we will do all that we can to prevent iran from creating a new career -- from obtaining a nuclear capacity. i will come back to what more we can do. through your excellent legislation and national measures that we continue to take to implement not only security council resolutions, but the measures and authorities given to us by congress. inside the un, in the short term there is scope for tightening enforcement and implementation of 1949 and previous resolutions which are having a significant and packed. we are regularly getting support of countries from nigeria to asia in blocking and intercepting iranian arms shipments. there is a panel of experts.

there is a sanctions committee, all of which can help tighten enforcement on existing measures. it needs to be acknowledged that china and russia work with us to pass that important resolution. they have implemented it to the letter. we have asked them to do more. russia has dealt with the s300s, which is above and beyond the resolution. china, we are asking them not to make investments. we are receiving good response to that sort of request. in terms of a new resolution in the short term, i think that is unlikely to be viable. obviously overtime and a given response to actions that iran may take, we will continue to keep multi-ethnic -- multilateral action on the table. >> i appreciate that. in addition to these resolutions on nuclear revelation

activities, they have been found to be in violation of arms transfer resolutions. the interception and seizure of illegal arms shipments by nigeria in february. iran has continued to violate the security council resolution 1747. i would request that you continue to look for ways to penalize iran for noncompliance with that resolution which prohibits iranian arms exports. >> thank you. >> thank you, so much. based on our previous arrangement you got to be back at the white house at 1:00. we appreciate your time. i give my deepest apologies to mr. kelly of pennsylvania to is

our un representative from our committee. i hope that you work well with ms. burgle and mr. keating from massachusetts. thank you congresswoman for joining us. madame ambassador, thank you for your excellent testimony. we look forward to working with you on un reforms and issues we are both passionate about >> thank you barry much for your leadership and your kindness and that of all of your colleagues. >> you are a good friend. the committee is now adjourned. thank you. host[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

[no audio] [no audio] [no audio]

." [no audio] [inaudible] [no audio]

[no audio] [no audio] >> last night, president obama said that he and congressional leaders hope to announce today that a deal has been reached to fund the government for the rest of the year. the current temporary spending resolution and expires tonight at midnight. the house, senate, and white house would all have to agree on a measure.

>> yesterday in baghdad, robert gates told u.s. troops that allowing gays to serve openly in the military will have little affect on the armed forces. the house armed services committee looks at the repeal of on c- ask, don't tell" span. the house will double in the 10:00 a.m. eastern and later, they are likely to continue work on a 2011 federal spending. >> throughout the month of april, will feature the winners of this year's studentcam competition. watch the winning bidders every morning on c-span at 6:50 a.m. eastern just before "washington journal." meet the students who created them. street all the winning videos

any time on line at studentscam.org. >> senior officers from all four branches of the military testified about perhaps -- preparations for banning don't ask don't tell. >> the meeting will come to order. i think we are going to have the votes of about 20 minutes so we will try to get through as much as we can before we have to break for that. the committee will receive and establish report on the process for repelling law and changing

the policies governing the service of openly gay and lesbian service members. this past fall, i was troubled by the process employed to set the stage for repeal of don't ask, don't tell. following the december release of the department of defense report on the issues associated with the repeal of this law, there was none of the in depth analysis that is so essential to sound decision making in the house of representatives. as a result of the rush to judgment that bypass this committee, congress was denied the opportunity to ask questions and identify weaknesses in the repeal implementation plan. we are now confronted with an implementation process that is moving quickly to completion of the education and training phase. our primary interest today is to insure that the senior leaders of the service have the opportunity to communicate their current views about the implementation of repeal. several of the service chiefs have except -- expressed reservations about the timing

and potential impacts of repeal during a hearing before the senate armed services committee. we want to understand it if our military leaders remain concerned about the prospect of full repeal a law. general casey, chief of staff of the army, indicated the repeal was a major cultural and policy change. in the middle of a war that would add stress and complications for combat units. he stated he felt the implementation would be more difficult than what the pentagon survey would suggest. general schwartz, chief of staff of the air force, recommended not carrying out any repeal until 2012 because of the strain of the high operations temple on our forces. he stated that he does not agree with the study assessment of the short-term effect of military effectiveness is low. general amos, he said it block is changed and assimilating openly homosexual marines has

strong potential for disruption at the small unit level. it will no doubt the bird leadership attention away from an almost singular focus on preparing units for command. those comments were made a couple of months ago at the senate hearing. the one outcome that must be avoided is any course of action that would put the combat readiness of our military forces at risk. our witnesses today are the four leaders of our armed forces. that would put military at risk. our witnesses are the four leaders of our armed forces. general peter correlli, u.s. vice chief of staff united states army. admiral gary roughead usn naval chief of operations. general am as, u.s. marine corps. general norton schwarz, chief of staff, u.s. air force.

general correlli, we thank you for standing in for general casey today and ask you to please extend our heartfelt condolences from all the members of the committee and the staff of the armed services committee to general casey and his family on the passing of his grandson jackson ryan casey. admiral roughead, you're moving closer to departure from your current position and may not have the opportunity -- should would probably not call it an opportunity to testify before this committee again. i want to express collective thanks of all the members of the committee for your 38 years of service and best wishes for the future. >> thank you. i join you in passing along my condolences to general casey. i welcome you all for being here

and thank you for your incredible service to our country. don't ask, don't tell was put in place years ago. at the time it was hotly debated, discussed, studied and argued about. in the 18 years ó% to get their feedback and their opinions. i believe we have analyzed this at enormous length over an enormous period of time. at some point you have to make a decision about the best way to go forward is. i'm pleased the congress and

president made that decision last year and made what was the only logical choice and that is to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. it's interesting we all know gays and lesbians have been serving in the military for quite sometime. i have yet to meet a service member who wasn't abundantly aware that somebody they were serving with was gay or lesbian, yet we have the finest military in the world. the unit has been able to function and function quite well under that circumstance. the only oddity we had in the law if in fact a gay or lesbian happened to bubble up to the command structure, the law required you at that point to take the person out of the miller. they have served, served well, served alongside other service members who found an easy way to work with them and give them the finest military in the world. when you look at these questions, it's frequently asked whatever policy comes before the military, does it make us safer?

does it strengthen our national security? in this case the answer to don't ask, don't tell is no. driving able-bodied people out of the military who are serving us well during a time of war does not make us safer and does not give us a better military. i grant you there will be some implementation issues here. but there are many policies problematic and difficult throughout military for service people to work with and they find a way to work with them and they find a way to move forward. i applaud you gentlemen and plowed the military for the way they approach this. they are trying to do it in the most user friendly way possible to make sure it is effective. it is long pastime to study this issue. it is making us weaker to drive people out of the military who are serving us well. i hope we will go forward with the implementation of the change in this policy as quickly and expeditiously as possible. i look forward to your testimony. thank you. >> as bipartisan as this committee is we can disagree but

we can do it in a gentlemenly like way and i thank the ranking member for his comments. >> i should say i think the chairman is doing an outstanding job running this committee and i agree with him most of the time. we work very well together. we just have those moments like anybody. >> thank you. i do have unanimous consent request knowing general casey, chief of staff of the army, would not be able to testify. i asked that he provide answer toss a series of questions i put to him in writing. we have his response. at this time i ask unanimous consent miler of april 4th, 2011 to general casey and the general's response of april 6th, 2011 be entered into the record. the letters are now or have been distributed to the members. >> without objection, so ordered. general. >> chairman mckeon, i thank you

for the opportunity to appear before you to discuss the army's implementation plan for repeal of legislation commonly referred to as don't ask, don't tell. as you acknowledged, mr. chairman, general casey is unable to participate in today's hearing due to the recent loss of his grandson and he deeply appreciates everyone's thoughts and prayers during this very sad and difficult time. in december general casey testified before the senate armed services committee state his belief that while the implementation of the repeal of don't ask, don't tell would add another level of stress to a force already stretched by nearly a decade of war. it would be more difficult in combat arms units, and it would in general be more complicated -- be more complicated an endeavor than the comprehensive review suggested. if properly implemented, the repeal would not preclude our

force from accomplishing its worldwide missions to include combat operations. general casey assured the members of the committee that we have a disciplined force led by experienced, seasoned leaders who with appropriate guidance and direction can be relied upon to effectively overseas the implementation of don't ask, don't tell repeal with moderate risk to military effectiveness in the short-term and to our ability to recruit and maintain america's all volunteer force over the long hall. finally he assured the members if directed to implement the repeal, the army would work closely with the department of defense and other service toss make certain the implementation is conducted successfully, in a timely fashion, and in the same disciplined matter that has characterized our service to the nation for over 235 years. i stand by the chief's previous remarks. i know he does as well.

since that hearing, consistent with congress's decision and the president's and secretary of defense's guidance, the army has begun the deliberate process of training and educate our force on exactly what the repeal means in terms of regulation and policy changes. as in everything8ñ9 educated on this important policy change. its potential impact on them and our expectations of them. to this end joe casey's guidance to commanders is clear.

leadership matters most. this training is not disruptive. in february, general casey personally led the first session with all four star generals. flanged by the army's subject matter experts, the judge advocate general, inspector general, chief of chaplains and deputy chief of staff for pernell, i participated in this session and i can attest the process works. the chain teaching program facilitates thoughtful, constructive dialogue between leaders and subordinates. this dialogue is hugely important, especially at the lowest levels where ownership and consensus are most critical. the soldiers response to the repeal has been generally positive. we cannot assume there will be no opposition within our ranks and the days ahead. in fact, we recognize there are some segments of the force

primarily with the combat arms that have expressed concern regarding the appeal. on the whole, our forces stressed and stretched by nearly a decade of war, a war that is not over yet. mindful of these and other considerations we recognize if we are to mitigate the rifsks t readiness, recruit and retention we must continue to do this deliberately. training is just the start. although i'm confident in our efforts to implement the repeal of don't ask, don't tell are on track, the entire process done properly will take time. mr. chairman, members of the committee, on behalf of our secretary john mckeon and the chief i thank you for your patience, your continued generous support and demonstrated kmipt to the outstanding men and women of the united states army and their families and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, admiral. >> distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to address how our navy is

preparing to implement repeal of 10 u.s. code 654. i testified before the armed services committee in september that i supported repeal of 10 u.s. code 54. the united states navy can successfully implement a repeal of the law. combat effect i haveness is what we provide the nation and repeal will not change who we are or what we do. your navy will continue to be the professional global effective and relevant force for the nation it has been. although a speak day for repeal hasn't been set we have gun the process for prompt and thoughtful transition. we're preparing policies and regulations and training our leaders at all levels. our training exercises leadership, professionalism discipline and respect. we have not conducted sensitive training.

we are focus on sailors understanding what the repeal means to them, their families and navy, and that our standards of conduct and behavior will not be compromised. we're using a tiered approach to ensure all sairs receive the appropriate training. we have 17 master training teams providing training to leaders in 17 geographic regions. once certified by master trainers, command leaders will then train pernell within their respective commands. specialized training being provided to experts who may deal more frequently with repeal issues such as chaplains, judge advocates, personnel report professionals and recruiters. july is the navy's goal for training and we're on track to achieve this goal. feedback from the sailors indicates the training is comprehensive, well delivered and effective. additionally we have not observed impacts to readiness, effectiveness, cohesion, recruiting or retention during

this training period. i continue to provide updates on training process to the secretary of defense and chairman of joint chiefs of staff and remain personally engaged with them throughout this process. i'm confident my assessment of the navy's repeal will be competent during the process and it is not necessary to provide additional or separate input outside of this process. i have the ultimate confidence men and women with the united states navy, character, discipline and decency will successfully implement this change in the law. navy leaders will continue to set a positive tone, create an inclusive and respectful work environment and enforce our high standards of conduct throughout the navy as we serve the nation. our sailors will continue to live with core values of honor, courage and commitment which endure as the foundation of our navy i thank you and look

forward to your questions. >> thank you. general amos. >> thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and report on the marine corps's process of certification of don't ask, don't tell. i had the opportunity to specifically address congress on don't ask, don't tell on december 3rd where i stated to the senate armed services committee that should congress change the law, that our nation's marine corps will faithfully support the law. the law signed by the president on december 22nd established the conditions for the eventual repeal of don't ask, don't tell. the marine corps is working diligently to meet the corresponding requirements as are all the uniformed services. once met the required certification process may be provided by the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, secretary of defense and president to the congressional committees. overall i am confident that marine leaders at all levels will ensure compliance with the

spirit and intent of the new law once it goes into effect. as suture marine corps is taking the follow significant actions in line with the direction of our civilian leadership. after the house of representatives and senate voted to repeal title 10 u.s. code 654 in december of 2010, i published the following guidance to the following marine corps. quote, as marines we abide by the laws of our nation. we implement -- we will implement the new policy in accordance with specific directions and implementing guidance from our chain of command. fidelity is the essence of who we are. accordingly we will faithfully execute this new law and continue to treat each other with dignity and respect. while in afghanistan over christmas, sergeant major kent and i spoke to 12,000 marines and sailors about the pending repeal and my expectations for successful implementation. shortly after returning from afghanistan, he and i made a

video for all marines and their families to reinforce our message and to reach out to marines in locations that we could not personally visit. your marine corps has closely followed the recommendations of the comprehensive review working group in developing and executing our implementation training. some of the very first marines to receive this training were my three and four star general officers in late january. on 7 february, the marine corps as a whole began corpswide training. the marine corps completed all of tier one and two training. as of today our tier three training is 40% complete throughout the marine corps. i anticipate full completion of all training by 1 june. we will complete this training with the aid of the internet online when absolutely necessary, but the majority of our training is done face-to-face. successful implementation of

this policy depends upon leadership, professionalism, discipline, and respect. leaders at all levels of our corps are setting the example and are fully committed to the sustainment of our unit effectiveness, readiness and cohesion. in our profession of arms adherence to standards of conduct is essential. leadership is the key to creating and sustaining an environment where the opportunity to contribute, achieve and advance to all is available. before making my final recommendation to move forward with repeal, i intend to use both the objective and subjective measures to gauge the effectiveness of training and readiness to implement this new policy. before i recommend certification, the marine corps will have completed 100% of its special staff and leader training and approximately 90% of all remaining marines training for both active and reserve components. while useful objective measures alone are not sufficient for me to recommend certification.

i will also use subjective tools to include command climate surveys, enlisted retention surveys and inspector general reports to measure training success. additionally, i will rely heavily on feedback from my commanders throughout the marine corps. prior to recommending certification i will confirm all preconditions for certification have, indeed, been met. i am confident that your marines will faithfully abide by the laws of this nation and will conduct themselves in accordance with the intent of the new policy. while leadership is the ultimate key to successful implementation of don't ask, don't tell repeal, our core values of honor, courage and commitment will guide us throughout training and implementation. i appreciate the opportunity to provide these details and i stand ready to answer any additional questions the commit may have. >> thank you, general schwarz. >> mr. chairman, congressman smith, members of the commit, thanks for the opportunity to report on air force implementation of the pending repeal of the don't ask, don't

tell policy. our implementation plan comprises two key components. necessary revisions to policies and regulations and then training of all airmen. we will rely on steady leadership at all levels to implement this change in a manner that is consistent with standards of military readiness and effectiveness and with minimum adverse affect on unit cohesion, recruiting and retention in our air force. until applicable directives are updated and released, current policies remain in effect and will be enforced uniformly. over our team policy changes updates, recruiting guidance, standards of kubt and separation actions are the basis of our implementation training which began on february 14th and will complete on or about june 30th

of this year. the air force is administering the three tier training program, which was developed in conjunction with the services. and with osd's repeal implementation team to ensure consistent training themes for the entire source from functional experts to commanders and senior leaders to all airmen across the force. so far we have trained 23%, some 117,000 of our members and are on track to train the remainder within the prescribed training window. we will ensure implementation is achieved responsibly, deliberately, and effectively. our preferred method of training is in person. however, when face-to-face tier three training is not feasible for example during convalescent leave or deployment to locations where interrupting the mission to conduct training would have

an adverse impact, commanders have discretion to use computer-based training or schedule training upon return to garrison. as training progresses, we will continue to report completion data to osd twice a month. in the post repeal environment, we will continue to monitor the effectiveness of our training through existing processes for follow-on assessment in monitoring. mr. chairman and members of the committee, we thank you again for your support of the armed forces. the standards of conduct we expect, you expect of all airmen entitling every airman to dignity, respect and equal opportunity, commitment to service above self will not change, guided by our core values of integrity, service and excellence, we will implement this policy change with the same

professionalism that we demonstrate in all of our daily endeavors. mr. chairman, i look forward to your questions. thank you. >> thank you. thanks to each of you. the law was passed. you understand the relationship between military and civilian law. you're doing your best to see that the law is implemented and followed correctly. i would have expected nothing different. general correlli, general amos, general schwarz, as i indicated in my opening statement, each of you -- and in your case, general correlli, i'm referring to the comments of general casey -- expressed reservations about the central conclusion of the dod department of defense group that the risk to all military effectiveness was low.

as you proceed with the education training phase of the implementation plan, has your attitude changed and what is your current professional military judgment about the risk to military effectiveness? >> mr. chairman, thank you for that question. as you indicated general casey did indicate that he felt the risks walgreen's moderate. i believe it remains moderate today, as far as we've gotten in our training. i will say i had a session with commanders last friday. they have indicated no issues so far in tier one and tier two training as they get ready to kick off our tier three train g

training. i think general casey would remain with moderate risk only because we're not far enough in our training to change that. >> thank you. general amos. >> chairman, you remember the results of the survey that came back for the marine corps and it was well above the 50 percentile from our combat forces that had concerns about unit cohesion and come bat affe-- combat effectiv. i had an opportunity to report that in my testimony. i traveled around the marine corps. in fact this morning i was on a vtc with commander on the ground in helmand province. i'm looking specifically for issues that might arise coming out of the tier two and tier three training. to be honest with you, chairman, we've not seen it. i mean, there's questions about billeting from marines. the kinds of questions you would expect.

there hasn't been the recalcitrant pushback. there's not been the anxiety over it from the forces in the field. i will tell you that i asked specifically this morning from major general, i said, john, what are you seeing in the young marines out there. he said, sir, quite honestly they are focused on the enemy. maybe they will have questions when they get back to the united states of america but right now they are focused. he doesn't think it's an issue. >> mr. schwarz. >> i'm not prepared to fall off my assessment of moderate risk either. but we have trained 100,000 airmen to date. the way we have approached this and the reaction we have experienced thus far indicates to me that we are mitigating the

risk in the way we're approaching this. and so i am more comfortable than i was on the 22nd of december, but we still have a ways to go. and it requires the constant attention of all of us to bring this home. >> admiral, what are your thoughts today? >> i think, mr. chairman, my view as the report was conclu d concluded, as i testified in december, it was consistent with the force i had the opportunity to engage over time. our training is going very well. in those areas that we detected there may be some areas of moderate risk, particularly some of the expeditionary forces we

had engagements similar to my ship mates here indicate that it is not at the level that we had originally forecast and it is going rather well. similarly as the training is connected, the types of questions reflect the professionalism, the maturity and the decency of our people. so i'm very comfortable. i was comfortable in making the recommendation last december. it's consistent with what i continue to see in the navy today. >> i think one of the problems i had, as i expressed in my opening statement and a little of the difference i had with ranking member smith was kind of the way it was presented to us and given to us. we didn't hold a hearing at the full committee level.

we were given a briefing. and the study was handed out to us just as the briefing started. we really didn't have adequate time to read it, to ask i felt appropriate questions. and so my concern was more the procedure of how it was all laid out. but i -- that's past and now we're moving forward. i want to make sure that we really are in tune with what's going on. everybody has the opportunity to be involved in the process. i'll hold my other questions for later, ranking member smith. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'll make a quick comment. i have a question. i think you gentlemen have answered all the pertinent questions in the opening statement. to the chairman's questions, is it a fair process, is there time to implementment it.

you seem to be working through it. it seems to be better than expected. we'll see what happens. there was not a rush to judgment. we didn't automatically repeal don't ask, don't tell. part of the way we put it in place the way we did was to give you a gentlemen a chance to do what you're doing now. it ultimately has to be approved by the joint chiefs. the comment on unit cohesion and effectiveness, i would imagine there's a fair number of things on a day in, day out basis that challenge unit cohesion and you have to pull together to make it work. i think you ask the question in a survey do people have concerns. they may very well express them. if you follow up what happens on numerous occasions in the military part of the job, you have to do a lot of difficult things. have you to do things but they come together and do it. that's why we have such an incredible military. your comments about the initial stage of the training bear that out. yeah, we have concerns but we'll make it work. that seems to be the direction

it is going. it is not going to undermine what the military is doing. again, as all you gentlemen would acknowledge, it's not the first time it occurred to anyone in the military they are serving with gays and lesbians. that's been known for a while. so i appreciate your work. i think the training you're doing helps make sure this will be a successful implementation, but i, too, am 100% confident with the military, all of the services, will keep doing the fantastic job they are doing and be better for it because we won't have to drive people out of the military who are doing a good job just because of the sexual orientation. we stand ready to help with the process. with that i yield back. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i had a couple of questions, again, going back to when we had the hearing. it wasn't technically a hearing,

i guess. the first thing is, particularly there was a sense of resistance in the combat arms. that doesn't surprise me particularly. at least it seems to make sense. because if you're dealing with a regular office situation, that seems to me to be a very different environment than if you're bivouced in the field or in tight quarters under pressure. it doesn't surprise me. what were the numbers, first of all, in the marine corps, combat arms section there. what were the numbers on that survey. >> congressman, they were in the 60s for -- i don't have the precise number. >> rough number. >> 60% for combat arms. >> was that your assessment the same as what seems to me to make sense in a more combat-type environment than tensions could

be stressed as higher. and also the conditions you're living in are more complicated. do you think that's what drove that number? >> i think it could be that i think in the units predominantly are principle combat units, they are all male. typically there's a few that have females in it but predominantly male. i think it's the function they are just worried about combat. they are not sure what to expect. i think it was expectations and anticipation. >> okay. now, the way the policy used to work, particularly in one of those combat situations, or whatever admiral, if it's a submarine or wherever there's tremendous amount of pressure, if someone's behavior started to become detrimental to the mission the way it used to work, then they could be asked to leave the service. so that tended to be a pretty strong -- sort of kept a cap on

behavior, perhaps. with the new policy, you have to figure out how it's going to work. you could say everything is going to work. obviously you've had to do a lot of thinking, if this happens, if this happens, how to you handle those different types of situations. if there is somebody who is openly homosexual and their behavior starts to get in the way of the mission, what are your alternatives now and how are you advising the officers to handle those kinds of situations? >> thank you. i would say that the fact that someone is gay or lesbian doesn't really enter into a disruption to the mission. as you know, on most, almost all of our communities, and very soon to be the submarine community, we're a very diverse

force. it is not necessarily someone's sexual orientation or even someone's gender. if there's inappropriate behavior, the kubt is unacceptable and undermines good order and discipline, that is the mechanism that causes a commander to take action and process that individual or individuals through a judicial process or administrative process. so the same standards, the same regulations, and standards of conduct will apply as to good order, discipline and sexual harassment and sexual misconduct. so it's not as if we're having to create new policies. we will be enforcing these as we have for many years. >> so then in the scenario i'm talking about, that's handled the same way as if somebody were

disruptive in a heterosexual kind of context and if somebody's behavior is therefore a distraction in getting in the way of mission you discipline them the say. >> absolutely. >> thank you. >> thank you. miss sanchez. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you, gentlemen, for being before us again today. when we were going through this whole process of don't ask, don't tell, i did not believe that our military units were so fragile that finding out having somebody next to you that was openly gay would be so disruptive to our units. i am very proud, so far, as you've discussed today, of all our men and women in uniform who have -- who not only go out and fight for us every day but who are also working through this

new policy that you're trying to implement. so i always thought they were strong and a great military force, and i think they are proving us right. my question today, gentlemen, is about those gay and lesbian members, service members who were discharged because they were gay under the don't ask -- during the time of don't ask, don't tell. now, it's my understanding that those service members if they didn't have anything else on their record, there was no other problem or judiciary issue or anything, they would be discharged with honorable discharge. is that correct? okay. now the policy will be in the normal process, those who were discharged under don't ask, don't tell can come back and ask

to be put back in military services. is that right? >> ma'am, those former members can apply to reenlist and will be considered for reenlistment based on the needs of the services and our normal entry process. >> okay. so will they have to start all over, or will they get to reenter given credit for the service they have held. if the only reason they were put out is because it was known they are gay. >> it is an individual case consideration, but there is no guarantee for returning at the same grade necessarily. again, it depends on the needs of the service. >> but if that position were open, is there a process, or are you working on the process in which a person says i've been out for two years. i'm still fit. i want to go back. i had a career. i'd like to go back to where i

was. i see there are openings there. >> once again, if that scenario unfolded, it would probably be accommodated. >> what are the guidelines if someone feels they have gone back to the recruiter or they have gone back to try to reenlist and they have pushback? what is the -- what are the policies in place or what are you working through to make sure they get a fair shake to get back their career. >> there's opportunities to appeal both to the inspector general of the recruiting service in their case as well as the air force board of corrections for military records. and in those two mechanisms, former members can appeal the des ig nation that they have received. >> and lastly, what are the

reporting -- if you get harassed by someone of the same sex, who happens to be gay, is it the same process as you would in any normal -- i know i heard it from the other side. what happens in the perpetrator is in the chain of command, the supervisor? is it the same rules we see, for example, you said sexual assault or sexual harassment in the normal context we've been working with. >> zero tolerance. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman, those are my questions. thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you. we have a series of votes probably going to take close to an hour. if the -- mr. simmons has said he will make his office available if the chiefs would -- i apologize for this, but this is -- we're trying to go see that your pay continues.

we'll be in adjournment until the votes are concluded. >> last night, president obama said that he and congressional leaders hope to announce today that a deal has been raised to fund the government for the rest of fiscal 2011. the current temporary resolution expires tonight at midnight.

the house, senate, and white house would all have to agree on the measure. studentcam 's petition asked the students to consider washington, d.c. through their lens. the third prize winner addressed their role in the federal government. >> and soon enough, the official order arrives the. >> they have been announced as winners and i want to share with you which ones they are. [applause] >> on august 24, 2010, the maryland department of education was pleased that maryland was awarded to enter $50 million for education. this was part of the race to the top program.

this is a momentous event for the maryland department of education. let's take a step back and focus on the need for a good education in the first place. ♪ >> education is important because it allows one to become a literate, critically thinking, member of society and one can contribute to society in positive ways. >> i think the purpose of an education is to bring out a potential in kids, a potential that makes them successful. >> it is a socialization think g. that is an important aspect of education. that is probably why it started. it gets kids off the street and gets them into a controlled environment. at the same time, let's teach them to a three r's. >> the government revealed race

to the top. >> with the race to the top fund, we will reward states that come together and adopt a common set of standards and assessments. >> the principles are detailed in which states would win federal funds. >> it is a catch-22. in the state of maryland, once we get money for our educational system, we have to, unfortunately, about to the united states government's ideas of what they believe maryland

students need to learn. this is my 38 year of teaching. >> i have seen teaching change, sometimes what happens 10 years ago and is dropped usually rolls around again. they're always new ideas in terms of how to teach. >> i applaud the federal government, the new head ministration for reaching out to an american gene which is about competition. nobody has figured out a way to tap this before then competition drives people to do better. for a very long time, there have been -- has been no competition among schools. now that there is with race to the top, look at what that says with introducing competition. it says that not all schools will be equal. the challenge then becomes how do you make those more competitive?

>> when you have a competition where there are winners and losers, and when you have to actually help pull kids, there will always be criticism that what happens to the kids in the states that did not win. >> each state has their needs. you have small states like maryland, rhode island competing with places like texas, pennsylvania, california to get funding. what is pertinent for a student in california to have an what someone in maryland has may be totally different than it is great to look at and try to see promising programs. >> also have to be mindful how we will help all kids get a great public education better after the federal government initiated race to the top, maryland governor martin o'malley passed the education reform act of 2010 which updated the maryland current education policy. today, debate exists over the content of this act as well as

race to the top. should education be handled by the state are at a federal level? >> this is established what we -- where we want to go. grace to the top has identified -- raced to the top has identified the elements that will get us there. we are now in the process of es toating those process thes get there. it is a four-year process and it will take time. >> maryland has the capability to define the standards of excellence or performance for educational programs. >> i believe it is the merrill responsibility to educate our students the best way possible. -- i believe it is the maryland responsibility to educate our students the best way possible. >> of the components of the reform act that made the race to the top education are good education policy. >>the role of the government

will continue to grow. it is in part because we have become far more dependent on federal dollars than we were before. if we are accepting federal dollars, to think we should be ready to accept the conditions for it. >> there is no language in the constitution states that the federal government should run schools and education. that is the responsibility of the state and local government. >> even though creating educational programs is the responsibility of the state, it is very interesting to see the topcts of a race of to the as a federal plan. with the money maryland received, we as a community can certainly find ways to improve our educational programs as we move forward into the future. >> as a society, we have an

obligation to all of our kids. we have an obligation to transcend whatever their family's circumstances might be. we need to make sure that we bring out a strength in all our kids that will serve us in the long run. >> go to studentcam.org to watch all the winning videos. >> "washington journal" is next. the house is in at 10:00 a.m. eastern and they will work on a measure to disapprove the fcc internet and broadbent regulations. if congressional leaders and the white house can reach agreement, there will also take up the 2011 federal spending bill. live house coverage is on c- span. span.