but in this administration, it did. also something that many of us have had problems with is the authorization and use of military force going back to september, 2001 after the 9/11 attacks, gave the president way too much power. some thought it was ndaa that it gave too much power. it was amuf. a a gohmert amendment amended that. i feel better under this ndaa because it is not continued anymore. that was a good thing. but the problem is the ndaa, this massive national defense authorization act that is a big important bill got to the rules committee last night. we didn't have a chance to read it. and i'm anal enough, i try to read these important bills. and i didn't have time to read this bill. what happened to our 72-hour

promise? actually, it was a three-day promise and has been whittled down since then. but we didn't have the three days that were originally romised by republicans. the bill, i knew it would increase tricare costs. wasn't happy about that. i voted know against a procisthat takes something as important as our national defense and said here you go, here's the whole thing, trust us, vote for it. we didn't have a chance to review it. what -- were there any powers in this thing given additionally to the n.s.a.? is there any more power to spy on americans under this bill? i don't know. i couldn't vote for a bill that as launched on us last night that's this important, and i

deeply regret it with the good things that were in here, and there were numerous good things, well thought out. but you can't push a bill this important on us, especially when we know there are problems , we just don't get a chance to find them. can't vote yes. i couldn't in good conscience vote yes. one additional ironing, mr. speaker, i run for republican study committee chair and i knew if i were elected chairman of the republican study committee i would still vote as representative of my district in texas. but i also knew if i were representing a majority of the feelings of the republican study committee, i should not and would not be in position to speak out as bowledly against the majority of the -- boldly against the majority of the people in my organization, but maybe it's fortunate i'm not the r.s.c. chair so i'm here to complain about the abuses when they happen by our own leadership.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa, mr. king, for 30 minutes. mr. king: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, it's my privilege to address you here on the floor of the united states house of representatives, and i always appreciate that opportunity to come here and voice some of the things that our expressions often of the voices of my district and also the voices of iowans, the voices of the american people. and i happen to live in a place that is the best place in the world to live and raise a family and anchor of the values that are there and the culture in the neighborhood are reflected in the people. and i rise today and i come to the floor to express my sadness at the passing of a very, very

good friend and a great man, dwayne alonz. dwayne alonz passed away saturday night after a short but brutal illness with cancer. his life meant so much to so any of us. he lived in sioux county and sioux county is if i fell asleep in a park and woke up i would feel like i had died and gone to heaven. it has the best faith and education and families and culture and work ethic and neighborly. it's got the best balance of anyplace i know and dwayne alonz contributed so much to that and almost all of my years i was in the state legislature i served in the senate while he served in the, when i needed a partner on a cause it was

dwayne alons that i called upon. he was someone that helped on my side or if he needed help same we stood in the philosophical and ideological square year after year after year. when the six-year endeavor that i had embarked upon in 1996 and early 1997 to establish english as the official language as the state of iowa, that effort came up short in the general assembly. that was 1997 and 1998. then in 1999 and the year 2000, that effort came up short again. but in the next general assembly, i talked to dwayne alons and he agreed that he would be the individual carrying the bill in the house of representatives and there in hat general assembly after six years of trying we were able to

pass english as official language from the senate over to the house and there representative dwayne alons floor managed the bill and we were able to put that bill on then-governor tom vilsack, a democrat's desk, where he signed the bill that established english as the official language of the state of iowa. that was a crowning achievement of much of the work we had done together. we also opposed the iowa supreme court's decision called varnom v. brean when the supreme court kind of magically, anonymously designeded in the ratification of our state constitution and their equivalent of the 14 amendment or the equal protection clause that they said marriage didn't necessarily have to be between a man and a woman. we were able to pass legislation earlier in 1998 that established that a marriage in iowa would be

between one male and one female. representative alons definitely supported that. and when the judges decided they could rewrite iowa law without a legitimate, legal and logical constitutional basis, it was dwayne alons that stepped up to defend marriage between a man and a woman and he did so without apology. he did so without reservation. he did so because he always acted on his convictions. he carried deep convictions. he had a style not at all similar to mine. a quiet, understated, respectful style, a strong, faithful man who is also a prayer warrior. whenever there was a bible study group you could look around and dwayne alons and his wife would be there. i would like to chronicle some of the milestones along in his life that he represented the fourth and then i think later on the fifth district in the state of iowa but also he oined the air force and became

, he was a fighter pilot, rose to the rank of brigadier general, the 185th, the beloved 185th. he raised a pilot, son, kevin. that example before his four children was one they acted on. he had such an influence on their lives, the lives of their four corner children and their 14 grandchildren. a quiet, respectful, stayed, resolute voice that lived by example and when he spoke you knew he wanted to hear what dwayne alons had to say. he was -- he was stricken by cancer in september and taken just right after thanksgiving, t his wife, clarice, 47 plus years and the four children they raised and the 14 grandchildrens and the daughter-in-laws and

son-in-laws remember dwayne, remember them as i did, grateful to god that we had him as a gift to us and an opportunity to get to know him and an opportunity to call him a friend, to work with him, to pray with him. on his last days, i had the privilege to stop and see him in the hospital where i think we all knew he was in his last days and was able to go to his bed side and hold his hand and offer a deep prayer with and for him and the strength he had left after i said amen he said, now i'm going to short prayer of my own which i could hear. i could barely hear, but in that there was a message to me, don't let up, don't give up, keep up the fight, keep up the fight. as dwayne did for his whole lifetime in a quiet and polite and respectful way but as a leader, he led by example, he led by conviction, he led what the moral authority of a man

who knew who he was, a man who understood his faith, a man who understood the constitution and the rule of law, the structure of government and his role in society as a father, as a grandfather, as a husband, as a friend, as a state representative, as a brigadier general in the air guard and as a father of another officer in the guard. and so as i think about dwayne alons and think about having to say goodbye to such a friend, i look at the back of the announcement here for the funeral and it couldn't be more fitting and something that i -- of course, i think the language has been embedded in the hearts and the minds of the american people and it's the poem "high flight." as an f-16 pilot, as a general, he always saw the clear blue skies and the high flights is is this. o i have slipped the surely bonds of earth and danced the

skies on laughtered silver wings. some were i dived and joined the tumbling merth of sun-split clouds and done a hundred things you have not dreamed up. wheeled and soared and swung high in the sun lit silence, hovering there i've chased the shouting wind along and flung my eager craft through footless hills of air. up, up, the long delirious burning blue, i've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace where never lark or eagle flew and while with silent lifting mind i've trod the high, untrespassed sanctity of space, put out my hand and touched the face of god. that was the life of dwayne alons, my pheasant hunting friend, my legislating friend, my bible studying friend, my air warrior friend and my prayer warrior friend, general,

representative dwayne alons, may he rest in peace, mr. speaker. and i appreciate your attention to his life and the opportunity to place some of these memories into the congressional record here. his last ask of me and his last prayer which was not for him but for me tells me something about the sacrifice and the will of the man that we have lost as a servant to our country but his inspiration lives beyond. keep it up, don't let up. understood the constitution. and here we set today, mr. speaker, with the president who luctured on the constitution for 10 years -- lectured on the constitution for 10 years as an adjunct professor at the university of chicago and many times lectured about the separation of powers, article 1 is the legislative body of government. this congress, comprised of a house and a senate.

article 2 is the executive branch, the president and the people he gets to command. article 3 are the courts. and the separation of powers that was defined by our founding fathers, this was not three equal or co-equal branches of government, not designed to be, mr. speaker. they were instead -- they were designed to be a preeminent branch of this government as the legislative branch, article 1. the branch closest to the people, most responsive to the people and most accountable to the people. and of the legislative branch, of the article 1, the two bodies of the senate and the house, it's the house of representatives that's established to be the quick reaction force. up for election every two years so that if the people are dissatisfied with their representatives in the united states congress and the policies that we bring forth, then the people have an opportunity to change out those

seats in that house of of esentatives, all 435 them, each two years they're up for election or re-election. if the people decided they wanted to throw out all 435 of us, they had a chance just about a month ago today. and if they decide two years from now, short a month, that they want to throw out everybody in the house of representatives, that's what they do. our founding fathers wanted that restraint on this house. they wanted this house to have the most control. they wanted the house of representatives to be where most ideas originated. not all of them. most of them, and they wanted us to be the place where we fought out these ideas, brought it -- each of us represents 750,000 or so people here. each of us in the house of representatives represents about that many people. out there in america, 316 or so million americans, all of the good ideas that this government

needs to consider are out there in the hearts and minds of our people. and our job in this constitutional republic is, go home. listen to the people whom you have the honor and the privilege to represent, listen to them, exchange ideas with them because we're not charged to be devoid of ideas and simply carrying their ideas here, we're charged within this republic of having a responsibility to get informed, stay informed, do this full time so we're giving all of our heads, all of our hearts and all that we can to this job that we have, we owe our constituents our best effort and our best judgment and that includes go home and listen to them, gather the best ideas that can come out of our districts, bring them here and each one of these seats in this place should have within it, within the mind and within the records and within the staff of each one of us and our staff,

we should have the best ideas that come from our district and they should be incorporated with the best and bring this idea into the marketplace and test them. and we are evaluating the best ideas that come from the other 434 members of congress that come here with the best ideas they can gather. and throughout that, all of competition of ideas and debate the regular order that we ought to keep here, then those ideas get written into bills and those bills need to go before subcommittees for hearings and need to go before the full committee for markup so the people in the ki who have the most information and out of committee, it need to come to the floor, where the rules committee should be allowing the maximum input from the members. there is not one single member

of this house of representatives that has the market cornered on all good ideas and not one single member that they ought to have more leverage than everybody else thrfment has to be a leadership structure. but that doesn't mean there is only one or two or three places where the idea can be approved. it is the best ideas that can come from the people of the united states of america. that is the structure and we should have the closest thing to regular order that we can maintain. if it means we work longer and harder, we should do that. and we should send our best ideas over across the rotunda to the senate and there in the senate, they can generate ideas, too, but they are up for re-election once every six years. they have a different attitude about what they can vote for and what they are willing to support and what their leverage might be. but in the end, this is about

bringing the best ideas that exist in america, process them through this competition of ideas in this great debate forum we have. well, mr. speaker, sitting here in this police, we have a president that thinks he does all of that, we have a president who thinks even though he lectured on the constitution and separation of powers and understands that all legislative power and authority exists in the congress, not in the president of the united states, it exists in the congress of the united states. and when you look at our founding fathers, they had a habit of putting things down in priority order. one of those examples that i would place into the record here, mr. speaker is in the declaration of independence. that's not an independent document from the constitution. the declaration is the promise. the constitution is the fulfillment of the promise that is in the declaration. life, liberty, pursuit of happiness in that order.

didn't say pursuit of hopeness and life and liberty. that's because there are are priorities. life is the paramount right. it takes precedents over any other right. the second was liberty, god-given liberty and our founding fathers are the one that put it on the paper and pledged it to that cause and pursuit of happiness is not not just envisioned by our founding fathers, like this endless tailgate peat. it is the development of the whole human being, some pronounce the greek term, and that means the development of the whole human being physically, mentally, spiritly, intellectualy, knowledge-based and someone enjoying the rights

of life and liberty is ontributing back to that civilization. that's what pursuit of happiness is. but it is trumped by liberty and liberty is trumped by life. no one in the exercise of their liberty can take someone else's life and no one in pursuit of happiness can't take away someone's liberty or life. i would point out that our founding fathers envisioned that they wrote it in the constitution, article 1, they didn't start out with article 2 or article 3. if they declared article 1 to be the executive bamp of government, one might be able to read into this that the president has more power. they made sure the people had the power. they wrote in article 1, article 1, section 1, all legislative powers herein granted shall be

vested in the congress of the united states, which shall consist of a senate and house of representatives. that's an irrefuteable first truth in the constitution of the united states. that's what barack obama taught at the university of chicago. that is the foundation of article 1. the president of the united states, he's -- he embodies the top of the executive branch of government. and it says in the beginning of article 2, the executive power shall be vested in the president of the united states of america, and shall hold his office during a term of four years. and the president and in the first sentence has this massive power. no where in article 2 does the say the president has the power to legislate because it is reserved for the congress of the united states and very sentence. excuse me.

>> and so this little lecture that i have provided here, mr. speaker and i know you know all of this to be fact, similar to the lectures i imagine the president delivered at the university of chicago and it reflects the expressions he has made of his constitutional understanding, at least 22 times into the public record when he says i don't have the authority to grant amnesty and i'm summarizing this, of course. he wouldn't use that word himself. he said he didn't have the authority on march 28, 2011 at a high school here in washington, d.c. he said i know you want me to pass the dream act. you are studying the constitution and you know i don't have the authority to do that. the congress writes the law.

the legislature writes the law. i'm head of the executive branch and my job is to enforce the laws and the judicial branch is to interpret the laws. pretty consist interpretation of what this constitution does. >> excuse me, mr. speaker. pretty concise description of what the constitution does. that statement, at least 21 other statements by the president of the united states in his declaration, his declaration that he didn't have the authority to legislate. the lo and behold president of the united states -- the president of the united states had a change of heart. he stopped saying he didn't have the authority for several

months. didn't seem so curious because he was floating trial balloons about executive amnesty. floated out june, july, august, september, october and announced at some point or leaked it out that he wouldn't commit his executive amnesty until after the election for fear there would be consequences for such a thing and so he held back. and then, a couple of weeks ago on a thursday night, he gave an address at 8:00 on a thursday night to a national audience that more or less laid out his executive amnesty, which, as many times been characterized as unconstitutional. and so the president then decided he could write immigration law and he could waive the impolice station occasion of the law and for vast

classes and groups of people that he defined in his executive edict. that number of people may be five million. whenever there has been an amnesty, there has been a massive amount of fraud and significant amount of under estimation of the real numbers, whether it's five million or multiplier of five million. i don't think anyone thinks it's going to be less. we have a bunch of people who came into america that committed the crime of illegal border crossing and some who overstayed their visas. they have committed a serious misdemeanor and in both cases, the law removes them from the united states. that's what the law is. the president has decided they could create these classes of people, exempt them fl the law and reward them and a work permit. and some of it is going to turn into green cards.

and so, this has been a massive effort to you superthe authority of the united states -- usurp the authority of the united states. to take care that the laws be is hfully be executed, he obligated to take care that the laws are executed and instead, he is taking the constitution, separated out article 1 of the constitution, torn it out and said i do the law, too. folded it, put it in his shirt pocket and walked away from the podium in the east room that night. now here we are, we are a nation thrown into a constitutional crisis, a nation that was struggling to respect the rule law as far back as ronald reagan's 1986 amnesty act.

i believe he would veto the 1986 amnesty act because anything less meant there would be another amnesty, another amnesty and when you reward law breakers you get more law breakers. i have been trying to restore the rule of law and watched it eroded by each succeeding president. but no one has eroded the president for the rule of law from the white house nearly to the extent as this president. and so, as i see what's happening in america, i have been wanting to and working in this congress to restore the pillars of american exceptionalism. you find them in the bill of rights, but just in the first one, freedom of speech, religion, press, the right to assemble and petition the

government. second amendment's right to keep and bear arms. the bill of rights is replete with pillars of american exceptionalism. if you pulled it out, this great shining city on a hill that is built upon those beautiful rble pillars of american exceptionalism and a greatness of the people that are here, you pull any of them out, we don't become the great country that we are today, but the rule of law, mr. speaker, the rule of law, the exceptional pillar of american exceptionalism and no man or woman is above the law and we get equal protection and treated equally. that rule of law is an essential pillar of american exceptionalism without which we could not have become this great

nation and neither can we sustain ourselves as a great nation. but i'm watching as it is torn apart by an individual who knows better. we know he knows better, because he lectured for 10 years better and gave us 22 speeches across the country that told us he knew better and then flipped and did this to throw this america into a constitutional crisis. then, what are our alternatives here in the house of representatives and in the united states senate? we have a majority and the republicans coming into the united states senate, nine freshman republicans that will arrive on the floor of the united states senate to take their oath of office in january, 2015, not that long from now. here in the house, we are going to end up with 247 republicans, a pretty good-sized majority, the largest majority we have had

since the roaring 20's. 15 new republicans in the seat of the house of representatives. some say, well why don't we just wait and we'll pick some better ground to fight on and can fight better maybe in january, so let's do a continuing resolution, maybe we'll just kick the omnibus can down the road until september 30 but we surely can't do this or can't let the president shut the government down. we aren't going to defund the president's lawless act. . now, if we don't use the tools carefully given to the house of representatives, especially, but also to the senate that gives the power of the purse to the congress, in the federalist papers it's very clear our founding fathers made clear that we would have the power of the purse because with the

power of the purse it controls everything the executive branch does if we so chose. we can write language that's limiting language. we can write language that says, here's all the money you want, mr. president, you already soared through $17 trillion in national debt and now $18 trillion in national debt, we'll scoop you a few more billions of dollars, in fact, trillions of dollars over there and you can spend whatever it is we agreed in the discussions with senator reid and the president of the united states that we're going to provide for money. because we don't want to fight. huh. we don't want to fight. yes, we do. we have an obligation and we have to. money can be compromised. if money is not a prain pal, the constitution of the united states cannot -- principal, the constitution of the united states cannot be compromised, it is a principal and we have -- it doesn't say we

have this caveat. it doesn't mean this is too painful to me. i won't do it. it doesn't mean that i disagree with the policy so i'm not going to defend the constitution. it means, you uphold the constitution come what might may, without with regard to policy complications, political implications, to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the united states. that's our oath. and if the president doesn't keep his, we're ever more obligated to keep ours. that's what we must do and the most reasonable tool that we have is the tool that defunds the president's lawless executive edicts. that's what must be done and it must be done on appropriation bills that are must-pass that the president wants which means now, given an understanding that they continued to issue

permits throughout the government shutdown 14 months uscis.at's under they function during a government shutdown issuing daca permits. another lawless -- daca, the deferred action for childhood arrivals, and they continued to exercise this nonprosecutorial discretion morton memos. they were doing those things, mr. speaker, during a government shutdown. so they declared it apparently to be an essential service or they went off on the loop of it being fee-based. we can write language in the next appropriation bill and it should be a very short c.r. that gets us into next year and that language must shut off the funding to the president's lawless act that he committed and knew what he was doing. we need to do it now. it's a matter of principle. you don't get to decide when you're called upon to keep your oath of office. you don't get to decide there's

going to be another time, a better time. if we vote to fund the president's lawlessness, mr. speaker, if we do that, we don't get our virtue back in january, february, march -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. king: so with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities towards -- personalities towards the president. for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? mr. king: mr. speaker, i move the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the house stands adjourned until noon on monday next for morning

>> it would be an act of monumental error. people letters to their will and denial about the choices of the white house. work week, the has will to keep it government open and keep our leveraged summer we reinforcement in the senate with a strong positions to take additional actions to the president unilateral actions. based on numerous conversations with our members.

yesterday, the house to case simple but powerful step to to help individuals with disabilities across the country. not only help them earning, that will help them make a stronger future. it is a wonderful step that we took. to thank the members of this project. help ave an opportunity to our economy grow, unfortunately, the president blocked a bipartisan solution. instead, the has prevented to stop taxes on hard-working americans. in the new congress i would the president to submit a new authorisation for the use of military force regarding our efforts to destroy isil.

reminded the president last month that he is still the commander-in-chief, he should and w the military force write a new muf. work to build a bipartisan support for the measure. have would ublicans be ready to work with him. the white house needs to show some action and strategy to reverse the terrorist momentum on the ground. i have great concerns that the president is not going to accomplish his goal of destroying isil. and need a more robust compliance of strategy, that should start with a new authorisation of military force.

>> [inaudible] >> we think this is the most practical way to fight the president's actions. listen to our members and to other members. >> is going to be a priority the house next year? trying to do en trade for the last years. the president has to work the get bipartisan support.

>> why do you do this instead of for immigration? >> appropriators have a lot of work to do. as a result, it makes up difficult to come with an on the nt on the senate approbation package. >> [inaudible] >> i expect bipartisan support to pass the bill. >> [inaudible] >> there are a lot of options on the table and i am not going to get into hypotheticals.

, generally will have a republican house and republican senate and will have a strong position to take action. 911 members of the commission says there only if you their recommendations have been filled. is very congressional of homeland security with committees, do that any plans to try to consolidate that? >> i have been working on this for around six years, should up e been done when we set the homeland committee. they do not have the sufficient jurisdiction to do the job in a strong way as possible. as you are aware, that jurisdiction rests in other committees which are not interested in giving it up. >> [inaudible] >> you could, if you get members to agree.

a lot of members think that republicans don't have that against a everaged unilateral decision. >> as i have made clear we are limited in our options to deal with this. there are options out there and will continue to pursue them. >> mr speaker, the yellowing -- are the affordable you allowing to let the

affordable care act go through. >> we have voted to stop this, hurting families and others. of effort ut in a lot against that, but come january we will have a republican senate and house and will be in stronger position to deal with not only the issue of the the ident violating crustacean -- constitution but stronger position. you cutting the budget? >> the more the president the more ut his ideas inpopular they become.

a lot of has been unrest, especially with ferguson. tractors in our society, i think the american want to understand more of how the facts work. there is a lot of unanswered questions. a department of justice are others, they suggested that they may need to be hearings. i do think that the american people deserve more answers what really happened here, and was our system of justice handled properly. >> youu prissy any changes

next week and this tax issue to fund the government? out a think we have laid reasonable options. this did not happen overnight. we have worked with many of our members. >> the authorisation bill, have you read it? >> i am well aware of the bill. safety regulations -- [inaudible]

>> i am confident that all of those will be solved. >> you said that you have concerns about the in the nt 's strategy islamic state, you believe that any new authorisation of force should include american troops on the ground leading the fight? going to special the president should suggest. i do believe that a more comprehensive and robust is certainly in order it we are going to defeat and destroy isil. thank you. >> the house is out for the rest of the week, earlier they

passed the defence act. they also approved a measure aiming to block the president's executive order in immigration. with debate be back on emergency and funding the government. current funding expired on december 11. today, from senators debated during the christian science monitor breakfast. club is asked about the executive order on immigration. which have men and women

are very competent. let them do their job, move it to the floor, state late, stay vote on it, day and quick acting like a bunch of chickens. i am hopeful that things will move. they have to do that, we should have done this on 2007. the amount of current ms eyesore into thousand seven on immigration bill was extremely disappointing. it was one of the things that pushed me to move over and do something else. do this on will pieces, they could move it in three pieces. border security, the piece situation and a

way it reasonable cannot be defined as amnesty. >> some of the comments from earlier today. the questions ll and comments later today, we will have that at 8 pm. and the washington journal, richard beary will talk about police department after ferguson. will be taking your phone calls and facebook comments, all on the washington journal live tomorrow, and every morning at 7 am eastern. >> here are some of the programs you will find this weekend on c-span network. live coverage of the memorial chicago for former mayor marion barry.

and a question-and-answer with former correspondent. new hampshire assistant professor on how the not the haven was of racism. our ay at noon, conversation with arthur brooks. saturday at 8 pm martha jones on famous lives and the law. from secretary of state james baker on the fall of the berlin wall. let us know what you think about the programs you are watching.

this is an conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. chuck hagel published a report of a number of sexual assault in the military. this is about an hour. >> good afternoon. president obama wanted a back on the progress in the fight against sexual assault in a military. gen dempsey and generals know reported on the president this week on the review.

i will announce the latest actions to improve the prevention and response efforts. want to thank everyone, many involved in this, but i want to thank everybody who was involved in this compounds of review. it was organised and supported by the defence department. to thank in particular for the personal readiness, jess white. announced her retirement after years of distinguished frauds for this country. i have to issue a stay on the was until this mission complete, she did, and i appreciate that.

women of this department appreciate this as well, thank you for your service of this country. many, long and distinguished given to this e country. also general snow, thank you. thank you for what you have done, your direction, leadership and commitment. and thank you to all that have worked with you. your know that general snow remarks he fter my will take some questions and take you down to the depths of the review and results. of congress members

gen dempsey, general snow and myself briefed the president earlier this week. review was about measures needed both to evaluate. we asked to independently and a department wide survey, which was the largest ever of its kind. we received thousands of volunteer responses. were conducted focus groups which gave us not only direct but back from our people also important recommendations, many of which have been incorporated to the report. for the first time ever we spoke to survivors of sexual

assault in a military, to they have seen progress and where we need to do better. overall, the data shows that there is measurable progress the improvement in 10 of 12 specific measures. long way to have a go. sexual assault threatens the lives and well-being of the that shows the uniform, it destroys the bonds and confidence which is at the heart of our military. eradicating sexual assault is not only essential to the readiness of lth the force, it is also about honouring our highest commitments to protect our fellow soldiers. we have taken aggressive onto stop sexual assault.

i made this one of my highest is secretary of defence. know, i ink you all have directed over 28 new initiatives over the year, to strengthen how we prevent and respond to sexual assault in a military. how we support the survivors of this despicable crime. and we scream, educate train our people. and how we hold accountable not only offenders but also dod as an institution. were recommended numerous justice reforms. they have given us much on this and help. with approved victim rights and privacy, we implemented council victims programme across dod. giving survivors. stand a

the military justice progress. compared to 2012, the dod prevalence of sexual assault in the military over the last year has decreased by about 25%. also found the most valued highly the work. nearly 90% reported taking action to prevent an assault when they saw the risk of one of the current. wheels that belief that the are becoming more confident in the militaristic responder sexual assault. competitive rates and, more survivors participated in the reform of the system. have over 1000

certified victim advocates and over 17,000 volunteer personnel to assist. after last year's unprecedented 50% increase in continued to has go up. ago we estimated in 10 sexual assault were being reported, today is one in four. then to be reported both nationally and in a military. way to maintain our focus throughout the ranks. one of the most important ways is to ing the confidence reduce retaliation against people who report sexual assault. this is a challenge we are very aware of. we now have better data to

in p us be more effective stopping this retaliation. in 2014 of its 62% of women were reported of sexual had some kind of retaliation, normally social retaliation by co-workers. it directly contradicts one of the highest values of the military, that we protect our sisters in the uniform. when somebody reports a sexual need to be y not punished with retribution. i want to help close this gap and build on what we have already done. we are developing new procedures to engage commanders to avoid social retaliation. will also have training for

officers and enlisted we are helping them better prevent sexual assault in their units and reduce the potential for retaliation. issues will take time to have an impact, they are critical to lasting change. additionally, to better understand how work environments influence the risk of sexual assault, we are undertaking a wide range of sexual prevention efforts at military installations nationwide. there is much more to be done. shows we haveata a long way to go to fight the cultural stigma of reporting among men and in addressing assaults and hazing or practical jokes. must continually reinforce accountability up and down the chain of command.

based on the many conversations i've had with service members all over this country and the world, i'm also concerned there may be an increasing use of social media for sexual harassment. like sexual assault, this problem is not new or unique to the military. the dod holds its people to a higher standard. if you want to wear the uniform, understanding our core values is not enough. mustty or off duty, you live these ideals and enforce our values every day. with strongtinue and committed efforts to pursue comprehensive and dynamic approaches to fighting sexual assault in the military. president obama and all dod , both military and civilian, are committed to doing whatever it takes to stamp out this scourge. in may, told you about my visit to the dod save helpline for survivors of sexual assault. the wall that i

saw covered in anonymous posted notes, notes that contain inspiring words of thanks from individuals who called the hotline. i thought about those notes, as i know all leaders have over the month. we ultimately want a military with no more victims, no more calls, no more posted notes -- more neededs, no help, and no more efforts to stop, because it will be stopped. we are not there yet, but we will get there. until then, we will continue working relentlessly to prevent and we will give survivors the help and support they need. i want to thank you all for your coverage of this issue, your continued coverage. and before i take a couple questions, i want to acknowledge our place chiefs of our

services, some chiefs who are here with us this afternoon. their efforts, their leadership, their commitment to stamping out sexual assault would not have ,ome as far as we have come thank you, without your help and all of your people. i'm glad you are here today. it has been a privilege to work with you on this and many other issues. thank you very much for what you do. ladies and gentlemen, thank you. before general snow proceeds with his details and answering questions, the results and recommendations, i would be glad to take a couple of your questions. >> mr. secretary, i would like to ask you something on a separate topic. lastu have seen over the couple days, there has been a lot of reporting on your decision to resign, including a lot of observation that we were

forced out, forced to resign. did you feel pressured to resign , either spoken or unspoken, at all? did that play a role in your decision? and john mccain said he talked to you about this and expressed some frustration with national security decision-making, and he pointed to micromanagement. was that also a factor in your decision, and how big a problem do you think that was and is? >> well, as to your first comment, i have not really noticed there has been the attention given to this over the last year, but i'm flattered, ,specially in the last week concerning yourselves about this. ask,eal question that you

i will answer it this way -- first, you have heard the president's comments on this. comments speake for themselves. but the president and i over the last few weeks have had private discussions. when i say private, no one else has been in the room. the president of the united states and me. so with all the speculation and all the smart people figuring out what was said and what was not said, only two people know what was said. at is the president and me. my brief give you version, and you can ask the president for his, but he has spoken i think directly on this. i submitted my resignation to the president of the united states. this was a mutual decision based on discussions we had. onen't think there is ever overriding or defining decision

in situations like this, unless there is some obvious issue, and there was not between either one of us. i always looked at this job is a privilege, of immense , of which i have expressed to the president. i said so many times over, which i will always be grateful to the president for this privilege. look over the you last two years, and it will be two years in february i've been is aspart of leadership you build, hopefully build and participate and contribute to an institution, you build on the process. i built on two what my predecessors, and my most immediate predecessors,

secretary gates and secretary panetta, what they did. i took on a different set of challenges over the last two years. and the preparation of a institution is probably the most significant responsibility a leader has. to hand that off to somebody coming in behind you, the discussions the president and i had were about the next two years. how is he best prepared to lead country, and how is this institution best prepared to do the things that he must have prepared toat are do, options, capabilities, capacity. and going back to the first point i made about the last two years, we have had a tremendous amount of challenges over the last two years, and am very proud how this institution and its leaders -- chairman dempsey, all of our chiefs, secretaries, both military, uniform, and

civilian -- have handled them and responded. i'm proud of my leadership over the years. the next two years is another zone, i think, of kinds of challenges for this country. and leaders have to be wise .nough to know that and as we talked through it, the president and i did, we both came to the conclusion that i think the country was best served with new leadership, he thought it was over in this institution, after we had talked through it. i made my contribution during my time, and i'm proud of that, with what we did. and i feel very confident and very secure about as i leave here that we -- all of us

together -- not secretary hagel, but all of us as a team, have prepared this institution over the last few years to take on these big issues that are ahead. those issues are still undefinable. we know of some of them. we know long-term challenges. but i think you have to know when to leave. and as i said, there were just two of us in the room during these discussions. and we had some very direct and very honest relationships. i would also say that as the president has said, the president is a friend. i consider him a friend. he said that about me, which i appreciate. plainly to each other. he is president of the united states. i serve at the pleasure of the president of the united states. but we talked as friends.

we talked as americans. we talked as senior leaders of this country who both have awesome responsibilities. , you any differences reference senator mccain, there were no major differences in any major area. issues ofe are always style and how you get things done, and are things moving fast , asgh, but this country i've said, is well served. to have a president like president obama who was thoughtful, careful, this is a time that a powerful nation, the most powerful nation on earth, must be very wise in its implementation of its power. it must do so with a clear, steady sense of who it is, what

it wants to accomplish, always looking for the longer term, not just a quick decision. impact, consequences, ripple effects. great powers have that also responsibility. the president of the united states has that awesome responsibility, and i have been proud to serve in his administration, and i leave here, again, very, very, very proud i had this opportunity, and very secure in knowing these people and the next secretary who comes behind me will be better prepared than we were two years ago. not having anything to do with my predecessors, because they did tremendous work, but their challenges were totally different. what leonates faced, panetta faced, what chuck hagel

faced, the new leader will face a new set of challenges. >> was senator mccain wrong? >> i've already answered the question. i'm afraid i'm going to busines

always unpredictable. you recognize that going in. said i was going to be here two years, four years. part ofis the first your question. about a job,knows especially a big job. until you get in it. until you are the actual practitioner of the job. now, you can read about it. your predecessor can tell you about it. you can think that you know about it and you can write about it and broadcast about it, but nobody knows about these jobs -- let me finish. second, it was not a matter of whether i thought i could stay here another two years. i thought i explained that. that was not the issue. whether i thought it was the any whether it was isil or

other job, that was not the issue. what i said here a moment ago it is as you look forward the next two years and the challenges that are coming, as i thought through it, as the president and i talked about it, i think fresh indership is not unimportant all areas. but the president and i had a long conversation about all this. so what was not a matter of was isil too much, or this too much. no. as i said, leadership also comes with the responsibility of knowing when it's a good time to let somebody else come in, come up where, and pick

you have left off, as panetta did, as gates did. it's an institution. it's not a matter of what i want to do and not what i will not want to do, barbara. it's a matter of what i thought was best for this institution, for the country, and for the president. , andhas been a great job i've loved every minute of this job, i really have. , as i'vethink ahead already told you -- this may be hard for some people to understand, but you have to be in these jobs to understand what they are and how to prepare an institution in what's best for an institution. now, let's just take this a little further. i think everybody knows that most likely there is going to be a rotation, a new chairman of the joint chiefs of staff in a year, a vice-chairman, some of the chiefs. that is the president's call,

ultimately. but there is most likely going to be a rotation of senior leaders. and as i have thought through this, this is probably the right for the nextw team two years. for all the other reasons i've mentioned, just one other point. , it isgan my comments .ot one defining issue for me it would be different if it was that i could not accept or i could not do, or whatever it would be. no, it was not that at all. it was a commendation of things as you think through these things. talked about and i it. i'm very comfortable with my position and decision. i think the president feels good about it. i feel good about it. this country is such a great try, this is such a

core of who we are as a people, and i've always tried to do everything in my life based on what i thought was best for the country or for the institution i represented. not that i am a selfless person. i'm not. last point andne i will and here. arrived ato today, i oakland, california, on a transit back from vietnam, after i spent one year in vietnam, 46 years ago today. toldybody would have sergeant hegel walking off the plane with my duffel bag, where would i be 46 years down the road, that would have been hard for me. the privileges i have had -- happy holidays, thank you.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> ok. [laughter] i guess it's called last man standing. up, andlike to follow as the secretary articulated, kind of go into the details of the report. so i will walk you through a set of slides, try to hit the highlights, reinforce some of the points. the first point i would like to make is this report is comprehensive. it covers a lot of ground, over 1000 pages long. report,ion, the overall

each of the military departments and the national guard bureau contributed a supporting report further detailing their progress. the secretary also agreed to the request by the coast guard to have their submission because they modeled their program after ours. there are significant improvements made in the sexual assault and prevention program, criminal investigations, and the military justice system over the past few years. there is a force wide prevalence overseen by dr. andrew arounmorales. they will provide a separate press conference. it also contains results from the survivor experience survey. it was overseen by dr. elizabeth

van winkle. the report further provides provisional statistical data about the reports of sexual basalt received by the department during fiscal year 2014. this reportieve demonstrates significant progress, we are in no way suggesting we have a copley star we are of eliminating -- not suggesting we have accomplished our mission of eliminating sexual assault. the secretary is further enhancing the growing climate of dignity and respect. now, as most of you know, the department establish the sexual assault and prevention program in 2005. we have taken many steps to holdve our efforts, to offenders appropriately accountable, and force wide support in the prevention of these crimes. 2012,r, starting in then-secretary panetta and hagel gave it their personal attention. in 2012 the joint chiefs of

staff also provided strategic guidance in the guidance of sexual assault, which became the strategic plan that secretary hagel issued in 2013. this unprecedented, sustained leadership has driven much of the progress contained in the reports to the president. mr. hagel's willingness to put this problem on his weekly schedule has been a key factor to sustain must show the attention paid to this problem. -- much of the attention paid to this problem. he has initiated a 41 initiatives to improve the capabilities of sexual assault prevention response. many of these are codified by law, making them permanent. ourssist with describing system and illustrating progress along key points, we have developed metrics. in february of this year the department delivered to the white house, and approved, a set of 12 metrics. six included were a set of

non-metrics designed to illustrate several aspects of the nonmilitary system. inputunderstanding that can be tailored to generate certain outcome, the non-metrics are sickly observations about the justice system that we try not to -- are simply observations about the justice system that we try not to influence on the military level. just told you,y overall the department found evidence in 10 of 12 metrics. ascription's of these metrics and a summary of the progress have been included in the back of the slides provided to you. the report also details are progress in many additional areas that demonstrate our focus on prevention and are uncompromising commitment to victim assistance. these improvements are solid, sustained changes. our survey results indicate to 7000 few000

were sexual assaults in 2013, while the reports continued at the same high rate as last year. 2014, we experienced an 8% increase in reports of sexual assault made to dod authorities. i think some of the media outlets got this incorrect. they reported there was an increase in sexual assaults. i want to make it very clear that is not true. the increase was in reports, which as you all know when this particular crime an increase in reports are a good thing. the decrease in problems and increase of reporting, we estimate that we heard from one in four victims, up from one in 10 in 2012. condensing a report of this size does not do justice to the progress that the department has made over the past three years. nevertheless, i will try to give me some of the highlights. the department approaches this program three strategic plan.

listed on the slider some of the top examples of progress, and contained in the report are more examples of the line of effort and evidence of the progress that you can review for yourself. for example, the prevention line of effort captures the work we are doing to stop the crime. there are likely to be few were sexual assaults in years with healthy climates. , theresult, in 2013 secretary directed every unit commander to regularly assess their unit and act on the feedback from the assessment. that assessment process included accountability measures as well. each commander's immediate supervisor is also provided the results of that assessment. and then each of the services has implement the policies that allows unit commander's actions to be expressed annually on their performance evaluations. so this assessment, feedback, action, and evaluation is

something the department has not had in prior years. promotingct it to be long lasting and meaningful organizational change to prevent not only sexual assault, but other factors that impact unit health. another example of progress is something fully enacted this year across the department. that is the special victims counsel program, as it is known in the army and air force, and the victim's legal counsel as it is known in the navy and marine corps. this is the program that provides an attorney to victims of sexual assault for consultation and representation in the military justice process. while this program is less than a year old, initial indications are the victims are highly satisfied with the services rendered by these attorneys. closely howatching this program impact sexual assault reporting and victim participation as it matures and becomes a robust part of the department's response system and justice process.

without going into greater detail, the steps we have taken energized by our leadership are intangible and it has a demonstrative effect on some of the statistics that i would like to go into. use prevalence rates to estimate the extent of the sexual assault in the military. he tween 2012 and 2014, evidence contactted sexual decrease significantly for military women and trended downward for men. the rate of unwanted sexual contact is down significantly for both men and women from level seen in 2006. workplace study, an independent survey taken at the request of leadership of the senate armed services committee. will describe this in another press event following this. the official reports of sexual and 2014, continued at the same high levels that we saw in 2013, and actually increased

by 8%. reporting increased substantially between 2013 and 2014. last year and this year, in this is an important statistic, 9% of the reports we received were from victim seeking assistance for an incident that occurred prior to them coming into military service. we see these reports as particularly encouraging as an indicator of confidence in the response system. victims in these cases are only seeking assistance, but the department lacks jurisdiction in all most all these cases. demonstrates the progress the department is making and closing the gap between our estimated prevalence of sexual assault and the reporting of the crime. the blue points across the top and side are estimates of active duty service members who experienced unwanted sexual contact in the years noted, based on the scientificl conducted surveys.

about 4.3% of women and 9% of experiencedhey unwanted sexual contact in the year prior to being surveyed. weng these rates, th estimate about 19,000 service members experienced unwanted sexual contact in 2014. the red points across the bottom are the number of active duty service members who have made a report of sexual assault in the years noted. these reports are made to law enforcement or sexual response -- sexual assault response corps knitters. making a report increased substantially over the past few years, and this year we received a report from over 4000 service members. given the prevalence and reporting rates, we estimate we see a report from about 24% of the victims of sexual assault and 2014. 11%, onep from about in 10 victims, in 2012.

there is progress in terms of closing the gap. however, there is considerable difference in estimated reporting rates between women and men. 40% of female victims made a report in 2014. only about 10% of males have made the report. clearly we have more work to do to encourage males to come forward. it is the department's intent to ratesthese prevalence down and encourage greater reporting by victims. that said, reporting a sexual assault is a highly personal choice and one that may never be right for some. we respect that decision. for them we have a support and services available through the dod helpline, which is 100% 24 hours and available per day, seven days per week. we have provided victims with options of services which they can choose to assist them with the healing and its desire to help them navigate the military justice process.

survivor of sexual assault, please reach out to one of our trained counselors at the line.org.elpline at safeh demonstrates the position of military members made by commanders under the legal authority of the department. 2004 hundred 19 service members accused of sexual assault, the department had evidence to take some kind of action against 73% of them. actions could eat taken for a sexual assault offense or any form of misconduct discovered during the criminal investigation. 27%on against the remaining could not be taken into account -- victims declining to participate in the process and other evidence-based reasons. the percentage of cases is up

considerably from the 57% in 2009. this does represent the investments the department has made in the training and resourcing of criminal investigators and attorneys over the years. question how do military commanders address allegations of assault when they have sufficient evidence. as you can see by the redline and 2014, two thirds of the commanders supported by legal advice from the judge advocate sought to -- sought charges. this was best addressed by the nonjudicial punishment process and 14% received some form of administrative action or discharge. please keep in mind the offenses being described here range from crimes like rape and in each ofition reflects the level

evidence and severity of the crime according to legal standards of the unit of warm code of military justice. report,tained in the and a secretary mentioned this, first of its kind anonymous survey of military survivors of sexual assault who made he restricted or unrestricted report to the department in 2014. what is reflected in the report of 150initial analysis survey responses and what we plan to be an ongoing survey. we agree feedback for survivors who use our services is an important source of data we can use to improve our support. most survivors that responded to our survey were satisfied with the assistance they received from our first responders and service providers. special victims counsel attorneys and response coordinators were the most highly rated by survivors who used his services, receiving 90% and 89% satisfaction ratings respectively.

, and theoncern secretary spoke to this were victims that received some top -- some kind of retaliation. 59% of survivors indicated they perceived some kind of social retaliation associated with their report and 40% indicated they had received some kind of special retaliation. behaviors associated with this are at the bottom of the slide. while this was not generalize to the full force, we asked about retaliation as well as the scientific survey this summer. this -- 62% indicated receiving some kind of retaliation associated report. with most receiving social retaliation and a lesser amount receiving national retaliation. this is admittedly one metric in which the department cannot run

straight progress. one additional insight we were able to gain is the command has received fairly high marks in their support of victims but these high marks do not extend to all as you move down the chain of command. this and other data indicates command appears to be providing good support but others in command in a supervisory chain may not have the skill and knowledge to do the same. summer, there were focus groups conducted at 10 installations to capture information that is more qualitative in nature. bele the themes may not generalized for the entire force, they were heard across all services in the national guard. this approach lets us provide an impression of our soldiers -- of what our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marine are saying about sexual assault and our efforts to address it. here is what they told us.

they say they have been trained extensively on the problem in the resources available. focus group members noted a handlingshift in the of sexual assault and russman and this is a substantive change from years past. with few exceptions, focus group participants indicated the leadership was working hard to encourage an environment of unity and respect. however, they too saw the potential for perceived social and professional retaliation for reporting. in a separate annex is the review of the therms the military -- in military justice system since april 2012. the military justice system has seen sensitive change over the last few years. in fact, last year's changes were most sweeping reforms the late 1960's. victims rights and legal protections have been expanded the command over sexual assault cases has been amended. to authority has been pushed

hire, more experience levels of commands. these and other reforms are currently underway. the department is also reviewing recommendations to further improve sexual assault relations, response and proceedings panel is studying among other things the reforms that have already been implemented. next year, the military justice review will be replacing a review and make recommendations to further amend the uniform code of military justice. is not their code specific to sexual assault stop as the secretary announced he is announcing further actions to address the findings in the report stop first to listed here specifically address retaliation. we firmly believe we have an obligation to the victims of sexual assault to be able to report the crime without concern of retaliation from their peers or anyone else. the secretary is

directing action to have military commanders ask about an follow-up on experiences of retaliation when they chair the monthly case management group that reviews the installations response to all reports of sexual assault. commanders will be asking about retaliation against victims were first responders and referring these experiences for investigation if appropriate to do so. second, as indicated by our data, most managers received fairly high marks and there's word of victims in their efforts to have a climate of dignity and respect, but this does not appear to hold for individual down the chain stop for this reason, the secretary is directing improved training for military first-line supervisors and civilians who supervise military members. this fuels and knowledge that allow someone to prevent retaliation must be required and practice. first-line supervisors are the one most ugly to see

unacceptable behavior when they take collective action. the secretary is directing a study that will allow us to better accept and customize local factors that impact sexual assault prevention efforts. efforts indicate one size does not fit all when it comes to prevention. baseworks at a large army in a metropolitan area may not necessarily work at a small air workmates in a more remote, rural area. this will help us identify concrete examples of what military communities can do to further prevent sexual assault. finally, feedback from our focus group sessions indicated that our troops may benefit some hearing about the progress we are making in sexual assault prevention and response. will recall feedback directly to our soldiers and reads in an interactive way. in summary, the department's report documents comprehensive

progress since 2012. engagement,this was commitment to transparency with members of congress and other federal partners. however, no one here is declaring success. you just heard that from the secretary and i will reiterate it will stop we have much more work to do. decrease in prevalence indicates there are few victims of this horrible crime and i think we would agree it's a step in the right direction. we will continue to monitor and publicize our progress and recognize the future progress will be defined by continue decreases in cases of sexual assault. it's our intention to continue to work as broadly and creatively as possible so as to reach our goal of illuminating sexual assault from the military. our focus is truly on reinforcing a climate where sexual assault is seen as acceptable not just because it

is illegal but because it is counter to our core values. at this point, i will be joined by qualified expert, dr. nate gelbart, who i am fortunate to have as my partner in this effort and we will be happy to take your questions. two things -- one on the retaliation. you have addressed that quite a obviously, last year positive or cents bike did that play any role in the fact that there was a lot of retaliation and only a smaller increase this year -- do you think the retaliation issue cannot stand reporting to some degree over time and how do you address that -- these are officers, it sounds claiming arele are retaliating. get to those first-line people?

follow-up.a a's data that that. you said something that is not accurate -- last year, we had a 50% increase in reports. whenhallenge last year was we reported that, we did not have a survey and we did not have the feedback from that that specifically addresses retaliation. so it is difficult to know and link the two. when we talk that the department has not made progress, we're talking about not making progress from the retaliation rate found by the wgr report in to 2014.ared with regard to officers, when we say first-line supervisors, you are right. we are talking junior officers, we are also talking junior noncommissioned officers.

in directare supervision, the demographic that is most at risk, which is the 18 to 21-year-olds. anything you want to add to that mark -- anything you want to add to that? >> correct the if i'm wrong -- there are a lot of numbers floating about, but it sounded the prosecution aspect seemed a little flat last year to this year. you said it was like 73% of action taken. court-martial number seemed to go down. why do you think that and the things did not go up?

--let me just say this that's why he made the point and i talked specifically evidence-based. this is one of those metrics -- the fact ited happened to be the same last year and this year, we see that as the facts as they came to us. the second thing with regard to if we can put up the slide -- what you are showing is if you look at this, out,the documentary came "the invisible war" there was probably some truth in that given the evidence that was presented. come a longe have way from 2009 forward. just because there has been a

slight decrease, that is what the evidence shows in 2014. we don't see that as a bad thing. even though the percentage was the same, the actual numbers increase and that is what is on the bottom line there. the number of offenders considered by commanders -- there's almost a 300 increase their. congresses deeply concerned about -- this is sort of fuel to the fire for changes in some of those. drop in thert of a number. >> i think the point about a drop in percentage but an actual increase in numbers. >> you mentioned the retaliation total. of the two

what was the other one? >> i'm glad you asked that. -- could you go to the first slide and the backup? investigation length. this crime is reported, it's referred to a military criminal investigation and it must be investigated. what we found is the led to increase from four months -- as we looked at this, you will note when we look at slide, we did not claim that as progress -- i will tell you why. reporting has increased dramatically and what we have noticed is a number of these are words are from reports happening

not just in the past year but years prior to that. has taken longer to investigate them, we don't think that is a bad ring, and upon reflection, although we list it as a metric, we should have made a nonmetric. it is what it is all stop -- it is what it is. >> you mentioned military commanders discretion over sexual old -- sexual assault was limited. could you tell us what are the changes exactly? things secretary panetta did in 2012 was he elevated the initial disposition 06 level officers, colonels in the navy, and air force with special court-martial convening authority. basically that meant when an offender, when a commander gets

a report of investigation and has to decide what to do, what if that commander knows this person that has been accused and they are under their command? the concern was maybe those decisions are not as independent as they should the. what secretary panetta directed was to elevate that decision up out of that unit and to a much higher level in the chain so it hit a more seasoned, experienced officer who was removed from all the parties involved to be able to give the initial decision on what we are going to do with this case. in addition, there have been a number of things -- changes to article 16 which changes clemency and the ability of a commander to set aside that after finding guilt has been taken away. your are a number of reforms i would refer you to the judge advocates who could go into more detail but those are the most

significant points. >> have you seen a change in the number of cases that get overthrown? for a victim, that's probably that's probably the worst thing -- to get a conviction and see another officer overthrow that. have you seen a significant differences in the number of cases? >> i have not seen any. the last one we are aware of is the wilkerson case. >> i'm glad you asked the question because there was an article in the new york time that road about this -- in the "new york times" that wrote about this. our system has changed so fundamentally that what happened in that case has received a lot of was before all the right reasons. that cannot happen. say that cannot happen. >> the sex offenders themselves -- hundreds of them after they get out of the military and up

falling off the radar and not on into any public sex offender registry. the dod talked about how in august the military's inability to register sex offenders while they are still in good feynman helps these offenders evade registration. where doesn is -- the pentagon stand on this issue? i'm goinghat is one to have to take -- i don't -- >> that is not in our -- >> that is better left to someone else, probably the ig or maybe the oh gc within the department. >> it has not come to your attention yet? >> no. i have seen an extract of what you are describing, but i will tell you that is not one i am well-versed in all stop next if this is the office in charge of

looking at sexual assault prevention and response, should there be an aspect of the invention and response in the civilian community as well at comes under your leadership? >> i think we have a relationship and work very closely. this has just not been one that -- and again, my experience over the course of the last year, that we have had that all stop but in line eight -- in light of your question, we will look at that stop -- we will look at that. >> the screenings the secretary had ordered. 588army disqualified soldiers. i wonder if that screening is ongoing and how many troops and then disqualified from those positions and how many have been discharged from service? >> the answer to is screening ongoing is yes and in the wake of that analysis, we are working

to take that to the next level and automate some of that. question, iecific have to defer to the army on what her latest numbers are. >> i want to ask a question on the retaliation. a report today indicates the percentage of people in the who indicated they perceive some form of retaliation has remain changed in 2012 and 2014. what's the mechanism for someone who feels retaliated to complain about the retaliation and second, is there any data indicating the department of defense is -- has prosecuted or investigated these claims of retaliation? >> let me take the first one and will turn it to the second one. retaliation is a tough issue.

we would hope if an individual was willing to come forward and report they had been retaliated on that they would tell someone. whether it's in the chain of command or outside he chain of command, if it were to come to the leadership's attention, it would be investigated and followed up. unfortunately, we don't have a lot of statistics yet that tell us what in fact has been referred to the investigation and we hope to have more of an instance of that. officen air force special investigator in my military career, i followed up on any report of retaliation because that was witnessing imitation stop -- witness intimidation. i want to hold people accountable. that being said, the new tool congress gave us is making retaliation an actual violation under the unit code of military justice. i don't have data as far as the numbers go. our process for meeting the

deadline was to shrink a five-month process to about 30 days. of the quality and wealth of data, i just don't have yet but it will be coming this spring. -- we have had people ask and i will reach out and collect that data. to ask a question about rape and penetrating crimes. rand found the number of sexual assaults that involved penetration was early 5% versus on -- 35s 35% waste does thisrsus 29% -- show rape is the worst form of

sexual assault, much more trouble metadata -- trouble that you initially thought? >> the answer is no. but there are two things. number one, i would say rand after this is going to have a briefing and they will walk you through that. i encourage you to do that because it is really going to lay out for you what the differences and why. i want you to have that. it is not the right conclusion. >> as far as penetrating crime goes, we don't try to classify peoplend of crime experience a man is why we have a rod category. what they're trying to show you is the methodology and how they

might be tapping in to some of the crimes people have experienced that may be they did not think were sexual. under the code of military justice, article 120, the behavior you experience doesn't necessarily have to be sexual and that might be tapping into hazing and things like that, like the secretary said. >> have you looked into the demographics of the offenders? who they are, what their service histories have then, if they had post-traumatic stress disorder, if they had been in iraq or afghanistan? let's say there's not a big rubble in the air force but there is in the marine corps, is that in the report? >> that is not included in the report will stop for the most part, our offenders are between 18 and 35 years old, they are in the enlisted ranks. e2 andf them are between

e8.four we are currently conducting some research right now that will give us better insight as to service history and where these folks some from but i don't have that yet. quick thank you very much. i appreciate your interest in this matter. the report on military sexual assault was released earlier today, several senators held a briefing on the issue. we will hear first from missouri senator claire mccaskill who sponsored a bill last year on reforming of the military justice system handles sexual violence. colleague, who along with many of our colleagues who are not here today worked very hard over the last several years trying to make a difference for the women and men who served in our military who have been victimized i sexual assault. -- victimized by sexual assault.

there was a lot of discussion about what we wanted to accomplish and there were three major goals will stop the first goal was to bring down the prevalence of sexual assault in the military and the second goal was to make survivors more comfortable about coming forward and increasing the number of reports that were made about sexual assault in the military, and light of the fact that sexual assault is the most underreported crime in america, no matter where it occurs. providing a support system and services to victims and survivors that would give them a level of satisfaction about whether or not the system is responsive to them and listening to them and giving them a chance to recover. a year ago, after we passed a laundry list of long come historic reforms in a national defense authorization bill, the president asked the military to

do a report over the next year and give it to him to actually assessed the progress of the department of defense in all the departments as to this problem. today, that report was released. let's go through the list. the first -- revel in. -- prevalence 27% is down 27%. prevalence is down in our military in terms of unwanted sexual contact will stop this is year, apples to apples comparison, with the surveys that have been done dating back every two years for some significant time. reporting -- reporting of these crimes to the military has gone up 50% last year and another 8% this year.

we've had a combined total of over the 50%,s 8% so we have seen a spike that is can going to climb in terms of orting. -- in terms of reporting. two years ago, only one in 10 victims reported what happened to them. last year, it was one in four. change in terms of victims being willing to talk to people in the military about what has occurred to them. 62% increase in the number of unrestricted reports being made since 2012. why is that important? it's one thing to come forward and make a restrictive report to get services. it's another to make an unrestricted report when that information becomes known in the military and the perpetrator can be held accountable. this is a really important one.

the percentage of restricted reports being converted to unrestricted reports at the request of the victim continues to go up. it went up 14% last year and 19% this year. they did a thorough job not only did they have 57 different focus groups on 10 different involving 650 did survivors of sexual assaultion they also did an anonymous survey of those victimized by sexual assault in the military and this is about the survivor experience. 2/3 in the survivor experience survey agreed that supported them. 82% of the survivors said the commander supported them, address privacy and confidentialallity. professionally. 79% listened without judgment. 78 percent