n. >> i'm sorry $25 million was appropriated to our hospital to improve access for veterans. >> thank you. >> doctor. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak on continued whistle blower retaliation. my written statement outlines the type and extensive reprisal against federal employees that continues. retaliation is destructive and costly to our nation in so many ways and too convenient to be used without fear of consequences. when they sound alarm it's for the safety and well being of the veterans we serve. my written statements speaks as a house divided with power and resources for the v.a. itself

gained at the expense of care provision to the veterans we serve. for example, i had the honor of meeting an 88-year-old world war ii veteran several weeks ago. he aryedrived in an electric wheelchair as he was unable to walk. same for the loss of his left arm and hand and right shoulder. he was unable to see to his right eye due to glaucoma. he was living at the ymca. that's all he could afford $500 a month special security. he was sent to the y as an answer to homelessness. years ago he could have called our facilities extended care section his home. but due to yearly mandates

reducing the beds earmarked for extended air if favor of more rapid turnover and hence more billables and collections this 88-year-old warld war two veteran was sent to live in the ymca ymca. who is community is the community living center and what type of living is being provided. true to world war ii vet generation he believed a bed must be needed for someone in worse shape than he. he had no what do we look at when we evaluate success? if expediency the only measure? what is the most important thing? there is a spirit that enters the body at birth and ace area that leaves at death. our nation was founded on's airport. -- on air it.

-- on spirit. when the day come to the v.a. must they have their spirit crushed? whistleblowers are passionate people who care about veterans and the true mission of a v.a. for veterans and not themselves. thank you. rep. coffman: thank you. you have five minutes. i am here with you today to testify about the unacceptable vicious, ongoing retaliation against our health care system where the director became the first senior executive service member in history fired for

neglect of duty. the chief of staff under investigation was on paid leave for six months. the disingenuous claims of improvement there remains an atmosphere of retaliation. we were to seasoned and experienced -- too seasoned and experienced. we i didn't of wide manipulations and illegal higher her -- we [indiscernible] fraud and breakdown of human resources, we quickly concluded he would not support our efforts to whole stuff accountable. -- staff accountable. we were forwarded e-mails.

alerting him to critical manipulations from the staff position. publicly claiming to no prior knowledge of no scheduling manipulations and we became concerned about his integrity. on june 11, we raised it. we also informed we had been contacted by representative martha roby about her face-to-face. immediately after, the severe retaliation escalated exponentially for we later learn it was because -- about talton t o talton. from june 24, i sent a plea about violent outburst in management -- mismanagement about talton. i was forced on the campus by order of robin jackson. i was devastated to realize i had been betrayed.

i was removed from my leadership responsibility and prevented by talton and jackson and humiliating all employee e-mails. he promised he would immediately be in effect if needed to help us bring four days earlier, he had chartered a fact-finding about allegations by talton and jackson. it was chaired by a subordinate as a result, they requested an aib without specific charges. it was conducted by aor. instead requesting additional testimony citing a new allegation by a union president thus extending the investigation. one of the members, sitting director was a former subordinate. incredulously during my first year, i'd been under investigations for the render five out of 365 day -- 305 out

of the render 65 days per it is difficult to describe -- a 365 days. it is difficult to describe. major reorganization and without my input. my direct reports -- i was excluded from key information. blocked from critical horse on major, when i asked for the assessment done before i write he told me if you want to see it, requested through a freedom of information act. a detailed -- they detailed the doctor out for 90 days. i speak to you with a heavy heart disgusted by the continued cover-up and discrediting campaign to open an

investigation by the v.a. i've always loved serving and being a part of area so many employees are monitoring and hope leadership at all levels demonstrate a commitment to true excellence and transversely by creating an environment free from whistleblower reprisal. if the actions against a dedicated veteran executive and a brilliant terror woman executive both who have committed their lives it will most certainly have a chilling effect on any other of those 74. -- of those stepping forward. we both fear a further loss of our reputations. we sat in disbelief a year ago and agreed that moment in time we do not have a choice because it was more important to protect our veterans than protecting either one of our careers. we respectfully request you immediately address

whistleblower retaliation that has become rampant in our v.a.. thank you for your commitment to our veterans and i'm available to its are any questions. rep. coffman: thank you for your testimony. as a combat veteran, my heart goes out to you. you are waiting for our nation's veterans. i would like to ask the whistleblowers a question first or all three of you, to your knowledge, has there been any disciplinary action taken to those who have intentionally created kind of hostile workplace that you testified today in terms of retaliation against you? start with mr. tresmaine. mr. tresmaine: there has been none. dr. hooker: none. dr. head: none.

rep. coffman: ms. lerner, if you look at the number of cases from the v.a. that have gone before the usc compared to other agencies of the federal government, it seems substantially higher. a civil comparison would be to the department of defense. i believe it is -- the number of civil servant employees and yet there are more cases. last year, that came forward from that of armor of veteran affairs that the department of defense. can you explain just the nature of the volume of cases from the v.a.? ms. lerner: we do get more retaliation claims is -- cases that any other federal agency and other department. the numbers are increasing.

just for comparison, the complaints we get from the v.a. are higher than the dod which has doubled the number of employees. so we know that people come forward when they feel that they have to to protect the life of a veterans or the health and safety and so the fact that people are coming forward is a very positive sign. while the numbers are bad and are increasing, i personally am encouraged that more people are coming forward. we need to know when the problem exist. and so, i am encouraged that people feel confident that they will get some relief when they come to our agency and get some results. the number one reason whistleblowers come forward is they feel an obligation. the number of a reason they do not come forward is they feel like they will not get a result, nothing will happen. it is a double edge sword. we are not happy the numbers are

increasing and our staff is overwhelmed by the word. on the other hand, we're glad they feel comfort and coveted coming to us. ms. flanz: i would add go what -- echo what ms. lerner said. people feel comfortable raising disclosures whether to members of the committee or -- rep. coffman: i think they are willing to take a risk. ms. lerner: i would agree with that. the whistleblowers left come forward today to provide their stories, it is an act of cour age. something we need to celebrate because disclosures about problems give us an opportunity to fix them. if we do not learn about them we're not able to improve. to ms. lerner's point, we do need to to understand what it is that is driving these numbers

continuing to drive these numbers and be able careful not to assume good or bad things about the numbers. the fact people are coming forward with a concert is an indicator -- with concerns is an indicator. the fact that they are bringing them forward it means we have the opportunity to identify the problems. rep. coffman: can you comment give me some idea, we had testimony from the witnesses here that are whistleblowers that in no disciplinary action has been taken a guess at those who retaliated against them. can you give me any data in terms of actions that the v.a. has taken in terms of disciplining those who have retaliated against our whistleblowers? ms. flanz: absolutely. i cannot speak to the cases of

the individuals here. tell from my colleagues at the office of special counsel. their issues are pending. we currently have in my office 80 ongoing investigations of which 15 involve among other things whistleblower retaliation. we keep a database of employee disciplinary actions taken across the department until the late summer of last year we do not have any particular database that show discipline across the v.a. we have begun to collect and that data. among the things that go into the database are general descriptions of the charges that are used to support the discipline. one of the charges is something having to do with prohibited personnel practices. a generic term that includes whistleblower retaliation. another type of charge is

retaliation. information that i have is that ended the approximately one year we have been collecting information and we have 22 actions in our database that include charges of prohibiting personnel practices or retaliation. it is not a large enough number. i will say that now. we have more work to ensure individuals who have retaliated against whistleblowers as ms. lerner and her staff bring cases to us to provide corrective remedies to the employees who have been subjected to retaliation -- rep. coffman: i am running over my time. it seems like such a typical hearing. you are giving us a great news. we have three individuals who have testified and not -- testified before. no disciplinary action is taken against those retaliating against them. that situation remains unchanged.

ranking member kuster. rep. kuster: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to address my remarks to ms. lerner and i want to thank the whistleblowers for bringing your individual cases and encourage you to work with our good colleagues. representative roby is on the case with you mr. tresmaine and encourage you to work with the office of special counsel as well to make sure that you get the protection you deserve. and we do not have any other tragedies. chris absolutely. it has been a lifeline. working throughout this ordeal for the past year has made a huge difference. i do not think there is any question. they are totally understaffed. the opportunities i've had to speak with them made a huge difference. rep. kuster: good and i hope

your situation will get resolved. it sounds like we have 45 settlements of whistleblower cases which hopefully did bring some relief to those people and i know there been reinstatement with back pay and such and it is important to send that signal to others. one of the issues i wanted to get at is the issue of the v.a. culture and because it seems to me that in the idea it has gone to the osc is a recognition that this issue has blown up to a place where it was not resolved at a lower level. i want to make sure that we have a collaborative workplace throughout the agency. i did note of the charges we received, the top agencies providing case were, it is true that the v.a. is higher than the dod. what is interesting for me and i did i know if they get the desk for the camera, the v.a. and dod

are right at the top. then it drops dramatically down for any other agency in the cabinet. and i'm curious about sort of the hierarchical nature and structure of those organizations and whether it is a greater challenge to change the environment. i am a so curious and this is to ms. flanz what steps are being taken to foster a more collaborative workplace? i will combine this with my follow-up question. we hear about steps taken here in the dce for improvement but how -- what are the specific steps that are being taken to improve the a culture and ensure accountability on the frontline? step-by-step with the people can protect the lives of these whistleblowers and protect the quality of service of all veterans?

ms. flanz: i want to speak to both of those questions. one with respect to improving the culture at the front line across the v.a. system. the veteran health administration has an office called the national center for development. that office is looking at an issue of psychological safety and how psychological safety can be improved in v.a. workplace. it is a larger term of which protecting whistleblowers is a component. he had all the national center for organizational development speaks in terms of 4 cornerstones of the culture that is required to ensure that patient care is provided in an environment in which people feel safe and the workplace is as we want it to be. those 4 cornerstones are

transparency, accountability psychological safety, and risk-taking and innovation. they need to be in balance. transparency perhaps is stressed above all other things. you may get people feeling less they and/or less willing to involve in risk-taking and innovation. if accountability is overstressed you may sacrifice other issues. the experts are focusing on tools for employees and supervisors across the v.a. system to improve psychological safety within the framework of those cornerstones. with respect to accountability for whistleblower retaliation we are working on a number of things. first, we need to capture the attention to understanding of medical center directors regional office directors and regional council at the facility level. ms. lerner's staff are coming to

get a training program to our regional council coming to town later this month. we will address them and begin with some training, new training we will rollout to supervisors. training regional attorneys and hr from the facility level and having them serve as the trainers. we need to get at 2 things. make sure the environment in the workplace is appropriately safe and we need to improve understanding on the part of supervisors and attorneys as to the ramifications for retaliation. rep. kuster: thank you very much. rep. coffman: the story emerged about the wait time scandal in the phoenix v.a., how many -- since that time, how many disciplinary actions have been

taken against those who have retaliated against whistleblowers? how many k-fed and finalized? ms. flanz: the numbers i brought i did not break down by month. rep. coffman: utah's only about pending cases, how many cases have been finalized where those who retaliated against whistleblowers? ms. flanz: i am aware of three. the numbers from the facility level are kept in our database and i would love to provide you specifics which i do not have to my fingertips. rep. coffman: you're here to testify on the congress and you do not have specifics? ms. flanz: i have the specifics i have -- rep. coffman: how convenient. i was ask you on the record to submit. dr. head: thank you. i am frustrated by this.

you testify you are not familiar with his case? ms. flanz: i am not free to speak to the specifics. >> are you familiar with all the cases in your department? ms. flanz: those that involve senior members. >> are there other active cases? ms. flanz: we have 80. some allegation of retaliation. >> how many have you closed within the past year? ms. flanz: we have been operating since july of 2013 and with closed dozens. >> only three of those dozens have disciplinary, is that what i am to understand? ms. flanz: each result in a finding that the alleged misconduct could be

substantiated or a recommendation around discipline. >> let me ask you about ms. lerner's written testimony. they're all types of cases specific cases are the people involved do you get involved in the discipline of the person who did the retaliating against the whistleblower a you are mainly concerned that the whistleblower is restored, is that correct? ms. lerner: it is a relief for the whistleblower. rep. benishek: do you report to ms. flanz's department? ms. lerner: we are working to expedite the identification of cases where it is appropriate. i want to mention we know all 40 disciplinary actions against employees who were complicit in

their wrongdoing identified by whistleblowers. on the disclosure side where people can't toss and make the disclosure of health and safety problems, it is part of our review on the agency and we look at what there taken disciplinary actions. on that par we know of at least $.40 -- 40. rep. benishek: you are only aware of three cases. three cases of disciplinary action being taken amongst the case. it seems surprising especially in view of dr. head was here last summer. and still under investigation. mr. tresmaine seems like he is under quite a bit of distress. let me ask dr. head what have you been doing in the last -- since your testimony here? what actions have you taken? it seems i you are still having

trouble? dr. head: i continue to report each and every event. you know -- rep. benishek: is anybody coming to you from ms. flanz's department asking what is going on? dr. hooker: the office of special counsel has communicated with us. rep. benishek: did the office of accountability review talk with you? dr. head: they have but it has been disappointing. rep. benishek: mr. tresmaine, i heard you testify you made contact with ms. lerner's department, is there anybody else you have talked to? mr. tresmaine: no, sir other than the aib after about six -- i want to say 12 or 13 hours of grilling over 2 days -- i am sorry, three days. rep. benishek: they were talking to you.

mr. tresmaine: they were not talking, they were grilling. they were investigating. and i told them -- i clearly thought it was a sham and i expressed it on numerous occasions during the investigation. one of the most interesting questions, the questions they wanted asked or answered the most dealt with the fact that i identified a vehicle that was driving on a friday night at 8: 30 in the evening did not have any tell lights on it at all. i stopped in the vehicle and notify the driver there were not any tell lies before they got on a dark highway. and then the next monday i and part about what the vehicle was doing at 8:30 because would have feel close destroyed by staff and used to take staff to crack houses.

i had a concern about why it was out. the oar and aib investigation was more concerned why i stopped the vehicle. when i said maybe it is a good samaritan, all three of the members advise me they would never have done anything like that. i thought it was incredulous. they questioned me why i questioned the employee on monday without a union representative. i told them, i'm still number two in the organization and i felt i had responsibility to ask what the vehicle was doing at 8:30 p.m. at night. that was my -- rep. benishek: i am out of time here. thank you. >> i always felt that a lot of time these investigations are more about us and not the facts of what we have complained about. and my experience is very similar to that.

>> i will try to organize this. i am at a loss. for words. first of all, i do not understand your attitude ms. flanz the fact you can sit in there and come with literally no information and you cannot answer a question with any specificity is very disturbing. so -- i do not understand how any, the 2 of you, ms. flanz and ms. lerner can say there's been progress when we have ms. lerner saying she attributes the increase of complaints to the fact people are feeling more comfortable coming forward. at the same time that ms. flanz is admitting that there has been literally no accountability on the part of the people retaliating against

whistleblowers. can either one of you explain that conundrum to me? ms. flanz: i would like to try. we are committed to ensuring that supervisors who retaliate against whistleblowers are held accountable. >> let me stop right there. it seems to me that maybe it is my prosecutorial background, if you want to send a message that road doors will be held accountable you actually have to hold at least one accountable. if you look at the numbers of complaints, they far outweigh any level of accountability. please explain that. ms. flanz again, i would like to very much. we have ongoing investigations right now that will provide as the evidence necessary to hold employees'supervisors accountable.

until recently, we have not had the collaboration with ose that we have now that allows us the evidence that they have pulled together to give a jumpstart so we do not have to start fresh with our investigation. we will whenever the evidence shows that retaliation has been engaged in. rep. rice: will hold people accountable. let me ask you this. why is that the determination of the whistleblower was not giving accurate information? it is a much easier determination to make them retaliation against a whistleblower. what i am hearing from the three whistleblowers is that if you guys have no problem saying this whistleblower was wrong but you have no ability to hold a wrongdoer accountable. explain that. ms. flanz: with all do respect, that is not how the process works. rep. rice: no, no.

i have to stop you. this is a simple question. why is it you're able to come to the conclusion that whistleblowers have made allegations that were not based in fact and you could do that pretty expeditiously it seems to me. and you can't do as expeditious an investigation when it comes to holding the retaliate or against the was laura accountable. guess what? the numbers support what i am saying. you can give whatever as nation you want, but i am telling you right now, the level of disrespect that you are showing to the veterans. by the way, and we know allegations are true in terms of treatment, ms. treatment of patients, the list, a luxury list of stuff we know is going on. everybody knows. you are telling me you are

spending all of this time trying to hold somebody accountable. forget about what is happening about fixing the problem where veterans are not getting the services they need. just another disturbing the. that's almost an afterthought to you. -- disturbing thing. i cannot hear and estimation that includes some kind of, well -- believe me. i am a lawyer. i get to the ongoing investigation is a convenient way of getting out of answering. i apologize. my blood is boiling. this is a disgrace. please give me a succinct answer. why is it that it is easier for you to come to the determination that whistleblowers are wrong before you can in a faster way you can say these retaliate or's are wrong? -- retaliate or's are wrong hold one rick talley --

retaliate or-firing them. ms. flanz: it has to do with the burden of proof. what to show the preponderance of evidence supports. rep. rice: i get the burden thing. that's why you shall more people working on it. this system is not going to get fixed a you can tell about we change the culture here and it is so much better. if retaliators are not held accountable, that's the bottom line. rep. roe: thank you. the direction i want to go is with dr. head and mr. tresmaine and dr. hooker. when you make an allegation

obviously, you are not a team player right there. what is it to lead me to believe you are not just an incompetent employee? you are a troublemaker and you do not want to work with the team. we have all been on the team before, what is to make me because i've seen this happen before where -- how do i know dr. head is a very good dr.? he may not be good at we move them off somewhere. essentially move you out of clinical care just to get you out of the way. it is hard to protect your reputation if you have two or three or four senior people ahead of you making those allegations. how do you protect yourself from that? to follow on ms. rice's statement? dr. head: my reputation speaks

for itself and my education and expertise in track record speaks for self. i have never had a lawsuit filed against me. i've never had a level three complaints filed against me until i testified in congress. rep. roe: i am being facetious. dr. head: i understand. as a whole world needs to understand. i am a team player. i have followed the chain of command. every allegation of malfeasance the problems with the wait times , suggesting perhaps that the medical stop should -- staff should review record and nonmedical as were teasing rather than students should be doing. it is common though as i said before, what is the first thing they do? they take the whistleblower and they isolate them. second, they defame them. third, they push them out.

what they have them isolated and defamed, they try to go back and rewrite history as the just something they have done to cause the action against them. and then they send out their surrogates usually not trained professionals to suggest that perhaps that person is a bad person. not a good doctor. my strength comes from my patients. i get much more out of seeing you then i give you. i do my best every day of the week to make sure that i give them the best care possible. the mistake i made initially during this process was allow them to push me out of here. i am stronger now only because i have insisted and i fight to see as many veterans as possible. rep. roe: the problem is when you stick your head out. it is easier to keep your head down. stick your head up and speak out you get a lot at rose. the point is that people shooting arrows do not have any

going back there way. mr. tresmaine you come into a new shop in working in there and see issues and pointed him out. and what happens you become the problem. mr. tresmaine: yes, sir. with a 24 point five years of the experience at two different facilities and nothing less than an outstanding rating, after arriving in central alabama, it really quickly we discovered and i discovered and then simultaneously the assistant director, we started comparing to know a little bit. we both realized we were team players and we would've done anything on the team that was going to fix things. i promise you we were never built the wrong team. the team that disrespect or harm's veterans. i'm a veteran myself. i come from a family of veterans.

i have my son here who will more likely be in air force veteran. if he wants to go surf, i will support him. i want to make sure she walks into az 8, 80 v.a. across this nation. the moment he crossed the threshold, he should be treated with dignity. it should not be a matter of which team are you on? there's only 1 -- the right team. we realized the wrong team was in place and we tried our best to help that team to re-energize that team. as it turned out, that team did not want to be helped. they wanted to protect themselves. neither dr. muse or i would give up the fight. rep. roe: thank you, the three of you for being here and speaking doubt. i think it will help other people around the country to have the courage to stick their head up.

i yield back. rep. coffman: thank you. mr. waltz you are recognized. rep. waltz: the v.a. can not provide the best care if there is a coulter of fear. since i have been here and i'm somewhat biased, this idea of coulter is never far from us. it is difficult. a week or so ago, we were on a field hearing on this very issue of over prescription of opiates and a whistleblower if you will, christopher kirkpatrick was one of the people who brought into peoples' attention. he was backed up by this. we have another whistleblower out to their whose medical record, a veteran, was looked

into with a very clear example of trying to find a mental health issue to discredit them. it is so despicable because the very stigmas we are trying to overcome among mental health is used against the people were talking about it. this is a cancer and i know the attempt and i'm grateful that we start to bring into light. in so many of these cases, the difficulties to overcome and i think ms. rice was hitting on it. we understand you have to make a case a you cannot accuse people and there is safety and collective bargaining that makes sense. i will come back to that. thank goodness for dr. hooker and the local 342 for providing democracy where management cannot run rock shock over employees. this issue seems to me and i know it runs deeper than you at the table. i looked up in the dictionary, looked a whistleblower.

you know the synonyms are? but trader -- betrayer, narc. this is hard. what you 2 are doing is more important to make sure the integrity is there. i went through the list and i'm grateful it appears we are starting to get justice for the whistleblowers. that's one piece. the accountability piece, the thing that troubles me in the nine cases you listed, i may be wrong because they are summaries for it only appears that charles led to changes to how business was done in a hydration practice that was wrong. am i wrong to assume? my concern is is threefold. justice, accountability, and improved quality. when you adjudicate these things, all you gave them back is what they should've had. you do not get a pat on the back

for doing the right thing. we paid them back the music -- the money because you fired them incorrectly. maybe we're talking to the wrong people for implementation of the changes. are we seeing true change in your mind or are we just going through the motions and paying people back pay and never should've been taken away in the first place? it is the taxpayer that settles when they do this wrong. ms. flanz: we are seeing changes. not as profoundly as we should. we are seeing changes. the office of the medical inspector when they go out to investigate disclosure that comes to us through ms. lerner's office if asked to do with patient care, the recommendation in close not just -- it includes not just protection for the individual but substantive

change around whatever the problem is that was disclosed. added the department have an obligation to provide the information about what it is going to do and provide updates toward the corruption of the problem. absolutely, it is fundamental. that is what the process is about. ms. lerner: culture change requires many elements. this is not a problem that just developed overnight. it has been around for a long time. here are things we see that makes a difference in changing the culture. you have to have a message from the top. leadership has to be very strong. some of the things was seen like secretary mcdonald meeting with whistleblowers. rep. walz: this troubles me is -- was secretary shinseki unethical? did you get the impression he did not care about this or those that came before him?

ms. lerner: i think a lot of the props under secretary shinseki's term was at the office of medical inspector was doing nothing when they found a problem. when there was a disclosure, the office would say an incident and maybe the whistleblower is wrong -- that is very different now. the office of medical inspector is different. after our report, the office of medical inspector was changed around. though person was heading get left. we are seeing a change in the types of investigations they are doing, including disciplinary actions. rep. walz: my time is up. i would like to have the other three address that. i think that is fundamental. if it is made a significant change. that is an important piece. rep. coffman: you are recognized for five minutes. chris i appreciate you holding this hearing and i wish you were

not necessary. i wish listing the types of changes that we wouldn't be sitting here. i want to follow up on what thing that was just mention and i think it was the travel by the secretary and other top of v.a. leaders. this can be a question for ms. flanz as she makes reference to visiting with whistleblowers. has the current secretary visited the l.a. facility? did he meet with the doctor? ms. lerner: i do not know. dr. head: i was prevented from meeting with the secretary. i was told my id badge was -- there was a problem with my badge. i went to human resources. rep. huelskamp: say that again? dr. head: i was told you had to have an updated card and mine had expired and i would not be

allowed to see the secretary. rep. huelskamp: did that happen when you were before the congressional committee? dr. head: it could have. i was instructed to get that taken care of. i went to human resources. when i went to resolve the issue which was resolved they instructed me that a block had been placed in my id and they had a problem with the block. i was called saying you could meet with the secretary now. dr. norman has said is not a sorry to have an updated card. the problem is the secretary just finished his presentation. rep. huelskamp: very troubling. ms. flanz any response? you made the claim -- this a very public whistleblower. dr. head put his reputation on the line and very courageous, very public. was he not searched out to less

solve this problem? ms. flanz: i was not consulted for it if i had been, i would want to intervene. the secretary makes a point to model the behavior in all supervisors. i am sorry dr. head was not able to meet with him. i know that conversation would have been of use. rep. huelskamp: are there any other whistleblowers? you made is that he would like to me with the whistleblowers, in others he skipped? how many times has he met with whistleblowers? ms. flanz: it is my understanding he seeks them out. rep. huelskamp: except for dr. head? ms. flanz: it is the first time i've heard of this. rep. huelskamp: when you make statements for the record, this pretty certain. i want to the firm correctly earlier that no v.a. supervisors have been fired for retaliation against was a blower's? ms. flanz: that is not correct.

rep. huelskamp: how many? ms. flanz: they fall in the jurisdiction in my office which a look at senior managers. i cannot speak of the photos below that level. we have been involved in recommending termination for three individuals. it included whistleblower retaliation. rep. huelskamp: they have been terminated? ms. flanz: yes. rep. huelskamp: the second question. maybe have the names of those? ms. flanz: not in this public forum, but i would be happy to provide them. rep. huelskamp: follow-up all medical records. you made a reference in your written testimony that perhaps supervisors or others have access to medical records to whistleblowers to discredit them. can you describe that?

i am astonished that would actually be occurring in the v.a. ms. lerner: we have raised -- sorry. we have raised some the concerts with eva and the -- v.a. and ig. we are seeing a pattern of not just accessing medical records but opening things for like hippa violations, relative minor violations that become the focus rather than the underlying focus that the whistleblower came forward with. that is problematic. one of them is the underlying disclosure and it has a chilling effect on other whistleblowers and so we are -- rep. huelskamp: hippa violation by the v.a. retaliating against the whistleblower? ms. lerner: it is all of those things. rep. huelskamp: medical records

of whistleblowers being accessed, that has occurred? do you have any idea roughly of how many times? ms. lerner: i don't have the number. i can find out. we have cases that involve improper access to the whistleblowers' medical records. a lot of people who work at the v.a. get their care for the v.a. so their medical records are there. rep. huelskamp: are the exempt from hippa? ms. lerner: i don't know. rep. huelskamp: what is the penalty for inappropriately accessing whistleblower medical records? ms. flanz: there is a range of penalties and in each case we have to look and see if the individual acts test a business reason to do so. i am also deeply troubled by this. we see it far more often than you would expect. i do not know if that is because of so many of our employees are

veterans who receive their care at v.a. facilities for it is deeply troubling. rep. huelskamp: my idea for penalty for that would be immediate dismissal. i yield back. rep. coffman: ms. robie, your recognize. rep. roby: thank you for the invitation to join you. i do not center your committee but i said on the appropriations subcommittee and mr. tresmaine is my constituent. to choose understatements, first to say these people are coming forward shows there are issues that need some attention as well as saying we hear over and over that you cannot change a culture overnight. it has been a year. it has been almost a year since mr. tresmaine and i had our

first conversation. we are tired of hearing you cannot change this culture. it has not been overnight. it has been a year. here we are today. mr. tresmaine i was traveling up here today and i was taking about us being in this room together today and how significant that is and i just want to thank you for you being willing to tell the truth when no one else was. for you to step forward to reveal the -- horrible circumstances in montgomery, tuskegee, just says a lot about who you are. i want to thank you many times. i want to take this opportunity today publicly to thank mr. tresmaine and the other whistleblowers who are here who i do not know but i appreciate your courage. thank you to mr. tresmaine. we uncovered layers of scandal.

thousands of missing x-rays. manipulated medical records as mr. tresmaine referenced dva employee who took a recovering veteran to a crack house and only took a year and a half even though the administration knew it had happened. it took a year and a half for the individual to be fired. the culture we are talking about a here a year later with taken a step backward in an ap article showed that montgomery and tuskegee, the hospitals mr. tresmaine that mr. tresmaine work that where number one and number two were the worst in the country. there is a new scam. let's scheduled appointment within the timeframe but we will cancel 30 minutes before and reschedule it. it is on the books. it looks is though the v.a. is doing what they are supposed to. by the way, if they come in, i

learned last week, if a mental health patient comes in and asks the scene as a walk-in they only get reimbursed for half of their travel expenses. otherwise as an appointment holder, which by the way canceled 30 minutes prior this is the kind of stuff we are hearing directly from veterans. i have to tell you -- nothing has improved. we have taken steps backward. mr. tresmaine, thank you for being here. i want to ask you because of asked nicely for a year and all apologies, i'm a little over being nice at this point. how often, mr. tresmaine did a professional staff member from the secretary of the v.a. office here in washington sit in your regularly scheduled staff meeting? zero.

senator shelby from alabama and myself sent a letter that we wanted washington v.a. to come down in oversee what was happening in central alabama v.a. has to there been any presence from the national v.a. in central alabama? direct link to the secretary's office here in washington to oversee in the last six months? ok. has the secretary and other top leadership here in washington shown a direct interest in investment in correcting the problems? would you say that washington the following through with his promise to directly oversee the overhaul in cabinet? mr. savage wasn't the visiting

director and mr. chapter -- jackson is the acting director after mr. talton was remote. mr. tresmaine: he was placed there by dr. savagery when dr. talton was fired, robin jackson came in as the director. again, i pointed out i thought -- rep. roby: i'm a visitor so i have to be careful not to violate your rules all five minutes. ms. flanz was in the room with me and the deputy secretary when i asked mr. savage to be in the same investigation that mr. tres maine. mr. savage was the first fired against the law this congress passed in august. mr. savage quietly retired one week ago. thank you for letting me be

here. thank you to mr. tresmaine. i cannot tell you how much i appreciate your courage and your willingness to help get this right. rep. coffman: i think your passion speaks for itself. when i mentioned about being on the right team, there's no question our representative martha roby has been advocate. web not seen the likes of. thank you so much for that. -- we have not seen the likes of. rep. kuster: a brief follow-up along the lines of representative rice and i want to ask ms. lerner is procedural but i think it will get an important point. you talked about the office of medical inspector doing a more proactive or interactive follow-up to the recommendation and you mentioned including

disciplinary action and that seems to be what is hanging over this hearing. our disappointment that it sounds as though it is more rigorous investigation of the whistleblower then those who have been standing behind retaliation. to me and i think this what representative rice is getting cap, if you want to change culture, you have to change the view not just a first step that we would take care of whistleblowers and treat them fairly. but something will actually happen to those who retaliated against. i am an attorney as well in understand the burden of proof. can you follow up with this? maybe we do not have the right witness in terms of the medical a -- office of medical examiner. can we ask for data that may be

available? ms. flanz: i think there are 2 -- ms. lerner: i think there are 2 different processes. one of the things we look at when we decide whether the office of medical inspector's is adequate before we report it have they taken appropriate corrective measures? has relief -- it is not really retaliation investigation. where we are seeing the problem with rotarian with tori investigation is with the ig and regional council the problem is that when someone comes forward with the disclosure, and then an investigation is often opened up into their own behavior.

we can protect them from retaliation if they come for but the office of medical inspector is look at the underlying disclosure. rep. kuster: then there's a procedure because my colleague talked about you need to deal with protecting the whistleblower and making the long term changes for the health and well-being of the veteran. i want to get at the crux of the matter. who is investigating the retaliatory action and what is the disciplinary procedure for that person? do you follow me? ms. lerner: when somebody makes a disclosure, they have a number of options. they can go to the accountability and review or the ig or ose or congress for if they experience retaliation, we can open up an investigation or within use our process to get

relief very quickly for them. we have been able to get relief quickly -- rep. kuster: you are still to our relief to protect them. keep going on the track, what is the procedure for disciplinary proceeding to set the example? that is half of what criminal justice system is all about part of what an employee justice system is about. to set this example, here were modeling the behavior of this collaborative approach. over here, we do not want this to happen. sending somebody to an office with a hole in the floor. sending somebody to an office with no windows. these are things that are not tolerable and we will demonstrate to all of the other employees by saying, that person was led to go.

they didn't uphold the spirit we hold dear in our workplace. ms. lerner: disciplinary action is key to accountability, there is no question in terms of changing a culture you have to hold people accountable. it deters future violation. our primary focus has been making the whistleblower back. we have 130 employees and we have to prioritize, but what we do is when we identify a case where we think disciplinary action is appropriate we work with the office of accountability review and we try and get the agency to take disciplinary action. we have several cases in the pipeline now that will involve disciplinary action. we are trying to pin it and focus more on disciplinary action but our first priority has been getting people back to work.

with someone has been fired we want them back to the work and when someone is in the basement we want to get them back. the have been very successful. ms. flanz:rep. kuster: the sooner you can get to the retaliatory behavior, the sooner you will be going through for years on end example such as these. thank you and i apologize for going over. >> to her now recognize for five minutes. >> you still don't have an office? why hasn't he got in his regular office back? ms. lerner: i don't know, but i will find out. rep. benishek: obviously he is

back in good faith and i would like that. rep. benthis is the same supervisor you have had all along? dr. head: no, really, it is dr. dean norman. rep. benishek: this is not a hip of violation, so why are they accused of violations? ms. flanz: we are very

protective of patient care information and not all supervisors are aware of the right of supervisors to provide that information to other oversight bodies. rep. benishek: miss lerner, what changes have occurred since last year's hearing? ms. lerner: we have many more cases to investigate. we have been able to do a little bit of hiring, working full-time on v.a. cases and the expedited review system, hiring additional staff to work cases. our process works -- we have been getting relief or whistleblowers and getting people back to work, getting adverse personnel actions. i think people feel more comfortable and know about us and we are getting more cases. rep. benishek: thank you. doctor tell me what your

responses today to the testimony of ms. flanz. dr. hooker: we had one patient -- you are really technically not supposed to continue giving that medication that someone has abnormal drug screens. repetitive positive urine drug screens should be the cause for not giving the medication. we had a clinical specialist who reported that practice going on. rather than investigate they investigated the nurse. he has been sitting in a clerical position. doing no functions a windowless office reporting to clerks who need something moved or carried

around when he has a masters degree. he is on active duty. just this past weekend in the reserve, they have no proposed -- he didn't contact the office of special counsel back in august. they did propose discipline against him proposing suspension on something that occurred in 2013. a couple other things that they alleged occurred in 2014. rep. benishek: i just want to interrupt you because i have heard of this before from other members and physicians, saying they have a peer-reviewed ga ig, without referencing the thing you brought up. is that your experience? dr. hooker: my personal experience for being in the limelight -- i only had one time when i was called to the peer-reviewed committee.

this particular instance, there was no peer in the room or on the telephone to be my. . -- my peer. there was a dietitian and a few other occupational therapists, but there was no true peer for me to address my concerns. number two -- rep. benishek: the peer review process is flawed at your facility? dr. hooker: very flawed. people that they want to harass -- i had several colleagues who had no true peer in the room when they went before the peer-reviewed committee. we have people in the inner circle who are the team players and you don't get the reviews for cases that should be peer-reviewed, and others who get peer-reviewed cases that should not be. rep. benishek: thank you. >> you are now recognized for five minutes.

rep. rice: what is the burden of truth you apply when looking into allegations by whistleblowers? ms. flanz: it depends on the tribunal that my peers in action. rep. rice: are you making a regimentation to -- ms. flanz: it is -- in most cases, employee discipline will be subject to the appeal of the merits protection board. and almost all cases, it applies a preponderance of the evidence. rep. roby: for both retaliated and whistleblowers? -- rep. rice: for both retaliate or send whistleblowers?

ms. flanz: if it is a suspension, a demotion, a removal, most actions -- there are differences if we are talking about title 38 doctors and nurses who have their own disciplinary process. but if we are talking about title five, if the person did something wrong and should be discipline and the appeal goes -- the preponderance of the evidence standard what apply. rep. rice: in terms of disciplinary action, that is meant to be taken against the retaliateor or a whistleblower? they both have built-in protections, union representation or whomever, no, none? ms. flanz: not for pure title 48 -- that is a little glitch in the system pertaining to section 74. dr. hooker: what the secretary

says goes and that is typically delegated to a chief of staff locally who can be very, very, very retaliatory to physicians who do not play according to the party line, or who are not team players. rep. rice: mr. chairman, maybe that is something that we should as a committee look into trying to fix. in my prior life as a prosecutor, there was a saying that it is true not just in the world of criminal justice but i see it here in the world of va. that term is snitch is get stitches. -- snitches get stitches. while you don't have physical stages they are certainly burying figurative ones.

>> thank you. i am still trying to figure out parts of the testimony but i am looking at a document from november, 2014 about rebuilding trust. at that time, you did note that there were over 100 investigations currently being undertaken. do you have a rough figure what those numbers are? ms. flanz: i believe he was speaking to the ig. it was at its most active point at 98 sites. they have completed their work at several of them. let me make sure i have the right data here. they have completed their work at 43 of those sites and have substantiated some scheduling and propriety of 14 of the 43.

they found no particular impropriety at 29. their investigations are ongoing at the balance. rep. huelskamp: so they have not delivered half? so five months later from this report to the public, half these -- these investigations have yet to be completed or started? ms. flanz: you really have to ask the ig. rep. huelskamp: can you ask them for me? this is from the secretary. the justice department and the office of special counsel, all those together. do you know a, comparable

figure? half of these have yet to be completed. ms. flanz: i believe ig has started them all and finished quite a few but has not yet delivered the report. rep. huelskamp: this would be worth three individuals have been fired out of 100 investigations. ms. flanz: the question that you posed before about individuals three had to do with whistleblower retaliation. the ig is looking at something different. that would be a different number. i'm here today to talk about whistleblower retaliation and i apologize, i don't have a number of actions taken as a result of the ig finding. rep. huelskamp: one thing i will ask -- when you put together this testimony who did you visit with to clear

this testimony? the deputy secretary cleared this testimony? ms. flanz: there is a process that includes our leadership yes. rep. huelskamp: so they approved all this testimony? so nobody in the front office knew mr. head did not have the opportunity to visit -- you are suggesting that everyone was talked to. somebody looked at this and let you say that a decision might have been made? ms. flanz: i testimony is that the secretary makes a point of meeting with was as he travels throughout the system. it didn't specifically speak to any meeting with dr. head. when the secretary of veterans affairs came to our facility he did not meet with any whistleblowers. we asked for a private meeting

because we have sent a letter in november about a number of people under investigation that we thought were inappropriate that appeared to be sham investigations. he had a strict schedule. we were allowed to go with another union for 15 minutes jointly. i was unable to go because i had care duties. my colleagues in the union went. >> the secretary didn't visit our facilities. the deputy secretary did but he did not meet with any of us. >> i am just about out of time -- if i might ask ms. flanz of the 15 corrective actions that were rectified, i would like to know how many of those had business with senior v.a. officials? would you please find out? >> thank you. >> i will venture out on a limb

-- i bet you get a call from the secretary now. it goes to something bigger for me. i would go back to this issue with secretaries and jackie -- secretary shinseki. an organization this bed has to happen -- i want to get to this training and how we will change it, how we will make it better. i want to talk about osc. i bet everyone in this room has gone through some form of professional training, whether it is on a friday afternoon or a retreat, and i bet you can count intel the ones that were highly effective and those that were forgettable. i am going to go to this -- have any of the three of you received osc whistleblower certification training?

dr. hooker: no, i have not. ms. flanz: know. -- dr. head: no. dr. hooker: what the training is -- it is not a specific training. there are five steps agencies have to take and one of them -- a lot of it is the training component, putting posters that facility and providing information to new employees about retaliation, providing information to current employees. >> their confusion on that in the v.a.? that if someone tells you about a practice, isn't it widely known that you don't move them from their office without due process? yes, facetiously but do you believe this is going to work? >> the problem is that it has to filter down. the message is good coming out of headquarters those folks for implementing it.

>> is this going to work, dr. head? >> i think the current practices made a big change. >> i would venture to say -- i always think about this is -- training folks is not technique and content. i would argue the a's issue is people -- argue v.a.'s issue is people. there are a whole bunch of dedicated v.a. employees that are living at sacrificing and doing great service and their morality hurting. -- their morale is hurting. there are folks in the management chain that do that so my question is what would be the most effective thing we can do? i do want to belittle the training but i think it is good to refresh your course on what is appropriate and what is legal. i just -- i would ask the three

of you, what should we be doing more of? >> i think one of the -- your definition of a whistleblower that in itself is really derogatory. i don't think that in itself -- it kills a lot of people when they think whistleblowers and negativity. you have to embrace that, you have to embrace the whistleblower and acknowledge that and acknowledge that there are problems and you have to resolve those problems. just adding knowledge meant and that openness, the transparency is critically important and we just don't have that. we have the retaliation. that seems to be the first step anytime a whistleblower comes forward. >> why not want to be better? you could take everything with a grain of salt. each one of us in our lives when you get positive feedback

from those you trust -- why that resistance? >> i don't know. you hit the nail on the head when you said there are many v.a. employees -- the majority of the v.a. employees, 99.9% are going to work every day and love taking care of veterans. you just have that small minority that feel that they can utilize taxpayer money to do whatever they want and retaliate and -- >> do you think miss rice is right, that there needs to be some teeth in this? is there a patience to this? i don't want to step on anyone's due process rights but you hear the frustration that nobody is ever held accountable. it is not a juvenile desire to seek punishment for the sake of punishment, it is about making sure people are served. >> we don't have due process rights in the traditional sense. 742 prevents us from2 having

that due process right. in the committee, i would be held to the standards of my peers, but in the v.a. i am told what i do and how i do it. i can't argue in a sense the way i could with colleagues. i don't have the collegial oversight, i have clerks telling me how to practice medicine. if i call the office of special counsel and report -- i did come across evidence that another veteran employee reported two years before i discovered it through a proposed termination of another employee who had brought up some issues. she was put in another window was office in the basement and had two masters degrees and a counseling degree. where i'm going with this is that, when i reported to the ig, i went to the inspector general of report goes back to the v.a.

i called on all nine people i currently have sitting home, getting paid at a high professional salary level for not doing their job. they don't even know why they are home. and ophthalmologist was just threatened. when we do reports of these outside agencies, they turn it over to the v.a. for investigation. i am not a farmer but i would have trouble asking how many hens are in the coop when the feathers are sticking out of the foxes mouth. >> thing mickey is coming back to me is this is how deep it is -- what is the deal with this office thing and moving people to the basement? that is an intimidation -- that is your definition of violence in the workplace. >> that is unacceptable. >> i went over my time. >> one quick final point. that has to be accountability.

move me to a storage bin makes me feel bad, but they are trying to send a message not only to me but to everyone. look at dr. head, he thinks he's great. they said they will protect them but on my v.a., no. they listen to me and congress can't do a thing about it. they are trying to intimidate all the other potential -- i like to label whistleblowers as patriots. these patriots, they are trying to suppress their willingness to make a better life for these veterans. it is shameful. >> let me say also that retaliation simply isn't limited to employees of the v.a. but also patients who step forward. in colorado, we had a case last year where a patient gave a

statement to an investigative reporter and the reporter then called the v.a. and talk to the public affairs individual. the public affairs individual said you really don't want to talk to this person, he is a patient undergoing psychiatric care. i sent a letter to the secretary of veterans affairs, never got a response. are thanks to the witnesses. you are now excused. today we have had a chance to hear about problems that exist within the department of veterans affairs with regard to whistleblower retaliation. from the testimony provided and questions asked, i am dismayed at the failure of the department to adequately protect conscientious employees who seek to improve services provided to our veterans. since this hearing was necessary to a con question -- what

efforts it has made to improve whistleblower protection practices and processes; address where improvements either have not been made or where insufficient attempts give way to continued retaliation experienced by whistleblowers; and ss next step -- andassess next steps to make sure that those who seek to correct problems with the department are adequately protected. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material. i would like to once again thank all of our witnesses and audience members for joining us in today's hearing. with that, this hearing is adjourned.

[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> republican senator marco rubio announced his 2016 campaign yesterday. on this morning's washington journal we will get an update on the presidential race and look at us-iraq relations. live at the top of the hour on c-span.

ahead of the u.s. immigration and customs enforcement, we will testify about the enforcement of immigration laws. we have live coverage today at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. in the afternoon, the senate foreign relations committee will work on iran legislation. the final much a cricket congress the authority to deny sanctions torelief to iran. live coverage of the market starts at 2:15 eastern, also on c-span 3. >> were you a fan of c-span's first lady series? it is now about. looking inside the personal life of every first lady in american history. based in original interviews with more than 50 preeminent historians and biographers learn details of all 45 first ladies that may these women who they were, their lives

ambitions, and partnerships with their presidential else's. -- spouses. the book provides lively stories of these fascinating women who survive the scrutiny of the white house, sometimes at great personal cost while supporting their families and famous huyssbands. c-span' first ladies is an inspiring read and is now available as hardcover or an e-book through your favorite bookstore or online bookseller. >> florida senator marco rubio officially launched his presidential campaign with the republican nomination. he is the third gop candidate to announce a 2016 run. he was elected to the senate in 2010 in a three-way race that included former governor charlie crist. senator rubio made his presidential announcement in miami at the medium tower.

-- the freedom tower. [applause] [crowd chanting "marco"] senator rubio: thank you. thank you. that is a lot of cell phones. [laughter] thank you. thank you for being here. after months of deliberation and prayer about the future of our country, i have come here tonight to make an announcement on how i believe i can best serve you. i chose to make this announcement at the freedom tower because it is truly a symbol of our nation's identity as a land of opportunity. and i am more confident than ever that despite our troubles

we have it within our power to make our time another american century. in the very room five decades ago, tens of thousands of cuban exiles began their new lives in america. that's part of a larger story of the american miracle. how united by a common faith in their god-given right to go as far as their talent and work will take them, a collection of immigrants and exiles, former slaves and refugees, together built the freest and most prosperous nation ever. you see, for almost all of human history, power and wealth belonged only to a select few. most people who have ever lived were trapped by the circumstances of their birth. destined to live the life their parents had. but america's different. because here we are the children

and the grandchildren of people who refused to accept this. [applause] both of my parents were born to poor families in cuba. after his mother died, my father had to go work when he was 9 years old. my mother was one of seven girls raised by a disabled father who struggled to provide for his family. when they were young, my parents had big dreams for themselves. but because they were not born into wealth or power, the future was destined to be defined by their past. and so in 1956 they came here to america. to the one place on earth where the aspirations of people like them could be more than just dreams. here in america my father became

a bartender. my mother, a cashier, a maid, a k-mart stock clerk. they never made it big. but they were successful. two immigrants with little money or education found stable jobs owned a home, retired with security and gave all four of their children a life better than their own. my parents achieved what came to be known as the american dream. the problem is now, too many americans are starting to doubt whether achieving that dream is still possible. hardworking families that are living paycheck to paycheck, one unexpected expense away from disaster. young americans unable to start a career or a business or a family because they owe thousands of dollars in student loans for degrees that did not even lead to jobs. and small business owners who are luck to struggle under the weight of more taxes, more regulation and more government.

why is this happening? in a country that for over two centuries has been defined by equality of opportunity? it's because while our people and our economy are pushing the boundaries of the 21st century too many of our leaders and their ideas are stuck in the 20th century. [applause] they're busy looking backwards. so they do not see how jobs and prosperity today depend on our ability to compete in a global economy. and so our leaders put us at a disadvantage. by taxing and borrowing and regulating like it was 1999. [laughter] [applause] they look for solutions in

yesterday, so they do not see the good paying modern jobs require different skills and more education than the past, so they blindly support an outdated higher education system that is too expensive and too inaccessible to those who need it most. and they have forgotten, they have forgotten that when america fails to lead global chaos inevitably follows. [cheers and applause] so they appease our enemies, they betray our allies and they weaken our military. at the turn of the 19th century, a generation of americans harnessed the power of the industrial age and they transformed this country into the leading economy in the world. and the 20th century became the american century.

now the time has come for this generation to lead a way towards a new american century. [cheers and applause] if we reform our tax code and reduce regulations and control spending and modernize our immigration laws and repeal or replace obamacare, if we do these things -- [cheers and applause] if we do these things, if we do these things, the american people will create millions of better paying modern jobs. if we create a 21st century system of higher education that provides working americans the chance to acquire the skills they need, that no longer graduates students with mountains of debt and degrees that do not lead to jobs, and that graduates more students from high school ready to work

then our people will be prepared to seize their opportunities in this new economy. [cheers and applause] if we remember that the family not the government, is the most important institution in our society. [cheers and applause] if we remember that all human life deserves protection of our laws. [cheers and applause] and if we remember that all parents deserve to choose the education that's right for their children, then we will have a strong people and a strong nation. [cheers and applause] and if america once again accepts the mantle of global

leadership. [cheers and applause] by abandoning this administration's dangerous concessions to iran and its hostility to israel. [cheers and applause] by reversing the hollowing out of our military, by giving our men and women in uniform the resources, the care and the gratitude that they deserve. [cheers and applause] by no longer being passive in the face of chinese and russian aggression. [applause] and by ending the near total disregard for the erosion of democracy and human rights around the world, especially cuba, venezuela, nicaragua. [cheers and applause]

then, if we did these things then our nation would be safer our world more stable, and our people more prosperous. [cheers and applause] these are the things that we must do. but this election is not just about what laws we're going to pass. this election is a generational choice about what kind of country we will be. just yesterday a leader from yesterday began a campaign for president by promising to take us back to yesterday. yesterday is over. [cheers and applause] we're never going back.

we americans are proud of our history. but our country has been about the future. and before us now is the opportunity to offer the -- author the greatest chapter yet in the amazing story of america. but we can't do that by going back to the leaders and ideas of the past. we must change the decisions we are making by changing the people who are making them. [cheers and applause] that is why tonight, grounded by the lessons of our history, but inspired by the promise of our future, i announce my candidacy for president of the united states. [cheers and applause]

i know my candidacy might seem improbable to some watching from abroad. after all, in many countries the highest office in the land is reserved for the rich and the powerful. but i live in an exceptional country. i live in an exceptional country where even the son of a bartender and a maid can have the same dream. [cheers and applause] i live in an exceptional country where the son of a bartender and a maid can have the same dream and the same future as those who come from power and privilege. [cheers and applause] i recognize the challenges of this campaign.

and i recognize the demands of this office that i seek. but in this endeavor, as in all things, i find comfort in the ancient command. be strong and courageous. do not tremble or be dismayed for the lord, your god, is with you wherever you go. [cheers and applause] i've heard some suggest that i should step aside and wait my turn. but i cannot. because i believe our very identity as an exceptional nation is at stake and i can make a difference as president. [cheers and applause]

i'm humbled by the realization that america doesn't owe me anything. but i have a debt to america i must try to repay. this isn't just the country where i was born. america's literally the place that changed my family's history. i regret that my father did not live to see this day in person. he used to tell me all the time, he used to tell us all the time [speaking spanish] [cheers and applause] that means, in this country you will achieve all the things we never could. [applause] on the days when i'm tired or discouraged, i remember the sounds of his keys jingling at the front door of our home, well past midnight, as he returned from another long day at work.

when i was younger i didn't fully appreciate all he did for us. but now as my own children grow older, i more fully understand. my father was grateful for the work he had. but that was not the life he wanted for his children. he wanted all the dreams he once had for himself to come true for us. he wanted all the doors that closed for him to open for me. and so my father stood behind a small portable bar in the back of a room for all those years so that tonight i could stand behind this podium in front of this room and this nation. [cheers and applause] that journey from behind that bar to behind this podium, that's the essence of the american dream.

and whether we remain a special country will depend on whether that journey is still possible for those who are trying to make it right now. the single mother who works long hours for little pay so her children don't have to struggle the way she has to. the young student who takes two buses before dawn to attend a better school halfway across town. the workers in our hotel kitchens, the landscaping crews in our neighborhoods, the late night janitorial staff who clean our offices and even the bartenders who tonight are standing in the back of a room somewhere in america. if their american dream's become impossible, we will have just become another country. but if they succeed, this 21st century will also be an american century. [cheers and applause] this will be the message of my

campaign. and the purpose of my presidency. and to succeed on this journey i will need your prayers and your support and ultimately your vote. and so tonight i'm asking to you take that first step with me by joining us at our website, marcorubio.com. my wife, jeanette, and my four children are here tonight. [cheers and applause] the next 19 months will take me far away from home. i'll miss watching amanda run track. and daniela play volleyball and anthony play football and dominic play soccer. but i have chosen this course because this election, this

election is about them. theirs is the most important generation in america. [applause] and i'll tell you why. because if we can capture the promise of this new century, they will be the freest and the most prosperous americans that have ever lived. but if we fail, they will be the first generation of americans to inherit a country worse off than the one left for their parents. the final verdict on our generation will be written by americans who have not yet been born. let us make sure they record that we made the right choice, that in the early years of this century, faced with a rapidly changing and uncertain world our generation rose to face the great challenges of our time. and because we did, because we did, there was still one place in the world where who you come from does not determine how far you go. [applause]

because we did, the american miracle lived on. because we did, our children and theirs lived in a new american century. thank you, god bless you. god bless the united states. thank you. [cheers and applause]

♪ >> democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton will be in monticello iowa speaking to educators today. we will have live coverage at 1:15 eastern on c-span two. >> during this month, c-span is pleased to present the winning entries in this year's student cam documentary competition. student cam is c-span's

competition that encourages middle and high school students to think critically about issues that affect the nation. duties were asked to create their documentaries based on the team "the three branches and you" to demonstrate how a policy or action by one of the three branches of government has affected them or their community. giobanna anguiano, sierra vaught , and martha pacheco flores from metropolitan arts institute in phoenix are one of our second prize winners. their entry focused on the topic of immigration. >> in arizona, we had a chance to meet people from all walks of life but the ones who voices needed to be heard the most were hiding in the shadows. we began researching issue of immigration and order to understand the situation of so many people, we set out to tucson, arizona, to learn more about the effects of president barack obama's executive actions. president obama: if you have

been an american for five years, if you have children who are americans a nuisance or legal residents, if you register, pass a background check, and willing to pay your fair share of this, you will be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily with out fear of deportation. you can come out of the shadows think you're right with the law. >> to support their families many men migrate to the united dates to work. by taking low wages, those men are hoping to bring their wife and children to the country. >> [speaking spanish] >> in response to the president's address, a local migrant support organization rally together for a press conference. >> he said we are deporting --

not families. it is the system that is creating felonies. so we are actually having families being branded with these felonies. so that is in fact deporting families. we are here because the reentry is one of those felonies. >> [speaking spanish] >> to further understand the

circumstances that half of the undocumented population faces, we travel to max co. on the other side of the wall -- we travel to mexico. we visited the memorial of a boy who was killed by a border control agent. there is an fbi investigation. jose is an example of the tensions border communities face. as migrants wait in line, the border communities are stuck with what they leave behind. >> jose antonio had been throwing roxette him and his back turned your board official the border patrol opened fire and killed him. >> waiting to enter the united eighth has taken a toll on many people attempting to enter this country. in turn, they search for ways to travel across in order to find work and safety. >> the actions by the president

will only encourage more people to come here illegally and put their lives at risk heard we saw the humanitarian crisis at our border last summer, how horrific it was. next summer, it could be worse. >> just made it so clear to me how much people's lives are impacted by what we do in the united states and the policies we have. my very first day was -- i went out as journalists to report on the no more death camps. it was the fourth of july, 24 004. i had just finished college. we drove out and came across two guys sitting on the side of the road. was the first time i had, being in the desert and encountering people who were on that journey and just seeing the look of exhaustion, but also of feeling and what they were saying to us as they could not go on. there were too tired and they thought they would be able to make it. they were older. how sad and upset they seems

to feel. they asked us to call border patrol, which i think was difficult for all of us to do. which we had to do and then watch them get picked up and taken away. narrator: even though some actions made by the united states have had detrimental outcomes, others have had results focusing on young people and their families without documentation. >> 2010 came up, it was the last time the dream act was voted on. that pushed others to realize that we can let other people choose -- cannot let oth other people's choose our lives for us. their permit will be extended to three years instead of two. one by one, we are leaving behind some people. 4.4 million will benefit from this. and so that leaves more than

half of the undocumented population still wondering what could be. there are still things that need to be in progress and that need to be changed, like our broken immigration to be modified. we talked about getting in line. we talked about getting into the nation the right way. a lot of us what the right way and a lot of us have been in line. narrator: within that community the metropolitan arts is a two there is a bright and ambitious dream are ready to move forward. with the president's excited action, we can welcome a girl who can come out of the shadows. >> it enables me to have access to more colleges. i have more interest in. jobs many more like support with it, because there are a lot of people out here that really

want to get somewhere but we don't have the opportunity to be doing it. narrator: the system is complex and has been worked on for many years by multiple administrations. the house has made a decision to dismantle president barack obama's executive action. and is now now my into the senate. the result is unknown. >> to watch all the winning videos and learn more about our competition, go to c-span.org and click on student cam. also, tell us what you think about the issue the students addressed onon facebook and twitter. >> " washington journal" is n ext. the house is back for member speeches. they are expected to vote on a measure to go to conference with the senate on the 2016 budget. watch live house coverage here

on c-span. >> today marks the 150th anniversary of the assassination of president abraham lincoln. at 10:15 p.m. on april 14 1865, john wilkes booth entered the presidential boxed and shot president lincoln. the wounded president was carried across 10th street to the peterson house. tonight we will be live from 10th street at 10:00 p.m. eastern where ford's theater will re-create the overnight vigil. we will talk to historians about the assassination and take your calls on c-span 2. >> coming up this hour, we will get an update on the 2016 presidential race. shira center and catherine lucy will join us. president obama is scheduled to

meet with the iraq prime minister this morning. we will talk to former u.s. ambassador to iraq, christopher ho, about relations between the two countries. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. host: good morning. it's tuesday, april 14. both houses are in chambers today with legislation expected to can the -- to convene at 11:00 a.m.. along with the april 15 tax deadline on the minds of so many americans this week, we will begin by asking our viewers to weigh in on whether you think the u.s. tax them is fair. -- cap system is fair.