improve the efficiency of gsa and refocus the agency on the core mission, of streamlining the administrative work of the government to save money for the american taxpayer. given that the genesis of this hearing was the acting administrator's recent referral to the inspector general of a 2010 awards ceremony for the federal acquisition service. i have come here today to outline the steps we have taken to prevent waste from happening again. as of april of 2012, all travel for events, including internal gsa meetings, training conferences, seminars and leadership or management events, among others, was suspended we have consolidated oversight of travel and conference expenses into the office of administrative serces, which i lead. my office now reviews each and

every planned future conference to make sure these events and any related travel are justified. for example, a conference requires a business justification, submission of a budget, and must be approved by the head of the office pursuing a conference and myself. conference with anticipated costs over $100,000 require approval by the administrator. any travel must be approved by the agency. any travel for a routine internal meeting at gsa requires a waiver from the administrator or deputy administrator. we have canceled 37 previously scheduled conferences. these are a few of the many reforms the acting ainistrator has taken to improve oversight, strengthen controls and help refocus the agency on its core mission.

i know he looks forward to scussing these with you in the future. in 2010, fas awards ceremo is another example of what the acting administrator has already recognized. a pattern of misjudgment, which spans several years in administration. new policies on spendin to put an end to waste. the new leader is committed to stopping any misuse of taxpayer dollars. wen we find questionable occurrences we refer them to the office of the inspector general, as we did in this case. gsa has already taken a number of important steps. as part of the acting administrator's top to bottom review, more steps will be taken to improve efficiency and save the taxpayer dollars. i appreciate the opportunity to come before you today to discuss

thises a set reform at gsa and awelcome any questions you may hav have. well, thank you. and i appreciate your coming. we requested mr. tangerlini and he had a family issue. we requested the administrator and she was involved in the question that's under investigation. so she is not coming. we invited the chief of staff. he's not coming. then we invited -- what's his last name? federal acquisitions services. i guess he was pretty heavily involved in this, the virginia conference, and i believe he took a leave of absce from the event. did he take a leave of absence last week? >> i believe he's on medical

leave. >> okay. >> and then we got further down the public building's administrator couldn't come. so we got down to you. and we appreciate your being here. but it's getting diffict to find anyone who hasn't been involved in these scandals to now come and testify. and i know, mr. miller, you have ongoing investigations now we identified 77 conferences with at least 25 attendees and $10,000 cost. is that correct? are you aware of this? >> that's correct, mr. chairman. >> many of them are smaller amounts. but we have some smaller amounts with very significant expeitures.

i see some almost the $2,200 a person. some raise some questions. i think we should give particular attention to the national congressional support conference in henderson, nevada. were we able to find out if that was the same hotel mr. neily was in? but that 44 congressional -- ma'am,s that your ledge office? your legislative office? 44 persons? >> it's the office of congressional affairs. >> and i'm not sure if they were at the same resort with the same hot tub that mr. kneely was in, but they were there for five

days for a government relations conference. and that's september of 2011. but i would like particular attention, if you can g back to the committee. the initial inquiries were on that. but we have particular interest in that. so again, the committee and you have some work to do, and appreciate your work. i won't g into specifics because i don't want to tie the individuals with your ongoing investigation. is the agency cooperating with you now, mr. miller? >> yes, it is cooperating. we are getting a lot of information from the agency, and we work with them. we obviously get information in waves sometimes. we don't get complete information all the time.

and so we go back and get additional information. i think the committee understands the process. >> and further, i don't think we have a referral on the bonuses. were you doing anything on the bow nugss? >> we have an audit of executive compensation under way. well on its way. >> well, we will turn over to you what we have been provided with. i'm not an attorney, mr. miller. but the way you ask the question anthe response you get from the agency is when they ask how much in bonuses. we were told 10 million. now it appears it could be up to

44 million, another 30 million. do you know anything about the tol number of bonuses? dollars that were expended? >> chairman mica, unfortunately i not. i'm not in charge of the human capital part. >> could you -- >> but we can get it. again, when you have 1% of the employees and 13,000 gsa employees and you get 10% of all the bonuses, it seems something is not right. are you familiar with the issue that's brought up on signing the gsa contracts. in particular at the world trade

center? it was a $350 million contract, which was signed before it was authorized by the committee. >> any responsibles have to do with the internal operations of gsa. and that with the public building services. >> can you also request that the agency provide us that information? we are eecting some sort of a reply. we already requested it. we do not have it. when the law states anything over $2.7 million needs approval in this committee we -- i might say, too, you ve 13,000 employees. i chaired the civil service sub committee. and there are thousands of federal employees who go to work every day in this city and around the nation who do an absolutely outstanding job. they help people. they're nderful. and i have nothing against going to conferences. i come fm central florida.

we welcome people to central florida. unfortunately the heavy spending visits were to central florida. many of these may be legitimate expenses. but obviously some of them are over the top. ma'am, are a you aware the agencies areot to give big gifts, recognition items in a presidential or a standing order. you're familiar th that requirement sf. >> i'm familiar with the presidential directives. my office only took on responsible for approving conferences and awards ceremonies and related expenses in april of 2012. so we've been reviewing

conferences from april 2012. >> and we can't get the people who were responsible before us. but now you would not approve $20,000 in drumstick, $35,000 in picture frames. would those expenditures comply? >> we would not approve those now. >> the inspector general cited $40,000 in cost for organizing the conference. i wen back and looked at the figures, and i think there was transportation and other things included in that. i saw the consulting fee of $140,000. i took 140 and then subtracted from expenses. is $104,000 the typical fee for a one day conference?

>> chairman, we looked at the organizing fee. >> $104,000 for one-day conference. there are a lot of people in the wrong business out there. >> we would not have approved that conference under today's standards. >> these things just pop out. i've got people in my district losing their homes, their jobs. we have an agency snding money like there's no tomorrow. it's got to be brought to a halt. and we couldn't get the responsible party in here. would you convey also to mr. tangerlini that i have tried for three times to convene the hearing. and one ofhe reasons that

we're not waving further delay in holding this hearing is because of that. so we will have him back in for discussions. and i hope to have the missing people involved in this the committee, too. >> thank you, mr. chrman. mr. miller, you say in your testimony in page three that the administrator began a top to bottom review of the agency. are you satisfied with the steps the administration is take iing prevent what came before us in

las vegas? now we find we're in crystal city. >> representative norton, it is encouraging that gsa is taping steps to correct abuses and putting controls in. they strengthened the financial accotability. in terms of whether they're effective or whether or not it's enough, i think it's too early to tell. >> thank you. now, could i ask a question about the crystal city matter of the chairman. because i look at that, even 140,000 plus, miss meltzer, can be -- you take out some of it. you're still left with 140,000.

and it's by far the largest expenditure. can i can you if there are agency personnel that could perform the function that is called coordination and logistical management? or should this be contracted out? i see almost all the conferences are contracted out to some private event planner. and they have their property margin and all that goes with it. so is there no agency that can do conferences >> congresswoman, yes, there are people in the agency, and under the new standards of the acting administrator, we have a new requirement that before one of the third-party event planners can be used in the future that the head of the service has to approve it. has to come through my office. >> you do have event planners and people who do event panning

in the agency. >> it's not the mission of gsa, but there are people. >> conferences aren't the mission either. >> yes. >> if everything that isn't the mission had to be contracted out, and work in the profit margin, and the real question, and i would ask mr. miller this, wodn't it be less expensive to have a few people knowledgeable at conference planning in the agency, rather than contract out to some private event planner every time you want to do a conference? >> they have event planners on staff. >> i would strongly recommend you hiring out. event planners do very good. my hat is off to them. i don't think they try to do the fanciest job they can.

i think shall be who worked for the federal government would have a better understanding of what the agency wants, and i very much recommend it. that the matters not be contracted out. but th federal employees be given the task of designing and developing conferences for employees. mr. miller, i have to ask you about this. it's strange, and i would want to look blind this. the federal governments come from gsa, which has 1% of the employees. that will catch anybody. do you think that figure is a figure, and i don't know wt the word bonus means, tt fairly represents the proportion of bonuses at gsa relative to

other federal employees? or agencies. >> representative norton, i heard the figure this morning from the chairman. i have not had a chance to evaluate it. >> mr. miller, i would ask among your priorities you look at that matter. i don't know what the karkization is. frankly i find it difficult to believe. it's very difficult for me to believe that agencies which have hundreds of thousands of employees don't have a larger percentage. so i don't accept that at face value until you have the opportunity to look into it. the president has essentially asked that certainly his appointees lead by example. i would not begrudge federal employees bonuses, but i would

say on a moderation basis, when you consider that for most americans, a salary would be considered a bonus. so, i don't, without knowing more aut bonuses. i certainly don't want to prive bonuses. but during a recession and a recovery. it seems they ought to be given, and i can only say on a ration-basis. some people who otherwise might deserve them won't get them. i ask you to do is look at bonuses now so that we can see what that was about. i am very curious about page two of your testimony. you say in the last semiannual, that would mean for six mons reporting period, your office made 486 referrals for federal

prosecution, civil litigation and administration action. would you break that down that sounds like a large number. would you compare that to what happened in the past? >> and i would ask you to break that down quickly. >> okay. well, we make referrals obviously for crimin prosecution, for civil action. >> what portion of each? i know you may not have all the figures before you. >> i can get the figures and send them up to you. i would be happy to do that. they should be in our semiannual report as well, broken down. >> can you characterize them to say civil litigation orre administrative action, it would be helpful to know that as well? >> that's usually a civil fraud case. so when a vendor or contractor

has inflated billings to the gsa. >> so it may not be federal employees? >> correct. and again, if a contractor is gibing a bribe, it may be a criminal referral against the contractor. and dependin on the circumstances and not against the government employees. >> mr. miller, if you could provide full details to this committee, we would appreciate it. >> i would be happy to. >> mr. miller, are you familiar with the august 3rd, 2010 memo from the president the presidential memorandum to freeze doe nuss? >> only a general way. zblf let me ask you. since 2010 have all the diretionary awards been frozen? >> i understand the president has kept -- >> are there awards that you

know of to date between august of 2010 to today? discretionary awards, bonuses or similar payment? >> i believe they are either capped or frozen or actually, miss metzler may be in a better position to answer that. >> you sent a report to the committee there have been a number o bonuses that have gone ouin the last three years. >> yes are you familiar with the memorandum to the heads of the executive department and agencies thatays approval of conference related activities and expenses shall be eared through deputy secretary or equivalent? >> yes, in a general way. >> have all the conferences,the 77 in the last year and a half, have the 77 coerences been cleared by deputy secretary or equivalent? >> i do not believe they have. >> you do not believe they have.

>> correct. >> are you familiar with the presidential document, t executive order, promoting efficient spending, where in section seven it says extraneou promotional items, agency should limit the purchase of those items rchlt you familiar with that? >> yes, in a general way. >> have there been any commemorative items, plaques or clothing given out? >> well, mr. chairman, we are conducting an ongoing investigation. >> were the drumsticks at the crystal palace given out? >> they were given out in connection with the celebration. >> were there kem rative frames? >> they were given out in connection with the celebration. >> would you consider those commemorative items that should be covered under the executive ord sner. >> i think we're getting very close to our ongoing investigation. with that matter. so i would decline to answer

that. in you report, $28,364.45 for picture frames. i would consider those picture frames commemorative ems. $7,000 for shadow frames. i would consider that commemorative items. $20,578 for 4,000 drumsticks given to attendees. i would consider that in the same category. so my question to you is if you have a memorandum from the president. if you have a memorandum from the department heads saying that deputy secretary or equivalent will approve all conferences, and if you have two executive orders by the president, how could this go on for the last

two years? >> mr. chairman, we are looking into that. our investigation is ongoing. >> mr. miller, you've been doing these investigations for quite some time now. have you ever seen a period of time where executive orders are just flat out ignored? >> when the commander in chief issues an executive order, do you ever find that agencieses just ignore it? as the ceo of a company, if i had a dartment head ignore my order, they would be fired. so the question is, why aren't these people being fired if they're ignoring the commander in chief? >> i understand that, and we have an ongoing investigation. >> thank you. miss metzler, i understand that mr. -- couldn't be here today. i appreciate that. this committee had the responsibility to continue on the investigationnd make sure the law is being upheld.

but we would like to continue to offer an -- i assume he doesn't have avacation planned on august 6th when we have our hearing. i hope he doesn't have a family vacation planned august 17 thd. i understand how important family vacations are. we're going to give him two more opportunities in the next few weeks to testify before this committee. we hope that he doesn't have previous engagements. let me ask you. in your testimony you say as of april 2012 all travel for events including internal gsa meetings, trainings, conference seminars and leadership or management among others were suspended. were they suspended? >> they were suspended. and any event subsequent to april had to go through the new approval process. >> conferences and celebrations? >> yes. >> awards ceremonies? >> yes. >> awards ceremonies with food, yes. >> all gsa travel went through you on these conferences,

celebrations or award ceremonies? >> after april. >> you con stop dated oversight of traffic expenses in administrative services which you lead. >> that's correct. >> why is there a conference going on today in nashville. >> that conference was subject to thesmart pay conference. it was previously scheduled, before the acting administrator. those responsible came in with their proposals for the conference, why it was being held. who was going to be attending it, what the purpose was. >> my time is brief here. over 6,000 rooms the gaylord in nashville. i understand the presidential suite is occupied today. is there a gsa employee in the presidential suite? >> i do not know. >> it's over p 3$,000 a night. >> i don't know. >> you don't know? >> i don't know. i would hope not. >> how about the junior suite? those were all booked up today, too. >> under our policies, those

rooms are not be occupied by gsa employees. >> and since you oversee the oversig and travel expense of these, what is the travel necessity of the general jackson lee steamboat that is taking a party out tonight? are they going to a destination? is that the reason for the travel expense? >> there is no such travel associated with anything that the general services administration is involved in. that may be some other third party. >> so there is no expense to the federal government for the general jackson lee steamboat that is having a party tonight. >> that is correct to the best of my knowledge. >> we look forward to looking into that further. >> i apologize for my delay. i had a judiciary hearing. good to have you all with us by the way.

mr. miller who brought your strike that. who brought this conference to your attention? >> acting administrator brought it to my personal attention. there was a -- we did receive a hot line complaint in may of this year it was an anonymous complaint of about five single-spaced pages with about four lines of general information about this conference. >> were you familiar with it prior to havin seen the notice? >> no, i was not. >> it appears, and i hope i'm not being duplicative. but it seemed the conference took place in two cities. a reception th costed over

$7,000 at the tea bridge marriott. the reception, i'm furthermore told was complete with a violinist and guitarist,or a music variety. and it appears a bus was hired at more than $5,000 presumably to shuttle between the different hotels. i guess my question is why were two locations needed for one day conference "a", and who was invited to the reception? >> those are questions that we're looking for the answer to as well. we have an ongoing investigation into this matter. >> you want to weigh in on this? >> when the acting administrator found out about this conference, we referred the matter to the inspector general for inquiry. so we're waiting for results of his survey. or his investigation. >> as i said in my opening

statement, it does appear that sound fiscal practicing have been cast aside, if not abandoned. for mismanagement and waste and recklessness. and i'm hoping that this hearing will at least expose the wrong doing, and i think it has been wrong doing. again, thank you for being here. any of you have anything before i yield back? >> no maung. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> mr. chairman, yield back. >> thank you. miss napolitano? >> thank you, mr. chair. just a couple questions. how many conferences a year do you normally have scheduled? roughly. i don't need an exact number. >> the numbers that were scheduled prior to april 11th, 2012, we have been trying to

uncover for the last several months. right now for this year in 2012, we have only five conferences scheduled. >> the conferences were -- pre-april you were attending the conferences. is there any calls go to whoever is in charge to find out whether they're meeting the requirement to uphold the budget to be transparent and to be able to have information? >> before that? >> before that we did not have central control of conferences, how many there were or who wept or the nature of them. >> but apparently you still have conferences preapproved prior to april. >> actually not. any conference that was scheduled after april -- >> no, i'm talking pre-april.

>> even if it was scheduled before april, it was deemed to be canceled. and they had to come back through my office. through the administrator to hold the conference. >> so you do have oversight over anything, regardless of preor post. >> yeah, that is correct. and the concern that now races inside my head is the cost is going to be on the taxpayer, if you will, for the investigation of the 77 conferences. am i correct, sir? >> we are currently investigating those. yes. it comes out of our appropriations. >> right, but again, that's money that should not have to be spent, in other words. >> yes. >> but you have them go back and review to ensure that compliance has been made. >> yes.

is there any way to quantify how much time you're going to spend on these? i'm talking in terms of dollars. >> that would be difficult. we're trying to do this in the most efficient way possible. we have strict parameters. >> understood. i'm trying to get to the point that it's going to cost the taxpayer a lot of money because of the decades of doing twhavr it is that they did without any oversight or any control over the conference with the expenditures, the bonuses, et cetera. and you say you've cut all bonuses, ma'. >> bonuses are not within my lane of responsibility. i am aware that the acting administrator has issued a serious curtailment on expected bonuses, and other bonuses are being looked at as part of the top to botm review. >> that's curtailment, but not

necessarily ending bonuses until clarification is made of whether they've been earned. >> certainly. the senior management gets bonuses. the american public doesn't get bonuses. how can we justify that with such a tight budget? we'reooking for money. you're paid to do a job, for goodness sake. >> i'll be happy to get back to what the information from the right officials at gsa regarding. >> i don't sit on the committee of jurisdiction, so i'm wondering about the questions that kind of fall through the cracks for me. you talk about misjudgmenfrom several administrations. but why has it took me so long

that it took me, the whistle blower, to raise the question tw the inspector general's office? >> the acting administrator came to gsa on april 15th and 16th. he issued a sies of new policies regarding conferences and training. so it didn'take him but a minute or less than a week to issue the policies that we have now that provide oversight central control. and put fiscal responsible back into the spending. >> and what brought that to head? >> well, him comi to gsa, prompted by the resignation of the previous administrator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. miller, i had intended to ask ab these 486 referrals that

miss norton got into. i'm still curious about those. that does seem like an awfully high number. over a six-month period, that comes to over 80 referrals a month. is that much higher than has been done in the past and i know you said, many of these or most of these were not referrals of that gsa employe. but more front pas to the gsa contractors or something. would you tell me a little bit more about that? >> it's a mix of referrals. my point was that a referral can either be against someone doing business with gsa, or it can be about a gsa official. so i wouldn't want to quantify it off the top of my head as to which one is more, rather there are more referrals regarding contracts or more referrals

regarding gsa employees. i would be happy to furnish the committee wth the precise breakdown of the referral. we do a lot of referrals with credit cards to go with the leased vehicles. gsa leases vehicles called the fleet to other agencies. any time another agency uses one of these cards a credit card goes along with it. unfortunately they misuse the credit card and charge gas for friends and family. and that's a crime. so it's not a large case. but it's a referral, and we do have it prosecuted by u u.s. attorneys when we can, or by state prosecutors, when we can. so we do have a number of those, which may contribute to the higher numberle of referrals.

i don't know if that explains it. >> do you know if that was a much higher figure than the proceeding annual -- >> i think we've been increasing oureferrals over the years. and i take that as the accomplishment of the office. >> i would like to see a preview and also if one of the gsa contractors was a repeat violater. there's a small number of companies that are just repeat violators, something needs to be done about that also. >> we recovered $200 million from oracle recently under e settlement oaf a civil fraud case. so that's an example of one of the cases. so it can range from $200 million to swub misusing a

credit card or leased car for gas in the amount of 100 to $500. so it's a large range of damages. >> on another topic, i'm told by staff that cbs had a report that said over 13,000 gsa employees receive bonuses or extra pay, incentive pay, whatever you want to call it. different types of bonuses are extra pay. it says the number of gsa employees is 12,635. have you looked into that? was it just a common accepted practice that every gsa got a bonus? >> we have an audit on its way of executive compensation. it's an audit we started some

time ago. we suspected multiple awards to gsa officials. multimillie awards for the same work that they've done. >> miss metzler, on this conference where it says $10,000 was paid for a presentation by somebody called mission possible agent "x", do you know what that -- what they got for that $10,000 or what the presentation was about? >> congressman, i do not. that conference was in 2010. it created our current review processes, and indicated we would not be approving conferences at this time. >> rt. i'll close by saying this. i'll repeat what i said in the opening statement. it unfortunately is far too easy to spend other people's money,

and the problem with government is it'not coming out of your own pocket. we have too in people at the federal level just abusing the taxpayer xpayers. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we have hard deds line of 11:00. any questions you feel comfortable providing the chair would help to move the committee along better. with that, mr. wallace? >> thank you, mr. chairman for holding the committee. mr. miller, thank you for being back again and for the work that you've done. there are a couple things my colleague has said. it's hard not toeel the frustration here. at some point in time expressngn frustrations is not good enough. mr. duncan pointed out the issue. i would argue there is an

incentive other than pay, it's called ethics. and i would like to think as i taug school starting out for $17,000 a year i worked just as hard as i did when i reached the top at 47,000. that i was working just as hard in that classroom and trying to save money for the taxpayers. but when we get a situation like this it absolutely,s miss johnson said, too, it destroys all credible and my friend is very thorough. we both know there's not going to be good news out of that conference. swb is staying in that damn suite tonight. i would almost guarantee you. i understand you don't have that. i think you know that, though. so my question next is what happens when you come back and the questions getting asked today, i don't have any answers for these. and i'm as frustrated as anybody else. how do we make sure this stops? it appears to me there was clear

cut directives put out. mr. miller has been to the committee and testified. many of us sit here appalled at $45 breakfast and everything else. and here we are again. so are you confident the changes implemented in place are going to stay, for example, to make sure none ofhe things forbidden are going to happen in nashville. are you comfortable with that as an administrator. >> i am confident that we reviewed that with all the others that have been held. we looked at the expenses in the budget. weade very clear ethical responsibles and the ethical responsibilities on the companies also attending. so i am comfortable that we have conducted a thorough review of this conference. >> for the american public then,

and i am speculating, but erg everything -- my spidey sense tells something very bad is going to come out of that. if it does, can you give dpi me a buck stops here. if there's an employee at the $3,000 a night suite, what is going to happen? i think it is. i don't want to put words in his mouth. who going to be accountable if thathappens? we'll find out. this is going to come out. so in a week or so there's going to be a story. no there was not. i'll say, goodness they put good checks in place. if it comes out somee is in there, what will happen then? >> as all things with actinge a administrar, once we discover something has violated the policy or the w, we've been referring those matters to the spector general. if we find anything about the conference does not comport with what was proposed to be to the acting administrator and to me,

then we will be referring to the matter to the inspector general. >> when you leave this room, is somebody going to be on a cell phone calling nashville? >> i think somebody is probably on a cell phone already, while we're in the hearing, because we were very clear about the limitations on any pre existing conference that received approval that there were not to be questions of riverboats. there were not to be questions of presidential suites sochlt that was the guidance that was given, the direction was given, and the conditions under which this conference was approved. >> i appreate that. >> i'm hopeful by the time i leavhere we will have answers. >> and i do appreciate that. i want to be clear. i know you're in an uncomfortable position. that's what comes with leadership. but i can't stress the corrosive factor that happens to so many dedicated, hard workingethical employees across the country. and whatever you say about is

unfair with gross generalizations, i certainly know it here that we are painted by our colleagues in this body. and we seech get associated with one another. and it's all of our responsibility, especially leadership to fix that. >> thank you. i would remind committee members we have about ten minutes. i'm going to ask each of you to keep it to two minutes to make sure we finish it on time and get to everybody. miss metzler, i want to clarify. mr. wallace was very clear, and you said we consolidated the expenses in the office of administration services. which you lead. you lead, you sign off on, and u said, there probably are people on cell phones right now, ju contacting the gaylordopri land who confirm they have present rented out the general jackson for a private event is evening. did you authorize gsa to rent out e general jackson for a private evening tonight?

the steam boat? >> we did not. this conference -- i just might add -- >> i need to yield to next member. mr. barletta. >> miss metzler, i asked if i could see gsabudget. the response i got is the answer is complicated. they budget a top line for building operations, but they have not budgeted down to line item like conferences and meetings. now, i know you talked about the reforms in place. could you tell me what they have budged right now for conferences, meetings, travel, bonus bonuses. >> congressman, the budgeting of the agency is within the view of the chief financial officer.

and the entire budgeting, along with every other aspect of gsa is pa of the -- >> i'm asking if they have line items specifically for conferences, for bonuses. is it itemized like that? i couldn't even get a budget. i couldn't get a copy of the budget. i'm a member of congress. is it down to line items? >> the proposals for conferences after april are very much line item by line item. so that saw, for example, for the smart pay conference -- >> if i could. i want to get to the point. could you then send me a list of how much money is budgeted for conferences, bonuses, travel. and also what gsa's budget is. and how do we fix the problem? we could go on and on and on. this is not the only agency. so this is my takeaway from this meeting. number one, we need to force the

senate, and congress should act and the president should sign a budget with the americ people. two, congress should require that every department utilize zero base budgeting. every department require. three, we should not ask to take more hard working taxpayers' money so tat washington can spend it, and four, we should not let this government run our health care system. thank you. >> thank you, miss metzler, if you could provide that back to the committee. we will be anxious to see how many conferences you approved as well as the expenses and line items moving forward. >> i'm sorry. mr. edwards for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to the witnesses. just a couple of questions that we could just run down because time is short. how many empyees are at gsa? >> over 12,000.

>> and what's your estimate of the number of them that have participated in these conferences in the last year? >> congresswoman, i would have to get back to you about the numbers of people that have participated in conferences. >> but it would be fair to say it's probably not 80% of the agency participating in these conferences or 90% of the agency. >> it would be fair to say it's less than half. and much less than that, i would estimate. >> now over the last three years the regular general service workers at gsa haven't received a pay raise at all. is that right? >> i have just rejoined the government in august of 2011, so i'm not familiar with what the pay situation was before that period. >> pretty much guaranteeing that federal workers haven't received a pay raise in three years, and

what's the percentage of employees at gsa who have received have to have someone get back to you with that information. i don't have i since it's not part of my responsibility. >> would you also get back to me about the numbers of those employees in the gs-3, 5 and 7 range who weren't the recipients of those bonuses at the senior executive level? employees who haven't received a pay raise over the last three years? >> we will get that information to you. >> and how many annl conferences have there been that aren't related to boosting moral, but are serving the core mission of the agency? >> the vast majority of the conferences of gsa are serving the core mission of the gsa. the conference we're holding right now is called the smart pay conference. it's to provide credit cardholders with required training so that they know how to manage their creditcards. the last conference we had was to provide conferences on contracting and -- >> we're out of time, soy can't -- and i appreciate that,

but i can't run through all of these. let me say in closing, that i think in addition to strengthening the account ability of the conference arena, it's important for the i.g. to look at questions i've had, longstanding about the transparency accountability, fairness and parody in every areaf the general services administration. and this is not about the good employees of gsa, a lot of them live in my congressional district. but when i walk up to a woman who works at gsa who works hard every day, who hasn't got a raise, who shows up and does her job, and she's in tears because this agency is in the newspaper every single day, it is disgusng, it's not worthy of the taxpayers, it's not worth think of the citizens of this country and gsa needs to get its house in order. and the acting administratoadmi i'm glad he routed out the problem, he needs to be in front of this committee. he you have somebody who is a friend of the administration

totally disgusted with the administration. totally disgusted with the gsa and its operation at every single level, every single time that we have a hearing in front of this committee. and it just -- we just can't take it any more. you know, let us defend the employees who are good and hard workers at the general services adnistration, but not to defend this kind of garbage that's a waste of taxpayer money and makes all of us not have any confidence at all, that the good workers of gsa can do their job, and with that i yield. >> thank you, miss edwards. this committee would request the analysis of the training per individual as miss edwards said. there's a lot of money going into this. want to make sure the good training their receiving is a benefito those that are getting trained. if they're spending a million dollars at a conference, we want to see the benefit of those that

are trained and receiving out of that, i'd like to see the cost benefit behind that. i recognize mr. ribble, the final two minutes. >> thank you, m chairman. >> mr. miller, the current heads of fas and pbs at the virginia conference? >> the current head of fas was at the coerence, i'm not sure about pbs, i'd have too look into that. >> do you know if the head of pbs was at the virginia conference? >> i do not. >> could you get back to me with that information please zm. >> >> in your testimony, you said, he looks forward to continuing to work at the committee to refocus to save money for the american taxpayer. what were they doing before? >> the acting administrator has committed to conducting a thorough top to bottom review of this agency, so that every

single aspect of the agency is being looked at right now, so that we can ensure it's carrying on its mission in the most cost effective way. >> you say in you're testimony on page 2 that your office reviews each and every planned future conference to makeure these events and any related travel are justified. and then you say, for example, conferences require a business justification, and a submission of a budget. that wasn't going on before? this is pretty basic. >> there was no central oversight of conferences to require that the proposal for what the conference was about, how it was related back to the agency's mission. that may have happened but it wasn't done at a centralized fashion. >> this is unbelievable. the american people watching this must be stunned by this, that they weren't required to bmit a budget to have a conference approved?

>> after april 11th, 2012, we have beenequiring much more diligence in what the justification for the conference is. and i'm sure there were budgets beforehand but we have been looking at these in a different fashion to ensure that the american taxpayer dollars are well utilized. >> again, i jt say this -- mr. chairman, as i yield back. my son's a professional drummer in nashville. however, he pays about $7 a pair for drum sticks. the gsa who's core mission is to save money for the american taxpayer bought 20,000 drum sticks and paid $10 a pair. they paid 25 to 30% more. i wonder how they're saving money for the american taxpayer. >> thank you.

>> i'd just like to associate myself with a colleague. and let's talk a little bit about leasing. the gsa signed a lease with the war and trade center? >> yes. >> why would you go to the world trade center? besides the fact that the lease was approved by this committee, and it was never brought before this committee? that's the reason i'm -- >> was not involved in that in anyway. >> it comes before the committee and we approved it. why the world trade center? i would think you'd get something cheaper. can you tell me why the world trade center? >> my responsibilities include

the internal operation of the agency, not leases like the world trade center, i'm sure we'll be happy to provide that information to the committee. >> why wasn't it brought before the committee. it's usually the history that the leases are brought before the committee for approval. >> i understand that, i cannot answer that question. certainly that's something that acting administrator tangrilini or someone at gsa who controls the functions of gsa could answer and should answer. >> i don't have much time. but it's just outrageous, really is. here we are trying to defend the good workers and then we have the situation with the bonuses. who sets the standard for the bonuses. how do they arrive? is that a committee? a person that says, mr. miller, you can have a bonus? >> i believe there are policies

and performance criteria involved. but again, that's a function within gsa. we have an audit ongoing of exactly -- executive compensation. so we are looking at th and looking at how awards are being given out and how bonuses are given out. >> all right, i yield back. >> thank you. if other members have additional inquiries they would like to submit to our witnesses, i welcome them. i ask unanimous consent that today's record be kept open for 15 days for witnesses to respond or four members to provide additional commentary to the record. without any further business, i would like to thank the two witnesses for coming today, particularly mr. miller for your cooperation as the inspector general.

we are expecting additional answers. i'm sorry you got the short straw today. you are fairly new and the others have either duck or hidden for cover. we will convene for additional hearings when we come back in september. i invite members to participate in the field hearings and i will be conducting that in the hearing. there being no further business on this particular hearing, i excuse and a thank again the witnesses. this will conclude the gsa portion of our hearings today. i will call the meeting

adjourned. >> tonight on c-span come up speeches from a potential republican vice presidential candidates. the house budget committee chairman, paul ryan and south dakota senator, john. that starts at 9:00 eastern on c-span. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies by your television provider. >> the former eastern afghanistan regional commander talked about progress in the war and the planned 2014 u.s. military drawdown. lieutenant general daniel spoke. this is about one hour and 15

minutes. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> our guest today is a lieutenant general dan allyn and the moderator is the general jack keene, u.s. army retired and acting chief of staff of the army. he currently serves as chairman of the board of directors and with that, i will hand over to him. >> thank you. we have some friends in the group here. general sullivan. we're surrounded by good

friends and were you? the national treasurer back there. probably the best intel dive met in my life. welcome, everybody. our president is in afghanistan a cent -- is in afghanistan or she has been spending the last few years. they just arrived today. it has been about a month. she welcomes u.s. well. we are honored to have the lieutenant-general who commands the 18th airborne corps and was the commander of the regional command east in afghanistan. he grew up in maine. does that make you a red sox fan? >> absolutely, sir. >> -- >> do we have to go there now? >> [laughter]

strong support from the second row there. he's had a distinguished career as a commander all his life. the great first cavalry division and multiple tours in iraq and was a commander in the third infantry division. recently he finished -- i saw him twice in afghanistan when i was doing assessments and i have to tell you that we have been in rce for a long time but when general allyn arrived there, it was different and better than anything we had seen before. the results were commensurate with that. it was a very interesting and productive time for him and his guys.

to set the stage a little bit, i would like to go back to the president's decision to commit forces to the strategy of counterinsurgency in afghanistan. that decision being made in 2009. what that decision did impacted significantly what has happened in afghanistan. what you need to know is the recommendation at the time were three options in terms of the size of the force -- 80, 60, 40. 80 was the maximum force, no risk. very desirable but not available. but they wanted to see what it would actually take. 60 with a desirable for us with some risk. 40 was a minimal force they needed to do the mission.

internal debate inside the national security team led by vice president joe biden want a force of 20,000. the generals wanted 40 and a compromise that 30 which is i think fairly frustrating. we're not arguing over a transportation bill. we are arguing over what forces are needed to do a coat mission. what did that do for us? it's something we never recovered from. the intent at the time as we get the force of 40,000 was to conduct a simultaneous campaign in the east and the south with those forces and put maximum pressure on the taliban. when it forced us to do is create a main effort in the south and start their first and do the campaign sequence in -- sequentially. that protracted war, drove up casualty, in my view

unnecessarily and eroded political will and are capital and other countries' capitals participating in the war. the decision truly mattered. that campaign began and it is relatively stable there. rc east got the campaign full. what we were able to do with some degree of success is maintain some depth. they have never been able to sustain a level of violence which would delegitimize their regime. the fact of the matter is it has always been episodic. but we have never had the forces to defeat the enemies.

i think we will begin with general allan who left in april -- general allyn and what he was trying to accomplish and what he did. >> there are a lot of distinguished leaders here. what was not mentioned as he is the predecessor in my current job. i am always blessed to have sage counsel in ongoing missions and challenges. i will start by saying we have a complex mission at regional command east. but as the prior mentor of mine like to describe, they often have simple solutions at their core. we had a tremendous -- his

intent in regional command east boiled down to four critical tasks. first and foremost, kabul sits pretty much center sector of regional command east. our primary task was to expand the security zone and in doing so, protect kabul from external threats. there is only one thing that unites insurgent and terrorist groups that operate in and around command east. there are eight principal ones we focus on and destabilizing kabul was their focus. expanding the security zone was job one and our principal focus in doing that -- that general talked about the unique terrain restrictions and constraints

inherent in regional command east. as you look at the mountainous terrain around the border with pakistan. the terrain forces all of the insurgent groups that operate south of kabul in order to get to their objective. as you look at regional command east, there are too decisive pieces of ground. with you can't see it on this map, but if you put a three the new map of regional command east, all of the natural lines of drift both east and west and north and south come through the province if your intent is to attacked kabul to achieve success, we would expand the security zone and protect kabul

and deny the enemy their objective which is to destabilize kabul. it is a task that which we had significant progress in our time there. it deals with the primary threat to afghanistan, the flow of weapons across the border in toward kabul. developing a strategy that would enable the afghans to secure their country from external threats was a secondary critical task. as i look at the tasks we had come to the one we made the least progress in was that one. it was hampered by events that occurred along the border. it was hampered by when you can

only control one side of the problem as a commander, you are starting with a 50% probability of success. that's not particularly good odds. the biggest challenge was you might be surprised to hear this, but the border security location were not postured tactically or strategically to protected national lines of draft the insurgent groups have used throughout afghanistan's history. the solution for that was to reposition them and you don't do that quickly. that is at best a three-year effort. we started in the event -- in places where the infrastructure was in place. the minister of the interior to

follow through on the infrastructure changes, that they long-term task that is still underway. the third critical task and the enablers for the first to was developing the security forces to secure their own country. this was a central focus of our efforts. it drove our entire partnership strategy. it was the underlying principle we apply to everything we did there. afghans secure their country and however we do what we do, and has to be afghan-sustainable. it also drove what we did in governance and development.

we wanted to ensure the timely transition of those provinces and districts designated by the government of afghanistan to return primacy on the timeline karzai outlined. to do that, you had to have the government and development capacity for the government after the liver in a credible way for their people. i would say in the time we were there, we were on track through this summer truth be told, a critical component is a government that is seen as credible by the people of afghanistan. the challenge remains an

underlying shortfall in terms of the people's acceptance of the credibility of the government. one of the enduring truths as if someone wears a government of afghanistan uniform, the police, army, civil servant, they are seen as an extension of the government. appel low oil level, security forces suffered from support for the people because of the lack of credibility because the average afghan could see the corruption. they were pretty vocal about their opposition to it. in terms of meeting the goals of our fourth critical task, we were doing that well for people

to see credible face of their government, it is something that has to be taken on in earnest for people to accept what they're trying to accomplish. those are the four critical tasks. i would say we made significant progress during our time there. the development of security forces was the number one success story which remains the success story today. security forces never lost a battle within the insurgent group. as you heard the general mention, if your principal objective is to disrupt kabul,

one could make the argument they are inherently and successful and have been for nearly most of the past year. that's in large measure because the security forces have been proven incapable. in this high-profile attacks that occurred in the last six months, three out of the four cases, it was the afghan security forces that prevented the success of those attacks. in the final one, the only reason they did not is because the attack was against a u.s. base. they were very effective in helping to respond to this attack. they are not the front line for preventing it. i have great confidence in our security forces if we finish the development of their it enabled capability which is a long pole in the tent. they can fight and win battles

today. they have to be able to fight and win campaigns. that requires a statement capacity and that requires the ability to process intelligence in a time-sensitive environment and requires capabilities that are works in progress but they require resources and commence and those of you who have read the recent testimony, it speaks specifically to that issue. >> of the principal opponent was the hakani network while you're there. can you give us a sense of what they are trying to achieve and how successful they have been at

it and if you project us forward, can you tell what the expectations are question marks -- what the expression -- with the expectations are? >> one is an expansion -- the national hakani network, their focus is to disrupt kabul and play a substantial role in the post 20-14 government of afghanistan, what ever that is. that is obviously the taliban- led effort. we had substantial success against the network. the fact they were not able to significantly influence them describes that success.

the most historic network is the host network that operates principally in this area. they have a trouble support network. many of you know it well. they have explained in great detail. but they also have support networks of convenience that day leverage and they also provide support to other disparate groups in a similar way. because of those deep rooted familiar and tribal ties -- they are able to route that network out much longer term, a task which the security forces must

-- security forces must deal with that laissez come to some type of political decision of with that group. their principal leadership is support across the border. it's often estimated and your ability to take a leadership out and prevent their ability to command and control. the government does not consider the network anywhere in their top five threats.

that inherently is the challenge. be it at the lev local or at the national level, there is going to have to be dialogue between the government of afghanistan and the hakani senior leadership about what their role was in the future of afghanistan. at the local level, there was recognition that there is another solution be on the path they are currently following. >> going back to the security

forces, you touched on it in terms of their capability. as you look beyond 2014 -- can you expand beyond that and -- into where they are conducting independent operations from us and we have a residual force of some description and size left there, what does the afghan national security forcemeat 2014 and beyond to be successful? >> i think to sustain themselves from the national to tactical level, we have had great success in developing their tactical statement capability.

i like to describe it as to possible worlds. you have the bureaucracy of the soviet system laird of the complexity of the u.s. system. it helps to sustain their readiness. it is one the general and his team are continuing to focus and worked on today. worked on today.