>> the council on foreign relations hosted the best one- hour event. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> good morning. the congressman currently chairs the house permanent select committee on intelligence. we have a former member of that

committee in the front row, so we could have a good inter- converse conversation among other things. congressman rogers brings a wealth of experience party is a former special agent of the fbi. he served in the army. he is also been in the private sector. i think all of those issues may turn out to be relevant to our conversation today. first, let me do the necessary, which is turn your gadgets off, which means all the way off, and our meeting is on the record. we have a number of members of the press. this is being recorded. the entire session is on the record. the format will be as follows. the congressman will offer remarks or 15 minutes, then he and i will engage in a q and 8 together, and then we will open the floor for your questions.

please introduce yourselves and your affiliation. congressman rogers will be talking to us today about the implications, the lessons, the significance of the successful attack on osama bin laden for the intelligence business. we look forward to those remarks, and we welcome you, mr. chairman. >> well, good morning. it is great to be here. i appreciate the opportunity and the offer. thank you for your work on the intelligence business as well. i know you did some liaison work of the united nations. you now work on the peap. in this business, they changed acronyms more often than underwear. [laughter] >> mahmoud ahmadinejad cit the work you do. james harmon, my former -- thank you for the work you do.

james harmon, my former colleague. thank you for being here. it is always good when you walk up to give a speech and he says do not screw this up. my good friend, but mcfarland, i am honored to see you, the national security adviser for ronald reagan. i see paul bremer, the former ambassador. i do not know but if you know my wife worked with you for quite awhile. thank you for sending her back in one piece. i thought i would start today, by talking a little bit about where we are. before i talk about where we are, i want to talk about where we came from. 10 years ago, on the date of 9/11, the intelligence community was very different than it is today -- very different. it had suffered huge losses in the 1990's.

in some places of the world we have no stations, no coverage whatsoever. we closed down shop in a lot of places. they used the intelligence community as the opportunity for the peace dividend, and the fall of the city -- soviet union. we see leading up to 9/11 what a serious mistake that was. we saw that the problems that were inherent in a shrinking organization, and its ability to want to survive, do good, and continue to do its mission, they became hunkered down. they hunkered down into a place where information sharing was a huge problem for them to read some of the hurdles that were there were legal problems turned i often heard about the cultural problem between the -- problems. i often heard about the cultural problem between the fbi and the cia, and sharing information, and it was not personality based, it was legal-based sharing information was a crime.

as an fbi agent, i have often said i did not look good in those orange jumpsuits. what that meant was the culture that was developed was developed because the lanes in the road and the rules in the road prevented those things from happening, and over time, it became known they used -- you just do not talk to each other. that culture was in grave yet law, policies, and the institutions. you have a shrinking intelligence community. we said human intelligence is not valuable, and just too risky. we need to pull back, eliminate large numbers of our intelligence community, and really, it led to 9/11. once 9/11 happens, the whole question of who was responsible or who do we blame started, but at the same time, something pretty remarkable happened. all of our intelligence agencies realized they were not prepared

for what was facing them, and the integration started. so, we saw a technology that did not exist 10 years ago that is today absolutely critical to the success of those missions, and it is integrated in a way that i have never seen before between all of our services. in the case that we saw last week, it is a great example, a great example, of how it can work, but i caution this. it was one successful operation in what is a long and hard fight against al-qaida, its affiliates, and those who want to do harm to the united states. we have do not -- heard calls that this is the opportunity to do it just like that every time and dismantle other large parts of the intelligence business. it could not be farther from the truth, and we need to caution ourselves, and take the lessons from the 1990's as we move

forward. look at what happened. 10 years ago, the target was osama bin laden. they have an osama bin laden unit in the cia with the function of try to understand and study, and see what validity they had. there were events that were concerning -- east african bombings, the uss cold, our bombings, all of those things have an impact, but none had tapped the united states directly. when 9/11 happened, it took a unit that was fairly obscure, did not get all of the resources, and made it incredibly poor. we realized we do not have enough human intelligence, we do not have the ability to touch people using the correct language in the correct place as often as we would like to our ability to have signal collection was lacking, and it was washington-centered to the

rest of the world. we did not coordinate with the intellectual platforms. did not really happen that way. something really pretty amazing started. we started taking people off of the battle field, and we gave them interrogations'. think about why that is important. i had a scene intelligence official tell me a couple of years ago that about 70% of what the intelligence community understands about operations, recruiting, finance, weapons movement, how they raise money, what their propaganda unit looks like -- all of those things, including what their relationship is with a network, or what a relationship is with the intelligence services in other countries came out of those first tier interrogations'. all of them. that is important. if you're going to get to the

next place, you have to understand who they are, and how they operate. five years ago, through interrogation, a small bit of information came out -- and arabic nickname applied to an alias. that is pretty difficult. that is about all of the information they had that may have been tied to one of the courier networks tied to osama bin laden. that is really all they had, but it is more than they had been a long time. they started building on that case using every piece of intelligence, technology, and human intelligence that we had. sources became incredibly important to try to keep defining who this might be, what a physical description was, where what operational status they might have. signal intelligence got better. our ability to get signal intelligence got better. small conversations reaped big rewards overtime to try to continue to help identify who, what, when, and why.

how our ability to use overhead imagery that track patterns of life and other movement was integrated into the unit. until about last august, that continued, and i have to tell you, if you have ever seen 8 pin board on potential leads, you can imagine that thing lit up like a christmas tree. many joked that they thought bin laden was with elvis at the burger king in kalamazoo, michigan. guess what there was apin there on that map. they decided to follow every lead, dedicated a little bit of time to figure out if there was any merit or truth in that particular lead. they say the largest grossing start-ups in the united states is that cia headquarters, and that this review there is a reason. there are a lot of people wi

drinking a lot of coffee, fall been a lot of leads, most of them that when the work, but then that one lucky break using all of the pieces. every piece got you a nickname, a hometown, maybe a real family name, where a piece that identified where that person might be working. all of that led to a very lucky event when they were able to follow a particular individual to a certain compound in august. it did not fit characteristics. some called it a mansion. i'm not sure i would call it a mansion. it did not fit the characteristics of the town that it was in. they put a special unit, an isolated unit even in the counter-terrorism business, and they decided they were going to have something equivalent to 8th

pursuit team to analyze everything at the next level, up, and utilize all the resources that we have, with all of the agencies that we have, to apply on that particular target. we wanted to know everything. by the next few months, they started to know everything. the complete patterns of life, all of the things you would hope they would know so that somebody could make a very good decision to say yes, that is probably osama bin laden, we had better go get him. here is an interesting thing. all of the things, all of the lessons, and even the operation itself, was built on something that came before it. those elite special forces teams do two and three raids on night when they're working in iraq and afghanistan, much like the compound, much like the operation, which gave them a high degree of confidence and combat experience and

operational experience to pull off something that was just a little more tricky than the other ones. that was an incredible feeling. the agency's ability to get closer and closer with sources of information, with people that would wittingly or unwittingly provide information about patterns of life -- our abilities to pick up just the smallest thing that might benefit that whole operation -- it all happened because we have learned from the ones i have happened before. some notion that this was put together at the last minute, based on a few months, or even a few years of planning is ridiculous. why that is so when portent is that now that this success, and albeit a very public success, the calls have started for changing the shape of the intelligence business, changing the mission in afghanistan, changing how we do things -- this is the only way that we should conduct operations moving forward tried to break the back

of al qaeda. i could not disagree more. we need to take lessons of the 1990's and apply them today. we have all of the tools that have been laid out. the patriot act, the fact that this year we will do a fiscal year 2011 that provides authorization in the intelligence committee to put proper oversight on 17 committees for the first time. the authorities and the leadership is important. leon panetta has done a phenomenal job. not only did the engage the chairman of throughout the process, but when resources were needed, or not needed, when we needed to move resources, all of that became a working relationship. in the past few years, the committee became almost dysfunctional in its ability to provide that leadership and assistance and help, and oversight to the communities

because of the intense partisanship that crept in. my ranking member and i have committed early on from the day that we both assumed our roles as the chairman and ranking member, that we were going to take partisanship as much out of the intelligence committee as we possibly can. after all, there is a benefit to not having a reporter in that office. the reporters might not think so, but those in the committee know how important that is, that we have that dialogue, that debate, and come to a commitment moving forward. what does that mean? we will look at the successes on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, including catching osama bin laden. we get so focused sometimes on the ct mission that we forget other agencies are working serious problem sets all at the same time. the network in 2006 was a major

coup for the intelligence community, and stop a serious problem for us, in our national security interests, and the world. that proliferation network was growing and growing rapidly. it had a very different frazier -- flavor from any proliferation you might see out of north korea. it was called treat lead-based .- was culturally-based pare it includes some of the failures that we still have to pursue. in iraq, the wmd assessment was wrong, but it was wrong in libya. libya was far more advanced. they have a robust nuclear weapons program, a robust chemical stockpile, robust biological weapons program -- we did not know about any of it. we had a very, very, very

limited view and and a logical -- analytical product. wrong in iraq, wrong in libya. when we said had to much, and one we did not know they had hardly any at all. it shows you that we must continue to integrate. we must continue to integrate technology. one of the biggest problems we have today, in the last 10 years, we have developed a way to select so much -- collect so much information that we cannot get through it all. if we're going to have smart access so we do not have the wikileaks disclosure, and we will have technology applied to databases that will allow us to have a software-based analytical product, so when the human eyes take a look at it, it is already narrowed down, and it encompasses more information that they could -- than they could possibly come through in

short order. we will continue to get better. what does that do? it decreases the opportunity to be wrong on iraq and libya. it increases the ability to be right on iran and exactly right on north korea. there is a lot of speculation on where they were. we keep finding information every day that points to or more aggressive analysts being right about iran's intentions, and where they're at, and the same with north korea. while they were making a deal with us to stop their program and take food aid, they were clearly engaged in pursuing weapons of mass destruction at an aggressive rate. again, one of the purposes we agreed to do this today, and thank you for the opportunity, which to put in context where we came from history, and how we got to where we were last week, and renews the call for

continued oversight of the community to continue work on policies and other things that made them successful. we are already seeing pressure on the patriot act, that maybe we do not need it now, the enemy is gone. it cannot be further from the truth. one of the great analogies i heard was when the doctor gives you your regimen of medicine, if you take half of it, and think you are better and go away, you will get sick again. this is about taking all of our medicine. al qaeda is alive and well. they are hurt, damaged, as they're inspirational and operational leader has been taken off of the battlefield, which is a huge opportunity for us. confusion with them is opportunity for us, and this is the time to step on the gas and brake their back. we will get into a lot of imaginations. there will be people disclosing information they should not be talking about when we are continuing to pursue. at the end of the day, we will

take this opportunity and analyze our our analysts doing the right thing? what was the problem. why did we miss the times square bomber? the detroit bomber? major has on? we knew there were titles of and -- tells of information that would have helped us. we are still not there. we are going to continue the integration with analysts and our ability to share information in a way that is smart. again, smart access -- will continue to make sure they are funded at the right level. this is the wrong time to back off on funding the intelligence community when they are very close to technological breakthroughs that will make our analytical products exponentially better by giving analysts access to far more information. so, our fiscal year 2011 bill makes that down payment, the 2012 bill, not next month will continue to make that

investment. it is one of the fuel line items you will see this year coming out of the house that will be a slight increase because of the investment in technology and people. lastly, throw the politics of interrogation, all of those things that crept into our political debate -- it is important to understand that leadership on these issues from the top to the bottom was as equal -- equally important from -- on the osama bin laden catch as anything else parent good on the president for looking at information and authorizing the operation itself. was a good day. at the same time, we need to make sure all of the policymakers from the executive branch to the congress understand all the things that led up to osama bin laden have to be improved on, and they need to have the leadership behind them so they can continue to

produce the information in that will get us the next no. 3 in all -- al-qaida, and continue to break their back. this is the chance to break the back of the al-qaida, and it is not the chance to retreat. with that, we will open it up. >> thank you, mr. chairman. [applause] >> i will get a start with a few questions tried one of the observations you made is we do not catch all of them one of the examples was the domestic terrorists. we talk about integration. i wonder if we could focus about -- on integration on the hill. post-9/11, one of the committees as the homeland responsibility, and there are the ones, i believe, that have the lead and

some of these questions on the domestics, integration of the fbi, national intelligence, etc. audi relates to the other committee that is at least -- how you relate to the other committees that are at least in part intelligence? what is working, what still needs to be addressed to deal with intelligence matters? >> great question. one of the big complaints coming out of the 9/11 commission, and if you have ever been in the executive branch, one of your big frustrations is how many committees you have to talk to, sometimes on the very same issue. that is a long-term problem for congress to fix. we will probably have to deal with it eventually. . battles are some of the most fierce fights i have ever seen. it makes other parts of policy look like child's play. what we have done in the committee is i've brought in, i

changed the rules this year, to allow three members of the appropriations committee to be full partners without a vote in to the committee. so, they have the clearances. they sit on the committee. they participate in the briefings. i argue that is one step getting closer to where the 9/11 commission had intended. so far, so good. they will participate in any classified briefings. we want them to do that. that way we can have a discussion with someone that sits on appropriation about all of the information that surrounds it particular issue or program in a way that gets us to a better conclusion. i think it has helped us on the 2011 bill, and it will help us on the 2012 bill. great members participate fully. we have reached out, and we are doing joint efforts with armed services, which really has not been done before, in a sense to

work out a military intelligence portion of the budget, which is huge, in some cases, larger than the national intelligence budget. we have better integration, and work out the issues. homeland security, we do not do with as much, but we have been working out with the fbi on its transition with its analytical corp. primarily. it is been a big switch, to go from i'm going to put someone in jail, or report on somebody for 10 years. it is not the fbi culture, and there are still bugs in the roads. we'll come a long way we -- we have come a long way. we have done our own outreach. i was led to say would take an act of congress to fix cars, but i am not sure we are -- an act of congress to six congress, but i am not sure we are ready.

it probably will not happen anytime soon. >> you talk about the successful integration across the intelligence disciplines that 9/11,artly inspired by t and the creation of the office of the director of national intelligence. do you think integration is working well on topics of events terrorism? >> boy, it had a rough start. it had a rough assignment to try to bring together all of the intelligence services. now, there have been some positive things. the president's daily brief is removed from the cia. now, you have much more participation. i think you get a better model that the president has an opportunity to see. there is more input than there used to be. there used to be guidance through the cia lines. i think that is a good outcome.

i think we have finally gotten, and i've worked with director clapper -- there is a lot of argument about how big it should be. we have gotten past how big this thing should be, and gotten back to what really is the mission of the office of the director of national intelligence? if we could focus that mission on the non-sexy things of the intelligence world, it would be hugely successful. so, he gets it. i think when we get there, the size will come into line with what the mission is. he is doing a review that he hopes to present to us soon. i support that. if anything came out of that, one of the things congress said you have a -- is you have to share information better, and that clearly has happened. directive 5 all one has said we're going to put this out there. it is a little risky, as you saw with wikileaks. we think we could fix that

problem, but it promoted information sharing across the intelligence community like it had never happened before. i think if those two outcomes alone come out, that would be very, very helpful. >> we are in an era where everybody is going to be expected to tighten their belts, an era of resource constraints. you said you thought intelligence budget could be stable, if not increased a little bit. one of the issues that effects the tolerance for budget increases when everybody else is cutting is the level of public support. i know on the diplomacy said, the funding for the state department suffers because there is not a domestic constituency for u.s. foreign engagement and the role that diplomats do. military officers are seen as very her relic, but sometimes the civilian side of our -- heroic, but sometimes the civilian side is not popular. i am wondering, is serving on

the intelligence committee popular with constituents? heidi think the public cares about intelligence, and if it were to be the only part going up, do you think the american public would support that? >> well, i do think the american public supports intelligence services, and nothing more exemplifies that the and when you see the osama bin laden success. that is a 10-year success story. we have invested a lot of money in the process of not just that particular event, but in the ability to do exactly that. i do think that americans see that, and interpret that for what it is. we have a second-to-none intelligence service, and they are out doing dangerous things. politically, it does not do much for you back home. it is hard to go to a town hall meeting and state by the way, i cannot talk about -- it.

[laughter] >> quickly, we turn onto -- we turn back to subject like gasoline. on the americans see it for the value it is. intelligence is planning more important role than i think i have never seen in my time in congress or before. the real time essence of how the world is changing means you have to make real time changes as a policymaker in washington, d.c., and without good, accurate, well-analyze the intelligence, it makes our job that much more difficult, and it makes it likely you are going to make a mistake. it is absolutely critical we continue a robust intelligence service. that being said, i actually brought in auditors to go through budget audits, and try to find things that we thought we could change, that we could get savings on. it has been effective.

we think we have saved probably a couple hundred million dollars this year alone in merging programs. we get to peer over all of the silos, so sometimes you can see what one silo is doing, another is doing, and it looks similar, and they might not know it. we have been able to merge some of that, and that is where the dni has been helpful as well. >> thank you. i will open it to you all. we for a microphone, and please introduce yourself. i think i will start with jane harman. >> thank you, alan. welcome to a bipartisan bastion. i'm enjoying my new service here. two things -- in your remarks you did not mentioned the intelligence reform legislation of 2004 but alan ask you about

that. it was passed over the implacable opposition of the and secretary of defense rumsfeld, and duncan hunter. it was bipartisan legislation strongly supported and originated in the house intelligence committee, and your predecessor played a courageous role in pushing it forward. my question is this -- director of national intelligence clapper credits the reform legislation for helping him leverage and create this aimlessness that was necessary to put up clues to gather that were the predicate for finding osama bin laden. i think you would agree with that, and i think you would agree that we have to continue to do that and other things going forward. my question is, we seem to be much better at doing that

horizontal it, at the federal level. you are a form of -- former fbi guy, and you get the fact that we have to share intelligence and vertically, from the federal level, down to our communities, and there, i think, we still have problems with over- classification, and less leadership than we might need. if we are going to find the next attack, and hopefully prevent or disrupted in our country, we need informed law enforcement at the local level. my question to you is how can we do better with vertical information-sharing, using the tools at hand, and using the oversight that congress can provide? >> that is something we wrestle with. the department of homeland security, their analytical unit, has tried to take this role, and take classified information, put

it in a format that is readable and on classified, and get it out through the joint terrorism task force, fusion's centers et al. my only concern is that we might have gone too fast. you might have them within a few miles of each other in some places of the country. his heart for local officers to supply the people -- it is hard to supply the local people to the task force. they are of solving burglaries, homicides, and other crimes, and this is a more nebulous concept. i am not sure i know the answer other than we need to continue to take that information. i would argue we probably ought to look at how we do it, how we structure them. we could probably do it in a much more efficient way.

after 2004, we were in a hurry. i think we should take a hard look, see if we can consolidate, and find a better way to get information that is usable. the other thing is we have a i used to call it the "the need to know with home to share their call we had a big rush everybody needed to know everything, and that is not the answer either. one of the things we are hoping to work on we hope is having the ability for smart access to systems. so, if i am an analyst in fill in the blank, south america, i probably do not really need to understand what is going on in the yemen unless there is a clear nexus, and if there is not that nexus, they will not have that access. you could not get another wikileaks, another massive data dump. that problem would go away, but it would still continue the notion that i have access to

everything. then, you take that, and find something that is important to detroit, but perhaps not for the state of maine, and we need to share information that could be of value. that is the next phase. it will look more efficient, i think. >> chairman rogers, back in 2005, sir richard deere love was retiring from mi6, and he said the time was at hand for exchange of intelligence in real time in a multi-national basis. i'm wondering if you share that view or not. >> there have been some big changes in how we share multi- laterally. our liaison service, partly because of a lack of time, i

would love to talk about that, because we could do an hour on that and how we develop those services for better cooperation. we share information with people that you might be surprised because we have been able to get by in on what a common enemy is, and we try to do that as fast as real as we can because we have found that with good relationships we get better information. our british, australian, new zealand, canadian friends, they are some of our best partners in the war on its hair, and we have fairly seamless information sharing -- war on terror, and we have fairly seamless information sharing. when there are problems, you can see them manufactured -- manifest themselves in these liaison services. with five problems because of relationships with certain countries that filters down to our ability to share information with liaisons'.

it is a top-down leadership -- you do not want to offend british friends too often. they are important partners to the united states in the war on terror. they have something like 300,000 or 400,000 pakistan e-mails travel back and forth to the tribal areas and everywhere else every single year. i know they are worried about it, which means we ought to be worried about it. we need a robust relationship. we have done some real time sharing. they have access like i have never seen before. they're integrated here, in the united states. we are integrated there, in the united kingdom. it works great. again, the problem is we have to be consistent, up and down the pike. sharing information that should not be shared means that people stop sharing information with us i am trying to talk around it

as best i can. there have been instances where information was shared the cost liaison partners to say if you continue to do this we will stop talking to you. very dangerous. >> barbara? >> i am with "the atlantic council." first, did you know about the osama bin laden -- bin laden raid, before, were you one of the select few? i hope so. secondly, want has been the most effective set of tools against the iranian nuclear program? assassinations, intelligence programs, and we're using they are? >> wow. look at the time. [laughter] >> first of all, leon panetta, i think, has done an exceptionally good job at the cia. video is a product of being a former member, but he is very

good at understanding how valuable a partnership could be with the intelligence community. when i became chairman, we called a dinner and a briefing, as we went over where we were in january about what the possibilities were. at that time, it was 40% to 50% that that is what was apparent over time, you could see he was good about keeping us in the loop. of those things were well done terror i think it was much more effective. -- well done. i think it was much more effective parent reach effected. -- effective. on the second part, this is one of those interesting areas where there were some policy differences at the senior levels

about how you approach to iran. you let other countries with other equities were far more aggressive, who were leaning far more aggressive that maybe did not line up with where the united states was a couple of years ago. there was just some misalignment of how aggressive we wanted to be. you could imagine where israel was, and then go around the rim, and you would get as many different opportunities and suggestions about how we go about this as you could possibly imagine. some of what you have seen over time has been because there has not been one single focused plan on how we get there. i do think that is a lack of u.s. leadership on this particular issue. we have to lead this effort. we should be sitting at the head of that table, discussing those ideas, and then talking about them with our european allies,

iran's neighbors, who are as equally-terrified of a nuclear iran as israel is. i think we can come to common approaches. we are not done that yet. i thing that needs to happen. so, yes, we will see these other things that may not have been coordinated as well as probably they should have been. >> the gentleman in the middle? >> i am with al jazeera anguish, and an oakland county native. -- english, and an oakland county. >> i want to be contrary entered >> you are from al jazeera, and you want to be contrary index shocker. -- contrary in? shocker. >> you talk about the enhanced interrogation method -- methods that helped lead to the compound

mansion where bin laden was found, but what if america had not pursued a war in iraq that alienated so many moslems around the world, and what if they had done the interrogations' without laying a hand on the persons in custody. the thing that maybe it would not have taken the united states 10 years to find more information on bin laden's whereabouts, and to add on to that, the policies of the united states that have been pursued over the last 10 years, whether it is the unbridled support for israel and it's very controversial policies in the region -- none of them have substantively been changed by the united states. how do you see your role in looking at american foreign policy, and whether different approaches may have led to a better conclusion less than 10 years, possibly? >> sure. that would be great if you dismissed everything that happened before. the 1993 bombing in new york,

the east african bombings, the uss coal, the way we're operating then did not work, and they were getting more aggressive, more bold, they were feeling their oats, recruiting, using those successes -- the barracks bombing, i know bud mcfarlane spent time trying to deal with that. all of those successes led them to recruiting more people. there was no guantanamo bay. there was no interrogations' toured there was not much of anything going on against al qaeda, bin laden, and his network. what we found was that it was going better, stronger, and more sophisticated. 9/11 was a result, i argue, of not having an aggressive policy and not understanding the threat of al-qaida, and what their true intentions were.

al qaeda had killed more muslims than they did any westerner, and they continue to do that. some notion that we are just going to go back to the way it was, and somehow this is going to go away, i think that is not even at best, and that is why we found such good partners in moslem countries that say you are right, they have to go. there are as dangerous to a moslem family as they are to an american family, and that is that our success. i did not talk about enhanced interrogation operations, you brought it up, but if you took somebody off of the battlefield, you are going to talk to them. i do not think you have to use torture. i'm a former fbi guy carry out this, we have our ways. all of those interrogations' in edit information that helped us get smarter about who they were and how they operate.

everybody you talk to, that gives you an opportunity to solve the next big problem for our effort to break the back of al qaeda. so, yes, i think we should be interrogating people. having this problem -- policy that we are prosecuting cia officers who engaged in interrogations' lawfully, and then celebrate the fact that that information may have contributed to the fact we got osama bin laden is confusing. i argue we need to shake ourselves out of this, had a good interrogation policy. we need a place to put them. where you put them? if we got bin laden, he would of had to go to guantanamo bay, because that is the one facility that is not only protected from people on the inside getting out, but from outside people getting in. we know that as happen, with the biggest being in afghanistan

were 500 fighters were taken out through a tunnel and they're back on the battlefield fighting. we need to shake ourselves out of this notion. this is than a decade-long problem, and we have seen how it works under the old system, under this system, and under this system osama bin laden is dead. >> the very back row. >> thank you, mr. chairman. jonathan, with mcclatchy newspapers. given there is an investigation going on right now on whether or not there was official pakistani complicity in the harbor rain of -- harboring of osama bin laden, and given the fact of who he was, you think it is incumbent on the administration to publicly acknowledge, if there is evidence produced of talk the study complicity, that they should make that public?

the american people have a right to know that the man who was responsible for 9/11 was being harbored by another government -- should that be made public, or, given the nature of the u.s.-pakistan relationship, should that evidence remain classified and not release? >> interesting question. pakistan is one of the most confusing the relationships we have. i talked about those liaison relationships. they are critically important. you have a country that sent its army into the tribal areas for really the first time since it became a nation, and under their own constitution there are treated as a semi-economists area, so this is a big deal car there taken thousands and thousands of casualties in that fight. they'll also help us a rest some 600 al-qaida and taliban leadership, everybody from bomb

makers, to finance years, and a whole host in the settled areas. those are the days that make you think this is a good l.i., somebody we need to be a partner. at the same time, they hold a diplomat against the treaty of which they signed to has immunity status. they interrogated him, which is just unbelievable for a country that wants to join the rest of the world as a law-abiding country. you have at least the notion about bin laden and why he was able to -- clearly, yet a logistics' network. who knew, and what they knew, is something we are asking questions about. we know that the frontier corps is riddled with sympathizers to the taliban, mostly because it is familiar. they have family ties, cross- tribes, even, that as presented

problems. we know certain isi members have the sympathy toward el tidy. -- al qaeda. we have all of those problems going on all of the same time. it is confusing. our national interests have not lined up. pakistan has not come to the conclusion that the taliban and al qaeda is as big of a threat as india. they believe india is their big problem. that is in the united states' struggle all along. they look at this as we are going to try to help, but have you look at india? that is the struggle we have. i believe we're going to need to ask some questions. we need to understand, as it is inherent that we know who, what, when, and why, about osama bin

laden being in this compound for as much as five years. we should all understand that. today, i will tell you today, from all of the information i have seen, we cannot conclusively say that somebody senior new and promoted a safe haven. clearly, there may have been elements that new and look the other way, though we cannot say the institutions new and look the other way. we will all know that, i believe. and this is a good opportunity for pakistan to say this was an berson, let's move forward. there's a lot we can do together, and let's talk not all the things we can do to break the back of the tribes to >> in all due respect, you have not answered the questions to >> i think i did. we do not know.

>> this is washington, d.c., one does anything not become public? clearly, i think that information will be made public if it is true. i do not think you can contain it. most of the leaks on some of the programs come out of the pakistanis, not the u.s. government. i clearly think that will get out current . >> a few more questions. >> charlie stevenson. many years ago i helped write the law that requires the president to make a finding, and notify congress when there is going to be a covert operation. we think that law should be broadened to cover operations conducted solely by defense personnel? >> well, it is a great question, and one that i said earlier on we are going to take

a look at. it is title 10 against title 50 -- military operations against defense operations, and all of the things that get reported. i believe we need to do some work. i will give you a great example -- the osama bin laden operation was a title 50, even though we use elite special forces units to carry out the act. there are other places in the world where there is confusion about whether it should be entitled 10 or a title 50. yes, we are going to review that. we are going to have an opportunity to go pretty carefully, over a case-by-case, many of which we cannot talk about, some which we can, to try to get to a better place on that. i believe you have to be very careful about in power in the military to do things on their title 50 without the same reporting and covert action.

we watched that like a hawk. we have a full-on quarterly briefing on covert actions, plus. we do that pretty frequently. this is something we do not lead gets too far away, because it is the most sensitive, and fraught with the most opportunity for something to go wrong. the military peace seems to be missing, so we're going to try to close that fine line, and that gap, by a review of title 50 entitled 10 operations. -- title 10 operations. >> i came from the region. thank you very much. my question is pakistan is telling the government, and the military is telling its people that they have shared information with the united states at some level leading to

osama bin laden and the compound. how does the united states think that intelligence will share, and you think there is a need for pakistan to share on that front with the united states? how much does the pakistan on tricky relationship make it difficult for the congress at this time that questions are raised on pakistan? [unintelligible] it is finding difficult to aid the military of pakistan in the fight against terror. thank you very much. >> well, pakistan has been helpful in the past, so it should come as no surprise to anyone that they would say they believe they have shared information in the past that may have ultimately led to osama bin laden's whereabouts.

i cannot say that i would dispute that. the problem has come with the fact that if they knew he was there, and if they did not pass along that little tidbit of information, it is a huge problem. again, they have been on-again, and off again. they have been helpful. some of the detainee's they have taken into custody we get access to fully, and some we do not. has been this frustration with dealing with the isi, the army, and the government of pakistan. i hope we look at this -- we will go back and do the forensics on all of this. that will happen. how did this happen? we will have a full, and complete picture. but, i hope we do not spend a lot of time on that portion. this is the time for pakistan and the united states to say local all right, done deal,

osama bin laden is done, we have a lot of work to do." the network is still alive and well, and producing suicide bombers and logistics, and finance, and soldiers in the fight both for afghanistan, and, we believe, they may have a logistical role in helping in the bombings in india. so, all of those things are still going to happen. taliban leadership is still a threat, not only to our soldiers, and our allies in afghanistan, but i argue to the settled areas as you saw when they invaded. it was the first time they had gone into a settled area of pakistan. our argument is we want to be your friends, but this has to be transparent, open relationship, where we both fully understand the threat of taliban and al qaeda elements, and that is where i hope we take these opportunities to get

there. i think you probably know better than anyone of the internal political debates happening in pakistan today. it is not one heck of a lot different than a very knocked down, drag out presidential election season, and pakistan is suffering the same thing. the smallest thing could get out of proportion that causes them to get out of -- make bad decisions about full cooperation with the united states. >> regrettably, we've run out of time. on friday, the next event will be the ceo of the volkswagen group. i want to thank the chairman for a fascinating hour. [applause] >> thank you so much dirt >> thank you -- thank you so much. >> thank you.

>> in his new book, "mastermind," richard miniter looks at the 9-11 attacks. >> this guy really mattered. to understand him is to

understand the war on terror. now that bin laden is dead, this is what we have to fear. >> inside the mind of a terrorist, sunday night on c-span's q & a. you can also download a podcast of q & a available online at c-span.org/podcasts. >> i'm newt gingrich and i'm announcing my candidacy for president of the united states because i feel we can around america to the land of hope and opportunity. >> follow the candidates announcements and speeches on their rode to the white house and look back at their careers online at the c-span video library. it's what you want when you want. >> from today's "washington journal," a discussion on whether the endangered species bill protects animals.

this is about 40 minutes. continues. host: in the next 45 minutes, we're going to talk about endangered species with two guests. myron ebbel is with the competitive enterprise institute. he serves with the -- as the energy and environment director. bill snape joins us from the center for biological diversity. the decision this week concerning the list of endangered species, what was the decision? guest: it was not a decision as much as a proposed settlement. the obama administration has committed on paper to try to list 250 species that our own biologists have determined are imperiled by extinction. the good news is the administration has a knowledge these species are in peril of

extinction. for awhile, they were putting them off to the side. the bad news is details of the settlement are not quite clear. we need to make sure it is enforceable and species are protected. host: what is your take on the decision as far as what happened and the bigger picture? caller: it does not have a lot to do with protecting endangered species -- guest: it does have to do with enriching environmental groups that make the lawsuits. they get paid through the litigation fund for their efforts. at the other end, it is less about protecting endangered species and more about putting on federal land use controls, shutting down economic activity

on federal land, and telling of the world when the owners with the can and cannot do with their land. -- in telling the world -- the overall -- rural landowners where they can and cannot do with their land. host: was the decision a clearing of a backlog? does it streamline the process? caller: there is essentially a factory assembly line where we find more species, in many cases where there is little scientific evidence, this is done on the best available scientific evidence. if what is available is of poor quality or minimal, you can go ahead and list the species. we have a huge number of species on the list where there is

little being done to protect them. they are useful tools or weapons to block particular projects, especially in the rural west but also across the country. more species on the list, the more projects you will be able to block. we think this is -- you can say you think it is a critical environment for a species. you do not want to take a chance so you have to stop in mining project or oral and gas field. we have to get the ranchers of the federal land. this goes on and on. guest: he has thrown a lot of spaghetti on the ceiling. let me respond to a few of the main points. these are species that biologists have decided after numerous years of steady warrant protection under the endangered species act.

i think he is wrong on that point. will we can have a reasonable rate is on the role of federal public land. we think the federal public lands are owned but all americans. that is land we all own. we think endangered species ought to be protected. it is not for the sole use of private ranchers or companies to do what they will on our land. host guest: think we have a disagreement about what the federal lands are. they're not owned by the public. there are a lot of private rights on the land. in the west, ranchers own land that is mixed with the federal land. they own water rights. mining claims and the mining laws, these are private rights. as far as timber production, this is the best example of how the endangered species act is

best used prove the spotted owl was used to close down timber production on the most productive forest in the world in the northwest. over several years, about 175 mills closed down. the industry was destroyed. we now import timber from indonesia. instead of protecting the spotted owl, we set the course for one catastrophic thing after another. billions of feet of timber are added each year and nothing is taken away. the end result is catastrophic fire. that does not help any species in the forced eventually. guest: i completely disagree. i think he is wrong. when you look at the spotted owl protections from two decades ago, we heard that this was the end of the world. the economies were going to hit

the tank in oregon and washington. what we did is protect the last remnants of our ancient forest. things to cough and high-tech industries. did you need to liquidate the last remaining ancient forests to survive economically proved to be false. guest: he is completely wrong about the facts. oregon and washington took off in places like urban portland and seattle. rural areas have a continuing depression. -- things took off in the high- tech industries. these were real people doing real jobs. those economies have never recovered. the spotted owl was listed on the basis of saving the ancient forest. the old growth of big trees, the spotted owls do not live there because there's nothing to eat.

they have to have the undergrowth forests. as soon as the spotted owl was listed to supposedly save the old growth forest, they then stopped timber production on the new growth throughout the region. everything was shut down. it was not just shut down on federal land, it was shut down on private land. this is a disaster. it is an environmental disaster. it is an economic disaster for real americans with real jobs. quichost: if you want to ask questions of our guests, here are the numbers. it was your organization and another that weighed in on the actions this week.

guest: we did not sign the proposed settlement. we have concerns about the legal details in terms of how enforceable it will be in a court of law. the settlement amounted to the species we think a very important for protection. -- omitted two species we think are very important for protection. we're concerned if along, those species may not get protection. i think there were not. included because of politics. the announcement today by the president about drilling in the arctic ocean is an indication that the administration is moving timidly with natural resource protection. it looks a lot like the bush and ministration. -- it looks a lot like the bush administration. when you talk to the department of interior, you have the political entities and the biologists.

i think the biologists know what needs to be done and what to do the right thing. the others want to give some things to one side and others to another. it may be politics, but we think it is bad policy. host: the first call comes from oceanside, california. jeannie is on the democrats' line. caller: politics does seem to come up in every subject on your program. i am all for protecting the animals. however, when you talk about. in the lands of the border -- when you talk about protecting the land at the border, is a shame that animals are more important than protecting the people. i would love it if your guests would explain whether they are a democrat or republican. we are having these political

influences here. guest: i work for a nonpartisan group. we're on the political, conservative side. i think bill works for eight group on the political left of the spectrum. i do not think my personal politics come into it. it is pretty obvious what we support. we support free markets and property rights. that is that the competitive enterprise institute. i think the endangered species act, your caller makes some good points. it was set up to trump every locaw in the country. the question of how to balance human interests and the interests of wildlife is a good question. it is one we ought to have a debate about without starting to leave our hands and say this the last great wild place in the world. if you look at the places his group and others have claimed is

the last great place north, it would be most of the world. i think this is a legitimate discussion. the wolverine potential listing is a place where you might want to balance the interests of people. a wolverine has been spotted for a first term in a century in northeastern oregon. a doubt they are in danger. i think they are expanding their range. host: with is a balanced discussion look like? guest: it would be created to act very different from the current one. instead of penalizing land owners, it would reward them for providing the environment. he would have officials working cooperatively with the landowners and not having everything turn into a legal battle with groups filed

lawsuits to try to force the issue. i think cooperation and incentives rather than command and control selling land owners what they may or may not do. i do not think you can illicit or encourage behavior through penalties. i think you can discourage behavior. if you want to have people providing habitat, we need a cooperative system based on incentives. host: is cooperation possible? guest: absolutely. for human behavior, you need carrots and sticks. i would like to answer the your question about the border lands. it is a good question and underlines one of his points about how the endangered species act is trumping losaws.

congress passed a law that allows the attorney general to waive certain rental lo-- certan environmental laws. we have seen the degree of flexibility is necessary with the act. the endangered species act demands science when species are listed. at every other critical point, socio-economic impacts are required to be taken into consideration. the act is actually incredibly flexible. host: the next call is from florida. caller: if we're going to talk about the endangered species act, we need to ask the question of why the species are becoming endangered. i think it is important that we all try to envision the biosphere in three dimensions.

it is a sign that the human population is hitting 7 billion. the rate at which we are consuming resources of the planet, we're using petroleum and rate of 1,000 gallons a second. we cannot continue doing this. we have to turn the processes around. the endangered species act when it was created was kind of the first way of green to our attention that our human project gobbling up other forms of life on the planet. guest: i do not think i could say it much better. in many instances, the energy use we have is subsidized by the american public. the oil companies give billions of dollars a year in tax breaks

as they're making billions in profits. we ought to put all of the economic activities on a level playing field. host: greeneville, tenn., on the republican line. caller: of like to address the issue of the over-regulation by the legal profession in this country. i feel like the country is being taken over by the lawyers and the unintended consequences. the predictions are often not played out. years ago, they did say the oil pipeline in alaska was destroyed -- would destroy the caribou. i think this is evident of the competing world views.

those of us who believe in god know that god is built into the system. the environment heals itself. the attorneys are mostly liberal in this country. they have a world view that does not believe that. the dire predictions often do not come true. host: you brought up unintended consequences. guest: endangered species act is a factory for making a lot of environmental groups and lawyers that work for them rich. this question does go nicely with the previous one. the fact is we're not running out of natural resources. if you look at it long series of world bank studies, the countries in the world that have the highest consumption rates and are the wealthiest are not only the healthiest for human

beings and have the highest standard of living with longest life expectancy, but they also have the best environmental conditions. that is not a function of having the most onerous regulations that tell people they cannot use their land and hold a job digging or growing. it is a result of wealth. wealth and technology are good for the environment. that is what allows us to take care of things and preserve things. in very poor countries like india, the problem is not the population. is that they are so poor that they have to struggle every day to have enough to eat. that means they do not care about saving the forests because of weakened think about is getting their next meal. we do not have that in this country. that is what allows us to spend time and resources on protecting the environment and the habitat

for endangered species. guest: there are all sorts of conservative lawyers. there are some very talented conservative lawyers. i acknowledge that some people file about lawsuits. the system weed's those out. when you read the bible carefully, it is clear of the scripture is seen to be construed as -- good stewards of the land. that is conservation of natural resources. that has the same linguistic root as conservative. there's a reason for that. we need to be careful of correlations. that is true for countries like saudi arabia. i would not want to live there in terms of the lack of freedoms and other issues the country has despite its wealth. it does not always work out as simply as myron is pointing out.

host: are there safe harbor agreements on these kind of cases? are they effective. the man do they need changing? -- do they need changing roste? guest: these things are indicative of how flexible the act is. we think it times is too flexible in terms of those listings. if an interior secretary wants to make the act work and work with the landowners, 99 times out of 100 is able to be done. history has borne that out. guest: i think the problem with the endangered species act is the flexibility. the interior department, the fish and wildlife service, the secretary of the interior can make deals. they can favor one corporation

agains on rural land owner. we see this over and over again. people with a lot of political clout can do a deal and small landowners cannot. this is one of the real problems with the endangered species act. it is not a law. it is a moving target compilation of regulatory decisions. many of those are pushed by environmental lawsuits. the lawsuit, proposal is a deal. it is not the congress being involved. it is not the interior department doing its job it is a deal that puts the environmental agenda into the law. it then becomes difficult for people to do anything about it. if anyone says this particular part of it is not fair, the environmental groups will say they have a deal.

this happens over and over again with environmental regulations. it is a real problem. it creates political favoritism. the act is a guided weapon. it is used selectively to stop one project and allow another to go forward if the corporation is a big donor to environmental groups. it does not change much with too is in office. i think republicans have been slightly better than democrats, but not a lot. the of guesguest: in my view, ts powerful rhetoric. he said the act trumps laws in then talked about the flexibility. he cannot have it both ways. we base our decisions on the best available science. we look at it as if politics transe science of time.

the short-term demand for cash is immense. the act is an objective check on what would be an avalanche of developing business as usual if we did not have to look before we leap. that is all we want. guest: would you reveal how much funding you get through lawsuits? guest: we get no federal funding as well. guest: how much money have you gotten over the past five years from litigation? guest: roughly 5% of our annual budget. we get the money in terms of attorney fees and costs. we win when the law is found to be broken. all this been done is being made whole. we're not getting wealthy at all. host: diana is on the democrat'' line. go ahead. caller: my father has been in forestry for as long as i can

remember. i am 45. we always had controlled burning in pine forests. i do not know what myron is talking about. i cannot believe what he was saying. i do not agree with a thing that he said. . .

most of those are federally owned and what we have found there is that they have been mismanaged for decades and i think bill would probably agree with me on that. and one of the reasons they've been mismanaged is because they're not privately owned. the federal land managers, the people in the forest service and the blm do not have the same incentives as private land owners. and so we find a long series of different regimes, different ideas about how to manage the forests. but by and large the federal force forests of the northwest are much more poorly managed than the mostly private forests of the southern united states. and so i would just say thank god for private land ownership and private stewardship where people care about the land and one of the reasons they care about the land is they ve an economic interest in it. and if they degrade it or wreck

it, they will lose their investment. and this is not true of the west where most of the land is federally owned. host: wyoming mark, independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to weigh in on two specific species that i have observed in the last 20, 30 years of my life. the first being the grisley bear. i'm going to qualify myself. i'm a fifth generation rancher here in wyoming. i'm also a wilderness guide most of my life. the grisley bear, the magnificent creature that it is is one of the most first animals that was put on to the endangered species list. twice that animal has reached the number that was supposed to lift it from the list. twice they have raised that target number after it was met.

hunting in the yellow stone region has become a dangerous sport. it hasn't been hunted for so long it has absolutely no fear of anything in those woods. and in fact, when it hears a rifle it comes to it and you have to compete against the grisley after you have killed an elk or a deer. touf compete against the grisley to take it out of there before he comes and takes it from you. host: you made your point. but what's the question or i guess ultimate comment you want to make? caller: well, the wolf debacle is incredible. the wolf has spread all over the west. it's not staying in yellowstone. there's no fences there. and they're killing livestock all over the state of wyoming and there's nothing we can do to protect our livelyhood. host: huh would you respond? guest: there's a lot to respond

to. first on the grisley bear. the major issue right now for my advantage point looking at the science is that its main food source or one of its main food source is the white bark pine is an absolute decline because of climate change. and i understand your frustration about the different numbers and those numbers are driven by byeologies learning more about the species. so it's my sense in wyoming and throughout the region that the grisley bear management is working pretty well. wolfs are another matter. they were just delisted about a month ago in the budget battle done so in a way that we think is not a wise idea. they were not delisted in wyoming because wyoming does not have a state management plan as do montana and idaho. so again like with the grisley bear the wolf when you have management plans in place you can balance the interests and make it work. host: pennsylvania, republican

line bill. caller: i'm concerned that there's been a dramatic shift in the republican party to what i perceive as anti-environmental rhetoric and policy. the endangered species act was passed from support from both parties and there seems to be more widespread support for the inevirmente back in the 70s. and i think minor has either got a very shallow understanding of the issues or he's very deceptive because on one hand he says that the act hasn't done anything to protect species yet on the other hand he's saying it's too restrictive. these lawsuits are occurring because the government isn't protecting the species to keep them from going extinchingt. guest: yes. i think that the bipartisan and across the spectrum support for environmental legislation has broken up because the legislation -- and it's not

just the endangered species act. it's a lot of the pollution regulation laws, are out of control. they have gone so far beyond what they were envisioned to do and partly this is congress' fault in the way they dell gate too much authority to the regulatory agency. in this case the fish and wild live service on the land and marine -- what is it, bill? noaa? >> marine ma'amle protection act. guest: yes. i think the wolf delisting was done by congress. this is a good example of rural americans from the west, this was done by the lors from those states. they demanded it because they know what the wolf listing is doing to places like rural montana, rural idaho and i would say also my part of rural eastern oregon where the wolf

got across the snake river in just a few years. so this is not -- i think the debate over the endangered species act is primarily a debate between rural america which doesn't have nearly as many people as urban and suburban america. rural people know about the effects of the act. they know about the good things it does which aren't very many and the bad things it does which are a whole lot. they know about the threats to property rights, to the use of their land and their jobs and livelihood. urban americans can look at this and believe the propaganda from environmental groups that we've got to list this species to save it. we've got to stop oil production to save the care bue or the polar bear. most of this stuff is just made up. they get away with it because urban americans and suburban americans don't live on the ground, they don't know what it

takes to earn a living from growing stuff, for digging stuff up. and they are out of touch with the realities of i believe most rural americans. so i'm sorry, i just fundamentally disagree with you. i think that there are reasons why this is no longer a bipartisan agreement on how to proceed with our environmental regulations. host: let's hear from pennsylvania. democrat's line. caller: yes. thank you. i have a question for mr. snape but i have a comment first. i'm an environmental activist for over 40 years and proud of it. i knew at a young age that greedy corporations and right-wing politics would destroy our environment with no remorse if the choice was over a quick profit or natural resources. besides protecting endangered species much of our food sources depend upon the protection of our environment. bush gutteded the endangered species act about six, seven years ago.

he put the balance of power on the side of big business and big game hunters. he changed rules and regulations that were in place for over 30 years giving more power to then land developers, timber and oifment he did this by allowing federal agencies in his administration to determine on their own if development were endangering the species without having to consult with experts and buy ologists. i know president obama has reversed bush's policies on endangered species. could you give some examples? and as for you ebell? you lie. host: sounds like a script. were you reading that? guest: i'll answer that question. the endangered species act has been characterized as sort of cutting the baby in half. ken salazar at the department of interior has rejected some of the bush rules but has adopted other bush rules.

for instance, secretary salazar and i guess the white house support limiting protections for the polar bear as relates to climate change. we've already talked about the wolf example. on the positive ledger, the secretary of interior did reject the bush administration consultation rules which would have allowed agencies and corporations to get out of the normal consultation process under the endangered species act. so it really is a mixed record. one thing i want to say just factly which i think is hard to rebut is the longer the species is on the list, so if critical habitat is designated, a recovery plan is put in place, the data clearly shows that those species begin to progress and do better. in other words, there's been a lot of years and problems that put a species on the list. you need time to reverse those trends to put in protective measures. and when those occur, good things happen. host: 1374 are class fd endangered or on the list so far. isn't that a lot of management?

guest: it is a lot and i think it underscores the threats that speech eas in our world face. of those though, roughly three quarters of them are improving when they've g >> we will leave this. you can find online et c- span.org. we'll take it to the mississippi river flood where army is discouraging a a flood repair this is live coverage of the press conference here, on c- span. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> we have all been there one time. [laughter] >> sorry, we had not seen everything. >> that is fine.

>> good afternoon. today is a historic day, not only for the state of louisiana, but for our nation. today is the first day in the history of our nation that we have had three major floodways open. we opened up the first 0.3 weeks ago. we opened up last week, and we will open up today. the floodway operation has been precipitated by a number of billable amount of water coming down the mississippi river that is setting record levels, all the way from illinois through the red river landing here, in louisiana. because public safety is our top priority, we will operate the spillway this afternoon, and we will take approximately 10,000 cubic feet per second off the top of the mississippi river.

science, engineering, and technology are our backbone. they go into every decision that we may, keeping in mind that public safety is our top priority. we have worked very closely with the state of louisiana, the louisiana national guard, a local parish sheriff's, and local parish and city elected officials to get to this point. based on the predictions of the national weather service, of a crest of 1.62 6 million cubic feet per second, going past by congress, and when the levels are designed to handle 1.5 million cubic feet, we anticipate peak flow, we will have to operate this to get that off of the mississippi river. so, in a few short mission -- minutes, we will start an

opening of the structure with one day. we will do that with it -- for a few reasons. from a human, an environmental perspective, it gives folks plenty of time to evacuate. from an engineering perspective, we do not have too much water coming through too quickly, and from an environmental perspective, the wildlife can get to higher ground, and go to safety. it is important to remember that i have just had a discussion with the state of louisiana officials, and they have confirmed that everyone that is within the first 24 hours of sea and water has been evacuated from the floodway. so, we will operate this floodway in accordance with the manuals we have said in -- and in 30 minutes, will operate the floodgate and open up the first it appeared with that, i will take any questions. >> can you tell us specifically

the areas -- how they went door- to-door, or what they did? >> within the first 24 hours, we will see it down to the interstate 10. there are no permanently inhabited communities. there are other fishing outlets where people go for recreation. between the state police, the local parish, and overflights from the louisiana national guard and the coast guard we have confirmed the best we can that everybody has been evacuated. ipad numerous local meetings in churches, fire stations, and schoolhouses, to talk about the impact that operating the morganza spillway will have at some parishes had a mandatory evacuation is and some of them voluntary evacuation.

i think it is importance to remember that at this point in time, not only is public safety of our top priority, but family has to be the top priority as well. when you have an evacuation order for many elected official, or a local law enforcement official, you need to understand what is important to you, pat the important things, get your family, and heed their advice. in order to protect [unintelligible] >> what are your thoughts [unintelligible] >> in 1927, this area of the country experienced a horrific flawed. at -- slot, at some points, the mississippi river was up to 80

miles wide. because of that slide, congress authorized the country to embark upon the rivers and harbors act, where we, the corps of engineers, started to build levees, flood ways, flood walls, and other structures that would protect densely-populated communities. i think as we operate this floodway, it is important to remember that we are also fled fighting in other areas. what that means is we are issuing sand bags, baskets, pumps, and all sorts of flood- fighting materials in the low lying areas and the areas that may be impacted by the flood. i have sent my more -- mobile command forced to the city, is being staffed and backed in new orleans, to be able to flood- fight a backwater and flooding that may happen in those

committees. we operate this as a system. >> they are very emotional about it right now. [unintelligible] >> being in the military, there are a lot of things that we do, and it is important to remember that when a local official, or a superior official tells you you should heed their advice and evacuate, you need to do that. being in iraq and afghanistan myself, when somebody tells you it is not a good place to be, it is probably not a good place to be. he need to remember that as you go forward, and heat the advice. none of these decisions are easy. by the time they get to my level, there are no easy decisions left, and i did not take them lightly. we remember the public safety is our number one priority.

>> how long can citizens expect to see water in the spillway area? >> when we operate the morganza spillway today -- i will wait for the helicopter, just one minute. >> when we operate the morganza floodway today, we are at a trigger of over 1.5 million cubic feet per second. we are not supposed to see a crest until may 22 of 1.626. so, here we are on the 14th, with the crest not expected to come for eight more days. the national weather service tells us the crest will last at least 10 days, maybe longer, and then we have to wait it -- for

it to recede below the trigger. although the river gets what the river needs, and we will do our best to modulate that flow based on daily calculations, we could have this spillway open for upwards of three weeks. >> what is your best guess for when the farmers and ranchers will be back in business? >> well, when we operate this floodway today, eight days before the crest, then we keep that operated for 10 days after that, and then when we wait for the flood to recede, it will be a couple of weeks before folks will be able to come back into this area. >> could you tell us how confident you are? [unintelligible] >> the structure was last operated in 1973, however on a

daily basis, we pulled these gates in and out. we do maintenance, we paint them, we repair them, and we are comfortable with the with the structure will handle the water that will come through it this afternoon. the sequence that we open thesebays is calculated based on the design of the structure, and the design of the tail bay. will only open one today because it has scour protection behind it, so we will open a bay that we know will control the scour, and then come back tomorrow and open up another one or two. we will take calculations on the river, and as the river and needs it, will continue to open it. i have no concerns about the morganza spillway structures appeared >> time for one more question. >> [unintelligible]

>> a couple of more days? [unintelligible] >> the morganza is capable of 600,000 cubic feet per second. we expect a maximum we will see is 125 cubic feet per second, about 25% of its design capacity. he will not see that today. you will see bay on a slow opening, and one is approximately 10,000 cubic feet. will be operating at about 25% capacity, and we uncomfortable with the stability of the structure. >> folks, just so we get an idea what we are going to do, you can see where the train is. that is where they will operate the gate structure. we will stay here for about 15 minutes, then as i get clarence,

i will take you on top, and you can see the water coming over the gate. will get some additional footage there. thank you very much. >> and as the ap reports, the flooding we just heard about will directly affect 25,000 people, 11,000 structures, and 3000 square miles of land that are in the flight path of the morganza spillway. it looks like the crest, as colonel walsh -- or colonel fleming was saying, it is expected to hit around the 22nd of may, and it could last up to 10 days. it is the third largest watershed in the world. 41% of the u.s. drains into this

area. we will keep you posted as we get updates. you can also check c-span.org for some of the latest. >> on wednesday, former speaker of the house newt gingrich announced he is running for president. on "road to the white house" you can see his address to the georgia republican party convention tomorrow, at 6:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. eastern on c- span. >> what choices do they make to become terrorists, to kill hundreds and thousands of other people? >> in his new book, the investigative journalist looks at the architect of the 9/11 attacks turned >> this is a guy that really mattered, and understanding him is about understanding the war on a tear. now that bin laden is dead, this is what we have to fear. >> inside the mind of its harris, sunday night on c-span's

"q&a." you can also download a broadcast available online at c- span.org. >> next, testimony on sexual assault and violence against peace corps volunteers with remarks from the mother of a volunteer who was murdered in west africa. a portion of this testimony from a house foreign affairs committee hearing is an hour and 45 minutes. >> the committee will come to order. after recognizing ourselves for our opening statement, all recognize each member of the committee for one minute for their opening remarks.

we will then hear from our witnesses, and as to summarize your prepared statements in five minutes each, before we move to the question and answers with members under the 5 minute rule. without objection, the prepared statements for will be made part of the record, and members may have five days to insert statements and questions for the record, subject to the limitations and the rules. we apologize, as it looks like it is a sparsely-attended a hearing. we have the gop conference going on, the democratic caucus and about five different committees have been briefings and hearings as well. so, it will slowly build up. the chair now recognizes herself for seven minutes. march 1, 2011, march the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the peace corps. we initially planned to hold this meeting in march, but postponed it to accommodate the many anniversary celebrations. over two hundred thousand americans have served in the

peace corps. today, there are over 8000 peace corps volunteers serving in 77 countries. 300 of the volunteers are from the state of florida, and nine are from my own district. according to the peace corps facts and figures, 16% are female, and the average age of a peace corps volunteer is just 28 years old. for half of a century, peace corps volunteers have given their generous talents and skills to help the poor and developing countries thereby increase understanding between diverse cultures. for many, these volunteers serve as the only american faces to visit far away places and distant lands, and volunteers should be proud of their accomplishments as there are many to celebrate. in spite of these successes, his time to examine how, after 50 years, the peace corps is fairing. we must review how the peace corps as an institution has supported peace reaching peace

corps volunteers. despite critical reports by its own inspector general, peace corps safety and security failures have been a recurrent problem with tragic consequences for thousands of volunteers. some who seek to ignore those problems have asserted that volunteer service itself is inherently risky as an excuse for a lack of an effect -- a lack of effective safety measures. that is on its -- unacceptable. clearly, the conditions under which volunteers serve present unique challenges, with restricted access to reliable communication, limited or no police or medical services. volunteers may have only a basic understanding of local language and culture, and may be viewed as wealthy, becoming targets for criminal activity. according to an audit report by the peace corps inspector

general, "is compared to public colleges and universities, the peace corps would rank first for the most robberies, second for the most burglaries, and seventh for the most ever did assaults. further, in comparison to crime statistics reported by countries around the world, peace corps volunteers experienced higher rates of rape and burglary than any of the 86 countries that responded to the united nations crime statistics analysis." historically, the media has downplayed the dangers of serving in the peace corps, an under-reported and overlooked any criticism of the peace corps. recently, this immunization have started to subside. in 2003, "the dayton daily news" released a seven-part system -- series entitled casualty's apiece. the former editor stated "the extent of this safety problem has been disguised for decades,

partly because the assaults happened thousands of miles away, partly because peace corps has made little effort to publicize them, and partly because the agency deliberately kept people from finding out, while emphasizing the positive aspects of the peace corps." earlier this year, on january 14, the abc television news program "20/20" exposed their lawyers regarding the reporting of sexual assault and rape which urged many victims to come forward. according to dozens of disturbing affidavits received by our committee, the mishandling of rape and assault spans over four decades. several of the affidavits are from volunteers currently serving in the peace corps. the affidavits received by the committee were obtained by first response action, a support group of volunteers who were victims of rape or assault. the affidavits established five

basic themes -- volunteers are generally inadequately trained on sexual assault issues, often placed in dangerous situations, the peace corps's and country response often fails to meet survivor needs, upon returning to the united states survivors often receive high style, previn support of treatment, and lastly, institutional obstacles often prevents survivors from receiving long-term medical and mental health care. without objection, i would like to include these affidavits into the official record. at this time, i would like to include, without objection, a statement from returned volunteers who have been advocates for reform to address problems with the peace corps, including safety and security. further, without objection, i would like to include for the record a statement from the building bridges coalition, a consortium of 300 international

volunteer organizations regarding peace corps safety and security. finally, i will be handing mr. williams a letter from a constituent of mine who was serving in the peace corps, but was recently terminated. i am asking the peace corps to explain why it did not accommodate the medical concerns of this older volunteer. at our hearing today, three returned peace corps volunteers have made the difficult decision to testify about their traumatic experiences, and i commend them for their bravery and continued commitment to effect positive change in the peace corps. we'll also hear from the mother of the peace corps volunteer who did not return home. lois posy will testify about her courageous daughter, and how the peace corps failed kate when she reported the rape and abuse of students for whom she cared so briefly. -- dearly.

we will hear from the peace corps director, the inspector general -- our goal being to find ways to address these problems so future volunteers will not fear for their safety. we are joined today, thank you senator isaacson, whose constituent is lowest posy. the senator's presence is another indication of his commitment to securing justice for lois' daughter who was killed. i understand you will be traveling there next week to get further updates on the case. now, i am pleased to recognize my good friend, ranking member mr. berman, for his opening remarks. >> thank you, madam chairman, and thank you for calling this important hearing. i want to second your

puzye andon of thi the other witnesses that are coming forth to talk about something that cannot be that easy to talk about. we very much appreciate your courage in doing this. this year, as you noted, marks the 50th anniversary of the peace corps. since its founding, nearly 20,000 volunteers have served in 139 countries around the world, promoting community-based development, share in american values, and in reaching our own nation by bringing knowledge about other countries and cultures back to the united states. the distinguished list of peace corps alumni includes 15 members of congress, four current members, cabinet members and ambassadors and educators, and many others who are leaders in their field, making an impact

around the globe. no one has the more than the peace corps to extend the presence of america into nearly every part of the world. this has the strong support of republican and democratic administrations. but many of us were troubled by the recent segment on 20-20 that show the volunteer of a volunteer in a west african nation and the sexual assault of volunteers in a number of different countries. family was not told about the exclamation of the circumstances leading to her murder. by failing to provide the protection she had requested the peace corps lester open to an

attack that could have cost her. by providing an adequate training to have to respond to sexual assault, a volunteer community is left vulnerable to physical and psychological trauma. we have a profound obligation to do everything that is possible, but only to improve their safety and forget -- prevent these crimes from taking place, but to respond effectively in emergency situations. our job is to identify the flaws in the current system, and laying the groundwork for fixing them in a reasonable and bipartisan matter. -- manner. often they spend their lives in the most remote places in earth and they deserve nothing less.

the volunteers will always be the most precious asset. they are doing all that they can to protect them, minimizing the risks that the volunteers face in the field, providing the training and support that they need for emergency situations. is this using the best protocol to respond to sexual assault and protected the survivors. are they treating the families with compassion and respect? we're honored to have with us the mother of kate, the volunteer murdered in benin. we know that it takes enormous courage for you to tell your stories in this public setting. we all share the goal of making the peace corps of the next 50 years even better than the peace corps of the last 50. we must live up to the idealism and the generosity embodied in the volunteers.

let me just say that it takes a certain kind of person to join the peace corps. to leave behind all the comforts that they have known to enter the unknown, to serve others. these individuals live with those who are less fortunate than themselves. they see the poverty gripping billions and join them in the struggle to make a small business work, to gain access to clean water and combat debilitating diseases. it is not just the united states but the world that opposed the peace corps of debt of gratitude. i hope that we can learn today about how to improve the peace corps and work together in the bipartisan way that has marked our approach to the agency. we do this for the knowledge of those who have yet to come forward, to respect the legacy

of an agency that has done so good in the world. i look forward to the testimony of the witness. >> the members are recognized for one minute for opening statements if they choose to. congressman? >> in the interest of time, i would yield. >> thank you for holding this hearing. we have had 200 volunteers serving in 130 countries. i am happy for the volunteer service and the change you are making in the communities where you are serving. because of my strong support for the work of the peace corps, is so concerned about the history of safety and security that threatens volunteers all over the world. i look forward to hearing from

the inspector about the progress that was made regarding volunteer safety and i would like to thank all of the peace corps volunteers for being here to share their stories with us. i am also interested in learning the process when a volunteer is in danger. how do you remove them from a dangerous place? i am very curious about how you determine this. >> the peace corps -- those american angels are the best that we have in this country, representing everything good and right about this nation. you are here on the front row. thank you for your courage. when a crime is committed against the peace corps, this nation needs to be pro-active in making certain that you are taking care of -- too often in

what i have read, the peace corps volunteers become the accused. they have blamed you for the crimes committed against you. let me just say this. sexual assault is never the fault of the victim. our system must totally support the victim's abroad, take care of them and bring them back and give them justice because justice is what we do in this country. >> thank you. i thank you for holding the hearing and i thank the ranking members. i want to apologize in advance that i cannot say -- stay for the entire hearing. i want to thank you for being here to share these stories. we recognize that you have done extraordinary things but this is

a serious issue, and i am proud to be in my district of brown university, but we have a responsibility to make certain that everyone who makes the sacrifice to serve in the peace corps, we do everything possible to ensure their safety. the testimony that you have provided is very disturbing to me and all members of the committee to me. i thank you for your service to our country. >> i want to thank these brave women that are here before us, i want to thank them -- for what you have given an order to allow peace abroad. 60% of the people in the peace corps are women.

your mission of a better understanding of america, to help people understand the people in america and abroad, this is commendable. but when you go over there, you need to know that you are safe. and that something happens to you you will be taken care of. this is a blemish in the whole debate. i read that article many years ago, and could not believe that this was happening. now that i served in congress i can do something about this. >> mrs. wilson, of florida. >> thank you for holding this hearing. founded in 1961 by john f. kennedy, this is thought to promote world peace and friendship by sending american volunteers to serve at the grass-roots level in villages

and towns in all corners of the globe. working with ordinary people, the volunteers have contributed in a number of capacities, small business advisors, to improve the lives of those they serve in helping others to understand american culture. 200,000 volunteers have served in 139 countries and about 8655 volunteers -- in september 2005, the score response volunteers were sent to give relief during hurricane katrina, the first time they were used domestically. now they are serving in haiti. and as they serve the nation and our interests, we will hear terrible stories of sexual assault and abuse to volunteers in the peace corps.

it is important to learn what changes the peace corps has made in the wake of these charges. the sexual assault protocol -- is this sufficient and what can we do to keep the volunteers safe? i look forward to the testimony of the witnesses. and thank you. >> as a former state and federal prosecutor, i want to know why these good people were treated like they were and why these crimes were not prosecuted and taken to the fullest extent. i yield the full extent of my time. >> i think the witnesses for being here, and the peace corps has done an extraordinary work for the past 60 years. we have an obligation to make certain of their safety. it is not what america does --

says, it is what we do. this is the embodiment of the great generous spirit. i look forward to hearing and i yield back my time. >> thank you. to the witnesses, i want to thank you for coming forward, and having the fortitude to do this -- i cannot tell you -- i cannot believe that we put you in such danger. i have only been here three months by will dedicate my time the following up on this and if this ever happens again, we will follow through the way that we promised to. i look forward to your testimony. >> i want to express my welcome and my appreciation of the courage of those who joined us today. their stories are compelling and need to be addressed.

i also think that as the yankee -- as the rookie -- as the ranking member has said -- the presence of the peace corps overseas has been a marvelous symbol of democracy. we cannot protect all the volunteers. but the goal should be to do just that, to bring the risk factor to zero. we will never get to zero but we need to explore what we can do to make certain that this never happens to another volunteer. and that when it does, the fault -- the full list brought of resources, for bringing to justice the perpetrators are at work. making the peace corps even better should be the subject of this hearing, and not cloud the

50 proud years of this organization that has done so well. >> one of the frustrating aspects of my job is that i have a couple of hearings at the same time. they are both very important. i will be reading your full testimony and i thank you for coming forward. this is a sad commentary that the women who went overseas to serve our country, to serve others found out, when the most important time of need happen, that their government was not there . i hope that you will permit us to help a bad situation. thank you for calling this hearing. >> i would like to commend the

strength of the women before us for advocating on such an important and delicate issue. i appreciate you coming here to speak with members of congress, and i know that you have dealt with great hardships from your experiences. you should be commended for it for making certain that future peace corps volunteers did not have to deal with what you have. we are grateful for your service during your time in the program and after, and i look forward to try to understand what we can do to make certain that this situation does not continue. thank you. >> as i pointed out in my opening remarks, isaacson of georgia, who represents this family, we would be honored to

give you a moment to talk about her case, and anything that you can help us with. thank you for going back there last week. >> i did not know her in life. i attended her funeral service, i appreciate what she brought to georgia. i'll make certain that lois puzey and he rfamily -- her family that we will see that this never happens again. i am grateful for you for being here, and this is one of the most important things that we can do for america and the continuing integrity of the peace corps.

thank you. >> thank you. i would like to welcome the witnesses for the first panel. lois puzey is the mothe rof kate puzey, who was murdered in benin in 2009 while serving in the peace corps. she is here to make certain that no other family experiences tragedy like terrace. she married her husband in 1976, with two children, davey and kate. the department of defense school system -- he taught military dependents for 30 years, in germany. and in okinawa, japan. i would like to express our sincerest condolences for you and your family. next, we will hear from carol

clark. she served as a peace corps volunteer from 1984 until 1985. she received her master's degree in counseling and her pageant -- bachelor's degree from wake forest, university. she has served her community in many ways, including a child enforcement agent. i would like to thank you for your bravery in sharing your experiences and we greatly appreciate your testimony this morning. also appearing before the committee is jessica, a peace corps volunteer in bangladesh in 2004. she is a volunteer for nonprofit organization, seeking a change in the sexual assault policies of the peace corps, providing assistance to former members of the peace corps who were victims of drought -- of violent crimes.

next, we will hear from dr. kunan. he was of it -- she was a volunteer from 1993 and she is a clinical psychiatrist. she talks about generalized anxiety disorder and depression. we're honored to have you here today. and finally, we welcome jennifer march. she currently works for the rate abuse and national network. the largest anti sexual assault organization. they manage the online hot line to coordinate services and communications with over 1000 affiliate's sexual assault

service providers for the national sexual assault telephone hot line. thank you for taking the time to appear before us today. all of your statements have been made part of the record and we ask that you summarize your statements to 5 minutes. we will begin with you, thank you. and if you can put your microphone close to your mouth, this will help. thank you. >> i am lois puzey. my daughter was murdered march 12. i ask congress to enact legislation so other families will not have to endure a similar tragedy. she was a talented and upbeat person, with a gift for understanding others.

she was twice elected student body presidents. after college, she joined the peace corps. she loved her time there and built close ties to her village. she was considered a model volunteer. how did she become a victim of murder? from the beginning, she was warned about the man who was accused of killing her. he worked part-time at the peace corps. over time, her concerns escalated, and then, in february 2009, students and fellow teachers told her that he had committed rape on two of his students. despite the potential danger,

she tried to do the right thing. the village had no internet service and she was 12 hours away from the country office, she traveled to the nearest workstation, where she contacted the country director, asking for assistance. she emphasized the need for confidentiality because she understood that the brother worked in that same office as the peace corps director. tragically, the way that this was handled that ultimately led to her death. the director did not talk to her or take any kinds of precautions or any kinds of -- there were no precautions taken to remove her from the village. and even worse, the inspector general's report indicates that her confidentiality was broken,

resulting in them telling about the email. she was never alerted to the danger and within a few days she was murdered. it is believed by this man and another man, both of whom who were arrested along with the brother. she was the heart of the family. our lives have been shattered. the peace corps was very supportive during the funeral. they made great efforts to honor her. that being said, we were surprised by the experience we had with them after her death. the peace corps provided very little information and did not answer our questions about the inspector general and his investigation, and they broke off communication with us after four months, leaving us by ourselves to understand what happened to our daughter. six months after she died, her

belongings arrived. this was simply left in our driveway. we discovered that before her death, there was no whistle- blower protection or training procedure in place. these were first drafted a couple of weeks after she died. we created our own group and have since had improved relations with the peace corps thanks to the leadership of the director. however, the peace corps has never talked about the critical role they played in her death. we are painfully aware that if they had not investigated her murder, we would not have heard from them. our family deserves a formal apology from the peace corps for any actions that contributed to her death.

after the experience and hearing many other stories, we also believe that whistle-blower it and victims' rights legislation is urgently needed. in the past, the peace corps -- they believe that they have solved the problem. but because of the transit nature of the leadership, the efforts have eroded, time after time. we do not want another family to indoor the nightmare that we live daily. the recent news that those responsible could go free. legislation is the only way to make certain that reforms are consistent over time. we still support the peace corps and understand the instinct to protect us, but by not acknowledging and addressing the wit -- witnesses, this does not help the peace corps or the volunteers.

instead, please build a stronger and safer the score by passing legislation. in the future, there will be another volunteer like my daughter, who wanted to do the right thing. honor her sacrifice by doing the right thing now, so that future volunteers may serve safely. >> thank you very much. and we will do so. thank you. can you push the middle button and hold this very closely? >> thank you. my name is carol clark. i am a schoolteacher and a former peace corps volunteer, and a survivor of rate. i thought i was alone in my

experience. but i learned that women were still living through what i thought had been remedied decades ago. in august 1984, three months after i graduated from college, i flew to nepal. the peace corps staff did not talk about protecting ourselves from sexual harassment or assault. i never expected that the own staff members are really the most protection from. shortly after i arrived, the supervisor told female volunteers he expected sex in return for providing us with our living items.

the program director was allowed to continue supervising us. three months later, the program director raped me. devastated, i reported this to the medical officer. instead of helping me, he said he was disgusted with the volunteers. and anything that happened to us was our own fault. he has not offered counseling. the continued to supervise the volunteers. i was forced to confront the rapist different of the peace corps medical director. to convince them -- this was very traumatic. they took no action against my

assailant, even after the forced confrontation. in fact, after a return to service, he arrived unannounced at my village. it was clear he told his friends that they could violate me without fearing repercussions from the peace corps. he was right. a nepali official who i had worked with told me that i liked to have fun and demanded sex. when i refused, he grabbed my neck and choked me. he forced me -- he forced me to put a used, torn condom on him and began raping me. for 15 hours, he raped and beat me. i prayed to live for a long time, then prayed to die.

i took my bike, rode, ran, and waited my namway to -- then at katmandu i reported the rape. they did not document the crime. my attacker was not brought to justice. the peace corps instructed me to tell others iwai was leaving because of dysentery. the man who raped me was assigned to collect and mail my belongings. so many nepali volunteers had been assaulted, the ycreated their own -- they created their own safety survey.

we sought change from the peace corps. the regional director said our stories had made a difference. we were creating future volunteers who would be better treated. i believe the peace corps wanted to change then. but the women sitting next to me showed tha timprovement was lacking. the volunteers reported 16,000 incidents of sexual assault. the three most recent years have seen the greatest number of assaults. director williams is a good man. but the peace corps has had 90 years to fix things on their

own. the women cannot wait decades more for the peace corps to organically mature. they need the immediate and permanent and meaningful change that comes through legislative accountability. help us build a better and stronger the score so that we can help the peace corps build a better world. >> chairman -- >> can you hold this closer? thank you. committee members, my name is jessica. the son of former peace corps volunteer and a survivor of rape.

thank you. all of you have a working to make the peace corps better and stronger and safer for the volunteers. in 2004 i was 23 years old. fresh out of college i joined the peace corps, an organization i admired. we were told that we may face issues with the posting. but this did not help us with the reality we would face. a group of six local men began to follow me home. and eventually they surrounded me, not me to the ground and began touching and kissing me. i was terrified and helpless. eventually they simply left. when i reported this, they said that the peace -- the peace corps said that these kinds of

things just happen. we reported this to the staff as well but most of the calls went unanswered. a male volunteer offer to teach us self-defense but the peace corps rejected this offer. we ask for pepper spray or mace, but the requests were denied. we moved to a safer place, and again, the peace corps refused. soon, reporting these incidents became dangerous. when they learned of the reports the became furious. they said that they would hurt me if i was not quiet. with each report, the men grew angrier, and the peace corps did nothing. and then, on december 6, 2004, shortly after 5:00 p.m., the men dragged me into an abandoned courtyard and the violence

began. they started by raping me, and forced other objects inside of my body. and when they were done violating me, they intensified the physical assault. they yelled insults and threatens to kill me. i began to think it would never stop and i begged them for the death that they promised. they just laughed. and after a lifetime by ordeal -- by ordeal was over, or so i thought. i went to the capital to report this but the peace corps medical officer did not examine me or collect any evidence. instead, she took away my cellular phone, and this prevented me from morning other volunteers about what had happened. in fact, she told me that if i did talk the other volunteers i should tell them that i was getting my wisdom teeth taken out.

before leaving bangladesh, i was forced to go back a loan to my village, where the rapist's remain, the gather my belongings and spend the night their one last time. then, still reeling from this, i was put on an airplane alone to washington d.c.. the peace corps did not send me home or give me the option. and so, i stayed in washington for the next 45 days. when i arrived in washington late at night, there was no one there to meet me at the airport and i was forced to find my way through this large an unfamiliar city on my own. the peace corps first sent me to a male gynecologist. he was insensitive and this was excruciating. they also required me to meet with the cat -- meet with a counselor to talk about what i had done wrong for this to

happen. as examples, she suggested that i had been out after 5:00 p.m., and i did not fight back. rather than feeling safe and supported, i felt belittled and blamed. after a month and a half in washington, i was taken on to workers compensation. there, i was forced to describe my injuries, to get the support i needed to recover. this can take months or years to receive reimbursement. this must be changed so that survivors did not have to go from agency to agency, begging for the help that they need to recover. i wish what had happened to me have made a difference for the other volunteers in bangladesh. but shortly after i left, the

country director told the female volunteers that i was raped, that this was my fault, and this was always the fault of the woman. years later, i learned three other women in my volunteer group were sexually assaulted, partly because of what the country directors said that day, they did not report this. the peace corps must change. women must be better protected from this treatment that too often follows. by angela said that history, despite the pain, cannot be unlived, but faced with courage, need not be lived again. i am hopeful that the hearing today will precipitate the much needed change in the peace corps sexual assault policy and that my nightmare need not be lived again. thank you again for the opportunity to testify today and for bringing me -- for bringing these very important issues to

light. >> thank you for your testimony. doctor? committee members, i am and associate professor at columbia university. >> can you put the microphone closer to your mouth so that we can hear you better? >> i am and associate director at columbia university. i teach about psychological trauma and my understanding for the topic are the results -- results of my education and my own experience with the peace corps. i joined the peace corps in 1991 and it was clear that my country was dangerous. also unclear was the peace corps staff and adequacy in dealing with the effect of danger on volunteers. one week during the training, several men broke into the area and attacked two male volunteers

and attacked a female volunteer. i told the director i felt unsafe but i was told i was making too much of what had happened. they instructed us not to tell our families about the attack. the instructions to come down and keep quiet or the only training that we received on how to respond to an assault. despite the fact that serious crimes took place on the training compound, we did not receive any training on how to minimize the risk of attack, or how to deal with it when they occurred. on december 22, it 1991, i learned about the dangers of sexual assault. a nigerian man toward off my shorts and underwear and he raped me. the doctor who worked for the peace corps was kind of was not trained to perform the exam. no one gave me the opportunity to make a formal statements were

to meet with law enforcement. the doctor reported this to the director, but he did not visit me, he did not call me, and i was soon put on an international flight to washington d.c.. upon arriving at the peace corps headquarters, i was greeted with a cold reception, first sent to a male gynecologist. the pelvic exam was very painful, and he told me to not be hysterical and to calm down. i was then sent to meet with an investigator who said, i am is so sick of you going over there, drinking and dancing and flirting, and if someone comes on to you, you say that you have been raped. and my peace corps director said, it is your word against his and you said you wanted to have sex and we believe them. as an expert in the field of psychological trauma, i know how dangerous an adequate response can be. the fear of being blamed as i

was by the peace corps is exactly why so many survivors did not report this. their own data suggests that twice as many assaults occur as are reported. over a decade of research has shown the social support a survivor receives highly influences the risk that the victim well suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder. they are left in a quagmire of self plan for the rest of their life. i have examined the sexual assault protocol, and although they have a vault since my time of service, they are dangerously inadequate. several other experts have reviewed the sexual assault guidelines as i have, and have written letters to the committee expressing concerns about the policies and the recommendations for change, and i am including this for the record as part of

my testimony. the letters from other experts make clear that this is time for a systemic and permanent solution to address better training for volunteers and the in country staff, and the of corporate accountability for staff in the united states. there are several things at the peace corps could do right away to increase and improve the care that they have provided to their volunteers. this is to discontinue the use of the current sexual assault training video, called, serving safely, showing the survivors apologizing. the victims' advocates in every region. i am happy there is a victim's advocate in washington, but the care for the postal service needs, or at least 100 sexual assaults are each year, is too much of a burden for one person to carry. provide travel companions for the assault survivors, returning home from the u.s..

eliminate the harmful and minimizing distinctions used in the material of the peace corps to distinguish major sexual assault from minor sexual assault. set up a task force with the department of labor to determine how to help the survivors get timely benefits without being forced. experienced the trauma. enlist the help of outside experts with authority to make certain that the policies continue to reflect the best practices. give survivors a choice of treatment providers. and fire the staff and treatment providers who blame the victims. director williams is well intentioned but we cannot ignore history. the peace corps promised time and time again to fix these problems and they have not. we need congress. thank you for the chance to speak to you about my experience and my hope -- help for a

stronger peace corps. >> thank you, mrs. marsh? >> good morning. thank you for inviting me to speak today. before i began, i would like to commend the women who have spoken before me for their courage and their eloquence. my name is jennifer march, i am the net -- national sexual assaults director, the largest anti-sexual assault organization. we are recognized by the justice department as a leader in the field of sexual assault services and have provided thousands of hours of training and technical assistance to sexual assault service providers across the country. in addition, we have been selected to be a member of the justice department and their national victims' standards

consortium, and have assisted more than 1.5 billion people affected by sexual violence to the sexual assault hot line. i will begin by outlining several of the best practices used in serving the victims of sexual violence. we have a long history of promoting peace around the world and we believe that if applied correctly, these practices can strengthen the peace corps organization and the response to victims. i will follow this with a description of how we are currently working with the peace corps and conclude with my recommendations. the following best practices are drawn from the department of justice. accessibility of quality services following an assault is paramount, and the value of the services is lost if the victims did not know of their existence. the peace corps volunteers need to receive information describing the services that are

available to them, and this training should also include a comprehensive overview of issues surrounding sexual violence and risk reduction strategies. we are familiar with a bystander training and we believe that this is an effective model for risk reduction. also, all staff members who may be first responders should receive a minimum of 40 hours of training and complete annual refresher courses. training should focus on the special needs of sexual violence victims and the reinforced by the administrative policy and procedures. a sexual assault response to a model is the most effective approach when responding to sexual assault victims. this is most often comprised of the victim advocate, law enforcement and a forensic medical examiner. this approach is a streamlined response, and it provides a

singular point of contact, allow the victim to focus on recovery. without a guarantee of confidentiality, the victims may not seek help, for fear that the experience may be scrutinized. control over personal information is not only a matter of privacy, this is a matter of personal pride. with the national sexual assault hauling, we have seen that with confidential services, victims can report their concerns and will be able to seek long-term support and report the crime. there is to be a clear procedure for people who thought that there were treated poorly by the staff or did not receive an adequate response. on march 23, 2011, rain and the peace corps side a memorandum of

understanding to share educational resources and training tools on sexual assault risk reduction and response. we have been asked to review training contents and as the peace corps is still in the process of improving the response to the victims of sexual assault, we believe that they are moving to implement some of these best practices. as the committee in forms -- that is charged with the general oversight, we believe that they should do the following. enacting legislation to make certain that they adopt the best practices with it in response, to include a mechanism for formalized planning, to address high staff turnover due to mandated appointment limits. we ask that you expand the process already made with the victim advocate, and the addition of mobile but the advocates. the staff would be able to travel to the location of a volunteer who has been a salted

and provide help on the ground, completing the model. the staffers should be experiencing the navigating cultural system, and victims will benefit from having advocate that can negotiate the unique challenges of being victimized abroad. we believe the peace corps is making positive steps to improve their response to the victims of sexual assault, and implementing these recommendations will make certain that they have access to the quality services that they need and that they deserve. >> and thank you very much to all of you for your brave testimony. thank you for appearing before the committee today. your testimony is going to make a big difference. mrs. puzey, i wished offer you my most sincere condolences over the loss of your daughter, and your testimony will change the way that business is being done in the peace corps.

and you are very brave to come before us and i am sorry that you only have five minutes to describe this dreadful, like changing experience and how this has been for your family. the criminal case that is about to begin in your daughter's case -- i do not know if this is true that not what your testimony to have any negative influence on that. perhaps you explain to us what you think, what you think needs to change in the peace corps that would prevent this terrible tragedy to occur again. >> as i have said in my testimony, i believe that this is important, to have the protections in place, and also -- not just train them, of course, for the volunteers so they know the avenue and they know what to report. and this is very important that the staff knows what to do.

the people in these positions like the country director, they know how to handle a situation when it comes to them. this is very important. and of course on the other side, to be sensitive to the families of victims -- the victims' families, we see that the peace corps -- when everything is going right, this is one of the best ideas of the country. but when things go wrong, the response component needs to be improved. >> thank you very much. i wanted to ask you about blaming the victims, and how this would impact the recovery of the victims of sexual assault or any kind of crime is committed against them. one theme in the testimony that we have heard, is that the peace corps was not equipped to handle the complaints, they did not act

on this, the accusations were not taken seriously, and more than anything, it was blaming the victim that was in play here. can you tell us how this impacted the recovery of the victims of sexual assault? >> thank you, chairman. the social support for the reaction that a survivor receives in the aftermath of an attack, within hours, 24 hours, this is the key factor in determining whether he or she will have long-term mental health consequences, and the reason is because the victim is incredibly vulnerable, in fight or flight mode and she is played over in her head why this has happened to her. by nature, when something like this happens, we question ourselves and our behavior.

we meet a provider, who does not ask us questions about how to stay safe, what do you need, here are some choices about what you would like to do, blaming the victim -- this just adds to the questioning of your own behavior and you end up internalizing the blame. psychologically, this can keep you from talking to anyone else about this, it can keep you from seeking the help that you need because you are worried that other people will respond the same way. and in the long term this could negatively affect your mental health, with posttraumatic stress disorder. blaming the victim after an attack increases the risk of posttraumatic stress disorder, more than the characteristics of the assault, if they were physically injured or if there was penetration or not. this is the key factor in whether the victim will recover

or not. >> thank you very much. i wanted to allow you to comment on the safety and security information that was included in your handbook, and the welcome materials. did you find this to be useful? >> in my hand but, there was just a very general fact sheet, i would say, and there was no clear cut -- to call when something happened, there were no steps in place. who do you call and where do you need to go, how do you find a safe place. how was the confidentiality going to be helped. buried deep within the packet was a number for the office in washington, and as a survivor,

you have been sexually assaulted. you have to go through your handbook to find a number to call in washington -- this is ludicrous. many volunteers don't have cell phones -- were not have electrical capability to make this kind of phone call. i feel that this was very inadequate. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. i just wanted to know that i think that your testimony today -- and the other things that you have done will work to empower the other victims and also, i think that they have helped to motivate the peace corps to make certain that people who have -- people who will suffer if your

experience get the assistance that they are entitled to. mrs. puzey, i think the world will miss your daughter and her sense of community and her commitment to public service. we all lose was someone with that energy is taken from us. mrs. marsh, you spoke about this in your testimony. the king take a moment to talk about the evaluation that you have about with the peace corps is starting to put in place, once again, and what they need to do, to focus on this issue of, whether one person based in washington with this responsibility is enough, or if we need it -- you've talked about the notion of roaming

personnel, who can go there to make sure that the country director, the program director and the people involved, the medical officers are operating correctly. >> in terms of the work that we have done, with the peace corps so far, i was invited to take part in the bystander training, and i found that this was a very positive experience. i feel like having a victim advocate is a step in the right direction. but as mentioned by the women before me, i think that having someone on the ground in person is crucial, and someone who does not have collateral duties. cross training, a medical officer involved to be a victim advocate or security advocates

-- security officers could be an advocate. i think that this needs to be solely responsible for the entire approach to case management, and victims' services. having a victim advocate here who will oversee -- this in the field, whether they are mobilized, when this takes place or to travel to accompany the victim, or if they are based in the region, i believe that these are the different options to explore. this compares to the effort -- an effective sexual assault response. >> i would like to ask any of the witnesses, if congress, based on a we have heard today, and the other information about this, decide to embark on a legislative implementation and

mandate for the best practices that she spoke about, to become the enforced policy of the peace corps, to institutionalize this, a number of you have mentioned this like us, directors come and go. this creates an institutional bases for these best practices. and the funding, what needs to be done here. do you think that that can significantly reduce the situations that you found yourself in, should we just end the program? >> i would like to speak to that and i am serve the other witnesses would as well. i want to say that i love the peace corps and support the peace corps, and i would be devastated if my testimony was used to stop these core funding

were cut funding or eliminate the peace corps. we need legislation to submit the changes -- cement the changes recommended so that when directors come and go, times change, priorities change, the victims -- crime is prevented and victims are treated adequately so they have the best chance of recovery. in my case, the changes proposed, if they were in place and legislative when my assault occurred, my recovery would have been faster and much better. everything they recommended would have changed my experience with peace corps d.c. the implementation of the regional victim advocates would

have changed our experiences. i know budget priorities are tied. the cost of doing nothing is higher. you can see that in the witnesses here today. >> anyone else? >> i would be heartbroken for my testimony to be used to destroy an institution that i love. i still believe in the ideals of the peace corps. we are there to show the rest of the world the best part of the united states. peace corps is there to make changes in the world for better, to provide education, to provide ways for people to learn to have a decent living and income that will promote unities around the world to become more economically self-sufficient.

i do not have the goal of destroying the peace corps. michael is to make the peace corps better -- my goal is to make the peace corps better, to provide better responses. we cannot stop of sexual assaults and pilots from occurring. the key is to provide strong, effective, best practices when problems do occur. -- we cannot stop sexual assaults and violence from occurring. >> thank you for holding this hearing. i appreciate your being here today. i appreciate your courage. also, miss clark, i appreciate your service to the peace corps. the answer is to make it better and safer for americans angels

-- america's angels abroad. kate was the same way. ms. puzey, what is it you want to hear directly from the peace corps director? >> director williams did give us an apology. the apology we have heard from the peace corps is that if there's anything we felt it was not compassionate, they are very sorry. i have never doubted the compassion of director williams or the present staff. what we would really like to hear is an apology and to acknowledge any actions on the part of the peace corps that made them responsible for my daughter's death. >> i hope you get an apology from the peace corps. >> thank you.

stay tuned. >> dr. koenen, let me ask you something about victims of sexual assault. i think it is awful that sexual assaults occur. 122 have been in the peace corps in 2009 overseas. this is a unique crime in my opinion, based on my experience on the bench in texas, because of the way it affects the emotional stability or inner spirit of a crime victim. would you agree or not? would you elaborate on the fact that victims who have been sexually assaulted want the peace corps and us to give them validation for what happened to them, to support their side, as

opposed to immediately distancing them from us and making them fall, making them feel it is their fault crime was committed against them? is that part of what we need to do as a society and the peace corps to support their validation of what they say? >> absolutely. victims of sexual assault need to know from their initial contact that the peace corps is on their side, that they are not a criminal. in all of our cases, we have felt we were the criminal. rape is always the responsibility of the perpetrator. the peace corps needs to change the culture so victims know that the peace corps is on their side. that is crucial for the recovery

of the victim. it is essential. it is a unique crime in that way. >> do you think the peace corps based on the testimony in things you are aware of, does it need a change in mind set? does it need to have a different mind set about when crime is committed against a peace corps volunteer customer rather than say it not to say anything because it might hurt the diplomatic relationship and these other excuses, do we need a mind-set change in the peace corps? >> the peace corps needs a change in mind set and culture from victim blaming to supporting victims. we're all fond of talking about the peace corps family. we need to out like a functional family. if one of us is hurt, the family

comes to our support rather than treating us like criminals. >> can we fix the problem and change policy in the peace corps. and then do we need legislation? >> i do believe we need legislation. that is because of the appointment turnover. you have heard about programs or policies that may have been done previously but it was unclear who was responsible for them. the people that were responsible tfor the may have left. legislation is the best way to guarantee the best practices stay permanent and are institutionalized through all layers of the peace corps. along with that notion is the training of first responders, country director, and anyone in

the peace corps who may come into contact. the training should be blared throughout the peace corps -- should be laird -- layered throughout the peace corps. >> i would like to introduce three other statements from peace corps volunteers that have come to my attention. they want to keep their names anonymous. i would like to submit their stories for the record. >> without objection. >> i yield back my time. >> miss wilson from florida. >> i have a map in front of me that outlines where these rates have occurred. rape is tantamount to death. it is the killing of the spirit

and soul of women. i am wondering about the local governments. is there any sort of compact or contract signed between local governments and the officials? especially those highlighted in red and purple where most of the grapes have occurred region where most of the rapes -- where most of the rapes occurred. most of them are not far from the united states. haiti and jamaica are in red. if these places are this dangerous, what of local law enforcement and elected officials in those countries responsible for law and order in their respective provinces or

countries? is there ever any communication with these people pressing charges just as if these people were murdered? >> i would like to -- clarify that i am not representing peace corps. i am representing rainn. i will refer that question to director williams. i agree with you that rape and sexual assault is a horrible crime. according to the fbi, it ranks only to homicide in terms of trauma. >> i would like to defer to director williams to talk about the specific arrangements in the countries. what congress can do and where we can make change is with legislation that will change the peace corps response to rape. there are three things that can

be done now. they can stop the video they are showing, "serving safely." they can stop the major and minor distinction of sexual assault. that is victim blaming. i would like to hear the definition from them of minor sexual assault. they can provide care and travel companions for survivors. those are immediate things that can be done now. dealing with local law enforcement is important but a more complex and long term process. >> a follow-up question. is there ever any contact battle with -- you are talking about intervention after it has happened. i am trying to ask a question about prevention. how do we threaten these countries to say we are not

sending women to be raped? if this does not stop, we will pull all of our peace corps volunteers out. is there any thought of threats or anything leveled at these countries? i am talking about the purple and red. it is unconscionable that this many people are being victimized in these countries. is there any warning that this is a dangerous place for peace corps volunteers who are women? that is what i am asking. prevention. i understand you are saying about intervention and after the rapes occur. how do we help prevent some of this? i am at a loss.

in terms of prevention, rainn has talked about training with volunteers. the video i talked about pulling is part of their prevention training. i think the best prevention is that the peace corps can start treating victims of sexual assault with respect and set an example for people in these countries of how the u.s. expects its volunteers to be treated. the peace corps mistreating its own victims, how can we demand people in these countries treat us any better? >> thank you very much. miss smith -- schmidt from ohio.

>> this is astounding. i hope the peace corps takes note of it. i have never been so incensed and enraged at an agency. my rage began before your testimony when i had a constituent a few years ago that needed to come home to the day's early for her sister's wedding. her father had died. the inflexibility of the peace corps would not allow her to come home. she quit the court. at that time, i thought they needed to get a grip. the need to get a major group and not a minor. . my message is that every woman has a right to say no. this is not an american right. this is a human right. when you go overseas, if you are not just presenting american rights and values. you are presenting human rights and values. it is incumbent upon the peace corps to understand its own mission. i applaud you for wanting the peace corps to continue while

you were so violently attacked and no one came to your aid. dr. koenen, i applaud what you are saying about changing the video. it needs to be done today. there is no difference between major and minor assault. when it does happen and you have to go back home 12 or 15 hours overseas, if you need a companion with you right there. those are immediate fixes. i want to work with you for legislation to put the peace corps on the right track to protect you. before i finish, i want to ask you what you want for us -- from us today, ms. puzey. >> whistle-blower rights, protection rights, and that the

rights. >> i think we can work on that. with that, i yield back my time. but mr. connolly of virginia. >> think you. thinking to all of you for your courage -- thank you to all of you for your courage in testimony here today. ms. puzey, our hearts go out to you and your family. i hope this hearing give you some comfort that your daughter's memory is not lost. working together, we can try to make the peace corps stronger and more compassionate in her memory. i have worked with the peace corps for a long time here on the hill. i have travelled to many peace corps missions abroad and met with many volunteers. your stories are another side to the peace corps that obviously

troubles all of us. we cannot make everybody 100% safe everywhere. it is not that kind of world. frankly, the work of the peace corps puts people in much riskier situations. i have a daughter at a university here in america. sadly, what you described sometimes occurs on u.s. campuses as well. but there is counseling. there are training and awareness programs. there are prevention programs. what troubles me the most about your testimony was that there was lacking in standards of compassion. when someone signs up as a volunteer in the family supports the effort, understanding the risks, and god forbid something goes wrong. it seems to me that we dropped

everything as a peace corps family, as you said, and we respond. we take care of the family. we do everything in our power to make sure the system of justice in the host country is working on behalf of a volunteer -- de volunteer and the family. everybody in the chain of command is clued in, genuinely compassionate and sensitive, and working on your behalf. that is the standard we have to reach. we can legislate. it sounds today that we need to. at the end of the day come inculcating that passion, understanding -- at the end of today, inculcating the passion and understanding, re- is never the victim's fault. -- rape is never the victim's

fault. the proper perspective has to be adopted always. zero tolerance for any variation from the standard. i know we're going to hear later from director williams about reforms and measures he has put in place. i have heard the appreciation of ms. puzey for those efforts. i know we have to go further. i want you to know that on a bipartisan basis, we continue to support the peace corps, as to each and everyone of you. were also going to make sure do everything we can to make sure we are cognizant of the risks and dangers. the goal is to try to get to zero risk. we know that is an elusive goal. that should be what we're always pushing ourselves toward. should something happen, the full force of compassion and

resources of the peace corps and the united states government are behind you and your families. thank you for your testimony today. i yield back. >> ms. buerkle. >> i would like to thank all the panelists for coming here today and sharing your testimony. as a mother of four and granddaughter of -- grandmother of three granddaughters, it is appalling to me and breaks my heart to hear what you have gone through. mrs. puzey, my deepest condolences on the loss of your daughter as well. i would like to join with my colleagues. it will be a very partisan effort to get the legislation in place to do what we need to do to make our volunteers say and change what is happening within the peace corps. i spent over 14 years with pro

bono advocacy and domestic violence. i have a keen awareness that rape is never the victim's fault. it cannot be that mentality and mindset. that must never be accepted. i will work hard with my colleagues to get the legislation passed. i would like to ask dr. koenen, with regards to healing and recovery, is that possible? what can we do to help the victims suffering? >> healing is absolutely possible, as is recovering. i think you can see that from the testimonies of the people here and able to testify as part of our recovery.

in terms of what we can do, putting things in place to support victims recovery starts before an assault even occurs. stop blaming, training materials, change the mentality of the peace corps to one that supports victims instead of blaming victims, and the distinction between major and minor assaults -- that is a victim blaming. set protocols in place in terms of confidentiality. people will know that confidentiality will be respected and we have control over who our stories are told to. provide a support person to travel back. provide adequate support when the victim's back in the country. victims advocates who coordinate services across these complex systems. all those things can aid in recovery. the initial response of peace corps staff is key in that.

i want to assure anyone who has experienced sexual assault is that recovery is 100% possible. >> i understand your dedication to the peace corps and desire not to see it disrupted. as my colleague said, this has to stop. this legislation and our efforts need to start today so that we can make the changes required to prevent any more harm from being done. thank you all very much for your courage in being here today. we look forward to working with you. i yield my time. >> thank you. mr. payne. >> thank you all for coming. i would like to commend each of you. i am a strong supporter of the peace corps. i visited many sites.

i have been to graduation ceremonies when a new class has their graduation. there is so much pride. in some countries, they make outfits that reflects that particular country. i have been a tremendous supporter of the peace corps and the amount of work you have done. i commend all of you. i hear talk about getting the legislation going. the problem has been the u.s. congress, senate, and house. this is not the first time we have had these kind of hearings. back in 2001, "the date news" had a 20-month investigation of the peace corps. yton news" addedon

20-month investigation of the peace corps. we were going to deal with in 2001. in 2004, senator dodd had legislation that was going to go to correct some of these. it passed the house but died in the senate. 2007, we have the same thing. when we look at the problems in the peace corps, there may have been some that wanted to see the program ended. there may have been a hidden agenda because of tough times at home and we cannot afford to spend a penny a broad philosophy -- the kind of thing i have heard for newcomers. i commend you all for your support of the peace corps. to be in the peace corps, you have to be unique in the first place. and am not surprised at how you feel about it. my own point is that if we're really going to do something, then the congress passed to a

ct. the agency can do things on its own, but if it is backed by law and signed by the president, you might see something happen. the peace corps has not gonna do. it has not done a good job in some instances. i hope there will be the will on the part of people saying they are indignant that this is happening. for the last 11 years, i have heard what we ought to do. we have not had one single piece of legislation. i do not have any questions. i do not know if any of you might comment. >> there were whistle-blower protections in the god bill. if you had passed it, there's a possibility might daughter would

be alive. -- there were whistle-blower protections in the dodd bill. if you had passed it, there's a possibility that my daughter would be alive today. >> i really appreciate that. i will yield back. >> mr. smith. >> thank you for calling this important hearing and for the bravery of the women who have testified here today. hopefully, each of your trauma'' should have been the game changers. if this hearing is not, i do not know what else could be. the legislation is important. our distinguished gentle lady from florida will take the lead on this. we know she will. we will all do our parts. i hope the peace corps itself will realize that deploying vulnerable young women and men to places where there is

enhanced risk -- state department personnel are deployed and have access to the compound. they are more likely to be in a protected state. they get hazardous pay if they are in a warm vulnerable -- anymore global deployment area. the chart shows that there are areas of the world that are much more dangerous to women when deployed there. that ought to be a serious factor to find some other locale where these women could be deployed. the testimonies are chilling. i know every member of this committee and those who follow the transcript and are watching on c-span will be moved. we need a zero tolerance policy. echoes throughout the entire process.

training, the assessment of risks. -- we need is zero tolerance policy throughout the entire process. the ig will be testifying shortly. she points out that for fiscal year 2004, the office of the inspector general visited 66 posts, made many recommendations, 85% of the posts were visited, it 25 out of 66 were found to be deficient in some aspect of their site development. she points out that increases the risk that the safety net will be compromised if a threat arises. the conclusion of the oig is

that the agency has made substantial progress in recent years in developing a comprehensive safety and security program. do you agree with that? on the issue of harassment, usually an act of sexual assault is preceded by either verbal or some other harassing behavior that is clearly the harbinger of what may be headed that individuals way. did the peace corps personnel take seriously your concerns about the harassment? we know in related issues of sex trafficking and other violence against women, where there is a culture of impunity, it works all women.thly for when it comes to women standing

and going out as angels to the world, it seems we need to have zero tolerance with regards to that risk. >> i can speak to the second part. i was placed at a site with two other female volunteers. we all received extensive verbal and physical harassment and sexual harassment from the first day. we kept reporting incidents. we were reporting them to the medical officer and safety and security officer. to toughen same reply o up and deal with it. what happened to me, i was

targeted by this group of six men. i believe my altman gang rape by them and near death could have been reading my ultimate gang rape by them and near death could have been prevented. my side was unsafe if anyone had come to look at all of the reports being filed and taken them seriously. we specifically said we are not safe. we do not feel safe. we are going to be harmed. we were not taken out of this dangerous site. that is a case of how what is deemed minor harassment or , where it can lead. it can lead to much greater

crimes. there definitely has to be more accountability and response for all reports submitted. they need to be followed through on. every single report needs to be followed through on. they need to follow through to ensure the safety of a volunteer. >> thank-you to the witnesses for testifying here today regarding some horrific circumstances. mrs. puzey, my condolences to your family. thank you for the desire to give to our country, other countries, and mankind. i cannot imagine a more altruistic sentiment than the ones with which you entered your service in the peace corps.

the peace corps has been an integral part of assistance around the world that we provide to other countries. at the same time, i hope the entire world is listening, and particularly those who can make a difference with respect your circumstances. i hope they're listening as well. it is quite concerned to many of us that you all have mentioned many instances where the agency has tried its feet in implementing systematic reforms with respect to safety. that is troubling. -- where the agency has dragged its feet in implementing systematic reforms with respect to safety. that is troubling. there should be the highest levels of accountability when it comes to safety of volunteers.

we need to make sure the plan is brought forward. if it has not been coming in needs to be, particularly after today's hearing. i believe i am the last questioner on the panel. i am very interested in moving forward and hearing from the agency with respect to what you all have been talking about. i am not going to aske any questions. i will give you all my last minutes. i have about three. maybe each of you could take 30 or 45 seconds to let us know your final thoughts. what do we need to do? what do you want to see done? >> i will go ahead and start. one thing -- >> a little closer. >> one thing that definitely needs to be considered in

legislation and has not been addressed by the peace corps in their latest movements for work is the health care services and health care providers in- country and within the united states. that is key. they are the first responders. it is not only making sure that there are trained people who can work with the survivors, but after service, it is difficult to navigate the workers' compensation system when you are still in trauma mode. once you are severed from the peace corps, that is it. there is no one there. there's nothing there. you are left to navigate it completely on your own. some people get information.

others do not. it really can further harm the survivor. >> thank you very much. miss clark quizzed iraq >> even this week, we have received new reports -- >> miss clark? >> even this week, we have received no reports of women with similar experiences. with the support of congress, there will be a spike in reports. i would like that not to be used as an indication that peace corps should be disintegrated, but rather that peace corps has taken the chance to reform. with that in mind, apologies without action for useless -- are useless. i have had apology from the

peace corps. i have not seen the action. michael -- my goal is that we have long term action that can be provided through legislation. >> dr. koenen? >> i would like to conclude by saying that we all want a better, stronger, safer peace corps. we have all come forward with our stories at great personal cost to ask congress to cement the changes we've request in legislation so that future generations can serve in the peace corps and be protected. >> thank you very much. miss march? >> i would like to reinforce what they said and go back to my testimony and suggest that peace

corps follow past practice recommendations. i feel as though they are taking steps in that direction. i believe this hearing will help them to further the process. >> mrs. puzey, finally. >> as has already been said, i think legislation needs to happen now at this time. from the peace corps, i would like them to be as sympathetic and compassionate and give the support to victims' families. things are going to go wrong. when there is that, the family should also have that support. >> thank you very much. thank you for excellent testimony. thank you for your courage in appearing before us today. we will work on legislation to move forward. thank you very much, ladies.

>> i am newt gingrich. i am announcing my candidacy for president of the united states. i believe we can return america to hope and opportunity. >> with a field of presidential hopefuls beginning to take shape, follow the announcements and speeches. look back at their careers online with the c-span video library. it has everything we have covered since 1987. it is what you want, when you want it. >> you are looking at the opening of the spillway on the mississippi river earlier this afternoon. the army corps of engineers is diverting water away from baton rouge, new orleans, and chemical plants along the lower regions of the river. this is the first time the flood gate has been opened in nearby four decades. [mechanical noises]

>> officials said the process of releasing pressure on the flood gates and levies will happen bit by bit over the coming weeks. the crest of the flooding is expected to hit this area on may 22. it could last up to 10 days. a look now at international politics from today's "washington journal." discussion on u.s.-china relations. this is about 40 minutes. is steven orland. serves as their president. this week, the u.s. and china both have high key representatives talking about economic issues. what was the nature of those discussions? guest: well, they were both strategic in terms of talking about the increasingly

intertwined relationship between the united states and china kind of on the strategic economic level. and then kind of in the weeds talking about things like u.s. surance companies having the opportunity to sell car insunce in china, u.s. investment banks having the opportunity to underwrit mutual funds to underwrite corporate bonds. so it both was at the very high strategic level and at the low kind of ground level. i think the talks we very successful host: as far as the financial times were concerned, their headline quotes the talks as minimal progress being made. would you agree with that? guest: i would say incremental, not minimal. there's no magic bullet in the relationship and that they made progress on a number of issues, and there's lot of progress that's made between these annual meetings. you know, it's interesting, it ran a similar story which actually or a story related to

china which i think was almost more relevant than what had occurred at the s and ed. they talked about this was in friday's ft that talked about coach, the manufacturer of accessories, hand bags, women bags, men bags and they talked about how eir market share in china is going to go from 100 million and hope to grow it to 500 million. at the same time, they talked about the fact that coach was relocating production facilities from china to vietnam, phillipin, india. so what you're seeing in fact is a result of years of this strategic and economic dialogue that the increase in the value of the rnb, the inflatio in china is making the cost of doing business in china so high that companies such as coach that are in the china market are now beginning to relocate outside of china.

and that's something that's a result i think of years of discussions between the united states and china on the economic relationship. host: our numbers are on the bottom of your screen. if you want to ask our guests questions about the u.s.-china economic relationship, is it true that you were part of these talks on some level? guest: well, they're government-to-government talks. so the private sector and the ngo sect senior not included. after the end of the talks i attended a very small dinner with the head of the strategic side of the talks, which is the state counsel for foreign affairs from china who is hillary clinton's counterpart and we had a very small dinner with secretary kissinger, secretary albright and a very small group of other americans

and what they wanted to know from us was a readout on the talks and how we felt u.s.-china relations could be improved. so we all had suggestions on both the strategic level and again on kind of the grass roots level on thing that is could be donto improve the relationship. host: as far as the amount of debt that china-u.s. debt that the china owns, how much of that shades these talks? guest: well, it's -- i don't think it really has an enormous effect on ese talks. you know, china owns that debt. they have -- in an excess of $1 trillion of u.s. government debt. they have few other options in terms of placing that amount of dollars anywhere in the world. real, the euro market, the yen market simply are not deep enough to allow cna to do it. so they're kind of stuck with doing it. what they worry about of course is our fiscal discipline.

so kind of being stuck in the dollar being stuckn u.s. government obligations, they worry are we going to exercise sufficient discipline so that we are able to repay that debt. we're not going to enter into a period of hyper inflation where they would be paid back in what is in effect devalued dollars. so there was some portion of the conversation that was about that. but it was -- there's not much the chinese can do abt it, and our decision with respect to spending is a domestic issue and the chinese understand that's a domestic issue. i think the near shutdown of the u.s. government that it came literally to 90 minutes before the deadline struck them i think they were somewhat shocked by it. they looked at that and said oh, my gosh, the united states government really came that close to closing down? it struck them as not the best atmosphere for them to be

putting over $1 trillion in u.s. government oblations. host: atlanta, georgia is the first call for our guest. go ahead, atlanta. caller: yes. please give this some thought and let me finish what i have to say. first of all, the reason that the united states ose china money is because of the exchange how china manipulates against the dollar. wouldn't it be best united states would just print off the money and pay china and aow china this money back into the system? what i'm saying through the reserve and then the united states this money would be coming back to the united states. it will stop the debt. it will stop the interest payments on the loan. and then all the businesses have to come back and china will have to spend its money back to the united states

because the united states has the largest ecomy. guest: if this was a suggestion that the united states default on its debt obligations, i don't think that would be a great idea. what we've seen during the course of these strategic and economic dialogue is the rmb appreciating. what secretary geithner says and i think what is absolutely correct is that over the course of the last several years we' seen the rmb appreciate on both a nominal and real rate. so in fact, in the last 12 months, we've had a nominal appreciation of about 5% and then because china's inflation is far in excess of the u.s. inflation, we've had a real crease in the exchange rate of another 5%. so you're looking at about 10 to 11% appreciation in the rmb. and again what happens is you've got people like coach, back to my initial comment,

deciding to relocate manufacturing facilities out of china to other places, which also highlights i think one of the issues which is kind of an in the beltway versus outside of the beltway conveation. in the beltway, there's an enormous amount of conversation about the valuation of the chinese currency and that's effect on trade, and how if china revalued its currency the united states would benefit enormously. china should -- host: there's a question off of twitter. guest: i think the prospects given the diversity within asia, given the political conflict between the historical political conflict between japan and china, the two major asian powers, i think the chance of having an asian

currency is extremely limited. i think what we're going to see is the chinese currency internationalizing. given the size of its economy, given the size of its inteational trade, we're beginning to see an internationalization of the rmb. trade settlement in rmb. and what i think we'll see over the next decade is it becoming more freely converitible, becoming more of an international currency and at some point in the next few decades seeing it be a reserve currency alongside the dollar. . . caller: they have made no

progress on it. their culture does not have an understanding of what intellectual property is. guest: you have raised an important question. it is one i did not touch on an answering. there were specific commitments made by the chinese government during this past week with respect to intellectual property. previously, the central government agreed to respect intellectual property. when they bought software, they would make sure it was properly licensed. they have taken that commitment and extended it to localities. the provincial and municipal governments will take on that obligation to respect intellectual property rights. i first arrived in china in 1979. there was virtually no respect for intellectual property. during the next 25 years, it was

predominantly foreigners looking to enforce their intellectual property rights. what has occurred over the last seven years is the chinese themselves are looking to enforce intellectual property rights. patent suits and copyright suits are from 1 chinese individual against another. we are seeing this as allies. the attorneys also want to enforce it. we have seen enormous progress in this area. the chinese need to do better. i think the commitment from the leadership is there. they need to take the commitment and bring in local. they need to get the local governments to enforce local property rights. host: ronald from minnesota on the independents' line. go ahead. all i: in the 1950's,

heard was communism, communism, communism. i do not understand what is going on between us and communist china. is it a profit of the capitalistic american businessmen? i do not understand it. all the negativity in the 1950's -- could you explain how we got to dealing with china to begin with? guest: we got to china to begin with because they were our partner in opposing the soviet union. literally 40 years ago next month, secretary kissinger had his secret mission to china. in order to help us resolve the conflict in vietnam, to oppose the expansion of the soviet union, we decided we needed to

establish diplomatic relations with china. we did. over the years, it has evolved into a much broader and more complex relationship. viewing china as communist, the party the rules is called the chinese communist party. but its relationship to traditional communism is rather limited. we often joke that if you change the name to the china democratic party or the chinese socialist party or something else, it would more accurately reflect what has happened in china since 1979. host: they still, indiana, paul is on the republican line. the debates bill -- indiana, paul is on the republican line. caller: i have been wondering

about the mechanics. is it true that we need them as much as they need us? guest: we need each other. that is absolutely right. the mechanics are that it is not a currency that freely trades. the rate of exchange between the dollar and the chinese currency is set by their central bank every day. you can only trade at that level. it is not one which trades freely with the dollar, the pound, the euro, the yen and with trade. that is the effect of mechanics for how this works. st: military discussions were part of these discussions, right? guest: they were. i think there was real progress and for the first time, we have a very senior chinese general in

the meetings with senior representative from the u.s. military and in addition, they decided to now organized a strategic security dialogue, which really is talking about military and military relations and doing that on a regular basis, which is another break for. having the u.s. military in the chinese military sit down together is critical to make sure that we both understand what each is doing. what happened as a result this summer policies, as a result of chinese response is that the relationship has often been sacrificed in the name of those policies. it is important that the dialogue has been established. it is important that beginning tomorrow thehief of staff is going to be visiting washington

and they'll be visiting with secretary gates, admiral mullen, during their bases so we understand better what the other is doing. ultimately, the problems in the world will be better solved the united states and try to cooperate, not the focus on conflict. host: pennsylvania on the democratic line. good morning. caller: how are you doing? good morning, everyone. i cannot help but think the money that we of the chineses would actually protects american corporate investments from being seed because china is a communist country. ias wondering you could speak to that. our middle class is being forced to compete against slave labor. i was wondering if you could speak to that. guest: if you of the bank $1,

they control you. if you a $1 million, you control them, so you can argue the chinese ownership of over $1 trillion of our government debt, and in fact, gives us greater leverage than they have overaw. again and, i think this is one where there is a mutual dependency, but think are needed, when weeed to do, the $1 trillion is only a small percentage, unfortunately, of our debt, so what we need to do is get our act together in the united states in terms of spending, entitlements, and not blame try for holding over $1 trillion in debt. host: as the chinese government weighed in on this discussion we're having as we approach the debt cling and whether to

raise it? guest: how they wait in is they say they want fiscal responsibility. they want the united states that actually reduces spending. they see this as the raising of the debt, a procedural matter, not substantive. they are expecting the u.s. congress and the executive branch to get together and find a way to rein in spending and entitlements. they do not worry much about the u.s. that will fold. they think that is highly unlikely. given if you are a major holder of u.s. treasuries, if there should be a crisis of confidence in the united states, interest rates go up, and the value of those treasuries would go down, so they worry about that. they worry about a crisis of confidence in the united states. it would emanate from capital markets. that is one aspect of the worry.

the other aspect is they worry about qe2 creating an environment of inflation in the united states in which case they fear that the dollar would devalue enormously and the treasury obligations that they hold will be repaid in a devalued dollar so they will take a loss on that. they worry about those two aspects, not really a default by the u.s. government. host: lexington, kentucky, go ahead. caller: a singlereasury bond never should have been sold outside of the united states. we not only own money to china, but we barrault consistently from the federal reserve and almost 100% of our income tax goes to repairer debt to the federal reserve. the day that the world decides to stop using the dollar for the

reserve currency, as the man just said, china will be repaid in a dollar that is worthless, and what will they do in response to receiving worthless money? what will they use to cover the debt? as far as the military aspect, when china has a disaster or their economy fails as well, where are we had at that point? host: mountain view, calif., on their public and mine. caller: -- on the republican . caller: i have a few comments, and i will let you respond. this will take just a minute. rep wolf made a comment and said he characterizes the chinese government as fundamentally evil and according to the u.s.-china security

report, they are aggressively pursuing cyber warfare capabilities thawill provide them with an asymmetric advantage against the united states. finally, you look at a comments made by this person, and they have almost 43,000 intellectual property cases ever taken up by their courts in 2010 in a range of industries and continue to complain about copyright and patent infringement. according to the american chamber of commerce, 58% of the respondents said their operations based material damage from chinese infringements and 70% said the beijing protections are ineffective. that was 2010 and i have been in china since 2000. i applaud you for being there in 1979, because that shows you are

a real pneer, but could you comment on this point? guest: in terms a patent infringement, there's no question that there is work that needs to be done. i try to put it in a historical context at a time when there's literally no protection, and now there is a time of some protection and we want whole protection. if you look at other societies in the process of their economic development, that is very standard, low levels of economic development, low levels of palin protection. as it goes up the scale, there is increasing patent protection, because their citizens demanded. it is a serious problem and our government raises and on a regular bas with the chinese and but secretary clinton and geithner rays did during these discussions. as to cgressman wolf's comments that their fundamental evil, i do not agree.

is a nuanced, complex country. when i have seen over the last 32 years, when i first arrived, there were hundreds of millions of people living in abject poverty, less than $1 per day. i would good villages where there was no running water, no electricity, illiteracy was very high. those places now have virtually 100% sign literacy, running water, electricity, schools, health care, there is less death in childbirth, they're living martyr. this government has enabled them. we do not agree with all of their policies, and we should not agree with all of their policies. we should politely rai those, but to say that their fundamental evil when they have raised over five under dock -- 500 million out of poverty, i think it is wrong. host: out of new mexico, the

democratic line. caller: you talk about how they're no longer aliterate and they have almost all of their jobs. when'm curious about is the new labour force which seems to be unlimited in china. do these people know they're working for $2 an hour when the job was at one time over here paid $15 per hour? labor laws, oh sure, all these were created to prott the labor force -- osha, all these were created. do they know how little these wages are? these jobs are moving in this is a new form of legalized slavery. w long before the people turnaround and that say no? the work force would say there are working for this amount of money. does china know they're working for $2 per hour at a job they used to pay $20? guest: some jobs have moved from

the united states to china. i think it is quite a small percentage. job loss in the united states has been more based upon increases in productivity. some have moved. most of the jobs and ended up in china, did not gorom the united states to china but to japan, then to taiwan, career, and then from there to try to. he's labor-intensive industries, shoes, textiles, toys, these there require low-wage workers, they left the united states decades and decades ago. i do not really agree with the premise. do the note with their wages? yes, they do. what we're seeing now is very high wage inflation in china depending on where you are. it is diffent in each region, but you're seeing wage inflation that is at 10%-20% per

year which is creating a situation where companies better in these labor-intensive businesses are moving out of china to lowewage destinations such as the philippines, sri lanka, and other countries. host: our guest is stephen orlins. can you tell us to fund your organization? guest: we were set up 45 years ag this is our 46 anniversary. we seek to educate americans about chinand the chinese about americans. for the last 45 years, we have been doing that. in 1972, we have to the chinese pingpong team. after the trip by mentioned were secretary kissinger went to china and the nixon went to shanghai, we had the chinese pingpong team which was hosted by s, and since then, we have

sought to educate members of congress, governors, mayors, the public about china as well as the chinese leadership about the united states. we have numerous programs you n read about our website to come -- website, ncuscr.org. host: how are you offended? guest: grants from the government, the department of education, the department of state, no. foundations. about 20% of our funding is from corporate america and a little less than 5% from individuals. st: on the republican line, misery -- missouri. caller: can you please explain how china benefited from these policies?

guest: when they joined the world trade organization, almost 10 years ago, it was required we give them a permanent favored nation treatment so they were treated in the terms of imports to the 90 states as every other country. that was a prerequisite to their joining the world trade organization. we do not every new the most favored nation treatment annually. in the 1990's before they joined, of we would annually have a debate on whether we would renew that treatment. now it is permant. host: dallas, texas, on the independent line. caller: as a retiree, i tutor young people about currency changes because it is very confusing for those who really do n know how to invest in the future.

excited about this culture and i think the kindness was to stabilize the dollar. you joke about making a wage cheaper than the yen. the young people need to be inundated with enough informatn to understand this. india has better health care than we do. it is iredible. host: mcdonald county, missouri. on the democratic line. caller:, to take exception to something that mr. orlins said about the chinese helping us in the past we thought the chinese in the korean war. we killed thousands of them and they killed thousands of us.

we thought the chinese in vietnam. they supplied north vietnam with technical expertise to help to the fetus in vietnam. my bther fought in korea and i fought in vietnam. last week, after the seals went pakistan and killed. lawton, the chinese military people -- killed bin laden, the chinese people tried to steal from the helicopter. they hack into the pentagon all the time. their spies are working here continuously taking everything they can. i would like our best to tell the truth instead of sugar coating this and say they are a

wonderful nation and they love us and went to help us. they do not. they are after our downfall. host: mr. orlins? guest: there are seeking to preserve stability within china and they need an environment of peace and security in the pacific in order to accomplish that. their problems are very much within china. they do not have a forced exposure in afghanian, iraq, libya, and other places. i always smiling and remember a story told to me by someone in the chinese ministry of foreign affas. this was during the bush years. president bush shot would get briefed every morning about afghanistan, iraq, somalia, latin america, and other places. president hu would get briefed

about things going on within china. they're basically focused internally. the two conflicts that were mentioned were both on china's borders and they have historically not sought to find power far from their borders. host: kansas, republican line. you are on. caller: most of the 60,000 jobs went to china. the jobs that they did not have here are no longer. they are out of work, they're taking lesser jobs. my problem is that there are no tariffs that we are getting from china. host: we will let our guest responded to that. guest: this goes back to a

previous answer. yes, there are some jobs to have left the united states, but predominantly, they left decades and decades ago and they went to japan. from japan in which currie and taiwan. that is number one. number two, even today, there are me jobs as a result of chinese investment and we really have not talked about that in the united states there being created by chinese capital. i have a friend who makes car parts in china. there is a car parts manufacturer in michigan that was gng to be going under, said dave refunded and recapitalize the company and ended up preserving 125 jobs in michigan to that investment. that kind of investment is starting to happen more frequently and i believe in the coming decades, it will happen more. again, we should not blame tschida for these issues. we need to focus on what is going on in the united stas.