tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN June 10, 2014 11:00pm-1:01am EDT
the research act -- gabriella kids first research act. we don't believe you should spend taxpayer dollars on political conventions. to help cure disease. not only do you help save lives but it can ultimately solve the federal deficit by bringing down health care costs. [applause] kind of things that i know we will continue to work on. i know there's a lot of long faces here tonight. it's disappointing, sure. i believe in this country. i believe there is opportunity around the next corner for all of us. toook forward to continuing strive for all the things that
we believe in for the conservative cause. the solutions are the answers to the problems and so many people are facing today. tank you also very, very much. [applause] that was house majority leader eric cantor at about 8:25 p.m. eastern. calls.eciate all of your we're going to a newscast in richmond, virginia, with the latest on the race. >> we have team coverage. chaos and what was supposed to be a victory celebration. protesters meeting resistance. what they wanted from the majority leader. i'm bill fitzgerald. a political upset the likes of which we've not seen in recent memory.
a seven term congressman, eric primary tonight to a political novice. it was not close. bratt 155%-44%. we are live in the west end where brad celebrated his dream his victory.rated not much going on there now, joe. >> we don't usually begin election night broadcast from the losing candidate's headquarters, but as you mention, this was historic on local, national, and state levels. this is all that's left. one yard sign highlighting a june 10 primary that will not soon be forgotten. >> obviously, we came up short. >> a shocking night. long term republican congressman and house majority leader eric cantor defeated in the seventh district gop primary by randolph
macon professor. despite outspending i'm estimated 10 to one. >> i know there's a lot of long faces here tonight. it's disappointing, sure. i believe in this country. i believe there is opportunity around the next corner for all of us. to win byd expected up to 30 points. a recent supporter showed up at a victoryexpecting party. nothing but shock and sadness by nights and. serving as the seventh district congressman and having the privilege to be majority leader has been one of the highest honors of my life. >> any to your supporters? the hoteldiately left and swiftly departed via motorcade. after he acknowledged the setlroom would quickly up
with progressive immigration protesters. >> he has done so much. he had been such a good congressman. >> for longtime cantor supporters, the results don't seem real. john says heblican will be voting democrat because of this election. >> i'm a longtime republican and i will vote for the democrats. >> an election that will not soon be forgotten here in in the united states. i have been speaking to several political analysts. they say this was an upset very few people saw coming. there were a lot of commercials of advice. perhaps the cantor team knew something privately that many of us did not.
cbs six news. back to you. >> he outspent his opponent by more than 10 to one. we are at head quarters where they are at a joyous mood. what are they which are beating the win tonight to? attributing the win tonight? >> to this grassroots effort. knocking on doors. wrap up atpposed to 930, but a lot of folks still out here. one supporter said this is like david beat goliath and for that reason, they will continue celebrating well into the night. there wasn't a quiet moment in the room. as supporters learned their candidate the doubt eric cantor in the gop primary for the house he representing the seventh congressional district.
for thebeen after him last six or eight years. >> they said it was time for change years ago. >> tartar aid to get him to do town hall meetings and he refused. he's not doing it. >> i voted for cancer all the other times. this was time. >> he told supporters he did not run against him as a person but his principles. he wants to give virginians a voice in washington again. >> every vote i take will move the pendulum in the direction of the people and away from washington, d.c., back to the states. celebrating, one of the many tea party supporters like this man. he tells us he thinks the tea party image is destroyed.
in turn, he may not get support from a lot of republicans to win. >> its conservative people. >> we spoke with chair of the republican party of virginia and he says he has the parties. or. we will doxcited and everything possible to get him elected. >> back here alive, i can tell you this was certainly a surprise for many people. he was surprised as well. you did not have a victory speech written. he went off the cuff thanking supporters. he will face jack trammell, a democrat nominated at their convention. cbs 6 news. >> even the winner. it was an upset. bob, how does a seven term congressman -- majority leader -- how does he lose?
absolutely stunning. bh are viewed this to two features. did an effective job criticizing his support for immigration reform and that had a lot of resonance out in the community. these, as we saw a lot of shows coming on right before, a lot of frustration with washington in general. he mobilized that tea party frustration with the extraordinary effectiveness and ultimately pointed to a weakness that he just was not a great retail politician. he did not come back and do the have that, did not touch that a lot of republican activists wanted to see. >> he got outspent but still managed to pull off the upset. .oney cannot i anything we will be back to talk a lot of it more about this upset victory . take a look now at his democratic challenger.
this is jack trammell, also a professor. he accepted his party's nomination. he teaches courses in disability studies. those two will be squaring off. will there be others? you can continue to follow this major story and find his concession speech in the victory speech on our website. as i mentioned, and a few more minutes, dr. bob will talk about what it means for the immigration debate and other big issues. >> tonight's weather, quiet now -- >> as we heard in that newscast, there were some protesters at eric cantor's election headquarters. aurora from the washington post was there. >> shortly after mr. cantor gave his concession speech and left
, aboutlroom at the hotel 25 immigration protesters came into the room. some cantor supporters tried to block their entrance and there was some pushing and shoving. man even through his why not one of the protesters. a were chanting very loudly. what do we want? immigration reform. when do we want it? now. >> how did it resolved? >> the whole group moved into the room. there is a spanish-speaking hotel employee who got the microphone that mr. cantor had used and he was telling the group in spanish that the police were on their way and they should leave. eventually it lease officer did, and arrest the group. he said if they did not leave
the premises right away that they would be arrested. a man with a protesters took the microphone was saying in spanish that they had accomplished what they needed to. then they all left but it was aite a disruption and lasted number of minutes. most people started clearing out at that time. in the parking lot, there was a attor supporter who shouted them, get a job. it was certainly another unexpected twist this evening. many protesters were there compared to how many people were there to support eric cantor? dozens of people therefore mr. cantor. it was starting to break up after he gave his concession speech. probably 25 or so protesters came in and they had signs and buttons.ing
one woman was wrapped in an american flag. peacefully after chanting and after the police told them to leave. >> what about eric cantor? did he talk to supporters? >> he did. it was very brief. he thanked them for their and said that he will continue to go on to fight for conservative runcible's acknowledging that it was a .isappointment there is anelieved opportunity around the corner for all of us. >> enrichment tonight for the washington post, thank you. more of your calls now.
carollo from pennsylvania, a democrat. what do you have to say? how are you doing? as a democrat i am grateful. i'm joyful. eric cantor has done nothing to help move this country forward. , i'm worried.e i'm watching the destruction of the republican party. fine gentleman, he could be a great american, but as far as i know, he could be a knucklehead. who could possibly be to the right of eric cantor? what about the tea party? do you think that will affect members of congress that are in the house? i think it will. there is no real leadership in
the republican party. catering no one is leading. partye in the republican has to tell them -- looked. we have to actually work on immigration. people comingjust from ireland, immigration would not be a problem. because they are brown, it's a problem. this foolishness will eventually really hurt our country. we have seen the republican party go through this. as a democrat, i can laugh at it . but as for the country, i worry. there is no leadership left. >> joseph is an independent in vegas. isn't all about immigration or are there other issues? i think there's two
things i wanted to touch on. we are starting to realize that this is actually a republic. the reason i say that is because a lot of these people that have been in leadership have in there for quite some time in their turning us into a monarchy. they have enough wealth and nobody can stop them. i really believe that people are just getting sick and tired of these people who think through their bloodlines they can just keep running this country. it's about time we the people get to stand up and say enough is enough. there might be a thing about immigration. i looked at it this way. i don't mind people of coming to this country. great. i would love for as many people right wayt do it the and prosper. if you come here illegally, what
does that tell people who had to get here? to what they did was useless? they could have just come across the border easily? over here in las vegas, we are having a problem with these mentally unstable people being dropped off here in nevada. the issue is we're having all these other countries drop their children off in our country and we're having to take care of them and it does not make sense. >> david is a reporter with the washington examiner. david, what do you think? thank you, c-span,
forgiving the look at the democracy. you are a national treasure. theor giving a look at democracy. in november, one lady suggests she was a republican and she was talking against obstructionism. then you had the gentleman on the local broadcast to said they would vote democrat in november. this will hurt in some of the races. you have the ultraconservative tea party district, you have a lot of republicans that will not vote or will vote democrat. fromxt is steve calling
virginia, a republican. where is the leeza compared to richmond? miles due's about 40 east and eight miles from mineral where we had earthquake. >> what are your comments tonight? caller: i've been listening in on the calls and it's interesting. on immigration reform, i'm an immigrant myself. i migrated from hungary back in 1959 and i became a united states citizen by the law, by the book. i was ordered and i had to sign a document that when i became a teen in this country that i would have to join the military. i did everything by the book that i was supposed to do as a
migrant. the route thet country is taking. this is not just the republicans. this is the democrats who are the authors of this situation. they offered this madness we are in with all of these kids brought in here from mexico. the gentleman just prior to me is welcome to the united states. all you have to do is just walk across the border. that's not true. i migrated through europe. how can i walk across the border? through hoops and hoops, many documents. >> i want to get to a few more calls. first, a tweet from congressman jared connolly.
democratic caller from clinton, massachusetts. i just want to congratulate karl rove for creating the tea party, a party boomerang against his own people. i think it's a wonderful day for the democrats and i cannot think .arl rove enough >> we have word from the democrats. the triple c chairman steve israel released a statement that republicans, this congress was with eric cantor at the home. now we will see them run further to the far right with the tea
party stretching fear into the heart of every republican on the ballot. the dysfunction that has paralyzed this congress and prevented them from taking any action to help the middle class. that is from steve israel, c.airman of the dcc se sayid? go ahead. go ahead with your call. caller: hello? >> go ahead with your comment. caller: i'm an immigrant. i come to this country in 1988. my daughter was 13 months old. now it's 2014 enzyme illegal. no card, no nothing. national it's 2014 and i'm ill
legal. we have a statement now from john boehner, speaker of the house. >> is a good friend and a great leader. he is someone i have come to rely upon on a daily basis as we make the choices that come with governing a. my thoughts are with him and diana and their kids tonight. again, eric cantor losing his gop primary to tea party challenger dave brat. next call, a republican from kentucky. what's your comment? can you turn your television down? he's a numbers man -- >> can you mute the volume on your television? caller: ok. is a numbers man. he does exactly what i wanted him to do. dave brat, we don't know
anything about him. once again, the tea party has decided that a person who was , saying you've been there so long that you are fired just for that. that thets me greatly tea party is picking people because they've been in the position so long, never mind whether they are doing a good job or not, just the fact that they've been there. they are ousting people who have done a good job. why don't we get harry reid out of their? to getthe man we need gone. >> the tea party patriot citizens fund also putting out a statement congratulating dave brat on his stunning victory against eric cantor saying that analysts will be poring over election midterms for months trying to explain how my college professor who had never run for office before was able to defeat
the second-most powerful republican in the house despite being outspent 15 to one. next is diana, a democrat from missouri. caller: good evening. just a very quick comment. i really think that we need term limits in this country. i think we can affect that simply by voting the current congressmen out and voting in new people. thank you very much. from orlando, florida, and independent. don't: a lot of people come to this country for freedom but they come from what's free. not have a lot of this problem if they secured the southern border. if democrats are such caring people, why don't they house them and themselves of the taxpayer won't have to do it?
say gop sources representative steve scu aleese will run for whip. gene is an independent from south carolina. go ahead. day forit's a good virginia. it's a bad day for south carolina. the king of amnesty for illegals, it used to be that white people did the roofing business and black people did masonry. now it's all mexicans. i worked construction all my life. everybody white and black good scaffolding. now it's all mexicans. they probably make more in a week than they made in a month down in mexico. they're just taking jobs from americans. something has to be done. amnesty is not the answer.
they need to come back here. good day for virginia. bad day for south carolina. bob is a democrat in new york. what do you have to say? caller: wow. wow. i think this will be seismic. i'm a conservative. as, there is such is a thing a conservative democrat in new york state. this is just unbelievable. .'m 59 years old i cannot recall in politics this happening. this is just mind blowing. countryd point, for the i think we are picking at
straws. we need to get our industries back. we need to put towers back up and stop the lunacy of sending everything to china and india and outsourcing stuff. we need to bring it back here. we are fighting over the crumbs. there is not much historical precedent for a majority leader losing a primary. in 1994, tom foley was the first to be defeated for reelection. he lost a general election during the republican wave. a republican caller now from mississippi. good evening. theyt want to see that should look at this. the tea party incumbent is a runoff for the republican primary in mississippi.
the longtime majority with needs to take note of this and everybody needs to get out and vote. in mississippi if you vote in the primary as a republican, you can only vote in the runoff but you cannot vote until the general election anyway that you want to. this should be a wake-up call for that caucus. you have any comments about what happened in virginia tonight with eric cantor? comfortable,t too like a collar said before. of name recognition and loyalty they will vote because of who they say they are and they've been there for a long time. people are waking up. they are not voting for you just because you've been there. looking at the principle of , they just really need to
change. they want a change. people are hurting out here for .obs by the government shutting down, that really hurt a republican party. >> our last call is deborah from alabama. you get the last word. have been so concerned about what we are going through in this country. is failure of the government taking over everything. the emigration of thing is a mess. we just let anybody in this country come in. is a purpose for trying to destroy the country. we are releasing people who should not be released to the taliban.
take people and investigating when they should not investigated. let's just go down the list. nothing has been done. nothing. breaking lawsn taking place, the breaking of the constitution. when will they get back to doing the right thing. yourappreciate all of calls. economics professor dave brat with an upset against eric cantor and the seventh district primary contest in virginia. more of your thoughts against this on tomorrow morning's washington journal that starts at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. >> we need to learn again how to work together, how to compromise , how to make pragmatic decisions. in the upcoming midterm election, the americans will
have choices to make about which path they want to go down and whether we make the investments we need in our people. i believe that discussion to others. the private us in and nonprofit sectors, we have work to do. the government does not have a monopoly on good ideas. even if it wanted, it could not and should not try to solve all the problems by themselves. dohave a responsibility to what we can. >> hillary clinton's latest book , hard choices, about her time as secretary of state and how her experiences shape their view of the future. friday live on c-span 2. watch covered live starting at 6:00 p.m. eastern followed by a book signing in arlington, virginia. both events will re-air saturday night. book tv, television for serious readers every weekend on c-span 2.
>> special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction testifying before a house foreign affairs subcommittee tuesday. money spent on afghan reconstruction projects whether it has been wasted. this is one hour and 10 minutes. >> the subcommittee will come to order. i recognize myself and ranking member deutsch for five minutes each for opening statement. we will then recognize other members seeking recognition for one minute each. we will then hear from our witnesses and we thank them, first of all, for your patience and understanding. that goes for the audience as well.
we had 16 votes so we thank you .or the time the witnesses prepared statements will be made a part of the record and members may have five days to insert statements and questions for the record subject to the limitation in the rules. before we begin, i would like to express my most sincere condolences to the family and friends of the five american troops who were killed in afghanistan. our thoughts and prayers are certainly with them and their families out this troubling time. the chair now recognizes herself for five minutes. year, the subcommittee convened a hearing with special inspector general for iraq on theruction, sigar,
lessons learned from the u.s. stabilization, relief, and reconstruction operation in iraq. the purpose of that hearing was to examine the final report to get a better understanding of how the u.s. approaches reconstruction efforts and where we can improve so that we will not be confronted with the same the sameand repeat mistakes. the major take away from that hearing in addition to the billions of dollars in wasted not the money was united states government was unable to adequately plan, execute, and oversee such large-scale operations. have we learned any lessons from iraq? have we learned to use our assistance more effectively and more efficiently? we may have implemented a few reforms as a result of the recommendations from these
oversight entities in front of us, sadly, it seems that we still have a long way to go to be good shepherds of taxpayer dollars. having seen previous gao and sigar reports relating to oversight and accountability of u.s. assistance in afghanistan, several things are strikingly obvious. their abilities will be severely restricted due to the security situation and lack of access. difficult for it them and subsequently for us in congress to keep proper tabs on all of the u.s. funded project in afghanistan. and desireour effort
to do good in afghanistan, we have some glaring deficiencies of that must be addressed. over $103as allocated relief to afghanistan and reconstruction. however, the afghan government is still not capable of handling such a large infusion of money, goods, and of equipment. it is incapable of achieving long-term sustainability. this is particularly telling with many of our infrastructure projects like in the health oftentimes it usaid would fund projects that are way too large and way too ambitious and it leaves the afghans with facilities that are larger and more expensive to operate. and then these hospitals go unused and unstaffed because the
afghans cannot find the funds nor the staff to operate them. these efforts are not economical and are not practical. as a result, it is a waste of taxpayer dollars. the result of this large infusion of money is a two fulda. our report is commissioned by general dunford and conducted by the joint coalition operational analysis determined that the vast influx of money overwhelmed capacity. this helps foster an environment of corruption that has worked against our interest from the start. as general allen once said, the existence show, strategic threat to afghanistan. the other result is that it created an environment in which we are not tackling the root
cause of the issue. afghanistan tor maintain and sustain the progress it has made under the relief and reconstruction efforts is to continue to rely on donor contributions to fill the revenue gaps. that is not sustainable for afghanistan nor is it sustainable for us in the united we risk losing all of those gains. in 2009, they decided they would pledge 59% of the della fumento developmental aid. the gao reports we went from $470 million in 2009 to over $1.4 billion in 2010. however, that same year, several reports including one commissioned directly by u.s. a id said how decidedly
ill-equipped they were to receive direct assistance. raised thed sigar warning flags and recommended that usaid identify and assess the risks associated with direct assistance but sigar is now reporting that usaid had ignored these recommendations and may direct assistance without mitigating these risks. how are we to conduct proper dod, tot of usaid, ensure that they are fully compliant with the , gao,endations of sigar and the rules and regulations laid out by congress to ensure u.s. taxpayer dollars are put to their best use? sigar identified major lessons that should have been learned in iraq that should the applied in afghanistan. these included the need to
implement better interagency fundsnation and use our wiser, more efficiently, more effectively. if we are still running into the same problems in afghanistan that we did in iraq, now that we are transitioning, is it time for congress to re-examine how we conduct these operations and consider implementing some much-needed reform? the obvious answer is yes, of course. with that, i am pleased to yield to the ranking member, mr. deutsch from florida. you, madam chairman. i would also like to extend my condolences to the families of the five troops who were killed yesterday in a and a stand. we spent a lot of time here talking about what our government does but it is ultimately the men and women who serve our government in tough
places like this that we need to keep in mind. on this day, we keep in mind the families of these five. today's hearing comes on the heels of the president's announcement that 9600 troops will remain enough in a stand until 2016. after almost 13 years, trillions of dollars, and thousands of american lives lost, this was met with mixed reactions we come to expect, those who cannot bear the thought of even one more american livestock eyes to those who believe it is our responsibility to remain and protect our national security interests. a recent gallup poll found for the first time since the war in afghanistan began, more now view the war as a mistake. after the united states has given so much in blood and treasure, what do we have to show for it? have we strengthened u.s. security at home and abroad?
the department of defense, state department, and usaid continue stance.significant they're working to reform and they are put into danger every day. our presence in afghanistan draws down, are we putting the necessary measures in place to ensure the programs that we've instituted in the infrastructure that we have built a strength in afghanistan security capability governance and civil society are sustainable and will remain in place long to release? accounting for billions of dollars across multiple agencies is no easy task. thatieve the good folks usaid have taken significant steps to deal with corruption within the app and government abuses.at potential this is necessary and welcome to create programs that run as efficiently as possible. congress established a special
not just or general for tracking waste, fraud, and abuse but for recommending more effective methods for completing the enormous task of reconstruction. thanks to the work of sigar as well as oversight investigations , they have identified a number of key challenges such as the limited capacity of the aft and many persistent security challenges. it is clear that evidence of these challenges can be seen throughout our footprint. gao identified numerous weaknesses in the overlap of funding accounts between dod, state, and usaid creating the potential for duplicating projects and programs. it appears that little progress to advance that recommendation has been made. in 2012, gao went so far as to recommend congress take legislative action to require
u.s. agencies report information on their development related i vividly's in a shared database. dod did not agree. sigar is also raise serious concerns over the ability to terminate contracts when they are found have ties to insurgents or opposition forces. toy lack the authority terminate, restrict, or void a contract identified as someone aiding the enemy. they would likely have to pay up to the full cost of any contract to complete a termination. implementation of these broad reforms and others will help achieve greater results. unfortunately, on a micro level, and have also found numerous wasted funds like the $12.8 million utility equipment purchase to meet urgent needs in the counter insurgency strategy that sat unused in storage
controlled by the u.s. army corps of engineers. our development work will not end when the last true believes in 2014. many of these ongoing programs will be tremendously successful. we have been instituting desperately needed health programs. how can we sustain these programs going forward with the to mondayoal being transition to complete afghan control? with a decreased foot rent on the ground, will we be able to provide needed oversight to make sure projects stay on track? usaid has developed an extensive remote monitoring process that has been used in a number of other challenging environments. i hope our witnesses will address critical components needed for these monitoring programs and whether they
believe this type of her mode monitoring can be successful in afghanistan. any development work of the ofle will see its fair share development successes. we are directly impacting the security of this country and it is my hope is will shed light on how we continue to ensure the congress, state, dod, and usaid are working together to ensure that aid is provided in the most efficient way possible. >> thank you. i'm so pleased to yield to our subcommittee chairman. >> thank you so much for calling this hearing to continue this subcommittee's oversight of the u.s. reconstruction efforts in afghanistan. many of us have ongoing concerns about the future of afghanistan. president obama's recent announcement that he was pulling all but 9800 u.s. troops out by years end and then in half 2015 and pulling all troops out by the end of 2016 is troubling.
announcing a departure date, no matter the conditions on the ground, just tell the taliban and how long they have to wait canus to leave before they then in their mind take over the country. puts at risk,ent i'm afraid, the sacrifice of our .en and women in uniform i fear that we may see something similar to what we saw in iraq when we all thought there would be a number of troops that would .emain there we now see rather than a u.s. ally there, extreme iranian influence and i would hate to see a repeat of that. thank you for holding this. >> mr. hagans of new york is recognized. this situation relative to
afghan reconstruction is sobering and rest. at the condition of this country and you have the afghan economy, about $20 billion. in one year, we spent $.75 of that in reconstruction. $75 billion for a turbine in the southwest. $230 million highway project in the east. $4 billion in training and equipping afghan security forces. i think any assessment of the condition of any of those is one that requires a lot of explanation. when we consider that congress last year approved $53 billion to rebuild the roads and bridges we spent 89et billion dollars over 12 years rebuilding the roads and bridges of f and the stan, a nation of
some 31 million. at the very least, the corrupt nature, the inadequacy of the , it doescurity forces not justify the commitment that we've made. i look forward to listening to .he inspector general >> i will be short. let's go. >> thank you. >> thank you for holding today's hearing. condolences tomy the family of the five soldiers killed. as we begin drawing down, i think it's important that the responsibility rests to maintain their own capacity.
long-term security and a sustainable peace in the region can only be accomplished when the people of afghanistan take on the responsibility. some argue that helping has been important to our mission and some like me begin it's time to return our focus to our own schools, bridges, roads, and hospitals. i hope all would agree we need arensure whatever funds used wisely and they are andding programs institutions that are sustainable. there's a lot of explanation that needs to be provided when you look at the magnitude of resources when we have urgent needs here in our own country. i look forward to hearing the two witnesses today. >> thank you for calling this important hearing. it is important that we conduct
this oversight in order to taxpayerat american dollars are being used appropriately to ensure that our various agencies and departments are working efficiently here and making use of best practices. without appropriate oversight, money will go to waste in afghanistan. i also look forward to a the issues that are the subject of this hearing. it's an emotional issue for the american people as we have seen bergdahl with sergeant . we need to make sure we are communicating effectively and honestly about our departure and what will come next. thank you. >> now we are pleased to introduce our witnesses. first, we are pleased to welcome special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction.
he has more than 30 years of experience as a prosecutor, congressional counsel, and senior federal government adviser. he spent 20 years on the hill -- poor thing -- serving in the house and senate including on the house select committee on homeland security and in the senate permanent subcommittee on investigation. was sworn in on july 2, 2012. secondly, we welcome mr. michael johnson, senior executive and director of international affairs and trade, at the u.s. government accountability office, gao. assesses u.s. counterterrorism and security efforts focusing on afghanistan, pakistan, and other terrorist safe havens. prior to this position, mr. johnson was assistant director and a yearam
detailed to the house of representatives homeland security committee. gentlemen for your patience, your expertise, for waiting around. we are pleased to yield to you now. >> thank you very much. chairman ross leighton -- ros-leighton, it's a pleasure to be here to discuss reconstruction efforts in afghanistan. today's hearing, as you have noted, is very timely. we are in the midst of a pivotal transition year and afghanistan. the ongoing transition will undoubtedly shape afghanistan's future for many years to come. for instance, this week's presidential runoff could result in the first he's for democratic transition of residential tower in afghanistan's history.
likewise, just a few weeks ago, the president announced his land to reduce our military presence to approximately 10,000 troops by the end of 2014 and by the end of 2016, u.s. presence will be reduced to a normal embassy operation in kabul with a small security assistance office. these events may leave many to incorrectly assume that the reconstruction effort is also coming to an end. when, in fact, it is likely to continue for the foreseeable future. due to previous commitments made by the u.s. and the international community at the chicago in tokyo conferences. in addition to the weak state of the afghan economy and the limited capability of the afghan government to collect revenue. since 2002, congress has appropriated $103 billion for
relief and reconstruction. this is more than the united states has ever spent to rebuild any single country in our history. to give this number some context, by the end of this year we will have spent more money on afghanistan reconstruction than we did to rebuild europe under the marshall plan. this year alone, we plan to spend more money on afghanistan reconstruction than we spent on the next four countries -- israel, egypt, pakistan, and iraq. consequence of this has been that be have built infrastructure, a security force, and a national government that the afghans cannot currently sustain on their own. example, they generate roughly $2 billion per year in annual revenue.
the afghan government will depend on assistance to meet this budget shortfall. according, it is critical that effective management and oversight remain a top priority for all u.s. agencies as we --pare to enter a post 2004 post-2014 reality in afghanistan. this is extremely important this remains to be spent by u.s. agencies as of march 31, 2014, including approximately $7 billion spent by usaid. comrades our oversight are already contending with
constricted oversight access. based on best estimate, it is there will be 50% decrease. despite these challenges, sigar is committed to its mission and is developing methods to adapt to the evolving security environment. given what is at stake, the international community and the afghan people, sigar believes oversight must be "mission critical." if it is not, the historic investment we have made to date and billions more yet to be will be reconstruction significantly vulnerable to possible waste, fraud, and abuse. thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> madam chair, ranking member
deutsch, members of the subcommittee, i'm pleased to be here to discuss key efforts in afghanistan. the gao has issued 70 projects including a special publication highlighting key issues for oversight. we have also participated in numerous congressional hearings and briefings in afghanistan. during the course of our work, we have made recommendations on a range of actions that should be taken to improve program planning, implementation, and oversight. today, i would like to highlight a few key issues. among them are the need to mitigate against resistance. the oversight of development of projects and the need for a more comprehensive database in the need for more planning as the u.s. transitions to a predominantly civilian presence. in 2010, the u.s. along with other international donors 50% throughrovide
direct assistance. as the chair has noted, we reported in 2011 that the u.s. going fromits pledge $470 million in fiscal year 2009 year.4 billion in fiscal 2010. we also reported that why usaid had complied with other internal controls, it had not always assessed the risk of providing direct assistance. of sigar'sce learned findings that usaid may have approved direct assistance to ministries without mitigating against all identified risks. with respect to afghanistan , they have allocated
$23 billion for these related projects. taking steps in respect of our private -- of the previous review, they continue to inconsistently still into strengthen its oversight of its contractors. as the ranking member noted in his opening statement, to avoid the potential overlap and to ensure a full accounting of usaid, dod and state-funded development projects, the chairman in multiple recommendations, including suggesting congressional action to the establishment of shared database to account for u.s. funded projects. someugh they have taken steps to designated database, nearly six years later, we continue to report on the need for database. this is due in part to the lack of dod action. regarding the need for planning,
2014, we reported while circumstances in iraq are different from those in afghanistan, potential lessons could be learned. when you transition from a military to civilian life presents. program implementation, oversight, and accountability in afghanistan has a very -- including a dangerous security environment, the presence of corruption, and the limited capacity of the afghan government. contingency planning is critical for successful transition and for ensuring the environment is conducive to carrying out the operation and oversight. the challenging working environment and uncertainty of the bilateral security agreement underscores the continued need for contingency planning and continued oversight of u.s. efforts. members of the
subcommittee, when like to personally thank the staff members to put their lives in the line and putting out oversight. i want to thank the members of congress for their support. stands ready to assist congress and ensuring there is oversight accountability of u.s. partnership in afghanistan. thank you for the opportunity to testify. i will be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you both for excellent testimony. i will begin with question and answer segment. corruption is so systemic. it is so pervasive in afghanistan that it only serves to exacerbate the already difficult obstacles facing the government's ability to govern effectively. underminesat, but it the security of the both the international forces and the afghan people. it erodes the people's confidence in their government.
why that leads them to distrust us, it leads to the waste of billions of taxpayer dollars. for all of these warnings and all the reports we have had about corruption in afghanistan, we have yet to develop an anticorruption policy. even karzai, if you can believe it, acknowledged this as a major obstacle. how is it even possible that we still don't have an anticorruption policy even as we are sending billions of dollars in direct assistance to afghan ministries despite all the warnings. do we have any insight into updated amounts of direct assistance? sticking with the direct assistance issue. after the assessment of the afghan ministries were not ready, were not capable of receiving direct assistance and
asked to recommendations from gao to mitigate all identified risks for proceeding with the assistance, usaid continued anyway without regard to these warnings. why did usaid continue to provide direct assistance despite the warnings and are there any other instances where usaid has ignored recommendations? how would you characterize your relationship with usaid and what does congress need to do to in fullhat usaid is compliance before going forward with these high risk programs? i am also greatly concerned about the duplication of efforts where we see overlap between state and dod on infrastructure projects because there is no central and comprehensive
database. i know that one thing you both would say is seriously lacking in something we need to address -- what else would you say congress needs to do to ensure that usaid, state, dod, are all accountable for these billions of dollars that we are spending in afghanistan. what tools do you need us to give to you to ensure that you have everything you need to continue to do your work? i know it will be extremely difficult for you with the troop drawdown and the uncertainty over the bsa, but we want to help you to keep you safe while you continue to perform your duties. thank you. >> madam chairman, starting with your last point and that is on
colleague from gao in that although we have had very good support from dod on cooperation, particularly under generals. we have had some problems with a id and getting access with overclassification. we think an improper classification of some material has unclassified. can i just add to my colleague's numbers. i think he was focusing on the .tate
the biggest player is dod so the is giving atance possibly 4.2 billion dollars and that is going directly to the ministry of interior and ministry of defense. that is the biggest play although we were focusing on the aid. assessmenter been an on the ministry of interior and the ministry of defense by dod. we have highlighted that is a potential problem. >> thank you. our ranking member is recognized. say thereko, did you was more money spent on afghanistan reconstruction than the marshall plan? >> by the end of this year, taking into consideration inflation, etc. what you analyze the data, is the total amount spent by this country on afghanistan?
>> the appropriations on afghanistan reconstruction is $103 billion. for both of you as you what you refer to as fraud and abuse. it is waste as well. from all of the good reports you have put out, is there a total? is there a total amount of that $103 billion that has been wasted? >> i can i give you an exact figure on that. i have to look more in depth. i know there have been various inefficiencies. is there really an inventory of everything? the biggest problem is that many of the agencies weren't holding many good metrics.
>> mr. sopkko? o? >> we cannot come up with an estimate. we will be spending all of the time to figure out what was lost in the past. we are looking forward. i think it's safe to say a lot of money has been wasted. probably more wasted than actually stolen. we don't even know where the money was spent then that is hard for us to him up and particularly a gag of standards which is a standard for auditing. do we much of that money not know what was spent? n, $18 of the $103 billio billion is still in the pipeline. that money is still safe. the vast majority of the money,
over 60%, was spent by dod so that could be on numerous programs. i am not saying that is wasted but i am saying that is where the money is. dod is the big player in afghanistan reconstruction. >> i also want to look for it but -- forward but for all your reports, there are plenty of examples that you appointed to, right? ofre because of the lack systems in place, because of lack of oversight, all the myriad of reasons we discussed, there has been some significant amount of waste. it will be helpful if there was a range. even of the review you have done where you know there was a waste. butnt to look forward, too, as we deal with this issue of a
shared database, it is a whole lot easier to convince all of our colleagues here and those who may not be inclined to support a shared database, why it is important if beyond speaking generally about the types of problems that exist, we can point out that out of $103 dollarsof taxpayer that x percent has been wasted. i'm not asking you to re-create the wheel but based on all of the analysis you have done, you must have some sense. >> i think we can speak in broader terms and give specific examples. that a back to the point lot of stuff was not done efficiently. or it cost a lot more than in other areas. the biggest amount of the u.s. contribution has been on the security side. of the congress
back in 2008 where the afghan security forces were apparently fully able. what happened over time and in many years we put billions of dollars, the benchmarks continue to be reset every single year. we have lowered the standards of their capability ratings. with therying to do u.s. away and try to get these guys to operate the way we do. that didn't seem to be afghan first. we waste a lot of money buying u.s. equipment, training them on equipment that they couldn't maintain. rebuild the force of the afghan government cannot sustain. the u.s. contributed 90% of the afghan public expenditures related to security issues. we are the largest contributor on the security side. in terms of waste there, it
could've been done more efficiently. we could give you specific id was going toa go in and build a road. what would like to know dod is going to leave behind a they have some indication of what is already there as they move forward with their planning. >> what is the biggest impediment to the shared database? >> we don't really see a major impediment. they areition is that concerned about the security of the database itself. there are sufficient firewall to prevent others from getting in. that would not be a problem. i think it is reluctant on the part of the of the to engage and and complete this database. they give them a manual desk sk everynth or so -- di month or so for dod to upload. the hesitancyes
on the part of the of the -- dod stem in any way -- is ther concern about what we see going forward? 60% of the $103 billion is dod funding and we are not in a position to identify the total amount of waste. is there were concerns going forward. some of what you describe i would suspect our friends at dod would view it differently than the way you describe it in terms of changing standards. what do we do to help convince them that this is ultimately necessary? i go back to where i started. for allreally urge you of the analysis that has been
done it would be immensely helpful for us to have a conversation not just about going forward, but if we cannot acknowledge- cannot that we spent billions and we cannot even identify some ballpark range of what that is and where that comes from that it makes it even harder to support -- forget the creation of a database. it makes it hard to continue supporting funding. i yield back. a i am so pleased to yield to real war hero, both iraqi and afghanistan. >> thank you. thank you all for being here. the important thing to do at the very top of this is for everybody to remember why we were in afghanistan in the first place. we were attacked in september
right in the united states of america but we thought we were completely defensible by two oceans. thousands of americans lost their lives and since that day on september 11, thousands of americans have lost their lives securing freedom for the afghan people. importantly thousands of afghans have lost their lives. we see today in the postwar mission of afghanistan, the afghan people and forces are really stepping up to secure their country. there are going to be a lot of challenges. two weeks ago, the president announced his plan to withdraw almost all service members from afghanistan in 2014. he is going to leave in place about 9000 -- 9800 certain servicemembers. i know this is the purpose of the hearing.
the parallels between what iraq and what the president has lined up for afghanistan. i found that a place that i have been in iraq has fallen to extremists and we see what happens in a post-american situation. the reduction of forces will place a significant demand on the afghan security forces. years 2002 and 2013, nearly six the 5% of agency funding went toward supporting afghanistan security in areas such as developing the security forces and counter narcotics efforts. with the looming u.s. troop drawdown, more of the onus is going be placed on the afghan security forces to maintain the stability of the country. a large portion of the money we invested has gone to them and security. are they now prepared to take the lead in can help sustain an environment in which development will succeed?
for 13 years, we have fought to create an environment that they could take over. i want to make sure that we are not in a hurry to fill a campaign promise that 13 years of effort by the people doesn't go to waste because i think in 20 years, the history books will judge us very harshly. an environment where they can succeed? a couple of parts -- yes, they can. there have been great successes with the military. you have seen the afghan military hold her own over the last fighting season. i think everyone is hopeful that they will continue in that robust fashion. there are concerns and the major iscern we have highlighted
you need to be a safe side. be.e can assume there will >> we are very hopeful. i have no inside information but that is what i read. both candidates have said they would sign it. the second issue which i think -- the general is the expert on the military capabilities. it is basically the backend, the tail of the ansf. the salaries, the support, the buildings, getting them to understand and how to do that which is what he is working on. i think the vast majority of the assistance going forward will be trying to make that military capable to do that. we are looking at -- we have looked at spare parts, fuel,
literacy. there are serious problems in those areas. not aar stan you are policy maker so i'm not putting this on you, but i think my big concern is in 2016, the president put down an outline that says counterterrorism is a good mission. supporting the afghan government is a good mission but in 2017 it is not because we are going to pull all our troops out. my question is assuming we have basically two years in which to bring the afghans where they can operate without american assistance. if all troops happened to be out today, if we pulled them all out today what do you think would happen to the future afghanistan -- of afghanistan? that gives us a benchmark. >> i would have to refer to the
dunfordny of general don where he said if we pulled out today there would be a collapse. i have to rely on his expertise. we have not done a study on that. >> ok. thank you. i think the point is if they got pulled out we would see an utter collapse. we are focused on withdraw and pulling out. in my me smarter to have a mission past 2016 in which we can have a long-term gain. thank you for being here. i yield back. >> thank you. mr. connolly of virginia is recognized. >> thank you. i know you want to look forward, but i think before we do that we need to glance backwards and see what we have learned or not. reading your reports and press
stories, including press stories referring to you and listening to your testimony and of mr. johnson's, i have to tell you one has a sense of déjà vu all over again. example, lotsor of aid money thrown at vietnam. the biggest aid mission was in vietnam. there was no aspect of life in south vietnam we were not helping to finance. fraud, thethe inefficiency, a lack of metrics to show what we did or did not inpositively has an echo your testimony today. be a senateed to staff member. .e used to have a chart showed all sources of
assistance from the united states from imet and a map to direct development assistance and others. when you referred to $103 b illion, is that all spigots? does that include the dod money? >> no, this is just reconstruction. $103 billion. >> for the duration of this war? only u.s. funding. let's take that as our universe. i know you are reluctant to say how much got wasted. how much are you comfortable with and looking at it that you think actually performs really well by some metric? we need some metrics here. love toessman, i would tell you 50%, 60% or whatever, but i live in a world of ga -- i
cannot say that. i know my good colleague over in iraq reconstruction came up with a number and it was later shown to be wrong. i cannot say that. i look at specific programs. we can see they succeeded or didn't succeed or they run a risk. going intimes, we are and alert people that you run a risk of fraud or waste or abuse. i assume my colleague for gao has the same. we cannot say they lost x amount or they succeeded. we have identified some successes. i think the last time i testified before another committee, i said i sent a letter to the secretary of state, secretary of defense, the head of aid said give me your success stories. i thought that will be used -- if we can use that in our
analysis of lessons learned but i cannot answer that question because i have no basis. theet me tell you consequences of not being able to answer that question. bysays to the public implication all of it was wasted. if you can't psychometrics, not anecdotal, but metrics. 30% absolutely went to the purpose intended and is performing well. is a grayer category and 50% is wasted or whatever the metrics may be. if the answer is i cannot answer that question at all, it suggests united states taxpayer $103 billion was down the drain in afghanistan, 100%. >> i think every inspector general who asks whether it is the department of energy, the
vaig, could not answer that question. i don't know if the american people merely jump at the response were the answer that all of the money is being wasted. you cannot give us enough money to answer that question. we would be spending all of our time trying to highlight what worked. if you actually look at our legislation, you look at the 78 act, it is not to find out what worked. given to me by you is to highlight problems, not to highlight successes. >> you also answer to my colleagues question how much is wasted. we are not -- we cannot put a metric on how successful we have been and neither can we apparently have a metric about how much we feel confident was wasted in retrospect.
>> the biggest problem that we both face as an oversight into entity is the poor data being collected. an enormous amount of data was coming in from partners. they did not assess the data. it is required for them to approve the partners indicated. they were not even approving them. they were giving money to partners which turned out missing. for us to come in -- >> mr. johnson, i appreciate your answer. this is 2014. we have been running bilateral and multilateral aid programs cents immediately after world war ii. this is not a new subject. are justou mean we throwing money and aid has no records to be able to be evaluated? how is that possible? billion. $103
>> with the recommendations we , maybe they will be more accountable when they come up and ask for more money and they don't have metrics. >> please continue. johnson,pko and mr. something that bothered me when i was in afghanistan and iraq -- wass in a category -- it well-intentioned walking around money. i military officer could see a problem and fix it on the spot. a bridge is out, let me help repair it. enormousram became an equal bilateral aid program run by the military who are not experts in economic development. it is all cash. one worries in the category of what could go wrong with that, i
wonder if you could share with us your observation. >> you are highlighting an issue that we have serious concerns with. i think many members of congress have serious concerns with and i aink if i can make a comment little out of my league, i think it was a wise decision in your consolidated appropriations bill of 2014. 2.2 $9 billiony obligated of which $2.26 billion has been disbursed. in january we spent a letter to dod regarding all the on obligated funds, although performance metrics, any assessments that have been done. we are in the process of doing that and once it is done i am happy to report back to you and
the other committees. intention, but if i can answer -- use that question to try to answer your question. even taking that money, some of it actually worked. it is going to be so difficult to focus and try to do that. that is only $2 billion. to do that for every one of these programs is going to be very difficult to say what percentage worked in what percentage didn't. we need to get the metrics and apply the metrics. we are not given the metrics or they do not use those metrics. how do we determine whether it works or not? i have been prorated by dod for ted by dodra for even questioning the proposal because it saves lives. i don't know what that means. maybe it did save lives and maybe that was the metric they
wanted to use, but it is hard for me to take that and say the money was wisely spent. that is worries to the predicament we are in -- that is where you see the predicament we are in. >> thank you. while some of us may say while i was in iraq or afghanistan, here's a man that was really in iraq. a vet who is still serving our country valiantly in the air force reserve. mr. collins. >> i appreciate that. mr. connolly, you might want to stay here for quite a moment. we are getting ready to agree wholeheartedly. you have pointed out some things -- i came for some of the questions and i will get to those. that me say if anybody from the u.s. a ideas here, -- usaid is way if dod, the only
these are supposed oversight what is being spent, tell me they are not getting the metrics to spend money. they are not getting the metrics on how to even evaluate these programs. maybe it is time to cut the money off. maybe it is time to say let's stop. if you cannot handle this. this is the problem i have seen rebuilding. am for i have a huge problem with no accountability. the people of the ninth district of georgia do not get it. we are not spending monopoly money. we are not spending money to just pop out of the air. it is not that. it comes out of my back pocket and yours. is tax dollars. we have a ba system that has problems -- v.a. system that has problems. now we are blowing money and we can he may get metrics so they can do their jobs? are you kidding me?
amazing to me. i feel for you. you are trying to do a job with no metrics. you are trying to do a job in which you were given money and go spend it and be happy. we are not going to provide you the metrics. if dod gets mad, so what? i will ask the same questions and they can get amad at me. theve submitted language in appropriations bill forcing them to take it closer look at funds it is act locating -- it is allocating in afghanistan. billion over $100 between dod, usaid. what promise do we have if we continue this? there are some things we need to do to hopefully keep this country stable. and not have to send our sons and daughters back there in a manner a few years or send
others there. happily take it seriously if usaid and others cannot provide metrics because they don't want to. how can we have any of that? would you like to answer that? >> it is definitely difficult. we need to measure the u.s. progress against the goals. we need metrics to do that. those metrics need to be collected routinely and not every so many years. they should be collecting those depending on the type of program throughout the lifetime of the program and making them available to us. they should be approving those metrics they're asking partners to carry out. we did find several deficiencies in that area. up how do youme gather information in a war zone? they have done in other locations. they have done it in pakistan
where they collected data using other means to get that data and to have those metrics. i don't think it is something that cannot be done in afghanistan. they need to commit to doing it. >> can i add something to my colleague? it is something that congress and connolly alluded to. that is lessons learned from iraq and vietnam. n cited a report done by aid i 1988. it is a lessons learned report on aid's operations in afghanistan from 1950 to 1979. i could not find anybody in our embassy or anybody at aid whoever read it. if i was being assigned to aid, i think i would want to read my lessons learned report from 1950. generalto a very wise
who says i am in the army, we do lessons learned reports by going to the bathroom. the problem is they are not applied. i think one of the things you could do and congress could do is mandate that each of the services do these lessons learned reports. and importantly, that aid state do that and in the future as we all know, this will be an all government approach to a problem. that means we need to mandate dot any agency involved combined lessons learned reports on contingencies. remember under goldwater nichols, you created purple in the military. you have not created purple in contingencies. you have not required state and aid to do the same in-depth analysis and lessons learned
like all of the various -- i know you serve in the military so you understand a lessons learned reports. it produces doctrine. you are not seeing combined doctrine come out. i throw that out. if you want to make certain we succeed. maybe not for afghanistan but at least we can learn from our mistakes. that is something you might want to consider. >> if you might indulge me. i understand what you are saying. what bothers me is -- it is a simple business plan. you don't give money for just an idea. can apply they we metrics first? once the money is gone, it doesn't matter. it doesn't matter. i think the problem we have -- i go back to mr. connolly statement. i come from a background where neither or.
if you tell me nothing has happened and everything is happened i would discount it immediately. repeatedly, at this the people of my district want the truth and they will accept the truth even if it is hard but they would not accept incompetence. this is simply incompetence that you have unveiled. they may call it whatever they call it. it is incompetence. plain and simple, fireable incompetence. i don't understand how we continue to do this. frankly, if this thursday. -- it disturbs me. i had to do lessons learned. i had to tell the person coming in who took my job here is the lesson learned. is the't involve where latrine.
it had to do with what we found on the ground and how you work it out. i applaud your work. in some ways, i feel for you. in a no-win situation. we can do better. the agencies i am talking to competence.ain your >> justin conclusion as our inory foam type -- just conclusion, cumulative appropriations for relief and reconstruction in afghanistan totals approximately 10$103 billion since 2002. this is more than the united states has ever spent to rebuild a single country. the financial audits were not conducted from 99 of those 140 assistance awards and usaid did
not meet strategy objectives to use performance indicators to measure and evaluate its performance towards meeting the strategies goal. gao as previously reported on systematic weakness in usaid's monitoring and a valuation of programs carried out by its partners in afghanistan. gao and other oversight agencies have highlighted gaps that shows usaid continued to inconsistently apply performance management procedures, fall short in maintaining knowledge. the subcommittee will continue to do its work and we thank you gentlemen for appearing before us. with that, the subcommittee has adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]
>> my mother-in-law, brothers, it all starts with family. a want to thank them -- i want to thank them. [applause] you, so many of you who not only today have spent and lives hours in the heat with your undying loyalty and effort. i want to thank you. absolutely. [applause] it is not only the hundreds of volunteers, it is also my team.
have served that the constituents of the seventh district both here and the district office have been continuing to serve the seventh district constituency in washington and culpepper, but also my political team. they have put in so much extraordinary work to try to win this campaign and have done so for the last decade or more so i want to thank them. [applause] now, serving as the seventh district congressman and having the privilege to be majority leader has been one of the highest honors of my life. do andat i set out to what the agenda i have always said we are about is we want to great a virginia and america that works for everybody.
efforts asfocus our conservatives, as republicans on putting forth our conservative solutions so that they can help solve the problems for so many working middle-class families that may not have the opportunity that we have. we can also put our solutions to work for the multiple normal -- for the most vulnerable. i spent a lot of my time in charter schools to make sure everyone in america can have access to that american dream starting with a quality education. we talked about research a lot in my office and our campaign and congress. the getlly proud of of really miller kids first research act -- gabriela miller kids first research act. [applause] what it says as conservatives that we don't believe you want
to spend the tax payer dollars on political conventions. that it is probably better to disease because not only do you save lives and help people, you can ultimately solve the federal deficit problem by bringing down health care costs. [applause] other kinds of things that i know will continue to work. i know there was a lot of long faces here tonight. it is disappointing, sure. i believe in this country. i believe there is opportunity around the next corner for all of us. i look forward to continuing to fight with all of you for the things that we believe in for the conservative cause because those solutions are the answers for the problem so many people are facing today. thank you all very much. [applause]
>> the news begins right now. fallout from one the most shocking upsets in virginia as u.s. political history. ntore are cancer -- eric ca losing the primary in virginia. we have team coverage. chaos at what was supposed to be a victory celebration. protesters meeting resistance at his election night gathering. what they wanted from the majority leader. it is a political upset. the likes of which we have not seen in recent memory. house majority leader eric cantor lost his primary race tonight to david brat, a political novice.
it was not close. brat as 155 to 44%. 55-45%.won not much going on at cantor's victory celebration. >> we don't usually begin broadcast from the losing candidates headquarters but this was historic on local, state, and national level. this is all that is left from the victory party. this will not be forgotten. >> we came up short. >> a shocking night in virginia and national politics. congressmen and u.s. house majority leader eric cantor defeated in the seventh district gop primary to david brat. he outspend that his opponent by
an estimated 10-1. >> i know there are a lot of long faces. it is disappointing but i believe in this country. i believe there is opportunity around the next corner for all of us. they hadrs tell us expected to win by up to 30 points. to reason supporters showed up at the hotel expecting a victory party, but nothing but shock and sadness by night's end. >> serving as a congressman and having the privilege to be majority leader has been one of the highest honors of my life. >> any word to your supporters? >> he immediately left the hotel and swiftly departed via motorcade. the ballroom would quickly arrived with immigration protesters who were forced to leave by hotel security and police.
>> he has done so much and he has been such a good congressman. theongtime supporters -- results do not seem real. says longtime republican he will be voting democrat, no better -- come november because of this election. >> i plan on voting for the democrat. >> an election that will not soon be forgotten here in virginia and united states of america. i have been speaking with several political analysts in virginia and they say this was an upset very few people saw coming. there was a lot of commercials spent in this election. a lot of ads by the campaign. perhaps the team knew something privately that many of us did not. >> thank you. he outspent his opponent by more
than 10-1. b upset has supporters and a joyous mood and what are the a tripping the win -- what are they attributing to the win? >> they are a tripping it -- attributing it to the grass roots effort. the party was was to wrap up tonight but you can see a lot of folks are still out here. one supporter told me it is like david versus goliath. they believe they will continue celebrating well into the night. there was not a quiet moment in the room. as david brat supporters learned their candidate he out for the house seat representing virginia's seventh congressional district. >> i have been after him for the last six years. >> that sentiment would echo
throughout the night who say it is time for change. >> i try to get him to do a town hall meeting and he refused to. he is not doing what we want. >> i voted for cantor all the other times but this time was time. >> brat told supporters he didn't run against cantor as a person, but as his philosophies. >> every vote i take will move the pendulum in the direction of the people away from washington back to the state and back to you. >> some of his many tea party supporters like this man wonder about the challenge ahead. he feels the tea party is distorted and brat may not get a lot of support from republicans. >> i understand the real tea
party. it is conservative people. >> we spoke with the chair of the republican party of virginia and he says brat as the parties. party's full support. >> we can do everything we can to get him elected. >> this was certainly a surprise for many people. brat was surprised as well. he said he went off the cuff for his victory speech thanking a lot of supporters. brat will face a democrat who was nominated. back to you. >> amazing stuff. even a winner thought it was an upset. bob, how does a seven term congressman, the house majority leader, how does he lose? >> what happened i think contributes to to features.--
two features. did an david brat effective job criticizing eric cantor support of immigration reform. secondly, i think as we saw a lot of the shows come on right before, what we had was a lot of frustration with washington in general. i think he mobilizes that tea party frustration with extraordinary effectiveness and ultimately pointed to a weakness that cantor was not a great retail politician. he didn't have that kind of touch that a lot of republican activists wanted to see out of their congressperson in washington. >> he got outspent but still managed to pull off the upset. we will catch up with you in a few minutes. we will talk to little more about this upset victory. take a look now at the democratic challenger. trammell.s jack
he is a professor and teaches courses in disability studies at randolph. those two will be squaring off. will there be others? you can continue to follow this major story and find the concession speech and victory speech on our website. dr. bob will talk a little more about what it means for the immigration debate and other big issues. >> on the next washington of arizona,gressman member of the oversight and government reform committee on veteran health care. joe courtney of connecticut talks about president obama's proposal to change student loan financing. on thee kiefer administration's decision to swap five guantanamo prisoners bergdahl.nt oberbowe
tomorrow, the house armed services committee investigates the u.s. taliban prisoner exchange involving bowe bergdahl. members would hear from defense secretary chuck hagel. it is on wednesday at 10 a.m. eastern. >> c-span's new book sundays at eight includes kenneth feinberg who oversaw the 9/11 victim constant -- compensation fund. >> i don't see any distinction. if you try and justify my program on the basis of the victims lost, i cannot convincingly explain why 9/11 yes, 1993 world trade center no. i think the only way you justify this program as a special one is
from the perspective of the nation. was,ognition that 9/11 along with the american civil war, pearl harbor, maybe the assassination of president kennedy and 9/11. its impact on the american people was such that this was really a response from america to demonstrate the solidarity and cohesiveness of the american people towards these victims. >> read more from our conversation with kenneth feinberg and other featured interviews from our book notes and q&a programs in c-span's sundays at eight, now available for father's day gift. >> consumer financial protection bureau director richard on the agency's agenda. he testified before the senate