, the cost of producing baathist exceeded the reimbursement. it not only asserted theç -- te cost was less than the subsidy. for the average fsa revenues, for reimbursable meals,ok exceed cost of producing those meals. on average, revenue exceeded cost by 15%. in contrast, revenues from reçreimbursable meals fell shot by probably 30%. çwhile reimbursable breakfasts

and lunches together generate a surplus, this is due entirely to the surpluses generated by reimbursable lunches. consistent with the relationship with the subsidy rate, revenue -- revenues from breakfast fell short of the cost of producing those meals by an average of 4%. if we look at the full cost of producing school lunches, we come to a somewhat different findings. nearly all school districts provide goods and services to fsa's that are not charged to the school food service accounts and there from the -- and therefore go unreported to the full cost of producing reimbursable much as, including the unreported costs, exceeded the costs. in 68% of the fsa, the full cost was -- in looking across all

school meal programs, the revenues fell considerably short of covering the school costs on çaverage, revenues covered just over 80% of full cost, and costs exceeded revenues for t(reimbursable wedges, breakfas, as well as competitive meals programs. those are the key findings on our cost fighting it. thank you very much, and i would be happy to answer any questions on methodology and results. >> thank you, dr. marlon. now we turn to mr. boldt. >> good morning. >> could you bring the microphone a little closer to you? >> it is that better? >> there you go. >> good morning. thank you for giving me the opportunity to tell you about the knoxville committees -- community experience. knoxville is located in south-

central iowa with a population of approximately 10,000 during the school district has five buildings and serves about 1600 lunches daily. knox the's elementary school, and east, west and at north star, each received a gold award. in knocks the school district and a supporter by the board of education and administration, promotes healthy lifestyles of students, staff, and family produced a feels this is the part of the total learning environment and will continue to academic achievement as well as process of lifestyle. serving healthy meals that students will eat is not the easiest thing toçñr do. it requires money and time, but the benefits for classroom achievement and healthy life styles are more than enough to make the effort. when mandated, the district developed a wellness policy by convening a committee with strong connections to improve student life styles. pettitte addressed many areas including physical -- it addressed many areas, including physical -- staff health and

wellness, national school lunch programs, and competitive food. written into the well as policy or specific requirements for all food in all grades k through 12, including a lot cart breakfast the well as committee requirements and were included -- the wellnessç to the requirementsi]ç includedç serg whole grains whenever possible with the goal of at least half okt(by 2008-2009. w3even though i wasñrçó a membef )q committee at these food service director, i was concerned that these requirements were challenging and too vague. i was also concerned about the overall cost and how i was going to do this. the wellness policy went into effect it in 2006-2007 school yearç. implementation of the requirements were phased in. we started by adding one fresh fruit or vegetable, common ones like apples, oranges since, and carrots. popularity increases over time,

that we now include more seasonal produce such as grains and cucumbers. these additions were welcomed by eáup#f. then came the school meals initiative review in december of 2006. our department education consultant introduced me to the healthierçó u.s. school challen. this certification program recognizes elementary schools that take a leadership role in helping students learn to make healthy eating and active lifestyle choices. givenç our district's commitme, these guidelinesi] appeared to e policy. to achieve the cold war, a number of criteria had to be met, including school lunches that demonstrate healthy menu planning practices and principles of guidelines for americans,fái] nutrition educatn activities in at least two grades, physical education activities at every grade level, a student average daily participation ofçó 70% or great, and competitive food cannot be sold on elementary campus during the school day. óoóinç early 2007, we started

secondly, we modifiedçq our current schoolok recipes to include moreç grains. these changes were well except that and possibly some not even notice. during the past two years, we also found we mishandle these products differently. the whole grain does not seem to have a long shelf life and quickly becomes stale. çthus encountering more waste t increase costs.

in july of 2008, we learned that we had achieved the gold award. we could look for new ways that support the challenge into our menus, curriculum, and daily lives of our student. however, increased food costs will make reapplied for the challenge more difficult in the future. in fact, the implementation of the healthier u.s. school challenge criteria came with an increased cost. some items were as high as 76% more than the traditional item we were purchasing. in addition, not only had the cost of fresh fruits and vegetables increased, the labor to prepare them also increased. i know figure about 10 to 20 cents more per serving. finally, the batter in the hallway we receive this really awesome, and the plaque in the

school was quite impressive. but we did not do it for the plaque or the banner, we did it for the sake of the kids and i am proud of the knoxville elementary school for having achieved it. as i said before, serving healthy foods is not without a cost, and my budget is suffering. please help us implement this great opportunity to serve children nutrition food in more schools throughout the nation by supplementing reimbursement. it costs more money to prepare and serve the meals that knoxville schools received that what we receive and reimbursement. i support the request for additional 35 cents for all meals, for all lunches, and 20 cents sfor all lunches served. thank you for giving me this opportunity to share our experience for a healthier u.s. school challenge. it has made a difference. >> thank you very much for the testimony and your great leadership. i'm sure we will have some questions for you.

i would like to start thhc round of questioning by lookingxdçq e w3cost and reimbursement. çthis isw3çç something we gre with a lot here, too, and i think all of us here are anuerested in making sureç that weç adequately reimburse schoo. but we have to have a better handle on what that means. i am struck by the ver9ñì(lc@&c+ different testimony here between you, dr. wilson, and dr. martin, with respect to the costçç of producing a reimbursable meal. r. barlow suggest that the federal reimbursement for a free mealç -- dr. bartlett suggests çthat theç federal reimbursemt for a free meal -- dr. wilson suggested 35% gap between production costs. i wouldt( like tow3ç see ifç n figure out whyç we have such a significantlyçi]ymw3 differentó çconclusion from twoçç very qualhvied individuals. i]that is one thing. then on competitive foods, with

respect to non reimbursable meals, such as allied car lines, the testimony concludes very different things. dr.ñr wilson, you sai you need theçi]o4/ñçqçóegç( money fros to cover gaps in the service budget. dr. barlow, your study found that such foods suchçç as a la carte, are actually the reason for the budgetw3 gaps and that federal reimbursement for free elections are subsidizing foodç to e& çi would likeçç to try to exe this and see if we can get to the bottom of it because it has veryçói] significant policy us. or the other, i am trying to figure out whyçó we have such çdifferent conclusions. dr.çççjvi]çqweçç wilsone your testimony on the cost of competitive and a laç carte foods, in lightç of dr.ç barbara's testimony, which is

different from your own. >> thank you. firstw3çç[ñçw3çów3w3çt,sñzóáe cents we're talkingçç about, i have some sfate statistics, one fromççççççç mijasotaxdçt frommyç]i the state of minness çótz'yto $99 cents average to pe andç serve?z# that meal. )spn what happensç iwe data -- for instance, and inc 2005-ç2006, that is when the study was done, andg# in -- it y have been from a year later. just from theç year 2005-2006 o today's environment, i see a drastic increase in cost in my program. the whole grains, the fruits and vegetables, my labor costs, which mr. boqiss boldt referred. ñokt)/;mç from =çq73s&ñó=)s3oçubççsj÷9k- 2009 schoolçv0l;3i]qçxd year.

cost has gone up, reimbursement rates have gone up, too? >> i do not think they have kept pace with particularly labor and food costs. >> what you are saying is that this snapshot that was done in 2006-2007 -- is that the basis? >> 2005-2006. >> 2005-2006. you are saying that since that time, that is two years, maybe three years. that the increase in the cost has far exceeded the increase in the reimbursement rate. >> that is right. >> the reimbursement rate went up about 10%. just my figuring, 10%. do you have any data on how much the associated costs have gone up in that period of time? >> we studied the top 100 districts in the country, and some of those costs -- we can give you exact data, but my own personal experience was 11% to

14% in cost that i experienced in the 2008-2009 school year, and that includes labor and food costs. the indirect cost, as schools have begun to -- school districts provide for the food service programs, in 2005-2006, schools were not as pinched as they were overall. the school districts in themselves, see their budgets shrinking more and more with less. to provide more and more in direct costs to help them run the overall school program rather than just food service. >> dr. bartlett, i asked you the same question. how does your data that you haveç -- how is it different tn what i have heard from dr. wilson? >>ç indeed, the study was based on 2005-2006 data, so things could have changed over time

from the things that we talked about. a couple of points. the study that we did was a nationally representative sample, so we sampled districts across the country. the entire country, not just the largest district. i think i can tell you that this is probably the main point of difference. it has to do with allocating the administrative and overhead costs of meal production. when we look at reported costs, we look at all the expenses -- all the expenses. some of the costs are directly related to food production, the cost of food, so those get directly allocated to the meals that they are attributable to it. then there are costs like the fsa director, secretary, things like that. those kinds of administrative

costs that are part of food service, but not directly attributable to any one given meal. so the question is, how to allocate those. we followed what are considered generally accepted accounting practices, and we allocate those non production costs across lunches, breakfasts, and not reimbursable foods. so they each pay a share based on the food and labor, the direct production labor. that kind of loading of the overhead costs across all meals may be one of the major differences. >> it seems to me that the real -- i do not want to say culprit here, but the real question is the indirect costs. is that the main difference we are seeing here, how you allocate those indirect costs? >> i think if i could answer,

the thing is that when we set up our budget, and if we are where housing food or working -- my salary, for instance, the budget is separate. the foods also -- all have separate line items in my budget. so that is broad-based. my secretary ---broadbased over those. when we talk about secondary costs, because you store your food in the warehouse and you have a quarter of the warehouse, because the districts are so pinched for finances, whether its stores desks or paper or supplies for the school building, and a quarter of it might stores and food over in the corner, we know people that pay for maintenance people that really have nothing to do with food service. they might not the building that the kitchen is attached to.

electricity, all garbage pickup, instead of charging the -- you might be charged for all the garbage pickup in the district. those are some of the indirect costs we are seeing, and there is no cap in the statute to keep that from happening. >> have you seen that the schools are shifting more of these indirect costs to the school lunch program? >> yes, they definitely are. >> did you pick that up in any of your studies, dr. bartlett? >> most districts have indirect cost rates that they apply to school food services as well as other federal grant programs. indeed, to pick up costs of -- different districts have different rates to include different things, but we did not find -- we found that most districts have indirect cost rates. only about 16% of the districts

actually charged the -- >> about 16%? >> 16% charged direct costs in their line expense statements. while it applies to some, it did not apply to most, in terms of those kinds of costs. >> i guess that raises the question, is 16% is the mean on this, then it raises a question of why other school districts cannot meet the mean if they are higher than that. >> this is just what percent of districts are charged at all for indirect costs. >> tell me what the 16% is now. i thought that was, of the total that was -- >> if you look at the total school districts, what percent of the districts themselves get charged these indirect costs on

a set statement. we only found that those kind of indirect costs showed up on 16% of the budget. the rest of them were not charged for those. again, we also have to make sure parley when we talk -- we are clear about talking about -- we also talked about the overhead costs of the school could manager, the fsa director. -- those are -- >> senator chambliss? >> that is an area i wanted to address, too. i think senator harkin has been will covered it, but it looks like dr. wilson -- it looks like, dr. wilson, in your particular case, there are some charges being assessed against the program that ought not to be assessed. we do not mean to but you at odds with your school board and other folks who are assessing

these costs, so i think this is an area we need to address in this legislation, and your testimony this morning on that has been very valuable. ms. boldt, do you know what happens in your system? du know where these indirect costs are charged to your program? >> now, i really cannot say. >> i think that is something we need to look closely at from a state-by-state standpoint? certainly it is something we need to address in the reauthorization. >> one example from georgia come if you would like to just hear some numbers -- this is in georgia, a district, quite a large district. they pay $1,140,000 in indirect costs, $395,000 for six maintenance people that work throughout the entire district,

$220,000 for utilities that are used in the buildings that they are housing kitchens and, and $84,000 from uncollected meal costs. that gives you some numbers of the district in georgia. this has truly been -- the difference is that it has exploded in 2005-2006, those kinds of costs because the school districts are in trouble as far as finances are concerned. >> is are obviously very difficult economic times, in every area of our economy, and i know school districts are looking for every way they can to try to recoup the tremendous overhead that they are seeing because they have the same fuel and labor cost increases that you alluded to that you are being charged with. but that is not right. i expect i will get a call from that nutritionist, probably the chairman of that school board. [laughter] but it is something we need to look at. dr. wilson, if usda were given

the authority to regulate the national school lunch program, do you see a continue requirement necessary for all district to have wellness programs? >> we believe that usda needs to have the authority to regulate in the district because then we can all conform to dietary guidelines. while well as policies are a good idea and everybody meant well, we have some very excellent policies in this effort that were done well with the committees, and then we have some where somebody was pestered the superintendent and they needed somebody to do. we heard a speaker yesterday that he talked about the philosophy of nutrition rather than the science of nutrition. many of these local wellness policies are not dealing with the science of nutrition, they are dealing with the philosophy of food or 1eating or how well

someone eats. even though they were intended to do good, they did not always do what they were intended to do across this country. yes, we believe that usda -- we have national standards, a meal path that we all need to follow. if usda had the jurisdiction over everything during that school day bells to bell, we will file -- with all follow the guidelines. >> ms. boldt, i applaud your a commitment for receiving that gold award, especially since you incurred additional cost for some of the products you provided. we oftentimes talk when we talk about education in general about the fact that really a good education starts at home. if you do not have strong support from parents, it makes it much more difficult to educate a child. did you find that same

experience with trying to achieve this goal that you were successful in achieving, that you had great support both from your pta or other parental organizations as well as your school board and how big a factor it was in achieving this award? >> we did have a pretty good support across the board. we also have in our will this policy that we made efforts to encourage parents and support for them with information, different kinds of things that we can do to help them at home also. so we have included that in our wellness policy. >> dr. bartlett, the your study looked at the impact of school policies regarding a la carte or vending sales? regarding how valuable it was to fool food-service personnel? >> we really focused on looking at the costs of the different components of the program and

collected data on that at that point in time, 2005 to 2006. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. we welcome senator klobuchar, who will offer questions and has a opening statement. >> thank you. i have spoken on this from my perspective, being the mother of a 13-year-old and releasing a tale of two schools, one of a student -- one of a school that she attended that was 90% free of school lunch, and now a different demographic makeup. just seeing the differences of school with less free and reduced lunch kids in terms of the fitness and their mothers packing them carrots and things like that, and then seeing in the inner-city school, the vending machines being used a lot. i think a lot of kids going for may be the less healthy alternative when there were choices. and then some healthy food given as well.

minnesota, as you noted, and put a lot of emphasis on this. but even despite that, to see the difference between schools and the nutrition these kids are getting is very stark, and to also see the future obesity problem with some of these kids. i'm worried it is going to get worse as the economy gets worse because oftentimes it is cheaper to go out and buy nutritional food, so i am very concerned about the obesity issue. the other reason i am interested in this is we have a lot of food that is produced in minnesota, a lot of food that is processed in minnesota. i have gotten some information about the need, as you talked about, dr. wilson, for national standards and how this is contributing to cost, the fact that we do not have these national standards. i wanted to lead with that. i know you were referencing it with your answers to questions to senator chambliss. i personally think it sounds like a good idea, seeing this

patchwork of things going on. as we look at how to reduce costs. but at the same time, the whole focus is to make these meals as healthy as possible and to limit some of these -- i do not know what you're calling them, but that competitive choices. then also, how we work that with the state because i can see they may have different kinds of food available in the state that are healthy. a long question. >> thank you. first of all, the whole idea of standards is that -- and if i could just give you an example. if you are a manufacturer in the school market and you make a small bag of gramm crackers and you make it for 1.5 ounces the 5 miles down the road, their standard says, no, you can have up to 2 ounces, and the next says you can do 2.5, then i go back to the manufacture and my district just said 1 ounce, now there are four different bags of the exact same crackers, and to

me that is very costly. we are not all metropolitan districts, so we keep -- so when you cannot buy hundreds of thousands of them at the same time, the manufacturer is not going to make them just for you. without standards, we are eliminating a number of products that all of us could potentially use because the manufacturer will make the product that is a standard. that product will be made for all of us and we will all buy it at a much lesser cost than -- it would eliminate something for smaller districts, and i am talking about the majority of districts, but it will cost most of us more if we are asking manufacturers to make three or four and five different sizes of the same product. as far as nutrition is concerned, i truly encourage local produce, local kinds of things that maybe are made in your community. but there, too, we are looking for a range of things when we're looking for those standards. it is very difficult to hit a sugar number in milk, for

example, that we are not going anywhere else, this is the number. it is much easier to do things in ranges, because one day we do things really well, and last night i was at a gala that we enjoyed every minute of it. >> we have a lot of those problems. too many choices. >> we have a range for fiber in our standards, a range for sodium's of that over the period of a week we can look for things so that it will fit within a range because i will balance that throughout the rest of the week. so i think is very nice that we have a set of standards if we have some regions and some standards that we all need to meet. again, it is not based on somebody's philosophy but on the science of nutrition. >> and how would it work with these a la carte choices? because i have seen myself go for the fries. >> the standards do work.

the usda secretary has the opportunity to eliminate the rule and they have the authority to say these of the stands and the entire school day, whether it is in my a la carte line or the school store, or the young person selling to keep their school club afloat. >> that is what i did. ok, on the student council. so, what about the vending machines, and how would they fit in? >> they all fit in. everything within that building for the school day would have to meet the standard. now, they're too, i am not competing with the football coach because if i have the most wonderful program, even by my aa

carte, if the football coach is going to sell something out there in the hallway, i guarantee you students will come and purchase it. they want to support their team. that is part of being in school. we do know what to be the adversary to that, and that is when the problem becomes a problem, because they take their $1.50 or $2 and they want to support the football coach. they all mean well, but it is not all the best interest of the science of nutrition. the standard needs to be bell to bell in every area of that building for us all to be on the same page. >> mrs. boldt, what to use it about that? >> i agree 100%. that is exactly what happens in all school districts. >> dr. bartlett, suggestions? people want to have healthier kids, but somehow these things

keep falling through and these kids are smart and they find ways to find the food. that is what i have seen. >> they find an unhealthy food wherever they can find it. that is a true fact. >> and also itheir parents do nt always have the ability to find the money. when they are at the school, they're looking at the vending machine that has a -- i'm not going to say the brand name. i will get letters. but they find something that is non-nutritional. >> that certainly seems right. our study -- we did not look at the nutritional quality of the different foods, but my experience as a parent shows that there is a lot of unhealthy stuff. >> ok, well, thank you very much. we look forward to working with you. >> dr. wilson, you talked about

the plethora of different wellness policies across the country. in the last reauthorization of the child nutrition bill, i offered an amendment that would have had a well this policy developed by the institution on madison that would have applied -- on medicine that would have applied to all schools. i lost that amendment. then we said we would have a wellness policy that each school would develop. that way, at least schools have to start thinking about, what is a wellness policy. but you are right, school districts are different all across the country. i am glad to hear you say that is not based on science, but on institute of medicine guidelines. i am not delighted to hear you

advocating for the secretary to have the authority. i have often said, what sense does it make if you have the authority for school lunches in the lunchroom from the cavatelli, going right outside the door and there are all the vending machines? -- from the cafeteria, going right outside the door and there are all the vending machines? the message we're sending to kids is if you have all the sugary drinks and candy and stuff in the gym, but not in the rest of the school, are we saying to kids that is the healthy thing to eat, in the gym? i really appreciate your testimony on that. i think we have to come to grips with this, in terms of having the dietary guidelines, being standardized for the whole country and for every school. the only thing that i would think about in terms of a wellness policy beyond that is for the physical activity of kids, making sure that we have some wellness policies developed in accordance with that so that kids get adequate exercise and

that type of thing in a school setting. that is a little bit outside of your purview, but that should also be a part of the wellness policy. but i want to delve into one other thing. that is the idea that increasing the reimbursement, we have the inflation standard now that goes up with inflation. but i think what i am beginning to see is that we do not have a real good grip on these indirect costs, and there is no cap on them, no inflationary guideline on them whatsoever. ñri think?çñk it would be probay fairly easy for a school district to think if i have to cuti]ç corners, i will shiftedo the school lunch program. they will get more moneyç because they have an inflationary increase. i think somehow we are going to have to take aç look at how we might want to address that. ñri do not have a formula or anything in my head. somehow we have to address how much of the shifting can goi][óç

for the indirect cost. but i also want to address the question to you, when you have done in your school. read your testimony and what you have done, and you were able to do it within these guidelines. you were able to do all this -- you were able to do all this. >> i really do not have the bottom line yet. i am not quite sureçççok whee bottom line is. >> xdxdwell, you have beenv: dog this for two years now, and you have gotten all the healthier foods. somehow you have been able to do that within the reimbursement that you have been getting. ç>> i am not quite sure if we are in reimbursement or if we have tapped into some savings,

so to speak. çxdçóçwe also haveç an aomçe ujtj that fitçr wellnessç policyççç that sut theç totalç program costs. >> you have control over that, too, right? so you are alsoçççw2çmçq%9ñd foods and fresh vegetables and things like that in the of the card line. >>ç >> i just wonder if -- i am proud ofç what you have done. you have the banner hanging in the hallway. but if we want to replicate what you are country, i wonder if we need to have some more financial incentives or bonuses. for example, do you think the more schools would become çhealthier if they receive not only a plaque and a commendation but a significant financial bonus at the end of the year for

maintaining those strong standards? >> it would definitely be of assistance for the budget. ymt(ççç>>ç well, i think ths somethingçt( that -- that is something we ought to think about. ymymw3çó theseççi]i]e kindçó ofw3 financial incentiver çthis at the end ofw3ç theúyl. iç think maybe thatç isxd somg çt(that we could lookw3ç atç. çóçdr. wilson, if you haveç - >> it is certainly worth exploring,ç senator harkin. i]again, i goç back toç the it cost, and if that would be something that would be decided upon, then we have to have the other piece that says that that state withinç the food service program, to continue to do those activities and increase the healthy environment in that program. as long as that money is looked upon fromç the school districts a school district bonus, but maybe it is used to do healthy things in the cafeteria.

it has to be tied toçó that a word, then, but it isççç cerk something to explore, yes. >> well, ms. boldtç, i think it is very difficult to do what you have done, in figuring out this 51% of whole grain items, bringing in more fresh fruits and vegetables. iç think the importantt( part f your story is that you did it and you did not give up. you kept at it, made it work without any extraç money, at ã;x(hinkçw3 thatw3 is a tremens achievement, and you have to be proud of its. i am just, again, thinking about how we replicate what youç have done about the country. i think maybe some financial incentives and bonuses might be something that we could do. now, i am told that there are, dr. bartlett, omb guidances

indirect costs. can you tell us about that and what can be assessed with the school lunch program? >>çg3 indeed, the restricted s and under -- unrestricted indirect cost rates have to be approved, so -- >> by whom? >> i believe by the school district, or the education -- i amt(qwlçç not 100% sure of why approve something, but i believe they do have to pass -- and not an w3xçó%. sq%ei+ sq%ei+ ççthat. i do notçxdççxd knoww3w3 if n omb guidelines or not. >> i do not know the answer to that question. >> i did not believe there is any kind of