mr. rahall: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from louisiana. mr. boustany: mr. chairman, i yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio, mr. gibbs, the chairman of the subcommittee on energy and water. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. gibbs: thank you, mr. chairman. congress has been neglecting our nation's dredgeries for far too long. 95% of our nation's commerce goes through our nation's ports. despite the fact that the fund has raised money, congress has only been incorps rating some of that annually. this isn't right. i'm a firm believe that are trust funds should be used for the intended purpose, to dredge the harbors. in response to congressman boustany, he introduced h.r. 104, the realize america's maritime promise or ramp act. this legislation of which i was probably the 100th co-sponsor, simply ties the harbor maintenance trust fund revenue to expenditures. while this amendment is slightly modified from h.r. 1 -- h.r. 104, it would require that the funds equal the level of receipts plus interest credited to the trust fund for that fiscal

chairman mcdonnell: mrs. melara? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mr. leigh? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: and mr. alonso? no. chairman mcdonnell: ms. tidwell? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. let's go then back up to doctor sorry, give me one moment, please. let's go back up to north panhandle. mr. alonso? >> yes, let's get the population for the portion that is currently in 2:00-1, south of fulton and east of stan on-- -- stanion. >> that is a population of 2,855 people, to bring the deviation for district five for 3.89% and the deviation for district one to negative 8.01%. >> d-5 one more time? >> 2:00 p 5, 3.8%. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. >> and i would like to see the population of ansa -- vista. >> would you like me to put the neighborhood layer up and just select those census blocks, or would you like the whole chunk here? >> we will start with the neighborhood layer. >> ok. >> i think it is not the northerly blocks. chairman mcdonnell: he is trying to suggest to you what to consider. finish what you are thinking, and then we will give him a chance to offer a counter thought. >> this population

mr. chairman. >> thank you. mr. wills. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and mr. secretary, chairman dempsey, thank you for your service. i appreciate it as a veteran and also a very grateful parent of a son serving in the military. in the context of any instability that you're reviewing, i'm very concerned about the sequestration of the defense budget, which would be redemption of 8% to 12% beginning next january. you both have correctly warned of a hollowing out of the military, but people are still confused because they've heard and seen a $100 billion cut, a $487 billion cut, and now a pending $600 billion cut. it's just total confusion. what message do you have to the american people on the -- what do you want them to know about the effect of sequestration, mr. secretary and general? >> congressman, i try to make clear time and time and time again that sequestration and the cuts involved in sequestration would be a disaster for the defense department and would truly hollow out our force and weaken our national defense. we're already cutting close to a half a t

mr. speaker, thank you very much. with that, mr. chairman, i'll yield back by 39 seconds. >> thank you, mr. andrews. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. speaker, and chairman. your service is both an inspiration to us and a blessing to our country. we thank you very, very much for you. i want to congratulate the administration on your success with russia and china moving them to a very different place on this issue as to compared to where they were just a few weeks ago. mr. secretary, the data you gave us about the exchange rate are a reflection of the effectiveness of that coalition. but you also note that we do not yet have the level of consensus in the arab world that existed for the libyan problem. what do you see as the principal obstacles to achieving that kind of con sen with us with respect to the syrian regime? >> i think the arab world is struggling with the same issues that the whole international community is struggling with. which is in order to take additional actions what in fact does make sense. who is the opposition. who you do we best assist the operation. how do we best assist the help that the syrian

mr. chairman. >> thank you. mr. lewis is recognized. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i want to apologize to members of the panel. i had to run out and speak to a group of eighth grade students, and so they kept me for a while. i heard your testimony, and i want to thank you all for being here. and i thank you for your service. ms. miller, it is good to see you again. thank you also for all that you do. ms. miller, many other people who criticize the question of tax incentives for retirement saving argue that they are for the wealthy. they say these laws favor high-income people. in your experience and research, do you find this to be true? do you have any ideas as how we can further increase participation among low and middle-income workers? how can we make it easy for people to save for retirement? >> that's a very good question. i think if you look at the retirement savings incentives, first of all, there is a cap on compensation that can be considered. and it's a 250,000. so when we hear a lot of talk about, let's cut incentives for people making over $250

mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. scott. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i was just going back and forth with my aunt who has a nephew serving under you there in korea, young man named jake butler. forgive me but i know you were the commander of the third id and very proud of fort stewart and what you gentleman accomplished, ladies and gentlemen accomplished over there, and representing george well and the united states well. i want to speak just very briefly that we're very proud of. could you speak about the program what it means in a potential conflict with north korea? >> congressman, first off, in respect to jay stars, that gives us moving target capability without going into the classified portion of it. more importantly, what i am looking for as a commander is i have a set of priority intelligence requirements and i welcome any system that is going to help me answer those requirements. it is an added capability that does help us on the peninsula. >> my cousin is honored to serve under you as a commander, his mom wanted to ask why was issued live am n

mr. chairman. >> mr. burge is recognized >> thank you, mr. chairman. obviously the goal in this whole thing is how do you make us template easy to pick the rate plan for each individual? obviously someone's understanding of financial markets and what is best for them and trying to make a lifelong decision rather than a short-term decision. so i was kind of intrigued by the automatic iras. i'm part of the testimony, mr. john cummings talked about simplifying things, but also having automatic ira. the kind of my question to you, does the simplification comes first? 42 the automatic ira and the simplification after that quite >> i anticipate that given the direction of things that the auto ira comes first. the auto ira is crucial because if people don't save, if they don't get started early on, it doesn't matter if you simplify your not. >> thank you. i just had one kind of out-of-the-box question and it seems like so many people are going through a lot of different jobs today and so kind of the new normally several different careers, several different job

mr. chairman. >> all right, either senator gallardo or mr. landfried? >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> in terms of my question. >> thank you, mr. chairman. senate bill 1070 has been the worst piece of legislation ever passed in the state of arizona. if you look at section 3b, what you were mentioning before, "where reasonable suspicion exists that a person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the united states, reasonably suspicious." the only way to determine this it's not by clothing, it's by the color of skin, end of discussion. there is no way to enforce senate bill 1070 without using race as the determining factor if someone is here legally. i would propose that if mr. pearce and myself were walking down the street and you asked law enforcement to pick out the person who they suspect would be here undocumented, they're not going to be pointing at mr. pearce. they're going to be pointing at me. they have to use race in order to enforce senate bill 1070. that's the unfortunate part. and mr. chairman, if senate bill 1070 was so popular, why did the sponsor get recalle

mr. neely's actions came to light. it seems clear that mr. neely has a los to answer for. let me ask you one final question. the chairman has written to mr. neely's attorney stating that the committee was considering conferring immunity on mr. neely. and i applaud the chairman, he is a great -- he made it clear and correct me if i'm wrong mr. chairman, he has now indicated that he has no immediate plans to go forward with immunity and i want to ask you this question. i agree with the chairman absolutely. mr. mill e given what you have uncovered about mr. neely, and his actions, would you support granting him immunity at this time and do you think it would be a good idea. the chairman's not going to do that but i'm curious. >> i agree with the chairman's decision not to grant him immunity. >> can you tell us why that is? >> well, i believe that the criminal justice system should run its course and that if any charges are brought against mr. neely he should defend himself, he does have a right, a fifth amendment right, and all people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. and if such charges do, are lodged against mr. neely, i think it's

mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. forbes. mr. turner. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, general dempsey, i want to thank you for this week for your strong statements on the issues of addressing sexual assault in the military. i think your leadership is well needed and appreciate your strong statements and your strong action. we had a meeting yesterday with general amos. we understand that general dempsey he is echoing your strong commitment. we appreciate your commit. . it makes a big difference for the men and and women who are serving. mr. secretary you say every day we're within an inch of war. as we look to the issue of syria, we no that russia and china have blocked two united nations security council resolutions with respect to syria and certainly i think that takes to us an issue when we look to the world and instability of a question with regard to russia and china. with regard to russia we've seen public reports that they continue to arm the syrian military. have sent russian advisors to syria and have deployed naval forces off the syrian coast. my fi

mr. speaker, how much time do i have, mr. speaker? mr. bishop: let me yield to the chairman of the rules committee who is here to clean up the mess i made so far. i yield him five minutes. mr. dreier: it's going to take more than five minutes to clean up that mess. madam speaker, thank you very much, madam speaker. let me say that while i am here to clean up mr. bishop's mess, i got to say i never in my wildest dreams believe that the ship that my grandmother almost rode on but didn't quite get on, the titanic, would be brought in to this debate. i am very impressed that my friend from massachusetts has proceeded to do this. i would say another of his lines, madam speaker, was just absolutely incredible. taking food from the mouths of hungry children. come on. give me a break. i mean, madam speaker, the notion that anyone, democrat or republican alike, would in any way embrace the notion of taking food from the mouths of hungry children is one of the most preposterous things imaginable. we want to ensure that every single child in this country has opportunity as well as food

mr. chairman, mr. secretary and general dempsey, thank you so much for your testimony and thank you for your service. i join many others, i'm sure in appreciating your recognition that the unacceptable level of debt is a threat to our national security. and i hear that back at home as well. and thank you for making proposals that will implement efficiencies while keeping our military strong and our nation safe. i wanted to ask you about overseas contingency operations. the budget includes $44.2 billion per year from 2014 through 2022 as place holders for future war costs. now, mr. secretary, and general dempsey, you've stated that the forces are on track to take the lead responsibility for afghanistan's security. and you talked about that today. by the end of 2014. so assuming that that timeline holds, is it possible that we could have significantly fewer deployed troops in 2015 and beyond and could our costs be dramatically less than the $44.2 billion in those upcoming years? >> well, there's no quest

mr. pearce. >> mr. chairman, it is the exception if there is. >> yes. mr. pearce, you get the last word before i conclude here. >> okay. thank you, mr. chairman. you know, i get a little disappointed that we're the bad guys for enforcing the law. first of all, proposition 200 passed in 2004 overwhelmingly by the citizens of the state of arizona also has that right of action to citizens to sue their government if they're giving out benefits to knows that are ineligible. >> what is that one? >> proposition 200. known as -- >> is that an immigration law? >> it dealed with voter fraud and proof of citizenship. no benefits for those in the country illegally. and that right of action is in that bill. >> did that allow law enforcement explicitly to be sued i? don't think so. >> it was just the benefits. and this -- i don't mean to argue with you but i'll correct you again. the law enforcement helped write that section. they got qualified immunity in that bill. qualified immunity to enforce the law. has to do with officials, the policy, setting, position, and agenci

mr. neil is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i've had a lang standing issue and i think pretty strong credentials in this area. just to recount quickly, i worked with bill thomas before he was the chairman of this committee on raising i.r.a. rates. if you recall, that was not a favorite of mr. rosstencould you ski at the time. and carried with bob rubin, recalling the clinton proposal, in terms of differentiating itself from the bush proposal was the clinton rsa proposal was in addition to social security. the bush rsa proposal was as a substitute for social security. and have carried this i.r.a. issue for a long period of time. now, i introduced this bill five years ago. and is at least three of the panelis panelists, i know, have already endorsed it. and i suspect the other two have some sympathy for it. now, this proposal would -- could raise the national savings rate by nearly $8 billion a year. endorsed by brookings and now with hard work from david john and the heritage foundation, we've developed this proposal. i

mr. chairman. >> thank the gentlemen. now, mr. secretary, thank you very much for being with us today. we appreciate your patience. we will -- i will ask the secretary panel to come forward now, please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >>> this is our second distinguished panel of witnesses. mr. howard shapiro is counsel to the inspector general at the department of labor. mr. cecil roberts is president of the united mine workers of america. and dr. jeffrey colder is director in the office of mine and safety health research with the national institute for occupational safety and health. before i recognize each of you for your testimony, i'll just remind you of the lights. i know all of you have been here. we've got a green light, yellow light and red light. green light will indicate that you have five minutes. the yellow light, you have one minute. and the red light, we would ask you to wrap-up your testimony. your entire written testimony will be included in the record. so you can summarize, if you would like. with that, we'll start with mr. shapiro. you're recognized, sir. >> thank you, mr

mrs. lam? >> yes. mrs. mondejar? >> no. >> mr. philip, >> no. >> mr. schreiber? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. so we will not make this challenge. mr. leigh? >> can i just make a point of information or add a point of information? the population of the north panhandle that i believe we were looking at in an effort to explore restoring was 2,855. chairman mcdonnell: that is correct. >> i believe that i cludes the three blocks in the northwest corner of that section that are currently in district one in the current lines, and i believe that the population -- i wrote down 361 or something in an earlier meeting. if we were to imagine those blocks remaining in district one, that would make the gap a bit smaller. chairman mcdonnell: ok. let's look at this. >> sorry, could you clarify that? >> in that same area, you see the stair steps just east of golden gate park? >> correct. >> if we could look at those three blocks. this is the -- sorry, the other side. yes. that population. >> that is a population of 361. >> my point being if we were if we were to prioritize and leaving those blocks in one which

mr. chairman. >> thank you. mr. forbes? >> thank you. mr. chairman, i want to thank you and the ranking member for having this hearing and for your questions on this and one of the things we know in early 2011 secretary of defense then robert gates said that north korean ballistic missiles could pose a threat to the united states within five years. what, if anything, does north korea's upcoming launch of the new rocket tell us about the ballistic missile technology advances, and to your knowledge, are we within four years of north korea fielding a functional intercontinental ballistic missile? >> congressman forbes, first off, the continued development and willingness of the north korean regime there to test ballistic missiles, and we've seen that continue for a period of time, is of major concern of ours. it has the potential to destabilize the region and as you point out, left unchecked, if their development continues, poses a serious threat to us, and it's something that i think we've got to maintain close vigilance on, and obviously, work

mr. chairman. >> the final of the gentleman has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. scott. >> thank you very much, chairman. welcome, mr. secretary. let me say this is about international monetary policy, we can't leave out what's going on right here at home in the united states. certainly, i want to touch upon the get a progress report from you and share some information about the heart of the problem that caused this whole problem which was housing and mortgages and where we are. as you know, i've been on a mission myself and thanks to you and your help at treasury and getting folks home safe, with that regard, i do want to say if you would just tell your assistant secretary for financial stability timothy ma saudi that we appreciate the fine soopgs he's given to us alo along with others. i want you to know we're going back and having the second home foreclosure event in atlanta, georgia. i mention all of this because we were able to save 3,827 homes last time. this time our goal is 10,000. and we can do this, mr. secretary. a lot of things have happened since last

mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. dicks, ranking member of the full committee. >> i also want to welcome secretary chu to the energy and water subcommittee for the opportunity to discuss the fy-13 department of energy budget request. and for fy -- i bet you could have thought of better things to do on your birthday and on your anniversary. but we'll be brief. for fy-13 the president's budget request for the energy department is a sensible proposal that carries on our investments and important national programs and defense, science, and energy efficiency. this proposal represents a further investment for many programs that are the building blocks for a more efficient and independent energy future. this fy-13 budget request contains a small increase for naval reactors but healthier increases for nuclear weapons activities such as modernization as well as nonproliferation programs. while the increase for weapon activities is less than what was outlined in the budget document of a few years ago, the funding seems adequate

mr. chairman. as you know, mr. secretary, thew

mr. chairman, thank you for the time. >> senator menendez. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you all for your testimony. mr. giddens, mr. freeh, let me ask you, i heard your response to senator corker's last question, that mf global is poorly capitalized, had a liquidity crisis, that it was highly leveraged. was that in essence the harbinger of its doom? >> that was certainly a large contributing factor, so if they had a crisis there was not much of a cushion to fall back on. i think also would be the nature of their investments in risky european sovereign debt in countries such as i believe italy, spain and ireland. with a result that since those were purchased on margin, the margin amounts and the collateral put up had to be continually increased. so that toward the end, as i recall, something in the neighborhood of $200 million to $300 million in margin became closer to $900 million in margin that had to be put up. so all of that created much more severe strains on the firm. >> senator, also in addition to that, a critical factor was the -- really the inability of its

mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i want to thank you for your opening statement. i think you struck exactly the right note. this isn't an opportunity for partisan exploitation. this is an opportunity for the oversight government reform committee to look at an agency where something went dreadfully wrong. i think mr. chairman you struck the right tone as did the ranking member and i thank you both for the way you began this hearing. mr. miller, you're the inspector general of gsa. how long have you been in that job? >> congressman, i was confirmed by the senate in july 2005. >> 2005. between 2005 and when miss johnson's office alerted you, were you ever aware of the fact that excess spending and raucous behavior and perhaps inappropriate use of resources was going on in the agency anywhere? >> we always look for that, sir. >> i mean, specifically talking about this kind of conference, because as you pointed out, this is not the first time this happened. happened in new orleans, in other locations. did any one at any point ever bring to your attention or did you disc

mr. camp. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to mr. kind from wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. kind: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the ranking member for yielding me this time. mr. chairman, mr. speaker, just to set the record straight, the amendment that was offered by mr. mcdermott at the rules committee and what our ranking member levin and us democrats in the ways and means committee supported offered an immediate expenses, a bonused appreciation for capital investment for small businesses that was fully offset. and fully paid for by eliminating the tax breaks that large oil companies are receiving today who are sitting on record profits, with record high prices and it wouldn't add a nickel to the deficit. and that's why i adamantly oppose the underlying bill before us today. it's the here-we-go-again central drom down here. how deep are -- syndrome down here. how deep are we going to create this hole? a tax cut that's not paid for will go straight to deficit reduction, close to half of it going to millionaires and an average tax savings of over $58,000 is not the way to get this economy out of a hole

mr. chairman. >> either senator gallardo or mr. landfried. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> in terms of my question. >> thank you, mr. chairman. senate bill 1070 has been the worst piece of legislation ever passed in the state of arizona. if you look at section 3-b, you were mentioning before, where reasonable suspicion exists that a person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the united states, reasonably suspicious, the only way to determine this, it's not by clothing. it's by the color of their skin. end of discussion. there is no way to enforce senate bill 1070 without using race as the determining factor if someone is here legally. i would propose that if mr.

mr. chairman. mr. miller, what the chairman has just described, if someone in region nine wanted to know whether or not what they were doing was within the rules, under the present structure, would they turn to -- who would they turn to in region nine? >> is that directed towards me? >> yeah, to you or -- region nine, if the chairman described -- if someone wanted to know is this within the rules, who would they go to to find out in region nine? >> they have regional council in region nine, and regional coup sill was consulted at least once about the possession of the -- >> and who -- what did regional council say? >> i believe that regional council provided an opinion that the regional commissioner requested was not in writing and if you can hold on a minute -- they provided unwritten opinion about bicycles. when the charity -- >> because there was an inquiry about the bicycles, but not about other things? >> well -- >> who was -- >> the regional commissioner asked about the bicycles because of the dis

mr. chairman. >> vice chair of the committee, mr. crawford. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. peck, what were your impressions of the $30,000 pool party awards ceremony where you were given an award for your work on the stimulus program? >> mr. crawford, there was a reception i think the afternoon i got there. it was outdoors at the hotel. i wasn't aware of what it cost until reminded by the investigator, i didn't remember what the food was because i don't think i ate very much of it. but i -- nor was i aware that there might have been an awards ceremony there to justify food expenses. that's not something i would have thought of. not a rule i believe i was familiar with. i saw it as part of a hotel package i had seen both in private and public sectors before, that those kinds of receptions were provided as part of a hotel package. so i thought at the end of the day not knowing the expense, i didn't think it was out of the ordinary. may i say one thing about the awards? >> sure. >> i want to say if i have ab opportunity i'd like to say something about coins. when i left the go

mr. chairman. mr. chairman, thank you very much. thank you for the opportunities to talk about my views on budget plans being presented i want to take a brief moment to do that. it's important. the process here. you've heard me say it before. here we are in the process of talking about a budget while apropriators are already down the hall doing the work. so for us to believe that and budget and assume the appropriate tors will change all the the actions they're doing is misleading. the second part is the budget, which is so -- process is somewhat unusual to me. the mayor has to sign it and agree to it. we assume we do all this and the president signs it and agrees to it is mistaken. so the one thing he did sign and agree to, and i know people have different views that we've heard a little bit about it here on the budget control act, i'll tell you, the budget control act is in place. we had a chance to commenting on it. we had a chance to debate it. we did that. some voted for it. it passed. the president signed it. that's where we're

mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, if i might, first of all, i'm really looking forward to this hearing. i agree with the ranking member that we really ought not to make design questions here. there are others that are far more capable of doing that. and the commission has it. but it would seem to me that our purpose ought to be to make sure that this gets done, that we get this memorial under way, and that it become available for the general public to memorialize and to remind us of the incredible contributions that this man made together with millions of other americans during world war ii before and after in his presidency. so we get on with the hearing here. art is always controversial. and certainly memorials to this day, some on the monument remain controversial. it ought to be our task to sort out any delays that there may be in the causes of those delays. and to get this project under way and completed. i yield back. >> thank you. all right, leonard, we have done our formal work here. we now turn five minutes to you for any remarks you may have. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman, c

mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, could i correct a couple dates here. i want to be clear about the record. we put mr. neily on administrative leave. i resigned on april 2nd. i just wanted to be sure that's in the record correctly. >> thank you. >> on june of last year, your chief of staff, michael robertson is your chief of staff, correct? >> he was my chief of staff, yes. >> he was the liaison to the white house prior to that. >> before that he was the in policy shop for awhile. >> yes. >> in june of last year, he informed kimmerly harris, white house counsel about this report. did you ever have subsequent meetings with the administration? >> first of all, i learned that yesterday in the testimony, i did not realize he had informed anyone at the white house. we held meetings with the white house after we received the draft report. >> after may 3rd? >> terms of terminology, we termed the may 3rd report, the interim report. and our practice when we have a final report, we give the agency 30 days to respond. at the end of 30 days, we'll publish everything.

mr. chairman. i'm hopeful, mr. chairman, that we can bring mr. tan ga lienee back, with regard to where they are and what they're doing. i just don't -- i want us to make sure we stay on top of this. >> i have no doubt we'll have several hearings of this sort going forward on a joint basis. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. you shared a hats-off program that word awarded electronic cameras and ipods. the hats off program has been suspended pending your review. i understand you also closed all other award programs, is that correct? >> all other similar award programs in which points were given to employees that they could then turn in for prizes or awards. >> and where did that -- how did that start, do you know? >> i really don't know. and that's part of what i'm trying to understand. what i would like to do is look at things like these award programs, and ask ourselves, where did they come from? what purpose do they serve? is there some good underlying them? what contractual agreements do we have with our employees related to them? so we have susp

mr. chairman, that's not accurate. >> well, that's -- >> mr. chairman, there's a reasonableness again inferred. you know, you're taking the extreme, and i understand trying to make a point, but mr. chairman, it's just not accurate, it's just not so. >> well, does the law say anywhere that children don't have to be checked when they're stopped in a car in the situation? i understand the law says the opposite. >> mr. chairman, it gives an out. this law makes exceptions to law enforcement to make reasonable decisions based on the circumstances at the time. i suspect, and again, i think it's demeaning to law enforcement to assume they don't know how to do their job in a respectable, proper way. >> i want to go to demeaning to law enforcement, because -- yeah, i'm just going to submit for the record section 3b, and it doesn't list any exceptions at all. >> mr. chairman, it's modeled after federal law. >> okay. well, but there are no exceptions here.

mr. chairman. mr. secretary, i thought your statement was excellent. i loved the outline that you prevented and you are the right person at the right place at the right time. there is nobody in history that has had the range of experiences you have had legislatively, in the executive branch, the various departments. you know this stuff. i think it important that you emphasize we will still have the most powerful military in the world if this takes place and actually if it went beyond that because of the outstanding capability that we have. i think you imply and i think we in congress need to have more sympathy with the notion of how we deal with the notion of risk. we're not going to reduce risk to zero. i think what you have attempted to do here is to provide a more balanced approach to a wider variety of risk. it is much less likely that we're going to fight two land wars. there is nobody in the world that can engage us with the naval efforts, even after the chinese somehow, some day, get an aircraft carrier or two. this is -- we need to be and i thi

mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, could i correct a couple of dates here? i just want to be really clear about the record. we put mr. neely on administrative leave on march 19th. i removed steve leeds and bob peck and resigned on the -- on april 2nd. i just wanted to be sure that's in the record correctly. >> thank you. >>> on june of last year -- michael robertson is your chief of staff, correct? >> he was my chief of staff, correct. >> he wasly an son to the white house before that. >> he was in the policy shop before that. >> he did work on senator obama's staff before senator obama became president obama? >> yes. >> did you ever have subsequent meetings with the administration? >> first of all, i learned that -- that yesterday in the testimony i did not realize he had informed anyone at the white house. >> did you ever inform anybody at the white house? >> we held meetings with the white house after we received the draft report. >> after may 3rd. >> so far? >> when the report came out last year. >> no. i did not talk to the white house until after the fi

mr. giddens if i might for a second, mr. chairman. mr. giddens, there's been a lot of questions here today, maybe half a dozen regulators, maybe more, about what happened, what transpired, things been talked about, poorly capitalized, liquidity problems, when mr. corzine came on board. and we see something happen in the eighth largest bankruptcy that's ever happened where segregated funds were compromised. does this kind of stuff just happen? as a policymaker, you always look to say, what went wrong, what could we have done better, who screwed up? are you to a point where you can say that? i don't want you throwing anybody under the bus, just be honest. are you at a point where you can say, this is where the system failed? this was a regulator that either didn't do their job or did do their job, or if you've got a cagey enough accountant, you can juggle the books good enough, you can get away with just about everything? because it appears to me that, unless there's something else out there, and tell me what it is. >> i think that the evid

mr. chairman, mr. vice chairman, members of the committee. i'm dr. yvette roubideaux, director of indian health service and accompanied by vice director. i'm pleased to have an opportunity to testify on the president's fiscal year 2013 request, budget request for the indian health service. for my written statement, reviews in detail what his has completed in funding that congress has appropriated for us in the past few years. since 2008 the budget has increased and it's helped the indian health service make significant progress in our efforts to change and improve the organization as well as in addressing the priorities of our work. our partnership with tribes is fundamental to improving the health of our communities. each year we incorporate tribal budget priorities into our budget requests. we're also making progress on reforming the indian health service with an emphasis on improving the way we do business and how we lead and manage our staff, setting a strong tone at the top that we must change and improve, improving our financial controls, findin

mr. kelly. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, thank you for being here. i don't think there's anybody on on the panel today that would question the desire to make sure that people are safe all the time. unfortunately change usually doesn't take place unless there's a tragedy or crisis. if i understand correctly, your inspectors have to have a knowledge under policies and procedures of 4,500 pages of inspections, is that right? >> probably more than that. that's probably a fair number. so how would you change what you have now? listen, i understand about spending more money. but throwing money at a problem without having a definitive plan usually isn't a fix. that's just a waste of money. what would you do differently? >> what we are doing differently, here's the way i view life. i think what's happened, if you look at a number of the past tragedies, we're taken an inspection procedure and process that was pretty challenging for an inspector to do. as the theory i use we expect them to do a thousand things, they can do 750. after jim walters and darby and

mr. chairman. mr. miller, what the chairman has just described, if someone in region 9 wanted to know whether or not what they were doing was within the rules, under the present structure would they turn -- who would they turn to in region 9? >> is that directed towards me or -- >> yeah, to you or ms. brita. in region 9 with what the chairman described, if someone wanted to know is this within the rules, who would they go to to find out in region 9? >> they have regional council in region 9. and regional council was consulted at least once about the possession of the -- >> and what did regional council say? >> i believe that regional council provided an opinion that the regional commissioner requested was not in writing and if you could hold on a minute. they provide an unwritten opinion about bicycles. when the charity -- >> because there was an inquiry about the bicycles but not about other things. >> the regional commissioner asked about the bicycles because it would involve disposal of federal prope

mr. neely immunity at this time, mr. chairman. on thursday, the chairman sent a letter to mr. neely's attorney suggesting that the chairman was considering immunizing him. on friday his attorney responded positively writing that mr. neely quote will abide by the appropriate court order and the procedures under the immunity statute. granting immunity is a serious action since it can negatively impact the future criminal prosecution or prosecutions. such a decision requires thoughtful considerations and consultation with the justice department. our committee has no consultations aboutments and i see no reason to immunize mr. neely if he has taken the actions of which he stands accused. in addition to addressing the actions of specific individuals, we need to understand how the system allowed this pattern in this case. the extent to which it happened in previous cases and the reforms necessary to prevent it from ever happening again. according to interviews by the inspector general's office, these activities were going on for years. when discussing the 2010 conference the witness

mr. chairman. i apologize, mr. westlake. >> you do not have to apologize ever for 29 seconds in this committee. senator kerry, then senator pryor. >> thank you, mr. chairman. indeed, the lines are blurred. in fact, it's pretty unclear right now where a lot of jurisdictions began and where they end. and i think we're way behind the curve. ironically, and i've said this before with the chairman here, as chairman of the subcommittee, i've said that we were really behind the curve within six months of the 1996 bill being signed. because we didn't really think very hard about data transmission. so a hearing like this is pretty important as we think about what's the role of government in the market going forward? and hopefully it will help us understand how free americans are to really engage in the creation and consumption of video in fair terms, at fair prices. as well as the role that competition is going to play in those choices. and i don't think we've tapped the answer to that yet, to be honest with you. you've ment