let's take the averagejoe, or in our case, mr purge. this person is on in our case, mr purge.hat they pay out about £5,000 on things like income tax and national insurance. looking out what this person is spending money on, they pay about £2000 in vat, and £700 for things like alcohol and fuel duty. all of that adds up to about £8,000. about one third of his salary. so what about the rich against the poor? is there a difference? statisticians have estimated what people with different incomes will spend on different things, and work out some averages. if you look at the poorest households, those with an income of about £15,000 per year, they pay out about 35% in tax. at they pay out about 35% in tax. at the other end of the scale, a household with £88,000 per year coming in, they pay about 34%. the numbers do not suggest there is a big difference but some people feel that the tax system is unfair. ed, you are an economist? the numbers there are averages and the system is more complicated than that. all of this depends on what that. all of this depends on what that person spends

purge of the data. d >> thank you for that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. as indicated, a custom question on another matter. director coats and admiral rogers, it will mostly be directed at you gentlemen. thank you for your testimony this morning. we all know now that in march then director comey testified about the existence of an ongoing fbi investigation in two links between the trump campaign and the russian government. the reports out in the press that the president, separatelyn appealed to you, admiral rogers, and to you, director coats, to downplay the russia investigation. and now we've got additional reports, i want to give you a chance to confirm or deny these, that the president separately address you, director coats, and ask you to intervene with the director comey, again, to downplay the fbi investigation.n admiral rogers, you draw the short straw. i'm going to start with you. before we get to the substance of whether this call a request was made, you vetted very distinguished career, close to 40 years.s in your experience, would be in way typi

purge the data. >> thank you for that. vice chairman? >> thank you, mr. chairman. as i indicated i've got questions on another matters and director coats and admiral rogers, they'll mostly be directed to you and thank you for your testimony this morning. we all know now in march then-director comey testified about the existence of an ongoing fbi investigation into links between the trump campaign and the russian government. there are reports out in the press that the president separately appealed to you, admiral rogers and to you, director coats to downplay the russia investigation and now we've got additional reports and we want to give you a chance to confirm or deny these, that the president separately addressed you, director coats and asked you to intervene with director comey again to downplay the fbi investigation. admiral rodgers, you drew the short straw, i'll start with you. before we get to the substance of whether this call or request was made, you've had a very distinguished career, close to 40 years. in your experience, would it be in any way typical f

mr. barrow: -- chechnya's bar i -- to chechnya's barbaric lgbt purge. i thank you for the time. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: mr. speaker, it's my pleasure to yield four minutes to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline, a co-author of this resolution and someone who is fighting for human rights all the time. four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for four minutes. mr. cicilline: i thank the gentleman from new york for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise to support h.res. 351, which condemns the violence and persecution against lgbt or perceived to be lgbt individuals in chechnya. this resolution is an example of the strong bipartisanship of the house foreign affairs committee under the leadership of chairman ed royce and ranking member eliot engel. i want to thank my good friend, ileana ros-lehtinen, who has long been the champion of dillingnyity for all people around the world,

its was stopped immediately and the data is purged, but we're still able to target threats internationally. i appreciate that, thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman, thank you all for your service, and you all are held at the highest regards by your colleagues and your peers, and i think that speaks volumes of the character of all four of you and i appreciate that very much. i'm brand new to the committee, this is my first time at this and i don't think there is a person up here that doesn't want to find out the facts and the truth and be able to go back home and explain to colleagues, no matter the political persuasion, that we got the facts from our intel and we appreciate the quality of work that you do, and this is our findings, and we have a hard time getting there. i have respect for where you're coming from. i hope you can understand that sooner or later wbl thethere ha one element of this government that the public can say this is not politically motivated. it's not a witch hunt, no one wants to harm anyone, we just want to do the business of our government and country and do the best we can and they want confidence in the peopl

purged. but we're still continuing to be able to target on threats internationally, and i do appreciate that. thank you. i appreciate and yield back the time. senator manchin: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank all four of you for your service and you all are held at the highest, i think the highest regard by your colleagues and your peers and i think that speaks volumes, the character of all four of you and i appreciate that very much. we have a committee here which i am so proud to be -- i'm brand new on the committee this is my first time at this. i don't think there's a person up here that doesn't want to find out the facts and the truth and be able to go back home and explain to the democrat and republican colleagues no matter what political persuasion that we have gotten the facts. we got it from our intel which we truly appreciate and respect the quality of job, work that you do. and this is our findings. we are having a hard time getting there as you can tell, and i expect. and i hope you could understand sooner or later we are going to have to. there has to be one element of this government that the public can look at and said this is not politically motiv

purge that pushed out some of our most senior and accomplished diplomatics. with few chepgs exceptions, the president simply has not nominated anyone to help you run the department. mr. chairman, i ask that my graphic be displayed. this is an organizational chart of a state department, the three dark green boxes of president trump's confirmed nominees. light green boxes are officials in place in the last administration. yellow boxes are nominees awaiting senate action. and all the red boxes are positions for which the president hasn't even submitted a nomination. that's a lot of red boxes, far behind where presidents bush and obama were at this point, and that doesn't cover the dozen of vacant ambassadorships. we should all keep this in mind next time there is talk about obstruction in congress. people have not been confirmed not because there's obstruction, because they haven't been submitted. now career diplomatics keeping the seats warm are came able and devoted public servants but they aren't able to direct our foreign policy. what satellite president's approach to russia's hacking our election or nonproliferationors human trafficking or africa or the arctic? wh