state of new jersey. >> i rise in strong opposition to the pay-china-first act. by the way, the firefighters are in town today i am going to go to every firefighter i see and tell them how foolish -- the sponsors of this legislation it believes the federal government has no responsibility anyway. it is strictly a local thing. they are not trying to balance the budget. if this bill becomes law, the government will still be borrowing money and our deficit will increase. the government allowed to borrow money to pay our active military? nope. can we add to our deficit to fund veteran benefits? what about medicare? sorry, we will not pay those

bills. the majority believes it is ok to borrow money and add to our deficit to pay china, but not to honor the obligations we have to our troops, of veterans, seniors, etc. shameful, at this is simply no other word. whether it is obligations -- we do not need every be. >> the gentleman's time has expired. i continue to reserve. >> the gentleman from the michigan is recognized. bijan from new york is

recognized for 1.5 minutes. -- the gentleman from new york is recognized for 1.5 minutes. it will turn us into a dead be nation, a nation that does not pay its bills. insure taxpayers always paid china and other regimes and foreign banks before our veterans, are seniors on medicare, and even before are listed troops bravely serving overseas. we will pay these folks before we pay these folks.

we pay these folks under this bill before we pay these folks. that is wrong and unacceptable to the american people. in addition to putting china first and america last comment it will increase the deficit. this bill will also increase the deficit and will pay china first. what the republican majority is doing is announcing to the that this congress is not serious about putting our nation's bill. colleagues, please put americans first. put our troops first and china last. do not pass this act. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. >> i ask unanimous consent to record a letter

from the cbo. to yieldmy pleasure two minutes to the ranking member on the budget committee, the gentleman from maryland. i strongly oppose this bill, which is -- says we should pay the government of china before we pay our troops, of lipari -- before a pair veterans, before we pay other bills in the united states. of all the bad ideas, and this one is one of the worst. it is a reckless, irresponsible proposal but says the united states of america is not gone to pay all the bills that are due. that will have a terrible impact on our credit worthiness, it will undermine the credit of the united states and would wreak havoc on the economy.

our constituents to not have the luxury of waking up one morning and saying, i'm only going to make my mortgage payments. i will not make my car payment, will not make my credit card payments. if they did that, what would happen? they would lose their credit worthiness. for the united states of america to say, we will pay some bills, we would have -- it would have damaging impact on the economy. when they say we have to pay some, you have to decide do you will pay first. what they decide is they will pay china. first. they have to decide who is not a priority. in this bill, our veterans are not a priority, our troops, they are not a priority. china is a priority. what will happen is that people will lose faith in whether or not the country pays its bills.

people need to understand very clearly that this is not about expanding the debt ceiling to take on new obligations. this is about putting our existing obligations. if we announce to the world that we are planning on not paying our obligations, whether they are to bondholders or to our troops, guess what happens. people will lose faith in the united states government and the economy will get hit hard. let's vote against this bill that says china comes before our troops. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the jump in from michigan is recognized. >> -- the gentleman from michigan is recognized. >> in 2010, admiral mollen said the most significant threat was our debt. since that time, we have added hundreds of billions of dollars to our national debt. our reserve. >> the gentleman from michigan is recognized. the gentlemen -- the

gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for 1.5 minutes. >> i rise in strong opposition to the republican paid china first bill, which would jeopardize the credit of the united states. this legislation dictates wish of our nation's bills will pay in which we will not. it poses a dangerous threat to our economy. the republicans but foreign creditors ahead of our veterans, active duty of military. the republicans' refusal to pay our nation's bill in flux another round of the necessary weapons that weakens our economy in 2011. american families, workers, small-business is have battled economic uncertainty for far too long. this legislation will only exacerbate the challenges we

face. instead of moving closer to common ground on a responsible path, republicans brinkmanship threatens to undermine consumer and investor confidence and slow economic growth. i urge oppositions of legislation and do what we have always done as americans, pay our bills, paid them on time, pay them in full and protect america's economy and our financial standing in the global economy. the original men from michigan is recognized. >> i reserved. how much time is there on each side? >> the gentleman from michigan has 3.5 minutes. the gentleman from michigan has 6.5 minutes.

>> i have no further speakers. yield 1.5 minutes to the gentleman from texas. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for 1.5 minutes. chairman, i rise in opposition to the pay china first act. republican majority has chosen to play politics with the credit of our nation. instead of coming to the table with solutions, they are insuring we will come to default on our nation's debt. this accomplishes one simple goal, paid china first. if the republicans cause a default on our debt, it would guarantee that bondholders in china and other foreign nations will get paid before our men and women in uniform. willable veterans, doctors all lose out. are these the right priorities for our country, mr. chairman?

democrats are focused on job .ecovery we are ready to act now on common-sense budget proposals that are balanced and fair. i asked the majority to stop playing political games and let's work together on common sense solutions to strengthen our country. but to come in from michigan continues to reserve. -- the gentleman from michigan continues to reserve. >> are you ready to close this part of our debate? >> i have how much time? >> the gentleman from michigan has 2.5 minutes. >> thank you. facts, byread the this bill says china first. i want everybody to understand

that this is not rhetoric. this is reality. the republicans under this bill prioritize $14.30 trillion in debt. of that, $2.70 trillion in social security, a $11.60 trillion in public debt. debt, $5.60ic trillion is foreign. all of thelk about american public comment you are not talking about what is in this bill, if that foreign debt ,ank is -- the largest debtor creditor is china was over when dollar trillion.

-- $1 trillion. what you are saying is paid the largest of the foreign creditors instead of american troops, veterans, a physicians, school lunch programs, at universities doing medical research, taxpayers doing refunds, and other federal trust funds holding treasury bonds, medicare. highwaye americans, trust fund, etc., etc. that is the fact. ,here is some effort to say we're not defaulting. yes, you are. you are not defaulting on sovereign debt bank. but you are defaulting except for social security on everything else.

becoming leade defaulters in terms of paying our debt. earlier, the credit agencies -- it is not assured the treasury would prioritize -- very likely prompt downgrade -- >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> this is a serious mistake. " the gentleman's time has expired. >> the gentleman from michigan is recognized for 6.5 minutes. is helpful in a debate like this to start with the facts. i would say that it is illustrative of how out of touch

and irresponsible the other side is when they assert that our debt is $14 trillion. it is over $16 trillion. no wonder they do not think this is an urgent problem. this legislation is very similar to a 1996, legislation that was passed in a bipartisan vote am assigned by bill clinton. ministates' guaranteed their government debt -- many states guaranteed their government debt. if we default on our government or sovereign debt bank, the consequences are so severe, no one gets paid. our military, seniors, veterans, farmers. a strongcans deserve economy and that means getting our debt under control.

let's clear up another fact, the top two-thirds of our debt is held by americans. and their retirement funds, including the u.s. military retirement fund. one reason we are in this position is that this administration has racked up ,ore than $5 trillion in debt more than the previous four president added together. that is why we are in a situation. we have a debt problem. this legislation ensures that the debt of the united states will be paid. 807.ge support for hr- >> we will focus on the senate judiciary committee markup of immigration legislation. we will discuss the political, situation in tibet.

we'll be joined by kevin johnson to discuss the report by the bureau of justice statistics of firearm violence. "washington journal is live on c-span every day at 7:00 eastern. department may be nearing the stage for the frequency of this crime and a perception there is tolerance of it could undermine our ability to carry out the mission and recruit and retain good people we need. that is unacceptable to me and the leaders of this institution. it should be unacceptable to everyone associated with the military. when a cultural change where every service member is treated with dignity and respect. we're all allegations of [inaudible]e

that they will be held accountable by a strong and effective systems of justice. >> this weekend, defense secretary outlines new initiatives to fight sexual assaults in the armed services. former senior diplomat in libya on the attack in benghazi. on c-span booktv, eric schmidt share their vision of a world where everyone is digitally connected. american history tv, ray cline on cold war intelligence during the eisenhower administration. that is sunday at 3:00. >> the judiciary committee has begun marking up the border

security bill. thursday's meeting included these comments from charles schumer. you can see the entire hearing, at c-span duckboard -- c- span.org. of eight of us spent a great deal of time on this legislation. we believe it is sound, balanced, sturdy ship that will not begin its voyage. we believe -- that will now begin its voyage. we have taken all considerations into account and have come up with a fair bill or no one gets everything they want, but at the end of the day, it will mean

dramatic improvement for the american economy, for the american people, ammo make our immigration policy much more in sync -- and will make our immigration policy much more in sync with what is good for jobs and america. i would ask my colleagues, americans will support common sense solutions to both future immigration and the 11 million living in the shadows, but only if they are convinced that there will not be future waves of illegal immigration in this country. this bill is far and away the strongest bill that has been put together, that has a chance of passing in terms of stopping future flows of illegal immigration. we had ander along, amendment a few months ago that 600 million on the

border. , aspent much more than that much as $6.5 billion. the border will effectively be closed with these expenditures. andake a future immigration make sure that we deal with the industries that desperately need help. google moved 400 engineers as part of the map to vancouver. canadian immigration policy allowed the people to come there. our policy did not. at the same time, in new york state, the leading cabbage court in new york did not plant his thousands of acres this year because he could not get people to pick the crops.

we will change our policy so that people who are needed to help our economy grow can finally come into this country. at the same time, we will note that when families are divided come at the humane thing to do is to back together. because we stopped the flow of illegal immigration compound we can do both -- immigration, we can do both. we know our present system is broken. we know the status quo is unacceptable. that there arew many who will want to kill this bill. i would ask my colleagues, if you do not agree with everything, be constructive. we are open to changes, but do not make an effort to kill a bill that is the best hope for immigration reform that we have had in this country and the best

hope to help break the bipartisan -- the partisan gridlock that has strangled the senate, the congress, and the country. the first congressional hearing looking at the bombings of the boston marathon. in two hours, air force officials make their 2014 budget request. >> several of and to tell you about tomorrow morning. future of u.s. special operations at 9:30 eastern on c- span to. on c-span 3, at 9:40, prince nationalarlington cemetery. constitutione

project discussion on the guantanamo bay prison. what options are available to the administration for transferring detainee's and the feasibility of closing the present. that is at 10:00. a form on how u.s. national security is affected by what happens on the korean peninsula. >> this department a year in the stage where the frequency of this crime and the perception that there is tolerance of its could undermine our ability to effectively carry out the mission and to recruit and retain good people we need. that is unacceptable to me and the leaders of this institution. and it should be acceptable to everyone associated with the united states military. we cultural change with every service member is treated with

respect, where all allegations of inappropriate behavior are treated with seriousness, were victim's privacy is protected, were bystanders are motivated to intervene, and where offenders no that they will be held accountable by strong and effective systems of justice. >> this weekend, the defense secretary outlines new initiatives to fight sexual assault in the armed services. saturday at 1:40 eastern. theay morning at 10:30, house oversight committee on the attack in benghazi. share his vision on a world where everyone is digitally connected sunday morning at 10:45.

>> commissioner edward davis told members of congress today that officials warned the fbi about one of the boston bombing suspects. the information was never passed on to the city. this portion of the homeland security hearing is two hours. >> the committe on homeland security will come to order. the committee is meeting today for the first in a series of hearings examining the boston bombings of april 15, 2013. i now recognize myself for an opening statement. the attacks in boston shook this nation, and brought back memories of that day in september, 2001, that changed our lives forever.

i am confident that we will emerge from this tragedy stronger than ever before. anyone who thinks they can execute an attack on this country and change our way of life, greatly underestimates our spirit and our resolve. it is the responsibility of this committee to provide oversight and investigate what happened, what went wrong and what we can do to better protect american lives. the victims and their families deserve no less. we will never forget april 15th. but we must do more than remember, we must hold accountable those who did us harm, as well as the terrorists who inspired them. we must also demand more than just answers for any mistakes made. we must find solutions so that

it does not happen again. in the chaos following the blasts, the american people, including myself, were amazed at the courage of first responders and civilians who ran towards the explosion, instead of away. these men and women motivate us all to pick up the pieces and move forward. commissioner, we applaud you, as well as the first responders and law enforcement officials who risked their lives to save others. we owe all of you a debt of gratitude. [applause] in order to move forward, today we look back. the families who lost loved ones, and the over 260 wounded deserve answers about how this happened, and what can be improved in the future.

almost three weeks after the smoke cleared on boylston street, many questions remain. what we know today is that radical islamists still threaten our homeland. while we don't know if this attack was foreign-directed, we certainly know it was foreign- inspired. tamerlan tsarnaev's trip to the chechen region, the radical videos proclaiming the caliphate that he posted when he returned, and the type of bombs he and his younger brother used, all signal an al qaeda-inspired terrorist attack. tole mystery continues surround what happened on the older brother's trip to dagestan, much can be drawn from what we know about the region. many chechen rebels have forged a bond with the al qaeda jihadist movement. these lethal warriors have fought side-by-side with al

qaeda and the taliban against u.s. soldiers in afghanistan and iraq. in fact, my constituent's son, marine sergeant byron norwood, was killed by nine chechen rebels in iraq. perhaps most appalling, are the suspect's reported statements following his capture. these men who hate our values used our freedoms to kill americans. since the bombing, questions have been raised about whether dots were connected before and after the attack. we know that russian intelligence warned the fbi about tamerlan, and that he may travel outside the united states to meet with extremists. we know he was then investigated and interviewed by the fbi, but when he travelled to the chechen region in 2012, the fbi was unaware. the cia also received an alert

from russian intelligence and the agency asked that he be added to a terror watch list. we now know that d.h.s. was alerted to his trip overseas, but nothing was done. in other words, he was on our radar and then he was off. what remains unanswered is whether this information was shared between federal agencies and state and local officials. almost nine months after tamerlan returned, he and his brother dzhokhar, executed the largest terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11. this demonstrates that the radical jihad movement is alive and well around the world and in the homeland. we learned over a decade ago, the danger in failing to

connect the dots. the cornerstone of the 9/11 commission report was that agencies had "stove-piped" intelligence, which prevented us from seeing potential terrorist plots. in fact, the dhs was created in the wake of 9/11 to help fix this problem. my fear is that the boston bombers may have succeeded because our system failed. we can and must do better. equally concerning is the emerging narrative which downplays the spread of the global jihadist movement. from the attack at fort hood, to the tragedy at benghazi, the boston bombings are our most recent reminder that we must call terrorism what it is, in order to confront it. you cannot defeat an enemy you refuse to acknowledge. i was disturbed in the days following the attack to read that some officials had closed

the case on whether there was a foreign connection, when the fbi had just begun its investigation. as a former federal counterterrorism prosecutor, this rush to judgment was both premature and irresponsible. the american people demand and deserve accountability. and while we investigate what may have gone wrong, we must also pay tribute to what went right. just as tragedy often exposes weaknesses, it also reveals our character. the acts of heroism in boston in the minutes and days after the attack made us all proud to be americans. recognizesthe chair the ranking minority member. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you for holding today's hearing.

i want to thank our witnesses for appearing. this hearing has been billed as a first look at the boston marathon bombing. while it is appropriate that we examine the events of april 15th, we need to understand and recognize our limitations. first, we must recognize that the events of that day remain under investigation. while we must fulfill our oversight responsibilities under the constitution, we must be careful not to jeopardize an on-going criminal investigation. so we must exercise some discretion in our questioning and our statements about these events, the suspects and theories about links to others who may not be in custody. despite those limitations, there is much we can discuss regarding the boston marathon bombing. we can and should discuss the incredible response from the police, fire fighters and

emergency medical personnel. once again, the first responder community ran toward a catastrophic situation when all others were running away. so, i want to commend the boston first responders for their bravery and heroic actions. but i also must recognize that as first responders, they demonstrate that kind of bravery every day. second, we need to acknowledge the people of boston and the surrounding area. withnot only responded calm and determination on that day, but in the days that followed, they responded to law enforcement's call for help by sharing their photographs and videos. that kind of community spirit the willingness to pull together and lend a hand is one of the qualities that make this country a great place. additionally, we must recognize the thoughtful and difficult decision by the governor of the commonwealth of massachusetts. inuiring residents to remain their homes for a few days after the bombing and placing

an entire city on lockdown was not easy. but given that the exact nature of the threat was unknown, it was a decision which had to be made. and finally, we must acknowledge the decision of the attorney general to immediately refer to the bombing as an act of terror and send the fbi and other federal law enforcement to assist in the effort to locate, arrest, and bring to justice those responsible. as we look at the events of april 15th and the days that followed, we must also look at what happened before april 15th. as the committee on homeland security, we must acknowledge that the kind of response that occurred on that day would not have been possible without federal grant funds. the effectiveness of the

response executed by the first responders is a direct result of over a decade of investment preparedness and response capabilities and exercises supported by the federal emergency management agency and its targeted homeland security grants. since 2002, the commonwealth of massachusetts and the boston urban area have received over $1.3 billion in funding through federal grant programs. the commonwealth and the boston urban area have used these funds to develop capabilities to prevent, prepare for, mitigate the effect of, respond to, and recover from natural disasters and terrorist attacks like the boston marathon bombings. thene who has doubts about value of federal grant dollars should be reminded of the brave actions of the first responders on april 15th. so, as this congress continues to cut funding for these programs, i hope my colleagues

on the other side of the aisle who are members of this committee will oppose those cuts. refusal to support these funding cuts would be the greatest tribute any of us could make to the people of boston. but i also recognize that in addition to the positive effects of federal grant funding, the boston bombing also revealed some negatives that we cannot ignore. we cannot ignore that once again, it has taken a tragedy reveal problems in our vast, varied and numerous federal databases. we faced a similar problem of a faulty database in the christmas day bomber incident. now we learn that there were database problems which made it possible for one of the bombing suspects to re-enter the country after a trip to russia. it is time to recognize that we must develop a way to fix and integrate these various databases.

but we must also realize that in the federal government, no one agency or entity has the responsibility and the authority to scrub and integrate these vast systems that contain records on millions of people. togress cannot continue complain about the failure of the databases without giving the authority and the funding to agency to fix these problems. i guarantee you that if we fail to act, we will be discussing this issue again. issueat is not the only we must act upon. in response to the events of september 11th, congress enacted the terrorism risk insurance act of 2002. that measure increased the availability of terrorism risk insurance to at-risk american

businesses by guaranteeing that the government would share some of the losses with private insurers should a terrorist attack occur. that act is set to sunset in 2014. today, i am introducing a bill that would not only extend the act, but would add some needed improvements. i urge my colleagues on this committee to co-sponsor this act. we must recognize that small businesses and others that suffer an economic loss due to a terrorist act should not have to shoulder that burden alone and should not have to rely on the kindness of charity. finally, as we take this first look at the boston bombings, i hope we do not fall into a pattern of reaching conclusions before all the facts are known. at this point in the investigation, speculation about the motivations of the suspects and the role of external influences seems to change daily. we all want to know the answers and are tempted to reach our own conclusions. but somewhere i read to everything there is a time and season.

the is not the time and season has not yet come. but it will arrive shortly. so, i look forward to our second look, where we can receive testimony from representatives of the intelligence and investigative agencies that may serve to answer many of our questions about motivations, the suspects and external influences. again, i want to thank the witnesses for appearing today. >> i thank the ranking member. let me just say as a former federal prosecutor, i always reserve judgement until all the evidence is in. with respect to grant funding, i met with the boston fire comissioner. he told me if it wasn't for the department of homeland security funding that helped them with response exercises, it could have been a different situation. that helped in saving many american lives. with that, let me just say we

are pleased to have the witnesses hear today. the first witness, no stranger to the congress. our friend and colleague, senator joseph lieberman. he represented the state of connecticut and was the distinguished in the united states senate from 1999 to 2013. septemberths after 11, he led the fight to create a department of homeland security. it led to the creation of this committee and the senate homeland security committee. he chaired it until his retirement from the congress early this year. with that, i would think it appropriate for my fellow colleague and friend from the boston area, one of the best district in the area, he represents waterton, and i thought it would be appropriate

for him to introduce of the police commissioner and mr. swartz. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i just have the pleasure of introducing boston police commissioner ed davis. in 2006, commissioner davis was appointed by the boston commissioner to be the 40th commissioner. in this role he oversees police services for over half a million people him along with those visitors that come into the great city. mr. davis, i knew him before he

was commissioner. he is a leader in using a position to bring different layers of law enforcement to gather, working in a task force of major cities. he he is the superintendent of the office in 1994. during this, he was recognized for reducing the crime rate lower than any other superintendent in america. over 100,000 residents. most recently, he led the police department response to the boston marathon bombings and the quick thinking of the men and women under mr. davis'leadership, and civilians in boston led to the survival of 17 critically injured civilians. i want to note during this leadership he led first and foremost in his mind the four victims that lost their lives, lindsay lou, martin richard, christian campbell, and chuck alere.

i want to thank you for that. we are pleased to have you here today. another friend of mine, the under-secretary of the committee in massachusetts. he is a person who has just done extraordinary work in so many different regards. he was an emt himself. he was a police officer. he has served so many different and important positions in massachusetts at times of crisis and emergency. homeland security and emergency management in executive office in 2007. he was the leader. he also serves as the director of our agency, as well as the homeland security adviser to governor patrick. a long history of service in the commonwealth. he has been under-secretary for

fire services under governor patrick as well. he has worked for eight years under the attorney general where he worked with district attorneys and law-enforcement officials like myself for the five years as chief of the criminal bureau. isexpanded a resume that rich and deserve. this does not really include the full picture of kurt swartz. he brought people together. most recently, he played a critical role in emergency planning and response to the boston marathon attacks. he participated in many of the training exercises which aid in the response so successfully on april 15. he further managed shelter for the city of boston. successful the apprehension of the suspect, saved possible damage for

their other actions that they had contemplated. i want to thank both of these gentlemen for being here. i've been proud to work with you personally. you are to be both saint for what you have done to save lives in this terrible tragedy. thank you. >> i think the gentleman from massachusetts. our final witnesses erroll southers. he is the associate director of the national homeland security center for risk and economic analysis of the terrorism events at the university of southern california. they key for being here today. he is formally served as to b.d. corrector in california at the office of homeland security. the witness. beir full statement will made into the record. the chair recognizes senator lieberman's opening statement. chairman mccaul, ranking member thompson, thank you for inviting me to testify and for giving me the honor of doing so alongside boston police commissioner edward davis and massachusetts undersecretary for homeland security kurt schwartz.

after the terrorist attacks on america on 9-11-01, i was privileged to work with colleagues in both houses, both parties, and the executive branch to enact the most comprehensive reforms of our national security architecture since the beginning of the cold war in the late 1940s. i am grateful that the reforms we adopted and new organizations we created have worked well to protect the american people from terrorist attacks but, as we saw in boston, they are not perfect. since 9-11, no terrorist plot planned or launched from abroad against our homeland has succeeded.

that is a remarkable record and is a testament to the commitment of the men and women both civilian and military who have devoted their lives to keeping us safe. at least 65 homegrown terrorist plots planned and launched right here in the united states have been stopped. but three have succeeded in that at least one american was killed, carlos bledsoe killed an army recruiter in little rock in 2009, nidal hasan killed 13 at fort hood later that same year, and now the tzarnaev brothers killed four and severely wounded many more in boston during the week of april 15, 2013. the boston attack was the first successful terrorist attack either homegrown or launched from abroad on a non-military target in america since 9-11. could it have been prevented? from what i know of the facts

and what i know about homegrown islamist terrorism and our efforts to prevent it, i believe -- it would have been possible to prevent the attacks in boston. you must acknowledge that it failed to stop the brothers. out your help, we must find why and fix it. ira member a leader who want said to me the terrace to keep coming at us, they'll have to succeed once. we have to stop them every time. that is almost impossible. that is the standard our defenders hold themselves to, and we have to as well. i am grateful you begun this investigation.

you to go step-by-step, pull apart and ask what more could the public and private individuals involved here have done to prevent this area. whenever there is a governmental failure, the ministration power will become defensive and not share information and that congress will be divided by politics and lose sight of overriding missions, which is to protect the american people from the next planned terrorist attack. i hope and believe that this congress and this administration will not let that happen this time. second, the boston marathon attacks should again teach us that the enemy we face is violent extremism, not just al qaeda. osama bin laden is dead. the remaining leadership is on the run.

the ideology of violent extremism is rapidly spreading. we do not know yet whether the brothers were involved with foreign groups. outrageouslyhe false narrative of violent islamist extremism. tot they are in a struggle the death of each other. that compels us to ask again how this ideology and radicalization can be countered and ultimately stop. the leaders and members of the world community, including our own fellow americans, probably have the greatest capacity to do the most important work on

counter radicalization. the rest of us have a responsibility to help. three, prior to 9/11, there was too little sharing of information about terrorist threats. therefore the so-called dots cannot be connected because they were not on the same board. our post on 11 reforms aim to overcome that serious problem and to us it -- and to a significant degree they did. there is a much information being shared on the same metaphorical boards by governmental agencies that the larger problems for personnel may be being able to separate the wheat from the chaff. that may have been the big part of the problem. determine to try to whether it was. and to ask whether lingering failures to share information, in this case by the fbi and the department of homeless security, made it more difficult

to prevent the boston attacks. it may be that the most damaging failure to share information was committed to the russian intelligence service. their original inquiries to the fbi and cia were quite vague and apparently whose knowledge of what he did was not really convey to our government until after the boston marathon attacks. however, we have got to ask. i hope you will, shouldn't the fact that the first notice of his possible radicalization came to us from a very uncommon source have marked the case for special handling by our government, to guarantee this file not be close. with the original fbi interviews adequate to determine whether he was lucky to radicalize? was the fbi investigation curtailed by existing attorney general guidelines, which go back to previous administrations. did the fbi enlist the help of

state and local law enforcement, to continue to watch tamerlan, and monitor his or the purposes of assessing whether he was radicalizing even further. why did the department of homeland security notify the in the boston phd f when it system pained that he had returned? finally, when it comes to preventing homegrown terrorists from attacking us, our homeland security agents cannot do it alone. the government needs the help of the american people.

if people see something suspicious, they must say something to our government. in this case, there are people who clearly could've prevented the massacre by just saying something. most obvious are the friends of tamerlan hua been arrested. they should have told police instead of obstruct injustice. the leaders of the boston mosque that threw him out because of his extreme views could have said something to the police. even members of the family, including his wife, could have lives, including tamerlan if they said something. the cost of silence as we learned can be enormous. i thank you for that. i will do anything i can to help you with this investigation, beginning with answering your questions this

morning. >> thank you for your service to our nation. we look forward to working with you. we are always open to your advice and counsel. the chair now recognizes commissioner davis. let me just say that your actions and the people of boston made us all proud to be americans. i recognize you for opening statement. >> thank you mr. chairman. chairman mccaul, ranking member thompson, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the tragedy that occurred in boston on patriots day, april 15 when two cowardly

brothers laid siege to one of massachusetts? most venerated traditions, the boston marathon. i am here as the commissioner of the boston police department, but i also speak on behalf of mayor thomas menino, the mayor's emergency management staff and law enforcement from across the state and across the nation, when i describe our cooperative response to these attacks and what they did to our community. i would like to point to the four people who were killed in this attack. they are indicative of who was there at that event that day. we have eight-year-old martin richard, who was there with his mother and sister. by father had just run completing the marathon. we have a boston university graduate student. she was finishing her studies and was there with friends right next to martin when that bomb went off. we have a restaurant manager, krystle campbell.

she was at the finish line when the first motion occurred and lost her life there. a few days later, we had sean collier. these brothers assassinated him. a young man that had committed his life to law enforcement and was going to go into the police department. these individuals turn the city upside down. the impact on boston will last for years. the boston marathon will come back stronger next year. it will never happen again without the memory of this tragic event. out of that tragedy, that terrible experience, comes strength on the part of the community. it was alluded to earlier, but

the medical people who staffed the tent at the end of the finish line, a were there to treat people with blisters and exhaustion. instead, they ended up being thrown into a battlefield scenario with injuries that were her rent is. if it wasn't for the actions of my police officers, firefighters, ems people who were at the scene, and those medical people in the tents, the death toll would be much higher. that response is indicative of what happened in the city of boston. it underlies this whole conversation of boston strong. it involved the baa. it involves spectators and businesses.

the amount of charitable giving that occurred there was spectacular. the city and resident of boston co-op or a with us.-- cooperated with us. that was the right decision to make based on the information we had. the residents full cooperated, which was astounding. boston is a stronger city because of this. i hope the pity you -- people who commit these acts understand that there is a futility in their efforts. the city is back on its feet. we will never forget the people you see to my left. i will tell you that they had no effect on the city of boston, except to make us a stronger community.

one of the things that has been much discussed here is the information sharing that occurred before and after this incident. i can't tell you how much i appreciate the cooperation of the fbi, atf, massachusetts a police, and all of the help that they gave us when this happened. [no audio] [no audio] in the seconds after i was notified, the first phone call i made was to rid the laurier, -- him and the state police were my go to people because we needed swat assets in the downtown, expecting a further incident. they responded immediately and gave us all the equipment available in massachusetts. they were there within 30 minutes. the first victims were evacuated within 22 minutes.

we had every swat team in the commonwealth. we were on-site -- where we had our first meeting of the command post. the information sharing that we did before hand to prepare for the marathon was good. we certainly need to look at everything we did. the senator's comments are well taken. everything that we did has to be reviewed so that would make sure this does not happen again. until the facts on the table, it is hard to say what we could've done differently. i am satisfied with the preparation that we put in place. after 9/11, i met with the director of the fbi after the incident. he committed to including us. he has been good to his word. we are real members of that organization. i have three detectives and a

sergeant that are there everyday day and working closely with the bureau. we certainly need to enlist the community better. the points about identifying radical extremism and ferreting that out, the first thing that we need to do is go to our community and explain to them that they have a responsibility to their community and their nation, into what is right to report the kind of activity that these brothers were involved in. i think that is the first line of defense. there is going to be conversation about cameras and technical him -- and technical means. there is no computer that is going to spit out a terrorist name. it is the community involved in the conversation and being appropriately open to medicating -- communicating

with law enforcement when something awry is identified. that needs to happen. that should be our first step. we have to look at cameras, sure we do. do we have to look at more bomb dogs? utilizing homeland security and the federal government? we do have to do that. it is important. the training you alluded to is important. people are alive today because of the terrorism training that homeland security provided to us. further investment has to be made. moving forward, the help of the federal government was critical to our response here. we need to look at how it happened and why it happened. the truth of the matter is, --body messes with boston.

1.00. bats we need to comes -- we need to recognize that intelligent analysis and joint terrorism task force are part of our future. boston is an international city. we derive an enormous benefit from the people who come to boston for school and for hospital care, and just to be a part of our community. the world is a dangerous place. we need to recognize that and be prepared for it. thank you. >> on behalf of the committee, we thank you for your efforts. your department, our hearts go out to the victims and their families. both of those killed and the 260 that were wounded. many of whom your department saved on that day. let me just say thank you for that. the chair recognizes under- secretary schwartz for a statement.

>> thank you. on behalf of governor patrick, i thank you for this opportunity to share thoughts and insights as you take your first look at the tragic events related to the boston marathon bombings. the week of april 15 demonstrated the value of our investments in money, and our local, state, and federal security enterprise. within seconds of the bomb blasts, an array of personnel resources and capello -- capabilities, many funded with homeland security grant dollars, or bought two bear and triaged to care for the wounded, communicate with the public, provide situational awareness or decision-makers, ensure the safety and security of the public and critical infrastructure, set up a joint command center, and identify and apprehend the suspect it terrorists.

the speed with which boston responded supported by the police is a testament to the homeland security spending and investments and preparedness, training, and exercises, coordinated response systems, and outstanding leadership. i speak with firsthand knowledge of the heroic work done by our safety team on april 15, and in the following days. i arrived on boylston street only minutes after the blasts where i joined city and state command level public safety officials, including commissioner ed davis of the boston police department and colonel timothy alben of the massachusetts state police. and i was still with this team five days later when the last of the suspected terrorists was

captured in watertown. i commend governor patrick and members of his administration , commissioner davis, and the many men and women he commands, the first responders, and the many other local, state, and federal agencies that responded for their extraordinary performance. as you all know, april 15 mark the 117th running of the boston marathon. one of the most prestigious marathons in the world. the marathon is a big deal. public safety for the mass -- massacre -- marathon is a big deal. the boston marathon is one of our largest annual events. we have had substantial planning and operational resources to protect as best we can the

runners and spectators, and the towns that host the race. on april 15, the playbook safety committee was prepared. -- the public safety community was prepared. on race day, an 80 person multiagency coordination center was operational. representatives from boston police, ems, and public safety fromnnel the other seven cities along the 26 mile course were present. -- along the 26 mile course, local, regional, and state technical teams, hazardous materials response teams, eod

teams, the national guard civil support team, mobile command post, and state police helicopters were deployed as part of an all hazards operational plan. in short,when 27,000 runners started the race in hopkinton, we were prepared from the starting line in hopkinton to the finish line in boston. as we well know, two powerful bombs were intentionally detonated 12 seconds a point -- a part within a short distance of the finish line. the results were catastrophic. three people killed and over 250 injured, dozens of them seriously. the response by the public -- by bystanders, witnesses, and

volunteers in those moments was nothing short of remarkable. the public safety response was equally incredible. the response that eyewitness speaks volumes about the investments that we have made in the commonwealth to enhance our homeland security. --om a high-level view, seven several things stand out. there is a clear correlation between the effectiveness of our spot operations in the aftermath of the bombings and our homeland security investments. the response of the bombings relied heavily on specialized capabilities that have been built and sustained through our homeland security program. the response of the bombings was augmented through three existing agreements that have been built on regional response strategies and plans.

interoperability was a success story. over the years, millions of dollars have been invested under local, regional and state interoperability plans, and our investments in mutual aid channels, tactical channel plans, radio towers, new radios, and specialized training allowed first responders, as well as command level personnel, to effectively communicate by radio between agencies, between disciplines, and between jurisdictions. -- to activate our specialized response teams, to stay familiar with the technology-based systems we rely on during emergencies, and to strengthen personal and professional relationships amongst people, agencies, disciplines, and jurisdictions that otherwise may not have opportunities to work together.

we benefited from our investment in regional exercise programs that allow for -- first responders with honed skills and gave the military from other areas and may be called in to support under mutual aid agreements. the cooperation and collaboration across agencies, disciplines, and jurisdictions was immediate and extraordinary. there was unity of focus and purpose at the command level and through the ranks all the way down to the first responders on april 15, and the thousand plus police officers that participated in the state's largest manhunt on april 18 and 19. the relation between public safety leaders and public officials at all times was open, positive, and constructive. governor patrick and mayor mean you know -- mayor menino or regularly communicated with and briefed.

their decisions were informed by and reflect the public safety concerns, needs, and object to-- objectives. this fostered constructive decision-making and opportunities for bold, out of the box decisions. the support from the federal government was immediate and effective. i need to personally thank fema, the department of homeland security, executive office and human services, all of whom had been on the ground and with us and supported us throughout this event. finally, local and state emergency agencies effectively communicated with the public or social media, reversed 911 systems, smart phone apps, and for the first time massachusetts, and emergency notification with the new

wireless alert system. the response by the public to the bombings and ensuing hunt for the suspected terrorists was nothing short of incredible. on april 15, people do not panic or act out of a sense of anger or frustration. these tragic and shocking events brought out the best in our communities. they supported our first responders and heeded requests and directions from governor patrick and public safety leaders, including the unprecedented request that residents of boston, watertown, and four others running cities remain indoors. the community has responded to these tragic events with compassion, with strength, and with support for the survivors of the bombings. the families of the victims, and the impacted communities. boston and watertown, all of our impacted communities have shown us what it means to be resilient. in the days ahead, we will conduct a comprehensive local, regional, and state review of the bombings, including

mitigation strategies and are responsive the recovery efforts. -- response and recovery efforts. we will identify -- an event of this magnitude requires that we worked,what what might not have worked, and if there are various improvements. finally, it is important to and by stating that governor patrick and i have tremendous pride in our of public safety professionals come who demonstrated so well its commitment to public safety, even under the most difficult of circumstances. these were trying times, and we were able to look back upon them with admiration for the collaboration and that truly made a difference.

thank you. >> please express to the mayor and governor our appreciation and thanks. the chair now recognizes professor southers for a statement. >>members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. it is extremely unfortunate and saddening that our gathering and important conversations were precipitated by the tragic events in boston, but this hearing, and those to follow, offer valuable opportunities to discuss the methods and strategies that can best address and disrupt the ever-present threat of terrorism and violent extremism. my deepest condolences, thoughts and prayers go to the victims of this cowardly act. the boston marathon bombing was conducted by terrorists who grew up within miles of where they committed their tragedy. they were locals, educated, living and working in the area. because of this, they knew the target environment and did not require training to familiarize themselves with the area and its protective measures. put simply, tamerlan and dzhokhar tsarnaev were homegrown violent extremists, and because of them, boston joined a fraternity of cities around the world that have endured

terrorist attacks plotted and conducted by their own residents. much like the madrid train bombings in march 2004, as well as the july 2005 bombings in london, the terrorists' familiarity with the target area afforded them critical situational awareness that facilitated their ability to plan and execute local attacks, as well as the capacity to -- discuss whyial to and how these attacks happened. in the context of our country, homegrown extremism describes a terrorist or plots targeting the night states -- united states by residents who have embraced their expressed their ideology within this country.

the concept of radicalization is widely referenced but remains poorly defined. the term is not limited to any one racial, issue, group. it is a process. radicalization is a process. the final element, engagement, is one part of the indoctrination continuum which has potential to yield violent activity. an examination of radicalization brought questions regarding how a person becomes engaged, stays engaged, or may disengage from a group or extremes ideology. -- extremist ideology. the requires a commendation of three things. an enabling environment. of the three, it is the

environment that is most susceptible to positive influences that supported can reduce the extremism. as officials analyze the boston marathon attacks, we should resist the urge to fix something absence of specific evidence until all the facts are in. security is comprised of policies, processes, and technology. as it relates to environments like sporting events, it should be on emphasis of policies that are risk-based, focusing on threats that present the most danger, and are most likely to occur. we had the applied research ability to -- citizen awareness, intelligence, and interdisciplinary management

round the country, edition two other new cutting edge technology being tested in the united states, in brazil and in cooperation with the 2014 world cup, will continue to hold significance. at the same time, recognizing that the global goal is to contain terrorism. we should seek to prioritize opportunities to engage communities to take part in disrupting the radicalization process that can also mentally -- ultimately lead to violent action. the challenge in this case is the role of online media in fostering extremism. the internet in some ways is the virtual community, and future attacks against the united states will likely involve adversaries who have traversed the process at least in part

online. securing a democratic society is a formidable challenge and will never be completely free of the protecting theat. country is an ongoing efforts must remain versatile in the face of adaptable adversaries. every step towards a security is met with a would-be terrorist exploitation of a vulnerability. there is no finish line and that there's no finish line in in home security. >> thank you professor. the chair now recognizes himself for question. i like to start with you. commissioner davis, i would like to start with you. post-bombing, the actions of the police department and all of law-enforcement, federal, state, and local, it was unparalleled. i commend that. i would like to ask you a few

questions about before the bombing. were you aware of the russian intelligence warning regarding tamerlan and the fact that he might travel overseas to meet with extremists? >> we have three detectives and a sergeant. we have access to the databases but we were not informed of that particular development. >> it is fair to say that your police officers did not know this information? >> that is correct. >> did you want to know? >> in hindsight, certainly. >> were you aware that the fbi opened an investigation into tamerlan? >> we did not know.

>> would you like to have known? >> yes. >> were you aware that he traveled to the chechnya region? >> no. >> would you like to have known? >> yes. >> were you told that he posted radical jihadist stuff online? >> we were not aware of the -- weers, but we knew of were not aware of tamerlan's activities. >> the joint chair and task force that was alerted of the overseas trips, how were you aware of that information below the bombing? >> they received no word on that individual.

>> were you aware of this information? >> yes. information started to comment immediately on the identification of the older brother on the morning of the watertown arrest. the shootout occurred late in the evening on thursday and friday. friday in the early morning hours, we started to get information about the identity of the individuals. >> if you had this information before the bombing, would your force and you have done anything differently? >> that is very hard to say. we would certainly work at the--

look at the information and talk to the individual. the fbi did that and closed the case out. i can't say i would have come to a different conclusion based on the information. >> of the russian intelligence warning that he might travel overseas and that he did and came back to the united states, would that not have caused you to give this individual a second look? >> absolutely. >> the department of homeland security fund and fusion center, i asked the commissioner -- >> the state police has seven troopers assigned on a full-time basis to the jttf. my understanding is that at no time prior to the bombings, did

any member of the massachusetts state police or the center have any information or knowledge about the tsarnaev brothers. >> the whole point is a shared information. i used to work with the joint terrorism task force. it is not shared with the state and locals, it defies why we created the department in the first place. we went through a litany of cases, the --ort hood shooting, but the looking at why the dots were not connected. we've putater,

billions of dollars into this. why are we still having problems connecting the dots? >> the line of questioning you have just carried out with commissioner davis had their answers are very important. this might be one of the most significant and painful take away lessons from the boston marathon terrorist attacks. particularly when you are dealing with homegrown radicals, the community around that is probably going to be your first line of defense. state and local law enforcement will always have a better knowledge of the neighborhood and the institutions that might be involved. neither the fbi or the customs agent notified of the local members of the joint terrorism task force. that is a serious and

aggravating omission. as the commissioner said, nobody bat 1.00. i am currently one of their biggest fans and admirers. here is a case, and they have to look back at it. why didn't they involve the local law enforcers that could have stayed on this case and picked up signals from the students that interacted with them, from the people that threw him out because he was such an extremist. or seen the videos that he posted that could have prevented all this from happening. how do you explain it? people are not perfect. information is being shared.

they did not involve, before the event, the state authorities that could have talked prevent the attack on the marathon. >> in closing, i completely agree with you. so many of these cases, there are very difficult to stop. i applaud the department of homeland security, state, and locals. i am concerned and troubled by the fact that may be in this case, there was not shared -- it was not shared with the state and locals. they are the eyes and ears.

going on his youtube website, they may have seen that this person had radicalized. >> for the purpose of witnesses at today's hearing. one of the responses we have as a committee is to look at what actually happens. if, in fact, the money that we have provided to your department were not available, and the

training that went with the money as well as the equipment, how would you have been able to respond to that situation? >> it would have been much less comprehensive than it was. we received funding to foot the trucks and equipment for our offices. he had just done something on a bunch of parcels left by people running away at the instrument. -- away from the incident. he was clearing hundreds of potential bombs, dangerous work that we could not have done without help from the federal

government. it has given us the opportunity to test these systems. we have discovered gas in radio -- gaps in radio communication that were closed because of the training. those gaps caused us to be responding -- we were not aware we have the problem until we did the scenario trading. the response would have been much less. >> it would have been an integral part of your department's ability to respond like it has been. >> that funding has set up response and the operation that has been put together for the funding.

also with the threat of homicide, that money is critical to our operation of the police department. >> you are a former fbi agent. the immigrant communities being engaged in this total process for identifying potential terrorists in our community. can you share with me ha your experience on the community engagement aspect of what we are talking about? >> with all due respect to intelligence that comes in, the most valuable information we will obtain is from community members and family members, they could have shared some

information that the joint forceism task could have worked on. in fact, activities that were going on. adam, with al qaeda and was thrown out of the mosque in orange county, california but not before the fbi was aware of what was going on down there. a magazine has been referred to -- inspire magazine has been referred to a number of times. he was an american and editor in chief of esquire magazine, engaged by members of the mosque. it would have been very valuable. another has left the country but was engaged by his family about the fact that he was taking got

-- taking on a form of islam that was not appropriate and is now engaged in an al qaeda affiliate in somalia. it is important that we don't engage in any activities that would compromise that relationship and compromise authorites from knowing what was going on. >> thank you. >> the set refers to it as the afterlife.-- one of my colleages t thee senate calls is th afterlife. [laughter] i hope you and the others will stay here.

>> getting resources and communities and states where they can respond as the commission has said. i heard you expressed concern --at the government oppose the proposal to eliminate grants for states and localities.that's not what we should be doing. >> great to be with you again. we are in a war and it is against the ideology that is not receding. it is spreading and it is taking a very difficult turn. the only three attacks against america, the terrorist attacks that have succeeded sinces 9/11 are

homegrown terrorists. you can't fight this war with our resources. we have created and funded a critically important version of this battle. particularly with homegrown terrorists, they are in the best position to create the relationships within the communities that will allow them and have allowed them in numerous cases to stop terrorist attacks before they occur. they are simply not going to do it without funding. every level of government is pinched. there are police departments that spend the lot of money funding counter-terrorism programs and a lot of those programs are out reach to the -- to the community.

that is why a they have been so effective. we have to rely more in this new phase of war with terrorism, and they can't do it without financial help from the federal government. >> i yield back. >> mr. king. >> let me thank you for scheduling this, it is vital and i thank you for it. commissioner davis, thank you for your leadership. let me ask you, from the time of the attack on monday afternoon --til the issue out on friday morning,on friday did the fbi bring to your attention the fact that the older brother had been under investigation? >> we did not start to look at that until after the shoot out. >> 3 and 1/2 days that they did not make you aware of it? >> i should stress there was an ongoing investigation and a lot of information coming from

different sources. we did not look at the brothers until after the shoot out. >> after the photos were posted, did anyone from the local area come forward to identify the brothers? >> i am not certain of that. i don't know of anyone that did, but i know there was conversation with a group. i am not quite sure what their role was in the conversation. >> the photos were all over television, somebody should have did any student. come forward to identify the younger brother? >> they did not. >> senator lieberman, it is wonderful to see you today.

the conference committee, the joint hearing and the radicalization, let me thank you for that. you mentioned any number of times violent islamist extremism and i have not heard one administration official use the term islamist. how do we fight the enemy if we don't identify the enemy? >> there are other sources of terrorism that violent islamist extremism. we know it from the oklahoma city bombing and the unabomber. violent islamist extremism led to the attacks on 9/11. osama bin laden declared that to

be the purpose. they wanted to bring out america -- down america and our civilization. the old chinese wisdom, the first thing you have to know is who your enemy is. call it by its name. i understand the sensitivity here, but in some sense, it is not fair to the overwhelming majority to leave it unspoken as somehow they are part of this. it is a very small minority in the community.the community in ourica, as we all know from friends and neighbors, are

law-abiding and patriotic. we are looking for the right words to distinguish this. the overwhelming number of muslims, maybe we have not found the right words. in this case, i gather is very-- what i gather from what happened verye mosque in boston was instructive. when tamerlan tsarnaev came back from his trip overseas, he was clearly radicalized. people asked himm to leave. it is representative of the mainstream muslim communities. >> we talked about the lack of information sharing and i think it is absolutely indefensible that there was a planned attack against times square and never notified of the nypd.

the fbi refused to give the information. we went public and they criticized us as if we were somehow compromising the investigation. they can't have it both ways and the failure to share intimation is absolutely indefensible. they owe everyone an explanation as to why they would withhold information. i just can't explain it or understand it. >> that is certainly something to be explained. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i find this to be an overwhelming experience.

i think it is important to call the names, we should always take a moment to recognize them. collier,indsay, sean and krystall. we should take a moment to recognize them. i want to proceed with enormous thanks, commissioner davis, for the leadership and heroics of everybody in boston. many of us have worked with officers. we thank you and we think the people of boston and your great state, the commonwealth of massachusetts. i want to pursue, senator lieberman, we are limited in this time frame, but the russian contact.

it baffles all of us, in spite of diplomacy, why if nothing --se, it was not a trigger and center,oint terrorism to share that information with local law enforcement. what do you think happened? >> i agree with you. hindsight is always clearer. this was an unusual circumstance to notify us. it includes the mother of tsarnaevy.-- the brother initially. we understand that we are operating in the context of mistrust and there is cooperation in some areas. it seems to me that the fact that this a original

notification, you investigate what went wrong. at what point could somebody have acted to stop this? it really should have raised this case to a very high profile internally because of where it came from. it could be that the most consequential failure was the failure of russian intelligence to explain why they were more interested in tamerlan tsarnaev. i hope you will go back and speak to the fbi had and take another look at those guidelines to see if in any way they constrain the fbi from acting more aggressively. >> i ask unanimous consent to put a number of questions in the record.

and to put a number -- an article from "the washington post" dated today in the record. let me say that this approach has to continue. in the course of information coming to you, did the homeland's security department provide you with information about the visa or any of the individuals that were arrested earlier? there was concern about them dealing with the senior brother and the others? >> we had a homeland security analyst. >> you feel confident you could have acted on that information or have a structure in your operation that would have looked a that?>> yes, we had

structure. >> is there any mass labeling of the muslim community in boston? >> that is always a concern of ours. we are concerned about it. >> what about the number of muslims that, in essence, pay their taxes, and call this country of country that they love? how do we work with this community? >> the most important thing we can do is build a bridge instead of a wall. we want to engage in community and what that feels comfortable and confident sharing information as we have seen time and time again. a number of thwarted plots have come because we had engaged

community. >> i think that you made a very good point. this tragedy, for those of us that started on the homeland security committee, this is not a place to raise partisan divide between congress and the administration. this is a place to stand against this ever happening again. >> that is most important. >> i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the vice chair of the committee, ms. miller. >> we have all said thank you

and we can say thank you enough. our eternal gratitude and admiration for what all of you have done on that terrible day. one of the county's i represent has an annual breakfast, we had 700 people. it was almost the entire topic of conversation in michigan and how well you reacted. anybody watching tv, watching the people on the sidelines, people applauding the first responders. it is something none of us will never forget. one of the things that senator lieberman mentioned, you

mentioned the christmas day bomber. we are facing a new type of enemy, something our country has not faced in the past that sees the battlefield asymmetrically. the battlefield that day was seat 19a of that flight. the battlefield then was the end of the boston marathon. there is a lot of talk of the information sharing and i am very appreciative of questions and comments about that. my question, as we go forward, how can we better resource in utilize existing resources for first responders? not only at 9/11, those first responders that first responded. we had the national guard that was a force multiplier.

i would economic times, ask for your comments on that, how would the national guard ild into what you are doing? ask that because i'm wondering if there is a way, if we are resource in the national guard, whose role has changed and expanded since 9/11 -- we all have national guard units in every state -- about doing a joint training exercise with our first responders, all kinds of various things that they may be we have a bige national guard base in detroit. they are really everywhere. perhaps this is a way we could have them share -- even though they are under dod -- i think ,here is a lot of application things we are already resourcing through the department of defense that may have, we could utilize better through training exercises with the first responders.

what do you think about that, commissioner? the do not know at national standard is. in the city of boston and throughout massachusetts, the national guard has been at the table for all of our training exercises acted just after 9/11. one of the roles they played bombiately after was detection and having units that could come in and monitor to make sure that there were no chemicals or other things we had to be concerned about in the environment. the day of the marathon, they were an integral part of our preparation. they had already been deployed prior to the bombing to assist us in our traffic control and security operations. the receptor hundred national guardsmen -- there were several hundred national guard's people at the season -- scene. one of the first to arrive was tremendously helpful. by the end of the day, we had over 1500 troops available to us them assisting our officers,

and securing the most complex crime scene we had ever processed in the city of boston. those troops stayed on the ground for a seven-day period until the scene was shut down. more than just premature --urity, they arrived perimeter security, they arrived at the scene of the pursued and brought equipment. at one point, we needed three of our swat teams to deploy out to dartmouth, massachusetts, and they brought in helicopters to make that happen. blackhawks came in and took the teams out. state police have helicopters, but they were nowhere near as large as what we needed. general rice laid a critical and in not only preparation prevention, but also in response after the attack. >> i appreciate that. my time is up, but i am so

delighted to hear all of that. i think that is an area where the congress can think about melding all the various things that are happening with the national guard with the first responders. in my own area, on our national guard base, we have an air and marine wing from the department of homeland security within operational integration center through which all the information is fed and used principally for border security. we've used the national guard along the border. i think that is something congress needs to think about war. i'm very appreciative of your answer. i yield back my time. thehe chair now recognizes gentleman from massachusetts. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i was just going to delve quickly into while everything was going on, after the islosion, the big picture the extraordinary coordination. all that training, all the effort, and hero is him --

heroism that was involved in that. i think we have to look carefully at some of the information sharing even during that time. you mentioned, commissioner, that you first learned of the individuals, the terrorist, friday morning. of senseless killing officer collier. could you share with us who think that in the first to the terrorist attack, how that information was conveyed to you, how soon you are able to put these identities and connect to the atrocity as well? >> i can speak about the pursued certainly of these individuals -- pursuit certainly of these individuals. i do not want to get too far into who knew what when because that is part of the criminal

investigation. as do my best to answer your question. -- let me do my best to answer your question. officerved a call of collier's murder within 30 minutes. i received a call from the fbi command post. the information we have received was that it was most likely associated with an armed robbery that occurred prior. they were not establishing a link to our investigation at that point in time. we were highly suspicious of it. everybody was concerned about it. ,fter a couple of phone calls --sent officers to assist my chief of department went to the scene and had a conversation with the charge of colonel in investigations for the state police -- the first indications

that it was probably not related. ,fter the carjacking occurred it was clear that there was something going on. we deployed more officers into the area. certainly as soon as the watertown officer engaged the suspect and there were reports of firepower and bombs being involved, there was no doubt in my mind. that is the way things progressed. >> were you informed friday morning? who convey that to you? [video clip] -- >> the fbi. teams were sent to process the body. they were quick to identify who the individual was that was killed in the shootout. that i think is worth are suing, that was mentioned here, is messages received from russia. i am curious about people's thoughts -- i'm not sure there

is anything we have not when the fbi tried to get more information, they were interested in the person, and they try to inform the fbi -- when the fbi tried to get further information, they do not .et any even though they asked i know there is a history of antrust, but there was such opportunity for mutual benefit in terms of both countries security in these areas, especially in the caucasus , but it is clear that the insurgents in the caucasus region are not focusing only on russia, but western europe and the u.s. now. communication is going to be so important. --her professor southerners -- how can we pursue better communication when it is so much in our benefit to do that?

[[[[[çççççççççç

..

>> product quality is a real issue for our commanders. the sensor products and the intelligence arena nahs are not as good on the global hawk as they are on the u2 and our mansion eshessters and commanders will tell you that. we've talked about this in the past and they understand the concern. the commanders would prefer a u2 product in many issues than the global hawk. the range is longer on the u2 as well. you're using it in the areas that you can't cross the border. pilot being in the airplane has nothing to do with it. i couldn't care less. we want the best equipment to do the mission, man or manned --

or unmanned. we requested relief from buying the global hawks because we think they are an excess. we don't think we need them to do the job. if we're unable to get the relief we need to obligate the the funds. we would love to have both. we just don't have the resources to do both. >> well, ok. i hear your response and i don't want to take any issue with the sincerity and the objectivity of your response. but we have data that shows this global hawk has a larger range. it operates 365 days a year, 24

hours a day, 1,200 mile range to only 400 for the u2 and the operational costs are 19% lower than the u2. the global hawk costs are declining while the u2 costs are increasing. we'll repeat that. i'm not going to get repetitive in the hearing here. i do think it is an issue that needs to continued to be addressed. is need to move forward and it consistent. one other area, this -- aois system with the f-35, i'm told we need to pay for seven

contractors for the squadron and that is not affordable. can you share with us why you feel that is absolutely necessary to have the seven contractors with each f-35 squadron and this information system? >> sir, i don't have the specific data on contracter for each location but i will be happy to get that for you for the record. it is an important part of the program. it is the support system, if you will for this aircraft. it is going to be used across the services and with international partners as well. it is a big program and has lots of management attention and we're working on trying to get the cost down on the program. by itself, it would be an a-cat

one program. it is significant. we're working to get the cost down and to work out smart logistics and support strategies with our d.o.d. partners. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. i'm sorry i was late and you may have covered some of what i'm going to ask you about. if you have, mr. chairman, just tell me that. of course it concerns sexual assault and the report that says 26,000 people in the armed services were sexually assaulted in one year. the head of your department that concerns that was then arrested. what are you going to do? what your doing isn't working. no doubt about it. it isn't working. what are you going to do?

what is your plan? i don't want another study or another report. are you going to let congress change your rules, which we're certainly willing to do? >> this is a concern to all of us. all of the services, including the air force has been focused on improving both the climate and the environment in which our airmen live and work. >> may i interrupt you? it's not working. >> we understand. >> you are going to do more of the same? >> we need to find the game changers in this work. we're working -- changers in this work. we're training investigator, we're training lawyers to be more effective to uncover this problem, we're working with victims so they will come forward and get support through a process, a legal process, which can be lengthy and frustrating and even traumatic to the victims.

we have established a victim's council program to help support the victims. >> that is after they have been assaulted. >> it is. we're working every part of this. we just have not yet found the game changer. >> most assaults are they on women? >> ma'am? >> are most assaults having to do with women? >> i think most of the victims are women but not all. >> maybe you want to put a woman in charge of it. >> right now, the officer responsible for the sexual assault prevention is not the colonel. he is charge of a four-person branch. a female is the officer who i consider the lead in the air force. >> i'm just saying -- the congress will take actions. it may or may not work but we're so fed up with this.

while we talk a protecting our military and we're not protecting those women who are serving the military. stopping it from happening. that's all i have to say. what you're doing is doing more of the same. we'll get the same results. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you for being here today. i want to ask you a little bit about the space launch capabilities. when you represent a state like florida, mr. young and i do. you learn the impact of space has on everyday life and you learn about space having an impact on every aspect of our national security. the space launch capabilities are provided by one particular alliance. they do that in an excellent way and a near her pect record but it is very expensive as you

know. one of the reasons it is expensive is because you have demanded a zero risk situation, which is, i think is appropriate. if you do a cost analysis if you want zero risk then exponentially the cost will increase. i think it is important for the sub committee to understand about that, about why we have that zero risk demand and, therefore, the expensive part. it is my understanding that you intent to open up the launch capabilities to other certified interests. i think that is a good idea if they have the proven reliabilities. so maybe you can talk a little bit about your plan to do that and how you're going to make sure they are as reliable as who is doing it now. at the end, who are you going to decide if you have more than one that is capability how are you going to decide who has the launch capabilities?

>> this is a good news story for our space operators and the taxpayers. it is a product about three years of work. let me address the eelv's which you described as the primary source for space launch. this is a big deal because space launch is 40% of the cost of our space enterprize. we have high standards because we are putting hundred million dollar plus satellites into orbit. and this is the most dangerous part of the mission is access to and launch to space. on the eeld side, we have done extensive work. we have entered into deep discussions with ula, the manufacturer. and we have arrived at a block

by decision that allows us to buy 36 cores over five years. using a block buy approach, we are reducing the cost of eelv. at the same time, working with the national reconnaissance office and nasa, we put together a program for satisfying new entrants, new companies that want to get certified for national security space launch. and working with nasa we published the new criteria. i think it was in november, 2011, which outlines what companies need to do to demonstrate proficiency and reliability in space launch. and to support that work, we have isolated two payloads, maybe more, but i can correct that for the record, we have

identified payloads that would be available to those new entrants to help them demonstrate their proficiency and reliability for excess to space. when they get certified and we think the first company or companies will likely get certified in f.y. 15 timeframe, we have space launch slots for which both ula and the new entrants will compete. so we believe there is a competitive environment that starts at about f.y. 15 that will drive down costs further. i think we have a good strategy, both on the eelv side and the new entrance side. we have got good results already. we anticipate better results going forward. >> this is a critical capability for the future. so if there are things that we can help, we would like to be aware of that. thank you very much.

>> mr. talbert? >> thank you. going back to north dakota for a moment, just for the record. what proportion of the top 10% of the air force academy graduates are assigned to that specialty? do you know? >> i don't know -- just to clarify the question, the top 10% of air force academy graduates are assigned there? i did not know the answer. >> could we get that for the record? >> yes, sir. >> what is the military occupational selection process for officers for that purpose? >> we have changed the process recently. we used to combine them with the space career field. the intent was to try to provide a more diverse set of options for people who come into either career field. they are related. and the missions are interconnected.

what we found recently is that we felt we needed more expertise at the mid and senior levels. we are starting to people -- starting people too late. and so we split the two career fields, so now we have a missile force that is going back to the past, where they come in as a missile officer. they will grow with the missile career field. >> what percentage throughout the air force are officers working at specialty? do you have an idea? >> i do not know the exact percentage, sir, but there are 40,000 people working the nuclear business. >> do you know the number? >> i did not know. this is about 5% of total air force resources in the nuclear enterprise. >> i also want to talk about on unmanned

aircraft systems. i think it has been talked about, mr. moran mentioned it. the air force was slow in capturing that technology as the unmanned vehicles came aboard, and i know today that certainly there were trying to catch up. now we have this perforation of unmanned aircraft systems throughout the dod, that the air force is not necessarily control, whether it is the army or other agencies. getting to the reapers for a second, air force has requested funds to purchase 12 m9 reapers in f.y. 2014 and i am glad to see continued support for the program, but the efficient production rate is about 24 aircraft per year to maintain a low was cost per unit. i know there are budget considerations, but the per unit cost obviously on those aircraft go up considerably because of

the inefficiency of the system. we are talking about the training units which are critical to the air force. and these so-called ftu's are costly. due to personnel costs. we have existing facilities. and i understand the air force is looking at expanding those facilities throughout the united states. doesn't it make more sense to use facilities to already have, rather than expand these facilities to other locations? >> yes, sir. i know no plans to expand beyond the facilities in syracuse or the national guard base. >> we understand that if you are

looking at expanding that beyond, for instance, on the air guard, beyond the california, arizona, north dakota, texas and ohio, the existing are flying m- 1 aircraft. i understand that the m-9 will not be provided to those existing units. >> our intent is to replace be mq1 with mq9. but we do not intend to stand up new flying training units in those areas. they are controlling aircraft or around the world, but they will not be additional training. >> ok. thank you. >> ms. mccollum? >> thank you, mr. chair. secretary donley, many of us have been sitting in hearings all week on the other side of

the capital and in the policy committee, that military branches up to work to end military assault crisis. we have been told over the years that you are. that you saw a 32% increase. the marines had a 30% increase. air force had a 33% increase. the army showed only a 16% -- decrease. so maybe the army's figured it out, and maybe we should not be paying for all of these different programs. assault this assault. rape is rape. we are not tolerating it. so one of the things i have been speaking to folks and congresswoman granger, i wanted to catch you as working with some of our other colleagues that have been putting together a special committee. this is going to stop. and to the air force, you know

it your best is not good enough. when i was appointing young women to the military academy 12 years ago, i gave them my personal cell phone number. and said, you do not have to take this. you call me. i have got your back. do not have to call your mother. you do not have to report -- you call me. but all the women who in my congressional district in minnesota and around the country who enlisted, they did not have my cell phone number. they did that have anybody tell them you do not have to tolerate this. so we have the air force academy scandal. and then we had lackland. and now we have what happened this weekend. so you talk about changing the culture, and i am reading from "the new york times."

mr. hagel said he would review the decision by lieutenant general franklin the commander of the air force to do this -- dismiss the sexual assault conviction. you couldn't even change it at the top? a court martial would come down. that is pretty serious. and it got overturned. what did that say to women who actually did report and go all the way through as victims? and what did that say to that jury who had the tough job of weighing the evidence and coming down on one of their own? stroke of a pen, doesn't count. it doesn't matter. so i have a question for you. the way i understand things and i am not an attorney. the air force spokesman confirmed the air force can

bring its own case, regardless of what arlington county does. god bless them for taking up the charge. but the secretary of the air force must approve a dual prosecution and cannot do so until after the virginia case concludes. so that means, if virginia finds him guilty, my question to you is -- are you going to charge him? because the buck stops someplace. >> it does. in cases like this, we will wait for the local jurisdiction to reach its conclusion. and then we will figure out what the air force can and should proceed with separately. >> i did see that if he was found guilty. so let's take it away from him. let's not talk about this case in particular.

if civilian courts have the opportunity to pursue some of these, i am telling them, do not turn it over. it is going to be up to the secretaries to say, if a court of law, if a jury found this person guilty, we are going to do the dual track and hold them accountable. i have said this before -- everybody is victimized by this. the woman who has been assaulted or the man who has been the salt that are the primary victims. but everybody who wears a uniform, every veteran in this country is victimized by this. so mr. chair you graciously offered to do a hearing on this and i know we are wrapping up, and you have spent -- i do not want to say we have spent more time. we spent the time we needed. i have many more questions about this massive budget to talk about. but if we do not get this right, nothing we do with equipment

matters, because we are saying you're not even safe to be enlisted in the united states military. and i spoke with military leaders that are here on the war college exchange, and they were asking me about this. and they are looking to us for leadership. so, mr. chair, ms. granger appeared interested in working on this committee -- i have a draft ready to go. whether we do it jointly with the policy committee or with the briefing or something like this, enough time has been spent on this and the appropriations that go to this, programs that do not work. we have an oversight responsibility. and you have been very, very supportive of this issue and i look forward to the briefing or hearing in the upcoming months. thank you. >> thank you, gentlelady.

>> in the interests of time, i understand we might be voting in the next few minutes, i will assess get my comments with mr. moran and others about global hawk. general, there are additional questions that we have got that we have not gone answers from. i will also share my comments with mr. crenshaw about space launch. we have additional questions on that as well. i am going to ask a question on tanker, because it is something that is critically important especially since we just lost one and lost that crew on the kc 135. before i go there, as you are giving us the permission, i asked the army yesterday for our record of the sexual assaults since 1992. if we could see, to try to glean additional information about whether there is a tendency when

we are surging or drawing down, what some additional information, not just over the last decade we have been in afghanistan and iraq, but the last 20 years, to try to get additional information. so as we are trying to come up with some ideas and constructive suggestions, maybe we can get something from that. i would like to, though, associate this one comment about sexual assault. ms. granger, mccollum, many have spoken about this, but it does become personal because i am going to be nominating one of my daughters very best friends. she is going to be appointed to the air force academy. i am having dinner with her and her family on monday night. and i want to be able to look her parents in the eyes and i

want to be able to look her in the eyes and i want to let them know that the highest levels, the problems that we have been discussing are not going to be ignored. it is -- so a lot has been said, and we look forward to working with you on this to ensure that this problem ceases. let me mention briefly about the tanker, because this is an important program. certainly the secretary and general know. mr. secretary, the discrepancy between the contractors' estimates and the current

government estimates has grown to $500 million. even though the program is operating under a fixed-price development contract, and the contractor we understand will have to absorb the overrun, does this committee have any reason to be concerned about the growing discrepancy? and secondly, have you made any engineering changes to the aircraft or the subsystems at this time? >> to answer the second question, first, the answer is no. i am required to sign a report to congress on a regular basis on this subject, and it has been consistent over the last couple of years. no engineering changes have been made to the program to which you referred. it is true that the contractors, the estimated completion is above the ceiling that we have set, but it is a fixed price contract. so the taxpayer's exposure is limited at $4.90 billion. and anything above that is on

the contractor. we know of no schedule concerns at this point on the program. so far it seems to be on track. >> and we do not anticipate any additional issues as it relates to sequestration, having an impact on haven't these -- on having these planes. >> main thing for the air force is to make sure the programs is funded at the levels necessary to support the contract we agreed to, and the schedule we agreed to. if the air force has the support of congress, we will be able to do that. >> mr. chairman, i yield back. >> mr. kohl. >> thank you. gentlemen, thank you for your service. thank you for being here. i had not intended to say anything about the sexual assault issue because i knew it was going to be fully covered by others and probably more knowledgeably, but i do want to add one thing.

my dad was career non commissioned officer in the united states air force. my brother served honorably in the vietnam era in the air force. and my favorite first cousin just retired after 20 odd years as a lieutenant colonel and served in afghanistan and iraq. and i know what kind of guys those three people are. and they would not tolerate this, and they would look on this -- and they do look on this as a reflection on them, because they were very proud of their service and very proud to be associated with the air force. so when you hear what ms. granger and ms. mccollum have said, they are speaking for those gentleman, too. ms. granger said that congress will probably do something -- it may not be the right thing, but it will.

so please take this -- i know both of you do. i do not have any doubt about either one of you, but we cannot collectively, this committee, this congress cannot allows the sort of behavior across the services, certainly not unique to the air force. it has got to change. and i would suggest -- i was impressed by what he said about your missile crew and the commander and the actions he took. some people need to get kicked out or you need to do something. i think we have almost got too much judicial process here for the perpetrators and not nearly enough for the victims. and if there have to be some examples made, then they need to get made, because it is just not tolerable. to be in this situation. you can respond if you want, but

i know, again, i do not doubt your sincerity and where you are coming from on this. >> sir, i would like to briefly respond. the young men and women in our air force have been entrusted to the secretary and i. nobody, nobody cares more about them than we do. there is no magic that is going to solve this problem. it is going to take a lot of hard work, new ideas, partnership with the congress, with agencies and experts. we are trying to do as much of that in all those areas as we can. i would be happy to discuss the details of that with any member who would like to know more. but we understand the problem and agree with everything you have said. >> i appreciate that. i have a lot of confidence in you. my dad joined the old army air corps and lived to the integration of the services. he said it was the best thing he had ever seen happen in his service. and he was always very proud of the military for having led in that regard when the rest of the country was awful slow in

dealing with this. this is that kind of situation. it is probably not fair to you, but -- because it is not unique to the military services. we have this problem across the board. we are dealing with the violence against women act up here, and it happens a lot. but i guess because you guys and ladies are our brightest and our best, we expect you to figure out a way. i think it will have incredible support, but you do end up being held to a higher standard. you have always come through and i know you will again, but this one is a big, big deal for the country and long term for the service, because it is so counter to what the value structure of the men and women you lead -- 99 out of a hundred, who they are and what they stand for. anyway. let me move to something else, if i may, quickly. i want to ask some things about

the civilian work force in full disclosure -- i have a very large civilian work force in my district at tinker air force base. they are concerned about the furlough situation. i know you have to deal with sequester. i am concerned in what your thoughts -- we talked about this a little bit with the secretary who i admire tremendously. he talked about, we want to be fair to everybody. i understand that. but i do not think all civilian work is of comparable importance of quality as you wrestle with this. particularly my good friend from alabama talked about tankers. we maintained the kc135 from fleet. my dad spent several years working on them in the air force. as my brother did. and they are still coming through. those are 50-year-old airplanes.

and they are funded differently. that work force is funded out of the working capital fund. so i would just ask, as you wrestle with this problem, that was not of your making, please focus on making sure that those maintainers, that those aircraft get the kind of attention they need. i wish we did not have a 50- year-old tanker -- although we are proud that we can keep planes of that age going. it tells of the quality of the work force, uniformed and non- uniformed. they are remarkable people. what are you doing -- and again, if all things are not equal, you are going to have to make value judgments as to what you keep going to make sure we do not have accidents or loss capability. >> i'll offer that first of all that the decision on civilian

furloughs has not yet been made. this is that the secretary level. he is in the process of making that decision. we have had extensive discussion about the issues you have race. -- raised. but we know there is an impact on weapon systems sustainment from sequestration, and there is an impact already to what you referred, which involves the delay and creation of a backlog in repair for probably 60 aircraft and 35 engines, is roughly the current estimate. but this is complex work. so we know that there is an impact on inductions. there is the issue of the working capital fund and its fiscal health and how to keep it solvent through this period. then there is the additional issue of the civilian workforce management challenges on top of that. the issue of furloughs and how

that will be managed. so all those three things, weapons systems sustainment, working capital fund, and furloughs, are being addressed collectively and we are doing our best to minimize the impacts --d to maximize the betting is readiness that we can get out of our depo work force with the funds available. >> i know that you are, and i appreciate that those furloughs came down seven days. i'm not telling you anything and did not tell the secretary of defense, i would hope, again, it is admirable to want to be perfectly fair and treat every employed the same way, but i think where we can, particularly if there is an issue of safety and maintenance of assets here, that some discrimination might be appropriate.

so i know you will continue to work to minimize those furloughed days. i know this committee did not like sequestration any more than you did. most of this committee would hope we can arrive at some larger deal. and i suspect people on both sides of the aisle are the kind of people that tend to vote for things like that to make them happen. but, again, we have given you a tough task. please give it a lot of attention, because i do not want airplanes that to not fly. let alone airplanes that come down with crews and them. we want to give -- maintain those assets with the kind of work it takes to do it. thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> before i yield to mr. owens, i would say that the vote that is on presently is the camp amendment. then there will be followed by a vote -- 10 minutes of debate on the motion to recommit. the next vote will be on that motion to recommit. then the third vote will be

final passage, which will be a five minute vote. and then the possible a fourth vote, approval of the journal. mr. owens, i am happy to yield to you now, sir. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i wish ms. mccolum was here, as a former jag officer, the regulations provided that in the event of a conviction a lieutenant colonel, he would be subject to administrative discharge proceedings. it was unfortunate when that discussion was going on that that was not shared with her, because i think it may have given her some, for the basis for understanding the process you were going through relative to the potential for a dual prosecution versus allowing the prosecution to proceed in the civil arena followed by an

administrative action in the military. do those rules still exist? >> i believe they do. >> and depending upon the degree of that conviction, a misdemeanor or felony, then that would move -- that is a potential that you could move to eliminate that officer from the military? >> well, that is a decision that would be initially looked at by the wing commander who supervises him and has ucmj responsibilities. that is the 11th wing at bolling air force base. they are getting legal counsel, of course. we will let that process play out. >> thank you. now to the business at hand. i have taken a look at your budget request. it is fairly clear when you look at this that you are looking for relatively marginal increase, about 2%. however

sequestration continues into the next year, the next fiscal year. in effect, you will have a further reduction. and my question is -- have you established a prioritization of actions you will take to meet sequestration? so that you are starting with a list and crossing them off as the dollars are eliminated? >> sir, we are deeply enmeshed in the process and the department of defense right now. it is consuming a lot of time and attention. there is no set-- i would say that we understand the requirements of the budget control act and the potential that sequestration might continue. we still hope that the congress and the president might reach an

agreement to change the budget control act. >> so do i. >> to relieve us from the burdens of sequestration which are on the books now. but we are going through multiple budget alternatives internal to the department to assess the impacts going forward and to prioritize our work, absolutely. >> and are you looking broad --ush, are you looking up personnel, equipment, are you looking at o & m? >> we are looking at everything. the secretary, as you know, right after he came in established a strategic choices review. it is referred to in the department as the skimmer, which is a 75 day review top to bottom on strategic fiscal resources and issues on all of the matters that you asked about. so it is really a complete soup to nuts review of our defense

priorities and resourcing. and that will play out further into june, we will get the secretary's direction on how to proceed for planning purposes through 2014 and 2015. but i will say that you cannot take $1 trillion of the defense budget over 10 years without having a devastating impact on our military capability. so it is not a matter of just choices or strategic choices, which of course, we will make. as i tried to assure every committee i have addressed this year, we will make the best use and get the most out of the resources that you provide. your military will do that. but at $1 trillion over the next 10 years, every part of our military will be affected.

nothing will be protected. so it will affect the force structure, it will affect rate of modernization as i described for the air force. all of our military forces will be smaller. we will have less capacity. it is my hope that we would be a ready force, even if we are smaller, but that cannot be guaranteed at these levels of reductions. so i am just saying, $1 trillion is going to have a huge impact on our military. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you for your patience. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my thanks to the secretary. i wish you well when your tenure is over. general welsh, it is always good to see you. as the secretary said, it has been a long time ago he said this -- we covered a lot of material here. but i want to associate myself

with his remarks about regular order. and i think that is one of the true challenges facing this congress. i know there are a lot of things that are challenging our defense department and the services, but we have to get back to regular order and i could not agree more, and i appreciate you so much saying that in your opening comments. i also want to associate myself with remarks that have been provided regarding the critical issue of sexual assault and going on within our services. and i know has been a difficult issue. i think mr. kohl said it pretty well when he said he had absolute confidence in the leadership of the air force to deal with this issue. but it obviously is something that has spiraled out of

control. and general, i would just challenge to as the new chief of staff of the air force to call on your days as the commandant at the air force academy, where you had the future leadership of the air force, many of those men and women now moving through the ranks in our air forces, call on those days when you were dealing with leadership issues there, because this is a true leadership issue for our department of defense. but i have confidence that we'll get -- we'll find the answers and solutions to the challenge. mr. secretary? >> sir, i would just like to make sure the committee is aware

of how much work that the chief has put into this matter. it has been a growing concern to our military leadership. it was a subject that came up in the chief's confirmation hearing. it is one he has focused on absolutely since day one. one of his first acts was to bring in all of the wing commanders from across the air force for a focused day and have a discussion on this issue. every wing commander in the united states air force was there to hear and understand the importance of this issue to the chief and to our air force leadership. and the expectations from them as commanders, for not only good order and discipline, but a unit climate that promotes the dignity and respect of every airmen, the respect for the work that every airmen brings to their job. and so i think we have a chief that understands this and is working very hard. >> i look toward to the results. i have a couple of questions.

one is somewhat parochial in nature. as the general knows, one of the air bases -- the national guard air bases -- has been remissioned in my district. there was a line of questioning that came up in a senate hearing, and general i will give you an opportunity to for the record to help me reassure the people there that the remissioning into the remote split operational platform for fort smith, ark., it is still the plan. and that the appropriate steps are being taken to ensure that the proper budget and what have you are in place to ensure that it has, i guess what we call initial operating capacity. just a thought or two on that. >> thank you, congressman. the plans are still in place.

the plan is to start drawing down the a-10 unit this summer. that will continue at about two aircraft through next summer. in the spring or summer of 2014, we will move people who are interested from the unit to the new targeting squadron that will be at fort smith. and we will start to look for training opportunities. the intent is to have initial operational capability of operational -- of the mq9. we are working the budgetary issues to go with that. >> is it your initial opinion that these kinds of missions are the most enduring that we have >> the force right now? i do not know about most enduring, but clearly, this is at the leading edge of what our combat commanders expect.

that is what these units do. the targeting group can work both in that or arena and in the cyber arena, both of which are clearly growth areas for the future for the air force. >> my last question is about the total force task force and the testimony on march 1, that that task force was stood up. having been involved -- i'm sorry, mr. chairman -- having been involved in military planning throughout my military career, i know that anytime we look into future planning for these kinds of issues, that many times we introduce into the equations certain facts or assumptions that may be in play, initial guidance, for the people that will be coming out with these kinds of reports. what kind of facts and assumptions have we made as we start looking at the proper force mix over the next decade or so?

mr. secretary, this may be -- or the chief, either one. >> our total force task force has been working for the last several months in consultation with a couple of the great tags or around the country who are overseeing the activity and offering suggestions. the next step for the total force task force is to come together next week. i believe the first input is tomorrow. next week, we will sit down and they will get me there update on what they see as potential models for the force mix. should it be a percentage, by mission or by overall force structure? is it better to put emissions into the guard or the active component? we are going to look at that model first. we know the cost drivers. and we know the operational effectiveness. and we're going to start talking

to the options. the best part about this discussion so far has been its honesty. all of the myths are on the table. we have been able to come to agreement on what the components see as the problem versus what they do not agree to. the total force task force will also be our principal point of contact and information generating advice offering body for the senate's force structure task force that is standing upright know as well. so lots of activity going on. the intent is to streamline it so that in the 2015 budget, the air force has a proposal. >> mr. secretary? >> chief's on top of it. i would add is we ago forward, and potentially as the services potentially get smaller, depending on the budget outcomes, we are destined to work more closely together. and this is already recognized across our forces. we have made bed downs.

and for the kc46 tanker. there are associate units planned for all of these locations. tighter integration at critical locations around the country is going to be more and more important to ensuring that we have already forced and the most capable force that we can generate across the total force, not just active or not just guard, but working together as a total force. that is where we are focused -- give us the most efficient but most effective combination of forces and try to do that as efficiently as possible around key locations. >> thank you, gentlemen. thank you for your service. mr. chairman? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for your service to our country and the most trying

time for the nation and for the air force. i wanted to say something to you that i said to navy and army and that this in terms of the --rsonnel that are now and enlisting in our services, based on behavioral studies, we know that a much higher percentage of those who are prone to violence because they experienced a violent in their own lives with a volunteer military are investing in the services. in addition to the behavior work being done to address the sexual assault and other issues we deal with inside the military, during deployment and post-deployment, what i would encourage you to look at screening. because it expresses itself in many forms. as individuals attempt to carry forward with the tasks that the nation asks them that to do. that is only in the way of the suggestion. number two, i wanted to ask in assessing my remarks with the congresswomen and mr. bonner, what can we as members say to

our constituents, our immediate actions that you have taken it as air force? if there is any individual out there who attended the academy and left because of sexual assault. or believes that this has occurred today with in the ranks. is there a hot line we can tell them to go to? is there some person they should report this information to? what can we do. we are asked in our districts. what has their force done to create a special place where people can take these concerns? >> there is a special sexual assault response coordinator at every air force location. so individuals who think -- who want to report or need to report either a recent or past event can do so through that channel or through their inspector general. >> i hear what you're saying.

i know we ran into the problem with ptsd, or agent orange -- we created a special place. we created another platform with in the department of veterans affairs, within the dod. i would ask you to consider some place where if a congresswoman wanted to allow information to come forward to you, that there is a special place. if he could think about that, if you could get back to us, a 1-800 number people can call. it is at that level of public concern. i had a young woman i appointed to the air force academy who was beaten up and went through all of the processes that existed at that time, and it really changed the way i looked at the academies forever.

and i am surely not the only member that experience that. so i would like to see your personal involvement at some level as a secretary. because it is that serious. so think about that. if you could get back to me on that. my third question, third, it relates to energy independence. thank you, general, for mentioning it. i would be a very interested in more detail from air force as to how -- where your focus has been in terms of fuel consumption, base powering, r&d, so that we can exceed the standards that have been adapted. you have already exceeded them on an annual basis. but air force is the largest user of fuel in the military. and any additional detail you could provide so i could see your policy focus on how you are going to move toward air force

energy independence and helping the nation get there, i would appreciate more detail. now i want to move and associate myself with the remarks of congressmen -- and that is, i find what happened at myna in conceivable. there have been statements in the press regarding various individuals in charge, calling the situation a crisis. the grade level was d in in terms of oversight. general, you used the term, turmoil in the ranks. what can you do to assure us and assure the american people that this situation has been dealt with aggressively, and that our missile capability is being properly shepherded and confidence restored?

>> congresswoman, that phrase is not one that i would use. it may have been in the press. that is not a quote from me. to my recollection at all. >> perhaps it is colonel -- >> i think most of the comments in the press came from an email that colonel folds wrote. he is very passionate about his job. there is terminology i would have used differently. if he was here, he would tell you that he would use it differently as well. but the bottom line of this was, the only thing we can tell the american people, because this is the fact -- there was an indication of a problem highlighted by inspection that is there to do exactly that, and the leadership team took aggressive action to ensure the standard never slipped below the minimum required to get the job done.

>> is that what "d" is? >> a marginal as a passing grade. these inspections are extremely difficult. the standard is very high would be graded that low. that is why the wing commander reacted that way. there is nothing good about the fact this happened. the response was appropriate. i would be more upset if they had not responded. >> i do not know what the 17 people are thinking. i have talked to the commanders. their belief is that this is just a matter of getting, refocusing the work force on the standard expected every single day in their job. that is the way they characterize it to me. i can understand that. this is a difficult job. the congressman alluded to that. you have to be focused. there is no room for error and

there is no room for commanders accepting less than expected performance. that is why they took this action. >> what about the term used "rot." >> the term "rot" was used by the same individual in the e- mail. in view of his commanders is that he was trying to get the attention of the work force and a way that they would not avoid paying attention. he was very passionate about the fact that he wants his team to perform better. >> can you replace members of the team? >> all members of the team have been decertified. 60-y are going through a dayretraining program and they will re-earn the right to go back into the missionary or not. i am confident they will not go back and if they do not meet the required expectation. >> how long did you -- when the >> how long did you -- when the evaluation was done, did you take action immediately? >> within 24 hours of the

inspection being completed, we get a report as do the commander in chain above the wing. the commander told me immediately that far occurred that the wing was taking action after the grade that they were concerned about that kind of a score on the report. >> did that alert you to attention you should pay to any other sites? >> yes, ma'am. -- uld the gentlemen wham it would gentle woman yield? >> yes. >> the reporter was asked about something that had been open source and because there had been problems here one would assume there was a problem reported as the commander did at that base that something that would be another black eye on the same unit that perhaps with a potential for