couple questions, and some of us will depart. we will leave the record open for questions by committee members until 5:00 tomorrow for these valuable witnesses. the statement that ambassador ford made earlier was that at the current time, neither side has the ability to deliver a knock-out punch to the other. is that an opinion -- i'd like each of your opinions about that statement. >> senator, i think ambassador ford was exactly correct. at this point -- at this point, you don't even have -- you don't even have a civil war in the sense of much going on in terms of units firing and maneuvering. this so-called civil war looks nothing like, pardon the expression of grant marching on richmond, senator -- >> a little sensitive where i come from. >> what we are really seeing,

the primary aspect of the so-called combat is regime stand-off weaponry, artillery, aircraft, rockets, missiles pounding residential areas that it either cannot take through ground forces or has chosen not to take. so you really -- you really don't have much in the way of a fluid situation between units at this point. you have -- >> if the chemical weapons were in existence and could be used, that would be a knock-out punch. at least the removal of the chemical weapons from the equation took a knock-out punch away for the assad regime, correct? >> i think, senator, the chemicals were an important subset of the terror aspect here. i think we have to keep in mind that chemical weapons, as loathsome as they are, accounted in the end for a tiny, tiny,

tiny fraction of the deaths and injuries. >> and mr. gelb, you raise a -- the idea you put on the table about an organizing principle in syria is intriguing. what would that idea -- extend that idea to how we should be positioning -- if that was our goal, how should we be positioning our efforts with respect to the restart of syria's geneva discussions? >> i don't think there's going to be a serious restart of the geneva negotiations. >> so you really assume that -- this is a strategy that assumes the geneva discussions at best will be superficial and kind of window dressing but not substantive. >> i do, and i think you've got to begin to portray for both the sunni moderates we want to support and for the alawites who we can't allow to be killed, they'd be slaughtered too. a kind of solution for them,

which i think ought to take place along power-sharing lines, a federal system. then-senator joe biden and i, some of you will remember, proposed a federal system for iraq as the only way to prevent eventual slaughter there. you have to let each of these communities basically run their own affairs within a united state. we solved our own problem, which is such a federal solution. i think we have to put that forward to them to explain that that's the only way for them to escape the continuing stalemate and the continuing horror of the war. >> let me see if senator markey has questions. >> if you could expand a little bit more on iran and russia and what you would propose that we do in order to extract the kind

of actions that you believe are necessary for us to bring assad to the table. >> good to see you, senator markey. >> good to see you, sir. >> i've talked to the russians and iranians about this. i think they're quite sympathetic to the idea. they haven't agreed to it by any means, but it suits their interest because they want to do something in the end that protects their allies, the alawites. and they see they're not foolish. they see down the line that assad is not going to be able to stay in power and that regime is not going to be able to stay in power, but they want enough protection for them and that this presents somewhat of an answer for them. so i think we need to have this overall strategy and go and talk to them with that strategy in mind. we can't just say, hey, let's have a geneva conference.

it won't work. >> and let me just, if i may, because administration officials. didn't want us specifically calling out saudi arabia or other nations. we'll just call them gulf states. do either of you feel comfortable in talking about those individual states by name in terms of what we should be asking from them in terms of reducing the amount of support which is going into the more radical groups that are inside of -- >> absolutely. >> could you name the countries and what it is -- >> saudi arabia and qatar mainly. although, it comes in from some other places as well. but, you know, those are countries who look to us for general protection in the region. i'm not aware that we've really leaned on them about some of this aid to the jihadis and we should. >> mr. ambassador?

>> senator, i think it is -- i think it's critically important, and i recognize the operational difficulties of this. this is not a silver bullet. it's not a panacea. it would be very, very hard to do. but i think the united states has to insert itself as the overall supervisor of who gets what in terms of external military assistance going into opposition groups in syria. in order for us to do that effectively, you know, my sense is and i realize there are reservations about this, we have to have some skin in the game, okay. i know that there are departments and agencies of the united states government that have spent a lot of time identifying elements inside syria we want to support. i believe that we have from the saudis and others agreement in

principle that this supreme military council should be a conduit. the problem is we need to be out there in charge of what's happening. >> can we be in charge if we are not providing an additional massive increase in lethal weaponry? >> i don't think we can, senator. i think this needs to be a department of defense activity. i think we need to scale this up and get serious. >> and if i may, mr. chairman, if i could just take -- >> and senator, if i could make this it the last question. i do not want you to mess up your 30-plus year perfect voting record as a member of congress. >> i cast the 11th largest number of votes out of 10,850 members of the house. so far i'm perfect in the senate. i was not in the house. if we did dramatically increase our military, what would the response be from the saudis,

from the iranians, from the russians, from qatar and others? why does that give us a leadership role with them? why doesn't it just lead to an escalation rather than a reconciliation? >> i think the practical problem we face right now, senator, is that people who are syrian nationalists, people who are dedicated to the idea of a non-sectarian government of citizenship in the future are the ones finding themselves squeezed out of the picture as private money from the gulf, plus what ambassador ford described as activities inside syria, are funding al qaeda related groups and other jihadis jihadists. they're flushed with money. they're flushed with weapons. the regime on the other side is being supplied lavishly by both russia and iran. it's the people in the middle, the people who actually stand

for the kinds of principles that i think everybody in this room would be comfortable with who are not getting what they need. >> thank you. >> i'm going to let you have the final word, then we'll adjourn. >> it'll just take a minute. i disagree with my friend fred hoff on this. i don't think the answer is to put a lot more arms in there, although we should be putting some more arms in there. i think the way we can lead, take care of our interests is to have a strategy that makes sense to the countries in the area so that they'll go along with it. they're not going to go along simply because we're providing more arms. it won't work. >> thank you, both. the record will stay open for additional questions for these witnesses or the first panel until 5:00 tomorrow. we appreciate your testimony. thank you for your

. .

youif you have a card and have a contract that says you are not authorized to make a and you doer $3000 anyway, the vendor does not know that there is a 3000 dollar limit on you, they will just take your card and hit it for $10,000. the person is that you're talking about, his contract was not even valid because he had moved from veterans health care over to and his assignment authority did not transfer with him. it is one of the areas the department is addressing to tighten down.

we are doing additional work in the area of purchase cards to make sure things are in order. doneat has the department -- what is the department doing to correct this? >> i am going to turn that over to mr. murray. >> thank you for that question, representative. what we did upon learning this occurred -- let me be clear that there was an approval official that should have approved each of those purchases and signed off on them. dismaying, disappointing. i think we were shocked that it occurred. did was not just look at the hr purchase card transactions, we look at the entire department of veterans affairs purchase card

transactions. we got with the office of acquisitions and said we need to elevatedhas the purchasing authorities and who does not. for those that do not have those elevated purchasing authorities, we check every monday. if they do not have a, we reduce those cards to the $3000 micro- purchase limit. controls when in fast. -- went in fast. >> did you find these steps to be adequate? >> i haven't reviewed the entire response in that area. i am not sure if our follow-up team -- if it meets the requirements of the recommendation, but i would be pleased to give you an answer to the record for that.

(wee will keep the record will have announcement -- we will keep the record open. we will have an announcement on that later. >> i have sponsored bills with respect to this. the v.a. spending on conferences seems to be more egregious than any of the others. especially when you look at the .acklog of claims they are in the excess of 125 days in some cases. thoseing to digress on backlog claims to set the stage for conference questions. i would like to ask you, ms. for

--.ipt -- ms. farrisee >> at the time of the shutdown, there would have been more employees for load had the government not come back on. --employees for load furloughed had the government not come back on. i.t. did furlough information technology employees. >> congress has met every request to process the back log claims? camaraderie -- the department received $300 million in the resolution which would have ended the shutdown. it seems they have the money to reduce the backlog, why have we not seen a significant decrease and where we see this problem getting salt?

, i will let you take a stab at that. >> the goal is 2015. they have used the use of overtime, they have trained the employees. training is critical to the mission. it is critical to us being able to -- >> let's talk about backlog. during this process, the -- and during these investigations, the committee found that the department of employees received overtime pay for things entirely unrelated to the conferences. we are looking at helicopter time -- would that over have been better spent on employees processing veteran

claims? >> that is disturbing. i would expect my leaders in the future to execute good fiduciary responsibilities. nonmilitary spending has been capped. -- bill is designed it has transparencies to remove loopholes from the president executive order. earlier this year, i sponsored the bill and it was passed. case -- itin this appears, in this case, that we have lost sight of what the purpose was for training. we have no itemized expense report. mr. griffin, you have testified that there is no way to find out

how much was spent, is that correct? dowe did the best we could to review available receipts. that isot confident 100% of the expense. >> don't you think it is important that we keep detailed information on what we are spending taxpayer money on? >> it is. in policies put in place 2012 will allow us to keep this information. >> i understand you're working on a web portal for some of this information. what is that costing? we are not going into the healthcare.gov $600 million range, are we? i cannot answer that. a it seems the government has

habit of spending too much money on bad websites. is there a process in place to try to move some of this training done at these high dollar conferences to online? you look at the general trend in -- allining community sorts of opportunities to do this online. can you give me an overview of what you're trying to do to move more of this online? >> you are right. we have a management system that has numerous courses. we do webcasts, virtual blended training, and we are looking that training. training can be accomplished in other forms. >> my time has expired. thank you. >> let me recognize the gentleman from virginia. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

congresswoman duckworth wanted me to point out that you are here after a 30 year career in the united states army. is that correct? --behalf of mrs. congresswoman duckworth and myself, thank you for your service. >> thank you, it has been my privilege. >> mr. murray, you answered on furloughs. he asked if only four percent of the veterans workforce were for load -- furloughed. furlough notices

did go out. this committee has a resident tone to it because we are very struck with the fact that i.t. -- one of the things that i.t. capacity for the veterans administration has been deployed for was to read into the notorious a backlog of applications and claims. is that not correct? the programse of they support. >> those people were furloughed for 16 days. do you know the status of those individuals? they were not for load into

what we consider an accepted status to continue to support. >> did it disrupt our eating into the backlog? did make a difference because of the employees were for late -- furloughed for the v.a.. >> we can't have it both ways. we can't beat on you for having a backlog and then beat on you for the government hampering an action that was showing significant progress. two conferences have management value? -- do conferences have management value? >> absolutely.

we determine the training was and that theg previous training that had been hit a small 2009 percentage of the hr staff. we felt the actual training was justified. >> there was a lot of training going on at the conferences. >> we included the training agenda as an appendix to our reports so people could see with the courses were, how long they lasted, and so on. >> i did not understand your answer to mr. davis. this happened two years ago. have you reviewed the new procedures given that we have new people in place to clean up what happens. that there areed new procedures in place to aevent excess spending from

kerning from legitimate training conferences and other parts of conferencing? >> i think it is a work in progress. previously the memorandum that came out before the issuance of our report lay down a lot of -- laid down a lot of various markers people would have to meet at future conferences. we need to finish up about half of the recommendations which are still in various stages of completion. ms.ould you address that, farrisee? >> i am confident that the policy that was put out in 2012 was the first step in doing

that. the conference certification form is included which prohibits many things that happened in that conference. likeohibits things purchasing of entertainment and many of the waste, fraud, and abuse you have discussed here today. we have put those into place. it will be in the handbook by december. and has evolved over this last year. we look forward to our handbook over thisevolved last year. we look forward to our handbook. >> would you be willing to provide a draft of the handbook? you said you have already provided it. it was one of the responses we have provided. >> when was it provided? in the oig report, october

23. >> thank you. >> thank the gentleman. we have not gotten a lot of information and just before the hearing. thank you, mr. chairman. , thank you for your service. i spent some time at fort knox. i was at the warrior transition unit in october 2007. were you there at that time? >> i was not. they opened a new facility at fort knox. >> when?

>> 2013. >> that is good to hear. when i got there, everyone was in a hullabaloo because a soldier died in the barracks. they said, you do not understand. i said what do i hundred -- what do i not understand? understand -- they didn't find his body for days. hours for the pharmacist to telling they do not carry the prescription, come back on thursday. on thursday,ack they forgot to requisition a medication for my neck injury. from activecharge duty, you go back to the national guard unit and i was ordered to go apply for v.a. benefits. ordered.

being a vietnam veteran, 30 , with my experience, i do not want anything to do with it. do you understand? are you familiar with those feelings? >> yes i am. >> there has been a 30% since 1973. that is one percent improvement for the last 30 years. i have direct experience with the v.a.. given, i filled out my paperwork and waited 11 months of the v.a. to tell me they lost my medical records. soldier, i made hard copies. i took him down to the detroit v.a. and stood behind the antleman as he photocopied

stack about eight inches tall of my medical records. within 60 days, i had my disability, 50%. i toured the facilities as a congressman and got the dog and pony show. i saw a lot of new improvements to the v.a., but when i talk to i see the same, story that i saw in 1973. i have a question. fm101-5?amiliar with >> not off the top of my head. >> it is the officers bible. >> yes i am familiar with that. >> can someone hand are this please. -- can someone hand her this

please? the commander is responsible for all that his staff does or fails to do. he is not -- he cannot delegate this responsibility. >> you carried that army training with you to the v.a., correct? >> correct. position ofd in the responsibility and we must incur that responsibility for every action. actionse military, the attributed to the leadership and culture of the group. the v.a. is no exception. the leadership of the v.a. is flawed. atil the stagnant attitudes the top of the v.a. are eliminated, we cannot eliminate

the problems plaguing the v.a. let me ask you this. i am new to congress. i was a taxpayer. it worked in the service. i served my country in two wars. i see the epa, the irs, the energy department, and now the taxpayer's money. what can i do to stop that from happening? i would like to fire you all and start over. that is my feeling. the reality is i have to work with you. how am i going to get , 100% improvement, more than 100% improvement? all i saw was 30% improvement over the last 30 years. that is 1% a year. do i have to wait till 2083 to get 100% from the v.a.?

>> we plan to work faster than that. for 30ve heard that years. actions speak louder than words. what are you going to do tomorrow to eliminate that backlog, to get it done? inis the same backlog we had 1973, 19 74, 1975. if you want something screwed up, let the government do it. that is the way i look at it. that is not what my taxpayers are expecting. i want quality service to our and next week.ow not in 2083. i think the gentleman. he yields back the balance of the time. say as i begin

this series of questions, the backlog is not the same backlog. that is one of my concerns. givengency has been responsibilities it did not have. when i thought initially it was a v.a. hearing, i thought it was on the backlog of claims. closely atwe look the v.a. is the president hearing all the complaints about -- from veterans about processed traumatic syndrome. change the standard. possible for veterans to show ptsd. it is not the same backlog, it probably has always been a backlog. that is why this agency is under very real scrutiny.

, in two of hearings my committees, on conferences. held inference was 2011. perhaps the v.a. was not on fair april 2012, there were hearings about the gsa conferences. in theearings resulted beheading of the top of the administratora and the person who headed the main division of the gsa public buildings service. this occurred in 2011. there was some evidence this on has conference goings

been systematic in many agencies for years. what made us take special note was the outlandish gsa conference and the fact that we were in a very hard times and we still are. mr. griffin, you testified there failure of senior officials to give the proper oversight. one begins to wonder about conferences in hard times and with agencies that have additional backlog. not the vietnam backlog, but an additional backlog. as far as i could figure out, mr. griffin, they said training did occur and we think about 12%

might be chalked up to entertainment and even waste. is that correct? i cannot put a percentage on it for you, mrs. norton. were these conferences devoted to training? understand the v.a. staff may have needed? it a disproportionate amount of time spent on these other activities? >> i would not say it is disproportionate. four hours of classroom training , there was a plenary session in the morning and at the end of the day. and in the four hours

or was that in addition? -- do you count that in the four hours or was that in addition? >> no. >> iran a federal agency. ran a federal agency. you do not want to wipe out all opportunities to have fun, -- during then times when people are under pressure. these people may have had steam to let off. context never of tells me anything. in this 12% of the time, i am not sure this

would have been so bad. it does not tell me anything. what tells me more is what we did not learn from the gsa conference and that is most of -- was being spent. if you had a government agency and you are being overburdened -- they senior official have designated a conference certifying official and he has all kinds of duties. we managed to have a conference certifying official and he is responsible for seeing the after action review. that is not a new hire, is it? >> no, congresswoman, it is not

a new hire. that ase suggest a mitent as training is is difficult to understand how training is,has -- it is difficult to understand -- is difficult to do the function of the agency given what has been discovered. the agency is going to have to look carefully at what i would normally regard as an important activity and see if the training can be done as training in the locations. i do not see how this conference certifying official as this titlet

is, is going to be able to do that. thank you very much. >> mr. duncan. , mr. chairman. i want to commend mr. bento volio. oh -- bento employees that think they are immune from they knowbecause members of congress want to support the veterans. was state legion commander, my uncle was state legion commander in 1963. those were times when the american legions around the country were huge.

i might product of boy state and i think it is only about 90% of the congress who are veterans -- it is only about 19% of the congress who are veterans. i appreciate the opportunities i got from the military. on the other hand, most veterans do not want to see the taxpayers -- or moneywar wasted. mr. griffinmmend for the work that he has done. we have this report that says there was an e-mail where employee said we will are -- we with deepe agency pockets. did disregarded -- they

disregarded budgets. that is a disturbing report. in the time of a $17 trillion debt that is heading higher, how , howa statement like this does that reflect on the department? >> it is a troubling statement. it does not reflect well. the is not the process -- thought process today. fiduciary responsibility is taken seriously. another e-mail obtained by , an employee stated you have to get it all when you can.

we have heard that this $6.1 million on these conferences, , i think --s spent >> the total overspend was $762,000 is what we determine. >> it could have been more. the planners were using these trips to look -- to resort locations as paid vacations by the taxpayers. this type of activity needs to be stopped. it needs to be restricted. employees of the v.a. are

employees,dedicated this will stop. why do you think conference planners were able to maximize spending on these promotional products? did any supervisor step in to say these amounts were too high? did they not control this at all? >> i believe there was a lack of oversight through the conference planning. there was not leadership attention to all the details. we certainly hope this stops. , instead of paid vacations for v.a. employees could have been spent and better

ways. thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> thank you. recognize the gentleman from nevada. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the inspector general's office report onleased a conference oversight, internal controls, and spending. themany recommendations did secretary concur with? >> with all of the recommendations. had already issued a conference oversight memorandum many ofan implementing those recommendations when the report was released, correct? >> we shared a draft report with the department in august. they had an opportunity to see what the issues were. they generated an aggressive memorandum laying out new

guidance to try to address a lot of the issues. >> how many of the 49 recommendations have the department finished implement in? a lot of activity in the last few days which is a byproduct of the hearings. we have roughly half, is my belief. we will get you an answer with the precise number for the record. we send a reminder to the department that this is still an open recommendation and how are you progressing on getting to closure on it. it is a process that we had in .lace 26 of the 49 are open, i am told by my colleague. of 49 remain open. exchange ofen some information back and forth between our follow-up staff

are thatications progress is being made, but we have not gotten enough information to say they have met the requirements of the recommendations. >> there are 23 still in process? are 26. 23 are closed, 20 six are open. -- 26 are open. >> where is the department in the progress and what is the follow-up on the implementation until they are completed. ? all 26 of speak to them. i have seen some of the responses and as i have indicated, there is progress being made but we are not going to close those recommendations until we're are satisfied they have nailed it. that is not the case and all of them. three of them involve personnel actions.

the department intends to conclude tomorrow. >> is there a date when they have to be completed by? >> we will follow-up until they're done. >> there is not a deadline? >> there is not a deadline, but as things tend to get older, we do send a pass to do lists -- a past due list to congress to bring it to their attention that some of these things have been out there and we try to get assistance in making sure the department understands the importance and takes care of the problem. as mr. griffin just indicated, the department has additional reporting requirements to congress regarding these conferences. how often is the the a report -- is the v.a. required to report on conference spending? will have to pass that

question to mr. murray. >> we have to reported quarterly and annually to congress as well as omb. is includedrmation in these reports and who do they go to? >> committees on the veterans oig, reports go to omb. their breakdowns on conference spending costs in the statute. there forrsight is the conference spending on a quarterly and annual basis? >> i believe it is. i believe there is a lot of oversight before a conferences ever approved, which is where the key oversight belongs. to there alternative methods

do this? is there another way to accomplish this training short of traveling and leasing a facility and incurring those incumbent costs? we require the activity to make a strong case their first. if they make the case and they can demonstrate they are going to be good learning outcomes, then we look at the analysis of different venues. i think that is where the control exists. >> thank you. meadows, the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. >> thank you for coming. i want to start off by saying are are -- there tremendous amount of workers in veterans affairs. they are a number of dedicated employees. our committee staff is unbelievably dedicated and they do a great job for the american people.

i do not want anything to be misconstrued that there is not you becauseion for these hearings can come out that way. one must address a few of these issues. i have agencies saying why do haveget to travel and i people in the blue ridge who end of thefrom one without beingkway able to go back because of the spending going into other areas. -- wee seven or $62,000 have 760 $2000 that was spent according to the iag's report. you have said that top officials did not know about that.

this is an e-mail -- a senior official e-mail to conference lanterns that says, and i quote line, you do not have to worry about a thing. " does that not send at the wrong message? >> absolutely. that is the wrong message. >> when do i get to tell the carolina,f north which you do not have a good track record of processing claims in north carolina. toy veterans that i talk have to wait as many as 600 days to get there claims handled. you do i get to tell them

don't have to worry about a thing? when are we going to get to that point? does this type of spending, when we send out a word like this, what does that tell the american people? does it show that we have an unlimited budget in the v.a.? we absolutely do not have an unlimited budget. i think it shows a past history of bad decisions, bad leadership -- fired many people got because of the bad leadership and bad decisions? how many? i think i know the answer. for bad got fired leadership and bad decisions? >> none fired that i am aware of. >> mr. murray? >> none in my organization. >> how many got disciplined greatly in your organization?

>> there was no discipline -- >> no discipline, no firings, yet we have bad leadership and bad decisions. i am more troubled by the next slide. here is an e-mail the department approved a $450,000 marketing budget for a conference. why do we need such a large marketing budget to make employees go to a conference that they are required to go to? why would we do that? who makes that decision? who would have made the decision to approve that? >> the leadership of hr and a would have made that decision. >> they are still employed? >> they are no longer with the

v.a. >> ok. you are kind in the way that you responded. i want to thank you for your service and the way you responded. esther murray, as we see these e-mails coming out, do not play poker. you are rolling your eyes and huffing and having disdain for mails comethese e- out. do you think your organization does a great job? organization, when we become aware of these issues, we find weaknesses in internal , we immediately take actions to correct, mitigate, fix these kinds of deficiencies. we have a collaborative relationship with the ig and we work with a transparent fashion. >> i have been watching you.

your demeanor would indicate that you are frustrated by these e-mails as they roll out and tell a story. do you agree with the story that this is indicative of those that are making decisions -- that they did not have accountability for costs? >> the employees that work for me, the leaders i work with, they have a strong accountability for the cost, their actions, exercise good judgment. dismaying, very disappointing, sir. >> when does this translate into my veterans in north carolina count the moms and dads, the children counting on care of?ng taken when are we going to get our act together? i yield