there'll be differences of faith. i am proud of my faith, but i am not going to talk about to my religion. i subscribe to what abraham lincoln said. in america, there is something called the political religion. it is our adherence to the laws of the land. as a governor, i consider my highest promise the promise i made to uphold the constitution of my state and the country. host: mitt romney on his mormon is some -- mormonism. guest: i asked him about this idea that a lot of folks think it is a cult. he went on to explain as long as we share the same values, that

is all that is important. i think for mitt romney, it is not as much a big deal in 2012, at least publicly. economic concerns, a tea party and all that. with rick perry getting in the race, he also has michele bachmann and rick santorum doing the dirty work for him. he can come across as the mainstream guide. host: this is from a research poll that came out in may. what are the chances that you would vote for mitt romney as a mormon? 44% saying they would not vote for a mormon candidate. guest: this is clearly a

problem. that is why i mention that it has not been a public issue. privately, there'll be quite a few evangelicals that will not even take a look at him for that reason alone. that is why you will not see him compete this heavily in iowa this time around. he will make a plague in south carolina. -- play in south carolina. host: michael is joining us from new york. caller:

we are building towards tension in this country. we need to realize that we are headed for another conflict.

how you canly know respond to this issue. host: thank you for the call. we hear a lot of points of view and some are quite animated. is it any different now than it has been in past campaigns cycles? >> it is getting more vitriolic, there is no doubt about it. president bush, he campaigned on this idea that he would be a new type of president, this compassionate conservative. he was going to be able to help with the vitriolic atmosphere. compared to today, is a whole lot worse. obama did the same thing. we have rick perry and others who are clearly pushing the envelope. i do not necessarily see it going in a different direction anytime soon.

host: some of the speculation under way from the weekly standard team of viable -- some speculation that this virginia gov. on the short list for 2012. guest: i do not think there is any question about that. he has some solid credentials that a vice-president would bring. he comes from a swing state, virginia. host: a swing state? guest: it is definitely more probable than they used to be read. -- more purple-and it used to be red. bob mcdonnell is extremely popular with the evangelical world. who knows? i do not know if rick perry

would pick a bob mcdonnell. mitch ronnie picking bob mcdonnell would help. -- mitt romney taking bob and donna but help. caller: -- host: we do not appreciate that under any circumstances. caller: good morning. ok, a 75% of americans believe in god and jesus christ. that is a fact. we want the people to listen to us on the right. we want the democrats to stop killing our babies. that is not asking too much.

stop killing our babies. we are labeled that these wackos that we believe in god and jesus christ. that is not asking too much. my goodness, people. i would like to make one other comment. on the last episode, on the tax deal. we have to remember, we will have to all come together, democrats and republicans, and gets a reasonable tax code. just a reasonable tax code. everybody can go by that. we will have to move on. let me tell you about the tea party. people do not realize how big

the tea party is growing. they can label it however they want to. when did all this hate start in politics? when did all this hate start? i will tell you when it's started. when ted kennedy took after clarence thomas and made their families cried. what they did to clarence thomas -- when ted kennedy put on a hearing like that, that is when it started. host: thank you for the call. guest: know what will be able to put an exact a blueprint to gather on something like that. the caller made a few interesting observations, one about the tea party. i think it is important to

understand that 2010 for the tea party was act one. 2012 is apt to. we're just getting started here. anybody that believes the tea party is going to fizzle or be able -- be labeled extreme, i think there is some danger in doubt because you can make the quantitative argument that they are gaining steam. you can actually see it. you will see it and the numbers in 2012. the actual tea party, libertarians, and the evangelicals combining together to raise their numbers in 2012 will be just as important. host: linda --

guest: it is a candidate is gone to bring up their faith and talk about their faith in a campaign situation, they should be asked questions about their faith. where do you draw the line? now we're going down a whole other rabbit trail. if they bring up their faith, it is fair to ask the candidate how they see the world's through a biblical world view. host: let's turn our attention to the democrats.

we continue to hear this on long -- from moveon.org. guest: of the energy is clearly not there. this is a dynamic president. he gives a good speech and he is able to rally the troops. he is a great fourth quarter campaigner. he can close the deal at times. many times. and so he is going to be formidable. in 2008, there was not a tea

party. they are energized and mobile and that changes the variable game. host: the tea party would have my respect one and start running instead of being a republican lap dogs. her organization will endorse a republican primary candidate and did not rule out a third-party .id guest: the tea party and members want to work within the republican structure. he wants some new republicans on capitol hill.

as long as those republicans are constitutionally conservative republicans. this is the dynamic going on in the party. host: this is an editorial by ed koch. he is a former democrat, mayor of new york city. guest: i interviewed ed koch back in 2008 when the jewish vote was gone to be an issue for president obama back then. add koch had some very tough words for the candidate at the time. those words have been ratcheted up even more so now. yes, this is going to be a problem. this is an issue for the

president. he has poll numbers that are a problem. he has an economy that is not doing well. you have got the jewish democrat problem and i think you can go layer upon layer and you have to wonder what is going to happen. host: one of the reasons why it -- why she was elected to be the dnc chair. ed koch says if the president does not read the tea leaves and change its position, you can be certain that i will continue to bang my drum. i will be loud and clear about what i believe. there are many floridians better concerned about the tree -- the president's treatment of israel.

guest: that will get even worse as time goes on. host: next call is from baltimore. caller: good morning. he was speaking of the bible earlier. in the bible, they have the high priests. they had the pharisees'. they were holding the bible and teaching the people the bible. but they crucified jesus. i think about the people and the need to be more christ-like. there are precedents that have been -- there have been it presidents that have been white and irish.

it seem so crazy that we are just human beings. rick perry, michele bachmann, he says he is a christian. in the christian faith, you embrace your brother and left him up. they tear him down, that is not christian-like. they need to be more christ- like. he had a message of love. christ is love. you cannot find anything in the bible that is not love. host: thank you for the call. guest: evangelicals lived in biblical absolutes. what you are seeing from rick perry and michele bachmann, the

media turns -- terms it as more strident in their views. evangelicals do not see it that way. they are taking a stand from biblical principles. having said that, the vitriol that comes from some folks. host: two weeks ago, sarah palin was campaigning for her ideas. we asked our viewers the question whether or not she should stay out of the presidential race. a lot of emotion back and forth, some even questioning why we ask the question. but i will ask you the question. is there room for sarah palin to get into this race? guest: yes, there is room for

her in the race. she would get quite a bit of support from evangelicals. will she gets in the race? who knows? no one really knows, only sarah palin knows. i think she is getting end. i think there may be some room between rick perry and michele bachmann in terms of this crummy capitalism. we have. perry talking about his executive experience. we have michele bachmann who does not have the executive experience. sarah palin is able to leave and between the two and say, called out creek. on capitalism and some of the favors that have transpired. and the fact that she has some executive experience and has been on the national stage. michele bachmann does not have. she may be able to craft a path.

mitt romney is smiling like that cats we talked about. that is going to split even more of the evangelical vote. host: taking a look at the calendar for next year. it could be a firewall for the mitt romney campaign. guest: we will have to wait and see on the calendar. i do not think we know. i think -- host: we know that new hampshire will be first. guest: as it relates to florida, this could be the linchpin in all of this in terms of what actually happens from that point forward. let save rick perry wins iowa, or even michele bachmann.

let's say it mitt romney wins new hampshire. you have a situation where you could have a wreck. or a michele bachmann when south carolina. it makes florida -- it could be a huge situation because then you are moving into the primaries. host: his visits, among 30 trips by the governor and his wife, costing texas taxpayers more than to hundred $94,000. the scope -- $294,000. guest: let me start with michele bachmann. part of why michele bachmann may have a problem to a degree would evangelicals is because rick perry is in the race with executive experience. having said that, rick perry has some issues, the fact that he

has been an executive for a while. watch for michele bachmann to continue to trickle these type of stories out. rick santorum told me the other day in tampa, the more i know about rick perry, the more i get concerned. host: north carolina, independent line. caller: i appreciate the fact that you have written this book talking about the evangelicals. the tea party has denied -- they want everyone to believe they are purely about fiscal conservatism.

i appreciate you and knowledge into the and exposing this. -- acknowledge and exposing this. you taught about rick perry going to liberty university. a popular stop for a lot of the republican candidate. the fact that there are so many people -- george bush was very fond of a lot of these people. i am concerned about their allegiance to the constitution as opposed to the allegiance to their religious agenda. i want to get your take on that.

how would it be different from someone to get a law degree from harvard burris is getting a 700 club law school degree? guest: i did not think the people that graduate from these universities would consider its a 700 club degree. what you have seen and the numbers will bear this out, places like -- and other christian university's have not only it raised the bar academically in the last five or 10 years, but you are seeing a lot of these graduates come out to have some serious influence on capitol hill. the campaign aide and some of the chiefs of staff or legislative councils, many of them involved in the higher

echelon of politics today. host: we will hear more tomorrow from the president. the president tries to do a couple of things. pay for a jobs package and try to figure out ways to bring down a growing federal deficit. the white house saying that by taxing those people who make a million dollars and more, we could pay for the bill and helped lower the deficit by $1.90 trillion. this story is available on-line. what is your reaction? guest: when you talked about they are going from that $250,000 threshold to 1 million. . interesting, the polling showed the president has majority support on this issue. to go to 1 million common -- to go to a million, that will may get more popular.

at this point, it is going nowhere in the house of representatives. nearly every single republican is taking a pledge to not raise taxes. the president knows this and the white house knows this. this speech tomorrow is part policy, but it is also part campaign. not rhetoric, but that is a campaign pledge because this is what he is going to campaign on in 2012. host: can you elaborate on the connection between t party, the fiscal movement behind the tea party and the religious connection? >> here is the thing. the tea party stands for fiscal restraint, constitutional conservatism, limited

government, free markets. that is their message. you do not see god in the official platform. having said that, there are certain members locally that thoseize god and many of issues relating to the bible as part of their charter. the key tie that binds, why are evangelicals involved in the tea party? social conservatives are typically fiscal conservatives. that should come as no surprise to anybody. the media likes to put everybody in a box. you of the fiscal conservatives, national security conservatives, social conservatives. as it relates to god, it is the judeo-christian history of our

country and this idea that the tea party libertarians want to get back to a constitutionally limited government. but since seem to be able to come together and understand and take the nation back. back to the founding principles this country was founded on. host: we are talking to david brody. he is the author of an upcoming book. guest: it will be out in july of 2012. host: we will feature it on c- span. a couple of other views on the comment earlier.

caller: i did research the candidates and their records in the previous election. the big thing that i could not vote for president obama was his record in the illinois senate. that did not align with my christian values. i am also concerned about -- we are founded with the belief that we should have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. i see the government taking more and more money from the state and threatening the churches to lose their tax-exempt status. that goes against everything that i was raised to be and i

believe them. host: thank you for the call. what ever happened to the separation of church and state? guest: you can line up 10 evangelicals -- i am talking about political savvy evangelicals -- and they will say, where does it say the word separation of church and state and the constitution? the principle remains as it relates to our constitution. ig dilemma,hold bak upper or within the community about this idea of separation of church and state. they take into this idea that you can remove of god. host: indicated that democrats are voicing complaints publicly and privately. it is september and barack obama

is in trouble. his poll numbers are down and there is unrest within the party. some democrats have begun to doubt whether his inner circle is up to that task. they're calling for changes in obama and his team. are there parallels? guest: i think what happened -- we need to take a step back. what happened is that he decided to shoehorn a lot of legislation money started out in his presidency. you can make the argument that this is a -- he took progressive, liberal ideas and try to shoehorn them through the congress and through the american people. use of a blow back from that. that is what we saw in 2010.

the president is also a pragmatist. what we see from this president is that when push comes to shove, he is willing to compromise and get ahead and cut the deal when he needs to cut the deal. he has already ticked off of the conservative evangelical and tea party base and all that. he has problems there right from the get go. he has problems and his liberal base because of the compromising he has done. he is trying to straddle the middle a little bit and what's in that happening -- what's in that happening is that you please . host: -- please no one. host: how does this happen? it comes down to mistakes by this president. his decision on health care, the

white house inability to understand that the death of the economic crisis, and the spending decisions. best coat that is all that and i think part of it there was talk in the campaign about they would hold hearings on c-span. there was something about that but i heard as it relates to health care. when you campaign as a guide that is going to change the way business is done in washington and you look like you're not doing that, that is going to play into the perception that it is just business as usual. fox news as a heyday with the bizarre -- czar issue. the train left the station on bad and he started to get pigeonholed.

host: our last call is from new york city. caller: good morning. hopefully, i will be able to finish my point. to your guest, i have a question for you in regards to your point of view on what the t party is and where it came from and why it has materialized. and why it is most people are caucasian. they seem to be enamored with that. you may point earlier about how they want to go back to what the forefathers had. case in point, the four fathers and their constitution did not say all men were created equal. a person who looked like me was not considered a person equal to my counterpart. a person that looked like me, sir, was owned by the same forefathers. if you believe that the tea parties agenda is to go back to that, because of the man that

sits in the white house happens to look like me. host: let me be very clear. they are about taking the country back to the constitutional principles of limited government. not the issue that you are addressing, which was addressed in the constitution because of the horrible stain it was on the nation. as it relates -- i traveled the country all over the place at these rallies. it is just not true. beyond that, let's think about it. who are some of the biggest leaders within the two-party movement?

last time i checked, it was alan west, herman cain. it is hard to make the argument that this movement has this racist strain when three of their beloved heroes of the movement are african-american. that is just one of millions of the evidence -- that is one of the million examples. host: i want to follow on one final point. the media is accused of making this a race between iraq. and to -- a race between brick. and mitt romney. is there room for any of these other candidates to move up in the polls? guest: rick perry and its romney both have to stumble.

-- and mitt romney both have to stumble. these candidate will be tried to get them to stumble. maybe there are some of unforced errors on mitt romney's case. rick perry has a lot of critics down in texas and around the country. you never know what is going to come out of the woodwork. if both of them stumble, michele bachmann is right there. we have seen newt gingrich increase and the polls. michele bachmann is in a position, ron paul is in a position to make some serious move at rick perry if rick perry stumbles. i am not convinced that he is going to stumble. i think he's a seasoned professional. someone that has been able to weather the storms debauches careers. host: david prodi, we always appreciate your perspective.

>> tomorrow, dean baker and james from the heritage foundation look at republicans economic and job creation proposals. the director of the prescription project discusses oversight of the pharmaceutical and history and the safety of foreign-made drugs. military time's pentagon chief talks about the cost of military retirement programs. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. next come a discussion on u.s. security issues with national security adviser thomas donilon. after that, british counter- terrorism efforts. a house oversight hearing on afghanistan contacting and corruption.

>> spent next began in charlotte, north carolina. the history and literary life from the site of the 2012 democratic national convention. charlotte's banking industry. how the south was created in american popular culture. a visit to park road books to learn about the relationship between the independent bookstores and publishers. on american history television, tour jame polk's birthplace.

this is where gold was first discovered in america. in charlotte, n.c., next weekend on c-span2 and 3. >> thomas donilon discusses american security concerns, including the wars in afghanistan and iraq. at the economic club of washington, d.c. he has served in this position by october 2010. this is 50 minutes.

>> he did a spectacular job and held president carter get the renomination. that election did not go the way we thought it would go. tom then went to help president carter set up his post- government career. he then went to law school at the university of virginia. he then joined -- he has been back and forth in government service for many years. he served in the clinton administration as chief of staff to warren christopher and

assistant secretary of state. he was involved and that entire policy operation as well. in the obama administration, he served initially as deputy national security adviser and about a year ago or so became the national security adviser. he has served in the carter, clinton, and obama administration. he leads a daily briefing for the president of the united states. he is not lead by blundered briefings for the president. he also is -- he has now led 500 briefings before the president. he led the committee meetings that led to the successful raid on osama bin laden and spent one day during that committee. he has been involved in the efforts in china and the middle east and in his spare time, he has time for his two children

and his wife, who is also a member of the administration. she is the chief of staff for joe biden. they know a lot about this administration. >> we at least get to see each other once in awhile. >> you have worked for three very high iq president. who was the smartest of them? [laughter] >> that was not in the staff preparation. the answer to that question would be this. one of the keys to being able to work closely in a senior advisory role with three presidents over 30 years is not answering questions like that. that is the answer to that. i have been privileged to work for three administrations. i am struck, david, increasingly

by the board and replace our president. -- by the stress we place on our president. we had a lot committee meeting that day. at the end of the day, when the decision was made, the president had divided council. our team of national security advisers is a team of prominent americans. from vice president biden to secretary clinton, to secretary gates. he received divided council. when you walked out of the room, it is on his shoulders. i am struck by that belong price serve. i am struck by the fact that we have then lucky. >> that night, the night before

the president spoke at the white house correspondents' dinner. he knew the raid was going to occur in needed a very good job of hiding the fact that he had all this pressure on his mind. did you have any doubt that the rate would succeed? >> we had kite -- stepping back in terms of analysis, a couple of things. the evidence with respect to osama bin laden being in pakistan was circumstantial. it was an intensive intelligence analysis. it was the result of work that took place during the course of two administrations. many of the same people working on it with president bush worked with us with president obama.

it became the focus in august of 2010. we worked very hard. at the end of the day, it was a circumstantial case. but it was the best evidence we had to with respect to the whereabouts of osama bin laden. it was a circumstantial case. if you're looking at that, there is a slightly better than even chance that he is there. when people tried to put percentage points on intelligence estimates, it really is a judgment call. what he had tremendous confidence in was the ability of the special forces to carry out the mission. our special forces had developed

expertise 2000's of these kinds of operations. -- through at thousands of these kinds of operations brick through the experience that he knew, for the quality of the briefing at the rehearsals, what he did have is 100% convent and the ability of special forces to go and and sick or the place and did back -- and secure the place and get back. a judgment call on intelligence, but a very high degree of confidence with respect to the ability of the special forces. >> when you heard that a helicopter had failed, did you leave -- relive the carter presidency? >> i spent quite a bit of time worrying about things.

it had been a contingency that the special forces had planned for. even when there was an event, i do not think that these folks missed a minute, frankly. i do not think it delayed the mission over a minute. it is an extraordinary set of skills and assets that the united states has right now. >> from the iconic fatah were you're all looking at the screen, what were you actually looking at? >> i do not have the answer to that question.

there were hundreds of pictures taken. >> the plan to not bring back osama bin laden alive, was that always the plan? would you have brought him back alive if he said i surrender? >> the first of all, it was a military option against an enemy combatants. the only leader that cockeyed debt ever had. and we were at war with them. -- the only leader that al qaeda ever had. and we were at war with them. osama bin laden did not surrender. he did not give any indication that he was going to surrender. one of the hallmarks is suicide. and other kinds of booby trapping of homes and facilities. i think that our forces were within their rights. to take the action that they did. because the president chose the

office that he chose, we were able to limit collateral damage, the protection of women and children. >> let's shift to another person we're not that firmly with, gaddafi. if gaddafi is found, is the u.s. position that he should be tried in libya or be tried by the international court? >> the libyan people have to make that decision. i do think it is important that he is captured and brought to justice. i think that he has shown over the course of his life that he is capable of exercising and taking action with very negative

consequences. i think that he would be a threat to -- not in terms of overthrowing the government -- but in terms of harassment and trying to undermine the success for a democratic government. it is an important thing to capture. this is not slowing down the development of the libyan government. it is up to the libyan people. what the leadership of the ntc has said is that they will capture and turn them over to the international criminal court. >> president sarkozy and prime minister cameron were in libya saying they want to help the new government. is the united states prepared to about the new government? >> the united states is prepared to help with the government and we have helped the transitional national council in its efforts to get the army are today.

-- did where we are today. we are leading the effort prior to the fall of the gaddafi government. we have frozen under our laws $30 billion in libyan assets. we did that at the front end. we have gone to the u. n and unfrozen about $1.5 billion. that is an extraordinary resource for the libyan people. we also support the reopening and reestablishment of the oil industry there. obviously, working with them for the united nations in terms of their getting the government

together. a lot of challenges. it is a very big success for nato. the operation -- the president saw a potential humanitarian catastrophe when gaddafi was threatening a town on the coast in libya column benghazi with 700,000 people. the president saw an opportunity to act in concert with others to protect those people. we did that. it was a well designed approach where we decided that military action could be taken, could be successful. we set up a set of criteria. we wanted the participation of arab countries, not just rhetorically, but in a real way. you wanted to see a burden sharing.

i think a division of labor worked. turn the ongoing operations over to nato. it has been a very successful operation. we have talked about burden sharing for a long time. you were actually able to implement its year. >> why not do the same in syria? there seem to be people being killed there. >> there are a set of criteria that we need to work through. with respect to military action. including a set of allies and partners that he would work with. it also needs to be affected. syria is a different case. >> you do not expect anything soon in terms of syria? >> no, i do not expect that.

what i expect us to do is that we have organized an effort from the world to isolate and squeeze the regime. he took a choice to repression. he had other choices in front of him. what he has done is lost his neighbors, who had a close relationship with them. an example is turkey, who invested 10 years in developing a positive relationship with syria. during the course of the last 45 or 60 days, assad has demonstrated his commitment to oppression. he slaughtered people during the holy month of ramadan. he rejected turkey and its efforts to seek to push him toward reform. he now has the european union putting in place the oil and energy sanctions. he has succeeded in making

himself a pariah. >> do you think he survives? >> i think the regime will not be the governing regime. >> speaking of trials, the president of egypt is now being put on trial in egypt. does the united states government supports the trials? >> that is a decision for the people of egypt. >> do you have any regrets about the way egypt was handled by the administration? some people said we were pushing him to leave. are you happy with the message that came out from the administration? >> i think it was consistent with a set of principles that we have laid down since the beginning of the year. we oppose repression and violence, we are for a set of

universal rights and principles. we stand for reform, economic and political reform. i do not at all regret the way that the united states has handled this. i do regret this. i regret that president mubarak did not take action sooner to be responsive to what was going on. i think there were a series of mistakes there that turned out to be tragic. one last thing, the arab spring is ongoing, it is very country- to-country. it is indigenously driven. communication is possible and in and out of countries.

a couple of big strategic and pacs, though. the contrast of al qaeda is really stark. this is a very big blow to the narrative. the people in the square and in tunisia and syria and about the arab world were not in any way advocating the violence agenda of al qaeda. it is a very real blow to the narrative. it has also been a blow to iran. they thought they would be able to take advantage of this. iran turns out to a been a very negative -- >> egypt has forced the israelis to close their embassies in cairo. are you worried about the impact on israel be damaging to our ability to defend israel when necessary?

>> the united states is absolutely committed to the security of israel. i spend a lot of time personally on that issue. we have been devoted to ensuring israel's contains its quantitative edge. we work with them on important projects. a protection against rocket attacks. we have security opera -- cooperation with israel. our first principle is israel's security, front and center. there is tremendous uncertainty on each of israel's borders right now. that is the focus on working for these issues. in dealing with this uncertainty. we have to acknowledge the uncertainty. as we work with israel, we have to acknowledge that. the egypt-israel relationship

has been a pillar of israel's security since you and i were in the white house. 30 years ago. >> over 30 years ago. >> we have been working on both sides to try to do everything we can to preserve that. we had an incident last friday in cairo, the israeli embassy is on an upper floor of a high-rise building. there was general breakdown in cairo last friday. the ministry of the interior were not enforcing had ended migrated to the building with the israeli embassy in extended to pushover a wall and threatening the israeli embassy. we worked very hard that day and night with the egyptians to have the egyptians meet their obligations. an obligation to protect the embassy of another country in your country. that night, we were able to evacuate the israelis who were

under siege by the crowds. we were able to do that working with the egyptian military leadership, who run the country right now. we have been very clear with the egyptians on their obligations. they met those obligations. it was a tough scene, but we met those obligations on friday.

recognizes the gentleman from which is currently,

>> thank you, all, for being here. apologies on delays. you're busy with important responsibilities, and i appreciate your patience as we had votes on theloor earlier. i'd like to welcome ranking

member and other members of being here. we are overseeing the billions spent in military and civilian operations in afghanistan. last year, the subcommittee conducted investigations of the he's nation trucking contract. the idea was to remove this burden from the armed forces whilet the same time promoting the local afghan economy. since inception in 2009, allegations surfad that war lords, power brockers, and the taliban were seeking payments for safe passage through tribal areas. the result was a potential wind fall for o enemy. in short, the american taxpayer allegedly funded the same enemy our soldiers fought on the battlefield. while the investigation did not yield evidence this occurred, the antedotal evidence was substantial. the oversight was woefully

inadequate. despite whether the allegations could be sub stanuated, the oversight structure did not allow for review. there was a hearing last june in which the leaders testified. the defense department established three task forces to examine these particular issues as well as corruption in general. today we'll hear from the defense department about findings and progress with the hearing and with the recent revelation anywhere between $30-$60 # billion was misappropriated in iraq and afghanistan sin 2001, it's critically important that the pentagon get this right. i hope it's made progress in this regard. i also want to commend my colleague, mr. tierney ase's done work on this and glad to continue on the workhat he initiated. i want to recognize the

geleman from massachusetts for his opening statement. >> thank you -- [inaudible] i'll put that on. we just marked the 10th anniversary of 11, and it will be a decade since the forces crossed the border into afghanistan. we entered the conflict for a cause, and the men and women greatly accomplishedded the mission of al-qaeda and the threat against the united states. i want to begin by honoring and how proud i am of all the people given service to the country, and i want to thank all of you for your sfsz to the country and for our soldiers, sailors, airline, and marines. i asked chairman to conduct the hearing to combat corruption in afghanistan, and i thank you for working with us on this issue. last year, there was a six month investigation of the lo gist tick trucking contract in afghanistan. our investigation found that t

trucking contract spawned extrouterred contractors for protection payments to obtain safe passage. our investigation shows senior officials within the military contracting chain of command were aware of the problem, but d little to address it. in plain i think lish, the envies gages found the supply chain in afghanistan relieded on paying the enemy and fueling corruption in order to sustain the military footprint. following the investigation, general petraeus established thee task forces designed to address the problem and issued new guidelines to break down the silos of contracting and operations. they were important first steps. since then, the department provided multiple briefingto the subcommittee staff demonstrating substantial progress identifying where dollars are going. i commend the department for that effort. unfortunately, the picture is not pretty.

recent news reports stated the task force 2010 identified and traced over $360 million in contracting dollars in afghanistan that had been diverted to war lords, power brokers, and criminal networks. the task force confirmed results of the subcommittee's investigion finding many of the contractors were mking payments to the hands of the enemy. the contracting looks add contracting in both iraq and afghanistan and estimated $$60 billion was lost to waste, fraud, and abuse. i fear these reports are only the tip of the iceberg. much of the afghan economy centers around the united states and military presence and contracts, but a significant portion of the funds end up supporting the dew buy real estate market rather than jobs in afghanistan. there's weekly reports about politicians, brothers and cousins of politicians who have

multibillion dollar contractings with the united states government. the contract is a movi industry. today, the business of afghanistan is war. how can we hope to extra kate ourselves from the war when so many benefit from the insecurity used to justify or continued presence. we crossed a tipping point in which e size of the foot print sters further instability. every additional soldier and supply convoy we send to afghanistan further fuels the cycle of dependence, corruption, and endless war. with that said, i want to foc today on the hearing on three basic questions. one, what is the scopeof contractng corruption in afghanistan. two, what is being done to address it? three, how can we dramatically reduce it? i'm skeptical about the design of the united states endeavor there, today's hearing focuses on practical solutions that can be implemented right away. congress had an important role to play. this spring, i worked with the

armed services committee to include the authorization act giving commanders in the field more authority to immediately stop contracting with companies that undermind our troops on the ground. i introduced a bill to install a permanent general, one of the key recommendations of the commissioner of wartime contracting. i encourage my colleagues here today join me in that legislation, and i'm working 20 draft comprehensive contracting reform legislation to change how we do business in war zones. i'll close from reading from the contracting guidance released 234 september of 2010. he wrote, and i quote, "if we spend large quantities of international contracting funds quickly with insufficient oversight, it is likely that some of the funds will unintentionally fuel corrupti, financial organizations, strengthen networks, and undermind our efforts in afghanistan. we can't afford to fail of getting a handle on contracting

corruption in afghanistan. it's unacceptable for dollars to make the way into the hands of those who use them to harm our brave men and women in uniform." i appreciate your testimony here, gentlemen, and i look forward to the discussion, and i thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. any other member have an opening statement? mr. lynch is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank you for the hearin i want to associte myself with the remarks of the ranking member who has done work, along wi the chairman, on this issue, and his staff had the benefit of traveling many times to afghanistan in the company of mr. tierney's staff, and on this issue, and i just want to

amplify what was said here. i understand the mission and the president's approach, there is still, i think, a wide distance between where we should be in terms of watching our money and resources in that country, and where it is today. i honestly had eight or nine trips over to afanistan, and many times on this issue and on corruption in general along with kabul bank, a whole other issue. i honestly believe at this point that corruption, corruption is a greater enemy and a greater threat to afghanistan's stability than thealiban. i think the taliban can be

beaten oro-oped. i think corruption in that culture, in that country, is a much tougher road, and i just, you know, i applaud mr. tierney on his great work, and, you know, i see that the dod has made changes in the contracting protocol, and that's good, but i don't think it's enough. i don't think it's enough. i think we need a better handle on this, and i think it needs to be a tighter reign and o greater -- a greater concern for the theft, the theft of billions of dollars of american taxpayer money. the american people are doing a good thing. they are trying their best to help a country gain stability, but our kindness and generosity is being abused in this case,

and it needs to stop. it needs to stop. we need to put systems in place that will prevent that abuse from continuing. we're partners in this. we're partners in this. the congress and the dod. we have to make sure that this system is tightened up, and address some of the concerns that mr. tierney has uncovered. thank you, i yield back. >> thank you. members will have seven days to submit opening statements for the record. mr. gary is the secretary of defense forcquisition technology and lo gist ticks. mr. kim denver and mr. stephen townsend is with the pakistan coordination. pursuant to rules, all witnesses will be sworn in before they testify. please rise and raise your right

hand. do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> i do. >> let the record reflect the witnesses answered in the affirmative. if you please limit your verbal testimony to five minutes and whatever materials and statements that you have for the record wl be submitted in its entirety. we'll start with gary. you're now recognized for five minutes. >> good morning, mr. chairman, ranking member. congressman lynch, i wish i would he written what you said. i tie myself to your remarks. i appreciate the effort to duce corruption in afghanistan. this is an update to the testimony we gave last june, an i hope ce with demonstrate we've

made progress. coractors continue to provide critical support to operations in afghanistan, the use of contractors in particular is a key to the counterinsurgency who coined strategy of our commanding general. they currently make up 47% of the dod contractor work force in afghanistan. there is no doubt that the strategy that promotes afghan first carries risk; however, it is clear that the coined strait ji is essential to developing a stable afghanistan. recognizing the central contractors of september 2010 was noted previously. the commander of iasp published his contracting guidance. this guidance stressed that everyone must understand the role of contracting counterinsurgency and how i cannot only benefit, but under md our efforts in afghanistan. due to no small part of the concerns of this committee, task

force 2010 was established by that same commander to address contracting rungs and its negative impact to the coined strategy. the task force consists of individuals from uniformed services, union representatives from a variety of contracting, auditing, and investigation agencies. the team inclus contract, forensic accountants who assist the task force in tracing money flu the afghan financial networks. i need not remind the committee that's the toughest part of the job as we all recognize. one of the key efforts of task force 2010 took was the assessment of the host naon trucking contract. we're thankful for the june 2010 report which served as an important resource. the host nation trucking assessment looked at a-prime companies supporting the contract to evaluate the extent, if any, that the power brokers, and insurgents had on the

execution of those services. i know one of the specific concerns of this committee was our use of a particular private security contractor, and during last year's testimony, i committed to ensuring action would be taken. immediately upon departure from this committee, we suspended operations with that ntractor. on augustth, 2011, the army entered into an administrative agreement with that private security contractor stipulating he will not provide cvoy security for a period of three years, and according to this administrative agreement, we ceased to use this security contractor for convoy security. there are a number of direct actions taken as a result of the 2010 host nation trucking sessment. the most significant action was the contracting command's decision to have a new vehicle to address the challenges we had with the previous contract. specifically the new vehicle expands the potential number of prime contractors establishes

new standards of conduct, and a variety of ways of applying security. due to the complexity of this new contract and meet operational requirements, we continue to use host nation trucking vehicles with additional controls until the performance can be started under the new contract which is tomorrow. to address the concerns that you expressed with the host nation trucking -- we put together a comprehensive strategy that should drive business away from the bad actors, enable smaller companies to prosper, and to meet the vast arrays of current complex needs. with the potential of money, we have to execute this program with care and vigilance. this is one of by several actions taken by the task force 2010. other additional examples include the debarment of 78 individuals or companies, the

suspension and pendg debarment of an additional 42, and the refeferl to the appropriate department official of an additional 111 persons or companies. we continue to pursue a wide range of corrective actions. however, we can't do this alone as you're aware. task force 2010 is but a part of a larger organization that is operating that. of course, challenges remain and there are concerted efforts to control corruption and contracting must persist. with the commander's commitment that we have withoutny doubt and the participation of the inrnational community, we'll continue to make progress. i thank you, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. mr. denver, you're recognized for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, ranks member, and to the committee, thank you for the iitation to appear today to talk about combating

corruption in ahanistan. i'm here representing the contracting work force and soldiers relying on us for timely and efficient material, supply, and services in support of expedition their operationings. when the army deploys, they depend on civilian support from contractors. the last decade brought challenges to contracting. we operated in theaters where the culture includescoupt business practices. army personnel strive to uphold the integrity of the procurement process. we appreciate the congressional attention by sevel amendments in the current version of the fy12 authorizationct as well as the investigative reports last year on host nation trucking and private security contractors. oversightas been a significant concern of the contracting community, the audit agencies, and congress. in response, we trained over 9600 contracting officer

representatives cor,s is, vetting procedures and increased transparency by demanding governmental approval of our sub contractors. we're on the front lines of oversight for taxpayers' dollars. we rejuvenated the training by mandating that the brigades have 80 soldiers trained to cors. the vetting is a key element in fighting corruption and ensuring security for the reconstruction effort in afghanistan. it has been a struggle to create a process for a country that lacks universal identification criteria. identification is time consumes, b provides reliable means of security. the continued use of vetting reduces risk to contracting of bad actors creating a secure environment. let me update on how we improved the systems and processes with

respect to transportation contracts. chairman, ranking member, we paid serious attention to the findings and recommendations of the report. the national after can trucking contract, nat, addresses these concerns. there's new transportation ntractors welcomed by the support contracting command last month including stricter oversight and performance controlsthan the previous host nation contract, h and t. nat ensures greater transparency into subcontracts, code of ethics, expands the number of prime contractors, ensures prior vetting, and establishes a teared rate structure based on security requirements separating contracts into suites to encourage others to participate. the contract ends today. execution of the nat contract begins tomorrow. the increase the number of available contraors from 8-20 on the nat enables greater competition leading to greater

work. it also provides a flexibility to spend problem contractors and facilitate the development of the trucking industry in afghanistan. nat supports congressional recommendations on the role of afghan national security forces and ghway security. nat inventories trucking assets available to dod on a regular basis. as a result, nat reduces cost, pays only f services performed, and gives timely delivery resulting in improved oversight and performance. we continue to have more effective wys to get the most value of the contracting dollars and the most effective support for the war fighters. i cannot stress enough the requirements overseeing tens of thousands of contractors, and awardi billions of dollars in an environment that is hostile on many levels. it remains a challenge to the contracting personnel t. takes time to change the environment.

the u.s. army is committed to the protection of the united states, war fighters, and tax fighters through all contracting activities. thank you for your support, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. we'll now recognize brigadier for five minutes. >> thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss our efforts to link contracting and the flow of u.s. contracting dollars to the counterinsurgency strategy in afghanistan. bottom line up front is we must -- we recognize we mu see and address the challenges we face with corruption and popular perceptions in afghanistan. even as our supplies are fluent to the war fighters, they arrive with good reliability, surprisingly little loss in u.s. lives and battlefield

resources. the focal point for the coined strategy in afghanistan is to deny terrorist safe havens and secure the afghan pple. our effective management of our government's contracting dollars is essential to the success of the strategy. as you all know, after 30 years of war and social devra davis revolution, congressman lynch said corruption's a greater threat, the stability of the afghanistan than the taliban. i would agree, and so would many of the other soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines i was privileged to serve with recently. this involves efforts at all levels so we can see where the money is going, gain an awareness of level of control overred unintended consequences of our spending. we have, and will continue to take appropriate steps to reduce the effects of corruption and be good stewards of the american

taxpayers' dollar. the u.s. military greatly increased understanding of the problem and the contracting dollars' effect on coin operations in theater. this report was helpful to that increased awareness and understanding. since last year, you've heard here we've taken a number steps to combat corruption, joint inner agencies and that's helped to map out the criminal patronage networks that exist in afghanistan and to address corruption as a strategic problem. task force spotlight aided in tracking and enforcing procedures regarding private security companies, and task force 2010 has given us a better understanding with whom we're doing business and providing commanders and contracting activities with the information they need to take informed action. i visited with task force 2010 just three days ago to see how

they are doing. under army brigadier ross ridge, task force 2010's accomplishments include a detailed study of the host trucking contract leading to identification key changes they made and contracting practices. these were integrated into the new national afghan trucking contract. this new contract provides a better understanding to service costs and increases the number of prime contractors which you already heard. they al identified individuals and companies for referral and debartment. these are the preventative actions that they've taken. task force 2010 implemented, including working closely with sitcom's command and share information uet the theater to share with kabul, u.s.-aid,

nato, and other partners. this vetting process helps identify high-risk contractors before agreements are entered. i've highlighted just a few of the efforts that dod is making to counter of the effects of corruptions on coin operations in afghanistan. these underscore or focuses to overcome the challenges we face in afghanistan to help improve how we perform now and in the future. thanks for your continued support of our men and women in uniform, and for in opportunity to appear before you today. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you, gentlemen. i'll now recognize the ranking member. as has been said before, has really done some very important work on the subject. now recognizing mr. tierney for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairma thank you for the testimony, gentlemen. your testimonied height lighted the -- highlighted the creation task force 2010.

it's serious about attempting to understand the problems with corruption that are going on in contracting in afghanistan. i think those are good efforts. i praised them in my opening remarks, but i do a significant problem seeing tangible evidence of them really being put into serious action at this point in time. last year, when you re in front of the cheat, you did, as you said in your testimony here today, assure us that you are concerned about commanders and risk management taken seriously and that you would start action, and i understand that you did start action on debarment for those two individuals on that. in fact, the army announced suspension and debarment an made a big deal out of that fact, and it right any was. the task force 2010 found significant sums of money from that company went 20 insurgents while the commander served as the principle security provider.

now, the findings -- you understand that our committee investigation was a committee investigation, not department of defense investigation or doj's; is that right? >> sir, it's source document, that's crect. >> i was disappointed to learn without further investigation, this went to a hearing, and then the army basically cut a deal with the trucking company. they claimed they hadn't understood what was going on in the investigation which i would pose as nonsense, but at any rate, i was disappointed the army didn't do its investigation to nail down facts not to allow for that determination. they said, well, it wasn't much of a punishment on that basis. according to task force 2010, a

war lord, a bad actor, malign actor free to contract with the united states. you have watan free to interact. do you feel you fulfilled your promise to the committee? how do you feel about it? >> sir, when we came together we said we would take under advisement, and i used the term in your investigation, anhing that was in there was actionable, we'd deal with it immediately, and so the short term solutions, as you recall, there were issues with army, the primary reason we were able to suspend the group at the national outset, and we continue to march forward. task force 2010 did, in fact, do ditional work with regards to both cases that you talked to. what is important in my mind to remember is that debarment by

the code of federal regulation and your own excellent congressional research service shows this over and over again should not be interpreted as punishment. debarments are there to protect the interests of the united states. >> well, you know, i'll grant you that point. >> sure. >> so the findings, $1.7 billion made in payments, paed on to malign actors. they found, in fact, he was not such an upstanding character himself working in concert with waton contracting company. assuming what you said is true, let's protect ourselves fm contras with them, and wouldn't that require debarment avoiding to deal with these characters again? >> there's an independent suspension department official that makes the judgments bad on facts presented to him.

without reading into his decision, he believe, and he is the deciding official, that the government was protected because you cannot -- he agreed you will not go into additional contracts with them for a period of three years if they try to go around the corner, but -- >> he's fired for doing business there and given up with a host of others. the management company is the brothers; right? cousin to president karzai; right? get it on the table, there was a deal to appl [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] general townsend, i appreciate your testimony, but when i saw on page two, the afghan population perceives our money is not positively benefiting afghan people instead of supporting malign actors. they found money was going to

malign actors. >> that's fair. it's a fact. it's also a perception amongst the people. >> okay. >> we're both going down on that. it's a problem here, and it has to be stopped. now, the other part of this thing is we have a serious issue on that. what are we going to do about it? we have the task force finding telling us that we have choices. we have use of united states or isaf forces to protect the convoys, but we want to use them in other ways, and we don't have enough of them to put them into protection; is that fa to say? >> yes. >> the forces are not ready or able to in this point in time, is that a fair statement? >> that's fair for now. we're working on it. >> you're working on it, but it's a ways from happening, so what does that leave you with to protect the convoys and to get this done? >> for now, private security

companies as we build the afghan protection force. >> back to the same people involved in the problem who instigated the investigation. now, let's talk about -- one of the things found in the investigation was there was little going on to actually oversee and manage these contracts, and i know that some of the regulations addressed that, but let me -- tell me whether this is happening on the street. are people going outside the gate in observing those convoys, riding along on the convoys, auditing, and taking investigations and inspections to be sure they are getting from one point to another? is there physically people out there doing it or just relying on reports and somebody's word that these things have been done? >> i wouldn't say that every convoy is observed or escorted, but i think significantly more of them now are than were a year ago. >> sir, if yo recall last time

i was here, ouriggest deficiency with regard to the pse's were failing to follow our own procures requiring the dual licensing process as you'll recall, but if you're going to use a pse, it must be dually licensed in the country, and we had a procedure we were supposed to follow, and in this particular time with regards to wanton as the subcontractor, we failed to do that. task force spotlight under general bore's, one of the primary functions was to get her hands around that licensing and vetting process which we should have done before. the other piece that has occurred since we discussed the last time is if you'll recall, we had temporary rules in the federal code of regulation regarding the use of private security contractors overseas, and then they don't apply to us, but they apply to our sister agencies. since we've met, we've been able

to finally push through the final rules which are a substantial improvement over the original, so they were published about six or eight weeks ago. that was not an easy process to get them through the cfr, and that's my fault, but they are out there, so that process and those procedures are in place. the visibility because of president car city's -- karzai's decree is diving this entire institution inside afghanistan to a different standard right now. as you know, we are not going to be giving up pse's as a nation overall the. dip maltic side of the house will continue to use them and in retrospect, yes, in the short rm, we'll use them, but our intention is to have the options to use the other two alternatively. >> i recognize myself for five

minutes. can we get a grip on the dollars, and i want to understand what is also being transported. because it's by understanding there is a difference as to what the actual physical materials that are being transferred, so if -- do we have a sense of what we think we have lost? what has been pilfered through this trucking process? >> if i could take that question -- >> yes, sir. >> as it relates to the h and t contract, i'd have to take the question for the record in terms of getting you the specific items, but understand about 700 million has been paid out, and we've -- >> paid out? >> paid to the contractors for their services, for the transportation they provided, but we have about 145 million in penalties and withholds that relate to lost equipment,

pilferage -- >> do we have a total value of what had been shipped and what had been lost, pilfered, or simply didn't make it to the destination? >> i can get that for the record, sir. >> my understanding is the task force 2010 being stood up, a number of items have been recovered. do you know the value of what has been recovered? >> about $172 million in recovered losses. >> and what would be included in the list of the $172 million that was recovered? >> i think probably just about anything we transport. you know, a piece of anything we transport on the roads from unit equipment to general purpose supplies to kind of get at the question of a second ago, we transport roughly 1.5 billion gal lores of fuel per day in afghanistan, and roughly half of the cargoes moving on the

ground. >> there's certain cargo not transported via this. >> that's right. some of the recent press accounts talked about ammunition being transported in these con -- convoys, and that's not the practice in afghanistan. ammunition is typically transported only in a u.s. military escorted convoy and not in convoys 245 are secured by private security companies or moving unsecured. >> so, with these private security companies providing the transportation and security, do we do sensitive electronics in those shipments, ju drives, and those types of things? >> i think -- we have electronics that track what the electronics do. we have intransit vehicle transponds that -- >> i'm talking about the content of what's behind those. >> so, the standard is no class vibe, no ammunition, and what we have is class of supply called

sensitive items. the simplest answer i would give you is things like night vision goggles would not be permitted to be transported by them. lded computers wouldot be allowed to be transported by them. we could take it for the record to give you -- >> weapons on that list? >> no,hey are sensitive items. they would not be transported by them. >> un-- uniforms? >> uniforms were transported in the convoys earlier in the effort. we've made large efforts to reduce that now because of problems with the -- >> reduce that or eliminate that? >> probably the goal is to eliminate it, but i wouldn't say we eliminated that completely. >> that's not too reassuring. i appreciate the candor though. medical equipment? there's a "wall street journal" report i wld appreciate you familiarizing yourself with. it came out in the last couple weeks talking about some of the

horrendous and horrific situations that are happening in afghanistan. the article is entitled "afghan military hospital graft and deadly neglect. ". we are talking about the oversight issues. i would appreciate if you would look at the article dated september 3r of this year as well. win of the other deep concerns here is that these -- that we're not doing our job on the ground, an i recognize in the theater of war and all that's happening there is an added degree of pressure that i'm sure only those theater can appreciate, but o of these reports said that often the containers were never counted or reopened once they got to thir destination. what assurance can you give to the committee that you're actually solving that problem because it's pretty easy to tell -- you should be able to

tell what left and what arrived, 5e7b yet the -- and yet the reports say that that check point at the end doesn't happen when our men and women receive these materials. >> i think i can -- the ground truth out there is the vast majority of everything that shows up at a base gets opened, checked, received, and looked out. there's a percentage of stuff that doesn't get received or inspected? yes, i'd say there is. one example to describe this from my own experience. we found in a yard, we took, you know, we did a transition with the unit before us. we started inventorying everything on the base, and found a series of containers there locked up. what are they 1234 the last unit didn't take them. we opened them up and discovered parts that had been ordered overtime, you know, supplies ordered over a period of time

so the unit, so the unit ahead of us maybe didn't even order it. these things arrive, and, you know, you do your best toking the for your equipment, and now you start accounting for someone else's equipment that may be on your base. that's how it transpyres, but, yes, there's a tremendous effort for unites to account for their stuff. >> not just their stuff, but checking the manifest as to what was shipped and did it arrive. >> of course. >> mr. denver, and then i'll yield back. >> if i may, chairman, let me talk about the process of what's happening and what we do in the contract to get our hands on the pilferage and address this issue. first, there's an understanding that the that is transportation mission request is sent to the contractors, and within that, identifies what is to be thans -- transported and trucks we need transport further. within the convoys, we have --

if there's sensiti equipment or pilfered equipment, we seal the trucks so if they are unsealed, we're aware of it at destination. if we find a situation where that occurred, pilferaging or the seal is broken, that's a failed mission, then the contractor does not receive payment for that mission. the other thick that happens is they also, within the contract we built a d-duct relating to their total mission throughout each month, and if there's instances of pilferages, there's deductions that takes off their invoices from the monthly shipment, and we hold it from their invoices. we're taking a number of steps to identify that. the other thing we're doing i'd say is with dcma. the intent on the previous contract is we did not have a random inspection method. in the future object nat

contract, we'll have dcma at the gate, both in where origin and destination, and it will be random so that we can conduct spot checks based on what was shipped, the condition of the trucks, involving security personnel being checked that they are appropriate and banded andicensed, but the real answer is are we putting 234 the oversight? the oversight takes more than just contracting, takes a management agency, an officer, a requirement. >> do we hve a log of what is missing and the value of it? >> i would have to take that for the record and get that back to you, sir. >> thank you. >> gentleman yield for a send? >> yes. >> it's the time to have this on the record if i could. this is a sheet that the department made available to us with respect to oil deliveries. all right. it's a multipage item. in the red there's the amount of

percentage of shortage of delivery. there's mostly zero. what should have been 100% is zero on that on significant occasions. now, we're also told that $25,000 is the penalty they pay for not delivering a full load, yet the value of this over $40,000 on the street, so i'm not sure we got our penalties aligned with the price on that and certainly there's 1100 trucks delivering oil that were pilfered. 5.4 million gal lores of fuel, gone, no explanation on that. i hope we address that and i ask the chairman to put that into the record. >> without objection, we'll enter it into the record. i'll yield back. yes, general? >> i just want to put that into a little bit of context. you're right. fuel pilferage rates are higher than we want them to be. overall, pilferage rates on the ground locks in afghanistan is about 1% plus or minus, so

that's overall context here. still, you know, the level of our endeavor in afghanistan, that's still a lot of stuff, 1% even. with fuel, it's up to 15%, and part of that is congressman, what you just pointed out there about penalty may not be offsetting the street value of this commodity, and this is a discussion i 4 with general ridge three days ago. he recognizes this and is working on adjusting that penalty. >> thank you. now recognize the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch for five minutes, or maybe a little t more. >> all right. thank you, mr. chairman, i appreciate that. i want to thank you for coming before the committee and helping us. like i said before, this is one team, one fight, ande're all trying to do the right thing here. we had an opportunity, myself, i believe the chairman, and several of our staffers here.

mr. alexander was there, mr. lindsey was there, but we went into kandahar and went down that route 4 that leads from karachi, goes up throughqweta, and then into afghanistan. the major sea port there is in pakistan, and then these trucks leave, and the pakistani trucking outfits take over at a place that we went into. that's controlled by a fellow by the name who is now general razik. now, they had, you know, they had threatened if we went in there to do oversight on the trucking operation that they would shut the border down, and there's thousands of trucks going through there, you know, in the course of a day, and so when we, on behalf of

mr. tierney at the time who was the chairman, they shut it down just as they threatened. you know, first of all, we couldn't refuse to do our jobs doing oversight, but he followed through on the threat and shut the trucking center there,he border crossing down until we left. you know, we did as much oversight and inspection as we could, an then when we left, the oversight committee left, he opened up the border again, and, you know, myself, we had a striker brigade with us. we didn't go down there by ourselves, but god bless them. you know, that's pretty tight control when you can shut off theversight of the united states congress and dod and the military did what they could to get us in there to do the oversight, but that troubles me

greatly that here we are spending billions of dollars in taxpayer money. we go down there. we're elected by the folks that are actually paying the freight here. we go down to inspect what's going on there, and you got this -- he's a general now, he was a colonel back then. he's a war lord is what he is. he's got -- this is all sort of taliban controlled territory that we drove through from kandahar down to the port, and i just -- i got to tell you, you know, it's a whole lawless area, and if the guy can shut off congress om conducting reasonable oversight, then what chance do we have of implementing a system whe we actually perform due diligence on protecting the taxpayers'

money. it's just a, you know, i just have great misgivings about this, and unls, you know -- look, we have some leverage here. they need our help. we need to use that leverage to make sure that they operate by our standards. we shouldn't be operating under the wild west standards that they operate under, and that's sort of what's going on here, and, you know, i he to say it goes right from the toprom karzai on down. it's just rotten from top to bottom over there, and, you know, the goodness and the generosity of the american people is being abused. here they are trying to do the right thing, i know the president's going to withdrawal plan there, but in the meantime, he's trying to do the right thing. the average afghan over there is in a desperate strait, and we're

trying to do the right thing from the humanitarian stand point, stand up the country to take care of themselves, but in the meanwhile, we're getting fleeced by the same people we are trying to help, a certain portion of it; right. i don't think the average afghan is really as malicious as these folks, but it's a game. it's a game. ..

and and the way that is consistent with our mission. this just can't go on. so, you know, i appreciate what you're trying to do. appreciate your tweaking the contract by gng from eight to 20. that's helpful, but next time to make going to face the same situation, where they are blocking the oversightommittee from going down there quite >> circum- a very possibly. you hit the nail in mymind on the head. what we are doing in the core of this hearing has todo with a cole of contracts. you hit the larger ratio and covers the interior is raised as has chairman that this is a

society that is based on 3000 plus years of doing things this way of 30 long years of war and we are not going to change it overnight. i mean, that's the frustration we have. the metrics of the number of convictions i have are interesting and they are important, but the real issue is the efforts quite frankly that the larger task force is doing to try to engage, to change the tones so you have a judicial system that you can trust. you had a police system you can trust in the leadership system that you can trust and it goes back to congressman tierney's comment about who is related to and what not. it's not going to happen overnight. we all know that. >> i don't think it's going to happen in a thousand years. >> and it may not. because in this committee we are

not taking the narrow view. america would've been task force 2000 spotlight. to have the other partners, international partners, paul said the isaf side of the house, so we have to look at it directly. we get the right words. make no mistake. we get the right word to the senior leadership about the importance of corruption and controlling corruption. years ago we do need to get the right words. my frustration and i'm sure everyone's frustration is the same of yours is what is tolerable. my personal opinion ise are not going to eliminate corruption. we are not in our lifetime. our efforts right now should be centered on primarily controlling corruption we can control so that our interest in dollars and vues and our resources are protect it as our our allies and resources. what happens to you as you go in and as soon as you leave, unless

we have a presence there 24 hours a day seven days a week, we take risk double transition back exactly as you said. so we all share your frustration, but i would say that the fact that we are looking probably cannot is going to be very tough to measure. as you know, i can't give you metrics that says that the executive branch of afghanistan is now good because these for metrics. the proof will be if we can reduce the numbers. the only numbers they have to show you is a reduction in the number, the dollar value. that will be the bottom line. >> the gentleman's time is expired. i want to make sure we have time for theentleman from kentucky. i recognize you for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm going to use part of my time to make a unanimous consent requt to sort of document into the record, last month ranking

member coming request authorization from me to join the authrization to afghanistan led by senator wyden. the purpose of the deletion was to investigate allegations of contacting fred and corruption. as today's hearing demonstrates come the subcommittee is de great work on this issue and given recent media reports and to know to be here today, it is clear we must continue this oversight of this very important issue. as a member of the subcommittee, i wanted to join senator wyden's delegation to price u.s. officials for exactly the kinds of questions we examine today. that's why was extremely disappointed that chairman isah rejected my request. they should not be allowed to drink bipartisan delegation to list a republican from a committee joins. this is a misguided policy that has no basis for rul and policies. the policy established by speaker pelosi and continued to

speaker boehner is every foreign delegation must be bipartisan and include a republican and democrat from each committee. i'm sorry, not included republican delegation. it meets the standard because it has another republican house member from the david schweiker. but the committee and house administration opposite interparliamentary affairs have come from this misguided policy is not the spkers, the chairman isaiah's a loan. i ask unanimous consent to chairman issa to immediately reverse this policy. thank you. >> going to hold off a ruling on that. but you might have a chance to look at the letter? >> certainly. >> you may continue. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this conversation that mr. lynch has talked abot comments and

misuse of taxpayer dollars and a waste of taxpayer -- american taxpayer dollars that sometimes go to where people are trying to help and according to the task force 2010 reports that task force 2010, it indicated that they have identified $360 million that has been diverted to insurgents and power brokers and warlords and so forth. some of that money, presumably funding the very insurgency that our counterinsurgency is designed to combat. so general, as he taught about the counterinsurgency strategy, i'd like to ask you, to what extent do you think these diverted funds are undermining the couterinsurgency strategy and to what extent they are being used to attack our own troops and you think we are doing enough to make sure we are not funding attacks on our own

men and women? >> thanks for the question, congressman. i ha this conversation with general bridge a couple days ago and the 360 million that they have identified, that was cited thayer, is a buck at $31 billion in contracts. 31,360,000,000 is still a tremendous amount of money. >> if it's correct, it's really bad. so, i don't know how you can quantify how much money. i think part of it is probably going to just simple prime that would exist in any society. some of that money for sure is going to i think the insurgency. i can't codify how much money it's going to ta can thus versus some other insurgent purpose. it is clear to estimate the money goes in the insurgency and we have to do whatever we can to

stop that. we have to do whatever we can to minimize it. there's nobody in uniform over there. everybody in uniform as a taxpayer, two appeared to don't like to hear that our tax dollars to funding the guys were trying to say. what i can say is we've got the processes n place partially due to the efforts of this committee, with the process in place to address it. it'd be hard to quantify how much of the money is going to the insurgency. clearly some as too much. >> if you have a strategy or are working to devel a strategy to determine how it is getting to the insurgent and stopping that? the >> well, absolutely. you have certain task force, you have to thought and integrate the efforts of some of the other organizations like 2010.

they also integrate our fforts across not just u.s. government, the afghan government and also our nato and oth partners they are. so there' other organizations over there. the afghan threat finance attended a briefing with chairman mullen just a week ago by the ghan threat finance and they are an intelligence organization in a regency organization their job is to delve into this and point folks out. i can tell you they're certainly taken action there. >> title ii the extent that you can't, you can report to the subcommittee is to progress you've made any discoveries you've made about how this process may be going on and whether you've had any success in stopping it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the gentleman yields back. the gentleman previously requested unanimous consent to insert a letter dated september 15, 2011 without objections ordered.

now recognize the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. cheney for five minutes. >> thk you. the problem is the money. nobody wants to lose the money, but the larger parties but is it doing to afghanistan in terms of this the angle that we've taken over there. one aspect of that firm jenner petraeus and songwriting that corruption is not going to be helpful is not the main things that has to have been for the counterinsurgency to be effective. the publicly available legal documents filed by wartime in the case said there is. the alleged tribes were not birds per se, but rather facilitation papers. they argue what tom had no case or to pay government officials and other groups for police while transporting the united states military through this volatile war zone. do you agree that the security

operators and contractors had no choice but to make those payments? >> i do agree that in many cases they don't have a choice in the perceived they don't have a choice. they perceive they will be attacked if they don't make some of these payments. >> and mr. motsek, do you agree with the watan's facilitation payments or bribes of large sums of cash per by provincial governors to local police or warlords in order to ensure their trus are bothered you think that's legal in united states law? >> clearly it is not. it is clearly counterproductive to what we are trying to do. it's part of the larger systemic problem we have. >> so here is what watan's profile designed to stay. at last be whever necessary to ensure convoy security and prevent loss of life. the abnegation the affirmative misconduct encouraging private contractors to undertake activities that the army

disallowed once ey were exposed to the public. with the army aware of the common part is and does it encourage people like watan to make them? >> i am not familiar with whether the army had that information. i would tell you this. in conversations when i had a meeting but the department official, he indicated the same that you've heard today that the facilitation payments were nessary. so in that context, i would say when watan came to the table and identified what they paid, in that context i would say that is when we were aware. i'm not familiar as to wther we are aware prior. >> watan stated the policy made a policy demonstration that's cheaper than paying for the same guns, bullets and bodies. the court goes on to call extortion payments the realities of afghan society and reality is that war. do you agree that it's simply

the cost of fighting were? >> i am not sure i would agree that it cost of fighting war in afghanistan. it's certainly part the land keep in afghanistan. we took extraordinary efforts at the low tactical level to trade routeut with your report that a check point was charging passage fee toll. we would go investigate that and go to great lengths to try to find out if they were charging a toll in ways we could mitigate that. there is one example of billboards with check point says that there's no total required to pass up such a point. then you have to do with the afghan literacy rate below 30%. >> somebody with a gun will stand there and ask you flory told. >> there's no argument from us that the corruption is probably the big country because victims are the afghan people even more so than the american taxpayers.

>> said there is a nexus between iminal enterprises, insurgence networks and corrupt political practices in afghanistan? we know they are relatives of people in high political offices th are involved in these contracts and subcontracts in making these payments or whatever. my question is in order to break th nexus, what prosecutions have been? how many people are prosecuted? how high up the chain? can they see an example of the well-connected people actually been brought to the rule of law or will they continue to be an impediment to our counterinsurgency because they think the whole game is great and the government says that if the taliban? >> i can answer that uestion him in the context of what were talking about here, trucking, corruption. >> at the much larger picture. >> kabul bank, for example,

there's a number officials under investigation with respect to the kabul bank situation corruption practiced very. and i think we are hopeful that the afghan government will prosecute some of those parties, t it's yet to have been. there's a number of investigations, over 20 investigations and work with kab bank were waiting to see what they do. right now the united states rnment is conditioning some of our support to see the outcome of kabul bank. >> well, you would hope so. reject to the airport to the capital of the cup and you can see houses that are well-heeled people living in that and the other people suffering and having a hard time making it an eye, too. i don't know he got the confidence of that to support have in this country, around the move in the right direction without doing more in that regard. so i think you got your work cut out for you. we have to take a look at our

mission and prospects for accomplishing well intended goals on this thing without really addressing the issue of the way it ought to be. another's people and for the watan case and that toll brothers and a good reason why people would be disgusted when someone should've been disbarred and all of a sudden they get a slap on the wrist. this is not good and i think we have to be cautious of that. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. i now recognize myself for five minutes. under the host nation tracking, with a prime contractors. six of those they were found t have committed some sort of fraudulent bavior. the fraudulent paperwork, reverse money-laundering, excessive profiteering, aiding and abetting. so now th plan is instead of having a contractors coming out with g to go to 20 contractors. one ofhe criticisms of the

host nation tracking process was way too many contractors who can keep track of and sometimes people pay themselves only to pay themselves again and again and again. so what are you doing to alleviate this problem because you're expanding the number of contractors and at the same time, what are you doing to make sure this nefarious characters are not indeed getting on my thumb off a diferent name? >> fair, if i could take that question, as iindicated earlier, the real approach is ensuring that we have the right oversight. it is true that the number of prime contractors has expanded in the new contract and many of those contractors came from the previous contract. >> how many? >> i believe it's 11. 11otal play a primer subcontractor capacity, sir. >> how many of those have

previous found to be involved quite >> none of those were involved in this. 11 contractors we know that they were conducting performance previously. >> my understanding is in order to be considered from you have to have access to 600 tracks. is that right? >> it may be across. i would tell you that -- >> and afghanistan, i have to believe the universe of potential vendors and contractors is fairly small. >> i have some information on the contracts. i would tell you it is a growing industry. but when we without the contractors. >> we are $.2 billion. if the growing industry. probably the most enriched industry areas next to th poppies. go ahead. >> but basically, we asked

contract is to co into the prime contractors and subcontractors to come in and identify with the capacity was in the contract. i would tell you that with sufficient tracking assets to be provided within afghanistan from the afghan firms. so it is a developing industry. i would consider it a policy they were able to grow the industry to show some success. these new companies now participate in the new contract has been vetted. and so, are you here to assure us that nobody who has been found to be fraudulent in the past is involved in this new contract? >> no, sir. >> how to get the assurance to get the case? >> i retired there's risks associated we're putting the oversight. do not are they or they are not allowed to participate in this new contract if they're under suspension were found to be fraudulent in the previous

contract? >> thereunder suspension, but there's ongoing investigations coming after the due process run. and here to tell you something couldn't happen in the future, but those companies gewirtz who arenot excluded and were not suspended commissary. >> that continue to dive further into that. time is short. laughter, propose re again. there's two programs via the afghan first in the direct assiance something the state department is very adamant about pursuing. with those two prorams, is there overlap of contracts here do we think will become increasingly -- we're asking for more oversight. we ask for more accountablity and yet at the same time the state department says you got to speed up pavements nd make them direct. yove got to make sure -- and i

see a conflict between those objectives under afghan first and direct assistance to opera trained to do can making sure that two plus billion dollars is accountable. > sera, that's something we talk about a leader that is the two pending pieces in the nba are somewhateen to address your concerns. the fact that -- i can't remember whether it's a house or senate version, but both pieces passed in committee. it gives them authority to delve deeper into the secondary, those tertiary contract or so we've never had before. as you know, we only have a legal relationship with the plan. the law changes as in the nda. that's number one. number two, you are going to grant if the law passes. they command greater authority to take people off the table which frankly last legal proof

that they are undeserving to continue or to operate with us, that we can actually use in our judgment process, intel and a variety of other methods to make that assessment. both of those pieces we talked about that the early testimony we promise to review proposed legislation and it always gets a little more -- advocates on the hill. fundamentally, those two pieces are in the nda. they are key for mr. denver to dig further into the secondary antertiary cotracts. the reality is trucking industry is a decentralized process and the bk of your tracker is our owner operators like they are the united states and that is not going to fundamentally change. so these guys to get these contracts are able to pull together 600 or 450 south tamayo

150. that's had to pull together resources to make this happen. that's the reality of the business come in the same way in the night stayed. the key come as mr. denver said is we're trying to set that guy before he ever gets a chance to come to the table and not after the fact that your legislation gives usgreater ability to do that. >> what the gentleman yield for a second? >> as early as the summer of 2009 your frequent reports of subcontractors paid money to warlords and the taliban to guarantee safe passengers calm voice. u.s. army investigators had a briefing that was the point title post nation tracking payments to insurgents. the investigators estimated the going rate for protection was $1500.1200 per track. i contractors and the private afghan security companies, allied with warlords are insurgents or in some cases directly to militias are told the commanders.

the military maintained that the federal contracting rules do not require them to some interpretations prohibited a close look below the level of prime contractors. i mean, that's a disgrace to someone in the defense contract to my people go deeper into what s behin those contracts with the subcontract level. to better quarters from someone in the military said these people should be fired and sent home. the senior defense officials said the military overseas beatitude is crazy. it's okay to pay the enemy because they are better smacks of the congress tvel unimpeded? i hope everybo gets that now. that kind of cntracting is before first level law school. >> will not recognize someone from massachusetts, mr. lynch. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate that. gentlemen, the commission on wartime contracting which is an independent bipartisan commission recently published a

report summarizing their work in afghanistan and iraq ince 2008. in based on their estimates in the last decade, the united states has spent more than 192 billion continuing contracts and grants. at the same outcome as much as 60 billion has been lost to contract waste and fraud. mr. motsek, do you think that's a reasonable estimate? >> sera, i think i hold the record for testifying. the answer is based on the way we discuss, the answer is no. >> what do you think the better number? >> i can't give you an exact number. >> edges had one question you answered it. we need to move on. were short on time. i'm sorry. i don't mean to be disrespectful. you've been very helpful as a

witness. here's my issue. read on to present a uple plants, one in iraq or afghanistan for reducer profile for the military actually is more and more contractors. and so we've got this problem. at times, we've had more folks under contract than we've had in the military. so as this trend continues, they've estimated were already over reliance on contract is in iraq and afghanistan and it's going to get more so as we draw outroops down. and so, they put it this way. the united states will lose much of our mission, essential organic capability and also it will create in afghanistan a rise in inflation and economic committees. you have some bad incentives are there. how do we -- how do we facilitate this transition with greater subcontract or his?

80% are non-us citizens. soe had very little control over that, you know, accountability guesses what i'm looking for. but 80% of those under contract to non-us citizens, i'm very concerned about, you know, this corruption, you know, undermining the remaining african-american in iraq and afghanistan to stabilize both those countries. where does that leave us? or does that leave us if we transition to a contract are based -- contact your century -- a >> sera, we don't have capabilities into force today in many areas we are discussing. you would have togrow the department of defense to make that happen. so that is the reality. so you're absolutely correct. were attacked about the broad issues of what needs to be done.

the microcosm in my mind to eliminate and to give competence to local national is twofold. number one, with regard to post nation tracking this example. we're not going to pay in dollars anymore. we're not going to pay in dollars. that's a blinding/of the obvious. so now it's not dollars in the country, which has been a problem to begin with. the second piece and i don't know how to resolve this in the short-term and long-term, but until you wish or payment to the individual without payoffs on the way down, we had this problem with the police. we have it endemic in the government. until you compare the person directly their money, there is no confidence in the system. we have gone with the international community. we are paying some of the police on their cell phone because it goes directly to the policeman and it doesn't filter down to lose those dollars along the

way. so there are practical steps you have to take them which are absolutely correct. it will be a contract centric attrition. iraq obviously after december december 31st as things stand absolutely. >> mr. chairman, my tennis about expired. having been enough time ove there in afghanistan, if that is the situation is, it would be worse if we had u.s. personnel, military personnel, you know, providing security of its convoys. the body count would be coming in now, totally unacceptable. so i appreciate the effort you've need to raighten this mess out. thank you. i yield back. >> i'm going to recognize ranking member tierney for just a moment here as they conclude, we have folks cing up on the floor. >> thank you, mr. chairman. kulak continues to be providing security and norton afghanistan to this day.

anybody look at the intelligence reports and our community about the background of this individual? >> sera, at the say this about roulette. can't go into a whole lot, t it's not a fair scope. >> but they get the gentlemen would provide in written form subsequent tothis hearing, the amount of prosecutions that are ongoing right now before this type of corruption and draft as well as the amount of money recovered to date. lastly, to get an idea of who's responsible so when we look at this and try to evaluate later on, we can know who to call for witness is in his attacked you. the 418 control battalion in charge of the contractors, is th correct? nobody here knows.

that's one problem. they report the 143rd brigade, does that sound reasonable? >> sera, before you have your next hearing it will change as things rotate. i would caution about using the organizations for you and give you the hierarchy. >> what i have from the investigation we did is the contract signing is the immediate response of the bagram contracting thinner, who reports that the principal assistant responsible in iraq and afghanistan who gets authority for the army acquisition than a practical matter for centcom. where do you fit in that chain? >> the commander of gtt --

commander joint contracng command admiral khalifa is the deputy and has detailed there to operate that. >> is he doing the regional contracting thinner and bagram? >> he owns that. >> he works for me. he's been detailed forward. if i could quickly explain it, the army is the executi agent for contract in the conflict. we had to get the executive agency and it could've been a service, could've been agency. they tried many years toget away from that. because that, the army acquisition mr. denver's boss is the ultimate responsible agent from a contracting standpoint. so the authority and the words of people to operate under the joint contracting command can't be at the army to spend money

and so appeals and oversight -- direct oversight, with very few exceptions within afanistan are the army's responsibility. i'll give you the wiring diagram, sir. >> that is true. osc appointed the army is the executive agency went to my boss. i am actually detailed those authorities for executive agencies and a good organization and provides broad oversight. were admiral khalifa is the head of the contractingfficials to work for him. one in afghanistan, one senior contract official in iraq. the senor contract official oversees those, the ones he referred to. t that is the contracting chain of command. >> i suspect we'll see you

gentlemen back again since you have responsibility and i want to thank the chrman account for working with us on this and appreciate his hard work and leadership on this matter. thank you all for participating. >> i want to thank you gentleman for your commitment to our country and for your service. we do thank you. the pentagon, the department of defense have to get this right. the state department has to get this right. we are talking about elegance upon billions upon billions of dollars but uortunately, we know, is going to feel somef the very people that we are trng to uppress. that is totally unacceptable. the waste, fraud and abuse happening in the theater of war is unacceptably high and we see that in report after report. i understand difficulties and i'm trying to appreciate all the nuances and the difficulty of war. and there will be somesmall degree that happens in that theater. but when we hear that tens of

billions of dollars in waste, fraudnd abuse, it's unacceptable. one of the next hearings we will have in the subcommittee will deal with what is happening in iraq. we have to get the contract is part of the equation right. the transition states and the department of defnse to the state department, the state department is lookingo bring up some thing like 17,000 contractors. so the news clips may be that we are turning down in iraq, but the reality is we are high enough to the tune of 17,000 contractors in an unbelievable amount of money. we have to get this equation right. i thank you all for being here and appreciate the great work for mr. tierney and his staff in a very collaborative effort. we find republicans, democrats working together on this. at this time, the committee will stand adjourned. [inaudible

>> nearly partially segs successful defense initiative would mean that the soviet planner looking at the united states could not be assured of the outcome of an assault in the first right on us. >> the late senator malcolm wallop served in the senate from 1977 to 1985 and was a leading supporter of the star wars space system and a proposeer of

anti-communist activity. all arkifed online at the c-span video library. >> this week, ivan kander and rob jones discuss their documentary, "survive. recover. live. "the rob jones story." [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> why did you do a documentary on your injured buddy from high school? >> it came from a natural, a natural place, when rob first got back bethesda, he kept saying, things were happening so