launch, november 8, 2005, for enrollment, january 1 the program enrolled, began actually signing people up. february 22nd secretary levitt said, quote, we are now at the 53rd day since the implementation of medicare prescription drug coverage. after reviewing the numbers and experiences to date, i can report that we are seeing solid progress. we continue to work aggressively to solve the problems that inevitably occur in transitions this size. that was medicare part d. despite the glitches in medicare part d, democrats worked with republicans to ensure that the law was a success and that all medicare beneficiaries had the information necessary to take advantage of medicare part d.

in fact, chairman -- in fact, i joined with chairman fred upton to request additional funding for community-based organizations to help seniors actually enroll in medicare part d. i have that letter right here. unfortunately the republicans have actually taken steps to ensure that consumers do not know all the benefits and protections provided by obamacare. in june, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell, senate minority whip john cornyn sent letters to major sports leagues warning them not to help could be sumers -- consumers be educated about the benefits of obamacare. after medicare part d, democrats like me hosted events in order

to boost awareness and facilitate enrollment. this has not happened with obamacare. several republican members have even stated, they will not help constituents who call and ask for more information about the benefits of obamacare and how to enroll. those republican efforts will only harm american families and small businesses and cut short the relief americans need because insurance companies are no longer in control of their health care, and they are guaranteed access to affordable coverage that will be there for them when they need it. i agree that the website must be fixed, that the republicans should stop their obstructionism, commit to working with democrats as we did with you on medicare part d to fix any provision that is need to be fixed rather than continue your efforts to nix the law. let's work together to fix it and not nix it. i thank you and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania, dr. murphy. >> thank you.

ms. campbell when healthcare.gov went live on october 1 it was not possible to browse the site in order to see the prices. you had to register. who made that decision? >> c.m.s. made that decision. >> who within c.m.s.? >> i don't have the exact name of the person. i would say henry chow from c.m.s. >> are you aware of any white house involvement in that decision process? >> i am not. >> ok. so what challenges arise when you switch a website where individuals can brows -- browse, just browse versus one where you first have to register? does this require substantial amount of work? >> it definitely puts a different -- additional burden on the system. >> do you have to write a new code to make that happen? >> for us to turn it up it was putting a flag in our system. >> how much more time does this take to test the system like that once you have made those decisions? >> it became part of the normal testing process.

>> but you never tested the whole system, right? >> c.g.i. did not. >> mr. slavitt, when were you made aware of the decision that the website would not allow browsing and require registration first? >> we weren't made aware of this until the final days prior to the launch. >> final day being what date? >> i believe it was within 10 days. >> do you know who made that decision? >> i don't know. we don't know who made the decision. we don't know when the decision was made. we don't know why the decision was made. >> are you aware -- it was someone from c.m.s.? h.m.s., administration, white house? >> we don't know. >> ms. campbell, did you inform anyone at c.m.s. or h.h.s. of any concerns you had that this required more testing? more time was needed because the system wasn't going to be

working? >> more testing because of the anonymous shopping or -- >> both. start with the shopping issue. the whole system. did you inform anybody at c.m.s. or h.h.s. you needed more time because the system wasn't working? >> once again the portion that c.g.i. was responsible for went through its unit -- >> you did through your -- you didn't look at the whole thing? >> we are not responsible for end-to-end testing. >> mr. slav itcht tt, did you inform c.m.s., anyone there you needed more time. >> we informed c.m.s. that more testing was necessary. we informed c.m.s. of the pieces of the system that had -- we had tested that had issues. so, yes, we did. >> how manyable cases did you receive to fill out the process for people? >> as of today i would estimate about 9,000. >> how much these successfully completed? >> about half of those were

successfully. >> do you have to go on line or >> do you have to go on line or another process? >> work through the consumer portal. >> are you expecting more applications? >> we are, yes. the volumes are increasing. >> ms. campbell, you're saying you haven't gone through and tested the whole system. you did your part. mr. slavitt, you said the same thing? you both just tested your parts? you didn't check the whole system? >> c.m.s. has independent contractor to s.s.i. that test our system. >> ok. >> and, mr. slavitt, did qssi test the whole system? >> we tested portions of the system for the code we received. >> who was the independent contractor who tested the system? >> qssi was one of the independent contractors, we tested code from c.g.i. >> did you find any problems? >> we found problems in the code. >> would it require more time to fix it? >> which in and of itself isn't necessarily a problem so long as they are fixed.

>> did you inform anybody at c.m.s. or h.h.s. there was problems and you needed more time? >> we informed both c.m.s. and the other contractor. >> who did you tell? >> i don't know the names of anybody we told, but i can tell you we informed c.m.s. and informed the contractor responsible for the code. >> ms. campbell, how much money did c.g.i. get to do this whole process from the federal government, total? >> our total t.c.v. is about $290 million. >> mr. slavitt, how much did your company receive to do all this? >> the data services hub has been funded to just under $85 billion. >> let me ask you. ms. campbell, have you tried to log on and test the system yourself? >> i have. but i have insurance. >> how long did it take you to do it? >> it took the normal time that it would take an individual -- >> you were able -- what state was that in? for what state? >> i'm a virginian.

>> does virginia have its own website or government website? >> it's part of the government website. >> mr. slavitt, did you personally try to get on to thecies? >> yes. >> what state? >> i think i put in texas. >> is that where you're from? >> i'm not but i was testing the system. >> did it work? i logged on to create an account. was able to do so. i just never received a confirmation email. >> it didn't work? >> didn't work. >> thank you. yield back. >> the gentleman from kentucky, mr. yarmuth. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. campbell and mr. slavitt, would you say if far more states had decided to do their own exchanges, the national exchange would not have experienced as many problems? >> i can speculate. i would say probably. but i don't know for sure. >> i wanted to talk about the kentucky experience, and i want to thank your company for its involvement in our state because

the experience in kentucky has been extraordinarily successful. even though there were problems for a few hours on the first day, again because of excessive demand, at least unprojected demand, those were quickly rectified. i have these statistics now for the first 21 days in kentucky. we had 640,000 kentuckyans estimated without insurance. so assuming that most of those were people who contacted the system were mostly from that population, we have had 280,000 unique visitors to connect, kynect. 247,000 have actually conducted prescreenings to determine qualifications for subsidies and so forth. 47,000 applications for health care coverage had been initiated. and 33,700 are completed. as of the 21st, 18,370

individuals are enrolled in the new affordable health care. and i think almost equally important, 378 businesses have started applications for health insurance for their employees. in terms of the numbers of people who were -- that could take advantage of the affordable care act in kentucky, a huge number have already done so. actually have enrolled in affordable insurance for the first time in many cases in their lives. mr. shimkus talked about one person he got a letter from said that not happen with what the prospects were. we heard a lot of these anecdotal stories, and in fact fox news brought some people on last week and one of the small businessperson said, he had to cut the hours of his employees and so forth. and reported -- reporter

followed up on that, found out this man had actually only four employees. he was not even covered by the affordable care act. we have to be careful about people who say they have done things or suffered because of the affordable care act when in fact they haven't. i have a couple case from my district that i think are very valid experiences and also testified to how important this law is and the benefit of it. jeff bower wrote, i'm 62 years old, and my wife will reach that age before the end of the year. in january i parted ways with my employer of 39 years. we were lucky to have never needed government assistance of any kind. we are pretty much a typical middle class family. we asked our doctors if they anticipated any problems with us acquiring health insurance, they told us our health was good and did not anticipate any problems. we were dismayed to find we were both turned down for coverage based on existing medical conditions. the conditions were not chronic

or serious. our only alternative was to select cobra coverage for 18 months with monthly premiums over $1,000. when cobra expires, july, 2014, we would have to go the next 20 months with no health insurance. on kentucky's health exchange i was able to purchase our insurance for $800 less than our cobra coverage. previous medical conditions were not a factor. the exchange was user friendly. i was able to complete the application with no problems. like to thank lawmakers and the president for representing those of us who only have little voices and have the courage to make this coverage available through the affordable care act. another woman, 17 years ago, was diagnosed with late third stage breast cancer. she was able to get into a special trial at duke. and she overcame her disease, but left with a $200,000 bill. it was not paid by the insurance company. now because of the affordable care act, she cannot only change coverage, she has no lifetime

limits. no annual limits. these are the things that will protect her and her family. so i just want to say that the experience is not all negative, and i'm confident that eventually the national exchange, i hope, very quickly becomes as effective as the kentucky exchange. thank you for your testimony. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: dr. burgess. >> thanks, mr. chairman. mr. slavitt, i will say my experience was similar to yours. i live in texas so i did try while we were sitting here spending time together this morning tried to sign up on the exchange for texas, and i ended up with a similar result as you did. i just have to say here we are three weeks into the open enrollment period and i can't think that anyone on this panel this morning would think that that is acceptable that the system would still work so poorly. regardless of the state involved. miss campbell, can you tell me

at this point how many people have signed up through c.g.i.? >> i cannot. i need to clarify an answer i gave regarding 200 failures on the end-to-end test. it was an end-to-end test on the eidm were there were 200 failures. >> on that first morning, october 1, we were up late doing a vote, probably about 2:00 in the morning i attempted to sign in then. and met with the same response, the system asked my favorite kind of -- something along those lines, and froze up. and like mr. slavitt, i never got a confirmtory email on the many times i spent that information through. what happens to that information? ms. campbell? >> that's on the eid site. >> can i ever get it back?

>> i can relate my own experience. of course what i found out that i didn't get an email back, i called the qssi team to see what happened. indeed, eidm had a record of my transaction, received the transaction, and we know that eidm received my submission. we also know they sent that transaction over to the marketplace. as i mentioned eidm is only a tool used in the registration process. not the registration process. beyond that i don't have any visibility. >> can i get that information back? >> i believe that information would still reside in registration tool. >> there's only so many passwords that he the mental capacity to make up. i'm running through all of them, continuing to sign this up. if you could return some of them back to me i would greatly appreciate that. ms. campbell, you referenced a number of questions from dr. murphy about the amount of money c.g.i. had received for this

contract. >> to clarify, that's the total contract value. so to clarify, that's the total contract value through the out years. that's not the dollars that we have received to date. the dollars that we have received to date is in the range of about $112 million. >> are all of these fix-its occurring now were those included in that $112 million bill? or are there ongoing invoices going to have to be reimbursed from c.g.i.? >> c.m.s. is has implemented a cost reimbursable-type contract. as we continue to do the normal contract says we are responsible for the development and then it moves into operations and maintenance, which is continued bug fixes and things of that sort. >> we are saying -- >> if the normal course of a

development and a production environment scenario. >> i'm not trying to be harsh here, you are continue to bill taxpayers for the fact that your code did not work or your product did not work as advertised regardless of whose fault it was, on october 1, i think we all agree it wasn't working. the taxpayers being build for those invoices to fix things. >> sir, on october 1 the taxpayer couldn't get to our system. >> let me add this as an observation. it seems like we've got several fingers but no palm here. was there anyone involved in sort of overseeing the entire -- entirety of this to make sure it worked from a to z? ms. campbell? >> that would be c.m.s., the system integrator. >> who at c.m.s.? mr. chow again? >> one of the individuals, yes. >> who else at c.m.s.? was the administrator for c.m.s. involved? >> i can't say who was in that decisionmaking process.

>> how about you, mr. slavitt, who was the unseen hand trying to put all this together? >> c.m.s. did play that role. i'm not aware of who within c.m.s. >> in other words, there was a comment on a blog post this morning on one of the local papers that said, when do i start to really freak out about this? the average american watching this hearing this morning, can we give them any comfort about that? when should the average american begin to really become upset about what they have seen here in the past 3 1/2 weeks? ms. campbell do you have an observation? >> i do not, sir. >> mr. slavitt? >> i can work intensely in those first few days. >> here's the problem. nobody believes this thing will get fixed when we keep getting answers like this. we are asking you for help, to be transparent, and we get nonanswers to our questions.

i would submit that the average american looking in on this hearing this morning is going to feel like there is nobody in charge, maybe somebody at c.m.s., but who is going to take the responsibility for getting this thing fixed and making it right? because heaven knows they paid enough money to have it work, right? thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. welch. >> thank you very much. thank you for the hearing. we all have a real interest in trying to get this thing 20 work -- to work, that's for sure. i do want to say a couple things about what this hearing is not about, because it puts it in a bit of a context. it's not about whether we should take away the right of our kids up to age 26 to be on health care, our own health care polcy. that's working great. it's not about whether the preventive care that has been made available for free to seniors on medicare should be rolled back. that's working rhetty good. it's not whether the $4 billion in medicaid -- medicare fraud

that's been found out and saved for the program was a bad idea. strong bipartisan support on that. it's not about whether the opportunity americans have to now get health care coverage, even if they have a pre-existing condition, should be rolled back. people are pretty happy with that. it's not about whether the doughnut hole that was such a burden for seniors on medicare should be rolled back. what we have done in this law as everyone knows is provide coverage to folks through that doughnut hole. so that's pretty good. and it's not about whether the medicaid exchanges -- expansion a that is part of this bill should be rolled back. in vermont, that would be like 40,000 people that are going to get access to health care. that's going to affect some of the hardest working people in this country, farmers who work hard. make very little. but were not eligible to get medicaid because they didn't have young children.

so, mr. chairman, all of those things we are not having to question. they are working great. what we are talking about is a computer program that's messed up at the moment. and i've got some -- we all have some historical experience with that. when the prescription drug program for seniors in medicare part d was put into place, it was a huge computer program, there were a lot of glitches. the question that this committee had at that time, march of 2006, was what to do about it. we had some really good advice from some really good members. one of them said, who was a supporter of medicare part d, as i mentioned earlier the new benefit in its implementation are hardly perfect, rather than try to scare and confuse seniors, i would hope that we could work together as we go through the implementation phase to find out what is going wrong with the program and if we can make some changes to fix it,

let's do it. let's do it on a bipartisan basis. i'd say that statesman had it right. that statesman was joe barton of texas. we had another member, we can't undo the past, but certainly they can make the argument they were having a hearing a month late, but the reality is that for the prescription drug program is the benefit is 40 years late, and the seniors who signed up for medicare on those first days back in 1965 when they were 65 years of age are now 106 years of age waiting for that prescription drug benefit. so i hope it doesn't take us that long to get it right. i don't believe it will. that was congressman burgess who serves with us on this committee now. and then another i think quote that was really terrific, any time something is new there's going to be some glitches. it is of no value. as a matter of fact it is of negative value and questionable

ethical val ue, i think sometimes if people only spend their time criticizing the glitches that have been made in the program as with any program that occurs, whether it is a public or private program, criticizing it, standing on the outside, and frightening seniors, frightening seniors into thinking that because there was complexities and difficulties, therefore they should not sign up. that was congressman tim murphy. you know what, that advice they gave them is pretty good advice for us to take now. i adopt their comments as our path forward. i'll ask just each person on this panel, can the computer challenges that we are facing right now, none of us want, it's a real hassle for americans, it starts to undercut confidence in a program whether it's e-bay, amazon.com, you name it, if their program not working there is flussstration for anybody on it. can this be fixed?

>> we are working every day to get it fixed, yes. >> we believe we can. >> thank you. >> we hope so but we don't have visibility into that. >> we have no direct involvement with the system. >> thank you. i yield back. get it done. >> dr. gingrey. >> mr. chairman, thank you. the gentleman from connecticut said what this hearing was not about and he listed a litany of things that in his opinion are positive. let me tell you what this hearing is about. it is about whether young people over the age of 26 and not eligible for subsidies, who are forced come january 1 if they had no insurance, to sign up for the exchanges and pay at least double what they normally would pay.

it is about that. here we are 24 days after the exchanges have come on line and yet we receive conflicting reports from the administration on the number of people who have successfully received coverage. when we met more than six weeks ago, with this panel, i warned that companies charged with developing and implementing the federal exchanges had not had the time to successfully produce and test such a complex system. we are hearing that today. during that hearing we heard that all of your systems were functioning properly and ready to go on october 1. after what has been an unsuccessful first three weeks plus of implementation, we now have to better piece together the timeline of problems and figure out who knew what and when did they know it? ms. campbell, in your testimony you say that your company was selected as the best value to create federally facilitated marketplaces, f.f.m.n. 2011. due to the fact that the requirements were not well established at the time of the

award and that the requirements did evolve over the next two years. how was c.g.i., your company, made aware of these changing requirements by c.m.s.? >> we received change orders, and then we would respond back with a proposal, and that proposal would be accepted, and then we would continue moving forward. >> when was the last time that the federally facilitated marketplace requirements were changed by the administration? when did they prior to october 1? >> i believe our last modification occurred in august of this year. >> was there ever a point that c.g.i. expressed doubt as to whether the updated requirements would affect your ability for a successful launch? >> each time we received changes, we shared with c.m.s. the risk associated with any changes that we were asked to provide support.

>> can you tell me today, this morning, who specifically you gave that information to, expressed that concern to? >> i'd have to go back to my team specifically. >> could you do that before 9:00 in the morning? >> if i'm allowed to provide that information based on our terms and conditions of our contract with c.m.s. >> this is a government that prides itself in transparency, i'm certainly sure you would be allowed. you also stated that c.g.i. delivered the functionality required by c.m.s. did you ever have concerns that c.m.s. was not requiring enough in terms of design and functionality? and were there ever internal concerns at c.g.i. that c.m.s. did not have the technical expertise to handle such an ambitious project? >> in terms of -- c.m.s. has a number of technical resources, and it was their responsibility to be the system's integrator

here. we provided support and guidance as we could. >> ms. campbell, over the last several weeks when the republican majority in the house of representatives was trying desperately to keep the federal government opened and submitted several bills to the democratic majority senate, mr. harry reid, one of those requests after the initial request was rejected was to simply say, look, we will fund the entirety of the federal government at sequester levels. but we think it's a good idea to delay the rollout of obamacare for a year. now, that was summarily rejected again by mr. reid. we then came back and said, would you just meet with us? would you just allow us to meet with a bipartisan, bicamera

committee and talk about this? it's very possible if he had agreed to do that that this delay of a year could have been negotiated down to a delay of six months. let me in my few seconds left ask -- >> we'll leave this house committee hearing on problems with enrollment issues at healthcare.gov. the house is about to gavel in for a brief pro forma session. x abovenet can answer that with a yes or no scenario. >> is there any scenario which you can answer at? system went live, there are many entry points in which there is an ability for person to enroll. the online app is one. >> i'm over time. i don't know what flexibility

there is but it always helps projects like this succeed. >> the wall street journal said she needed five more years. >> the gentleman's time is expired. >> i yield back. >> the gentleman from new york. them a thank you, mr. chair. thank you, witnesses. to hear some concern expressed on the other side of the aisle regarding axis problems that people are having and interacting with the health care government -- website. we are working with him in a bipartisan way to make it happen. i sent great demand out there. sense great demand out there. echo theike to

comments of many of my colleagues indistinguishable between the unfortunate rollout of the website and the underlying promise of the law itself that all individuals will finally have access to affordable health care. many of the benefits of that andage are now well-known appreciated. able to say on their parents' plan until the age of 26. seniors not having to pay as much money out of pocket for prescription drugs, and eventually closing the doughnut hole. while there might be problems with the website, we have heard it here this morning and it's worth repeating, we have to fix it, not nix it. we have to fix it, not nix it. it's an important mantra to guide us forward. mr. chair, when people are able to overcome these initial bumps in the road, they are discovering a quality product that will save families hundreds of dollars a month on health care costs.

you don't have to take my word for it. fox news contributor sali kahn, upon discovering her family will save $408 per month in my home state of new york. ideal ogs may not like obamacare, but my wallet and family's health sure do. while we are here to address problems of an underperforming website, we can't ignore the larger story that affordable health care a has finally become a reality for millions of americans and something we should not delay. ms. campbell, that being said, most of the bugs in the system we have heard about here today have been with the federally run website, healthcare.gov, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> how many states are currently participating in the federally facilitated marketplace through the healthcare.gov website? >> 36. >> it was my understanding that the affordable care act envisioned that the states would be taking the lead on designing and running these exchanges. do you have a sense of why 36 states chose to let the federal government take the lead instead?

>> i have no further information to support that. >> i think it's clear to state that this was how it was envisioned to work and would have been beneficial. from what i can tell many states that refuse to create state- based exchange, largely for ideological reasons. did c.g.i. participate in building the exchange websites? >> yes, we have. >> my sense is that the states that have taken ownership of the affordable care act and designed and run their own exchanges are outperforming the federal exchange. would you agree with this assessment? that is correct. >> thank you, ms. campbell. i do agree the picture we have seen in the state-based exchanges is vastly improved over what we are seeing through healthcare.gov. my home state of new york, which also experienced website problems at the outset, has now signed up nearly 174,000 new yorkers for quality, low cost health insurance. that means that more new yorkers have completed an application to

receive an eligibility determination than any other state in our nation. this is clear-cut evidence that the temporary setbacks can be overcome. and success can be achieved when the law is implemented the way it was intended. without malice and obstruction. in closing, i would implore my republican colleagues to reject the politics of division and join with us in finding constructive solutions to these technical problems so that the many billions of americans demanding and deserving access to the private sector driven health care options they now have before them is a reality. with that, mr. chair, i yield back. >> mr. scalise. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate you having this hearing. i want to thank the witnesses for coming to testify. there's been a lot said about why we are having this hearing. one of the reasons is that our constituents are calling us on a daily basis reporting some of these many problems that we are talking about here today. it's not just a failure of a

website. obviously a lot of focus on the failure of the website, but it's a focus on a failure of the law in general. the fact that there were so many broken promises made by the president about what this law would do. if you like what you have you can keep it. thousands and thousands of people losing good coverage they have. in florida it's reported, 300,000 people will lose the health care they have that they like. all across the country we hear that. costs were going to be lower. you're seeing so many states report that costs are dramatically higher. chicago, president obama's own backyard, it's reported 21 of the 22 plans on the exchange, the low-cost exchanges, have deductibles of $8,000 or more per family. people don't consider that a low cost. people are losing good private sector health care they have. you are hearing the promises the president quoted, this gets into conversation we are having

today, this was the president's quote. just visit healthcare.gov and there you can compare insurance plans side by side the same way you shopped for a plane ticket on kayak or tv on amazon. while you were testifying i went on amazon and looked for tv. within one minute i had over 300,000 options of tv's that i could purchase. and it was all low-cost tv's. i tried to go on healthcare.gov and register. this was earlier this week. i spent more than two hours, probably like mr. slavitt, kicked out four times, had to re-enter data, was given blank screens a number of times. ultimately never even got to a point where i could see health care plans, where i could compare as the president promised side by side, just like you look for a tv on amazon. that's not the experience you get when most people go on line to purchase products. this isn't just any product, this is a product the federal government said you have to buy by law or else you get fined.

the other side wants to mock us because we are asking for at least a delay of the fine while people can't go to the website. this isn't just any product, this is a product that the federal government said you have to buy by law or else you get fined. i used to program computers for a living. i understand how you design systems, big systems, small systems. i understand how you design test plans. i actually wrote test plans for systems. and you would test the system, would you do all-nighters until the system worked and you wouldn't deploy until it worked. and clearly that didn't happen in this case. so i want to ask, first of all, y'all said that you tracked air logs. -- error logs. if i can start with mrs. campbell, how many errors have you logged since you've been tracking the errors? >> i don't have that information. >> can you get that to the committee? >> i don't have that with me. >> i have to get back to you for the record. >> we really don't have access to that system. >> we need to get those numbers. clearly there are many.

you said in your testimony that there was a late decision requiring consumers to register for an account before they could browse. early off it was promised that people would be able to go to the website and just shop around. look for a site, if you like something you find, you can go buy. it you don't have to give hours and hours of personal data and social security numbers before you buy a product. the company would go out of business. you'd said there was a late decision made to change the system. so that you have to give all the personal information before you can even shop around. who made that late decision? >> we don't know who made the decision and we don't know when. >> do you know? who made that late decision? was that c.m.s.? >> it was c.m.s. >> do you know who? >> we don't have full knowledge of exactly the full chain of -- >> c.m.s. made a decision. how late in the game did they make that decision? >> for c.g.i., they asked us to turn that flag off or functionality off at two weeks before going live. >> two weeks before going live. so they made a dramatic change to the system just two weeks before going live. nobody would have done that in the private sector, to make that

kind of change to a system. let me ask you this. all of you were paid lots of money. over $500 million of taxpayer money spent to build this website. more money than it cost to build facebook. facebook gets 700 million users a day. 700 million people use that day and it works. the first five years they didn't spend $500 million. did you deliver -- i'll go down the line. did you deliver the product that you were contracted to build? >> we have. >> did you deliver the product that you were contracted? >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> there's a saying in computer programming. garbage in, garbage out. if you're given a bad product to build, then ultimately what you'll deliver is a bad product. the focus is not just going to be on the failed website. clearly there's some serious questions that need to be answered. all the taxpayer money that was spent to build a site that people can't even go on to use and then ultimately if they're

able to get through, they're finding the prices are dramatically higher. this will not mask the fact that the law fails in general. you wonder why we're calling for a delay of the implementation of this law, delay of the fines that people will have to pay if they can't even use the website. 50% of you who said you went to the website said you had a failure rate. you built the site. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> i yield back the balance of my time. >> mr. sarbanes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the panel. this is an important hearing. there's two stories that have unfolded in the last three weeks. one of them clearly is the problems with this website that need to be fixed. and i'm going to ask some questions about that in a minute. but the other story is the incredible demand and interest that americans have in accessing this new opportunity for affordable health care. we saw it in the demand that came in on the federal exchange

which outstripped all the projections that people had for it. we've seen it in the state level exchanges, the state-run exchanges, where there's been a lot of success in terms of people coming there, browsing, applying for coverage, enrolling in coverage, and that story continues. that's the reason that we have to fix this. in other words, if there was no interest out there, if there was no demand and you had a website that wasn't working very well, you could say, well, maybe we don't need to fix this thing. but people really want this opportunity. that's the bigger story. people are coming to these sites. so we have to fix it. that's why you hear the refrain on our side of fix it don't nix it. now, let me ask you this.

i assume that you've been involved, all of you, in big projects of this kind. this may be particularly complex, i get that. but i'm sure you've had the experience where you went to, you know, you pulled the switch on a go live situation and it didn't work out exactly as you expected. ms. campbell, when that happens, i imagine c.g.i. doesn't just sort of the bury its head in the sand and give up, but you get about the business of fixing the thing so it can function properly. correct? >> that's correct. it's a normal course of what happens when a system goes into production. >> absolutely. and mr. slavitt, i assume if you encounter difficulties when you go live with a product, you don't light your hair on fire and run around? you get about the business of fixing it. right?

>> yes, that's correct. >> in fact, did you that in this instance, from what i understand. >> that's correct. >> you're professionals, you do this for a living. you understand, we've got some problems here that need to be addressed. you're getting about the business of fixing them. and you're doing that because this is a platform that americans need in order to access health care coverage. let me ask you another question. do you have any reason to think that the problems with the website that we've been talking about today in any way are affecting the quality of the underlying product that's being sold? in other words the plan options that are out there and so forth. is there any reason for us to conclude that because somebody's having problems accessing an

enrollment or doing an application because of the website that that somehow is a commentary on the underlying product that ultimately they're trying to access? >> no. with 4,400 plans for people across -- within the 36 states that can apply, i would say that the plans are there for people to be able to shop. >> mr. slavitt. >> i wouldn't conclude that. >> no. >> no. >> and in fact the reports we're getting about the underlying product, the plan that people are going to have access to, the options that are available to them, that they're good-quality products and that they're going to be available at very reasonable premiums, which is exactly again what people are looking for here. and certainly there's no suggestion that problems with

the website are at some point going to mean that an enrolled beneficiary is going to have an issue accessing their doctor, or accessing the hospital or anything like that. so the product is good. the website needs to be fixed to make sure that we can get that product to people, that's what you're engaged in now, and that's why we have to fix it, not nix it, when it comes to this health care website with -- website. with that i yield back the balance of my time. >> mr. latta. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and thank you very much for our witnesses for being here today. greatly appreciate your testimony. and last night i read through all of your statements beforehand and if i could, because there's been a lot of questioning of course about the testing site. ms. campbell, if i could turn to your testimony.

page two, you said in recent years that c.g.i. federal has delivered some of the most complex i.t. implementation to the u.s. government including federalreporting.com and medicare.com. we heard from you all saying you only had at the very end about two weeks to make sure this thing was integrated. when you were working on, for example, medicare.gov, how much testing did you do on that? did they give you a time frame or what can you tell me about that testing at that time? >> [inaudible] i'm sorry, i can't give you the exact time frames but we had sufficient time to test the system before it went live. >> can you tell me what sufficient time is? >> so we had, you know, a number of months before the system went live. >> if you could, by tomorrow morning at 9:00, i'd like to get that information from you, to find out exactly how much time you did specifically have to test that system. what about on federalreporting.gov? how much time were you given to test that system? >> i'd have to get back to you. that wasn't in my area. >> we'd like to have that by 9:00 in the morning tomorrow

morning. so we can get that information. and i think i heard this earlier. is healthcare.gov the most complicated of the systems that you've created? >> it is by far, for our country, one of the most complicated large-scale systems that is out there. >> so what you're telling me is you've had months vs. a couple of weeks to do that testing. let me ask you this. did they -- when medicare.gov or federalreporting.gov -- are you able to, especially on the medicare side, because you say in your testimony, which successfully helps more than 15 million u.s. citizens compare health and drug plans each year, is it set up the same way that healthcare.gov is, that you first have to register before you can browse or can you browse, then get what you need? >> you can browse first. >> now why would those two systems be different?

any reason that was given to you by c.m.s. or h.h.s. that they wanted it reversed? since the one system seemed to be working. >> i do not. c.m.s. i guess does speculation, a number of priorities, maybe that wasn't one of the priorities. >> ok. mr. slavitt, if i could ask a couple of questions in your testimony. again, i found all your testimony all very interesting. it's been talked about a little bit before. in your testimony you stated on page four that it appears one of the reasons for the high concurrent volume at the registration for the late decision requiring consumers to register for an account before they could browse for the insurance product. again, whose decision was that? >> we don't know. >> you don't know whose decision that was? how did you get the information you were supposed to do that? >> i'm sorry, can you repeat that?

>> how did you get the information that you were supposed to switch things around? >> one of the testers in our company that was responsible for testing the c.g.i. software code was notified that there was code they no longer needed to test. >> if we could also by 9:00 tomorrow morning get the name of the individual for c.m.s. that asked for that, we'd appreciate that. going on in your -- following up a little bit on your testimony on page four, again, it goes back and says in our role as tester, we were tested with -- tasked with identifying errors in the code that was provided to us by others. we reported the results back to c.m.s. and the relevant contractor who was in turn responsible for fixing the coding errors or making the necessary -- any necessary changes. do you know who that was back at c.m.s. that you were supposed to report back to? >> i don't. >> if we could get that by 9:00 tomorrow morning. do you know who that relevant contractor was that you were also supposed to be getting that information to? >> c.g.i.

>> all right. and when you submitted those -- that information back to c.g.i., did you hear back from them? what happened with that information that you sent them? >> i don't know what happened in every case. but what typically happens is we submit the results back and then the other contractor is responsible for making those changes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i see my time has expired. thank you, i yield back. >> parliamentary inquiry, mr. chairman. >> yes. are you asking for a second round already? >> congressman rush and i have sent around 40 letters to you requesting a hearing on climate change and we haven't gotten any responses. >> we had one. >> we'd like to have a response by 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. somebody made up the idea that 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning is some kind of deadline. you can say it, it doesn't mean it happens.

>> i withdraw my parliamentary inquiry. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. mcnerney. >> mr. chairman, i'd like to ask if i could postpone my questioning for another -- >> sure. mr. lance. >> thank you very much and to the panel, the september 10 hearing in this subcommittee, the health subcommittee, where you testified, ms. campbell, and your company testified, mr. slavitt, if you had the opportunity now, would you in any way amend the testimony you gave at that time? >> no. my testimony was fine. i would not change anything based on what i knew at that point in time. >> did you know at that time that there was no end to end testing? >> i knew that that was something that was forthcoming. >> so you knew at that time that there was no end-to-end testing as of that date? >> it was not our area of

responsibility for end had been to-end testing. -- end-to-end testing. >> do you believe you have a responsibility to tell the subcommittee that at that time there was no end-to-end testing? >> i don't believe that question came up, sir. >> i suspect that's the case. the question did not come up. this is not a game of cat and mouse. this is the people of the united states, one of the most important proposals of the obama administration. i'm sure that question did not come up. in your other activities with other entities, you have testified that there was always end-to-end testing. is that accurate? >> that end-to-end testing is a component for a system goes live. -- before a system goes live. >> yes. and you do not believe you had a responsibility to indicate that end-to-end testing had not yet occurred with 20 days to go? >> it was our client's responsibility for end-to-end testing. >> would you respond on that?

>> we wouldn't amend our testimony. we testified accurately. >> do you believe that you had a responsibility affirmatively to indicate that no end-to-end testing had yet to occur? >> sir, i believe on september 10 we were expecting to receive the code that would allow the end-to-end testing to occur. >> so you are of the opinion that there would be end-to-end testing between september 10 and september 30. >> that was our expectation. >> in your experience with other clients, does end-to-end testing occur before 20 days to go? >> each project is different. i can't comment. >> on another large project in which you were involved, is it usual that end-to-end testing occurs long before the last 2 1/2 weeks?

>> we would certainly have liked to see as much time as possible for end-to-end testing. >> would you suggest that this be delayed for three months or six months, given the experience so far? regarding the individual mandate. >> no, i wouldn't have the information to make that determination. >> so you don't know? >> i don't know. >> you don't have an opinion. do you have an opinion, ms. campbell? >> i can tell you that i have a team of people working 24 hours a day to make these corrections that are needed to continue moving forward. >> i'm sure you do and i certainly respect that. on the risk involved in change orders, this impresses me as being serious. mr. slavitt, regarding that, did you perceive a significant chance that there would be a huge problem because of the change orders with which you were involved?

>> we didn't really see significant change orders on the data services hub that i'm aware of. >> ms. campbell, regarding the change orders, the risk associated with that, you received several change orders, i believe you testified six or eight of them. did you perceive a significant risk in that regard? >> we did not. >> you did not think there would be a significant risk? >> no. over time these change orders occurred over a two-year time period. >> some have commented that much of the problem exists because c.m.m. decided to do its own in- house analysis, equivalent to someone who had never hung a picture deciding that he would become his own general contractor, instead of subcontracting the responsibility for integrating the software of the multiple contractors. do you agree that c.m.s. should have hired a contractor in that

regard, ms. campbell? >> i've seen it both ways, where the government has taken that job and quite often they would bring in a separate contractor to do that. >> in many many cases a separate contractor would be brought in. mr. slavitt. >> i don't know. >> you don't know. in my opinion, i think in the history of working with complicated i.t. systems, it's difficult to see that there was a more incompetent systems integrator, do you have an opinion on that? >> i have no opinion on that. >> i don't. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. mcnerney. >> sorry, mr. chairman, i'm not ready yet. >> ok. mr. guthrie. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for testifying today. a lot of people don't realize that before the government shutdown of september 30, almost every republican, all but one, voted to fund the health care government to sequester level and only asked to get rid of the individual mandate.

for a delay for a year. because as businesses and other people have been treated with waivers and special delays, we felt the hardworking taxpayers deserved -- because we didn't think a product was going to be ready for them to purchase. and it turned out on october 1 it wasn't. so we wouldn't even have had the government shutdown if we had people agree to give hardworking taxpayers the same treatment they gave businesses because the i.r.s. wasn't ready to enforce that. having said that, people say there are other alternatives and so we have good people in the great commonwealth of connecticut working -- kentucky who will take paper applications. so there's argument, well, they can buy if they do paper applications. so you said you take the applications and enter the data? where do you enter the data? >> into the portal. >> the same portal that is having trouble being accessed online? >> that's correct. >> so even if people get frustrated -- because i was watching my good friend here most of the morning trying to

get online, he's been kicked out four times today, you're going to take that information and enter it into the same data. so maybe you're making it easier. do you have a special portal to get in or do you have to deal with the same problems he's dealing with? >> the difference for us is we don't have to establish an account. so our landing page on the portal is behind that. >> you have to have an account for the people that you're entering, right? >> in the initial days you had to sign up. that's what we had been talking about before. establishing an account before you could do an application. for us we just bypass the account establishment and begin keying in the data for the application. >> ok. that's what i want to get to. i'm glad you said that. when the president and secretary sebelius advised americans to submit paper applications, if they're having problems with the website, they still have to go to the same portal. we've been talking about entrance into the portal. the front door i think we talked about a few times. but also, ms. campbell, i know to quote "the washington post,"

quote, about a month before the exchange opened, a tested group of insurers urged agency officials not to launch. so, when you had -- this according to the "the washington post," unquote, so you had a test about a month before the exchange opened, c.g.i. provides that information, were you involved with the testifying with insurers? was c.g.i. involved with the testing with insurers? >> we do test with saturday of -- a set of insurers to make sure that obviously we -- before we go live that our system is working appropriately. >> did they recommend that you weren't ready to go live? >> they did not recommend that to c.g.i.,-- to my knowledge. to my knowledge the insurers did not recommend that directly to c.g.i. >> do you know if they recommended it to h.h.s.? >> i do not know. >> you don't know if they did that or not. >> i do not know. >> did h.h.s. share that information with you that they weren't ready to go sflive >> not that i'm aware of.

>> are you aware that this test took place with insurers? c.g.i. is not aware that this test took place with insurers? >> i didn't say that. to my knowledge i'm not aware that the insurers provided feedback to c.g.i. or to c.m.s. or h.h.s. >> did you discover errors during that test? >> the purpose of test, the ature of test, is it's there to >> find the problems that you can fix. >> that you find the issues. >> there's still reports in the weeks before -- there's still reports in news that insurers are saying there's missing data, duplicative applications, enrollments and missing data that's still taking place. at least it was reported last week in the news. is that still taking place? >> when we receive a -- what we call a -- they call it a trouble ticket or a defect ticket or an issue ticket, then we are in the process of making corrections and then when we do the next build, we make corrections to the system. have been a point in time where there were duplicative insurance

forms and things of that sort or duplicate information and we would have made corrections. where we are in that process at this very moment i don't have the answer to. >> my point is, we wouldn't have had the government shutdown, believe it or not, and i know that didn't get out in the news, if we would have done the individual mandate delay. we didn't say get rid of the exchanges, just not mandate people buy a product they can't buy. so my point that i'm trying to make here is there's other issues. it's not just not being able to get on the website. it's making the exchanges work. it's hard to believe that if that report is true, h.h.s. didn't tell that you they were having trouble between or that there'd been a delay. it's concerning that those tests are taking place and it's being reported in the media but it doesn't seem to have gotten to c.g.i. from h.h.s. my time is expired, i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. i would note that we've been at this for 3 1/2 hours. would any of you like a five-minute break? i see some nods. why don't we take a five-minute break. when we resume, we'll come to mr. mcnerney. ok? >> if you missed any of this hearing you can watch it in its entirety on the c-span video library. former white house budget official jeffrey zeitz will oversee improvements to the federal health care website. he has been named the director of the white house national economic council and will take that up in january. he says he expects the website to be working by the end of november.

we will have more on the health care website with two hearings this week. one with the house ways and means committee on tuesday. the administrator for the centers of medicare and medicaid services is in charge of the website rollout pitch he testified on august 1 before the website opened. you can take a look back at her testimony on c-span positivity a library. reuters reports her testimony this week is expected to offer some insight into the decision- making. she was a key player in getting the website ready. the white house shows she was -- a visitor log shows she was cleared to visit the white house -- 27 times over past couple 427 times over the past couple of months. you can watch her testimony live tuesday at 10 a.m.. housecond hearing is the energy and commerce committee on wednesday, with testimony from health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius.

it will be her first appearance before a congressional committee before -- congressional committee since the website opened. we talked to a capitol hill reporter about the hearings coming up this week and what else to expect in congress. be a short week on capitol hill next week, at least for the house. he writes the hill action book blog. of -- one of the things happening next week, two hearings in the health care law. what will committee members here about? >> it is usually not the case that the hearings are bigger than the floor stuff. it will be more on obamacare implication or non- implementation from as a look -- as a lot of republicans would put it. kathleen sebelius will testify at the house energy and commerce committee on wednesday.

she has been in the sight of a lot of republicans as the person not only responsible for the website rollout, which by all accounts seems to not have gone well. i think 10% of people are trying to find out -- she is going to get an earful. she will be grilled, probably, at the hearing. people will look for questions -- answers to questions like didn't shoot no, who is in charge of the whole operation, things like that. before that the ways and means committee will hear from marilyn tavener, she's the administrator at the cms center for medicare and medicaid services. that was the agency that correlated the construction site. she will probably be grilled at a hearing all week. is writing about next week's house budget meeting.

revenues are on the table and budget talks, they are talking about republican tom cole, what is the deadline facing that conference committee? >> this is because of the build ended the shutdown and extended the debt ceiling. they have a december 13 deadline to find some agreement. -- a are some high hopes lot of people have high hopes we can reach some grand bargain, the thing everyone is looking for that ends the fiscal debate for a while. that is a quick deadline. we arty have democrats saying we need to do this before thanksgiving because they do not want to get through thanksgiving and come back with a week or two left and maybe there are still problems and there is no deal and it creates a crisis again. democrats are even saying what stood by mid-to-late november. that seems to be putting them on a track to a short-term deal that would give us some funding for 2014. it may mean we do not have

things like entitlement reform. we may not have much in the way of taxes, not in any big scheme sense of it. they are up against a faster deadline than we thought given the democrats want to do it by thanksgiving. >> we are hearing about a couple of bills intended to roll back some of the dodd frank financial reflation loss. -- financial regulation loss. laws.ulation >> these two ideas don't seem to be as controversial. dodd frank is the financial reform law. there seems to be some measure of bipartisan support. to become simply, one would expand the ability of banks to do swaps trade, that is an instrument that lets them hedge risk. people think hedging risk is what led to a lot of risk in the financial crisis from five years ago.

the closed on the ability of banks to do certain swap trade. ben bernanke in the federal chairman thinks we should expand on them. there is a never bill up that the ability of the labor department to impose new standards for financial advisors, it is going to make them wait for the fcc to act first. -- for the sec to act first. the part i would like to call the "new bipartisan to work," we have seen in new that we have seen some new bipartisan bills come up since the advent of the debt ceiling. you seen a lot of from your stuff. >> covering it more on "the hill." thank you for the preview of next week.

a look at capitol hill's schedule, the house in tomorrow, 12:00 noon for general speeches. 2:00 p.m. to consider a series of bills. the senate also in tomorrow, 2:00 eastern time for general speeches, and fourth -- and 4:30 debate of thee national labor relations board general counsel. >> what is the most important issue twitter should -- government should focus on for 2413 -- for 2014? make it documentary shown very in points of view -- showing varying points of view. this year we have doubled the number of winners and total prices. entries must be in by january 20, 2014. need more information? the student cam.org. -- go to studentcam.org.

a yesterday a coalition held rally near the capital. they were protesting an essay surveillance programs. it coincided with the 12th anniversary of the u.s. patriot act. kucinich,rom tennis gary johnson, and republican congressman just in the mosh of michigan. this is a little under two hours. -- dustin the mosh of michigan. this is a little under two hours. quick thumbs-up? before we go any further i need to tell you all what may be perceived as a joke. newlywed, young wife is cooking her first dinner for her husband and she's making hot roast. she cuts the tail end of the puck before she puts it in the oven. the husband asks why he -- why she does that read she says that is how it done. she said her mom told her to do

that. she asked her mom and her mother said her mother told her that. and hers grandma grandma says it only fits in my pot that way. a lot of what people believe has been unexamined and unquestioned. the pot we have as much bigger. free your minds. this is a song i like. this is a song michael jackson -- it is a rockwell song. i ain't got no privacy. ♪ it feels like somebody is watching me. ♪ we got somebody come into the state. i want to acknowledge the youngest person i have met here today at this event. put your hands together for my

new friend gabriel. come to the stage real quick. you?ld are >> 11. >> you are 11 years old. do you trust the government? >> no. >> give it up for gabriel. is carrying & sign i love. read what it says. -- >> we will work it out. >> schizophrenia. who wrote it? >> my mama brother and me. say?s that name >> george orwell. >> but your hands together for gabriel. on the other side he has something that you may have heard before as well, the right

of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures should not be violated and no warrants shall be issued but upon rubble caused supported by oath -- probable cause supported by oath . i think that is a piece of paper, the bill the bill of rights? all right. one more time for gabriel. thank you. you want to say something. give a shout out yucca -- give a shout out? >>. -- thank you. >> we have a group called the yacht club and it is basin l.a.. they have a wide range of interests. i'm going to work on that.

this is what happens when i do not have a drink by 12:00. i hope they're going to be performing. put your heads together for yacht. we were supposed to have a banner up front and we need people to help hold that up. if i can get some volunteers for that banner. volunteers onsome either end of the state willing to hold it up. i don't see the banner. can we say, why attack fight back. >> why attack fight back. >> we are yacht from los angeles california.

the song is about how the internet is not punk anymore. ♪ party at the nsa day.-24 hours a

♪ [indiscernible] ♪ party at the nsa a day.4 hours

party at tehe nsa day.-24 hours a party at the nsa. party at the nsa. party at the nsa. party at the nsa. party at the nsa. party at tehe nsa. party at the nsa. party at the nsa. 20-20-24 hours a day. ♪

party at the nsa 20-20-24 hours a day. ♪ [applause] >> thank you so much. >> thank you.

>> we have the banner? a little lower. but your hands together one more time for the yachts. how many of you all have ever been on a cruise? you've seen the ocean. you have a one-dimensional view of the ocean. most people are satisfied with it, they are not going to venture out the need the service -- beneath the surface. most people are content to living a life on the surface. whenever someone says something profound he say "that is the." we are looking beneath the surface. i want to point that out. we are in the same boat. we are all writing the same boat. are you with me? i didn't say you have to like it.

you ain't got to like it but we are here. if there is one thing about equality in america, it is for everyone. i have a lot of papers in my hand, i'm working on that. about -- up next on stage the american civil liberties union. they do a lot of good work. , iresenting my black ass couldn't afford an attorney. aclu, whereicer at she advances public policy, including national security, human rights, privacy -- i wonder what that means -- a productive rights, civil rights, and first amendment issues. these put your hands together for laura murphy. -- please put your hands together for laura murphy. >> you look fabulous. it is beautiful to see all of

you here on this glorious fall day. the aclu is so proud to be with you, to march with you, to be a part of this coalition. we are marching to shut down secret government programs that illegally spy on us. we are marching to defend the constitutional values we hold dear. to get congress to pass legislation to end this illegal surveillance on law- abiding citizens. since the tragic event of september 11, congress has cared congress and the american people into giving our spy agencies unchecked powers. they gave us the patriot act. they gave us the foreign surveillance -- the foreign intelligence surveillance act. at every turn the aclu warned congress and the american people

that these laws would be abused, they would operate in secret, the so-called checks and balances contained in the laws were inadequate. we were right. the government is reading your e-mail. the government is reading our blogs. the government is listening to our phone calls. they are intercepting our business and banking transactions. they are storing this information for years, even though we are doing nothing wrong. these whistleblowers have revealed that the government has lied to congress and the american people. it has lied to the secret foreign intelligence surveillance court and it has lied to and spied upon or in government. illegal snooping and's buying -- and spying on citizens are not the values our soldiers are sent into war to protect and defend. this is not the promise of a constitution and a bill of rights that members of congress

and cabinet officers swear to uphold. the fourth amendment of the bill of rights is at risk. dude, wherey to you is my privacy? why have we allowed the government to flagrantly violate this most cherished right? i want to know one thing, where are our constitutional rights? the aclu has determined that our government will not routinely invade our privacy or show our rights to 3 -- to free speech. we will not support the wasteful tax dollars that fund this e- mail is fear factory that is our spying agency. travel, every time we go to a crowded place, every time we enter a government building we are made to be fearful. fearful people are powerless people. yes what. we are not afraid. and we are not powerless.

we must organize to stop this spying. it is our right and obligation .o demand that are asking president obama to shut it down. we are asking congress to shut it down. what do we do? shut it down. the aclu is strongly supporting legislation called the usa freedom act will be introduced this tuesday by republicans and democrats. we need independence that independents -- we need ts, and others to ask your members of commerce to cosponsor this legislation and vote for the usa freedom act. or you can go to

aclu.org/action. yourll help you find congressperson if you do not know how to reach them. on july 24 there was a vote in congress. we lost the vote only by seven votes. towas a member -- a measure shut down the funding for dragnet surveillance by the nsa. can you help us get seven more votes? we can do that, can't we? we have got to do that. these people report to us. let's shut down the spying great let's get the slip station -- the spying. let's get this legislation passed. thank you very much. [applause] >> give another strong

rebellious hand right there. it ain't that sexy but someone has to do the work. we have cell phones, if you can take them out right now. hold them up high. you see a sea of devices. one of the things we can do to protect ourselves right now is take the battery out of that phone. you have an iphone but you cannot. a shadow to mohammed ali and tossed in texas, bellingham, a different cities in germany. if anyone is on twitter, did we get a response back yet? no.

next up is another artist. we have some happy boys over here. you all did just it here, right? you know how artists are. senior at the cesar chavez will. iesco captain of the debate team, student government senior tcu --nt, a member of tcu, and a cofounder of right for change. please welcome the dcu slam team .

hard. >> ladies and gentlemen can we please put our hands over our hearts and i pledge civil disobedience to the flag of the hypocritical tyrant that has set us to assimilate. and to the republic which somehow stands, one nation under many gods of individuals, stripped of their liberties, and the need for justice for all. [applause] 2001, separating american freedom and security, slowly drowning the trust of the misrepresented governmental low blows, take the fight out of the fighters to make the domination that much easier. george bush signs off on the nsa

domestic spying program, uppercut come ask not what you can take from your government but what rights your government can take for you to haymaker. 3000 people convicted, 3000 people arrested, rightly and wrongly, all suffocating under the hands of an anti-terrorism clause, technical knockout on the back of your neck. do you feel it burning your privacy e guilt the -- of privacy? they would rather crackdown and piece together, rather than set their own definitions, using patriots as an excuse to pass their right illegally. that's their right illegally. -- their riot illegally. a missed read letter to mike grandmother can be categorized as a scheme that letter to my grandmother can be categorized as a scheme. , i refuse to be stripped of what little i have to offer. if you are going to watch,

flipped through the channel with each that flip through each channel with the same lens. less on invading muslim neighborhoods, categorizing -- then allowing presidential scandals. political polarization to watergate, not allowing what are -- not allowing upper-class water -- it is a threat to justice everywhere, everyone is threat to the community gob. we hold these truths to be self evident that we are all created equal. it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it. we pledge civil disobedience to the flag of the hypocritical tyrants to expect us to assimilate, and to this republic which barely stands, is one nation under many gods, our individual stripped of their liberty and a need for justice for all. [applause]

>> sexual chocolate. all right. like somebody's -- privacy -- i ain't got no privacy. we are almost there. we just need some brown paper bags. that is all we need. now, it has been brought to my attention that one of the reasons we have a different cities in germany covering this event right now is because the german chancellor's cell phone has also been tapped. let us get a rebellious handclap for the chancellor of germany, she can hear you. shout out to the german people. shout them out. stage,ht, coming to the

we have a very interesting young a supporternot only of the decriminalization of marijuana but he is also against the nsa. what more can you ask for in a politician? gary johnson, two-time governor .f new mexico 2012 libertarian party candidate for president, he served as honorary chairman of our american initiative, the african-american committee. he retired in 2003. he is anadmitted that avid skier and bicycle her. -- he is an avid skier and bicycle r.

we are going to climb this mountain, two. these put your hands together for gary johnson. -- please put your hands together for gary johnson. [applause] gary, gary, gary. has grantednment itself powers that it does not have. we have to stand against this. , thank you for bringing the attention to the world that the u.s. is monitoring the cell phones of are the five world leaders. thank you for allowing us to recognize that 70 million cell phone conversations in france every month are being monitored. edward snowden, thank you. thank you for bringing to the attention of the world the fact that the u.s. government is

engaged in massive information gathering. 25 ilium cell phone judgesations a month, forting illegal authority the nsa to monitor 113 million verizon users. this is not to process. there are six other nsa employees that have come forward to also focus on this egregious government overreach. forget that one of the chief complaints against the british government, which has led us to the revolutionary war, was the act of the british used lauren lauren -- general

for anything and everything. it sounds a lot like me to the patriot act. the nsa is certainly reading it that way. of congressmbers that wrote the patriot act and are vowing to fix it. there is only one way to fix the patriot act and that is to repeal the patriot act. the nsa has made a mockery of our privacy values. record of every cell phone call and every internet transaction made in the u.s. today. this is just an absolute slap in the face to every service man in every servicewoman who has fought for this country, many who have given their lives for this country under the guise of protecting freedom and liberty. this is a slap in the face to everyone who believes in the

constitution and believes privacy is a cornerstone of life in america. shame on testimony by nsa officials in front of congress that mass surveillance of u.s. citizens was not taking place. edward snowden's disclosures, i have learned that your cell phone can be used as a listening device, an open microphone wall turned off, as a result of edward snowden's disclosures. your cell phone's locating devices can be used when your cell phone is turned off. i have is thatar nothing will change. there is a general apathy for what is happening because it is not about me. i am reminded on the statement

of the wall of the holocaust museum. i did not speak out because i was not a socialist. because ispeak out was not a trade unionist. out -- then they came for the jews and then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me. who is looking at all of this personal information, how will it be used, how will it be stand up america, we are mad as hell and we want you to stop this spying now. [applause]

>> i am not gary johnson but i'm glad share in my quicken. i am with the defense rights community joined by the drum workers union and all of the beautiful people. thank you for being out of here -- out here today. feel free to dance if you are inclined. the nsa pricks the law every day. it doesn't matter what you are who you say. they monitor your phone calls, e-mails anyway. , there is aay lesson they wanted to learn someday. watch what you say. the recorder calls for posterity, come that commits daily executive crimes with impunity. inevitably the boot ends up on your face. it is the nsa versus the constitution. we can force our government to make a new choice when we build a movement by each raising our voice. movement by each

raising our voice, stuck in the day during world war i it was the fbi versus the speech holding the gun. hard-fought constitutional rights on the run. fast forward 40 years to the real red scare, the fbi they were there. the nsa, they were everywhere. they knew what you wore to bed. they prosecuted people for the thoughts in our head. they tried to drive mlk to suicide, no one knows why brother malcolm died. those lies go all the way up the chain of command, the fbi and nsa lie when on the stand. in plan. his lies are we the people are the ones that the government are abusing, we can force anyone to make a new choice when we build a movement by each raising our voice. when we build a movement by each raising her voice. when i say simple, you say liberties.

civil -- >> liberties. >> when i say restore, you say -- and i say defend you say the bill of rights. defend -- >> the bill of rights. demo we will defend the bill of rights. say it with me now. we will defend the bill of rights. we will defend the bill of rights. like you mean it. we will defend the bill of rights. keep it going now. m a we will defend the bill of rights. -- >> we will defend the bill of rights. >> we will defend the bill of rights. are the things that made us americans for hundreds of years. races,nited across our across our ages, across whatever color your skin is, what ever your blood comes from, whether you believe he stepped to the left or right, it is our rights

that define us as a people, as americans, our rights hanging banners today, which is why it is so incredibly important that each and every one of you is here today and give yourselves a round of applause. keep the movement going. we will defend the bill of rights together. >> give another handclaps to the great performance. -- if yous needed guys needed to be relieved, please raise your hand. two more volunteers to relieve these people when they are ready. i want to make sure everyone is aware we are on the same page and on the same boat now. we are also in possession of the same information. martin luther king, who was

under surveillance -- it resulted in a letter on to his house with photos of his indiscretions to his wife. it resulted in a letter going to his house, encouraging him to commit suicide. it resulted in him being encouraged to refuse to accept the nobel peace prize. this was surveillance. that is a beautiful thing, -- a shadow to harry belafonte. -- a shout out to harry belafonte. it feels like somebody -- >> is watching me. >> i ain't got no -- >> privacy. >> now we are dancing together. we have a whistleblower coming up. the whistleblowers. the bighand.

-- give a big hand. when i say whistle you say below. whistle -- >> blow. >> he is the former and is a secret executive, u.s. air force and navy veteran, computer software expert and whistleblower, he is a former senior executive at the nsa. he blew the missile on a multibillion -- a multibillion dollar fraud. the justice department charged him with 10 felony counts, espionage, indictment, [indiscernible] he's the 2011 recipient for the the prize for truth

telling. put your hands together. >> why are we here? we are against mass surveillance and i am truly honored to speak for all whistleblowers. we are here together as one from all walks of life to rally against unfettered mass surveillance of the people because of the bravery and courage of edward snowden to tell the truth about what our government is doing without our the justice department branded me as an enemy of the state and prosecuted me under the espionage act. their intention was to encrypt, silence, and imprison me because i threatened the surveillance state. being a whistleblower can

alienate you from your colleagues and friends. defendant cannage alienate you from your allies in the civil rights community. as defenders of the constitution and in defense of the freedom and rights of all people everywhere, we cannot let this happen to future whistleblowers. any domestic surveillance was elation must include a whistleblower protection for the credibility and enforcement of any reform effort. otherwise secrecy read that secrecy enforced by oppression will reap -- will turn into a full reform and an honor system by the nsa depended on the agency's confession -- conviction of violating new rights. i don't think so. due to the material evidence exploited by -- exposed by edward snowden, we know great detail. nsa does notat the

have an honorable track record of telling the truth while keeping track of us without our consent. hiding behind secret laws, secret opinions and secret interpretations in the shadowlands of surveillance. i agree it is unacceptable. we only know of government spying, illegality, wrongdoings, and violations due to the disclosures of the whistleblowers. earsublic eyes and exposing abuse of government power in the public interest. without adequate protection employees are likely to turn a blind eye to the privacy violations of innocent americans. it is the constant possibility of observation without our consent that those in power renders creativity and engenders our freedom with the acid served up by the potent brew of the

surveillance, for the sake of security while forsaking our liberties is a price we must pay to make us feel safe. i don't think so. i was fortunate that i did not end up in an actual prison, having lived the virtual version for a number of years for coming out of the system and seeking truth to and of power. clearly a dangerous act of civil disobedience. act --defines a criminal aided and abetted by journalistic and -- journalistic reporters, and individual rights -- in the face of a government bent on destroying it. the last thing a free and open society needs is a digital fence around is creating a digital turnkey tyranny.

now increasingly wanting to know what we think and feel, the very essence of who we are and what we share as human beings. i fundamentally reject this dystopian premise. and the siren call of security. if we just give up our essential liberties, given what happened to me and other whistleblowers , it is timesnowden to roll back the surveillance state. it is time to restore the fourth amendment. it is time to repeal the patriot act. it is time the united states government stops watching us. us as the time for people to save the government from itself in order to form a more perfect union here and everywhere.

we need to let freedom ring. never forsaking life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. it is now my extraordinary honor and privilege to invite up to the national security of human rights director for the project. i think she might have a few words to share. >> i cannot reach the microphone. i work for the government accountability project, which is the nation's leading whistleblower organization.

i see our president out there. i never thought representing whistleblowers would be representing truth tellers charged under the espionage act. i see a lot of signs out there thinking edward snowden. we would not be having this rally but for one person. and that is edward snowden. he asked me to deliver this message to you and i am honored to do so. in the last four months we have learned a lot about our government.

we have learned that the u.s. intelligence community secretly built a system, a person -- a pervasive surveillance. today, no telephone call in america goes through without a record from the nsa. today, no internet transaction enters or leaves america without passing through the nsa's hands. representatives in congress tell us this is not surveillance. they are wrong. we also learned this is not about red or blue or party lines -- it is about

definitely not about terrorism. it is about power, control, and trust in government. we are here to remind our government officials that a are a public service, not private investigators. this is about the unconstitutional, unethical, and amoral actions of the modern-day surveillance state and how we all must work together to remind the government to stop them. it's about our right to know.

in an open andve democratic society. we are witnessing an american moment in which ordinary people from high school to high office stand up to oppose a dangerous trend in government. we are told that what is unconstitutional is not illegal. we will not be fooled. we have not forgotten that the fourth amendment in our bill of rights prohibits governments, not only from searching our personal effects without a warrant, but from seizing them in the first place and doing so in secret. holding to this principle, we declare that mass surveillance has no place in this country.

it is time for reform. elections are coming and we are watching you. thank you from edward snowden. [applause] >> all right. we are about to get ready for the photos. everybody that is behind me, if you are with us we need you to the front of the stage. i need you all to cram in here together. we are all the same boat. let's do the slave ship thing, let's move it up here. we need everyone to come up here together.

everybody on my flanks, everyone behind me. come together. monument,d, face the they have the-- technology from -- a phallic symbol, it is a male principle. we are going to take it back will we still got it. are we getting ready for that? front, we have to get this group photo together. hold your signs up high. come together. somebody --e >> is watching me. >> and i got no privacy. why is that? -- wiretap.

wiretap. wiretap. wiretap. wiretap. whistle -- >> below. >> all right. are we good? give us a thumbs-up when we are good. a little bit longer. a little bit louder now. waiting for the thumbs-up from the photographer to know that we are good. we stand on the shoulders of those that came before us. martin luther king canada -- king, abbie hoffman, john lennon

, help me out, give me some names. shut them out. shut them out. -- shout them out. shout them out. shout them out. bradley is still here. we have to acknowledge their contribution but they are still here. for the ancestors, those that are gone. that's a good one. all right. running out of names? you can shout for your grandma. how about that? underscore and to put it out there. -- i am just going to put it out

there. are we done? .aiting for thumbs-up an schwartz, did not know his greatness until he was gone. he is still with us. chelsea is still with us. marcus garvey is the reason why we have the first black president. addicts. by default i will give you that one. for the wronget team but i will let you keep that going. still with us. we can shout them out.

it is beautiful. give us some more names. all right. somebody said deep throat. [laughter] are we good? ladies and gentlemen, give a howard.us hand for all right. god knows john lennon was on surveillance. i think he is gone, give me a new record.

the late great herman walls just passed away. again, michael hayes. say it again. michael hastings. ", they can hack into those computer chips and you can find yourself -- be careful, they can hack into those computer chips. whenever you accuse the government of wrongdoing that you cannot prove it want it is called conspiracy, but when you have evidence it is called national security and you are whistleblower. coming to the stage for yet another performance, they will ,e performing psychic city 1984. wiretap, george orwell. wiretap. wiretap. wiretap. [chanting] wiretap. wiretap. wi