>> senator, while i would certainly defer to my colleagues at the treasury department, having served at the treasury .department on matters of tax, the broad issue of corporate tax issues, i think that i would -- what i believe is that we can broaden the base and that we can work to change loopholes in the corporate area. >> and if we do go after corporate loopholes, particularly the ones which are, in my judgment, egregious, indefensible, even if there were no deficit, i'm talking about the way in which revenues to corporations here have been transferred to offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes altogether, there's a number of other loopholes which i think are egregious and bad and unjustifiable and serve noes economic purpose, even if there were no -- serves no economic purpose even if there were no economic deficit, but assuming there are loopholes which should be closed, not just in order to broaden the base, or not just

for simplicity but because they're unjustified, ok, so on that asummings, do you believe it is appropriate to -- assumption, do you believe it's appropriate to look at the closing of those loopholes as a revenue razor to erase the deficit? >> how one thinks about the corporate piece and the individual piece i think needs to be thought of in the context of a broader package. >> ok. let me ask you about the independent agencies and the -- first of all, do you support the concept of independent agencies, meaning agencies that by statute have a measure of independence from the president? >> yes, sir, i do. >> and would you agree that independent agencies, including those involved in financial regulation and enforcement and consumer product safety, have that degree of -- need have that degree of independence? >> the congress has spoken to that matter and that is

something that if i were confirmed would want to support the implementation of. >> is it your understanding that independent agencies now have cost-benefit analysis that are adequate? >> that's a point we've had the opportunity to discuss earlier today and that i think is a point of question. in terms of the quality of that cost-benefit analysis. >> so you have not reached a conclusion as to whether the current cost-benefit analyses that independent agencies use are adequate or inadequate? >> no, sir, i haven't. i have not had the opportunity to be exposed to i think some of the information that would be important to make that term digs determination. >> i hope when you look at that you'll remember the answers that you gave relative to their independence. will you? >> yes yes, sir, i think the question of independent agencies and cost-benefit analysis and the question of how and who determines that cost-benefit analysis -- i'll repeat what i said earlier, apologize for repeating, but i think what's important is to understand, i think what everyone wants is

cost-benefit analysis that's appropriate and rule making that's appropriate and of high quality in the financial area and in this area of the independent agencies. and the question that i have is, what is the best way to get there? and it was raised that there are legislative approaches, is one way, and what i'd love to do is understand what is not happening and what do we think is the best way to achieve that? >> i've been a strong supporter of cost-benefit analyses since i came here and as a matter of fact, believe it or not, part of my commain to get here related to -- campaign to get here related to that question. my wife never thought i could turn that into a campaign issue but i did. got here anyway. 34 years ago. but my point here is that i hope that this is going to be a big issue in front of this economy. it was last year and -- committee. it was last year. before we bring up that, mr.

chairman, i hope we get our new o.m.b. director's opinion as to whether or not the cost-benefit analyses that are currently being used, some people forget that, by independent agencies are adequate or not. so i hope she'll get into that issue promptly, upon our confirmation, which i think all of us or most of us look forward to. and we commend you and congratulate you on your nomination. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. just a quick question, when were you first elected to the senate? what year was that? >> before you were born. >> ok. [laughter] great story from senator levin. hold on for just a second. back in michigan, during a break, he was great enough to host me and take me up along the northern border of our country with canada, 1,000 miles of water border and learned a lot from him. it was a real interesting and enjoyable experience. i stayed at a hotel. he said that -- i guess it was 34 years ago, is that possible? 34 years ago when he was elected to the senate for the first

time, the hotel that i stayed in was a hotel where they had their election night celebration and it was closed later o'on for maybe 20 years and has since been reopened. i think it was a westinhotel. his most recent election celebration was back at that same hotel, some 30 years later. >> proof of the comeback of detroit by the way. by the way, i was elected, i better quickly look over at senator prior here. when i was elected there was another prior who had just been elected to the u.s. senate. a prior who we love and whose wife barbara we love as well. we loved them all. the mr. pryor:s anded the current prior the prior priors and the current priors. >> speaking of war stories. i know you're a senator bird fan. welcome to the committee. and we appreciate you being here. west virginia roots.

maybe my favorite senator byrd story is the story that senator carper told me. he was born in west virginia. he was driving through west virginia and seeing some of his family. he gets on his cell phone, he calls senator byrd. he says, you'll never guess where i am. he says, i'm in west virginia on the robert byrd highway. and senator byrd said, which one? loved that. listen, let me talk to you if i can about kind of a well worn phrase that we hear in washington, that people love to talk about, but we don't ever seem to do enough about and that is the phrase of waste, fraud and abuse. we hear that all the time. we all talk about it from time to time. everybody loves to talk about waste, fraud and abuse but it just seems to me that we as a government, as a congress, as an administration we don't do enough about it.

and i feel like o.m.b. is a place where things can be done about that and one thing i'm curious about is when you see c.b.o. or g.a.o. or some think tank or somebody, whoever it is, that comes out with these studies and these analyses of how we're wasting money, how we can be more efficient, how we can do things better, that really kind of covers the water front, does o.m.b. take those and sort of take those to heart and try to allow those to shape their policy and their priorities and their reform efforts? or does o.m.b. sort of just defer to congress and say, well, congress needs to fix that, that's not our headache? >> the g.a.o. report that came out today will be an important contribution to how o.m.b. thinks about those priorities. and i think the prioritization comes through both conversations

and reports, certainly this committee, and actually the chairman and the ranking member have both focused on these issues of waste and those are lists that o.m.b. does think about and consider and whether that's how some of the progress has been made on improper payments, while it's not enough, improper payments have gone from 5 dwp 4% 05 -- 5.4% to 5.35%. there are a number of inputs that are about how we look at finding good opportunities that are both good at cost savings, increasing the value for the takes payers' money and achieveble. which i think is an important consideration about how one thinks about prioritizing. i think we all want to get rid of waste, fraud and abuse. but how you go about thinking about what it we achieve -- can we achieve, because i think what's important is points on the board. i think o.m.b. uses a number of these tools to do that. >> i appreciate you saying that. i know earlier, mr.

chairman, i missed the questioning about senator johnson and senator heitkamp as well about oira. one of the things that i'm concerned about is that their staffing level is at an all-time low and it seems to me that an agency's really not going to be fully effective if they're not fully staffed. it's one thing to have a vacancy here or there but to really -- it seems like that agency, that office is just not, you know, it can't function anywhere close to where it needs to. so, what can you do, what can we do to try to make sure they're fully staffed and fully equipped to do their important tasks? >> senator, it's g if confirmed, one -- if confirmed one of the things i'd want to do is think about the team. when i enter into organizations, one of the things i think is most important is the team and what you have and what you don't

have. and if confirmed that is something very quickly, the team across o.m.b., i think there are a number of positions in places and how does one think about that to make sure we put a strong team in place across the board at o.m.b.? so that would be a priority. with regard to the second part of your question is what can we do, one of the things that i hope is that we can have a dialogue and we can -- i can have an opportunity to call members of this committee to support and help and as long as i'm articulate about what the needs are and what those needs would produce, in terms of some of the results that we've been talking about. there's a part of this that i would look forward to working with the committee to make sure we get the reality of good people doing good work. >> right. to change gears on you. one of the things that you know and you know better than most people is that if you look at all of our federal spending, it's roughly about 2/3 as mandatory spending or entitlement spending.

here in the congress we have tightened up on our discretionary spending quite a bit, with the budget control act of 2011. but we really have found it difficult to really pursue the rigorous reforms we need and sensible reforms we need in our entitlement programs and i would hope that that would be a priority for the administration and i hope that we would do that in a bipartisan way. i think that's the only way you get it done. let me, if i may, mr. chairman, just close with something that we talked about yesterday in my office and that is, i've been here for 10 years. going on 11. and for 10 years, for nine of those 10 years we basically have not followed the budget act. you know, we've either -- we didn't get a budget done and/or we didn't get our appropriation bills done or we did an omnibus or a c.r.

or a minibus or some combination. nine out of the 10 years basically we've had to do that. and that just is evidence to me that the system, the law we have on the books right now is just not working. and my guess, it's probably the politics more than anything that's preventing it from working. but i would hope that congress and the administration would work together to possibly, if we need to, to go in and rewrite the budget act, you know, apparently senator byrd wrote it back in the early 1970's and after a couple of years of false starts and trying to get it done, and that's one thing we talked about yesterday. i'm not asking for a commitment out of you or the administration on this, but i would hope that you all would consider making budgeting, and that includes not just the dollars, but the process of priority so that we can have a better way to budget, a better way to account and

check on the effectiveness of government spending and i know that we're going to be in peard of budget tightening over the next 10 years and, you know, i think if we have a budget process that works better, that makes the whole thing work easier. so, i don't know if you had any comments on that. >> when i probably have shud have been studying a little more last night for my hearing today, i have to say your question stimulated, i spent quite a bit of time last night just starting to think about the point. it's not the responsibility of the executive branch or the responsibility that falls in our laps as well. it's a shared responsibility. one of the great things about this committee is senator pryor

that is something i did start to at least reflect and think upon. since i've not been here it is something i will will look forward to learning more about. why people think the process is not working, and what are the critical things and how do you think about changes to process that would help that or support that thing that is not currently happening? thanks for, bringing it to us today. at this time well senator pryor is still here, he raised again the issues of waste, fraud, abuse. we never seem to do enough about it. it is a huge enterprise. most successful nation in the world, we spend all over the world in different

ways. it is hard to get our heads around it. seek to put our nation back on a fiscally responsible path -- not just responsible to the executive --nch, not just responsible it is a shared responsibility. one of the great things about serving on this community -- committee is that we have the opportunity here, this is an oversight committee. we deal with homeland security in a big way. have for about 10 years. as an history this is an oversight committee. we have the opportunity to perform effective oversight. anytime we have someone testify before us, defense, homeland security, whether it's health and human services, whatever it might be, i ask at the end of whatever we're hearing, someone from g.a.o., say what do we need to do bettory make sure we spend our taxpayer dollars more effectively? almost without exception they say do more oversight. that's why we try to have four

subcommittees. the full committee, it's largely an oversight subcommittee that's dependent to this huge homeland security, government affairs overview. we have the ability to leverage the capability of one committee and we do it by working with g.a.o., the high-risk list comes out every two years. we have the opportunity to work with you, your predecessors, with your team. we'll have the opportunity to work with all the inspector generals. there is about six or seven departments that don't have the inspector general. we need people confirmed. we need good people. whened administration nominates them, we need to confirm them. if they are totally incapable, we need to make clear of that as well. we have the opportunity to not only coordinate and cooperate and collaborate with g.a.o., o.m.b. and the inspector generals, but there is a bunch of nonprofit

groups around the country that basically want to do what we do. we want to stop wasting taxpayers money. this is not a great partisan committee, as you know, as to set aside politics and just figure out how we can get a lot with the most money. i was struck what people said in recent months, given my new responsibilities in this committee, people said with regard to having to pay more taxes, even as we approach april 15, people said, i don't mind paying more taxes. i don't want you to waste our money. that's our challenge, and it's not just our responsibility. it's a shared responsibility. we look forward to really to working with you and your team. i want to go back. following up on senator pryor -- i want to go back 15 years and you were in an administration, bill clinton was president. as i understand, he asked erskine bowles to lead an effort

to see if we can't produce a budget deficit -- see if we can balance the budget. erskine was asked to lead an effort within the administration to see if we couldn't find common ground to get us to a balanced budget or more balanced budget. would you go back in time, walk us back, i think you were in the white house at that time, walk us back in time the dynamic that existed then, why were we successful? we had a very strong economy. we don't know. it's strengthening, i think. what was the dynamic for us to move from substantial deficits, $200 billion, $300 billion, to a balanced budget four in a row? what lessons are transferable to today? >> one of the things i think happened at that period in time is that when we saw that you actually could achieve -- that it was within reach, you started understanding that when you saw

the numbers that it was within reach, a balanced budget was within reach and how one thought about what to do. and that conversation was put in terms of the long-term commitments that we had, thinking about the economy in the short and the long term, and it's probably a phrase that some may not remember but there was something called the social security lock box. and the reason that that came about was the idea that what we wanted to do was to start paying down because by starting to pay down you were creating the debt at that time. what you were doing was creating the space and ability to make sure that we as a nation can meet some of our long-term commitments and the commitments right now that we are very focused on in the entitlement space. i think that was an important part. but with regard to the negotiating and how we actually got there, which erskine was the leader of the team at that point in time, there are a couple elements that i think i learned from. one was honesty and integrity in process. your best to be able to have a relationship where you could

pick up the phone and call and say what you can't do and what you can do and it be respected, that it's a confidential matter, that this is part of what we can do to build the trust to get there. i think the second thing that was important is prioritization, and using the processes to create the prioritization, when one reflects what senator pryor said, we haven't used the budget process in its full over an extended period of time, that is the means by which we as a nation need to trade off. when things come in their pieces one by one, it's much harder than when you put it in a package. why does everyone suggest brac processies for all kinds of decisionmaking? it's because when we bring it all together, that's when we need to have to act as a nation, not as individuals, not as individuals simply, of course,

you need to represent your district and your state, but also that overlay of representing the nation together. so prioritization was a second element. then the third element in terms of what i learned was listening, listening and try to really hear and understand, knowing what you need and that was part of your own prioritization, but listen to understand others, those are some of the lessons from that period of time. >> we have an interesting dialogue here in the congress and the senate. actually we're getting along better in the senate. i think they have their struggles in the house. i'm encouraged by the mood here in the senate and our ability to find common ground. for example, in the spending plan for the balance of the year, the continuing resolution, and our robust debate for the next 10 years, just a good spirited and healthy debate, nonetheless. when we say to our republican

friends, we need more revenues, we go back to those four years when we had balanced budgets. if you look at the revenues as a percentage of g.d.p., it was about 19.5% to 20% for each of the four years. last year i think it was closer to 16%. even with the fiscal cliff revenue package adopted i think we'll be up to about 15% of the revenues as a percentage of g.d.p. within this 10-year period. what we say to our republican friends, we need more revenues. if we are serious about really balancing a budget or coming close, and they say, well, we need some entitlement reform. and to its credit, the president has said what we need is entitlement reform. he said we need entitlement reform that saves money and that saves these programs for the long haul, and sort of -- i'll add these words but i think it's felt by him and as we do that we need to look at the least of these within our society. i totally agree with that. i spent some of the recess we just concluded on the road.

i mentioned earlier i was up along the canadian border with senator levin and others. i went over to minnesota and went to a place called rochester where the mayo clinic is. one of the things i've done in the last couple of years as a member of the finance committee with one of my other hats on, medicare, medicaid, oversight, to see how they can get better health care results for -- with less money at mayo, guysinger which covers a big part of pennsylvania? i spent time with folks at kaiser permanente and spent time at united health while in minnesota last week. but if we don't do something real and substantial on figuring out how to get better health care results with less money or the same amount of money in

medicare we're doomed. we had one come testify before the senate finance committee over a year now, about a year and a half ago, and he as a panel -- alan -- former vice chairman of the federal reserve when alan greenspan was our chairman, now back at princeton teaching economics. i said, -- he mentioned in his testimony the 800-pound gorilla in the room is health care. when it came time for us to ask questions, he said in your statement 800-pound gorilla in the room on deficit reduction is health care. what do you recommend we do? he thought for a moment and he said, i'm not an expert on this stuff. i'm not a health economist but here's what my advice for you, find out what works and do more of that. that's what he said. find out what works and do more

of that. i'll never forget him saying that. it applies not to just health care costs, medicare, medicaid, it really applies to pretty much everything we do in the federal we'll find out what works and do more. we'll find out what doesn't work and do less than that. we especially need to do those things. others raised the issue duplication. you and i talked a little bit about that. senator coburn is especially passionate about it. it makes sense to have duplication, for example, in training programs. we want to train veterans, people that are disabled. you want to train people coming off of welfare. it's understandable how you would have training programs for different parts of our population. we need to find out what's working and do more of those. those not working, we need to end them or fix them, that's the way i look at it. with that having been said, this is an open question for you, but reflect on those thoughts i just shared with you and a thing that comes to mind for you is -- to guide you in your efforts and

frankly to guide us and help us to work together on is we got to figure out a way to do this together. tomorrow the president's budget will come alas. we'll welcome that. hopefully it will look like a grand compromise which i hope to embrace and embrace with others, especially senator coburn. please. >> the issue of mandatory spending as part of what's driving the major part of the issue is one that deserves great focus because it's so much a part of the problem. and as we go to that health care point, one of the things that excites me most about what you said with regard to the examples at mayo and cleveland, some of which i have learned a little bit about, is that what you described actually as part of

what i believe is so important to the solution because it's not simply about government spending. it's about what is happening in the overall economy on health care spending. and so when i think about the issues, while there will be a spectrum and a continuum of things that need to be done so that we can make progress on the costs of medicare over time as a nation, the things that are the best because they put us on a positive cycle and not just the government but the private sector are those things that bend the cost curve. and what was exciting about what you said was you were focused on the things they were doing that are actually bending the cost curve, changing the cost structure, and examples that i have experienced, i had the opportunity to be on a university health center board when i was in seattle and saw the institution trying to implement information technology so using it in the office. and so was part of the transition and the costs and figuring out how to change behaviors because it means changing behaviors in a doctor's office. and then now that i'm in arkansas, have the opportunity as part of the hospital system, the mercy system, it is fully

done. and so i am able to receive the results of my children's tests on my email at night. there isn't a nurse that has to call so that i'll know if the child has x or y and know to follow the steps. it's appropriate to get a call but you know the efficiencies and the quality. i have that information in one place. if i want to log on right now i can see all the tests. and the quality and cost savings when i go in, whether i've been to any part of the mercy system, they can pull up every test i've had. they know i had the flu. they know that -- they know that information. it just creates incredible efficiencies. so those are the types of things as i think about it is an incredibly important issue, like to focus on the things that can do both, help the private sector and government because the cost shifting and the bending of that cost curve. that's how i start to think about those issues. >> sometimes i tell my colleagues, i wish -- and

others, i wish i had only one issue to focus and that is health care. and to figure out how to get better health care results with less money. in terms of vibrant economy, to be able to compete with japan, they spend half as much, 8.5% g.d.p. for health care, how can they be that smart and we be that dumb? what i sought to do is see where there is consensus. i mention a number of health care providers doing exciting and smart things with respect to the delivery of health care. but i've -- we've also invited health economists and others to meet with my staff and my colleagues and looking to where find out where these circles -- where the circles overlap. it seems like one of the smart things we hear, number one, get away from the stovepipe delivery, figure out a way -- one of the ways to do is electronic health records.

and we have the delaware health information network which complements the electronic health records so they can function not as isolated stovepipes but as a team. secondly, prevention and wellness. obesity is literally killing us, literally and figuretively. there are people overobesed. their families are overabeesed. you look at obesity and you look at end of life care, tough issue but one i think we need to come to grips with in a compassionate kind of way. i think the opportunities are just enormous for us to provide better care and for less money. even with respect to the issue of defensive medicine. there is an -- out of the university of michigan, played a tough game last night against louisville, it was a -- also come up -- ohio state graduate. it pains me to say this but they came up with a really good idea

a number of years called -- you are my university of michigan, you are my doc and i'm your patient. you perform a procedure, screw up, i know it, you know it. before i can sue you, we have an opportunity to meet as two human beings. you can apologize. offer financial opportunity, nothing can be said against you can be used in a court of law. this reduces dramatically the incidents of medical malpractice lawsuits. they also found out it reduces the incidents of defensive medicine and it leads to better health care outcomes. that's the university of michigan demonstration, if you will, but for a number of years called sorry works. it has been taken -- tim mcdonald, doctor, lawyer and he's got a project called seven pillars which takes the idea of sorry works and puts it on a

larger scale. we have two years of really good data and demonstrates conclusive we can get reduced incidents of medical malpractice lawsuits. we can reduce the incidents of defensive medicine and demonstrates better health care results. it's a trifecta and the idea we want to be able to spread across the country. the administration supports their efforts. we want to take them and spread them like wildfire. take ideas like seven pillars, bring it to delaware and other states. that's -- those are all parts of the solution. and as we focus on bet remember results for less money or the same amount of money, health care is one i think has great potential for us. and we need to particularly focus on that. in the past, you worked a little bit -- i think at mckenzie and company, management consulting firm with great reputation. any lessons learned from that experience for you that you bring to your current

responsibilities if you're confirmed? >> in terms of my mckenzie experience, one of the things i learned was client service which is a topic that's come up in a number of different ways in this conversation and the idea of responsiveness and listening to the client. more broadly i think mckenzie was the start of some lessons that i've had the opportunity to learn when in the private sector that are related to things like when thinking about how to use an organization to address a problem, think about strategy, structure and people. second lesson is clear and measurable goals for impact. and so that's a part of that first one, but really articulating, what is it we're trying to achieve and really deeply focusing on impact. i think you heard a little bit of that when i was talking about what are the targets we want to use, what are the imfacts we

want to achieve when we think of transparency? transparency in and of itself is a positive thing, but is it the outcome we're looking for? so the focus on impact would be the second lesson i think i've learned. the third, and this is an extension from mckenzie through my current role, is the importance of actually of culture and that leaders actually drive culture and that often culture is as important a part of achieving the types of things we're talking about in terms of cost savings, efficiency and effectiveness, creating a culture and an institution of that. there is important as often as the rules because sometimes they get you more because if people are thinking about it and being a part of it, they consider what they do, they take pride in making things the most efficient and effective. they take pride. it's part of what they do. so this issue of culture i think is one that you can't overestimate how important it can be to achieving whether it's healthy thriving o.m.b.

or the types of cost savings and efficiencies that we're talking about that we think are so important. >> it's ironic you would mention that. when i was a kid growing up in west virginia, i later on in danville, virginia, my dad used to say to my sister and me, we'd have chores to do in the house, the yard and our garden and he was always saying to us when we didn't do our chores very well, if the job is worth doing, it's worth doing well. if a job is worth doing, it's worth doing it well. he was a chief petty officer in the navy, tough as nails. he said it often, not nicely, but he said it a lot. if a job is worth doing and worth doing well, and i like to do i know if i can do it i can do better. i talk about culture. on this committeery talk a lot about culture. in too many cases a culture of spend thrift in the federal

government. we need to replace that with a culture of thrift. everything we do. say how to do this better? provide better customer service, do it more. people say i don't like paying more taxes, i don't want you to waste my money. they say things are different. a police woman on the job at o.m.b. and some new leadership on this committee as well, culture, i think you're right, hugely important. i ask about how your work at mckenzie helped you. you kind of morphed into how your time at the gates foundation and wal-mart prepared you for this job. are there work with bill and melinda gates and wal-mart helped prepare you for this work? >> the bill and melinda gates foundation and wal-mart has done

in terms of preparation is my experience around grant making. that has two elements to it that i think are helpful and important. one is that i spend much more of my day saying no than yes. there are many, many wonderful things that are happening in the world, and even a foundation as large as the bill and melinda gates foundation, the vast majority of requests are actually noes. and so that experience of how to respect there are incredibly wonderful things going on that people are coming to you about but saying no in a respectful way, respectful of their time, respectful of their ideas and their energy. so i think that's an important part of the job. the second thing i would say is actually doing grant making. how one thinks about spending money for impact? and that experience is about, what is the strategy? how does this spending connect with that strategy?

how am i clearly focused on impact? what are the strengths and weaknesses of what i'm looking at? on grants, i would -- if someone sent me a grant report or a proposal for a grant, if it had weaknesses it had to go back. if you can't articulate the weaknesses, i don't believe there are anything that really don't have weaknesses, and that's part of that quality management for impact is not just recognizing the strengths but the weaknesses. i think the grant-making experience is one that i think is really vent to the work we do every day at o.m.b. >> as you've been briefed by o.m.b. staff, what has stood out as maybe some of the areas where you think or others think our federal government has made some progress since you last served? just mention a couple. >> since i was last year, i've actually seen good progrets on the m side. certainly not enough but good progress.

and i would mention something that's important to this committee is gypper modernization. when i was here before, gypper was a box -- >> people who might be watching this on television, just go ahead -- >> government performance and -- government performance and review act which is an act to try to put in place that type of strategy so that governments can admit to the strategic approach to mayor work and set clear goals that they work against. and i think that has advanced in terms of the different departments are doing that. and that's the place where i've seen changed. i mentioned earlier in the hearing the issue of the c.i.o. and how we think about technology as a tool both that we can think about the opportunities with regard to efficiency and effectiveness, transparency and not forgetting innovation, that's an important part. so those are two specific changes that i think are important. >> it's funny you should mention the government performance review act, it's something that

senator warner and senator akaka and some others did in the house and the president signed it without any -- with really no fanfare. and it's like a time bomb in a good sense, and it's one that -- it's like a cancer but a good cancer that's sparting to spread through the federal government. as it metastasizes, instead of bad things happening good things that will be good for the executive branch and for us as well and for folks trying to get better results for less money. glad you mentioned it. for some of the areas you think we're making progress, maybe a couple areas that you think -- and you've alluded to this already, but maybe as we get ready to wrap up, couple areas you want to mention where we may not have made sufficient progress and we really, really need to. >> clearly in the conversations that i have had, including in this hearing, the regulatory area and the functioning of

oira, and it's from a number of different perspectives and thinking how the regulatory process is working. there have been a number of issues raised and that's a place where i'll want to understand what those issues, how does the o.m.b. the institution feel about those issues and how do the cabinet departments we work with as well the -- as the voice of the people, who i hope is represented by the people, is represented on a regular basis and that's something i want to understand more deeply and has been brought up in my hearing. >> mention the management practices that you witnessed in the private sector that you think were especially effective that could be transferred to this realm, just one or two. >> would go back to thinking about strategy structure of people. i think that's an important process and sort of just basic framework to help people move to a place where you get that kind of clarity of goal, that's part

of what the strategy is. so that would be one thing. i think another element that's important is actually thinking about people management, and i know we are all extremely busy in government and it's very, very hard, but i actually think that performance management is another thing that i think you said have i learned that's actually very important. it is important to set goals with your direct reports. it is important to review those goals on a regular basis. it is important to use that as a tool by which you review people in terms of their performance and so how we invest in our personnel in government is something across the board executive branch, legislative branch, all of us, something i think it's an important thing we can learn from the private sector. toes disciplining tools and mechanisms, because we all get so busy and it's one of the things i think first goes.

>> thank you. jeff science served as our acting o.m.b. director, he's not here. for those in the room that talked to him and somebody is watching on television over at o.m.b., i want to express my thanks to him. i know the president and others feel that way as well. coming in and served in a variety of capacities at o.m.b. and we're grateful for his service. if you're confirmed i'm encouraged that you will be, there are going to be a number of direct reports that are going to have to be confirmed to put your team in place. would you just mention what those are likely to be? >> those are likely to be brian who has been sent up to be the director director on the b side. i would add my thanks to jeff. if jeff departs there will be an opening in the director for management. there will be the position in oira in terms of senate- confirmed positions that are opened currently or will be open at o.m.b.

>> the administration has an obligation to give us good names. they've given in your case an excellent name, excellent person. we look forward to getting to know the person they've nominated for the b side of o.m.b. and looking forward to new number niece for the other two. administration has an obligation to nominate really good people. we have an obligation to get to know them and to have hearings promptly. if there's no problems to move those names promptly, especially in this instance. the other yes, this is like a personal question, and i don't know that i'll ever get to meet your parents. your husband over your right shoulder. they must be very remarkable people to have raised in hinton, west virginia, a couple of gals that turned out as well as your sister obviously have turned out. what was it in the water there in hinton, west virginia, right along the new river, that -- and

a gal i grew up there and a town where i lived who's gone on to harvard, rhodes scholar, worked at the highest levels in business, clinton foundation, which has a remarkable amount of success, what were the secrets i don't know your sister, but i heard very good things about her what are some of the secrets that have enabled you to turn out as well as you have? i know you're modest. you have no reason to be modest. i admire the fact that you are. but what are the secrets? >> i would credit my parents with a couple of very important things that they did and one is they instilled in us the importance of service and that's whether my father belonged to many community organizations -- the lions club, the elks club, the j.c.'s, the rotary.

my mother was with different organizations, the business and professional women's group. she was president of the church women for almost 25 years. and so this idea that just part of everyday living, and so that's one thing. the other thing i think the simple idea of always do your best. and those two things i think are what have enabled me and my sister to do the things that we've had the chance to do. >> that's great. whenever i go to schools, i go to schools a lot, i love to do that. all kinds of schools. elementary schools, high schools, college. i talk about service. young people i meet with -- and the folks i met are the least happy people, people who don't really think outside of themselves, look for ways to serve. some of that is faith based. we have an obligation to serve other people and to the extent that we do that we are the lucky ones that are entitled to serve. i think you'll be lucky if this opportunity to serve. my hope is you'll have this

opportunity soon and we'll help to put a good team around you and to really collaborate and see if we can't somehow be a force multiplier for one another. we need to be and create somes ynergies that's dramatically needed as this administration continues the second half of four years. i have been handed a letter and say the record will be open until tomorrow, april 10, for submissions and questions for the record. close the hearing, the majority people have come and gone during this hearing, but most of the members, democrat and republican, on our committee have come and asked questions, heard you. i think that's a positive sign. it's actually sort of encouraging we didn't have a crush of people in the room or .itting up at the dieas.-- dais

if it were i think you'd mean you're in trouble. you'll really be in trouble if you do this job. the rest of us will not be because i think you bring the kind of service that -- and leadership that we need. again, anything else for the good of the order? no. all right. with that being said, steven, great to see you. finish up where you started. great opportunity to share your ride with all of us and for you to be able to share your life with the people of our country. that's a wrap. with that this hearing is adjourned. thank you. >> thank you, thank you, mr. chairman.[captioning performed bynational captioning institute] [captions copyright nationalcable satellite corp. 2013]

[inaudible conversation] .> today and immigration rally members of congress and labor activists are expected to lead what they're calling a national rally for citizenship. live coverage starts at 3:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 3. president obama's nominee for white house budget director will be on capitol hill for a second day of confirmation hearings. sylvia burwell, currently president of the walmart foundation, will testify before the senate budget committee. see it live starting at 10:30 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> the economy and federal deficit our topics in this documentary from franklin county

high school. in third prize winning video this year's student cam competition. ♪ >> dear mr. president, my name is rachel. mr. president, i understand you are very busy as there are many issues you have to deal with, but i think the most important issue is the economy and the national debt. in fact, the people i interviewed seem to have the same basic thoughts when i asked him about the economy. >> it is rough. >> it is hard right now. >> i think it stinks. >> well, it could be better. it is no secret the economy is struggling in america. businesses are moving overseas, american jobs are being lost, and the national debt is increasing.

i believe helping our small businesses across america can be important to revive the economy. many of the stores in our small town in southern indiana were for sale or for rent or empty in the last two years. these buildings look neglected and run down and visitors refer to us as a ghost town. so many housing and job opportunities would be available in small towns throughout america by fixing these rundown buildings. by reviving small towns, jobs become available and the economy can continue to pick up. we started our project to rebuild the village when my family moved here from oberlin, ohio in 2006. -- sat empty in the middle of town but now theks to my grandmother and community it is now not just a business but a home. the building is more than just a place for business. >> for us it is our business and

our house together. the people that come through here our customers. the people who live around here , the small town. >> also we has a community have put forth the effort to help bring back our small town and have successfully opened an art shop, a wellness clinic, to stores, a comic book shop, to bed and breakfasts, a restaurant, a coffee shop, a academy of dance, several gift shops, and a 30 acre campground. done to help the economy? the people i talk to have many different thoughts and what we can do to help america. ofi think there is not a lot people -- people expect an awful lot out of governments more than me. i do not think the government is

responsible for fixing everything. it is not right for our taxes to i do fored in things myself. my ownmy butt off with effort, my own work. >> no more tax breaks for people, more government grants, ways to help people start their business. we started from scratch. we had nothing when we started. >> did these sound familiar? one who has been unemployed for 26 weeks has run out of state benefits. everyone can get an additional 14 weeks of federal benefit. >> that is what we do in this country. the american dream. that is freedom and i will take it any day over the supervision and sanctimony of the central planners.

>> the reason we are here tonight is because senators why wend sanders said talk about outsourcing of jobs, let's do something about it. that is what we are trying to do tonight. actually do something about it. , every townntry goes through cycles and things are easy and then things are hard. , i mean, hard times are just that. they're not the end of the world. hard times force us to get creative and think outside the box and do things differently, which grow us as business people and people in general. they say necessity is the mother of invention, so hard times create solution and new ideas. but it takes place under that pressure. >> my grandmother came up with one of these unique ideas.

on the fourth of july the town held the first of our saving sam's sales. i grandmother's idea for a trillion dollar garage sale all across america to spend the money earned to help pay down our nation's debt. 16 shopkeepers and townspeople sat out in 114 degree weather to earn $500 that was sent to the national debt. there is not going to be an easy solution to fixing the economy and reducing the deficit. it is not fixable in the next year. it took a while to get here and we'll take a while to get out. >> isn't of the same in washington? hundreds of different people with different ideas, but when everyone talks at once adjuster comes noise. none of that matters if nobody is putting forth the effort to change things.

our government sounds a lot like a small town -- small towns across america, including mine. --a lot of business people i have been here over 30 years. you have to get over problems you had in the past. , notu voted for action politics as usual. to focus on your jobs, not hours. in the coming weeks and months i am looking forward to reaching out and working with leaders of both parties to meet the challenges we can only solve together. mr. president, you have a powerful voice. the people of america want to help america. needfices the to beat -- to be made because you cannot

satisfy everyone. small towns may not be important to everyone in this nation, but they matter to people like me businesses and those employed by the small businesses. thel towns matter to economy because of the unique atmosphere the small communities have to offer, not to mention job opportunities that could be available to anyone. that you, as president, continue to set a positive example and we, as americans, continue to work -- after all we all want the best for america. >> congratulations to all the winners in this year's competition. for more winning videos go to amudentcsm.org -- studentcsm .org. >> the acting omb director will discuss the president's budget.

he will be joined by the chairman of the council of economic advisers and director of the national economic council. news conference starts at 12:30 p.m. eastern on c-span 3. would like to think it is an important book in that it tells you how the court works. there are so few good books out there who tell you, what is the process, how do they go about and decide these cases, what are they saying to one another? we see courts -- cases that split the court. what do they really think? do personal feelings go into it? it is not just about capital punishment but also about how the court operates. >> in the library of congress, the memoranda, the notes back and forth between justices that are available, a lot of it is available. i plead notawyer, guilty or whatever you guys do, but i was just fascinated by the human side of it.

, you canases justices see they have reservations about capital punishment. >> martin clancy and tim o'brien on the capital punishment cases that have defined the supreme court, sunday night at 9:00 on " afterwards" part of book tv this weekend on c-span 2. washingtonup, " journal" is live with a preview of the president's 2014 budget. over on c-span 2 at 9:30 eastern the senate returns for work i firearms bill. on c-span 3, british lawmakers pay tribute to former prime minister margaret thatcher who died on monday. >> in 45 minutes, congressman peter walsh of vermont discusses the president's budget and proposed cuts to social security and medicare. more about the budget