of properties that over the last 20 years that ended up being turned over to homeless groups, it's a meager list and grows more meager over the last year. some of was put together of a split with the legislation with an approach that said, rather than turning over these properties, why don't we allow them to be sold and some percentage of the sales be turned over to homeless groups? the homeless groups were afraid that if that happens, there appropriations would be cut back dollar for dollar. we are not getting where we need to go. the other problem may be a bigger problem. we have the incentives misaligned with respect to

agencies either leasing space or buying space. we had a great example presented the other day from the nuclear regulatory commission. building was built, making it three buildings. the idea was that we would build all of these nuclear power plants. the hundred or so that we have, 100 are coming up for a license renewal. in this space for that. now we find out he will not have dozens of nuclear power plants. we have four under construction right now. the level of the activity is down for the nrc. i remember looking at the cost per square foot for the new building and the existing buildings. of the buildings that were listed, the one that was cheapest was the one they own. it was half price in terms of

the life cycle for the nrc. i just want to lay this on the table. let's have a good discussion. this will be my only question for the first round. in that allowed for us. what can we do -- think out loud for us. what can we do? >> i appreciate the question, senator carper. >> before you do that, i have questions for you. this is a warm-up. is there anything in your background that might present a conflict of duties? >> no, i am not. >> is there anything that would prevent you from fully and honorably discharged in the office that you have been nominated for? >> no, i do not.

>> these it was are out of the way. -- the easy ones are out of the way. thank you for your time. >> the three ingredients you need to cook anything up in washington are there. you have a proposal from the administration. you have a version of the bill from the house and you have your own version of a bill from the senate. the question is, can we work together to coalesce around some basic principles. we all share the view that we need to efficiently and effectively use these federal assets. we need to not only ensure we are fully utilizing the assets we have under our control, but that we are realizing the most

value from them and disposing of them when we do not need them anymore. the disposal process is complicated because you want to make sure that before you get rid of an asset and use -- lose it forever that you make sure you have checked with everyone who may have an interest or need for that assets. -- that assets. there are policies regarding the legislation making sure we are providing opportunities for the homeless to potentially use it. as you also point out, the number of times it is used for that is very low. i know our past discussions have been how can you create a mechanism by which you address the needs and vicious and issues --ociated with a group homeless advocacy groups and move the process forward

quickly? that is why the legislation -- we are continuing to work on it. there is an awful lot of work gsa can do to move more quickly and more thoughtfully in terms of disposing of the assets, at least the ones we have under our control. we have been working closely with agencies to try to help them use authorities we have, even anout leasing, or exchange authority we are exploring, that would allow us to quickly move the as set out and have the agency gets something back in return. there was a request for proposals from interested parties in cooperation with nasa to have an out lease of theething called hangar 1 federal air fields --\ >>

>> that is where i was trained as an officer. hangar 2 or hangar 3. you will find all of the squadron.f the patrol they are all in. you can look through their and my name actually used to appear on that wall. -- california national guard. the historic property that needed to have some environmental remediation that required deskimming it. we have asked for someone to exchange occupancy of the air field in exchange for renovation

of hangar 1. we are asking the private sector if they can partner with us to get the historic preservation investment made in exchange for limited access in the use of the airfield. we suggested in our fri for the the fbi headquarters to explore the possibility of exchanging the existing fbi headquarters, which a long-term meets the needs of the fbi, for a new fbi headquarters or part of a new fbi headquarters that does actually meet the needs and would be more effective and sustainable financially and environmentally for managing the property of the fbi. we have a number of authorities that if we work closely with congress, maybe we can move on

the margins or of these properties out, create better incentives for the agency to participate and give us room to have the conversations we need to have between the two branches of congress and the administration to push for was some kind of the deflation to make our asset disposal process more efficient. over, if youurn it are confirmed, the month after you are confirmed, i want you to come over and sit down with dr. coburn and myself. in the cigarette will we can do. i appreciate what you are trying to do on your own authority. but what we can do to enhance your authority to facilitate what you are trying to do. i do not want to be here six years from now and say, we still have thousands of surplus properties that we should sell. i won us to have dealt with this issue in a smart way. thank you.

have dealt with this issue in a smart way. >> thank you, mr. tangherlini, for being here. thank your family as well. i want to ask about the recent june i.g. report, that senator coburn referenced in his opening statement that is troubling. the conclusion that the management improperly intervened an -- award extension of of a contract and resulted in the contract being inflated. if you look at it, to have the gsa contacting officers tell that theythe oig feared for their jobs because they were trying to protect

taxpayer interests and companies were able to go above their head and gets a more favorable officer to change a decision that was in the best interests of the tax payers. this is troubling in terms of culture. we want the contract and officers to fill in power. we want everyone to be focused on saving taxpayer dollars. what are you going to do to change this culture? what are you going to do to hold the people accountable that improperly over rhode the decision of the contacting the of theoad the decision contract officers? >> i appreciate your question. we have already taken some personnel action directly related to an individual named in that report. we will continue to pursue and explore any other action we need to take directly related to the

evidence or the issues raised in the report. like you, i am equally concerned about the broader issue suggested in the report, that our contractor and officers are not given the control, authority, or support by the organization that they need. what have i done over the last 14 months to change the view in the organization about who has the authority and how can people relate to each of the? is started on the first week. i sent out a joint letter with our inspector general telling everyone within the organization that if they see something they are uncomfortable with, that they think is wrong as to just live of waste, fraud, or abuse, it is imperative -- and suggestive of waste, fraud, or abuse, it is imperative that the share it with their supervisors and the inspector general.

we need to have the best, most honest process we can possibly have for running the organization. when this report came out, our new head of the acquisition , a person who has not only experienced -- experience in the public sector, but quite substantial experience in the acquisition by men in the private sector, he sent out a memo to his entire staff, including the i.g. reports stating that the behavior described in the report was unacceptable. he wanted every officer to feel empowered to raise their concerns to him or whomever they feel more comfortable with the minute they feel any sense of any of the behavior that was described in the report. another memo to the entire contracting officer

staff saying if this exists anywhere else in gsa we want to know about it and we want to support you in reporting it. we want to begin to build a fence within the entire organization that the entire organization has each other's that forgetting the test results and the lowest costs. if we want to throw the market share of gsa, if we really do want to achieve what we were set up to achieve, people have to have trust and faith they are getting the best outcome when they take the gsa route. >> i know you cannot talk about personnel actions. probably one of the most effective things you can do is hold the people who have done this accountable so that other managers in this situation see that if i go down this road, it is going to have the consequence to my job. i know you cannot talk about that here.

that will set a culture along with the culture you are trying to set from the top. that is how people are judged. i appreciate that. this is a serious issue for the challenges you face in this organization. with respect to those haveenges, i know you talked about this issue at length. it really struck the american people when they heard about the spending of the $822,000 at the conference to celebrate, share, and showcase the professional talents. it sent a shock waves through your organization. you have testified that last year gsa eliminated 50 conferences and saved $28 million. i commend you for that. the american people are still very suspicious. they are feeling that this conference and the abuses we saw with their money really sent a

shock wave as to what the gsa was doing with taxpayer dollars. the fact that you could eliminate 50 conferences and save $20 million and the fact that this huge the egregious conference occurred, what was it in the culture the thought that was inappropriate use of the money and how you see yourself changing that culture? it goes hand in hand with the other issue of an appalling people that their job is to save taxpayer dollars and not to find ways to spend them in irresponsible ways. >> you describe in the question my challenge of the last 14 months. i can tell you one of the things that reassured me. there was hope for us making a substantial difference in the organization. some of the angriest people i have encountered about what took place at that conference were

gsa employees, people who have committed decades of their lives and their public service careers to an organization that is built around the idea that if we leverage the scale and the scope of the federal government and we do it once and well, we can drive down costs and push up results. what happened there was the opposite of everything flows have committed to doing in their folks service career -- have committed to doing in their public service career. we rewrote the mission statement. we want to provide the best value in real estate, acquisitions, and technology services to federal agencies and the american people. we did not know exactly what the agency was doing. it was hard to focus on great outcome. we established six priorities. chief among them is to get the best price, reduce the long-term

costs, find ways that help agencies deliver their services more efficiently. that was something to try to empower everyone in the organization to line -- to participate in. we want to leverage social media we have within gsa. gsa, what are their great ideas for reducing cost? we got over 6000 comments. with greatsa came up ideas, ideas that saved us over $5 million. we want to keep that dialogue going and we want to build a sense of accomplishment and driving down the cost and driving up the value and not a sense of accomplishment that comes from celebration. >> i thank you for what you are doing.

your job and this job is very important. you have taken over in difficult times and are asked to serve to change a culture. that is not easy. you are the taxpayer watchdog and we are here to support you with that. whether it is the federal property issue or other issues you are trying to address, we want to work with you. it is a tough job. the organization needs to be strong leadership and consistent leadership on this issue so that they view their role as a taxpayer watchdog. i appreciate you being here. thank you. i would say as a follow-up is that one of the things we try to do in this committee is to provide some leadership, just like the kind of leadership dan totrying to provide actgsa, try to -- provide at gsa. we cannot do it by ourselves.

we can have a huge impact. i am in paris by what you are doing and what else the wood-i am encouraged by what you are -- i am encouraged by what you are doing. >> i should have looked into that history before i agreed to come. .> senator mccaskill >> bear with me as i get into the weeds in one of my favorite subjects. maybe my focus on this will give you the ability to move mountains with regards to gsa. no fewer thanwas nine agencies containing information relevant to government contracting.

the subcommittee that i worked on at the time did some work around this issue. the federal databases and how worthless they were at getting act the idea that there should the single portal -- at idea that there should be a single portal where someone can get the information necessary about problem contractors, about cost, price, scope, all of the things we duplicate over and over again many different ways, many different times. at the time, i expressed great concerns about how well this would go, that it was a massive undertaking and there were all kinds of land mines along the way. this is one of those times that i hate to say i was right. it appears i was. has recommended reassessing

the system for awards management and even terminating the s.a.m. development entirely, maintaining the current acquisitions approach, which is not good, or pursuing a whole different acquisition strategy for awards managing. that. to ask you about in your questionnaire response you said the chief information officer was conducting an in- s.a.m.nalysis of when do you expect that analysis to be complete? >> we have information that we can present to the entire acquisition steven chu this summer. >> good. we will anxiously await that and hopefully you will share that with us so that we can figure out the best way to move this ball.

cost containment, cost growth and resource constraints have happened at the same time. you saw a $53 million for s.a.m. but only received 7 million. the time line has slipped. weording to the 2012 report, hoped for early 2014 to read it has slipped to 2015. as we slipped this timeline, it is robbing peter to pay paul. the underlying legacy system has to be paid and that is wasting money down the drain. how realistic do you think the current timeline for thelementation of s.a.m. is, 2015 timeline? >> it is related to the options that we are working with omb and

the acquisition communities to develop. what lessons did we learn from s.a.m.? we needed to reform the acquisitions systems and create a new modern acquisition environment. you are right that it is challenges -- challenging and will be difficult for us to pull off. we demonstrated the latter with our version that came out of s.a.m. last summer. because of the integration of those systems, we have gone from a number of vendors with actual representations' and certifications -- with actual presentations -- representations anticipations third.third -- to a we have also learned how we should manage information

technology development programs. the office of government-wide policy, giving it to our policy shop was a mistake. this is an acquisition system. these are the folks who will .ave to use the -- who have to use the system. we owe you an explanation of how we will use the system along the way. we should be realistic about the time line. this is a very complicated area. onwe can really get a handle creating an integrated acquisition environment, that is a big key to the us fitial a way to reduce the cost of contacting the with-dicty to figure out a keyto reduce the -- a big

to us fitial a way to reduce the cost of contacting. to us fitial -- figuring out a way to reduce the cost of contacting. >> it was not easy doing the monitoring that was necessary. i really care about this. gsa -- love your time as cherry woodam and before you to leave with a single porter -- portal for

apposition. -- for an acquisition. it is possible to get that done. we will depend on you to come to this committee for whatever support you need. i also want to bring up with you the i.g. report that happened a few weeks ago detailing improper management intervention resulting in inflated pricing and on favorable terms for certain multiple award scheduling contracts. there were people who undermine the authority of contacting officers. identified instances ande management overrode reassigned contracts to different contacting offices even the appearance that they were not getting within wanted someone contact the office and they would move somewhere else

to get what it wanted. i would like to know -- if you are not prepared, do it in writing -- which steps you have taken to hold individuals and management accountable for this obvious overstepped cited by .he i.g. in this report >> what was detailed in the report was completely unacceptable. we took immediate personnel action against one person named in that report. we have also undertaken a top to bottom review of contacting within the organization. i put my new head of the federal acquisition service in partnership with our new chief acquisition officer and asked them to blow look at the entire structure of how we -- and ask them to go and look at the entire structure of how we award

contracts and make sure we are doing what we are expected to do. if i am going to go to the they neednd use gsa, to be able to know they will get the highest contacting duties with the highest integrity. after the report came out, a copy of the report was sent to be contacting officers. what happened in there was unacceptable. you should not be put under the kind of pressure that contacting officer was, at least as suggested in the report. if you have concerns, raise it to the supervisory chain. i distributed an equivalent note to all contracting officers within gsa saying just because does not mean it cannot happen to you. >> that is excellent.

i want to compliment you on the steps you have taken on bonuses. my first encounter with gsa on the bonus front was when we were looking into improper contracting practices in kansas city several years ago. gsaof the supervisors in came in front of our committee, and to be most gracious, committed sins of omission. i will not say she was not truthful although i can probably say that. she certainly committed sins of omission. to my surprise, the translator and she had gotten a performance bonus for that year, which was clearly misnamed. when i looked into with, they said everyone gets it. everyone is these bonuses as gsa. there was no assessment. i know you have taken bold and the -- and controversial steps

to end bonuses as a right or entitlement and turn them into something that they would be in the private sector. think the figure is 85% that you have diminished the bonus- gsa.g that -- at it probably does not make you the most popular guy around where you work. you will come to this committee and we will holler at you a lot. i want to tell you that we know some of the work you are doing is hard to do. you are changing a culture and we appreciate it very much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> that need follow up on something senator mccaskill said. we talked about the i.g. report. used on contacting

officers brought by management in some cases. senator mccaskill did the same thing. pressure from whom? >> in this instance, there was a sense that there was precious from the vendor -- pressure from pressurer, theoretical from congress. >> let's talk about that. sometimes we are looking out for our constituents, our states and are not disinclined to go to bat for them. sometimes it can be appropriate and sometimes it is not. moreou talk a little bit about what might be appropriate? it sounds like pressure is being brought in part by people who do the jobs we have and they walk away from this. in other cases, the contrasting officers and the managers get disciplines or they lose their

jobs. to the extent that our colleagues in the house or the senate are doing things inappropriate, that we know about that as well. >> what was really inappropriate was the suggestion that there was this pressure that was coming from congress that would suggest we would take an action not in the best interests of the american people. we have a fiduciary responsibility and congress has a fiduciary responsibility. under the constitution, it is an ultimate one. we have an office of congressional affairs. that is when the correspondence should be managed. that is how it should be tracked to make sure we follow up with congress immediately to address issues and that we do not allow them to be a sub-hierarchical pressure applied to get some outcome. we need to be allowed to andain, justify, support,

dissent in the outcome. -- standard is, the 1 i am support in the outcome. we want to make sure -- support any outcome. we have a responsibility to provide information and respond to contours. congress. the real pressure as described in the i.g. report was from the supervisor to be contacting officer. both of those folks know what their job is. the supervisor should recognize their job is not to pressure the contacting officer to do something that is not in the best interests of the american people. for ais appropriate member of congress to go to bat to provide auent

better service at a better price than another option. i do not see anything wrong with that. the idea that a member of congress will go to bat on behalf of a constituent to provide a service that is not more cost-effective is another kettle of fish. senator mccaskill? me that sunshine solves a lot of problems. something you would not want to do unilaterally. maybe we should talk about a requirement, letters from congress advocating on certain vendors, that they immediately be posted on a public web site and that calls be locked -- logged and posted on a public

web site. i do not agree with the chairman's characterization. it is one thing to write a letter to say that this company exists and to give them every lawful consideration with best price been determinative. it is another thing to make phone calls and say, did you know i am on your appropriations ?ommittee or write the kind of letter to make people believe that there would be a negative consequence to not doing with this congressperson or senator would do. i assume every letter i have written will be on the front page of the paper. our letters that we have written are carefully crafted so that we would never give anyone the impression that we were trying to influence how something was going to turn out.

maybe that is something we should talk about. it would not surprise me of some of the people writing inappropriate letters and making inappropriate all calls are having press conferences about conferences in las vegas. that would not be a shock to me. >> nor to me. i would like to talk about a first cousin to some of the contacting issues senator mccaskill was mentioning. she has been like a dog with a bone. i am happen to be here to urge her on and support her. i want to talk about strategic sourcing. there is widespread agreement that the federal government could save a ton of money through strategic sourcing. you also have expressed strong support. reports one two

strategic sourcing. sectores in the private managed 90% of their spread through strategic sourcing. the federal agencies managed only about 5% through strategic sourcing. in a report released this april, gao estimated that in 2012 the federal government could have saved $12 billion if they have followed the strategic sourcing practices of several large largel largegao --- companies -- large companies that gao examines. they are not buying fighter fires -- firefighters. there is some overlap. havespecific steps to you

planned to increase the opportunities for agencies to participate in strategic sourcing? >> i appreciate the question. we talked to a number of large companies to ask them how do you handle acquisitions? what we found over and over is that the large, high-quality companies are focused on trying to leverage their scale and scope. they really are trying to find strategic sourcing opportunities. one company we visited in silicon valley did 90% of the buying of the organization. they were so focused on doing so much of the sourcing for the organization that they were able to change the nature of the discussion they had every year with their son of components from how much are you going to components from how much are you want to buy to how

much can you save? if we can give visibility into what we are buying and how much we paid and are willing to pay, i think we have the ability to drive down prices while pushing up the value and reducing the cost of making the acquisition. working closely in partnership sent $300 million in strategic sourcing across the federal government. we think that is the tip of the iceberg. we have five strategic sourcing initiatives. we just announced the wireless strategic sourcing contact. tangherlini family has done better in buying our wireless service than the federal government. we have one line. >> that includes your wife, your

children, and yourself? >> yes. >> be changed the culture a little bit. you changed the culture is a little bit. >> the federal government has 400 contracts. we have one plant and we can drive down the costs. the gardner group assesses the performance of i.t. organizations and they think we can cut half of our price. we want to bring business like solutions to agencies, demonstrate the savings to them and signed them up. you want to come up with new ways and ideas for pursuing janitorial and sanitation supplies for strategic sourcing initiatives. the things you buy associated with cleaning products and toilet paper -- the kind of

thing where you can get the benefit of volume. we need to be attentive to small business and make sure we protect the ability of small businesses to compete. in our office supply contracts, we were able to drive down prices as much as 30% across the market. we were also able to expand small business participation in andoffice supplies for 65% 75%. businesses are able to move more quickly and compete more aggressively. they have lower overhead and are closer to the end users. we are able to leverage small businesses through strategic sourcing to drive down costs. that is a win-win. >> those are encouraging words. i will continue to follow up on this a little bit.

when you look at agencies that mccaskill,tor claire thank you for your good work here -- when you look at agencies that are not buying goods and services through the strategic initiative, what are some of the advantages to doing that? >> a lot of it is understanding those vehicles are available. understanding what the value proposition is. that is why the administrator of chairs a strategic leadership council, bringing together professionals across the agency as well as gsa. -- divideied to drive up the waterfront for what we are going to pursue. we try to use that as an opportunity to market solutions across the agency. it is my job to be the educator

and sales per cent and chief funds strategic forcing -- to be the educator and the chief funds for sourcing. there is a percentage of participation in existing strategic sourcing the vehicles, such as office supplies. with the percentage is low, we showed them the data and encourage them to push it up. is managed.ured by bringing that data to agencies, that can create the ship pressure to make people move on it. creates leadership pressure to make people move on it. in and diversity lies opportunity. there is plenty of adversity

through sequestration. there is some opportunity as well. let me see if there may be another question our two here. -- or two here. another question on acquisition. i am talking about 10% of all federal spending on contracts. it goes through gsa. one reason we see such duplication is that agencies to pricing.data on

we know that having better price data could help agencies demand the best price possible. gsa further steps is planning to take to get access to pricing data? >> we are working closely with a prices paid portal into a common and shared environment that other agencies and contractors can see to test if they are getting a good price or not. the other thing we are doing is bringing agencies -- bringing to attention the cost in not using as a jumping off point the already completed gsa schedule. within the scheduling environment, we are able to take vengeance on the schedule and have them compete against other

-- compete against each other. using agency acquisition time line data, we can save 1/3 to to getting the-the time of getting marketing data. in gettingeduce -- time line data. -- marketing data. when we get the agencies coalescing around common vehicles, we get a wealth of data that we are then able to use to negotiate even better deals with the vendors. i think there is a virtuous cycle we can start. the trick will be getting these systems by which we can share that information and doing a better job of getting out there

and teaching the agencies but they are leaving on the table in terms of costs. the last thing i want to do is go back to the issue of real property and space. i mention the nuclear return commission's new building. they will lease it for a multi- period of time. we have misaligned the ascent -- incentives for agencies. scores that a senator's budget every year. , maybe the something same building, they buy it for a particular cost and it might be cheaper over time. have toes it so that we out take the money for the first year.

?ow do we change that do we need to pass a law? what we are doing is so cost-in cost-in effective effective. >> agencies pay roughly the same amount based on market analysis for occupying leased or owned property. the problem happens on the other side when it comes time to start paying for things. on the leases, we pay the leases directly because it is a contract. on the business -- buildings we own, that money is effected as revenue.

it counts as credit to the appropriations committee for other expenditures. for the last three years, that money has been used to pay for things outside of maintaining our federal assets. budget,iscal year 2014 all of the rent money comes in to pay least rent or to maintain, operate, or improve our buildings. if we want to buy a building to replace a long-term lease commitments, which we would pay as an operating expense every year, we have to have the full upfront cost of that building in the first year. it makes it hard to buy or build buildings. but we have to do it is explore the way the scoring convention's work. we have to work with cbo and omb to understand what the first principles are and to protect the flexibility of the president and the congress to make spending decisions and take a

hard look at long-term costs so that we know what impact we are having in later budget years as well as make sure we are reinvesting in our assets so we are not pushing subsequent benefits off on later generations for them to pay for. >> thank you. one last question. confirmed, what policies with new employment to assist agencies in assessing space onlization levels and save leasing costs by consolidating leasing space? >> we are working with omb to help them understand what their portfolios space looks like, what the opportunities for savings are. we think the immediate opportunities happened with every lease expiration for agencies to consider with their space needs are. i have been challenging the staff of the public buildings

service to look at least expiration's happening in the next five-seven years to begin happening intions the next five-seven years to substantially reduce our footprint. as we have demonstrated in our headquarters building, you can at twice as many people into standard office building by implementing more mobile office approaches. reducing the number of single occupancy individual offices, using more collaborative space. we are using hoteling, which means 80% of the people in the building don't have an assigned desk. they both won in advance and have a reservation. we are down -- they book one in advance and have a reservation.

it does not feel like you have a tiny little space. >> all right. me give you the opportunity to give an opening statement in response to our questions. if we want to follow up, there will be questions in writing. is anything you want to say to some of as we prepare to wrap up? >> i really appreciate the opportunity to come before you today. i appreciate the opportunity to sit before this committee in nomination for this important job. i particularly appreciate the tremendous support i have gotten from the women and men in gsa over the last 14 months, helping us make possible some of the improvements i was able to present to you today, suggested of some of the work we can do to better agencyen that it already is and use it to support federal agencies in

driving down their costs and delivering important services to the american people. thank you very much. >> i want to close with something cues as well. somendra is 15 -- with yous as well.thank- what your dad is doing is something that is important for you and your sister and your friends to keep you from inheriting an onerous debt. we have to get more for less money. that is a big part of what your dad will do with the general services administration. thank to say to your mom, you for your willingness to share with us this man. we probably do not say thank you enough. i would say to your dad, a young

89-year-old marathoner sitting behind you, i run half marathons. i do not run marathons. i used to say, i do not want to -- -- lose to the a year old old beating me over the finish line. now i have to think about the 89-year olds. you have obviously done something right in raising this guy. we thank you for that, too. sa's parents, you live somewhere around here. we are happy you are here and you are able to join us as well. told that the hearing

record will remain open until noon tomorrow. that is june 19, until 12:00 p.m. for submissions of statements and questions for the record. we ask our colleagues to try to meet that deadline. it is a short deadline. if you have questions, respond to them and we will see how quickly we can move this nomination along. with the that having been said, we thank you. this hearing is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

>> next, live, your calls and comments on "washington journal ." after that, [applause] ,.""newsmakers the house intelligence committee on nsa surveillance programs. >> this is a challenging time for people who are conservatives. we have a democratic president and a quite liberal democratic president who has not only been elected, but reelected, after putting into place some ideas and programs and projects that i think our wrongheaded. the public had a chance to think about that and they reelected him. ifis also an exciting time what you are trying to do is

modernize conservatism, bring it in line with the challenges the country faces right now, to help conservatives think about how to confront the challenges of the 21st century. neither party is doing a good job at that. there are a lot of opportunities for thinking about what america in the 21st century needs to change and how it governs itself to get back to economic growth, prosperity, a cultural revival we need. it is challenging, but it is exciting. >> more with national affairs editor, yuval levin sunday on c-span's "q & a." >> this morning, the director of the heritage foundation. a debate on immigration policy. then a look at the congressional agenda before the july 4 recess.

a discussion on the recent iranian presidential elections. "washington journal" is next. news from several sources that edward snowden, the nsa contractor wanted by the united states, has left hong kong for a third country. not quite sure where he is heading. we will continue to follow the story and give you information as it comes out throughout the course of this morning's "washington journal" program. july 4weekend before the congressional break. a president may -- the president set to make a major speech.