following on the 2013 omb requirement guidance, a requirement to adopt the omb requirements into their regulatory framework. those requirements will be released in december of this year. and on the date of the release, those consolidated regulations come our grants management policies will be made effective for all grants awarded. move forward over the next couple of months, there is a lot --work to do to develop the those set the framework. and our work will be, one, and those requirements, and number two, establishing and collecting data metrics to evaluate whether or not we have done what we hoped we achieved. pivoting over to real property, which may seem like something out of left field only talk about financial management, but in fact, i think as we think about more and more about financial management, real property is probably one of those core activities that has always existed, but now has its time to shine. and it is time -- and it's time has come about because of limited financial resources, as well as just having such a different way of doing business now, and in the future

we wanted to give it out before it goes into omb clearance. we have to work on it internally. if you sell that come out, that is it, and now we are working -- i am not holding you to it -- >> the guidance did take longer than we had hoped for, but one thing we did, the internal controls, the new taxonomy for requirements,15 and we sent out notification earlier in the year, statistics, more accountability around estimates. requirement.4 we have been working with agencies to give them a heads up that that is coming. most of them are prepared for it. we pushed things out that getting too close to the fiscal year. our hope is that you should have it soon. >> thank you. >> and i think that concludes the questions. our panel, ik wanted to remind everybody about the cte ccode. i believe the evaluation will be available 15 minutes after we are done. 8eight., if i could have a round of applause for our panel, omb. [applause] thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] institute ofan certified public account

. >> my understanding is the auditors are not allowed to consider the omb professionals those but those are considered part of the physician's records initial on the physician's record so the omb, the person makes the artificial leg, his notes, the auditors are not allowed to look at his notes to the only look at the positions notes. when you look, you look at them in entirety which includes the person, the process notes. is the feedback from you to cms to allow their auditors and a lower level to say, you need to look at the notes which are pushing these people in the system and it's ridiculous when someone is being, yo you know, something as simple as patient, and beauty is missing for the record for a guy who's been paid already. >> does. we do regular meetings with cms and their appeals group within cms. i think those happen on a weekly basis? weekly basis. when we identify a trend, we would bring that up at those meetings or if it was significant trends, i would bring it up with marilyn tavenner. i'm not aware of the specific instance that you are describing. >> all, it's more than

i know you're working on this and in a we just got back from omb which is a great thing.t when do you think those rules will be done? because we can't support these drug takeback programs to the extent that we want if we don't have the rules from the dea when it's taken four years. >> thank you for the question and thank you for your support and to leadership on that bill. that was a very important bill for us. right now there is one issue that we're trying -- >> right, long-term care facilities. something like that pic you don't have to tell me. i don't know what it is. >> we are trying to do it as expeditious as possible but the fact is that omb has done their job. they fed it through, conduct of us. we are trying to work out -- >> i just know i was given with the center said about the importance of the 390 tons. we could multiply that over if we could make it easier to have these drug takeback on a weekly basis or have them on a daily basis in pharmacies achieved -- so people can bring them back. >> the problem with this bill in particular was this bill and these regul

all i know is it went to omb. they have 60 to 90 days to get a standard out. they sat on it for two and a half years. i did everything but go over there and drag them out of the building. as i said, seven people die every day from silicosis. i ask of this question -- how low with the american -- how long will the american public tolerated if seven americans were dying to terrorism everyday? every day, seven americans died. how long would it be before the american people demanded action? one, two? seven people died silicosis every single day, and you don't even hear a squeak. no one is crying. we kill over 100 people a day and occupational diseases and injuries. no one says anything. there is no outcry. if seven in the day were killed by terrorism there would be a demand to stop it. there is no difference in the cost of human life if you'd i with terrorists or silicosis, both of them are preventable, both of them should be stopped. so we will keep pushing it and hopefully we will get it done. we did get some of the dust on the call side. i give tom perez very h

it will include white house staff including the domestic policy counsel, omb, the department of defense, homeland security, justice, treasury, as well as congressional hearings. that's something several have been calling for. claire mccaskill has been front and center about this, warning about these problems, sayi inin shem she wants to hold hearings in september. >> but to the very question of whether it's appropriate an at all, can you explain what the administration's thought process has been on this? this has been going on since 9/11. is it purely about ferguson? was it really the spark here for this review? >> certainly ferguson did spark this review and president obama spoke about this on monday. he said that he doesn't want to blur the lines between local law enforcement and the military, but this did come about after 9/11 and the reason is local law enforcement in small communities could not handle terrorist attacks and they needed to have some of this equipment in order to do that, but now, the question is the funding that local communities are getting for this equipment, are t

earlier at a hearing here in september of 2004, the secretary sat at this table and stated i asked omb for $1.2 billion more than i received. one year later after stating unequivalently that the budget was sufficient, secretary nickelson admitted va needed an additional $975 million for '05 and $2 billion more for '06. even when va accurately indicates it's needs they pass back a lower number in the final budget. that is why dav and ib partners have testified over the last decade that the va structure budget wasn't adequate. the funding provided for medical care was more than $7.8 billion less than what was recommended. for next year we project it will be $2 billion less. here is what was said in a report and i quote under current law for 2015 and the baseline projections for 2016, the va's appropriation for health care are not expected to keep pace with growth in the patient population or growth in per capita spending for health care. meaning that waiting times will tend to increase end quote. in addition, over the ten years the funding appropriated for construction has been about nin

. >> my understanding is the auditors are not allowed to consider the omb professionals note, but those notes are considered part of the physician's record and they showed on the physician's record. so the person who makes the artificial leg, his notes, rac auditors are not allowed to look at his notes. daily look at physicians does. when you look at the physician's note you look at in tidy which includes the person, the notes. is the feedback coming from you to cms to allow rac auditors and the lower level to say, you need to look at the prosthetics notes because your pushing people in the system and it's ridiculous when someone is being, you know, something as simple as patient isn't npt, is missing from a record from a guy we paid already to have his leg amputated. >> and we do have regular meetings with cms and with their appeals, their appeals group within cms. i think those happened on a weekly basis? weekly basis. when we identify a trend, we would bring that up at those meetings, or that was significant trends i would bring it up with marilyn tavenner. i'm not, i'm not aware of

military personnel costs which have been derived from the omb data which include military personnel and the defense health program, continue to consume the same amount of the pentagon budget for the past 30 years, about one-third. that's hardly spiraling out of control. even so, we're asking for deeper cuts. leveraging our people program versus readiness is simply a false choice of what this nation should be able to afford for its defense. the key to a ready force is and has been sustaining a topnotch service member for mid-year, noncommissioned officers, mid-level noncommissioned officers and officers for another ten years. without existing military career sniffs over -- incentives over the past ten years of this protracted warfare, the all-volunteer force would have been placed at serious risk. so in conclusion, we believe that the cola cut needs to be fully repealed now and not wait until the retirement commission. secondly, we believe that any changes to today's retirement program needs to be grandfathered to existing retirees in the current force. and, three, any further changes re

getting earnings now from omb, the austrian company building part of the south stream pipeline whichill provide a way to transport gas out of russia without passing through ukraine. ryan is here with the details. >> it looks like a mess. 232 million euros. the estimate was 415 point 34 pretax. that is down 55% from last year. like you said, they are building the last leg of the south stream pipeline. this is the line we were talking about with gas coming through ukraine. it would go around ukraine. they don't want to see it built. european union has thus far resisted it. at 132ome coming in million, the expectation was that it would also be higher. again, a bit of a mess there. is company is saying that impacted by lower refining margins. i have to say we have seen trouble ever since reps all kicked off the season. omg shares are down close to 6%. they're down nearly 16% year to date. the most interesting ping about this company is simply what they do and what they intend to do. there've been working with russia since 1968. in june they hosted vladimir putin, the russian president, a

i was first chief economist at omb, the office 6 management and budget under goering shults. i saw how -- george schultz. i saw all the policies changed wage and price controls. i changed my view then. stuart: by 1978 when you wrote the prosperity plan for ronald reagan. you're a good man, art laffer. >> thank you, stuart. it's a pleasure. you're great. thank you, stuart. stuart: thank you, art. truth and tell or something? it is deadline day for the irs. federal judge demanding answers on lois lerner's missing e ills ma. what happens if the -- emails. what happens if the irs refuses to meet deadline, refuses to respond, what happens? we have a lawyer on a that next. ♪ you make a great team. it's been that way sincthe day you met. but your erectile dysfunction - it could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor

t know it went to omb. they have 60 to 90 days to get a standard out. they sat on it for two and a half years. i did everything but go over there and drag them out of the building. seven people die every day from silicosis. i ask of this question -- how howwith the american -- long will the american public tolerated if seven americans were dying to terrorism everyday? every day, seven americans died. how long would it be before the american people demanded action? one, two? silicosisle died every single day, and you don't even hear a squeak. no one is crying. we kill over 100 people a day and occupational diseases and injuries. no one says anything. there is no outcry. in the day were killed by terrorism there would be a demand to stop it. there is no difference in the cost of human life if you'd i with terrorists or silicosis, both of them are preventable, both of them should be stopped. so we will keep pushing it and hopefully we will get it done. dust onet some of the the call side. i give tom perez very high marks for what he is doing. for enforcing

management of the $82 billion worth of funds that government spends to see if, in fact, policy changes with omb and others should be instituted and funding allocated so that this kind of fragmentation doesn't happen in the future. as one person who's worked in private america to another, that's something that your briefing can be informal, off the record, doesn't have to be definitive, but our committee i think really has to have an understanding so we can be part of policy formation because what i know about how corporate america does it and what i'm beginning to glean you have to do are very different. >> they're very different, as i've said pip asked that question some time ago that we should not have to spend $18 million in this amount of time responding to documented e-mail requests. it's clear, sir. but i think if we could kind of get two birds with one stone we could, as you say, have that briefing that would answer your questions about how did this discovery process go and then what are the problems of that going forward, because it is my understanding that there's been a tremendous amo

accurately indicates its needs, omb passed back a lower number in the final budget. that's why dav and our partners have testified over the past decade that v.a.'s medical care and construction budgets were inadequate. in the prior 10 years the funding provided for medical care was more than $7.8 billion less than what they recommended. for next year we project it will be $2 billion less than needed. here's what the congressional budget office said in a recent report. and current law for 2015 cbo's base line projections for 2016 v.a.'s appropriations for health care are not projected to keep pace with growth in the patient population or growth in per capita spending for health care. meaning that waiting times will tend to increase. in addition, over the 10 years of funding appropriated for construction has been about $9 billion less than what was needed. and that's based on v.a.'s own internal analysis. mr. chairman, in 1905 american philosopher george santiana famously wrote that "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. ." the question is will

it's omb and a political issue in terms of the cost of making those changes for cargo pilots. >> butthe end of the day, it's your number one goal, right? >> that is the faa's number one goal. >> question over here. >> let me just start by saying a very distinguished panel this afternoon. i'm a canadian pilot assistance chair, and so i guess my crush would be directed to dr. salisbury. and it's kind of a multilevel question. regarding dsm five. if an individual is diagnosed under the new dsm five, what are the expectations from transport about how trade options will be considered? for example, education versus outpatient treatment versus full inpatient treatment programs. what level of reporting and feedback will be needed for each of these category of diagnoses? and what level of follow-up monitoring will be needed or expected by transport? and last but not least, when will we be able to expect some guidelines on the transport canada website regarding alcohol abuse disorders? >> well, that's your question. >> okay. >> so first of all for those of you who don't know what some of the q

i was the deputy director for management at omb for three years. i was the chair of the presidents council on the year 2004 two years, adding the country through the year 2000 transition. i was asked by the bush administration to take over freddie mac as the chairman of the board when the government took over those enterprises, and i was asked to come to the irs last january, when i was confirmed to steer the agency through these difficult times. >> the letter that went from the council to the president, mr. cap, and mr. wyden spelled this out and indicated when the treasury was notified, or when the treasury counsel informed the white house counsel about this problem with the computer. it also has indicated, contrary to this effort by the committee on the republican side to connect the problems, and they were serious problems, to the white house -- that there is no such connection. they are desperate to find a connection. they have never found it. they will keep looking, because i think it makes sense for them politically. i do not think, whatever

i was the deputy director for management at omb for three years. i was the chair of the presidents council on the year 2004 two years, adding the country through the year 2000 transition. i was asked by the bush administration to take over freddie mac as the chairman of the board when the government took over those enterprises, and i was asked to come to the irs last january, when i was confirmed to steer the agency through these difficult times. >> the letter that went from the council to the president, mr. cap, and mr. wyden spelled this out and indicated when the treasury was notified, or when the treasury counsel informed the white house counsel about this problem with the computer. it also has indicated, contrary to this effort by the committee on the republican side to connect the problems, and they were serious problems, to the white house -- that there is no such connection. they are desperate to find a connection. they have never found it. they will keep looking, because i think it makes sense for them politically. i do not think, whatever

therefore, the use of atomic .ombs was not needed this is public knowledge.today, i thought it was interesting. you didn't mention anything about the government's effort to make that assessment and what the report said and how you react to that. i thought it would have been useful for us to hear your comments on the government people. >> what you are referring to is called united streets strategic bombing survey, and the specific report were talking the bombs were used. i'm in a skirt on explosives. -- an expert on explosives. [laughter] >> that was admiral leahy. >> thank you all. thank you to our panelists. thank you for your attention. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> you are watching american history tv, all weekend, every weekend on c-span3. to join the conversation, like us on facebook. likeness,unting likened by some to a sold apart in the body composition product of the women's titanic memorial association. over 1500 lives were lost when the titanic went to the bottom o

reporting to the congressional committees and having the budget approved and you can't ask for what the ombove having the gal looking over your shoulder and the inspector general as opposed to the governing body of the customers and stakeholders saying yes and no about the policy. as soon as you have taxpayer money you have all of the oversight. when i talked to th talk to ther officials and retired ones who can speak more freely they say again and again how much the top management is taken up by responding to all these overseers and constantly they are required to not only go and testify that every time the inspector general gives a report they must by law to report to the recommendations. that takes a lot of time. and we talked to them candidly off the record and they will tow you that. that's not how you should be running a business. it really isn't. stack i'm sure a lot of people are going to after these comments. just a reminder we have about half an hour left for the panel and i want to make sure you realized you have the opportunity if you have a question but i'm going to keep the co

seems to me the only time you see tax reform is when take the lead, omb has to be involved in the numbers. what's treasury doing? tell me what concrete steps are being taken to address this, as said today, emergency situation. is it just to plug the hole in the dam here or are you actually looking, as the president has talked about over the last couple of years, actually solving the underlying problem? >> sure. senator, the president's framework in 2012 really was kind of a far-reaching move forward. to think differently about our international tax rules. and that is to say it was going to be able to bring down the rates, broaden the base to deal with some of the differential effective rates i mentioned earlier. but also through the foreign minimum tax, try to cut out some of the game playing that goes by stripping into, you know, very low-tax jurisdictions. we think that kind of set the tone for some of the work that was done both in finance committee and by chairman camp. and that there's a very robust set of proposals, you know, on the table right now. in addition, for many of the thin

>> we did exactly the requirements for omb and the law that we needed to do for the -- >> did you do a domestic cost benefit. >> it was considered to be not the most appropriate way to look at it. it's looked at globally. >> you don't think that is required by the law. >> we actually followed all of the procedures we needed to do for the office of management and budget. >> well, i disagree with you about that. i think it's required. i also think it's useful to know a domestic, a u.s. -- i mean, we're representing u.s. citizens, a u.s. cost-benefit analysis. let me ask you some louisiana-specific things which i'm concerned about. in reviewing epa's calculations regarding louisiana performance goals, we in our state discovered it appeared epa included at a capacity factor of 70% at least two, maybe more natural gas combined cycle units that are not operational or not fully operational. it's a significant mistake that makes our burden significantly larger. is that going to be corrected? are those mistake elsewhere in state plans? >> senator, the reason for the comment period is to take

would point out that 11 of the cohorts that xms have actually requires subsidy, according to ex-im and omb's estimates. based upon re- estimation. so we really won't know the full cost of the credit until they have had time to mature. >> i want to agree with that. i was careful to say in the comments is that under the rules that congress has legislated at the we, of course, follow the ex-im bank in the negative subsidy scam we've also said a number of times including just recent report, that we think a more comprehensive way to measure the cost of credit programs which of ex-im bank is having a positive subsidy cost. that's not the way it is recorded in the budget now. >> thank you for the verification. >> just so it's clear, a negative subsidy needs we transfer your we make extra money if we don't use and it goes to the taxpayers for deficit reduction. that's what a negative subsidy needs. so we transferred, this year, over a billion dollars. last year $800 million. since federal credit reform in 92, it's $6.6 billion have gone from the bank to the treasury. if i could add one less thing. i

that aligns with omb and jo guidance. the aca is the law of the land, this should not be a controversial program, mr. chairman. >> the gentleman's time has expired. now recognize the gentleman from new jersey, five minutes, if or questioning. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i am the sponsor of the legislation to repeal risk corridors, and i do this because i believe it's bad public policy, and i certainly do not do it as a matter of some sort of intellectual exercise. and i'm deeply concerned about it. mr. be haislmaier, would you go into a little greater detail as to why you believe there is a difference between this program and the program designed roughly a decade ago for medicare part d? >> well, essentially, the risk corridor program is a deal between the government and the insurer that says we share the profits, and we share the losses. it's, you know, you see commercial deals like that between two parties all the time as a joint venture. the question in my mind is, is that appropriate in each of these cases?