stay and millions of americans will get insurance because of it and the security that comes because of it and to focus on working together in washington onards making progress creating even more economic opportunity for the american to ensure that if you work in this country full-time, if you take sponsored ability for yourself and your family, you are not in poverty. that you make a living wage. should be having a hearing every other day, some senators hay cut -- some senators say, on -- some senators say. it has become futility and an exercise to deny the benefits from americans that they basically want. >> you are quoted saying that the

people do?uld those >> this is a temporary problem that they are working on fixing. secondly, those 100,000 people, which represent the same number of people and rolling will be able to finish the process. everyone who faces the problem is now in aed circumstance where they cannot complete enrollment tonight, they will have time to make sure that they completed, the same process initiated in december. i begantarted out today by saying that people should go to healthcare.gov and start the process of enrolling, because this is the day to begin enrolling. volume ons so much

election day, if you are in line and the polls close, oh you get to vote. we believe in that approach when you are voting and we think it should be the correct approach when enrolling in insurance. >> where do you think this stands as a political issue? test case that we have i am wondering if you still think the debate is about repeal versus the lobbying here to stay, or just changing attitudes? i will leave that kind of analysis to the pundits. i will say that as the year progresses and as republicans point to their record in congress and what they have done, which is offer no alternative again and again

attempting to take these benefits away, democrats, supporters of the affordable care act, they will have a strong argument to make. most americans believe that the law should stay. that the law should stay in note and be improved, but repealed. only 29% believe in repealing it. you said it, there is all sorts of evidence and we don't know what role the aca played in that. the fact is, you know, the democratic candidate came very lous in a district that had been held by republicans for 60 years. if you are telling me that republicans having done nothing and now they don't mean it? i don't know who will buy that.

you can go on television to talk about this and tell me what you believe. [indiscernible] >> watch out for april, she always asks really hard questions. >> [inaudible] it was not denied. >> it was denied by the white house. [laughter] >> can you quantify the number? you are talking about an achievement that will have critics gnashing their teeth. >> we are talking about over 6 million.

>> 699. >> there are hours to go. i can report to you that the website is fixed. the account creation issues have been fixed. people are creating accounts and moving through the site. i just got that through my your piece. so, problems arise, problems get fixed. from the beginning but this has been about is not who won the political battle of the day, but whether or not the website, which was only a means to an end, writing health insurance, would function effectively for the vast majority of americans who wanted it to work. when there were problems, we fixed them. >> what about the americans who have yet to sign up? is this the year when enrollment starts back up again? >> obviously, if you look at

projections by cbo and others about the affordable care act and the impact on the numbers of americans insured versus those who are not, this is not just a one-year proposition. those numbers will increase over the course of several years. i am sure that this effort will be ongoing when it comes to making sure that the folks out there get the information that they need, so that they can get the coverage that gets them security. to start talking about folks waiting until november to enroll when they still have the opportunity today. certainly, there will be a continual effort because the aca is here to stay. millions of americans know what their options are, know that they have access to quality, affordable health insurance, and know that as more and more states take it vantage of the provision to expand medicaid, as we have seen gradually over the

that theythis year, will have options that they did not have before. a lot of folks live insurance they did not have before. >> [inaudible] >> i have no scheduling announcements to make. i did not get invited to that party. some of thet to regular topics, but i want to ask you something about service. the director is going to the hill tomorrow to meet with homeland security. as you know, there was another the secretnt to service. is the president taking stock again over that agency is? with the zerod

tolerance policy? is he upset about the fact that it was not found? and by extension, at least indirectly, the president had to deal with another embarrassing episode publicly disclosed while he was traveling last week. >> a few things. for details on the incident, i would refer you to the secret service. but i can tell you that the president expect anyone traveling on behalf of the united states must observe only the highest standards and the president fully supports the directors tougher new guidelines and the agency's efforts to ensure that all personnel abide by them. as an agency, the secret service has implemented stricter higher-level supervisors on trips, ethics training, briefings before departure and after arrival on trips. president fully supports that new program instituted by the new director. cleard also like to make

that the president has faith in and enormously appreciates the remarkable work that the secret service does. much of it unseen by you here, and even some of us on the inside. they perform an important duty on behalf of our country in protecting the president of the united states, the vice president of the united states, and others. they do an exemplary job. so, obviously when it comes to occasions when someone working for that agency fails to meet the high standards that are set and that the director has imposed, appropriate action needs to be taken. but any discussion here, from our perspective, must include the high regard the president has for the men and women of the secret service. >> it must be particularly frustrating when on a trip that

the agents know that julia pearson willy on traveling throughout, even then they don't get the memo. >> i don't think that this is about the president. this is something that is handled by the secret service appropriately and was handled in accordance with the new standards that the director put in place. the president had a very productive trip. >> early retirement, again? know, i saw them on several occasions, i don't know if this was discussed between the director and the president. the president is certainly aware of the incident. again, on this trip, which was a complicated trip, four different countries, a lot of moving parts, the secret service did a great job. every time that they go out there into a foreign environment like that, they are on the line. incidents like this

notwithstanding, people only think about the secret service when, you know, something more serious happens. do their jobsthey so well and professionally has to be noted, i think. >> the president met with leaders in south korea and japan over the weekend. i am sure you know that there were exercises on both sides of the border. does the white house believe that these various shots fired into the water were entirely harmless? or is there something of greater concern? >> the actions of north korea are dangerous and provocative. there are continued threats and provocations and average -- and aggravated tensions. we remain steadfast in our defense of ourhe allies and we remain in close coordination to the republic of korea and japan. we saw the march 30 statement. any nuclear tests or missile launches would be violations of u.n. council resolutions,

including 17, 18, and 1874. we call again on them to comply with their international obligations and refrain from actions that threaten regional peace and security. >> a couple of things i would like you to put into context for us in ukraine. vladimir putin, the competition, reports of troops pulling back. does this feel like it does the white house believe that this collectively suggests a lessening of tensions in the prospects for a better outcome than, say otherwise? >> the most significant piece of your question is the report that mayeast some running troops be drawing down from their positions on the border again. that thatt confirmed has taken place, but if it was true that would be a positive

sign and the beginning of what we would need to see. what i can tell you is that it is certainly in keeping with what we have, what we and our partners insist needs to happen. but we remain very concerned about the situation there, very concerned about the implications of that number of troops on the border, concerned about russian intentions. that is why secretary kerry met with the prime minister. that is why they have promised to meet again. we have been clear in the back and forth that we were serious about the proposals that have been put forward. in consultation with ukrainian government. we are absolutely serious that any, any discussions or negotiations about ukraine

cannot be held over the head of the ukrainian people or ukrainian government. they have to be the key player in any of those negotiations. now, direct negotiations between russia and ukraine need to take place, but they can as necessary mediationternational and participation. but russia needs to engage in a dialogue with the government of ukraine. >> many people who stood at that odium representing various administrations have been asked about jonathan crawler. it has been the practice of administrations to be emphatic that he would not and should not be considered a bargaining chip in any other negotiations with the israelis. can you unequivocally say that that is still the case and that any suggestion otherwise misreads what is going on regarding the prison release russian mark >> what i will say is that i have nothing new about

jonathan pollard that i have not said in the past. he was convicted of espionage and is serving his sentence. i have nothing to add to that. when it comes to the middle east the work beingnd done with both parties to try to move that process forward, there are a lot of complicated moving parts. earlier i was asked about the issue of -- i will not get into will but the only thing i say about him is what we have always said, he is convicted -- he was convicted of espionage and he is serving his sentence. you are asked earlier about the issue of the release of palestinian prisoners and other prisoners. my response to that is, obviously, that has been discussed. it is a complicated issue that is being worked on by both arteries.

>> what else? >> afghanistan elections over the weekend. many were concerned over the violence. if how far has the white house gone for fair and free elections? >> we expect millions of asking -- millions of afghans to go to the polls to vote for their next president. these are critical elections and the united states welcomes the democratic process that is underway in afghanistan. i want to stress that this election process is afghan owned. the afghan security forces are in the lead nationwide. the leaders and staff of the electoral institutions are all afghan. the campaign. of the last two months was full of open and responsible debate among the candidates and it would be up to the people to choose the direction of their country. we are hopeful that the

elections will be peaceful, inclusive, and broadly acceptable to the people. it goes without saying that a stable transition is critical to sustaining support for afghanistan. it is often said that when you have new democracies that it is not the first election or even election,he second but the election that brings about the transition that is most important when it comes to embedding democratic institutions in a society and the country. this is an important milestone that we are watching very closely. >> your favorite criticism of the suggestion that the books are being cooked? >> expecting a lot of play on this? >> well. >> why should he not be suspicious when you have appeared to be very specific about things like the number of people who have signed up? but

not so much specific about the breakdown of young and old? and whether or not this is meeting the needs of the affordable care act? >> look, i will say couple of things. one, we have provided a significant amount of data about the sign-ups. that information, when it has not been good, and when it has been good. we have provided information about the demographic breakdown. when it has become available. that is in away from the knowledge meant, if you will , that we have, despite the obstacles we have created for ourselves, the obstacles we put in front of the american people

early in this process, that we have achieved something significant in meeting and exceeding the 6 million and rowley threshold. someone mentioned this before. all that this is about is providing benefits to the american people. it really is not about midterm cycles or, you know, what a critic in the senate or the house says versus what we say. it is about delivering on a promise that the affordable care act embodies. and that the president made. and that many presidents prior to him tried to make. remember, this was a century long fight involving presidents of both parties. the case of presidents of both parties, it was always a fight about expanding this to millionscurity

of americans. the security that you get from having health insurance. so, this is not -- this is not the end. the end of the first open enrollment. for theollment period affordable care act and there will be many more in the years to come. >> what about having hearings every other day? is it your contention that nothing that the house has done in terms of hearings has improved the affordable care act at all? >> is it your contention that it has? look, i don't think -- and this goes to what was being said, that any leader in the republican party would contest that their position is repeal. for repeal. the speaker of the house says that. the majority leader says that.

everyone says that. even as they have sort of tried to dress up repeal behind the bill that purports to just make a small change, but in fact, when it comes to, say, the individual mandate, affectively constitutes repeal, that anybody buys their position is anything but being for repeal, because they said it again and again. pulled up by the roots is something one of them said recently. we obviously have a fundamental disagreement about that. we think that the millions of americans who now have health insurance are now going to question whether or not the wise course of action is to take it away from them and give them nothing else in return. and to give them only the insecurity that comes with not having quality, affordable health insurance, or of being subjected to the status quo, which was one in which the insurance industry dictated to

individuals whether or not they would get coverage and whether or not there conditions would be covered. >> thank you. is there any anger here from specific reports that people should not listen? has the president had any thoughts about this? >> our focus on this, on this tragic situation, is on the families of those who have lost a loved one, or who have loved ones who remain missing. the administration continues to work in support of washington state around the clock. the president continues to be briefed and updated on the situation. as you know, the president directed his team to stay in close touch with our federal partners, as well as the state

and local officials leading the response. on the 24th he declared an emergency in the state of washington and offered federal aid to supplement. that is what we are focused on. i know that that is what he has instructed his team to focus on. any presidential scheduling updates. roger? >> does russia have to surrender crimea in order to get the sanctions lifted? >> there have been sanctions individuals,ssian or individuals who have been designated because of the role they played in the action in crimea. the violation of ukrainian territorial integrity. the violation of ukrainian sovereignty. theree made it clear that would be consequences for those actions. there have been and there may yet be more. there may be potentially more,

and more serious consequences imposed by the united states and our partners, should russia engage in further acts that violate ukrainian integrity. and sovereignty. our position is clear. russia is illegally occupying crimea. , do notnever recognize recognize, and will recognize, partners and allies have made it clear, that illegal occupation. it was done in violation of the u.n. charter, of russia's own commitments to the sovereign state of ukraine. that remains true today. it will remain true in the future. there has already been a cost imposed on russia for that. the authorities provided in the executive orders allow for more action to be taken.

as a result and consequence of the occupation of crimea. >> is that a yes? is that a yes? to get them lifted they have to release crimea? that was the question. >> the costs imposed for the occupation of crimea are not going to be changed if they occupy crimea. sanctions that have been foreshadowed, the central economic sanctions and other actions allowed under the second executive order signed by the president are ones that we would impose and that our european partners also said that they inld, should russia engage further violation of russia's sovereignty. >> i have heard you say that the annexation can stand. >> the office said that. and stand in what way? we will not recognize russia's

illegal occupation of crimea. we do not and we will not. our european partners and allies have made that clear. i would point you to the overwhelming vote in the u.n. general assembly, the 13 to one vote in the united nations security council to demonstrate that this is not a sentiment held by the united states alone. >> let me try once more. what needs to happen for the sanctions to be lifted? >> russia needs to draw down its forces in crimea back to reviews levels and engage in dialogue with the ukrainian government about its concerns with regards to crimea. annex.n nx -- on >> it isn't illegal occupation. any dialogue or negotiations about the status of crimea, about the status of this region of ukraine, would have to involve discussions with the

government of ukraine. >> senate democrats in the primary, two questions. >> i can tell you that the senator and the president worked on issues important to hawaii. the senator is important to fighting for -- is dedicated to fighting for the middle-class issues of the hawaiian people. in terms of endorsements and the theit was proposed, president feels the senator has done a good job fighting for the families of hawaii and supports his reelection. possible that it can be taken at all as a sign of good faith on the ukrainian

border in the continued negotiations of that area? >> john christopher, we have seen the reports. if they are true, and if more importantly they represent further withdrawals, that would be a positive sign. that is certainly something we have explicitly called for. even this report would only be the beginning of what needs to happen when it comes to the disposition of russian troops on the border of ukraine. it is only one piece of what we have called for when it comes to the need to de-escalate the situation and resolve it diplomatically. so, it is certainly a fact that they have met and have talked solution.plomatic the united states and our partners have presented a proposal and have been in dialogue about that.

not there obviously yet and remain very concerned about the intentions of russia when it comes to those troops on the border. fully oppose and consider illegal the occupation of crimea . we strongly support, as evidenced by our actions, the government of ukraine and international efforts to assist the government of ukraine economically as they deal with this trying situation and as they move forward towards elections at the end of may. thank you very much, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> that was today's white house briefing with press secretary

jay carney. you can watch the white house press briefing again any time on our website, c-span.org. reporters asking about a number of topics, including the health care law, with sign-ups ending tonight in the first open enrollment. we have been asking for your comments online. over 1000 posts since this morning, here are a couple. "no more coverage denied on the basis of pre-existing conditions how a thank you. -- livese all rights in america. we welcome your comments at facebook.com. the health care law and how it is working in several states, from this morning's "washington journal." today is the deadline at

midnight for health insurance under the affordable care act. while there are a number of , today is the deadline without penalty, we want to take a special look at how different states are approaching that from the front pages. this is from the courier-journal. they have made it the centerpiece of their front page. 640,000 were estimated for the uninsured before the exchange rollout. more are now insured to the state's health is -- health exchange. open enrollment in that state, as well as indiana, continues to monday. that is the front page of the courier-journal. if you would like to join the

.onversation to join our conversation we would love to hear about your experiences and signing of route here, and what you think about this law. we want to stick with kentucky were just a moment, and we're going to be joined now by audrey tayse haynes. june practiced a little bit about what is going on her state. thank you for joining us this morning. guest: good morning. host: kentucky has joined a state-based exchange. how is that than out so far? guest: my role is the secretary of the cabinet of health and family services. everything from medicaid to public health to behavioral health to the local health department to our com process, all health policy as well as in the human service side, and the

other delivery program they're all within this one cabinet. how benefit exchange was located here, and it actually has been a very good decision because it has made the coordination of all of the other programs to be easier. we do not have the barriers even with the government that you can have. i am the secretary of the cabin and all of the departments, there are listeners and republic dutch department heads that report may. host: we have a chart about kentucky and the affordable care act. it is a state-based marketplace, they are individual selecting -- there are 85,000 individuals selecting a plan, 300-2000 digital enrollees, and 18.2% potential -- percent enrolled. guest: as of today, we have 73,100 2024 that have chosen -- 73,124 that have chosen enrollment this weekend. we have a total of 350,000 of

enrolled in our state-based exchange as of this morning. host: so far, has president been happy with rate they are seeing from the marketplace? guest: we have not received complaints, but i am sure there are some people out there that would say that the rates are not what they expected in general there have been many press articles as well as we have gotten excellent the back from many people. i have lots of friends that have small businesses that maybe with just one or two employees, small law firms, had an excellent coverage and went on and watch the best coverage and i think she's going to stay with that. host: so far, has president been happy with rate they are seeing from the marketplace? guest: we have not received complaints, but i am sure there are some people out there that would say that the rates are not what they expected in general there have been many press articles as well as we have

gotten excellent the back from many people. i have lots of friends that have small businesses that maybe with just one or two employees, small law firms, had an excellent coverage and went on and watch the best coverage and i think she's going to stay with that. her salary is such that she receives no subsidies that all, but she is getting the platinum level plan from a well-known company and still saving pointed bit of money. people here have been very pleased. host: kentucky is just one of two states that requires applicants to disclose their fear insurance that is. what decided that disclosure?

guest: it was just one of hundreds of others decisions at the time. we knew that the goal of this was of course to not only help people who had insurance improve upon their insurance policies, yet enriched a policy with more benefits, not just catastrophic policies, but also to reach the uninsured. thus far, within our state, about three out of every board of the jewels who have signed up did not have insurance priebus -- three out of every four of those who signed up did not have insurance previous. kentucky is the 44th sickest date in the country. we have very high chronic disease numbers. our governor made the decision to expand medicaid and to have a state waste exchange for several reasons. one of them was to improve our health status.

we are all thrilled about that. we are thrilled the success of our exchange we were thrilled that so many kentuckians who have been putting off screenings and preventative care, and maybe even surgeries that they needed to have for some time at been put off for some long times and i can now take care of their health. i see this as an important step as kentucky continues to be a bright shining star for economic development. there've been several rankings that come out this year that shows that kentucky is definitely on the move in education and now in improved

health status and we believe this is going to help us with our economic development strategies as well as our citizens. we will be ready to go to work. host: that was audrey tayse haynes, the secretary of the kentucky cabinet for health and human services. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you. host: the messenger based -- the kentucky-based newspaper the messenger. let's go to the violence. our first caller is care and in philadelphia, pennsylvania. caller: hello. i'm calling because the previous callers had mentioned that the obamacare law had been passed by

being forced through congress over the objections of the republicans. i just wanted to give some facts about that that refute what they were saying. i had watched the hearings leading up to the passage of the law, in particular in the senate, the senate committee on health care had adopted over 200 amendments that were offered by the republicans, and agreed to take out the public option which the republicans had vigorously opposed. still, the republicans got not one vote even though they accepted the democrats -- even though the democrats accepted

the amendments they had offered. people do not know that half of the states opted not to expand medicare -- medicaid, rather, and a opted not to participate and set up state exchanges. we only have 50% of the states are actually participating in the law through the medicaid expansion and through setting up state exchanges. that is where there was an overload on the federal exchange. host: taking a look at more states no, cnbc reports a high number of uninsured under new york and new jersey obamacare sign-ups. in kentucky, 75% of the nearly 65,000 people who enrolled in private obamacare insurance sold on the state-run exchange were uninsured at the time they rolled, according to

questionnaires they filled out when they applied. and 75% of people enrolled in medicaid be of the exchange likewise had been uninsured. in year, 59% of the nearly 343,000 private obamacare plan enrollees reported being uninsured women picked their plans. and 90% of the medicaid enrollments the of the states exchange reported being honest short -- being uninsured. caller: i would like to make the comments that medicare part d was extended for 6.5 months in sign up. also the people that are working and receiving subsidies also pay taxes and paid 75 cents of the premiums for our congress people. and the most important thing is when our seniors signed up for medicare part d, had their

insurance cards, and went in to pick up their prescriptions, the pharmacies could not get approval for the assurance that is because they have no record of these people. it was so bad in michigan that jennifer granholm had a law passed that the state government would pay for these inscriptions and wait to be reimbursed from these insurance companies. i helped a lot of seniors during this time. it was so sad because these people would cry and walk away without their medication until this law was passed. there was a problem with computers talking to one another and getting the information to the pharmacies from the

insurance company for some reason. i do not expect this to work 100% either after it goes into effect. this has happened before, and we will get through it. but people need insurance, and i am so happy that this law has been passed. host: let's take a look at some of your comments from twitter -- bobby, knoxville, tennessee. caller: i have a comment regarding something that secretary haynes said. she gave a great example of one of her friends, a trial lawyer, who is benefiting from the exchange.

a trial lawyer who is probably well paid and above the average compensation that probably most people that need to exchange and by ext -- buy insurance needs. the only reason that savings comes into existence is because her premiums are basically subsidized, and lower than what they would otherwise be on hers pacific situation. others are having to pay more than they would have to pay because of their basic situation. there are those who cannot afford the premiums as she can give can, and they are probably subsidizing those savings that she realized. i think that is a good example

of how this thing works. that is my comment. host: next up is margin in bay city, michigan. caller: good morning. i had my first experience in witnessing and obamacare card being used. i am on medicare into a supplement myself, and it affects my children. this lady, medical house, well spoken, she said it will pay may -- will not pay for my mammogram? so i kind of question her after she got turned down, and i said, so you have been using obamacare for a while? she said is my first time use. and i said how much did you pay? susan i pay $600 a month when my husband pays $600 a month.

and before that was etc. dollars together. " them. i cents ozone did your plans it would cover your mammogram test? she said it would be free because it is preventive care. so i asked the lady behind the counter, it doesn't take the aca? she says we are supposed to, but it must he a breakdown in the computer talking to each other. just like this lady that called, i am assuming that is what is going on. they are probably covered. i am not war or against it -- for or against it, but i do not think the computer systems must be catching up with each other

yet. they must not be synced so to speak. that was my first encounter with anybody with an aca card. i thought doubling the premiums -- before i went on medicare, on -- i was paying blue cross and .blue shield and $50 co-pay on drugs, and hundreds of dollars to go to the hospital. but now i paid $352 a month by medicare, and a good supplement, and i have a good drug coverage. last year i had $40,000 between two hospital visits, and i did not pay a dime on it yet. i'm happy with the way that medicare is that up, but i do pay a little more than i did when i was on private care. that was my comment. i have not seen anybody using obamacare until about a week ago, and it was surprising. thank you very much. host: taking a look at another run page -- front page of the chicago tribune. our next caller is david in virginia on the line for

democrats. tell us what you're thinking about the health-care law. caller: good morning. i think most people that are complaining about the health-care law have not tried it. i signed up for health care last night about me, my wife, and my our next caller is david in virginia on the line for democrats. tell us what you're thinking about the health-care law. caller: good morning. i think most people that are complaining about the health-care law have not tried it. i signed up for health care last night about me, my wife, and my three kids. at first i was playing close to

$1000 a month, and now it is down close to six -- $600, and i get more coverage than before. i do not understand why people complain without trying. thank you. host: the next caller is vaughn. caller: i am looking at this and saying the health care law establishes a policy. it does not do anything for health care per se but when he going to use it you find out of your covered or not. we do not have our. yours necessary, our hospitals necessarily, to pay for this thing which is a lot in whether

to subsidized or not. somebody has to pay. and in order to keep this thing all we have to do is shut down our military and withdraw from the world. i do not think that is a very good idea or the plan. host: a couple more comments on twitter -- our next call, comes from massachusetts. caller: good morning. thank you for take my call. the question about something that has not been really addressed at all, the fact that first of all i would think at least 70% of americans do not want this program.

we feel like it is being forced upon us. this was a bill that was asked without even being read and understood by our politicians. with that being said my question is, if the bill is such a great program, why do all politicians and possibly over 1200 different groups have now been exempt by president obama from this program? unions, hollywood contacts, and so forth? why is it that all of these other groups are exempt and yet the average american person is not getting the programs they want, they are paying more than they anticipated, and so forth? if the program is so good, why are all of these politicians and over 1200 groups exempt? it seems as if president obama just wave his magic wand and makes these exemptions for -- who? people contribute into his program? i am not sure. it is so wonderful, why do so

many people have to be granted exemptions? host: our topic this morning is today's deadline for aca enrollment. that deadline is at midnight. we would love to hear from you from your experience and thoughts on the law. our next call comes from south carolina, mary is on the line for republicans. caller: i'm calling about obamacare because we are going to want obamacare. nobody ever wanted it, it was crammed down our throats. people protested the whole summer before the against it,

and then they were calling us tea party people. we wanted a good health-care plan, but not the way they wanted it. they said they should have record -- negotiated with republicans, and we don't want the government telling us. i go through medicare and medicaid. i'm a poor southern woman, that is how i get it. host: you're not a supporter of the health-care law? caller: i hope all of the democrats lose in 2000 thing -- lose in 2016, and we can scrap this bill. host: next caller is henry in new jersey. caller: good morning. listen, it really bugs me when i hear these republicans and everybody who has been health

insurance and when they know that obamacare is nothing but the truth about my wife and i we are living testimony of obamacare. my wife lost her job because of downsize, i lost my job because of downsize. i was on the phone from day one when the health-care law went into effect to get a policy. january 1, when i got my insurance for my wife and i. we getting the subsidy, because we don't make that kind of money. these republicans cover they don't want to work with obama, they do want to do nothing to help the poor people, and the

majority of the poor people who don't have health care is people of color. host: you said you and your wife have enrolled through the health-care law. have you been happy with the care that you have knowledge of signed up? caller: i got my colonoscopy, and do not pay dollar. the lady who called just now talking about qwest, we went to quest. we did not pay a dime for blood work. there is tier one and tier two that i have. i keep my regular family doctor or, i'm only paying $50 for the co-pay for my family doctor, but my specialist, i go through the program was the insurance company allows me to do. if i stayed with my old insurance company, my payment is

ready five dollars for special and $15 for maryland is a should. these people do not know what they're talking about, and the lady just now says she is. obamacare for the first time, and she doesn't know what she's talking about. host: earlier today we talked about how enrollment is going in kentucky, we went to focus now on another state, and how and role it has run in the federally run extremes there. joining us now is mike chaney. thank you for joining us. mississippi is a part of the federal exchange, and even though you do not support the federal caps off -- the federal health-care law, you support the state exchange. guest: i am charged with supporting all of the laws come even if i do not agree with

them, and i thought it was important to have a health care exchange for mississippians by mississippians. host: what kind of enrollment host: what kind of a roman have you seen so far -- what kind of enrollment have you seen so far? had 32,000 sign up by the end of march. had issues with people being able to sign up effectively? guest: we had a lot of issues in the first few months. we did not start to see a kick in enrollment until the mid part of december when the government got the website up and running effectively. the huge increase came in

january and february. you have heard things about other states, i am sure, but it took a concentrated effort to get people to go back and try to sign up again. host: doing research on this, we the that in mississippi rates are some of the highest in the nation. can you explain why? guest: first of july lester, i 50% ofcounties, almost the state, had no coverage at all. we only had one company that in mississippi, and we cut a deal with the federal government or i said i would help recruit someone at the request if they would do some things for us, which they agreed to do. we recruited humana, so they covered an additional number of

counties. they have 40. they had the actuarial's for the counties they were writing in, but it took a lot to get the rates correct -- >> we now go to a senate homeland security committee on management's practices of the federal government. this is just beginning. >> then i will give a short statement. welcome, everybody. thanks for joining us. being soyou for gracious. going to the floor in typical fashion to address the issue of sgr, it is a problem we keep treating symptoms to but never address the real problems. that is what our discussion is about today. the government cannot manage what it cannot measure. we know that. any discussion of the initiatives should start with the fact that we do not have a full accounting of everything we

are doing. only one agency knows all its programs. that is the department of education. the rest do not. that is why i come along with 60 members on this subcommittee, have introduced the taxpayers right to know act. i have had a conversation about additions to that and some great ideas that we had before the hearing. the first step is to create an inventory of all federal programs. i am reminded that someone helped us with a bill that senator carper and senator mccain and then senator obama introduced, creating the transparency we now have, and we ofe seen the inadequacies that. although it is better, we are not where we need to be. i thank you for that. the taxpayers right to know act the create a way to address $200 billion that the gao has

identified in duplication. make a stat sheet for every program so we can know at a glance what we are doing, and then the question, why , what is the strategy, what is the plan in terms of the government's responsibilities and actions? most of our witnesses today have been on the front lines. tom, i know you have. ask has. robert has. i welcome you as well. the sunlight foundation has been really out there in terms of making it apparent for what is not happening and being a voice to make sure that the taxpayer gets to see where the money is spent and how it is spent and why it is spent.

i appreciate you being here. i appreciate the chairman, even though it is a monday, it is hard to make a 3:00 meeting, but i am glad to be here with you and i hope to return after i finish on the floor. >> thank you. good afternoon. it is good to see you all. two,u notice, this is part like the beginning of the baseball season. this is the second game of a day-night doubleheader. the sun is shining, the skies are blue. it almost feels like baseball. that is not a bad analogy to use. we are happy to be here. one of the things when i talk to folks about deficit reduction, i talk about three things we got to do. work on oured to entitlement programs to make

sure they are going to be around for our kids and grandchildren, to see how we can save money, and do so without savaging all the poor people. we need tax reform that generate revenues. the third thing we need is look at everything we do and ask how do we get a better result for less money. when i talk to folks about me ir two, people say to do not mind paying extra money in taxes. i do not want you to waste my money. actually, a lot of people feel, the regrets, republicans -- democrats, republicans, independentss. how thet about organizations waste money. also do those things that our responsoibility. we are happy to have your help in doing that. this is a follow-up on a hearing tohad a couple of weeks ago

discuss the management agenda for the remainder of president term, and hard deputy from management at omb is present. metzenbaum, is that a physician you once held? >> i was the performance director reporting to that deputy. >> who did you report to? zyontz. witnesses hearing discussed the four pillars of the administration's approach to good management, which include effectiveness, efficiency in government, how to drive economic growth, how to recruit and train alerted and dedicated workforce. that was their pillars.

a fellow who was the comptroller general of gao testified. dozensseen him testified of times. he never used a note. i understand in deference to him you will not use notes today. just at let it. audibles, is that what they call it a football? he testified and suggested ways the administration and congress to work together to help achieve the goals and to save taxpayers money in the long run. our hearing was a discussion of the challenges facing our thernment agencies, what president wants to fix, and how we in congress can be partners in promoting more smart, more effective government. those are the things for those of us in the congress, but especially on this committee. something i often like to say is everything i do i know i can do

better. that is true of all of us. it is true of every federal program. part of our challenge is to figure out how to do things better. sadly, the challenges we are facing are not new. for decades, democrats and republican administrations have struggled with inefficiencies. in some cases we have succeeded. there is still plenty of work to do. notrnment fortunately does have to go it along in the struggle to improve efficiency. there are private groups that have made it their mission to revise -- advise government agencies on approved efficiency and spend taxpayer money more wisely. today we consider a conversation. this time we are receiving input from folks who represent outside groups. our witnesses want to see agencies run well and achieve their missions effectively. they have personal spirits in a number of cases in government, have gathered opinions from

others, have done studies, and nform us to what they have found. i believe groups like the ones represented here to take and prove to be valuable partners in advising our government on good management practices. i look forward to your thoughts on the administration's management agenda and what they think -- what you think are the best ways to tackle those four effectiveness, efficiency, economic growth, and people and culture. effective government management has long been a priority for this committee. i hope this hearing shines a spotlight on what initiatives are being done well, which ones can be done better, and how we can help keep the administration achieve this important goal for our country. quote a bunch of people. today i want to quote president truman.

i will paraphrase him. he said something to the effect that the only thing new under the sun are the things we never loot learned -- we never learned or forgot. we have to learn from the lessons of the past government workers. so we do not repeat their mistakes. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses on what you believe can be done to set our government management on a more responsible course. brieflyt, i am going to introduce our bonuses -- our witnesses. witness, max stier -- he is president and ceo of the partnership for public service. the partnership seeks to finalize government by recruiting ways and generating new public servants.

a small undertaking. partnership, he served as the general counsel at the department of housing and urban develop mud. -- urban development. you might have been a congressional aide to a guy from iowa, jim leach. shelleynd witness is metzenbaum. are you any relation to howard metzenbaum? is your great-grandfather? is your dad? just kidding. i never served with him. i know him well. i went to ohio state, so i know him well. and from columbus? metzenbaum is president of , which isr alliance to bring up out sustained government improvement. she was joining them,

the associate director for parliaments -- performance at omb. she was responsible for committing the approach to improving performance. our next guest is robert shea, a firm.pal at a cost and quotation -- budget management machine? right? he helps meet financial requirements, improve -- and effectively implement i.t. investments. he was the associate director for administration and government reform at the office of management and budget. what years was that?

2002 to 2008. >> he also served on the staff of criminal affairs committee under a senator-- from what years to what years? >> come on. and i see a bunch of friends behind you. >> on which side? >> both. >> our final witnesses tommy labsdirector of sunlight at the sunlight foundation. what a cool name for a foundation. the sunlight foundation seeks to expand access to government information to create accountability and seeks to make public information available online. dr. coburn is very much interested in this. sunlight labs is an open-source

community supported by the sunlight foundation dedicated to using technology, correct -- and convert government data the user-friendly applications. he also led the sunlight foundation subsidies scope explored theh level of federal involvement in various sectors of the economy. we thank all of you for being here today. my colleagues are coming in from around the country as we speak. we start going at 5:30, so we will be finished up before that happens. in colleagues will be coming and joining us for parts of this hearing. i will be able to hear everything you say. i'm the lucky one. after coburn will come -- dr. coburn will come back when he can. ier, you're welcome to proceed. we are happy to hear you. you have seven minutes for your stay. if you go much beyond that, i

will rain you in. thank you very much. these proceed. >> thank you. it is a pleasure to be here. it is important for you to have this second hearing. this is a time of great need in government, in congress and this committee has a critical role to play. we are all here applauding some --is doing. that i was trying to come up with analogies. --nly have eight >> like a rain-shortened game. >> specific ideas and each of them i would love for this committee to be focused on. i will begin with an issue that is dear to your heart, reducing vacancies in the management of government at the senior levels. you have described this as sister she's come and it is. it is a real problem. you cannot have government run effectively if top people are

not there. we need to focus on how transitions. every administration gets behind the eight-ball. every new administration should have the top 100 people in by may 1. requiressible, but different expectations and different levels of corporations between the incoming administration and congress. he should be focusing on that goal right now. number two, we need to build out the success of -- to reduce the number of says confirmed positions. be changing at least the management positions away from senate-different political spot to career positions. no need for them to be political appointees. it creates great disruption. number three, we need to ensure that appointees are well

prepared. today it is misery. the attention is focused entirely on taking -- picking. time is not being used well. yunnan is leave they cannot do anything cause the senate would be offended, when they should be preparing to do their jobs well. in this committee and the senate, they should be signaling that they should be getting ready to do the job well, and that would have a huge impact in making sure they start effectively, which does not happen today. we need to see improvements in the presidential transition process. there was legislation that was championed to make these improvements. there are additional things that need to be done. >> senator ted kaufman, cor rect? on theot to focus

private sector. we have seen this again, too much focus on the ideas and not getting the stuff done. congress has a big role to play. if you look at the hours there have been oversight hearing, they are going down. we are not seeing congress focusing on programs before there is a problem. we need to see more of that. 104thours in the congress. we need more oversight hearings. we need to engage the private sector more effectively. one idea is create a public-private sector exchange. that would be a great way of getting government people into the private sector or to learn best practice. you might consider whether you can retail hill staff -- detail hill staff to federal agencies. that would he a novel idea, but a beginning.

we got to treat government as a single integrated enterprise. we did a report on this. legislation iss important, but what it is missing is we do not have an integrated strategic land from what government is trying to achieve. we need to know what is happening from the programs, but they need to be tied to a core set of objectives across government, and that needs to be a presidential priority identified for everybody to understand. it is a commonsense notion that you cannot do anything without that plan. we need to see the president driving us to the pmc. we need to celebrate what is working. iforganization gets better you only find things that are wrong with it. and it is always finding things are wrong. not only to find things are wrong, but find out what is right and they have that

celebrated and make that were located. this committee could be pushing in that direction. we do something called a service to america medal which identifies great stories, amputees from the military brought back to the battlefield and the gentleman who arata k did polio in india -- who eradicated polio in india. the air force saved a billion dollars on fuel costs on an annual basis. there are wonderful stories that people do not see. any is person will tell the way to drive good change, it is not happen in government, and i hope you will come to the same celebration. we have an event on may 6. agency leaders accountable for managing people well. that is not happening now. we see employee morale plummeting, and what is

interesting despite it plummeting overall, 1/4 organizations in government are seeing increases, and it is all about the leadership. we need to make sure we are investing in leaders and holding them accountable. thatery concrete thing could take place is that you could pass a law requiring agencies to include employee morale as a performance plan requirement. that is what ray lahood did at transportation. he put it into the performance evaluation system. it is quite impressive. we need the data faster. it is critically important data. number six, we need to develop a career leaders, and we are not seeing them as an enterprise asset. an element of that would be required that usgs members have

worked in multiple self other -- sectors. today it is an insular group and does not represent the skills that we need. we also need to make sure the investment of the development and training is taking place with this group as well. we need a scorecard for the political leaders. the only elements i would highlight more from what he has to say is that we need this to be a presidential prior to the. -- priority. we need the people metrics to be included, and lastly we need a reform of the whole civil service system. it is 60 to 100 years old. it is desperately broken. we are putting out a new framework. at minimum, we need a conversation. the last reform, there was seven days of hearings.

that is what we need to see here now, things that are truly desperately broken. the compensation program, all federal employees are paid at the same level. it makes no citizen -- it makes no sense. that is not how any other organization works. the system worked terrifically well when it was first dealt. nothing stays the same and relaxed -- in the last hundred years. the people are not supported by the system that is supposed to help them. thank you very much. i apologize for going over, but it is a pleasure to be here to testify. >> i'm glad we went over that. you have a lot to think about. >> thank you. >> dr. metzenbaum, welcome. >> i greatly appreciate the opportunity to testify. government management matters. it needs more attention. that is why last year building on a long and distinguished career in the public and private

sector, paul volcker decided it was time to launch the alliance. aims to rekindle intellectual, political, practical, and academic interests in implementation issues in the nuts and bolts of government. these days the electrons, too. i appreciate the opportunity to be here to talk about priorities for improving federal management. because performance measurement is the core way that the best businesses and increasingly the best government organizations achieve greater value, i will devote most of my testify to the .essons learned as requested i will share my thoughts on other management issues. federal performance improvements efforts have made noteworthy progress over the years. the 1993 law. agencies to set

goals, measure reports -- measure permits. congress was doing things, but there was a critical missing element. too few agencies were using the data to find ways to improve. agencies using the goal is to communicate priorities, refined his priorities with the public in congress, and an list assistance -- anenlist assistance. agencies needed to spend more time using goals in the data to inform and drive improvement in outcomes, productivity, peoples experience with government, and accountability. not just focus on completing the mandated reports. otherwise the goals are wasteful. if it is not useful, it is wasteful. research identified key practices that make goals and bysurement transformative

encouraging discovery, innovation, and best practice diffusion. the obama administration policies and the law, was passed in 2010 required these additional practices. agency heads setting a few --cific prior to goals priority goals without new funding, with a new budget, without legislation. that was about perfect to the improvement. -- that was about productivity improvement. the deputy secretary equivalent became the chief operating officer. as chief operating officer david, -- officer, needed to identify the goals and run a to-driven reviews. improvement officers supports the chief operating officer to drive performance improvements across the agency and with other agencies and works for the performance improvement council district and patty --rnment's capacity in analytics and how to use the data.

be -- y goals need to not just once a year. prioritymation about goals must be updated at least quarterly on a central website. the site includes key information about what agencies are trying to accomplish, why they are trying to a commerce those goals, how they plan to a college each goal, the strategy, the logic and evidence of why each strategy is the right one, the progress made every quarter, and plant next steps if that progress is not as good as expected. i think we have learned it is important to get accountability expectations right. the emphasis needs to be on significant improvement in all areas, not achieving 100% of the targets. it needs to be an understanding

and tackling impediments. some targets will be missed. an agency that meets all of its have as much cause for concern as one who does not meet them all, because targets that are too timid to not stimulate innovation. the kind of invitation -- innovation needed. research by the general accountability office and others found when additional practices it is remarkably useful. trends goals reinforce that finding. adult smoking is down. the lowest performing schools are beginning to turn around. greater attention to electronic transactions is improving customer experience and cutting costs. visa processing times are down. all of this information is altered on performance.gov. that is not to suggest that everything is so rosy. there is plenty of room for improvement on the goals and

sunday of missed opportunities in mission support areas. one area needing attention is the federal worker with an hiring process. it is seriously limping and internship programs are being broken. congress can help by making it easier for one agency to recruit on behalf of others. crater agility is needed in procurement and it is time for renewed attention to contract performance. grants need to be more agile and performance focused, and agencies need to play a stronger managementknowledge and knowledge diffusion. the administration's push on and fantastic -- on benchmarking, and benchmarking should be expanded. types common programs such as for benefits processing. the folk or stands ready to work with congress and the federal

government find ways to manage smarter. we are ready in some situations to lead the charge, catalyze new thinking, and convene partnerships to leverage change. i appreciate the opportunity to be here today and am happy to answer questions. thank you. >> thank you for joining us. >> thank you. i would be remiss not to point out that i'm here in part in my capacity as chairman of the board and the fellow of the national academy of the book administration. shelley are also fellows, representing the deep edge of expertise that you can draw on for your oversight challenges. >> thank you. >> i am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today. i applaud your interest in finding areas in which the efforts will have the greatest impact on the government's performance and efficiency. my experience in working to improve operations comes in part from my time as a staff member

on this great committee. the committee, documented what many of greed were the greatest management challenges. report after report showed the extent of the challenges. agencies took months to produce audited financial statements and improper report payments. recruiting for the workforce was difficult for agencies. information technology projects were over budget and off schedule. did notisition system support the timely and objective procurement of business services. performance was not as clearly and transparently reported as it should be. accelerate progress in these areas, the management council at the time developed a scorecard with indicators that measure the degree to which agency efforts resolved these challenges. agencies were rated red, yellow, or green based on progress.

what was new was the fact that agency progress was updated and reported publicly every quarter. these updates followed a rigorous review by omb staff with evidence provided by agencies. i cannot emphasize enough just how critical transparency was to how seriously agency leadership took these management improvement initiatives. knowing their scores, we are going to be republican -- publicly, made them work very hard to improve in each of these areas. government agencies made progress during this time although i do not think it would be fair to suggest changes related finance, human capital, information technology, acquisition, and performance have been resolved entirely. because those measures are not being reported publicly today it is difficult to show objectively how agencies are performing in these areas of common concern. the management improvement initiatives described in the fy

2015 budget offer a renewed opportunity to address these management challenges. they fall neatly into the framework described in the budget. any of the initiatives promise genuine transformation of operations with real gains in terms of performance and efficiency. without clear metrics to gauge progress, it will be difficult to determine whether or not improvement is being achieved. the good news is this committee's oversight efforts can move agencies to address common challenges so long as key ingredients are in place. first is clear goals. choose,ever area you it is imperative you have a cup understanding about how progress will be measured. then the committee's evers and staff will have to provide attention to ensure progress is sustained. my testimony provides examples that offer a roadmap, but the

bottom line is with bipartisan consensus on a couple of these priorities, some big problems could becap for -- tackled. i'm grateful for the opportunity to offer suggestions. inventory of duplication and the accompanying recommendations are a good place to start. those,e is a subset of on which you and the administration agree, i would expect the committee's efforts to produce real benefit. excellent provides an oversight target as well. the national academy of public administration is convening agency officials and omb to share ways agencies have tackled high-risk areas in the past and gotten off the list. their common approach is agencies can take to these thorny issues. the focus oversized, some

agencies might get the knowledge they need to address the issues raised by gao and get off the list. the administration's evidence agenda is an area where the focus could pay big dividends. tograms are often found not be as effective as originally thought in solving whatever problem they are designed to address. over the past decade, the executive ranch has renewed its effort to study programs and build a body of ajit evidenced -- of evidence about which programs work best. and number of programs have been piloted to determine which -- allowing government stood than if i the most promising strategies that warrant expansion. we know far too little about which programs work best today. thee can move a fraction of investments in the more proven approaches, results could be dramatic. while we know little about how

programs for form, we know less about what they cost. under current policy agencies are supposed to report annually what it costs to achieve their goals. a number of other laws the tape the extent to which agencies measure the cost of their operations. too few agencies take these efforts seriously. when a study of the cost will beover ways waste can limited. i can find a better way to find savings been to look at their programs. a lot of information needed to form the basis of a program cost adjustment is included in the taxpayers right to know act, it is under consideration by the committee. the useortant would be of this information to find ways to illuminate waste and reduce cost and and program administration. wherever the committee focuses with it considerable oversight, success will depend on how clear the goals are and whether you

are willing to invest in repeated attention that similar endeavors have required in the past. in the committee has set goals, measurable progress is made, and it is a recipe for success that can produce results. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. mr. lee? >> thank you for the opportunity to appear today. i am the director of sunlight labs. sunlight is a nonprofit dedicated to using the power of the internet to catalyze greater government openness. we take inspiration from an advantage that sunlight is the best protection. our recon technology has led to a focus on data and its capacity for proving government functions. we collect and redistribute a variety of types of data, serving millions of citizens, journalists, and researchers. aending data has had

particular focus for us in recent years. we believe the data about government spending operations are among the most essential forms of information government can publish. it is a prerequisite for any effort to maximize efficiency or improve the value received for taxpayer dollars. its utility extends beyond these questions. it is one of the clearest measures of government's priorities. we believe the current administration deserves credit for its commitment to open data and its efforts to reduce application. the effort that began with the . dashboard is worthy of praise. these artists are particularly prone to failure. at their worst such efforts represent complex appropriation engineering projects and are implemented by contractors and supervised by staff that did not have experience managing

technical undertakings. the incentives create a high potential for waste. the commitments to a stronger supervisor role is welcome. we are pleased to see this committee considering the taxpayer right to know act. this registration promises to expand information available to the public and oversight bodies thein a way that minimizes disclosure burden. we believe the existing programmatic description process conducted in connection to the catalog of federal assistance to the expanded to include data newly anmandated. making this reporting more granular, and complete promises to increase its usefulness. because this system already exists, we are optimistic costs associated will be minimal. we wish to urge the committee to consider revisions to the act

that would enhance its effectiveness. the difficulty of getting meaningful to do the jocks reporting apartments should serve to underscore the need for imposing specific methodology upon those reporting such a debt. which in the bill calling for accounts of the number of full-time federal employees rather than the full-time equivalents is a potential source of imprecision. the bill's definition of services -- in the past a similar provision has been used inappropriately by agencies to claim that certain activities are completely exempt from spending disclosure requirements. although it is beyond the scope of the bill, we urge the committee to consider addressing y program spending. the failure to disclose

programs, and the capacity of the procurement system can make it difficult to determine how agencies are using firms to pursue their missions. consider the difficulty in identifying cgi federal. anyone who spends time in washington is sure to encounter contractors who perform the same work as agency personnel but at higher hourly wrrates. collecting and publishing data about the major contracts associated with each program will enable oversight bodies to monitor and control progress spending more effectively. although we believe these alterations could strengthen the bill, we wish to emphasize that support for the transparency efforts the taxpayer right to know act represents. attention to federal data

promises to provide americans with more accuracy in accounting. we believe this will empower policy that is more efficient and cost-effective. we welcome your attention to these matters and encourage you to engage with transparency issues. thank you for the opportunity to speak today, and i look forward to answering any questions you might have. >> thank you, mr. lee. there's a time not that long ago when dr. coburn and i were not the chair or the ranking member of the full committee, but we took turns leading a subcommittee called financial management. subcommittee.e we were interested in -- less interested in the homeland security piece of this and more interested in the governmental affairs side. still interested in both of them, but still continue to the a strong interest in

governmental affairs side. when we were leading that smaller subcommittee, i used to helps we struggle to nature we got better results for less money, better results for the same amount of money, i would opine on the need to gain leverage in terms of what we were trying to do. we figured out if we were able to be on the same page with omb and the president's management objective, that would help. legs could somehow tie our together with gao, particularly with the high risk list a put out at the beginning of the congress, that might help. dr. coburn has been very much involved to make sure that we have inspectors general in place. we figured that could help. o work with a lot

of good government groups to focus on how do we get that her results for less money. to do thisn trying for a while. in some cases with some success. you mentioned a few of those. want to do is ask each of you to think about what the other three have said. just think about what the other three have said. mr. stier, you went to a pre-good -- a pretty good laundry list there. i was going to ask you, think about what mr. lee has said and mr. shea and dr. metzenbaum has had an pick out one or two pieces that you think, as i listened to a radio station in philadelphia, every week they heara song, you gotta song. something that we gotta hear.

bothially something that of them have said. please, you go first. >> i like this exercise. i will start with shelley, and the thing she said that i think the committee would be well advised to pay attention to, her point about the broken hiring process, particularly around student internships. the federal government today has 7% of folks under the age of 30 in the general work -- 30. in the general work for some of that is 22%. we do not have a workforce that is generalization really -- general is -- generationally diverse. that is important to our country and government and that is something this committee could do some good about. shelley tension one idea i will highlight, simply the most commonsensical thing, allow agencies to use each other's work to find the best talent.

in the case of cyber professionals, the department of homeland security goes through an amazing process. no it or agency can remaihire te others off that list. robert hit the idea that i would about the scorecard. we need that transparency, that public face to that transparency in order to arrive action to govern. everybody is over one. i believe the reason they have traction is it is transparent, a front-page story, easy for people to understand. we need that kind of clarity around the management issues and it needs to be something that this committee and the president leadership accountable for. i think president bush got that right. from tom, i concur entirely on

the importance of the transparency of data, and i think his ideas on the taxpayers spot on.know act are there are some things we would add, too. >> thanks. dr. metzenbaum? >> what a great question. thank you so much, mr. chairman. let me talk, making sure that the scs has broader experience and that we make it easier to get people from outside government into government to bring the fresh ideas and some rotation. that is an area that deserves serious consideration. we used to figure out how to make it happen more than giving it serious consideration. at me talk about robert's suggestion that the committee and the administration work together to find a few priorities where there is serious attention and serious

follow-up. duplication area, which are the areas you want to give consistent attention to. it makes a huge difference. if this committee starts to look at whether it is the priority goals that some agencies has set, what the administration has sent, were some of the duplication issues identified by gao, which once, you cannot do them all, but do them and set some priorities. then the consistent follow-up makes all the difference in the world. their goals, measure to see how you're doing, and consistent follow-up and if the congress works with -- is attentive to that on the administration where they reach agreement with the administration, that will be transformative. on what tommy was talking about lee was of -- tom talking about, sunlight.

quoted inandeis got my written testimony as well in terms of the states being the laboratories of democracy. to0? that his saying, >> it is a great one. >> i use those quite a bit. was there anything else he said? data and itke the is disinfected to have the force of better data, but also to prevent corruption, fraud, etc., but also to use the data to learn, how to improve, and take inse state laboratories democracy, but if there is no scientist, how are you going to learn? one of the things the committee could ask is is there a scientist, whether the federal agency or the agencies supporting others in academia or whatever and as robert was talking in terms of does it-based, how

work. we need to figure out how to do it better and at a lower cost. that gets to be a huge potential. >> before i turned to mr. shea, i want to quote a former vice chairman of the federal reserve. we had a hearing for the finance peopleee, very smart testifying on deficit reduction. thatid in his testimony health care costs were killing us. it is going to do us in. when it came to time to ask questions, i said, you said that health care costs are killing us, i agree, what should we do about it? he sat there, he sat there, and finally he said, i'm not an expert in this field, not a health economist.

i would do is find out what works, do more of that. that is all he said. there is huge wisdom in that. >> there are fantastic examples of both reductions in costs. the role in health care where you have got some of the 20% of the folks in the emergency creating 80% of the costs, and you have had turnarounds in some locations. here.is such opportunity there's almost consensus among the witnesses here that there is huge potential you gotta look at the data, you got to use it to figure out how to do better. >> thank you. mr. shea -- did any of your colleagues -- >> not an area in which you will find an area of disagreement. we better for pick some that we disagree with in the next round. i will cheat a little bit and

pick up on a common theme in the testimony, which is around civil service reform. there is a survey of the committees on a regular basis, and they all raise the major challenge workforce. number of them can recruit people they need to commerce which their mission. unless we get reform of civil service, that challenge will not be diminished in the near future. i would have to say it is a major prior artsy, and there is consensus that it is the major -- senator for an average work ivich worked on this. he thought he made some progress. i do not know if that is a view you share. if you feel like pointing to that maybethat --

were not able to attend, you would work on that, that would be helpful. >> during the bush administration we were able to accomplish reform of the scs, reform of dhs personnel system, and dod's. repealed, two were which is a huge shame, because getting them and acted was a huge challenge, and implementation was not perfect. it was the beginning of the road to reform. we are back at square one in both of those cases. what max's organization talk a goodit would be opening salvo in the new start to that comprehensive reform. >> ok. >> if i could talk about tom's p oint, contract data, and the provide muchuld

greater transparency. when we were implementing the usa spending,g -- we got assurances from the procurement community that the data was going to pristine -- data was going to be pristine. >> thank you. agreement with the people on this panel. to highlight two things. dr. mensa bomb mentioned the metzenbaumt -- dr. mentioned the points about being correct. we look at these issues related to technology. we are pleased to have a number of former colleagues become presidential innovation fellows.

it is true that that program and most innovative ones bring people who have innovative skills, into government, have to be done at the moment through unusual hiring vehicles at step outside the normal process for bringing people in, because it is too onerous to get high quality technical talent. this applies not only to the presidential innovation program, initiative, and other attempts to bring up-to-date typical skills in government. it is essentially impossible given the formal hiring processes. to speak also to the point about the need for the usefulness reports, we agree completely, and that is one of the reasons why we feel the data quality and is such an urgent issue. i did not focus on it in my remarks, that sunlight has performed a data quality analysis comparing the total of -- they are listed by yearly

obligations per program with the totals from the assistant side of the usa spending. the numbers are off buying as much as one dollar trillion every year. d for any serious analysis. this data is what powers gao reports. discontinuation, it powers a report to congress relies upon. is made toeffort correct the eta, it is true -- the data, the reports are wasteful. we are aware that-- it represents a meaningful effort. your point about trying to work in harmony with omb and other portions of the administration, that is wise, but we have been dismayed to see omb efforts to

alter the act and weaken it. there will be necessary -- >> how do you explain that? if somebody is watching this hearing on television and have no idea what the data act is, just explain another sense, a couple sentences, so somebody who never thought about act says i get it. >> the systems are exposed to the public to the transparency act. as i mentioned to the serious data quality, it tries to move responsibility for those systems to treasury and to establish oversight oddities that will create a more uniform process and imposed reader levels of quality. i believe the current state of the act is up in the air a little bit. in its strongest form, it will create an independent body and

move the oversight of the usa spending system to treasury which maintains other substantial financial oversight systems and could result in usefully analyzable public spending data. >> ok. something we talked about, hiring folks, whether they happen to be cabinet secretaries or entity secretaries, undersecretaries, we think of the efforts of senator schumer and senator out zander. we no longer require quite as many presidential appointees to be confirmed. do we make enough progress? no, i do not think so. i hope we come back in a year or so and do more of that. i don't care whether george w. bush was the president or barack obama was the president, in the last decade, we've seen both

administrations -- we have made it too hard for folks who have been nominated to actually get a fair hearing, an up or down vote, and it was that way would george w. bush was president and it has been that way in administration. i think it is even worse in this administration. rules a change in the which has not been well received, but at the end of the day, some day, democrats will be in the minority and we will have a republican president and we have to figure out how to work to get eggs and regardless of who is in the majority in the white house. i'm not going to ask for political advice. every entity i've ever been apart of, whether it's state government, navy, the federal government, my wife is a career