hamilton. she has worked in various recruiting and consulting positions. she specializes in diversity recruiting strategies. sally sullivan is an executive vice president -- she leads in the business development functions. prior to that, she served as vice president for secured infrastructure at northrop grumman. it is the custom of this subcommittee to swear in all witnesses that appeared before us. if you do not mind, i would like to ask you to stand. do you swear that the testimony that you will give before this subcommittee will be the whole -- the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? thank you, and let the record

reflect that all witnesses have answered in the affirmative. will be using its timing system today. do not worry that we will -- be hitting a buzzer or agong. if he would begin, we would at -- we appreciate you being here. >> thank you, madam chairman. i want to thank the staff here. vetjobs has a unique vantage point. we have dealt with the veterans and their family members on a daily basis who are pursuing employment with government contractors. a big part of our membership base our government contractors. from our perspective, we find that for the most part contractors are enthusiastic

employers of veterans. when looking at veteran implement, it helps to understand it from an employer's perspective there are two groups that comprise veteran employment. the first to be those who are transitioning off active duty with no further military obligation. this group is the most desirable of the veterans groups from which employers refer to hire -- prefer to hire. they come with many skills and andrius wanted by employees -- employers. -- skills and at tribut -- attributes. the third bancorp is the national guard. -- the third group is the national guard. going to the numbers you cited,

madam chairman, the biggest part of the veteran unemployment problem is in the national guard. form the most part -- for the most part, they are getting jobs. of the two groups, the national guard is the least preferred veterans. -- group of veterans. they do not have a ready source of income unless the confined a job. hi operation -- a high operational tempo, they have problems maintaining continuous service with this employer. the national guard personnel are used for local emergencies, such as flooding and hurricanes, security, what ever. for example, at the national

guard in georgia has had 6 01- year or more collops in the last 10 years. that makes it really hard to keep the job. many studies have found that, due to the constant call ops, employers ought shy away from hiring members of the national guard and reserve. studies show upwards of 70% of employers will not now hire as a new employee an active member of the national guard. fortunately, contractors are supportive of the national guard. this is important, since the national guard reserve now represents more than 50% of our total fighting force. some department of labor officials like to tout how many unemployed people there are for each job in the country. you and other officials to make

the statements are displaying a gross misunderstanding of how our economy works and why employers hire candidates. employes to not hire someone just because they are standing and breathing or are unemployed. they hire candidates to fill a need within the company. the bottom line is that and they look for qualified candidates to hire. -- you have negative numbers. right now, they are paying $45 an hour for welders in the midwest and they cannot find enough welders. it will go up to $50 by the end of the summer. government contractors are major employers. many of them have discussed with me the problem of finding qualified candidates to hire. they like to hire veterans

because, generally, they have excellent skill sets and the attributes they want. in my written testimony, i used the example of a stellar government contractor. there be -- to be commended for their practice hiring of veterans. i've also written about the obstacles that hinder government contractors from hiring veterans. those include the vets 100 report, which in my opinion is a waste of time. the federal compliance program kind of disincentive rises programs -- companies -- disincentivizes companies wanting to hire veterans. i'll be happy to answer any questions that you have. >> senator, thank you for

joining us. mr. kimson. >> thank you for inviting me to bridge is a bit in these hearings. it has been my experience as a veteran and in the mission continues, it is my opinion this committee is doing work that is crucial to this generation of veterans. i'm testifying as a west point graduate and former helicopter pilot. i nasser as the chief operating officer of -- i now serve as the chief operating officer of an issue -- the mission continues. based on these experiences with veteran recruitment and retention, i believe there are several key lessons that federal contractors and corporate leaders can apply to successfully tap into the great skills up-to-date's veterans. applying these lessons will

strengthen their organizations well building successful transitions for veterans. at the mission continues, we create successful transitions by engaging veterans in six months community service fellowships. today, a cavalry scout mentors hundreds of children at the boys and girls club. a marine corps sergeant taught his community prepare for disasters to the american red cross. an army communications specialist teaches english as a second language to immigrant children and their parents. we introduce these fellows to information. we welcome the monterey distant team. we ask him to don a -- we welcome them on to a distant team. at the end of the fellowships, we will challenge them to mark their lifetime commitment to service by executing a project in their community. afterwards, they realize their

post-fellowships goal of full time employment, continued education, or an ongoing role of service. our experiences with these fellows and the veterans to apply for fellowships has shown us that when you connect veterans to a meaningful mission, asked to join a distant team, and challenged him with a set of goals that leads to a definable impact, they excel, just as they excelled in their military service. a primary factor in our selection and placement of fellows is the passion they have for service. the cavalry scout serving at the boys and girls club is fulfilled by mentor and youth. the marine is passionate about emergency response. reconnecting to a meaningful mission has been critical to their success. our fellows are further enriched by a renewed connection to 18. as you know, all enlistees take an oath to support and defend the constitution.

they then joined their military units, each of which possesses a strong identity and position. we recently gathered 100 veterans and awarded them fellowships. we asked them to take a similar oath and join a new team. in front of thousands of fans at a baseball game, standing at attention alongside their new comrades, these fellows proudly resected an oath of service. they walked off the field motivated and eager to serve. well they serve, we require that they set achieve the goals -- set and achieve goals. they identify a post-fellowship goal that will impact their own lives for years. we hold them accountable to those goals and partner in their success.

one man drop in war-torn sierra leone. as a child, he marvelled at the marines guarding the embassy. he decided he wanted to be a marine. years later, after immigrating to america, he enlisted in the united states marine corps. he honored the serve for six years, including deployments to iraq. -- he honorably served for six years, including deployments to iraq. but unemployed and unable to translate his military skills to job fairs in southern california, he found us. driven by his personal responsibility to assist the less fortunate, he earned a fellowship with habitat for humanity. he has reconnected to a mission that is important to him. he is working on distant teams. his team at the mission

continues, habitat for humanity, and the teams have now volunteered. he is transferring military skills to civilian skills. his story can be the story of this generation of veterans. the story of service and war -- service in war and continued service at home. we're grateful for the continued support of the subcommittee. we would welcome any questions you may have. thank you. >> madam chairman, distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of more than 200,000 members and supporters of iraq and afghanistan veterans of america, we thank you for letting us share our views on this issue. i spent 14 years on the marine corps. as a staff member, i try to make their lives better. the views represent my organization and not the marine corps.

unemployment is arguably the most pressing issue facing veterans today. while recent statistics may indicate that the employment outlook may be getting better for veterans, the situation is still worse than it ought to be. the unemployment rate for veterans 18 to 24 year olds -- years old is nearly double the rate for civilians. many people have wondered whether federal contract and loss and goals are being met. if not, what is the best manner to do so? there are three areas to consider -- dasa, outreach, and implemented solutions. -- data, outreach, and implement solutions. one program is a convenient that touched. -- touch point that allows for communication for the white -- to the widest possible audience. the administration is

developing an entrepreneurship track, and we believe this component will be important for success. we also believe in allowing veterans and their spouses to retake the program after separating. this allows a veteran or spouse who has completed one track to retake in other track based on new circumstances. this is a small investment on the front and which we believe will pay big dividends on the back end. on the question of data, we must ask, what we know, and what do we wish to know? much of this is dispersed among different agencies. results are not easily accessible. information is more akin to a head count that mrs. crucial information.

-- that misses crucial information. there is no guarantee that the amount of hiring by a contractor or subcontractor is reliable. a contractor may have 100 veterans at the beginning of the year and two at the end. the value of the forms is limited. some good examples would be the north american industry classification system codes. they allow the tracking of the number of contracts and from where a veteran hales. these pieces of information would help see in what industries of veterans are most heavily concentrated. much of that information resides with sba. the certification process for a a veteran-owned small business should be easy and consistent. we support efforts to curb fraud and abuse of a veteran- ounce status, but we recognize that the certification process

should not discourage small businesses with limited resources. the process currently used by the veterans administration is too cumbersome. extending this to all agencies to be unnecessarily burdensome. it is worth noting that the va center for veterans enterprises was down for approximately two weeks. it was up last thursday, but it is now back down again for maintenance. there is no information posted as to when you veterans may be able to register their businesses. the small business administration has experienced little fraud. we believe that this system will help ease the burden on veteran-owned small businesses while helping to guarantee that the consideration earned through service to this country

is not a breeze. as far as solutions go, we pursued many different leads on increasing the number of veteran contractors. the idea of a searchable, centralized database of veteran contractors could that could be used already exists as the central contractor registry. the use of these sources to find veteran contractors appears to be less than optimal because, we are told, many people choose "the past -- path of least resistance." with that data, -- data that is substantial and easy to understand, implementing solutions is a little bit like

shooting first and a minute later. -- a ng later -- aiming later. sba are the experts on small business and should be the prime actor. i strongly welcome the efforts of congress, the executive branch, and private industry to increase the number of contractors. as part of our commitment,iva will be communicating to the population through extensive social media outreach. will be partnering with agencies and private organizations to increase employment in our program. we have a partnership with the u.s. chamber of commerce. we believe the unemployment is the number one issue facing veterans of iraq and afghanistan. it will only become more important as the war in afghanistan and. we look forward to help anyway we can.

i'm prepared to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. ms. hardy? >> thank you for inviting me to testify here today. i testify as a senior manager in the diversity inclusion team at booz allen hamilton, where i am responsible for all aspects of organizational efforts to build and maintain a diverse and inclusive culture for all employees at the firm. that includes making booz allen an employer of choice for veterans. we are based in virginia and have more than 80 offices throughout the united states. our work has helped u.s. government agencies, defense components, and other clients better execute the most challenging government visions -- mission as around the world. forbes magazine recently ranked

us as the top employer for veterans, citing the approximately 1/3 of our employees to have self- identified as having a military background. we have been recognized by the national guard, the reserve, and the disabled veterans organization for outstanding practices. we're honored to have been named in the top-10 of the gi jobs list of military friendly employers. our commitment to veterans and wounded warriors is part of our corporate culture. it is coordinated by our senior leadership and extends throughout the firm. we have multiple layers of our business -- much like we indicate our various capabilities for our clients. we hire veterans because of this commitment, and because veterans bring unique knowledge and experience to their work.

you can know the challenges that face our u.s. military and other government clients better than those who have served our country in uniform. for these reasons,boon allen supports efforts to hire former military members. we believe the current regulatory contract -- construct strikes the right balance, allowing employers to explore and develop programs that work best for their organization. we approach military hiring through a variety of creative recruitment programs, but we also leverage the wide range of expertise. -- the wide range of expertise we provide to clients, such as veteran health services, to help support new hires. we support a veteran-owned

businesses to our contract organization. we use members of our own work force to mentor and support other veteran employees through employee resource groups, mentoring circles, education, and leadership programs. we focus on programs to support military families and spouses. importantly, veterans and it would warriors are a major focus and beneficiary of the firm's philanthropic efforts. in our prepared statement, we detailed several hiring and retention programs that have made us so successful. in hiring, we sought out a strategic partnership with nonprofit organizations in the military committee -- community. we also worked on a program to put it recently separated jr. office is in direct contract with our recruiting team. -- recently separated junior

officers in a direct contract with our recruiters. we maintain initiative with our surrounding community. we offer resources to give former members of the military a forum to interact with one another and navigate their transition into the civilian workplace. we have a proactive disability accommodations program, generous military leave, and return policy for reservists. we conduct targeted training and develop programs to help veterans import skills from the military to skills they can use at market atbooz allen. we also worked to improve in community organizations.

well we believe we are already affected in employing veterans, we recognize there is work we all need to do. collaboration among organizations and the government is of paramount importance. we support the subcommittee's efforts to enhance this type of collaboration. madam chairman, thank you again. i welcome any questions you may have. >> thank you very much. ms. sullivan. >> madam chairman and distinguished members of the committee, i am honored to appear before you this morning to share our experiences in hiring and retaining veterans. we are global employer to almost 10,000 people. 40% of our employees today identified as serving or previously serving in the military. this is evidence of a culture

that attracts member ought -- members of the military. mantek offers members of the military the opportunity to gain additional training, health care coverage, and the opportunity to continue to serve the country and support an important mission as a contractor. the majority of the work supports our military and intelligence community. most positions directly support mission requirements. they typically require skills into military service and the possession of active security clearances. many of our recruiting activities are focused on engaging those and the process of accepting the military -- in the process of exiting the military. mantek has more than one dozen military partnerships such as

the wounded warrior project, hiring our heroes, and va for vets. we also have relationships with colleges and universities that support the gi bill. we have purges abated in more than 125 hiring against -- we have participated in more than 125 hiring eve dance in 72 cities nationwide. we work closely with the transition assistance program sponsored by the u.s. military. through t.a.p, we offer advice, including advice on how the civilian job in varmint works. -- environment works. mantek offers educational skills and career development

training, as well as membership opportunities. our programs are offered through mantek university, a first- class corporate university designed to support the educational needs of our employees. we have alliances with 13 accredited universities offering certificates, bachelor's and master's degrees both online and in traditional settings. in 2011, a large percentage of our veteran employees took advantage of training opportunities through this university. more than 40,000 courses were successfully completed, roughly 10 courses per employee. many of our contracts require foreign deployment, so we offer two specific programs to assist family members of the plight individuals. one program provides family members free access to resources and counseling 24 hours a day.

the program offers expert guidance on addiction, parenting, and coping with stress. a second program is available to employees 24 hours a day by human resource professionals who have knowledge and experience to assist deployed employees and their families. as a result of retention efforts such as these, many of our new recruits come as referrals from existing employees. that contributes to us being named one of the top six military -- a veteran hiring employers.

that may comment on mantek's experience with filing and reporting information from the department of labour. this is an automated process, with database programs that capture information at the initial stage of the hiring process. each employee is asked to self- identify if they are a veteran. this information is aggregated and reviewed by a human- resources specialist and senior management routinely throughout the year. lastly, you ask for our suggestions to improve the federal government's efforts to hire veterans. human resources specialist, recruiter, or line manager, all

the employees we interviewed spoke consistently. they said that the government already takes important average steps to this segment of the population. companies like mantek have served veteran average. outreach. after all if we have not served ourselves, we each have family members and loved ones who have selflessly served our nation war are serving today. recommendation is to stay the course with those efforts we have in place today. that concludes my oral statement and i am pleased to answer any questions. >> thank you. i tried to visit small businesses in my state and i had a visit with a plumbing supply house in st. louis. this is not a large employer. the people who work there, most of them have worked there for

many years. this sum when they hire someone they will be with them for years. i did not go there to talk about hiring veterans but they brought it up with me. the man who owns the company said it was incredibly difficult for them to find veterans. he mentioned a couple of things. i love your take on this. he said first the websites as they looked at the listings on the website, the work -- there were taken aback -- they were taken aback by how many people put information on the web site who were not veterans. there were anxious to get employed and when they do they do diligence they found that people were signing up on these websites that were not veterans

at all. the ended up working at this for a while. they spent a lot of time and energy. they found two applicants that they are in the final process of interviewing. the other thing he mentioned is matching. at the veterans jobs fares and the places they were going to access, there would be employees there like banks and enterprise rent-a-car and anheuser-busch and they needed people for their warehouse. there were not able to hire someone who is disabled because they needed someone who is going to help them blowed plumbing supplies into the warehouse and out of the warehouse and deliver these. he said it was clear to him how inefficient this was because you had all these employers that wanted a much different employee that he was looking for. he said that once again took

hours and hours of their time and effort to match of the right veteran with the right job opportunity. if you were to address those two issues that this employer was struggling with. >> excuse me. i am suffering from allergies. your comment about not being veterans does not surprise me. there are a number of sites out there who did not validate who was putting up the resume. you have over 300,000 internet job boards out there. you have 30 left in the military space. the three lists to validate each person putting up their resume. some others let anybody put up a resume. most veterans do not put the resume of on the internet. we are getting over 200,000 visitors a month but we have

140,000 active resumes and it was hammered into is that our friends at sandbox are using the sites or other free sites to track down veterans in this country. i hear that from a lot of employers. if i have to have a heart doctor a common thing that everyone uses on an everyday basis. there were mechanisms that we have.

we can identify a veteran that meant his best with an employer. we have customer service representatives will go in and identify people who and refer them to customers. we have had a pretty good success rate. a lot of the complaints that he or she was voicing comes from understanding how the system works. what would you suggest? >> part of the problem is always want to help. sometimes all best intentions have ugly endings in government. i am beginning to believe this is a good example of that. we have all best intentions

where we are keeping track of contractors hiring veterans and no one is doing the due diligence to make that effort meaningful in any way. what could we do that would help this employer find veterans in a way that is more efficient for them? these are great folks and they kept working added. it wanted to do this because they love their country and they want to hire veterans. i am not sure that many businesses would have spent the time and effort. what should we be doing to make this easier? i was not surprised -- i was surprised about your web site. is it very clear that the veterans have been certified as veterans?

>> yes. we have people who have put their resin maze -- resumes up who were not veterans. one would be to have your representatives. having more of them familiar with what goes on. khyam outspoken. you have a lot of people who are the classic bureaucrats. they do not take the initiative. we had a veteran in georgia who

needed a job, he is in his 50's. he was at the office for three days trying to get help. they said you are in the system now. he could give a damn about being in the system, he wanted a job. someone had him give us a call. he did not have a car. we did a search on google onear his apartment and we called the managers and all three of them said sent him over and we made him a job offer and he took one at target. we did that inside 20 minutes. why cannot you have this bureaucrat do the same thing? there is no penalty and no

incentive. that is not politically correct but that is the bird reality and we do with that day in and day out on -- at our office. having them better educated as to what the resources are for their local area. all employment is on the local level. and being able to direct someone, we put out a listing of what we considered to be the legitimate job boards because there are so many ripoffs sites that would be a big move forward if it would do that. >> we have to figure out a way to remove as much of this as possible from the federal government and put it in the state and local offices where there will be the ones that will have the best years to the

ground. let me ask about -- you have great records and both of your company's told us the reporting requirements were not burdensome on your company. i'm not sure they're providing much value. you did say they were not burdensome. the me ask you this about the national guard problem. the majority of people you're hearing are leading national service as opposed to national guard -- i know cap we those. a was thinking about congressional mandate programs and one program that we love and we know it has a high impact and it does make a difference and has to do with those who are in the process of separating and

that is the talk program. -- tap program. this is where you can work with them and help them think through how to write a resume. i will look through our numbers. i do not think the majority of them are national guard or reserve. they're typically one source of spreading from the military. if you would get those numbers for us, that would be helpful. i assume the same thing is true for ms. allen. about 11% of our hires' self- separated. this represents the highest overall diversity constituency in the group. -- the firm.

these individuals are coming directly from active duty to booz allen as a first thought. i do not have the numbers for the reservists, but we to capture them. >> i think it would be important to get those numbers. let me ask you, mr. sulayman. i think the national guard problem is a crisis. i think this is something we are sweeping under the rug. when i was a prosecutor in kansas city, i remember thinking that the national guard is a very good thing. that was before it became an operational reserve. i think the testimony that was given here today demonstrates the problem. these companies are not hiring people just because they want to hire a veteran. they are hiring because they

need to employ people for ongoing business operations. you cannot blame them for hiring some -- not hiring someone because they are worried that it begone four or five times over a 10-year period. i know we are drawn down in afghanistan and, obviously, we have drawn down in iraq. but i think that we have currently injured the ability of the national guard to get employed in our country by the way we have made these changes. i do not think the worst well thought out. -- i do not think they were well thought out. i think that is one of the reasons we have had problems with suicides and other issues we are seeing in our military. what would you recommend that we could do, short of convincing our military leadership that they need to go back to the old way in terms of utilizing the

guard and the reserve -- what could we do that could help this problem? >> you really hit on the crux of the matter. it is that the national guard and reserves have been used in an unprecedented fashion in the conflicts in iran and afghanistan. they have been used as an operational -- conflicts in iraq and afghanistan. they have been used as an operational reserve. they envision active guard and reserve units activating at least once every five years. you can not expect to be deployed at least once every five years. more often if you are switching units and happen to catch the unit at the right or wrong time in the cycle. that will be continued as an issue, particularly with

smaller employers who can stand to absorb that lost less well. -- that loss less well. we've heard from our membership anecdotally that they are not getting hired because they are in the guard or reserve. employers -- is one of the questions they are often asked -- are you in the guard or reserve? are you anticipating deploying any time soon? there are bills in the house and the senate designed to strengthen protections. it will make that law a little bit tougher. >> those protections are the protections put into the law that prohibits discrimination against members of the guard and reserve in connection with their military service.

>> yes, ma'am. having employment rights be a little stronger is always a good thing. but we think that giving incentives to employers -- is better to dangle the carrot and break out the stake. -- it is better to dangle the carrot and break out of the stick. it is really a tough question. we have been trying to work with employers to are smart job fairs to show the value of a bar or reservists. they may be gone for one year out of a five-year. i deployed with a reserve unit out of iraq. heavily mechanical. we had a lot of mechanics in the

civilian world who i would say nine months after we were deployed, tearing out engines and tearing them apart and rebuilding them, without any electricity or water or lift. improvising all this. detroit diesel engines that meet the much bigger -- better. the army and the marine corps is going to operate on a similar fourth generation model are not going to change that because of the operational commitments we had and what they need to fill. >> let me turn to senator baggage -- begich.

>> first, appreciate you all being here and giving us some insight on what we need to do about unemployment for veterans. we have 11 or 12% of the population are veterans. we have a lot of need and issues that come up. esgr, we always signed up on it. let me throw out an idea and i have a couple of questions. to create an incentive for businesses -- they know it -- it will be gone. how long can you keep those jobs open? is there a policy, an opportunity to create incentives

not only to hire them but to keep that space opened in creating flex schedules? >> i testified about this several times in the past. tax incentives while they're nice and feel good is not a way to get people hired. bill of people getting off active duty. there would love to support members of the national guard reserve if there were compensated for when their employee is taken away. he gets called up, i wanted a direct cash stipends i could hire a contractor to do his job.

once the department of labor -- of this cost me $11,000 for the reporting. i will not make it up. >> the better approach from your view is if there is an opportunity to do it differential, a cash differentials for the period of time deployed. >> you have a bigger problem. you said it was written for when people were gone on the weekend. it was not designed for people going away for 18 or 24 months. it is an anachronism. what is happening now and we documented this, they had 750 people unemployed. over 30% of the brigade. they did not lose their jobs

when their work in afghanistan. they lost their jobs before they left. it was announced and most of them lost their jobs because the employers realized -- you have your orders in hand. if you were going to make this effective, no one will ever hire a member of the national guard. you have a systemic problem and until you fix tha tproblem, everything else will be a band- aid. >> i agree in large part. less of 1% of the population has served in this -- these

conflicts. this is not the situation like world war ii we had all been%, everyone had a brother or cousin or husband or wife or sister. there was a relative or neighbor, someone who was close to you. everyone had sacrificed. there was rationing of sugar and gas still . it is interesting to hear my grandmother talk about silk stockings. not being able to have stockings. that is just weird. something that is not -- i have been in the marine corps for 14 years and that is something that does not enter my mind. i think employers have to understand there is sacrifice associated with the wars that have been fought. while tax incentives or direct stipends -- those are the

carrots that are the best solutions and we can afford to do. that would be great. it is a matter of --it is a obligation. the reservists and i took over -- tookvists i garver over. you do not have to have another position. employers' understanding that this is part of the shared sacrifice and hopefully as afghanistan winds down, this becomes less of a problem. with the unprecedented use of the army fourth generation model i was talking about, it remains to be seen exactly what effect

that will have live in the future. continuing on operational reserves. we feel it is more of an obligation. a small percentage of the population that is doing the fighting and multiple deployment. >> i have one quick question left here. that is it is a big question. different employment training programs between the department of labor and veterans affairs and this other miscellaneous. i am coming to the feeling that we can consolidate these and put them on the department of veterans. focus in that arena. give me a couple of quick thoughts. i did think that so many departments -- veterans understand veterans and it seems like we should shifted and streamline it and focus on what we should be doing and that is employing and retraining and

having the veterans administration do it in concert with their benefit programs and all these things they do. thoughts from folks? >> take your time. >> there is legislation that is currently working its way through. h.r. 4072. designed to department of labor and transfer it wholesaled to the va. w describee to the same thinking that you have -- we subscribe to the same thinking that you have. where do i go for help, i'm going to the va. the legislation is written to make an address change is a good thing. it is not diminishing any of the functions of the program. >> you are coming in and you are

trying to figure out the need more education -- and do i need more education? it seems to want to do that in one place. >> va has implement our reach. having -- has implemented outreach. -- employment outreach. it centralizes it all. with the numbers and the outrage -- outreach, if veterans come looking for small business help and advice, they should go to the veterans outreach because that is -- they are the experts.

>> were you about to say something to that issue? ok. i appreciate it. you answered my second question on small business. we want to make sure it is as streamlined as possible. there are some good efforts being done with trying to move entrepreneurship. tap has a lot of work to be done. the mind of a soldier having to take that program and figure out how, they are focused on i am doing xyz, and i have to go where? it seems like a huge opportunity for veterans. and credible work they are doing, worldwide operations, a small manufacturing business but they took their skill and turned it into a business.

enough of them banded together, they had some capital. it seems like that is an incredible track for veterans when someone comes from the small-business world. this is a huge opportunity for the innovation. >> i would like to add to what you said. i am on the small business council. i have submitted 11 different ideas on how to help the national guard and reserve. for the government to put up a pool of money. this may help 12% or 14% of people in the national guard. they can draw on with no interest or low interest, they can buy a franchise. veterans tend to hire other veterans. but we do. if they are in the guard,

[unintelligible] while they're gone, their family -- and when they come back there is no unemployment problems or loss of benefits or income. it only helps 10% to 14% of them. entrepreneurship, study after study shows that some of the best were prior military because they had that important quality called leadership and they can understand risk. if i made a mistake out there, it cost some troops their lives. you can make a decision quickly. entrepreneurship would be a big part. there is no silver bullet. everyone is looking for the one silver bullet that will solve all their problems. the problem is multis that -- multifaceted. none of them are cheap.

>> thank you for the chance to ask a couple of questions and thank you for doing what you're doing. you are right on the franchise fees, i have seen some reports from franchisers. the veteran component, they look for. they know when they build five stores, it is like a mission and there on it. they figure out how to move but the issue is capital. you do a franchise, there is no $5,000 issue. >> the international franchise association sponsors a group and a half bigger issues going on this summer. are in one dsop's it. it is a piece to the puzzle.

>> maybe we could take that savings and put it into a fund for low interest or loans. there is something touching veterans in almost every agency of government. all for the reason because people wanted to help veterans but we have spawned what this hearing today has shown. there is one piece of this that is exposed is this report that everyone is supposed to file. you guys are doing a great job. one of the data they had, the committee got data that showed one company hired 400% veterans more than they employed. their total employees. the data is like a joke. it is like a bad joke.

let me ask the certification. this is something that was scandalous that the fda had to deal with. it was discovered someone was claiming to be a veteran, was getting the advantages of being a veteran and was not a veteran. in the example that brought this to light, they were claiming a service disabled veteran and there were not a veteran. how can we certify veterans for advantages we tried to put into the law for them in a way that does not hinder the entrepreneurial ship of them as they move into the business world. what about fronting the -- fronting? how many are hired to front for companies and how have you seen that and do you think the government dents the surface of

getting that fronting? >> i have heard of fronting. we have not heard of anything anecdotally. those the process that the va gs through to certify that -- businesses, it is statutory mandated. it is also made it difficult for veteran-owned companies whether they are small or service disabled, veteran-owned businesses to get into the system. we were talking about some of the bureaucracy. there is that biz.gov and fedbizops.gov, which is the general site. there are multiple touch points

and that makes it difficult for veterans to understand what they need to do and where they need to go. on that point i have heard several veterans who have gone through the va's credential bling process and fighting, they never had to do that to do business with the arms of the federal government. we certainly have heard not necessarily from our membership, instances of fronting or companies claiming to be better known businesses. talking to the outreach folks, historically, the rate is very low. we think the self certification that is used by sba is the way to go, but maybe at some small

barriers. you have to produce incorporation documents that showed a veteran. something that is more than self certifying. what that would be and how best that would be done. i could not say off the top of my head. adding some small hurdles while allowing that to enter is probably the way to go and you would weed out most of that fronting. at that point, taking one to the woodshed judicially speaking is probably the way to end that. >> we were wondering if we were doing what is necessary to find the fronting. we are passing laws and we're not ping attention.

that is why we will try to stay on this from the contracting standpoint and tried to continue to pay attention to see if we cannot, bet you a dollar, but you a dime, what is going on out there. it has not been uncovered in any way. let me ask you. i am fascinated by your organization. it is win-win-win. i am all this is being done with charitable organizations. are there government funds involved? >> there are no government funds at this time. >> what is the amount of stipend? how many can you do a year? how big is your budget? this is a great example of where the private sector and -- the

not-for-profit sector does a much better job in trying to assist not only the veterans but the community at large as relates to the various organizations to get fellowships in. are the various organizations providing the money or do you provide the money for these type and during the fellowship? >> our planning figure for a family of ship -- fellowship is $10,000. six months of living stipend for the fellow said that he or she can work in a volunteer capacity within whatever organization, habitat for humanity or the boys and girls club. all that money comes from private dollars. corporates -- corporations or private individuals who have seen the value of placing these individuals. the livingston and we pay them so they can serve in a volunteer

capacity represents roughly 7000 of that $10,000 and is pegged to the americorps living stipend. we have pegged it on something that is out there. it varies by location and by the cost of living in that location. again, the intent is so they can serve in a volunteer capacity and reconnect to a mission while they are working towards a longer-term outcome for the veteran. whether that is full time employment with the organization with which they're serving or when they have targeted as a place that would like to serve or going to continue dedication or placing them in that ongoing role of service. >> are you a united way agency? >> we are not. >> how many veterans are you serving? >> we have targeted internally somewhere between 400 and 500 fellows. most recently we have organized

these fellows in two classes, cohort is the military concept so we bought 114 fellows together in san diego and started them as a class and after their three day orientation in person, a military-flavored orientation. >> how do you find these veterans or how do they find you? >> the most prolific source of recurrent for us are our former fellows. are our former fellows.

or the volunteers who have served with this in communities and have seen what these fellows are capable of. >> have you done national guard folks? >> we have. >> it seems this might be a good fit for the national guard. if you are talking about a six- month period, been deployed and has come back and is serving, maybe this model is something we could try to promote. it seems to me they're not as worried about future deployment not sending the entire business model makes more sense than some of the other kinds of work that a guard or reservists could look for. >> i can tell you anecdotally and with david organizations in which our fellow surf deeply respect what they have brought to those organizations. in terms of the skill sets and experiences and they're getting a volunteer who are bringing this bill sets and experiences to the table. they keep coming back to us. we have placed more than one fellow at habitat for humanity. that is due to the impact these veterans are having. >> i bet they get those organizations a shot in the arm in terms of moral and passion

and focus. i think it is a terrific organization. and want to give senator -- i want to give senator karper a chance. >> thank you. to our welcome. nice to see you and we welcome each of our witnesses. are.we i wanted to express my thanks. we have a situation where -- the of being able to pursue a degree or post secondary program while on active duty, that is great.

that could be a great model. because of the nature you work -- of the work you do. we have some folks who are in distance learning. making sure they get the triggering the need and a lot of support. being prepared for jobs. enabling them to be citizens and paying off their loans or deaths that might relate to their education. that -- we have been working on legislation. let's go back and revisit the with the law used to be. 15% of the revenue is of proprietary school had to come from sources other than the

federal government. 85% could come from the government. this changed to 90% could come from the federal government and 10% had to come from other places. the rules are such that 10% could come from other places, the gi bill. there is 100% of t comehe could come from the federal government. we're trying to address this and working your way back. i wanted to ask if i could. if you want to jump in here. employers are not stepping up some of our veterans.

even those who have completed college degrees using the gi bill benefits -- one of the questions is why is that and could there be some correlation between the quality of the training that folks are getting and whether or not is doing as much in terms of job preparation as we think it ought to be doing? >> if we did not have the national guard problem, we would not be talking about better and unemployment. what we see overall, the bulk of the veterans are getting an unemployeemployed. when they're separated, it is that national guard issue. when we were talking about this problem it was the over 50 veteran that could not get a job. and then put inthey is computers

training programs and the unemployment -- the put in these computer training programs. they had the skills but they did not know how to use a computer. if you cannot use a computer you are illiterate in today's environment. the unemployment rate is 7.7% using the cps numbers. is that young veteran in the national guard where your problem is that. employers want to hire them. we have 5000 or 6000 companies -- i can only think of one company that was anti-military. out of over 5000. only one that i would call anti- military.

the government contractors and i know this will be a big stink about what the weather channel did with the major here recently, for the most part, an individual is stupid judgment when there are problems. it is not corporate policy. they do want to hire them. you have to fix the systemic problem. if he fixed the problem -- go back to change the policy. the unemployment rate for your 18-24 group was -- at 2007 it went to 23%. the employers said wait a minute, take my employee away

and for 24 months i will not keep them. you get rid of that systemic problem, you would not need a hearing like this today. >> any other comments? i am looking for a correlation between folks using the gi bill for tuition assistance and is not preparing them for a real job. >> the gi bill is working. people go in, when they come out of schools on the other side, it prepares them. a lot of great companies, they bring people in and train them. they want to hire them but they do not want them taken away. it is a simple problem. >> in king about any stones left unturned, i am glad that you

brought up the jury bill. mantech is as network does anybody. it is part of our culture and company and how we operate. there is one thing i heard universally from people within mantech. is there some stone unturned that can make a difference? i am no expert but something for all of us to consider is, is there a way for veterans who are leveraging the gi bill and trying to improve their skills set so they become more employable, something we see as veterans who are leveraging that gi bill in the process of getting their education or more training, they lose their security clearance. and for an employer like mantech is mission oriented. it serves the intelligence community. that ability to have a security clearance is necessary.

that part of the market is still a good market and it has competitive pay. you can put it in a deep freeze or deferral load. -- mode. it would be a great meal-mover for everyone. -- needle mover everyone. >> that is something we thank you for your leadership on. we think we have plenty of examples. veterans in trying to take advantage of the program that is out there which is the gi bill especially the post-9/11 jarret bill now that it can be used

for licenses and certifications, not just post secondary education but professional degrees and trade and everything else. and transferable to children and spouses. an awesome program. >> we had 250 a month after vietnam. >> there was a big differential between the post-world war ii bill and the vietnam veterans. the post-9/11 built restored some parity. it can be a game changer and lots of institutions and sprang up to take advantage of that. and take advantage of some of the loopholes we have found from our membership that that has been an issue for them. not completing degrees because they have exhausted the gi bill on expensive degrees that were

not going to prepare them for the jobs that were taking. criminal justice technology, for instance. i had a small business before got deployed in construction. i was reviewing some of the inine university's courses construction management technology. i could not figure out how that would have applied to any of my subcontractors i used for me as a project for senator -- manager. that is one of the things where if you go to school and get that degree and go out looking for the job or you try and start of the business as a small contractor and what to do business with governments in construction, those sorts of things, that is not going to impress anyone and help you out. that is one of the things we have found as we have looked at the issue. >> anybody else?

to the issue about security clearances, we hear that all the time. there is a solution that would change the paradigms at dod. when you step out, you are no longer cleared. you have six months to get back into a job at the level, otherwise you have to start over again. very expensive. which is why we always make jokes that when one contractor -- the have not fill the job and they have created a vacancy someplace else. when a person goes to school, when they get out to go to work, they have to start all over again. the solution is to create some billets that would be holding billets. maybe i have a tssci and if i

wanted to go back to school, i would be put into billick that leaves me at that security clearance even though i am not working at it. when i applied for a job i already have my tssci in place. i will be going from the ability to weather -- what ever billick. that would be a solution. a lot of the unions want to fight that because they cannot fight that -- they cannot do the background check. we talked for years about a guy who drives a truck and has a cld license, -- we are not going to have them come out and compete with us. >> we already passed that.

didn't we? >> there is a program called helmets to hard hats that the unions organized. the trades are averaging 52 or 55 years old and they are meeting replacements. i'm not sure that old paradigm -- they are opening up the doors. the program in my state has been somewhat successful. i walked out of here with the union with what they're doing. >> and they recruit people into the unions which is great. if you are an electrician in the army and you come out, you have been in the army 25 years, you're not going to detroit and starred as a journeyman electrician. to right to to go work states where you can make a decent wage and not start at eight or $9 an hour.

that is the reality. >> thank you. we are using the vehicle of service as a re integration strategy for veterans. we are finding that it is leading to employment, leading to continued education. currently, we're not receiving any federal funding to do that. i believe the gi bill represents an opportunity to expand what we allow veterans to focus that funding on and to choose the training program or the education program they want to use as a vehicle to further implement. that vehicle of service, funding of six months or year in service might just be possible within the gi bill. >> thanks for holding this hearing. nice to see you.

>> my last question was on the vow to hire heroes act. the goal is to start making sure that if you're an electrician in the military that you can make that transition into the private sector without having to y.train, recertifie this was a significant. maybe it is a question we asked. -- ask veterans. if you are a truck driver in afghanistan, it can be a train driver and where is the way i look at it. what they need to get the legislation that is past and what dod is doing on that so just a little side know there. -- note there.

>> let me finish up with this. do the two businesses represented here, do you feel like going through the requirement of filling out this form has been beneficial to your company, even though the department of labour is not paying attention to it? >> we aggravate so much information because we are publicly traded. any information we collect a report comes up to management attention. i do not think we have ever looked at our acknowledged that the vets 100 as a tool or research. there are a lot of reports we have to file in compliance. i am not sure we have stepped back from that. and really thought about it in

that sense. >> i am wondering if we made these public if it would help. if the data was publicly available, would you notice they did not have your data? >> we think providing public access to all that data would encourage other companies to step up their practices. and provide contractors with more information about the government's internal use of the data would lead to new solutions. transparency is the right approach. >> one of the reasons that this data has been such a waste of time is because no one has and inattention to the fact that they are not being attention to it. whereas if it had to be publicly posted, perhaps the agency would feel -- they're not here today. they will hear from us. we will make sure that they are aware we have discovered no one

is being attention. they're not checking this data, they are not being -- validating the data. it is a check that someone is making in a box somewhere and taking energy from companies that are doing but frankly, if you're not doing what you're supposed to be doing, i do not think anyone over there would ever know it. the way it is being operated now. perhaps the way we do it is to before we try to do away with it, we try to make it public and see if it could come to some good. and make it transparent before we try to say, let's -- unwinding legislation that was put into place because people were trying to help a real problem is hard. speaking of sec companies, looks

at -- look at sarbanes oxley. i am not sure they accomplished what we want it to accomplish other than providing full employment for a lot of lawyers and accountants. >> i i realize some of the questions might come from reporting. when i talk to people inside who are more closely tied to compliance reporting, at the end of the day, from a practical sense of being an employer and doing the work that we do, it does not change our behavior. we are so mission-focused. he worked the we have -- the work that we have is for missions that are very mission- focused. we will do what we do it anyways. one way or the other, it is not wanted change. >> i think it is time that we step back and see what does it

mean for the government to impact the problem? there are meaningful ways we can. the new gi bill is one way we can get our act together and figure out that he will have a special place -- the people that will have a special place. organizations and web sites, those are the things that will make a difference. and cackling the guard problem. focusing on the guard problem. that is what is driving these unemployment numbers. those that wanted to the right thing because it is important to their company will do it. those that do not will not. i am not sure turning in a report to the government will have one bit of impact on that. we will go forward from here. if you would get us your information on guard reserve

hires. that would be instructive to us. if there is anything you can add to the record about things that we should unwind, that the federal government is doing now, programs that should be consolidated. there is a big controversy about moving all of these programs. some of that is turf. some of that is legitimate. there are those who think we should move the fca functions around the veterans' programs. the jury is out on that. i want you all to feel comfortable continuing to give information to this committee as we track this. i wish i could tell you that government contractors are doing a good job of hiring veterans. unfortunately, the government's incompetence made that impossible for us to know. we have two good examples of companies that are doing the

right thing. by the way, a pleasure for me to complement contractors. most of the time, i am not doing that. most of the time, i am doing the opposite. it is pleasant for me to compliment you on the work that you're doing. thank you all for being here today and we will continue to focus on this problem in a meaningful way that does not cause businesses to much of a had a and helps veterans get where they need to be, gainfully employed where their leadership has a chance to shine. thank you all very much.

>> sees them's congressional directory is the complete guide to the 2012 congress. inside, you will find each member of the house and senate. also, information on cabinet members, supreme court justices, and the nation's governors. you can get a copy for $12.95 plus shipping and handling. order online. >> coming up, interior secretary kenneth salazar on the administration's energy policies. then, election night speeches from the governor recall. first, we will hear from the democratic candidate who lost, tom barrett. then gov. scott walker, who survived a recall. then, a hearing on the government contracting efforts to hire military veterans.

>> tomorrow, a senate banking committee hearing on how the security and exchange commission is implementing the dodd frank regulation laws. there will look at the jim morgan trading loss of almost $2 billion. thursday, federal reserve chairman ben bernanke testifies before the joint economic committee about the economic outlook and the efforts of the fed to improve the comic. that is live at 10:00 a.m. on thursday. >> over the past four years, a pulitzer-prizewinning author has been researching and writing his 10th book, "barack obama: the story." it involve traveling the world and speaking with his ancestors. he found the origins of his mother's family. it comes out in bookstores on june 19.

booktv will give you an early look with exclusive pictures and video, including our trip to kenya, as we traveled with the offer. join us on june 17 at 6:00 p.m. eastern time treat later that night, your phone calls, e- mails, and tweets for the author. >> ken salazar said that domestic oil and gas production increase under president obama. he spoke at an energy forum hosted by washington d.c. law firm and george washington university. he was introduced by former senator byron dorgan. >> let me say thank you to senator mikulski -- senator rakowski, a great credit to the united states senate. she was vice chairman of one of

the committees in the senate for a while and i worked with her. i think her so much for coming. it is my honor to introduce the next presenter. in north dakota, we have something called nonpartisan league, which merged with the democratic party. [laughter] what is so funny about that? we thought it was a pretty good thing at the time. it became the democratic npl. it used to have a bomb plot -- a bumper sticker that said, "we will stick. we will win." also, "the office seeks the man." if so, the office of the interior secretary would have been seeking ken salazar. he has been an extraordinary interior secretary. i know his background.

it is extraordinary. he comes from colorado, a family that farm and ranch. one of eight children. all eight kids got a college degree. i will not describe what the rest of them have done, but it is quite extraordinary what this family has produced. secretary salazar went off to become a businessman and a rancher and a former. attorney general for the state of colorado. then a united states senator and secretary of the interior. truly an all-american story. remember, we said democratic leadership when we were trying to figure out what comes to the floor, who is willing to be where. the question was always, where is salazar on this? the answer was, we do not know. the reason is that this is truly, and i think bob bennett would agree, one of the senator

that came to the senate to try to figure out, how do we advance the country's interests? how do we find a way through this to reach agreement? hallmark ken salazar's as the united states senator. he is a great friend and a great american. i am really pleased he has accepted our invitation to speak today. secretary ken salazar. [applause] >> thank you very much, senator dorgan. and senator bennett, thank you for being leaders and statesmen for our country. mentors and role models for me in our work in utah together. senator bennett on matters involving conservation. we were successful, not withstanding headwinds that were very strong in the other direction. senator dorgan is a great

legislator for energy and continues to be alive and well as we work on those issues across the united states of america. we just heard from lisa murkowski, who i very much enjoyed the working relationship we have together. let me tell you -- i want to share some comments on energy overall and how i see the world. looking at the debate that is taking place all across the country, you get the sense that the united states of america is very divided on the issue of energy. you get the sense that there is an impossibility in terms of how we, as a nation, can come together as a consensus for how to move forward with a sustainable energy policy in the long term.

also, i believe, including some of the trade associations and some of you who are here, are part of this to all that says there is a quick fix to what we do with energy policy for the united states that will get us to energy independence and energy security in the way that all of us want to get there. yet, all of the attacks that go back and forth are not helpful to getting us to the real energy world. the real energy world is what i came to work on when i was elected as the united states senator from colorado. it is the real energy world that the president and i have been working on for the last few years. it is capturing the future of energy for the united states of america in a way that will bring us to the kind of energy security that all of us want. summit said this cannot be done in washington.

this country is too divided. there was a time, the two senators who invited me to come here are much -- are very much a part of this effort and i was a part of their effort in 2005 and in 2007, when we passed the last two pieces of energy legislation in the united states. we were able to prove that we could find common ground and a way in which republicans and democrats could come together to chart a future for energy for the united states of america. unfortunately, what has happened in the last two years is that it has become so divided that people seem to want to battle the common ground. they want to battle the common interests of the united states of america rather than getting to results that would fashion energy policy for the long term for the united states of america. i reject the notion that we

cannot do the right thing. americans, overall, believe that we have a huge consensus about what we ought to be doing as an american society, as a nation, the united states of america. most americans would look at all of us, the members of congress, and say, we want united states to cut its dependence on oil. they would say that they remember the days when richard nixon coin the term "energy independence." when we thought we could get to energy independence. they would say that jimmy carter declaring energy independence as a moral and credible warless signaling something that was important to our future. there would also be cognizant that no matter how important those leaders of our country felt, when you go through the

'80s and '90s under ronald reagan, bush, clinton, not much was done in terms of moving us forward to energy security. some of that started happening in 2005 and 2007 under the bill that we passed. this emperor -- this administration has been implementing that program to get as to the kind of security we want. when you look at what is happening, we went from the 1970's, importing 30% of our oil from foreign countries, to the point where we were having these debates on the floor of the u.s. senate, importing 60% of our oil. one of the things i think most americans, including the people who work in this town, in the senate and house of representatives say, we agree that we ought to cut our dependence on foreign oil. most americans agree that we need to broaden our energy

portfolio. they would say that what we have done is to have too much of a focus on only oil and gas. so our work to capture the power of the sun and wind and build transmission lines, do all the rest we're doing on renewals and biofuels, that is something most americans would say is important for us to do. most americans would also agree that we need to do more with respect to drilling, including offshore and onshore. we need to make sure that we are developing america's oil and gas resources, both onshore and offshore. i think most americans would say that those who say that we can simply drill our way to energy independence, that there is no other alternative than to produce more, including

biofuels, there is another component that is missing, and that is the area of the efficiency. how can we take our transportation fleet and have a goal longer and farther on the same amount of oil? it is no surprise that as part of what has been a major accomplishment in terms of what is happening with the automobile industry in the united states of america, that part of what has fuelled the recovery of the work force and all of the companies that are dealing in the automobile world, is the fact that we now convey and are producing vehicles that are much more fuel efficient. just in march, gm sold more than 100,000 cars that made over 30 miles per gallon. over 100,000 cars that made more than 30 miles per gallon. it is remarkable that the

monthly sales from gm represents 40% of their entire vehicle fleet. some people said three or four years ago that that was not possible. the industry stepped up to the plate along with the leadership of the president, getting them to do what they should have been doing a long time ago. now we are producing vehicles in this country with much more energy efficiency. this is what i deal with every day, sometimes testifying in front of committees with the house or senate or giving speeches to industry groups for it we live in this world of what i call the world of fairy tales and the world of reality. for me, both in my days in the u.s. senate as well as the secretary of the interior, being a key member of the president's energy team, we tried to center our work around the real energy world. we try to focus on things we know we can do.

that reflect what it is that the american people want us to do. when you take an honest look at the achievements over four years, you can see that there has been great progress that has been made. the all of the above energy strategy was not picked out as an energy slogan but it was something that we started working on on day one when we walked into the department triet it is going to include the production of oil and gas because that is essential to our country, but it will open up a new frontier for renewable energy and a host of other things that are so important to our country. i am pleased to say that we have made significant progress on those fronts. the statistics speak for themselves. you have heard them but i will

repeat a few of them. on the broadest scale, we know this is more private land than public land. much of this has been caused by the new technological innovations of horizontal building and hydraulic fracturing both on private and public lands. today, gas production is at an all-time high writ oil production in the united states is at an 80-year high. the oil production of the united states for domestic energy sources. some people who like to live in the fairy tale world of energy politics like to say that is all from private lands. that is not the case. we have supported what has gone on in private lands in our policies. public lands, the total oil production from federal lands has increased 13% during the first three years of this administration compared to the

last three years of the previous administration. anyone who is out there saying that we are stopping oil and gas production is simply wrong. they are living in this world of fairy tales, not the world of reality. americans depend on foreign oil but the defense has gone down every year since the president became the president. all of us who has -- who have worked on america's national security has an imperative to that security for the long term and know how important that is. we are importing less than 50% of all oil. that is something we ought to celebrate. something the american people want to make sure is happening in this country. last year, for the first time, oil imports when down to 45%, a far cry from where we used to be as 60%, on the way to 70% just a few years ago. if he looks positively at what

happened in the last year, there was a 10% reduction in the amount of oil we are importing into the united states of america. that is 1 million barrels of oil less per day that were being imported into the united states. 1 million barrels less of oil being imported into this country. all of you here are very smart because you are here at george washington university. you can imagine what 1 million barrels of oil would look like. stack those 55-gallon barrels from new york all the way across the country back and forth a couple of times and that will tell you what 1 million barrels per day is. that is a lot of oil. why are we lose -- why are we using less oil? why are we importing this will? we have a much more fuel efficient vehicles system that is coming up out of the ground as we speak. it is important that we all recognize that we have made

significant progress on what we are doing in terms of energy imports. renewable energy -- many of us have spoken about the bright future of renewable energy. and yet, we look at the world of fairy tales and they will say it is not going to work. let's go back to the way it was in the old days. forget about solar energy, and geothermal energy, biofuel. i am proud to say that, in the world of reality, the united states has doubled its renewable energy production in the last three years. we have doubled our renewable energy production in the last three years. it is, in my view, not time for us to be able to look for long- term sustainable energy programs, to do a u-turn or press the cause but not on

renewable energy across the country. that is the world that i live in. the world of reality. the world of dealing with what we have to do to accomplish the imperatives of our national, economic, and in our mental security for the united states. that is what we have been working on since i became secretary of interior on the 21st of january, 2009 corrine i want to review a couple of things that are related to that. another reality is that sometimes, those who live in the fairy tale world of politics have a very short memory. they forget it was just 2010, two years ago, in fact, right at this time two years ago, there was an oil well, 5,000 feet below the surface of the gulf of mexico which was spewing out at

a rate of 50,000 barrels of oil per day into the gulf. nobody knew what to do. we through every conceivable resource we could to stop that oil well from gushing. the industry, including all the captains of industry, all the heads of the companies, which come into the office at the department of the interior and i would ask of them how they could help bp do what bp was supposed to do, to shut in the well. not even the department of defense had the ability to do what needed to be done. i led the team with thad allen, steven chu. the days were the same from their one until we shot the well 87 days later until we could convince -- we were convinced that we could declare the well

dead. we believe it was important for us to inject a sense of reality in terms of the safety requirements for offshore drillings, not only in the gulf of mexico but across all of america's oceans and because oil and gas affect global industry. it has to happen around the world. we worked very hard to make sure that we are restoring the confidence of the american people in the work that we do with respect to offshore energy. because of the leadership of many people, we are there now. we have divided of the conflicting mission of the mms that have put into a position agencies that are split so they do not have conflicting visions. we have an agency that does the revenue collection. we have an agency that does the planning for the future of the

outer continental shelf. we have an agency which is the cop on the beat, the bureau of informal safety enforcement. led by jim watson, who helped bring the oil spill in the gulf to an end. we are in a better position to make sure we can move forward safety -- safely and responsibly in the development of offshore gas. today, notwithstanding what you might hear from some people who are in washington and represent the state of louisiana and a few other states, the fact of the matter is we are back up to pre- spill levels of exploration -- exploration and development in the gulf of mexico. i conducted a robust sale and we're planning on putting another 38 million acres of for

auction in the gulf of mexico this month. when you listen to, when you know the world of reality, you know we are moving forward with development of offshore oil and gas. when you hear the world of those who lived in the fairy tale land, they would say that we are shutting everything down. the fact is, we are moving forward and embracing oil and gas in the offshore areas of america as part of the energy portfolio of the united states of america. i could speak to similar statistics on shore because we continue to move forward with energy development on the 700 million acres which we control through the bureau of land management or around the country. there are many things going on, including the fact that we have cut through some of the litigation, some of the processes that have been in place, to the point where we

expect to reduce permitting of oil and gas wells on public lands by as much as two-thirds. when you hear those who come from the fairy tale world that we sometimes deal with in washington, they will tell you that we have stopped it, that we are putting all kinds of roadblocks in the way. the fact is, we have an agenda that will cut down the amount of time that you have to use to get your permit for oil and gas -- for an oil and gas well by two- thirds of the time. that is making government work on behalf of the american people. i could choose lots of examples. i will give you to places and one statistic. 7000 permits are out there in the hands of the oil and gas companies. they are not yet acting on them. they should go ahead and act on the permits. secondly, if i look at north dakota, it was my department

that did the study at the request of senator dorgan and senator conrad to move forward ed assess what the resources were. they were tremendous. it was senator dorgan who, three years ago, took me to the reservation and show me that there was huge oil and gas development occurring. discovery and oil resource potential for the united states of america that rival some of those discovered in the middle east. and yet, this 1 million acre reservation at one oil and gas well in the whole place. he said, how can that be? it is not good for our energy security and not good for art responsibilities for the tribes of the united states of america? we set up a one-stop shop. for those of you who have been north dakota -- to north dakota

in the last several months, you will see the difference on the ground. it is a place transformed. there is so much oil and gas activity across north dakota that there are camps built to bring people in from a run the country to come and work in those oil and gas fields writ

>> seems like you want to do that in one place. >> yes, sir. and they have employment outreach, and v.a. has employment outreach.

so to do that at the v.a. makes sense, because it removes some of that duplicative effort. that's what i talk about in my testimony here is the numbers and outreach for veterans small business, we feel like v.a. should be a conduit if veterans come to that looking for advice, they should go to the v.a. small business. >> can i ask ted, were you about to say something to that issue? ok. i appreciate. let me just in there you answered my second question. got right to it. because i think the same thing, want to make sure we streamline as much as possible. i know there's efforts with tap and with tap there's a lot

of work to be done. the mind of a soldier going into and having to take that program and figure out how the -- they are not focused on that. they are focused on i'm glad i'm xyz. i got to go where now? i met some small companies that have bids. all that incredible work they are doing. small, little manufacturing business. very precise. they turned their skill into a business that struggled getting their business together but because enough of them banded together, they had success. it seems an incredible track. seems like a huning opportunity for innovation. >> i would like to add to what you just said. i'm on small business council, small chamber, and i've submitted 11 different ideas on

how to help the national guard and reserve and that's for the government to put up a pool of money. and that will help maybe 12%-14% of the people in the national guard. but a pool of money where they can draw low-interest or no-interest to buy a pran choose business. because veterans end to hire veterans. if they are in the guard, they can't file a -- against yourself. and while they are gone, their family can be running it while they are deployed and when they come back, there's no loss of benefits or loss of income, but it will only help 10%-14%. entrepreneur ship, studies after studies shows that some of your best entrepreneurs are

prior military, because they have that all-important quality called leadership, and they can understand risk. because if i made a mistake out there, it cost some of my troops their lives. so you make a decision very quickly. so entrepreneurship would be a big part -- there is no silver bullet. when i come here, everybody's looking at the one silver bullet that's going to solve problems. your silver bullet isal multifaceted. >> i see. i want to end this by asking a couple questions. you're right on the franchise piece. i have seen some good reports, and franchisers, which i've looked into many times in my years, the veteran component, they look for because just what you said, they look for -- it's like a mission. and this on it.

and they figure out how to move it. but their issue is capital. when you do a franchising, it's not a $a,000 issue. it's $250,000 or more. >> we sponsor a program called vet fran and the v.f.w. and some of the others are getting involved in that. we think it's a solution. but it's a piece to the puzzle. >> thank you, madam chair? >> maybe we could take that savings and put it into a fund for low-interest loans. >> combined with the department of labor and vets. >> and it's more than just department of labor. there's something touching veterans in a almost every agency of government. also for the right reason, because people want to help veterans. but we shown one piece we've

exposed is this report everybody's listing. you guys are doing a great job. they don't even have your data. you weren't here, senator, but the committee gotdaya and showed one hired 400% veterans more than they employed than their total employees. so clearly -- >> whose company is that? [laughter] >> yes. i mean the data is like a bad joke. let me ask -- the certification -- this was something that was scanned louse that the s.b.a. had to deal with. someone was claiming to be a veteran and getting the advantages and not a veteran and what was worse was they were claiming service disabled veteran and they weren't even a veteran. so first, how can we certify veterans for advantages we try

to put into law for them in a way that it doesn't hinder the entrepreneurial ship of them as they move into the business world and second, what about fronting? how many veterans are being hired to front for companies to get the benefits that are associated with a veteran-owned business? and how, in your experience, have you all seen that? and if so, do you think the government even dents surface of getting at fronting? >> well, i can tell you that i've heard of fronting. we have not heard of anything anecdotally, and i've talked to folks at s.b.a. and d.o.l. on those issues a couple of times. the process that the v.a. goes through right now to verrett phi veteran contractors, veteran businesses is apparently mandated.

and i understand the step was to limit those abuses. but it's also made it very difficult for veteran-owned companies, whether they are small or service disabled-owned businesses or veteran businesses to get into the system. you were talking about some of the bureaucracy. there's vet biz.gov and another which is the general site. there's multiple touch points, and i think that makes it difficult for veterans to understand where they need to go and what they need to do. anecdotally on that point, i've heard several veterans who have gone through the v.a.'s credentialing processing and ok, now i can do business with the government and only to find out they didn't need to do that to do business with the federal arm.

we've certainly heard through the media and news about ince assistances like the s.b.a. or veterans fronting or companies claiming to be veteran-owned businesses that aren't. and s.b.a. talking to the veterans outreach folks over there say historically the rate is very low. so we think the self-certification used by the s.b.a. is probably the way to go. but maybe add some small barriers. you've got to produce a certificate of incorporation and documentation that show the veteran and the veteran's d.v. 14, what that would be and how best that would be done, i couldn't say off the top of my head, but i think adding some small hurdles while still

allowing that is probably the way to go. and i think you would weed out most of that. fronting, i think most of that. you know, taking somebody to the woodshed traditionally speaking is probably the way to end that. >> i just wonder if we were doing the oversight nopes find the fronting. i mean, what this hearing has taught me is that we're not really paying attention. if we are passing laws, and then not paying attention. and that's why we're going to try to stay on this from a contracting standpoint and try to continue to pay attention to see if we can't -- i'm just dollar betting a dime that it's going on out there, but it is not been uncovered in any way. let me ask you, mr. kimton.

i am fascinated by your organization. it is win-win-win-win-win. i assume this is all being done with charitable donations. >> there are no government funds that the time, no. >> and what is the amount of tape soened? if someone is on a fellowship with your organization, how many can you do in a year and how big is your organization's budget? because we should, you know, this is a great example of where the private the not for profit sector does a much better job than government in trying to assist not only the veterans, but the community at large as it relates to the various organizations that you get fellowships in. how does this work? are the organizations providing the money or are you providing the money for the tape so ends? >> our loose fellowship is

$10,000 per fellow ship. it provides so he or she can work in capacity of that organization whether it's habitat for humanity or the boys and girls club. all of that comes from corporations or individuals that have seen the value of placing veterans within these non-profit and community-based organizations. so the living tape so end we provide them to -- so they can serve in a volunteering capacity while they are also working towards a longer term

outcome for the veteran. whether it's full-time or one they have targeted as a place they would like to serve or a segue into continued education or placing them into an ongoing agency. >> are you a united way agency? >> no. >> so how many veterans are you serving on an annual basis? >> this year we've targeted between 400-500 fellows. we've organized these into classes, cohorts, a military concept. so we brought together 150 together in san diego and started them as a class and after their three-day organization in person, a very military kind of flavored orientation. >> and how do you find these veterans or how do they find you? >> our former fellows or the

volunteers that have served with us in communities and seen what these fellows are capable of. >> have you done national guard folks? >> we have. >> seems like to me this might be a good fit for the national guard. because if you're talking about a six-month fellow and someone deployed and came back and serving in the national guard, maybe this model is something we could try promote in the private sector to actually focus on the national guard population. because it seems to me that the flexibility that a not for profit represents in terms of not being as worried about future deployment upsetting the entire business model of a not for profit makes a lot more sense than maybe some of the other kinds of work that a guard or reservist could look for. >> madam chairman i can tell you anecdotally and with data

the organizations with which our fellows serve deeply, deeply respect what they have brought in terps of skill sets and unique experiences and plus they are getting a volunteer who are bringing all those volunteers and experiences to the table, so they keep coming with us. we placed more on one fellow to habitat to humanity and i believe it's because of what they give the organization. >> i bet they really give those organizations a shot in the arm in terms of morale and experience. i want to give senator carper a chance. >> thank you madam chairman. to our witnesses, welcome. very nice to see you. we welcome each of our witnesses. >> thank you.

who was that guy anyway sitting next to senator mccaskill. air dropped in from finance committee. here we are. i just doont express my thanks. some of you here today, we have this situation going on where i'm a former veteran navy guy, and the idea of being able to pursue a degree or post secondary program while on active duty being detached deployed around the world is great. that's a great model, because of the nature of the work you do in the military, you're gone a lot. unfortunately, and we have some folks who this is running colleges and universities. that i do a great job screening people, preparing people to make sure they get the tutoring they need and support and they are actually being prepared for jobs enabling them to be

citizens or paying off what their debts or loans might be in terms of their education. but that industry as we know, not everybody is gsh mr. daywall knows as someone working on legislation, let's go back and visit the way the law used to be. it used to be that are 15% of the revenues of appropriate school had to come from sources other than the federal government and then it was changed to 90% had to come from the federal government and 10% had to come from other places. now the rules are that 10% can come from the g.i. assistance so literally you can get 100% or the student's college or

tuition can come from the federal government. so no skin in the game. so how can we act with a real 90%-10% rule where 10% has to come from some place other than the federal government. so i want to ask if i could of mr. daywall andos if you want to jump in here, customers we know aren't readily snapping up our veterans. some are but some aren't. own those who have completed their college degree using their g.i. benefits. one of the questions is why is that? and could there be some correlation between the training folks are getting from the g.i. bill and assistance and whether or not it's doing as much in job preparation as we think it ought to be getting? could you just speak to that, ted? >> sure.

i'll start by saying that if we didn't have the national guard problem, we wouldn't be sitting here talking about federal unemployment today. because we see overtall bulk of the veterans coming off active duty aren't getting employed. but when they are totally separated, customers try to get ahold of you, it's that national guard issue. if we're talking 50 years ago, it was the over 50 veteran who couldn't get a job. then one of the best programs they ever did was put in this computer training program and in six months uncomblpt rate for them went from 20% to 4% or 5%. they had the skill but just didn't know how to use a computer. in today's environment, if you can't use a computer, you're illiterate. but the overall unemployment rate 7.7% using the c.p.s.

numbers. that's young veteran in the national guard is where your real problem is at. but to your question, customers want to hire them. -- employers want to hire them. i can only think of one company i've ever dealt with that i would say is anti-military. >> out of how many? >> over 5,000. only one that i would call anti-military. now, and the government contractors -- i know this is going to be a big stange stink about what the weather channel did with major here recently, but for the most part when there's several problems within a company, it's because an individual made a stupid judgment. it's not corporate policy. but overall they do want to hire them, sir. and you've got to fix this

systemic problem. go back to the -- change policy of january 11, 2007. in 2006, the unemployment rate for your 18-20 referrals was about 10%. there abouts. in 2008, it went -- at the end of 2007, it went to over 23%. and the customers started saying wait, you're not taking my 'em employerier away after 6 months, because that's are most of the members odd your national guard are 18-29-year-old veterans. you get rid of the systemic problems, you won't need a hearing like that today. >> i'm looking for the correlation between folks that are using the g.i. bill and assistance and it's not preparing them for a real job.

>> the g.i. bill is working. it gets people. they go in and student veterans go and it gets people in schools, wanting to come out of schools on the other side. it prepares them. and a lot of great companies, and that's a good example where they bring people in and train them. they want to hire them but they don't want to take them away. >> yes? >> so in thinking about any stones left unturned, and i'm glad that you brought up the g.i. bill. as certainly sbefwrated, it's part of our culture and company how we operate, but there is one thing i heard universally from people inside man tech of is there some stone unturned that could move the needle in a significant way, and certainly i'm no expert but something for all of us to consider is, is

there a way for veterans leveraging the g.i. bill and trying to comblove their skill set to become more employible. something we see as the process of getting their education or more training, they lose their security clearance. and for an employer like man tech and most of our work is man tech so it serves the department of defense or intelligence community, that ability to have an active security clearance is a very necessary component, and that part of the market is still a competitive market, so anything that could be done to help preserve that clearance. i don't know, put it in a deep-freeze deferral mode as opposed to just canceling it outright i think could be a good deferment. >> how do you pronounce your

last name? >> is a laman? >> ok. >> i know you're used to hearing tom but that's something we thank you for your leadership on for trying to change the 90-10 rule and we have heard anecdotally and have heard plenty of examples to back up the idea that veterans in trying to take advantage of the best career-right ready program out there which is the g.i. bill especially the post 9/11 g.i. bill. not just the post secondary but professional degrees and trades and everything else, basically. >> even transferable, i believe. >> and transferable to children and spouses. >> what a deal. >> came back from southeast asia, i think we got 250 a month. >> right. and there was a big differential between the post

world war ii g.i. bill and the post 9/11 g.i. bill really restored some parity on the level of the post world war ii g.i. bill and a lot of institutions sprang up as they did after world war ii to take advantage of that and some of the loopholes, and we have found from our in my opinion that that really has been an issue with them not completing degrees because they have exhausted the g.i. bill on quite frankly really expensive degrees that weren't going to prepare them for the jobs they were taking. criminal justice technology. for instance. i had a small business before i got deployed in construction. and i was reviewing some of the online universities courses in construction management technology and i couldn't figure out how that would have applied to any of my

subcontractors that i use or me as a project manager for a fortune 500 construction company. and that's one of those things that if you go to school and get that degree and then go out looking for a job or try to start up a business as a small contractor and want to do business with federal, state or local governments in construction, those sorts of things, that's not going to impress anybody and help you out. and that's one of the things that we have found as we have looked at the issue. >> all right. anything? anybody else? >> to miss sullivan's issue of security clearances, we hear that all the time. there is a solution, but it's going to take a change of pair dimes. our country not like europe the individual has security clearance. the level, you have six months get back into a job at that

level, otherwise, you have to start all over again with a brand-new special background investigation, very expense i have. which is why when one government contractor hires someone that level, especially with polygraph, they create a vacancy somewhere else. when a person goes school, they have to start all over again, so the seclusion so create some -- something that would beholding that. since i retired from naval intelligence, off -- if i wanted to go back to school, i would be put into a level that leaves me with that security clearance so now when i go to apply for a job i already have that in place because i will be switching from that to whatever one i work for in that company. that would be a solution. a lot of unions want to fight that because then they can't do

the background checks and everything else. and the same problems with the certifications of the veterans. we're talking for years about doing if a guy drives a truck in a military and has a c.d.l. license or able to get a -- license and everybody says you're in favor of and the floor of the house and says no, we're not going to have them compete with us, but that would be a simple part to fix that. >> i think we have that, don't we? >> there's a program called helmets to hard hats that the union organized, because they t trades averaging 255 years old may need replacements so i'm not sure that old pair dime of one group against the rest, because i know the helmets to hard hats program at least in my state has been comma

successful and when i walked out of here i met with the labor unions about what they are doing. >> and that's great and good. but let's not stand in the way of -- if you're an electrician in the army and you come out, you've been in the army 25 years, you're not going to go to detroit and start as a journeyman electrician, but that's what the union wants you to do you're going to right to work states and not start at $9 an hour and work your way up through bureaucracy. that's rude reality. i come from real school, i'm sorry. >> thank you. as it continues, we're using the vehicle as a service. reent integration strategy for veterans and finding it's leading to employment and continued education. currently, madam chairman, as you asked, we're not receiving any federal funding to do that.

i believe the g.i. bill represents an opportunity to expand what we arow vet troops focus that funding on and to choose the training or education program that they want to use as a vehicle to further employment. and that vehicle of service, if you coulding a six-month in service or year in service might just be possible within the g.i. bill itself. >> ok. thanks. thanks for holding this hearing. let me ask a couple questions. captain, nice to see you. >> i don't -- the reaction of that last question was the vow to hire heroes which was what we passed. i know one potential might be -- maybe it's here or in the veterans committee, because the goal of it is to start making sure if you're an electrician in the military that you can make that transition into the private sector without having to retrain or recertify or go

into -- that was passed last year or passed several months ago was pretty significant, so maybe it's a question we've asked where that's at or progressing, because that's one of the biggest complaints i hear that if you're a truck driver in afghanistan, you can be a truck driver anywhere is the way i look at it. but they need to get the legislation that's passed and what d.o.d. is doing on that, they need to look at that. >> let me finish up with this vets 100 form. do you -- do the two businesses represented here, do you feel like this -- going through the requirement of filling out this form has in any way been beneficial to your company even though clearly the department of labor is not paying any attention to it?

>> we advocate so much information because we're publicly traded so any information we report comes up to management attention. i don't think we've ever looked at to my knowledge the vets 100 a as a management tool or resource to that end. typically, because we are publicly traded there are a lot of reports we have to file relative to compliance such as s. crpt c. reports. so i don't think we've ever really thought of that in that sense. >> i wonder if maybe we were public if that would help. i mean, if the data was publicly available, wouldn't you all notice that they didn't have your data? >> madam chairwoman, we think providing public access to all vets data would encourage all companies to step up to their practices and provide the

information with internal use of the data leading to more creative solutions so i think it would lead to a new approach. >> i think this data has been such a waste of time because no one's been paying attention to the fact that no one's paying attention to it. if it had to be posted, -- they are not here today but they will hear from us. they will be aware that we have discovered that no one's paying attention. they are not checking this data. they are not validating or sharing the data. it is just a check that someone is making in a box somewhere. and taking energy from companies that are doing it, but frankly, if you're not doing what you're supposed to be doing, i don't think anybody over there would ever know it.

it's the way it's being operated now. so perhaps the way we do it is to -- before we try to do away with it, we try to make it public and see if it could come to some good and make it transparent before we actually try to say, you know, unwinding legislation that was put into place, because people were trying to help a real problem. it's hard. i mean, speaking of s.e.c. companies, look at sarbanes-oxley. it has become engrained in our business world, and i'm not sure it accomplished what we wanted it to accomplish other than providing a full-time employment for a whole lot of lawyers and knts. and account ants. >> and when i talk to poem close to man tech more into

compliance and reporting, at the end of the day in a practical sense of what we do, it doesn't change our behavior any, because we're still mission-focused. the work we have are for positions required by the government that are very mission-focused, so we're going to do what we need to do anyway. and it's -- so it's not one way or the other, it's not going to change our behavior. >> yes. i think it's time to step back from all this and look at what is a meaningful way to impact government? because i don't think it's a way to impact it. think g.i. bill is one way if we can get our act together and get these people who have a special place in you know where for not doing one iota like that and getting the benefits,

those are the things that are going to make the difference and tackling this guard problem, really focusing on the guard problem since that is really what is driving these unemployment numbers. but those that want to do the right thing because it is what their company is will do it. those that don't, won't, and i'm not sure returning a report into the government is going to have one bit of impact on that. if you would give us your information on guard and reserve hires, because that would be instructive to us. if there's anything you all can add to the record about things that we should unwind if the federal government is doing it now, programs that should be con some dated, you know, there's a big controversy about moving all these programs into v.a. and some of that is turf. some of that may be will jit mat.

there are some that think we should november s.b.a. functions over to the v.a. and i think the jury is out on that. but i want you all to feel comfortable continuing to give information to this committee as we track this. i wish i could tell you that government contractors are doing a good job of hiring veterans, and unfortunately the government's incompetence in that area has made it impossible to know. we have two great examples of companies doing the right thing and it's a pleasure to me to compliment contractors as most of you know. most of the time when i'm sitting in this chair, i am not doing that. i am doing the opposite of that. thank you-all for being here and we will continue to try to focus on this problem in a meaningful way that doesn't cause businesses too much of a headache and ultimately helps veterans get where they need to

be which is gainfully employed in a leadership role where their leadership skills have a chance to shine. thank you all very much. >> c-span's congressional directory is a complete guide to the 112th congress. inside you will find each member of the house and senate including maps and assignments and information on cabinet members, supreme court justices and you can get a copy.

order online at c-span.org/shop. >> an energy reporter with bloomberg b.n.a. in looking at the house resuming debate on the 2013 energy and water spending bill, what are some of the issues lawmakers are talking about? >> energy into the interior department's recommendation and agency like nuclear regulatory commissions. some of the key issues controversial are the fact that it was cut funding for the energy department renewable energy programs and increased funding for their possible field programs that oppose it. but the administration and lawmakers. in addition the bill has several policy writers including ones that would continue funding for licenses application process which is also -- the obama

administration and particularly harry reid and policy writers that would stop the army core of engineers implementing the -- guidance and also stops energy department from finalizing rules that would set efficient as i standards for -- >> in terms of overall spending, how does the level this year compared to the 2013, the bill that's being debated? >> the level was on par with last year's bill which appropriated $32 billion in supplementals for disaster relief. so it's on par. the senate would appropriate $33 billion more. >> what are some of the -- you talk about policy writers. but what does the bill say about house republicans priorities for the energy bill? >> i think it's pretty difficult. i think there's a lot of

messaging, especially in an election year. for the most part republicans in the house want to increase funding for both fuel programs and decrease funding for renewable energy. for instance, it would cut the energy department for energy efficiency and offer relief for the vavensed research project agency which is under the obama administration and fund transformative energy so it wouldn't get traditional financing through traditional mechanisms. >> what have we heard from the energy secretary which you and the obama administration? >> well, i haven't heard much from secretary chu but the obama administration is concerned about how the bill would play into the budget control act and there might not be enough funding left over at the end of the appropriations

for the traditional bills, so they are concerned about that. that's why they have issued a full veto threat. >> tell us about the tone of the opponents. what are we hearing from democrats? >> well, each side is offering amendments that offer other priorities. on friday, there's a lot of democratic amendments that would increase funding for renewable energy programs and also today, and republicans are offering amendments that would bring the bill's cost down, including amendments that would take funding from the programs. >> where's the senate on their version of the spending bill? and talk about the timetable for a second on this house bill. >> sure. the democratic bill out of the appropriationses committee in april, and it was a 28-1 vote, so there was a lot of bipartisan support for it. had $1 billion more.

and the jurisdiction over the legislation said that he wants to be able to move to recess. but that's largely up to leaders in the senate. and they haven't said yet what's going to happen. so it might come up later this summer or it's just not knowing yet. >> ari flooda with bloomberg d. thment a. talking about energy and water spending in the bill. thanks for the update. >> thank you for having me. >> this morning on our companion network, c-span 3, a senate banking committee on how the securities and exchange commission is implementing the dodd frank law and look at the trading. that hearing is live today at 10:00 a.m. eastern. then thursday on c-span three federal reserve chairman ben bernanke testified before the economic committee about the

economic outlook and the efforts to improve the committee. that's -- improve the economy. that's life at 10:00 a.m. eastern on thursday. >> for over the past three years, pumentser prize-winning author has been researching and writing "barack obama the story." it included speaking with his relatives in kenya and discovering his african ancestry and toured family homes and sites in doons find the other gins of his family. "barack obama:the story" comes out of the we traveled with the author in january of 2010. join us sunday, june 17 at 6:00 p.m. eastern time. later at 7:30 that same night, your phone calls, emails and tweets for david maraniss on book tv.

>> mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall. >> sunday night at 9:00 eastern and pacific on american history tv, mark the 25th anniversary of ronald regan's speech from the brandenburg gate in west germany. also on c-span three our series "the contenders." 14 key presidential candidates that ran for president and lost but changed history. james blaine this sunday. >> ken salazar said yesterday that domestic oil and gas production has increased under barack obama. hosted by the launch arent fox and george washington university. he was introduced by senator dorgan byron. >> well, let me say thanks to

senator broe cows can i. she is, i think a great credit to the united states senate. i was chairman and she was vice chairman in one of the committees for a while and i have worked with her and admire her and i thank you for coming today. it's any honor now to introduce the next presenter. in north dakota we have something called the non-partisan league which then merged with the democratic party, but it used to have -- [laughter] >> it did. what is so funny about that? so it became the democratic n.p.o., non-partisan league. the old bumper sticker used to say we stick, we'll win and another that said "the office seeks the man." >> the job surely must have been seeking ken salazar.

he has been extraordinary as secretary and cabinet official. i had the opportunity as did senator ben et to work with ken salazar when he was with the united states senate, and i know his background is extraordinary. he comes from almosa, colorado, a family that's farmed and ranched one of eight children, all eight kids went and got a college degree. won't describe what the rest of them have done, but it's quite extraordinary what this family has produced. and secretary salazar went off to become a businessman and rancher and farmer then attorney general for the state of colorado then united states senator then secretary of the interior. it's truly an all-american story. as a member of the democratic leadership, whenever we were confabbing and trying to figure out what comes to the floor and who is going to be where and whose vote is what? the question was always raised, well, where is salazar on this?

and the answer was always, we don't know. and the reason -- this is truly -- i think bob bennett would agree -- this was truly a senator that came to the senate to try to figure out how do we advance the main interest? that was ken salazar's hallmark as a united states senator. he's i think a great friend and great american and i'm pleased he accepted our invitation to come here today. secretary ken salazar. [applause] >> thank you, very much, senator dorgan and senator bennett. thank you for being leaders and for being men for our country and being mentors and role models for me and our work in utah together.

and thank you for the issues in wilderness in utah. we were successful withstanding head winds. and senator dorgan for energy and native american issues and so many things continues to be alive and well as we work out those issues across the united states of america. and i know we just heard from another former colleague, lisa her cows can i who i very much enjoyed the working relationship we had as working on matters together. i'm going to share some comments with you on energy overall, but how i see the world. i look at this -- looking at this and looking at the debate taking place whether it's in utah or north dakota or all across this country, you get the sense that the united states of america is very divided on the issue of energy. you get this sense that there's an impossibility in terms of

how we as a nation can come together on a consensus on how we move farpped on a policy for the united states of america long-term. then there are those who i believe, including some of the trade associations, maybe some of you here who are part of this that says there's a quick fix to what we do with energy policy with the united states that will get us to energy independence and energy security in a way that all of us want to get there. and yet the kinds of attacks that go back and forth in my view are simply not helpful in getting us to what i call the real energy world. it's what i came to work out when i was elected united states senator from colorado. it's a real energy world that president barack obama and i have been working hard at and it's the real energy world that is capturing the future of energy for the united states of america. in a way that will bring us to

the kind of energy security that all of us want. now some may say this can't be done in washington. this country is too divided. but there was a time. in fact, two senators who invited me to come here were very much a part of this effort. and i was a part of their efforts in 2005 and in 2007 when we passed the last two major pieces of energy legislation in the united states. and we were able to prove in those two pieces of energy legislation that we could find common ground and find together a way in which republicans and democrats could come together to chart a future for energy for the united states of america. unfortunately, what's happened somehow in the last two years, especially in this town is that it's become so divided that people seem to want to battle the common ground. they want to battle the common interest of the united states of america rather than getting

to results that would actually fashion energy policy for the long-term for the united states of america. well, i reject the notion that we can't do the right things as americans, because i think americans overall believe that we have a huge consensus about what we ought to be doing as an american society and as a nation as the united states of america. and i would say most of us would look at the members of congress and say we want the united states to cut its dependence on foreign oil and treb phrase when nixon coined the phrase "energy independence" and when opec was formed we thought we could get to energy independence and jimmy carter declaring independence was signaling something that was very important to our future. they would also be cognizant,

those of you here that are students of the subject that no matter how important those leaders felt, when you go up to the 80's and ronald regan and the 90's with bush and clinton that not really much was done as far as moving forward to energy security. in 2005 and 2007 under bills we passed it started to happen and we, as an administration have been implementing a lot to get us to the kind of security we want with energy in the united states of america. but when you look at what was happening and what happened in that timeframe. we went from the 1970's where we were importing 30% of our oil and now we were 'em importing 60% of oil from other countries, so including people who work here in our senate and house of representatives they

say we agree that we ought to cut our dependence on foreign oil, most would also agree that we need broaden our energy portfolio but what we have done is to have too much of a focus on only oil and gas, so our work to capture the power of the sun and geo thermal and power of the wind and everything else we're doing on renewables and biofuels, that's something most americans would say that's most important for us to do. most would say we're on the right track and need to do more of that. i think most americans would also agree that we need to do more with respect to drilling, both offshore and onshore drilling to make sure we're developing in a responsible way the dripping onshore and offshore. also most americans would say

those who say we can simply drill our way to energy independence, that there's no other alternative to produce more including biofuels that there's another component that's missing, and that's the area of efficiency. how is it that we can take our transportation and have it go longer and farther on the same amount of oil? so it's no surprise that as part of what has been a major accomplishment in terms of that's happening with the automobile industry in the united states of america, that part of it has fueled the recovery of the workforce and all of the companies that are dealing in the automobile world is the fact that we now today for the first time are producing vehicles that are much more highly fuel efficient. in fact, just in march, g.m. sold more than 100,000 cars. that made over 30 miles to a

gallon. over 100,000 cars that made more than 30 miles to the gallon. it's remarkable that that monthly sale from g.m. represents more than 40% of their entire vehicle fleet that was sold. some people it's said three or four years ago it was not possible. yet because industry stepped up to the plate, along with the leadership of the president getting them to do what they should have been doing a long time ago, we now are producing vehicles in this country that are much more energy efficient. so this world that i deal with every day, sometimes testifying in front of committees of the house or senate or giving industry and gas groups, etc. speeches, we live in the world of what i call fairy tales or reality, for me in both my days in the u.s. senate as well as

secretary of the interior and being a member of the president's energy team, we try to center our work around the real energy work and do what reflects what it is the american people want us as their leaders to do. and i believe when you take an honest look at the achievements over now almost four years, you will actually see that there has been great progress that has been made in the all of the above energy strategy. the all of the above energy strategy was not a slogan we picked out but something we started working out on day one when my partner and i walked into the department of interior on january 1 and said we're going to work on the all of the above energy strategy and it's going to include the production of oil and gas, because that's essential to our country but it's also going to open up a host of things important to our country. that's where i spend my world on now for the last 3 1/2

years, and i'm pleased to say that we have made significant progress on those fronts. the statistics speak for themselves. you have heard a few but i will repeat a few. on the broadest scale on private and public lands, not getting away from the reality that much of this has been called by the new horizontal drilling on public and private lands, but today gas production is at an all-time high. gas production is at an all-time high. oil production in the united states is at an eight-year high. the oil production of the united states is at an all-year high. some people who like to live in the fairytale world of energy politics will say that's all from private lands. that's not the case. we have supported what's gone on in private lands in our policies but in public lands themselves, the total oil

production, oil production from federal lands and waters has increased 3% during the first three years of this administration compared to the last three years of the last previous administration, so anyone throughout saying we are somehow stopping oil and gas production is wrong. they are living in this world of fairytale not in the world of reality. america's dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year since this president became president of the united states and for all of us who have worked on america's nuret as an imperative to the national security of this nation know hold up important it is. so for us the fact that we are now importing less than 50% of our oil from other country sincere something we ought to celebrate and something the american people want us to make sure is happening here in our country and last year for the first time oil imports went