mr. robertson, do you think that $130,000 was your money? >> i believe that money belongs to the taxpayers. >> mr. foley, do you think that was your money? >> no. i believe it's the taxpayers' money. >> food and drink for the conference. $145,000. mr. robertson, do you think mr. neely truly thought that was his money? >> i don't know what mr. neely was thinking. >> do you think that was your money? >> that money clearly belongs to the taxpayers. >> mr. foley, do you think mr. neely thought that was his money? >> i do not know what he was thinking. do you think that was your money? >> no. it clearly belongs to the taxpayer. >> and i don't know you, and i respect your service, but why even joke? why even joke about abusing taxpayer dollars? why even do that? i mean, all my colleagues have said, rightfully, everybody knows what the american people are going through right now. >> it was -- >> can't you imagine that for $6500, the average struggling taxpayer out there could find something to do with that? for $8,000, for these souvenir yearbooks,

mr. robertson, would you know? >> i think the gentleman hit on something which is we appreciate things being centralized but one of the questions is, do we have high ranking high paid civil servants in these regions going every back, because they're not responsible, perhaps we're paying more than we should support responsibility not met. >> my understanding is that in -- i believe all the regions, the regional commissioners are paid more than the regional administrators. >> but more than $100,000? >> significantly. >> i believe both of them are over that number, yes. >> thank you. >> mr. chair. >> yes. the regional commissioners are paid quite a bit. the regional administrator is at the gs-15 level. >> which would put him quite a bit below sas. mr. chaffetz is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. johnson, with whom did you collaborate the development of your testimony submitted? did you collaborate with anybody in the development of your testimony? >> i wrote my testimony, and i discussed it

mr. robertson. you were previously liaison to essentially the white house and i know the word administration versus white house versus president gets use loosely. so let's just take the largest question. in your role as, in fact, the communicator not representing the administrator, but representing white house liaison, that role in which your job was to communicate, to have no surprises, nothing unknown to the people of the white house, both political and nonpolitical, wouldn't you ordinarily have reported something like this in that role? >> the role of the white house liaison is to on board appointees to different offices and executive branch agencies and departments. >> no, but here's the whole point. when you worked for senator obama, i'm sure your chief of staff told you, no surprises for the senator, right? >> i don't remember having that conversation in the senate. >> so you would have kept something like this that could embarrass the president? you would have kept it a secret when he was you

mr. michael j. robertson is chief of staff at the general services administration and mr. david e. foley is the deputy commissioner of public building service at the general services administration. pursuant to our rules all witnesses are required to take the oath, would you please rise, raise your right hand to take the oath. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. in order to allow time for discussion testimony will be limited to five minutes. some of you have written statements some do not. in other case -- your written statement will be platsed in the record in their entirety. you may read your written statement for five minutes or make other such comments that you think may be helpful to all of us. with that the chair recognizes mr. miller for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, good afternoon -- >> would you pull the mic as close as you can tolerate. >> chairman, issa, ranking member cummings, members of the

mr. robertson, do you think mr. neely truly thought that was his money? >> i don't know what he was thinking. do you think that was your money? >> it clearly belonged to the taxpayers. >> do you think mr. neely thought it was his money? >> i do not know what he was thinking. >> do you think it was your money? >> no, it clearly belongs to the taxpayers. >> i don't know you. i respect your service. why even joke about of using taxpayer dollars? why do that? all my colleagues have said, rightfully, everyone knows what the american people are going through right now. can't you imagine that for $6,500, the average growing taxpayer could find something to do with that? for $8,000 for these a souvenir your books. do you think the average man or woman in any one of our districts today would know what to do with $8,000? >> again, i absolutely apologize for my remarks. i clearly recognize there were inappropriate. >> what made you feel like you could joke about it to begin with? this culture -- why? why did mr. neely feel he could do what he did? would he have felt

mr. robertson and mr. miller know we'll likely be back in this setting more times as we get through the reform part of this. ms. johnson, we're unlikely to ask you back in the same setting. your experience, computer science corporation, your experience here, we may ask if you would voluntarily help us as we sort out the frustrations you saw between political appointees who, in fact, might -- you might have a hard time recruiting the kinds of people that need to oversee ses and other very senior individuals in the bureaucracy. and, of course, some of yours from tragss that may exist as to what it takes to eliminate a member of civil service, even after egregious behavior. >> i would be happy to be of any support i can be. >> and we'll make sure it's not at a cost of needing a council here again. >> thank you. >> and with that, we'll take a short recess before the second panel. >> thank you. >>> just taking a break here, re-setting the room, letting some of the witnesses go during this oversight and governme

mr. robertson, mr. pek, ms. brit ta -- >> mr. leads and myself. and we discussed this report and we agreed it was egregious and we were eager to get the final report so we could act. it took nine months before we were able to receive a final report. i will say that had i had had that report earlier, i felt i could have moved much more strongly with respect to -- >> we will come deeper into those details. mr. walls? >> thank you, mr. chairman. and ms. johnson, i want to make sure i avoid generalizations and myself and this committee as a whole the interest is not for grand standing and while the loss of your career is personally tragic to you, i have to tell you if you will excuse e me, my concern relies with the taxpayers today. i don't doubt your sincerity that you're sorry this happened, but i hope you recognize the magnitude of how this reaches. it's just incredibly difficult for me to imagine that this happened having worked in different organizations and seen it. i think your analysis was very honest with your matrix design whatever, but firs

mr. robertson, who wrote it then could have written it now and i quote from the column. this is from mr. karzai. the time has come to reduce military operations. the time has come to reduce the presence of, you know, boots in afghanistan. to reduce the intrusiveness into the daily afghan lives. this is what president karzai said to the "washington post". well, in his column in 2010 that he could be writing today, april, 2012, this is what mr. robertson said in response to karzai. all right then. let's save american lives and a ton of money. let's oblige him. mr. robertson, thank you. i hope that this congress, when we debate the d.o.d. bill in may, and we have amendments from both sides saying that we must have a more defined end to this involvement in afghanistan, i hope and pray that we will pass some of these legislation -- legislative amendments. mr. speaker, i brought with me today, i got so many of these posters of a tragic scene of a soldier, marine, airman, navy, whoever it might be in a coffin going to his or her grave. that brings me to my last point. the body o

mr. robertson, the chief of staff who is also the white house liaison. and was on senator obama's personal staff. we're going to hear today from mr. peck, who for the last year and a half i have asked, i have requested on a bipartisan level with ms. norton, we've sent e-mails, memos, held hearings, and asked for a budget that is outside of congress's purview. we've been held up for far too long, and i'm here to tell you the buck stops here. we're not going to hold up any longer. the american public demands to see the budget on the public building's fund, the federal buildings fund, and how that money has been spent. this slush fund is no longer going to be used for personal uses. when federal buildings -- when agencies pay rent into this personal building fund, it is meant to redevelop. it is meant to sell off, which we've been attempting to do for the last year and a half, sell off the properties that are unused, underutilized, and redevelop, put people back to work where we can by utilizing these funds. the public has a right to know how much money is i

mr. robertson, was informed back in may or early june, so this is something where the white house knew whenarly on and 11 months later they're taking quick action. >> can i follow up on that? such a key point. all these videos come out and everybody's running for cover inside the administration. in fact, team obama now tries to blame the bush administration. okay. why do you think they waited 11 months? did they think they could cover this up? >> well, it's one of the amazing questions we never got fully answered by the inspector general. why did it take this long to come out with it. why is it nothing happened when the 60-day preliminary report happened. why were there no real changes, no changes of any substance during that 11 months that intervened. one of the things we made clear is on a bipartisan basis we can't have inspector generals who not only -- they're dual hatted, work for the administration but also for congress. we need to have a heads up much earlier so the kinds of reforms that our committee is now anticipating doing, we've sent out letters to all the other major agencies.

mr. robertson, do you think mr. neely truly thought that was his money? >> i don't know what he was thinking. do you think that was your money? >> it clearly belonged to the taxpayers. >> do you think mr. neely thought it was his money? >> i do not know what he was thinking. >> do you think it was your money? >> no, it clearly belongs to the taxpayers. >> i don't know you. i respect your service. why even joke about of using taxpayer dollars? why do that? all my colleagues have said, rightfully, everyone knows what the american people are going through right now. fort you imagine that $6,500, the average growing taxpayer could find something to do with that? for $8,000 for these a souvenir your books. do you think the average man or woman in any one of our districts today would know what to do with $8,000? >> again, i absolutely apologize for my remarks. i clearly recognize there were inappropriate. >> what made you feel like you could joke about it to begin with? this culture -- why? why did mr. neely feel he could do what he did? would he have felt that

mr. robertson said recently. i have never used manner, and i don't intend to, he said, but it's just one of those things that, well, i think this war on drugs just hasn't succeeded. the reason robertson is for legalizing marijuana is that it has created a prison problem in america that is well beyond what most americans imagine. he is right. here are the numbers. the total number of americans under correctional supervision, prison, parole, et cetera, is 7.1 million. more than the entire state of massachusetts. no other country comes even close to our rates of incarceration. we have 760 prisoners per 100,000 people. most european countries have one-seventh that number per capita, so it's adjusted for population. even those on the high end of the global spectrum -- brazil, poland -- have only one-quarter of the number we do. if you say this is 134 kind of enduring aspect of america's wild west culture, you would be wrong. in 1980 our rates of incarceration were a quarter what they are now. what changed was the war o

mr. robertson, you are the chief of staff. >> i'm unfamiliar with the results.gov website. >> this is the disconnect. you are the chief of staff, she is a former administrator and sites a handful of great accomplishments of the gsa and you don't even know what it is? >> the notion you have to spend $800,000 to exchange ideas is laughable. perhaps criminal. the part that gals me the most is the hypocrisy of gsa not even following its own damn rules. you are so quick to make everyone else follow the rules and you can't follow your own rules. >> let me tell you, as a guy who has only been here 14 months, thank god some of us are here now. because apparently you folks made a career out of spending taxpayer money. have got some kind of a magic shield and staying inside this bubble that allows you to do those things without any, any feeling of wrongdoing. >> greta: did the house oversight and government reform committee get answers? chairman darrell issa joins us. nice to see you. >> thank you for having me on. yes, we did get answers. >> greta: this is hard not to think it's moose used with th

mr. robertson? do you see it?e is also email evidence showing that jeff neeley, the gsa executive sent emails inviting personal friends to come along for a good time on the taxpayer dime. shep. >> shepard: the guy we showed there in the it tub, did he have anything to say today? >>. no he essentially tried to stay out of it. tried to avoid any more trouble. >> mr. neeley, did you approve of the funding for the 2010 western regional conference? >> mr. chairman, on the advice of my council, i respectfully decline to answer based on my fifth amendment constitutional privilege. >> but the former evidence the gsa sounded much more accountable. >> i personally apologize to the american people as the head of the agency i'm responsible. i deeply regret this. i will mourn for the rest of my life the loss of my appointment. >> tomorrow morning first thing, a separate house committee takes over. the second of four hearings on this government agency this week. shep? >> shepard: mike emanuel on capitol hill, thanks. the u.s. i

mr. robertson the chief of staff who is also the white house liaison and was on senator obama's personal staff. we are going to hear today from mr. peck who for the last year and a half i have asked and requested on a bipartisan level, we sent to e-mails, memos, held hearings and asked for a budget that is outside of the converse purview. we've been held up for far too long and i'm here to tell you the box tops here. we are not going to hold up any longer. the american public demands to see the budget on the public building fund, the federal building fund, and how that money has been spent. this fund is no longer going to be used for personal use. when a federal buildings, and other agencies pay rent into this personal building fund is meant to redevelop, which we have been attempting to do the last year and a half felt the properties that are on used underutilized and redevelop back to work where we can by utilizing these funds. the public has a right to know how much money is in this fund, where it's been used, a full accountability of the past. we are producing the new administrator ab

mr. robertson? >> reporter: hearing a great deal of frustration on capitol hill. the hearing is underway at this hour. martha: will be interesting, mike. we will be watching. thank you very much. gregg: those executives now being told the taxpayers want their money back. in three separate letters to robert peck, jeff neely and robert shepard, the gsa acting commissioner demanding return of money used to throw parties in their hotel during that now infamous las vegas conference. the commissioner writing this. it is unconscionable the american taxpayer should pay this cost. you are responsible for this unacceptable expenditure. therefore i demand you make payment. the letter goes on to detail how much they owe and who they can make checks out to and where to send them. martha: let's talk about another scandal bubbling up right now. that has to do with the secret service. security clearance has not been yanked from those 11 agents hot are accused of interacting with produce tuts at a colombia hotel. that happened during a the president's visit to a conference there o

mr. robertson? do you see it? >> he kept taking the fifth. if they really wanted some answers, maybe they should have hired a mind reader. they already did that. >> there were eight scouting trips. eight scouting and off site preconference meetings to prepare for that october of 2010 conference, $130,000, your dollars, paid for those eight scouting trips to determine whether or not they should hold that convention at the m hotel. >> by the way, darrell issa will be joining us. he sent out 23 other letters to federal agencies to examine the need behind these conferences period. do you really need to go away, hire a mind reader, get black jack vests for $6,000 in order to build a team attitude or bond? but the traveling industry is pushing back. their lobbyists are saying hey, congress, don't overreact. this could be very beneficial. >> this is not -- we want to make sure that we're careful to say don't go to las vegas, you know, because they got the bum rap before. we're not saying that -- i just want to bring up the point that i think this is

. >> reporter: julian robertson recalls that ad barrage with pride. so when mr. romney's super pac outspent gingrich's in florida, you thought excellent? >> i thought excellent. and i'm a part of that. and he won. >> reporter: but does the rescue of romney make him beholden to the super pac or to wall street tightens like robertson? >> i want to get dodd-frank out of there, want to get rid of it. >> reporter: one key romney promise, to end the dodd-frank financial reforms, would specifically help wall street by halting new rules on the trading abuses that magnified the it 2008 financial meltdown. robertson told us emphatically his gift has no connection to the promise. so your donation is not tied thaied? >> absolutely not. >> reporter: directly to his call to repeal dodd-frank? >> no, not in the least. >> reporter: if mitt romney were to become president, would you expect him to take your phone call? >> i would expect mitt romney to speak to me occasion easy because i think he respects me. i don't think he would ever say i owe julian robertson a call because he

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. we technically call that a draft. that draft report was delivered on february 17th with a 30-day notice, which administrator johnson asked us to extend by another 30 days, which we did. >> you had no discussions with the white house last