the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 421 and the nays are 4, with zero answering present. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

is the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute, revise and stepped. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. tonchingtonching as hurricane season begins -- mr. tonko: as hurricane season begins this week, congress has to refocus on protecting our coastline communities and the people that live within them. in the wake of hurricanes like katrina, rita that took lives and destroyed property, extreme

weather preparedness should be an issue that republicans and democrats support more than ever. since 2011, extreme weather episodes have costed 188 billion. even worse, these storms have taken the lives of 1,107 americans. this trend of increased extreme weather which has grown since 2000 will only continue to get worse. just today we heard about the tornado at 2.6 miles wide and winds at 296 miles per hour. do we address the climate change problem now and make preventable disasters. as the co-chair of the coalition in the house of representatives, i suggest we act now. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, thank you. tonight, we want to talk about jobs in america. we want to talk about how we can rebuild the great american manufacturing sector and spend time about talking about the american economy and that is the

infrastructure upon which that economy can grow and prosper. so there are many pieces to this puzzle about rebuilding the economic strength of this nation and much of it comes down to what we call the make it in america agenda to rebuild the great manufacturing sector of this nation. that's where the middle class found its strength and where the middle class grew following world war ii. unfortunately in the last 15 years or so, we have seen a decline from 20 million americans in manufacturing down to perhaps 11 million. in recent months, we have seen a resurgence in part due to some changes in law that we have put in place here that end tax breaks that american corporations receive when they send jobs overseas. really, foolish tax breaks. we ended many of those. we have a few more to go. we want to give manufacturers, american corporations and others, who want to jo shore and

bring jobs back to america. the make it in america agenda is rebuilding that american manufacturing base. part of it is the infrastructure system. talking to one of my friends from the connecticut area just a few moments ago and he said, listen, i can't be with you tonight, but i want you to say, we had a terrible amtrak train wreck in connecticut a week ago and we think it may have been been due to bad track. that's the infrastructure, folks. we really need to build that train system here in america, the infrastructure for it. i'm going to put up one more sign before i call upon my friend from new york. ere it is. now, that's a beautiful train. that's an american-made loco motive. this is manufacturing.

that is made by a train built by seimens. they bid on a almost half a billion dollar project that was the stimulus for 70 locomotives for america that had to be made. the company said, half a billion, we can do that. they set up a factory in sacramento, california and that s the first american-made loco motive and that is a beauty, 7500 horsepower and going to be used here on the east coast and on the boston to washington, d.c. track. and hopefully, it will be rebuilt. joining me tonight in this discussion about infrastructure and jobs and make it in america, my friend from new york, paul tonko, doing the east-west show.

mr. tonko: thank you for leading us in this discussion about focusing on jobs, from a manufacturing sector, jobs from an investment that come about in an investment in research, r and d and come about innovation. we have talked about it many times on this floor that we come from districts that have that keen sense of vision about how to do it smarter, which can be that difference in the competitive edge that our businesses require in an international marketplace. what i like about the investment through this package, make it in america, is an across-the-board approach, incentives that provide everything from encouragement to the local industries to retrofit and rebuild their manufacturing processes to investments in the work force making certain the skills and trades being developed within our workers,

making certain that we have that human infrastructure up and ready to go so as to robustly competitive and talking about the investment and the idea economy, which speaks to the sophistication of our american society, the intellect, the intellectual capacity that is harnessed to produce jobs to an awesome measure that allows us to maintain a great bit of hope that we can robustly respond to the needs of today's economy and international economy and be a winning agent out there. and happens with this investment. mr. garamendi: you have come to a very important point and that is before you came to congress you headed up an agency in new york that did that. >> i was at the new york state energy research and development authority and we saw what public-private matches were about and deal with the economy and came up with new ways to harness energy, to create energy

efficiency in the outcome, and by so doing, innovation, research equals jobs, good-paying jobs that allow us to have that cutting edge of cleverness, of having a thoughtful way to do things, the smart factor to win those contracts on an international scale. so i'm thrilled about what we can do through research. . mr. garamendi: all of these have been packaged and pulled together by our leader, steny hoyer, who has joined ounce the floor. maryland is on the east coast. california on the west coast. so now we've augmented our east coast-west coast show. mr. hoyer, thank you so much for your leadership on make it in america. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for taking the floor and i thank the gentleman from new york for joining in. i think that we are on the cusp

of a real expansion and reinvigration of our manufacturing sector in this country. for a lot of reasons that i point out around the country and i know the two of you do as well. first of all, salaries are going up overseas. that's good news for them and frankly for us. furthermore, as we all know, it's costing a lot more to ship goods back to the biggest market in the world than it used to. and thirdly, i think both of you have talked about energy. we are about to become an energy-independent nation with energy that has a cost less than most of our competitors around the world. so we have become in a relatively short period of time, i think, in many respects the venue of choice for somebody who wants to either expand or establish manufacturing here in this country. or frankly continue to grow things in this country.

as you know, our make it in america agenda really has four component parts. one is vk a plan -- having a plan. nobody talks about this more than john garamendi of california. and god bless you for that. thank you so much for your leadership on this issue. and paul tonko from new york also has been very, very focuseded on this issue and i thank him for that. -- focused on this issue and i thank him for that. not only have a plan, but be focused on exports and be focused on building markets for small, medium and, yes, large businesses. large businesses have the resources to look for markets them selves. in many respects small and medium-sized businesses do not. but they are producing products that they can sell not only here but around the world. president obama was in baltimore not too long ago, relatively small company. they have sold dredges to over 100 countries in the world. and they're making it -- those

dredges -- in america. the third part is to encourage bringing jobs home, not sending them overseas. it makes no sense to have a tax policy that gives benefits to people who are sending jobs overseas while we have millions of americans who can't find jobs. so what we want to do is incentivize bringing jobs home by giving a tax break for not only bringing jobs home but creating jobs here in america. and lastly, you both referenced this, we need to make sure that we have a 21st century work force. and as a result we need to invest, as the gentleman from new york just said, i'm repeating his words, but i use them all the time as well, we need to invest in education, innovation and infrastructure. that's what helps you grow american manufacturing jobs and americans, when they're polled, over 85% of them say if

america's going to be the kind of country we want it to be, it will be because we make things here in the united states of america. and the made in america label is seen all over the world. and in fact, of course, the made in america label is a very popular label all over the world. so i want to thank the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, the gentleman from new york, for their leadership and their focus on what is critical if the next generations of americans is going to make it. that we provide the kinds of jobs and opportunity, as well as education and investment in innovation that they need to continue to live in the most successful economic country on the face of the earth and i yield back my time. i thank the gentleman for his leadership. mr. garamendi: mr. hoyer, thank you so very much. as i've heard you say other and over again -- over and over again, america will make it when we make it in america.

mr. hoyer: amen. thank you. mr. garamendi: thank you very much for joining us. mr. tonko, education, innovation, infrastructure. those are keys. there are a couple of other keys as mr. hoyer was saying. part of it is our tax policy. the policies that come out of this building. and we can really do the kind of things, laws, that really make a difference. one of this dish put up that picture of that -- one of this -- i put up that picture of that amtrak locomotive, it was a law. the stimulus act. that allowed the men and women in sacramento, some 200 of them, plus another 70 companies that are the supply train, that supply the various parts to this locomotive, to have a job. and what happened in the stimulus bill was, ok, we're going to spend half a billion dollars for 70 locomotives for amtrak, but -- another sentence -- they must be american-made. using american taxpayer money

to buy american-made equipment. and so we now have this manufacturing plant in sacramento. we now have men and women employed. not only in sacramento, but around the nation, making the various parts for this most advanced locomotive. so it's public policy. i have a bill in that does that. it requires that if we're going to build the infrastructure in locomotives, buses, trains, roads, bridges, and use american taxpayer money, then we must be buying american-made products. pretty simple stuff. it's the buy america and it creates jobs in america. i know you have several pieces of legislation that you're sponsoring and supporting. you may want to bring those up. we'll talk about them for a few moments. mr. tonko: sure. the thing you're talking about is so critical. the addition of language that clarifies or specifically states, you know, made in

america as an outcome, very critical to the legislation. and two things were happening. there was a disinvestment in manufacturing as a sector of our country. and agriculture was ignored, manufacturing was ignored, service sector was paid attention to and then more narrowly, financial services got great attention. but we know that story. turn your back, the government says, go function as you choose, and created derivatives avoid government overview and avoid the watchdog and we saw trillions lost to american households because of that failure. here there's a conscious attempt to say, no, we're not going to pay to have you ship jobs offshore. yes, we're going to pay to have you bring them back. yes, we're going to invest in workers. yes, we're going to invest in research to develop new processes.

i have a bill that deals with energy efficiency. that allows for us to enhance the efficiency of turbines that are being produced in new york, that are being made in new york , at g.e., and then exported to the markets around the world. routinely i am showcasing manufacturing in my district. so that the media has a partner -- as a partner can showcase what's happening right in our very neighbors -- neighborhoods. and that the story fully, complete and told to everyone is that we're also exporting from tech valley, new york. that is so important for people to know. and we need to enhance that. we need to provide for the reinforcement, the underpinning of support to language and bills and resources that are attached to various appropriations bills and putting a focus on american manufacturing. i saw what happened to an incubator program at r.p.i. in my district where a local

manufacturer was able to revisit his process, his manufacturing process, they upgraded it, went to another community college -- went to a community college in the district, hudson valley community college, which trained the workers from this facility, how to use this new automated piece. and now they've added workers who are specifically trained on this automated concept. they're winning contracts, in the upstate new york region, a rural county, setting, by the way, is strengthened by all that investment. that's what it takes. it's a focus, laser-sharp focus on how to meet various elements of the equation that will take us to a winning effort. and it's straightforward, it's thought out, it's not mindless. instead of issues of ignoring manufacturing, providing for sequestration, that automatically cuts programs where there ought to be

investment, let's move forward with a sound budget. let's move forward with an agenda that produces jobs. the president has issued -- has introduced the package that calls for a budget that's real, that displaces sequestration. knows of the damage that that would do to the economy and to the investment in manufacturing. that is needed now in a very targeted way. so this is a thoughtful, mindful, analytical, academically-driven -- academically driven agenda that speaks to the needs of all sorts of efficient operations, turbines that will be built to better scale, that will allow for better outcomes, and save us in the process, save jobs in the process. grow jobs and then provide for more productivity on the local scene. so, i think it's incredibly successful when we just apply simple logic to the situation. gar mr. garamendi: mr. tonko, i certainly agree about logic and sometimes the lack of logic,

the sequester -- sequestration which is no-sense or sometimes nonsense. i'll give you an example in my own district. davis, california, university of california-davis. and here's where your discussion really meets the road. the engineering school did computerized programming for machine tools and doing some very advanced research on how to do that. one of the japanese companies that manufactured machine tool, one of the most advanced machine tool manufacturers in the world, they came over to the university of california-davis, talked to the engineers and the students and the professors that were putting together this computerized system for machine tools and said, we want to be part of that. and so they began to use it and realized that what they needed to do was to be right next to the research. so that they could constantly upgrade their machines.

and they therefore came to davis, california, built a factory, hired about 120 people now, and they're making the most advanced machine tools, computerized-driven machine tools, anywhere in the world, right in davis, california. so we can see the connection between research, the adoption of -- adoption of that research into the manufacturing process, and then the jobs, these are all middle class jobs and above that are now available in davis, california. and there are others that spin off from that, providing certain parts of it. so, these are the keys. now, here's where the nonsense comes in. if those are the keys to industrial growth and manufacturing and job growth, why is it that we have a budget that's going to be back on the floor tomorrow that actually cuts research? cuts the educational components, cuts the job training, the retraining that's necessary and doesn't do

anything to create jobs except reduce the federal support that has been critical in this nation's history, why would we do that? i don't understand, but it's going to be back here. this is the republican ryan budget, they're going to play some games tomorrow, try to pretend that somehow it passed the senate when in fact we really need a budget conference committee so we can sort out our differences, so we can lay the platform for future economic growth. but, that's not what that budget does. it's exactly the opposite. it's an austerity budget. and it cuts those things that really do create economic growth. unfortunate, but we have a different agenda. and we want that agenda of growth. we perhaps ought to shift our gears here and talk about the infrastructure component. which is integral to this. you mentioned it earlier. i know that in your area a year ago you had tremendous flooding and so the infrastructure, the

protection from that, you may want to pick that up and i'll follow along. mr. tonko: sure. even the, you know, the data exillation there and the research that's -- compilation there and the research that's done with the weather patterns, putting together data that's compiled, that's very compelling, allows us to grow back smarter. if we're just going to rebuild ter the damages of these consequences of mother nature -- mr. garamendi: it's global warming. mr. tonko: yeah. and we have to be real about this. we have to take into mind and heart the situations out there. and to just simply rebuild and ignore the facts, if there's increased precipitation over the last 20 years, markedly so, discernably speaking to us, we need to move forward accordingly. and so there should be retrofits that are responding to the data. you don't rebuild a bridge to the same span and same height if the water volume is growing

exponentially. we have combined heat and power situations that were impacted or survived the consequences and disaster of superstorm sandy. should we revisit how we rebuild some of the electric infrastructure? so there are calls here that challenge us, that require us to do it more wisely, to do it more effectively and to do it ith intelligent approaches that allow us to use the innovative approaches that are available. . i see what is being designed here by the startup companies, taking into account climate change and various elements that are impacting us on my coast and your coast, where people need to rebuild in a clever way, in a

way that is sensitive to the demands of the system. and the threshold by which we need to respond to climate change are quickly approaching us, some suggest as early at 2017, some will stretch it 2020. and that is around the corner. and we need to be sophisticated in the approach. go forward, do it with science and intellect and ackca democraticically and -- academically. and let's get the stuff done. you know, i just watch -- recently i went to several college graduations in my district and to see the technical strength walking across that strange from doctorates to master's degrees to bachelor's degrees, there is great talent being released out there and let's put it to work so the nation can build on the

pioneer spirit that has always driven us. there is so much great opportunity. if you believe that all the products ever required by humankind have been conceived, developed, manufactured and sold, story's over. no better than that. products are being developed as we speak. and the challenge to a sophisticated society, maybe some of those manufactured goods that you did a century ago are replaced by precision-on the parted, heavy-duty ideas formulating -- reformulation that allow us to be clever. mr. garamendi: the infrastructure structure of this nation is the foundation for the economy. and any economic growth that we have has to be built on a solid infrastructure. the american society of civil engineers rates the american

infrastructure at a d. that's not good. that's doggone bad. you look at china and others that are building first-class infrastructure, we are way behind. you talked about the safety issue. i have miles and miles, probably well over 1,100 miles of levees old. district and decades sacramento, a district, an area that i share with congresswoman matsui, it is one of the riskiest areas of flooding right behind new orleans. we need to upgrade those so people can be safe and areas can grow. at the same time, the sequestration, to go back to that nonsense, removes $250

millions of levee improvements from the army corps of engineers' budget. projects will be delayed. god will we won't have another flood. money to rebuild those levees is gone. the president has suggested and he was standing right behind us here in the state of the union and said we need to rebuild our infrastructure and proposed three things. first of all, he wants to put in $50 billion to be spent in the near term this year and the year after, to really give a major push for america's infrastructure. he also said we need an infrastructure bank. yumpe has had one for nearly three decades and helps to finance projects. sanitation systems, water systems, toll roads, toll bridges and the like. the other thing we ought to do, when we spend that money, we

ought to spend it on american-made equipment and that's what my bill does. and the other part is we really need to address the infrastructure issue with a very robust program. i'm going to take this for just a second. for every dollar we invest in infrastructure, there is a boost to the economy of $1.57. so by investing in the infrastructure, we actually grow the economy more than than a one-on-one basis. $1.57 for every dollar we invest. you set this economic growth going on and built the foundation for the future. that's what we ought to be doing. i ask my republican colleagues here, pay attention. forget whether it's president obama or president whomever, infrastructure is really important. take up with the president has suggested. boost the infrastructure spending in this nation.

put the men and women who build america's foundation, put them back to work so that we have a foundation for economic growth and for safety. let's realize that we had a train wreck in connecticut. was it caused by a bad track situation? possibly. we had a bridge collapse in washington state. we know that that was an infrastructure maintenance problem. we have potholes. we know the economy of this nation has slowed down because of traffic jams, insufficient capacity on our highways and we know we have insufficient transit systems. in new york, you need to rebuild from superstorm sandy. mr. tonko: absolutely. when you talk about roads and bridges, the district that i represent, in fact my home county of montgomery county, new york was host to a terrible bridge collapse.

we celebrated in 2012 -- we commemorated, more appropriately stated, the 25th anniversary of the bridge collapse that took several lives. that was 25, 26 years ago. we have only accumulated more concern for deficiency. so it's roads and bridges, it's rail, as you made mention, and also telecommunications and utility. you look at a system that was geared to be a monopoly, serving a region of energy needs for people, and then with deregulation came the wheeling region to s from region. canada wheeling electrons and need to upgrade the system. there is new technology and get more efficiency. less line loss. these are the things that are

smart. and we're asking with this passage, let's be smart. let's respect the hard-earned tax dollars that are under our stewardship and beyond that, august of 2003 when i was serving in state government in new york, when we had a major collapse of the system that was driven by transmission. nd an outage in ohio triggered a collapse into new york so that ohio put out the lights on broadway in new york city. and this was long-term in its consequences. and great economic loss. great challenge to us. you know in the midst of homeland security, anti-terrorist sentiment. here you had a gaping volnerlt for terrorists to see that weakness. we need to invest in the infrastructure.

so a bank bill, an infrastructure bank bill, you are absolutely right, it's a tremendously strong, powerful way to leverage public-private sector matches to extend the opportunity, to grow the opportunities to make investments in all sorts of infrastructure. you know, i live in one of the oldest sections of the country. our water sewer system is old. our utility sectors are very, very old. the upgrades that are required. the if he can noling that can be invested. the cutting-edge technologies that are part and parcel, these are incredible opportunities for us to strengthen the outcome. we have businesses coming into upstate new york, global boundaries represents some of the greatest job growth in the world for chip manufacturing. are they energy intensive? they are. do we need state of of the art

hookup, capacity that is delivered? absolutely. we know what the needs of business happen to be. we know how best to respond to that. we do it through clever public progressive policy that enables us to see the worthyness of investment. belt-tightening we have talked about it before. waste, fraud and abuse, undone. cut where you can, so that you invest where you must. cut where you can and invest where you must and the infrastructure requires our response. you need to move workers. you need to have safety addressed, public safety addressed. i saw the consequences, i saw the deaths that came from the agic collapse of a thruway bridge collapse 20 years ago. happening. not be

and here, we're asking simply to put people to work. this is not just spending money. it's investing in workers that will make for a stronger outcome and provides for state of the art opportunities. if you are going to say, we are going to cut our way to prosperity and deficit reduction and job growth, it's not going to happen that way. mr. garamendi: it certainly won't. you have been talking about bridge collapses, the bridge that collapsed in the twin cities in minnesota and wisconsin, lives lost. we are seeing the infrastructure, bridges and others, unable to really carry the modern loads that are there, rusty and falling down, we need to address that. you raised the point about the

electric grid, the electric power infrastructure of this nation, critically important. need to make the investments there. and we are also making -- mr. hoyer talking about the energy independence we are moving towards in the united states. one part of that is the natural gas that is more readily available at a reasonable price and repowering of the coal-fired fired power plants which reduces the greenhouse gas emissions from coal. all of that is good. i want to pick up another area. i have now become the ranking member of the coast guard and maritime. while i have been interested in ports, california ports, i can spend even more time focusing on the ports and the maritime industry. international commerce critically important to economic growth. mr. hoyer talked about the export potential that this country has and will even grow

more in the future, but that is also the ports. and the airports. none of these -- both of these airports and the ports are unable to meet the demands of modern and advanced transportation. many of the ports in america need to be deepened so the new container ships that are now coming into play and many of the new oil tankers and the rest can access the american ports. in doing so, we will be able to maintain the vitality of international trade, the export market which we really must once again, dominate and the jobs that go with the ports. it's ports and railroads that lead out of the ports and the trucking industry that goes out of it, so we need a comprehensive transportation plan. we're going to rewrite the surface transportation act in this session of congress, start on it this year.

get it done -- hopefully this year -- not maybe, we have to do it next year because of the expiration of the current transportation plan. so there is enormous responsibilities that we have to create the infrastructure upon which america grows. it's the roads. it's the ports. it's the airports. it's the electrical system. the communication systems. all of these are critical. and all of them one way or another are dependent upon the actions taken by the 435 of us in the house of representatives and the 100 members of the senate and of course the senate. bear in mind that the president has presented to the congress a very robust infrastructure plan that takes into account all of the elements that we have discussed here tonight. very, very little of that has been taken up in any committee hearing. and what we have seen pass the house thus far is not the robust

investment needed for infrastructure but the opposite, disinvestment, such as sequestration and the ryan budget which will be back on the floor in the next day or so. these are not the ways that you grow the economy. these are austerity programs that reduce the investments that we need for america's economic growth, education, research, infrastructure investment, modern manufacturing. these are the keys and we have to do it. mr. tonko. we have run through most of our time and if you would like to take a wrap and then call it a night. mr. tonko: i think to reinforce the doability of it, the acceptability of it. perhaps we just need to recall some of our most golden moments in american history. when we were challenged, when

there was a need to respond with boldness, with vision, with courage, we did it. my district is the donor area in a large way to the erie canal system. you talk about ports. it grew a port out of a little town called new york. it was that port of entry that then allowed for the shipping of goods up the hudson, into the mohawk, into the erie canal system. a system that was brought about under tough times. you know, the proponent of the canal said, look, if we're going to do this, it's a tough time, but let's invest. did that prove successful? you better believe it. it sparked the westward movement, an industrial revolution, gave birth to a necklace of communities dubbed milk -- mill towns. mill towns became the epicenters of innovation. powerful. when franklin roosevelt led this nation out of its worst economic crunch, it was about

investing in america. putting people to work, developing projects that were essential to our hopeful tomorrow -- hope for tomorrow. it put a lot of people to work. it pulled us out of the doldrums of the depression and allowed us to rise from the situation and provide again hope for this nation. president eisenhower, understanding that in some tough times we needed to develop an interstate system, for a highway network, because, again, it was transporting and shipping of goods and we needed to modernize and advance what was best for america. and that golden moment of our history should speak to us. and certainly president kennedy , picking up on that moment where we dusted off our backside and said, never again, called us together as a nation saying, we're going to win this global race on space. we're going to do it because

with passionate resolve we're going to say yes to the investments required so as to stake that american flag as the first flag onto the surface of the moon, winning that race, that global race on space. and we did it because we invested and we believed and we resolved with passion and worked together as a nation. so, let's take inspiration from those golden moments, the erie canal and f.d.r., compounding the workers corps and the building of an infrastructure -- a highway infrastructure and winning the global race on space. let's let that speak to us as a nation. let us move forward with the passion and the resolve and say, invest in the clean energy, science and tech, innovation economy, we know we can win this. but if we sit there complainsly -- complacently and deny the

potential of this work nation, that is not leadership. that is not leadership. we will then be passed bibi other nations. we have the intellectual that can be harnessed here -- intellect that can be harnessed here to grow the sophisticated products, to deal with the position orientation of manufacturing today, to provide for advanced manufacturing, to come up with clever batteries as a lynch pin to the energy revolution and the list goes on and on and on. leadership from this -- from this chamber can make a difference and a sound budget, an honest budget, one that invests in america is what we require right now. mr. garamendi: mr. tonko, thank you so very much. your passion on this has been displayed on this floor numerous times as we talked about making in america, about jobs, about infrastructure. as you were going through that recitation of american history, i want to go back even further than the canal period.

let's go back to our very first president. george washington. he refused to go through the inaugural in a suit made by england. so he wanted an american-made uit, he found the cloth from boston and a tailor and wore an american-made suit. he also, immediately upon taking office, our very first president in the very first days in his office turned to his treasury secretary, alexander hamilton, and said, we need to build the manufacturing in this country. i want to you develop a plan on manufacture -- manufacturers. hamilton went out, i don't know if he had a committee or not, but he came back with a report, it was probably 30 to 50 pages, now it would be 30,000 to 50,000 pages. he came back, i think he 15 different thoughts in the report, and they were preceasely on this -- precisely on this subject of make it in americament and you'd love this. one of the very first things in

that document was, we need to build the infrastructure. canals, roads andports. the very first -- and ports. the very first president said, the role of the federal government is to help build the infrastructure and here we are centuries later, still debating how we're going to do it. well, just pay attention to the founding fathers. they told us how to do it. they also said, we ought to spend the american taxpayers' money on american-made goods. it's in that document dating back to the very first, very first policies of this nation. and so when i introduced this bill that says, use the taxpayer money to buy american-made products, it's not new, folks. i'm simply copying what alexander hamilton suggested to george washington. and the first congress of the united states. there are other elements in it that play into this in a similar way. and certainly we know that thomas jefferson was really big on education.

and so the university of virginia came up. these are the elements of economic growth. and here we are, 435 of us in the house of representatives, and the question for us is, are we going to put in place policies that provide the foundation for economic growth or are we going to go the opposite direction and continue on the austerity route which actually disinvests on those key elements that create economic growth? for me, i'm an investor. i want to invest in america's future. with infrastructure, education, innovation, research and manufacturing in america. those are the policies that i believe we need to put in place, mr. tonko. you and i have been here many nights and we've talked about these issues many, many times. and we're not going to stop, are we? mr. tonko: you know, we're not. and i think it's, again, that belief, that sense that we can

accomplish, as you were talking about, those early, early days, from our humble beginnings. i was reminded of the event this weekend in my district in saratoga where we were evisiting the area that hosted a general's surrender to the american troops after the battle of saratoga. and this was the david-goliath routine. we weren't supposed to win that battle. and it's been dubbed the battle of the millennia and that it was more than a national battle, it made a statement around the world. that this mighty force came up against insurmountable odds and won. that's in our d.n.a. you know, we are replete in our history of all sorts of response that came in powerful measure, that said, this is america at her best.

that's the moment to seize right here. not to walk away and sequester us. weaken us. disinvest in us. defund us. you know, i told a group of ung students this weekend, hundreds of students, do not let us as a political generation undo your political generation. you are worthy of education dollars. you are in need of access supportability to a college path. you deserve your climate change to be addressed. your planet requires our stewardship. what is this walking away from the next generation? is that our legacy? is that what we want our legacy to be? or is it us remembered as a generation, that faced immense challenge after a difficult

recession and we came to terms and said, the academic supplies here show us how to work our way through this critical test and how to invest in america so that her best days lie ahead? that's responding with fairness, are respect and justice to that next generation of workers who are only asking us to do what generations before us did. believe in us, care for us, invest us in. so only our best will be available for us. our best opportunities. mr. garamendi: mr. tonko, i don't think i could say it better and so what i thinkly -- i think what i will say is, mr. speaker, we yield back our time. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman have a motion? mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, i do have a motion. i move that the house adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow for the morning hour debate. in recent years four of the 11

seats on the bench have remained empty. hear the president's remark ollowed by reaction from a reporter. >> one of the most important responsibilities of a president is to nominate qualified men and women to serve as judges on the federal bench. congress has a responsibility as well. the senate is tasked with providing advice and consent. they can approve a president's nominee or they can reject a president's nominee. but they have a constitutional duty to promptly consider nominees for confirmation. too often the senate has failed

to do that. time and again, congressional republicans use rules and procedures to delay an even block nominees from coming to a full vote. as a result my judicial nominees have waited three times longer to receive confirmation votes than those of my republican predecessor. let me repeat that. my nominees have taken three times longer to receive confirmation votes than those of my republican predecessor. these individuals that i nominate are qualified. when they were given an up or down vote in the senate deny when they were finely given an up or down vote in the senate they were confirmed. this is not about opposition, his is about political obstruction. >> president obama announced three new nominations.

what are senate republicans saying? >> they haven't had a chance to get to know these nominees yet because it was kept pretty secret until yesterday. they don't know these nominations are necessary at all because they are arguing that the courts these nominations are for the court of appeals for the district of columbia have enough judges and not enough work. so i that are questioning why the president is making these picks to begin with. >> what can you tell us about these nominees? >> one is respected, one a federal judge here in the district of columbia and was confirmed in the senate, unanimously. another is a law professor in georgetown university and the thirds is a very experienced attorney who has argued before the supreme court more than 30 times. so there's no question they are

experienced and probably have the background for this kind of job. >> back to the process itself. what is your take on the democrats allegations that republicans are slow walking, not just on these three mom niece but overall nomination process? >> it depends on the way you look at the question. republicans say you haven't been slow walking process and any claims of expensive time before nominees are confirmed has to do with the fact that, for example, president obama has had two supreme court nominees confirmed. those take a lot of time especially in the committee. if democrats are complaining about the lower court nominees that is because the president got two supreme court nominees confirmed in his first term. >> with republicans dining political move, why is he using strong terms? >> he is using strong terms. i think he's referring to the

fact that under president george w. bush the d.c. circuit today had 11 judges and republicans weren't voicing complaints then that there was 11 judges on the court. today, republicans are saying the court does not need 11 and eight might be sufficient. president obama views this is a flip flop on the terms of the republicans and accusing them of playing politics. > there's been this drumbeat about changing the filibuster process. what are we hing about that lately? >> nay want to filibuster these three nominees as well as other nominees that have been held up. the leadership in both peats is gearing up for this fight over nominees. the question is whether the senator majority leader will consider changing the rules to

get around the filibuster threat from republicans. this is called the nuclear option and they have shown reluck tans to go that route. he hasn't yet said he would do it but things are moving in that direction in terms of parties coming to a head over nominations. >> what did he hear from senator reid about the issue? >> he said he wasn't ready to say that he was going to make any rules changes. senator mcconnell, the minority leader said he was going to see about these nominees on an individual basis. there is must remember you aring behind those -- murmuring behind those statements that there might be a move on the part of the democrats to change the rules. certainly, there is a lot of members of the democratic caucus who would like to see that happen. >> you can read more reporting

at rollcall.com. thanks if the update. >> thanks for having me. >> coming up on the next "washington journal" florida congressman alan west weighs on some of the issues facing congress and his work with next generation tv. then tim ryan joins us to talk about the manufacturing industry. cities in the future will need be healthier, safer and sturdier because of increasing natural disasters, that is part of the spotlight magazine series. washington were journal live each morning on 7:00 eastern on c-span. senior pentagon officials testified on capitol hill that sexual assault in the military is "like a cancer" that could destroy the force. they were asked about legislation proposed that would remove commabbeders from the

process of -- commanders from the process of deciding if serious crimes go to trial. rl levin chairs this senator committee hearing. >> good morning, everybody. the committee meets today to receive testimony on pending legislation regarding sexual assaults in the military. before we begin our hearing, we note with sadness the passing of our friend who is the last world war ii veteran serving in the

senate. seven bills relating to sexual assault have been introduced in the senate beginning in march and are now pending before the committee. senator bill 538, introduced by senator mccaskill and others on march 12. another bill introduced on march 18. a bill on may 7. 67 on may 16. and senate may 21 bill 1041 on may 23.

more than 40 senators have sponsored or co sponsored one or more of these billed. there's good reason for this legislative activity. the problem of sexual assault is of such scope and magnitude that it has been a stain on the military. last year, if the fourth year in a row, there were more than 3,000 reported cases of sexual assault in the military, including unrestricted reportings and additional 816 restricted reports. restricted meaning with the victim's request they were handled in a confidential manner and not investigatived. a recent survey conducted by the department of defense, indicated that the number of sexual offenses could be higher as 6.1%

active duty women and men surveyed reported having an incident of unwanted sexual contact in the previous 12 months. even one case of sexual assault case in the military is one too many. nobody volunteers to serve our country should be subjected to this kind of treatment by those with whom they serve. the problem is made worse when the system fails to respond as it should with an aggressive investigation that brings the perpetrators to justice. the recent document "invisible war" provides heartbreaking examples of some of these system failures. every member of this committee wants to drive sexual assault out of the military. the question for us, is how can we most effectively achieve this

objective? we have previous and some cases as recently affidavit last year's act taken a number of steps to address the problem of sexual assault in the military. to ensure the aggressive investigation and prosecution of sexual offenses, and to provide victims of sexual assault the assistance and support they need and should have. for example, in the area of training it requires training for service members at each level, education, sexual assault training of new recruits after entrance of active duty and enes had tranning for commanders. in the area of prevention, we have provided surveys of gender religses. we have prohibited the military from granting waivers with criminal convictionings to allow

them to serve in the military. in the air afterof victim protection, we have established restrictions for -- provided for trans fors of victims of sexual assault and required flag officer review of any and voluntary separation of a victim of sexual assault when requested by the victim to ensure that the victim is not victimized a second time. in the area of reporting, we have authorized restricted eporting of sexual assaults to maintain confidential when asked to do so. we request each unit has its own trained response coordinator and victim advocate. we have established electronic cordkeeping requirements for

reports of sexual assault. in penalties, we have required d.o.d. agencies, established especially capabilities for investigating and prosecuting sexual offenses and we require ny service member convicted of an offense be processed when the court-martial punishment does not include a discharge. recent and are their effectiveness has not yet been determined. we propose a wide variety of actions to consider. these include the following, amending the uniform code of military justice, the limit the authority of a convening authority to modify the findings and sentence of a court-martial. riring that special victims council be provided to victims of sexual assault. the air force has been doing it

on a test basis since january. bills before us would be put into statute the requirement of commonders who receive reports of sexual assault offenses that next higher fore officer in the chain of commabbed. the secretary of defense to establish a legal authority outside the chain of command to determine whether and how to proceed with a case. that would take the place of the commander who now serves as the initial disposition authority under current law. the bill before us would amend the ucmg to establish a separate authority outside the chain of command to appoint courts

martial for serious offenses. to remove the character of accused to be considered in deciding how to proceed with a case and would require that all sexual-related offenses be noted the personal records in the offender. it is important as some of these procedural changes may be, we cannot successfully address this problem without a culture change throughout the military. discipline is the heart of the military culture. trust is its soul. he plague. -- the plague of sexual assault erodes the heart and the soul. be prepared to take care of each other in the toughest of

situations in the face of the enemy. that requires a level of trust that is rarely matched in civilian life. trust, sufficient that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and coast guard personnel are ready to put their lives in their comrades hands. that trust is violated when one service member sexual assaults another. it can only be restored when we have restored discipline and addressed this plague. the key to culture change in the military is the chain of command. higheritary services are arkal organizations and the tone is set from the top of the chain. the message comes from the top and accountability rests at the top. but addressing a systematic

problem like sexual assault requires action by all within that chain and especially by the commanders of the units. only the chain of command is establish a zero tolerance policy for sexual offenses. only the chain of command has the authority needed to address any problems with command climate that foster or tolerate sexual assaults. only the chain of command is protect victims of sexual assaults by ensuring they are appropriately separated from the alleged perpetrators during the investigation and prosecution of a case. only the change of command can be held accountability if it fails to change an unacceptable military culture. the chain of command has achieved culture change before. for example, two generations ago, when we faced problems with

racial desensation in the military and more recently with the change to don't ask, don't tell policy. the chain of command can do it again. the men and women of our military deserve no less. our sons and daughters contemplating a career in the military and their parents also deserve that commitment. we have today three panels of witnesses to help us in our review of these issues. we have asked each of them for their views on the bills before us. we are very appreciative of their presence here today. i will introduce the first panel after the senator will make his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we'll address the legal and moral foundation of the military readiness, the military justice. under the constitution, congress has the responsibility to make rules to governor and regulate

our military. this responsibility is important as we evaluate the effectiveness in combating sexual assault. last year, we created an independent panel to review the ucmg and proceedings of sexual assault cases. under section 576 of the fiscal 2013. this panel was tasked with assessing the response systems used to investigate, prosecutor, and had jude date crimes involving sexual assault. the work of that commission, as i said yesterday, it has only just begun. we have to allow an opportunity to do what it was created to do. over the last decade congress has passed a number of laws to

better equip services to combat sexual assault, including 10 provisions. i'm not going to read those but i ask they to be included in the record. >> they will. our commanders have not had time changes ent the recent and some think we should change them again. we made these changes and they are doing it as we speak, mr. chairman. they have to have time to get this done. as we consider additional changes to the law of this year's act, we should keep three things in mind. first, fundamentally, we cannot abolish sexual assault by legislation alone, as you point out. eliminating sexual assault involves commanders to drive cultural change and achieve accountability.

secondly, we have to allow the commanders to address the repeat changes and to monitor and assess their effectiveness. third, while i share chairman levin's concerns we should not delay considering things that can make immediate and positive changes we must be deliberate in making fundamental changes to the ucmg. i've had several conversations with other members and i think that is a general agreement. there is a risk of unintended consequences if we act in haste. rushing to change the law again, could prove negative to the ultimate objective. over the past few weeks, several of my colleagues have introduced bills proposed to significant changes to ucmg and i thank them for their commitment and combating sexual assault in the

military. i look forward to work clab ridively on these efforts. i oppose moving any commanders from their role in the military justice. i think one of the things that the senator has been talkinging about is to maintain this authority in the commanders and had vance that to a higher command. woe must remember that the military is necessity uniquely separate from the civilian society. military service requires those who serve to give up certain rights and privileges that civilians enjoy. those of us whob in the military understand that. those who voluntary to serve must give up their will under the authority of the constitution and the ucmg. -- sexual assault

is an enemy to moral and readiness. the men and women of the military often must tolerate the duty and separation from loved one but they must not tolerate sexual assault. some have criticized our commanders in the military julls system because a recent case in the court-martial was set aside. if you take time and look at the statistics the commanders have set aside findings of guilty in rare circumstances. about 1% of the cases. again, specific details are in my statement. s there also a suggestion that commabbedsers haven't done a good job of preserving good order or discipline or effectively overseeing the conduct of their forces. the record did not reflect this. the legal policy board released

a report just lack week. this is brand-new. a lot of us haven't had a chance to look at this yet. i'm encouraged that the main theme of the report validates my long-standing position concerning the central role of the joint commabbedser and the administration of justice. it states and i'm quoting now "while in good order and discipline is important to any military environment. it is vy tall in the deployed environment. the military justice system is the definitive commander's tool to preserve good order and discipline and nowhere is this more important than in a combat zone." "a break down of good order while deployed can have a devastating effect. the commander is responsible for

his forces and this sub committee has determined that the joint commander must have the authority to preserve good order and discipline through the military julls system." i will be asking, when my time for you to respond to this, if there sh general agreement to this statement, which i just quoted that came out last week. pow critical this system is to our commanders is demonstrated by the frequency of its use. this report states since 2001 800army alone has conducted court-martials. he army conducted court-martials. we must not take this readiness from our commanders, it is vitally important that we make sexual assault culturally unacceptable as the chairman said in our military.

no change is possible without commanders as agents of that change. look forward to this hearing. >> thank you very much. e now welcome our first panel. general martin dempsey, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the legal council to the gross. richard admiral chief of naval -- vice and viced a admiral.

general mark welsh, chief of taff of the air force. and judge admiral germ of the coast guard. i've asked the witnesses on this panel for one opening statement per service by the service chief. we've asked all of our witnesses to limit their opening statements to fivel minutes. i've asked the germ to take a little extra time to describe in some detail the kern process in the army for addressing allegations of serious phoneses, including to whom a victim can report an offense, who is informed of the offense, once it

is reported, how they are informed, who conducts the investigation, who decides what offenses to charge, and who decides to deal with the offenses whether they are handled by court-martial or some other means. i vine it our other witnesses and other services to include in clarifying remark about the process in their own service. so we can all understand how allegations are handled now and what could change if some of the proposed legislation under consideration by this committee is adopted. general dempsey, again, we thank you for your and your colleagues for being here today and for your service to our nation. we'll start with your opening statement. >> thank you. thank you for this opportunity to discuss our commitment to eliminating sexual assault from

the armed forces of the united states. the risks to military service must never include the risk of sexual assault. it's a crime that demands accountability and consequences. it betrays the very trust on which our profession is founded. we are acting swiftly on a climate that has been com play sonets. lasting change begins in changing behaviors. we're taking the comprehensive approach that focuses on prevention, victim advocacy, and assessment. all of it is part of the obligation to safeguard the force. we must do more to protect victims and to prevent and respond to high-risk rebehaviors and to make sure we have a professional work environment.

we're open to every idea to have meaningful institution change. it should continue to end sexual assault. i've been attendive to every piece of legislation. there's many reasonable recommendation on the table. in fact, i conveyed in writing to the chairman and the ranking member, my sincere interest in considering many of them. those e merit in convicted of sexual assault and preventing them from joining our ranks in the first place top. to require commanders to report sexual assault cases to the higher commander. it is my expectation that the panel established under section 576 will take up these and many

other initiatives and we need it to fully assess all the options and all the potential consequences both intended and unintended. directed by secretary hagel we need the panel to deliver on an accelerated timeline. we won't be idea. implementingtively my strategy and the department's new sexual assault prevention and response plan. in addition to completing a standdown by the first of july, we're moving out on nearly 90 term action to catalyze change. we will assess units for climate, conduct refresher training for victims advocates and improve victim's counciling and much more. we welcome the opportunity to update you regularly on our progress. as we consider further reforms the role of the commander should

remain central. held more ould be to accountable. they punish criminals and they protect victims. commanders are accountable for all that goes on in a unit and they are responsible for the success of the missions assigned to them. of course, commanders and leaders of every rank must earn that trust and to trust their units. moat do. most do not allow gender ohetion to mask betrayal. our force o the -- has within it the moral courage to change course and reaffirm

our professional ethossthost. we can restore trust within the force and the american people. thank you. >> thank you very much, general >> thank you. , the army has a serious problem. we are failing in our efforts to fully protect our people from sexual assault and sexual harassment. as a chief of staff, a former commander of forces of every level, and a parent of two sons and a daughter, the crime of sexual assault and harassment cut to the core of what i care most about, the health and welfare of america's sons and daughters. these crimes violate what our army stands for, and they cannot be tolerated. our military profession is built on the of trust. the trust that must inherently existent months -- amongst soldiers and leaders in order to

a comp which the difficult mission in the chaos of four. recent incidents of sexual soul and harassment demonstrate we have violated that trust. we have failed to address these crimes and a compassionate, just, incomprehensibly. two weeks ago i told my combating sexual assault and harassment with our ranks is our number one priority. i said a because as chief, my mission is to train prepare our soldiers for war. these crimes cut to the heart of the army's readiness for war. they destroy the very fabric of our force, soldier, and unit morale. we will fix this problem. our actions now and in the future will be guided by five imperatives. first, we must prevent offenders from committing crimes. when a crime has been committed, and must provide compassionate care and protect the rights of survivors.

second, every allegation of sexual assault and harassment must be professionally investigated and appropriate action taken. third, we must create a climate in which every person is every withoutle to thrive concern of retaliation or stigma. it is imperative that all entities respond -- understand the responsibilities. specifically, commanders and leaders, we expect them to create an environment to uphold standards consistent with our armies and nations values. if not, they will be held accountable. it is imperative the chain of command is fully engaged, and the center of any solution to combat sexual assault and harassment. command authority is the most critical mechanism for ensuring discipline, accountability, and unit cohesion. our military justice system was liberally designed to give

commanders the tools to reinforce good order a prosecuting misconduct with nonjudicial and judicial punishments, so that commanders can only prosecute crimes, but punish minor infractions that contribute to discipline. this allows us to punish misconduct in -- on any scale, quickly, visibly, and locally anywhere in the world. it is clear we must implement a system of checks and balances to ensure our commanders and the legal advisors reinforce one another's mutual responsibilities to administer the uniform code of military justice. have a farmmanders wider range of options to -- available to them than civilian law enforcement. from four levels of court- martial, administrative discharge, and nonpunitive measures. these options allow commanders to address the entire spectrum of sexual misconduct, from verbal harassment up to and

including rape read it allows commanders to prosecute multiple crimes at the same time. sexual or otherwise. it is essential to the commanders effort to build the right time within a unit. it allows commanders to prosecute crimes with the full backing of the u.s. army. take the recent example of a victim who essentially assaulted by a soldier off post in all colorado. it on fourth conducted an initial investigation, but determined it not have enough sufficient resources to investigate or prosecute the case. the local commander directed army cid to investigate the case. they uncovered three additional victims that were sexually assaulted or better by the accused, and several locations across colorado and texas. the soldiers chain of command referred the case to court- martial, where the accused was convicted and sentenced to 35 years in the dishonorable discharge. of silvers the flex ability

the u cmj to prosecute multiple crimes across jurisdictions. if the commanders had been removed from this administering justice, he could have prevented justice in this particular case. if i believe that removing commanders from their central role of responsibility in addressing sexual salt would solve these crimes, i would be your strongest proponent. removing commanders, making commanders less responsible, less accountable, oma work. it will undermine the regulars -- readiness of the force. most importantly, it will hamper the timely delivery of justice to the very people we wish to help. the victims and survivors of these crimes. let me just take a few moments to explain how the army response to a sexual assault. our process consists of five basic elements.

first, the army officers victims has two options for reporting. airport which allows a victim to assess counselors, medical support, legal services. an unrestricted report, which triggers an independent law enforcement investigation. there are nine ways a victim can make an understood to report outside of the chain of command. uniform advocates, uniformed sexual so court vendors, military to civilian law enforcement, military to civilian hospital staff, chaplains, the office of the inspector general, judge advocates, hotlines, and several websites for online reporting. following a report, victims are assigned a victim advocate and offered legal services. commanders are also required to protect the care of victims. they must transfer a victim of another unit if requested. they must keep the victim informed on the set of the -- a

status of the indication. second, every sexual so allegation must be subject to a thorough investigation. every allegation must be investigated by the criminal investigation division. the army felony level detectors. our cid agents do not work for the commander, and commanders cannot shape or advise an investigation. ,here, judge advocates including special victim prosecutors which intimated in 2009, provide legal advice to investigators and commanders. they must check every allegation is possible for protecting the rights of victims. when an investigation is complete, judge advocate rep -- provides a legal opinion based upon the evidence presented. i don't thought allegation becomes part of the permanent record, while on nation is founded is not the commander to consider the options available.

every allegation must be tracked on a daily crime blotter. the disposition of these cases is reserved for senior commanders with the advice of the judge advocate. the relation between the commander legal advisors is unique. the commander has the authority to decide the case disposition a while article 34 of you cmj requires the judge advocate provided written advice before charges may be referred to a court-martial. the judge advocate encounters a command or unwilling follow his or her device, the judge advocate may elevate the case to a judge advocate channel, or to the next. her commander. although the you cmj provides to imposeul tools

discipline, it is obvious that it hasn't been working correctly to prevent and prosecute sexual crimes in the army. i'm am aware of a number of legislative reports that contemplate changes to the role of commander into the you cmj. i welcome candid discussion. i offer a number of suggestions ucmjw we can improve the policy. my experience reason to believe -- rather the failure of some commanders and leaders to administer that system correctly. to act in compliance with the hardmj, we must take a look at our system from start to finish to ensure that commanders judge advocates are subject to appropriate checks and balances, while protecting the interests of the victim,

and due process rights of accused. i propose a number of such checks and balances in my written statement. if we find the checks and balances to be insufficient, and changes are required, we must move in a deliberate fashion to do -- preserve what is good with the system. i'm in full support of response systems panels to determine what changes should be made to lawn policy. i understand that the credibility of the armed forces, the credibility of the army are at stake. we cannot simply legislate our way out of this problem. -- without equivocation, the central role of command and military justice system is absolutely medical to any solution. -- are though we have struggle in our efforts to get these issues right, in the beginning, we always work through them until he got it right.

commanders were central to that success. sexual assault and harassment are no different. will dot -- we can and better. we must take deliberate steps to change the environment. we must restore confidence by improving our system of accountability. tois up to every one of us, stop this problem that our ranks. over the last 12 years of war, our army has demonstrated exceptional courage and resilience to adapting to the demands of war. we will take on this problem and adapt as well. we will fix it. andk you, mr. chairman other distinguished members for the opportunity to speak with you today. >> thank you. thank you members of the committee. i want to thank you for the opportunity to testify about this deeply troubling issue. i'm grateful for your involvement, and your continued

interest in providing our commanders and sailors the tools to help stamp out the cross- sectional assault within our ranks. sexual salt is a serious offense. -- sexual assault is a serious offense. it is not who we are. it represents a safety issue, it and is next central threat to our core values. our sailors deserve a safe environment in which to serve their nation. i am outraged and find it inconceivable that a shipmate would assault another shipmate, someone with whom they stand watch and trust their lives at and with whom they will go into combat. my outrage alone is not enough. we need thoughtful, deliberate, relentless and effective action. we need to dig into the root causes and establish a place to sustain improvements that can be institutionalized and assessed over the long term. our current and future readiness are at stake. the three years ago, we began a sustained issue --

developmentwas the and integration of a pilot program that we instituted at our training command in great lakes, illinois. we chosen environment we thought we could readily control a school environment. the results have been sustained and substantial reduction in the sexual salt and conduct violations. ,ased on these positive results we instituted similar programs at the aviation dreaming -- aviation training coming, and naval station san diego. we will implement these programs in naples, italy, and the coast of japan within the next six months. the back from sailors in san diego thus far has been positive. reduction and conduct violations and sexual salts, and confidence in their security environment. these are just the snapshot of

an issue to prove -- improve command climates, and to create an environment that dissuades these from occurring. we have much more work to do in this area. our sailors must be on for an hour reporting process. simple, multiple, reliable, and readily available means of .eporting assault the training for every sailor in the navy. thermal options available in every unit to report an assault. for example, sailors can report an assault to victim advocates. adequateafe line, personnel, the chain of command, judge advocates, 911 or basic lease, or the chaplain. we are hiring credentialed response coordinators and victim advocates to augment the

existing train advocates we have today. in addition to numerous efforts in victim support, we recognize our military justice system and processes may need to evolve. drugws challenges, such as abuse, demonstrated the code of military justice must be able to adapt to better serve our sailors, and to provide advocate -- adequate support for our sailors. poseve to ensure that our modifications to military justice system are deliberate, consider second order effects, and do not ultimately adversely impact the best interest of justice, and due process rights of the accused. further, the unit commanders authority and role as the singular individual accountable for the welfare of his or her sailors, should be preserved.

i believe that for complex and comprehension changes, those that propose social changes to the military justice system, and uniform code of military justice, particularly the role of the commander, the response be givenreated should the opportunity to complete an independent assessment. it is not just a legal issue. it is a leadership issue, and that in what we call the charge of command. a commanding officer is responsible and accountable for everything that happens in his or her ship, squadron, or unit. we expect our commanders to create a safe environment down the on dignity and respect. one that reinforces our core values of honor, courage, and commitment. to reinforce this concept, each ed,ual saw reported is brief focusing on root causes, and the need for future avoidance. i review the results of these

quarterly, focusing on trends, progress, and a framework for further action. we have found that successful changes in our military are best done through commanders read -- commanders. from initial disposition, through convening authority, to posttrial review, the chain of command should be involved. recently, in the interest of improving the military justice process, in case of the ,ommission of rape, sexual salt seniority,ce experience, and the objectivity in this important element in the process. required toders are make independent decisions.

i believe it is essential that our commanders be involved in each phase of the military justice process. mr. chairman, we know there is more to do. we are main committed to preventing these crimes. nd to provide commission -- to ensure that sexual assault cases are processed through efficient military justice systems. thank you for the opportunity to talk today. >> thank you. of theing members committee, thank you for calling today's hearing on this most critical issue. let me begin by saying that sexual assault is criminal behavior has no place in organized marine corps. it violates the bedrock of trust that marines must have in one another. the legendary trust we have always had in one another. it is shameful, it is repulsive,

and we are aggressively taking steps to eradicate it. while there are cases of mixed and same gendered attacks, sexual assault within the , maining -- the ring core -- the crime is being committed by roughly two percent of our marine population. , and importantly, their mining -- your mining -- the remaining 90% are keeping their honor clean. we have seen measurable improvements in three specific areas. prevention, reporting, and offender accountability. i'm encouraged by these changes and believe we have momentum on our side. i testified before you today to let you know that eradicating sexual salt from within our ranks is a top priority with the senior leadership of the entire united states marine

corps. talking about this issue is not enough. strategy isn and a required. our history over the last century is replete with examples where we have changed marine corps as an institution. following world war ii, we knock down racial barriers, paving a road to racial equality. in vietnam, i saw firsthand how attackeded iraq bed -- a rampant drug problem. we were successful through determined leadership, and a combination of education and strict legal actions. over time the core change. drug users and drug pushers became viewed as what they truly were, pariahs. we exiled them from our ranks. during that time we push separation authorities down to commanding officers to enforce discipline standards, and to affect us with judgment against offenders. it was our manders who drove a

change. -- it was our commanders who drove the change. while we are far from complete in these efforts, duis and other alcohol infractions are no longer acceptable behavior for our professional court marines. i watch this change over the past decade in this regard. what was deemed acceptable behavior for lieutenant and major -- is not condemned today. it is the evolution of behavior, and it is good for us. accountability in the marine corps begins and ends with me. sexual salt prevention within our ranks -- sexual assault prevention within our ranks is a top priority. our senior officers are all in. they are focusing on making necessary changes to prevent the environment of the american people not only expect the demand from their marines. -- its goal is

complete element nation of sexual assault within our marine corps. as we launched our plan last spring, the surgeon major -- to look major traveled our marines in the eye, to remind them of their rich heritage, and to remind them who they are, and who they are not. we spoke of the importance of maintaining the spiritual health of the core. just as i expect to be held accountable, i turn hold my commanding officers accountable to every thing there units do, or fail to do. our commanding officers are the centerpiece of the marine corps effectiveness. commanding officers are charged with establishing and training standards, and enforcing those standards.

the unit will rise or fall as a direct result of the leadership of the commanding officer. officers never delegate responsibility. they should never be forced to delicate their authority. as such, congress's possibly considers changes to the commanders authority under the units are -- military justice, i plead with you to do it sensibly and responsibly. as strongly as i support the authority of the commanding officer, i reject the status quo and other areas to military justice and policy. i have reviewed legislative proposals related to sexual assault, and i believe there is merit to many of the proposals. i'm committed to being an equal partner as being gauge in serious debate about the best way to live -- eliminate sexual assault within our ranks. they queue for holding this important hearing on such a critical issue. i'm prepared to take your

questions. >> thank you. general welsh. lex thank you. -- >> thank you. thank you for allowing us to be here today to address this difficult but critically important topic area did -- topic. may offer on behalf of the entire panel am an dollar man and women in the u.s. military, our sympathies on the loss of senator loudon. >> we thank you for that. the air force process is almost identical. will associate myself with remarks of every service chief you have heard so far with the severity of the problem, and avoid the details an effort to my brain statement for that. i would like to say that sexual salt is a crime.

crime.al assault is a it is unacceptable than mr services. it undermines the effectiveness of our great for sprint everyone is committed to doing whatever is necessary to ensure an environment free of sexual harassment. air force leaders have worked hard to make sure people understand that it is everyone's -- is possibility to make sure the climb is free of harassment. that there is no middle ground. that message starts with me as the accountability for the solution. it is my responsibility to make -- are in our risk taught standards of behavior, discipline and respect for others. they sexual salt -- that if a

sexual assault is a care -- alleged perpetrators are given an impartial forum and held accountable. -- clearly, it is time for thoughtful consideration of every reasonable option. like my fellow service chiefs, i believe the panel gives us the option to look at the unintended consequences of major changes. and decide which ones make sense, and which might not. none of us will be standing still. commanders shouldn't just be bird -- par of the solution breathing must be part of the solution, or there will be no

solution. that's is the way our systems operate. none of us are going to slow down in this effort. we feel the same about one inc.. we all love the people in our service. all of us have families. we immediately think of them when we see a report of these crimes. i have five sisters and a mother. they set my moral compass on this issue. i've a daughter who is looking at coming into the air force. i will not be tolerant of this crime. none of us will. secretary hagel said it clearly. sexual harassment and sexual are betrayal of a sacred oath and sacred trust. they may be a must be -- they must be stamped out. i'm grateful for your continued commitment to this effort. i look forward to the conversation. >> thank you. admiral papp. >> good morning.

i appreciate opportunity to testify before you this morning. sexual assault is a violent crime that doesn't devastate its victims -- that devastate its victims. it rhodes -- he rhodes cohesiveness. we are making progress. new policies, enhanced training, improved access to victim support services, and greater reporting opportunities, including those outside the chain of command, provide us with important tools to achieve our goals of eliminating sexual salt and the coast guard. we must and we will do more. we willhe service intervene to prevent or halt these acts when they are occurring. we will investigate and discipline those who violate lawn service policies. we will insist that all our shipmates live by our core

values. most importantly, there are no by standards in the coast guard. i fouled this with a commander intent message that initiates are service wide campaign plan for limiting sexual assault from the coast guard. yesterday i brief secretary napolitano on our efforts. the coast guard system reporting of investigation and prosecution of a sexual assault cases is similar to the armies. details that are anyway different are different are contained in my brain statement. this is first and foremost a leadership responsibility. every commander must create a coulter that is intolerant of any unwelcome sexual contact or

the behaviors that enable it. we have enhance our training so that all hands recognize indicators of this behavior, and are prepared to intervene. victims must know they will be protected without fear of reprisal or stigma. prevention is the first and best option. when a response is necessary, when this crime does occur, we will hold those predators accountable. the military justice system is a critical tool for doing this. we give commanders great responsibility to act independently in demanding in danger situations greatly hold them accountable for the results. i recognize military justice system is not perfect. i welcome considered improvements where they are needed. i have serious concerns about legislation that would fundamentally alter the role of commanders without full consideration of the second and third order effects on authority, and the ability to maintain unit discipline. stopping sexual salt is the duty

of each -- stopping sexual assault is the duty of each individual. they can be know by standards. ofryone must take ownership this problem be intolerant of any action it minimizes the significance of the crime. they see it occurring, they must take action to intervene, prevent, or halt it. so you can help a shipmates in the so -- and those circumstances, i expect every -- t guard men to i look for to working with this committee to eradicating the crime from our midst, and i look for to your questions. >> thank you. we are going have a six minute round of questions. under the current law, both the initial disposition authority for a case, the official who

decides whether to proceed to court-martial, or to seek lesser punishment. in the convening authority, that is the official who appoints the military judge and other members for a trial by court- martial. both are part of a chain of command. that means that the chain of command as ultimate responsibility for addressing misconduct in the ranks. including steps to address command climate, contributes of misconduct, steps to protect the victims of misconduct, and to ensure appropriate punishment for the perpetrators. let me start general dempsey with you. tothe ucmj were amended reduce authority, i -- by taking away his or her power to refer to a case by trial by court- martial, or by taking away the

power to impose nonjudicial punishment, what impact would that have on a commanders authority and control over those who were under his or her command. in general terms, we hold the commander responsible for everything the unit does or fails to do, on or off duty. .hether deployed that kind of responsibility is best served by authority that is aligned with it. each of us heard suggest that the role of the commander is central in solving this problem, it is because we believe that the role the commander is essential to any change, any positive change we will be able to make on this issue. >> is there a relationship

between the commanders authority to take action against a member of the armed forces, and the commanders power to address problems of climate and culture with the issue of sexual assault or regard to other offenses. tonee commander sets the for all that goes on inside a unit. we must have the ability to quickly, visibly, and locally administered justice so soldiers understand that the commander will ensure that the climate operate in is important. it is important that we have these capabilities as you are deployed. that way we can export this capability. as mentioned, 800 court- martials were conducted in iraq and afghanistan by the army. several other cases of

nonjudicial punishments. this impacted not only our forces, but the iraqis are afghans that were involved in the incidence of they saw. which opened understandably were holding people accountable as well. that is an example of the kind of thing that our manners are willing and have to do. one other vignette i would give there are cases in the army, we have a soldier in the barracks who has to decide to give up. they refused to report to formation. the conduct larcenies. they start doing drugs in the barracks. it is incumbent on the commanders of the chain of command to ensure they do not alright this. if we had to give that to an independent authority to solve that problem, in my mind, that takes away the power of the commander to set a standard that

would say i'm responsible for the health and welfare of this unit. i will take charge of this discipline, whether it is here, overseas, to make sure we can operate in a cohesive way. unit cohesion is the key. >> it is frequently said that only option available to victim of sexual assault is to report to his or her chain of command. in other words, the only option is to report to the commander of his or her unit. how absurd it would be to require somebody to report to his or her boss if in fact that person has no confidence in his or bross. -- his over boss. her boss. there are many options they victim of sexual assault has for

reporting an offense. you enumerated them. , nothcare professionals terry police, local police, appropriate criminal investigative command. dod inspector general. chain of in the command, including the persons own commander should he or she make that decision. you indicated that every person in your service has been informed of those opportunities, options to report an assault. they are not limited to reporting to their own commander. in the army, and more important, do the men and , are theyin the army informed of these various options to report an assault or offense?

>> several years ago, we began training. you areirst two weeks, given the basic information about who you can report to for sexual assault offenses. it begins from the time you come into the army, to the time you progress through the army. i would say one caveat to that, which is that when they understand they can report, the next to ensure when they do report, even if it is outside the chain of command, that they are not retaliated against by the chain of command. that is the second step to this process. there are many ways for them to report. they are trained to do it. it is up to us to make sure that within the chain of command, there is no retaliation or consequences matter how your port. we are working on that carefully. and women in your services notified that they have the option to report a sexual

offense against them in numerous ways, and not just -- they're not required at all to report to their commander? >any of you disagree with that? we have to have that cleared. there has been a misunderstanding about this question of having to report your commander. any of your services, must a picture report an offense to their commander, or are these other options available? just give me yes or no. >> the options are available. >> i assume is the policy for all the services. that is exactly the same. i would add, we all have, something called a uniform victim advocate. these are actual young men and

women that are probably their same rank that are in these units. it is a lot easier to go to the contemporary. they are trained. 40 hours of training per the answer is yes. i think it is very appropriate that the defense legal policy warden reported on military justice. , theted in my statement synopsis would be the military justice system is a definitive commander tool to preserve good order and discipline. more important than a combat zone. breakdown can have devastating results. does anyone disagree? if you agree with that

statement, why don't you give -- ofexample of house authority of the maintaining good and order and discipline to more mission effectiveness. it is about quickly, visibly, and locally taking action. very quickly, make sure that the unit and other soldiers involved that this will not be tolerated. and ensures that action will be taken immediately. , havecannot do it problems with witnesses, or cause us to not have something done quickly, visibly, and locally. in my opinion, it is about continuing to have unit a forward operating capability that allows our perform to come --

their duties. >> in reeling -- in reading the report, a quote several of you on this panel. secretary mccue stated that services are consistent in their position that initial and final disposition authorities should decide in the commanders, as is currently the case. you are stated in here as saying creating artificial distinctions between offenses should not supplant the commanders case-by-case valuation of an alleged offense. is that an accurate statement today? >> yes sir. >> tommy why? -- tell me why? >> after 34 years of practice and law and the military, commanders are enhanced in their ability to exercise command and control read

ability to discipline their forces is enhanced by holding every member of their command accountable. >> very good. you statedof 2012, in a combat environment, noncompliance with rules and undisciplined operations caused -- cost lives. used to believe that the commander must maintain a central impermanent role as you did a year ago question or >> yes, idea. whether anomie on a -- good >> could either one of you give an example of how i could cost lives? >> we have indications, several years ago, where we had one or

two marines that were not paying attention to business, falling asleep on duty. tankresult of this, the commander and company commander had to do something about it. marines lives were at risk. there was nonjudicial punishment in those cases. for deployment is critical, it could cost lives. >> thank you. yesterday i talked about the temper visions that were in the fiscal year 2013 that were the programs that were on sexual assault. anyone give me a status as to what has been done on those 10 recommendations that were in the fiscal year 2013?

>> it is a long list. i think one of the big game changers here is going to be the hiring of certified credentialed victim advocates. we recognize our victims need an advocate. we think those be a supporting efforts for the uniform victim advocates. toting them online is going be big. we are in the process of hiring them now. lex i'm trying to get a if those are 10 pacific things. i assume you are all aware of those. lastly, the air force currently has a pilot program for special victims counsel. what is the current status of that? in january.am began it was planned to run for one year. we plan to give airport to secretary of defense no later than the first of november of this year. we have so far had 318 victims applying. we currently have 60 special

victims counsel, who are fully trained to do this work. they art supporting 282 victims in various ways, including all the way through a court-martial or adjudication of their cases. we believe the program is working very well for us. we are excited about where it is going. >> this is a air force pilot program. >> the results we are seeing are very positive. i'm going to recommend my secretary be continued the program. , but are resource issues it has been a good program. senator reed. >> this issue goes to the heart of our military forces on national security. all the talent, and the billions of dollars in technology will not make a difference if soldiers don't

trust their fellow soldiers, and don't trust the commanders pray the essence of the military is that soldiers protect, not exploit, their comrades. to youraid that, knowledge, has the army relieved the commander who has tolerated in an appropriate environment with respect to sexual abuse? >> in the last four years, we .ave nearly 57 commanders for commandf those climate. half were related to their ability to execute sexual assault and other issues associated with command climate. and toxic leadership. -- ifthis annex wasn't -- an explici

-- if you asked me specifically if sexual harassment is on there, we do not specifically mention sexual harassment. we talk about command climate. >> it may be well to consider making that more exclusive. not only in terms of relief, but in terms of evaluation and promotion. if you want the chain of command to be having the authority that has today, then it has to be extraordinarily responsible to the specific issue.

that is my opinion for what is worth. can you answer the same question? >> the command climate is an explicit part of an officer's fitness report. command climate of a unit is immediateby the senior income and growth fund's reported to our type commander. i virtue of those reports in the synopsis, the command climate is evaluated by the promotion board. it is explicit part of the board. the failure to respond to the sexual abuse in this command question are >> not specifically due to sexual abuse and a command. ,hose who have been removed unfortunate after the fact, we have found that it is an attribute. >> general welsh. >> we have not removed a

commander explosively for a climate of sexual assault. we have removed commanders for command climate. i do not want -- i do not know one specific to that. you're clearly held accountable as far as performance reports based on ability to to lead and influence people. this is a major part of that. maybe equally as importantly, our commanders in the field, need to fully understand how the air force and i feel about this topic. and that how it will affect their future opportunities. i called all of them to d.c. last year and made it clear that i haven't talked to them myut this, but i believe wing commanders can tell you what i expect in this regard. we have all done that. best of my knowledge, since i've been commandant, i

do not believe we have relieved anybody from command for having a climate of sexual assault or sexual harassment. that said, there isn't expectations -- there is an expectation to set the conditions, a climate in his own organization that not only does the combat stuff, equipment and training, but sets the environment so that young marines that are in it are confident in their leadership. last month i sign a policy, it is instituted now. every commanding officer will take the command climate survey. we just finished it. 34 questions. at least five deal with sexual assault, sexual harassment, confidence in the leadership to be able to protect the young marine. that command climate survey will be done at the beginning of every single commanders term within the first 30 days, and

then annually at that point. those results will go to the next higher command. as commanders responsible for everything else, clearly responsible for command climate. in my expectations, we will see more of this in the future. we average probably one dozen police for cause each year due to command climate issues. we call the spectrum -- we have officers in charge at the chief petty officer level, although we up to junior officer commands as well. summarily due to command climate issues, as they're discovered. two yearsd one relief ago relieved of command or for failure to report sexual assault. a came back in the chain of command about this manner, and he was remaining -- relieved for failing to report. >> thank you.

>> senator mccain. >> thank you. obviously, we are here today to determine how the department of defense can most effectively reduce instances of sexual assault and ensure that offenders are held accountable. eyewitnesses have characterized the problem as a crisis and the cancer. it threatens the fabric of our military but i cannot agree more. issue core, this is an of defending basic human rights. it is also a long-term threat to the strength of our military. we have to ask ourselves, if left uncorrected, what impact will this problem have on recruitment and retention of qualified men and women? last night, a woman came to me and said her daughter wanted to join the military. could i give my unqualified --port for her doing cerro

doing so. i could not. i cannot overstate my disgust and disappointment over the continued reports of sexual misconduct in our military. we have been talking about the issue for years. talk is insufficient. i would remind my colleagues that after the vietnam war, at the end of the vietnam war, after the aftermath, there was a breakdown in discipline. it was race riots on aircraft carriers. there was instances of -- and andendous racial unrest tensions within our military. we addressed the issue. we addressed the issue, and now i believe that the military is our most effective equal opportunity employer. we must do that in the case of this crisis that we are facing now. today and we agreed action has to be taken. i hope that today's hearing will build on that consensus. as you statedy,

in your prepared statement, you have endorsed secretary hegel's proposed amendments to article 16. i'm sure that my members of the panel are familiar with it. they would prohibit a convening authority from setting aside the findings of a court-martial, except for a narrow group of offenses, and provide a convening council -- is or anyone that disagrees with secretary hegel's recommendation? thank you. do the services allowing individuals with a history of sexual crimes to -- st receive a commission >> there are my judgment inadequate protections for precluding that from happening. findffender could in fact

their way into the armed forces of the united states. in fact there has been cases where convicted -- a conviction would not automatically result in a discharge. >> obviously we have to fix that. >> absolutely. expressed your support for this proposal. you need to consider several technical amendments to ensure ucmj continues functioning. would you submit for the record those changes would like to see? it is important to see the extent to which commanders are following the advice of legal counsel in making this position determinations. my understanding is that in an overwhelming number of cases in each service, commanders following the advice of legal counsel, could i service chief

or judge advocate tell us how many cases to the commanding officer go against the advice of a staff judge advocate and executing their authority? generaloing to let larry talk to his numbers. in 43 years, i cannot take a single instance where my judge advocate, and all the times i've been in commands, i cannot think of a single instance my judge advocate came to me and said we will recommend you prosecute these cases, and i didn't do it. on the other hand, i can think of many where he said we didn't have enough evidence, don't prosecute them, and that anyway. related to this, people are led to believe that all of a sudden commanders are doing this case with no experience. the time you come into the army

or any service as a commission .fficer yes. in every case, i agree with general amos. women had enough evidence to go, we did. in many times, we went to a court-martial anyway because of the importance of the case. >> we scrubbed every case for the last year for sure for discontinuities. the advice was taken by the commander. fore reviewed every case the last three years. , thecases pre-22 of those disposition authority did not agree with recommendation from the jagged -- jag.

that was the action was taken. in 12 of the 2500 cases, the commander made a different decision than what his jack jagmmended -- his recommended. >> you've had a long experience with this. is the problem worse? or the same? >> sexual sold issues in general? i think the problem is improving. during junior officer tailhook pritikin tell you that i do not recall the training efforts, the response, the prevention, the attention on our .bility to prosecute offenders reaching down from leadership at that time, i would tell you any time since, and now, i see a difference. i see a difference in the leadership. i see difference in how the judge advocates are trained to respond and support, and i say difference in the prevention and

response efforts. >> you would agree to improvements need to be made? >> yes, sir. >> we would be interested in your support or lack of support of some of the recommendations that we are considering. >> yes, sir. i would be happy to provide this for the record. >> thank you, senator mccain. i appreciate you being here. i have spent hours with your prosecutors over the last several months. i have a lot conversations with you at the table. including those i want to start with the fact that i think part of the problem here is that you will push together to issues in ways that are not helpful to successful prosecution. we have sexual predators

committing crimes in you have work to do on the issue of a respectful and healthy work environment. these are not the same issues. with all due respect, we can prosecute our way out of the first issue. we can prosecute our way out of the problem of sexual predators that are not committing crimes of lust. my years of experience tell me that they are committing crimes of domination and violence. this isn't about sex. domination,assault, and violence. while those two are put together, you will not be as successful as you need to be to get after the most insidious part of this. that are sullying the great name of the american military. i want to start with the way

that you are reporting, it has this backwards. unwanted sexual contact is everything from sometbody looking at you sideways and somebody pushing you up against the wall and brutally raped a new. you have to delineate the two problems because until you do, we have no idea if you are getting your hands around this. we need to know how many women and men are being raped and sexually assaulted on an annual basis and we have no idea right now because all without is we have unwanted sexual contact. that doesn't tell us if it is an unhealthy work environment or if you have criminals. you have to change the reporting. success will look like this. more reports of rape, sodomy, and the salt, and less incidence of rape, sodomy, and assaults.

do a good job, that number is going to go up. if we are doing well. we have no way of being able to demonstrate that with the way your reporting now. i hope you all understand that. and theg is key, senator and i are in agreement that this is about creating a culture were victims are comfortable coming forward. and that is incredibly important. in number of steps are being proposed in all the pieces of legislation that a number of you have agreed with, that is progress. we have to look at restrictive reporting and an emphasis on getting the perpetrator identified. nobody is pressing to get the perpetrator idea and an unrestricted report. he victim that won't come

forward today will come forward a year from now because two other victims have come forward. if we don't of the perpetrator was, we can't go back and talk to that vic them. that is one thing you need to work on. let me ask a question of you. i agree with the part of the senators legislation and others have included this as well as in the legislation that we should not be taking into account how good a military person is in deciding whether or not to try them on a felony. the fact of a felony is the fact of a felony. i don't care how the pilot is or how good a special loss person is. their ability to perform as a soldier who wore an air man or a member of the coast guard is irrelevant to whether or not they committed a crime. do any of you disagree with the

proposal how that we should be not considering how good a military character they have in terms of how well they serve the military as part of the consideration on weather and not a case should be tried? he does anybody disagree with that? >> i will comment that assessing the character to the extent that you can through previous thieves is inappropriate factor to enter into the equation. he doesn't enjoy overriding way, but i think that's what the code had in mind. also assessing and individuals' character in the community to determine whether or not the allegation is supported or not support it, but it is one of many characters in the totality of circumstances that you referred to that are taken into consideration in the decision

whether not to prosecute. but it is not an overriding factor for one that would result in a decision not to prosecute. >> the character would come in to the trial if the defendant wanted to bring it into the trial far -- and there would be an opportunity to impeach. i completely disagree with you. whethert relevant as to or not somebody raped a woman, how good a pilot he was. >> i'm not referring to their job performance, i am referring to their character. >> if the defendant and brings it in in a trial, it is relevant, but i have an opportunity to impeach. you don't have that at the disposition phase.

that is confusing to people out there. it is the end of the trial. of the trialing process, deciding whether not there is sufficient evidence to support the charges, the character of the defendant should be irrelevant. nosh a character for criminal actions in the past. convicted, ifeen he has had other actions against him, is not putting together a package. >> we may are may not disagree, but we will search that out. i need to know how many cases you will have taken and declined to prosecute and i need to know how many cases after someone has

been found not guilty in civilian court. a year of taking action after someone has found not guilty. having that is important for consideration. >> let's get the statistics that have been requested ha along that line. >> let me say that i think each of you delivered a statement with emotion and passion, and you obviously recognized the seriousness of the issue and i take you in your word that we are going to get to the bottom andow we attack the issue, the best way to resolve it moving forward, especially if we're going to have women in combat, the potential for the

issue to increase is going to become even greater. instanto go back to an that did not occur on your watch. haves i recall, whereas we the first females go out on an aircraft, when they returned to port, a significant percentage of those females were pregnant. it was pretty high. was any investigation made by the navy following that incident to determine whether or not all of those pregnancies occurred as a result of consensual acts? was there any investigation regarding sexual attacks? >> i'll have to take that one for the record. his thatson for asking

i hear and understand all of you talking about the importance for chain of command, and if we are maintaining good order and discipline, that has got to be the case. there has to be some kind of fear put into these young people that come through every thish of their service, were to defend the constitution in and the fear has got to be the that chain of command that we allude to really is serious about making sure that these types of sexual assaults do not do,r and by golly, if they starting with the drill sergeant all the way to the top, somebody is going to make sure that you pay the price. and if you look at the private antor, there would of been extensive investigation and it would not be taken for granted

everything was consensual. i dare say that after that happened, it made a airline -- the headlines and the paper. frankly, i don't recall any investigation being made. in looking back, it is easy to see that it should have because of the number of instances that we have seen. the easiest way to eliminate this problem is to make sure that it never happens in the first place and that these men and lyneham are trained early on as to the types of situations that ought to avoid and the consequences if something like this does happen. to each of you, i will ask you. background check done during the recruitment process to determine whether or not these young men and women

have had any incidences that might lead to this? >> there are background checks done, but i am sure there are cases where people have entered the military and airforce that have had a problem in the past that is not in any data base. >> with regard to criminal records, those are done, but as the general said, to the degree of success, we have the facts check. >> the same background checks were done, but the ability to identify sexual offenders is certainly not 100% right now. we have to make sure that we are providing the -- scrutinizing as we go forward. >> we are plugged into the fbi database, and we absolutely will not recruit a marine or

candidate that has a sexual assault background at all. and when we find out we have a marine that is convicted of it, how they are discharged. do a background on every person recruited, and if we find someone that a slip through the cracks, which have fraudulent and they are discharged. >> i doubt that there may be some exceptions has your responded. tore may be some exceptions folks that slip through the crack, but you will have to go further than looking in convictions of individuals. i don't know how you're going to do that. if you get additional character references or what. there may be individuals that need to be given to the military

to prepare, and it might be on other issues also. we of got to do a better job of screening folks before they come in. and we have to think about making changes in this respect. the young folks coming in the each of your services are anywhere from 17 to 22 or 23. the hormone level created by nature. it sets in place the possibility for these types of things to occur. job, not doing our with the rates we are seeing on sexual assaults. you recognize it and we recognize it, we have got to think this out because we can't tolerate it.

>> good morning to all of you, thank you for being here to discuss what is probably the most troubling issue this committee has addressed. the american people trust our military more than any institution in our country and that trust is well-deserved. of thisaid some honorable actions of our troops and leaders are threatening that trust. every sexual assault committed by an american service member represents a fundamental failure of leadership. and we're not just talking about a few assaults, we're talking about thousands. if they can't trust teammates or leaders to keep them safe, we are facing a fundamental

breakdown of order and discipline that with our troops a greater risk than they already face. we asked a lot of our troops, and i refuse to ask them to put up with ray. assaultmistake, sexual as a national disgrace. but the american people expect the military to uphold the highest possible standard of conduct. the military is failing to meet that expectation. i have been working with my colleagues on both sides of the aho who on legislation to help and display. i know that you're working to were the same goal. entitieseed to do more that have been much faster. fathers, leaders and you agree that the status quo was unacceptable. bold andxpect to see

immediate action in this crisis. i can assure you that is why you'll be seeing from me and my colleagues on this committee. my first question and i hope i could receive a yes or no answer. lacking that the dod is the authority or tools it needs to reduce the incidence of sexual assault in the military? and if not, why do you believe the number is not dropping. is not being done? >> thanks for your passion about this issue. i assure you that we share it. there are some things we have had an opportunity to reflect , and those things will come

ford and said we of had enough time to deliberate and we are eager to move ahead. the other things will eliminate if we allow it to do work. general, we have the tools that we need the we have not been getting it done. there are other measures to be taken and we hope that a panel allows us to understand that. >> i think you speak for the panel here and for the service chiefs. with theill start admiral and move to general famous. the think that we have all tools and it is a matter of focus. we have been driving that focus now and i expect to see results. >> we absolutely have the tools.

we failed on this in the past. it has not been a top priority in the years past four decades past. andit is now, on my service it is a priority. we are after if. >> i think there is a refinement that we can work together a whiff on this and we have to make sure that we understand how the effect of those requirements. >> i think that we have the tools that the commander has the tools to provide a proper atmosphere to make sure the command climate is there. i think the congress and the committee have come forward with ideas to further those tools. i think it is great that we

pursue those to move faster. we evaluate those tools to make sure that we understand the second and third order effects. believe the tools are there and i also agree that we can refine them. i think that is what this discussion of reasonable alternative should include. people know that what the result of this crime will be when you command it. we don't have a lot of people that are brilliant in this area. will take some time and it will take partnering with people that really understand the problem. >> i know we will have a series of rounds and i have more questions. this is truly something that

needs immediate attention. i know that we can solve this. >> thank you to each member of the panel. let me start with the general because i was interested in your statement about the colorado for the civilian authorities concluded there was not enough evidence to proceed, and the military court came out with a different result. understand, we have a lot of legislative proposals. among changes advocated are three that i want ask you about and how it would have impacted that particular case that you mentioned. one would be removing the unit commanders from the decision making process, a second would

be placing the convening authority for court-martial for sex-related crimes outside of the chain of command for either the accuser or the accused. and for having authorities from setting aside convictions in a court martial for sex-related crimes only. let me ask you, in the case that you mentioned, how would these changes have impacted the successful results in prosecuting a member of the military that turns out was a multiple offender? >> of the commander has information and tools available to him that might raise some doubt. he commander asked for further investigations. if you have independent authority, they would not be

privy to some of this information because the commander understands other things that go on and the climate of the command. it probably would not have happened if the commander was not part of this process. it depends exactly what the legislation means. my initial thought is echoed be very difficult in this case. command and the soldiers able to direct them to continue to investigate, and and making love with more and more information, for other potential victims came forward, they were able to prosecute this case over a couple months' worth of investigation. that shows the importance of the role. and why we want them in the system. in terms of overturning convictions, it did not play a role in this at all because it comes after the court martial

would have been completed. you look at overturning results. i don't think it would have had any difference in this case at all. >> i think what the chief talked-about is relevant, that the criminal investigation division can go back to prior duty stations and look at misconduct that might have occurred there. if you retain that evidence for a sufficient time, it can have a cumulative effect and would not have altered the ability to set aside. overink we are inclined the special victimhood prosecutor history, there were 28 cases the civilians were not proceeding on and have enabled the amount a court martial.

>> in every instance that you the commander is in histant consultation with jag. >> absolutely. was intrigued by something you said, and there is a bit of a paradox here. you say the reject the status quo. we have you say that the tools. help clear up any confusion i might have over that period which proposals have the most merit for moving? in would you clarify what you're

trying to tell the panel? >> we have the tools because we have the leadership. and the institution and the commands to be able to make the changes, make the difference, and eradicate sexual assault. reject, i wasout , itrring to the wholesale is perfect. we're not going to let get it. it does need to be reviewed at length that and that is what i was referring to. i am more than willing to sit down and go through these things and these proposals. >> you mentioned aggressive steps europe taken. is the situation better or worse? have gone upmbers 31% since i took those steps. he will look and say ha, when we began this campaign plan, if we

are going to be successful to set conditions of the atmosphere, the command climate so that the victims are comfortable coming forward. we can expect the numbers of reported incidents to go up. they are up there somewhere, but where do want to try to capture as many of those as we can. seven members of got out, i expect that to happen. . >> they are occurring? but more of them are being reported? >> we don't know the top line. the total numbers of real results, if we are successful, they will come down and the numbers of actual reports will go up somewhere and will meet and have absolute ground troops. navy that happening in the in these particular locales?

you've been pressing its schools, the naval academy? are things getting better or worse? are we seeing more reports because reporting is ok now? just getting started. but in san diego and the great lakes, we are getting more reports, and navy is a 50% increase. we are getting a significant amount, i have to give you the numbers were somebody has decided to come forward from the , the numbererall, of instances has gone down by 2/3. it is still promising information's but not statistically significant.

that is just better right now. >> i thank all of you for being here today. i have the privilege of meeting with the secretary of few weeks ago and i know he is serious of cutting this cancer from the ranks of the military. it has plagued our military for far too long. i've believed your understanding that congress is serious about congress not sitting back and letting this continue. i know you have been working with us and we can't change was half an but we can work very hard to make sure it does not continue to happen. to all of you, i would say this is not a new problem. ,he army basic trading scandals the coast guard capt that was kicked out in 2010 for an

improper relationship with subordinates, the air force scandal at lac leman, in many more. many are the uses of charged to prevent sexual assault. the department of defense leaders hall said, never again. he who used phrases like a zero tolerance. so i would ask, what is different this time? if we have a history of this repeating itself, nothing ever being done. >> i will respond, and then you can redirect to the chief. i have 39 years in the service tomorrow, so i have been through times of enormous change and when we have had this issue. about that as well. what happened was not focused on

victim protection. we focused energy on victim protection and. and then, as reflected in, we enter this 12 years of conflict? i will speak for myself. i took my eye off of the ball a bit. we talked about command climate surveys. some of that stuff got pushed to the side and we did not do the right amount of command climate surveys. you're hearing a recognition that we have to go back to take some of these tools and make better use of them and focus energy on it. >> we are also lawyers working on the prevention side of it. conflict,out of this we have soldiers that engage in

high-risk behavior. so when you tie it together, i would not say we have been inactive but less active than we need to be. >> i would say that i think that the senate or congress is more senators ofh different gender that bring the balance to us, and you can see the different aspects of what we are all concerned about. with that being said, do you believe that the chain of command? those of the concerns we may have, whether they truly be able to correct itself without

the intervention of really tough legislation? legislation that we are talking about, removing the convening authority is absolutely the wrong direction to go. it will take the eyes of the commander on problem that is enormously important at a critical time when we are committed to making changes. climateges in command and confidence can only start ft toft. i take it is the wrong direction. >> these types of sexual assaults have gone on for far too long and we have identified serious problems, serious crimes that have not gone unanswered. that is why you've seen it get to the level it has today.

>> i will make a statement here. services,tted in my and we all are, often making the changes and turning this completely around, that if i honestly believe that holding the commanding officer, the disposition authority of the chain of command would fix it, i would vote for it today. it is not clear to me that is the case because it is not that way with anything else that we deal with. >> anybody that disagrees about removing this from the chain of command? agreement that must stay in the chain of command?

anybody else want to speak to that? how to take it out of the chain of command and that in the continuance of responsibility, it goes to training all the way to combat. andng that part out of it, putting the victim if they come back. go, it is back again. i don't understand how to do that yet. from that perspective, i agree with the general aim is because i have not been able to internalize or understand that. i don't know how that works. if we hold them accountable for that and it has been forever. especially those of us that go out to sea the units and it can

confuse the crew. be reviewed much more closely. >> thank you very much for your answers. >> we are not planning for a second round on this panel. we are not. or you can ask questions for the record. any of us are free to answer or ask questions for the record, the witnesses that we have to cover today. i would like to point out that

my colleagues take this very seriously and they have been leaders in the past. we need to resolve that. soon.d to happen we are looking at a crisis here that is being viewed through the lens of the gender. this is not a gender issue. they eloquently reminded all of us. many of you had indicated the

prior in terms of sexual assault. in your prepared statement, you wrote that we are also addressing command climate and how it contributes to sexual assault, particularly the impact of sexual harassment and how it contributes to a culture that may enable sexual violence. i guess i would first ask you, -- dol, and you believe you believ the culture is putting aside sexual harassment and not taking action on that contributes to sexual assault? the command that innuendo,at tolerates jokes, posters and allusions

stageing gender sets the for an environment where a if not flourish, and exists. we have to get to that. i don't know that it would expose such a person. >> i would ask each of you. do you want to make commanders more accountable for the environment they are setting. anyigh go through --

support of command climate violation is thoroughly investigated. we have a couple of units right now. >> and you think it would be beneficial if you have a formal process in place? >> this is one of the things that we are looking at. >> it is the single greatest indicator not only for combat and also the health. for theitual health institution. i am not talking about religion, i am talking about the sacredness of taking care of one another.

i approved it last month. those reports, the climate for that organization, everybody will take it and go to the chain of command. willommander's commander look to the organization and say, how are they with regard to sexual assault and sexual harassment? >> about a year ago, the incorporation of the command months surveys with six and 12 months thereafter to get after this issue. we are doing a pilot on the assessments. it incorporates questions to include a sexual harassment or sexual assault.

we are in the process of determining what is done with those assessments. i expect that i am looking at directing 360 for every battalion brigade commander. it is about commanders understanding how long warned that climate is. >> how i know that all of the value trust and it is important in your ranks, but how do you develop that trust? how will you evaluate it by the number of reporting that comes out? >> i think one of the things we're struggling with, the one thing i know for certain is that we need to make sure commanders understand we won't tolerate toxic environment.

of a toxic environment and that is what we are looking to correct. s regarding to the they mentioned command climate surveys done at the relief of the commanding officer and periodically after that. unitgo to review on the and those comments have to be adjudicated or reconciled between the two. overall, so you look at the they move up. >> how often are those surveys done?

months in the relief of the commanding officer, and then i will get you specifically the time i believe it is annually after were that you get a command climate survey. >> [indiscernible] is reviewed by the immediate superior. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. admiral, everyone on this committee shares the appreciation for your service and the service of all of the men and women in our military today.

i know we are all very concerned at addressing what is a horrible scandal on the good service of most of the men and women serving. when the chairman gave his opening remarks, he talked about some of the scandals that have surfaced in the last couple of years from the allegations of the naval academy about ray, to the rugby team, being abandoned ,t west point, the recent video to lapland. all of these scandals make me wonder if the measures that have been taken are going to be able how weamentally address

operate in the military. you talked about the chain of command. i wonder if any of you can remove the chain of command from serious cases and how that is working. >> i have not, but i will. >> we have just begun that in preparation for this hearing in the consideration of some of the legislative recommendations. we have a briefing on the house

counterparts and a couple of other requests. >> i hope you'll let us know what you find out. everyone today has talked about the importance of good order and discipline. the unit morale and cohesion, what has been your experience about that? >> we have to rely on each other totally. what your position is, whether you are male or female, it goes against

everything we are. it fundamentally goes that the discipline of our unit. disturbingt makes a to all of us. that is why it is so important that we deal with this issue. we are increasing the role of women and a number of women. talents and that is important for us. >> we have introduced legislation that would make the sexual assault response positions more high-profile.

i am wondering if there is a response from the other chiefs. only if they had a hand in the selection process, do you think this would be helpful? >> a year ago, when we were putting this campaign plan together. let's change it and fix it. the head of our program, to come in and had that up because they had the passion and, intellect, and capacity to be able to do that.

representing these programs to us, they should be hand-pick. >> the sexual response coordinator is that are doing absolutely phenomenal work. are battlinge they upstream on this issue. the process of expanding the members and removing the entire office. we can expand highly qualified experts to help give us the expertise to move forward in this area.

i believe that the lack planned issue that we saw the last couple of years was exactly that. it was not knowing if we're relieved commanders for this. we have those that were relieved by ed rice and it was likely that allowed that to develop. >> my time is up. you, mr. chairman. people come forward and talk about being as all that --

assaulted and a bad working e nvironment are two different things. those numbers we're talking about, can you tell us the numbers or whatever allegations are being made out there, how many of them fall in the category of inappropriate conduct versus a crime? can you tell me that? >> no, sir. n have no stats or figures i ca give you. but we have someone removed for command climate issues, it goes much deeper -- command climate is a hostile workplace.

how do we capture the difference? they perform their duties but have this this position. how how do we separate those two? with the senator completely. >> are there reporting in a way -- goodthink it's a really place to start because i don't want everybody to think that every allegation is of rape. importantgation is

and needs to be dealt with. but i think there is a big difference between the two systems that she is describing and i don't believe there is any tolerance for anyone to allow someone who is a sexual predator i would likeng -- to follow up on her questions. and now, lay people making prosecutorial decisions. the decision to prosecute individuals are made by trained warriors. sometimeselected, appointed. how would you justify this in the military that has such a difference system?

>> what we do is very unique. we are asked to do things different from any other profession. the order and discipline that we talked about, the cohesion necessary to do the things we are asked to do. >> would you agree that the lieutenant commander has authority hard to find? very few of us have the authority to order somebody in the battle -- into battle. have thes responsibility to order people were they don't get to discuss amongst themselves if it is a good idea. there is a case where a guy had been offered 20 hours and the court martial was for the commander. why would you do that?

>> all the people aboard, that ship that so far the nation. -- itself are the nation. the authority delegated to the commanding officer is responsible for anything that goes on. >> who picks the jury? >> senator, the convening authority. >> is there a such thing as a jury of one's peers? >> it is different. correct. they outrank the individual on trial. every officer outranks an individual. >> they will all be senior enlisted people.

court-martial panels are not a jury of one's peers, they are made up of people of expertise and knowledge and experience. they are assigned to do justice to the individual cases but have the command perspective because the whole point of military justice is to render justice in individual cases to make sure the system is unique -- moving the of forward. unit forward. commanders listen closely to their jag's. the only cases are the bad cases. can you tell us why you would do that? >> there are times where i have sent the case forward when by jag says there is not enough

compelling evidence. makes up a lotid of sexual assault cases. oftense cases, i have forwarded it to a court martial because i will let the jury and the judge sort it out but i want to send a signal to the command that it is not tolerated. it may become clearer and the matter of a court. >> you will agree that should be taken away from commanders? that is internally inconsistent with your message to us. how do you reconcile that? >> they bring in trained judges

, the conditions are warranting that authority no longer .ertain >> the question was raised of keeping statistics separately from assaults, sexual misconduct, that might not be dividing line. said that asm well. to propose that put in place a system of tracking the misconduct in different categories so we can understand it better and have a base line that we can follow. leadership andhe

to see if it is possible with the staff currently available? >> it's not. >> it's not., senator. is not available, start now. if it is come a you can reconstruct something, find. >> the numbers we have been lying on that have been so widely reported is the 36,000 number and that is from the biannual survey and the question is, have ?ou had unwanted sexual contact does0fyr does not help us trac. we> if i could add just so

know how we got here to my 15ause i recall it might be years ago, a conversation about whether we should separate these categories because in separating them, you could encourage some to ignore the unwanted sexual touching or the sexual harassment and focus in only on the sexual assault. it wa it was our view that this was a problem that was a continuum. not individual acts. we didggesting to you not get to this point by being stupid. we got to this point because we were trying to do the right thing. looking back at it it is time to adjust. >> it is important we do that. senator joe brand, thank you for your leadership on your subcommittee. you have been a leader in the subject. we appreciate both of those things.

>> thank you. thank you for holding this hearing and what senator levin , he saidhe hearing discipline is the heart of the military culture and trust is its soul. i am not sure -- i am sure there is not one of you that does not disagree. i spend a lot of time over the past several months trying to understand this problem because i appreciate the service and dedication every single one of you gives every single day to this country to my and i am extremely grateful with the renewed passion and determination so many of you have shown in this hearing about how you will get to the bottom of this problem and how you will in the scourge of sexual violence and assault and the military. i believe you when you say that is what you want to accomplish create what i want to talk about today is how we are going to accomplish that and what the actual problem seems to be. after speaking to victims, they have told us that the reason they do not report these crimes

is because they fear retaliation. more than half say they think nothing is going to be done and close to half say they fear they .ill have negative consequences they will be retaliated against. of the victims who did report, 52% said they did receive some retaliation. unfortunately, the reports that we do have, the incidence of reporting has actually dropped in comparison to the number of cases. from 13% to under 10% of the -- of 26,000es are incidents. secretary panetta has said the most important thing we can do is prosecute the offenders and deal with those who have broken the law. we can deal with this issue. each one of you have talked about today. you said the military is built on a bedrock of trust.

troops, to rely on our it goes to unit cohesion and discipline. you said it perfectly. you said the exact same thing that we need to have trust. general welsh, you said the bottom line is they do not trust us enough to report. general amis, you said the exact same thing in april. why would not be male marines come forward? -- female marines come forward? they do no they do not trust the process. you might argue that we have become too forgiving because if the perpetrator shows up at it court-martial -- at a court- martial with a rack of ribbons and a purple heart. characterou think should be considered whether or not we go to stick -- to trial. no standard in the country

agrees. that is why we want prosecutors to make that decision. my concern is this. you have lost the trust of the men and women who rely on you. that you will actually bring justice in these cases. .hey are afraid to report they think their careers will be over. they fear retaliation. they fear being blamed area that is our biggest challenge right there. right there. what i want to ask you, you have all said you could never support taking this out of the chain of command. claire made isn important. i agree with you, the chain of command is essential for studying the climate erie it absolutely. you do set the climate and that is why we when we looked at this problem we have chosen article -- to keep article 15 issues in the chain of command. not showing up on time, going

awol, not charging up the hill when you command your service member to do so. we have understood that you do set the tone for all of this. there is a difference between setting the tone, dealing with misdemeanor level behavior, and dealing with some criminal behavior. when we are talking about serious crimes, serious crimes like rape and murder, crimes that have penalties of more than usear or more, several of are asserting and arguing is we think you should do what other countries around the world who we fight with every day, that they are our allies, they are side-by-side with us in combat. israel, the uk, australia, germany. they have taken this serious crimes out of the chain of command for this reason. the commander while you are also dedicated and determined, not all commanders are objective. not every single commander necessarily wants women in the force. not every commander believes

what sexual assault is and can distinguish between a slap on the ass and a rape, because they have merged all these crimes together. this has been done before by our allies. israel because they have prosecutors to high-level cases, you know what has increased by 80%? reporting. i would like you to tell me specifically if you elevated only the decision points of whether to prosecute the serious military a j.a.g. officer. woe decision is just t decision points. i do agree with you. you have -- you are essential to this. i do not think you can get this %one if you're not 100

dedicated. what i would like you to say and starting with general dempsey. how do you feel about those decision points and white can you maintainn't order without those points? ,ou have 26 thousand attempts either unwanted sexual attempts, assault, or rate area that does -- that is not defined as day- to-day good order and discipline. it goes to the heart of not having military readiness. please give me your thoughts about those decision points and why does overturning -- why is overturning ok with you and not going to trial ok with you? we will give consideration, it is part of the 576 process. as i have said earlier i have not had the time to talk to mike counterparts. i am not sure they would align

themselves with you on this success or failure of taking it out of their military chain of command. some cases they were forced to do it and they are expressing their support for that. i do want to be clear. though i am aligned closely with my peers here on the idea try to fix this through the commander, not around him, i also think we should take a look at surrounding him or her with a constellation of checks and balances so that we empower and hold accountable commanders. that is my initial thoughts create >> general amis, could you give me your thoughts? ong withfollowing al enabling the commander. at just last year, we had total of all our general court 97% under your

bill would go to this independent decision authority. be thingsat would like failure to abate orders and regulations. -- obey orders and regulation. >> any crime of omission is excluded. >> i'm going by what is listed down here. assault, article 134. adultery, child endangerment, all those things would go to the independent disposition authority. those are things that are in line with the commander's mete out justice and maintain good order and discipline. if i thought and i am not convinced of this, if i thought that moving an ida on sexual assault matters would reduce sexual assaults and her kris -- am note reporting, i there yet.

i am not convinced of it yet. >> i would like each of you to submit for the record two things. how do you intend to regain trust of the men and women that serve under you, that they can get justice within the current system, because that is clearly what they have told us. they do not have the trust in you, many of you have said that. how do you intend to hold commanders accountable if they do not get reporting up and they do not begin to solve this problem, because none of you has ever reprimanded or held any of these commanders accountable in the past. if everything starts and stops with the commanders, how do you intend to hold them accountable if you do not solve this problem? >> that will be to the record. a number of them have testified they have held commanders accountable in the past including for sexual climate. >> it was never dismissed. >> we will at their testimony speak for itself.

>> i would like to correct the record. my guys and behind me remind me ,e have relieved two kernels for sexual harassment and sexual -- colonels for caress men and assault. assault.ment and here.nk you for being get to this table without considerable skill in lots of areas. leadership, communication, lots of things. i am always impressed when you represent your service and represent those who serve us and defend us. i did inc. general dempsey and admiral, your response to the question that senator shaheen asked was stunningly bad.

the question was, have you talked to people, to services that have been dealing with this for longer than we have, and you said thanks for the tip about australia and israel which and general dempsey, you said you had begun that process preparing for this hearing. which i thought was -- good thing we had the hearing. but in response to what senator jill gillebrand said, this is not management, this is not a tough management thing. where do you go to find out how people have dealt with this before and how could that possibly be a tip from someone on this committee to the principal manager of the united states navy and i will let you answer that first and then

general dempsey. >> as the legal counsel, that is one of the areas i have looked into. i have done some research on the uk -- >> i will feel better than i did a minute ago if someone is looking into this. she too has had those conversations with our navy but i take that aboard as something that i should have done and i did not although we have talked j.a.g.t with my said that tohave senator shaheen. i know you have a difficult job. i admire what you do. this has been going on now for years. senator mccaskill has been since the day she got here trying to draw attention to this effort. you have not been in that job all that time but talking to people who have managed this

problem longer than we have come a seems to me the very easiest place to start, lace to star should knowhe top that. >> i have talked about sexual assault with several of my counterparts. i have not discussed litigating and taking litigation or the process of litigation outside of the chain of command. i have had numerous conversations with mike counterparts. fix that is a helpful addition. general dempsey. >> as part of my duties i have been looking into these matters. i have started thinking about it isaf and u.s. forces afghanistan in 2009 and get -- got a chance to learn about some of our ally systems. wascriminal justice

bifurcated from the military chain of command. an individual that made a decision that a commander would -- with atul field experience might have experienced as a violation of the rules of engagement. it was handed over to civilian prosecutors with no military or combat experience to make decisions about whether or not it was appropriate for that individual to call in fire on the position. there was some dissatisfaction. i have spoken with a reddish judge advocate and he sent me an article on the system i am in the process of looking at and some of my folks are as well. each service judge advocate has terminal law chops and from speaking to some of them, they have considered australia, the , thatd israel and others have looked at this not necessarily necessarily as a solution to sexual assault, but just as a system to pulling all crimes out of the chain of

command and into a independent and in some cases civilian prosecutor and in some cases court. >> i would think from a management point of view and i hope you are doing this, all of the thoughts we can get from other people dealing with this are, how do you stop it from happening? how do you minimize the chances, you will have to deal with this at a litigated level i whatever you do and the culture of the command. what do you do to stop this from happening, and if we find out they are doing a better than we are, that is something that we should know but i think in many cases they have dealt with this in the situation, particularly what we are going into now, longer than we have in combat and other situations. the question i am going to submit for the record and i do not have time for everyone to answer it now. among others it will be emma teach of the service chiefs, is the soldier, sailor, airman, rain -- marine, or coast

of being less fearful retaliated against for reporting instances of sexual harassment or assault than they were in the past question mark and i may put a couple of qualifiers. feel the guidance of commanders are issuing is restoring trust among members of the service that we need to have? and thank you. >> the question for the record will be answered. would that be addressed to all of the other chiefs western mark -- chiefs? all questions for the record we have identified so far, kindly answer those promptly. any other questions that are not referred specifically today me so we can to pass them on no later than

thursday so we can put some sort of finite and two questions for the record. senator blumenthal. join in expressing the appreciation to you for being here today. is aw this moment challenging and difficult and even a painful one because you share our view that the crime of theal assault sullies good name and honor of the greatest military in the history of the world and each of you has given your lives, your professional and personal lives to serving the military and many under your command have literally given their lives under your command to serve that military and to keep faith and maintain the trust that we all agree is at the core of the great service that you perform. , havingo question

spoken to you before today and many under your command that they share your determination to root out this cancer. and to do what the civilian world has in many instances failed to do which is improve our justice system there. and i think the military has a great opportunity to teach some lessons to the civilian world. just as you did on the issue of race relations and desegregation. which general ms has alluded to. amos has alluded to. i know about prosecution because i dated for a number of years. it it is difficult to make the judgments about whether to charge someone with a crime. it is the most difficult part of being a prosecutor. because you know in charging someone with many crimes, you're

going to ruin that person's life forever. whether there is a conviction or not. factors and of issues to be considered are what kept me awake at night. have supported making those decisions by someone who is trained and experienced, and has the responsibility exclusively, not only for making the decision but then trying the case. 'swelcome general dempsey suggestion that we have to have checks and balances, a constellation of checks and balances. i welcome general cody are now -- odierno's suggestion that we

need to take a hard look at the prison system but what i would present system but what i would suggest is that this is not about prosecuting, and as difficult as the decisions you make about the expertise it is within your training, and the military would be well served to having those decisions made by someone who is perhaps not completely outside the chain of command that at least within it and not -- maybe a judge advocate who is again not necessarily trained in this function, but someone who does have that role exclusively so that he or she can bring to bear that expertise and experience. reporting is the key factor here. i some of theed

numbers that we have heard, 31% in the marine corps which i think is a basis for hope or optimism but reporting will not occur in greater numbers unless we do refine the present system. i have suggested in legislation i proposed that victims be given restitution out of a compensation fund. as an incentive to come forward but a means of making them whole. ,et me ask all of you considering that someone can get restitution as a victim for having a car robbed, is it not appropriate for restitution to go to a victim or survivor of sexual assault? >> as i said in my opening statement, i have been attended to all the legislative proposals. i am hopeful as part of the 576 panel that that issue of

restitution would come up and i am not prepared to give you an answer because i do not understand -- australia has done that, in some ways successfully and in some ways unsuccessfully and i am still trying to learn allies ins of our that regard. i understand it. >> i assume you would agree from what you said that mandating a punitive discharge for convicted sexual offender would be something you would support, another measure that i have proposed. >> i have said that the automatic discharge for convicted felony offenses is in the case that we are discussing is an idea i would align myself with. >> what about the idea of --e ill of rights that is and bill of rights that is incorporated into the uniform code, a bill of rights for

victims or survivors. is that something that would serve the purpose of eliciting more reporting? >> yes, i believe it is. the only one we have put forward is the article 60 change. these others we would hope to put forward as part of the outcome of the 576 build. >> including the right against repeated interrogation without some kind of counsel being present,mma a right -- right to have counsel present, those kinds of rights are basic fairness. or some kind of ombudsman authority within the department of defense that would be a

source of action in the event there were [inaudible] in the justice system. would you support that kind of change as well? >> i am not trying to avoid your question but i am suggesting to you that i have said that we will consider any of the options presented by 26 pieces of legislation through the 576 process. >> let me just close and i appreciate being given this opportunity to question. one of the facts was the suggestion by the testimony from general amos and general odierno, that they went ahead to prosecute despite the recommendation from their judge advocate which i think indicates the passion and zeal that needs to be brought to this problem and i commanding officers

am confident that if that kind of zeal and passion were wrought to decisions to charge, it will change this climate -- the command climate and eliminate this cancer from the military system. thank you. we're going to after this panel is completed, we we will move directly to the next panel. we are not going to be stopping for lunch today, we will work through the lunch hour. that is good news i wanted to deliver as early as possible. >> thank you. i want to thank all of our witnesses who are here today for their service and leadership to our country, and let me -- there is a few questions that i feel, number one, has not been answered. graham touched about it,

gillebrand touched upon it. if you cannot answer it that needs to be taken for the record. why is it you change -- you support the changes to article 60 and yet when it comes to the dispositional authority for crimes of sexual assault, that you believe that it would undermine the chain of command to make those changes or some changes to the dispositional authority and i have not heard a clear answer on that today. i am asking just as someone who i believe, this is something we need answered as a panel. we have all these pieces of legislation. i think this is an important threshold issue that we have to address. if you would like to take that for the record, i would like a clear answer so we can understand what the differences are between what i think has

already been described and can be viewed as an inconsistent position on one end for the chain of command versus the dispositional authorities. i would appreciate your response to that. i am not asking for that today. it would be important in this markup to have a full understanding of what you think about that. -- then i wanted to ask >> is that addressed to each of the chiefs? >> it would be appropriate. asked today and whether it has been answered fully or clearly, we will leave up to each member here to decide. however, it is an important question that goes to the heart of the matter. we are asking each of the chiefs to give us your response to that question no later than this friday. your answer to that question no later than this friday given the fact that markup is next week. >> thank you. i appreciate it. i know general wells that you were asked earlier about the air

force special victims counsel pilot program. senator murray and i, we have a bill combating military sexual .ssault that has 33 cosponsors as i understand it you said the response has been positive. in the air force to this program. , senator,ator -- yes overwhelmingly positive. >> victims feel they have the when i look at the survey that is one thing that is loud and clear. 43% heard of negative experiences from other dems that reported their situation. ask what youro opinion is not only in the air force but every branch of our military.

>> thanks. we have discussed that, and there is a distinction between special victims capabilities and toocacy that we are trying work through and understand, but we are very much in agreement we need to do more for vic m's. -- four victims. if you areappreciate goe to give us -- as we into the markup it would be helpful to know because this legislation does have 33 cosponsors in the senate, and i want to make sure every victim of sexual assault get the support they need to make sure people -- we turn this around in terms of people -- there is a group of people not coming forward because they fear how they are going to be treated by so knowing there is

a representative who will represent their rights and respect their rights in the system i think is very important, so i appreciate any follow-up. i want to ask, one of the we talk about by,dents we are troubled i, we had 43 trainees allegedly victimized. it ranges from improper relationship all the way to rape, and one of the components of the legislation senator murray and i have introduced prohibits sexual contact between .nstructor or is an trainees i think all of you appreciate

there is a vulnerability to those in the training setting with those who are commanders and the people they are reporting to that are training them. when i saw your written response to that piece of the legislation, i was troubled there was not an endorsement of that regarded -- of that. i need to understand where do you stand in prohibiting sexual contact during basic training. >> we have spoken about special for basic trainees. we find ourselves in a dilemma. we have not had a chance to speak with him about any of these in particular, which is why i have said on a couple of

occasions personally i think some of these issues have real potential, but i have to be true to the legislation and a panel that will try to see this holistically. i am not trying to avoid the question, but i am trying to make sure i have the opportunity to bring it into context. .> i know my time is up it does not make sense when you have issues like the relationship between a trainee and a basic training session and individuals who are training that there should not be sexual contact because that could lead to issues of coercion. i would hope that would pass the basic commonsense test test.

i look forward to hearing more from you as we have these meetings. thank you. >> i want to thank all of you for your service. i know how hard you are working to try to get all of this right of this right. we have heard the risk of unintended consequence, but here is the risk that concerns me. ,e have mothers and sisters sons and daughters, husbands and wives, and when this happens, it is the risk of personal violation of somebody. it is the risk of destroying that person's internal soul, their emotional state, their physical state, and in some cases by a person they look to who is their leader, their that they look to

with the sacred trust. it best.you put this is a sacred trust, and we have an obligation to get this right. we are in this with you. when you said the buck stops here, the buck stops with us. we have an obligation to get this right. 500, and we indy inducted a couple hundred young men and women into the service. i want to be able to know when i look them in the eyes i can keep my obligation to tell them you can serve our country and have your dignity respected. what we are trying to do. we ask a lot of , and in manys cases they are in the middle of fighting a war at the same time. ,hey have a lot on their plate

and it does not in my eyes make they dos capable if not handle it. they have other things to handle. a soldier think less of their commander simply because their commander does not handle this area? >> having tina commander in combat on three occasions, i would tell you it is essential -- having tina commander in combat on three occasions i would tell you it is essential. commander inn a combat on three occasions i would tell you it is essential. you still have threat of retaliation. i want the commander fully involved in the decisions that have an impact on the morale and cohesion of the unit to include punishment, to include ucmj. it is not too much

responsibility. in my mind it sets the tone for the unit to execute under the most strenuous conditions, and i need commanders who can do it, and if they cannot do it, we hold them accountable. that is their responsibility. i feel strongly about it. what we asked them to do is very unique and very complex, and it requires a commander who sets the tone for every issue. as we increase the role of women, it becomes even more important that the commanders take this upon themselves and they are part of the process to solve the problems. the other thing i would say is they are not making these decisions independently. you have a very experienced advocate by your side the whole time helping you through this process. theyat is the training have, the commanders in terms of classes they take or book learning they take, that they

can look at it and go it is this or that? were they have the same prosecutorial ability? >> we require commanders to go through legal orientation courses. requirement.of the they are required to go through the school teach at in charlottesville that outlines to them what their responsibilities are. pieces is if you do not understand the responsibility you go to your general for them to explain to you the details and technical responsibilities you have, so it ,s not only do you get trained they are taught to rely on their generals. >> are you aware how often people who suffered sexual assault often not not long after

there are suicidal problems? this seems to compound another issue we deal with. >> you are right. it does. that is why it gets to the overall issue of climate, environment, etc. >> i would like to ask our coast .uard admirals who are with us there is a documentary, the invisible war. there is a young lady who is a member of the coast guard, stationed on lake michigan not far from where i live. she went through an extraordinary and horrible series of events. i was just wondering, after having seen that, she has been working with the va and working with others. has the coast guard reached out to her? talkedu sat with her or with her to figure out, how can we help put this back together

for you? >> some of the allegations she makes were not revealed when she was a member of the service, and every time we had made an offer to take up those allegations we received no response. i watched that, and it wrote my heart. myrought it home and had wife watch it. a lot of spouses go on the road with us. they are dealing with the families the cruise. we have made that mandatory viewing, and we have engaged in seminars, every single senior leader in the service. it is our intent nothing like that happened again. point i want to make, i know you are committed to this, but that we continue to try to get it right for some of these

folks who have felt, i have put .orward my best claims as this process goes through, once a situate -- once a decision is made, we do not just leave them by the side. they are continuing to deal with all whole host of issues that when i looked at those kids at the indy 500, the buck stops here, too, and i have an allegation to make sure they get it right and have an awesome and wonderful career just like all of you have had era good -- all of you have had. youru departed from testimony and one way i thought was issue. you said sexual assault in the military represents an ex essential threat to our core values, and i think that is a great way to put it here he get

i think there has been a lot of the effect upon those serving, the ability thing -- the debilitating effect it might have, but i want to say a word about external affects, not just those currently serving. the recruiting concern is a major one. the collegely at in virginia. there is an institute for leadership. there is an 800-person women's college. in an the women are institute focused on training people to take commissions in the military. they have a rate higher than most of the senior military colleges in the united states at 60%. as the students and i were in dialogue about what they thought for their future, they had two major concerns they wanted to raise with me. one is was congress really .ommitted to the mission

would we want to sign on for a career if they were not committed to us. the other one was the sexual assault issue. if somebody says, i will risk death, but i do not know if i want to risk a culture that has allowed this to grow so much, that is a serious concern. we want to make sure the best leaders in the future feel this is a career they can pursue. the second external affects this has is one on society. every society needs heroes, and you are as good as we have right now. when people start to question their heroes, in not only affects their view of the military, it affects the entire society. people look at congress, and

they feel we are too gridlocked. it affects the view of the country. is not just affecting the view of the military. it weakens their confidence in the nation. that is why the stakes are so high. i tend to agree with the line of that one of the main issues is fear of reporting. they have saccharine numbers for those who do report. 62% say they have experienced isething they believe retaliation as a result. for those who do not report, maybe seven or eight do not report -- 47% do not report because of fear of retaliation and 43% to not report for

another reason which is the experience of others who have had the same reason, which would be retaliation, nothing was done, so why bother. or they have seen others go through it, and it does not make a difference. i think we have got to the issue of reporting and retaliation. you talked briefly in your special about this victims council, the response you have gotten, and i would be interested in knowing about the positive response. i am sure it is positively received along the way there is someone who can help understand the process, but i wonder if the special victims council, whether you are getting reports, it makes me fear retaliation less knowing i have somebody who is going to be with me through every step of the process. if we cannot get the fear of

retaliation down, we are not going to solve the problem. i think the special big and counsel pilot roger you are -- special victims pilot project you are working on, that might help, but if we cannot whittle the fear down we are not going to solve the problem. whether you about are seeing that in the initial reports of the project. >> we have not seen comments back from the victims who do the survey. the physically relates to i feel better about the risk of retaliation because i had special counsel. the positive return rate is 95% on these surveys. they are overwhelmingly positive about the benefits of having someone who understands the process, who is by their side supporting them, who shielded them from unnecessary questioning, who helped them understand the confusion and tax law of the systems they are

in. s are theive result feelings from victims, even when the perpetrator is acquitted. other areas that are really positive for us is we are finding fewer victims deciding not to proceed forward with prosecution, and i agree with the comment made earlier about prosecutors and eating a very critical piece about this, so the more we can get support theet the case right, better we will be in the future. another thing is there is a higher propensity once they are assigned counsel to have someone .uide them more are deciding to come forward and change from restrict it to restrict did, about 50% more. thosethat do sticks --

statistics are really important. it is one of the game changing things that can help us in this area. the only one we have found that has gained any traction. looking foreep others. >> you indicated you thought you had the tools needed. you did say on the special big dems pilot resources are a component of how -- special victims pilot resources are a component of how you can implement that. >> that would be different anded on numbers available size of service. this is an issue. we cannot define it as we do not know what the top end of the support capacity is. hopefully we will be able to -- reportthat regard

on that. >> thank you. >> you have a great deal of experience. in my experience the qualities of a leader reflect the whole organization, whether it is for good or ill, whether it is a small unit or governmental entity. a lot abouted culture, and it seems to me one of the most important wings is for you all to mean it, to make it absolutely clear, no jokes, no winks, no not, and do not tolerate people who have made winks and nods. down the line that has to be part of this. , but ithange the rules is the culture that has to change. , isg those lines

retaliation and offense? is not, it should be. is retaliation and offense? >> there may be different ways to charge that. threats that could be charged. there are different ways you could get at that behavior. >> i would suggest you may want to look at something more withfic than tampering the system, but we are talking about more subtle offenses and perhaps think about defining and offense of retaliation for reporting one of these crimes, because non--reporting is the problem. that is the issue. >> i think there are adequate revisions. >> does it ever happen? >> i have recently seen charges where there was obstruction of

justice. it was the idea someone was encouraging someone not to testify or threatening them not to tell the truth. i have seen that a number of times. i do not know of a recent example of someone being charged for retaliation, but some of them might have an idea. todoes anyone else want address the issue? >> we talk about retaliation. the top three reasons people do not report relate to loss of rises see, the desire not to undergo the process, -- loss of privacy, the desire to not undergo the process. much of the retaliation survivors report relates to thiscization, so it is idea that through social media victims feel they are isolated within the unit they may have

once shared because of this report of misconduct, the same unit whose egos they share. ethos they share. ofit is creating a culture zero tolerance to think that is important. a lot of this discussion is about the bill to take these decisions out of the chain of command. all of you issue address in your comment, and i think it is an important one. are there any figures on how many decision not to prosecute after a complaint is made? thisig a problem is who decide notse to prosecute?

any figures on that? >> much of our experience would be anecdotal. in the army we have 50 major jurisdictions and last year 2400 cases. i would have 50 authorities individual decision accompanied by a discussion following a pretrial investigation. >> senator jill a brand has suggested we ought to take this out of the chain of command because that is a problem in prosecution. what i am trying to get at, is it a problem? once everypen thousand cases or one every 10 cases? if you can perhaps answer that for the record, i would appreciate it. >> there is very little daylight between the cases they

think is worth prosecuting and the decision to refer them. one percent would be more realistic. >> that is a perfect introduction to my final question. i am looking for an alternative to take it out of the chain of command but still have check and balance. a situation where a decision not to prosecute would have to have written concurrence of the jag officer associated with that decision. in other words, it is a two- person decision as opposed to one. that is an attempt to find a middle ground between not tampering with the middle ground and the bill that would take these decisions out of the chain of command. any reflections on that? the judge is required today to give his opinion in writing, so if it disagrees with the commander's decision, it could be pushed to the next higher

level. >> could be or would be? that is my question. fax i think could be. it really depends on the nature of the disagreement between the commander and the advocate, but certainly there have been authorities who have called me and my current duties to say, can i talk through this case with you and get your assessment as to the merits of this decision? is it would gon up one level if the general disagrees with the decision not to prosecute. i am searching for an option that maintains chain of command but still provides another check we balance in these cases all agree are unacceptable. >> thank you very much. senator nelson. >> i would like to ask the in determining

whether or not to prosecute, do the accused military service record should be a , a determining factor in whether or not to prosecute? , i will starty with you. >> we had this conversation earlier, and the question was at what point does character enter into a decision to prosecute, and i think we were pretty clear that the decision to prosecute was made in the context of the overall character but always in light of the crime and the evidence that supported the criminal prosecution.

, characterxperience generally comes into sentencing punishment far more than it does into the decision to prosecute. >> character in the sense of a person's exemplary military record. that is what i am talking about. is there anybody that disagrees to prosecutesion could be mitigated i an exemplary record -- by an exemplary record of the service member accused? i do not believe a valorous record or a substantive record should have anything to do with the decision as to whether or not an individual should be prosecuted,

number one. number two, in 43 years and having done this many times, i cannot inc. of a single instance where he sat down with me and said, we ought to reconsider this because this a tremendous record. not a single time. >> does anyone disagree with general amos? do i understand you all have already discussed of this? that you agree that the notanding officer can reverse the conviction by a military court? is there anyone that disagrees,

that in other words you would agree that the commanding, convening authority could not reverse a conviction by a alitary court area -- military court? >> i cannot be for everyone the panel, but we support the proposal to modify article 60 that a convening authority could not reverse the conviction in all except minor qualified offenses if those were the only ones remaining, and he would ill retain authority to reduce ill retain- with authority to reduce sentences. >> can you speak to the circumstances where this has happened where senator mccaskill has been so involved

in? >> i am not sure what you are looking for. are you talking about convening authorities actually overturning the verdict? >> yes, in the case of general helms. >> general helms is actually a case in california, and it is a case where an individual was torged with two counts, sexual assault charges and additional lesser charges. in the courts the principal sexual assault charge was found to be not guilty. the perpetrator was found guilty of the second charge, and the subordinate charges. was that the convening authority felt the court had not met the burden of roof for the finding of guilt, so she set aside that finding in the court and punished that finding under a lesser charge and subordinate charges under

non-judicial punishment. is do yoution believe the commander should to overturnhority the decision of the military court? oni completely agree article 60. >> thank you, senator nelson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we have heard a number of you testify the victims in these circumstances can make an initial report in a number of ways to a number of people. report is not to the person in the chain of command, it is to non-military entity, what happens to that report? are these entities required to

,ubmit a report to that person to the chain of command? >> each of the services may be a little different in how they start, but i think we are fundamentally the same. if the report goes to someone in the chain of command, the chain of command must now consider it an unrestricted report, and it is through the command chain. if the initial call goes to one of our special response coordinators or a medical person, if they get it first and contact the victim the victim will be able to follow the restricted report. the commander is not only notified through the command chain that an incident has occurred. >> i can understand when it is in the military environment, but we all know one of the major

issues with regards to these is the tremendous underreporting going on, so my concern is to reportre whatever the roo is it is being testified. these crimes are reported anonymously, so how do those get track if at all? in some cases they do not. in many cases have done a lot of work to communicate communicate with the victim care .gencies in those cases, unless there is a privacy restriction imposed upon them, they will encourage victims to talk to the coordinator, and we will get that back into the military chain. do your best to capture this kind of information?

also a discussion of command surveys and how important they are to determine what kind of environment our men and women are serving in, and it seems this is not institutionalized, and i would we determine what questions are asked, what happens in these surveys, and i think they should be institutionalized because of importance. >> i believe they are institutionalized. the entire unit answers the question. the entire unit will be part of the survey or at least the proper representation of the unit of every rank. it involved are anything to do

with the readiness of the unit, discipline of the unit, sexual assault and sexual harassment, to suicide, to how they feel the command reacts to what a do or do not do, so it if you overall toessment from a readiness climate issues, and we have questions specifically built for them to answer that have you studied and continue to be over time through the army, and those are taken. there are assessments done. >> these services are institutionalized. what about other services? there is a question of confidentiality. are these done confidentially? rex they are. >> what about the other services? >> it is for as soon as they take over, he or she has to have

, 100% ofey taken on the individuals, and it will be done on the anniversary, so every year the information is confidential and goes to the next highest commander. the regimental commander is going to know the climate of the organization. happy? marines what is the climate for sexual assault. importanta couple of questions. we know there are a number of ills that have been introduced. , israel,e have allies ,he uk, australia, and germany

and the response to the question over whether or not any of you have talked to our allies with regards to their experience i thought was youual in that apparently have not had those discussions. i like to make decisions based on information and experience. i would like to hear when you intend to or if you intend to talk to our allies as to what their experience is moving in the direction they moved in. when youany time frame are going to be doing that? >> we have done a little bit of this work. avril harding has spoken with australians, canadians, and a .ember of the jagged staff i spoke with the israeli chief on a visit to washington.

it is one of the topics we have on the agenda to discuss with the legal team, so i think this is happening. the problem is getting the details and to get the details of how they operate, we have to talk to them and their staff, and that was not available when we spoke originally. >> i would appreciate a response as to when they intend to talk to our allies if they and specifically regarding the removal of the chain of command on some of these decisions. >> please tell us whether you and your jags have had some conversations and if not what your plans are to have additional conversations with our allies. we will ask each of you to give us that information. thank you.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate your holding this hearing, and i appreciate your testimony. i also appreciate the fact we have an all volunteer service today. i think our men and women have a mission. they have a job to do. they should not have to worry whether today is going to be the day they are sexually assaulted is going to be the day they are sexually assaulted. both of you have said sexual assault is a crime and we have got to address it as such. that is what this hearing is for. one of the concerns i have heard is an environment in which tomanders are hesitant report issues like sexual assault up the chain of command because of the fear that making

these incidents known might possibly reflect poorly on them as commanders. commanders may fear if they are not handling it at their level they may be passed over for promotion and future command, and while i realize the official message is different for leaders, i am concerned at the lower levels there may be an environment in which commanders believe they have got to sweep sexual assault reports under the rug in order to avoid a perception that they are not properly leading their you could tell me, arethere any concerns commanders feel they need to handle the situation rather than properly reporting sexual assault, and in particular, if it would impact their careers? >> thank you for the question. this is all,

everybody's problem. it is every commanders problem. every soldier's problem. we have to work on this together. what we are trying to establish is the worst thing we can do is not report this and not deal with it. that is our responsibility. what i am trying to emphasize is if you do not do the things we are asking, it is about what actions you are taking. is we do not like. the constant discussion you have to have is what we have to do to ensure this does not happen what you described, and that is what we are really focused on. in order to solve this problem, everybody has to be all in. >> i think it could happen. when i look over years and

but is, it probably has, will say we have talked a lot about command climate. itself is aof commanders report card of sorts. there are a lot of other things a senior of value a a junior on, but you will know right away whether you have a climate that supports and protects victims of sexual assault and sexual andssment in riyadh -- sexual harassment. today is different than even a year ago. our commanders understand the problem is a service wide problem. we are all in it together. i am not going to take a commander and say, shame on you. shame on you if you do not handle it well, and you back away from it. leaving thate are

environment. we probably had it in the past. >> i want to make sure there is not negative consequences to the commanders who are doing the job to report these incidences and prosecute them. six months we have had a process where the commander briefs sexual assault as the first flag of the chain of command. they say, this is what happened. these are the specifics. all sexual assaults are reported, so there is no hiding it. thewe want to get to details. >> you have got to report it. > >> once it is reported, it is out there. it is a conversation we all have to have. then i sit down with my commanders and say, what are we

learning about this? is a broader conversation, and there can be more focused action. we do this for big things. it is embedded in important operational issues for us. want to look back at the military and how it relates to civilians. it is concerning the release of second offenders to their states, and there are instructions that must inform of his or her duty to register and must inform appropriate in the state of

residence. the secretaries shall establish a system to verify these have been made, and i agree military personnel convict it should be .unished and separated i also believe our obligation does not end at that point when a sex offender walks out of the gate. are theion is how services verifying these require notifications to state authorities have been made as they separate from the military or after they have been convicted? the issue depends on the point of departure, so the wouldsible installation be notification. if it is confinement there is notification to support the confinement facility. we have a challenge is

where the ex soldier or ex principal moves to another state. ensurewe follow-up to that that individual has been notified? are alsoke sure they aware of the sex offender? fax at what stage do you report it, and are they positive that takes place? from the point of the state from which they separate or from which they are discharged. >> we have a similar process. we will do notification of instances. i think making sure it happens and challenges is going to be an

issue. >> the individuals, do you see reports that this has been done. rude the brake system. -- this comes through the system. they notify the states of the state is on alert. when the individual does not receive an assignment criminal services do that for us. >> we thank this panel very much. we bank those with whom you serve. whom you serve. this panel is dismissed, and we welcome the second panel.

five- going to take a minute break for the sake of our reporter. it is going to be only five minutes. this is addressed to my colleagues. it is limited to five minutes. we now welcome our second panel, a panel of commanders. colonel donna martin, the commander of the 202nd military captain stephen

coughlin. >> it is called well. cogwell. >> colonel tracy king, u.s. andne corps commander, ,olonel jeannie leavitt commander of the fourth fighter wing. all.lcome you we thank you for your service, and we will call you i guess within the order we just stated. colonel martin, welcome, and please limit your testimony to five minutes. andanking member

distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. my name is colonel donna martin, and i have commanded the military police group criminal investigation division, it provides world-class investigative and protect this services to the european , andnd, african command central command. our mission is to protect and safeguard personnel and resources. i have been assigned to the other teen military installations throughout germany, italy, belgium, and kosovo. i have commanded military police units at the company, battalion, and brigade level. my experience has grown at each stage. as a company commander, i a course which included instruction on military

justice. the course emphasizes a role and relationship between the judge advocate and the commander. this relationship is critical. it is built on mutual trust and respect. from my time as a commander through brigade command, i have received instruction on military justice, and i have relied on my judge advocates as i have considered military justice actions. military justice becomes more complex as you become more senior. prior to pursuing my duties as the italian commander, i attended a course at the school. acquaints senior officers with legal responsibilities and issues commonly faced by the battalion, brigade, and installation and by those commanders assuming special convening at rarity.

on myommander, i relied making military justice decisions. i currently serve as a commander of the premier felony investigative unit in europe. it out only gives me the authorities of command, but it also exposes me to crime trends throughout the unit in europe. part of my mission is to educate and inform leaders at all levels of possible causes for crime trends and assist in strategy to prevent further crimes. we have conducted over 100 analysis briefings in europe for a unit. in my capacity i have had a unique opportunity to build a special victims unit consisting of skilled sexual assault investigators and a special victims prosecutors, all of whom

received an additional specialized training. this team develops the facts, build a rapport with the victim and advises the commander so he or she can make an informed decision regarding adjudication. the special vic m's unit is net -- the special victims unit is notified. ensure thorough investigation. we are in constant contact with the commanders we support as investigators. my criminal investigators offer an additional resources to combat actual assault, including a targeted crime analysis reefing and the sharing of rest practices aimed at solidifying our commitment to providing the best possible investigative support so commanders can execute their authorities. in summary i would reiterate i have in educated in military justice at each stage of

command, and i have worked closely with advocates at every step. it is of paramount importance commanders are allowed to be the center of every formation, setting and enforcing standards and disciplining those who do not. to commanders responsible for all that happens or fails to happen in his or her unit. they set the standard, and we enforce it. the code of military justice provides me with the tools i need to deal with misconduct in my unit from low level of fences to the most serious, including murder and rape. i cannot and should not relegate my responsibilities to maintain discipline to a staff officer or someone else outside of the chain of command. inc. you for the opportunity to's eight with you today. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. >> good afternoon.

thank you for allowing this opportunity to provide any information that may be useful on how we are responding to the crime of sexual assault from the perspective of a unit level naval commander. i am serving in my third unit at sea. my squadron is comprised of eight destroyers consisting of just under 2500 personnel. these units the ploy independently as components of a carrier strike group. i am a graduate of the united states naval academy. i have been a leader throughout my career. from the beginning we were taught to recognize the value of each individual sailor and , equal in response opportunity, and other aspects of military law and accountability. position i every

have held i have received mandatory training, particularly on sexual assault. in addition, i have had technical guidance from a staff advocate, and like any prudent commander, i have never hesitated to seek advice for any case i have handled. in all those cases, the authorities enabled me to set the tone, shaped the culture, establish discipline by quickly and holding those under my command accountable for misconduct and to protect those i am responsible for. i ensure all of my commanding officers are trained and that they use it for a tool to maintain an environment where all personnel are treated with respect and dignity and where rules and regulations are not violated. is a valuable component to

establish conditions of cohesion and trust up and down the chain of command, and since the commander of every unit is for all personnel, there must be a authority to take every action. any change will erode the ability to command by reducing effectiveness in the eyes of the crew. in short, the authority have been able to seize. the failure should and does result in the immediate removal of that commander. based on my understanding, the

process and many avenues available has encouraged more victims to come forward and receive the care and support they need. training initiatives have interrogated -- have targeted certain groups. it is not the typical death by but the engagement that is building trust and engaging our culture. thank you for this opportunity to discuss this important issue in our military. i look forward to your comments. >> i am honored and humbled i this opportunity to direct you on this issue. this is a responsibility i do

not take lightly. i have the honor of leading approximately three thousand men and women. i have commanded marines and soldiers. i have served in all three forces and with all elements of the task force. like all commandments of my -- and most recently just last year. accountability in my regimen begins and ends with me. this includes a prevention engine vacation of any form of misconduct, especially all incidents of sexual assault. my job is to ensure my regimen is ready to fight today's fight today. this kind of readiness demands a level of cohesion that can only stem from strong bonds between marines.