the problem is that tsa is too far behind the curve to see which is coming next. the truth is that you're too bogged down in managing an oversized work force to mitigate the next threat. that is the chili rlity. despite our efforts here process is still a miss. in the case of the new credential authentication technology, all signs point to another wasteful investment. the subcommittee will hold a separate meeting in two weeks. we need to make sure our transportation system is as secure as possible. with the least intrusion to the american taxpayer. i recognize miss jackson lee for five minutes for her opening statements. >> thank you to the members who are present and to the ranking member. the full committee chair person.

mr. pistole, good morning. i think the chairman for this opportunity and a welcome administrator pistole and acknowledged this month marks the two-year anniversary at tsa. may i also congratulate you on a great event you had with your family and wished them well. i thank you for your leadership and look forward to work with you. i would also like to thank you for holding what i think is an informative hearing. let me acknowledge as we all do in this business that i have before the judiciary committee the attorney general. i will be looking to be in this hearing as long as i can, if mr. pistole would accept the fact i cannot be in two places a once but have to be in two places for

the responsibilities that i have. it is important to identify opportunities tsa can do better. i consider this one of the hard working committees. there is a collegiality between myself and the chair person. we look forward to working together on a number of issues. i take issue with the title of today's hearing because i do believe the 40,000 plus numbers of officers are in fact the majority committed to the service of this nation. as i have travelled throughout the nation's airports, i have encountered a number and spoken to them about their commitment and how long they have been, a large number rose to the occasion --

i would ask, would we consider a misstep in the united states military as a cause for privatization or suggesting there are too many persons or we should indicate is too cumbersome and difficult what we think of the vast numbers of men and women in the military in places far away. for the most part, members of congress recognize it is important for them to be present where they are. i hope we can view the transportation security agency as our agency. i have said we need increased

professional development. you have agreed with me on that. we need to weed out those who are not committed to the duty they are mandated to do. we need to be able to own up to it, stand up to it and get rid of it. i hope that is what you are committed to doing. our system is not a call center or help desk. we would be remiss if we did not recognize the growth -- let us ask ourselves with the elimination of tsa as proposed by many of my friends on the other side of the aisle such as the appropriations committee would make us more secure? i remind everyone constantly 9/11 was pretty tsa. i am thankful that we believe -- most of us we can move forward

and improve the organization. weannot ignore it expands beyond our screening and secures flights that vets passengers against the no-fly list before boarding a plane. there needs to be cooperation with airlines and airports. we need to be looking at the egress of airports where individuals can bypass tsa because of so many entrances and become a security threat. they are at the screening. it focuses more time on those individuals it does the least about. that is important. the transportation security grant program that requires expertise on funding priorities across all high risk jurisdiction. in my own community of houston, this partnership has been vital. these are some examples of how

tea as a has established themselves beyond our screening. the national goals can only be achieved through by partisanship and the legislative branch and cooperation between the legislative branch and the executive branch. as i conclude i want to look forward to procuring from this hearing and clarifying some points discussed earlier this year. the vetting of workers at airports, privatization of security workers, weeding out the bad apples, the status of the repair station security role and the role and security -- responsibility for tsa and whether we are working with the industry to ensure. i am hoping that we will have the opportunity to lead -- leave this place with a road map for the professional service of tsa officers and tsa that are in the

front lines of securing the nation's feature. thank you for your indulgence and i lead back. >> thank you very much. i welcome and mr. pistole to the committee. let me start by commending you for your decision over a year ago to grant collective bargaining rights to transportation security officers at tsa. as proven by the performance of other federal security officers, collective bargaining does not diminished security. it can improve work force morale and productivity. this will positively help them fulfill their mission to secure our transportation systems.

it is important for all of us theto forget that tso's are front-line defense and aviation security. we must ensure these workers are not only properly trained but are afforded appropriate protections. tsa has come a long way since it was established in 2001. efforts to improve tso's morale would be to increase capacity and professionalism and their ranks and security. as you know, i have called on you to commit to reaching an agreement on a contract and renews the call to you today. i also would like to take the opportunity to note progress on the efforts made to improve screening at checkpoint procedures even though we have yet to pass an authorization bill for tsa in the house.

they also have made progress on initiatives that are aimed at supporting its mission. as the authorizing committee it is our duty to produce legislation that ensures proper funding levels and it sets forth critical programs and federal law. finally i would like to point out that tsa has not provided congress a plan for renewals. as you know there is some 2.1 million people in this country with cards. those renewals for those individuals coming up over the next year or so will be very crucial. we marked up a bill that addressed this in the committee yesterday. i encourage you to move forward with a plan that extends the deadline the for renewals until dhs has held up its end of the

bargain for deploying readers for the cards. i again say, mr. chairman, it was congress's intent that when the program was approved, the readers were just a matter of course. we are some years later and we are not there. clearly, we have a problem. i do not want that problem to become a burden to employees who had to pay $132.50 to get their card, which at this point is not more than a glorified flash card. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> opening statements may be submitted for the record. we are pleased to have this distinguished witness before us, administrator pistole. he has been the administrator at

the department of home and security since 2010. he oversees the management of approximately 60,000 employees. the security operations of more than 450 airports throughout the united states, the federal air marshal service and the security for highways, ports, mass transit and systems and pipelines. no small job. the chair is happy to recognize administrator pistol for his opening statement. >> appreciate the opportunity to appear before you. we know the goal is to maximize transportation security and stay ahead of evolving threats while facilitating the flow of legitimate trade and commerce. i would respectfully disagree with your assessment for reasons i will outline. i think we have made significant progress. let me start with the context of

the hearing taking place. this is my first hearing since the destruction last month of a terrorist plot. it ended up being intelligence to not only for the government but for security intelligence services. it shows the determination of terrorists to use unique designs, contract -- construct, and concealment of nonmetallic devices on a person or in cargo to blow up u.s. bound airliner. this highlights the challenges the men and women of t.s. a face every day to keep safe 1.7 million travels -- travelers who fly within the u.s. while we strive to provide the most effective security in the most efficient way. that is why we continue moving away from the one size fits all construct set up after 9/11 using technology and training to

accomplish this mission. of the 6 billion people we have screened since 2002 completely satisfied with the manner in which we accomplish our mission? no, obviously not. the vast majority are and we have learned how we can modify procedures without compromising security. that is why we are transforming how we accomplished our mission. including modified a less intrusive physical screening of world war ii veterans, children 12 and other, and passengers 75 and older. tsa pre check, nearly 1.5 million people prescreened including a number of members of congress going quickly through modified check. screening because we know more about you and them based on voluntary sharing of information with airlines.

pilots, who are the most trusted person sunday aircraft and in the future, flight attendants. now, we are exploring how to expand to include many others based on intel driven premise that the vast majority of travelers are not terrorists and simply want to get from point a to point b safely. we are focusing on our most of valuable resource, our people. two important changes at our headquarters to promote excellence in the workplace to complement the new offices of professional responsibility. these changes are designed -- hard work, professionalism, and integrity. first we created the office of engagement to centralized leadership and technical

training programs. we expanded our traveler engagement offices and efforts to focus on our pro-active out reach with the traveling public. we employed -- 23% of our employees have served our nation in uniform through prior military experience. attrition was 7.2% in fy11. this is a reduction of two- thirds of the last five years. recognizing communications is central to success. we provide opportunities to build these. by the end of this year with over 30,000 officers already trained, some key concepts and strategies include active listening, empathy, using force to communicate clearly and avoiding the tendency to trade- comment for negative comment. strong positive feedback from

officers to apply the training to their jobs. complementing the additional training opportunities available at community colleges close to where the word in schools and alabama, texas, mississippi and other states. approximately 2800 personnel have enrolled. in april we started specialize classes of the federal law enforcement training center designed to incorporate leadership and technical skills and expectations for supervisory security officers. we have established multi- cultural division within tsa that is responsible for engaging members of communities and attractive fashion. last december relaunched tsa cares.- as a strive to foster excellence and improve the travel experience, we continue to carry out our core mission of

providing the most effective security in the most efficient way. >> thank you mr. administrator. as we go into the questions i want to remind members we will take as many rounds as you want to have. i want to adhere to the five men their rule. i will enforce and of myself and everyone else. we will let you ask questions as many times as you would like but we will stay within the five minute rule. my question first, i see in my town hall meetings -- a few months ago i was in chicago o'hare on monday. it was palpable, the american people are disgusted and outraged with the department the sea is bloated and inefficient. you and i speak on a regular basis and you know i share with you that the department has an image problem. my question to you is, why can it not move more quickly to

remedies? you gave a laundry list of things that our initiatives in place. it is moving at a snail's pace. why? >> thank you for recognizing we are making progress, just not at the pace the american people would like to see. >> not just like to see, it is unacceptable. >> i disagree with that from the standpoint that if we put something in place to quickly as we have been so criticized over the years for rolling out technology, protocols before we got it right, if it implicates security in a negative way, that is the worst outcome. terrorists can exploit the vulnerability because of something we rushed to get out that does not serve any of us. we have to find the best security. how can we do that in the most efficient way. i appreciate working with the committee to say these risks we are taking are making a difference. if you ask any of the 1.5

billion people who have been through pre check including a number of people in the room, it is a step in the right direction. we are working aggressively to expand the population base. >> again, i acknowledge the list of programs -- the you have recently started they are good. they need to be moved along at a more rapid pace. you also had a talk with the privately about how strongly i feel that the department is bloated with personnel. i am of the opinion it could reduce its ranks by 40% and be able to do the job as effectively if you have control over her the remaining 60% of the people were. i also believe if we had a leaner, smaller work force, the public or have greater confidence because the public is upset when they see people standing around doing nothing. the ones they do interact with

seem unprofessional. it would be easier for you to get them professionally trained because it would be a smaller group of people. the realized savings would pay for the training. you just mentioned you would like to see a more professional and efficient work force. we all would. my question to you is, do you agree we could reduce the workforce by 30%? >> that is a very challenging proposition from a number of standpoints. go out and said this work force and a year's time. t as a hired 50,000 people in a year's time and had them at the checkpoints working within the years time. a huge undertaking. the challenge now is how do we go forward in the second decade to address concerns you have raised. most people who have come to a town hall are probably not there

to complement something. most people who want to show up for something want to offer constructive criticism or otherwise. >> i hear it everywhere. family get-togethers, church. as soon as you mentioned tsa people start venting their anger. it is not only a problem with the american people. you have an image problem in the congress. half of congress wants to get rid of the department because it is useless. we know that is not the case purity has some effect of programs. we have to have airport screening and security at seaports. until we get the department where the american people has confidence in it, you have a big problem. >> i agree. i appreciate the concern. i believe these initiatives that are involving more and more people. as we try to expand through less frequent travelers, we see

record enrollment in global entry that anyone can sign up for. they are eligible at personnel -- >> those are good programs. i want to go back to my question because my time is almost up. do you agree you could dramatically reduce your work force now that it is not the first year. you had a decade you could reduce 46,000 personnel you have as screeners and do the job as effectively if not more? >> no, i do not agree with that. that is a huge number. that would take a significant assessment on one hand it. it is good to talk about theoretically and said you could do that -- >> my time is expired. i recognize the ranking member. >> i want to make the chairman happy. the thing i said over and over again, i speak quickly and i will be pointed in my questions. i just want you to say yes. you have to tell a tea as a

story. i said that over and over again. we have to start being shy and add to the list of stories, some of the great examples of actions at theagents -- tso's gate helping passengers, being sensitive to the elderly. that story has to be told. do you see that as a valuable to do and will you be looking forward to do more of that when i say your team? >> yes. >> as you know the appropriations committee provided out of your $15 million dollars above the president's request for privatize screening operations. you testified operating a dual model costs taxpayers more than if the entire system is federalize. do you recommend that has issued? could it be directed to enhance other operations?

>> there is another aspect to that. the bottom line is, if there was additional money available for other programs, that would obviously be helpful. the whole issue of privatizing airports, working through those issues now in terms of applications and the bottom line is -- >> did you say that the dual system of cost taxpayers more? >> it does currently, yes. >> the issue of surface inspectors, and the question of the program, we have testimony last week we can do a better job. the surface inspector program were to be cut today by 20 million, how would that hinder the mission of the program? >> two keys has been the reduction in the toxic hazard,

freight rail including within a mile of where we are sitting right now that over the last several years because of tsa working with industry have been able to reduce toxic hazards. that is one area. another area is a base assessment we have worked with metropolitan transit authorities to enhance their security and a more efficient way by focusing on key vulnerabilities. >> $20 million would undermine progress. would you commit to me as well to make sure surface inspectors are trained to the industry or the rail system they are looking at? >> yes. >> we know that the senate and other members have joined in asking for flight attendants to be included in debt. in light of the bipartisan support for flight attendants, will you be -- expand the program month and see how that

can be implemented? >> we have been reviewing that. we start with the pilots and we are working through issues with flight attendants. there is a number of bass backs to that. >> -- aspects to that. >> i have asked for a cab and security hearing. one incident in particular that was unique that involved an airline pilot, in the midst there were fortunately among the other families, women, there were some ex-nypd officers. they were so aged that they broke. my question to you is, in the substantial cut that we face in the appropriations bill, how would the substantial reduction stress the mission for in cavan security? >> any reduction is a potential.

>> $50 million that is now reduced out of the budget, how would that impact -- >> that reduces aviation security. >> what are you doing to assist with airlines? >> over the years we provided training for pilots and flight attendants and the entire flight crew. the airlines have taken that in terms of additional training. they provide the restraints to talk about. we do not regulate the it type of restraints they are required to have on board. >> my time is sending. let me make sure they are -- you are looking at how to deal with up -- elderly and children? i think that is crucial. >> we have instituted new policies for children 12 and younger, 75 and older last

month. all of those would go through an expedited screening because they are in a lower risk category. >> let me thank the chairman. >> the chair now recognizes mr. turner of new york. >> thank you. good to see you again. how are you? some time ago we spoke about training and behavioral analysis. how do you selected these people -- a good amount of tact is required and overriding common sense which we all know is not that comment. are any of the collective bargaining provisions and heating help these people are selected? >> thank you. let me answer the last question first, no. there is nothing impeding that.

we go through a selection process. but for volunteers who have the aptitude and we do a screening process of them to assess whether they would be a good candidate based on the criteria you mentioned. the ability to engage with somebody in a conversation. we then put them through a training. for those we had at boston and detroit who are engaged in what we call the assessor program, they go through an additional training regimen which is designed to be the most comprehensive that we have with an tsa to say, what are their abilities to discern what somebody's attent is by a brief conversation. it may be as much as what not the actual answer is but how that person -- the body language, i kind tacked -- things known in law enforcement in terms of being able to engage in somebody.

all of those things are factors that we look at as we try to assess who our best people are to assess their officers. >> how long does it take to train one of these people? what's the assessors, if you want to call them -- they are all behavioral detection officers. then they go through a 40 hour training course which is tested, and graded. most people make it. this is based on some worldwide best practices without identifying specific countries on what is the best way to engage a passenger in a verbal and a non hands-on approach. they go through the 40-hour training and then they have on the job training to assess, ok, you made it through all right,

but are you doing this as we would like in real life? we have its in the two airports now. we have not expanded its yet because of rigid one of the questions is, what is our return on investments. we put people in this position. what kind of protection are beginning. what is the return on investment. >> to date, have you found the process of moving that line a long, does it speeded up? >> it does not speeded up but we have found some modifications. is it the document said that first checks the past four, can they do this or does it need to be a different officer? it takes typically from 20-30 seconds for this conversation to take place. it is not expedite the process but it is another layer of

security that helps us and is noteworthy in light of the intelligence from last year where they're talking about surgically implanted devices. where they are talking about not just under where bombs as we have seen but taking explosives and having suicide bombers -- agreed to have it surgically implanted. see whether there may be something -- does 30 options we looked at. >> the chairman brinks mr. thompson for any questions he might have. >> thank you very much. i would like unanimous consent to add to the record an exchange of letters between the mr. pistole and myself as well as unanimous consent to add into

the record the arbitration results relative to negotiations between tsa. >> so ordered. >> relative to the collective bargaining effort and the fact tso's had selected a marketing representative, can you provide the subcommittee your assurance that tsa will negotiate in accordance with the determination? and you are committed to reaching a resolution on a contract through regular negotiating process? >> absolutely. we have committed to that and we are working to reach that agreement. >> thank you. taking off from mr. turner's comments about behavior detection officers, gao looked

at the spot program. we spent about $1 billion of taxpayers' money putting this program together. if we look at who we have detained, had you made an assessment of whether or not by the people we are detaining? >> the short answer is yes. it adds value as another layer of security at airports. the question is, that return on investment is not something beyond the excess a program beyond the two airports we were an. i am still assessing the

information from there. we have identified a number of people who had exhibited anomalies, suspicious behavior. there have been people who had false documents on them or illegal aliens. perhaps had outstanding criminal warrants for them. law enforcement has been able to step in and detain those people. one of the questions we get, have we identified terrorists? it is because of the deterrent nature of the tsa system. everything we have seen has been from overseas. whether it is richard reid, the liquids plot, london, -- >> so your testimony is the $1 billion investment, even though we have not caught a terrorist, we have caught people with visa overstays or what have you is

worth the investment? >> believe it is. >> was that the intent of the program? >> it is to deter terrorists or to catch them. we have not had any actual terrorists try to get on a flight here. people have said and what about the times square bomber. he was a fleeing felon. >> i expect you to defend your program. now,gao also said, maybe we should have a fresh set of eyes look at it. have you thought about having a third-party and to the look at it as gao suggested? what's the think there is strong validation worldwide from some of the premier security services in the world that do this kind of work. as far as having an outside

entity to come in and do an evaluation, i have not taken that step if that is what you are suggesting. >> out side of tsam, given had no outside validation? >> outside the department. >> we have not paid for an independent third-party review to come in and assess the program. >> last point is, the card is a real issue. we have about 2.1 million people in this country with the card, over time will expire. do you commit yourself to address the expiration, before the time comes? >> yes. >> the chair recognizes mr.

richmond. >> thank you mr. chairman. to the ranking member, i will go straight to the last question because i think he was rushed wanting to get the commitment. i represent new orleans, louisiana, the port of new orleans, five or six major rail lines. this is an important issue for us. would you look at the loss of time for people going to renew the card and having to go twice. i think the major issue is the need for renewal and the need to go twice in order to get the card. is there a plan in place to address both of those issues, especially since we do not have the readers? >> recognizing the importance, especially to your district, there have been -- there has been a lot of good work done.

we are nearer to announcing a plan that addresses those issues in a way that still provides adequate security. also it addresses issues you have raised. >> getting back to the subject of this committee. i agree that i think the title is unfair to you. in your experience and any data service that you have seen. is your approval rating of customer satisfaction, reputation that much different than any normal police department, a meter maid, or anyone else who has to enforce laws that are uncomfortable or inconvenient? >> i think we are defined by antidotes. at one. millions -- 1.8 million people

who travel every day, i think it is part of the sheer numbers that we deal with with over 630 million people in a year. we are not going to have 100% customer satisfaction where every single person believes they receive the best possible security screening. i think that is a factor of the numbers. with that being said, it is our goal to provide the most effective security to make sure everyone gets safely from point a to point b but is done in a way that it recognizes the privacy of the traveling person and is something by definition our job can be confrontational. people may not agree with that. what we are working on, the training programs, the technology improvements to try to be less invasive but more thorough, all of these things are designed with that outcome. not that it is a popularity

contest, but it is something we want to make sure we can assure the traveling public that, yes, we are providing the most efficient security. change does not happen overnight. we have instituted changes that i think are addressing concerns and the traveling public's concerns in a way that affects the vast majority. there will be individuals or not fully satisfied. >> as you move to being smarter, one of my concerns, as you reduce the level of screening for seniors and an offense, do you worry about creating a opportunity for them to be used as mules is there voluntary or involuntary. is that a concern? >> that is a concern. we have seen incidents where people have been used unwittingly, particularly

several incidents where that has happened. we have to be mindful of that. that is why when we describe tsa being one of multi later levels of security for the government, the key is intelligence on the front end. the most recent plot, the human cargo plot disrupted, that was bad on intelligence. it is not like we are operating in a vacuum. if somebody is going to use a child or elderly person, we are in close concert with the rest of u.s. intelligence and law- enforcement communities. everybody is still going through some fiscal screening. is a question of if we can do with more smartly. >> only 20 seconds left. customer satisfaction, to you have any idea where you are in your approval rating? >> so -- >> if you have a number it would

be great. >> but say a half million calls so far this year, half of those are for information, 7% calls are complaints. mustered just asking for information about screen protocols. i think last year it was 6% -- 6% now or 7% last year. >> i would say it is far better than the 13% approval rating for congress. >> thank you, sir. >> i would not bet on it. he asked a legitimate question. i think it would be good for you to do a survey -- there are all kinds of service companies that do surveys on customer satisfaction. i think it would be good to ask the traveling public what they think of tsa. i will go back to what i am suggesting and that is to get leaner. you thought 30% to 40% reduction

is too much. what is a good number? keep in mind you do not need 46,000. nobody believes that with a strays -- straight face you have the right number of people. what is the size that you can cut? is it 25%? >> the challenge is to say what kind of security -- what are the american people expecting? >> you have been in the job two years and you are a very smart and confident fellow. you have had two years to run the department. if you can pick the workforce, what is the number you can get by with? is it 35,000 workers of the were professionally trained? >> the current construct an order to be the most efficient agency possible, which most people do not think about some of the details, 14,000 officers are part-time.

as opposed to having full time people there all day, we have part-time people who come in for four hours in the morning. some market split shift. >> is that not 14,000 over the 45,000 full-time? >> know, the requirement is, the cap is 46,000. the fte is below that. that is one way we get around that. we have the full time and we have all the part-time people. part of the challenges, how do you train and retain a professional work force. saying you would find us at x amount, i would have to look at, to a cutback the part-time, which would be less efficient.

then we have a full time people who are not -- >> heart as those people standing around not doing anything at the checkpoints. >> some of our at airports to not have break rooms. they may have to simply go to a coffee shop or something on their break because they may have to walk 10 or 15 minutes to get to a break room. if they have a 20 minute break that is difficult to do. >> i am not talking about people on their brakes. i am in airports all the time. i understand. tsa. you and i both know you can go to the airport and you can see a lot of people at these checkpoints. i will get back to my question. is it 20% you can reduce the workforce? >> i am not prepared to set a percentage a ambling to reduce because i believe the personnel we have currently -- using part-

time as a construct, it is necessary to provide the security americans expect. >> everyone knows you can get by with less people. i will tell you if the budget problems we're having, you know your number will not be getting bigger. if you're going to find money for the technology you are looking at, you will have to find it somewhere. if you want to find money to train these people, i think you will have to look at rightsizing the department to get it down and using money to make them more professional. he spoke a few minutes ago about the professionalism necessary for this job. you feel like the 46,000 screeners, there are exhibiting the professionalism you expect? >> most do, but there are some clearly who do not. if they violate our policies or procedures or if they are off- duty that they do not uphold

those expectations we take appropriate action. " now that you started and i applaud before starting a uniform training system so every screener will one day go through the same screens so there is more uniformity across airports. my question is at the rate you are putting people through that training program now how many years would it take for the entire work force to go through it? >> we are taking out of high because there is a priority. it is a long-term construct, multiple years we are talking about. >> decades? >> not decades but multiple years. >> tell me more about that attrition rate. 7.2 and fy11. i looked at what happened in fort myers. what does it take to get fired? apparently a lot more than these

people. >> obviously the fact that each individual, i would want to make sure we investigate properly. make sure there are processed. there is an immediate issue with security, we suspend them right away so they are not on the job. these individuals, we have proposed for dismissal, the other 37 weeks of but -- we propose for suspension. then the manager who had the oversight situation of, did they know or should have known what was going on. >> my time has expired. >> thank you very much. one of the issues that some of us have tried to move with this

committee is with respect to new technology. the culture of a lot of organizations is to only be able to -- they had a capacity to deliver. one of the things that a lot of members are exposed to is new detection technology. we always hear that the barrier between developing the technology and what is required to get tsa is so difficult to overcome what can you say to this committee that will allow new technology a faster way of becoming better? >> thank you. on monday of this week i met

with a group of industry a number ofo's from companies including small business minority-owned businesses. one thing i told them is we are always looking for innovation. the big ticket items if you well, i would agree it is difficult for small business owners to try to develop a $100,000 a piece of equipment. what we do is try to look for opportunities. i think if you look across the department and even across the government, we have one of the best records even though it is challenging to engage them in ways that may be outside of the norm or protocols.

if there is anything specific i would be happy to follow up. >> i have about four minutes. i would just like as a follow up to this meeting engage you with some of the people that have contacted the committee about the difficulty. i would like you to listen to them. what you say to us and what they say to us all so is not the same thing. >> i would be glad to do that. we are always looking for innovation. >> the reason i say that is, some of the company's half capacity. some have been able to deploy their technology overseas to airports we have relationships

with. they cannot get that technology tting.h tsa's ver if there is a disconnect, i want you to help us identify. these are american companies. american jobs that we could do. apart from that, i have one other issue. the reorginazation. korea been hearing about it for a while now. -- we have been hearing about it for a while now. do we have a preliminary report on the deficiencies you expect to gain? we have been exposed to reorganizations in the past. we have not been able to determine the efficiency.

what we have been able reject just to be honest with you, you move people around, some people get promoted. some people move down. what is your purpose in the reorganization? what's the bottom line is to come up with the most efficient service we can provide. cost and efficiency review to be taken. there is information out there, some reported by other committees that there are 4000 people at tsa headquarters. we have 2500 at our headquarters. we have other components that the national functions and of vetting. they may be counting those numbers. anyway, the numbers at headquarters, what this review

was is to look at the layers of review on documents, policy issues, and so we have eliminated a number of positions at headquarters to become more efficient, leaner, smarter to the chairman's. . i will have to get back to you in terms of the exact numbers and those issues. it is a number of positions that have been eliminated to reduce layers of bureaucracy and to become a smarter, leaner organization. >> can you provide us with an interim report on where you are with that and what savings are projected? >> i would be glad to do that. >> we recognize the chairman from new york for any additional questions you have. >> thank you. i travel a good deal.

i am in an airport 12 times a month i guess. i observed the lines. how fast we get in and out of there is -- it has a good deal to do with your image and customer satisfaction. even how much air travel. i know people who prefer to drive to carolina's rather than endure the airport. one of the things i noticed is the belts on or belts of policy. sometimes mails are required to take belts off. it slows things down. i do not know if there is a uniform policy just to keep everyone off guard. that is a slowing process. sometimes there are enough people there to help move the

trays. in peak times, i see inspectors who are looking at the electronic monitors who are on the job training. they stop at every other back and have to go through all systems. i think this would be better suited for low traffic periods. i do not see a process -- when things are getting out of hand there are a thousand people standing in line. there are blocks -- ways to quickly alleviate that. >> thank you. that is one of the challenges that we have. about the staffing, if we reduce

staffing by >> per cent, that would likely have an impact on the wait times. -- by x percent, that would have an impact on wait times. i would like to provide the committee with metrics we use. we actually look at the issue ss than look for ways to improve that in terms of the staffing model for each airport based on the configuration, how long the with the wait times -- i get a report that shows we times around the country. to say when there is a long wait time the what we believe is appropriate, i spoke yesterday with the ceo. i had five airline ceos and an updated intelligence briefing. i spoke with two of them about issues, one at an airport where

their customers are experiencing longer wait times than they are used to. he wanted to know how we can work on that together in terms of their additional staff and our additional staffing. it is something we are focused on. you raise good points about belts on and belts off. usually the whole idea behind a project program is leave the shoes on, leave the belt on, leave the light jacket on. expedite those things we have done more prescreening on. that is the whole idea behind the program. as we get more people into that, it will alleviate the wait times that regular checkpoints because we can streamline the others. it is not happen overnight. i wish i could say, yes, it will be done tomorrow. we are moving very deliberately and as fast as we can while maintaining>> thank you.

>> where recognize the gentleman from louisiana. >> will try to pick up where mr. turner left off. besides the pre check which has expedited significantly for people who have signed up and people who travel the time, what should we expect to look for for the regular traveled as not signed up. i thought that shoes on is something that we would have achieved by now. what can we do to expedite the process? >> we're working both internally and we have received some proposals from the private sector that asked that very question. how do we expand the known

population using available data? and then provide that information to outside of frequent fliers or even global entry programs. i think there is very good opportunity. i think it will give us the opportunity to greatly expand the base as well as, for example, the members of the military that mentioned. that would expand beyond reagan airport and seattle where they are now more and more in the didn't -- in the intelligence community coming on. for the everyday common traveler, ok, i travel a couple

of times a year. it could be low level entry which would give them limited access. but we are exploring ways for a partnership. we don't get the data. if a private company does that in partnership with the individuals and they can read that information to us, we can make a risk-best judgment for prescreening of the checkpoint. >> think he is far more aggressive and i am, but i would indicate support that i do think we can -- any entity can run in a bit leaner and smarter to reduce costs. at some people -- at some point, you get to where you cannot do more with less. i don't think we are at that

point it with tsa. we can operate leaner and more efficiently. i think there should be the goal. is there anything that you have that we can help you with to make it easier for you to operate more efficiently leaner? >> i appreciate that. the broader we can expand this known population, the more quickly we can do that, the more efficiently we can operate. as we expand the population, i do see some savings in the future. i don't know what those are. so the support of the committee is critically important in terms of moving forward. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> i now recognize my friend and colleague from illinois. >> i apologize for being tardy.

let me start out with a broad and general question. if tsa suffers from a bad public relations reputation these days and much of that is endemic to what they do, if you were to be critical though, what constructive criticism would you let it defeat of tsa itself and/or the folks that work with tsa in contributing to that poor public perception. >> we talked a little bit about that. i think the anecdotes that drive a lot of that negative impression and rightfully so, if we have treated in the body and professionally, then shame on us because we have not done the job that we are expected to do. so that is clearly on us and that is why we're doing all this

new training, retraining, professionalizing of the work force, those things that will enable us to move to the next level. i think the criticism is accurate. it is driven by anecdotes and you do not hear from the 99 per 9% of travelers who had a positive -- 99.9% of travelers who had a positive experience. the few weeks ago, there was the issue with secretary kissinger. he had ever-screening experience. -- he had a negative screening experience. he had no problem with it. it was somebody else who sought. he put out a letter saying that he felt the tsa employees were

very professional. i think it is just the environment we are in. >> do you measure that at all? >> we measure complaints. thus far, this year, and out of the 25,000 calls to our call center -- some people are so frustrated, they don't know who called. san francisco will call as to complain about the company who does -- and reactor for them to them. lacher, it was three-quarters of a million calls. -- last year, it was three- quarters of a million calls.

>> does tsa have plans for people who carry things to protect themselves, like pocket knives? >> i think there are some opportunities. there are strong concerns from some that, if we allow knives in we know how the box cutters were used on 9/11 to kill flight attendants and perhaps used as a way to intimidate people to get into conflict. there are views on both sides. we have looked at that. we do have a lot of modifications along the way. what we're looking for is to have our folks focus on what can cause rockefeller to the aircraft. -- rocket failure to the aircraft. the biggest threat now is non-

metallic instruments. in the future, we will have some updates on that regard. >> thank you. >> following up on that, you are right. we need to be focused on the the real risk, which are explosives and none on a pair grooming scissors or fingernail clippers. i hope you will visit that with a broad perspective. i want to go back to one of the other questions that was asked about kissinger. he is one of the most recognized people on the planet. donald rumsfeld, when he had initially couple of years ago, when he was going through and was patted down, i think the thing that aggravates the public about that is that, if we're truly moving toward a threat or

risc-based perspective on how we do the job, why are we putting down donald rumsfeld? a supervisor ought to have the discretion to say we don't need to worry about him. do you see my point? i think that is why it winds up on tv. it is an illustration that that is not the degree the of -- the degree of professionalism that we want. i would like to see the department get much more aggressive about finding the money by downsizing and putting more supervisors through training so they have a lot more professionalism and more discretion frankly. >> thank you, chairman. i agree completely with you on that. we need to empower from one people. that is why we started with their first two class's at a federal officer training center for supervisors knowing that

they are critical at making changes that the tsa cannot compare the they're not obviously at each checkpoint 24 hours a day. we want to push the discretion down with the right people to make sure there is good judgment and good common sense used in those situations. >> what time mind you see as realistic? >> for the? >> for the training of supervisors. >> i cannot do this. i will do that. right now, we have trained 50 supervisors and we have 89 more class's -- eight or nine more class is scheduled for the rest of this year. that will cover several hundred more. >> out of company? >> want to say 32,000 some -- i

don't know the exact number. if there was funding for this, tand congress and the american people have said we need to train tsa more, then i could expedite it very quickly. >> i do want to go back to the issuing little while ago about termination. shirley jackson lee said that we run across people were not doing their job and we need to run them off. i recall -- i completely agree with ron that appeared not just because we need to get bad apples -- i completely agree with her on that. not just because we need to get bad apples out of the system. but because it sets a bad example for other workers. when the gao report found failures in the audited screening system, not only was it attributed to human error,

some was because there were not trained well. those folks need to be fired. very rare have found that coming in that failure, there were fired in instead, they were removed from the opposition and given more training. you need to fire some of those folks. >> i agree with you, chairman. if you look at what we have done in the last year with security officers whether it is in honolulu or charlotte or, most recently, in fort myers, when we find people not doing their jobs, we will give them due process, but we will hold them accountable and we will fire them. >> i hope so. because the american public is paying for that. and they're standing in line. i hope the image, that the the

department has got, if you would put a bumping your step. did you have a question-you got my attention. >> no. >> i'm sorry. one of the concerns i have had is procurement problems in the department, not just yours, but the whole department. why was the business roundtable used to see who could come and talk to you? >> the? >> this was at the recent tsa systems integration facility. >> on monday, yes. so there were members of this roundtable who were organized because they have existing contracts or they were looking for what the with florida is.

but it was not limited to that. it was also open to 25 or 50 other businesses who were allowed to participate. it now -- he didn't have to be a member of the roundtable to participate, if that is your question. >> it was only open to a limited universe. one of the things we have been trying to urge the department to do is draw the number of people you bring in for dialogue so they can see what your challenges are and come up with some ideas to meet those challenges. they have indicated they will t ando broaden that necked this was inconsistent with that. >> it was a core group, but it was not limited.

i think there's another 50% of that group that was open to anybody they wished to come. so i think -- i don't know if everybody was interested in coming, i spoke to the group and i took questions from anybody who had a question. if it was small business or summit wants to do business, it was completely open to anybody wanted to ask the question. >> right. do you have any more questions? >> i was going to join you in the question about the inefficient people and the need to fire them. it is the same thing we talked about when we found the private security company in detroit who had the agent who found the bag outside and brought it into lost and found. our question at the same time was why do we need the private

contractor and does the priva contractors of the employee? people need to know that you do not in top -- they do not tolerate incompetence and laziness. it would improve the image, but, more importantly, it makes citizens safer. being in support of tsa and traveling a lot and even as someone who probably would not fit the motive getting the life security check -- i am neither young nor older -- i don't have a problem with tsa. i think there are some areas where you can improve. i do not think you need to be the greater at wal-mart. but i also don't think you need to be the no. overbearing security member. -- to be the over basic remember.

-- to be the overbearing security member. >> we have to make sure that common sense does play into the decision making. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> that is exactly my point. there are some purse -- certain people who are so well known that you just have to use common sense. if you start putting them down, people will say that they're patting down beyonce. she is not going to blow plane. what? zero, off a record. yes. i know where you're going. i want to offer a few more examples where you can get money of hide. we had a hearing here a couple weeks ago -- what was it?

the ground security -- the surface of inspectors. there are over 400 of them appeared to have five different industry folks in here who were saying we have no idea what they're doing. there used to be 80 of them, but they all felt they could get by with that 80 and we don't know why there are 400. that is one thing that i would like to see you visit. and that will wrap up. in the airports were do have private contractors, we are very rigid in san francisco, we have 88 federal employees under the a 50 -- under the fsd from the contractors but you only

have 40 managers from the tsa managing them. i do hope that you will take from this hearing the overriding theme that i have had. i want to see you all get leaner and smarter on a much more rapid pace. >> thank you. i think the 88 is less than 20 who are actually overseeing the private companies so that 88 comic that is the right number, is actually the entire office dealing with issues, not just -- they have four-deployed council. things that are not related to airport security. >> that makes sense. but even if it is 20, for 40

people, they literally should deducted two or three people who are supervising the 40 managers. >> i agree with that. we could turn them loose and say, ok, you have free rein. but there is a meeting in there, i agree. >> thank you again, mr. pistole. this meeting is now adjourned. [gavel] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> you can learn more about the house, and security and the members in the congressional directory. it is a complete guide to the one predicted the 2012 congress. you will find details on each member of the u.s. house and senate, including contact information and district maps.

you can order one online for 1295 + shipping and handling at c-span -- at c-span.org. >> jpmorgan chase president and ceo jamie dimon will be testifying on the recent two billion dollars loss. live coverage of that hearing starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span and c-span radio. and has financial services committee will hold their hearing on the public policy implications of jpmorgan chase and their trading loss on tuesday june 19. we will bring it out live on c- span 3 and specific -- and c- span review. coming up tomorrow on of the good news makers," senator debbie -- coming up tomorrow on "newsmakers," senator debbie

stabenow and senator pat roberts. >> there are often referred to as the conscience of the congress. after working there for almost two years, i cannot think of a better name. it is really the heart beat of the people. >> executive director and congressional counsel of the congressional black caucus. >> those who are african- american can come together on issues that are opposed to the community at large, issues where they can find commonalities. setting legislative solutions and proposals for people who don't have a voice. >> more with angela wrye sunday at 8:00 p.m. on c-span.

>> in president obama's weekly address, he talked about a teacher layoff across the called on congress to enact and help states with limited resources. and then the republican address. he says they're focused on removing government barriers. courts this week, spent time talking with college students on how we could make more higher education more affordable. and how proud i was that they were making that investment in themselves. in today's economy, the best way to success is a good education. that is not just true for individual success. it is also true for america's success. new jobs and new businesses will take root where they can find the most highly educated and highly skilled workers. i want those workers to be american workers. i want those good-paying the cost jobs to take retreat here. it should concern never be that,

right now -- should take -- i want those good-paying jobs to take root right here. it should concern everyone imagine when there are fewer students in our schools -- and there are fewer teachers in our schools. teachers matter. one city found that a good teacher can increase the income of a clash in by over $250,000. the lasting a country needs is to have fewer teachers in our schools. i know states are still going through some tough times. i realize that every governor is dealing with limited resources and may face stark tauruses when it comes to their budgets. but that doesn't mean we should just stand by and do nothing.

when states struggle, it is up to congress to step in and help out. in 2009 and in 2010, we provided aid to states to keep hundreds of teachers in the classroom. but we need to do more. that is why it's critical part of the jobs bill as it to congress in september was to help states prevent more layoffs and even rehire more teachers who have lost their jobs. of course, months later, we're still waiting on congress to act. when it comes to this recovery, we cannot fully control things that happen in other parts of the world. but there are plenty of things we can control, steps we can take right now to strengthen our economy putting teachers back in college classrooms is one of those steps. there is no excuse for inaction. you work hard. your leadership should, too, especially of this brick-or- break moment for the middle class. i know this is an election year, but some things are bigger than any election. some things are bigger than politics. i hope you'll join me in telling

congress to do the right thing, to get to work and to help our teachers get back in the classroom. we cannot afford to wait any longer. thank you and have a good weekend. >> i am congressman eric paulson from the great state of minnesota apparent last week, the department of labour give americans some very bad news. only 69,000 jobs were added in may. and the unemployment rate is 8.2%. far above the level the obama did ministration promised it would be by now. it is clear that getting our economy going again should be job number one for everyone in washington. to many americans are still having a hard time finding jobs. small businesses are struggling to create them. and there is little mystery as to why. the president's policies are standing in the way of a stronger economy. his health care law will may be the worst offender. driving up costs and making it harder for small businesses to

hire workers. it is making things worse in our economy. and it needs to be fully repealed. republicans remain focused on removing government barriers to job creation so we can build a stronger economy for all americans. in the coming weeks, brot plans for america's job craters, the house will act on measures to boost domestic energy production and stop the massive tax hike on small businesses scheduled for january 1. this is on top of the more than 30 job bills that the house has passed that is stalled in the democratic-run senate. repealing a massive job-killing tax increase -- it is a critical step also worthy of the senate support. this is a demonstration for why we need to fully repealed as health care law. the medical technology industry is an american success story.

it accounts for more than 423,000 jobs in our countries. many of which are in my home state of minnesota. it is made up of america's best innovators, entrepreneurs, manufacturers, engineers and doctors who are improving and saving lives. in other words, this unique industry brings the wonders of technology to bear on the toughest challenges of life. we're talking about small businesses, those with less than 50 employees, they're already struggling. the $29 million cap has not taken effect yet, but all employers are cancelling plans to expand, moving their operations overseas, and cutting research and development. worse yet, i have heard from business leaders who say this new tax is already forcing them to lay off workers and they may even have to shut their doors completely. we cannot afford to lose these or any american jobs.

promises to lower health care loss have is a health care costs has also -- promises to lower health care costs have also failed. clearly, we cannot go on like this. the health care law one-size- fits-all approach is an untenable and an affordable. and soon it will be ruled unconstitutional. families should be able to make their own choices and see their own doctor. decisions should not be made from washington. the bottom line is this -- the president's health care law is driving up health care costs and hurting small businesses. for the sake of our economy, this must fully be repealed. thank you for listening. >> talking about reform doesn't solve anything. you have to