it is a single process. a whole lot of earthquakes triggered with the same type of motion. it indicates that the stress field is uniform and means that the injection process -- within a larger [unintelligible] >> we are going to hold a formal questions at this point because we are well over the allotted time, but we would be more than happy for people who still have questions to come up and ask those directly. we will do the best we can at responding. thanks very much for coming. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

this year's student cam competition asked students across the country what parts of the constitution was important to them. today's third prize winners selected the fourth amendment. >> today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, are very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist attacks. >> i can hear you.

i can hear you. the rest of the world hears you. the people and knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon. ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ >> my understanding or impression of the patriot act is that it was the legislation that was passed by president bush in response to 9/11 and allowed the federal government to really tap in better to our communications system to understand the banking system, to be able to trace, apprehend

and prosecute people who might be involved in terrorism either within or without side -- or outside of the united states. >> patriot act is a collection of laws created to change or modify substantially existing laws in many different aspects of law enforcement, intelligence gathering, different agencies of government. it modifies many different things. >> for me, civil liberties are what you find in the bill of rights. for me, the fact that we have the civil liberties and the united states is what makes it so great. we have the right to free speech. we have the right to assemble. in my opinion, my civil liberties important to me are

the ones protected in the bill of rights. >> civil liberties are codified or set forth in the first 10 amendments to our constitution, so as a lawyer that is what i think about, but as a citizen what we'd think about our those aspects of the constitution, the protections we have that make us americans, that give us the set of rights and privileges that we have as americans. >> how are you seeing this right now? disobey and you die. >> someone is tapping into the power grids. traffic cams. >> you have a theory? >> i do not believe they are of using anything. obviously anything that is law

abiding, they follow the law. a lot of myths out there. >> i do not. i am a person who believes that first of all come anything done under the patriot act, and there are examples where you can do war with searches and seizures of information. that sounds carry on its face. i know that the government, should they attempt to use the again someone, still enjoys protection of due process. the judge gets to hear that case. and if something was done in properly, that is what the judge is there to protect. our entire system of justice

really insurers even though the patriot act has brought in the power of the federal government, that there will always be a check and balance to make sure people are being treated fairly ultimately. >> do you believe the government is abusing the patriot act? >> i definitely do. most of the patriot act was designed around keeping an eye on the american people, and it is very rare the american people are causing terrorists related acts. >> that is the way that you have, whether you want to weigh that being more important and then taking the information like you have that you consider personal and using it in a way that you might not find to be acceptable. >> i have a report from thelatimes.com bust as fbi intelligence investigations have compromised the civil

liberties of american liberties that were previously assumed. >> go ahead. all right. >> get down, get down. >> not cool. ♪ >> the patriot act as a destructive undermining of the constitution. we started this congress off with a discussion about reading the constitution. many of us carry constitutions with us in our pocket. how about today we take a stand for the constitution to say all americans should be free from unreasonable search and seizure? >> the purpose is to keep supplies but -- suspected terrorists under surveillance. i believe it has been successful, and i support this

extension. >> this, to me, has been a classic example of sacrificing liberty for safety and security. ♪ >> go to studentcam.org to what all of the documentary's. continue the conversation on our facebook and twitter pages. >> in a few moments, a hearing on homelessness among veterans. in less than two hours, the internal revenue service. after that, more about reason inspector general report criticizing the general services administration for excessive spending at a 2010 conference and las vegas.

>> on "washington journal glo- coat tomorrow morning, we will look inside the race for the republican nomination with mike allen and evan thomas. we will discuss the scope of student debt in the u.s. and its effect on the economy with the founder of website focusing on financial aid. we'll take your questions and comments about bullying in the nation's schools and we are joined by jack buckley with the national center for education statistics and catherine bradshaw of the johns hopkins center for the prevention of youth violence. washington journal is live on c- span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> this sunday on "q&a", the u.s. senate youth program. >> one of the greatest experiences of this week was when i got the opportunity to meet both of my senators, just

to be able to meet them and talk to them. >> he talked about how important is to be financially sound. we will not have any money to devote to the fence. >> students from all 50 states participated in a week-long program in the nation's capital. they share their observations and experiences as a interacted with members of congress, the supreme court, and the president. >> everybody we have met here has said they are reaching across the aisle. everybody is saying that, but it is not actually happening. there is a discrepancy between what they are saying in what they are actually doing. i had never thought about that before being here. >> that is sunday night at 8 eastern on "q&a". >> it the senate veterans'

affairs committee recently looked at homelessness among veterans. hearing from veterans about their experiences getting help from the va. the obama administration has established a program aimed at ending in veteran hollis this by 2015. this is a little less than two hours. >> good morning, everyone. thank you all for joining us for this very important hearing today. it goes without saying that no one who has sacrificed to serve our nation in uniform should ever be without a roof over their head. and homelessness is a harsh reality for tens of thousands of veterans. in 2009, secretary shinseki laid out the goal of ending homelessness among veterans in five years. rid of, says in five years. today's hearing will examine the

progress made as well as the opportunities moving forward, particularly the woman's veteran space. they recently announced a number, as veterans drop by 12% to a little me than 67,000. they deserve to be commended for the progress they have made. challenges remain. there remain focused on in new and growing segment of the homeless veteran population. like their male counter parts, they face many of the same challenges that contribute to their risk of becoming homeless. they're serving on the front lines. they're facing some of the harshest realities of war. they are experiencing ailitary sexual trauma, suffering from

anxiety, and having trouble finding a job that provides stability to ease their transition back,. they have needs that are unique from those of male veterans. they found in a report released some monday, some of the needs are not being addressed. they found there were serious concerns for homeless women verans, especially those who have experienced military trauma. they found better terms and bathrooms without sufficient locks and lighting. they also felt the va should do a better job at targeting places of populations that need help the most. in edition,hey released a report that cited them for the lack of gender specific privacy,

safety, and security standards. i sent a letter seeking answers to a number of questions it raised. they are reviewing their data collection process in order to capture more information. they are working to develop and provide training for staff to better treat veterans to treat traumatic events. as more wome began transitioning home -- from home, and we must be prepared to serve the unique challenges as we learn about the alarming number of homeless women veterans. we must make sure the va is there to meet their needs. we cannot violate their trust

when we place them in housing facilities are when they receive care. i am awful that today we can explore these issues during today's hearings. i am so pleased that courageous women like those that are joining as i have comeorward to help give us t firsthand account of the challenges that we need to meet. as the va continues to make progress, challenges remain. we are still facing unacceptable numbers of chronically homeless veterans. of thisroup often has complex combinations of issues including addiction and mental and physical health issues. all have been felled by a system that let them slip through the cracks. it is critical that we continue to look for productive ways to

get them off the street. this will take a concerted effort from the homeless programs. it'll also take collaboration from all of the programs. ine could today's economy -- today's economy, it helps veterans and their families remain in their palms. it is important to focus on getting earned benefits. for homeless veterans, these befits to make the difference in avoiding homelessness are becoming trapped in a cycle that keeps them on the street. we have been making progress at ending better and homelessness. there are permit housing programs. we must ensure we do not lose sight of the need to have

programs that match their needs. i had my staff to an exhaustive review there we opportunities to improve the program by providing a more guidance to providers and the staff who works with them. today's hearing gives them another opportunity to better understand the current situation . >> thank you. i like >> thank you for your

willingness to share your stories and experiences with us. as members of this committee it is important we hear first hand from our veterans. veterans and how it'll affect a lot of the policies and problems. i would like to extend a warm welcome from north carolina. thank you for your involvement and services. i would like to welcome our boston regional office. i am looking forward to hearing that testimony. thank you for being here. for many years of dedicated service, there are a few issues that we care more about. it is ending the monks are men and women. it is almost 65,0 veterans on any given night.

in massachusetts we're trying to do a better and work on it. i know congress has provided over $400 million increases for homeless veterans. bba has given service to assist homeless veterans. in light of the recent report, i am concerns about these programs. it is great to have additional funds. i know there are lots of nonprofit groups that are trying to do their best as well. i am quoting it. they do not have the information needed to allocate grants to minors and retract progress.

the second finding is fining the safety of women veterans. they found 22 hamas beam of veterans are faced in a facility that was approved for only male veterans. this is unacceptable. -- they found 22 of a homeless veterans arreplaced in a facility that is approved for only male veterans. this is unacceptable. they're providing housing to veterans that are not homeless. 1/4 the veterans are not homeless by entering the program. this goes to oversight. what progress has been made, pointing to the 12% decrease on any night does not provide the picture.

i am looking for to doing this. how can they have this without accurate data? do they know the living situation? the fall of there is very important. reality to make sure that this is being used efficiently. they'll have the opportunity to get these very real answers. >> thank you very much. we will turn to our opening statement. >> thank you for your leadership. this is still a persistent problem.

i appreciate the work the va has done. this is one of the best of veterans outreach programs for the homeless of any place in the country. the numr, as women veterans has more than doubled. to understan it is not just the va. it is not all hands approach. it is not just homeless programs like food and shelter. the reintegration program is designed to provide the support assistant needed for veterans to obtain economic stability. thadministration must be the leader and the coordinator of these efforts. i would like are witnesses to think about how we can coordinate these programs so

they are not overlapping or are not missed a gaps. we are reaching every veteran and every veteran's family. today second panel will have this. i'm glad she has come forward to tell her story. her story is similar of that service member. they serve bravely in uniform. she was mobilized. she was sent to iraq and kuwait. she found a job in in santa. -- jobin atlanta. she still needed to travel to cleveland to do her commitment. she was eventually let go by her

employer in a state. she found the homels [inaudible] she got the help she should have received much earlier. she has gone through the initial stages. she is n staying with their sister until the voucher process is complete. that can be as early as this week. she's also gine with your employers to a full-time job. i hope this will be a success story. she deserves what she earns. her testimony shows a moral commitment to our country that so many veterans have accepted. she surge again and is serving

now. thank you to center for this. >> i would like to thank you. we are pleased to have sandra strickland. she will speak to us abo her experiences as a homeless veteran. thank you for your willingness to come here and share your story. after that we will hear from the executive director of ash fell. he is accompanying the coalition for homeless veterans. she's testifying on behalf of the vietnam veterans of america.

will then hear from linda. it is good to have you here. we will be gimmicky. thank you so much for coming in sharing your story. >> you're welcome. i am an army veteran. i have served here for 2.5 years. i served in germany imported taxes. i was not able to go to desert storm but i did transition out and moved to virginia to open up my own business. my husband and i had issues. i was involved in a domestic violence situation. i left the home with my two chdren ages 7 and 5. i didtay at a domestic

violence shelter. i am familiar with how a shelter is. i never thought i would be homeless. i have 20 + years in the adminiration. there's aealth of experience. normly when you think of a homeless person, you think about a person on the issue with a sign. he never think about a person that has a life, a mother. i think they do not use the mall veterans as this. i was able to start working at a temporary agency. it was not full time. it was enough to get me started. i was able to get a full-time position at the timi was working on. an apartment for me

and my children. i am looking at unemployment. i was unemployed for six months. i did get unemployment compensation. it did end. a splinter custody issues with my children. i was not able to maintain custody because of myituation. it was a long struggle. but that i was facing homelessness. i got in contact with an organization that assists female veterans in obtaining suitable housing. that is where i am right now. my road to homelessness, i feel there are not enough funds being sent to the private organizations.

the organization i was in, it was used to help the victim. when you're homeless, you feel dehumanize. i think it will be more support for us. our voices need to be heard. as far as when i reached up to the veterans administration, i thought i would be able to get assistance. at the time, they cannot give me a list of shelters to go to. i did not have a full-time job. where are the resources? there's no one to direct us. that i do notlight

think our society has a clue as to what it is. you tend to not want to reach out. people tend to treat you differently. they treat you like you are an outcast. i did reach out to an organization to get help. theyere able to help me. the funds were dried up. i am facing eviction. i had two children need to worry about. i just feel there needs to be a voice as far as the mall homelessness. if i were facing this situation that i had to go to a shelter, i would have basically just stayed in my car. a shelter went to previously, it was cold.

in deceer 2010. the blankets that they gave us was very very thin. we were able to work in the pantry. they had donated a lot of w comforters. i asked the manager if i could get some blankets for my children. i did not care about myself. my children were freezing. she said that we cannot. she gave me little baby blankets. i said there are comforters in the pantry. why can i have some of those tathose? she said those a for someone else. i said to? -- who? why are we sitting in blankets letter paper thin. the organization that i am in now, i do not look at its a shelter. it is a transitional home. i look at it as a home. i do not know what i would have

done had that organizationot been there for me. and that with the owner -- i met with the owner. she made me where it was a two- year program. in still looking for full-time appointments -- i am still lookg for full-time employment. i am working at a temp agency. that was my saving grace. the program that is there, when shelters to extend their hand to help a homeless person, they should have resources in place to not enable them to stay homeless but provide resources that would get them on their feet to be able to become self- sufficient. the support, i cannot stress or

talk about the support for the homeless people. a woman veteran is different than a woman. we have unique needs. i think that needs to be addressed. >> thank you very much. we appreciate your testimony. >> thank you for those kind words. it is my honor to present this testimony and the bulk othe nister. i'm here on the nascent

coalition of homeless this. this is one who i am happy to call my friend. all of us providing service to veterans are commited to the five-year plan to end homelessness for all of our veterans. we have about 200 n and about a dozen women veterans in separate facilities. last year none could 2011, they ended homelessness for 302 veterans there are jobsrogram. jobs average $14 an hour. it was the cause of about $1,100 per placement.

they also placed disabled veterans into permanent support of housing. we ended homelessness for 389 of the 407 veterans research last year. how do we do this ta? it is laid out here was several principles. it is our support of 300 churches, congregations, and faith groups to come together to join the government's efforts in ending homelessness. we engaged in about 3200 volunteers just an hour restoration quarters. these congregations and volunteers did not just received

these dollars from the va and department of labor, but they matched them. they are there with their food, their clothes, their financial support. the volunteer time for training and mentoring so that we are doubling the impact of those resources to provide not only the professional staff services but especially that boundless energy from our volunteers. we really have strong support empresses a patient from the organizations like the american legion and the military officers association. are formally a homeless veterans have a culture of giving bk. they do not want to leave anyone behind. they say it begins with our formally veterans here at the

front desk who are saying to others welcome home. ey are giving back. they put together the post 526. they were the first as we understand it to receive their national charter and operate out of a homeless fality. it is also our local continuum of care. i think all of our folks for their support.

these principles can be summed up in a couple of words. one is respect. respect f every veteran to make their choices. these are laid out beaifully by the grand per diem program. it has the flexibility to build on local innovation. three is building on an incentive based culture by rewarding those who take responsibility for themselves and others. four is working on the rapid rehousing strategies that reduces the need for a transitional housing. we put back into homes 276 persons last year which kept us from having to build another 300 bed shelter. we have cemented supported -- our own, saysed

prevention. we hope you might consider adding three other items. first is a cost-of-living adjustment and the grant per em for more innovative funding that would provide and utilize the partnership between the medical centers and a local percenters --. thanks again for your commitment to our veterans and implementing

the principles that will help us all and homelessness for our veterans. as a pastor, madam chairman, i will be -- continue to pray for your wisdom and encourage this committee and our congress to offer the best to our veterans. thank you for giving us in the tools to serve. >> thank you very much. >> good morning. thank you, senator. for allowing me to talk on behalf of veterans for america. thank you for all the great support you have given. it has been a tremends opportunity for the veterans and has seen great advantage. i also would like to, mr. brown mentioned, the snap sought picture of a number of homeless veterans that exist today is 67,000 plus.

it is a snapshot. what it does show is that there has been an impact made by the additional care assistance services and programs th have been coordinated to work at helping to end homelessness. we have seen that these programs are doing something. although i have full testimony, which goes into great detail, i will try to be very conce. a housing model, which is a great push right now, it is a monster push right now, and it is in fact a beautiful house in model for veterans that fit in it. it is also one at is of great advantage to women veterans. they can have their children with them. they do not have to disrupt the family situation. the kids can stay in school. but it does not fit all veterans. not even all women veterans.

there are many veterans that are quite honorable and that we cannot dismiss the opportunity -- or i should say, the responsibility -- of not eliminating or disintegrating and housing-ready model for some of these veterans. even when the secretary first came out on eliminating homelessness, he said do not close all the doors. there are doors that should be left open because many veterans will have to find their way to the right one. by placing some of these veterans and housing-first model, we are setting them up for failure and back to the streets. i would like to make a couple comments about the program. because, in fact, non-profit agencies without them,. the attack on homelessness for

veterans would be a great issue. -- greater issue. there are a few situations across -- that cause great concern or a great impact. one is the ability to approve -- request an increase for the program. in order to get the per diem increased, nonprofits submit their last year's audit to show they need more money. non-prit agencies do not have the pleasure of hiring staff and augmenting program designed up front in order to show there is a law, because now, in the cases of some nonprofits, they have lost their les of credits and banks. they pay interest rates that are not reimbursable.

so i have proposed in my testimony a piece that could be worked into the situation where we can, as w have with other federal agencies, nonprofits request. i describe that in my testimony. another is the residential payments that we have to be docked -- the doctor the payments as a residential payment if they are in a nonprofit program, a residential program. that brings down in the cost of the program for the agency. if that could be eliminated, a nonprofit agency, especially those with one -- more than one program, it very difficult to have a program if you cannot help to utilize these moneys that are discretionary to keep the entire agency afloat because if that agency is solvent, it

cannot operate the program. it is a handicap to those agencies that have many programs to have to deduct residential payments. we believe the is an issue with consolidation of grant podium " projects grant per diem approach projects. these two brands have separate project numbers which have to be turned in and provided per diem payments based on percentages, and those non-profit receive several different percentage based on the differences in the project numbers and they still have the same garbage collected and the same staff and eat the same food. another is the grant per diem service centers. they are the gateway in from the

streets to the housing-first model. i will ask you to look at the testimony to see this evidence of those programs. some are seeing up to him a thousand -- 1000 veterans. $4 in change does not make it for the veteran that comes in for one hour and a staff past work for two days to get them housing. we believe we have a great opportunity to expand the use of the service centers. that is outlined in my testimy. we believe the scope of their ability -- and authori needs to be extended so that veterans who are placed in housingirst can get the place management they need to stay there so they can come back to the service centers and continue that process. we are looking into how we can utilize those and more if the program to become homeless prevention.

grant per diem did not put out any grants for the new programs. >> if we could get you to wrap up your testimony. i want to make sure we get to all of our witnesses. >> yes. i dress military drama programs. if we could extend the deal well opportunities for verans. and of course the reports i mentioned in testimony. i appreciate being able to be here. i encourage the committee to lo at the opportunity for nonprofits to continue to assist in this realm. thank you, ma'am. >> thank you very much. >> thank you for the opportunity . discuss the oig'weres

-- oig's work. the grant program is the largest of several virginia homeless programs -- several va calmest programs. -- homeless program. we reviewed community agencies in fy 2011. to assess whether program funding was successfully aligned with a program priorities. when identified opportunities and made recommendations to strengthen congressional oversight. -- prevention and oversight.

-- prevention oversight. to measure bed capacity and the needs services, to accurately report a outcomes report out -- report outcomes. and improved oversight of the providers participating i the program. we found vha lacked guidance for things expected fo homeless operations, such as female veterans living in transitional housing. almost 1/3 to not adequately

address safety services. halls and stairs without sufficient lighting. female and male residents on the same floor without access restrictions. we also found that 27% of the program providers did not ensure the safe storage of homeless- medication. a review of dietary report services showed 12% of providers did not consistently offer adequate and meals that were nutritionally balanced inappropriate for homeless veterans. again, we saw the grant applicants were not required to describe how they would provi meals or how they would meet the special dietary needs.

such as managing diabetes in their grant applications. vha needs to strengthen its oversight of the grant program, specifically meeting to assure it was aligned with goals. 26% of the veterans information was inaccurate. in more than half of the cases, vha k c manages inaccurately reported that a successfully creek -- it successfully completed the program. more management attention is needed to address the quality of program information relied upon to make decisions. another important step in helping veterans transition to vba's dent living eis

efforts. we have issued nine inspection reports that it found that four of nine va regional offices did not insufficiently have outreach services for veterans. va is taking actions to ensure the safety security and health and welfare veterans, and we expect a refund at -- the recent efforts will help to deliver effective services to help homeless veterans and the funding is used as intended. thank you for the opportunity to discuss our work. we would welcome any questions you may have. >> thank you very much for your work on this. let me start with you. you contacted the va and ask for help. obviously, they said to you, nothing. you got no response >> it to

me, their basic concern was my mental health. i shared with them everything that was going on the street and eir first question was, are you mentally stable? >> what do you think they should have said when you first call. -- called? >> what do you need? not what i wonder what they wanted for me, what i needed. if they were able to provide the resources themselves, provide resources that i could reach out to -- i was not even given that. i just feel there should be some type of partnership. if they are not able to provide the assistance, then they should work with us as partners. asian not just hang up the

phone and make me feel hopeless, because that is what i felt. >> your testimony is very i opening. telling someone they will be someplace policing without a lock on the door -- sleeping without a lock on the door. insufficient lighting. what would that type of environment mean to you? >> an unsafe environment? >> yes. >> i would have stayed in my car. it is different when you have children. of course i think of my safety, but i think of my children, as well. there are programs, but not enough, for women with children. i could have gone to other shelters but i could not have taken my children with me. and a female, just from being a woman, you want to be able to feel that when you go to a shelter that you have adequate such it -- adequate safety.

>> what would that have meant for the women who live in your facilities? >> let me just say, we do have at the agency, a 30- transitional program exclusively for women veterans. i believe that in some cases, women do come there because it is a place that they know is safe and they know is secured. we take great attention to that. i think one of the situations that exist is that there are so few of these programs in the community that are exclusive to women veterans that are designed for them to address their tremendous needs. that is one of the shortfalls, also. >> reverend, what is the importance of safety, security, and basic things like that for your clients? >> it is absolutely paramount. we felt like it took two years

for us to learn that trust. and making sure we could commit the amount of resources that were needed. thats why i ask you all to consider some kind of a challenggrant. the community wants to respond, because the number of response of women and children are low. even though we have them housed separately and they are able to have their own rooms and facilities, it is at a much greater cost. with a little bit of extra help from this committee and from congress, we can provide not only that safety and security, but then also really address the professional needs a around sexual trauma, having well- trained staff, being able to really train our volunteers. i he women who want to mental -- to mentor other women, but do not always understand the level of complexities of that trauma. we would like to able to have the funding and support, and we believe we can get it

matched by the community with some leadership here. because we do not bieve in the entitlement system, but we do want you to help us create the incentives, but with the funding to overcome the smaller numbers but dealing with more complex issues. >>: of the va inspectors made it clear they need more. we have found disincentives for homeless people to seek va's housing. my question to all of you is, what would you do -- what would you direct the va today to preserve homeless veterans.

what would it be? >> provide adeate programs that can deal with the unique needs of female veterans. the basics. safety,ecurity, locks, privacy. then, resources to help us get back on our feet, to become self-sufficient, so we do not stay homeless. >> certainly, the issue of the security really impacts the ability to focus on the programs they have. i think it is very important that the of the va truly does se oversight on what they have to remold and work with some of the opportunities they have in front of them. i think the addition of some

extra funding to the special needs grants, to those programs that want to do the work with women's veterans, which can be quite costly, because the staff that is needed and the support that that grant allows for assistance to families while they took care of the children, while the women were attending to some very specific and very, you know, important work in the mental health field. i think -- to really make an evaluation of how many mitar sexual tuma specific residential treatment programs there are in this country and the fact that if they are, how do they expect a homeless women to get into them and travel to them. >> i want to say, thank you for your courage and i want to say i am sorry for your experience. we simply ask the va to be right

there with us. what the medical center in nashville does, is a train their staff. their staff are with us as much as three and four days a week in our facility, working both with our women and our man, but they are also they're saying we are going to be the advocate, right alongside us as a fth-based and other community-based providers. i think is when they exhibit and put in place the men and women professionals with that se passion, that it really makes a difference. nobody can underestimate the power of saying, welcome home, veterans. >> we would like to say that we would like to see the be a transition -- va transition.

we would like to see incentives put in place for special needs to ensure that female veteran's needs are met. i think you would have possibly to explore using contracts outside of the grant per diem program, to meet the needs of female veterans, especially when they do not represent a large number. it would be smaller and get better economical solutions. >> can't you. first of all, i read your testimony. thank you for sharing your personal experiences. i commend you for your grit and perseverance, notwithstanding all the challenges you had and continue to have. i read with interest your new situation, where you are now. you are still there? >> yes. >> how do u find that program in terms of tting you to that

path to independence? how are you moving along? how are you dealing with your financial assistance? how're things working out with the kids? where are you in terms of your balance in your life? how was that coming along? >> right now, i am on the path to becoming self-sufficient. i am still working with a temp agency, so i do have consistent employment. am still currently seeking full-time employment. in the interim, i continue to press on. the program that i am man, it is a unique program because because it is catered to the specific needs of the person. there are four females in the home and we all have a unique situation. we are actually told to give a

plan of what we intend to do it. it two years that we have a program. with that, they cater to what our specific needs are. mine, of course, was continue my hunch rainier shipping, to maintain and get the physical these for my children and providing resours as far as obtaining a lawyer for me as far as the contra nor -- congress is quite content to be able to further do that. i do not have any mental health issues. but they have set me up with a mental worker that i can talk as far as support. i said, when you are homeless, it is one thing, but when you are dealing with other emotional

issues, it is another. >> looking at your challenges here, being homeless, and dealing with children's issues, which is the one issue, you can survive and do a thing, but when you throw in children and not wanting to lose them and keep the family unit together, and having a possible threats against your life and your safety and security. as i said, thank you for sharing that steering. -- that story. i was disturbed when i read that you called the va for help, they basically put you off. what we are aring a lot, whether it is dealing with claims, these types of assistance issues that lack a personal touch his sometis is all you need. they could say listen, we cannot have the ability to take care of you because your situation, however, we have these people in

your city or town and give you a whole list of contacts and follow-up with you in a day or two or three, none of that was really provided. is that accurate? >>orrect. >> that is unacceptable. reverend, i know you have a big fan in this panel. he was nice enough to allow me to share this and i am honored to do so. i want to thank you for what you all do. what separates your program for mothers and why isn't this going viral all over the country? >> that is an excellent question. i really think that there is maybe not as much emphasis on the counity-based and faith- based partnerships that can be put together. when you begin to really grasp what volunteers both from the

fake community and organizations can do offering both professional training as well as a kind of support system, they respond many-fold. >> how do you deal with costs, too, in that model? >> thank you for asking that. we are paying the bills by doing both. once they are exposed to the needs of our veterans, they see both the gaps between what our cramped -- grant per diem funds or other funds can provide. for the homeless veterans for integration program, we had more veterans applying for education, and i am talking about quality certification skills and healthare and internet technologies and transportation.

but when a license costs $4,000 right up front, we found ourselves with some significan gaps. the committee responded and provided the extra dollars, so we have a friend down in hendersonville. jeff miller, who started operation, welcome home. the same with food and clothes. >> it is a community-based effort. everyone gives a little bit and at the end of the day, you are squared away? >> yes, sir. >> do you think they are taking the necessary steps to correct it. >> i think the va has word with us very diligently to make those recommendations. i think the group in the headquarters has taken this seriously, realized they have problems, and has been very perceptive to do that. as far as our assessment as to

how well it is implemented, it is too early. >> thank you. >> and thank you very much, but madame chair. very much, madame chair. chris does our homeless coronation for the state. we are very happy that they are here. it does not matter where you are, what say you are from, there is an issue in the struggle in challenge that we have with homeless veterans. first, thank you for your testimony. i read your testimony. incredibly impact full, and someone who personally has dealt with homeless veterans as a landlord, reaching out to veterans programs to try to get a more standard and in stable housing situations, i have seen it firsthand as a manager and

operator of facilities, small apartments, ensure they are able to move through and get some housing. but the ask you. you made some comments about what they can do differently. do you think, in your experience and this will actually go to you, do you think they have the capacity within you think they have the capacity to do the services that are necessary? as i was mayor, we put aside this whole debate over church and state. we had individuals and veterans that needed to be dealt with. we were not interested in hearing the philosophical debates. we are more interested in .earing what we could do a

do you feel confident the va can would you do?encap index that may be a have a question. that is important, what is the right allocation of who should be doing what and out. it is not day va system by self. >> it is a collective system. iif seone were to come to me and mention they were homeless, i would point them intohe direction of the community-based organization. >> as your first choice? >> correct. if the va could partner with other organizations that can focus on the unique needs, the

va is a big organization. there are a little teeny bits that need to be addressed. >> we have a program in anchorage. we worked with a group called save harbor. this is for families. the costs for dade was maybe $15 for the agency. at any moment, someone cou transition there quickly, a community kitchen and

environment. they would bring in folks to work with people to ensure they have jobs or education or whatever they're looking to do. i think it is an incredible model. it was not a government run. it is a mixture between foundaons and faith based. that is how the va the partner. they want to do well. i know that. do they have the ability to do it? do they need to rethi this model in a little bit more? are they too bureaucratic? de think they can do it? >> that is a good question.

right now we believe that the va does not have the information it needs to really assess where it needs these services. the applications are cemented. it does not mean all the areas that need these services are getting them. i wld say they probably have to look outside the model. >> do you think they have the capacity to do that? >> yes. it will come down to the coordination and getting the office of rural health to work with the programs to deal with the tribal governments. to there has to be coordination. i do think they have it. right now they do not have all the information they need. they c better assess where the needs are and deliver the right

services. >> thank you. that is the crux of it all. if they cannot get there, all the reports we do will be reports. it is our job to have this oversight to make sure they make it to the next you see where it works and does not. where do we direct them? we want community services in the mix. >> thank you. >> i thank you for holding this hearing. it is absolutely vital. welcome. i welcome all of our witnesses today. it struck me as i read the testimony and heard most of you ies. your verbal testimony i

we had tea did you entities looking at different things. -- two different entities looking at different things. they're looking at homelessness from the standpoint of what they can do to affect the rest of their lives. we have a va focused on what the crisis du jour has today, a somewhat ignorant of what tomorrow has in store. i think it gets to some degree as what they have identified. i think there is a deep willingness on the pa of this committee to try to bring these two things into one alignment. it shocks me to some degree that

we seem to be ignorant of the successes that existing communities all across the country. by no means do i think this is intentional. i think every member of this committee can highlight a successful program number of communities they live and represents. i am not sure they are any better than what we do not come national. it is the vision of purchasing a bankrupt hotel or motel to open up a veterans outreach program. the fact that we have a va facility that understands the problem to in a non-traditional

way with a community organization to the degree they have now placed a nurse on your campus which eliminates the challenge of transportation. you're able to convce them why that benefits their overall delivery of care. you're actually able to treat people before they are in crisis. i n not thank you enough for your personal observations, insight into how you lived. i would hope your testimony and others inspired the va to look within. you can take the reports. if they do not do everything right. you sd if they cannot do this

alone. >> they cannot. >> i think to some degree it is reinforced by the a.i.g. report. my questions are pretty simple. do you feel the problems outlined in your testimony are proble specific to the grants and in per diem program or are they systemic throughout the homelessness program? the grant perd at diem program. that is where we identified the problems. we think that there are some of these issues that are impacting va's efforts in going forward. you have to have a need assessments to know where to liver the services. we did not see this in place to make the decisions.

>> of those that participate in your program, and how yo measures successful outcomes? >> i want to say thank you for being such a champion of veterans' issues and such a wonderful champion for north caroli. the success that we measure really is built on the principles of the grant per diem program which calls as not all made to remove them through this continuum of care where we have benchmarks a round there's stability -- around their stability and placement in private housing, the but but but we do follow them as the program

calls for up to 18 months-two years after they leave. it is following them for that time. this is where the department labor comes them. then go back 18 months and take our best at the men and women be placed in the workplace. they tell us that the in last one, at 87% of those were placed 18 months earlier are still on the job. we measure that success. our number was 76%.

it is not only that. for us, tre to other measures. first is a reintegration back into the community through not on the civic organizations but also their family. they have the internal and a ternal supports they need. last is one we have the opportunity to see them reintegrate. other times it is just reconnecting, as mrs. strickland' has. one of o most touching stories has come from one of o

veterans to run kennedy and after completing the job and having the housing answered an e-mail that simply said "could you be my daddy?" it had a child in germany he was reaching out for the last time for him to connect with a doctor he had not seen since she was one year olds. then to have the chance to come and connect has been a by changing -- has truly been like changing for him. >> we're going to move through our second panel quickly. >> thank you vy much. we appreciate all of you being here. it is so important that people such as yourself, you are bright and articulate, and you put a

face instead of a number. we appreciate you having the courage to come and show us your particular problem so that we can help you and others as we move forward. we have a guy that we are very oud of in arkansas. tremendous motivational speaker. his comment was that the government has the want to but not the heart. we are desperately trying to get these things done. it does not the same as the good care that you get. we are moving to that.

we're having good results. we have some problems. what do we do to ensure these programs are functioning well? there's always people that take advantage. did you find any criminal activity that bordered on that? didn't go that far? >> says our focus was on the quality of these serces and not looking at any disparities with the mess he is, we do not have criminal activities. we brought him in from seattle. >> how do we do a good job of

insuring that we don't have problems going forward? >> we have had serious discussions. they understand that they do need to have better oversight. we also have had a lot of discussions while weaver at the medical centers. i think folks of a local level, and they understand that they need to have supervision of the providers. some things we reported a pretty obvious. it was there when we walked in. it was obvious for us. other folks overlooked it.

this is the oversight that is needed. them fromwe getkeep overlooking? >> its is pressure from the top to the bottom. >> he mtioned that we needed more innovative training in ptsd. can you give us some examples of what you are a leading to? >> he has reached out to the local community to help draw in both trained professionals and are there be an music therapy. we have a group that has approached us with the biltmore estate to offer equestrian traing through their center.

it is called operation pegasus. with a little bi of funding and support providing the flexibility, to both contract with those professionals to help us strain the volunteers a round best practices that have been nationally, westil believe we can impact not only our homeless veterans, but of course those just returning. those who are coming back, we find these different modalities to address our situation to clarify their situation to manage it. they soar. ey do just fine. >> we have a series of ves

beginng in 12 minutes. we want to move quickly. if we can move as quickly as possible and have our second panel see dick, i would ask for order in the room as we do that so we can make it happen as quickly as possible. if we can have our second panel come forward nbc did. i appreciate all of you taking time. if we can have order in the room. i am introducing the second panel picks and he knows his way a wound this staff. he is accompanied by the

outreach coordinator. i want to thank you for your service to our country and your willingness to share your story. >> thank you. we appreciate the opportunity to be here. this committee has been a great aid to the effort may have made. let me thank the committee for what they have done. what you heard from the first panel is that there are things that are working in things that are not working as well as we want. the committee gave us the opportunity to move to the most important phase we are now into. that is prevention.

the first two years is to build capacity. we did not have the capacity to deal of veterans who neede long-term housing. we now have this with pretty good effort going forward. we have been building treatment services. we think that turning this off as an excellent thing to do. we innovation not been doing it alone. this effort is all being done by community non-profit groups and organizations. we are partnering. i want to give you a couple of highlights.

29,000 veterans and families have been houd under the program. over 11% of those have been women veterans. 28% have a child living with them or intend to have a child living with them. we believe that it is a good eliminate we're going to homelessness. we are doing more work. stopping the under veterans to get the treatment that they need will have some long-term dividends as well. the prevention mode is where we are going. that is the future of how we are

ending homelessness. in the first reporting cycle that we had. the first report that 6291 participants, 420 veterans could serve. 545 women veterans were seen as women veterans. over 2000 sundered hundred what you're getting this. we believe that holding that family together and getting then the health care they need and the benefits they need, of those pieces is the most important piece. we had a witness previously he watalking about some of the difficulties she was having.

this is exactly what they are trying to do. we appreciate what the committee has done. we appreciate what you and others have done. >> hello. i want to thank you for having me today. i started off as a veteran. i am from cleveland, ohio. i joined the military now could to thousand eight. i suffer many difficulties finding employment.

i recently relocated to atlanta, georgi i had an opportunity available for me almost immediately. during my process of living in georgia, a lot of different circumstances force me to buy back to ohio. that is where i was originally stationed. coming back to cleveland, it was hard to find a job. i bounced around from different relatives' homes. it became a burden. a lot of people that i knew suffered their own hardships. no one cld afford to accommodate another. that forced me to contact the va. i contacted the a high a collision for the hamas. william directed me to a female by the name of tony johnson.

she opened up a lot of possibilities for me to get back on my feet. she told me about the grant per diem program. i live in a woman's, shelter. there were other things that were available for me such as the employment connection. i met with a representative by the name of angela cash. she taught me get a job at the cleveland clinic. she offered me classis, a computer training, basically everything i needed to be able to be readily available for work. also, she had her own nonprofit organization known as the forever girls at part.

they helped me get all of the things i needed for my apartment. i will be moving into my place as of friday if everything goes as planned. >> we heard from mr. quinn on the first panel. there is no help. this is a totally different story. it is unacceptable. what was the turning point that led you to the va? >> it is a very long time before the resources are actually known to me.

and actually contacted military sources. what led me there was the fact that i was just tired of being homeless. i was tired and not having a stable job and having to ask people for things to thing. i am the type of person where i like to get everything on my mom. it was a challenge for me. i had to go to a shelter where it would be available. >> they found that they have to improve the way they serve homeless veterans. i am deeply concerned about

women veterans being placed in a place with no privacy or locks on doors. it is implicit that it should be available. i understand the department is developing a new gender specific safety standards. i want that done quickly. i want to ask you, is that enough to make sure we have protection from registered sex offenders? are we following that? are we really making sure we are focused on these issues fac? >> they're working very closely on making those creations. one thing we're asking the committee to do is change the

contract share. you have to have a serious mental illness diagnosis and able to giveesidential care. one of the issues is in some communities we may not have enough money to develop a whole program. >> let me be clear. it is very clear will be following this closely. we want to make sure this is a top item. >> i want to highlight something. there were deficiencies in our structures to how we attack the

homelessness problem. you have done a lot to move as in right direction. i think it is very important to maybe get on the phone with people like scott rogers. those community partners you have, regardless of who looks at it, they checked the box as all the way around to figure out what is missing in the strategy of how to look at this in a holistic way. scott is a pretty assertive person. i have seen flexibility from a hospital and not think was possible.

they cannot have accomplhed what they had it been not have a partner of the va hospital working outside the box. what i want to urge you and your entire staff to do, let's start thinking outside the box on solving this. holding thing we're anyone to is to live within the chain whermark of the past. the secretary has stated he wants to end this. if we are going to end it, we have to work with my partners to think more outside the box and design things that may be unique to their community. if dole resolve the partnership with all ascts of the va. i am not sure that buy in exist today. if it does, it is because they

convinced the local entity to do its. it would be much more natural if that was built to our model. i challenge you. let's reach out to these folks. let's understand what they need. as understand how we will be successful. >>hank you. we do have a series of budgets. a have to get to the floor for part of that. i want to thank all of our witnesses. we will continue to follow up with this. of thank you. i will be very quick. i will submit some from the record. i want to make sure any time we

have these discussions they put on the record, i am requesting that we have additional vouchers. veterans are moving more toward rural areas. there is no other place more rural than alaska. i want to make sure that is clear. you have a really good program that is working out in alaska. this seems to be having some great success. here is my question. we have lots of programs in every state. do you have a process that we did a group of these organizations that on a regular basis are critiquing and adding

information? they are looking at it. is there a model that says that may be the role of the beva is a granting sector? it will then connected these things. i use the catholic social service as an example. it seems to be a successful model. >> we also have it processed that occurs to each medical

center. for local opportunity governments. i have been to a couple of these. this really is to makme the nees of the local community. the company made is correct. all of the prevention effort is commanding lead. >> i appreciate that. it is great. you have some cap for directed dollars.

years ago, i had to manage grants. we put our capstan there. we really restrict the caps. social services will tell you that this was a problem. why not just eliminate those caps. he should do that immediately. >> the model if you will was taken after what was done on a community experience with the department of housing. this is the perspective of what we wanted to achieve it.

we are always looking out what those needs are. there may well be some changes. >> that is the answer, flexibility. senator brown is on the list. >> i will be brief. that is know the facts nice to me any. it is a success story. -- i didn't know the facts. it is nice to meet you. it is a success story. how is working to improve the data collected said they have

information to allocate the resources? this is based on the report saying the information is lacking. >> we have dangle collecting data for over 20 years. we're looking to roll over into the system and enhance the data we're asking for. there are their housing issues prior. what really what we're shooting for is connecting to the community and the lighting our data collection system with the hamas management system. it is so that we have been integred collection system.

but i apologize. people see me bouncing in and out. i am in a government hearing in the next building. i am trying to be in two places at once. i was concerned. the women ever to give it an average of four months before securing housing. what is being done to ensure that these women veterans receive a referral for ?ontemporary housing ta >> where have a referral system in place to either house veterans. there are housing a female

veteran or in the veteran. we heard that there needs to be so improvements. we're working with our medical centers to connue. we are coordinating to do more contract residential housing so have those opportunities. >> how do we make sure that these veterans are actually homeless? how do we major that the veterans have access to per diem programs in underserved areas? >> one of the first things we have to do is this.

how do we make sure it is in need. this has to be done by having people who can make the assessment to make sure the veteran is in fact a veteran and what services are appropriate for the veteran to recede. that is a process that takes a little bit of time. one of the things we do ask for is to have more staff who can make that assessment of the veteran being a veteran eligible. >> thank you for coming.

it is cutting to the red tape. that is the biggest challenge. >> thank you. thank you. you put a statistic in there. this is so important. i think the report is disturbing and the senate staff and regards to the safety and security of women. especially as some of them having similar problems. we are very concerned. we have to figure how this is

not tolerated. is there any congressional chills that we need to give you a with regard to dealing with that? do you need any additional legislation? >> we have some of our legislative issues we are bringing before the committee. one is to getore time a benefits barrack if they get access to benefits quicker and faster, those things are very important. some do not have veteran papers on their firstgoing and applying. >> what is the turnaround time?

>> we need to verify veteran status. that is what our standard is. it is provid for. it is oftentimes debacle for us to make that determination. >> i have been doing this for a long time. -- it is oftentimes difficult for us to make that determination. >> i have been doing this for a long time. will have providers across the nation have the independence to work in ways that government cannot do.

the difference is the state of arkansas and alaska. they're very different from rhode island and new york. we have to have program flexibility. >> thank you for your hard work. >> thank you very much. i will state the question any kid answered at a later time. with dealing with mental health services, this is a very alaska center question. it almost seems to me why replicate a system when there are the is one in the rural area.

that is the question i'm going to submit. i want you to think about it again. how do we make one track and maximize the capacity? that is the question. >> we appreciate each of you being here and being part of this panel. we have more work to do. their understanding what more we can do. the committee looks forward to working on this issue now and into the future. this hearing is now adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2012] >> in a few moments, the head of the internal revenue service on tax provision and the agency's customer service. in about an hour, the general services commiffings criticized for excessive spending at a 2012 conference in las vegas. after that, president obama signs the jobs act. a bill designed to make it easier for small companies to raise money from investors and then an update on afghan military operations. several live venns to tell you about tomorrow morning. -- live events to tell you about tomorrow morning. the center for strategic and

international studies on u.s. trade relations with china. that includes members of the reagan bush and clinton administrations. policy experts look at preventing nuclear terrorism. the event, part of the national press club's newsmaker series and focusing on security in afghanistan after the u.s. departure and what role will be played by afghanistan's neighbors, particularly pakistan and iran. that is on c-span 3, also at 10:00 a.m. eastern. >> this saturday at noon eastern on c-span 2's book tv, join our live call-in program with distinguished former navy seal chris kyle as he talks about becoming the most lethal sniper in u.s. military history. at 10:00 a.m. on afterwards. >> if you think of yourself as a family and as a team, she said

when i get a raise at work, he is so proud of me. i felt as show she had defe defined providing to include what her husband is doing. >> the richer sex author monday in the changing roles of women it is a breadwinners of the family and how that impacts their live ps. facebook and twitter pages.

>> "washington journal"

continues. host: joining us is tom shoop. he was editor in chief of "government executive" magazine and it is here to talk about the general services administration, spending issues of late, and government spending and waste in general. a first of all, mr. shoop, what is the general services administration? guest: it handles a range of purchasing-related and purchasing management tasks for the government. anything from managing thousands of public buildings -- building buildings and purchasing real estate on behalf of federal agencies and leasing it to them, and a host of other things. it does a lot of contract negotiations on behalf of all agencies that agencies can use, and it has various supply schedules for everything from huge information technologies and bombs to pencils.

>> does it serve as a purchasing agent for the federal government? guest: yes. and it manages the real estate for the federal government as well. most of the federal government. host: pawlenty employees? how much money flows through that administration? guest: they have about 12,000 employees in the budget is all around $30 billion. but very little about it is actually appropriated by congress, only about $2 billion. the rest comes from fees paid by agencies for the services it provides or rent on federal facilities. host: so commerce department gets a chunk of money from congress and they use part of it as rent. why is the gsa currently in the news? guest: because there public buildings service, western region, decided to hold a conference in october of 2010 that was later the subject of

and ig investigation, shall the spent upwards of $820,000 on this conference and had of this sort of lavished an unusually expensive -- and called attention to it. host: why was this conference held and what were some of the usual expenses and what was the result? guest: the conference is held every two years by the western region and it is sort of training exercise and recognition for employees. it seems this was considerably more lavish than previous efforts, but it is regularly held. it was held -- host: it was held just south of las vegas. costing $843,000 according to the ig report. food and beverage, $146,000, then a team building exercise

building a bicycle, costing $75,000. why did it cost $75,000? guest: i am not entirely sure. i think it is probably not outlandish for that kind of exercise. i think in the corporate sector it goes on -- and the company that provided it quoted a higher price and then went down to $75,000, in a negotiation according to the ig that was not entirely above board. host: commemorative coins, semi- private room parties, mind reader entertainer, $3,200. are these abnormal government conference expenses? guest: no. i think it is highly unusual for this to have taken place in a government conference. i think the vast majority of government conferences are much simpler affairs landis, and that is what sort of stood out about this one. host: weren't there some trips to set up this conference and

some planners from outside? guest:8, i believe, planning trips, including scouting trips and a dry warren. ig called attention to that. some of it would be necessary because it is a conference that about 300 people and there is certain planning that goes into it, but it appears there was excessive spending. host: who is martha johnson? guest: now the former administrator of gsa will resign after this scandal became public. after taking several steps, including removing two other officials at the gsa and overhauling their internal procedures and processes to try to prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future. host: was she aware of it ahead of time? guest: still don't know at this point. it would not be surprising to me if she was not aware of it. and certainly if she was not aware of it in its particulars, i do not believe she was at the

event. host: does gsa hold these events on a regular basis? guest: they do hold events like this on a fairly regular basis. this was a regional conference was held every two years going back some period of time. they will not be holding these things in the future, though, because they put a stop basically to anything like these employee-only events. host: when you look at this event and the spending, in the scheme of things in the federal government, where does it right? guest: as these types of scandals go, it is up there. unusual large amount of money an unusually lavish kind of spending. also, what is unusual about it in some regard is there really has been no effort on the part of gsa or the administration to challenge anything in this report. they say they are appalled by it and money was squandered an action had to be taken, so they

are essentially it knowledge in it occurred and it was accepted and it is relatively unusual. host: besides mark johnson, who also no longer employed question of guest: robert peck former bolden service commission, and stephen leads, a top deputy to martha johnson. host: what about any of the western regional folks? guest: there have been people placed on administrative leave and further actions like will emerge the they have not taken place yet. host: 202 is the area code if you would like to talk to tom shoop -- you can also send an e-mail or a tweet -- our facebook page is not on this issue. out of going to give you that one, too. tom shoop, what is the

"government executive" magazine? guest: magazine for senior federal managers and executives in the federal government and is certainly up to 75,000 people in prince and millions more on line on our website. host: this headline was also in "the washington post" recently from congressman micah. guest: what he is doing there is tying it into an issue he is also concerned about, and that is the sale of excess federal property around the country. there is a movement on capitol hill to get rid of unneeded federal office space. and he has been very active in that issue. which is a highly complicated issue because much of that -- and we will have an upcoming story about this in the magazine naturally -- there is an issue that a lot of the fedor office space deemed un needed is not sold because it is a rundown in areas people are not interested

in buying real estate, especially in this economy. it has been a big challenge for gsa. host: does the government own a lot of unused property? guest: yes, it owns a lot of property in general and agency needs are constantly turning over so over time it has accumulated property -- responsible for properties that are not needed anymore. host: mark johnson was like the fifth gsa head in two or three years. why? guest: a lot of and has to do just what the changeover in the administration and getting somebody confirmed by congress. but there was also an issue towards the end of the bush administration, their last administrator also left under something of a cloud because she had been under investigation both for alleged violations of the hatch act, preventing political activity by federal employees, and for allegedly

steering a contract to a friend of hers. host: a viewer tweets in -- guest: a pretty good question. i think they would make a case that there is still value in face-to-face interaction and team building and that sort of thing. so, i think that is why these conferences exist. there is a certain exchange of information that goes along with them. in some cases, they traditionally have been reviewed -- viewed as a reward for federal employees for doing a good job. host: how many attending? guest: 300. host: this hotel, was a more lavish than a usual government hotel? the m hotel. guest: fairly unusual for events to take place in these kinds of facilities, especially if they are government only and this came after 2009 where other

agencies were going to avoid las vegas entirely because of the appearance issue. so it is unusual in that context. host: the first call for tom shoop. jeff, republican from tampa. guest: good morning, guys. the reason i am calling is i am a republican but i am not approaching this from a left- right perspective. to me it boils down to money, the bottom line. i appreciate the comments of the guest. he seems very well spoken and he seems to know what he is talking about. my main issue is i don't think that the average person in this country even really understands that we have no checks and balance system in this country as far as money. our government just basically does what it once. there is no system to account. there are no checks and balances, no way to know what is

going in and out. i really don't think people realize that. i don't think the average american voter even knows that. i think they think there are people in the government who are trying to balance the checkbook when in reality it is just an open book. host: we will leave it there. tom shoop? guest: there may be some issues about how effectively the spending is overseen but there is quite a lot of oversight both in congress, on capitol hill, and with an agencies themselves. inspectors in general that conducted this report and various other auditors and oversight people. there are times definitely when things happen that slip through the cracks. but art objects and balances and a fair amount oversight but it is just a question of how effective it is an every incident. host: how big it discovered in its case? guest: according to gsa, the deputy administrator of the agency wanted to the attention

of the inspector general and then they launched their investigation. i think it is likely it originated with employees at the agency raising concerns about spending, which i think it's something people should not forget, that there were actually employees to step up and said i think this spending is excessive. the ig report indicated at the time those concerns were ignored. host: there was some e-mail exchange that i saw all in one of the articles that they got a room rate for a lot cheaper than not -- then the no more room rate because they wanted to keep it under the government limit. and there was. nod-wink arrangement? guest: couple of things -- according to the report, the traded catering food expenses for a lower room rate when in fact they should -- you are supposed to get a lower government rate independently. you are not supposed to trade anything off to get the rate.

. wink thing was on one of the scouting trips, going in a day ahead of official travel and wanted to stay at the hotel and get a favorable rate. host: this tweet is from victor -- guest: the head is appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate and martha johnson was in her job i believe since the middle of 2009, appointed at the beginning of the obama administration. host: joe is a democrat from michigan. caller: good morning. i have been so las vegas. you can get pretty good deals there. i am just wondering if this compares to a tempest in a teapot with the 800,000 or nine of the thousand dollars -- big deal, we are talking billions of dollars here and there and everywhere -- with $800,000 or

$900,000. guest: compared to certainly the entire federal budget or the budget of gsa, it is not a tremendous amount of money. however, $800,000 on one conference like this is a fairly high amount of money. necessarilyk it characterizes as a tempest in a teapot because they did spend a lot of money and there were several questionable expenditures. host: is their political hay to be made out of this? guest: it comes at a very bad time for the obama administration, both in the middle of a campaign where they are trying to say they are responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars and after last fall in the wake of another scandal about conference spending where they said we will step up our oversight of spending on these kinds of things. so, it comes at an inopportune time for them. host: michigan, steve on the independent line. good morning.

caller: i just want to say -- is of the gsa the same people -- and this district. they try to make it look like government business. but how about when president obama wife took two or 300 of her -- 200 r 300 other closest friends on jets to some foreign country last year and through them all over there. are these people behind that, too? is that how we spend our money? guest: i am not familiar with the particular -- that particular instance but i would be almost certainly giacomo certain as gsa would not have anything to do with that trip. host: new jersey. mark, you are on with tom shoop, editor in chief of "government executive." caller: i do not think it is a democrat or republican issue. i think it is an issue where somebody in the government

spent $840,000 for 300 people, to thousand $800 a person could -- $2,800 a person. putting it into perspective of how much productivity will we get back as taxpayers for that? guest: i think it would be difficult to make the case it was a sound investment of taxpayer dollars in terms of return and gains in productivity. i think that is why the agency reacted not by trying to defend the spending but by immediately dismissing the people they view as irresponsible and promising to crack down further. host: to all agencies hold these types of conferences? -- do all agencies? you go to a greater or lesser degree, yes. it is less usual -- they do go on, but i do not think nearly to

the same extent through the rest of this year because the scrutiny of these kinds of expenses, principally for events just for government only and not for the people they interact with. i think those are going to get much higher scrutiny. host: i don't know if this is an but you can address are not, but jack tweets in. guest: i think there may be some truth to that. i think that is part of the reason why the organizers of this conference may have thought this was not as big a deal because they see some more things happening in the corporate sector when a fairly regular basis. host: pittsburg, missouri. victor on our democrats' line. we are talking about gsa and government spending issues. caller: good morning. i find it really inspiring actually -- and lightning is a better word.

i would like to ask this question, and maybe you can answer it. one, as far as the number of presentation inside the government itself -- i know a good percentage of intelligence agencies, before obama became president, was privatized. if that is true, then pretty much the entire government is privatized. if that is true, we are spending a hell of a lot more money than what the average -- would be. guest: i am not sure the 70% figure is quite right in terms of intelligence spending but no question in the past couple of decades there has been a movement across republican and democratic administrations to outsource more government functions and use contractors to

do more stuff. top it does raise questions about the mix what is done by government employees and contractors. host: do you see some kind of rule change coming? guest: i think there may well be action in congress to curb these particular kinds of conferences,

spot on. it can provide basic needs and services to the people. whatever that equals, the people feel that.

a loss if you have been over there before. it does not take a lot to the village. it is a little bit different atmosphere. it is a pretty educated population there. the high-rises are going in there. we're over 300k. our senses takers said it increased by 30,000. i see indicators of confidence. by no stretch of the

imagination, there's much more work to be done. there is a psychological aspect out there that folks still need to see more. they still need to feel more comfortable about where the security forces are going. they shift of resources encourages leaders on the conditions that need to be met for transition. i had the afghan chief of staff. >> [inaudible] i was fortunate to house them a couple of times. i was sharing his vision.

what a phenomenal individual. understands the people. i would tell you, my conversation with a general officer. they were all comfortable with all of them. >> we go to the next question. >> what is the coalition doing if anything to improve security for local officials?

help them figure out ways to secure themselves consider ing the militants are aiming towards the local officals as they change their tactics. it helps them secured them. in your joint special operations that you're doing and afghan forces, how much do you have to factor in the risk of potentially tipping off the enemy. how much distrust is there between the forces? >> in my outfit, we had the same test to verify perrin i was

but verify.st by i was very ope open with the intelligence that i have worked. i knew all the leaders. i knew these men were men of character. i knew i could trust them with the things that we were doing. we did watch to see if there were any indicators that the offset was being violated. we had no indication that it was. this includes sharing information with their governors to have a right to know and to understand what is going on with their security forces in their forces. it is a requirement. to include special operations. the governor should know.

it's something that happens, they're the ones to solve the problem here with our support and working together, these are tragic events. they resulted in a no significant issues. i did a bit of this when i was battalion commander, too. the exact opposite happened when

the haqqani hit. no tolerance foe. i had a great division commander. he was all about being open and getting our afghan brothers up to speed their during this tour over a year, what change for me significantly was the afghan human intelligence network. the nds folks routinely came in with human intelligence that we confirm through other means. they led us down that path. as only afghans can do inside their country, a significant improvement in terms of intelligence capacity on a human side.

unlike 2006/2007, army hated the police. the police say the army. nobody trusted nds. woe be it if you were in afghan border policemen. you have that kind of environment. they have matured. we started this back then. we had senior representation from of the afghan security forces. it was a single coordination center. it is one of our tactical operation centers. they have all the technology and

communications devices. they are sharing in coordinating intelligence. when they walk in and say national director of security, when he walks in and says one of our informants a just tell me that there is an explosive device that is moving from from there, that starts this sequence of events. police now have it. the national army is there. he picks up the phone. he calls the general. instantaneously, they're calling my headquarters. it is very flat. hoursgetting this 24 ahead of time. it allowed us to posture, unchanged checkpoints.

redesign the battlefield. we found out it was completely disrupted. in the case it did occur, it is defeated. we had to get past not willing to share intelligence. in my office, we were doing that. trust but verify and make sure we are doing the right thing. >> this is largely provided fiat the afghan uniformed police in the case of the governor's in the districts of governors. my charger to myself was denied get the governor's killed. are you going to replace them? i monitor that very closely. how do you replace the leaders? that is why haqqani is trying

to kill them. i did not find a contingent to protect the governor at his compound. i did monitor intelligence. i'm a little protected by nature. i made sure i knew when they were going. haqqani did not get an opportunity to kill one of them. >> we're running to the end of our time. i would like to know if there is anything else that you would like to say about your thoughts on the future? >> thanks for this opportunity. hopefully i'll provide you some insight. it is only from my

perspective. if you were with me now could 2006-2007, and you can understand why i am an optimist. what has not change me over that time is the commitment of great afghan patriots. i have to be careful because i get a little emotional. i described them as founding fathers. did they put their lives at risk. the man could be making lots of money in a very benign environment summer in the world. the last thing is their families. it is often a challenge to watch them go off to their

families in kabul and not place the matter rest. -- niot place them at risk. there are some phenomenal individuals over there. they should be our story. another common aspect of this is the fan member that says you want this to be over with. this is the most challenging one in the world. counterinsurgency is the most

challenging fight in the world. there's one aspect that will be the same. it has been the same throughout history, a time. it takes time and patience. i'm a realist. i understand that this is our enemy. if anybody can make this happen, if they can make it happen. the afghans have to wanted. they have to stand up and take it. the strain of the united states was not the fact that we beat the british in the revolutionary war. it is the fact that we stayed together afterward. my challenge to them was how are you going to unite afghanistan? you are the guys that have to do it. history will tell us one thing.

when afghans unite, a look out. my hope is in this great diversity that exists them all fighting next to each other, that it will spread next to the country and they will create this awesome environment that haqqani cannot do anything about. >> thank you so much for joining the institute's for the study of war. for more want to learn about this area of afghanistan, i recommend you our website www.understandingwar.org. you can find the paper on the haqqani network as well as other videocasts from our series. i would be remiss if i did not

tens with extraordinary thanks and gratitude to colonel toner and the great men and women on the combat teams. they have tremendous work in changing afghanistan to make it possible for these great patriots to achieve their goals in an environment where they do not necessarily have everything they need to make their countries succeed. did you and your shoulders have done a tremendous job. i really want to thank you. we have for you a claim it to thank you very much for joining us. have a wonderful day. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> in a few moments, a former on expanded drone surveillance in the u.s. washington journal at 7:00 eastern. student debt and bullying in the nation's schools. >> this sunday on "q&a", the u.s. senate youth program. >> one of the great experiences this week is i get the experience to meet both to my senators. i just wanted to meet them and talk to them. >> it is important to be financially sound. if we are not financially sound, devoting money to national defense is not going to work. >> high school students from all

50 states participate in a week- long government and leadership program. share their observations and experiences as a interact with members of congress, the supreme court, and the president. >> if there is a lot of partisanship going on in congress. everybody we have met here from congress to the president said that. it makes me wonder if everybody is saying that that it is not actually happening. i have mayor really thought about that. >> the u.s. senate youth program, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a". >> now, a forum on the implications of expanded drone surveillance in the u.s. president obama signed a bill to expand the use of finance -- unmanned aircraft by the federal government and u.s. law enforcement. this is 1.5 hours.

>> we are on the verge of a kind of revolution in the country. probably beyond. we have seen the revolution already to a great degree in military affairs, but i -- but a provision of law that got little noticed at the time, but has been creeping up on people, congress has kind of brought the revolution home.

it has instructed the federal aviation administration to promulgate a set of rules that will allow all sorts of unmanned aerial vehicles to operate domestically in the united states. exactly how it will do that is not yet entirely clear and what will and will not be permitted is not yet entirely clear, but this is a very big change. to give you an idea how big it is, just consider the rules that exist now, which is that you can fly essentially model aircraft provided that you do it for non-commercial purposes and provided that you do it under 400 feet. which is to say you can hobble around with increasingly powerful technology, but you cannot sell services doing it and you cannot get in the way

of the big boys. what the military has shown abroad is that there is an enormous amount you can do with this stuff if the regulatory of latitude is there to do it. of course, the most famous applications of this involved surveillance and targeting, but that is not the only application. i will give you a little bit of an idea how far in principle this thing could go. i was talking the other day to a journalist -- not the other day, a few weeks ago -- a journalist named shame harris. we were reflecting. the spend some time writing a

paper sort of imagine in and talking to a lot of industry folks about where the technology was and how soon it was torn to get there. he basically comes to the conclusion that there is no reason any more of four pilots in the domestic air flights we all take he does not think that will persist very long. the phasing out is a psychological, not technological. when you think about the range of domestic applications, there was an amazing little episode that i ran across a randomly at recently. i think it was in texas. someone started taking a picture of a plant and finds a river of blood flowing out of it. it turns out to be a sort of grotesque animal cruelty

situation going on in this facility. you can imagine a lot of journalistic applications. you can imagine a lot of malicious applications as well by individuals, by governments, by corporations. you can imagine revolutionary -- and the privacy concerns, the promise, the broad range of potential effects are what we are here to talk about today on the theory that no one is here to listen to me, i will keep my role to a minimum. i would just introduce our discussion and then sort of got out and managed conversation flowed. speaking first is john villasenor. he is a professor of electrical

engineering at the university of california in l.a. he has written very extensively about this set of issues across a broad range of the topics we are going to discuss today. speaking next will be, to his right, paul rosenzweig, who served in the policy shop at the a chess in the last demonstration. catherine crump, aine crocke staff attorney with the nc -- aclu. then, kenneth anderson, who is written about robotics in law, mostly in the and international contacts, including a very

important paper he wrote for the brookings institution. without that, i am going to turn it over to john. thank you for coming >> if your microphone is not on. >> can we get a microphone member of capet thank you. i will focus on a particular class of unmanned aircraft called first person in view or fpv. it has a front facing video camera and transmits real-time video to an operator on the ground. the operator sees the view as if he or she was sitting a in the cockpit when the aircraft is not visible to its operator, this is called "non line of sight operation. the aircraft can be flown without a pilot many thousands of miles away. use of the fpv aircraft in

domestic air space raises some challenges -- safety, privacy, and as a security. in terms of safety, not a line of sight operation raises will recognize concerns. for example, if the communication link between the pilot lays the ground that -- as the faa moved to the process of implementing these steps, it will be important to be extremely conservative when it comes to the rules. steny in front of your house and operating an unmanned aircraft in your backyard is much like the to get caught. a pilot sitting in a car 10 blocks away will be much harder to find. that will make it possible for someone to drive a drawn into a fenced in yard, however outside a window, and take pictures of

the interior of the house. operation in this manner would be in violation of various aviation rules. despite those rules, there are tens of thousands of unmanned aviation systems out there. it is important for privacy laws to recognize the possibilities and put in appropriate prohibitions to address it. the last area of national security -- it would be made to deny that unmanned aircraft did not create some new risks. it would make no sense at all if terrorist attack at a shopping center or an office building. as we saw in oklahoma city, a car or truck would be far easier and more deadly. sensitive government facilities are different story because of their access restrictions. it can be far harder than -- to stop. an unclassified 2005 report issued by the federally funded

institute for defense analysis exclusively recognized these types of returns. the report stated "small team could launch with eight relatively small footprint and make their escape before impact." there would be little danger of protection in transportation. a precision guided uav -- there is a high probability of successful execution. today, i do not believe that smaller unmanned aircraft pose a credible security threat, however, other larger platforms my. even today of the commercial protection technologies could be guided to a target well beyond the line of sight. gps guidance is another possibility. i would think any of us would dispute the possibilities. how big is the risk? of the many thousands of methods available to someone intent on

committing an act of violence against america, does it rank as a legitimate concern? other measures to be affected while minimizing the negative impact? to this last question, are the measures that to be affected while minimizing negative impact? the best solutions are probably technological. government facilities to be equipped with the systems that jam communications within an coming at from potentially porting an attack. the same technology could be used to protect our military's facilities overseas. -- military facilities overseas. i suspect there are people in our government working on a solution to this. we are not going to be hearing about the details of that work. we should recognize the value of these technology and solutions and put those people in our government working on them in a better position to develop them. we are more likely to get the

resources and attention to solve the problems when they are recognized. the best defense against a drawn attack here at home is making sure it never happens in the first place. this involves a correlation within the government and the broader community to identify and respond to potential threats. part of that effort is making sure what denied drones do not get into the wrong hands. challenges resort -- regarding safety a national-security do not mean we need to forgo the benefits of an unmanned aviation. they could provide imagery in many different scenarios. some are developing amazing technology innovations. people in university research labs are developing equally amazing innovations. these innovations and the jobs they create both now and in the future can help american competitiveness not only in the drone industry, but also world wide. thank you. >> first, thanks for inviting

me. it is a pleasure. i appreciate the opportunity. it is good that you put me right after john. i am board to try to give you the book is and where john has spoken of the threat that comes from drone technology and the potential the security threats. i want to put that around and ask a question about the utility of a drones, especially in the homeland security and law- enforcement space, which would be the principal governmental domestic use of those. i want to fight the premise of ben's introduction. he says the introduction of a drones is a revolution. i would say that it is more of an evolution than a revolution. drones in utility might be more pervasive, but they are not so terribly different as a host of

a different aerial uses that law enforcement and border patrol, homeland security used every day. helicopters is an example. in doing that, i also want to sound a cautionary note, which is sometimes there are differences in degree the become difference is in time. if policy makers and within our government pushed to rapidly in the use of a drum technology for government purposes, i pay we will quickly lose support of the public and run the risk of killing the goose that laid the golden egg. driving it the technology into a ditch of public dismay. why do i think that drones are useful? just think of the border.

our southwest border is essentially a 1,500 miles long desert punctuated in a few places by large cosmopolitan populations. the crossing point. in between, there is nothing at all. that is why there was such a move in the last 5-10 years to think about ideas like fences across the border. it is virtually impossible to a imagine a situation where one could successfully patrol that 1,500 mile length of border with anything approaching uniformity. the fences, of course, have proven both difficult and expensive to construct and relatively easy to evade -- evade. there is a reason the department of homeland security is intent ,n the purchase of a new uav's the southwest border.

it is a broader scope of visibility. it allows for deployment of response forces. instead of having border patrol at every 30 feet along the border, you can have people who can respond when an intrusion is observed. that is one of many potential positive uses of that drone technology. when one thinks about whether or not that is different at, in general, i would say it is unlikely to prove any different from the existing law and the existing system. we have a classic case again the supreme court involving the use of a helicopter to hover over a dow chemical plant. the supreme court said and rightly or wrongly, you can form your own choices, said there is no constitutional limitation on the use of that technology to surveil the open fields inside of a plant. the same law would like to be

held to apply at least in the context of law enforcement uses along the border. i think the small uav that comes down and looks inside the house is interesting. it would probably fall under a different set of rules because one maintains a reasonable expectation of privacy in one's house. having said that drones are both useful and under the construct probably lawful is not to say that we should rush headlong into their application. to see that clearly, i want to tell you a short story from the very recent past involving something called the "national applications office." it came and went so quickly that made barely a blip on america's

policy screen. the national applications office was an attempt in the last administration to unify the use to which america put its national technical means. that is, the satellites and we have a circle the earth and take really excellent pictures of what is happening on the ground. we, of course, use those in a classified means, spying on russia, china, or wherever it is the ngia wants to look. we also used them to follow the tracking of hurricanes and, after a hurricane is said, assessed the damage. there was hysterically at a gap between those uses. a gap for the law enforcement and border security uses of these national technical means. satellites also pass over the border between the united states and mexico.

one could readily imagine using those satellites as a means of surveying the traffic across the border. the national applications office was going to be across the us government office that was good to unify all three of these purposes -- the clearly humanitarian, the intelligence, and the law enforcement. they would assign resources based upon need and to a wrecking or stacking of requests. in times, it was used for hurricanes. in times of tension, it will be focused on china, etc. and that was a totally sensible proposal to use a technology that had no legal limitations for a novel purpose. it crashed and burned. it was rolled out without any thought for the obvious privacy and civil liberties concerns.

it crashed and burned because the intelligence committee kind of drove the entire devilment of the proposal. it was presented in a way that was a fait accompli and presented in a way that did not involve congress or the ngos's. the history of that is, i think, instructive for what we need to think about in terms of going forward. it is not in my mount -- in my mind the drum used should be prohibited. to the contrary, i think there is a great deal of utility to be found in that sort of exposition. but if those uses are laid on the table as part of -- there

are concerns people will have about some of the scenarios john has talked about and kathryn will talk about in the very makes speech. without giving those concerns about developing an oversight mechanism, we will not be able to gain benefits. >> at catherine. >> atthank you for having me here today. i want to pause for a moment at the outset and note how unusual it is we are having this conversation now. the reason it is unusual is that when a new technology is introduced in the united states, it is generally the case it is introduced because of law-enforcement purchases and adopt that technology. the public learns about it after the fact. then there is potentially some debate about the issue. roleuse of the faa's

prohibiting the widespread domestic deployment of drones, particularly by law enforcement, but also commercial purposes, we have the opportunity to have a public debate about the role this technology should play in the united states. i think that is a really nice to change from how these issues normally play out. the aclu is an organization that focuses on a wide variety of issues. drines pose -- drones pose particularly complex problems and opportunities. they raise privacy concerns, of course. all drones have cameras. they could potentially become a new avenue for surveillance in american life. they also hold promise it could hold government accountable. in addition to working on a variety of surveillance issues,

i also litigate of these claims. when we have footage of the incident we can use, it is very helpful in determining what actually took place between law enforcement agents and private citizens. drones are unique because they are tools for free speech. when it comes to private usage, they need to be regulated in a more sensitive way than your typical technology. i will focus my remarks primarily today on law- enforcement use of ladrones and the privacy implications of those. one question that has been raised is what is the big deal about drones? how is this different from what has come before? is it abolition or a revolution? i think there are reasons to think of it as a potentially more dramatic change in what americans experience. it is true that there have been

unmanned aerial surveillance in the united states for a long time, but purchasing a manned aircraft and operating and maintaining that aircraft is an expensive endeavor. it imposes a natural limit on the amount of aerial surveillance the committee present in american life. a lot of these apartments -- departments cannot afford to purchase an airplane or helicopter for financial -- for surveillance purposes. drones will potentially sweep away that limitation and allows smaller law-enforcement agencies to adopt aerial surveillance and potentially raise a widespread availability of this type of surveillance. drones have capabilities that have a real impact on privacy that aerial planes at simply have not had. for example, as john has written about extensively, they could potentially stay aloft for long periods of time. we are not talking hours.

we are talking days. months, even years. unlike a traditional aircraft or helicopter, which can be easily detected. drones, depending on how they up evolved and are regulated, men and can work without being detected. i think those changes combined with the rapid development of cameras and our ability to analyze video in a way that has not been previously possible make these very powerful surveillance tools. everyone today as a smart phone and you can snap photos with that. but cameras can zoom in to tremendous degrees that was not

previously possible. they can be equipped with night- vision. technology is developing to make it easier and easier. all of these changes together with the possibility of facial recognition, analytical tools being used to analyze footage -- it could potentially be possible to film an area for a long time and go back and reconstruct individuals. i they there are a number of privacy risks associated with the government used at. -- government use. the long tracking of individuals is one of those. the supreme court decided a case in which it held -- five justices gave to the conclusion that prolonged surveillance can

become a search under the fourth amendment. to the extent of drones engage in that type of tracking, they also raise privacy concerns. drones and a lot of the same privacy implications to cameras have had. chilling effects -- people behave differently when they know they are under surveillance. the aclu put out a report on this issue in which we issued some recommendations. we are not opposed to the use of drones. i pick there are a volume -- broad range of valuable ways and in which law enforcement can meet genuine law enforcement needs. at the same time, we are concerned they do not become tools of a general or pervasive surveillance so innocent americans have to worry whether they are be subject. in addition, it would be nice

for there to be a real democratic debate about the rules under which it drones are adopted this is a different from out surveillance technologies are usually adopted. i pick there are issues with the private use of drones. i know you are planning to talk about pot -- private surveillance. i just want to mention one other issue, the potential weapon is asian of drones. ization ofis asian \ drones. i always thought the was far- fetched. in fact, law-enforcement has

expressed serious interest in this. it would allow them to contain crowds without having to have any officers present. i personally find that to be a very scary example of potato use of drones' because i think the potential for abuse is too great. if any private citizen can attach a carrot to a drone -- a camera to a draw, what kind of regulations will need to be put away in place to make sure we are safe? one of the things i wonder about nes -- and theves a public cannot use them. it raises the possibility that drones in its is the ability of government to control and monitor citizens. >> thank you. ken?

>> i would like to start with my saintly mother. she ran the social welfare stop at our church in the 1960's. she took a gazillion telephone calls a day. this was an era long before ordinary people like us had things like answering machines and the ability to screen calls and do all the important stuff we take for granted today. my father stepped in and installed a switch on the telephone that would turn off the rear. you do not look foot -- sufficiently shocked at what that meant in 1965. reaction and the reaction of many of the people she worked with, i think, today

almost sounds unimaginable. she had serious qualms that she was actually being dishonest and she was lying to people about whether she was in fact in the house by having the wringer turned off. i want to fast-forward from the 1960's to the mid-1980's. at a time when i was on the aclu's national free expression committee, the time before your born, my dear. the pennsylvania aclu at, which many of the state level aclu's, was trying to come to grips with new forms of technology available on telephones, including things like call waiting, but in particular, caller id. the aclu in pennsylvania took the position -- this was never taken by the national aclu --

they took the provision nevada -- they took the position that caller id was an intensely wrong way of denying people free expression because it is essentially meant that somebody could not get to you. the caller id and was actually a first amendment violation that the state telephone regulators should eliminate because it eliminated the first amendment right you had to reach somebody and communicate speaks to them. 10 trillion telemarketer calls later, this attitude is entirely inconceivable to any person in this room and any person listening. that is our notions of privacy have shifted in remarkable ways, including our notions of

privacy from person to person. how do drones' fit into this. on their own in relation to privacy and second as a sort of enablers technology, a leveraging technology in combination with the censors, the cameras attacked, the possibility of facial recognition, computer-enhanced ways of dealing with the material that is gathered to the censors. there is finally the ability to read something which is constantly out there and then connected to the web. these technologies, i believe -- and i am echoing in part someone else's views -- i actually do windup pushing our existing privacy structures to the break- in. brigid an important thing the goes beyond government, but how

we interact with each other and at what our social expectations of privacy are and how we believe they should be embedded in various forms of law. in this, we have tradeoffs in conflicts -- and conflicts between free expression, for to my concerns come up things like that. the notion of the public and private. at the same time, there is the evolving notion of privacy. on the one hand, we wind up insisting we have the right to turn the world of weight, even at the electronic level. but at the same time, we share so much. the. i am making again starting with privacy is i do not think we can really talk about drones in relation to their impacts on other areas, particularly their legal regulation between private

parties, unless we talk instead about the prior expectations we have about privacy and the ways in which it is socially constructed and evolves in different ways. we have to contemplate. one can give a very long list of scenarios, but the easiest one for private-party usages would be that it will allow you to put a grown up in the air on a continuous basis and have been looking over into your neighbor's backyard and seeing everything goes on there, which may be doing, -- which may be nothing, and a stream that live to the web and use the technology that allows it to pick out particular people and set up an entire gallery of what they are up to. it is all just going up there. none of it is commercial. and may not even be maliciously

motivated. i would suggest that everyone in this room -- in this room would find something profoundly wrong about that and this violates some set of informal notions that we have about the notion of intimacy, privacy, home, even though it is taking place out of doors. ultimately, the question becomes a most cases are we going to wind up going beyond the assumption that you could do things like build a wall, you could put up a hedge. q. you did not have all of this stuff that makes at things instantaneously available to everyone else across the planet. or do we plan to essentially let those changing expectations have to fit in with the existing set of rules we have, or will we evolve the rules in various ways? one of the answers to this is

very often given at the privacy level. nobody is icily serious about any of this stuff. if they did, nobody would use facebook the way they do. nobody would use twitter the way they do. none of these existing social technologies would exist if people actually care about their privacy and the way we potentially -- we previously thought about. people do not think of the embassy -- intimacy being private and more. on the basis of and no data except being the father of a teenager, i do not think that is how it works. i have a strong sense that the younger generation has an amazingly sophisticated sense of what their notions of privacy are about and the ways in which they expect that notion of privacy are socially constructed and are fairly close

to the bundle of sticks approach to property. they have a view that what is appropriate in one setting for the use of a foe is not appropriate in another setting. the ways and places in which one can collect information, images about the person that is a. for one use is not a. for another use. i think i surely we have an -- younger generations that are extremely sophisticated in their views about the ways one unbundles of the notion about the public and private and separates it into a series of appropriate or inappropriate usages. they are profoundly made on whether any of that is reflected in law. i think their expectation is it ought to be in some way. that is how we ought to feel. they are profoundly my leave in taking it actually is. where this comes back to drones

is drones of the leveraging technology for all the rest of this stuff. i think you are absolutely right in suggesting we have a moment to be able to address these things all the technologies are being set in place and not waiting until they have sort of hardened. when it comes to private interactions in these ways, i think there will be a small or should be a small but really limited rome for the criminal in this stuff. some laws may have to be updated. stalking laws. by and large, most of this is core to fall, first of all, under state law. most of this private party to private party stuff will inevitably fall under some form of civil law. nuisance law and the notion of

what it means to have quiet at on your property is a classic example. we need to think about ways by which it we obeyed these things. the notion that there is being a in public i think a really powerful notion of the ways in which other people can look and see, can take photos, can do various types of things. ultimately, the best thing that could happen in the private-to- private attraction would be some form of a model code aimed at states for their adoption a year in which we have a discussion upfront about the trade-offs between exposure and privacy. finally, and to close on this, it would be the worst thing in this kind of area to allow the law to be driven by a series of really ugly, really bad cases.

the public is driven by something ugly and reaches for something to reflect that. >> thank you very much. i should have mentioned this at the outset. we are being a the -- this event is being webcast. we have people surveiling this, not from a drone. let me welcome our virtual participants. that they will also be tweeting questions to us. when i go to questions from the audience, i will alternate with the physical audience and the drone audience. drone audience.