strong emphasis on investments and -- in roads and bridges and rail and combined sewer overflow and water lines and tams all across the country, we're going to put people back to work. not to not to mention high-speed internet which can light up the next generation of american workers. i wanted to come and join my friend here who is carrying the flag week in and week out right here on the floor to say we have a lot of work to do here. and to the american people to say there are members in this chamber who are saying make these investments. and the president had a plan. wasn't quite as big as i wanted it to be or i'm sure my friend from california but maybe he thought what could get through in a jobs plan and it got shot

down and i yield back to the gentleman from california. mr. garamendi: the president wanted to do two things in this area. one, the normal programs, the surface transportation program, the water resource is bill, but e wanted to add $50 billion of infrastructure investment and create an infrastructure bank which you so well described in your investment discussion here. none of that has been done to the detriment of the american worker. if the water programs that i was talking about early on, $44 billion needed in california, for every billion dollars you spend on a water project, you put 28,000 people to work with good middle-class jobs and i think the numbers would be similar to highways, bridges and the like. this is a great tragedy, we aren't moving in the direction of creating the fundamental

investments, rather than we are disinvesting, we are consumer. and that doesn't last very long as you so well said. so what are we going to do about it? hopefully this house will undertake the same process, find the same wisdom of the house of representatives and the senate when dwight d. eisenhower, president eisenhower brought to the congress a proposal foral national defense highway system, which we now call the interstate system. let's go back and kind of toss the ball here. mr. ryan: one of the things i mentioned toward the end, well, one i mentioned a couple of times, the combined sewer systems and all major cities in the united states. you take a city like akron or

youngstown, mid-sized cities in the industrial midwest and $500 million to $1 billion that is needed. mr. garamendi: excuse me for interrupting, a combined sewer system, that's the storm water flows into the sewer and it's not disconnected from the sanitation, toilets and the like, is that correct? mr. ryan: you want to make sure that this stuff isn't getting mixed together and you want to make sure that it's separated and you want to make sure that it's up to date. and so these investments that are -- municipalities have to make, goes well above and beyond what a city like akron or a city like youngstown or cleveland or detroit or toledo hoo or milwaukee, all across the united

states, let's make this investment. and you are talking about cities that have very high unemployment rates. let's get people trained up. we've got many solid union training programs out there that would put these people to work, get this economy moving, have state of the art transportation and infrastructure systems in the united states and inject some money into the economy that on the demand side, we have been since the supply-side 1980. deregulate wall street and every other sector you can deregulate and hope the economy takes off. but that will ultimately led to boom and bust and ultimate collapse in 2008. what i'm talking about is consumer investments, demand side. get people back to work, get some money in their pockets.

they go out and spend it and the commip spends right along because there are consumers out there. and that construction worker pays local taxes to the school district, for the mental health organizations, libraries and throw money into the basket in church on sunday. mr. garamendi: that's how we deal with the deficit and put americans back to work and the tax receive news increase and we have a solid good way to deal with the deficit. on the other hand as you suggested, cuts alone don't do it. what cuts do is create unemployment. we know that. we have seen it. we have talked about this extraordinary investment we need to make in rebuilding our existing systems, yet looking at the budget that passed this house, the ryan republican budget, they have an unallocated $886 billion cut in these kinds of programs over the next 10

years, $80 billion a year would be taken out of these investment programs that we are talking about here. so that what we do instead of investing for the zsh for our own generation and next generation, we actually increase the consumption of yesterday's investments, leading us nowhere, but into more bridges falling, more sewers backing up and more levees breaking and more highway congestion. mr. ryan: part of the investments, too, as you have talked about and i know on other occasions, what are the investments we need to make today, not just in physical infrastructure, but other things that will lead to the next generation of employment. and the united states -- our comparative advantage in the world has always been we make these investments into the next generation of research, whether through the national institutes of health, the national science

foundation, the department of defense, the department of energy. and you know what? sometimes it doesn't always work out. but sometimes it does. and when it does, we create new areas of the economy that can expand and grow, just like the human genome that has led to billions and billions of private investment. and here is the important point for a lot of americans that probably already know, but we, as we collectively as a society, make investments in the research that no one company can make on their own. this basic research that costs tens of millions, if not billions of dollars over many, many, many years that no company can come in and reap the profits immediately. we collectively say we are going to make that together. and then let the companies come in, pull out what they want and

take it to the private market, get investors and off we go. that is a pretty good recipe for the united states for a long time. and we are saying, physical infrastructure, but also these investments in research that have led to an explosive economy, a dynamic economy here in the united states. now in these budgets we are talking about, we are parring back our budgets to the national science foundation and until institutes of health and not only does it affect research, but also taking away from the generation. mr. garamendi: it is absolutely critical for the future economy of this nature and solving problems of the world. those investments are critical. you did leave out agriculture. i happen to represent the university of california, davis, which is by my argument, the largest best agricultural research program in the world.

but that's another -- we know the population of the world is going to have to grow so we have to continue the agricultural research. yet, in the budget proposals that passed this house and sequestration -- let me put it this way, in sequestration alone, there is a reduction of $ 45 million of research in agriculture at the university of california, davis. now health research, i was talking to the former dean of the medical school at the university of california, davis, last week, and she was talking about the significant reduction in health research affecting projects that are already under way. research programs that were going along, suddenly the money is gone and that is sequestration which is part of this, we can solve america's problems by getting government out of it, by reducing the role of government. george washington didn't believe that. he believed in inserting government into the economy as a

partner and growing it, growing the economy. and certainly, we talk about thomas jefferson and education and how he believed that education -- education and research go together. these are fundamental investments along with the infrastructure. yet, in this whose, there is an unwillingness to address this fundamental axiom of economic growth, education, research, infrastructure, manufacturing, the things that come from that, building the middle class, building the economy. mr. ryan: i know you are not and i am not going to defend wasteful government programs. they should go. we are now in a new economy, information-based, very dynamic in so many ways, faster than anything we have ever

experienced in the country, and i think there are some programs that we historically have had that probably we don't need to have anymore. and there are also programs that need to be tweaked and changed as far as how we are training our work force and how we are investing, our new understandings of our brain, for example. all of this research begins to change the way we approach some of these investments that we have made before we had that knowledge. so we probably need to shift resources into areas. but clearly we aren't making enough investments. we clearly still have 25% or 30% in many high schools of kids not graduating. so we need to figure out how to make, for example, school a lot more exciting. know, we have programs in robotics, we have programs in legos, kids that need to do

hands-on stuff to get them excited about learning. that is going to take some investment for us to make. mr. garamendi: let me give you an example in the "daily republic" newspaper in fairfield, they ran a story on your point. i'm going to read some of this. this is a program that e.d.f. renewable energy, which operates ind turbines between rio vista and my district, they are funding a program at the high school for the -- that's this year, as a way to promote job training in green industries. jim byrd is the instructor in the renewable energy class which emphasizes wind energy. exactly what you said, a private company that has numerous wind turbines, several hundred big wind turbines, needs workers and

they have gone to the local high school and they are creating what we would call a votion occasional education class but getting the kids prepare to take jobs in their own neighborhood. you see the green technology, wind energy, coupling up with education to provide middle-class jobs. my congratulations on to e.d.f. and their renewable energy program and to the folks at rio vista high school, which i proudly represent. mr. ryan: you make a good point. i remember having a conversation with a good friend of mine who is a lot more conservative than me and we were talking about the government's role in these different things and he said, well, what about the phone company? and the original government investment into telephones? and as the conversation proceed, he said, well, they weren't

doing well enough and the private sector could do better. my point was, yeah, we have fights with our cell phone companies now over cell phone bills, but no company was going to be able to do that at that point that the government came in and said we are going to do it. i'm not defending every government program, but what i'm saying is there is a role that has been successful in the history of our country. and so whether it was the phone company back then or green technology today, how do we begin to say incentivize these investments that's good for the environment that can create a whole new sector of manufacturing, how many tons of steel go into a windmill. thousands of component parts go into a windmill that may be made one day by three-dimensional printers. this is all starting to tie together, but while the chinese

and indians and other countries are making these investments, we are sitting on our hands saying, the private sector will do it. mr. garamendi: thank you for bringing that out. george washington, back to george washington, i like to talk about the founding fathers, but i would like to talk about him in a positive way. he also said that the federal government has a fundamental way in the infrastructure development. and he cited three different things, ports, roads and canals. this is at the very first this is the president at the very beginning of this nation doing what we continue to do this day, although at a much lower level than our nation needs today. last long history of this in america, and it really, really works. education, research, infrastructure, manufacturing. tie those together and build the foundation for economic growth and a just, equitable

society because people have a chance to climb the economic ladder, to go as high as they want to, giving them the tools they need to succeed. mr. ryan: when you look at you make that a point, i want to thank the gentleman, if you look at the united states as we compete against other in orderic countries, australia, some other countries in europe, we do not have the upward mobility, meaning if you're born poor, we talk a lot about the american dream and moving up the ladder, if you are born poor in america, we rank about ninth or 109 in our citizens' ability to climb up through that ladder and get themselves into the middle class. and i think that to me is a benchmark of how we move the -- moved away from that philosophy that we had. for many, many years.

up until the 1980's where we were going to make key investments that were going to help people climb up that economic ladder and that citizen has to bring initiative, has to bring ingenuity, has to bring determination. i am not one of these people who thinks every kid needs a get a trophy in little league. i don't adhere to thats no fi. kids are going to fail, we need to pick them up but at the same time you can have policies that allow and cultivate the ability for people to go up the economic ladder, not have such a disadvantage in life and an economic system that doesn't facilitate that to ultimately we're getting bypassed by some of these other countries who have a different philosophy than we do. mr. gare men tee: thank you for raising that, my colleague from the great manufacturing sector of the middle west, i guess, the eastern part of the middle west is that fair enough? mr. ryan: fair enough.

mr. garamendi: this is an interesting chart i came across a while ago, it talks about income growth, how does an individual rise and climb the economic ladder? and what kind of success do they have? this is the income growth from 1996 to 2011. and i kind of displayed this on a football field, years ago i played football with, i don't know, some modest success. mr. ryan: leather helmets? mr. gir men dee: i did wear a helmet, i don't recall any concussions. the bottom 90% of our population has seen an income growth, this is adjusted for inflation, of $59 over this period, 1966 to 2011. some 55 years. $59. so they're basically 09% of the population has stalled out and not able to climb the ladder. that's about one inch way down

here, one inch. i guess that's even a referee's error if they pull the chains out. the top 10% of the population has gone half the football field. and they've seen their income -- by expand by 11 $116,071 over this same period. so 90% has seen a $59 growth, the top 10% have seen a little over $110,000. the 1%, the very tiptop, not the 97 percenters or the three percenters, thises the 1%. they have gone two and a half football fields in comparison. they have seen their income growth of over half a million ollars a year, $628,817. now even a smaller, smaller group, the one tenth of 1% of

the american population have seen their income growth grow by 72 football fields exeared to the bottom 90%. they seen their annual income grow by $18 million a year. so what's happening here in the united states and you talked about it earlier before you arrived, i picked up some of this and talked about it, maybe this is reasonable place to lee it because we're going to see, going to run out of time. but where is it here? here we go. this is not class warfare. this is economic reality. and this is where the middle class and the lower income poverty class have been static and the very tiptop, the top 10% and above, have seen significant income growth over that period of time. i think, while i'm digging, you can make a comment to begin to

wrap up. mr. ryan: i'd like to say too, we all say, let the free market work and all of this but when there's a savings and loan issue or there's a wall street collapse and a lot of very wealthy people in the country are going to lows a lot of money, here comes secretary paulsen with his hair on fire walking around capitol hill say, we need $700 billion of the taxpayers' money. and you know, over and over and over again, we have seen this in the last 30 years with this system of heavy deregulation and heavy cuts for the top 1%. so it looks like they're making a lot of money and that's high risk and high reward in the deregulated market but when things collapse, here comes the government to save the day. pretty good deal when i've got

1rks700 fallly -- family going bankrupt in my district on health care alone. no one is rushing in to say, you're not going to go bankrupt. that's what happened to a lot of these folks, someone came to the rescue and that someone was the taxpayer. mr. garamendi: wall street was taken care of, not main street. this is not the result of a free market system operating. this is the result of specific governmental policies over the last 50 years that have resulted in a skewing of the wealth of america. a skewing of that wealth from the great majority of americans, as many as 90%, to the very tiptop of the income class. so over the next, i don't know, three or four weeks, maybe two months, i want to take this issue up of what happened to the american dream? what happened to it? when you see these kind of statist exs that children live in poverty and it takes four --

five to six generations before a child that is in poverty today, their successors -- successor generations will be able to rise to the top of the middle class. almost 150 years. five, six generations before a person in poverty can climb the economic ladder. that's incredible. and that speaks to something terribly wrong here in america. when education, when half of the children from the wealthier families graduate from college and only 9 pk of the children from the -- 9% of the children from the low income classes are able to graduate from college. these are problems that exist. and if you want to take one more shot at a closing statement, i'm going to -- i'm going to end by quoting -- mr. ryan: and i've got one point to make. why are we talking about inequality and poor folks and upward mobility? and the reason is, we only have

313 million people in the united states competing against 1.3 billion in china, 1.3 billion in india, we have to have everybody on that football field playing for us economically, wearing the jersey that says, u.s.a., on it. so we can compete economically and we need to get innovative and we need to make these kinds of investments if we're going to get everybody on the field, graduated from high school, on the track to go into manufacturing or other trades so we can really have a renaissance in the united states economy. i thank the gentleman and yield back. mr. gare men tee: thank you very much, mr. ryan, for that, i really like that one. i'm going to end with this, this is bill clinton, president bill clinton. if you work hard and play by the rules, you'll have the freedom and opportunity to pursue your own dreams. and leave your kids a country where they can chase theirs. that's our fwol. we're going to talk about these

things, about the american dream, what happened to it, what we need to restore it, how we can make things in america, how we can rebuild the american economy. mr. ryan, thank you so very much. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. flores, for 30 minutes. mr. flores: mr. speaker, the city of west, texas is a small, tight-knit community, located a few miles north of waco, texas with a pop ligs of just under 3,000. west can commonly known for its czech bakery, czech gift shops and fwift stores. it's recognized as the czech

heritage capital of texas. on april 18, it was subject to a cat strofpk explosion felt hundreds of mile away. the tragic explosion injured hundreds, caused tens of millions of dollars in damage and took 15 lives osm on the evening of the explosion, first responders from west and surrounding communities responded to a fire at the west fertilizer company. these brave men worked -- worked to try to tame the flames and evacuate a nearby apartment complex and nursing home when the explosion erupted and rocked this small community. when the smoke cleared and the rescue mission was complete, we learned we had lost 12 first responders. these brave men died while diing the job that they were trained and prepared to do in order to keep our community safe. today, we honor and remember these fallen first responders who put themselves in harm's way for the good of their family, their friends, their neighbors and their community.

mr. speaker, today we remember morris wayne bridges jr. of west, texas. he was born february 28, 1972, in dallas, texas, to morris and sharon bridges. he attended schools in dallas and later became a pipe fitter for action fire pro in waxahachie, texas. he had been a volunteer for the west fire department for three years he loved to ride motorcycles, loved to go fishing and enjoyed camping and the outdoors. he was preceded in death by his parents but leaves behind his wife, and his children, all of west, and two sisters, one of bristol and linda of missouri, and many friends and extended amily. mr. speaker, today we remember perry wayne calvin of frost,

texas. he was born january 18, 1976, in dallas, texas, to phil and cindy calvin he graduated from frost high school and attended the fire academy and emergency medical technician school at hill college. he was a self-ememployed farmer and loved the outdoors. he was a member of the navarro mills fire department and herton fire department. he enjoyed horseback riding, rodeos, fishing and spending time with his family. he was preceded in death by his parents hsm he leaves to cherish his memory his wife and two sons, all of frost, a brother, wes calvin and his wife emily of frost, two sisters, penny dickson of brian-college station and paige calvin, currently serving in the united states air force. his grandmother, edna calvin of hutchins and several nieces, of the fuse and other relatives and friends.

mr. speaker, today we remember jerry dayne chapman of hills bro. was born april 7, 1987, artin dayne and wanda chapman. jerry had various jobs early in his career and ultimately scored his passion which began when he became a member of the volunteer firefighters. he worked toward become an emergency medical technician. he loved all things batman, star wars and tolkien. he was an avid video gamers. tronics elock enthusiast, he wanted to be on the cutting edge of technology. he would give what he had to anyone in need. he was known for his passion for helping others, those he knew and those he did not. his willingness and giving

spirit was fit for the career he chose to pursue as a firefighter and e.m.t. he was proso -- preceded in death by an uncle, rodney, who was also a volunteer firefighters he leaves to cherish his memory his parents dayne and ron -- rhonda happenman, and his wife joy of plainview, maternal grandmother, charlotte mccullough, paternal grandparents, great grandmother gladys of lubbock, one sister and her husband of nacogdoches, niece of nacogdoches and many friends and extended family. dragu emember cody frank and was born in montana. cody graduated from montana

state university. he had been employed with the west chemical and fertilizer plant for many years. as a member of the volunteer fire department, he was involved with the volunteer fire department barbecue fundraiser and organized tractor pulls in west. he enjoyed hunting, fishing, cooking, watching nascar and being with family and friends. he was a member of st. mary's catholic church and the knights of columbus. he served as the president of the cottonwood water supply. he was preceded in death by his parents and a brother. he leaves to cherish his memory, andwife, sister and husband loretta fisher and husband richard of fort worth, brother-in-law and cysters-in-law and

brothers-in-law. and numerous nephews, nieces and extended family and friends. mr. speaker, today we remember captain enegget lucky harris junior of west. he was born november 21, 1960 to kenneth and scottey. he graduated from crawford high school and went on to attend a community college until he was accepted into the dallas fire academy. he graduated from the dallas fire academy in 1982 and served as a firefighter with the dallas fire department for over 31 years and attained the rank of captain. he owned harris home inspections and construction with his family. lucky loved fishing with his

enjoyed hunting and traveling with friends. he was a member of the high point church in waco. he leaves to cherish his memory his wife of 48 years, three sons , mother and husband, father ken harris and wife, sisters ann, .armen and three nieces

>> he attended st. mary's school and graduate of west high school and attended local community college. jimmy started working at his business at a very young age. he continued to work there for the next 40 years and spent the last 20 years managing all aspects of the business. jimmy was a member of st. mary's .atholic church, lodge 54 the state fireman's association and was a member of the ma sonic lodge in west. jimmy served on the school board and played the role of santa claus. he was preceded in death by his matusz. ife gail leaves a son and his girlfriend,

daughter and her boyfriend, two two sisters and kathy and cindy, brother and his wife, five great grandchildren and numerous extended family and friends. mr. speaker, today we remember y. eph fpustejovk he attended st. mary's school and graduated from west high school and attended the local community college. since 2009, he has served as the city secretary for west. he worked for the sears and roebuck company and as a

personal property appraisor for the appraisal district. he liked to hunt, play golf and ork in his hard and avid texas a and m university. he was involved in his community, church and fire department family. he was a member of st. mary's catholic church and started the youth ministry and director of the united youth minimum is ti. he served as a gift bearer and c.c.e. teacher and member of the knights of columbus council number 2305. also the west events community where he served as treasurer, the west fire department where he served as treasurer and national rifle association. he was preceded in death by his

brother and grandparents. he leaves to cherish his memory , s wife of a year, children parents, ren, his and his r, brother ife, in-laws, brother-in-law and numerous aunts, uncles, relatives and friends. >> mr. speaker, today we remember captain reed, born february 11, 1984 to mark and lucy reed and member of the volunteer fire department, west ambulance department, former

member of the almonth volunteer ire department and he was an eagle scout in troop 1110. he lived his life with a smile and gigantic heart. he was preceded in death by his grandparents. uncle and uncle. he leaves to cherish his mother his mother, parents and mark and lucy reed of houston and sister. brother and wife and their daughter, three aunts, three uncles, 11 cousins and many friends. mr. speaker, today we remember kevin william sanders, born

october 13, 1979 outside of sandra to duane and sanders. he graduated from morris high school and graduated from the university of illinois with a bachelor degree in animal science and from parkland college. kevin truly believed in the strength and goodness of people. his passion in life was helping and caring for others. he held several vet positions in texas.s, indiana, waco kevin always did what he thought was right. e taught at fox college in illinois and the community college in waco, texas, inspiring greatness in his students. he lived for the service of others through his participation in the plainfield emergency .anagement agency in illinois

kevin loved for caring for animals, working on cars, listening to music, watching the chicago bears. playing paint ball and spending time with his family. he was preceded in death by his father. he leaves to cherish his memory , maternal on, mother grandmother, sister and her husband, brother scott and wife. and many friends and extended family. . speaker, today we remember captain douglas dougs snookhouse of west. he was born january 1, 1963 to jimmy and louise. he attended st. mary's school and spent most of his childhood

with dad and uncles at the west volunteer fire department. he played baseball and football and graduated from west high school. after high school, he began his career at central texas iron works. doug loved spending time with his family and his seven month old grandson and enjoyed hunting, golfing, fishing, talking with friends and cooking barbecue. his passion with volunteering with the west fire department. he was preceded in death with his parents and his brother died in the same accident. his wife of 13 years, two daughters, both of west and . andson hogan james, stepsons her epdaughter and husband, three

step-grandchildren, sister and her husband. japan. and wife of sister-in-law of west along with nieces and nevada fuse, a great-neice, great nephew and numerous relatives and many friends. mr. speaker, today we remember captain i reserve the balance of my time. of robert bob lewis nookhouse of west born june 4, 1964. he graduated from west high school and received an associate degree from texas state technical college in waco. he was a project manager for central texas iron works and was on their emergency response team. bob was a volunteer for the west fire department where he held a passion for putting out fires. he was a member of st. mary's catholic church and knights of

columbus council 2305. he loved hunting and outdoor bar be cues. preceded in death by his parents . he leaves to cherish his memory his wife of 13 years, son robert daughters of florida. a brother and his wife from japan. sister karen and her husband. two grandchildren, several nieces and nevada fuse, a great-neice, a great-nephew and numerous relatives and many friends. mr. speaker, we remember william

buckmoore and born in 1968 in waco. he graduated from west high school and went on to study air conditioning for two years. he also attended texas state technical institute where he studied auto body work. for over 25 years he operated uptmor body and construction. he built farms and arenas and the hubbard auction and arena. he grew up loving the outdoors and loved to camp, hunt fish and work cattle. he was an animal lover and always picking up strays and loved watching his children's sporting events and coaching little league. race horses.ckey he loved to go to rodeos and liked to grill and thought he was a great chef. he was a member of st. martin

atholic church and cagget life wood.odge 6 in cotton his wife, sons hunter and evor, daughter, parents, grandmother agnes, brother ryan and wife chris, sister beth and her husband matt. mother in law julia and several nieces, nevada fuse, other relatives and friends. . . . these 12 men paid the -- made the ultimate sacrifice and they died doing what they loved to do, serving and protecting others. they will forever be remembered as heroes.

their selfless service is a model for the rest of us to follow. these men can be exemplified fwi the words of jesus in the book of john, in greater love has a man for than to lay down his life for hi friends. i'm in awe at the outpouring from people in texas, across the nation and around the world. we are hope thfl great town will quickly recover from this tragic event. all the help that continues to come will speed the process. tragedies such as this explosion remind us how tradge ill this life really. is i ask that everyone please remember, please pray for our military men and women who protect our country from threats abroad and for our first responders who protect us from threats here at home. before i close this evening, liled -- i would like to recognize the west veterans honor forward. throughout the 1990's, due in

part to the reduction of the active duty military forces and coupled with the increasing number of world war ii era veterans reaching the ends of their live the department of defense was typically unable to provide graveside honors to deceased veterans. in 1990, west v.f.w. post 19 nd its commander frank posegnig answered the call and selected a fellow member to form and lead the west veterans honor guard, whose mission has become to honor those who served this eoriginal group consisted of squad leader harry lee heigl, jim fware rhett, chaplain c.j. lavaty, ernest holichek, claude king, robert crede, rifleman frank pusenik,

color usednik, and bearers. the v.f.w. honor guard was later joined by american legion members to become the west veterans honor guard. additions to the squad included rob buchanan, chaplain marvin sepak, martin driscoll, john cosheka, william carlick, william pavelka. dan pocludna, steve souka, obert stanislav, russell willisly and robert zornak. in addition to rendering honors at funerals they participate at many events throughout central texas, including leading and

marching in the west parade, providing displays of service flags and displaying the p.o.w.-m.i.a. flag. since its inception in 1990, the west veterans honor guard has provided the long-standing military tra degrees of funeral honors, ceremonial elements of flag folding and presenting a, playing taps, providing rifle details and providing color guards at over 430 funerals. mr. speaker, tonight, i honor the west veterans honor guard for all they have done for our great community. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has six minutes left. mr. flores: mr. speaker, on june 8, america lost army lieutenant colonel todd clark in the war on terror. lieutenant colonel todd clark was a native of new york whose father, jack, was an army colonel.

todd was in the junior rmbing otc in high school and upon graduation attended texas a&m university where he would join company b2 in the corps of cadets. at the time of his death he was abury gade level advisor to the 10th mountain division he would serve on five separate deployments in support of operation enduring freedom. during his years of service to our country, lieutenant colonel clark earned many awards and decorations, including three bronze star medals, the purple heart, two herer tos you service medal the army commendation with distinguishing device b, four army commendation medals, three army achievement medal the army reserve components achievement medal, the national defense service medal with bronze service star, the armed forces expeditionary medal, the kosovo campaign medal with bronze service star, two afghanistan campaign medals with bronze

service star, four iraq campaign medals with bronze service star, the global war on terrorism expeditionary medal, the global war on terrorism service medal, the korean defense service medal, the army service ribbon, three overseas service remember bonns, the nato medal kosovo and the nato medal combat action badge and the basic parachutist badge. at the conclusion of his current tour in iraq, excuse me new york afghanistan, at the conclusion of his current tour in afghanistan, lieutenant colonel's next assignment, lieutenant colonel clark's next assignment would bring him back to texas as he was poised to become the executive officer of the second -- or the second in command of the reserve officers training corps at his alma mater, texas a quand m university. in the coming days, todd clark will be laid to rest at fort sam houston national cemetery in west.

our thoughts and prayers are with the family of sernlt stevens -- excuse me of lieutenant colonel todd clark, he will be forever remembered as an outstanding soldier, husband and father. we thank him and his family for their service and sacrifice for our country. his sacrifice also reflects the ords of jesus in john, 15: 13, greater love have no man than this, that a man would lay town his life for his friends. god bless our military men and women and god bless america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced spoil of january 3, 013rk the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. griffith, for 30 minutes. without objection. mr. griffith: i stand here today on the floor of the united states house of representatives and i come to talk about matters of import to

this country and what should be important to each and every one of us. i often look as i'm sitting on the floor getting ready to cast votes down here at efront, you see tolerance and justice and you see the word liberty, may not be able to see it at home but there they are, carved into the wood here. liberty is extremely important to this country and liberty is a fragile dreach which can easily be extinguished if we as citizens of the united states and particularly those of us who are members of congress do not take the opportunity to defend liberty even when it sometimes may seem to be unpopular. now, we have of recent heard in the press reports that certain agencies of the united states government have been accessing ll kinds of information, phone records, etc.. i think this is wrong.

i think that the approach that has been take season an overreach under the patriot act, though i believe there were, when written, there were gray areas of the patriot act which could have been anticipated that there would be an overreach by the goth but some have interpreted that it's ok that you gather information even if it's just in the mega data on millions an millions of american citizens. i do not take that position. i believe that it is wrong. i believe it cuts to the core of liberty in this country. let me explain. to understand why we do things that we do, we have to look at the history of this country, and many times of other countries, particularly great britain. when we look at our right not to have the government intrude into our homes, into our thoughts, into our very beings, it goes back to before the american revolution. and i would point to the 1760's

as being instrumental. as a student of history, i learned that there was a fellow named john wilkes. he was a rake of a fan and many time his actions i would not have approved of. but whether by design or just by circumstance, john wilkes weighs heavy in both america's history an in the history of great britain. john wilkes was from london. he stood for parliament, was a member of parliament, and he began a secret printing on thing he is didn't think that george iii was doing correctly in the 1760's. one of those that he printed in what was called the paper, the north britain new york north britain number 45, john wilkes actually inferred that george iii may have acted dishonestly in reaching a treaty with the french. needless to say, george iii was

incensed that this happened. and he issued through his ministers what was known as a general warrant. that meaning that they could go, even though they didn't have specific person, didn't have a specific place, they could go into parts of london and search house to house seizing papers, property, whatever they thought might lead to the conclusion of who was printing the "north britain" and response in particular for "north britain number 45." needless to say after rounding up roughly 50 people, going into a number of houses, they did arrest mr. john wilkes along with a number of other people an it was determined that mr. wilkes was in fact responsible for the writing that the king found so inappropriate. it's also interesting to note that as a part of this in his legal defense john wilkes raised the issue of whether or

not general warrants were in fact legal. the courts would later rule that they were not. the courts would later rule that they were not. it's interesting, and i pull out the wonderful treatise on brit herb history, just hits the highlights, a history of the english speaking people, by winston churchill. winston churchill in talking about, and he acknowledge this is faults of mr. wilkes but he also points out the court's reasoning on this matter. the question of general warrants became a big issue. the radical-minded londoners welcomed the rebuff of the government and it gos on to talk about what wilkes did. but it also goes on to tell us what the courts rule. let me see if i can find it

here, bear with me for just a minute. i appreciate your patience as i look for the exact quote and here's churchill talking about what the justices said. the officials pleaded that would be the government officials of george iii, that they were immune from a suit by wilkes because they were acting under government orders. churchill says, this large and sinister defense, the defense would be that they could use the general warrants, this large and sinister defense was rejected by the chief justice in words which remain a classic statement on the rule of law, quoting now the chief justice lord camden. with respect to the argument of state necessity or distinction which has been aimed at between state offenses and others, the common law does not understand that kind of reasoning nor do our books take notice of any

such distinction. wilkes was heralded as a result, wilkes was heralded as a hero of liberty and there's a great controversy in history as to whether he was a true patriot, a true lover of liberty or one who merely happened to fall into the circumstances of the time. i prefer to think he was a hero of liberty. notwithstanding the fact that he ultimately prevailed in england, he was also seen across the pond in the united states -- in what would later be the united states in the colony, particularly in massachusetts but in other colonies as a hero of liberty. he was in communication with sam adams and the sons of liberty. at the same time, almost identical to this, lfs there was a thing called writs of assistance. those were writs used in naval terms in dealing with trade. they said that whatever the king's people needed to do for assistance, they could have.

very much like a general warrant. some would argue that they were the same. in massachusetts about this same time, there was a james otis jr., this was pointed out, i must let you know earlier today by congressman nadler, and mr. otis argued the same things that were being argued in the wilkes case in great britain. and sam adams was present for those arguments so he was communicating with john wilkes and he was listening to the arguments against general warrants or writs of assistance ade by mr. otis. what this ultimately led to was the fact that in our country we have long held it deer that we do not issue general warrants. and to read the patriot act, to say that you can obtain the phone records of millions of americans, if in fact that be true, and it appears to be the

case, that you can use that act to do sort of backdoor a general warrant on information on most, if not all, american citizens is to forget that we have a right against search and seizure because of the reasoning of our founding fathers and the work of mr. otis and the work of mr. wilkes. and they can't be seen just in the vacuum on that. churchill later goes on to acknowledge that the work of wilkes, because wilkes was pushing the issue on freedom of press, that entire movement not only led to an expansion in great britain of the freedom of press but also underscored for the fopped the founding fathers of this nation that everyone should have the right to speak their mind. and that they should be able to do so without having to worry about a government that finds their actions just for speaking

their opinion to be intolerable. so, ladies and gentlemen, i have come here this evening because i think it's important that we understand that notwithstanding this interpretation or that interpretation of the patriot act, if we allow the government to have the right to collect even the megadata, as they call it, on each and every one of us , that is a violation of the spirit of our constitution and i would submit you to a violation of the constitution itself. i for one cherish our liberties and in that balancing act that every government must face between security and liberty, i say we side on liberty. because we can never make society completely safe. the only way a government can guarantee you complete safety, ladies and gentlemen, is if they assign each and every one of us a padded room to live in.

we are only allowed out in the sun a certain amount of times so that we don't end up getting skin cancer. they determine what we eat, they determine what we breathe, they determine what we do. that is not a society that i choose to live in. nor one which i will stand idly by and allow it slowly to creep in on us. and while i don't think anybody in the administration would want to go that far, anyone who argues that we must have all of this information in order to be secure forgets that having security may not be worth while if we don't have liberty. so, ladies and gentlemen, i ask that you study the issues, you study the history, you study this carefully do. we really want a government that knows all about us? do we really want a government that can take away our freedom to converse with other people who may not agree with the government? i'm not talking about people who are plotting schemes

against the government, but i'm talking about the right to talk to people who may have different ideas. in fact, many would argue we should do more talking here on the floor of the house. so, ladies and gentlemen, i ask you to study these issues. i ask you to go look at the arguments of mr. owe tills. look at the arguments -- otis. look at the arguments of mr. john wilkes. look at the arguments that were made at a time when people understood that liberty was precious and it could easily be extinguished. and i hope that you will join me in doing a little illumination on our country by talking about these issues everywhere you go and making it clear to people that liberty is worth fighting for, being willing to say, when i say fight i mean stand up and say your piece, and it's worth us taking a little bit of risk in order to preserve those liberties that have been fought for and won throughout the ages, beginning in the 1760's, culminating in the constitution

and forward to this day. thank you very much and, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. members are reminded to address heir remarks to the chair. does the gentleman from virginia have a motion? mr. griffith: i do, mr. speaker. i move the house do now 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 morning hour debate

what are some of the key issues coming up in the debate? >> probably the biggest is going to be a fight over how the problem should be addressed to curve the number of assaults that have occurred in the past year. jackie spear has been pushing in committee and she wants to take the process away if the commanders. that was rejected. i think that's going to be one of your major points. there's going to be fights over afghanistan, the east coast

missile site and the bill is $52 billion above the cap set by sequester. >> so you mention the spending levels and the budget caps, they are under the sequester. how did the leaders justify changing that? >> the pentagon put together a budget and the senator and the house kept it at high levels. they say they want this funding. they don't want sequester. so by legislating to a lower vel in their estimation they would be encourage the sequester to take effect. they say it there is time to stop the sequester by 2014, even though there is no momentum on the hill. >> what does it say about the priorities? >> missile defense is a big one. they want to establish a new

site on east coast to try to go against future lefts against iran. the committee put $140 million in that bill. we're going to see democrats try to strip that out. that is the biggest partisan issue. the republicans have put importance on dealing with the sexual assault. we also saw an increase of $5 billion spending to the war in afghanistan and this is going to go to the readiness that was hurt last year. >> what do pentagon officials say about the bill? > they have generally been a ortive but they have had small raise for the troops last year and the committee rejected

those. they say it is not fair and they disagree with the pentagon. the administration has put out a statement of policy and it is threatening to veto the bill. it frequently does that, particularly over detainee issues in guantanamo. the bill passed by republicans bars the president from removing detainees from guantanamo to u.s. soil. >> how is the senate bill shaping up? >> this week the senate arm service committee is mark up their bill. the full committee is mostly done in a closed session where the house session is here at 2:15 in the morning ding their mark up. they opening up section about military sexual assault. they are trying to take case was from commanders, the chair of the committee does not agree with that and he's establishing or seeking to establish a review

process for when commanders don't prosecute the cases. >> he's a staff writer on the hill. we appreciate your time. >> thank you. >> coming up tonight, chuck hagel and general martin dempsey on sexual assault in the military and the pentagon budget. then the army secretary talks about sexual assaults. later, a confirmation hearing for president obama's choice to head the a.t.l. >> defense secretary chuck hagel said the pentagon is reviewing all private military contractors following edward snowden's leak. secretary hagel and joint chiefs of staff chairman martin dempsey testified before the senate sub committee hearing on the defense department's 2014 bum. his is an hour and 50 minutes.

>> good morning. we meet this morning to receive testimony for the 2014 budget for the department of defense. thank you for being here, chuck. chairman of joint chiefs of staff martin dempsey. we're going to speak today about budgets and about people. all the services secretaries and chiefs have appeared before the sub committee this year and have expressed great concern over the impact of sequestration, particularly how the size and pace of reductions have the potential to degrade our nation's defense. sequester and the increasing st of fuel, shortfalls and oversea contingency accounts reduces the accounts by $26 billion in this fiscal year. the department's recent

reprogramming that the sub committee is reviewing could set off some of the shortfall but they would still have a bill for afghanistan with limit flexibility in paying it. i would like to know the options being considered. for face kill year 2014, the president's budget requests $5.6. have secretary hagel you examined options for how the department would absorb the $52 billion additional cuts in sequestration. i want to hear an update today. we can't solve the budget issues without being smarter and without making certain that we have spending cuts that are reasonable. two weeks ago, i discussed the army's track record on acquisition. an average of $1 billion spent

every year on programs that were later canceled. tomorrow, i'm holding a hearing on the tuition assistance program. again to make sure the department's spending is focused on getting the best bang for the buck. next week, i'm holding a hearing on the joint strike fighter so we can have a clear understanding of where this very expensive program is headed. quite simply, we don't have the fund for business as usual. if we want to continue to motorcycle investments across the government for a healthy work force, i know you agree. i also want to hear from you on personnel people. general dempsey, you said last year if we don't get the people right, the rest of it won't matter. that says it all from where i'm sitting. this weekend i attended a ceremony for a national guard unit, in my hometown of springfield, illinois.

they just returned from operations in kuwait. it because great illustration on why people were so important. in nine months, ten soldiers took care of the needs of more than 100,000 service members. they also saw a little bit of everything, medical issue, sexual assault cases and it was up to them to be leaders in the moment and they were. we're so proud of the work being done by all of our military and today i would like to salute the guard and the reserve units who have taken up the responsibility. that leadership is what we need to maintain but we have many, many challenges. how do we maintain the most skilled leaders when we shrink personnel? how do we preserve the guard's reserve? 182nd airlift wing is about to receive its sixth outstanding award since 9/11. it's conducted this national ,300 units.

the issue of suicide, last year we saw deaths by suicide outstrip the combat debts. in 2013, there was a suicide every 18 hours across our force. finally, sexual assault. this issue really threaten to undermine basic trust in the military between personnel and trust in commanders to maintain discipline. i know beneath of you take these accidents lightly but the time for action is long overdue. we need a commitment to change the culture. there was a story that came back with the national guard unit that was activated in kuwait. it because story of a young woman who was alleging as a member of our armed services that she was a victim of sexual assault. she was transferred from her f.o.b. to another unite before she was being sent back to the states to testify. the treatment she received during the transfer was awful.

she was placed in a living arrangement where she had to walk through the men's la treen to get to the women's la treen. this victim, was shattered by the experience. it was note worthy that the prosecutor said the first kind person she ran into was from the national guard unit who tried steady her nerves as she faced the biggest challenge of her life. this culture has to change. these concerns cannot be taken to say we have a broken force. we don't. we have the strongest mill in the world. i'm so -- military in the world. i'm so proud to help the military be success and keep america safe. we have many questions. before i turn it over for opening remark, i want to thank hagel h of you secretary and general dempsey for your

service. >> mr. chairman, thank you. i'm pleased to join you in welcoming the distinguished secretary of defense and the joint chief of staffs to review the budget request. in the current fiscal environment and the unservety of future funding levels, we need to know the consequences of sequestration and its impact on the department of defense. ultimately, on our national security interests. our sub committee has learned from the service chiefs who have testified and other department of defense officials about the challenges facing our military today and specifically in fiscal year 2013. we thank you for your service and we welcome your suggestions. >> i would like to recognize

secretary of defense chuke hagel for an opening statement. the opportunity to discuss the president's f.y. 2014 budget request for the department of defense. i also appreciate the sub committee's continued support of our men and women in uniform and our civilian work force and their families. as we discuss number, budgets and strategic priorities, we will not lose sight of these men and women serving across the globe. as you all know, their well being depend on the decisions we mic here in washington. the president has requested $526.6 billion for the department of defense's f.y. 2014 base budget. tingencies.erseas con

my written statement contains details on both budget requests. this morning, allow me to very briefly focus on three areas before i take your questions. first, the continued budget challenges face facing the department in f.y. 2013 as a result of sequestration, as you have noted. second, the department's f.y. 2014 budget request. third, how the department is preparing for the future of budget uncertainty and further reduced resources as a result of sequestration. as you know, the department has been forced to enforce deep cuts in the fiscal year because of sequestration. according to the latest guidance of office and management and budget the department must cut $37 billion for the remainder fiscal year. with our decision to shift the impact of sequestration away from those serving in harm's way

the cuts fall heavily on d.o.d.'s efforts to be able to train and equip those in the future. the department is experiencing higher war too many costs than expected. -- higher wartime costs than expected. to deal with the shortfall the department has cut back on facility maintenance, instituted hiring freezes, reduced lower priority programs, furloughs of almost 700,000 employees and submitted a $9.6 billion reprogramming request to congress. we ask this sub committee for your assistance in providing rapid review and approval of this critical reprogramming request. given the scale of this shortfall the reprogramming eastern steps we have taken to cut nonessential spending is not

enough. while we have protected spending to sustain the war effort and defend america's interest, the tivety -- activities will be disrupted for the rest of the fiscal year. we have begun to reduce training of nondeployable operating forces. you had the chiefs before this made ee and they have some significant detailed presentations and accounted for these cuts. for example, the army has stopped rotation at its key training centers for all deploying units. re than a dozen combat coded squadrons already have or will soon stop flying. in the navy has curtailed many deployments. to avoid more significant reductions to military readiness

i have alexander ricted furloughs to most of the department's 800,000 personnel if --. i made this decision reluctantly because i recognize the hardship place on personnel across our country and specially on their families. but the current budget environment is requiring difficult decisions and options. let me turn to f.y. 2014. the president's budget continues to implement the $487 billion in ending reductions almost the next 10 years. agreed to in the budget control act of 2011. if the sequester related provisions of the budget control act are not changed, f.y. 2014 funding for national defense programs will be subject to an additional $52 billion reduction in d.o.d. funding. if there's no changes continued sequestration will result in

additional $500 billion over the next 10 years. the president's budget replaces sequestration and gives the department the time and the flex lets -- flexibility to implement reductions wisely and responsibly. this enables the department to support troops still at war in afghanistan, protect readiness, dernize the military's aging weapons inventory and sustain the high quality of the all volunteer force that you noted that was in general dempsey's speech at the national press club. this budget also continues the department's approach for the last couple of years of targeting growing costs like overhead acquisition and pay in benefits. over the next five years d.o.d. identified $34 billion in

savings, this includes restructuring that will achieve $8.2 billion in savings, slow down construction and reductions in other lower priority programs. our military compensation ckage preserves d.d.o.d.'s world class benefits while putting the military on a sustainable path to the future. it brings the cost share closer to the levels and vision when the program was first implemented. the department of defense must be able to eliminate excess infrastructure. the president's budget request authorize for one round of base re-alignment and closure in 2015. it is an imperfect process. there are upfront costs. but in the long term there are significant savings. the previous rounds are saving

$12 billion annually. we cannot justify to continue funding unnecessary infrastructure when we're reducing our fore structure. since 2003, d.o.d. has invested more than 300 foreign bases and operations and we're on schedule to close or consolidate more than 20 oversea operations. there's clearly opportunities to achieve savings by improving proficiency consolidations and improving overhead the scale will also require cuts and changes to military operations. the budget requests aligns the budgets with the president's defense strategic guidance. while continuing to reduce the size of the ground forces and retire aging aircraft and ships, this budget invests in key elements of our defense

strategy, including rebalance the pacific region, maintaining a safe, secure, and effective nuclear stockpile. increasing investment in cyber capabilities and sustaining the growth of special operation forces. this seeks to sustain a high quality all volunteer force. last point, the f.y. 2014 budget reflects d.o.d.'s best efforts to match ends, ways and means during a period of uncertainty. it is obvious that significant changes to the top line spending would require changes to this budget plan. i directed, as you have noted strategic choices in management review in order to aes says future impacts and plan for those continued reductions. i have received the results of

this review and i'm currently reviewing those options and those choices. the defense department will continue to find new ways to erate more affordablely, efficiently and effectively. continued cuts and the timeline of sequestration would require significant reductions in military capabilities and the scope of our activities around the world. the president's 2014 budget sustained our military strention in an environment of strained resources giving d.o.d. the time and flex teeblets make the necessary reductions and had justments over a 10-year period. hard choices will have to be made over the next few years. in the past, many modest reforms to personnel and benefits along with efforts to reduce infrastructure and restructure acquisition programs were met with fierce political resistance

and they were never implemented. we're now in a new fiscal environment. new realities are forcesing us to face these tough choices and making it necessary to put the military on a path to meet these new and complicated threats we have to do things differently. this will require the continued partnership of congress. thank you. >> thank you, mr. secretary. general dempsey, you can see we have quital turnout this morning. welcome you to give your testimony and your full written statement will be made part of the record. >> thank you. thank you for this opportunity to discuss the budget proposal for fiscal year 2014. this hearing comes during a period of extraordinary uncertainty. risks tour nation's security are increasing while the resources and readiness for our force is

decreasing. the will of our men and with women are undaunted but the means to prepare to win are becoming more uncertain by the day. this budget was purpose built to keep our nation immune from coercion. it is a responsible investment and a force that is ready for options for an unpredictable future. it upholds funding for emerging capabilities, such as cyber. most importantly, it protects our investments in the true decisive advantage that we enjoy and this is our people. it treats being the best led, best trained, and best equipped military as the nonnegligentable imperative. it also makes our wounded -- it makes sure that our wounded warriors and families receive

world-class care. there are some things this budget does not do. it does not reflect the full sequestration amount, rather it imposes less reduction and gives us more time to implement new cuts. the the consequences of pull sequestration will gain clarity in the weeks ahead. the senate has asked us to provide our assessment of the impact on the joint force by the first of july. nor does the budget account for the cost of restoring lost readiness. we don't know the full cost to recover from the readiness shortfalls were experiencing this fiscal year. we continue to curtail or cancel training and exercises across all the services in four units that are not preparing to deploy. as a result, we are less ready every day for an unforeseen crisis were contingency operation. in effect, we are foreclosing on

options. is more expensive to come ready than to stay ready. this means the cost to recover lost readiness will compete in the next few years with those costs for building a joint force that we think we need for 2020. as our military power becomes or could become less sustainable, it will become less credible. risk breaking commitments and losing the confidence of our partners and allies, our defense industrial base, and our men and women in uniform and their families. this outcome is not inevitable. working together we can of hold the readiness and help of the force at an affordable cost. to do this we need the certainty of a predictable funding stream, a reliable top line. we need time to implement trade offs and forced structure of modernization, compensation, and readiness, and the readiness to keep the force in balance. but cannot afford to postpone essential reforms such as

compensation and health care. both should be allowed to grow more gradually. we should stop pouring money into excess facilities and unwanted weapons. real institutional reform is the only way to avoid repeating the mistakes of past drawdowns. we have an opportunity and i would suggest an obligation to do this and to account for any future budget in order to restore confidence. we have within us to stay strong as a global leader and a reliable player. thank you members of this committee for all you have done in the past to support our military. we are counting on you to continue to do so, and i look forward to your questions. this morning front page of newspapers across the u.s. tells the story of edward snowden, who is an employee working for one of our premier national security

agencies as a contract employee. the story that is told us that he is a high school dropouts, that he did not finish his military obligation and dropped out of committee college. it is also reported that he is being paid in the range of $200,000 a year to contract -- as a contract employee. i continue to be concerned about the cost of the contractor work force, not just in the u.s.a. but in the department of defense. recent reports have emphasized that the average contract employee costs two-three times as much as the average dod civilian employee for performing similar work. according to dot information of fy 10, contract employees comprise 22% of your department's work force but accounted for 50% of its costs. 250 four dollars billion. now let's take a look at what is happening when it comes to the

treatment of the work force. i wholeheartedly support the idea of exempting uniform personnel from sequestration cuts. we owe it to these men and women not to put a hardship on them when they are literally risking their lives for america. then if we take a look at the civilian work force in the department of defense, here is what we find. there has not been a civilian pay raise since 2011. i question to you is this. if we are setting out to save money, has the civilian hiring freeze resulted in more or fewer contract employees, and if so, how are you tracking the cost ramifications? as contractor pay increase during the civilian hiring freeze? >> mr. chairman, i will defer the specific numbers that you ask as a question to the comptroller here in a moment. that we address your larger context of your question on contractors.

reviewing allly contractors, all the contracts we have, we have no choice, for all the obvious reasons. contractors are part of any institution. we need them. certain skills and expertise. there is no question that we are going to have to make some rather significant adjustments, which we are. by the way, the furlough process does include contractors. in includes companies, acquisitions, contracts. your specific questions on the gaoo report, let me make one other point. i do not disagree with any of your general analysis on contractors. build upou look at the over the last 12 years, and i was in this body during a

significant amount of that, and as that build up occurred, the money flowed in two different departments and institutions, because we felt they were required for national security of this country, there will come a time where we have to make some hard choices and review them. if mr. hale would like to present a response on some of the significant numbers, i would be happy to do that. taking a sequestration cut in fiscal 13 that will come out of contractors, about $2 billion from furloughs, some from a hiring freeze is that will affect our civilian employees. the majority will come out of contractors so we will see a drop in contractors. drop.l be a sharp >> do you disputes this finding, the average contract employee

cost two-three times as much as the ever civilian employee? >> it sounds about right. whether or not a contractor civilian is cheaper or better really depends on the circumstances. in some cases we simply do not have the skills and the department of defense that we need. i am hiring a lot of contractors because they know how to do audits. we do not yet. if you are going to have a job over a long time, you are probably better off to have a civilian government employee do it. >> when i was on the bowles- simpson commission we ask how many contract employees work for the department of defense and he said i cannot tell you, i just do not know. wei will be the best number have. it is partly true because the feed to a fixed-price contract, the contractor has no obligation to tell you how many people are doing it. they just do the work and if it

is satisfactory, you pay them. we are asking them to tell us how many people so we know better. we have about 700,000 service contractors right now, that is our best current estimate. i have found a sense of disdain toward civilian dot employees. -- ofre is going to be laron to save money it should not be at the expense of those who are willing to work in the civil service. >> you will not get any argument from me on that. >> i don't know whether to turn to my right or left. i will turn to senator mikulski. [laughter] in reviewingan, the request before the committee, i notice there is an operation and maintenance shortfall for the army's

request in excess of $8 billion in the overseas contingency operations and maintenance account. hugere we seeing such a difference between what is being requested and what is available for these activities? why this big disparity? generally andond then asked the comptroller to be more specific on the accounts. in my statement here this morning that the costs essentially of transitioning and withdrawing from afghanistan, principally an army assignment as has been the situation the last 12 years, the army has had the ball of the manpower

responsibilities in these wars in iraq and afghanistan. as we are unwinding those and equipment and maintenance, to get that equipment out, is not easy to get out, for a lot of reasons. the cost as been significantly more than what had been anticipated over the last two years. that is part of it, but there are other parts to it that i will ask the comptroller to dress more specifically, which will address exactly your numbers. >> the shortfall you are referring to is in fiscal 13 and the army is short as much as a billion dollars. we do these estimates two years in the advance and it is hard to guess what a war is going to cost that far and events. -- that far in advance. sometimes we have asked for too much money, but this year, regrettably, we did not ask for enough. we underestimated the level of

operating tempo that would incur. we underestimated the transportation costs, as the secretary alluded to, to get equipment out. and a variety of other factors. so we are short as much as a billion dollars, coming at a time when sequestration has greatly limited our ability to cover that. , fulld this reprogramming probe -- approval or close. >> we appreciate your efforts to hold down the cost and try to eliminate unnecessary wasteful spending in this budget, even though we are involved in military operations and those are costly, more costly than when you do not have a war going on. we understand that, but it struck me as a pretty high number and i was curious as to what the details were. in 2012, the department of defense -- i guess this is

directed to the secretary. the department of defense announced a strategy that would shift focus on military capability to be pacific theater. since that time, the department has been forced to deal with a lot of uncertainty, sequestration included, and events such as what is happening in north korea and how serious is that, and are we going to incur knowable amounts of additional spending for dealing with that stressful area of the world? shipbuilding four and previous warship inventory -- if you look at some of the parts of the budget that he would think might come in for increases, there will be decreases. shipbuilding plant projects amphibious warship

inventory will fall to 28 ships in fiscal year 2013. a negativehave impact on our ability to protect our interests in the asia- pacific region. what is your assessment of this? >> thank you. i will respond and then i know general dnc will want to respond as well. first, your initial question about additional operating expenses based on threats in the asia-pacific, you mentioned specifically north korea. we have had to place asset differently, reposition resources, capabilities over the last few months, essentially

since i have been over there a little more than three months, a good deal of my time has been devoted to that part of the particular issue of north korea has consumed a good amount of it. so there have been additional cost and there may well be additional costs. part of what the comptroller is referring to in his general commentary on answering the chairman's question about uncertainties. you plan for uncertainties but you never know. we have had to protect our assets there, whether it is guam, hawaii, south korea. we need to continue to keep all options available for the president if we would be required to take any kind of additional action. second, ship building. yes, there will be a difference in 2015 as we work toward the

300-ship navy and we are on course for that. the budget numbers play that out. you mentioned specifically why is there a decrease in some of these areas. there are decreases in most areas, as you know, because the resources or not there. so tough decisions have had to be day, and more will come. -- have had to be made. more in line with our strategies and commitments and our guidance, we are committed to that 300-ship navy. we are finding new capabilities in these new ships that we did not have previously, but as you go through that cycle of 30 years, and if the comptroller wants to go into more specifics he can, you will find a couple of those years will dip because we are retiring old ships that would cost more to maintain them, as we are acquiring new technologies and ships. that may stop there s general

them see if he would like to respond. -- let me stop there and ask general them see if he would like to respond. >> if you are asking if the sequestration level cuts will have an effect in our ability to ,roduce capability and capacity absolutely. we are talking about 01 $0.20 trillion difference when you add in the gatesone efficiencies and sequestration. $1.2 trillion is going to leave a mark on what we plan to do. this strategic management review that the secretary does lead us through will allow us to identify the point at which the defense strategic guidance that referred to from last year, where we will potentially render it in feasible. that work should become clear in the weeks ahead.

>> thank you, senator cochran. chairwoman mikulski. >> thank you for your questions about mr. snowden and all of maryland is reeling from this. was disclosed,me workplace and home address. that woman had nothing to do with this incident and now she's being harassed. , what is theking kid who could not make through a community college should make 200 grant a year and be exposed to some of our most significant secrets. you, secretaryee hegel and general dempsey. i want to knowledge all the work that you do and to stress -- the

stress that you are under. it is enough to keep any one functioning at a 36-hour day. i just want to acknowledge we are in a very difficult transitional time. today i want to focus my , theirn on the truth families, and their well-being. hagel, i want to thank you for your participation, your we look forward to working with you to cracked the code on the military backlog. second is health care. as you recall in our confirmation hearing, i had hoped to work on these issues and i look forward to working with these issues with you.

mr. chairman, there is in the budget request for something called a healthy based initiative. this is working on all the resources of the federal government, working with the private sector and the state to create a healthy base related to everything from nutrition, physical fitness -- i will be working with the chairman to fund it. and now you have selected 13 , there is a national geographic tour. there are three in virginia and four in maryland. not a good thing to do. fort meade is in the news every day. there are 39,000 employees, military and civilian contractors there. could we take a look at that? i would like to talk more about health care, but let me move on

to something else, which is sexual assault. i have been working on this issue for 25 years, both as a member of the senate -- we had a and there waseek robust response. let me tell you my focus. my focus is on the service academies. i focus on the training of this generation and the next generation of leaders. secretary hagel, when i read your testimony, you outlined several steps that you are taking. i wish to acknowledge those steps and appreciate them. about developing military commanders performance. i support that. i support everything you have in your testimony. but let's go to the service academies. i agree that leadership trains

leadership. the tone is set by the superintendent of the academy. as you look at how to evaluate military members performance and establish a command, of dignity and respect, what you saying your testimony, incorporating sexual assault prevention in the selection of superintendents for the united states military, the now are would you consider really evaluating their performance, how they did their job and how they retain their that that this be a matter is included in the command performance evaluation. >> absolutely. yes. as you know, there is an evaluation process before any of these individuals are given these assignments. however, to your point, there has been merrill emphasis on this issue, but that is -- there

has been very little emphasis on this issue. attitudes, the entire context of this issue. i have redirected that effort and recertified and revaluing of our senior people from recruiters, all the sexual prevention office heads, anybody in those offices across the board. this also includes all our leaders at the academies, the ,uperintendent, the commandants and that will go down into instructors as well. that is a proponent of this problem but it is not the only part of the problem. >> i would like to focus on the superintendent of the academies. for 25 years, i have watched the superintendent's and i have seen some duds.

50% of the general's graduated from west point. 90% of apple's graduated from the naval academy. it shows what the pipeline of leadership is. that is why we spent $400,000 educating these very talented men and women. they need leadership that is contemporary and understands the contemporary work force. i am very concerned that in being alection for superintendent, what this is. support everything having your ontimony, but i need a focus the superintendent. could you give us a list of the criteria on selecting the superintendent? >> we will provide that to the committee and once again have my absolute commitment, and our entire leadership, on getting

this right. we will get it right. i understand exactly what you are saying and we will provide that information. >> my time is up. that year you get a report was mandated in the dod authorization when the sexual assault at the service academies -- the board of visitors is enormously uneven. there are inconsistent policies, in consistent implementation of the policies. could we really focus on the service academy? i could go through the numbers and statistics. >> we will, we are, and we will continue to update the committee. we would be happy to come and give you a briefing on specifically this issue any time your request. >> would you support senate confirmation of the superintendents for the service academies? >> i don't have any problem with

that at all. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to associate myself with the comments of the chairman of ayer appropriations committee. it seems to me that her. about the service academy are very important and i appreciate her bringing them up today. testifiedhagel, you this morning that the shortfall in the military readiness accounts for the remainder of $30 fiscal year is about billion. since i -- since unanticipated work cut its not per sequester account for at least 25%, and perhaps up to one-third of the shortfall in the readiness account, and about 50% of the

shortfall in the army readiness accounts, should we not be addressing this portion of the fiscal 13 budget shortfall with a supplemental oco request? we understand that war is uncertain and it is extraordinarily difficult to accurately estimate but the costs are going to be, particularly in the situation we find ourselves in in iraq and afghanistan. but there is a direct link between the unexpected, unfunded war costs and the furloughs, because they are funded from the same account, the readiness accounts. has secretary as hale, the reprogramming request that you have before our

committee, but that doesn't give you more funding, it just allows you to shift funding around. my question, mr. secretary, is this. will the department be submitting a supplemental aquest to congress to address higher than anticipated war costs? >> senator kyl and, -- senator kyl and, as you have not -- senator collins, as you are aware, one supplemental to address this issue is not going to fix this problem. the only thing that will fix this problem is a change in the know yoution, as i have heard countless times. now to your specific question. we have not considered a supplemental. i have not discussed a supplemental. if that occurs, then we would

look at it. as ihat is about as far can go. we just have not moved at that as a possibility. well, i would encourage you to do so. also, i do not support the sequestration process and believe we should be setting priorities. i am very worried about the detrimental impact on the department of defense. the fact is, that is not the inal calls up the shortfall the readiness account, and overall, across the department's come up between approximately one-third of the shortfall is not due to sequestration it is due to higher than anticipated war costs. even if we abolish sequestration today, that does not solve the --blem of your meeting legitimately needing more money to deal with the unanticipated,

underestimated war costs. so i would ask you to look at ae possibility of submitting supplemental request. let me just make one more the 300-to talk about ship navy being on track, and i am happy to hear that given the new defense policy focusing on the pacific that the president has revealed, the assistant secretary of the navy recently testified about the 10-ship plan for destroyers and that the marginal cost to acquire that 10th destroyer of makes it an extremely affordable acquisition, and would contribute to the cost efficiency of the overall multi

year. in fact, due to sequestration, the department is about $306 million short, despite the fact that a dish for your cost considerably more than that, but there are real economies of scale due to the multi-year procurement plans that the congress has approved. continuing with that multi-year procurement >> i am familiar with the specific situation. we are currently closely examining whether a commitment to the 10th ship should be made, for the reasons you just mentioned. the decision, as far as i know, has not been made yet. i will ask mr. hale to respond to this. it is part of the overall larger strategic interest, as we are

moving 60% of our naval assets into the asia-pacific area. do you want to respond? >> there are specific problems with sequestration. we are trying to solve them. there is a small amount of money in this program to help. but we have to look at this in light of what happens in overall sequestration before we make the final decision. we would like to finish it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i could not help but think of one of the earlier questions about sexual misconduct. at the naval academy and elsewhere, at least it was mostted in the press, in of those cases where nothing was that it was outside a

military reservation. local prosecutors would be prosecuting people. there would be people going to jail. i would hope any local prosecutor who knew what they were doing would not be taking the position almost of blaming the victims that we saw in some of these cases. i mention that because i know there is some reluctance in making the chain of command more responsive. but with all of you here, let me tell you, there is some thought, and this is a matter before the judiciary committee, to removing the exemption, and allowing state prosecutors to move in on those cases. i realize that would be quite controversial.

but i throw that out as a matter -- as a warning to the military chain of command that if they do things as they have always been done, it is not acceptable. on there many of us judiciary committee who had the opportunity to serve as prosecutors, of parties, in earlier careers. i just throw that out. i am not looking for an answer. i know the armed services committee and others will get it. mr. secretary, i was heartened by your very, very strong statement in this area. general dempsey, i know of your concern. will be revisiting this with

you privately. but it is something that we are considering. i think we have talked about what our troops have accomplished in afghanistan. i include the 86th brigade. they fought with great bravery. several lost their lives. with syria, iraq, and much of the muslim world descending into sectarianism, i wonder whether afghanistan faces a similar fate. can our efforts be sustained in the afghan army when we leave? and is it possible that we leave earlier than we now plan? .> thank you, senator leahy

a brief response to your sexual assault comments. you summarized it pretty well. in know what i have done, cooperation with our chiefs. there are going to have to be changes made. there will be changes made. but as we make those changes and work with congress on this, we need to be sure that the consequences that will come from one at that -- from whatever decisions are made by congress -- to make those adjustments we need to make, and you know and agree with that, in many ways, that they are thoughtful. the congress instructed the department of to put together which congress appointed 4 representatives to that panel.

department of defense, five are on that panel. that panel will have its first meeting in the next two weeks. i have talked with them a couple of times. the objective of that panel is to go down to every aspect of this issue -- chain of command, authority -- and make recommendations to the congress and the department of defense on what needs to be changed, what they think needs to be changed. these are qualified, experienced people, men and women of all backgrounds. i add that as a last point. we are working, to this point, very closely with them. questions on afghanistan, let me respond, and then i will ask general dempsey for his thoughts. we are building toward a transition with our allies. i was in belgium last week. this issue was very much a focus of the 50 member isapi

nations in afghanistan. have all continue to role in a transition effort, which we will lead, the united states. as you know, it is train, assist, and advise. a number of countries came forward at the nato meeting and committed -- germany, italy. the turks were looking at the consideration of being a framework nation. i mention that, because this is going to continue to be an international effort. as to your question, can they succeed, that is the question. we have a very strong feeling that they can, they will. they are going through a very difficult fighting system now, as you know, every day. our lead combat role is now extinguished. there will be a formal handover

to that effect in two weeks in kabul. the secretary-general of nato will be there to represent the .saf forces of nato we continue to help with their army, navy, police. ,ig problems, questions uncertainty, of course. but we are doing everything we can to assist that successful transition, and a peaceful, prosperous, and free afghanistan. >> i will submit a longer answer, for the record, in deference to your time. one could make a strong argument that what hangs in the balance in afghanistan right now is the confidence of the afghan security forces, and of the afghan people in them to preserve a measure of stability after our departure. i think that everything we do, in the next year and a half -- that is really what we are talking about now -- should

serve to reinforce their confidence -- a bilateral security agreement, commitment to our enduring presence, accelerating the enablers we provide them. we do to discourage that will probably make it a fake accomplish -- a fait accompli that they will not succeed. >> thank you. , forconcerned that example, in the past, we have cut things off. secretary gates shut down the joint forces command. they moved most of it. i do have a specific question of what happens. are things shut down, or moved around? general dempsey, i look forward to hearing your answer. i understand it is a very complex issue, but i also worry

about just what is happening there. and, well, my time is up. >> thank you, senator. >> mr. senator, welcome back to the senate where you spent a lot of years. i want to get in the area of north korea. a lot of us are very concerned, and i know you are, about the developments in korea. they run hot, and it cools off a little bit, that we have a very unstable regime, i believe, there. ift role could china play they chose to do so, with north korea? they have, at times. they have let them go at times. do you thinktant the developments in korea are to our national security? >> senator shelby, thank you.

china, as you all know, the president spent a couple of days with the new chinese president in california a few days ago. obviously, north korea was a significant heart of that agenda. i was in singapore about a week ago, sharing a dialogue. exactwith my -- not level, minister of defense level, but senior representatives from the ministry of defense. general dempsey has met with his counterpart. we have a number of tracks we are working with the chinese on. i say that because specifically it will address your point about north korea. there is very little question that the chinese have more influence with north korea than any country. without veering off into the secretary of states province --

state's province, i would say the chinese have been helpful in dealing with the north koreans. we have different issues, different agendas, different interests. we also have many of the same interests that are parallel and intersect. north korea is one. how dangerous is north korea? dangerous in the sense they are unpredictable. they have capacities. we know that. we have allies there, starting right on the border, the dmz, where there are allies in south korea. we know the kind of armaments and artillery they have lined up, the north koreans, against soul -- seoul. weapons capacity. japan. that is why responded, the last three months, the way we did, to

protect our assets. some other, which the committee is familiar with, decisions we have made, the president has decided on. we have to be prepared for every option, every contingency. we see this up and down diplomatic track. there will be something occur, and then there is a diplomatic track. the south koreans and north koreans sat down for the first time in six years a few days ago. i think any of those dialogues in any of those venues are helpful, important. but north korea remains a dangerous and unpredictable country, and we need to be prepared for that. i do not know if general dempsey has any response to that. >> you asked about our national security interests on the korean peninsula. one, to defend the homeland. they are seeking to acquire the ability to reach some of our territorial interests in the pacific.

we have a clear interest in that national security. secondly, preserve the armistice. we are responsible by treaty obligation to preserve the armistice that has existed there for 60 years. related to that, we have 29,000 servicemen and women and about 4000 families living on the peninsula to achieve that purpose. they are a risk to our security in the way they proliferate technology, whether it is nuclear technology or ballistic missile technology. fourth, i would say we always have an interest in ensuring secure and confident allies. to our republic of korea allies is a reflection of our commitment to the region. a few seconds. you might have longer to answer. cybersecurity. we are all interested in cybersecurity for industries,

private businesses, and so forth. we are being attacked everywhere. attackedu are being through defense installations everywhere. how important to -- i think we all know the basic answer -- cybersecurity is important to services. wasteh of what you do is on the internet. can you comment? >> i will. in the interest of time, i will be brief. it is one of the few areas of the budget where we have asked for increase, for obvious reasons. i saidsaid many times -- it when i was in the senate. threat ise cyber probably the most insidious, dangerous threat overall to this country, and there are a lot of threats. but it crosses every line. you do not know where it is coming from. you do not know when it is coming.

this is a very significant threat, and i think everyone understands that in the congress. we do. as you noted, it takes down industrial-based secrets. it can essentially paralyzed economies. >> it can change the whole equation. >> it could change everything. as you know, the president spent considerable time with the chinese president on this issue. , in my statements and my speech in the dialogue in singapore last week -- i made that a big part of my speech. i specifically noted that we are aware that many of these attacks are emanating from china. not think we can minimize this threat. it is going to be with us. big a threats as

as i think we have out there, in every way, to our country. it is not just unique to this country. it is unique to every country. >> i have other questions to submit for the record, if i could. >> senator reed? >> you and your colleagues have made difficult decisions in this budget. us back to thees benefits, and particularly care fees. one of the realities is that there are expectations in the active and retired force, based on great sacrifice and service, that they would receive these benefits or something equivalent to it. 10 you give us the rationale again about what is compelling you to take these steps? .> yes, i can toay ask the comptroller

give you a couple of numbers on this. first, as i said in my opening statement, and everyone on this committee knows this -- as the thatman noted in a speech chairman dempsey gave at the national press club, your people are your most important assets. we have made commitments to our people. our country has. we have asked them to sacrifice. you know all about that. therefore, we have an obligation. is a veryre program central part of the benefit package to our people. not unlike social security. not unlike our entitlement programs generally in society. when you look out over the next few years, how are we going to sustain these programs? what we are looking at is finding ways to make some modest adjustments now so that we are

we faced with abrupt cuts will not be able to sustain. we can continue to play out the kind of benefits we have now, but what that is going to mean is a much smaller force, because we are not going to be able to afford the same kind of benefits. what we are proposing is modest increases in the enrollment fees. by the way, it does not affect any of the active duty members. affectedhose would be in the still working age after they leave the military, before 65. we are asking for a modest a co-payin that fee, increase for prescription drugs. thatif we got those, benefit package, and rightly so, by the way, would probably be still the best and if it package i am aware of anywhere.

so, we have to do this, or at least think about it, because we are just not going to have the resources to sustain it through the years that we are making these commitments. i will ask the comptroller if you wants to -- >> just to follow a point, do you have a deliberate sort of strategy to engage these different groups -- retirees, active forces -- not just you, but the chairman and others -- so that they understand and they have the opportunity to communicate with you, and give their impressions, together with their ideas? , there is aimately real question here, 10 years from now, whether the soldiers -- and there is no one more invested in the success of our military forces then these individuals -- will have the

training, platforms, and support they need to do the job. are you going to do that? >> we do do that. we do it working with our military associations, who represent, certainly, our retirees. we do it with veterans groups. we reach out to congress. we are in touch with members of your staff and all the appropriate committees, think tanks. we ask for ideas. we ask for input. we give everybody an opportunity to weigh in. the last point i would make on this is, unless we are able to -- some of the comments we have made in our testimony this morning, and others, and will dempsey and i -- to slow the growth of some of these programs -- it goes to what you just noted. what we will find is, we are going to cut our combat power

significantly. that is one thing that, as you know, is the centerpiece of readiness, capability, and options for any threat in the world. we have got to balance this, and we are trying to do that so we do not hurt people, so we keep our commitments to people, we do the right thing. if we get at it early and make these modest adjustments, we can work through this. >> we cannot do this one year at a time. these things come up once a year, and we keep resubmitting them, and we do not get them. unless we look at the impact of sequestration over the course of sequestration, and recognize the trades -- strategy is about choice, and we have got to make a choice. how much readiness? how much modernization? how much compensation? we have to look at it over this 10 year period. we have to do what you just

suggested. >> my time has expired. have specific data, i would take it now. 2018, our proposals save two point $5 million in that year alone. if we cannot do that, it is about 25,000 troops cut. we need to slow the growth. thank you. >> thank you. we hadt five years ago, a group in the military associations, a summit about health care. i think we need to do that again i would volunteer to be part of that. what percentage of dod spending will healthcare consumed in the next decade if we do not change? >> it is about 10% now. a lot depends on what happens with the overall budget, but it

is going to grow, because it looks like the budget is heading down. >> i heard it could be up to 20% in the next decade. >> it could be, especially if the defense budget falls. >> when is the last time we had a premium increase? two years ago, but prior to that, it was the mid-90's. >> i want a generous benefit, but a sustainable benefit. do you agree with me that tri- care is not sustainable? >> i believe if we are going to sustain it, we will have to have a much smaller force, and one that is less modern. that is not the balance we want. >> we are not going to fight our enemies with a good health care plan. when it comesy, to afghanistan, are we winning or losing? >> i sincerely believe we are

winning. >> i do too. what happens if we lose? >> the region will become unstable. i think there will be problems on the border of pakistan. encouraged to become even more regionally aggressive. >> kandahar could fall back? >> we could find a reemergence of violent extremist groups. >> the difference between winning and losing is what we do between now and 18 months, would you agree? >> the difference is certainly what we do between now and the end of 2014, but also, i think, the commitment we make beyond that. >> i think we need a residual force to maintain confidence and capabilities the afghans do not have, so we can end this war well. 2000 14 inn in afghanistan -- how important

would you say that is, in terms of developing a safe, secure, prosperous afghanistan? is a keyk it component. it is about confidence, self governance, writes. >> don't you think the enemy will do everything they can to disrupt that election? >> they will, and they are doing it now. >> if sequestration is fully implemented, how would you describe the kind of military we would have 10 years from now? >> that is the effort the secretary has us undergoing right now. at full sequestration -- >> you said some dramatic things. do you stand by them? >> this will not be a force that will be adequate to the task. >> do you agree, mr. secretary? >> i do.

>> do you believe the iranians are trying to develop a nuclear weapon or peaceful nuclear power? >> i think we stay focused on our policy. that is preventing the iranians from acquiring any capability to weapon eyes. lex do you think what they are doing and what the centrifuge is designed to produce nuclear weapons material, or just peaceful power? >> it is certainly giving them options to move in that direction. >> do you believe the iranians are trying to develop a nuclear weapon? >> i do not think they have made the decision. they are positioning themselves to preserve the option. >> can you imagine why they would be doing all this if they were not trying to make a nuclear weapon? >> leverage in all different areas. >> do you think they are developing a medical isotope reactor?

>> i think that is probably part of it. but i think it is increasing their leverage. >> i just find it odd that if you are going to have a peaceful nuclear program, you would build it at the bottom of a mountain. do we have plans to deal with the iranian nuclear program if military force is necessary? fore have options both their acquisition of a nuclear weapon, but also the other things they are doing. >> does israel think they are trying to develop a nuclear weapon? >> i believe that if you were to ask my counterpart, he would say yes. >> is that true? >> i think so. he will be here this week. >> i think it is important we say to the world, as a nation, that we think they are trying to develop a nuclear weapon, and we are not going to let them. i just think that is important. how doesabout syria,

the war?ffect >> syria affects everyone in the middle east. >> it affects israel, certainly. what i worry the most about is the king of jordan becoming the first pick them up syria outside of syria. is that a rational thing for me to be worrying about? >> it is very rational. >> what would it mean for the region if the king of jordan were deposed? >> i think a destabilization of the entire region. anyway you would judge it, it would be very bad news. >> last question. is iraq getting better, worse, or the same? >> iraq has had probably the toughest month in its history since the end of our time in iraq.

malek he just met with barzani for the first first time in two years. it is very good news. but they are understandably can pressure from al qaeda. >> i agree with the general. there is a lot going on. >> al qaeda has risen. >> has risen. you saw the stories this morning about the fracturing of the army unit. they have got problems. >> thank you all for your service. you have a amazing hard decisions ahead of you. sequestration, to, is unconscionable. we need to find a way to fix it. thank you all for your service. >> it is a joy to join this committee, and i look forward to working with all of you. i am happy to be here. thank you for your service. let me associate myself with the prior remarks of the senator from maryland, who has been

absolutely a champion for victims of rape, domestic violence, and child abuse. an excellentade point earlier about really focusing the secretary on the academies. i had the pleasure to serve with senator reid for several years on the west point board of visitors. he chaired it. five or six years ago, we had a discussion at that level about the training in sexual assault. i will send you materials i know were not at the west point academy. i do not know if i can speak for all of the academies. but i think it is a good place to start training the next generation, as well as other actions that can be done by this chairman and the chairman of the armed services committee, and the women that are serving on these committees. it is shameful, and it needs to be addressed in the most direct

and effective way. , following up,ou about north korea. i know we are all concerned. about newspapers, it is their nuclear capabilities and long-term intentions. and the dysfunction of the society. mr. secretary, what concerns me whatbly is the recent -- concerns me terribly is the existence of these concentration camps. i know that there are articles that have been coming out, a flurry lately, that talk about the 24 million people in north korea that live in horrific general circumstances. but then reports from human rights activists say there may be as many as 200,000 or 300,000 people in concentration camps. and the way you get there is by knowing someone who is thinking wrong way. your whole family gets sent there.

there was a remarkable story about a 23-year-old man at escaped miraculously. a lot of this is based on his personal eyewitness account. is there anything you can do with south korea and with china to try to bring some level of on thesed focus concentration camps? i do not want to sit here, as a member of this committee, like some people did in the 1940s, and closed their eyes to what was going on in germany. is there anything we can do? because i think this is a serious human rights issue. >> as you know, north korea is probably the most closed country in the world. our access to that country is essentially zero. that havesome things been ongoing, and then they stopped. one i noted earlier this ofning is the resumption

talks between the south koreans and north koreans, the first time in six years. one facility has been an opportunity to start integrating and incorporating. it does not deal with the problem you are talking about. but because we have such limited influence and ability to change anything in the country, it puts us at, obviously, a significant disadvantage to do much. >> i understand. ande is a lot of respect cooperation between south korea and our military, for many years. and south korea is a remarkable country. i've visited it, as many of our colleagues have been. it sits next to this country that is virtually closed and dysfunctional. but if there is anything our military can do to bring relief to these horrible caps, i am going to continue to work with

you on that. that is going to be one of my focuses on this committee. training our soldiers jointly -- you and i spoke about this. communities so encouraging of the joint training base. the budget has been reduced for training, significantly. army reports it has canceled between six and 10 rotations in response to the overseas operations shortfall, which senator collins was referring to. how concerned are you about impacts to our military readiness over time reducing the training that goes on at some of our career -- premier basis, light -- like fort polk, louisiana? >> i am very concerned about it, as is general dempsey and all of our leaders. as general dempsey often says,

we are consuming our readiness. this morningier about the cost alone it is going to take us to get the readiness back -- it is a huge cost to us, and our readiness, and our capabilities, and our future. we are mindful of that. but we are living with the realities we are living with, and our first priority has to be the capabilities of our readiness -- where the threats are, and the prioritization of that. unfortunately, the training is at the back end of that, because you do not need it now. the we will need it. general dempsey has made that point every time he has a chance. >> thank you, general. my final question, for the record, is about the role of the national guard in our cyber fight. we need a million new cyber warriors.

the guard has 460,000 general strength. not only preventing attacks, but responding to attacks that could cause civil panic. they are in a particularly important role. i am going to ask in a written question what you view as the national guard role in the cyber fight. >> one image i want to leave with you -- you are talking about the joint readiness training center at fort polk. these are army. other services has similar -- have similar training centers. i will use the nba playoffs. what we are doing at local camps is training individual trainers on a basketball team, but not giving them the opportunity to scrimmage before we might at some point put them in the game. that is a bad place to be. >> i would like to underscore that there are only a few joint

training centers. i do not mean to be too parochial. but that is perfect. you have can you be if not practiced together? that is the question. and it is really a problem. >> i would like to echo many of the comments my colleagues made about sexual harassment -- rape and other similar actions. i think that ground has been covered. to theretary, welcome subcommittee. it is always good to see you. when we ask you about something that barely predates you, something you have inherited. it has to do with the critical manufacturing capabilities and capacities in the organic industrial base. we asked for a report that was to be do about

three point five months ago. i know you have extensions, so i am not picking on you about that will stop but i think the way it currently stands is, the army has identified the critical manufacturing capabilities, in accordance with the report, but has not identified the level of work to sustain those capabilities. that is the second part of this we need to complete the picture. we have part of the picture, but not the whole picture. these arsenals are very important for our national security. they make things in these arsenals that the private sector does not want to make, too dangerous or too small volume. one example i know you are familiar with is white phosphorus, made him kind bluff, arkansas. all of the arsenals make various important pieces. that thesetant arsenals continue to thrive and to be there when we need them.

i am curious if you can give me an update on the report, and if you know when the workload piece of this will be made available. senator, i cannot give you an update. i do not know. i will certainly get back to the record. let me ask bob hale. like i said, you have some extensions, so i am not picking on you. but i think it is important. some of us have these arsenals and other facilities that are very important. mr. hale, let me ask you, on healthcare -- i want to follow- up about that. senator graham talked about a premium increase. an important question about our health care for men and women in uniform. reforming we go about

our health care system for the military? at some sort of blue-ribbon panel? are we looking at congress doing it? a situationng at where someone comes up with a package of recommendations that we say yes or no to? think we are looking at a number of options. some of them go to making the health care system more efficient. , weexample, in this budget have undertaken as preparation an overview of our military treatment facilities, some of which are very low levels of utilization for a variety of reasons. a number of efforts we have made to try to make the health care system more efficient, to deliver the benefits at less cost. we believe some

modest increases are appropriate for the retirees especially. it up,ngress set retirees were paying 27% of the cost of healthcare. it is now 11%. we believe we need to move back in that direction. we are developing a package. i do not know that we need a blue ribbon commission. we will need the support of the congress with almost all of these. they require laws or at least the consent of congress. >> general dempsey, let me follow up with you on one of senator graham's questions. he asked about iran, and i see 's effort to get a nuclear weapon as a threat to u.s. national security. i would just like to hear from you how you feel that is a threat to u.s. national security. >> thanks, senator. iran is a threat in many ways.

thesimply their move toward potential to develop a nuclear weapon. and i choose my words carefully, because the intelligence community has not yet come to a conclusion that they intend to build a nuclear weapon. they are certainly building on their options to do so, which should be a concern to all of us, and is. we have been clear as a nation that we are determined to prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons, because it would be so destabilizing to the region. they are also active in cyber. they have surrogates all over the region and the world. they proliferate arms. they are a disruptive influence globally. i do consider them a threat to our national security. >> a follow-up. you used the term destabilizing. can you explain how that event

would be destabilizing, and also how it might change the balance in the middle east? >> the acquisition of a nuclear weapon? this is all coming out of the context of a broader sunni- shia conflict across the region, that stretches to baghdad. iran is very active in fomenting side ofence on the shia that equation. if they were to contract a nuclear weapon, it is possible somebody on the sunni side of the ledger would feel compelled to do the same, leading to a regional arms race. >> may i respond very briefly? there is a panel, to your point ,arlier about tri-care, someone set up by the congress, as a matter of fact.

it was chaired by former senator john kerry and senator bob pressley. senate members. their objective is to look at future compensation benefit packages. that has not been filled out yet. i think there are still a couple of members yet to be appointed. veryhat panel will be active, and they are preparing to fill that out. thank you. >> thank you. senator murray? >> thank you for coming before the committee, and your service as well. secretary hegel -- last year, i ask secretary panetta to begin a review of how the department diagnosis mental health conditions, and he agreed to do that. the army recently completed their review, and there are some really valuable lessons we got from that, and it really underscored the need to complete the entire review, and identify gaps in care, and improvements

that need to be made. given the number of suicides we have already seen this year, and our continued winding down from afghanistan, i think it is really important to stay on track. i wanted to ask you when you expect that review to be completed. of the well aware review. i am absolutely committed, as secretary panetta was, to the , as he and addressing it said very clearly. when you look at the latest number, we had 350 suicides last year. and all the other extenuating dynamics that play out. it is, as director panetta noted, one of the great internal problems that we have. as to your question, when is it going to be due out, i do not know. we will get back to you. >> i would like an answer. i think we have to make sure we stay on track and get the

diagnosis correct, and respond right. the armyme line, recently released some statistics saying there has been 100 nine potential suicide so far this year. that is just in the army. that is really high, compared to last year, and continues a disturbing trend you just referred to. we are losing more servicemembers today to suicide than we do in combat. we have passed initiatives and legislation to combat this problem, and to provide additional access to mental health resources. i want to ask you -- what progress has the department made in meeting the legislative requirement to create a joint, comprehensive suicide prevention program? >> let me ask bob hale or general dempsey. i kind of got in the middle of it. the progress report -- i do not know. i assume he made progress. i have gotten briefings. i know it is ongoing. i know we are doing it.

i know chief brodeur now is focused on it. anything else? >> i do not have the dates, and i cannot give you a progress report from memory. we meet as the jcs. we get periodic in progress reviews. i would like to take that question and give you the proper answer. >> and in your testimony, you say dod is protecting funding for mental health. can you quickly say how those funds are going to be used? are there programs that are going to be expanded? >> i am going to ask the comptroller to answer. >> we will not sacrifice any of the quality of healthcare because of sequestration. we will find ways to meet all of our key healthcare needs. there may be some reductions in programs, but health care for individuals will not be optimized. >> and the mental health care

side? >> the same. >> all the current programs we have will be funded. >> in particular, wanted warriors will be our highest priority. we will be nothing to effect affect that. >> i do not want to lose track of the mental health side of this. my last question is more strategic will stop over the last 10 years, military installations across our country have grown dramatically to sustain two wars. i have seen a joint base in my state grow by 64% since 2006 to meet the demand. as the military shifts its focus to the asia-pacific region, the dod is going to increasingly rely on installations in our western states. i wanted you to discuss how dod is taking advantage of the investments we have now made over the last 12 years, and the strategic value of our installations in western states,

like the fairchild air force base in washington state, to facilitate long-term strategic decisions. make a general comment in response to your question. if general dempsey and the controller would like to add anything -- comptroller would like to add anything. the assets in the western part of the united states have always been important, but , due to thatentral shift of our priorities, based on threats and interests, and our ability to defend those interests in the asia-pacific. i do not think there is any question that that is going to continue. that means infrastructure. that means all that goes with it. thereoes not mean that will not be any adjustments or considerations of consolidation.

until we get down into some of these things, as to the implementation of the strategic guidance, and the asia-pacific rebalancing -- my general assessment of it is that they will remain critically important to that strategic shift. >> the only thing i would add, senator, is that i align myself with the secretaries general impression that our rebalancing in the pacific will certainly advantage that part of our infrastructure that tends to exist on the west coast. it is worth mentioning that the army, for example, has not yet announced how it will go from its current strength, which is just over 550,000, down to 490,000, based on the last budget cut. there will have to be some number of brigades cut. the army has not announced, nor shared with the secretary yet, which of those -- where those

reductions will come from. iat will affect every -- predict that will affect every installation in the continental united states, and most of those overseas. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to all of you. >> we talked about a lot of ways the department of defense is going to envision saving money. some of them more painful than others. we have not spent much time this morning talking about the acquisition strategy at the department of defense, which consumes a substantial amount of taxpayer dollars each year. are you envisioning, mr. secretary, any changes in approach either to existing acquisition projects or future projects that could save us money and still keep us safe with the best technology? >> mr. chairman, yes. we are constantly evaluating that. we are currently evaluating.

we have to, if for no other reason than the reality of resource limitations. they have to align with our strategic interests, with the strategic defense guidance of the president. what kind of assets to we project we are going to need out into the future? this is a constant evaluation. i think when carter was the undersecretary for acquisitions, he started a number of new programs that have been followed by the current undersecretary, frank kendall, which bob hale will be able to provide numbers on. they have given dod significant savings, at the same time enhancing our capacity and ability to align our assets and resources with our strategic interests and defending those. let me stop there. general dempsey may want to say something, and the comptroller may want to add some numbers to

what i have just noted. >> i do not have a number for better business practices the secretary was referring to in my head. i know we have had success in sharpening our pencils and getting our suppliers to do the like the f 35. proposedlso restructuring of weapons that will save about $8.2 billion over the five year period. one, and aystem was major restructuring of the ground combat vehicle. i see that continuing regardless of whether we see budget cuts, and accelerating if we see cuts in the budget from sequestration. >> when i speak to contractors for major acquisitions, virtually all of them have an argument that goes along familiar lines. x, marginal cost of the next

whatever it is, is dramatically less, so if you will keep buying, it will be cheap. unfortunately, it is like going to the store and saying, i am just going to buy sale items. it turns out everything is on sale. you have to decide with the most important thing is. a briefing on one of these systems reminded me that what we are trying to do is stay a step ahead of the potential enemy. the cyber war makes it more complex. stealing there best ideas from us. can you address that particular issue, in terms of the theft of this technology, the cyber security issue, and how it keeps forcing us to try to run faster to try to catch this rabbit? >> as i noted in some earlier comments and answering questions here this morning, i put the cyber threat as high up on the

list of threats to this country as any one thing, there are a lot of threats. we have nuclear threats, terrorism, and so on. one reason i do is the very reason you just noted, mr. chairman. it almost every day in the papers, about the theft of industrial-based secrets, and all that goes with that. so yes, we do have to stay ahead of it, and we do have to work closely with the private sector. there is a mix, and there is a balance on this. we constantly try to achieve the right mix, with resources and priorities, and the technology. technology drives it all. me with theprovide information about the employees, i

would also like to know about their salaries. >> will do. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman, let me thank the panel. i think the hearing has been very informative, very straightforward. theyreciate the fact that have been responsive to our questions. and in situations where we do not have the exact dollar amounts for a request, they are getting back to us with more explicit requests. we want to be sure we cooperate with the department of defense. i do not know of any other responsibility we have here in the senate to try to be sure we get this right, protecting the safety and security of our american citizens, our highest priority. i think we need to convey that from this panel, as well as to expect the same commitment and attitude from the panel of witnesses before us. , senator cochran.

senator shelby? >> i have one question. i think i will direct it first to mr. hale. there will be, as i understand it, a significant increase in the number of ground-based interceptors located in alaska. as the department of defense prepares to increase this number, as i understand it, from 30 to 44, which we believe is the right thing to do -- nearly a 50% increase -- what steps will be taken to implement the fly before you buy policy? and how will this impact the unit cost of each ground-based interceptor in the near term? committedcertainly to making sure the interceptors work. the testing goes on. it has been more successful lately. we are hopeful, i should say. i do not have in my head a unit cost.

as you know, our plan is to refurbish one of the missile fields for operational use, and to buy additional interceptions, and to refurbish some that are now in storage. this is not going to happen immediately. that will give us time to finish the testing program. suree committed to making this works before we expand those numbers. >> thanks to our witnesses today, and all of you. we will be working with you in preparation of the budget. this subcommittee will reconvene tomorrow, wednesday, at 10:00 a.m., for a hearing on voluntary military >> wednesday, defense secretary huck hagel and joint chiefs chairman dempsey testified before the senate budget committee.

on plan to face questions the defense budget, sexual assaults in the military and other issues. coverage, 10:30 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> the confirmation hearing for president obama's choice to head atf. and chuck hagel and joint chief's chairman general martin on the issue of sexual assault unless the pentagon budget. >> coming up next on washington congressman joe wilson of south carolina, discusses issues and foreign policy. representative loretta sanchez member of the a homeland security committee talks about nsa data collection programs. later, our spotlight on agazines features joanne

muller, "forbes" magazine detroit bureau chief on the car of the future. washington journal is live every morning starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> one of the interesting of this building's history is that it exists at all. of the reason that this building is still here is due to our governor at the governor seb lan band. coming toivil war was a close and troops were outside concerned he was about the fate of the city and buildings. the surrender of the city of raleigh. agreed to leave the city of raleigh and have the confederate of raleighe the city

peacefully and the union troops would also take charge of the peacefully and specifically they would spare the state capitol with the museum and library. we do have three representations theeorge washington here at state capitol, one outside, two inside. downstairs is a copy of the original statue within the state house that burned. destroyed. that statue was made by an named by ulptor antonio kinova. he represented george washington he felt really matched is representation, as a political leader and military leader so he made him look like general. that was not entirely a popular decision with the people of north carolina. the thing that shocked people the most is his legs and feet are completely bare. thought that was a little disrespectful to show a his dent with his legs and

toes showing. >> more from the north carolina next weekend as book tv and american history tv, literary istory and live in raleigh, north carolina. sunday at 5:00 on c-span 3's american history tv. secretary john mchugh spoke at the sixth annual harassment and sexual assault in as shark on known the army's future plans to prevent sexual assaults. this is 20 minutes. >> apologize for running late. i see a lot of familiar faces. ou're familiar with the pentagon's pace and rhythms. by pentagon time, we're not

badly.oo but we're trying to get you back on schedule. thing i want to do is hank the chiefs of staff and the airports and the colleagues nd secretary mike donnelly for lending the palatial facility. ow that you've seen how the other half lives, we hope you stick with the army. we do appreciate the joint aspect of this. most importantly, i want to you.k i deeply appreciate this chance you.hare some time with and i appreciate even more the remendous effort that each of you have put forth these past help us the etter tackle what i know we all agree painful raordinarily and extraordinarily important ranks.e in our during these sessions, you heard from victims. advocates.d from

and i know each of them brought personal very perspective on this problem. we have to remember that when it comes to perspective as had a singular and to to reduce eliminate sexual assault and from across our ranks. now i'll be the first to state the obvious. is no easy task. hard work. ut this much we know, yours, ours is an organization built on values, loyalty, duty, respect, service, honor, integrity, sexual courage, and abuse and sexual assault in all to e abhorrent

each and every one of those values. to live by those standards, it's our duty and responsibility to act and do every day.nd the a few days ago, i had along with secretary agel to attend the ceremonies at west point. dave, thank you to your and your hospitality.r but along with the and along with the graduating class of cadets, heard the secretary when he very correctly stated i think as put it, quote, sexual harassment and sexual assault in military are a profound betrayal of sacred oath and sacred trust.

the scourge, he said, must be stamped out. the s i listened to secretary's words that morning, i thought of the parents of those young cadets. mothers and fathers who had entrusted us with their sons and daughters and the tremendous all hold lity that we to be worthy of their sacrifice, worthy of their support. and i thought, you know, in hearts and minds today, there's probably an of them fear that many were feeling. it wasn't just date. the unspoken fear that had undoubtedly been growing over the course of the last several weeks and months. of the fear a g parent has understandably when their child may be sent into way.s the fact is that everyone in morning came that

to the academy at the time when our nation was at war. came at a time when our nationf age with at war. and it's likely that most if not the parents had already with the easy terms inherent danger of their child's profession. really talking about another fear. it's a fear that no family soldier should ever have to face, the fear of harm to the hands of another soldier. fear that their daughter or son could be sexual assaulted by arms.rade in and i thought that warning too -- what could we possibly to them. what could we impart to ease hat fear to let them know that we are committed to doing everything we possibly can to keep their children, who are our

warriors, safe from all enemies, domestic, even when, specially when, that enemy is one of our own. several weeks ago i had a chance one of the newly appointed brigadier generals ttending the senior leader development program. i spoke about this occasion uring recent testimony i provided to congress. and that morning i told those ew general officers that no matter what they may do, no matter what they may achieve, no matter what battles they held when or ribbons they may wear, matter what battles they wage. ow far or how fast they rise, if they fail to act. if they fail to intervene, or if on this issue,ad they will have failed the army. more importantly, perhaps, they would have failed the very they were expected to

nurture, to protect, and to lead. and that's the message we have away from this event. because it's a message we have across the entire force, from the newest recruits to the most seasoned leaders. now as all of you know undeniably, this is not the issues me we faced the that challenges the health and the well being and the readiness army.r suicide, drug and alcohol abuse, ptsd. ental health, have all similarly challenged our resolve. some of the issues that you have to deal with, some of the issues certainly that are before us to our armye unique and our military. of combat, g stress the traumatic wounds of war. as well as ceived those that we can't. some of the challenges plague us

society and a nation as a whole. sometimes we lose sight of army is.w big this here's some 1.1 million soldiers, active duty, guard and reserves. civilians.0,000 or so when you take that as a combined than 11 n, it's larger states in this nation. and if the army were a city, be the nation's sixth largest. many of the problems we face are problems common to a population that is that large. and every very city state in this union. even in the areas of sexual have statistically occurwer such crimes than in other sites population. but i want to be clear. not being as bad as some others simply isn't good enough.

by a long shot. citizens.army of and as an army, we expect, we demand character within our rankles. that's character that we demand, not to say that we're better and the people that we serve, but rather we strive to lead by our example. we are true to our convictions, we have to be performance. our as i stand here before you have failed. we're without ay hope. that's not to say we made no progress. about all of lked if not most of the progress we made. significant, a 70% decrease and reports of sexual assault. propensity to report. 56% prosecution rate. 81%.the conviction rate of he army special vick them

investigation course is the d.o.d.-wide best practice and he army is training military investigators and prosecutors from all of the services. these are trends that point to work of this army, the good work of many of you right here in this room. and they are statistics that can oint us in the right direction that, in fact, say we will to prevail in h erase the scourge from our soldier's life. are statistics that tell us as well, there's much do.e we have there's more that most of us in senior leadership must do to to provide cause, all of you and our front line orces the training and the support you need to complete the mission at hand. many if not all of you know i

army tohe united states be the first military branch to screenings we appoint to counsel and aid victims.sault intense positions of personal trust. we have to make sure that they the right mental and physical tools to carry out the effectively.s jobs are highly stressful. to eed to provide the means better ensure their own continued behavioral health and well being. evaluating the b ft sark or the entire va will benefit strongly the alike.and advocates

we've placed restrictions on who as choose those who certain a sark or establish va. the officer ohher civilian equivalent b within the of command. only brigade commanders or commander or el supervisor may make appointments o the vitally important positions. the hiring authorities may not be delegated. elevating the , authority within the chain of command will produce

accountability, and oversight. finally, i've also directed that devise the plan to incentivize successful service sark or a staff or da. in a ioned this idea recent meeting in the white house held with all of the ervice chiefs and service secretaries to discuss our plans and how to combat sexual assault. fterwards, i was pleased that the president seemed to agree with that concept saying, and i our top people to understand this is as core to our mission as anything else. the president continued and we think ofward them, not this as a sideline for anything else they do, but incentivize am byrnes folks in the ranks to ake sure that they understand this is important. my opinion under the current

is there's no reward for well, s who do this job at least not a reward in the traditional sense. no recognition as other fields and occupations in the army for assignments and succeeding. help them advance their careers. we have to inventivize their mission. the commanders who took their best as important as that is. ut also to ensure that the soldiers who do the job successfully, to complete the mission expected of duly recognized in important ways as well. important steps. equally important. i don't intend this to be a blanket reflection of the 10,000 civilians that we currently have serving in the critical positions.

believe we have many, many committed dedicated and well-trained people currently serving across the army. people who too many recent cases has shown, by ourften measured less success than by our failures. can ed to do everything we to make this system better and make no mistake about it. we are committed to doing that. and i am here to challenge each you to ask and in fact to require your forceful help and your leadership. give you an area where work remains to be done. the past six months using the audit agency, we've been testing the effectiveness of the

that had ault hotline been established throughout the army to provide assistance to time of their greatest need. some of what we found was good. of what we found was not. this riple a first began test in december, approximately wo in every three calls were not answered successfully. returned, noeren't one answered the phone. the number was disconnected. numbers listed on installation websites were wrong. and no words to express the anger i felt or to capture my disappointment. but still, we had a plan. we weren't testing just for the testing. and since that first report, we mnra,been working with the the g-1 sharp offices and others better. we've been systematically correcting what we found to be needed to what we

fix. triple a conducted the most recent survey. in that test, 80% of the calls successfully. ore than twice as many than as in december. is that an improvement? absolutely. is it good enough? absolutely not. not with respect to this challenge. we need to be honest with ourselves. or any of this army the military services being able to completely eradicate sexual harassment are stacked against ups. necessary goal and it may be long and hard in coming, committed to be that path however long, however be.d it may whatever the odds, however steep the climb, we should be able must be able to answer calls for help. of the time.

time.00% of the every time an assaulted fellow to ier needs help, we have be here. we pride ourselves on being by the that lives commitment to leave no fallen comrade behind. agree. you that commitment cannot -- cannot between the hed battlefield or home station. hat's a realistic, necessary goal that shouldn't take years or even months to achieve. to ensure that we have accurate numbers and effective assistance. should expect nothing less. need and again, we expect your help. et me close the same way i began -- with a sincere thank are already ou doing. again, stating the obvious, this

difficult ordinarily issue requiring hard work and committed leadership. we've done much. you all have done much. ut there is much more to do to ensure that we live every day by the army values that ooch and one of you, that all of us, have sworn to uphold. now, many have spoken about impacts our t readiness, degrades our ability army's mission. again, you'll agree, they're right. we prepare to fight our nation's enemies when we have et to protect ourselves from the enemy within? that is where leadership comes in. culture. the and ensuring and environment of ensuring respect and the safety of every soldier, man wherever their duty may call them.

14th century chinese philosopher quote, ategist wrote, what made soldiers prefer to rather than retreat s the benevolence of military leadership. he observed when soldiers know their leaders care for them as own children their and the soldiers love their their own they do child. i know each and every one of would do f us anything, everything we could to sexual assault, the sexual abuse of our own child. we have that same responsibility. same t feel that dedication to the fathers and who pledged their sons and daughters to the army and

the nation. we can't let them down. we can't let our country down. nd perhaps most of all, we can't let ourselves let the army down. close by again hanking you for your dedication, for being here, and for telling you again, this is one of the most important things, one of the most critical challenges your army faces today. all of us must treat it as such forward. go so thank you for your efforts and the future as well. god bless you. may god bless this great army who keeps our nation strong. thank you. coming up on c spahn; a confirmation hearing for president obama's choice to head the atf. after that, defense secretary and joint chiefs chairman general martin dempsey on sexual assaults in the pentagon nd the budget. 4r5i9er, army secretary john

the issues of sexual assaults. >> wednesday, a hearing on cybersecurity with the head of the nsa. general keith alexander and representatives from the homeland security department and 2:00 i will be live at p.m. eastern with the senate

on opriations committee c-span 3. william years of mckinley's political career, the house serve as william and ida's canton residence. quarters on the third floor of the house, was nally a ballroom but turned into a entertaining area that room, an office that william used. we're in his office outside of which later becomes the living quarters of ida and ckinley while they're in canton. this is the setup they had everywhere they went in his plit call years. always when he conducted business, the door stayed open living quarters and ida ould stay in the liking quarters who she could hear what

was going on. silent help mate to william mckinley. they does cussed things but meetings or rt in discuss their political opinion. in columbus, there was no governor's mansion then. washington and here at the saxon house. website, le on our c-span.org/first ladies. fifr mags hearing for todd jones. mr. jones is currently the agency.director of the this hearing also included the the g attorney general for civil position. this is 2 1/2 hours.

>> calling the hearing to order. we have a packed house. todd jones to be the director of the bureau, alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives. first, mr. dellry. the acting assistant attorney general for the civil largest component within the department of jus tills. kappa anded fie theta earned the j.d. from yale law school in 1993. yale, he duating from went on to corporate chief judge joe flath of the 11th appeals.court of mr. dellry went on to private at wilmer, cutler & wilmer-hail wn as where he was a litigator for 14

years. if contract and corporate dministration and administrative law matters. n 2009, he held a number of leadership roles including the chief of staff and counselor to attorney of the general, the associate desk of the attorney general. advised positions he the department's leadership on a range of matters including civil appeals, national security litigation, and policy. s acting assistant attorney general for the civil division, he supervises approximately attorneys representing the united states, the president, nd cabinet officers and agencies. he supervises much of the government's civil litigation includes the defense of legal challenges to congressional statutes, policies, and actions. at the justice department, he tooted significant attention

the civil division's extensive docket of national security cases. he worked closely with the office of the solicitor general o which he makes recommendations concerning supreme court cases. e also has a strong track record of pro bono service. for example, from 2007 to 2008, a team of lawyers that conducted an investigation district of the columbia's office of tax and effective of $48 million by a long time employee. the employee pled guilty to charges in 2008. judiciary committee has received support from a ipartisan group of current and former government officials and a group of assistant attorney generals for the civil division administrations of presidents reagan, george h.w. and george w. bush. now turn to todd jones whom i've a very long time. we've worked closely together

the minnesota law enforcement community when he as in the first stint of the u.s. attorney of mrn minnesota when bill clinton was president attorney.the county for the past two years, todd joan has been doing the impossible. filling two crucial federal law as acting director of the atf and the u.s. attorney for the state of minnesota. anthony is back there. i know it's not been easy. also as wife margaret and a father to not just anthony but four other children and a good that. we welcome anthony here today representing the family. todd jones has an impressive pack ground that has him well atf.ared to lead the after law school at the university of minnesota, he marine corps s. where he served on active duty s the judge advocate and infantry officer from 1983 to

1989. two years later, he was called active duty in the first iraq war. in addition to the military career and having a rare a u.s.tion of serving as attorney under two different presidents, he has a strong prosecutor at e the minnesota u.s. attorney's office and out1257bding career in private practice. we are here to consider his nomination to be the atm.anent director of the a nomination that is supported y the national association of former u.s. attorneys including those who serve under bush and administrations, several former assistant u.s. attorneys, he administrator of the minnesota bureau of criminal apprehension. he minnesota county attorney's association. the association of the chiefs of police, the fraternal order of police. atf association just to name a few. atf's important role

in the crimes and incidents like marathon bombing, this should be a top priority for the nited states senate so have a permanent director of the atf. it doesn't make sense for the serving in a temporary capacity and yet there as never been a permanent director in place since 2006 when it became a senate-confirmed position. i think that's wrong. something is wrong when the senate fails to confirm the head years.gency for seven something is wrong when we have 2,000 of them, on the front lines of the major nvestigations like the boston marathon bombing while the victims lay dismembered in the hospital, the agents were on the line figuring out who did it and what happened. and yet the senate still have confirmed a permanent leader of this agency. members of t some the senate don't have the atf

benefit of the director. for all of the concerns of the legitimate in filling a fulltime permanent director should be a critical step in the atf is that doing its job and doing it well. turned downas never a tough assignment. he's faced challenging the careerthroughout and taking over the atf in the another 2011 with example of that. as everyone knows, the agency amount ofa tremendous scrutiny and understandable the failed fast and furious operation and jones atf rought in to get the back on its feet. since then, he's worked to practices and policies. he's begun making essential to the that are critical 2300 agents who perform under day out bothin and on major investigations like

boston and west texas. but also the lesser known investigations like serial california. igarette smuggling rings and drug and gun trafficking undercover operations in miami. atf, e taking over the jones served as the head of the u.s. attorney's office in innesota under two presidents and before that as assistant u.s. attorney. as an assistant, he was the lead number of cases involving criminal drug laundering, money financial fraud, and violent crime in the 1990s. sector, he became a partner at two well respected firms.ta law to highlight some of his tenure asments in his u.s. attorney in minnesota, that at the ith todd jones he rhino for the d

young somali ted terrorists groups to fight groups in somalia. indicted in november of 2009 and pled guilty kidnap,iracy of murder, and name abroad. date, it results in charges filed against 22 other individuals. operation highlight, a drug trafficking operation involving state, and federal law enforcement officers and resulted in 25 indictments, 25 pleas, and sentences of 200 in months. operation brothers keeper regional 200 member gang that took 22 dangerous off of the street. eceived national attention and was a prosecution for 27 defendants associated with a mexican drug cartel, including apprehension of the cartel's

regional leader and sentences as prison.20 years in ones' office was active in other areas like complex white collar crime including the prosecution of a ponzi scheme. $3.65 billion, the second argest in history after bernie madoff. those are a few of the examples jones oversaw dd as the u.s. attorney in minnesota. qualified and has a range of accomplishments that lev him more than ready to lead atf on a fulltime basis. not on a temporary or interim basis. he's a hardworking public servant who served his country military and civilian agencies. i look forward to hearing from both of our nominees today and discussion about their

past experiences and their utlooks on the positions to which they have been nominated. thank you both of you. i'll turn it over to senator grassley, the ranking member. >> thank you very much. as the chairwoman knows and as i told her yesterday, i objected to holding this hearing today nd requested the hearing be postponed. regarding mr. holmes' conduct.

>> members of the committee are the public interest demands resolution of these issues. members of the committee are to know that if these charges have any merit. one way for that to happen is for the committee to undertake investigation. that is not happened. follow the usual committee practice and wait for third party investigating agency to complete the process and reach a conclusion. either. not taken place so, we're left today to take mr. jones' word. no way of independently

to fying what he says or ascertain the truth of the matter. in addition to the open complaint, there are numerous regarding mr. es jones and his record while serving as u.s. attorney and director. that's why i requested a postponement of the hearing hile the chairman did postpone the hearing one week, that did not cure the procedure defects with the nomination. goit was unfortunate that we ahead with this hearing before resolved.an is in april, the chairman started alking about a hearing for mr. jones, i was concerned about moving forward. there were a number of requests that i made to mr. jones. i previously received a copy of letter to the office of special console making vicious allegations against mr.

jones. i sent a letter to ose on april for an update on those allegations. 12, ose responded that there were two pending matters attorney's he u.s. office, the district of minnesota where mr. jones was a u.s. attorney. matter was a prohibited personnel practice omplaint and the second was a whistleblow alleging gross mismanagement and abuse of authority. on may 28, the chairman sent out for a hearing for mr. jones to be held the 2308 lowing week. sent a letter raising my concerns about proceeding with a nominee with that omplaints and asked the hearing be postponed consistent with previous committee practice. on june 3, the chairman postponed the hearing one week. so, the n doing chairman expressed that the april osc letter had been publicly

disclosed. for tinuing justification holding this hearing today is that based on this disclosure, have an ees should opportunity to respond. but, of course, there was the osc onfidential in letter. in fact, i'm not about to hide issue from the public, it's inquiry of the qualifications of the nominee. to hide it, that would be their decision. dditionally, there were numerous allegations that republicans were holding up the for no good reason. the osc letter clearly identified why the hearing was going forward at this time. that justification remains valid today. again, this would be consistent with prior committee practice. everyone knows that mr. jones' appearance today no substitute for a full

investigation. we know the investigation is pen, so even if we ask questions today, we can't rely on the information we received. nomination hearing is nothing like the investigative by the office ed of special consult. in a full osc inquiry, there interviews with complaining witnesses, a review and interviews with attorneys and law enforcement officials in minnesota. access to none of these at this point. witness, a one nominee, able to offer up his side of the story. whistleblowers,e where are other assistant u.s. attorneys and staff and members, who was offering the other side of the story. did receive a token offer for the majority of one witness. that offer came sunday night a little more than six hours ago. received from we the majority and offered to

conduct some interviews this coming friday. after today's hearing. ow that's quite perplexing to me. e're going to begin the investigation after the hearing is concluded. committee ever conducted an investigation after the hearing for that nominee. 4, i suggested to the chairman that a mere one-week hearing ent of the would not allow sufficient times resolved.matters to be we had no reason to believe the osc investigation would be closed. that the majority did not want to wait until the completed the investigation, he committee would be fully investigating the matter for itself. i suggest we begin the process additional witnesses to testify at today's hearing. the ne 5, osc provided committee with an update on two

pending cases. while the that whistleblower disclose eurocase prohibited sed, the personnel practice complaint was theng through mediation for time being. june 6, the chairman reported to had been notified by osc that he had reached a resolution retaliation allegations against mr. jones and that closed.ation was now this directly counterdistricted received.mation i had i, again, suggested that additional witnesses might be necessary. hours ago, my 6 staff was notified by the chairmanstaff that the agreed to one minority weapons. y that time, there was no unreasonable way that a witness could be contacted or arrange on monday and appearance on tuesday morning. i contacted the

special counsel inquiring her at lability to testify to least explain more fully the status of the complaints. quote, i'm replied, unavailable to testify tomorrow about this matter. not be r, it would appropriate for me to provide any additional information about the pending case, end of quote. she confirmed for the second the investigation remained open. she stated, quote, the case for nt for the mediation did not result in the mapter being closed. quote.on -- end of based on all of this, i cannot conclude that the on jamming intent this nomination through the committee. we're left with open investigation of serious whistleblower retaliation and these are not unsubstantiated charges. of all of the complaints ocs, 10% are chosen

for further investigation. of them. is one osccareer nonpartisan staff forward the case. needed to be t looked into. of a are indications larger pattern here. osc.for acting director jones to inn a atf agents o all stating, quote, if you don't the chain of command, if you don't find the proper way to to your cerns leadership, there will be consequences. end of quote. of cold water ot on anyone who wants to whistle law. under the the u.s. attorney's office of minnesota headed by mr. jones in capacity. these employees wrote to the office of special consult asking review of the

patterns, practices, treatment, and abuse that they have end of quote. they reference the video stating quote, felt for atf as we, s at a too, have had the same types of statements made to us, end of quote. they then said, mr. jones, a climate instituted of fear, had pushed employees office.the dismissed employees wrongly. hiring practices of he eeoc, and put in place an orwellian style of management the continues to polarize office, end of quote. agent in charge of the fbi's division, mr. donald to this committee voicing concerns about mr. jones. in that letter he wrote, quote, a retired fbi senior

executive, i'm one of the few publicly express our complete discontent with mr. ineffective leadership thepoor service provided to federal law enforcement ommunity without fear of retaliation and retribution against him. the caution, kw0e9, mr. jones a significant impediment for law enforcement o effectively protect the citizens of minnesota, end of quote. and allegations of mr. oswald's letter were orroborated by another assistant u.s. attorney and mr. jones' office. yesterday mr. paulson gave his consent that the whistleblower complaint be released to the committee. it contains a detailed account abuse of management authority and other problems within the office. mr. jones' ils negative attitude towards

histleblowers and retaliatory action he took against mr. paulson. we received this document late afternoon. reviewing the document osc had of the chairman investigated, quote/unquote of committee confidential. would be asking questions based on this document. we asked the chair and staff to us know if he intended to designate the document, shl, to my onfidence knowledge, the chairman has not so.e do not think it would be appropriate to hide this information. i see no reason why it should of the vailable as part full record. i was told repeatedly that today's hearing, this very day, my one opportunity to ask mr. jones any questions that i would. and i intend to ask mr. jones

questions about the alsos described in the complaint. i have additional procedural problems with this nomination and minor but one which illustrates a breakdown in the normal committee process was the several routine nomination materials. file received a routine required for all nominees, i noted missing pages, two documents. i asked these from the white house on may 28. one of the requested documents night at offers last 9:59 a.m. there was no investigation for the delay. yet to receive the other requested document. now there's no secret that there been a number of controversial events that mr. ones was involved in to one degree or another. letters to the department requesting

information from or about mr. jones. in many cases, i have received response or an incomplete response. here's a sampling. furious -- subpoenaed documents. n october 12, 2011, the house versight government relations committee requested the records of the attorney general's committee related to operation fast and furious in a jones was mr. committee chair. i reiterated that request on year. 10 of this forndly, atf accountability fast and furious. october 12, 2012, i requested emgoes tion on which would be disciplined for fast and furious. furious st and interview request, october 7, i requestedy, 2012, staff interviews with mr. jones

regarding fast and furious. rei it rated the request of mr. jones, april 10, 2013. interview request on reno, utah, atf, u.s. attorney's office breakdown. letter also indicated that is failure to act on the management issues was another cover in estion to be the staff interview. fearless, on april 10, letter indicating in milwaukee is another area of the ions to be cover in staff interview. ixth document request of operation fearless. n may 10, 2013, i sent mr. jones a letter requesting a copy f the office of professional responsibility and security operations report on the botched

milwaukee store front operation. now, what has been the reply to all of these requests? on june 4, 2013, two months my request for many of these items, i received a letter rom the department of justice stating in part, mr. jones looks forward to answering your uestions about these matters during this nomination hearing efore the senate judiciary committee. end of quote. i regret the chairman would department of justice dictate to us how oversight investigation will be conducted. more, it's disappointing that the department was allowed nomination is hearing to suit their purpose, ours. but we held see row hearings furious, io fast and happy to have this

at all. on the quid pro quo matter, i able to have a staff interview with mr. jones just to this my colleagues about issue, give a brief summary, february 3, 2012. and epartment of justice the city of st. paul struck a deal, the terms of the quid pro followed.s the department declined the in two w, intervened false claim act cases pending st. paul and st. paul withdrew the petition in the supreme court, a case that observers believed would the desperate impact theory. this was no ordinary settlement. instead of furthering the ends of justice, this was for claims and recovering hundreds of millions of dollars to the u.s. treasury. he u.s. attorney in minnesota at the time of quid pro quo, mr. jones was serving both as u.s. acting director of

the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms. interviewing on march 8, 2013. however, before they could be nterviewed, the department demanded that staff not be permitted to ask mr. jones any uestions other than those involving the quid pro quo. questions remain about whether managing bothvely jobs as u.s. attorney and acting director. example, when asked by committee staff about his attend the meeting between the department of representatives and the city of occurred december stated he did not an event ause he had at atf. a holiday party called sweet and he felt it was more important that he attend the

vent than it was to attend the meeting on two pending false claim ms. there are many issues to cover and is hearing today beyond. for his part in the june 10, the minneapolis star tribute, mr. jones said, uote, i'm looking forward to a meeting with the committee and answering all of the questions. now, i hope that's the case today. that i would finally get some answers. but even so, many questions nominee.r the the first question is given the open complaint and all of the ther concerns that i have addressed, why are we even here today? i don't think anyone can provide answer to that question. proceeding today is premature. it's unfair to the nominee, unfair to the nominee to forms these questions today the osc process takes its course. the chair wants to insist

on proceedings, it would be unfair to the public, it would ail to perform our due diligence and examining these issues carefully. >> thank you, senator grassley. you have the opportunity now after we hear the opening nominees to ask the questions. i point out the nominee wanted to go forward with the hearing. atf deserves better when people are on the ront line investigating the crimes. they deserve better than not having a permanent director for because the senate won't confirm anyone. that's wrong. the sponse to some of points you made, i would prefer to have director jones answer first of tions, but all, to make clear, he came in fast and furious and was asked to come in and clean it up. i'm sure we can hear from him some of the things that he did. econdly, on the issue of the st. paul case which is, i know,

een well discussed in the nomination of mr. perez, mr. jones agreed to be questioned an entire day. by the staff in the house. third, i would note as far as he complaint that you brought up within the office, i would jones ote that mr. supervises 2300 people with the atf, 125 people with the u.s. attorney's office. mr. dellry will tell anyone here, it's not always easy to supervise lawyers and cops. but he has done his best job. it's very important that that complaint be heard out. that's what's happening now. the timeline here -- todd jones was nominated in january. march, the committee required materials on the nomination had been received and made available and his r grassley staff. a planned april hearing over a was delayedmination

after the committee was notified of the complaint filed with the office of special counsel. chairman leahy intended to wait finished itssc had work or if it's meant to be thisdential before holding hearing. in late april after these allegations were unnecessarily last week, they notified the committee that the underlying complaints made against mr. jones of management failures was closed due to insufficient evidence and that the second allegations made a retaliation for raising the underlying management issues. out,nator grassley points the parties agree to mediation. that is the procedural status. part of it was dismissed. the other part, the parties have willingly both agreed to read he may should and -- two remediation. satisfied the issues were being resolved.

the chairman determine that today's hearing should move forward and he asked me to chair. this past friday, senator grassley notified the chair then a rarelyed to invoke used senate rule. we have not seen witnesses to be hearings involving nominees that are not up to cabinet level. he decided to invoke the senate rule to have outside witnesses testify at today's hearing. instead of saying no to that request, the chairman agreed. i personally called senator grassley to let him know then we had agreed to the request. we found our own witness. then senator grassley said he did not have time. they sought to accommodate the ranking member by offering to invite outside witnesses to be cleared to come before the committee today. the witness was not ready. it is the procedural status of that particular allegation.

the other thing i did want to note. crime rates are affected by many things, the work of police, prosecutors, but i will note as we looked at the bigger picture , as u.s. jones attorney from 1998-2001, his first term as u.s. attorney under president clinton, the violent crime rate decreased by 15%. so far during his second tenure, which began in 2009, the violent crime rate has already decreased nine percent. i just want to note that because of the work that goes on between the local, state, federal law-enforcement in minnesota that they have had major successes. the appointed u.s. attorney by president george h w bush and his son, also serving two terms under republican presidents

pacific labor but if the allegations in the former fbi letter and he said this. "one year in minnesota is hardly long enough to learn to shovel snow let alone learn what his reputation is. the special agent in charge of the f ei office in minneapolis from 2007 until 2011 told the associated press that he had a good relationship with jones. we were in sync. he said he didn't not experience anything like the behavior described. when he had an issue, he was attentive and he responded. i think anyone involved in law enforcement knows there's going to be disagreements, issues. people have different interpretations. there are outside forces at work. in this case, he was supervising two major offices at the same time for nearly two years and it's my belief that the atf deserves a permanent head and i hope we can now go

forward with this hearing and with the testimony. with that, i will swear in the witnesses were the nominee. affirm that the testimony you're about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the the truth so help you god? thank you. we will start with mr. jones. >> good morning, madame chairwoman, ranking member grassley, members of the committee. thank you for those generous introductions and the recitation of my entire professional career and for the chance to be here today to answer questions. i'm honored to be considered as the president's nominee, as the director of the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives. to thank mymoment family for their incredible love

and support. she shouldered much of the burden and joy that comes with raising five kids. my youngest daughter just recently graduated from the university of minnesota and is moving to seattle in the next week to start her career and her life. my oldest daughter stephanie is on home leave from teaching in nicaragua. the core group is there in minnesota. my son michael is a graduate student in architecture in seattle and hope you will keep an eye on monaco when she gets out there, but as you mentioned, my oldest son is here. he lives here in d.c..

he works at the house of representatives. he did not get to see much of each other the first few years of his life because i was deployed pretty regularly on the marine corps. if you choose to approve the nomination, he will probably find himself with a new roommate. over the years, my family sacrificed a great deal to allow me to pursue a career in public service. in 1977 whenegan i was fortunate enough to do for senator work hubert humphrey who epitomized public service in the best minnesota tradition and he inspired me to follow that path. mentioned, after graduating from law school at the university of minnesota, i joined the united states marine corps and that was a decision that changed my life and made me the person you see sitting before you today. my formal leadership training began in the graincorp.

i joined it to be a trial lawyer, i was so energized by the experience, the challenges, the spirit and camaraderie basic training that i stayed an infantry officer for the first several years of my active duty. during that time, i learned the importance of concepts like unit cohesion among readiness and training, and staying focused on the mission. the marines taught me about leadership and leading people toward a common goal. washe end, i learned it not ever about me, but the team. it was about the unit, the tolective work together attain that goal. i have continued to employ those principles during the two times i have served as u.s. district attorney in minnesota, a job that it has been an honor and privilege to serve in. my team and minnesota has

tackled a variety of complex cases from the largest ponzi scheme to national security work. i have continued to rely on those experiences in my current capacity as acting director of the atf. when i came here in september 2011, i found an agency in distress, poor him or i'll undermining the overwhelming majority. morale. they are absolutely committed to the mission of professional law enforcement. i listen to them. i learned a lot from them. , immediate steps to address their concerns and the strategic needs of the bureau. i built a new leadership team appointing 22 new special agents in charge, 23 headquarter executives, conducted a top to bottom review of all atf policies and procedures and we

have overhauled nearly 50 orders and directives. since my arrival, i have worked to refocus the bureau on the mission to combat violent crime and enhance public safety. i'm proud to say the men and women at atf have responded with professionalism and dedication. ofator, you mentioned some the recent events that the atf has been involved in from newton, boston, west, texas, to stockton. we will continue to do our job. should the senate confirm my appointment, i look forward to leading these men and women permanently and to help them carry out this very important mission. i look forward to answering your questions, thank you. have aooks like you happy family behind you there. >> thank you, madame chairwoman. to appear honored

before you today as the nominee to be assistant attorney general for the civil division and i thank you for your consideration. i would like to thank the president for nominating me and the attorney general for his support. i have a number of family members here today and with the chair's invitation, i would like to introduce them. >> please do. i think i can tell who they are. >> first, my partner richard. i would not be here without the support he has given me over the last 20 years as we were classmates in law school. in addition to being a great father, he's a terrific lawyer and i have been improved by his intelligence, judgment, justice., and sense of our children, micah lan sebastian, are the joys of my life. they are here today to see a little bit about how their government works. thanks for doing that. i owe it deep debt to my parents for the firm foundation

that they gave me. an engineerus, was who worked his entire career for louisiana power and light. he passed away back in 1996, but he said a striking example for me of hard work, dedication, and character. i miss him. , is here, elizabeth along with her husband. was the first women's athletics director at tulane university and i watched as she built a program from the ground up. i have kept those lessons in mind as i have learned myself how to be a leader. are the and harry children of people who were in public service. tograndfather, in addition serving in the army in world war i and ii, i am honored to be

following in his footsteps. harry's father was a congressman from new jersey, a republican, in the 1940's. i also have my sister here, inet, a schoolteacher charlotte, north carolina. she made here about 1:00 in the morning and i'm great that she persevered to be here. ,nd one of harry's daughter's mary, is here. she flew from her home to help mom and harry get here today, so i'm very grateful for that. a number of other friends are here and i'm very touched that they are here. in particular, my colleagues and the justice department. it's been awoman, real privilege to work with the talented and dedicated lawyers and staff of the civil division over the past year and it's an honor to be nominated to lead them now. the division's greatest resource is its people who come

to work every day with a single- minded dedication to protect the interests of the country and its citizens, whether by defending government programs or by safeguarding taxpayer funds by fraud or protecting the health and safety of all americans. if fortunate enough to be confirmed, i will bring to this job a commitment to zealous advocacy and court on behalf of our nation, to giving candidates -- candid advice and hearing all sides of an issue with fairness and respect and, perhaps more importantly, to tok with our strong team advance the interests of the united states. i think you for your consideration and i look forward to any questions you might have. -- i thank you. senator durbin will put some questions on the record because he has to go to a

defense hearing that's important. andow others will be here try to return, so i guess i will start to the question. areess of the questions devoted to your dad, it does not mean it's a bad thing. [laughter] i think any of us can read the job ascription of assistant the civiceneral for division, but how do you see your role? what are your primary responsibilities? what direction do you want to take the department and? >> thanks for giving me a chance to talk about what the .ivision does there are really two main roles. the civil division defends the government when it is sued, whether it is a constitutional challenge or sued for monetary damages, breach of contract, personal liability, but then we

also bring an affirmative cases to pursue money that is lost to the taxpayers it is a fraud, waste, and. or protect consumers and the safety of the food that we eat, the medicines that we take. to betunate enough confirmed, i will continue to pursue several priorities. the most important, for the department, protecting national security. litigationole in regarding these issues. i will also continue to use the tools to pursue fraud against the government. the last fiscal year, we had a record recovery of just about five dollars billion under the false claims act. i know senator grassley and others have supported it and i will continue to make it a priority if confirmed. finally, our work related to health and safety, pursuing

cases like the one we brought a few months ago against executives of a peanut butter manufacturer because of a salmonella outbreak. we take very seriously our partnership with the fd and we will continue to protect the safety of the food we eat, medicines, toys children play with, the light. >> very good, thanks. we have three victims from the peanut butter outbreak from minnesota including a --ndmother who one day eat ate a piece of toast. thank you for going forward with that somewhat difficult case. the atf has not had a permanent director since 2006. it required the director to be senate confirmed. senator durbin has put a bill to put it in under the fbi because of the fact that we just cannot continue like this. it's not fair to you.

it's not fair to the agency. that has to change. one way we can show that is by confirming year as director. there are many reasons why the heads of certain agencies arm confirmed and that is because we want him to be fully accountable to congress and also the men and women to work in the agency. first, why is it so important for the atf to have a confirmed full-time director? what will a confirmed director mean for the roughly 2300 agents of the atf? thanks for that question, senator. i have given it a lot of thought. i have learned over the last two years that the atf is a very and thereorganization are great public servants there. it's absolutely critical that they have a permanent director. having been twice confirmed by this body as a united states isator, this organization

one that's really important. you have two impact morale and it sends a message not only to the employees within the atf that they have been so long without a permanent director after having several actors over the last seven years, it does impact morale. i think it's also a fundamental question of good government. as you mentioned, being a does carry aointee certain amount of gravitas to you can be a more effective so you can be more accountable to this body, the organization that you work with, in this case the department of justice. decisiveness is a critical quality for anyone in a leadership position of. i think it is also absolutely critical and a series of factors, no matter how skilled,

it does diminish the credibility that you are going to have a of operations and the vision will stay sure in the mission will be accomplished. at its core, it's good government to have a confirmed director at all of the agencies in the executive branch subject to senate confirmation. we all had concerns about what happened during fast and furious. you are named acting director surely after the fast and serious whistleblower came forward. the president named eu because he thought you had the knowledge, experience, and leadership to put it back on the right path. can you tell us the steps taken and to safeguard you have put in place to make sure operations like that cannot happen again and that any operation as phillies that it up the chain of command? after something like the fast and furious comes to light, we want to know what appropriate disciplinary action is being taken against the people who acted wrongly. can you talk about the steps you have taken to to discipline

or terminate people involved? >> with respect to your first question, senator, it's important to note that the inspector general did did do an extensive report and made recommendations to identify problems. when i arrived at the atf in september 2011, as i mentioned, it was an agency very much in distress and i went to the phoenix field division and i visited the ground zero for a lot of the controversy that evolved. one of the first things that i did was look at who was in a position of responsibility. who was in leadership positions? there have been a number of changes. none of the individuals identified in leadership positions during fast and furious incident are currently in place. as i mentioned, we have 22 new special agents in charge. assistantnumber of

directors. six of the eight assistant directors who helped me, as a team, lead the atf are new. as of them have experiences former special agent in charge. we are continuously in the ,rocess of implementing following through, and executing on many of the recommendations made in the ig's report. we did not wait for that report to come out. we knew that there was a failure in leadership and oversight. one of the first things we did was issue and clarify our firearms transfer policy. with the underpinning being public safety always trumps investigative needs. we have reviewed our undercover order. we have reviewed the confidential informant order. we continue to exercise and monitor case program and these are just some of the internal fixes. more than anything else, it was important to keep the agencies

the underlying mission, which is public safety. such a critical role within the department of justice and the fight against violent crime, explosives, arson. it's important that we do not have public safety suffer as a result of continuous critical examination. >> one more question and then i hope to keep it under 10 minutes, if senator grassley could do the same. we want to give all the other senators a chance to have questions. there have been questions raised about the decreasing number of federal prosecutions in minnesota with respect to violent crimes including gang, drug offenses. i worked closely with you and your predecessors, the other u.s. attorneys to make sure that we tackle the tough criminal cases. they also work with your successors to make sure that we

made the most effective and efficient use of federal resources. i still remember the u.s. attorneys office, focused in minnesota, caught one of the terrorists in our state and our office, the county attorney office, started doing many more white-collar cases, at higher amounts than before. we did that when bush was president working with the u.s. attorneys office and we took on significantly more white-collar terminal prosecutions, so i understand how there can be this advance low depending on resources depending on the types of crimes. drug cases are somebody focused on as county attorney, so i'm hoping you can address the concerns that have been raised and explain why some of the numbers out of the u.s. attorney's office may down. is it a trend? is it an anomaly? is it something else? thank you. >> i believe the statistics

that you cite only tell part of the story over the last several years. the department of justice in general, and in particular the district of minnesota, which is somewhat unique, and that we cover the entire state and we have a full range of federal challenges. we have indian country, a border with canada, a major with all of center the respective violent gun crime, gangs, drugs, and financial fraud issues. it really has been a challenge in this time of diminishing resources. not that the lack of resources is any excuse to be smart about how we utilize those resources. as you well know, our partnership with our state counterparts, the 87 county attorneys in minnesota, is absolutely critical for us collectively to do our job. but we have essentially done is look at what our uniquely federal issues that the state

,annot handle, doj priorities like a national and indian country, and where we have concurrent jurisdiction, as in the gun and drug area. we are making smart choices so that organizations who deal in careero that armed criminals are appropriately handled in federal court, as you mentioned earlier. we have had a string of very complex cases that have gone to trial. trial going on right now with frank venice. there are two national security people in the district of minnesota u.s. district attorney's office, both in the criminal and civil division, have been working very hard with a very active caseload. our bottom line is we are focused on impact cases. we are focused on cases that

augment what state and local prosecutors do and we are focused on cases that fit within the priorities of the department of justice. as a result, the overall numbers have dropped, but we are making a difference. >> thank you very much. i turn to senator grassley. , before i askman questions, there are a few things i want to clear up in your rebuttal to my statement. that absolutely right there has been six years without a confirmed head, but remember that it was two years after the president was elected before a nominee was even sent. we cannot confirm anyone that isn't sent. the committee asked for additional information for the nominee, which was never provided. therefore he never had a hearing.

if the committee asked for -- and themation, information is not given, then you cannot have a hearing without it, that obviously is either the nominee or the white house's fault. his nomination was withdrawn at the end of the last congress and mr. jones was .ominated january 24 then we started talking about the hearings in april. then there is one other point that i would make and that's in .egards to what you said i just want to point out that when this goes to osc and mediation, there's a big difference between being and the chairman in his letter to me saying that it is resolved.

said in my statement, has made very clear that it is not resolved. fourthu, mr. delery, -- for speaking about false claims. i ask every attorney general nominee, because i am the author of that legislation, and i'm very glad to know that you will be using it vigorously. mr. jones, you would not expect to not be concerned about whistleblowers. i'm sure you know my reputation in that area. not every whistleblower would necessarily be right, but every whistleblower is entitled to a hearing, either when they are personally affected and retaliated against or, in the case of somebody bringing information forward, they ought to have that information

considered. i've come to the conclusion a long time ago that whistleblowers are about as respected in their organizations as skunks at a picnic. they need a lot of consideration because they give us a lot of valuable information. 2013, an employee of yours filed the complaint with the special consul alleging you personally undertook "a prohibited personnel action" against him and reallocation -- in retaliation. this employee has 30 years of .ederal employment the employee alleges that after bringing serious concerns about mismanagement in the office to your attention that he was suspended for five days without pay and involuntarily transferred to a new section in

the office. the complaint also raises allegations about the employment of an attorney to a supervisory edition despite concerns about her performance by federal state law enforcement and judges on the federal bench. a special counsel wrote to us stating that the complaint was referred for an investigation in april this year and that the investigation remains open with .he possibility of mediation because the majority scheduled this is still likely pending, which is why i bring this up. you were quoted in "the star i'mne," by saying," looking forward to meeting with the committee and answering their questions." mr. oswald, former special agent in charge of the fbi in in minneapolis wrote a detailed letter this january alleging you

mismanaged his office and had " an atrocious federal reputation in the law enforcement community." filedwas a complaint with the office of special consul against you, which corroborates the account. have you been interviewed by the office of special consul? if so, when? your last question first, i am aware that the osc has requested information from our office in the district of minnesota. because those complaints are confidential as a matter of law, i have not seen the substance of the complaints, nor can i comment on them. i have learned more from your statement today than i knew before i came here this morning about the nature and substance of the complaint. i can assure you that i have always taken very seriously the

duty my office has to follow all of the laws and regulations, not engage in prohibitive personnel practice, and to be very sensitive to the issues around those you have so vigorously advocated for with respect to whistleblower protection. >> you have not been interviewed by special consul? >> i have not. >> other than the fbi special agent in charge and the assistant u.s. attorney who filed the complaint to the office of special consul, are you aware of any other individuals who would raise similar concerns? if so, who? >> i'm not aware of any other complaints your honor -- senator. this is like a courtroom. [laughter] i feel like a defendant. [laughter] >> as a farmer, i feel honored. you taken any adverse personnel reactions against anyone who complained about how you're managing the office?

, thank you, senator for the question. i have had the opportunity to be in a management position both in the public and private sector. i have always tried to approach responsibilityf with respect for those that i in a collaborative nature. but always with expectations. doi think the answer is you not feel you have taken any adverse action against anyone who complained about how you are managing the office? are you aware of an anonymous ,omplaint filed july 20, 2012 signed by employees of the u.s. attorneys office for the district of minnesota? -- well,loyees wrote let me go on.

they wrote, quote since he became u.s. attorney, he has instituted a climate of fear, pushed employees out of the office, this missed employees wrongly, violated the hiring ,".s by the eeoc did you learn who these individuals were? did you take any adverse personnel actions against them? recently saw a copy of that .nonymous letter again, i have not taken adverse action against anyone that i've worked with. i was quite surprised by the nature of the allegations. whether it is at the atf for the u.s. attorney's office, in both situations, i came into a less than perfect environment and, quite frankly, i have been an

agent of change. change is hard sometimes for individuals to deal with and i have always focused on doing the right thing for the right .easons sometimes, they are not happy about the direction overall. >> i'm including in that statement about adverse unwanted action and or retaliatory. does that change your answer? , i'm not familiar with the osc complaint. i'm at somewhat of a disadvantage with the facts. privacyy that considerations do fit into the picture. i have a certain awareness about disciplinary process, but it has never been my practice to engage in retaliatory employment practices. theill you answer complaints about the assistant u.s. attorney?

that's why you're here today. how are we supposed to mask about these allegations if we cannot ask you? at aite frankly, i'm disadvantage. there is a process in place. i've not seen the osc complaint. i know our office, working with executive office of u.s. attorneys, is in the process of responding to the issues you have talked about this morning, but i have not had the opportunity to either be interviewed or have any greater knowledge about what the osc complaint is. >> i'm uncomfortable asking .hese questions the chairman said this was the opportunity for us to have this interview with you and to get these questions answered. of course, you agreed to answer all of the questions, so i

would ask that you answer, but if you don't, the way it has to be. ?o we want to vote >> i appreciate that, senator grassley. i also wanted to put in the record letters from law enforcement in support of todd jones including the fraternal order of police, the national association of chiefs of police, u.s. attorneys including the republican appointee under both presidents bush. minnesota county attorneys from across the state, the national district attorneys association, several former assistant u.s. district attorneys and a former magistrate judge for the district of minnesota. i wanted to read one of the letters into the record from beth hill to todd jones. , wife, and 15-year-old daughter were murdered in a

brutal home invasion. unfortunately, the case was therefore two years when he returned to the u.s. attorney's office in 2009. they asked him to review the case. mr. jones office investigated and obtained convictions against the perpetrators. the both of the men were sentenced to life in prison on three counts of murder. myher letter she says "in sons keepsake box, i have a hand written note that you sent me in response response to my plea to you for justice for them. you did not promise me anything but a commitment to review my case when you came into office. your note gave me hope and the strength to continue to fight for justice for my children." him well ino wish his new leadership role. "when a job feels like you cannot go on and the odds are stacked against you, think about mothers like me who will rely on you to have helped stop senseless violence and move this

country forward." i thought those were pretty powerful words and i will include that letter in the record. we also have letters of support delery from previous administrations, both republican and democratic, that will also be entered into the record. i turn it over to senator blumenthal. >> thank you both for being here today. thanks to each of you for your public service, particularly mr. jones. your service in the marine corps as well as the united states attorney's office in minnesota servicedelery, your and the department of justice and private litigation. ,r. jones, as you well know there's been a lot of debate about ways to promote more prosecution under existing law that is designed to prevent gun violence. even for some of us who strongly

favor improvements to the law, the question is what can we do to promote more rigorous, vigorous enforcement of existing to either illte legal purchases or illegal possession of firearms? own view is inadequate resources are a major reason for the lack of sufficient failure tos or the increase the number. i'd like you to comment on what you view as the reasons or the ways that we can improve the rate of prosecution. >> two thanks, senator. vibrant andd a healthy atf. part of the reason i'm here for this process is because they

need a confirmed director. they've never had one. for all the reasons previously mentioned, it's an impediment to give stability, direction, guidance. >> i heard your testimony and i agree that a confirmed leader is essential to provide direction, vision, and the basic leadership. in addition to that? .> the atf is not healthy the biggest challenges its human capital. somes been subject, as federal agencies, to the ebb and flow of hiring. one of the biggest challenges in the next five years is the attrition among the special agent community. the special agents are at the core of our criminal investigative process. because of the mandatory retirement age for federal law enforcement, we're going to have have nearly one third of our special agent community eligible.irement the resources and the opportunity to bring on new

special agents does take time. foras not been sufficient a one-to-one replacement. >> what is the median age of your agent? >> the special agent community is one of the more senior and federal law enforcement. know the median age, but it is a very experienced workforce, and because of the nature of the work the atf does in arsons, explosives investigations, it takes time to develop develop that expertise. we call it the brain drain. inare aggressively, even the current environment, looking at the knowledge transfer. that human capital for ourinuity and maintaining current status and abilities is probably one of the biggest challenges we face over the next several years. >> would resources help you to attract more qualified potential agents at the atf? it helps, but some of the

other constraints we have been operating under, a hiring toeze, some of our abilities bring on agents. there's a lot of talent out there and there's a lot of talent inside the bureau, but what we need to do is very quickly match that up so we don't diminish our capacity. >> the atf has a strong history of responding to high profile incidents and investigations, as you did in sandy hook. theaps you can talk about atf's roll under your leadership wasandy hook, which particularly important to my state of connecticut, and to make, having spent a lot of time there with the community. >> the tragic school shooting at sandy hook was a seminal event

.or us personally and for atf atf is one of several law enforcement components. our immediate response in addition to bringing an agent from around the region was, of course, to ensure the safety of the school and community but, more importantly, work with groupsederal and state including the state police, as is our practice, to focus on the firearms issues. there is an examination of the firearms licensee that mrs. lanza purchased the weapon from, initial or in six, but always in partnership with the connecticut state police, local police, and with our brother agency and the fbi. >> i want to thank your agency and the special agents who were therefore not only the rigor

but also the sensitivity that they demonstrated from the very first hours that they arrived and began interviewing everyone involved for potential firearms violations including some of the licensed firearms dealers in the area and others who might have knowledge of working very closely with our state police who led the investigation. it is ongoing, as you know. my thanks to the special agents who were there and to your agency. thank you, madam chair. >> acting director jones, you that none of the individuals in leadership during the fast and furious are now in place. what does that mean? were they removed? by virtue ofgone attrition? what does it mean? >> what it means, senator, is that individuals who were

primarily in the executive service have either retired or resigned or have left the bureau ,f alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives. the personnel process can be dicey. the privacy act issues sort of preclude me from giving you a bigger disk friction, but from the former acting director down to the group supervisor in the phoenix field division, they are no longer in positions of responsibility and leadership within atf. >> was anyone disciplined? >> yes. >> are you at liberty to share who and when? >> not really because of privacy. i'm being very dicey. we can respond once again clearance. i'm being very careful and very respectful of the privacy

are involved with making disclosures with some specificity, but there was discipline imposed through the chain of individuals involved. >> when you are at liberty to share that, we certainly need to know that. can you tell us what disciplinary action was taken without revealing names? >> we have a range of options internally ranging from termination from employment, which would then be subject to a different appeals process, and from the grade down to moving people into nonsupervisory positions. >> which of those were taken? >> a combination of all of them. >> termination? >> i think the full range of our

disciplinary tools were utilized in handling the issues that arose as a result of the ig report and our own internal affairs examination. >> from termination to do motion? -- demotion? isbecause of the leadership edition and the supervisory nature, there were individuals who were eligible for retirement. in some instances, the was cutnary process off by the fact that individuals did submit resignations. >> is that described for all of those? >> not all. >> some of them were actually demoted or terminated? >> some individuals were on the disciplinary process and opted to retire. if they were eligible. for us toportant

have that information then for what can be shared to be shared. i can tell you, particularly coming from arizona, which was the scene for a lot of this, there is a lot of mistrust. people don't think that anyone has been held to account at any time. it's difficult for any of us to say with any surety that they were without this kind of information. we'll be following up. to the extent that information can be put out in terms of disciplinary action, honoring any privacy rules that we have, i think it's important to do so. bring up one case during your tenure as acting director of atf, there was a disagreement between the reno atf that was alluded to by senator grassley. there is a disagreement between resulted in that the atf not being able to

submit cases for prosecution for a full year, 2011-2012. i have asserted that the atf's lack of action constituted a public safety threat. yet when the issue is brought to your attention, atf whistleblowers said you mentioned that you had bigger things to worry about and it was not until there was a letter from senator grassley that the issue was addressed and action taken. , it was just to transfer agents to other offices which left the reno office understaffed. was this issue handled appropriately in your view? >> this was one of the issues that i call, my inheritance. that publice you safety was never on risk in the district of nevada. as a u.s. attorney, i was very dismayed when i heard of a disconnect between the federal

prosecution office and the atf. one of our challenges has been making sure that we have accountable leadership and oversight so i can assure you and the public in nevada that we have new leadership in the san francisco field division. we have very good communications with the special agent in charge, very good communications with the reno office, which is a satellite in nevada, from the vegas office. we have shifted agents, as i said. challenge ofrce where we are putting our limited resources based on needs in the violent crime front. we currently have two full-time, soon to be three, agents and reno. we have enhanced that working relationship and we are on a good path to fix whatever concerns that have historically existed there. >> you believe you moved

swiftly enough on that? >> yes, i do. >> thank you. >> senator franken. , senator clover char, for chairing this hearing. i apologize-- thank you, senator klobuchar. i apologize for coming late. i'm going to also have to leave again for the markup. mr. jones, thank you for your service to the state of minnesota. i know senator clover char -- klobuchar feels the same way. after taking the bar exam, you did not join a law firm but joined the marines. i just wanted to start out by thanking you for that. thiso went to take opportunity to knowledge the many brave atf agents who responded courageously and professionally to the bombings up the boston marathon and the .ecent texas plant explosion

mr. jones, your nomination to be atf's permanent director arose after the shooting of sandy hook, but other recent events 's roleus that the atf extends beyond gun issues. delerey, thank you for meeting with me. a fewyed our discussion weeks ago. congratulations on your nomination as well. you have done some tremendous work on issues like marriage equality and holding credit rating agencies accountable for their role in the financial collapse. thanks for being here to answer the committee's questions. i will do right to my questions now. mr. jones, since you were named atf acting director in august 2011, you somehow managed to

run the bureau while also serving as u.s. attorney in minnesota. you have basically been asked to do two full-time jobs. if confirmed, you will be able to devote your full attention to the atf. it's important because we have been without an atf director for about seven years. can you explain what it will mean for the atf to finally have a permanent, confirmed director in place? ,> thank you for the question senator. i think it is absolutely critical. as i mentioned earlier thomas at its core, it is a good government issue. not only does it send a positive and women the men within the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives but it sends a good message to the industries we regulate and our state and local agency partner that there is a permanent person who has been given the stamp of theoval to lead

organization going forward. it has not diminished really over the last seven years with the men and women in atf performing their job, but it has been a challenge to have the change in direction. when i was in the service, i remember leaders that i had that were good and the lessons taken away from them. just as importantly, i remember the leaders that were bad and the lessons taken from them. that cane steady hand share with the men and women at the atf and the vision, the mission, the execution to keep the american public safe in those areas where we have jurisdiction, i think tom is absolutely critical. >> thank you, mr. jones. the atf works closely with state and local law enforcement authorities to investigate

arson, bombings, gun crimes, acts of terrorism. i have heard from some minnesota law-enforcement officials who are concerned about the budget and from the sequester that they could hamper this type of collaborative work. what is sequestration's impact on atf? >> specifically with the atf because it has been somewhat , as anesourced organization, we are resilient, but it will hurt. the president proposed 2014 budget, i believe, gets us on the path of being healthy with the anticipated worst-case ,cenario from the sequester potential sequester cuts. you're cutting bone and you are impeding, i believe, our , asity to be as effective we have been, as lean as we have

been over the last 4, 5 years. >> thank you. ok if i asked one more question? i was disappointed the senate was unable to pass the manchen- toomey amendment. if they cannot pass a background check, they can simply go to a gun show. the amendment would expand the background check system to cover for marshall gun sales. i've heard from a lot of minnesotans who support the proposal regardless of their views on other aspects of the violence's gun prevention initiative. we heard a lot of testimony from law enforcement leaders who said that the background check would save lives. what are your thoughts? >> i believe that a background check system that is currently

in place, since 1998, has kept legal firearms out of the hands of nearly 1.5 million bad guys has been effective. is there room for improvement? yes. can we deal with the current system? we have. i followed the debate with some interest and i will defer to this body and congress generally to do what you do with respect to expanding or not expanding background checks. the current system is very in working within the limits that it is currently working, but there's always room for improvement, including tightening up what could be characterized as the gray market in firearms because of the background check only applying to those who choose to

go to licensed firearms dealers guns.chase or obtain >> thank you. thank you, madam chair. >> senator grassley for five more minutes, then senator schumer, senator cruise. cruz.ator >> you cannot offer any other answers on the osc complaint, our vote is something you should have heard about, the letter from the fbi official, the letter to the committee. did you hear of complaints by the former special agent in charge of the fbi agent in charge, mr. oswald? >> the answer to your question is no. i was quite shocked when i saw because of that letter my belief during the one-year that mr. oswald was a special agent in charge charge of the minneapolis field division, my perception was that we have a

professional working relationship, so i was very surprised when that letter was submitted to the senate. >> in 2009 after confirmed by , this was one of the allegations that mr. oswald made. >> when i became a u.s. attorney for the second time, i spent the first month talking to every single assistant indebted states attorney in the office. i received several resignations from individuals who had been serving in supervisory roles. a leadership team that remains in place and has been very effective in helping move the district forward with the goals and objectives of both the district and the department of justice. >> did you remove the chief of the narcotics and