mr. olson: mr. chair, as a matter of policy, we do not discuss prospective arms sales until they have been -- >> we know it is not cheap. let me just give you some of my metrics. in pakistan you have al qaeda, the taliban, the haqqani network , which are all tears organizations. at the same time -- terrorist organizations. meanwhile, a poll conducted by center saidarch only 14% of pakistanis expressed a positive view of the united states. they seem neither democratic nor tolerant regarding their governance or religious tolerance. and then we talk about this individual who allegedly helped the united states get the number one terrorist on our list and meanwhile, the backdrop is that this terrorist organization, the has been active in pakistan and kashmir since the 1990's. pakistan funded the group and isi helpedni establish the military structure. in november 2000 8, 10 let members conducted a coordinated attack on mumbai, india. pakistaner 2008, the leader who organized the mumbai attacks. released2

mr. olson: if i could respond to a couple of points, first, on the doctor we fully agree with you that he has been unjustly imprisoned, and we have communicated this at the highest levels. >> why don't we tie it to our actions? his release, why don't we tied the future of this individual to the sale of our weapon systems and our aid? who is negotiating these deals on our behalf? mr. olson: we believe, and again i cannot talk about the details of a perspective notification, but let me say we believe that the f-16s we have already sold to pakistan, or provided under security assistance, have been used to advance our national interest. they have been used against terrorists in north waziristan and in the tribal areas. the precision strike capability of the f-16s, and our programs are focused on counterinsurgency and counterterrorism. >> i understand the value of the weapon system and what it can do. we are very frustrated that for the american people's involvement, we do not see a whole lot coming

mr. olson: i think it is important for us to continue engagement with pakistan. despite the challenges of the relationship, which are many, we believe that it is in our international interest not to allow pakistan to become disengaged from us. i think we can draw on the lessons of history there, especially the period in the 19 80's and the 1990's, where we did disengage, and we paid i think a significant price as a country for that, at the beginning of the last decade. i think that with all the challenges of the relationship, it is most important for the u.s. to be engaged and to still, to build a partnership with pakistan. >> thank you, i yield back. >> now we will move to mr. were bacher of california. >> mr. ambassador, you have got a mighty tough job. we have to respect you for that, and thank you for trying to do your best. unfortunately, what i am about to say does not reflect on your commitment but on the visibility of you succeeding and what you are trying to do. the fact is that pakist

mr. olson: senator udall, thank you very much. that is a very thoughtful question. it strikes me that there are a couple of things that give us some leverage in this situation. the talibanl, the -- do seem to desire some degree of international political legitimacy. they recognize, apparently -- and i will say at the outset that i think we have to be cautious about what we know about the taliban and what we presume -- but it does appear that as a result of their historical experience when they were governing in the 1990's and were cut off from the outside world, and afghanistan as a country that has always been reliant on external assistance, i think that they look to international legitimacy as an important objective. and the only way that that could be achieved is through some kind of political settlement. the second element is what i alluded to before, which is the question of pressure. i think it is significant we have the language coming out of the trilateral statement next week. and islam

mr. olson, you mentioned sparsely populated parts of california which is where i live. 1500 people in 400 square miles. my question is, in the subsequent years since we have had the rural areas being essentially becoming really marginal, the cities were certainly overtaxed and underpaid in the earlier times, but i think rural areas today may be getting served the same treatment the other way around and i wonder if there have been studies or if anybody has looked into this over the years? ted: doug might have a better answer than me for that. but i think it is a very important point in question. it is not so evident from the constitution that states cannot decide that rural communities where there might be agriculture and there might be issues involving, especially california, water, that we want one branch of our government, for example, possibly like the united states senate, to have a representation of geography as opposed to simply people. since the federal government is structured that way,

>> as solicitor general, mr. olson would know more than i do, he represented the position of the united states before the court. and what's interesting, we heard a clip from charles rhine. and his argument actually was heavily criticized. therefore the nfederal governmet needs to step in to help. even an assistant to the general, wrote a memo criticizing this argument, there's no foundation for this argument and urged archibald cox, to say there is some line across which one cannot -- across which one cannot step without violating the equal protection class. we're not suggesting what the standard is buzz there's some level of discrimination so out of line it would have to violate the 14th amendment. and that's the argument cox made before the supreme court. didn't ask them to try to define the line but there's clear discrimination there and lacks a rational basis and no other alternative to hear the case. >> there's a couple of points about that. first case was a case between people representing tennesseeans and agains

mr. olson argued that providing the money could fuel arguments by those against tif deals, and that it will set a bad precedent, saying the move "opens pandora's box." mayor ron corbett, on the other hand, said the agreement is needed citing the city's "open for business" policy.regardless, the vote allows city staff to begin negotiations with the developer on the exact paremters of the financial assistance. for more in-depth coverage of these stories and more, be sure to check out monday's edition of the corridor business journal. we're starting to feel more december like temperatures, but they won't be around for long longjustin roberts is in for terry and is here now with and coming up in sports -- a cedar rapids native -- has found a new home in the big leagues -- where ryan sweeney will be stepping in the batters box -- next on cbs 2. 2."cbs 2 news connects with you.call us at 1-800-222-kgan email us at news at cbs 2 iowa dot comconnect with us on facebook at facebook/kgan cbs 2. don showl

my kids will be happy. >> thank you, mr. olson. mr. welch? >> very good. is there anyone else who would like to ask questions? thank you. i thank each of the members of the panel for participating. i think this has been a very interesting and informative hearing. before we conclude, i include the following documents to be submitted for the record by unanimous consent. statement from the electronic transmission association. a statement from the national association of convenience stores and the society of independent gasoline marketers of america. and a statement from the national retail federation. does the ranking member have anything that should be included in the record? >> i don't, but i approve of those inclusions. >> thank you. pursuant to committee rules i remind members that they have ten business days to submit additional questions for the record. and i ask that witnesses submit their responses within ten business days upon receipt of the questions. without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned. >>> on the next "washington journal" former nsa g

i served in baghdad. >> mr. olson, were you serving when we were involved in iraq?>> i served from december of 2003 to march of 2004 in najaf, iraq. >> you all correct me if i'm wrong, my recollection and the title of this hearing is the administration strategy in afghanistan, but i want to reflect back to iraq and my experience there. our strategy in iraq obviously was to stabilize the country through the use of soft power and things like usaid and reconstruction teams to win the people over, have security in the country, hopefully win them over to be an independent, free democracy in a very dangerous part of the world. wasn't that about right to describe our strategy? >> yes, have responsibility for iraq right now, sir. >> this is not a trick question. feel free to correct me if i'm wrong. i'm trying to get to a point. i read general campbell's statements about the growth of isil and the growth and strength of the taliban and reflected back to iraq. i walked in the streets with a u.s. rifle company that was handing out micro loans and we were helping small busines

we will buy from mr. olson at the general store. and tell limits to keep the indians away. since pa has been gone on the launcher to find the next little house, the one in the big woods with a little prairie or silverlake by the banks of palm pre did not work out. since then you've been spending a lot of time alone in the bar. we don't have any food or wood left. he's been acting very strangely. i know that when these people for the future arrive and set up camp in our house with tv cameras that they do under some extra pressure. now you have to act like living in dakota in the winter was depressed and frustrated and pa is fun so money that people will pay money to pretend to be like us. when he started ironing our underwear and using words like " sturdy help meat," i started thinking about that ax. [laughter] have you ever heard of zombies? don't worry. even if you're dead, we have a plan. the tv people save it can't be in the show because we are too dirty and thin. our uncivilized appearance by make people think homesteading of the great plains was not so much fun. some f

>> no, sir. 3= served in baghdad. >> mr. olson, were you involved when we were involved in iraq?from december of 2003 to march of 2004. in a governor-led team in iraq, a predecessor to the prts. >> correct me if i'm wrong. the teeblgts of hearing administration strategy in afghanistan but i want to reflect back to iraq for a second in my experience there. our strategy in iraq obviously stabilize the country through the use of soft pow around things like usa id and construction teams to win the people over leave enough's a residual force for security in the country and hopefully win them over to be an independent, free democracy in a dangerous part of the world. wasn't that about right to describe our strategy. >> yes-ñeeo is -- i don't have responsibility for iraq right now. >> this is not a trick question. i'm just -- feel free to correct me if i'm wrong in any of this because i'm trying to get to a point. >> yes, sir. >> what worries me, i read january campbell's statements about the growth of isil and strength of the taliban and reflected back to iraq. i walked in the streets

mr. olson: i thank my friend. a quote from dr. coonen, there is a useful consensus at the level of detail relevant to assess human i influence on climate change -- human influence on climate change, and yt here we are, fighting for american jobs and commonsense regulations, while world leaders are in paris making promises they can't keep. enough of the band-aids from e.p.a. i vote my colleagues to vote for -- and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. tonko: i yield myself such time as i may consume. it is unfortunate that we are considering two resolutions today that are designed to prevent the environmental protection agency from moving forward with critical resolution -- regulations to reduce carbon emissions from existing and new power plants. that previous resolution just aired in the house and now this resolution exactly are -- should be called exactly what they are. that being an attack on e.p.a.'s clean air act authority. these resolutions would block this administration or an

mr. olson: i thank my friend. a quote from dr. coonen, there is a useful consensus at the level of detail relevant to assess human i influence on climate change -- human influence on climate change, and yet here we are, fighting for american jobs and commonsense regulations, while world leaders are in paris making promises they can't keep. enough of the band-aids from e.p.a. i vote my colleagues to vote for -- and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. tonko: i yield myself such time as i may consume. it is unfortunate that we are considering two resolutions today that are designed to prevent the environmental protection agency from moving forward with critical resolution -- regulations to reduce carbon emissions from existing and new power plants. that previous resolution just aired in the house and now this resolution exactly are -- should be called exactly what they are. that being an attack on e.p.a.'s clean air act authority. these resolutions would block this administration or a

mr. olson: mr. speaker, the color purple and panther pride are alive and well in texas.dge point high school has been opened for five years. five short years. yet last saturday they took us to heights schools that have been around for 50 years have never achieved. they made the final four, the state -a division ii semifinal football playoffs. the panthers came up a little short, but fans like me walked ut darn proud of our guys. they never quit and they never will. i have a warning for teams we play next year, panthers don't retreat. we reload. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition. cohen: to address the house for one minute. the speaker: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cohen: i look forward to supporting the spending bill because it does so much good for america, moves us forward, brings us together as a body to ove america forward. included in there is an amendment i had on the house floor and the senate accepted to add an additional $4 million to testing rape kits. there's

mr. engel made about your predecessor, ambassador olson, in your job, ambassador richard holbrooke.he was a personal friend to myself and elliot engel and i know certainly from the day he began engaging with this committee i remember the dayton peace accords and the work he did on bosnia and kosovo with elliot engel and others of us here. we counted him as someone who had very wise counsel on a lot of issues. we miss him. i can't help but feel when i reflect upon your predecessor that the stress of the job may have had something to do with his heart giving out. we wish you, ambassador, well in your responsibilities here and we appreciate your time and patience today. i know that you're on your way to the senate so i'll just say what you've heard is deep concerns from both sides of the aisles here today. about the direction. this issue about getting more money into public education in pakistan. it's clear to us that this has got to be a priority. members are frustrated. you've got a difficult job but you have the full backing from us to weigh in forcefully with the responsibilities y

mr. chairman, and ambassador olson, it's good to see you. we had a good meeting yesterday in my office. i was just debating a bill on the house floor and also the new york delegation, so i apologizing for missing the first part of the hearing. we discussed many of the issues, and i'm delighted with your appointment. this week -- what i'm going to do is make a statement and then ask you to comment on it. this week we marked five years since the passing of ambassador holbrook, who was our first special representative for afghanistan and pakistan. and we still feel his loss. he left a remarkable legacy. and his final effort was laying the ground work for resolving the long conflict in afghanistan and pakistan. and i hope we're able to take advantage of that work. as he mentioned before, ambassador olson, i'm confident with your previous experience in both afghanistan and pakistan, this important task is in the right hands. when president obama took office, i was encouraged by the bipartisan commitment to support our military forces, diplomats, and development workers in afghanistan, and to

mr. olson: mr. speaker, this morning the texas skies were not as big. they weren't as bright. we lost cheryly johnson, the wife of our hero and our colleague, sam johnson. they were high school sweethearts, married for over 65 years. the entire eight years that sam was being tortured in hanoi, shirley kept a seat at the family dinner table for sam. he knew sam would come home. sam came home broken and battered. he worried, how would his family react to the new sam? sam had nothing to worry about. led by shirley, he was swarmed ith love back home in texas. shirley is now among the heavens. and those texas skies tonight will be as bright and big as ever. god bless shirley johnson. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new hampshire seek recognition? - new mexico seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. lujan grisham: mr. speaker, i rise to draw attention to the concerns and frustrations among parents, educators, business leaders and so many

mr. chairman,d pastor olson good to see you we have a good meeting yesterday in my office, i was just debating a bill on the house floor. also new york delegation, so i apologize for missing the first part of the hearing. but we discuss ised many of the issue ors, and i'm delighted with your -- appointment. this week i'm going to make a statement and ask you to comment on it. this week we marked five years since passing of ambassador holbrook, and first representative and we feel his los. we left a remarkable legacy and final resolving the long con applicant in afghanistan and pakistan and i hope we can take advantage of that work as i mentioned before ambassador i'm confident withier previous experience in both afghanistan and pakistan this important task is in the right hands. when president obama took office i was encouraged by the bipartisan commitment to support military forces, diplomat workers in afghanistan, and to renew our partnership are the civilian leadership of pakistan. this focus on pakistan was reflected in the kerry held by congress in 2009. but that authorization recently ex

mr. engle made about your predecessor, ambassador olson in your job. ambassador richard holbrook. he was a personal friend to myself and eliot engel, and i know certainly from the day that he began engaging with this committee, i remember the date and peace accords and the work he did on bosnia and kosovo with eliot engel and others with those of us here. we, we counted him as someone who had very wise counsel on a lot of issues. i can't help but feel that the stress of the job may have had something to do with his heart giving out. we wish you, ambassador, well in your, in your responsibilities here. and we appreciate your time and patience today. i know that you're on your way to the senate, so i'll just say what you've heard is some deep concerns from both sides of the aisle here today, about the direction, this issue about getting more money into public education in pakistan. it's clear to us that this has got to be a priority. members are frustrated. you've got a difficult job, but you've got the full backing from us to weigh in forcefully. with the responsibilities you have

ambassador olson has been recognized several times for his service, including being awarded the presidential distinguished service award. thank you for being with us, mr. ambassador. without objection, the witness's full prepared statement will be made a part of the record, and members will have five calendar days to submit statements, questions, and extraneous material for the record. ambassador olson, please summarize your remarks. >> madam chair, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the current state of the united states' bilateral relationship with pakistan. i'm honored to testify in front of you for the first time in my capacity as u.s. special representative for afghanistan and pakistan. after having served as your ambassador in pakistan and previously at our embassy in kabul. i'm humbled and privileged to be in this new role at such a critical time for the u.s. relationship with both pakistan and afghanistan. it's clear to me that despite many challenges, pakistan will be continue to be an important partner for the united states for the foreseeable future, particularly in light of our end

ambassador olson has been recognized several times for his service, including being awarded the presidential distinguished service award. thank you for being with us, mr. ambassador. without objection, the witness's full prepared statement will be made a part of the record, and members will have five calendar days to submit statements, questions, and extraneous material for the record. ambassador olson, please summarize your remarks. >> madam chair, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the current state of the united states' bilateral relationship with pakistan. i'm honored to testify in front of you for the first time in my capacity as u.s. special representative for afghanistan and pakistan. after having served as your ambassador in pakistan and previously at our embassy in kabul. i'm humbled and privileged to be in this new role at such a critical time for the u.s. relationship with both pakistan and afghanistan. it's clear to me that despite many challenges, pakistan will be continue to be an important partner for the united states for the foreseeable future, particularly in light of our end