mr. waltz and mr. jacobson, very quickly, if you guys could just respond with yes or no, basically. >> very quickly, mullah omar, the leader of the taliban, considered it a victory and stated so as soon as he received his five top commanders back. >> i don't trust mullah omar so i would say it pales by comparison to the video that could have taken place with one of our soldiers being beheaded like we saw with nick berg or daniel pearl. >> that's an interesting twist. your twist is, you don't trust this guy, therefore, him saying that it was a victory for his organization is probably a lie. i mean, that's kind of surprising to me, because i think if it was not a victory for them, they probably wouldn't have said anything or released a video and they probably would have sat back and been very quiet about it. that's an interesting spin. you have a right to your opinion but i think that was an interesting take that the other three do not share. do you believe, specialist, do you believe he intentionally le

mr. waltz hits it right on the head about the price you pay. does it help or harm the security interests of the united states? i would refer to people like my colleague sam johnson, who was a medal of honor winner, one of the most respected men in this body, prisoner of war, he said absolutely not, this should not have been done. and if he was a prisoner of war, he would not have wanted to go back if it meant harming the security interests of his country. when i talk to veterans in my district and people who were p.o.w.s, they say the same thing. of course we don't want to leave anyone behind, but we don't harm the country and put everyone else at risk to do that. mr. andrews, did your son darren get honored at the white house for service. >> knolls. >> and you were never invited for a rose garden ceremony? >> no, sir. >> i think veterans had the visceral -- because it was done to say we got a hero back, susan rice, honor and distinction in order to divert the public's attention from the price

mr. waltz or mr. -- correct me if i'm wrong. it sounds like the principle is one you agree with. >> it's the principle and the price we paid and i would argue we'll have to pay again to deal with these gentlemen in the future. >> and congressman, i think that it was a good price and this was worth the risk to get sergeant bergdahl back home. >> thank you, mr. chairman. recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. desantos, for five minutes. >> thank you. doctor, you had taken issue said . waltz when he -- great. h thought it was do you disagreeing with honestly think they thought beheading bergdahl would have got them back, they would so done it? i thought the comment was just, it struck me as totally off base. let me ask you this. do we have troops in afghanistan right now? >> yes, congressman the >> so you had referenced troops who have been left behind. we can argue whether bergdahl left his unit behind and i agree with specialist fuld, i think he did that. everyone that served with him said t

mr. waltzr mr. -- correct me if i'm wrong. it sounds like the principle is one you agree with. >> it's the principle and the price we paid and i would argue we'll have to pay again to deal with these gentlemen in the future. >> and congressman, i think that it was a good price and this was worth the risk to get sergeant bergdahl back home. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. desantos, for five minutes. >> thank you. doctor, you had taken issue with mr. waltz when he said that the mullah thought it was great. do you honestly think that if they thought beheading bergdahl would have got them back, they would so done it? i thought the comment was just, it struck me as totally off base. let me ask you this. do we have troops in afghanistan right now? >> yes, congressman. >> so you had referenced troops who have been left behind. we can argue whether bergdahl left his unit behind and i agree with specialist fuld, i think he did that. everyone that serve

mr. waltz when they thought this was a great thing for the taliban. well, maybe they thought beheading him would have been better. do you honestly think that if they thought beheading him would have helped them that they would not have done it in a second? they did this, they want those guys back in command. of course it was better for them. so i thought for that comment, i thought just struck me as totally off base. let me ask you this, do we have troops in afghanistan right now? >> yes, congress man. >> so you have referenced troop who is have been left behind. we can argue whether he left his unit behind, and i think he did that. but if we still have troops there, who have we left behind? we're still fighting the conflict. it's not over yet. and so the notion that somehow had wed not done this trade that means we, quote, left him behind, is utter nonsense. to so what we've done is we've replenished the enemy in wartime when we still have fighters in there and those individuals will be back o

when mr. waltz brings up the point of the possibility of getting surgery within 48 hours but it's six weeks until they can get their pre-open work done teva it's disappointing the surgeon can't make something happen sooner or nowhere to go, these types of things aren't corrected and i'm sure these have gone on for years. you know, there's a lot of things that we're hearing tonight and you share our concerns. when did you start? when i got here i went to gener gener gener general senseki three times. why are so few patients being seen opinion you talk about rvus and for our fans watching at home. rela receive value units. new patient has a higher value than an established patient. a short procedure has fewer value units than longer type procedures. when did you start looking at the rvus? >> the rvus, i believe, became part of our evaluation process after the report in 2012. >> that's been around for a while. it's some type of measure. but my question senior you measuring how many rvus per patient per

mr. waltz, a senior national security fellow at the new america foundation, who demanded special forces in eastern afghanistan. thank you for your service. and dr. jacobson, thank you for your 20 years of service in the military, including your deployment to afghanistan. first, as to a preliminary issue on iraq. let me point out that we do not have forces in iraq. we do not have a status of forces agreement with iraq. president bush established president malki in 2006, and in this governance is responsible for the violence taking place in the country today. it should not be surprising that malik he refused to enter a status agreement under president obama. as to releases for guantanamo, while we are focusing today on five guantanamo prisoners being released, resident bush released over 500 prisoners from guantanamo. most of them were dangerous. over 100 of them we know they are fighting us on the battlefield and we know where. most of the others are fighting against us as well. we just can't pi

. >> mr. waltz you're recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. i'll start out and ask has mr. chairman made northeast. a lot of this stems from us unable to get information. over three weeks ago we sat in other and after the audit several members mentioned our facilities were flagged and guaranteed we would be told why that was. nothing has been said. every day i get calls asking what's wrong with these facilities. so i'll ask you, why don't you take that back and let them know we're waiting. >> congressman, i actually had a discussion before i came down here tonight. we knew this issue would be raised. >> that's good foresite. i appreciate you're thinking ahead. >> he and i agreed that it's important that we brief the committee and we'll be make arrangements to do that and also provide briefings to other congressional staff on a visit by visit basis. >> you've been coming down here a lot and i appreciate the work you do. i think the time has come when you know you don't get the benefit of the doubt on anything right now and after today's osc you mentioned that was an unaccept

when mr. waltz brings up the point of the possibility of getting surgery within 48 hours but it's 6 weeks until they can get their pre-op work done at the va, it's disappointing that surgeon can't make something happen sooner or there's nowhere to go that these types of things aren't corrected. i'm sure these have gone on for years. you know, there's a lot of things that we're hearing tonight and you share our concerns. when did you start? when i got here i went to general shinseki three times saying i'd be willing as a physician to go into the clinics, go into the o.r.s. i come from private practice. i trained in a va. discuss why it is so much slower. why there are so many fewer patients being seen. never got a response, never got action on that. you talk about rvus, and for our fans watching at home, they probably don't know what those are. relative value units. so a new patient has a higher value than an established patient. a short procedure has fewer value units than a long procedure. those ty

mr. waltz. i'm sorry. you're recognized for five minutes. >> again, thank you both for being here and listening to the testimony. i appreciate it. i've sat here almost in this exact same seat for seven and a half years and just like you with the vsos and the va as partners and advocates to get this right for veterans. but i'm going to come back to -- and i oftentimes in those years said i'm staunchest supporter but i'll be your harshest critic when it needs to be. dr. clancy, i brought it up with several others, you said this is the time to think fundamental change. this is the time to think big. and i found it interesting that you focused, dr. clancy, on thetoriage, which, of course needs to be done with these veterans right now and called what we were talking about a second order question. i would argue had you addressed thattyer, we would have never had phoenix. we would have never had those things. are both of you clinically credentialed? >> i'm not currently, well, not clinically credentialed at this

when mr. waltzbrings up the point of the possibility of getting surgery within 48 hours but it's six weeks until they can get their pre-open work done teva it's disappointing the surgeon can't make something happen sooner or nowhere to go, these types of things aren't corrected and i'm sure these have gone on for years. you know, there's a lot of things that we're hearing tonight and you share our concerns. when did you start? when i got here i went to gener gener gener general senseki three times. why are so few patients being seen opinion you talk about rvus and for our fans watching at home. rela receive value units. new patient has a higher value than an established patient. a short procedure has fewer value units than longer type procedures. when did you start looking at the rvus? >> the rvus, i believe, became part of our evaluation process after the report in 2012. >> that's been around for a while. it's some type of measure. but my question senior you measuring how many rvus per patient per

mr. waltz. i'm sorry. you're recognized for five minutes. >> again, thank you both for being here and listening to the testimony. i appreciate it. i've sat here almost in this exact same seat for seven and a half years and just like you with the vsos and the va as partners and advocates to get this right for veterans. but i'm going to come back to -- and i oftentimes in those years said i'm staunchest supporter but i'll be your harshest critic when it needs to be. dr. clancy, i brought it up with several others, you said this is the time to think fundamental change. this is the time to think big. and i found it interesting that you focused, dr. clancy, on thetoriage, which, of course needs to be done with these veterans right now and called what we were talking about a second order question. i would argue had you addressed thattyer, we would have never had phoenix. we would have never had those things. are both of you clinically credentialed? >> i'm not currently, well, not clinically credentialed at this

mr. mike waltz is the senior national security fellow at the new america foundation. mr. waltz commanded a special forces company in east

mr. waltz's office? why have they been so slow in responding to this committee? just why, why, why? is it because there aren't enough -- >> it is not correct. i think we do have to work with this committee, and we do have to work with congress if we're going to build a better va system. and we do need to give you the information that you need. >> dr. lynch, let me ask one other -- is it a system that can innovate? >> yes. i think it is a system that can innovate. and i think we have shown that we can innovate in the past. particularly in response to crisis. if you rolook back in the mid-1980s, there were concerns about surgical care in the va. the va acquired a risk assessment model that has now become the model in the private sector. in the 1990s, the va was criticized and the va noin vain with the electronic health record. i think we have an opportunity here in va to respond to this crisis with an innovative model of staffing, of assessing demand and capacity that can become a standard for the industry as well. >> please do it. i yield back my time. >> well, if i could just add on

kind, mr. waltz and mr. terry as well as my staff. i want to acknowledge the success that this bill -- builds on from the omniwith us bus -- omnibus bill from earlier in this year that included my amendment to increase funding for d.o.t.'s pipeline and hazardous material and safety administration over lower priority programs. mr. chairman, on march 29, 2013, the exxonmobil pegasus pipeline in my district, the second district, suffered a catastrophic accidental rupture. it inundated nearby homes and businesses with thus -- thousands of gallons of spilled oil. i'm committed to making things right to the people of mayflower and ensuring that another spill never occurs again in arkansas. femsa is the government's primary body for regulating oil and petroleum products through america's interstate pipelines. as an interstate pipeline, the inspection of the pipeline in my district was femsa's responsibility. interstate pipelines deliver 11.3 11.3 billion -- over billion barrels of petroleum each year. the cost to transport it on the pipeline