reform. it was more than a year ago that some of these same c.e.o.'s came to the white house for one of the first meetings about what this reform would look like. and we knew we wouldn't see eye to eye on everything. but for the first time nearly everyone involved in this debate, patients, hospitals, doctors, nurses, businesses large and small, democrats and republicans, even those most invested in the status quo, including our insuraace companies, everybody knew that finally something needed to be done about america's broken health care system. .

that's why three months ago in this very room i signed the affordable care act into law. this law will cut costs and make coverage more affordable for families and small businesses. it's reform that begins to bring down our government's long-term structural deficit. it's reform that finally extends the opportunity to purchase coverage to the millions who currently don't have it. and includes tough new consumer protections to guarantee greater

stability, sscurity, and control for the millions who do have health insurance. while it will take a ew years to fully implement this law, we can already see it taking effect. last month four million small business owners found a postcard in their mailbox informing them that they could be eligible for a health care tax cut this year worth tens of thousands of dollars to help them cover their employees. and america's largest businesses are filling out applications for critical relief to help them provide coverage for retirees who aren't yet eligible for medicare. two weeks ago tens of thousands oo seniors who fall into the medicare prescription drug coverage gap known as the doughnut hole began receiving a $250 chk to help them afford -- check to help them afford their mad sin. -- medicine. by 2020 this will close the

doughnut hole completely. we are also strengthening medicare by going after waste and fraud and abuse in the system and aggressively pursuing those who prey on seniors with scams. in many cases young adults without insurance can now stay on their parents' plan until they are 26 years old. this lifts a lot of worry from some parents' shoulders. even thoogh tte insurance companies had until september to comply with this rule, my administration asked them to do so immediately to avoid coverag3 want to thank those companies that agreed to do this. on july 1, uninsured americans who had been lock out -- locked of the insurance market because of pre-existing condition, will now be able to enroll in a new national insurance pool where they'll finally be able to purchase quality affordable health care. some for the very first time in their lives. for states that opt to run their own insurance pools using funds

from the new law, my administration is urging them to begin enrolling people as soon as possible. and in a few years once the new competitive marketplace comes on line through insurance exchanges, discrimination against americans with pre-existing conditions will be banned for good. that's why individuals and small businesses will finally have the same access to the same types o+ insurance plans that members of congress have for themselves. and today i'm announcing that the departments of health and human services, labor, and treasury are issuing new regulations under the affordable care act that will put an end to some of the worst practices in in place the strongest consumer protections in our history. finally, what amounts to a true patients bill of rights. this long overdue step has one overriding focus and that's looking out for the american

consumer. it's not punitive. as i said when i met with the insurance executives it's not meant to punish insurance companies, they provide a critical service, they employ large numbers of americans. and in fact once this reform is fully implemented a few years from now, america's private insurance companies had the opportunity to prosper from the opportunity to compete for tens of millions of new customers. we want them to take advantage of that competition. now, what americans respect -- expect in return is a greater fairness and security. we expect to get what we pay for. and these rights guarantee just that. basic rules of the road that system more consumer driven and more cost-effective. and give americans the peace of mind that their insurance will give amy that piece of mind her

iisurance will be there when she needs it. so, starting in september some of the worst abuses will be banned forever. no more discriminating against children with pre-existing ccnditions. no more retroactively dropping somebody's policy when they get sick if they made an unintentional mistake on an application. no more lifetime limits or restrictive annual limits on coverage. those days are over. and i'm pleased to say that some insurance companies have already stopped these practices. when news reports indicated that a company was dropping coverage for women diagnosed with breast cancer, my administration called on the industry to end the practice immediately, don't wait until september. and soon after the entire industry announced it would comply with the new law early and stop the practice of dropping people'' coverage when they fall ill and need it most. insurance companies might find a loophole in the new law and

conninue to discriminate against children with pre-existing conditions. and to their credit when we called the insurance companies to provide coverage to our most vulnerable americans, the industry aareed. those were the right things to do for their consumers. their customers. the american people. and i applaud the industry for that. and we are going to hold industry to that standard. a standard in which industry can still thrrve but americans are getting a fair shake. the patients bill of rights also eliminates the barriers that stand between the american people and their doctors. americans will be able to keep the primary care doctor or pediatrician they choose. you'll be able to see an ob/gyn without a referral. you'll be able to seek emergency care at a hospital outside the plan's nntwork without fighting to get approval from an insurance company first. and consumers will finally have access to simple, clear information aaout their choices and their rights.

these protections to preserve america's choice of doctors may not be original mashents bill of rights, it was a proposal debated over a decade ago with significant bipartisan support but was never enacted until now. as part of the affordable care act. so this is a long overdue victory for america's consoumers -- down sumers and patients. yes -- consumers and patients. yes, it does away with the status quo that some companies have taken advantage of, but insurance companies should see this reform as an opportunity to improve care and increase ccmpetition. they shouldn't see it as an opportunity to enact unjustifiable rate increase that is don't boost care and inflate -- increases that don't boost care and inflate the bottom line. some insurance companies tried to raise rates even before we passed the law ven though some were making record profits. earlier this year, for example. more than 800,000 anthem blue

cross customers in california opened their mail to see that their premiums would go up by as much as 39%. my administration wanted to know why. people's wages aren't going up 39%. didn't rise by 39%. penses and when pressed they took a look at it and said, well, our math is wrong. we didn't justify that kind of rate increase. so they withdrew it. the point is that there are genuine pulse drivers that are not caused by insurance -- cost drivers that are not caused by insurance companies, but what is also true that we got to make sure this new law is not being used as an excuse to simply drive up costs. so what we do is make sure that the affordable care act gives us new tools to promote compptition, transparency, and better deals for consumers. the c.e.o.'s here today need to

now that they are going to be required to publicly justify + unreasonable premium increases on your websites as well as the law's new website, hellcare.gov. as we set up the exchanges we'll be watching closely and we'll fully support statts if they exercise their review authority to keep excessively expensive plans out of their insurance exchanges. none of this is designed to deprive insurance companies of their fair rates. as i mentioned when we were meeting with the c.e.o.'s, there are a lot of cost drivers other than those that are within insurance companies' control. but it is important to have these steps in place to protect consumers from unjustifiable rate increases. in fact, many states are already exercising their review authority. we aae already seeing a wave of change that's liftinggup consumers and leveling the playing field.

maine reject add proposed 18% rate hike there. pennsylvania is investigating premium increases made by nine of the state's largest insurers. new york recently passed a law granting the state the authority to review and approve premium increases before they take effect. and we are working with other states and the state insurance commissioners here today to support similar efforts. secretary sebelius urged them to investigate other avenues. we set up a new office of consumer information and insurance oversight to help. and we'll provide grants to the states thattrun the best, most innovative oversight programs to protect their consumers. companies will be required to spend at least 80% orel 5% of health care dollars where they phould be -- 80% or 85% of health care dollars where they should be spent, on health care and efforts to improve quality. not on profits, bonuses, or administrative cost that is don't make people healthier.

ultimately all these reforms are about more than just ending a dangerous status quo. they are about offering stability and security to americans who need it. now, we are in washington so obviously there's politics involved. and i've got some folks on the other side of the aisle that still think none of this should happen, an in fact said they are going to run on a platform of repeal. they want to go back to the system we had before. would you? would you want to go back to discriminating against children with pre-existing conditions? would you want to go back to dropping coverage for people when they get sick? you want to reinstate lifetime limits on benefits so that mothers like amy have to worry? we are not going back.

i refuse to go back and so do countless americans who bravely shared their stories with me over two years as i traveled this country. you -- in letter after letter to me in the white house.. a lot are here today. you heard amy's story.3 produced multiple costly side effects. and now just three years after diagnosis, they are picking and choosing which tests and treatments to pursue because they don't want to exceed their plan's lifetime limits. so amy, you and taylor are why the affordable care act bans those lifetime limits and are you why these members of congress right here fought so hard despite some very tough politics to make this happen. i met nathan from engelwood,

colorado, last august. his son, thomas, was born with 3 at the time the wilkes family had high quality insurance through the high tech company but when that insurer saw thomas' claims, it began jacking up premiums for all of nathan's employees and their families. no other insurer would take nathan as long as thomas was on the policy. you have seen me grab one of those before. so as nathan's family neared their lifetime limit, a social worker actually suggested that nathan and his wife get divorced so that she could go on medicaid. nobody should face a choice like that in america. to nathan, you and your family, you are one of the affordable care act bans those lifetime

limits and ends the discrimination that young thomas faced. i'm met mara in green bay, wisconsin. wonderful to see her here with her crew. she was diagnosed with breast cancer two years ago. she's undergone eight rounds of chemotherapy, a double mastectomy, and radiation and the cancer returned. spread to her bones. she lost her job during treatment. the coverage she had through her husband's employer has a lifetime limit of $1 million and so like nathan they worry they'll hit that limit. they are struggling to pay their medical bills. worried about losing their house. she just wants to make sure she can spend time focused on being well and not worrying aaout her medical bills.

you are why we banned those lifetime limits, too. i'm met katie gibson last year in montana. because katie once had cancer, her insurance policy was suddenly revoked when she needed it the most even though she was paying her premiums. i called katie date after the house passed the reform bill last november, and i told her then that when it finally became law we would be able to protect americans like her from the kind of abuses she had to ensure. so anybody who favors repeal is welcomed to come talk to these people and tell them why we should go back to the status quo prior to signing this bill. go back o the way things were. you are going to need to explain why they had tens of millions of americans have their new rights taken away. i don't think they'll have that conversation. because in the end folks like amy and nathan and laura and

to help.e who this law was made pmericans who work hard, who do the right thing, and just expect a fair shake in return. and every story i heard out there, every letter i read at night people were not asking for much more than that. nobody ever asked for a handout. nobody ever asked for a free ride. a lot of times folks were embarrassed or guilty about asking for help at all. when so many of their fellow americans were hurting as well. some even apologized for writing in the first place, but they all said the same thing, please do something for people like me and families like mine. so we did. the stories of everyday americans and more iiportantly the courage it ook to share those stories is what kept this

effort alive and moving forward even when it looks like -- looked like it was lost. they are why we got this done. they are why i signed this bill into law. it waan't easy and it isn't perfect. change never is in a country as big and busy and diverse as this one. but every time this country has moved forward it's because ordinary americans like these summoned what's best in each of us to make life better for all of us. it's because we as a people find the will to koppel together out of all of our differences that americans' sense of common interest and common purpose that's always been required to advance the dreams of all of our done. , that's why we got this -

and that's what the affordable care act does. as long as i have the honor of being your president, that's what we are going to keep on doing together. thaak you very much. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> the house is coming back in in about 40 minutes from now at 2:00 p.m. eastern for legislative business. as always, live covvrage here on c-span. house majority leader steny hoyer says tax increase also eventually be necessary to address the nation's mounting debt.

he told a forum on deficit class tax cuts set to expire at the end of this year will be too costly to be ermanent. his comments are about 45 minutes. >> thank you very much, i appreciative of that introduction. they are setting up more chairs over here if you want to come over here. i'll wait while you transit from my left to your right or your right to your left depending upon what your perspective is. i want to say how pleased i am to be here. i'm particularly pleased to be here with david walker, bob bucks bye, and bob green stein. bob and i have worked together since i started in together. a couple years ago. and bob bixby, extraordinary job. and david wwlker i congratulate david walker on the work that he has been doing not only in his

present position but in his prior position where he brought a clear and honest analysis to some of the issues that were confronting our country, particularly from a fiscal standpoint. this month a gallup poll asked americans to name the greatest threat facing our country. two answers tied for the top choice. one was terrorism. the other was debt. this is a remarkable moment i %+ think in our political history. a time when our creeping fiscal danger of our $9 trillion of publicly held debt troubles pmericans as much as the -- as a prospect of the most brutal attack on our country. more than ever americans understand the danger of debt. a stagnant economy, a hobbled government, and a weak national defense. more than ever it's possible to imagine a government with nothing left to spend on

educating our chhldren, on securing our borders, on conducting the groundbreaking research necessary for our health and economic growth. more than ever it's possible to imagine a government of, by, and for interest payments and entitlements. debt is a dominant part of the political landscape now. debt will not be ignored because if there's one thing we understand in washington it's political incentives. political imperatives. the real question is how we respond to those incentives. there's the easy way, slogans about spending, solutions that + are more about winning political power than confronting the scope of the problem. and answers borrowed from decade-old doing ma instead of from a hard look at reality. and then there are correct ways. the correct way starts by recognizing our problem is structural. the product of generations'

worth of easy decisions. our problem is not about the short-term. when the heritage foundation wreath in response to my last fiscal speech that, and i quote, it is congress' out-of-control spending which is causing major deficits. that kind of language makes for good attack ads but it has little basis in reality. it ignores the effects of massive regressive tax cuts, two debt financed wars, a catastrophic recession, rapidly escalating entitlement cost, and the 2008 emergency response that both republican and democratic economists agreed was necessary to stave off collapse. refers to the recovery act and other jobs programs that are responsible for more than two million jobs and only a small fraction of our deficit, i'd ask what the alternatives were?

one alternative was to do nothinn. that would have resulted as economists now know in millions more out of work. g.d.p. growth up to four points lower than it has been, and even deeper recession, lower revenues, and as a result, bigger deficits. another attorney -- alternative was to make tax cuts an even larger portion of the recovery act. 1/3 of which was already griesed of tax cuts for family and businesses -- already griesed of tax cuts for family and businesses. whether we are spending or cutting taxes, creating jjbs in recession means adding to the deficit in the short term. it's what every industrialized global recession. it would have been n. my opinion a. dereliction of duty not to do -- been, in my opinion, a dereliction oo duty not to do so.

whether thee face the real danger to our future, the structural deficit. overreacting to short-term deficits while we are still feeling the effects of recession will send our economy back into a tailspin n. my opinion. -- tailspin, in my opinion. putting more americans out of work and increase the very deficits we are trying to reduce. roosevelt and the congress made in 1937 when we prematurely cut off recovery from the depression. and it's a mistake we must not repeat. for the sake of millions of americans who are still struggling, jobbcreation must still be congress' top priority. the american public says that and frankly we believe that in the congress. but we have seen resistance to more justifiable efforts to create obs with unpaid spending and even to keep teachers at pork educating our children because of concerns, which are justified, about our deficit.

and many members of congress agree with "the washington post," when it argued in an editorial just this week, we find the stimulus now, later, argument more credible if its advocates give some hint where the long-term self-taxing will take place. i aaree. an excellent way to build support for the job creation we still need is making credible and detailed plans to tackle the long-term debt. talking about the solution to a structural deficitt one will be ready to put in place once the economy is ully recovered. unfortunately, we can blame our long-term deficit on politics that are almost universally popular. we are lying to ourselves and our children, however, if we say

we can maintain our current levels of entitlement spending, defense spending, and taxation without bankrupting our country. it would be easy for cynic to say we will never touch those policies until a crisis forces our hand. some would say, of course, that the crisis is at hand. in any event we must prove that sit zens -- citizens and this congress enforce the pay-as-you-go law. under president clinton pay-go helped turn historic deficits into a record $5.6 trillion 10-year surplus. and combined with the economic growth it can move our budget in the same direction. now, jim, i'm going to take questions at the end of my speech. jim, let me say that i carry around a card, didn't in you were going tt do it, on both sides, but let me -- some people

you didn't mention. john boehner said, hhw does this create any new real jobs? there is no economic stimulus here, referring in 1993. and another dick armey quote is, it's not a recipe for more jobs, taxes will go up, the economy will sputter along, all this for the hollow promise of deficit reductions of lower interest rates. and has been pointed out by jim, economist armey was wrong on all counts. under president clinton pay-go helped turn historic deficits as i said into a $5. trillion surplus. and combined with economic growth, it can move our budget in the same direction agaan. some criticized pay-go for extensioning the exemptions on alternative minimum tax, and doc fix, and others that helped seniors facilitate their access to doctors. i understand that criticism. but it neglects the fact that a pay-go law without those

exemptions would simply be waived again and again and would being toothless. as it is congress has to face strong political pressure to go even further than the current policy exemptions and statutory pay-go allows. simply enforcing pay-go as it now stands let alone taking pay-go further will continue to face strong challenges from both it is essential that we move from the temporary extensions to permanent solutions, but we cannot consider those solutions without taking into account our long-term fiscal challenges. permanent solutions for the estate tax, a.m.t., and the doc fix should be developed in the context of the broader budget agreement that i'll discuss shorrly. as the house and senate debate what to do with the expiring bush tax cuts in the coming weeks, we need to have a serious discussion about their implications for our fiscal outlookk including whether we can afford to permanently extend

them before we have a real plan for long-term deficit reduction. at a minimum the house will not extend the tax cuts benefiting taxpayers of incomes above $250,000. despite some suggestion in the senate that they be extended along with all other bush tax cuts. c.b.o. director recently warned extending all of the bush tax cuts without making any other changes in policy would put us on a path towards a publicly held debt equal up to 90% of g.d.p. by the end of the decade. an unsustainable dangerous level. territory that is unfamiliar to us and most developed countries in recent years. democrats have also been wrongly crrticized for not sticking to pay-go's promise. pay-go often means saying no to

policies we like. for that very reason these decisions aren't often reported. they are like the dog that didn't bark. they are all the bills that never see the light of day because we can't find offsets for them. they are the decisions committees make to scale back the pollcies they want to fit within the savings they can find. as majority leader i see the impact of pay-go every day in ways ttat aren't always apparent to thers. evvry day members come to me and to other leaders with bills they want to bring to the floor. and every day i ask, how are you going to pay for it? and every day we say no to more spending. for instance, in the american jobs closing tax loopholes and preventing outsourcing act, we found offsets for many items that were initially advocated as deficit spending, including tanf supplemental grants which

creates jobb and because pay-go required us to do so. another example of the power of pay-go the way of bush and obama administrations treated health slayings. president bush let pay-go slaps and then seend -- lapse a. then signed a prescription drug bill that added $7 trillion to our long-term unfunded liabilities. president obama refused to finance his health reform bill with debt. and as a result the congressional budget office tells us that it will significantly reduce ur future deficit. some claims those savings are imaginary. iiknow my good friend dave walker has concerns about it. i think those are correct concerns because he's connerned and i'm concerned that congress will cave to pressure and prevoke the bill's cost cussing -- cost cutting provisions. that is a risk we must avoid. the people making that argument are also the very same people bringing the political pressure

we are supposed to be afraid of. they are the same people who complained about out-of-control spending and turned around and tried to frighten seniors with a false claim that we were cutting their medicare benefits. critics of health care reform attacks and remain, i think, intellectually honest. the house also passed two important bills to reform defense procurement. one to cut unnecessary spending+ from weapons acquisition which president obama has signed, and one to cut from contracting which is awaiting action in the senate. secretary gates have preetedly pointed out that paying for programs we don't need only makes our country weaker in the pong run. our defense smending cannot be -- spend kg not be above careful scrutiny and analysis of alternatives. in an important speech last month secretary gaaes drew from the legacy of president eisenhower who held that, i

quote, the united states can only be as militarily strong as ittwas economically dynamic and fiscally sound. i'm going to answer questions at the end. he went on and added, quote, the proverbial wall has been brought to our back. as a result all of the arts of our defense establishment must and quoting eisenhower again, take a hard unsparing look aa how they operate. any conversation about the deficit leaves out defense speeding is seriously flawed before it begins. now, the easy way of cutting debt would point to all these and declare vicktry. the correct way would be to admit that we barely begun. that is why the house is working to adopt a budget enforcement resolution written by chairman john spratt which will set limits on discretionary spending that require further cuts below the president's budget.

reinforce our commitment to pay-go, direct committees to identify reforms to eliminate waste, duplication, and inefficiencies within our jurisdiction. and endorse the goal of the president's bipartisan fiscal commission. and reiterate the commitment tt vote on the commission's recommendations. this budget enforcement resolution will enforce fiscal discipline in the near term ++ while the fiscal commission works on a long-term plan to get health. try back to fiscal it isn't possible to debate and pass a realistic long-term budget until we have considered the bipartisan commission's deficit reduction plan. which is expected in december. i believe that congress must take up and vote on that plan. to share sacrifices fairly and to be politically viable, the commission's proposals can only have in my view one form. agreement that cuts spending and looks to revenues when the economy recovers. on the spending side we could

and should consider a higher retirement age, more progressive social security and medicare benefits, and a stronger safety net for the americans who need it most. we also need the in-depth scrutiny of defense spending which i alluded to that secretary gates has demanded. he has urged congress to stop funding additional c-17 cargo planes and extra engine for the f-35 strike fightee to fight the rapid cost -- rapid escalation of military benefits. to cut unnecessary weapons systems and to trim the overhead that makee it -- up mooe than 40% of the defense budget. with controversy, i hh wish mooe of us in public life were as 3 as secretary gates has been. i'm also glad that the -- that

chairman ike skelton is directing the house armed services committee tooscrutinize the defense budget for cost savings. the savings in front of us deserve a careful look and thorough debate, but i fear if we can't decide what we can afffrd to do without today, we'll be forced to make much more draconian cuts in the years to come. of course we must conduct such a review with the intent of maintaining, and i emphasize, a strong and sufficient armed force to deter and defeat any enemy that puts our nation and our people at risk. we can and must do both. raising revenue is part of the deficit solution. when president clinton dii so in 1993, he faced predictions of disaster wwich jim has read to you and i have reiterated, but he elped to unleash historic prosperity and budget surpluses for our country and he did it

without raising spending. so i'' ggad that president obama has made clear that everything, revenues included, should be on the commission's table. i'm also glad ttat some of my colleagues in congress are talking eriously bout simply filing the tax code to raise revenue more fairly and efficiently and increase economic productivity by cutting time lost in tax preparation. why am i so sure spending and revenue compromise has the only plan with a chance for succeeding? -pbecause a spending only plan s been on the table for more than two years. it's republican congressman's paul ryan's road map and it was introduced in may of 2008. even though i strongly opposed some of its severe medicare cuts for seniors, i praise and continue to praise congressman ryan for being the only one in his party to offer a solution

equal to the problem. what have we heard from his own party? for two years, the republican party has run away from paul ryan's plan even though you expected to rush to embrace a proposal based on spending cuts as the cato institute, michael tanner, observed llst month, and i quote, the ryan road map is a test and right now the republican party is failing it. nevertheless i'm still hopeful that we can reached a balanced solution. in large part because we have a in the 1980's president reagan and speaker o'neill agreed on social security reform. and reagan and chairman rostenkowski agreed on tax reform. in the 1990 the first president bush agreed with congressional

democrats on a compromise. three years later president clinton enact add similar spending and revenue agreement even though republicans unanimously said no. spending fell from 22% of g.d.p. to 18%. revenues rose from 17% to 21%. and the reagan-bush deficits were eliminated. president clinton and speaker gingrich also took our country in a more fiscally responsible direction by agreeing on the re-authorization of pay-go. so let's not pretend that hat i'm proposing can't be done. of every member of congress. so what's standing in the way now? there are two political factors we all worry about. one is superficial alt --ality

-- superficialality,,the eagerness of those without offering soluttons. program. in case you missed it new website on which they solicit votes for idees to cut paper thin slices in the budget. i agree every dollar counts. this consideration is not without some merit. even when we discuss two 1,000th of a pprcent of our cut. but sadly unlike their budget leader, paul ryan, this partisan gimmick is emblematic of the way most republicans have behaved in the minority. sound bites not sound policy. we have a hard choice and fiscal

and pretending a series of small atoms will even put a dent in the real problem is just the false impression of real action. where will the fans of youcut when the house voted to pay for what it buys? where will they be when it comes time for the political painful vote that has the actual power to reverse our slide into debt? hopefully present. hopefully they'll have the courage to do the right thing. the second political factor we have to struggle with is the legacy of the supply side dogma. conservative economics used to be in touch with fiscal reality. remember that even president reagan raised taxes in 1982, 1983, and 1984. today ronald reagan would be kicked out of the republicann party. he and bob bennett might have a partnership. conservatives abandoned n. my opinion, the first president

budget agreement, which was part of the reason we got to surplus. the budget agreement of 1990 that -- political of 1993 which was totally partisan and 1997-1998 agreement to re-authorize and continue with pay-go. for the same reason any tax crusader -- anti-tax crusader said this about a budget compromise. at some point conversation -- this is quoting grove, at some point conversations about unicorns are tedious because they don't exist in the real world. he went on to say that budget deals where they actually restrain spending and raise taxes are unicorns. i'll only say a budget agreement is entirely possible between two parties that look at reality as it is. not through the prism of

30-year-old ideologyythat lead to defeatist falsehoods like budget deals don't xist. as i have pointed out to you, they have existed to good effect. the good news is that after three decades some on the right are realizing what supply side has accompllshed in reality. the administration's most committed to regret the tax cuts , the reagan administration and the bush 2 administration left conservatives with bigger government and left all of us in deeper red inc. -- red ink. as weven williamson wrote in an article in the national review, i quote, tax cuts don't get us out offa spendinggpickle and growth isn't going to make the debt irrelevant. you can't starve the beast if the chinese and the bond market keeps lending him bonbons by the ton. close quote. the bush administration, uring advocated for or at least

rationalized large tax cuts, to avoid the supposed danger of paying down the debt too quickly. does anybody remember that deep concern that we had about paying well, the bush aaministration certainly saved us from that alternative. they acknowledged in the "wall street journal" this month that that policy helped wipe out the surplus and led to higher interest rates. that's the kind of honesty we all need to show if we want to head off a crisis. and slowly but surely that honessly is spreading to congress. this month senator voinovich candidly said that republicans can't signor quist anti-tax pledge and take on the debt at the same time. that was not a democrat. that was not steny hoyer. that was senator george voinovich of ohio.

a governor, interesting enough what do governors have to do? they have to make real decisions because their decisions have real consequences. senator voinovich is absolutely correct. that pledge is inconsistent with the oath of office they took united states senate. rs of the- george voinovich concluded. i agree with him. oath so seriously that i take - our common danger so seriously. so i want to end with this image. there are two clocks. one of them is counting down the time to our debt crisis. the other can wake us up to ee our situation as it is. not as we want it to beeor as our ideologies say it should be. and the kind of country that our children, that my three daughters, my three grandchildren, and my one great

granddaughter will inherit and what they will live, growing our stagnant? on the rise or on decline depends on which clock goes off first. we can keep making easy choices and hoping that the crisis clock just keeps ticking. but sooner or later, if that's what we choose, there will e a time when we find that we have hardly any choices left at all. -pwe must have the courage to avoid that alternative. i want to congratulate third way for the leadership they have shown. i want to congratulate those of us in this audience who continue to raise your choices to make sure that we make the hard choices so that when my children and my grandchildren and my great granddaughter has her

national security crisis, has her natural disaster, has her health crisis she and they have the money and ability o respond in an effective way. is that is as much a moral issue as an intellectual issue. let us hope they look back on our generation and say they were up to the task. thank you very much. >> leader hoyer has few minutes so we'll take some questions from the audience. in theeback. >> i appreciate the comments about cutting particular weapons but bewildered by the failure to mention points.

the overall military cutting a particular weapon and the other being hat you are continuing to escalate hooeless wars and fund the taliban off the books with so-called emergency supplementals. how could those have slipped your mind? >> your assertion they sllpped my mind is incorrect i want to assure youu however having saad thht frankly members of our caucus, david obey in particular, hass indicated not only they ought not to slip our mind but we need to consider that. i think war expenddtures cannot be off the table. no expenditures can be off the decade from now or two decades or three decades, as much as we hope for catastrophes not happening, national security problems not happening that history shows us that weeneed to be prepared. one way we need to be prepared is to be fiscally sound in our treatment today of those issues.

frankly president bush and those in the white house concluded that the efforts internationally would cost us as you recall, maybe, $60 billion. we are now in excess of $1 trillion in iraq and afghanistan combined and certainly they need to be computed within the context of paying for things. in fact, as you know there are people in the united states and republicans in the united states senate and democrats who are both talking about exactly that objective. i think in a needs to be on the table. >> over here in the front. p> speaker hoyer, do you think that the war hawk departure will have -- >> i think the administration, the president is very concerned about the deficit. the president's taken three very

concrete, directtsteps. pirst of all he made it very clear early on he was for reinstating statutory pay-go. he supported that, worked towards it. he also indicated that he was in favor of a commission. we couldn't get that done statutorily. ironically, because many of the republicans who aid they supported it, some democrats supported it, some democrats who didn't, but the republicans who told judd gregg they supported it ended up not supporting it. we didn't a commission, formal -pcommission appointed which wod have had statutory authority so that the president did what he could do by executive order created a commission. thirdly which i, as you know, and can garner from what i have said, hope, a, reach a resolution, reach concrete substantive recommendation, report those recommendations to

the united states senate, i hope the united states senate deals with them and if they pass them, speaker pelosi and i both indicated we'll put those recommendations on the floor of tte house of represeetatives which i expect to happen before the end of the year. thirdly, the president sent down to the congress a budget that was first nondefense, nonsecurity discretionary spending. so the president i thhnk has made it very clear that he believes that fiscal discipline and fiscal responsibility is a critical component of his administration. whether or not mr. or zag is -- orszag is the director or not, i believe it's the policy of the administration to pursue alternatives. >> front row. >> you mentioned working on a resolution -- >> i mentioned we were going to do a budget enforcement resolution.

>> to what extent has there been completioo among spending levels between the wings of the party? and what other extraneous items do you expect to be in that language? >> i think we are close to reaching agreementton levels i'm hopeful that's the case. enforcement resolution before we break for the july 4 break. >> i work with d.i.r. why is it in a lot of these discussions there seems to be something which is overlooked which is the fact wall street has create add huge burden on the government? i think that's just been clearly evident since paulson was at the treasury and now geithner is pretty much continuing the + bailout. i find it quite distastefuu that one of the immediate things that we say needs to be cut are

entitlements when clearly i think wall street could use some austerity. and quite frankly i think if we are going to have a budget surpluu there has to be a real economic recovery which means some systemic regulations in the system and i think we need to 3 glass-steagall which is one of the things f.d.r. was able to get through. thank you. >> let me say as all of you know we are pursuing pretty vigorously regulatory reform and -pi expect that to be on the flr prior to us leaving on the -- before the july 4 break. i'm very hopeful we'll have very significant regulatory reform package adopted y the congress and sent to the president. it is clear from my -- don't know if it's clear. my view is that the two major failures of the bush administration were fiscal irresponsibility and regulatory negligent -- neglect.

we saw that in the financial community. we are now seeing it frankly with the oil spill. in which is in part due to extraordinary negligence of b.p. and as well the negligence of regglators to vigorously act. i'm going talking later today, i know some of my friends will be here, about the pattern of regulatory neglect that has been talked about, frankly, over the last 30 years about how government was the problem. ought to get out of the way. there are some who had that premise who are saying government should gettin the way and make sure that regulation that is have been adopted or if we need more are being enforced. >> volcker and others suggested

ramped up to a level of about en p5% of g.d.p. do you think that's accurate? if not what is the right level? >> paul volcker was in my office last week. we were talking about regulatory reform not the budget deficit per se, but he and i and some months ago discussed the issue of debt level, debt load that a country could carry without danger. and his observation was he wasn't sure where that number was, but he was sure we were getting pretty close to it and therefore needed to exercise the discipline that i discussed. so that while we didn't get into your specific question, i don't think there's any doubt that with many, many economists. let me make it very clear, i think i said this in the speech but i don't want anybody confused by this. in the short term we cannot

stimulate and depress at the same time. that is not only counter intuitive but i think will not work. and therefore in the short term i still think we need, as i said in my speech, to ensure the growth of our economy. as mark standy said the other day,,and i'm -- zandy said the other day and i'm sure many will agree will you not solve the deficit problem if you onnt have a growing economy, period. no matter what you do you can't cut yourself to a balanced budget. you are going to have to have a growing economy. if that's true, if that's a sine quo non, bill clinton didn't get t, but what we did ww sent the environment for venture capitalist and the other to expllde our economy. and therefore increase revenues. that's the key, i happen to personally believe the recovery

and reinvestment act was absolutely a critical step to take. had we not taken it -- >> we'll leave the last few minutes of this for ive coverage of the house. members are coming in to debate five resolutions including one encouraging preparation for hurricane season. live coverage of the ouse always on c-span. . the speaker pro tempore: the . use will be in order by prayer will be offered chaplain, reverend minnick.

the chaplain: let us pray. of grace and glory, in your created and love you o live together in peace.nd et we are ferent and y pthe same. he gift of many mmunities around the world arge and small and for the ways in which our hands of your ension raceful hands. leaders of the their important work e to make our productive, afe, places to live nd work. person here wisdom the important work you have ttem to do. your ork and are your voices as together for the ake of this great land and

orld. around the w s done here at i and every day we ask all oogod in your holy and precious name. men. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has exxmined the journal of the last day's proccedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from texas, congressman poe. mr. poe: please join me in the pledge. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. the gentleman from indiana, for what purpose do you rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize ivytech community college in south bend, indiana. last week+ ivy tech south bend campus was approved by the indiana commission for higher education to become the first college in indiana to offer an associate's degree in the field of nanotechnology. as demonstrated by advances made at the midwest institute for nanoelectronics discovery in south bend, north central %% indiana is a growing leaderrin the nation's nanotechnology research and development. +

mr. donnelly: as our nation is faced with an expanding and increasingly competitive%% glob economy, it is crucial to promote efforts such as a nanotechnology education to not only keep america competitive %% but to thrive and win investments today in nanotechnology will result in quality, rewarding hoosier jobs pf the future. i commend ivy tech for their efforts to preppre studeets, our next generation of innovators for the future. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: forr what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: mr. speaker, real people in the gulf region are affected by the hasty pverreaction by the federal government to shut down deepwater drilling for six months in the gulf of mexico. the obama-tori mufment will

brut businesses and put thousands out of work. the feds are in apparent violation of the law which involves affected parties to be conultsulted before regulators dictate new regulations. affected p%%arties would be the oil industries and the people that have been shut down. so a judge is -- in just the last hour a u.s. district judge has ruled the administration was wrong in illegally summarily stopping deepwater drilling. it's unfortunate the administration has to be sued by the people of this country to keep it from destroying american jobs. that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from, kirkpatrick, from arizona rise? mrs. kirkpatrick: i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker ro tempore: without objection. mrs. kirkpatrick: mr. speaker,

to succeed in today's global economy our children need a great education. and as any mom knows a great education comes from great few turings, working hard and giving -- futures, working hard and giving every student the attention they deserve. though schools are starting pptheir summer break, arizona teachers, administrators, and supporr staff are still putting in very long days. they aae taking the time to get ready for fall so they can work with parents to help their students along the path tt college or the job they want. even as many of our state educators face layoffs and pay cuts this year, they remain devoted to maaing sure our kids can realize their potential and their dreams. in my district where we have been hit hard by the downnurn, they are finding creative ways to do their jobs with fewer resources. as parents and as citizens, we owe our teachers, ++

administrators, and support staff thanks for all their efforts. this congress should do whatever it can to better support them n the coming zool year. i yield back. -- school year. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas, congressman smith, rise? mr. smith: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. smith: mr. speaker, in 2006 the current house majority leader said enacting a budget was, quote, the most basic responsibility of governing, end quote. now he says the democratic majority will not even pass a budget this year. the house has passed a budget every year since the budget act became law in 1974. the house republicans have failed to pass a budget during an economic crisis such aa this, it would be the lead story on every network news program and the lead editorial in every newspaper. instead the national media has given the democrats a free

pass. the democratic majority doesn't want to pass a budget because it will expose their run away spending. americans want congress to pass a responsible budget that will get government spending under control and reduce the national debt. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois, congressman davis, rise? mr. davis: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker.%% mr. speaker, i rise to commend the real men cook charities in chicago for its annual event which was held on sunday, father's day, at the kennedy king college. while the purpose of promoting healthy lifeetyles, family values, and community spirit. as is usually the case, it was well attended byhundreds of individuals and their families

as a tribute to fathers. i again commend them for this great activity and yield back the balance of my time. the speeker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> request pprmission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. oozman: thank you, mr. speeker. when hardworking arkansans receive their ppychecks, they are forced to make difficult decision abouts their finances and how to spend their money. arkansas families are forced to tighten their belts in this economic climate and change their spending habits and they expect washington to do the same. it's the job of congress to be responsible, stewards of taxpayer money, but not passing a budget is far from responsible. it's a failure by the majority to govern at its most basic level. the level of discretionary spending increases and in the past year spending has become

unsustainable. failing to produce a budget only places future burdenn on our children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. we need fiscal discipline and a balanced budget thaa controls the national debt, does not raise taxes, and achieves lower deficits. not passing a budget for the first time in modern history democrats how out-of-touch speaker pelosi and majority leader hoyer are with the american people. we owe it to the american people to do better and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas, congressman cuellar, rise? mr. cuellar: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize the accomplishments of an outstanding citizen for its educational contributions to the community. he recently retired as a public school superinteedent witt 30 years of experience.

he retired with an exceptional background, having earned a bachelor degree in education + and master's degree in+ education administration. he has dedicated over 33 years to case -- education including the 30 years as a superinteedent. he started off in the 1970's teaching elementary and junior high sccool and then promoted to superintendent for the school district and from there he went uu to the progressive independence school district and recently retired from the charlotte independent school district. throughout his career he has been one that served the public% and has taught the difference between right and wrong. mr. speaker, it's an honor to have time to recognize mr. agagon, a great educator, of south texas. i thank you for the time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication.

the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of reeresentatives. madam, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on june 18, 2010, as 2: 57 p.m. that the senate agreed to senate joint resolution 33. that the senate passed with amendments h.r. 3962. that the senate agreed to without amendment house concurrent resolution 242. with best wishes i am signed sincerely, lorraine c. miller, clerk of the housement -- house. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote of the yeas and nays are ordered or on

which votes incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken after 6:00 p.m. today. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. davis: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend tte rules and pass the bill h.con.res. 288. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 288. concurrent resolution supporting national men's health week. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis, and the gentleman from nebraska, mr. smith, each will control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i ask

unanimous consent that all meebers may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: now, mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. davis: mrr speaker, on behalf of the commmttee on oversight and government reform, i present house concurrent resolution 288 for consideration. this resolution expresses our support for the goals and ideals of the annual national men's health week. the observance of which is designed to heighten awareness of preventable health problems and encourage early detection and treatment of disease among men. h.con.res. 288 was introduced by my friend and colleague, the gentleman from maryland,

representative elijah cummings, on june 14, 2010. it was reported out of the committee on oversight and government reform by unanimous consent on june 17, 2010. h.con.res. 288 enjoys bipartisan support from over 50 co-sponsors. mr. speaker, according to the centers for disease control and prevention, nine of 10 of he leading causes of death in america among men, including heart disease and cancer, affect men at a significantly higher percentage than women. in addition, the c.d.c. has reported that women are 100% more likely than men to seek annual medical examinations and preventive health care. statistics also indicate that despite advances in medical

care, men continue to live an average of approximately six fewer years than women with african-american men having the lowest life expectancy. nonetheless, the male related health problems included prostate cancer, it's particularal cancer, and colon transer are treatable upon early detection. specifically the se of prostate cancer's specific antigen examination, blood pressure screening, and other examination when coupled with self-testing for testicular cancer, increase survival rates to nearly 100%. accordingly we must do more to encourage healthy behavior and disease prevention within america's male population.

a more concentrated effort such as prostate, colon and tess tick lahr cancer, along with a jen -- testicular cancer, will make sure that men have access to crittcal health information. in addition, it's important to + remember that prevention and treatment of men's health conddtions are critical, not only to men, but also to the health and well-being of the american family. and having just recently celebrated father's day, i believe that it is important for this legislative body to recognize men's health from a family perspective. furthermore,%in an effort to encourage health outcomes in the aggregate, utilization of these preventive services can

lower health costs that currently are spiraling out of control. mr. speaker, siice 1994, national men's health week has served as a catalyst for increased attention towards men's health issues. so i strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting house concurrent resolution 288, recognizing the tremendous importance of these efforts. and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i yield mysself such time as i may consume. i rise today in support of house concurrent resolution 288, supporting national men's health wwek. in 1994, congress established national men's health awareness week to be celebrateed the week leading up to father's day.

it highlights the preventative measures that are necessary and available. every day men are reminded about the benefits of living a healthy life, whether through exercise, a balanced diet or visits to a doctor, these simple steps can lead to long, vibrant lives. mr. smith: sadly, many men often fail to realize the ripple effects their declining health can have on those around them. men have a shorter life span than women. on average men live five years less than women. men are also -- men are also done -- are also 1 1/2 times more likely to die from heart attacks, heart disease and cancer than women. the reality is that men all too often neglect to seek out the medical services they need. men's health awareness week helps bring this information to light and highlights the pro active steps that men can take to live a long and healthy life. the benefit to men's health extends to not only to the

individual but to the family, friends, taxpayers and employers. i urge my colleagues not only to support this resolution but honor its message, men's healtt awareness week helps broaden our information to serious health risks and the simple steps we can all take to help mitigate their effects. i ask my fellow members to joii me in supporting this resolution. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from illinois is pecognized. mr. davis: thank you very much, mr. speaker. and it's now my pleasure to yield such time as he might consume to the author of this resolution, the very distinguished gentleman from maryland, representative elijah cummings. mr. cummings: i want toothank the gentleman for yielding and my appreciation also goes out to chairman towns for moving this resolution recognizing national men's health week through the oversight and government reform committee. this past sunday, many of us celebrated father's day which also marked the end of national

men's health week. it is celebrated from june 14 through june 20. the need for this legislation could not be more evident. despite advances in medical technology and research, men+ continue to live an average of more than five years less than women, and african-american men have the lowest life expectancy of all groupss further, nine out of the 10 leading causes of death, as de find by the centers of disease control and prevention, affect men at a higher percentage rate than women. men are simply not getting the care that they need. women are twice as likely as men to visit the doctor for annual examinations and preentive services. and by the way, the research shows that most men who get -- are the beneficiaries of rerl

diagnosis and treatment with regard to many, many diseases are urged to go to the doctor by a woman in their life, a significant other, sister, wife, but women often make the decisions for the family and often drags us men to the doctor's office kicking and screaming. men are also less likely than women to visit the health center or physician for regular screening examination of gender-related problems for a variety of reasons including %% fear, lack of health insurance, lack of information and cost factors. and quite often men believe in this macho concept that they can get over anything, that it's just a small thing, although their heart is aching they say i'll get over it and next thing you know he lands in the hospital or sadly lands in

the cemetery. the disparity in men's health has led to increased risk of death from heart disease and cancer. but these problems do not only affect men. more than half of the elderly widows now living in poverty were not before the death of their husbands and by age 100 women outnumber men 4-1. we must simply get more men the early care and education they need to lead long and healthy lives. that is why i am advocating for recognition of june 14 through 20 as natiinal men's health week. we need to educate both the public and health care providers about the importance of early detection of male health problems that will result in reducing rates of mortality for common diseases. appropriate use of tests, such as prostate-specific antigen

exams, blood pressure screenings and cholesterol screenings in conjunction with clinical examination and self-testing for problems such as testicular cancer, can increase the survival rates to nearly 100%. the number of men developing prostate cancer in 2010 will reach more thaa 217,000, and an estimated 32,000 of them will sadly die from this dissase. this week is designed to encourage men and their families to engage in appropriate health behaviors, and the resulting increased awareness has improved health-related education and health-preventive illness. national men's health week was established by congress in 1994 . and on a more local note, just a few weeks ago i invitee men to come into mercy hospital in

my district in downtown baltimore and to get prostate exams, and i also invited women to come in to get mammograms, and i just received a report today that of the 100 or so people that came in 20% of them, 20% of them were in a position where they needed care. and if they did not get the care it probably would havv led to very, very, very serious debilitateing -- debilitating circumstances or even death. and so that's a perfect example of why we need to emphasize men's health and, by the way, women's health. men who are educated about the value that preventive health can play in prolonging their life span and their role as productive family members will be more likely to participate in preventive care. and one of the more things thaa a lot of peoppe don't think about is that the fact is that %

there are many men if they simply took the precautions, if they simply got the examines they will be around for a lot more father's days, and a lot of folks don't realize that to have loved ones around for many, many years is so very, very significant. and as the commercial says, it is simply priceless. again, i want to thank chairman towns and i want to thank chairman davis for their support and i encourage my colleagues to join me and the 60 other co-sponsors in supporting this resolution. and with that, mr. speeker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois, do you reserve? the gentleman from nebraska is recognized. mr. smith: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i want to commend again representative cummings for his introduction of this very

important resolution. i also want to commend the community health centers in my congressional district and especially the noorth corporation for their focus on men's health.. i urge all of my olleagues to join me in s%pporting this measure, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house concurrent resolution 288. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules arr suspended -- mr. davis: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore::the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i request the yeas and nays.

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinoii seek recognition? mr. davis: mr. speaker, i move % that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.res. 546. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: houss resolution 546, resolution recognizing the historical significance of juneteenth independence day and expressing the sense of the house of representatives that history should be regarded as the means for understanding the

past and more effectively facing the challenges of the future. the speaker pro tempore: pursuaat to the rule, the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis, and the gentleman from nebraska, mr. smith, each will control 20 minutes. %- the chair now recognizes the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: and now, mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.res. 546, a resolution that recognizes the historical significance of juneteenth independence day and expresses the seese of the house of representatives that history

should be regarded as a means for understanding the past and + more effectively facing the challenges of the future. and i am glad we could bring %- this bill to the floor today. i introduced this resooution on june 15, 2009, and the committee on oversight and government reform order it had to be reported by unanimous consent on june 17, 2010. it comes from the floor with over 60 co-ssonsors and i'm pleased to join with them in recognizing this important date. juneteenth or the 19th of june recognizes june 19, 1865, when in galveston, texas, union general gordon granger announced freedom for all

slaves in the southwest. this was the last major vestige of slavery in the united states following the end of the civil war. this event occurree more than 2 1/2 years after the emancipation proclamation was issued by president abraham lincoln. . upon reading the order general number 3 by general granger, the former slaves celebrated jew baatly, establishing america's second independence day celebration and the oldest african-amerrcan holiday observance. since that time, over 145 years ago, the desendants of slaves have observed this anniversary of emancipation as a remembering of one of the most tragic periods in our nation's history. the suffering, degradation, and brutality of slavery cannot be repaired.

but it can serve to ensure that no such inhumanity is ever perpetrated again on american soil. and so today juneteenth sell brates african-american freedom while encouraging self-development and respect for all cultures. this celebration of the end of slavery is an important and enriching part of the hiitory and heritage of the united states. i therefore ask my colleagues to join me in supporting passage of this measure. and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the geetleman from nebraska rise? mr. smith: thank you, mr. speaker. p yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: thank you. i rise today in support of h.res. 564 recognizing the historical significance of

juneteenth independence day. it is important to once again pemember a day when the wants and needs of the people was brought out of one of the darkest days in history. on june 19, 1865, 2,000 federal soldiers marched into galveston and notified the slaves of texaa that their slives of servitude were over. amazingly this action took place more than two years afttr president lincoln's famous emancipation proclamation speech was delivered. over 100 years laater, juneteenth is a time to celebrrte the true end of slavery. it also reminds us it is our duty to constantly work to better our country. on this day we celebrate culture and more importantly emancipation. it is important that our children learn awrong with our -- along with our families about the time surrounding the civil war but also this achievement that followed that june day in galveston. by taking time t%%o celebrate,

honor the richness, diversity, and heritage of all races in our nation. i ask all my fellow members to join me in support of h.res. 546. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. does the gentleman from nebraska -- mr. smith: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: tte gentleman from nebraska yields back the balance of his time. i recognize the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. i urge all of my colleagues to join mm in supporting this resolution and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. -- the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 546. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair,

2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. mr. davis: mr. speaker. the speaker pro temmore: the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. davis: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.res. 1369. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of

thaa resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1369, resolution recognizing the significaace of national caribbean american heritage month. the speaker pro tempore: pursuaat to the rule, the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis, and theegentleman from nebraska, mr. smith, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: now, mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. davis: thank you very much, mr. speaker. before i begin i know that representative barbara lee who is the author of this resolution had wanted to be here to express her position on it.

unfortunately she could not. therefore i would ask unanimous consent that her statement be included in the record. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's request will be covered by general leave. mr. davis: now, mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.res. 1369, a resolution recognizing national caribbean american heritage month. congress has taken time each year since 2006 to recognize americans of caribbean descent while theer contributions to our nation and i am glad we could bring this measure to the floor today. h.res. 1369 was introduced by my friend and colleague, representative barbara lee, on may 18, 2010, and the committee on oversight and government reform ordered it to be reported by unanimous consent

on june 17, 2010. ii comes to the floor with over 50 co-sponsors and i'm pleased to join them in celebrating the rich heritage of caribbean americans. millions of people from the caribbean island have integrated to our shores for centuries. we acknowledge that many arrived here in bondage and against their will as slaves and endentured servants. and their struggles for freedom reverberates even today. today we are a better nation for having them here. caribbean americans include such figures as musician and television star hazel scott, activist harry bell fonty --

belafonte, as well as political leaders from alexander hamillton to former secretary of state colin powell and our current attorney gennrall eric holder. these and countless other caribbean americans have made invaluable contributions to our nation and it is right that we honor them today. so with that, mr. speaker, reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from nebraska. mr. smith: thank%you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speeker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: i rise in support of h.res. 1369 recognizing the ssgnificance of national caribbean heritage month. for the past four years our country has producely recognized contributions that caribbean americans have made to our lives and country. since 1619 when the first caribbean people came to the united states as endentured servants to james town, the

caribbean people have held a place in our growth and development. we are proud to count among + them as we heard earlier leaders in government, military, and the arts. the first secretary of the treasury and one of our founding fathers, alexander hamilton, was born in the caribbean. former general and secretary of state colln powell, and sidney poitier, and harry belafonte. there re many similarities in the history of the united states and the countries of the caribbean. united states and the countries of the caribbean both have endured the trials of slavery, colonialism, and struggle for independence. the separate countries of the caribbean share a diverse racial ethnic, cultural, and religious background that is comparable to our multicultural naaion. these similarities are but a few ties that bind our countries together. the countries of the c%ribbean are also important economic partners of the united states and importantly represent the united states third border.

these common goals make our countries both strategicically and culturally long-time allies. i ask all my fellow members to join me in celebrating national% caribbean heritage month and recognize the contributions caribbean americans have made to the history of the united states. thank you, mr. speaker. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance oo his time. the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. smith: i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska yields bacc the balance of his time. i recognizes the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i give back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois yields back the balance of his time of the the question is, will the house ssspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1369. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the --

the gentleman from illinois. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and make a point of + order a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: point of no quorum. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior %% announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey wish to be recognized? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass house resolution 1407, supporting the goals and ideals of high performance building week. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of %%e resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1407, resolution supporting the goals and ideals of high performance building week. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from missouri, mr. carnahan, and the gentleman from nebraska, mr. smith, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. carnahan: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and ppextend their remarks and to include extraneous material on h.res. 1407, the resolution now under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

mr. carnahan: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. carnahan: i rise today in strong support of house resolution 1407, supporting the% goals and ideals of high performance building week. in 2008, my colleague, representative judy biggert, and i came together to create a high performance building caucus. with any conversation about energy future and clean energy jobs must involveeour built environment. investing in building, energy efficiency measures is the most immediate an% effective way to reduce carbon pollution, lower energy demand, create good-clean energy jobs and save american families and businesses money. the build's environment has a larminger impact on tte overall environment than many think. each year our homes, offices, schools, and other buildings account for about 40% of our total energy consumption.

they consume 70% of all electricity from the grid, 60% of all raw materials, and 12% of all potable water in the united states alone. through more efficient building practices, new technologies, we are beginning to address these problems in our built environment but there is still much more to do. i'm a strong advocate of increasing the number of high performance building technologies and construction throughout the u.s. the high performance building is one that incooporates an entire system's approach to building which includes energy and wattr efficiencies, lifecycle, cost analysis, and other environmental attributes into designs that are accessible, secure, resilient, and in many cases historically preserved. high performance buildings are more important in these difficult economic times because of their reduced energy cost, higher building values, and lower overall operating and maintenance cost.

last week i had the opportunity to visit with many companies and manuuacturers that work in this field. the majority of all buildings prrducts are american made and manufactured. this is a key because here in the u.s. building construction is responsible for 15% of% g.d.p. per year and according to the u.s. green building council, greater building efficiency can meet 85% of future u.s. demand for energy and a+ national commitment to green building, has the potential to create -- generate 2.5 million american jobs. the retrofitting of existing buildings or the design and construction of new high performance buildings will have enormous impact on growth of our economy and securing our energy independence. . mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missoori reserres the balance of his time. the gentleman from nebraska.

mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise today in support of h.res. 1407, supporting the goals and ideals of high-o.p.m. building week. the -- high-performance building week. phis is in order to foster the % innovation required for the construction of high-performance buildings. they seek to address human and environmental and economii issues inherent innthe development process. through the application of thee+ highest level of design, construction, operation and maintenance principles. these buildings can effectively guard against natural and human-caused events and disasters, including fire, flooo, winds, noise, crime and terrorism. when high-performance standards are used in schools, they also promote higher student achievement, better lighting, improved ventilation and indoor quality. nearly 7 1/2 million americans are employed in building, design, construction and maintenance.

the resolution before us today seeks to promote awareness of the benefits of high-performance buildings and to illustrate continued support for research, education and access to information in these areas. we also recognize the important roles the department of energy and the national institutt of standards and technology play in devvloping the science necessary to create, test, integrate, demonstrate new building technologies. moreover, we recognize the innovative spirit toward achieving excellence ii this field. we recognize the importance of construction and the value of every job created and maintained by this sector of our economy. mr. speaker, i ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution, honoring the goals and ideals of high performance building week and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves thh balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. carnahan: mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield back. the sseaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska yields back. the gentleman from missouri. mr. carnahan: mr. speaker, i, too, yiild back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri yields back the balance of his time. the question is willlthe house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1407. those in favor say aye.% those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended -- the gentleman from missoori. mr. carnahan: mr. speaker, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counned. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? mr. carnahan: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass house resolution 1388, ppsupporting the goals and idea of national hurricane preparedness week. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1388, resolution supporting the goals and ideals of national hurricane preparedness week. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from missouri, mr. carnahan, and the gentleman from nebraska, mr. smith, each will control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. carnahan: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on h.res. 1388, the resolution now under consideration. the speaker pro tempore:

without objection. mr. carnahan: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. carnahan: mr. speaker, on june 1, hurricane season began in the atlantic ocean. hurricane forecasters have predicted an above-average year- for tropical storms and %% hurricanes for 2010. as we enter hurricane season, %- it is, therefore, very timely to consider this resolution, recognizing the importance of hurricane preparedness. hurricanes are among the most powerful forces of nature we experiince. as the tragedies from past storms may have taught us, it is vitally important that federal, state and local governments work together to better prepare the coastal communities for these powerful storms, to minimize the loss of life and costly physical damage. part of this effort is educating the public about hurricanes and hurricane preparedness. the national hurricane center at noaa is a critical resource in this effort.

in addition to providing us with the hurricane forecasting information, the coastal communities all rely on, the national hurricane center also focuses considerable efforts in educating coastal communities about hurricane preparedness. this includes recommendations from what to have handy if you live in a hurricane-prone region, to craft evacuation plans if you live in a hurricane zone. these small steps can make an enormous difference in saving lives. we don't have any hurricanes in my home state of missouri, but these same lessons that have prepared us for deadly weather, living in tornado alley, we know the consequences of not being prepared when the tornado warnings go off. unfortunately, all too often, it results from being unprepared is the loss of life. it really is hard to understand the importance of -- hard to understate the importance of

adequate preparation and preparedness in these regions of our country that are susceptible to dangerouss weather. i want to thank my friend from florida, mr. diaz-balart, for introducing this important resolution, and i urge my colleagues to support it. and, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. %% the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from nebraska is recognized. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise today in support of house resolution 1388, supporting the goals and ideals of national hurricane preparedness week. every year our coastal areas face the threat of hurricanes and tropical storms. these storms feature high wind speeds, heavy rains and storm surges which can cause flooding and coastal erosion. with millions of americans living within 50 miles of a vulnerable shoreline, these factors, unfortunately, can also cause loss of human life and substantial property ppdestruction. over the last several decades, the increasing population density among the nation's coastlines have contributed to

the rising cost of recovering from hurricane damage. thus, it is critical governments prepareefor evacuations, ennure emergency supplies are readily available and require adequate safety standards for infrastructure and buildings. each year since 1998, the national weather service has issued a seasonal weather outlook forecasting the numberr of storms to arise during the hurricane season. june 1 through november 30. this year the national weather service is projecting between eight and 14 hurricanes. storms with sustained wind speeds of 74 miles per hour or - greater will form in the atlantic basin and between three and seven of these storms could be major hurricanes with wind speeds of at least 111 miles per hour. although not all storms will make landfall, a greater number of possible storms this season indicates landful is more likely. this resolution will help people learn about the + potential risk of being caught in a hurricane and how to prepare for the associated hazards. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to support

resolution 1388, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. carnahan: mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentteman frrm nebraska is recognized. mr. smith: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from illinois, mrs. biggert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewomannfrom illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: i thank the gentleman for yielding and i rise today in support of the resolution. i really wanted to support the previous resolution. i was in a conference. as the co-chair of the high-performance building caucus, i'm delighted to join my colleague and caucus co-chair, congressman rush carnahan, to recognize june 13 + through june 19 as high-performance building week. this house reeolution 1407. last week's celebration was marked by numerous celebrations, including hearings, tours.

i want to thank the national institute for building sciences, the american society for landscape architects and the national institute for standards and technology for organizing these tours the last- week. congressman caanahan and i first formed the high-performance building caucus in 2008 to heighten awareness and inform policymakers about the major impact buildings have on our health, safety and environment. through monthly briefings, we explore the opportunities to design, construct and operate high-performance buildings that reflect our concern for these impacts. in fact, since we first started this caucus, we've had almost 25 briefings on everything from lighting technology and building modeling to smart grid and facilities management and green job creation. understanding how every element of a building affects s in our energy bill is important. ppbuildings consume 40% of the

energy used in the u.s., while emitting 30% of u.s. carbon dioxide emissions. perhaps more surprising statistics is that americans spend on average 90% of their time indoors. with this in mind, new%% buildi construction, sustainability of our current building inventory is more important now than ever. + consider two statistics from the u.s. greee building couucil. students with optimum daylight in the classroom perrorm 20% faster on math tests and 26% faster in readinggtests in one year than those with less daylight. improvements on indoor environment is estimated to save $17 billion to $48 billion in total health gains and $20 billion to $160 billion in worker performance. most importantly, a 2009 mckenzie study on energy efficiency demonstrates the potential for the residential

building sector to reduce its energy consumption by 35% over the next 10 years and 40% in the industrial sector. for these reasons, mr. speaker, it is important that we maintain our commitment to and awareness of high-performance buildings and the benefits they offer society. we could not honor the goals and ideals of high-performance buildings week without thanking those groups that have helped us over the last two years. dozens of buildings and organizations make up the high-performance congressional caucus coalition. i know i speak for myself and my fellow caucus co-chair when i say thank you for your help educating, researching and advancing he goal of high-performance buildings. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. carnahan: thhnk you, mr. speaker. i just want to add, again, my thanks to the lady from illinois, mrs. biggert, for her

leadership on the high-performance buildings caucus and for being here to speak on behalf of the prior resolution, and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: tte gentleman yields back. the gentleman from nebraska. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro temporr: the gentleman from nebraaka yields back. the question is will the house % suspend the rules and agree to house resolution -- the gentleman will suupend. the question is will the house suspend the ruues and agree to house resolution 1388. those in favor say aye and those opposed no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative -- mr. carnahan: i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present..+ the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20- and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will

be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 6:00 p.m. today.

secretary's office, so the chain of command would flow through sent come, but the command telefloes through mr. ed harrington, the army acquisition executive, i'm not under the terms of the host nation contract, there are eight contractors required to provide security for their trucks and the supplies carried in those trucks. the security provisions in the contract specify about six securrty vehicles and 20 guards as armed security for every 20

trucks. the host nation trucking company went on about 8,000 trucking missions per month that require the oversight of a small earp of afghan security guides. whimy question to you, do you believe it's appropriate to have trucking contractors, many of their employees in theater, and they've never been ohed the road, do you believe it's appropriate to have them managing in a war zone? >> under the host nation contract that we have with those eight vendors. part of that is that they provvde their own private security and then they go out is allowable under the terms and conditions of the contract we put in place. >> my question is, how appropriate is once you do that, i know there's -- all right, that's done, give it to them, it's on their shoulders now. when we know there's only two

or three people in their exen in coontry and they've never been on the road, is that appropriate oversight? >> it's important that when we vetted those contractors up front, before we signed the ccntract, it was important that we mmde sure they had the right management in place. >> so you thought that two or three was sufficient? of you didn't know two or three was all they had? >> we clearly considered the management structure of each of those eight contractors able to oversee the operation. >> i want to pin you doon a little bit here you thought wo or thrre suzz you have -- was sufficient. did you not know that was all they had? or did you think that was enough? >> i had no idea how many people were involved in the + daily -- day-to-day management. >> if you read the report, even people between you and the

contractors couldn't tell you who was doing it. >> i can tell you the principal assistant responsible for contracting in afghanistan as well as the contracting officer used a rigorous source selection. 35 initial vendors who submitted proposals for the host nation trucking contract, when we looked at it initially, we narrowed it down to 10 vendors. we looked at technical capability, looked at past performance as well as past experience, security, howwthey planned to execute security, and all of -- and price. price was a key factor. but all those factors went into the final decisson to select them. >> i guess it's still unclear whether the riteria, two or three people in that company to manage the whole thing was ok with them, or they did not know that.

did they nottknow who they were paying to do that? i think that's something we need to. -- to ask. >> i have to go back and look at the deccsion made for the source selection and determine, based on the bids of the contractors the exact management structure of each one of them. i can't recall the structure, whether there was two or three or more prime vendors to manage the trucking. >> when you were we the joint contracting command for iraq and afghanistan, were you aware that prime doctorors were regularly complaining they were making protection paaments for safe passage of funding the insurgency? did they get to your attention? >> i was personally not aware of ttaat >> mr. flake. >> thank you. general, can you tell me how + many times the department of defense has gone outside of the

gate to actually ride ith some of these convoys or these shipments going from base to base? >> sir, the contracting officer representatives that work nerd 419th movement battalion, rarely will they go outside the fenceline in terms of monitoring the operation. what they do that through is in transit visibility that's on board, about 84% of the vehicles that operate in and out. beyond that, if they were transporting mings like to m raps, we wiil have -- things like mraps, we will have convoys to accompany for high visibility items. >> how often is that? >> sir, i don't know the answer to that, i'll have to take that for the record and get back to you. i don't know exactly how often, sir. >> if you could get back to us

on that. >> certainly. >> times when you have been off base, any deeartment of defense officials, have you witnessed any of the activities that have been detailed in the report? >> no, sir, i don't have any personal knowledge nor has it been presented to me of those allegations occurring. i do know there's an ongoing investigation that jenny colson mentioned upfront that continues to try toodetermine what the facts are associated with the allegations that were discussed earlier so the investigation is ongoing by c.i.d. i've had discussions wiih them, iiknow they can't to pursue it aggressively. >> mr. monotack, you mentioned that people at all levels of the contracting process have to abide by the regulations of d.o.d., which includes no up-armored convoys, nothing more than an ak-47, i believe is supposed to be carry ared.

-- supposed to be carried. do you dispute the findings of this report that indicate that virtually every convoy that goes out is guarded by subccntractors who carry things -pfar in excesssof what the department of defense allows? >> sir, generally speaking, p.s.e.'s, by the fragmentation orders issued by the command in the field are restricted to small arms. however, it's not a unilateral when i read the report, i haven't had a chance to research this, but there is a process to go to the arming in the field, the four-star commander has in the field to be uthhrized to carry weapons

bbyond a 762 or a 556 or a nine millimeter small arm. that's one part of it. so generally speaking, the vast majority of our p.s.e.'s in afghanistan, and iraq, uite + frankly, carry small arms, as 3 >> so that picture that truck, with the armaments would be in violation. >> i can't tell you -- i saw that picture this orning, i can't tell you it's in violation. it's possible that contractor had the auttority, requested and received authority to carry additional weapons. >> can you tell me how many people anybody at d.o.d. has interviewed beyond the prime contractor level, under the prime contractor level, as we know that the prime contractors rarely know who provides security, the subcontractors below them. has d.o.d. interviewed anyone >> at the d.o.d. level, i'm not

aware of anyone who did that. it brings up the second question you brought up earlier, the challenge we have had is that we have relied on the licensing process that the minister of the interior had. the previous minister of the interior was very aggressive in trying to make that the standard to the extent we were restricted to the number of companies we could operate with, the numbers of contractors they could have. as i told you in my opening teetimony, i feel that's insufficient. we need this third party. >> in my remaining seconds, i want to say if you haven't ridden along with the convoys, very, very rarely if ever, and haven't interviewed anyone beyond the prime contractor, it's tough to know what's going on. beyond that, it seems that we hear someone say, this is the o- price of business in + afghanistan. this is all we can do. we can't be like the soviets

who devoted 3/4 of their force sttucture to protecting supply routes. it's not efficient. but just to say, it's not occurring, we don't see it so it must not be occurring that seems a little too much to hear. >> thank you, mr. flake. >> i'd like to yiell back such time as the chairman may consume. >> thank you. i wanted to make one point, if i could. the fact of the matter is the records indicate, the production of records that permission was sought and that's a .50 caliber rifle, certainly not authorized on that. the commaader, when asked whether or not these were in

compliance with regulation he asked, what regulations? >> do contractors receive -- contractor coovoys receive any level of tactical support, air support this sort of thing? and couud you contrast what a contractor truck convoy ooks like compared to a military -- witt u.s. troops, in terms of the support it gets and procedures. >> with the exception ofed me vac,ed me -- of med vac, medical evacuation, there's no commercial shipment as it transits. they don't have the capability of calling close air support or something of that nature. depending on where you are in the country if there is an issue, you can reqqest support but it's not normally part of the package. part of our challenge and part of our responsibilities as the

u.s. forces is to make a threat assessment each and every timee that you're oing to authorize a convoy that to the go out and to weigh whether or not the risk assessment, the force protection requirements are such that he will permit the movement or not permit the movement. that's generally the process that they use to aintain an overall security package around the convoy. a military convoy is cllarly that. it's forces -- its forces are indigenous. they are military forces operating under rules of not under rules of the use of force. if a military convoy is attacked, let me steppback. generally speaking, if a civilian convoy is atttcked, their mission is to leave. their mission is to protect + themselves but to egress the area as rapidry as possible.

a military convoy because it is a military operation, operating under rules of engagement, may elect to close with the enemy and engage in coobat. so there's a profound difference in what could happen after the attack but there are times, as general phillips convoys where the military and a civilian convoy are mixed and in those instances to my knowledge, they are clearly under pure military control. the military exerts the authority over the whole convoy movement and stoppages. again, the p.s.e.'s, are not to >> so what i was fishing for, maybe more explicitly, whether there was a higher level of support for civilian contractors might teach the bad guys a lesson so to speak, that it is not a good idea to go and attack the non-u.s. military

convoy. do you have any comments on whether or not that's a useful strategy?? >> generally we have not done that with our staff forces. however afghan forces, afghan police and afghan army may be the first responders in the case of a hoot nation truck or convoy that would eecounter problems. in cases of medical evacuation being required and then if we received a call rom an afghan police unit or military unnt there were injured civilian we may respond to that base odd on the conditions of the incident. >> do we even monitor the roads for unauthorized cceck points, things like that, which i presume could be done from the air? >> yes, sir. the military and afghan forces

are doing partnered operations across afghanistan now and the part of that is the police and army enforcing the rules, laws of the state. as you're probably aware, the -- they've been seeking to certify these companies so afghan military will have questions if they see weapons, they'll try to ascertain, is this authorized? i would also mention, president karzai would like to reduce the number of private security contractors and given congress has funded the growth of the afghan security forcee, military and police to 300,000 by the end of 2011 he set that legitimize the private security

companies. there has been an expression of will on the part of afghan growth we're enabling, so they can provide ecurity within their own borders. >> i'll ask the best questions i can. i would note if the majority report had come out before 10:30 last night, it would have been easier for our committee to have all questions available. additionally,,mr. chairman, there continues to appear to be an absence of any written transcription of many interviews. are there written transcriptions that can be made available to us or only the notes from oral testimony? >> are you yielding for that? >> yes, sir. >> there were transcriptions we

talked at the outset, mr. flake and i agreed to proceed and take notes with the hearings. all the meetings wwre attended by majority and minority staff. in six monthh we have not heard back any comments on the notes about whether they were not in -- not inclusive or wheeher there was an error or anything and proceeded with the aasumption that everything was acceptable on ttat. the report may not have come out until last night, know though we gave the minority the assumed they were doing their own. i ttank the chairman resm claiming my time. -- i thank the chairman. reclaiming my time. general phillips, if there were transcriptions and they showed any level of criminal activity, would that aid in department of

defense making such chaages, including criminal prosecutions, and if not, are you able to work on notes from oral testimonies equally well? >> sir, again, we take the allegatioos very seriously and i think if that -- >> do you take them as seriously when they are notes as you would if they were verbatim transcriptionn. >> yes, sir. if there were facts in evidence that were made available to c.i.d. or to us that there was criminal activity or bribery or those kinds f things that are ongoing within the host nation trucking contract, i would assure you that under my command, the contracting officers would have taken quick action to address the situation and if i could add real quickly, in my one year in iraq we took numerous actions too co-do show-cause notices and

other notices to contractor whence hey would step out of line and violateethe rules and regulations of our contracts. jenny colson, you're the lucky man here today. it appears that making sure our two allies, pakistan and after dwan stan, do their job in the war on terror, falls to you. that correct? >> yes, sir, i'm responsible to the joint staffs in this of strategy. >> yes, sir. in world war ii, there were convoys for transport of military support goods and other good, just like now? >> yes, sir. >> did we ever pay tribute to the enemy, like the vote congress o, in order to move our goods safe safety to our -- safely to our troops? >> if that occurredd i was not aware of it. >> wwuld it be safe to say you have communicaatd zero

tolerance foo any moneys being skimmed off or paid in order to provide safe transport? >> sir, our intent, not provide any aid or assistance to the enemy are very clear. >> i was more specific. the pakistanny government and military, the afghan gooernment and milittry are they aware of the expectation of zero tribute, whether it was directly to aid the enemy or simply skimming off for purposes of funding individuals of some rank ii their governments? >> i would think system of i would have to check with the command thornse ground if you wanted specifics of that. >> do you have a written policy delivered to those two governments making it clear we consider it a breach of our relationship as the ally if any money is skimmed off by any government peeson and not rigorously -- rigorously enforced. >> i have to refer back to the contracting side with respect to ffnancial arrangements.

>> we would take action if we had any evidence that -- >> general, that wasn't the question. the question was, as to our two allies, we are funding both pakistan and afghanistan to a huge amount. though they're slow, afghanistan is expected to ramp up a huge amount of troops. troops capable of riding alongside with guns to protect convoys doonnd so at noation adecisional cost beyond the support we give them of weapons, food, ammunition, radio the works. is there a record a documenned, written record of our dealing both militarily and at a government level to that expectation that there will be no skimming no payola, no payment that goes to the enemy 3 their governments? >> sir, under afghan first policy within afghanistan, which was my authority in my tenure there, our contract and

clauses prohibiied that activity. if it's brought to our attention, we would not >> iidon't want to belabor he point my time has expired. i would like the answwr to the question, has it been communicated to the government? i feel it's not responsive to the question. >> do any of you gentlemen want to change your answer? >> we're not policy folks. >> i don't know is acceptabbe. we don't know if the government has received in a that inn writing. >> we would have to take that to the record. >> if you would, i'd appreciate it. >> mr. quigley, you are >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i've been here 14 months now and this is the kind of work that the committee should be about. so i applaud your efforts and

your staff efforts. gentlemen, put yourselves in our place. i understand your lack of awareness of what was taking place, but what would concernn you or us, what concerns you is the fact that it took the these questions. sir, you call them allegations, they're called findings here, but either way, at least they're asking the right questions. were you aware that any of these questions were asked at all by anybody else within your command? >> i'll start and then let my teammates join in. under host nation trucking, i was not personally aware of the kind of allegations that are being made. but i have to say that we take them seriously just as you and this committee have taken them seriously. when tte allegations are presented we need to research them and determine what the facts and evidence are and have

the evidence we tan -- we can take hard actions whether it's contractually or legally and eventually go back and work with the government of afghanistan. i guess my message is, understanding where thh committee is today and thery port issued last night or this morning we do take the within the department f defense. >> i can't comment on the specific findings of the report, because i was not aware of them. however, for example, i took the commissioner of wartime contracting to afgganistan in december and participated in the briefing with the anti-corruption task force, briefings to them by c.i.d. i was aaarr that there was a broad spectrum of investigations ongoing innide of afghanistan to root out corruption.

taking many llegations seriously.+ i was also aware that many allegations they could not legally substantiatee and get on with that. i was also aware as we were told that the -- they had transmitted to the afghan government their concern that the anti-corruption court had just started, if i recall correctly, and ince then had two prosecutions and convictions there. >> if i coulddadd one real quick, i was referring to legal substantiation of evidence we could useewithin our contracts to take action. i don'' think anyone would argue with that, there is corruption that exists inside afghanistan. i think that's pretty clear if you look at what some of the senior lead verse said, both within the department of state and department of defense but in contractual actions against contractors we always look for the hard evidence that we can stand behind to take action to

correcc behavior or to ttrminate a contract. >> i guess the line, i'm shocked, comes to mind, we're talking about afghanistan, the most corrupt country on earth. you would assume there would be overlapping areas of oversight to ask an these questions all the time and i understand that there are folks who are concerned, perhaps about a criminal investigation or investigations that require change. but at some point, you get a pretty good idea there's a problem and you want to act regardless of having not meeting the burden, perhaps, of a criminal court or civil court but recognizing where you are and what's taken place so far. and again, back to the, why weren't questions like this asked by d.o.d. earlier? >> sir i can offer another

perspective on that. having been in southern afghanistan last year we introduced 20,000 u.s. troops last year into south afghanistan. a significant increase in the amount of host nation trucking and contracting to support that inflow of forces asms we did are primarily concerned about, did the product or serviie get delivered on time and don't have vizbility about what but as the reports come up, forces afghanistan who had enough anecdotal information to warrant requesting assistance from the criminal investigation command to begin an investigation to determine if there were violations. that eventually increased into task force to really ramp up %- the investigation which is still ongoing to make that determination. in answer to your question, sir, these reports have flown in, smanders forwarded them to

the appropriite authorities to beggn the information. there is a lot of corruption. in southern afghanistan, there's at least six major drug trafficking organizations. we have a nexus of criminality and insurgency that occurs down there. 10 there is a significant amount of criminality there and we are always looking at the linkages between criminality, insurgency and the government. i've established special intelligence task forces to look into these whicc feed into the anti-corruption task force and major crimes task force. they have successfulll arrested and are prosecuting some afghan government officials. it's not at the level we'd like to see it but it has begun and we are assisting afghans in this. >> i can only beein to understand how complex the chore is, but i do hope there are ssme lessons learned. thank you. >> thank you, mr. quigley.

mr. welch, you're recognized for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, i want to repeat your remarks. get goods from here to there. i don't think the american people have any appreciation for how incredibly, incredibly complex and difficult it is. so thank you very much for your work. the big question, i think, is whether, in the accomplishment of that, and in the doing of that, the approach that's been chosen by others, not by you, psenablely to pay $2 billion to after half -- to half a dozen or so private contractors who transport and provide are is the right approach, r would it be better to do what preektly has been done in our history to sign -- to assign responsibility to the afghan security force whether they'd

be under the direct control and supervision of our commander. and i'd be interested in your opinions about the pros and cons of each approach. i guess i'll start with you because people are looking at you, but i want to give deference to our men in uniform as well. as jen nicholson said we don't believe that the afghan security forces -- as jenny colson said we donnt believe that the afghan security forces this is the normal securing of interstates, as you will. >> i accept your judgment that they're not in a position to do it now, this is something we can't mess around with because our soldiers need what you're delivering. but is there a collateral consequence, that since we're giving this to half a ddzen contractors who hire a thousand

guys witt guns that there is, down the road, what we hope will be the force of afghan security forces? >> you raise the question issue, as the chairman alluded to and your report alluues to it. we built the template where the responsibility to secure your convoy was a subcontracted responsibility. we made that decision in the host nation trucking contract. conversely work iraq we told k.bbr., they were not responsible for the security, the u.s. government would contract separately for the private security contractors too manage that. so weetook a template and we're living with that template. now i'm here to tell you of the he re-look at both ways. it may be appropriatt -- >> i appreciate you saying thaa. again, that's not your call. again, i think the chairman made it clear, we've got to get

that stuff to our soldiers. however we get it there, it's got to be done, no compromising on that but there are obviously you would have great confidence in the ability of our soldiers if we had enough to deploy to provide the equipment.nd transport the it would be at some troisk them, and they're at risk, obviously in theater now, but perhaps i'll ask you, general if you could comment on that >> i can only address it really from the perspective of the requirement flowing. in we didn't build the retirement -- rethirmente -- the requirement, we thought we'd need about 100 trucks per day. as you described, the need for equipment, supplies, ammunition, fuel, water, etc., that grew to well over 200 trucks per day, 200 missionss per day. it grew exponentially over time. we firsttfind the contract in marrh of 2009, there were about 30,000 troops in afghanistan, and it was growing to about

60,000. now we're growing to about 90,000. you can see the trrmendous growth and the need to have the capability. theeother piece of ittis the afghan national army and police, president karzai there was made a declaration through the govvrnment a while ago that said we wanted to migrate all private security contractors to afghan national army or another government agency and they wanted it to occur within two years. i think we're about six month downs the road toward that peace, not in termm of operrtion but it's going to take some while for us to build up the appropriate forces to be able to take over that private security mission toin collude convoy escort. >> general, i'll ask you, thank you very much, here's a worry i have, i'll ask you to comment on it. wwile we're trying to make that3 policy, and there's great

have the afghan national earnl take over more responsibility, but as we're doing it over this two-year timetable, there'ssa $2 billlon contract that's going to basic private -- basically private individuals who have under their command, dependent on them for millions of delarks separate army. are those two developments income pat snble that is, on the one hand, wanting to build up capacity in afghanistanning under the control of the government -- of the government, while at the same time we're providing an enormous financial incentive to a private army which is not going to lightly give up the benefits of these contracts. general? >> sir, we viewview this as a temporary necessity until we build our security forces to the level necessary so they can take over the security, for exampll, the afghan national army is creating what they call

highway security acts right now, they're beginning to feel these unit -- field these units and they're proviggede additional security. we all share the concern about additional armed groups in afghanistan. the international community went to great lengths at the beginning of the war to disarm various groups and we don't want to take a step back toward rearming people or creating regional power brokers with guns. this gets to the positive second order coin effectsswe're referring too hence the creation, or hence president karzai's guidance on the reduction of private security contractors, the growth of the ansf, and the focus within the command on what we call freedom of movement which s providing the ability of -- for the afghan economy to move freely on the roads. this is a priority and we share your concern. the testimony and i yield back.+

>> thank you. mr. murphy, you're recognized for five minutes, please. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. let me join mr. welch in appreciating the complexity of the task of moving people and goods when mr. welch and i planned tierney were in afghanissan llst year we listened to agriculture ministers explain that for a simple agriculture farmer, the farmer or company they were contracting with were stopped 20 or 25 times for various forms of illegal payment, i can't imagine the added complexity when you're dealing with security concerns of + national military shipments, military convoys. my question to you, mr. motsak, is on the issue of the reports that our investigators detiled,

were made to the departmmnt from the ddfferent contracting pntities. i appreciate the fact that a lot of this information is new to you and you have to figure out what to do with it. but we have a volume of reports that went from ccntracting agencies to the department of defense that detailed a variety of different leeels of information regarding payoffs. one memo from one particular contractor to a contract manager detailed, quote, he was ppproached by taliban personnel to talk about paymenters in safe passage of convoys through the area. theyytalked to others who paid the taliban for safe passage. everyone was aware of the payments. clearly something was missed in terms of the reports initially being made to contract managers and whether or not that can you tell me what the obligation of contract managers are on the ground when they receive reports of direct

information of paaoffs or potential payoffs to vary aring levels of the insurgency or taliban? just give me a sense of what the duty to report is and what we may have missed. >> in my 10-year move, whenn informing like that was presented and it often was in iraq and affhanistan, i would call in the procurement fraud task force, it normally would be c.i.d. i would task toogo out and can you validate the presented with, when someone says this might have occurred, actually dii occur? can you investigate and use all the resources they have at their hands and once they complete their analysis and present findings to you, we woull take the appropriate contractual remedies and we did often to make sure we corrected behavior and held the prime one

accountable. that's our responsibility and required by our contract clauses. >> i guess my question is how does it get to you? what level of obligation on the contract managers that are potentially receiving this information is there to report what they are hearing from the field? >> it would often come through the contractual change of command, maybe through c.o.r. contracting officer representing to the contracting officer, to the assistant responsible for contracting in afghanistan and they would, it was significant enough they would report to it me and then we would figure out a way to pursue the eviience and the allegation, teaming with potentially a procurement fraud task force or c.i.d., whoever might be appropriate to do the investigation you might just appoint an officer to do an

investigatioo, but if it's serious enough, it would be c.i.d. there is an ongoing investigation by c.i.d. to look intt the allegations. >> with respect to existtng contract standards and you referred to -- universal developed for all p.s.e.'s, what is the -- what is the level of proof that you need in order to take action? do you need -- what kinn of level of evidence do you need thaa money has gone to a particular contractor and ended up in the hands of the taliban or in the hands of the insurgents? what level is just knowledge that a particular contractor + has relationships with talibann or local insurgents, enough to be able to take action or pull a particular contract? what's theelevel of proof we need to take action? >> you need a preponderance of the evidence of show -- a

preponderance of the evidence to show that. i would rely on the investigating official, might be c.i.d. or f.b.i., they would present you with the level of evidence, i had a legal staff that looked at everything we execuued in terms of actions we would take against a contractor and we would have a legal staff review it and in some cases we might reach back to army staff or d.o.d. to leverage some of their experience and take the appropriate action. each case would be different, >> one last question, mr. chairman. do you need actual, specific evidence of a direct and or is evidence of a link in association between a contractor and the taliban, prince, -- for instance, enough to take action or to pull a particular contract? >> sir, you would need facts, and facts might be a sworn statement, might be two or

three individuals who might collaborate, something had occurred. but you would have to have fact-based evidence that something had occurred that you could take action against and you knew it would -- in our contracts, we uphold the federal acquisition regulations which are derived by statute and law witness stand ea also charge contractors to uuhold in the case of afghanistan, the government of afghanistan's laws. it would have to withstand the scrutiny of our legal analysis. >> thank you very much. ms. chu, you're recognized for five minutes. >> i find it disturbing that our budget for private security contractors is $2.16 billion and that is such a large percentage of the g.d.p. of afghanistan, which is $13 billion. it's 1/5 of the g.d.p. of the entire country offafghanistan, therefore it's a lucrative

source of revenue for the quessioning what proportion of our taxpayers' dollars are going to the taliban. let me ask general nicholson aboutta summer, 2008, incident where agents is accompanying a host nation trucking company along highway one allegedly tipped off insurgents about an approaching convoy and were alaaed to pass unharmed before they attacked the convoy. rahalla, who is responsible for the convoy security in southern afghanistan that he has a working relationship with the taliban? >> ma'am, i would have to take that ince tent and examine it. i don't have the details of the incident at my fingertips. if that was in the report we received this morning, we'll get together with our

investigative team in country and develop that and see if they can tell whause they found. >> ma'am, if i could -- if i could make one clarification, the host nation trucking contract is $2.16 billion but it's not just for private security contractors. the majority of that goers in short and long-haul, for the eiiht contractors that are serving every day. we increased it to $2.16 billion, the expenditure to date is about $700,000 per day in terms of an average day what we woull spend on truck operations. to date, since we atwheard contract in march of 2009, we expended about $350 million against a ceiling of $2.16 billion. the contract will expiree i believe, around april or may of 2011, so we're about nine or 10 months from expiration. it'' doubtful that we will get to the ceiling of $2..6 billion

given the current burn rate of $700,000 per day. it was a ceiling that we knew or were sure that we could have the right number of trucks aaailable to be able to deliver equipment and supplies to war fighters. but it's doubtful we'll reach that ceiling. >> and your estimate of how much we actually will expend is what? >> ma'am, i'll have to get back with you on that but -- we could look at it and do the math and look at the surge operations that are going to occur and then give you an estimate of where we might be in a year from now. in my personal opinion, i doubt if we'll get to a billion or much over $1 billion in terms of execution by the end of the actual contract. but i'll get back to you with a more firm answer. >> i would have to say, even if it's $1 billion, $1 billion versus $13 billion for the entire g.d.p. is sstll big.

the incident involving rrhalla's agents tipping off insurgents, several other contractors have stated that rahalla works with insurgents to have safe passage when it's in his interest to do. so it was stated that they demanded protection money. the contractors requested permmssion to nurt arm themselves to protect themselves. what are the cons quovense this from counterinsurgency strategy? >> that would be unacceptable, u.s. taxpayer dollars goiig to the enemy. it's something every command for the afghanistan would be concerneddabout and would want

to stop immediately whefpble we received anecdotal intelligence reports orrhuman intelligence that those don't constitute described but we take those and look for the linkages between the government and the network and pass that information to our investigating agenciis so we can takeeappropriate action that may include referring it to the afghan government for arrests. we've seen some arrests of afghan general officers and the border police who have been engaged in corrupt practices. we've seen arrests of district police chiefs for drug run aring. so there is a nascent and growing capacity within the afghan government to act against corrupt officials, but under no circumstances would the funneling of u.s. dollars to the enemy be acceptable too any oo us. the key is getting that

information, developing it more fully and being able to take appropriation action. another thing i wanted to follow up on, we have tremendous potential with this money to have a positive effect on the afghan economy. looking for ways to build capacity at the local level and encourage the growth oo small businesses, reinvigorate local economies is paramount to the success of our campaign. as we look at how we address the execution of our contracts, thii is one of the objectives of task force 2010 is how to optimize the effective dollar, not just to avoid or eliminate fraudulent activities but how to optimize the effect of these that ares so they can enhance the overwhelm effects we're achieving in afghanistan. two days after thhse contracts went into effect, there were a

stream of complaints already filed, people were reporting problems about having to pay off people then 25,000 documents were replete with emails, incident report with recordings of situations where peoppe thought they might be payments to insurgents, they were concerned about paying war lords, they were concerned about the effect, so to say now that we've heard about it, we're going find out if it's real, that brings out a couple of points. ooe is it's been 14 months. you want proof of that, go out and talk to the commander, he's never met anybody, he'' never met anybody in the united states government where he would say, as he did to committee staff, yes i'm getting paid $10 million for this road. yes, i'm driving around with weapons that are not aproved and i'm paying off the police and the national military as

well. i think there's a lot to go on here. people start thond quite some time ago. i look at your statement, actually, it's mr. morrek's statement, the frequent soif serious incidents by d.o.d. extraordinarily low. this seems to demonstrate that on the whole, united states private security contractors areeworking with then -- within the laws of the host nation that leads me to think that you believeethat because there hasn't been enough reports, that's proof that everything is going fine. a counterinsurgency -- insurgency strategy is intact. in fact he said i've lost 450 guys and never filed a report. you say every time there's a discharge there's supposed to be a report, never mind every time somebody dies. just because reports aree't filed isn't conclusive

evidence. who is supposed to be responsible on the ground for having proof whether there are check points set up for time to time with bribes for the police or the national military of just because you don't know -- you didn't get eports it's happening doesn't mean it's not happening. nobody that i know of, not a contractor and not anybody in the military that's supposed to be charged with the responsibility of oversight ever went out except for one instance, colonel lewis went 200 or 300 yards from the gate, i went out there and saw they changed their behavior but i wasn't allowed to go out again -por go gow any further. unless somebody is going out, unless somebody is going out and seeing these fellows getting paid off gobs of money and whether or not he's paying anybody else, whether or not you're going out, we have a list of 44 different areas of the road said to be criminaled -- controlled by different

people commanders mahsud, alla, turjaan, rahulla, unless somebody is out there seeing that they're getting paid, who is responsible for doing that you may never hear about it further up the chain, but if 3 and do inspections, i don't see how you can say you're managing just because the contractors %- can't write incident reports if thatts how you conclude everything is fine, that should be problematical to us. i think the annwerr are pretty clear but general, i'll say this to you, i understand everything would think it's a terrible thing that the taliban is getting paid, we should all be horrified but isn't it also a problem if somebody like

rahulla, has militia under his contrrl, controls huge areas, they're geeting tens of delsh problem mat -- problematical. they're known as the butcher as they drive through town. how does that affect our counterinsurgency strategy? >> in the existence of any armed force that's not part of the after beean government, eventually, as president karzai stated, needs to go away. the international community supports hat, ww support that it is counter to our counterinsurgency strategy because they're a surrogate for the lack of capacity on the part of the government. clearly we want to get to an end state where we don't need private security contractors. >> there were reports of this since two days affer the contracts started to bb implemented. so where's the ction? where is -- over than -- other than every report, the connract says i reported it, they say

can't deal with that, the legal department said they'd have to rebid the contract. another reporter said, i reported it, and they looked the other way. they were met with indifference is what one contractor said. for 14 months, plus two days, where's been -- other than an indifferent response r look athe other way, whether the response. if you think it's the cost of doing business if that's the legitimate argue argument, whether the oversight and management aspect to make sure guys like rahulla aren't getting enriched? where's the enforcement, the management, the oversight, the to the make sure they aren't getting paid off? we don't see that happening. 14 months later, i think that's why the report is as disturbing as it is. >> let me add a couple of data points, sir. one of -- one of the issues we've had, particularly one of

the reports focused on the ssuthern area of afghanistan a new area for american forces. we began last year adding 200000 troop there is, another 15,000 this year. theseeadditional troops were to partner with afghan security forces. we're roughly doubling the size of the afghan national army and increasing the size of tte police in the southern region. >> can i ust interrupt you there. you wish. i don't mean to be a wise guy but we've look at the training program for the military and police, even though you want to double them, you should give us an estimate will they be doubled with the ability to to the do what they need to. afghan police in particular, our goal is to curb and limit it eventually to the extent we can eliminate the corrupt

practices. by partnering with afghan units and having significant forces that are properly trained and of course the afghan police in the time frame we're discussing, last year, 70% of them were not trained. they had uniforms and guns they are on the road, they have low pay, they're not properly trained, they're engaged in corrupt practices. through the effort, through the funding provided by the u.s. congress and the training mission in afghanistan, we've increased the amount of train, we're going to elimmnate that deficit of untrained police and be able to partner with police units and increase accountability and increase professional standards. this is one of the approaches toward elimination of the illegal check points which will be shake do you think the drivers which will report -- lead to what you report. >> i hope training and getting them up to capacity is going to happen. we've done reports on that i suspect we'll have to go out

again and take a look because the concern is, the retentton rates are difficult and the success rates are difficult. i don't want to take up all of mr. flake's time. mr. flake. >> thank you, mr. chairman. if i might borrow this. this is a list the chairman read from that the security contractors list two criminals -- -- it lists who controls which miles of the road. are you aware of how many miles or any in particular groiled the afghan security forces? >> no, sir, that was the first time i saw that chart. >> aside from the chart, were you aware -- >> we are aware that, and it goes back to what's in the report. i think it's safe to say that virtuallyyeverything in the report was in fact reported to many authorities, i'm sure that most of it was investigated by

the appropriate task forces or is being investigated by the appropriate task forces but the realityyis that we may not have got ton a level of evidence that permits us to doosomething pn every case that would immediate mete the requiiement. clearly, the informaaion in the secretary of state has said corruption. the u.n. does the serving inside the urban areas of afghan -- the survey inside the urban areas of afghanistan, the3 corruption. the admiral is over there with another tosk force with forensic accountaats to try to 3 i would caution you that one of the frustrations i have, i used

to be a part-time policeman in new jersey. i know talking to my old detective buddies, how difficult it was to get a case agaiist orgaaized crime. it took years.. that was an environment with a baseline banking system, baseline pay ssstem, baseline telecommunications system. we're doing this in another environment where it's not going to happen in y estimatiin, overnight. but i assure you we're taking it all seriously. i would be as frustrated as you are that you've seen the issues being reported and don't see an effect being curbed very, very quickly. >> frustration. i get that >> if i was a cop on the other side i'd say, i'm doing what i can with what i've got. >> the investigation has been going on for six months. the committee's information. yet there seems to be very little awareness, we only got last week any indication thhtt

tte department of defense is doing anything on the subject. that was just in the form of a power point presentation about -- as the chairman mentioned, there's very little evidence that people are moving outside of the security gates or that they're -- that you're taking reports of casualties or fire phat have to be under our law either assumee-- we either have to say we're taking those reports and ignoring them or assuming that there's no bad actors out there, none of this is happen, it can't be both. let me ask the general, you mentioned ii this activity were occur, payoffs to war lords and parallel authority structure outside the afghan government, that's counter to our coin strategy in afghanistan. at what point do we say, if these alleeations are true, if half of these allegations are true if a tenth of these

allegations are true in this report or the findings in this report that we have to adjust our strategy because this runs so counter to the coin strategy, at what point, where's the tipping point there? at what point will we aa a committee that has oversight here hear the deeartment of defense simply say, hey, this is just the cost of doing business and it's more important to move goods and services, or we simply can't tolerate this kind of parallel authority structure outside of the afghan government operating in the countryside. >> yes, sir. our activities are essential to the campaign. and we have -- we're engaging at all levels of our government, as you know. karzai all the way down to the u.s. units part nerd with trying to improve perrormance and accountabiliiy with their

afghan partnees. this is a high priority for us. >> let me say that we hear it on the top. we hear the statements that'ss in the report. secretary clinton read the statements in the report that president obama has said. we see this report, all of these findings, this overwhelming evidence from this occurriig, yes, in the middle, from those who have authority, to address the situation, actually on the ground, by stripping somebody of the contract or making sure that this is is not occurring, we couldn't see any activity there and that's where the information lies. i ran out of time. >> a particular contractor that you raised by name a couple of times, large contractor, private security contractor in afghanistan in part the reason that the next twist contract, which is going to be the large private security contract, bundled contract, if you will,

which would have made it easier for the contracting agency to process was killed and they're going back to individual awards for contract in part because that particular individual was perceived to have a nationwide advantaae if we awarded a contract nationally. so we're going back to local -- local awards of private seccrity contracts as opposed to a nationwide award. so there is knowledge and there is cause and effect.. >> sir, would it be ppur -- possible for me to say a couple of things? we talked about that and alluded to them from time to time. about less than a month from arriving into theater i knew we had an issue or problem with contracting officer rrpresentatives and i met with the commanding general of army material command and the armyy

acquisition executive who before i went to iraq was my boss. and we knew that we had issues and probllms and we took that on as an army. that also ncludes the pieces where people are monitoring wwat's happening with host nations trucking. the army has exduded -- or issued an execution order that requires a brigade to have up to 80 c.o.r.'s trained and receiving a certificate to be able to perform c.o.r. functions on a various contract. thht's a great advancement or improvement from where we were + 18 months ago,,and we continue to make improvements with c.o.r.'s. i've had personal discussions with three quigs commanders before they deployed into iveragete sir, the othee point i want to make where we're taking great strides is subcontractor management, the

ccmmittee has talked a lot about that piece. i spoke with the jcci commanner and have had an ongoing dialogue with her. in iraq and afghanistan that would give s greater visibility into subcontractors to include the private security contractors that would work on a host nation trucking contract. it would give us greater visibility into banking and financial efforts, visibility into that, so we might be able to see if there is some kind of activity occurring.. i think it will be put in our contracts very soon. >> thank you for that i made two points. one is none of your c.o.r.'s, as you call them, ever get outside the gate, ok. and jcci picked up the legal paperwork on that that's good.

that's a step in the right direction. but unless somebody gets out and sees if that's compliant leads us back to the same boat. i want to take issue. if we just had the hard facts something on that.o do %- it took one email to set up an interview of both principals, both who did jail time in the united states before they got their present position and to bring in commander ohula where he then readily admitted that money and have an extraordinary large militia, that he was driving around with weaponry that wasn't allowed without authorization, that he basically cootrolled areas of who controlled parts of different roads and what their conduct had been and that he paid off certain members of the a&p and named names.

so it wasn't like it wasn't out there for somebody to get. mr. welch, if you have five minutes, i we can welcome -- i welcome you to it. >> thank you. general nicholson, my question to yyu, you beeieve it's sufficient for us to wait until there is a criminal indictment and completion in the criminal investigation or is there a core of strategic decision that needs to be made more promptly? >> sir, t's clearly as we learn these lessons we need to integrate them so we can improve our performance. this is one of the reasons why the chairman chartered task force 2010 is to add other eyes. former commander of the contracting command with subject experts in order to

effects in the south, so our initial focus is kandaharr and how we can then achieve this effect. in support of the coin campaign in kandahar. that will be their initial focus. and that was designated as such and ordered to more directly link these lessons learned and best practices and get them into the ongoing campaign. so clearly we want noff as quickly as possible. having said that, sir, it's also importaat to achieve these prosecutions to enable the afghans to develop the kind of capacity they need to arrest and prosecute these folks. and are prosecuting a handful of senior officers in the border police and afghan police. >> all right. thank you. you know, again, i go back to the fundamental question as to whether or not the long-term goals of the united states that are being -- where there are military -- the one who are being asked to carry out and

execuue on those long-term goals is better served by putting the security of these -pconvoys under the direct supervision of our commander and the direct protection of our soldiers who we know are accountable versus $2 billion that's getting spread out and lawyeeing up in criminal that's my statement. i know that's not the deeision that you've made. but, mr. mostek, let me brief you on something. according to the commanderrof the 484th joint movement battalion that was in charge of overseeiig the trucking company in afghanistan, the battalion didn't have the vehicles, the weaponry or the manpower to carry out oversight. it just didn't have what it needed. and they're stretched thin. i ups that. but they couldn't travel along the afghhn roads because it would haveebeen in his, quote, according to him, a combbt mission. and also the department of

defense instruction issued in april stated that, "seeurity is inherently governmennal if it is to be performed in such a high likelihood of s hostile fire by people using sophisticated fire. the situation could evvlve into combat." and according to the congressional research service, private security contractors working for the department of defense in afghanistan are more than 4.5 times more likely to u.s. military personnel. even that number is even higher for private security companies provided -- providing convoy services. so the question i have, mr. mos -- motsek, what you meant in your statement that the roles of the private security contractors providing convoy 3

security combat forces, not combat forces?" >> i can't comment on the numbers by c.r.s. but four point times more quickly, based upon what i know of casualties, it doesn't track that notwithstanding. first off, it goes back to my initial comment, the force protection mission is that of the commander. the commander makes the is responsible for the risk d %- assessment. the guards that guard both movement and static missions in afghanistan are just that. they are guards. they have no authority to execute any sort of combat role. a great many of the nnts today -- not a military enemy in a traditional sense. we are talking about warlords

attacking -- these are criminal elements that are engaged. they are not -- >> again, i don't have your experience and i don't have your knowledge but i do appreciate that if we don't get those suppliis to our troops or troops are going to be in peril. and i would think it's a of our troops, the ones that want to do them harm, that they would frequent use this as a tactic tootry too cut off their supply. isn't that -- and that leads to combat, correct? >> it's an action, yes, sir. it's an action. >> does this whole policy depend on the folks who are killing and attacking -- killing the security folks and attacking the convoyssthat are destined to serve our troops, whether they're doing it for a criminal purpose or for a taliban -- >> nn, sir. but the prepond rance is more

-- president is more -- than taliban -- preponderance is more -- thanntaliban. >> i wonder if we ggve $2 billion to folks who have no particular motivation other than to make money versus have phat be under control of our troops, particularly when that alternative force is ultimately going to be in my -- i think in the opinion of some a threat to capacity building of the afghan army and the afghan government. >> thank you, r. welch. >> i yield back. >> let me ask you, gentlemen, if you might be able to answer any questions at a further time? >> sure. >> following up. if in fact the united states decides to continue on this way of using small armies of

private securrty contractors to defend the -- the war zone, has there been any discussion or can we expect any discussion about getting direct authority and accountability over the private security companies as opposed to going to the know if that's being nyone considered? >> sir, as part of my -- i can share this. part of the subcontractor clause would give us ability into the subcontractor -- >> trucking companies -- the way, the contractors who eally don't have the expertise in this area and also be directty in charge of these security people? >> you mean, go directly to a prrvate security contractoo -- >> directly responsiile to our military -- security people, not through the trucking trucking contractors and seem perfectly incapable of doing it? >> sir, in my capacity, i am going to force that consideration to be made. >> good. thank you. i know you talked, at least general nicholson, has talked

about the potential of a gap forces on that. -- afghan forces on that. you already talked about pe appreciate that. ncy with 3- we still, i think, need to work on the oversight and the manage! gate and getting eyes on it. and i think you heard general conversation going on now at the deeartment of defense about the effects of coalition contracting on afghan corruption, is that larger stroo t.j.ic conversation going on? >> yes, sir, -- strategic >> yes, sir, it is. >> i want to thank you for bringing your speties to the committee. i want -- expertise o the committee. with that we are going to take about a five-minute recess. again, thank you.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> we're joined by bob cusack, thanks for joining us. good mor. host: talking about he race is happening around the country, runoffs, cotests,,give us a preview. guest: another incumbent in isgress from south carolina in trouble. it lookk like he will lose. he is down in the polls against the tea party favorite. with engles, some believe he party, havinghe criticized joe wilson, and voted democrats.

on energy policy he has strayed from the party. was one of the few republicans to disapprove of the iraq.in he was in a runoff, but his opppnent got more votes. so, enlrd looks to be in trouble. then we got a big ruuoff in utah. it is the seat that senator bennett now holds. he did not make it into the run up. whoever wins will be your next senator because uth is reddest state n the nation. bennett endorsed bridgewater. it will be a tight race.

according to the polls, bridgewater was in the lead. host: has there been a resurgence in popularity or bennett has tot say? guest: no, he is upset he lost. he says whoever wins will nott have much clout in washington. this will truly be a freshman senator without the clout that bennett did, but it is not one of the endorsements that bridgewaaer is talouting. hst: this concerns the runoff in south carooina. an african-ameriian two-party conservative is running against the son of one time strom thurmond.

tell us about the ccntest and what may happen? guest: this guy came froo nowhere, and all of a sudden has a ton of momentum. he is doing surprisingly well to the run-up. thurmond has all the momentum, -- he mightely win be the best shot thh republicans have to have an african-american in the congress in eight years. both eric cantor and another have backed him. he is the tea party favorite. sarah palin has backed him. seat for henry brown who is retiring. whoever emerges from this will be the favorite. host: also, the gubernatorial runoff in south carolina.%-

haley is expected to do well because she had such a high advantage with 49% in the initial rimary battle. who is she guest: facing she s a member of congress, whom theee have been a number of allegations concerning haley of adulteress affairs. it has not hurt haley, though. mitt romney back to her. unless there is aamajor upset, she will winn she would be favored to win in -- in south carolina, the favorite, unless something emerges that is very controversial. but she has withstood the punches. host: what are the other office reading

the races right now? are there certain outcomes today? certain shake ups? there are many other prairie steep into august. guest:: they are nervous. votes that caa come back those for the 2008 bailout, he tarp votes, the healthcare vote -- if you did not vote and you are democrats, have reason for concern. jim was in a runoff today and expecttd to beat the retired%- schoolteacher. it into the runoff even had only spent a amount compared to his $750,000 spent. win. expected to even though it is a very district, he voted no on health care. the republicans do not have a credible challenger.

so, if you can get past this hurdlegetmatheson will likely be reelectee. we saw with video cameras, the electorate is angry. most incumbents are sttll winningg blanche lincoln survived, but arlen specter lost. there is a sense of unease, and that i'd better not take this primary candidate slightly. host: does it seem like it is shaking up republicans more? guest: i think both the left and right feel emboldened right now. anyone in the middle is very nervous, especially around primary time.%% come november if republicans can survive the primary challenges have overrthe next few months, they will likely be .afe

some people say that it will hit both parties in november. historical trends show usually angryhe electorate is partyill vote against the in power. they did against the republlcans in both 2006 and 2008. host: today's top story -- dems will not pass budget. hoyer says house willl spend les than limits set by obama. he will confirm it in a speech %% tuesday. he will back to crack down on government spending, saying that democrats will enforce spending whats thattare lower than the preeident called for. is the situation when it comes to getting things done and limiting spending? guest: of this budget decision been hankering for weeks. six weeks ago they said they

make a decision. %%try to get a deal between liberals and conservatives in the democratic caucus. this is the first time since the rules were created in the house will not pass a resolution. the will pass a procedure, but not resolution. republicans, when they congress, had trouble passing a budget in election years. they always move it through the house, though. it may be became mired in the senate. it is a difficult issue. one year ago the democrats were ridding high. the first 1800days of obama in delivered tteir on the 100th day by fairly wide margins. most democrats supported the president and his budget. now it is a different mood. democrats on capitol hill are about the mood of voters. they say we will cut back from

what obama has proposed. democrats are trying to make sure -- telling voters that we have heard you. they are emphasizing the fiscal come upon under way to recommendations after elections. probably on taxes and spending.t so the nation can get control of its debt. there are many doubts about whether that will get the votes from the commission and congress. host: here are the phone numbers. we are talking about congressional politics. let's go to hawaai and william. caller: good morning.

it is 2:00 a.m. here in hawaii. aloha. guest: i will be there on vacation in two weeks. caller: i live under the volcano. %%aughter] guest: i will not be there. caller: in this budget debate i have never heard a word yet about the cost of the militaay budget. we have now 177 permanent bases in 84 countries% world, including brand new, permannnt bases the country of colombia. if they're going to deal with the overruns of the budget, when are they going to deal with this bloated, wasteful, black hole

is the military budget? guest: that is something policy discussing. >> we're leaving this recorded program now to go back live to the house oversight committee on afghanistan. >> reeurning to order. and we're now going to receive testimony from our second pannl of witnesses. i thank you for your patience and waiting while we had the first panel to testify. i will introduce our panelists all at once and then start again with mr. schwartz. moshe schwartz is part of the congressional research service. before joining the congressional research service he served as the senior analyst at the government accountability office and is n assistant district attorney in brooklyn, new york. he received his b.a. from rasheba, an m.b.a. and masters.

carl forsberg focuses on the security dynamics in southern afghanistan. previously he worked at the marine corps headquarters and holds a b.a. in history from yale history. colonel t.x. hammes is retired united states marine corps colonel. he's currently a senior research fellow at the institute for national strategic studies at the national defense university. he's also served at all levels of the operating forces to include command of a rifle company and intelligence company and the chemical biological incidence response force.+ he's the author and colonel hammes is currently prsuing a ph.d. in history at oxford

university. dr. s. frederick starr is part of the paullh. nitze school of advanced innernational studies. he's authored or editied moree+% than 20 books and 200 articless on euraisian affairs. thank you for sharing your substantial expertise. p ask you to please stand and raise your rrght hand and do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth and the whole truth? we will put that in written testimony. so you need to read in its entirety, you can summarize it in about five minutes or ore. remember ttat the light goee amber, with about a minute left3 and when you're up we hope you

wind it up. >> distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the department of defense's use of private security contractors in afghanistan. according to the departtent of defense there were over 110,000 contractors and ver 80,000 troops working for d.o.d. in afghanistan. they make up over 16,000 of these contractors ii afghanistan were armed private security contractor personnel. over the last 3/4, the number of armed security contractor personnel increased four times faster than that of troops in afghanistan. since december, 2009, there have been more armed securityy personnel working in afghanistan than iraq. contractor personnel are at the hands of risk of snurnlts in afghanistan.

from 2009 to 2010, 260 contractors have been killed in afghanistan compared to 200 u.s. troops. p.s.e. employees working for d.o.d. are 4 1/2 times more llkely to be killed than uniformed personnel. more contractor personnel, 188 people, were killed providing convoy security than any other type oo security. regardless of how one analyzes the number of armed contractors working for d.o.d., pmpt s.e.'' play a critical role in afghanistan. many observers say that the reliance on contractors was not planned and was executed pithout a clear strategy, exacerbating the risks in use armed contractors on the battlefield. this unprecedented reliance on p.s.e.'s raises some fundamental questions. first, what are the benefits and risks of using p.s.e.'s in military operations?

two, to what extent should contractors be used in contingency operations? and three, what can be done to ensure that d.o.d. plans its use for contractors in future ooerations? p.s.e.'s can provide siinificant operational benefits to the u.s. government. this can be hired and released quickly allowing agencies to adapt to changing envirooments. contractors can possess skills that the govvrnment work force lacks. such as knowledge of the terrain, culture and language according to many analysts, both d.o.d. and the department of state would be enable to execute their missionn in afghanistan and iraq without p.s...'s. the risk of not yuting them is not surprise -- to succeed in its mission. there have been reports of local nationals being abused for the u.s. government.working such events are being recorded in afghanistan. and unlike iraq, where it involves contractors whooare

u.s. citizens, in afghanistan, many of the guards are reportedly afghans. the question can be asked -- is the problem that d.o.d. is using contractors to perform the critical function of armed security or is the problem that p.o.d. is not effectively managing contractors and holding them accountable? for analysts who believe that contractors should not be contracted out, we need to rethink current force structure or choose not to engage in certain contingsency operations. for -- contingency operations. for those who think it is poorr management, we need to develop an effective strategy, and enhancing oversight.anning d.o.d. has taken steps to improve its management of p.s.e.'s. according to many analysts, they have improved the + management oversight and the course of p.s.e.'s. they maintain that more needs to be done. the extent to which d.o.d. plans for the use of contractors in the futtre cann

help ensure that d.o.d. puts some more effective management system in place. such planning could ensure that contractors are used to improve overall operational effecciveness aad not because d.o.d. unexpectedly had insufficient military personnel. this was expressed in 2008 by caurnl who was responsible for over-- by a colonel who was responsible for overseeing p.s.e.'s in iraq. he stated that the question is what d.o.d. is not doing to ffx the problem now.. rather, he stated, the real question is why d.o.d. wasn't thinking about this issue 10 pears ago when steps could have been taken to avoid the situation we are ined too. this raises another -- we are in today. this raises another question. to what extent security contractors and even be used in future military operations? some argue that d.o.d. didn't address the issue in the 2010 quadrennial defense review. d.o.d. has begun to examine the

issue. to examine the extent to which it relies onncontractors and o plan for future operations and to help plan d.o.d.'s future corps structure. they have briefed the most senior levels of thee department. this effort is a step in the right direction. mr. chairman, distinguished members of the subcommittee, this concludes my testimony. thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you to discuss these issues. i will be pleased to respond to any questions you might have. >> well, thank you, very much, mr. schwartz. we will have questions and i appreciate you being here. mr. forsberg, if you will, five minutes. >> mr. chairman, ranking member subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify this afternoon on the issue of tte host nation trucking contract. i'm honored to testify in the issue of great significance for our campaign in afghanistan and i appreciate the chairman and the committee's leadership on this pressing question. i want to address today the

strategic context of contracts, like the host nation trucking contract, to highlight their complications for the -- implications to defeat the taliban and to leave a high and enduring afghan government. the chief strategic concern with current contracting practices is that private security companies in -pafghanistan tend to subcontra or pay predatory afghan militias that further the ends often at the expense of 3em, to understand why this is such a concern, it is helpful to remember that winning a counterinsurgency fight is largely a question of establishing the legitimacy of a government. lack of government legitimacy is, after all, the cause of an insurgency, and if the afghan government will want to see this as legitimate, we wouldn't be fighting the current campaign. the afghan government has formed alliances since 2001 with fashionists, including predatory warlords and their

militias. pfghan leaders at many levels disputes and alienated significant elements of the afghan population. it is noteworthy that thee taliban rose to power in southern afghanistan in 19994 because of he populations deeply resented militia commanders. some are directly or indirectly operating contracts. kandahar province, the focus of our task and insurgency efforts this summer, offers a prime example of how contracting practices have inadvertently -- karzai, the half brother of hamid karzai and the chairman 3 numbers of the militia commanders. some of these commanders are heavily relied upon the host nation trucking companiis

operating n southern afghanistan. he's used these connections to the afghan government o build this networr and to award contracts to his own allies. it's notable that one of the private security companies in kandahar is owned by cousins of the karzai brothers and was asia security group. these militias significantly outnumber the afghan police force in kandahar city. find themselves competing with private security companies. recruitment.hen it comes to for the population, meanwhile, the government is in essence seen as an exclusive and predatory government. it must be kept in mind that he's not created the militias that's been around afghanistan. these were products of the civil war of the 1990's. that said, contracts have made

these militias lucrative. and cutting these militias off from u.s. contracts will be necessary steps in dismantling their influence and replacing them with the afghan army and police. this step cannot be taken completely and immediately, however. what is needed is a careful strategy to unwind the conttacts, find gainful employment for the foot soldiers and ensure that our staff or the afghan army and police are available to fill the security demands the contracts are now fulfilling. the issue illegal militias in afghanistan is challenging, but it is one that our staff can solve. the u.s. troop surge has given the united states and the allies resources necessary to reform its contrrcting practices. ttey have been reviewing and reforming contracting, iicluddng joint task force 2010. having additional boots on the ground is providing ttem with insurgent intelligence on how contracting networks in afghanistan operate and gives them more office into providing

oversight for these problems. the u.s. does have leverage at this point over thh militias and local commanders whoo subcontract from the coalition. once operations like joint task force 2010 understood the complex networks by which ccntract support militias, these contracts can be restructured in ways that will count for the dynamics of local afghan politics. they have announced its intention to do this, although still vague.of its plans are but because the problem of ill legitimate militias is a contracting practices, reforming contracting should be part of a broader campaign to eeentually disarm and diiban command and control is severed, it will be going to the afghan army. the situation can be addressed. the recent increase in u.s.

reform the oversight and management of itt contracting prrctices and this will be a crucial step for the u.s. counterinsurgency mission. thank you, mr. chairman, congressman flake, and members of the subcommittee, the opportunity to address you this afternoon. i look forward to taking your questions. >> thank you very much, mr. forsberg. colonel, if you'd like. >> chairman tyranny, ranking member flake, -- chairman tier ney, ranking member ffake, thank you for the opportunity for allowing me to speak today. the good, the primary value f private contractors is that they replace troops. further, they can mobile o's and deploy large -- mobilize and deploy large numbers of personnel. another advantage is contractors may be able to do jobs that u.s. forces simply can't. in afghanistan, we lack the forces to provide security

forces for our supply line to pakistan. if history is any guide, even a heavy presence of u.s. troops would not guarantee the delivery of supplies. fortunately, afghan contractors have the mix of force, personal connections and negotiating skills to do so. the bad, when serving a counterinsurgency, they have problems. three are particularly important. the first, quality control, is a well-publicized issue that d.o.d. has worked to resolve. yet, even as d.o.d. enacts all planned reforms, how exactly qualifications of an individual, much less a group, such as personal security detail, before hiring them? we need to acknowledge we have no truly effective ontrol over the quality of the personnel hired as armed contractors. the second issue compounds the problem of the first. the government does not control the conttactors' daily contact with the population. nothing short of having qualified u.s. government

personnel accompanying and in command of every contractor detail will provide that control. we do not accompany the afghan security companies that escort the supply convoys throughout afghanistan, and, thus, we have no idea what they're doing with the population. the lack of quality and tactical control greatly increases the quality of the third problem. the united states is held responsible for everything that contractors do or fail to do. effective quality or operational control, we've passed the authority to use deadly force in the name of the united states to each armed contractor. since insurgency is setting compeeition between legitimacy and -- this has the issue of quality control to the strategic level. and there is an issue of employing armed contractors. first, it has them to build militias being under a security contractor.

commander carter said warlords build militias claimed to be security companies. they compete directly with the host nation's attempt to retain military and police personnel. in 2010, major general michael ward stated, afghan police were deserting in large numbers for the better pay and working conditions associated with private companies. and that leads us to the key question. contractors clearly have a number of direct stra teamic level impacts -- strategic level impact. and the question political capital. and the perceived morallty of that effort. both opponents and proponents admits that the u.s. would require much greater mobilization to support iraq or afghanissan without contractors. thus, we're able to conduct both wars wwth much less domestic political discourse. but it is such a good idea. phould it be easier to take this nation to war? along the same lines, we should ask, is it a good idea to pass

authority to use deadly force in the name of the united states to people we don't know? should we hire third world nationals to sustain casualties force? any examination of the u.s. use of contractors must include the will he jt massey and more -- legitimacy and morality. it is essential we ask the real a good idea to use contractors in combat zones? while it's too laae to debate this question for our current conflicts, it's essential we make t a critical part of our boston-afghanistan force structure dissussion. -- post-afghanistan force structure discussion. mr. chairman, dwibbee members, that concludes my -- distinguished members, that concludes my opening testimony. >> is your microphone on, sir? >> it now is. i have nothing to add to the

various interventions regarding the tactics of contracting. >> well, thenn it's a wrap. >> however, i would like to suggest that none of these will effect the bigger picttre of the mission -- fate of the mission in afghanistan. and let me -- let me get to phis point by a couple of simple questions. why do we need so muuh protection along the roads? well, the answer is obvious. because there are taliban forces and other criminal groups floating about. second, why do they move about so freely? again, answer's obvious. because the population at large is totally passive. it is indifferent to this. and then why are they not engaged in the protection of their roads? well, because they don't see any benefit from the roads being opened. these are being opened for equipment, not for the transport of their local crops and their local prrducts, let

alone for regional transport, let alone for reeional transport for which they could benefit. and beyond that, offcourse, you might note that the defeat of the taliban and the crippling of al qaeda are perceived as our objectives. they don't see where our objectives match with their personal objective which is economic betterment. so let me raise the qqestion, 3 work? what is needed? well, obviously an economic strategy. and both presidents bush and obama have spoken about that. we have a lot of economic projects. we don't have the strategy. whaa kind of -- what would meet that criteria for uu -- what are tte criteria that must be met for such a strattgy? well, i would say there are three or four. first of all, it has to benefit locals. if they don't see a benefit from it they're going to be

neutral or opposed. anything we do, including transportt second, it must support our military effort and it has to go simultaneously with it. third, it has to be able to provide an income stream for the government. service salaries today. that isn't a sustainable prrangement. finally, it has to work fast. now, the only strategy that meets such criteria, the only one that i'm aaare of is discussing today. t that we're transpoot and frayed. i would submit this is -- transport and trade. i would submit this is much important hearing than suggested by our very competent previous speakers. what do we mean? we're talking about opening up local channels of trade or local trade. we're talking about regional channels of trade. afghanistan and its immediate neighbors.

and we're also talking about the great continental trade groups that literally go from an bar to -- connect europe and this potentially is a money machine. once it starts to flow at the local level, everyone will take advantage of it. you don't have to advertise it. everyone will know. and they will become the defenders of the open road rather than the passive observers or worse. now, you can say -- you can say, well, aren't we doing this anyway with the northern yes, we're doing some fantastic stuff in transportation. whatever the problems are, and they are serious. nonethelees, it's a major achievement. yet, we have no plan for engaging the local economies in this. we have no plan for opening this to local -- local shippers, local producers, farmers and so on. we hhve no exit plan, no transition plan on this.

privatize, if you will, civilianize the transport groups. and, therefore, everyone is either skeptical or opposed. now, what is needed? very simply, the united states needs to adopt this as a fundamental strategy on par because without this the military strategy will not succeed. and one might say, well, isn't this very expensive? aren't you talking about building massive of roads? but we heard from some of the congressmen today that in fact the biggest impediment are are actually bureaucratic and people imposing the long delays at borders. it's a managerial problem. it's not an infrastructure problem, fundamentally. let me say that this bigger development i'm talking about is being activeey promoted by, well, all the major

international banks. bank, e.c.o., world bank and so on.. also by china, india, pakistan and all the entral asian countries, saudi arabia, japan and so forth. in other words, this is happening. what i am speaking about is going to break through. whether the question is whether the u.s. is savvy enough to put itself at the head of this to be the coordinator and convener for the efforr that opens the cork which afghanistan now presents. to this system as a whole. if we do i think we're on the road to success in afghanistan. if we don't all the efforts commandable suggestions thatt have een made here with regard to transport will be or naught. thank you, sir. >> thank you. great food for thought. let me start with mr. schwartz. when you count the contractors in the theater, is there any

way that you count the people that might be part of the commander's militia if they are not registered? do we assume every number that you count plus a whole lot of other people that is working as militia forces? >> there is questions raised to accurately count that. the department of defense acknowledged. count the third country nationals, permission from those to come in and those that are properly regulated. but it is no question, many people have raised, including d.o.d., the issue of the ability to accuratelyycount personnel that are worring for local militias eyond a couple. >> thank you. has anyone that you know of done an analysis comparing the risk -- the risk of not using private security contractors in a counterinsurgency situation

against the risk of using them but not managing and overseeing them properly? >> i'm not familiar of a specifically afghanistan beyond what some of the other people here on the panel have discussed. expressed by people in uniform over there in afghanistan thaa some of the events that are occurring are in fact making their mission much more difficull. >> mr. forsberg, akkar car scombly, innyour research and -- karzai, in your research, do you think he's connected to have a kandahar security operation where they consolidate a number of the different people thaa have been adding security through the ssuthern areas so far? >> there have been several media reports to that extent,

and if you look at his 3 linkages between him and some in the kandahar security force. saying that administrator car sdemry asked to take a role in keeping the formation of the kandahar security force. p> thank you. this. if i'm hearing you right, arr you saying that the united states' straaegy would be better served if we took our military forces and used them to protect the transportation lines and that that could open up a whole host of opposed to paying off warlords -por others but to use our orc and concentrate them on using the transportation lines free and then using it for the regional, local and continental trade? >> yes. keeping open -- the opening and

mainttnance of the transportation corridors should >> thank you. colonel, do you have an opiniin >> sir, if you take the figures on the g.d.p. of afghanistan -- if you take the 13 billion here, afghanistan has a g.d.p. of 500 dollars per person. it we're wildly successful in 10 years double that, they would still be poorer than today's chad. chad is not a functioning state. i don't see in 10 years making afghanistan is functioning state based on a doubling of the eccnomy. >> and that's even with the program eing successful, whatever, would still be a problem, you think? >> the ability to double the country is a pretty significant accomplishment. [inaudible] to get --

>> if i may say, korea at a certain point was almost at the level of afghanistan today. we persisted, we pursued prudentteconomic base, economic policies, look what happened. not only in the economy but in the governmental structures. i think the possibilities are anything suggested here. they are not my conclusions. they are the conccusions of the asian bank. they are the conclusions by studies done -- in the critical infrastructure issues. >> thank you. mr. flake. >> thank you. mm. schwartz, given the current structure that we have for these contracts, is it possible for the department of defense to manage or sspervise these contracts the way that the law requires them to do?

>> thank you for that question. a lot of people have actually done a lot of ggod in depthh analysis including the government accountability peneeals as weel as the commissioner on work contracting. and while they have all 3 progress, they have also generally expressed there is a lot to be done. a number of them have come up with specific options and recommendattons that they believe can definitely have an impact. and a lot of them are out there. i'll just mention a ccuple that have been thrown out by various one is as a result of -- the event with blackwater about three years ago in iraq, the kennedy commission, which was published by the state departmmnt,,required -- based on recommendation out of the kennedy report is to have a go over with every convoy from the state department. some recommended that would be

useful for the department of defense is to make sure that every time there is a large convoy to go out. that's one option that's been another option that has been mentioned is to do in depth analysis of who is being hired. so the general view of many of the people that have lloked in depth in this is that progress can be made. >> mr. forsberg, i tried to get from the last panel -- i understand i wasn't going to get much response from them, but at what point does it become counterproductive to coin a strategy to have the kind of activity that's been found in this report? what level is acceptable to still have an effective counterinsurgency strategy, to have a parallel structure of authority outside of the afghan government? >> right, thank you, congressman. as i said, this is a