ms. richards? the department of homeland security. >> i cannot think of an instance where the purchases would be appropriate, but again, you have to look at the individual purchase to see if there was a nexus to government services. >> assuming there was not, though. >> the department of homeland security's regulations do state that government purchase cards are to be used for government business only and not for personal business. we do not have an explicit prohibition naming those items. >> just guidance. ok. understanding that you cannot speak for policy for the air force -- we understand that -- but can you think of a reason why we would not want to include the pentagon and by extension the air force and a government wide, consistent set of standards and enforcement and standard operating procedures with respect to the use of such cards ? especially since you are, by ? r, the biggest user >> yes, the department of defense is the largest user of ivernment purchase cards, and can speak for policy

ms. richards? >> i agree with my fellow assistant i.g.s. omb has put out additional guidance and they are following up on publishing the results. >> but they really don't go back that much to check. have you seen them -- any compliance of their -- >> omb puts out the guidance and it's up to the individual departments to enforce it. >> you all oversee some of that as inspector generals. >> mr. chairman, the only thing that strikes me here, though, correct me if i'm wrong, in a sense, neither the 2012 law nor omb guidance give explicit guidance for criteria of who gets a card and when can a card be used. would that be fair? if i understood you, even within epa, there was broad discretion about that dguidance. that would suggest that isn't government wide. >> i'm not aware of any guidance as to who can get it or how many can be distributed. >> and both mr. lewis would agree with that? >> same here. and our current audit, we're looking at the utilization of these cards. some people have them and they don't use them. evidently they do not need t

ms. anne richards is the assistant inspector general for audits at the u.s. department of homeland's security. mr. john lisle is the dep it assistant secretary for contracting at the united states air force. mr. hl larry is the deputy director of air force services at the yients united states air force. i thank all of the witnesses and welcome them today. i don't know if you've come before our committee or subcommittee before, but this is an investigations and oversight committee of congress. and, in accordance with our rules, we do swear in our witnesses. so, if you'll please stand, i eat add mem eel administer the oath. >>> do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give before this subcommittee of congress is the whole truth and nothing but the truth? all of the witnesses, the record will reflect, answered in the affirmative. and, again, i welcome you. thank you for coming today. our -- of course, we don't have as many members today since we're not voting. but we try to limit you to five minutes. if we have to go a little bit over,

richard umbdenstock is the president and c.e.o. of the american hospital association, and in minneapolis we are joined by jean ross the copresident of the national nurses united. and ms. ross i want to start with you. your organization is the largest in the country. and last week you had some scathing criticism of the outrageous handling as you called it of ebola at the texas health presbyterian hospital. they have apologized and admitted that mistakes were made. do you accept that? and where do we go from here on this? >> an apology is nice but a corporate c.e.o. apology does not save lives. where we go is to listen to us which we have been begging for since the get go. once you've got the evidence that we were correct that people are not prepared, nurses are not prepare federal we say we are not we are not. it unfortunately has been born out with the threats to the health and safety of the rn's and other workers. one thing we have done is write a letter to president obama asking that he set a uniform national standard that all hospitals must comply with in this system we have in this country. and we have a petition on-line at national nurses united.org that we wish

ms. holeson for one final question. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you stated that the theory on which you pardoned richard nixon was that he had suffered enough. and i am interested in that theory, because the logical consequence of that is that somebody who resigns in the face of virtually certain impeachment or somebody who is impeached should not be punished because the resignation in the face of impeachment is enough. i wonder if anybody had brought to your attention that the constitution specifically states that even though somebody is impeached, that person shall nonetheless be liable to punishment according to law. >> i was fully cognizant of the fact that the president on resignation was accountable for any criminal charges. but i would like to say that the reason i gave the pardon was not as to mr. nixon himself. i repeat and i repeat? with emphasis, the purpose of the pardon was to try and get the united states, the congress, the president and the american people focusing on the serious problems we have both at home and abroad. i was absolutely convinced then as i am now that if we had had this