brainard. security director for the state of kansas in the office of security operations at the transportation security administration. mr. mark livington is the chief risk officer at the transportation security dministration and mr. andrew rhoades in the office of security operations at the t.s.a. we welcome you and thank you for eing here. if you will please rise and raise your right hand, do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. thank you. you may be seated. let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. in order to allow time for discussion, we would appreciate if you would limit your verbal comment to five minutes. your entire written statement will be entered into the record. we will start with mr. brainard. you recognized for five minutes. make sure you bring that microphone up nice and close. you can straighten it out but we want to make sure we get you clearly on audio.

brainard, are you aware of these findings? mr. brainard: i am, ma'am. ms. kelly: as part of the ongoing efforts to complete the 10-point plan and resolve security vulnerabilities, administrator neffenger worked to address what he identified as a, quote, disproportionate focus on efficiency and speed in screening operations rather than security effectiveness. to that end, administrator neffenger testified before this committee that he has provided new training to, quote, every transportation security officer and supervisor to address the specific vulnerabilities identified by the o.i.g. test. mr. brainard, has your staff received this training? mr. brainard: yes, ma'am. ms. kelly: are you discussed the impact this training has had on the performance of the screener work force during your transcribed interview with the staff. you stated, while the management essential training has obviously improved our situation in terms of how they conduct their jobs, the thoroughness, i mean, there have been improvements in terms of -- i think -- without seeing any test re

brainard, if that's ok. as i understand it, at one point you were assigned in iowa, is that correct, in the midwest? mr. brainard: yes, sir. mr. carter: while you were there in iowa, you received the highest performance rating that you could possibly received while you were working there and i also believe you received a federal security director of the year award? mr. brainard: yes, sir. i received the federal director of the year award. one of the two top awards you can receive in our agency and a number of other types of awards from local stakeholders, partners, fusion centers. mr. carter: right. ok. well, then as i understand it, they tried to reassign you to maine? mr. brainard: yes, sir. mr. carter: they tried to reassign you to maine. mr. brainard: they reassigned me to maine. mr. carter: after you received all these accolades and awards? mr. brainard: yes, sir. mr. carter: do you believe that was their way of trying to get rid of you, to reassign your position? mr. brainard: well, i can't speak to th

a lot of people interpreting it as an effort by brainard to curry favor with the hillary clinton camp and maybe angling for a job in the clinton administration if that happens come next year. >> we know whether see has been a long-time clinton supporter, number one? number two, can you see circumstances under which this becomes a major political controversy that could potentially lead to her resignation? >> i don't think it becomes a major controversy at this point. it's well within her rights as a citizen of the united states. you're entitled to give this campaign contribution, no rules at the fed prohibit it, so she didn't violate anything in doing this. but yes, she has a history with the clinton -- the bill clinton administration. she worked in the obama treasury department. and her husband is a state department official. so there's a clear connection here between brainard and the democratic party and the clintons in particular. but the tradition has been that the fed maintains it's above politics, it's not in that partisan system at all, the fed simply does technocratic fed-type

brainard, if that's okay. as i understand it, at one point you were assigned in iowa, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> while you were there in iowa you received the highest performance rating that you could possibly receive while you were working there? >> yes, sir. >> and also i believe that you received a federal security director of the year award. >> yes, sir. i received the federal security director of the year, the secretary team award and one of the two top awards you can receive in our agency and a number of other types of awards from local stakeholders, partner centers, things like that. >> then as i understand it, they tried to reassign you to maine? >> yes, sir. >> they tried to reassign you to maine? >> they did reassign me to maine. >> after you received all these accolades and awards? >> yes, sir. >> do you believe that that was their way of trying to get rid of you to reassign your position? >> i can't speak to their motives. it would be unfair for me to speak to their motives. i'll speak to fac

brainard, if that's okay. as i understand it, at one point you were assigned in iowa, is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> while you were there in iowa you received the highest performance rating that you could possibly receive while you were working there? >> yes, sir. >> and also i believe that you received a federal security director of the year award. >> yes, sir. i received the federal security director of the year, the secretary team award and one of the two top awards you can receive in our agency and a number of other types of awards from local stakeholders, partner centers, things like that. >> then as i understand it, they tried to reassign you to maine? >> yes, sir. >> they tried to reassign you to maine? >> they did reassign me to maine. >> after you received all these accolades and awards? >> yes, sir. >> do you believe that that was their way of trying to get rid of you to reassign your position? >> i can't speak to their motives. it would be unfair for me to speak to their motives. i'll speak to fac

board of governors has been maxing out her contributions to the hillary clinton campaign by lil brainardu can see she is giving from $250 all of the way up to the february # 1st e donation of $1,950 which puts her at the maximum, and we have been doing research on this that she is the only sitting governor that cnbc could find that has given money to a presidential campaign, and so it seems that you is the federal reserve board here, an entity that prides itself on political independence, and long running tradition of not giving to presidential campaign, and it informal, and they dole allow the board members to make the contributions, but it is the practice in the past not to do that and we have seen some board of governors to give to local, state and parties, but nothing to the presidential election from a sitting federal reserve member. this is a first, guys. >> and now, including an interview on the ceo coming up on "squawk alley." (patrick 1) what's it like to be the boss of you? (patrick 2) pretty great. (patrick 1) how about a 10% raise? (patrick 2) how about 20? (patrick 1) how ab

captions paid for by cbs television distribution joshua burkin is suing his ex-girlfriend, amber brainard bail, and for money given to her under false pretenses. >> byrd: order! all rise!

the co-chair of his indiana election campaign, jim brainard, a mayor of a nearby town, he is running the show here and we wanted to talk to him about what he thinks voters should do, a conflicting message, kasich said voters ought to vote for me and then i won't tell voters what to do. his co-chair said i think voters should vote for cruz. we went one last time to the co-chair and said, mayor, who do you think the voters ought to vote for and he backed out, i don't want to get into it. that's clearly the new message from the kasich campaign and signal they are not going to campaign here but not willing to go the whole way and tell their vote others to cross over to cruz. the vote is quite chaotic, one family the mother voting kasich but wanting cruz. father voting for trump and the son wanting cruz but voting kasich. there is a lack of clarity and very fascinating to see where the numbers add up a week from now. back to you. >> wow, quite a story about the one family. since we have you, tony, we have that sound from the mayor. let's play that and we can talk a little more. >> i think

brainard, has your staff received this training? >> yes, ma'am. >> you discussed the impact that this training has had, and you stated, well, the management essentials training obviously has improved our situation in terms of how they conduct their jobs. the thoroughness i mean. there have been improvements in terms of, i think without seeing any test results, the detection capabilities. is that correct? >> yes, ma'am. >> administrator neffenger also we focus and resolving alarms at check points and testified he is readjusting the measurements of success to focus on security rather than speed. when you spoke with committee staff you were asked whether under administrator neffenger there had been a new emphasis on resolve is the alarm, you said, and i quote, absolutely. is that correct? >> yes, ma'am. >> what is the importance of resolving alarms at the check points? >> making sure that our people are thorough. the job that an officer does is certainly the most important job at tsa. one of the hazards of that job is when you're const

brainard, you handled that extraordinarily well. i know some folks who work there and their families fly, nair friends fly and they care just as much about safety as we do. it's probably just as inaccurate to say the airlines only care about moving product as it would be to say all you care about is safety. that you don't care about the folks who have to stand in line and how long they do. in fact, i look to a longer conversation about who cares let less about it, cooperation or bureaucracy. i guess they're tied. i want to talk about the way the employees are treated. is anybody familiar with the circumstances at charleston, south carolina about kimberly barnett? just something we talked about here today. she complained about her supervisor falsifying records in her area. it was the k-9 use of the dog. she went to the o.s.c. which is where she was supposed to go and made the complaint in june of 2014, and by november of 2014 she was fired. she was fired over a completely different allegation regarding using inappropriate language wh

they see it as brainard hoping for a higher paid job. they're wondering if it's an erosion of the fed's non-partisan stance. >> what do you think? >> i don't think it's a big deal. i don't think it's a big deal. if you look at the supreme court, right? supreme court, they're supposed to be objective. their political stripes are obvious. >> it's better for them to be transparent? >> personally i would rather somebody be honest. does anybody think that sonia sote mitt your is going to be prorepublican in her policies? i understand is -- >> should they maintain the artifice of independence. >> it's an artifice. >> but, maybe guard the fact the fed tries to separate itself from politics and not actively contribute to a campaign. >> that to me is the argument. $2,700. you can play it both ways. as a gesture what does it get you. if that's the cost of getting favor for an appointment down the road, that's a sad commentary. but then, you know, why not just not bother with it and maintain that appearance to the rest of the world of fairness. it

yellen now in terms of voters this year the most dovish taking that title away from fed governor brainard and mester out a little bit. show you in a second here 4.7. go to the next chart, fomc 4.7 just on the dovish side of neutral about where it was when we asked this question in december but slightly more hawkish than voters in 2015. the governors three more dovish than the presidents. and then you can see the most dovish is kansas city fed president george most dovish yellen 2.9. one comment we got lynn reaser, their speeches and remarks since december indicate a possible widening on views monetary policy. they do vote together in every meeting, simon. >> yes, in a word do you think they'll make a statement after the conference? >> i think not. i think the markets should be prepared for possible somewhat guidance on saying, look, rate hikes are still alive but they're not nigh. >> at least you get to stay in jersey today, steve. >> yeah. >> nice to see you. steve liesman there as we anticipate the fed. meantime shares of twitter plunging as revenue misses estimate and guidance again a