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

employee with the company and i've watched her be involved with knowledges and universities and the key to almost all of them to succeeding is leadership. if you have strong leadership, be it a company, school, university or agency, i will show you an agency or school or entity that on its way to be more effective with everything that they do. we make it too hard. a hearing withng the federal management subcommittee going through the gao high-risk list. one of the issues we focused on was the cost of weapons systems overruns. the cost is gone from $200 billion per year to about $400 billion per year. first the number two person for acquisition the air force, we said talk to us about how long you have been in your job, what

kind of turnover you got from your predecessor. this was in the bush administration. had beeny position vacant for 18 months before i got there. there had been an acting person in place but not a senate confirmed the person. -- i said toind of me about your direct reports. he said there are six of them but only to our fold. go three or four years forward with the current administration ,nd the person who is before us same job, new administration, what kind of turnover do you get? my job had been vacant for 18 months and we have an acting person in place. it's no wonder we have these huge weapon system cost overruns. we had to be secretary of homeland security who said to us when she and janet napolitano took over leadership of that agency, she said call jean who

runs the gao and sam going to comes on your doorstep and go through your high-risk list. until we have addressed the things that need to be a addressed, we want to get off your high-risk list and lo and notld, they did, especially just being honorable but gaining an unqualified audit for stop -- unqualified audit. with new leadership of jeh johnson, they are determined to lower it again. otheresson are there for deputy secretaries out of that experience with homeland security trying to get off the high-risk list? particularly with respect to dod which has been on the high-risk list forever. for a of appropriate financial management. they deny they have proper

payments and are not even auditable. the marines are trying to get close, but it's a very slow process. give us some advice on a huge asked why hethey robbed banks, they said that's where the money is to give us some advice, please. >> i think you said it already. the vacancies are killers. going to see substantial change when you don't have long-term leadership that can be held accountable for the changes that need to take place. there are a lot of things that can be changed with respect to the appointment process, reduce the number of people going through the pipe, certainly around the management positions would be our number one recommendation. you have the under for management who did a traffic job at dhs and is responsible for amazing things. peace, andht spot you mentioned how important it is to find things that work, that is not happening.

has the only to my knowledge integrated platform on all the management issues across the whole department. ofry other agency i know looks at it and says we would like the same thing. we need to see that wrought up and repeated across government. was around long enough to pay attention to those issues. it -- you're always going to be in the position of being behind the eight ball. if you don't have people in place for the necessary time to be will to focus on the change efforts that require years and years to push through and they have to be at a senior enough level to maintain the pressure and maintain it over time, you don't need senate confirmation for those decisions. you have ample opportunity to control it through the senior

leadership or secretary to have an infrastructure that could keep their eye on the ball. i think we will need a fundamentally important change. the key reasons it's a phenomenally well-managed organization is that the leader has a 15 year term. that kind of timeframe, they own your organization. right now, political appointees are awarded for crisis management and policy development, not the long-term health of the organization they run. they are gone before anyone can hold them accountable. that's my proper point of advice. to oversee that not only a dod, have your senior management position be career folk and make them a performance contract. the one pushback you get on this issue is will they actually be part of the senior team? there's a legitimate question to be asked.

this one is clearly not working in the present system and i think you ought to be trying the other way. >> i think an effort to create a chief management officer within anddepartment of defense the deputy secretary or undersecretary -- >> there is that position today. >> i seem to recall when we try legislatively, i think gordon england said he wanted to be, as a deputy secretary, he should have dual deputyd also have secretary for management. >> look, you'd don't want to manage the issue. that's not always the norm. you need something in place to deal with the variety of personalities that come in. by and large, people selected on the clinical side are not focused on management. they will be drawn into the

policies and you'll lose that on the management. at a senior enough level to drive the management focus you need. >> if you look at a couple of the positions, one is the director of the senses. senses director is appointed for i think five years. they gave the commissioner of the irs a situation -- >> we need more of that. size should not do one it's all and recognize you have a combination of political leaders. some phenomenal managers who have them into the political process and you want to allow that kind of turnover. that kind of infusion of new ideas and energy, that kind of leadership will stop one of the

challenges is getting the senior executive service to step up to plate and that they have that authority. vacancies, they should be leading and can be leading. goals --with free frequent goals and frequent oversight, i go back to where robert was, that needs to happen from the political and executive withr leadership, but also congress. he mentioned the security on a regularcess basis, really driving some change in there are huge opportunities and you can't do a few areas where there will be some coming and going at the same time, if you have congress and the administration regardless of party working together and the career

executive, using the goals, using the measurement and data on a regular basis and being transparent about it, you can get some real change. the meeting i discuss that that national academy of public it ministration will host will involve omg, gao, in each of the organizations responsible for the high-risk areas. will help agencies understand the factors gao uses to judge what on the list and what comes off the list. it's not hard. they are difficult issues, but the basic issues are there. clearly or should focus, implemented to some degree and you can see the implementation of those actions. they have an unheralded multi-administration process whereby they meet regularly,

says progress on these plans to remediate high-risk areas, what gao hopes will happen in the near future is a reinvigoration of that process so you can nudge some areas that have not really made sufficient progress forward little faster. nominated tota was secretary of defense and he and i were colleagues together in the house and i have huge admiration for him. he came by to chat with me a week or so after he had been aboutmed and we talked the gao and high-risk and we focused on financial management in the dod. i don't know is -- i don't know if he had given it much thought. my thought is they did not stop about -- did not talk about improper payments. he and i talked about at that day and he went back to the pentagon and said we're going to get serious about this.

he was succeeded by chuck hagel, another one of our colleagues here who i have huge respect for. we had some conversation and he that of all the other things they are expected to do, fight wars and put down the department of defense will become a better fiscal steward of their operation. marines aree the actually leading the way. >> as their proud auditor, we are side-by-side trying to get them there. hands on deckl moment. the things that are really hard to do, it's like turning an aircraft carrier. two get people on the bridge, you got the folks in the engine room. the department of defense,

these areas, it turning an aircraft air. one of the things i think we are going to do and we had talked a have aabout this is hearing where we have army, navy, air force, marines and maybe coast guard. actually done this and what i'm interested in doing is engendering a little friendly interservice rivalry. we about the three of you are going to try that as well. we have witnesses and are doing oversight hearings and i will say at the end what advice would you have for us, the legislative ,rath -- legislative branch what can we do to support the initiatives we are talking about today. oftentimes, they say more justight will stop

importantly that it's being done well. i've never heard gotcha hearings all stop i've never held a gotcha hearing. i don't think that's the way we should see government. every now and then, we want to get some people straightened out but sometimes we overlook the fact that we need to put a spotlight on good behavior. do you want to say thing on this front? >> sure. to the extent these issues reduce leadership vacuums, it's important to recognize responsibility flows to vendors. haveuld be useful to additional attention paid to this particular problem through whatever means are available. , -- whatvendor lock-in do you mean by vendor lock-in? >> the use of a proprietary

technology may make it more difficult to switch to a different vendor in the future. it may not be technology could be any number of aspects. costt factoring in the during the initial planning process, it's easier to bring things under budget but can ultimately be much more expensive than lead to sub par contractor solutions that need to be avoided. the use of open technologies is one way to address that problem. importantly,r more attention to the procurement system more broadly and workforce, it's known that that workforce is aging in part because the complexity of the fa are makes it difficult to bring new people and and a is exasperated further by problems endemic to this work, particularly agencies that do a lot of procurement. --would

i'm very hopeful congress will actually ask questions about agencies to make sure they are paying attention to this kind of opportunity that needs serious effort as well. can we talk about strategic sourcing a little bit? i don't think it has been mentioned here. we covered a lot of ground. we services

-- >> talk more about that, drill down on that. >> the administration has

suggested that before an agency procures a new financial system, it will have to consider migrating that to an existing agency which offers the same services to other agencies so there is not duplication of financial system procurements. to --mises >> give us an example of that. in need now, the hud is of a new financial system. it includes a system for monitoring the finances of the agency, preparing it for audit, any number of financial activities. before it will purchase a new system and implement a large financial technology system, it will need to strongly consider and likely migrate to another agency, say the department of treasury, which already provides

financial services to other agencies. they have implemented the system before. they've got customers and are responding to customers and that's a way to ensure a successful implementation of a lower cost. your overlap and duplication work is instructive here. you documented the overlap in duplication and government programs, not all necessarily bad, but something to pay attention to. imagine procuring financial systems or services or procuring pencils or procuring the really excellent consulting services of grant thornton. >> i have heard about them. >> all of this overlap and duplication is multiplied exponentially when you are buying goods and services. push hard enough on reducing the amount of spend by

-- in this way. >> i want to speak to three opportunities related to strategic sourcing. it's great the administration has a goal on strategic sourcing and is committed to expanding it. >> why do you think that happened question mark >> i think they first asked the question how many of these similar things are we buying and actually looking at how many of these similar things they were buying and the different prices , they saw aying real opportunity and so to the vendor. the commodity purchases that every agency is buying, it makes sense to look at the pricing and say with our opportunity both to compare prices and to get scale

offers from the vendors themselves. see theellent to administration pushing in that direction. i want to talk about shared services which is one part of the federal government offering services to the other. that priority goal, where they are going to compare cost and quality so other parts of the federal government actually have some basis to choose where to buy. providing herald provider services were things incredibleit's an opportunity and i'm optimistic for serious progress in this area. the thirdto raise area. people are not commodities. you cannot strategic source commodities and it would be great if congress gave legislative authorities to the

federal government to do so,uitment across agencies as max said, cyber security, there are lots of various economists where why should you expect every agency to get expertise in figuring out who the best schools are providing areas, why for those not allow some specialization and let one agency do all the if they get 50 great people, and only get 10, why not let the other agents hired of -- other agencies hire the other 40. >> i think that's and dan are doing a great job on this issue. it's one where there is a lot of opportunity. you ask about the department of commerce.

the acting deputy secretary -- they're going to get the number wrong but literally save hundreds of millions of dollars by getting ahead on this issue. they had leaders that understood the possibilities and that opportunity is there and you have some terrific people who will push on that. there is a, it -- common thematic there and we've done a report on that i would like to submit for the record. it's on the talent issues or the purchasing of goods and services, imagine as the integrated enterprise offers opportunities for efficiencies and effectiveness. there's a big opportunity if we pursue that direction. finally some of the risk -- i know you are interested in customer service issues. one important thing to mary to

these efforts is the focus on creating customer service and government. they are providing an important service to the public and provides a lot of services to internal customers, both in the mission support and mission area. some interesting things have been done at hhs. guaranteee pension program, that is something i hope that's something this committee can initially come to because that would truly transform the way government works. if you wanted to act as an enterprise, that's one of the issues we will run up against. building that in the front end would be very important. >> thank you. >> from the shared services perspective, we think there's

tremendous opportunity there. sometimes there's a trade-off for centralization but there's the opportunity, as has been pointed out for specialization expertise to be developed. to mindple that comes is at regulations.gov, a system used voluntarily by agencies. in part, there's a funding dynamic whereby the cost to maintaining separate systems is lower than an individual's contribution would be even know that contribution would lower the overall system costs and cost taxpayers less money. some centralizing efforts. how wenking through could operate more efficiency -- more efficiently. theave already mentioned initiatives but that's analogous

to what we could see in the future. i want to talk a little bit about workforce morale. the folks on our staff have heard this more than they want to remember. i recount listing to npr on my way to delaware. on my way to catch the train, i listen to npr news at the top of the hour around 7:00 will stop about a year ago, they told that an international study being done, asking thousands of people what is it you like about your work. what brings you satisfaction? some people like doing paid, some people like benefits, some people like pensions or occasions. some people like the folks they

work with, some people like the environment in which they work. thing most people identify was the thing they like about the work as they felt what they'd were doing is important and we're making progress. again, what they were doing was important and they thought they were making progress. we do make some pretty good progress from time to time, but we could always do better. thinking about employee morale, intuitively i think if i , thatorking for somebody we are not going to have a revolving door and not have an acting will be confirmed and another act in for a year or more. we talked a little bit about that.

rank-and-file -- if i were a rank-and-file federal not like towould call on a nameless, faceless bureaucrat. most employees are hard-working, dedicated people and we don't give them the kind respect. sometimes people just want to know they are valued. i think it might have been you, but you may have noted in your recentny that the rankings of best places to work in the federal government -- is that what you call it? barely a quarter of federal organizations improved this quarter. despite challenges like furloughs and pay freezes and the antigovernment rhetoric i alluded to. what are the key factors for these agencies to improve row in

difficult times? morale in difficult times? going to ask the other agencies if you would react to what he has to say and add to what he had to say. and most important differential is leadership cared and demonstrated they cared by focusing on the issue. >> focusing on the issue? >> i did allude to the fact that secretary lahood when he got to the department of transportation, it was the bottom ranked agency. he focused on trying to change that by listening to his workforce. there's a website they created where they brought in ideas from employees and had employees vote

on it. the bottom line was he said it was important and asked -- acted as if it were important. the most important thing he did is he required all of their senior and career people, there valuation would be on whether they focused on employee engagement. but something you could require and what is attractive is there are many, many different kinds of things that can be done. -- what is important is that it is viewed as being important. that leadership is told this is something we care about and this is how we are going to evaluate you. it's learning from the other side. a number of agencies have done amazing things. the patent office went from 177 out of 240 on our ranking list.

this past year, they were number one among 300 subcomponents of government and really important, at the same time, they saw incredible improvement of their outcomes for the public. they had a drop of 20% in the patent that log and saw improvement of the patent application reviews. said he unlocked the potential of the workforce. what did he do? he invited labor unions in and they had real conversations about engaging them and there was a relationship that was highly contentious before his arrival. the head of the main union cried. he built a cadre they're focused on enterprise of the whole organization and invested in that. some basic management issues he tackled -- it would be terrific if this committee rot in a cap owes them heard from those top

impressiveat did things and bring in some of the agencies like dhs will stop there is a lot to be learned across government that would be highly meaningful, but the one thing in addition to you asking the question and focusing on it, the homeland security committee in the house has has a hearings every year around employee morale. that has had impact at dhs. if you require them to build it into their employee senior leadership valuation, that would have a huge impact. to react ornt respond to anything? the workforce trowel? >> think there's huge opportunity here. during the first term of the administration, we put a lot of

effort to getting the employee viewpoint survey data so you could slice and dice it better. survey wasn't being run just .nce every two years as max went out, getting the data back sooner and a format they can actually analyze by thinkzational unit -- i asking the office of personnel management how they're going to build this as a tool for the federal government makes a huge difference. i want to get back to asking congress to look at the eta and asking in a constructive way, possibly even benchmarking across similar kinds of organizations. some organizations are production organizations that are production organization and can use it in a different way than those that are policy shops will stop there are huge

opportunities here and if congress looks especially where there are problems and start asking the question, that opens up opportunity if you do it in the context as max has suggested. benchmarking and similar types of organizations. then asking the ones who are not making the progress was your next step. ? be to the sure i can issues come principally but i can offer the perspective of someone who has watched a lot of fromted people turn away government service because of the challenges it represents. it's a particular problem in the technology agency where its focus toward a younger organization. organizations like code for

america puts young people in government doing technological work. there are two factors worth emphasizing be on the broader point you have made about the need to feel you're making progress and the difficulty of doing that. two problems i would identify that compensation is tilted toward people who are further along in their career and emphasizes credentials to a thisantial step will stop is a glaring problem when it comes to open source technologies and other competitors where there isn't any potential and body. frankly, another issue is the difficulty of making changes when there is a problem with the personnel.

there are countervailing considerations to this, but it's been my experience that a lot of people are persuaded by negative circumstances they encounter. much to add but it's never stopped me before. >> sometimes i find repetition is good. >> your point about language can't be understated. i've been really disappointed about the conversation we've had .bout the federal workforce we tried to change it in the bush administration with no success whatsoever. around theicies workforce has been really damaging and you can see that in the decline overall in the engagement scores. what is important to recognize high engagement as max shows

produces better results at little or no cost. you can get a lot more out of employees that are willing to put up with a lot of crap for the importance of the missions , if the serving leadership will focused on keeping them engaged and motivated. it's a low-cost investment to make in a higher performing government overall. people who said that in order for them to get something done, what they like to do is convince other people it was their idea. what i've been trying to get something done, what i like to do is maybe not convince other people it's their idea, but to feel like they own a piece of the idea.

bit of that's a little what you are talking about will i have a question for all the witnesses. then i'm going to ask senator coburn's staff to come and take their seat and they can ask whatever questions -- he's apparently hung up on the floor. gimme questions you want me to ask for him? for all of our witnesses, i urge we make agencies -- i think the term we use is granular and more uniform. in order to achieve greater transparency. goes too faration or is to prescript this, that

effort may impose too much cost resources fromny achieving the mission. the lease that concern has been raised. right suggest we get the ellenton this regard. granulesk you can take examples too far. it's not possible to track every cent the government tracks through the entire economy. we have an existing disclosure burden that has been in place for decades but isn't working at all. a necessary first up will be to get that particular house in order. the data quality analysis, we are pleased to see the thoroughness with which many agencies told with this inning system. upload theirwould data and check it and found me process had somehow messed it up

and was no longer accurate so they had to go and do it again. this is a system completely parallel to their internal system of checks for managing their accounts and flow funds. this information hasn't been given the priority it deserves is because it is seen as completely parallel and incidental to how agencies and the administration managed their own business. it's seen as something only used by the public and congress which we feel are important users that should be getting accurate information. a lot of the real systems designed and hope that these can -- we will ease the disclosure burden even as we recognize it's important we make

an investment in transparency and oversight. >> this one is open to each of our witnesses. were first negotiating the federal accountability act, the knee-jerk reaction was the requirements being discussion were too burdensome and on implementable. bill was enacted, it became clear all of the data required by the law was already being collected in some form. it looks as though from the taxpayers right to know act that most of those data elements are being collected and some forms by agencies and programs today. i think you can assure yourself with some additional languages that agencies when they are confronted with this new requirement that they first make

sure the data isn't already being collected and reported somewhere before they establish a new mechanism for producing the data. >> thank you. >> i am wholly supportive of the idea of the taxpayers right to and i think the challenge is before adding new data reporting requirements, really inking about what the additional data, what questions it's going to answer. i have some concerns about certain aspects of the proposed legislation. exacerbates it will the silos and duplication issues because if you focus on the program as the primary unit of reporting as opposed to outcomes, it gets everybody to want to protect their turf will

stop i can think of situations around clean water. what's the program? is it the clean water program at the epa or in delaware, which is a program supported by the federal money. water program,ce drinking water program or the inspection and enforcement program? is for iteally want to be about cleaner water. this, it'sall of good to know which ones they are supporting but being careful before adding new requirements to make sure that data are going to be useful to people making decisions and not to make sure i have my dollars for my permit row gram when in fact you might want to shift it to the enforcement program. really not creating a system that reinforces turf and the silos but focuses on the outcomes. i would urge and thinking about the next step in terms of how to

improve the proposed language, bob kaplan and robert porter, two harvard professors are doing some really interesting work on patient focused accounting and cost tracking and they are finding it is reducing cost and improving cycle times. there may be some lessons for the federal government and what they are doing there. before we take the next step and add a new set of reporting requirements, i would think about what are we trying to accomplish with those reporting requirements. one other thing that's worth considering is how the specifics -- how the specifics of the law should work are the front-line workers. whether we are talking about inspectors or policeman, if you actually look at what happens when these reporting requirements trickle down, sometimes you turn that caseworker into a data clerk. instead of inking about how do

you return aided to the data suppliers with value added through analysis that helps make better decisions about what kind of treatment or action they ought to be taking with a person they are trying to help or student they are trying to help or even a facility they are trying to get into compliance, what has worked better in other situations, you want to get the data back to how should they allocate their time? as we add data recording requirements, we need to think about users of the system and make sure we have users that will inform the decisions that will drive it will stop >> thank you. great points.ll all focusedyou are on the cost and the government side. there's an awful lot of time spent by the federal workforce and i think the information

usable is typically not. often that data becomes simply another report that gets thrown over the wall and no one is looking at it. off-the-wall -- >> as opposed to? >> over the wall. we can remove some of the donated -- and needed data collect shouldn't -- i'm going to get the number wrong, but some 300 reports they are doing that no one is reading, can you remove some chunk of those or create a process that is a and help them do what you really want them to do rather than provide data no one is actually interested in and instead spend time on things you somere about, but combined time for the compliance exercises you do care about. that would be enormously beneficial inside the workforce

and for you and the public. lex that's the first cousin to what sons dean tried to do with respect to making sure they're going back and trying to decide do we still need them all. >> his effort was still focused on the outside. no one's ever paid attention to the overhang the government itself is having to deal with and it is enormous. unbelievable stuff everyone has to do that adds no value or limited value at great cost. >> we opened our hearing today with your statements. sometimes when we have a diverse panel together, there's not a lot of consensus. one of the things i like to do is say where did you agree? as it turns out, there's a lot of consensus here, but i want each of you to give a short

closing statement, maybe a minute or so, just to go back and although we have talked about here -- just something you here.like to leave if you don't member anything else, and if nothing else you follow through on -- i think we have some of them, but if there is one terrific takeaway. and mr. lee, i want to call you tommy lee jones -- what might be that one point? >> coming from a transparency organization, i should take a , tont just to emphasize consider some great about the disclosure burden the government faces. they need to be done smartly to make sure they are useful, but ultimately, they can not only find duplicate it were wasteful

activity, they can forestall bad behavior or useless behavior in the first place simply by knowing people within government and outside of government will be paying attention. if there's a single thing to stress, i think it is that. it's important these systems be open to the light of day and useful information can help us produce better government be given to the public. thank you for the opportunity. you to simply implore pick a couple three areas in which you can agree with the administration, deserve your and pursue improvement actions with the agency responsible. you, mr. chairman. once again showing how i would think this

committee for giving attention to management matters. they don't get enough attention and they need or. i would urge you to pick a few areas. mission areas and missions supported areas, just a few where you were with the administration to find what's --king, shyness by live shine a spotlight on it and find what's not working, do some root cause analysis to figure out what's going on and deal with the difficult problems because congress working with the administration can take on some of the problems that neither alone can. would see tremendous progress. >> thank you. >> give me a minute and i can cover three things. thank you very much for doing this hearing and i want to and where i started which is i think the administration is doing important work and need all the support they can get and working in tandem with you a lot can be

done and frankly needs to be done. need to focus on the transition process before the political silly season and presidential stuff starts happening. there are things that could be done that would improve all these things going forward because it all begins where it starts and it doesn't start very well because of dysfunctions in the transition process. talked about employee engagement and concrete things that can be done and it's what something this committee could have an impact on. it's a system just does not meet the needs of today's world and certainly not tomorrow. >> this was two hours well spent and we are grateful for you to spending it with us in the preparation you have gone through and probably years of preparation, actually, preparing you for this conversation. i suspect we will want to follow-up with you on a number of these points.

thank you for that. i really believe einstein had a right -- in adversity lies opportunity. who saysfriend compared to what when you ask them what you're doing. usually when people say how are you doing, i tell them i'm happy. they say how can you be happy, don't you work in washington? how can you be happy with all that gridlock and inability to get along much mark i really believe einstein was right. there's plenty of diversity but there's also -- plenty of adversity, but lots of opportunity. people on both sides of the aisle in both branches and people willing to help us do better. do, i know i can do better in the same is true of the problems we're talking about. with that in mind, hearing record will remain open for 15 days. i think that is until -- what is tomorrow?

april fools' day. the window closes on april 15 at 5:00 for the submission of statements and questions for the record. if you could respond to those questions probably, we would be most grateful. great to be with all of you, thank you to all of you who have served and within this federal government of ours in a number of capacities and those who work closely trying to make our government more effective, we are grateful. with that, this hearing is adjourned. thank you so much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

>> if you missed any of this hearing, you can watch the rest

3. it later tonight on c-span tonight, watch three journalist chosen by edward snowden to receive top-secret nsa files and the impact of their stories on privacy, journalism and national security. .hat's here on c-span3 the communicators talks with the comcast vice president about the proposed merger of the two largest cable companies, comcast and time warner cable. that is on c-span2. also, hearing on girl funding for national, state and local transportation projects. the current legislation is set to expire in september. you can watch that on c-span3. today was the last day to sign up for health insurance at healthcare.gov in order to get coverage in 2014 and avoid a fine for being uninsured under the health care law. we asked for your thoughts on her face but age about the deadline.

--ty said tell us what you think by span.ing facebook.com/c-sp >> the issue is no longer whether to trade. it is how to trade. it is what are the rules of the engagement? the old issue of protectionism and free trade is over. it is history. the argument over the rules of fair trade and how to get our workers and businesses on a level playing field is the debate of the present and the future. our goal must be over time to achieve compatibility between all countries that are trading, just as we have compatibility

between all of the states of the united states. this debate started before the cold war ended. before the wall fell in berlin. war.e cold , our standard of living was rising were locked in a battle with communism. we did not care too much about trade treaties. we never had a debate on the floor that i cannot remember about a trade treaty like this because we assumed economic growth and we always put trade toaties to be subservient defense or foreign policy. nafta and gentlemen, this tonight is the last of the old world trade treaties. americans now realize that our standard of living has been declining for over 15 years. they realize that our most important national goal must be a rising standard of living.

proponents of this nafta represent the past, represent the status quo, and fear of real change. highlightsl -- more on our c-span -- our facebook page. c-span, created by cable companies 35 years ago and brought you today as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. hagelense secretary chuck thefed reporters on how pentagon identifies a recovers u.s. prisoners of war. he also addressed a buildup of russian troops on the ukrainian border. from the pentagon this is about 20 minutes. >> afternoon. happy spring.

you are laughing. it is here. you know that i'm going to leave tomorrow morning for a 10 day trip to the asia-pacific. some of you will be accompanying me on a trip. i think you have seen yet tannery of where we are going -- i tannery -- focus, starting with the defense minister meeting in hawaii for two days and onto japan and china and mongolia. it is to emphasize and rebalance strategic interests of our country, to reassure our allies clear to make our

commitment to our allies in the asia-pacific. this will be my fourth trip since becoming secretary of defense. the meeting in why in the full agenda of the trip underscores the importance of this rebalance and it will give us an opportunity to talk specifically about the issues that we're dealing with in the asia-pacific. all of our partners have security challenges, issues that to peace,cern prosperity, the future of that we haves you all know, been a pacific power for many years. we look forward to continuation of building those relationships and partnerships. stability are key

anchors for prosperity, for economic development, and we rebalance in the asia civic -- asia-pacific with all of those of responsibilities with our focus. it is clear that there is tremendous progress that has been made in the asia-pacific in the last years and it has been areat of a secure area, an that has worked through many of his differences peacefully. its differences peacefully. there are still issues and questions. it is a region that has prospered because they have worked through many of these differences. institution is critically important of that. to have 10 defense ministers in

hawaii on united states soil is important. i'm looking forward to that meeting. turn to another matter before taking your questions. that is the finding and recovering in identifying the remains of americans missing from past conflicts. ais effort is not just a top priority for the department of defense, it is our responsibility and obligation. in february, i directed the acting undersecretary for defense of policy -- defensive so that the dod could more effectively count for missing personnel and ensure their families receive timely and accurate information. based on his recommendations, i

have directed the department to undertake the following steps to aorganize this effort into single, accountable organization that has complete oversight of personal accounting resources, research, and operations. first, we will establish a new defense agency that combines these defense prisoners of war office, theonnel select forcesnd of the life science equipment advertorial -- equipment laboratory. by consolidating functions, we will resolve issues of duplication and inefficiency and build a stronger, more transparent, and more responsive organization. all communications with family members of the missing from past conflicts will be managed and organized by this new agency. second, to streamline the

identification process, a medical corner working for the new agency will the single dod identification authority. they will oversee the scientific operations of the central identification laboratory in hawaii and other laboratories. centralize budgetary resources for this mission. we will work with congress to realize its appropriations into a single budget. --rth, to in search the improve the search, recovery, and identify kaisha and -- identification process. we will have a system containing all missing service members' information. i have directed the department to develop proposals for extending public-private partnerships in identifying are missing. the goal is to leverage the capabilities and the efforts of

organizations outside of government that responsibly work to account for missing. these steps will help improve the accounting mission, increase the number of and applications -- number ofg, identifications for our missing, and include case files to include all personnel. we will continue to do everything we can to account for and bring as many of our mission -- missing and fallen service personnel as possible home to the united states. we have been listening to and consulting with veteran service organizations about how to improve operations. input appreciate their and their support to ensure the full accounting of all of our country's missing service members and we will continue to work closely together as we go forward. lumpkin andank mike his team and i want to thank the

veterans organizations who have been so important over so many effort. this in particular, i want to thank and mills griffin -- anne mills griffin from the national league of families for her many years of service on the project. i have known her and worked with her for over 30 years on many projects. she presented to me a five page, singlespaced, well thought through first identification of the issues, a framing of the , and i got some very solid recommendations on how to go forward. she deserves a lot of credit. her organization deserves credit as well as the institutions and veterans organizations that have been key to this effort for

many years. thank you. >> on that last issue, how to resolve this address with the basic demand of the families of the missing that you provide faster and more reliable accounting? and a second question, can you confirm the reports that russians have begun the point forces back from the border in ukraine? question, if you really break this down as to what we have done here, as to how it relates to the families, we are streamlining everything. we are streamlining the organization, the process, and the resources. what that means to families -- first, they will be communicated with clearly, directly, and it will be communications from one central location that has not been the case. -- location. that has not been the case. they will have a place to go to

to identify updates, questions, concerns. it will not be a one-way street. it will be a two-way street. we will communicate with them. i think another reason the families will strongly support what we're doing is that it helps us do the job. it helps us get the mission accomplished. we have tens of thousands of missing all over the world. it is a difficult, very difficult mission. if we put together a better organization, better management, structure, use of our resources, then i hope we will be far more effective in being able to accomplish the mission of identifying these missing remains and getting these missing or mains brought home -- missing remains run home to the

families. i am encouraged and i again want to say how much we all appreciate the good work that has been done here. poignant,ot a more emotional, more important issue the in dash issue in our system -- in our society today and you know that. you take care of the people who gave their lives to this country and you take care of their families. it has been a critical component of who we are as americans from the beginning of this republic. your second question. , one-wayconfirm, bob or the other whether the russians are pulling troops back from the ukrainian-russian border. president obama made it very there to president putin -- clear to president putin that it will be required and necessary for us to have any further, meaningful conversation about

how we resolve and de-escalate this crisis. it was also made clear by secretary kerry yesterday in conversations with the minister. >> if i could follow-up, is it your understanding that there was an agreement to pull back the troops? >> no, i did not say that. i said that the president told president putin and secretary kerry told minister labral -- lavrov. i was assured that troops were there for exercise. he assured me that they were not going to cross the border and i think mr. lavrov has said the same thing as president putin. there is still a tremendous

buildup of russian forces on the border. >> can you give us a sense of how many troops? >> tens of thousands. >> what you think president putin amassed those troops on the border? do you think there was really any intent to actually enter ukraine with those forces, or that he simply did that as a bargaining chip so that the rest of the world would forget both the fact that they took over crimea and think, well, as long as they're not going into ukraine, they can keep crimea. >> you're not going to like the answer, but i do not know what his intentions were. >> could i ask you about north korea? theartillery firing by north koreans into the western see earlier today, less the medium-range missile firing and their fitness on a nuclear test?

do you worry about what evidence we have that we may be entering a new provocation cycle with north korea. and also, a malaysian mrs. are -- minister talked about traveling to meet you and said he would be asking you to additional capabilities or equipment to help search for the plane. he was not specific in our was wondering if there is any that thel assistance u.s. might be able to practically give to the effort. north korea first. touchnorth korea, i am in with our commander there, the , the supremer commander general. he had a report to bang hours ago this morning -- two hours ago this morning. i think you have the latest.

there has been that aches -- that artillery exchange. the fishing vessel was released. the provocation that the north koreans have once again engaged in is dangerous and needs to stop. actinghe malaysian transportation minister, i have spoken with him twice in the last week. , when he isances requested assistance we have provided that assistance. some of the latest equipment locator, whichr has left australia on an australian ship headed towards this vast area where we all think we may have identified something. just a reminder, that area is

the size of new mexico. this very sophisticated equipment that we have provided, as far as i know, everything the malaysian government has requested of us is really reliant totally on a defined search area. it has tremendous capability, but we are going to have to narrow the search area. i don't know what additional requests you make of me. i certainly will listen carefully to whatever those are. now or the australians in the lead on this. they have been doing a tremendous job. we have provided everything we can, but the australians have this now and they are doing a good job with it. >> the foreign minister announced yesterday that north korea was going to run a nuclear test soon.

had to respond -- how did you respond to that statement? koreans have to stop these provocative actions. we have been very clear on that. obviously, when i am in china that will be a subject that i will discuss with my counterpart in china. >> ukraine has asked the united states for weapons and for other military supplies as they feel vulnerable in light of what has happened in recent weeks. on hows up to speed those deliberations are working through the u.s. government, whether there is any new thinking about what type of aid would be a good idea to render? asked forainians have

materials ands of the request for assistance. it also know that the m re: -- m.r.e.'s have been delivered. they're going to the last cuts of decision-making on what assistance the united states will provide. secretary kerry is in brussels today. he will be there for nato meetings for the next two days. are issueshat these that our nato partners and the united states will be discussing as well. in general was scheduled to specify in front of the armed services committee this week but he was recall. is there any thought to having another general stay there instead of testifying as he is supposed to do? >> the kind of world do we live

in is not a prescribed, weeklong schedule kind of world. depending on issues and challenges that occur, we have the flexibility avoids adjusting our military commanders, depending on where they are required. in the general's case, i think he a smart thing for him to do to have them go back in light of his importance to nato. there was the nato's foreign minister meeting next few days. the supreme allied commander is going to be an integral part of that over the next two days. we're flexible in depending on where we need our commanders. i would like to get your thoughts on this march 14 memo from your department about the banning of tobacco sales on military bases and in the navy

in particular. you were in vietnam. you know how cigarettes are often used iby forces in combat. it is a morale issue. where do you stand on the issue of banning tobacco sales? >> the navy already has taken some action on this over the years. , like any oftart these issues, you look at the health of your force. i don't know if there is anyone in america who still thinks that tobacco is good for you. maybe there are some. the surgeon general 50 years ago made that statement pretty clear. allow smoking in any of our government holdings, restaurants. states and municipalities have clear regulations on this. i think that in reviewing any options that we have as to commissariesgh

sell or continue to sell tobacco is something we need to look at and we are looking at a. it.t i think we owe it to our people. arehealth care costs stunning, well over $1 billion just in the department of defense on tobacco-related illness. but dollars are one thing. -- thelthier people health of your people, i don't know if you put a price tag on that. i think it needs to be looked at. mexico and u.s. military forces have developed a very ande relationship recently they have agreements to support each other in case of natural disasters or other common threats. been any they have not meetings between the secretaries.

do you plan to go to mexico or will the secretary come over here, and what is the current level of cooperation? our mexican troops participating in military exercises with the u.s.? >> i think that you probably know that our secretary of homeland security johnson was just in mexico and met with all the senior leaders, including the president. . will be going to mexico i am not sure we're ready to announce that today. i get nervous when kirby gets too close to me here and tells me not to say something. i will be going to mexico. mexico is a very important partner. we will continue to strengthen that relationship. on the plane. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]

the chairman of the text writing health, maize, and wheeze -- means, and ways committee says he plans to retire. e said that serving with congress was the greatest honor of his life. post" says that his retirement was expected by many in the capital. he is serving congress as 1991. >> it spun about in a circle. the driver wanted to know where the film was a cousin i guess it flew out of her home -- her and. flew out ofing -- her hand. she was looking for her phone.

ricky was stuck in the backseat. she was alive for about 45 minutes before they cut her out. >> hello. and ready tor-old start driving. i am very eager but also very scared. many drivers today are focusing their attention on their cell phones instead of the road. specific show that distracted driving is incredibly dangerous and that cell phones should have no place behind the wheel. something needs to be done about this. >> we have announced the winners of this year's c-span's student camp competition on what is the most important issue congress should address this issue. watch the top 21 video starting tuesday and every weekday

throughout the month on c-span at 6:50 a.m. today, former nato commander general john allen and other foreign-policy experts talk about afghanistan's upcoming presidential elections on saturday. they also talked about the planned troop drawdown at the end of the year. it is one hour and a half long. >> good morning, everyone. welcome to brookings. thank you for coming to discuss afghanistan. i am michael o'hanlon, we have a very distinguished group of american and afghan individuals and officials to talk with us -- former officials and continued scholars and experts on afghanistan to talk about the transitions underway. scholars and experts on afghanistan to talk about the

transitions underway. this upcoming saturday is afghanistan's presidential election. it will probably not be the clues of round, there will more likely than not be a runoff. one will ultimately get a majority in the late spring or even sooner. we will talk more about those details in a second. we have -- see did from your left to right, former ambassador , career foreign service officer and ambassador also in bahrain and algeria. he and his father were both ambassadors to afghanistan, making them along with the adams the only father-son team to be ambassador to the same country. the depth of commitment by this family to this important country. to be very active in his interests in afghanistan.

he and i were there recently on a research trip and he has been many times since being ambassador. general john allen was the commander of international security assistance force through last year at about this time. he retired a year ago today. we thank him and congratulate him for his service. in february 2013 he passed the reins to general dunford. general allen continues to serve the country actively and supports the israeli-palestinian peace effort. he is a distinguished fellow at brookings. we are delighted to see him. the most of experienced commanders. make him one of the longest-serving and most experienced experts on the subject.

he was also deputy commander at schedule command. he was a deputy commanding general for the marines in iraq. atwas a leading u.s. voice the pentagon on asia-pacific policy prior to that. thrill to have him here. i think he is still the only marine in history who was the superintendent at annapolis. for the navy to trust their midshipmen to a marine tells you even more about general allen. cirillo to have him -- thrilled to have him. >> it was called the great experiment. is aneeb sharifi accomplished afghan who has been a journalist throughout his career. like one of the three presidential candidates, abdullah abdullah, he was trained as a medical doctor. inis also interested

afghanistan's future. he has been an analyst for afghanistan awareness and analysis, the place he now works . we will talk about websites in a so you all can learn more from these distinguished gentlemen'. he has also worked for the afghanistan research and evaluation unit uncovered afghanistan for a number of .edia outlets we would like to cover the elections and also everything that surrounds them and everything going on by way of transition and 2014. this is also the year when isaf with end its mission uncertainty at present over what will follow. that will be a key issue. security will be front and center thinking about the elections, the violence the

taliban has been trying to employ to influence the coverage of election. also as we look forward and think about afghanistan's stability. everyone will be thinking about security. the more immediate question is to think about what is going on this week in afghanistan. the first round of elections for president on saturday. there will also be elections at the prediction -- there will also be elections at the provincial level saturday. we will talk amongst ourselves amended to your questions and answers about halfway through. i would like to begin with ambassador ron nuemann, ambassador from 2005 2007 in afghanistan. war: book "the other winning and losing in afghanistan" is one of the best books i can recommend. i want to discuss how he sees the situation today. the stakes and american policy

choices. >> thank you very much. been heavily involved in afghanistan for seven years. at least six of those, if not all seven, has been referred to as "the decisive year" in afghanistan. there is some truth in that. it is a bit like a really orficult graduate program military training program where you have one test after another. if you fail, you are out. if you pass, you get to take another test. the elections are that kind of test for afghanistan. perhaps even more so than for us. if they fail it, it is difficult. if they succeed, they get another chance. we will be going down the line, we have military expertise and afghan expertise. i wanted to talk, since i am the

about what the u.s. needs to think about in its own policy as we start off talking about afghanistan. electionhis will be an that is disputed. there will be a measure of fraud and certainly violence. if not between candidates, certainly from the taliban. important to understand that we really have -- we the u.s. have two goals. they are related and interlocking but separate. one is an acceptable passage of power to a new president with a broadly recognized acceptability by afghans. reasonablyis a better election. the two are related. and conversations show

that afghans care about the transparency of the election. they are excited, despite all the violence. i will do something that is very dangerous for diplomats -- i will make a prediction close enough to the event that anyone remember what you said. a pundit is someone who is frequently wrong but never uncertain. [laughter] i am going to predict that the turnout is going to be heavy in the selection. election,in this notwithstanding the violence. afghans want it. they have a potential to react if they are denied a fair election. there will be a high level of tolerance for what you might call equal opportunity fraud. which i expect will take place all over the country by all the candidates and their backers.

the second goal is progress in democracy. obviously, the two are related. i say the passage of power in a without is reasonable too much violence between , whiching parties afghans except as a higher priority. if you have that, you go forward with building and you have a chance for more elections and more progress. dispute, you are just going down a road of chaos. because thehis difference is a difference of about how america relates to the early results. an academic distinction alone. one that controls policy. our firstelieve, fairly smoothis

transfer of power, we should not be instantly reacting to all the cries and yells of fraud and misbehavior. they will immediately break out after the first vote. afghanistan -- afghan culture is also a shame culture, losing is a shame. even if you lost fairly you will call a fraud because it retains your honor. that is on top of the actual fraud i expect to occur. fact is what we need to be doing is not putting ourselves in a corner and taking rapid positions on fraud. our initial effort ought to be push the afghans out in front, support the election machinery and the electoral bodies as long as they even partially deserve it. council afghan candidates to look to their longer-term interest in their country and not bet everything on winning or death. scenes without

being responsible as the great superpower for the result, to encourage afghans to pull themselves together. this election is not going to be over after the first round. this election is going to be disputed. secondly, it is very unlikely that one candidate makes 50% which is required. there will be two candidates in a runoff. the dispute between number two and number three is likely to take some months or weeks to work out. florida, except with kalashnikovs. [applause] --[laughter] this process will go on for a while and then you have a second round. it is you are not locked into an early view. you need to work with candidates. it could go on for five months or six months, violence is going

to intensify with and as it does. the taliban have declared they are going to make every effort to sabotage the election and prevent it from happening. and to prevent it from being successful. we need to make up our mind of that. i am talking about security, that is someone else's job. >> you are good at it, i will come back for that. thank you for a framing of that. before we talk to general allen, i will go to najib. tell us about what the election is shaping up to be, a little bit about the candidates if you wish or the media coverage -- the role of independent civil society in overseeing this. your confidence the process is going to be reasonably constructive and helpful to the future of the country. whatever we need to understand what has been going on in afghanistan and the choices afghans are poised to make saturday. >> thank you.

good morning, i am glad to be here. let me start from here. talk about the general politics of elections in afghanistan. i will go into some details. thehe current elections, first thing we have to keep in mind is that president karzai will play an integral role in success and failure of elections. he will also play an integral role in who will win the results of the elections. if he puts his weight behind a particular candidate. the second thing is that this election is not about a person. because we do not have an outright favorite. it is mainly about the teams. in afghanistan, evan the same --

in afghanistan, ethnicity plays a role in politics and elections. -- according to the constitution, we have a president and the president has two vice presidents. the first vice president, second vice president. the teams have shaped up in a way that covers, to a large , the major ethnic groups. but because we have four major ethnic groups, every team cannot be complete it will leave out at least one. rolecity plays a prominent in the elections. continuing on the role of ethnicity, the votes of the three big ethnic groups --

hazaras --ajiks, and will be divided. many candidates represent the ethnic groups on different tickets. the only ethnic group that has is the best solidity uzbeks. dr. ghani'sum is on ticket. we have 11 candidates that were in the vetting process by the electoral commission. only eightwe have candidates because three of them dropped out in favor of other candidates.

one of them abandoned the elections. is toason they do this secure political concessions from the candidates who have the best chance of winning. and administrative positions. we have these candidates that we expect to have more withdrawals. in the coming week in favor of the front runners. ,ainly, dr. zalmai rassoul believed to be a favorite candidate. i have got some other facts about the election. they are extremely striking. biggest election ,onitoring organization issued

the glare the results of a survey they carried out a couple months ago. afghansurvey, 92% of support elections. 92% of afghans. only 5% are against the idea of elections. public, the survey covers all parts of the country. 50% of them are women, 50% are men. have said they will take part in the elections. again, that is striking. in previous presidential elections the turnout was below 30%. around 29% or something. is -- another important fact

, taliban attacks have intensified in afghanistan. with the intensification of th desire --s, people people's desire has increased to vote and express themselves, mainly in opposition. mainstreamt that the media and social media have made this significant role in enhancing the civic role of afghan citizens. which is a huge change in afghanistan. have -- a going to of national observers. unfortunately, we will not have a lot of international observers

because of security concerns. about 65,000 national observers across the country. among 6,775 voting centers 8ecause of security centers, 7 8 voting centers will not be operational. places where there is insecurity and observers cannot take part. -- there the parts voting stations that are the most vulnerable to fraud. this is the experience we had in 2009. for thatyou very much overview. as we get into a second round after we hear from general allen, we will talk more about the major candidates and what

they stand for and who they are. i will make sure i mentioned their names. we have heard them in passing. we have former foreign minister rassoul, thought to be president preference. president karzai has avoided making any public endorsements so far. we have former foreign minister the runner-up in the 2009 race to karzai. he also has a mixed tajik-p ashtun background. withlosest association afghanistan during the difficult years, he stayed in the area during the difficult years of the 1980's and 1990's, partially as a physician and partially as a leader in the northern alliance. and then we have dr. ashraf g and aa friend to many ndc

former world bank economist. he has been finance minister in afghanistan and has helped in various advisory roles. he was also a candidate in 2009. he has done quite well in polling so far. we have these three candidates who look to be the strongest. everyone will want to talk more about them. first, general allen, a lot to talk about with security. of the casual american consumer of news media is deteriorating security, especially with the tragic attacks of the last couple weeks. help us understand this in context. including the question of what the afghan security forces, what they are now doing in the country as we downsize. >> thanks a lot, great to be with you all this morning. i am a bit reflective, it is a retire. a day that i you can depart afghanistan but you can never leave afghanistan.

there is not a day that goes by that i do not think about the wonderful afghans with whom i served and with whom i felt such great affection. of reflection today for me, i see a german uniform and audience. probably many folks from diplomatic missions here to represent many of the 50 countries that served in that coalition. i just want to remind his audience as i remind every troops have0,000 served at the height of this war. they performed magnificently. seldom have we seen so large and so capable a field force do so much for the good of the country when it has such capacity for destruction. it is a great example of how one countries to come together with a common set of values, they can make a contribution in a difficult environment.

for the u.s. and the coalition, we are exceptionally fortunate to have a fellow by the name of joe dunford commanding in afghanistan. it has been -- beyond his many personal and professional characteristics which recommend him for this very difficult job -- it has been a long time since we have handed an american or nato commander a more challenging set of missions than joe dunford is attempting to undertake. with some significant success. there is a saying that the farther away from afghanistan you become, you are far more remote from the circumstances. when you get closer it looks better than from the distance. joe has done a magnificent job in handling what i would say are five major tasks right now. they could have been done in a

resident's order at one point. tomorrow, we will be insi de 8 months remaining on the isaf mission. these are tasks he is executing concurrently. it requires leadership and skill in planning operationally and logistically. the first is to maintain the very delicate advisory and support balance isaf the -- the isaf forces continue to have with the ansf, the afghan national security forces. the afghans are leaving most of the operations. while the last fighting season was the first fighting season where they have full operational control across the board, this will be the first fighting season with that kind of experience under their belt. equilibriumdelicate is advising and assisting as the afghans continue to move to the front and continue their operations in terms of securing

the local population and also in dealing with the taliban is extraordinarily important. the second thing joe is doing, i am going down one through five. i want to make sure everyone understands that some of these occurring are concurrently. as the pressures of the campaign continue to increase, the clock ticks down to december 2014, you can get a sense of the enormity of what we are undertaking and requiring of our military. ofntain equilibrium advising, assisting, and supporting. the second is the retrograde enterprise. over the last year, general dunford and his team have had to close down several hundred basis. we started with 800 when i took a man. bases in a closed long time. we closed 500 in the first year. we needed to get down to a platform of 10 bases to 12 basis

by the end of this calendar year. when you have bases with as many as 30,000 people, bagram and kandahar, the two largest. is as muchse bases an operational commitment to keep the logistics platform relevant to the campaign as it is simply closing the base itself. he is roger grading the excess is retrograde and the excess material that has been accumulating for over a decade. when i took control, we found we had 60,000 excess armored vehicles and 100,000 shipping containers will spare parts. he has been working to move that out of the theater as quickly as he can. the third part is sending home the troops and their organizational equipment. advise, assist, and support.

the retrograde enterprise. the third area is a transfer of tasks. on any given day, the isdquarters of isaf undertaking several hundred different tasks in the execution and accomplishment of the mission of this campaign. as time goes on and as isaf continues the process of moving towards the completion of its mission, those tasks will have to go somewhere. many will be completed and that will be the end of that. a number will transfer directly to the follow-on mission. at this point, nato's follow-on mission will be called operation resolute support. a number of the tasks will to higher headquarters in europe or central command. some of those tasks will go to civilian agencies, both on the u.s. side and within the

coalition. some will transfer directly to the afghans. right now, as we transfer these tasks, we will have to be careful we do not overburdened the afghans at this critical as they continue to get their legs under them operationally and militarily. the fourth task is providing support to the afghans who have the responsibility for the security of the election. this obviously is extraordinarily important. the planning that was done, the intent was that the afghan national security forces would have the lead for the security of the election. and the police close army providing outer court in support -- the army providing outer cordon support. trying to disrupt the elegant formations as much as they can.

-- trying to disrupt the taliban formations as much as they can. you enter send the troubles we have had recently in kabul. have the attacks in kabul received a lot of attention, they did not have a widespread effect. they did achieve attention and cause concerns about the security of the city. at the same time, those attacks -- what is not necessarily understood or receiving very much attention is the activities specifically targeted against the taliban to keep them off balance and disrupt their support areas. generale final task dunford is undertaking is the task associated with receiving the force that will be coming in, supposing that the bilateral security agreement will be signed.

and employee that force to the end of his mission. then begin the resolute support on january 1, 2015. remember thist to activity is occurring in an environment where the taliban is on the attack. the taliban are right now heavily invested in both attempting to disrupt the election, the preparations for the election, and appearing to have the kind of omnipotent across the country that can shake the confidence of the population. it is a really good point and an important point that the afghan people are extraordinarily proud of their police and military. themfghan people have seen fight a very hard fighting season in 2013. a lot of casualties and they gave as good as they took. there was some ground lost but much of that ground was recovered, only redoubled the determination that the selection is all about their future.

me as i surprise to have watched this process unfold over the last year and i have been in touch with afghans that this election and the outcome and the peaceful transition of power from president karzai to whomever will follow is very important to the average afghan. process is whole underway with the taliban attempting to disrupt it as much as they possibly can. it is worth reminding everyone that the afghan theater is 400 miles inland, this is a landlocked theater in which we have been conducting hostilities and combat operations now going on 13 years. for general dunford, his team, for our civilian to my partners and the interagency, the pressures are increasing every day to juggle the many different balls associated with security. equilibrium so

we deliver the afghan national security forces to the point where we want them and we have mission.e of the isaf bringing the resolute support mission in. so we have a clear transition in the post by 14 period. will talk more about the election and the candidates. coupleamplify and at a clicks sacked before going to run again. -- i will amplify and add a couple quick facts before going on to ron. more than 85% of all total arm strength in afghanistan is afghan. the nato coalition is down to below 50,000 troops. when general allen, he had 150,000 troops. he began downsizing, about 1/3 down.

now we are down 2/3. more than 85% of fighting forces are now afghan. last year, they carried out 95% of all the operations. they either let them or carry them out themselves. this is an important point that is both sobering and tragic. took 4000 700 fatalities. the afghan army and police. 2013, twiceies in the number we suffered through the war. i know we deeply regret the sacrifice of our own men and women. it is worth noting the afghans suffered 4700 fatalities last .ear it is those lives that have been lost. it shows that the taliban is still strong. five