<DOC> [109 Senate Hearings] [From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access] [DOCID: f:30598.wais] S. Hrg. 109-926 ROUND TWO: FEDERAL AGENCIES AND CONFERENCE SPENDING ======================================================================= HEARING before the FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE of the COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION __________ SEPTEMBER 14, 2006 __________ Available via http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 30-598 PDF WASHINGTON : 2007 --------------------------------------------------------------------- For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202)512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel Michael L. Alexander, Minority Staff Director Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk FEDERAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE TOM COBURN, Oklahoma, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska THOMAS CARPER, Delaware GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah MARK DAYTON, Minnesota PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia MARK PRYOR, Arkansas Katy French, Staff Director Sheila Murphy, Minority Staff Director John Kilvington, Minority Deputy Staff Director Liz Scranton, Chief Clerk C O N T E N T S ------ Opening statements: Page Senator Coburn............................................... 1 Senator Carper............................................... 15 WITNESSES Thursday, September 14, 2006 Lisa Fiely, Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development...................................... 6 Nina Rose Hatfield, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Policy, Management, and Budget, U.S. Department of Interior............ 8 Lee J. Lofthus, Acting Assistant Attorney General for Administration, U.S. Department of Justice..................... 10 Michell Clark, Assistant Secretary for Management, U.S. Department of Education........................................ 11 Edward C. Hugler, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management, U.S. Department of Labor........................... 14 Clarence C. Crawford, Chief Financial Officer, Office of Personnel Management........................................... 21 Eugene Schied, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.............................................. 22 Jeffery K. Nulf, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.................................... 24 Richard Holcomb, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, and Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Headquarters Operations, U.S. Department of the Treasury..................................... 26 Charles R. Christopherson, Jr., Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Department of Agriculture...................................... 27 Alphabetical List of Witnesses Christopherson, Charles R. Jr.: Testimony.................................................... 27 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 435 Clark, Michell: Testimony.................................................... 11 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 250 Crawford, Clarence C.: Testimony.................................................... 22 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 312 Fiely, Lisa: Testimony.................................................... 6 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 36 Hatfield, Nina Rose: Testimony.................................................... 8 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 148 Holcomb, Richard: Testimony.................................................... 26 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 419 Hugler, Edward C.: Testimony.................................................... 14 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 258 Lofthus, Lee J.: Testimony.................................................... 10 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 170 Nulf, Jeffery K.: Testimony.................................................... 24 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 378 Schied, Eugene: Testimony.................................................... 22 Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 334 APPENDIX Chart entitled ``What Federal Employees Spend While Attending A Dopmestic Conference''......................................... 33 Chart entitled ``What Federal Employees Spend While Attending A Foreign Conference''........................................... 34 Chart entitled ``Federal Agencies and Conference Spending 2000- 2006''......................................................... 35 ROUND TWO: FEDERAL AGENCIES AND CONFERENCE SPENDING ---------- THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2006 U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, and International Security, of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Washington, DC. The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m., in room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Tom Coburn, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. Present: Senators Coburn and Carper. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COBURN Senator Coburn. The Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management will come to order. I want to welcome our guests. I want to apologize for being late. That is one of my sticklers, and we are a couple of minutes late. Senator Carper will be here for a short period of time. He has some other things that he has to take care of, and I am going to just start with out him. I want to explain to you why we are having this hearing, and it is not really about conferences and travel. It is really about, Can the American people trust us to be prudent in a time when we are spending $400 billion of their kids' money every year that we do not have? And I am reminded of President Roosevelt, prior to World War II, when he cut his own programs that he had instituted by 23 percent to make sure we had the resources to do what was in the best long-term interest of our country. I am reminded of Harry Truman, who did the same thing for the Korean War. We did not fund the Korean War on the backs of our grandchildren. In an area where we have discretion, where leadership can make a difference, where we can make a difference by leading by example and have impact in every other area of the Federal Government, we ought to do so. And quite frankly, the leadership that I have seen is not doing that--and I am not just talking about this area. This is an area, because I think there is some waste, that if we concentrate on that and use as an example, we might, in fact, find other areas where we might not have to borrow money from our grandkids. So you see a couple of charts over there.\1\ It is not meant to embarrass anybody, and this is not about beating up on anybody today, but really having some examples. I came back from Iraq this weekend, and one of the problems that concerns me--I had two hotel nights, got to stay in really nice hotels. Was fed well, and the person that traveled with us, the military liaison, paid all our expenses, and everything else. There is $670 in these two envelopes of per diem, which is at the same rate that Federal employees get per diem, that is mine. Well, that is ludicrous. The only other trip I have taken as a U.S. Senator was China, and I turned back in $573. Well, nobody is required to turn that money in. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Charts referred to appears in the Appendix on page 33-35 respectively. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- So that says, first of all, there is a problem with per diems in excess. Second, it is not reported as taxable income when, in fact, it really should be. And, third, the idea that we have conferences and we pick the conference not on the basis of need, very often, but we pick the conference based on whether or not we can take some paid time off associated with it. And so the decision is made on where the conference is rather than on the necessity of having the conference. And I am not saying that is necessarily wrong. I understand the extreme need for you to bring people together and I know you cannot always do it on digital videoconferencing. I have done that between Geneva and here and Belgium and here. I have done a lot of that, and I know that sometimes the quality of that is not great. But the thing that is going before us is we are at war. And if the Members of Congress are not going to lead, you all can. You can set an example. We had two Departments, EPA and HHS, after our first hearing that set into place some very good requirements. And just a couple of things that I would put forward to you all as leaders is I think that some important questions ought to be asked--and you can get this from my staff--about conference and travel, and they are the following: Does the conference help further the Department's mission? Really, does it change the mission? Does it enable the mission? Could the information be shared through another means, such as videoconferencing or Internet? Is the location appropriate and is the location justified given the fact that we are in a time of war? What would the average American think about their tax dollars being spent on this conference at this location? What would they think? Now, we are going to put out all the ones that we think are somewhat questionable onto the Internet, and I am sure that most Americans are not going to agree that they are appropriate. They may be justified, but they are not going to agree. So we ought to create an expectation that we are frugal with their money for the future's sake. Is the number of employees attending justified? Does participation in the conference validate or endorse our foreign policy or our values or the Administration's policy? Or does it undermine it? Does the conference give a platform to ideas and panelists who undermine our American interests rather than support our interests? Is it a wise use of tax dollars when we have almost a $9 trillion debt, growing at a half a trillion dollars a year? And is it must-do for efficiency and economy for the Department? I know each of you are professionals. I know you are good managers. What I want to do is have you refocus an effort. With $1.6 billion on conferences--I have examples. I will not go into them. I will put my written statement into the record. But I think there are some highly questionable trips out there, and that means probably 85 percent are fine. And what I am talking about is the 15 percent that is not. When DHS is going to increase their conference spending 148 percent this year, I think, their conference level, and others--the Department of Labor is the lowest in terms of increasing expenditures, but on average, we have seen a 14- percent increase on average per year in the last 6 years. That is with the data that we have today. And that is in spite of advancing technology. Can't we do better? Can't we manage it better? Can't we make better decisions? And can't each of us in the areas of influence on this one area, which sets the tone, can we not also change this process--and I know you do not set the process, and I assure you, I am going to change this process. But can we not make it accountable? Per diem money that is not spent ought to be turned in to the Federal Government when we are spending $430 billion under real accounting rules more than we have every year. It should not be to enrich people who take conference trips. With that, I will end my statement. [The prepared statement of Senator Coburn follows:] PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR COBURN Welcome to Round 2 of Federal Agencies and Conference Spending. This past February we held a hearing after an oversight investigation revealed that the Federal Government had spent over $1.4 billion on conference-related travel and meetings in the last five years. I called another hearing on this topic because this figure is set to increase by at least $300 million after 2006 totals are tallied. The ten witnesses appearing before the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management have been called because they either have not provided information I requested about their fiscal year 2006 conference activity or their responses were late. I still have not received 2006 information from USAID or the Department of Agriculture. The Departments of Justice and Treasury submitted their data yesterday afternoon. Several of you informed my staff that people were on vacation in August so that is why you were unable to complete the request on time. However, when the information was due in early July, I don't see how August vacations are relevant. I hope that these agencies can assure us today that they'll submit final reports to this Subcommittee at the end of the month when the fiscal year concludes, and for those who have already responded, please update your information. I want to thank the Departments of Labor, Commerce and Treasury for submitting their testimony on time. The other seven witnesses were late. I set these deadlines so I can review your testimony ahead of time and we can have a productive session at the hearing. The Findings <bullet> In a review of your conference data, a few things that caught my eye between location, attendance levels, topic and cost: <bullet> USAID reported sending 3 people to Orlando for a conference they described as: ``workshops and networking for feds in D.C.'' <bullet> The Department of Labor sent 5 people to Vietnam for a conference on strategies for workforce development. They also sent someone to Hong Kong for an OSHA conference. <bullet> The Department of Interior spent $722,000 to send 125 employees to a 4-day conference just 70 miles outside of Washington, DC. That is about $5,800 per attendee. They could have sent each employee and spouse on a 7-day luxury cruise for the same cost. <bullet> The Department of Agriculture sent 550 people to a Rural Development Conference in Oregon. <bullet> DHS sent 842 FEMA employees to the National Disaster Medical Service Conference in Reno, NV this past April at a cost of $1.5 million. I looked at the program line up for this conference and attendees had free time after 4:30 p.m. every day. The first two days were all optional sessions. The conference website boasts the many pools, casinos, restaurants, go-kart tracks and shopping available for hotel guests. <bullet> The Department of Treasury sent 11 employees to a series of wine seminars throughout California. My point in bringing up these particular conferences is teleconferencing and the use of email to exchange information virtually reduce the need for employees to travel to most of these conferences. Instead of sending someone to the Rotary Club meeting in St. Croix, Virgin Islands, the Department of Labor could have hopped on a conference call. Or instead of sending someone to Fiji for a maritime seminar, the Department of Homeland Security could have had the information presented at the meeting emailed back to them in America. One thought I had is that it might be cheaper to hold conferences here in Washington. I am not saying that all conferences are a waste of time and money. Some conferences are very necessary and that's precisely why I am interested in this topic, to make sure that we are using resources for things that are ``must-do's'' for the efficiency and economy of the Department. Astonishing increase in spending since 2000 I continue to be concerned about the amount of time, money and human capital the government spends sending people to these meetings and sponsoring the conferences themselves. Between 2005 and 2006 the agencies represented here today increased their conference spending almost 20 percent. After the Subcommittee brought this issue to your attention last year most of you continued to increase this type of spending. At the very least this type of spending should return to 2001 levels and remain flat as that was the year American taxpayers began funding an expensive war. Since 2000, the government has spent almost $1.5 billion, a number that will be surpassed at the conclusion of this fiscal year. Given the number of holes in the data submitted to this Subcommittee, I am sure this number is much higher. But what is most astounding to me is the rate at which this spending has increased--some 70 percent in 5 years, or 14 percent a year. I note that between the witnesses today, some of you are below this average, and others exceed it. This was calculated using the latest available data. <bullet> OPM: spending has declined. <bullet> Interior: Couldn't submit complete data. <bullet> Labor: 21% spending increase <bullet> Agriculture: 53% spending increase <bullet> Commerce: 57% spending increase <bullet> Treasury: 96% spending increase <bullet> Justice: 141% spending increase <bullet> USAID: 147% spending increase <bullet> DHS: 148%--which is pretty impressive for an agency that is 3 years old. <bullet> Education: 261% spending increase. Above and beyond these enormous increases, I have to wonder about the loss in productivity within agencies when employees are out of the office and sitting at a conference out of town. On top of the conference and travel costs add in each day's salary when that employee wasn't doing his regular job. The loss of man hours is tremendous if you consider the fact that federal employees attend thousands of conferences a year. I also continue to be amazed that these large spending increases on conference travel--an activity that many see as a luxury rather than a necessity--have occurred during a time of war. Only one agency here today has reduced this type of spending. It used to be the case that government set priorities and cut back non-defense spending during war time. President Roosevelt cut non-defense spending by over 20 percent and several years later, President Truman cut non-military spending by 28 percent. Today, things are different. Technology should reduce need for travel, especially by large delegations Technology is dramatically reducing the need for travel. In the modern telecommunications era, it is unnecessary to spend time and resources to finance so many conferences. Teleconferences and video conferencing, for example, can save money while allowing the same type of information sharing at a mere fraction of the cost. Yet, this is not the trend we see. Three Departments actually doubled the number of conferences they sent people to last year: Agriculture sent people to almost 800 last year; Commerce staff attended 900 conferences this year; and Education sent people to 600 conferences. DHS officials attended 660 last year and they will attend a whopping 2,217 this year. Last year USAID participated in 1400 conferences. For an agency of 2,500 employees, I was shocked by this number. It will be interesting to see 2006 data when they submit it. First hearing round up I am pleased to report that as a result of our first hearing, both HHS and EPA have issued internal conference directives to help supervisors manage conference requests and spending. EPA asks managers to consider email and videoconferencing options before attending a conference. They also ask staff to consider lower cost locations and to hold conferences on an 18-month cycle instead of annually. These are positive steps being taken by individual agencies that I hope to see more of in the very near future. But we won't know if these process changes are sufficient until we see conference spending at these agencies reduced next year. We'll all be back to find out. In February, at the first hearing in this series, a former government official informed the Subcommittee that many federal employees lobby to attend conferences in beach, resort, casino or European tourist destinations including the Virgin Islands, Paris, Las Vegas, Maui, Geneva, and Australia. Many who attend the conferences then use annual leave to stick around for a few extra days or weeks, essentially charging taxpayers the cost of a plane ticket for their personal vacations. In other words, the destination drives the decision to attend rather than the agency mission. This witness also reported at the hearing that there are few internal controls on conference attendance or spending and questioned the cost effectiveness of the array of conferences. I am still awaiting responses on specific conferences, but in terms of taxpayer funded vacations we found that: <bullet> The Department of Commerce sent 31 people to Greece for the International Sea Turtle Symposium at a cost of $84,000. Between the 31 attendees, they took 81 days of annual leave. Lack of transparency I hope this hearing prompts you all to increase transparency within your agencies. With increased transparency I believe many of these problems could be avoided. There should be a formal vetting and justification process for conference requests, especially when technology allows for teleconferencing and use of the Internet to exchange information. As we go forward, I would encourage agencies to be sure that every conference attended by Federal employees passes the following tests: (1) Does the conference help further the Department's mission? (2) Could the information be shared through another means such as a teleconference or the Internet? (3) Is the location appropriate and justified? What would the average American think about their tax dollars being spent on this conference in this location? (4) Is the number of employees attending justified? (5) Does participation in the conference validate or endorse ideas or values harmful to American interests and culture? (6) Does the conference give a platform to ideas and panelists who undermine American interests? (7) Is this a wise use of tax dollars when we have an $8 trillion+ national debt? (8) Is it a ``must-do'' for efficiency and economy for the Department? Every conference should be readily defensible, on its face, to regular Americans in terms of topic, location and participants. The conferences must be related to the Department's mission. If annual leave is requested in conjunction with a conference, managers must scrutinize conference topic and consider value to agency's work and focus. I look forward to our discussion today. Senator Coburn. We will start with our first panel of witnesses by hearing from Lisa Fiely, Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Agency for International Development; Nina Rose Hatfield, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Policy, Management, and Budget, U.S. Department of Interior; Lee Lofthus, Acting Assistant Attorney General for Administration, Department of Justice; the Hon. Michell Clark, Assistant Secretary for Management, Department of Education; and Ed Hugler, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations, Department of Labor. Ms. Fiely, you are recognized. TESTIMONY OF LISA FIELY,\1\ CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT Ms. Fiely. Chairman Coburn and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss USAID's use of conferences as a venue for learning, information exchange, and program implementation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Fiely appears in the Appendix on page 36. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I would like to start by giving you a brief description of what the U.S. Agency for International Development is and what we do. We are one of the premier bilateral foreign aid agencies in the world and the principal U.S. agency for delivering foreign assistance, with missions in over 80 countries. We are the chief foreign aid arm of the U.S. Government, and we have been in the development business for over half a century. USAID's current budget stands at more than $9 billion with those resources going through grants and contracts with hundreds of U.S. local and international nonprofit organizations and companies. The total official development assistance provided by the United States in 2005 came to $27.5 billion, which was a near tripling of the ODA since 2001. USAID invests these resources in a wide variety of projects including malaria, HIV/AIDS, small business development, agricultural development, conflict resolution, rural electrification, microfinance, and many other activities. We also work with countries seeking to improve their economic governance structures to attract local and international private investment by reforming their fiscal, tax, customs, banking, energy, agriculture, and environmental policies. It is in our interest to work with host country governments that strive for democratic legitimacy and rule of law, and respect human rights. We are not the lenders like the World Bank or the IMF; rather, we put our resources to work on a wide variety of grass-roots projects in many different settings. As you can discern, as an Agency, we are all over the map literally as it applies to our locations, but figuratively as well, as it applies to our extremely varied nature of our programs as I have described them. I would dare to say that under our new framework, which our new Administrator, Ambassador Tobias, is currently putting in place, the Agency's programs will be more focused and defined; geographically, however, we will still be all over the map. Because of what we do and where we do it, it is very difficult to accomplish these initiatives using the normal business and operational paradigms. We have to deal with geographical physical distances, language barriers, communications barriers. Oftentimes the points we are trying to get across can so easily be lost in translation, and absent the physical presence and ability to see the disconnect or lack of understanding, an entire issue at hand can be lost. I say this as a backdrop to my discussion about the Agency's use of conferences. Oftentimes a conference or meeting is actually a venue for USAID to conduct program business. The interaction of key players in a worldwide environment is how we sell our product, and our product may very well be an understanding of the need for a particular intervention. Sometimes all that is standing between a program and a project working or not working is letting the folks know about the latest thinking in how it might be used to help their country's programs. Another example is in the Europe and Eurasia region where USAID sponsors conferences and workshops that seek to transfer knowledge from our ``graduate'' countries such as Poland to countries like Romania which are still in the process of transition. All of the conferences attended are not directly working conferences, but many of them are, and many others are used as training. We received your initial request for data back in February 2006 and did not send an initial response until June 2006. This was totally unacceptable, and we recognize that. We should have been able to respond much quicker, but because we did not separately track conference information, we were forced to go out with a data call to our 80 missions worldwide to request the information. I can happily say that we have instituted in 2007 a new expanded object coding system which will give us the ability to arrive at these numbers rapidly and systematically. Literally with the press of a button we can arrive at the dollar figures. The amounts which we reported to you earlier range from $3.5 to $8.9 million. Based on our 2007 requests, we are looking at an upper-limit figure of approximately $7.2 million. This is a substantial reduction. I apologize that I do not have the data for you today on 2006 numbers requested in your August 28 letter, but we just received this letter in my office on September 11, and we currently have a data call out to all of our missions. So we are in the process of gathering the 2006 and the 2007 projections for you. If you were to ask me if all of the conference travel was, in fact, necessary, I cannot personally tell you that it was. But what I would point out is that the nature of what we do and where we do it makes conference meetings travel extremely expensive. I would further point out that at USAID money spent on attendance at or hosting of conferences and seminars is in direct competition with our program execution dollars. I would venture to say that as a head of office, our managers would not approve a frivolous conference at the expense of putting money on the ground where positive results can be measured to the Agency's favor. In the statement previously provided to the Subcommittee, I gave several examples of results we have derived from our participation in conferences. In the interest of time, I would like to just give one of those as an example, and that would be the United States as the main cosponsors of the International Partnership on Avian Flu. In the most recent conference held in Vienna in July 2006, the participating nations reviewed the international contributions to combat avian and pandemic influenza and agreed to focus on the critical countries such as Indonesia where donor assistance is desperately needed. The result was that an international coalition of donors mobilized approximately $40 million in assistance to Indonesia. This shows where we use conferences as a backdrop, as a venue to promote and successfully further our programs. In conclusion, at USAID we employ strict controls over both conference sponsorship as well as conference attendance. Our Agency policy requires that approving officials ensure that the ``minimum number of attendees needed to fulfill agency requirements are in attendance at any individual conference.'' Further, in those cases where our Agency is the sponsoring agency, we require our offices to go out and get three estimates of the cost for various locations and go with the most economical estimate. We believe that our separate policy governing conferences coupled with the strict required approvals for hosting conferences lends strong stewardship in this area. In my 30-year career at the Federal Government, I have worked at several agencies--in fact, many of the agencies that you are paneling today. I have also been responsible for drafting conference policies at many of these agencies. I have seen conferences used as a work venue, a training venue, and as a reward venue in some agencies. There is no doubt that there is potential for abuse, which is why we have controls in place and why we at USAID welcome the constructive oversight on the part of this Subcommittee. Senator Coburn. Thank you very much. I want to welcome my Co-Chairman, Senator Carper, who will have to leave at about 3:30. So we are going to try to go through these panelists, and then he will have an opening statement as he asks questions. Ms. Hatfield. TESTIMONY OF NINA ROSE HATFIELD,\1\ DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, POLICY, MANAGEMENT, AND BUDGET, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR Ms. Hatfield. Mr. Chairman, I am Nina Rose Hatfield, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Business Management and Wildland Fire at the Department of the Interior, and I am pleased to be here today to discuss conference spending by Interior. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Hatfield appears in the Appendix on page 148. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Department of the Interior is the Nation's principal conservation agency. We are a large, decentralized agency with over 70,000 employees and 180,000 volunteers located at approximately 2,400 operating locations across the United States. The Department manages one in every five acres of the United States and maintains some 40,000 facilities. As this Nation's premier land manager, our very diverse mission inevitably places us amid conflict as different people have diverse aspirations for those 500 million acres of public lands that we manage. As guardian of thousands of buildings, roads, trails, research facilities, and scientific systems, our mission also triggers many basic management challenges. In conducting our jobs, we work closely with States, tribes, and local governments, particularly in seeking public input relative to our mission for the management of lands and resources. Much of our work involves meeting and collaborating with others. In the case of the U.S. Geological Survey, our science agency, there is a compelling need to work closely with academia. In many of our jobs, attending training and conferences is an important tool for employee development, learning, and sharing information. I also believe that the conferences in certain cases represent an indispensable tool for us in terms of promoting sound policy development and practice. Good policy for land all across the United States cannot always be developed in Washington, DC, and we believe that there are times when interaction with these impacted communities can help our decisionmakers identify options and craft more collaborative and effective solutions. In fiscal year 2000, Interior obligated about $209 million on total travel and conference expenses, or about 1.6 percent of our total obligations. In fiscal year 2005, we obligated about $210 million, or just under 1.0 percent of our total obligations. In 2000 dollars, this equates to about $188 million, or about a 10-percent decrease. The fiscal year 2000 total conference registration fees, they totaled $25 million. And in fiscal year 2005, that figure for conference registration fees declined to $23.3 million. We are committed to ensuring that our travel dollars are maximized by limiting attendance at meetings and conferences, using teleconferences and other alternatives to travel, and taking advantage of cost efficiencies in travel. While we believe that conference spending can help further the mission of the Department of the Interior, we also recognize our joint concern that conference attendance and spending should be appropriately controlled. And the Department of the Interior has made significant investments in a technological infrastructure that allows us to do videoconferencing and teleconferencing across the country. We will continue to use these electronic conferencing whenever possible to reduce the need for in-person attendance at training and professional meetings. We believe that in tough budget times, conference spending will continue to be reviewed carefully to ensure that it is contributing to mission-essential work, and we take every effort to make sure that we promote a very businesslike approach to conference planning and reduction of our agency costs. Our departmental policy demands that senior management monitor conferences closely. The Department of the Interior has a longstanding policy requiring that conferences involving 30 or more employees be approved by the Program Assistant Secretary. At least one of our bureaus has a policy that requires approval for smaller meetings and conferences. We believe that this review ensures that our conferences are mission related and that the location and timing of the conference are cost beneficial. Now, since our systems do not track the specific data that you have requested, our staff is gathering details of conference information through data calls to our bureaus, and we will look forward to providing you further information in the next few weeks as we can get that information from our bureaus. We also look forward to assuring you, Mr. Chairman, that at Interior we are very accountable for how we are spending our dollars and that we are maximizing the way we use our dollars to make sure that we achieve the mission that we have for the American public. With that, I will look forward to any questions. Senator Coburn. Thank you very much. Mr. Lofthus. TESTIMONY OF LEE J. LOFTHUS,\1\ ACTING ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Mr. Lofthus. Good afternoon, Chairman Coburn and Ranking Member Carper. I thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the issue of conference spending in Federal agencies. The Justice Department's leadership appreciates your interest in this topic and shares your concern for assuring the American people that their tax dollars are wisely spent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Lofthus appears in the Appendix on page 170. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- By way of background, our conference travel is performed to support the Department's mission on the war on terror and our traditional emphasis on fighting crime and protecting our communities. Our multiple missions requires keeping our nationwide and global base of over 105,000 employees educated and trained and in close coordination with our State and local law enforcement partners. We accomplish these efforts using a variety of approaches, including enhanced information technology, training and technical assistance, and through participation in conferences arranged by DOJ components and by other organizations involved in law enforcement and terrorism prevention. Our DOJ-sponsored conferences have ranged in purpose from countering gang violence to preventing identity theft to delivering critical training in identifying and countering improvised explosive devices. These efforts have borne results in the form of substantial reductions in the level of violent crime, drug use, property crime, and in improved emergency preparedness. Our annual expenditures on conferences have ranged from $33.8 million in 2001 to approximately $42 million anticipated in 2006, with our highest annual expenditure--$58 million-- occurring in 2004. Although these are significant expenditures, they are roughly two-tenths of 1 percent of our annual discretionary funding. It is also important to note a critical trend. Of the six larger DOJ organizations that typically spend over $1 million a year on conferences, only one organization--the FBI--has generally been increasing its conference spending. Conference spending in the non-FBI components of the Department of Justice has dropped by more than half since 2004. FBI's needs have increased legitimately as it pursues its transformation into its national security, counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and cyber crime roles. Let me briefly describe how we manage conference travel. Conference travel is generally approved by the individual components of the Department of Justice. Conference decisions are made, first and foremost, on whether the participation furthers the component's core mission. Second, we try to make use of alternative mechanisms such as videoteleconferencing where we can. For example, I am pleased to report that the Federal Bureau of Prisons estimates it has saved over $2 million this year by conducting over 8,000 videoteleconferencing sessions in lieu of traveling for in-person meetings or conferences. We also had a new policy implemented this year for all DOJ- arranged conferences held at non-Federal facilities, and those type of conferences are subject to my review and approval. The 2005 DOJ Reauthorization Act states that unless authorized in writing by the Attorney General or his designee-- me--DOJ shall use for any predominantly internal training or conference only a facility that does not require payment to a private entity. The act also requires an annual report to Congress that details the events we hold in non-Federal facilities. Pursuant to this act, we issued a DOJ-wide policy earlier this year regarding use of non-Federal facilities. Our guiding principles are: First, minimize all conference costs and maximize the use of Federal facilities; Second, that the CFO approval must be obtained regardless of cost; And, third, that the locations or accommodations that may have the appearance of being lavish must first be approved by the head of the component making the request and then approved by me. With this new policy, we introduced a new online tracking capability that facilitates a prompt review by our finance staff of all non-Federal conference facility requests. As a result of implementing these internal controls, we assure conferences are necessary and that the site selections are cost effective. We maintain an online list now of approximately 60 different government training locations for our component site selection consideration. This new policy was initially challenging to implement, but the process is now fully in place, and we estimate that these additional policies, this scrutiny has resulted this year in approximately $1.1 million in savings to the taxpayers. Conferences, used wisely, are extremely important to achieving our national security and law enforcement missions at the Justice Department. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Senator Coburn. Thank you very much. Mr. Clark, thank you very much for being here. TESTIMONY OF MICHELL CLARK,\1\ ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Mr. Clark. Thank you, Chairman Coburn and Senator Carper. Thank you for inviting the Department of Education to this hearing. My name is Michell Clark, Assistant Secretary for Management at the Department of Education. I appreciate this opportunity to testify on the Department's policies and practices as they relate to conference sponsorship, attendance, and related costs. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Clark appears in the Appendix on page 250. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As public stewards, we have a special obligation to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely, appropriately, and in a manner consistent with congressional intent. We are fulfilling those goals. It begins with a strong policy on departmental travel. I have here the Department's official Handbook for Travel Policy. It does not make for exciting reading, but its common-sense rules illustrate our principles. The very first requirement is that travel will be authorized ``only when it is necessary to accomplish the Department's mission in the most effective and economical manner.'' Travel outside a 35-mile radius of the employee's daily commute must be authorized by the Department. A Travel Management Center makes all arrangements, searching for best values and Federal discounts. Use of an outside contractor for official travel must be justified in writing with a cost comparison. We also have strict policies regarding acceptance of payment for official travel from non- Federal sources. Such an acceptance must be approved by the Department's chief of staff with concurrence by the Ethics Division of the Office of the General Counsel. Under the Constitution, education is primarily a State and local responsibility. Much of our work entails person-to-person contact with our numerous State and local partners and stakeholders, the people who administer programs for 54 million K-12 and 22 million post-secondary students. One of the most effective ways to communicate with them is through conferences which enable us to interact with hundreds or thousands of people at a time. Take our Federal Student Aid (FSA), conferences. These conferences are a critical source of training for financial aid administrators. They allow us to provide more than 6,000 participating schools with updates on changes to Title IV student aid programs and policy. For the past 2 years, FSA has hosted two Electronic Access Conferences per year--one in the East and one in the West--with plans to move to a single conference in 2008. Each conference is attended by as many as 2,500 customers who choose from up to 70 informative training sessions. FSA staff serve as session instructors and provide logistical support. They account for less than 10 percent of total conference attendees annually. We have also held conferences on the new IDEA legislation and regulations, helping State and local education officials learn about new provisions affecting students with disabilities. In addition, we have held conferences on the Title I program for low-income students. Hundreds of our educational partners and stakeholders attend workshops and confer with Department officials on a variety of subjects. These range from changes to Department regulations, to aligning instructional methods with State accountability standards, to providing choice and supplemental educational services to a greater number of families. Much of this recent conference activity was spurred by the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, the greatest education accountability law in our Nation's history. These conferences actually improve accountability. They help stakeholders better understand how to increase academic achievement for all students. They also help grant recipients avoid missteps that could lead to costly program fraud, waste, or abuse. In the most recent fiscal year, about $6.3 million was spent on conferences, a figure that included normal staff salaries, which would have been paid regardless of the setting. By contrast, our Department's discretionary budget was more than $56 billion. Seventy-six percent of the conferences sponsored or attended by the Department staff between October 2004 and May 2006 involved fewer than three Department employees. A total of 67 conferences were held in the Washington, DC, area. We are using technology to further reduce the need for travel. Our use of videoteleconferencing has increased by 78 percent since 2003. We recognize that accountability does not occur without transparency, and we are increasing our efforts. Our Office of Communications and Outreach has compiled information on annual conference attendance and sponsorship, coordinating with various offices to find ways to improve their management and administration. And Weekly Speaking Reports let our senior officials know who is going where and why, and how this contributes to meeting the Department's goals and priorities. As we continue to implement No Child Left Behind Act's accountability provisions, we must hold ourselves accountable as well. We are working hard every day to set a good example. Prior to 2001, the Department of Education had earned only one ``clean'' audit. We are about to receive our fifth consecutive. We were the first Cabinet Department to achieve ``green'' status on the Improved Financial Performance PMA scorecard. Our administrative expenses account for only about 2 percent of our total budget. And in 2004, we received the Presidential Award for Management Excellence for improved financial performance. We are continuously searching for innovative new ways to accomplish our goals in the most effective and efficient manner. Those goals include measuring and improving academic performance, sharing best instructional practices, promoting global competitiveness, and reducing conference costs. We will continue to improve our financial management and oversight of policies governing conference and travel-related costs. And we are eager to work with the Office of Management and Budget and Congress every step along the way. Thank you very much for the opportunity to present. Senator Coburn. Thank you, Mr. Clark. Mr. Hugler. TESTIMONY OF EDWARD C. HUGLER,\1\ DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR OPERATIONS, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Mr. Hugler. Senator Coburn and Ranking Member Carper, thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the Department of Labor. My name is Ed Hugler, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Hugler appears in the Appendix on page 258. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Department of Labor is very proud of its record of fiscal restraint, management excellence, and of ensuring that every Federal dollar is well spent. The President's 2007 budget request is the lowest discretionary budget authority for the Department of Labor since fiscal year 1997. Between 2001 and 2007, the Department's discretionary budget has declined by a cumulative 8.7 percent. At the same time, the Department of Labor remains the only Executive Branch agency to achieve a ``green'' status rating on the President's Management Agenda for all five initiatives. And, in addition, the Department has received nine consecutive clean audits of its financial statements from its Inspector General. Since 1993, the Department has had permanent authority to pay for attendance at meetings which are related to the activities for which we receive appropriations or which contribute to better management of those activities. With our focus on doing more with less, and on fiscal accountability, the Department has very structured controls around participation in and sponsorship of conferences to ensure that, in fact, they do clearly align in advance with the Department's mission, promote the accomplishment of our performance goals, and enhance the ability of our employees to better serve the public. Some of the criteria that we consider in approving conference participation include: Educating the public about the programs of the Department of Labor that enhance employment opportunities, business prosperity, and worker safety and health. We also consider promoting compliance by helping employers and employees better understand our labor laws. And we also look for opportunities to help workers acquire the skills that they need to be competitive in the 21st Century workforce. The Department also has very specific guidelines for conference selection. That would be for conferences that we sponsor. It includes cost comparisons and travel costs to focus attention on choosing the site that is in the best interest of the Federal Government. In addition, the Department has specific policies governing authorization of travel expenses for conference attendance. These guidelines ensure that managers only authorize travel that is necessary to accomplish the purposes of the government and include specifically consideration of budget constraints, adherence to our travel policies, and the reasonableness of expenses. And I might add, Dr. Coburn, that they also specify consideration of alternatives such as teleconferencing. Mr. Chairman, in response to your request, the Department of Labor has provided budget data on total obligations for conference activities in fiscal year 2001 through 2006, including estimates for the last 2 months of this fiscal year. That data shows that Labor obligations were $5.1 million to sponsor, cosponsor, or participate in conferences in 2005, which represented about four-tenths of 1 percent of the Department's total discretionary budgetary resources. For 2006, we estimate that conference-related obligations will decline to $4.7 million, a reduction of about 8 percent below the year-earlier level, and 28 percent below the 2003 level. At this time we expect Labor's total obligations for conferences in fiscal year 2007 to be at or below the fiscal year 2006 levels. I thank you very much again for the opportunity to appear today, and I look forward to your questions. Senator Coburn. Thank you for your testimony. Senator Carper. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER Senator Carper. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I have no statement. I think I would just like to get right to the questions, if that is OK with you. Thank you very much for being here and for your testimony today. Could we just sort of go from my left to my right, your right to your left, and let me just ask each of you to share with us one or two of your best practices that you think other agencies would be well to emulate as we try to restrain the growth of costs in conjunction with travel and conferences. Ms. Fiely. Sure. As I said earlier, anyone wanting to have their bureau or office host a conference, we have them go through a cost comparison and come up with three alternatives, and we go with the most economical alternative, taking into consideration not only the hotel and per diem costs of the actual location, but the actual flight costs of people that will be attending as well, since we are a worldwide organization. For example, oftentimes if you want to go to Africa, you have to go to Europe first, so it gets very expensive. So you have to figure out the various trails that people have to take. Also, in our office we have individual approval procedures within each bureau and office that are instituted on a procedural level, sort of like desk-type procedures that each office has to follow in getting approvals. We have an approval for over 30 folks, which I think you heard some of the other agencies have that, and that is also in the CFR that requires that. We have tried the use of telecommunications and teleconferencing. It becomes very problematic in some of the countries that we are located in because the bandwidth is just not there to avail ourselves. But we do try to take advantage of that whenever we can. Senator Carper. OK. Thanks. Ms. Hatfield. Ms. Hatfield. We do have a departmental policy that if it is going to be a conference of more than 30 people, the programmatic Assistant Secretary has to approve that. And as a part of the justification for doing that, the proponent of the travel would have to also supply information about the hotel rates, would have to provide estimates of airfare from various cities to look at the alternative that the official can select from in terms of whether or not--or which location we would actually have the conference in. And at the same time, the justification, as many of the others have indicated, does have to specify what the purpose of the conference is and how that does relate to our mission. And so all of that is done up front as a routine, and it has actually been the routine in the Department of the Interior for a number of years. In addition to that, as I said, we have invested in our bureaus to enable videoconferencing and teleconferencing across the country. Recognizing that a large part of our 70,000 employees are located west of the Mississippi River, that does enable us to do a lot of business from Washington to our field locations. At the same time, we have also created the capability of having broadcasts so that we do some of our training by broadcast from a central location and have our employees actually take the training at their local location through a conferencing capability and television capability. So we have worked on that for some time because we have recognized that every travel dollar that is used is something that does take away from our capability to perform the mission on the ground. So we have been as innovative as we could about that. Senator Carper. Mr. Lofthus. Mr. Lofthus. Thank you, Senator. One of the things we have looked at in our organizations that have large field structures and that have a nationwide presence, we have looked very closely at the videoteleconferencing abilities of our organizations. The Bureau of Prisons, I already mentioned, is a heavy user; the FBI is a heavy user of teleconferencing; the U.S. Attorneys, and the U.S. Trustees. So we are trying to look for alternatives to going out and physically holding conferences and having people travel in at great expense. That has allowed us to take some organizations that traditionally had annual conferences to meet with their field offices and their field employees. They are now able to have those conferences in some cases every other year or maybe once every 3 years, and that has been a tremendous savings, and I think that is one of the reasons you see the Justice Department overall travel and conference costs diminishing. Also, on a given outside schedule of training or conference event, we have a policy that limits the number of people from an individual office that can go to that event, so we do not have the entire office get up and go. We try to select one or two people who can go and then come back and share the benefits of the conference with others. Senator Carper. Good. Thanks. Mr. Clark. Mr. Clark. Thank you, sir. We have recently installed teleconferencing facilities within most of our regional locations that will help us with training, sharing information, etc., across the Department. The second thing that I would cite is that we have instituted an annual review by our Office of Communications and our Management Improvement Team that are looking at the spending for conferences and attendance and travel to ensure that we are getting the best use of the dollars that we have. We still believe that the program offices have the best understanding of the requirements, but we have instituted a department-level review to ensure that--and to look and hopefully identify opportunities for having, if you will, multi-purposes conferences within more than one program office participating. Senator Carper. Mr. Hugler, before you answer, let me telegraph my next and probably last question, and I am going to go back through your ranks and ask you to tell me where you think--you may have been talking about some of what I call the low-hanging fruit in some areas where you have made good progress. But let me come back and ask you where some work still is to be done in each of your departments that you are aware of, please. Mr. Hugler, if you would just respond to my first question. Mr. Hugler. Yes, I will. Let me presage my remarks with the fact that I have been in Federal service for nearly 30 years, so I have participated in many conferences, and I have authorized participation in many conferences. Senator Carper. Have there ever been any conferences when you have finished them you say, ``I am not sure that was really worth the money we spent''? I think I have. Mr. Hugler. I think I have, too, and I did not go back again. I agree with you. It looked good on paper, and it was not what I expected it to be. I think they were rare, but that did happen. I think the bottom line, though, is to have internal controls at the point the decisions are made whether or not to participate in the conference. I really think that is the bottom line. I think it is difficult to, if you will, legislate financial discipline. That needs to be part of an organizational culture. People need to understand that is the environment they are operating in, and I really do think that is the best solution to control spending as it relates to conference attendance. Beyond that, I think having the proper level of management review counts for a lot. I review travel authorizations, travel requests, conference requests, and am very picky about what gets approved because we do have limited resources. I think also it is very healthy to have what I will call strong audit controls so when I turn in a travel voucher I know it is going to get audited, and I know people have a checklist which they are going to check me against, and if I have asked for more than I am due, I am not going to get it and I am going to get asked why I submitted it. I think that also improves the environment. Beyond that, teleconferencing and videoconferencing, I think, is very successful internally to the Department of Labor. I myself participate in no fewer than probably three meetings a week that participants are conferenced into. So that works in my own personal experience, as does videoconferencing. That is a little more complicated inasmuch as you have to have compatible technology on both ends. But those would be the main things that I would commend attention to. Senator Carper. Good. Thanks. Mr. Chairman, do I have time to do the second question? Senator Coburn. Sure. Senator Carper. Good. Thanks. If we could come back, in no particular order, when you look at your own departments and areas where some work is still to be done, where there is some savings still to be found, what might those be? And if you cannot think of any in your own department--I hope you can, because I say it about my own office, and I said this when I was governor, too. Everything we do I know we can do better. And I suspect the same is true for you all. Ms. Fiely. I guess where I would come from on this one is it is not so much the conference fees. For the most part, conference fees are a minor portion of what it costs to go to a conference, and especially with our Agency being international, it is the travel cost. And I would say if anything were going to be looked at closely, it would be the travel regulations. I think right now in some cases the travel regulations tie our hands where we are going with city pairs and we could go out directly and get cheaper flights. There are ways to save money by being able to avail yourself, and in some cases the agencies cannot. Also, at least in the case of USAID---- Senator Coburn. Let me interrupt you there. Can you tell us what we need to do so you can? That is a key--this is a common- sense thing. Ms. Fiely. Sure. I would like to be able to give you that. Senator Coburn. You cannot make a decision that saves us money because some Federal regulation keeps you from doing it. Senator Carper. Or a law. Senator Coburn. Or a law. Ms. Fiely. I would welcome an opportunity to give you something as a follow-on. Senator Coburn. I would very much appreciate that. Thank you. Ms. Fiely. Sure. I would like to put something together and get it to you. Senator Coburn. I would welcome that. Ms. Fiely. But that is where I think the real savings is, in restructuring the travel regulations and allowing people to take advantage of a lot of the savings that is out there. Senator Carper. All right. Thanks. Anyone else, please? No particular order. Mr. Hugler. I would just make one other suggestion. At the Department of Labor, we have used more and more training by computer over the Internet among our employees. Again, when we have requirements to train every employee in the Department of Labor, 16,000 or 17,000 people, that has the potential to be-- not necessarily a lot of conferences, but certainly a lot of meetings and bringing people together, that can be avoided and very cost effectively avoided by what I will call computer- based training. We have annual requirements for all employees to receive certain training, and we have done that for the last several years over the Internet, and it does two good things. One is it allows the employees to take that training when they have the time. And, two, we have a record of when, and the fact that they completed the training. So both of those are very cost effective. Senator Carper. Thanks. Anyone else, please? Ms. Hatfield. That has also been true at Interior. We have really intensified the use of computerized training for the same reasons, especially when you have things like computer security training in which all of your employees have to have that training in order to continue to have access to their computers. We do that via the computer, and that does give us a record. I think that we have also tried as a management team to look at some internal policies, at things like not having multiple employees have multiple rental cars at the same conference and things like that, so that we would decrease the overall travel costs. So I think there are things like that that we continue to do. Senator Carper. Mr. Lofthus. Mr. Lofthus. I would just add one thing, which is in terms of the biggest payoff for us, I think it has come from simply more vigorous scrutiny of the necessity of the conference in the first place. I know when we were looking at proposed conferences that some of our organizations wanted to do this year, we looked at them and we asked some questions, and so far this year, we have canceled 13 conferences because of the view that they could be done through another fashion or maybe they are annual conferences and we can get away with doing them once every couple of years. And there is a real payoff there. Senator Carper. Thanks. Mr. Clark. Mr. Clark. I would echo some of the comments from others. We, too, have increased our use of the Internet to do the training that we do, for computer training, for our coop training, and for other areas, and we are looking for other opportunities to build other courses that we can do online. In addition, I guess I would encourage us to look at the use of electronic tools to manage conference attendance and travel so that we can do a better job of identifying issues up front and then being able to reconcile at the end or audit, if you will, at the end the amount that is paid and the number of attendees at the conferences, etc. Senator Carper. Thank you. Ms. Fiely gave us something for our to-do list, and I think she is going to come back to us in writing. And let me just ask, if you will, for each of you to put on your thinking caps, talk with your other colleagues with whom you work, and come back to us maybe in writing in the next week or so and tell us some things that we need to do or that we need to ensure that others do, maybe within the Executive Branch, to better realize the further savings opportunities that are out there. This has been most informative. Thank you to each of you. Senator Coburn. I would echo Senator Carper. We know you all have competence, and sometimes we are your greatest hindrance in doing what you know to do because there is some regulation or some assumption that you are not going to do it right, so somebody has put a regulation in to protect it. If we cannot trust our Federal employees, we might as well hang it up. And so what we have to do is put regulations out there that assume people are going to do the right thing, not assume people are going to do the wrong thing. And, on my staff, I know, you go to the travel office here, and then you get on the Internet right after that, and you can find oftentimes a fare 40 percent less than what the travel office just gave you, which was ``the best fare.'' And so we need to give you the flexibility to do your jobs. You are trained to do them. You are executive leaders. You know what to do. And we need to do that. So I would echo that. I want to make a couple of comments. We have had a 70- percent increase--well, we do not know what it is going to be through the end of this year, probably a 72-, 73-percent increase in conference spending. And yet the Federal Government has grown by 48 percent during that time. So there has got to be something here that we are missing that says why have conferences and conference spending--the other point--and that is what I want you to think about. And I understand USAID. We have done all this stuff in Africa on PEPFAR and AIDS and all this other stuff, and the Justice Department, I can understand that as well. But some things, for example, Interior, we have never been able to get your numbers. Yours are the first numbers we have been able to get. And part of that has to do with the management and accounting systems within Interior. They do not have the tools to get the numbers. Well, you cannot manage what you cannot measure, and so the President's Management Agenda is a key part in being able to control this as well as many other expenditures. Ms. Hatfield. If I might comment on that, sir? Senator Coburn. Sure. Ms. Hatfield. We have about 17 different financial systems operating at the moment, all of which are no longer supported by their vendor. So we are in the process now of trying to bring up a modern financial system for the Department so we will have a single system. And, undoubtedly, that effort is going to help us in terms of being more accountable in an easier fashion than having to do the kind of data calls that we are doing now to get that data. But I would point out that we have actually, to the extent that we can track it, reduced the overall costs that we are spending on conferences over the last 5 years. So I think that is indicative of the fact that we are very conscientious about it. Senator Coburn. Why couldn't my staff have that data, couldn't get it? The fact is when we inquire to get it, we cannot get it. Ms. Hatfield. It is very difficult. Senator Coburn. Your staff cannot give it to us, and so I would love to see those numbers. Because we are pressed for time--we do have a vote that is scheduled for 4 o'clock--I am going to be submitting to each of you very specific questions. I am highly concerned about some of the conferences that I have read about, some of the agendas of some of the conferences I have read about. And I am not going to put that out--it will become a part of the record in the questions that we ask, with no blame and no thought that anybody intentionally is wasting any money, but to get you to answer back, and let's make this--if we make small things--all the small things on significant issues, before you know it we will be declining the size of the Federal Government. We are making it much more efficient, and we are preserving future opportunity and the American dream for our grandchildren. I want to thank each of you for your testimony. We would like to have fairly prompt responses, if you can. If you can't respond promptly, just say, ``We can't respond promptly because it is going to be difficult for us to get this,'' and we understand that there are other issues that you are struggling with. Let me thank you for being here, and we will call forward the next panel. Senator Coburn. On panel two, we have Clarence C. Crawford, Chief Financial Officer, Office of Personnel Management; Eugene Schied, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Department of Homeland Security; Jeff Nulf, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration, Department of Commerce; Richard Holcomb, Deputy Chief Financial Officer and Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Headquarters Operations, Department of the Treasury; and Hon. Charles R. Christopherson, Chief Financial Officer, Department of Agriculture. Welcome to you all, and you will be recognized for 5 minutes, and then we will have questions. Mr. Crawford. TESTIMONY OF CLARENCE C. CRAWFORD,\1\ CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Senator Coburn and Senator Carper. In the interest of time, I will just summarize my points. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Crawford appears in the Appendix on page 312. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Senator Coburn. Good. Mr. Crawford. We are happy to be here on behalf of the Office of Personnel Management. We are happy to be here to be able to testify before you. My Director, Linda Springer, is a former CFO in the private sector, so she is very much committed to ensuring that OPM spends taxpayer dollars wisely and that we use those funds to carry out our mission, which is to ensure that the Federal Government has an effective workforce. OPM supports the prudent use and participation in conferences, those conferences that actually help to improve an employee's ability to do his or her job. As a central agency, we receive numerous requests to present or to participate in conferences. Director Springer has made it very clear to the senior staff to scrutinize every conference. Supervisors understand that they are to make sure that the conference makes good business sense, make sure that it supports our mission, and make sure that we send the right person. To complement our efforts in this regard, we have also implemented a new strategic plan. We are in the process of changing our culture and instilling sound financial management throughout OPM. In large measure, that is why we have been able to manage our conference spending at about 4 percent of our personnel compensation cost. In 2004, we made a decision to change the way we sponsor conferences. Rather than continue to host a number of conferences throughout the year, as we have done in the past, OPM decided to consolidate our conferences and offer one Federal human capital conference, and that conference is held about every 18 months. And we have found that to be an effective way to deliver information to the human capital community. In addition, we obviously are webcasting. We are posting things on the Web. We are doing videoconferencing as well. Our conference spending for 2004 was $358,000, for 2005 it was $331,000. We are expecting this year to have it come in at about $327,000. We are projecting conference spending for 2007 to be $177,000. Mr. Chairman, we would be happy to take any questions that you have. Senator Coburn. You have said enough. Music to my ears. Mr. Schied. TESTIMONY OF EUGENE SCHIED,\1\ DEPUTY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Mr. Schied. Thank you, Chairman Coburn, for this opportunity to testify before you today on travel and conference spending at the Department of Homeland Security. I will briefly summarize my statement that I have submitted for the record. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Schied appears in the Appendix on page 334. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Travel and conference attendance are important and necessary to DHS' fulfillment of its mission. Secret Service agents travel regularly to fulfill their protective responsibilities. FEMA employees travel and spend extensive time away from home when responding to disasters. Air marshals travel daily to protect our aviation transportation system. As I am sure you agree, travel expenses are necessary to DHS. Travel costs related specifically to conferences are a relatively small portion of our overall budget and a small portion of our travel budget. Senator Coburn. Let me interrupt you for a minute to make sure you understand. This is not about legitimate travel within your agency. This is about travel and conference costs. Mr. Schied. OK. Conferences are an important part of DHS' outreach efforts with our other Federal, State, local, international, and private sector partners. Often this involves travel outside of Washington to meet with those partners in homeland security. DHS' participation in conferences can be a cost-effective way for DHS to communicate with our stakeholders. I know that appropriate discretion must be taken and used in deciding when to travel to conferences. I believe I share the Subcommittee's concerns that conference dollars must be spent judiciously, limited to necessary government participation. Policies governing employee travel are the responsibility of the CFO. In his testimony yesterday before the House Government Reform Subcommittee on Government Management, Finance, and Accountability, DHS CFO Norquist outlined financial management improvements DHS is pursing, including people, policies, processes, systems, and assurance. Three of these five areas are important to how we are trying to improve our oversight of conference spending. First, DHS is in the process of building a comprehensive set of financial management regulations to govern DHS-wide financial management operations. We need to develop one DHS way of conducting financial management, including policies related to travel and conferences. DHS has management directives that specifically address travel for office government business and attendance at conferences and meetings. The current management directives on conferences encourage DHS employees to participate in conferences as a means of exchange and communication of ideas and knowledge; however, the directive recognizes that attendance must be prudent, relevant to the employees' job performance, and beneficial to the mission of DHS. We will be supplementing the new policy with a guidebook that outlines questions that approving officials and travelers should contemplate when choosing to attend conferences. The second area of improvement needs to be our ability to oversee travel spending through information systems, and as you mentioned, sir, to the last panel, you cannot manage what you cannot measure. Producing the type of information requested by this Subcommittee for DHS is a very manual-intensive process, which explains much of our delay in responding to your information requests. Manually intensive processes I find are also much more prone to error and inconsistency in reporting, which is why to date the Department has only been able to provide partial information for fiscal year 2006. While some of the data, such as total travel spending, writ large, is relatively easy to obtain through the Federal accounting classification, salary costs and other costs associated specifically with conference attendance is not readily extractable from our automated financial systems. The final area in which we need to improve is in the area of assurance. DHS must have in place a means by which we can test the policies and procedures that we have to assure that our internal controls are well designed and operating effectively. Managers cannot assume that the controls are only working well just because the auditors do not tell us to the contrary, and so to this end, the CFO is creating a CFO's assurance team that will test the processes and validate effectiveness of controls such as those over financial conference attendance. Mr. Chairman, DHS is very committed to the responsible stewardship of the taxpayer's dollars entrusted to us by Congress. We know the dollars are limited, the DHS mission is large, and we must take steps to assure that we are putting their dollars to the best use. Most of the travel spending is necessary to the mission and, likewise, conference attendance can be an important tool by which we communicate with the public and our partners in protecting the homeland. However, we recognize travel and conference attendance, as with all things that we do, has its vulnerabilities to waste and abuse. It is the responsibility of the CFO's office to promulgate travel and conference policy and, thus, also to monitor the spending in ways that we can ensure our policies are effective. Thank you for the opportunity to share this information, and I look forward to your questions. Senator Coburn. Thank you. Mr. Nulf. TESTIMONY OF JEFFERY K. NULF,\1\ DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Mr. Nulf. Good afternoon, Chairman Coburn. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you on behalf of the Department of Commerce on the topic of conference spending in Federal agencies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Nulf appears in the Appendix on page 378. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your requests for information and the invitation to speak to you today have focused attention on an area that, for the Department of Commerce, not only is an important element in mission support and employee development, but also presents an opportunity for savings at a time when we are trying to do more with fewer resources. In furtherance of sound management and as a result of current and coming budgetary constraints, the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary have instructed the Department's Presidential Appointees and Heads of Operating Units to direct resources to mission-critical activities, and to do so by taking a hard look at what is expended on administrative functions. All elements of the Department have been charged with meeting our program responsibilities efficiently and effectively while reducing the amounts spent on non-essential activities. Our bureaus report to the Deputy Secretary on a quarterly basis regarding their performance in this and other areas. The Department of Commerce is a diverse organization, as you know, largely scientific, with numerous compelling responsibilities. It is essential for the employees working towards accomplishing the Department's missions to have a current understanding of developments in their program areas. Commerce employees predict the weather, manage the Nation's fisheries, allocate radio spectrum, and we create better ways to measure everything from the structure of atoms to the flammability of buildings. Our employees help American business learn how to expand markets for their products, count people for the census, and support the Nation through the provision of economic information such as quarterly reports on international trade activity, residential construction and sales, and the gross domestic product. Participation at critical conferences furthers these mission-related activities by providing continuing education for our scientists, our engineers, economists, and other professionals. Conference attendance also furnishes venues where the exchange of ideas in an intellectually stimulating environment can lead to new solutions to problems faced by our country and the world. We believe that investment in conference attendance, balanced with sound stewardship of taxpayer dollars, is necessary for the Department to meet its responsibilities to U.S. citizens and the world community. The Department is a large organization with extremely varied responsibilities. We have in place no single policy that governs conferences and related activities, nor do we have a line item in our budget for conferences or a conference spending ceiling to restrict expenditures in this area. We have confidence that our managers are making prudent decisions regarding which conferences to attend and who should be attending them. We do recognize our affirmative obligation to restrain resources expended on travel in general and conference attendance in particular. Concurrently, we recognize that in austere financial times, conference spending is among the top candidates for reduction and offers an opportunity for savings that can be applied to mission-essential work. Although Commerce Department spending increased rapidly between fiscal years 2000 and 2003, as you know from the information we provided in January, our conference expenditures decreased in fiscal year 2004 and fell again in fiscal year 2005, the most recent year for which we have complete data. In examining the available 2006 data, we have identified several indicators that we consider positive in terms of the efficient use of taxpayer dollars for conferences. Among these: The single most frequently used geographic area for conferences attended by Commerce employees is local-- right here in the Washington metropolitan area. There also is a relatively small number of Commerce attendees--five or fewer--that have attended 87 percent of the conferences in which Commerce employees are involved. Conferences sponsored or cosponsored by the Department typically are held in cities where the sponsoring organization is located, thereby minimizing travel expenditures as well as overall costs. As an example, of 69 conferences sponsored by NIST, only three were held outside of Washington, DC, or Boulder, Colorado, which is where all their employees are located at. This is not to suggest that we do not participate in conferences held in locations perceived to be more exotic. Indeed, the North Pacific Marine Sciences workshop, sponsored by NOAA, was held in Hawaii, but this was truly the most economical place for this event to occur. Similarly, NOAA's cosponsored Gulf of Mexico Alliance meetings were in New Orleans and Naples, Florida, both on the Gulf Coast. The fiscal year 2006 conference spending data that we have collected indicates a continuing downward trend in conference spending. To date, the Commerce Department has spent $7.8 million on conference-related activities in fiscal year 2007 and 2006. This is about 62 percent of our fiscal year 2003 high. Projections for fiscal year 2007 suggest that conference- related spending will drop further, to around $7.5 million. These figures are good news, but we remain interested in identifying where we might continue our reduction efforts. Mr. Chairman, we appreciate and share your concern that current technology be used to bring people together for electronic conferencing. The Department will continue to seek creative means to leverage its ability to video- and teleconference in order to reduce, as much as possible, the need for in-person attendance at training and professional meetings. Consistent with that objective, we have created within the Department an online Learning Management System that now provides our employees desktop access to over 1,600 training courses. This, of course, will not take the place of professional conferences, but it certainly is an economical approach to professional development. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to share with you this information about what we are doing at the Department of Commerce, and I look forward to answering your questions. Senator Coburn. Thank you. Mr. Holcomb. TESTIMONY OF RICHARD HOLCOMB,\1\ DEPUTY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, AND ACTING DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HEADQUARTERS OPERATIONS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Mr. Holcomb. Chairman Coburn, thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Subcommittee today. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Holcomb appears in the Appendix on page 419. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The mission of the Department of Treasury is to promote the conditions for prosperity and stability in the United States and encourage prosperity and stability in the rest of the world. Communication is the key to our relationship with the individual American taxpayer and the corporate entities that between them provide the bulk of the revenue that supports the business of our government. We use a variety of media to communicate our messages in support of the governmental activities for which we are responsible. We make use of conferences to broadcast and explain matters to individuals as well as corporate bodies that relate to changes in tax law, tax collection, banking and thrift procedures, and commodities regulation. Consequently, the vast majority of the conferences we sponsor are either Internal Revenue Service or Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau events that focus on taxpayer advocacy, small business practitioner forums, or on a specific sector such as the wine and alcohol industry. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel within the IRS listens to taxpayers, identifies taxpayers' issues, and makes suggestions for improving Internal Revenue Service services and aiding with customer satisfaction. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel acts as a two-way conduit focusing on taxpayer advocacy as well as providing a venue for raising issues by citizens. There are seven geographically based area boards aligned with the current Taxpayer Advocate Service areas. These area boards address local issues and schedule outreach activities. Issue committees, with nationwide membership, identify and work servicewide issues and are closely linked to the Wage and Investment and Small Business/Self-Employed program owners. A major part of TTB's mission is to have its industry members voluntarily comply with rules and regulations. Part of this can be accomplished through field presence via tax audits and product integrity investigations. Another very effective tool to reach voluntary compliance is to inform our industry members of what is expected of them. TTB seminars allow us to reach a wide audience and give industry members the instructional tools that are necessary to successfully meet the Federal rules that apply to their businesses. These events represent a cross-section of industry producers, wholesalers, and/or importers. They provide outreach to industry members who are geographically dispersed across the country and a platform for information sharing and learning about current issues and trend in the marketplace. These seminars attract active permittees, those interested in obtaining permits, industry trade associations, industry lawyers, and State regulatory agencies. Attendees are able to obtain relevant information on Federal rules and regulations that apply to their businesses, ask specific questions that pertain to their daily activities, receive updates on the latest issues that apply to their activities, and important contact information. The end result is a better understanding of their roles as permit holders and increased voluntary compliance with Federal law. It also allows TTB employees to hear firsthand the issues and concerns that our industry members have pertaining to the regulation of alcohol and tobacco products. We consider conferences and seminars as vital to our understanding and to taxpayer understanding of the rules and regulations of tax law and trade code. We consider there is nothing more important than an informed public, particularly where it involves taxation and compliance. We regret the delay in providing the requested information that you and your office sought. Our financial databases do not distinguish between types of business trips and do not cross- reference other business expenses. We intend to develop a system that will be more responsive to your and our needs in the future and will provide us with a positive business tool in safeguarding the money entrusted to us by the American public. This completes my prepared remarks, and I look forward to answering your questions. Senator Coburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Holcomb. Mr. Christopherson. TESTIMONY OF CHARLES R. CHRISTOPHERSON, JR.,\1\ CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Mr. Christopherson. Chairman Coburn, I appreciate the opportunity to give testimony concerning conference attendance and expenditures at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA is a diverse and complex organization with programs that touch the lives of all Americans every day. Our six strategic goals for 2005 through 2010 are to: Enhance international competitiveness of American agriculture; enhance the competitiveness and sustainability of rural and farm economies; support increases economic opportunities and improved quality of life in rural America; enhance protection and safety of the Nation's agriculture and food supply; improve the Nation's nutrition and health; and protect and enhance the Nation's natural resource base and environment. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Christopherson appears in the Appendix on page 435. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In order to achieve these goals, the Department leverages the services of a vast number of entities. These entities include State and local governments, colleges and universities, school districts, community organizations, faith-based organizations, associations, other Federal agencies, and international-based organizations. Conferences are very important in the communication, training, and coordination needed to deliver the regulations and requirements of hundreds of programs. The USDA has a formal travel policy that includes conferences. As the Chief Financial Officer of the Department, the policy is under my administrative responsibility. The Department's policy and available funding in the individual agencies provide the checks and balances on the sponsoring and attending conferences. In late August, we provided data on conference attendance and costs for the time period between 2001 and fiscal year 2005. In 2005, the Department's expenditures for conference fees equaled approximately $22 million. The costs for conferences is approximately 0.02 percent of our total expenditures. Conferences at the USDA are mainly sponsored by its agencies for outreach or training of employees, States, colleges and universities, and communities. During 2005, the outreach and training conferences accounted for 72 percent of total attendance. Two groups that I would like to highlight for this testimony are our mission areas responsible for Natural Resources and Environment and Research, Education, and Economic. The Natural Resources and Environment mission area includes the Forest Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service, NRCS. The 2002 farm bill vastly increased funding for conservation by authorizing increased spending for several programs under prior farm bills and establishing two additional programs. While NRCS activities benefit all of the people in all the Nation, the primary customers are individuals that make natural resource and management decisions on non-Federal lands. These include farmers, ranchers, and other members of the private sector; units of government; and not-for-profit organizations. NRCS partners with other 3,000 local conservation districts to assist in implementing its programs. Targeted conservation areas and management practices change often. These changes are due to various regional management requirements, new research, certain conservation practices, natural events, and legislative changes. In addition, NRCS has been impacted by a large amount of employee retirements in 2004 and 2005. To address critical training needs NRCS held ``regional training boot camps'' in 2005. Research, Education, and Economics (REE) is responsible for the research and statistics covering the full breadth of the Department's programs. Their research benefits the lives of Americans and provides competitive advantages to our products in the world market. REE does not act alone in its research. It is accomplished in partnership with universities and other institutions. Much of the travel in this mission area involves coordination and collaboration with other scientists, institutions, and organizations. This enables the REE mission area to be far more efficient in carrying out its responsibilities of research, education, and economic activities. Such collaboration through conferencing avoids excessive duplication and enhances efficiency and effectiveness. In addition, our scientists are widely recognized for their unique and high level of expertise and are in active demand by various groups and organizations to share their knowledge and expertise at conferences and meetings. About one-fourth of the conferences we attend are sponsored by non-USDA groups. The subject matter of these conferences is geared towards historically disadvantaged groups, State government, nutrition, conservation, science, information technology, foreign marketing, and safety. To help reduce expenses and continue to educate our greatest resource, the Department has developed and implemented an electronic education medium, AgLearn. This year the system has been used by 69,000 employees to complete 1,422 different training courses. The Department understands the value and cost savings that AgLearn provides as its primary education source for USDA employees. The Department uses conferences and other methods to support the requirements of the mission areas. Due to the diversity and breadth of our programs, our conference attendance is located across the United States. We believe that transparency into the Department's expenditures is very important. We have set this as a goal in our strategic plan as well. Through our Financial Management Modernization Initiative, we have addressed the need for electronic approvals and detailed centralized information for management. During this initiative, we will include an evaluation of our current policies and procedures, including the approval of underwritten and attended conferences. I appreciate this opportunity to testify and would welcome any questions. Senator Coburn. Thank you. I thank each of you. Let me just go through a couple things. Secretary, the budget for conferences and spending in the year 2000 for the Department of Agriculture was $6,600,000, and you just told me it was $22 million in 2005. That is almost a 400-percent increase in conferences, when we are having the biggest budget deficits that we have had in our history. Explain that to me. Mr. Christopherson. Well, there are a couple of issues there. One, I would say our 2001 numbers were difficult to obtain, at best, and may not be fully correct. I think you will see that as you get into 2002, you see numbers that are more respectful to what---- Senator Coburn. I actually quoted you a 2000 number, not a 2001 number. And you are saying that is a questionable number, too? Mr. Christopherson. As we went back, correct. We actually run our nine general ledger systems. All of them, as you have heard from other members, they are not supported by their vendors anymore. We have travel vouchers at probably close to 6,000 to 7,000 different offices in which we accumulate data, and we are addressing this through our modernization effort, but we are not quite there yet. Senator Coburn. Good enough. Treasury, according to the numbers that I have, went from--it doubled from 2001 to 2005. Mr. Holcomb. Correct, sir. Yes, sir. Senator Coburn. OK. How much digital videoconferencing do you all do on a lot of this training? Are you utilizing that? Mr. Holcomb. Sir, the cost increase was in large part driven by the IRS' increase in Taxpayer Advocacy Panel meetings and outreach to taxpayers in their geographical regions. It reflects the IRS' effort for education and positive marketing. Senator Coburn. Well, let me clarify that. Then that should not be included in conferences. That is part of your function. A conference is not where you go to teach somebody else. It is where you go to learn from somebody else. And I think we need this clarification. This is a real important thing. If you are carrying out your mission by teaching the American citizens and the recipients of your Department information where you are holding the conference for them, I am not as concerned about that as I am us going for us. And so if you can clarify some of those numbers, I think it would be important. Mr. Nulf had said you all do not have a line item for conferences. Mr. Nulf. That is correct. Senator Coburn. And it is interesting to me--and your statement was, I believe, that you feel comfortable with your management of conferences--Hawaii Association of Land Surveyors, Honolulu, Hawaii. Niederberg Auction and Wine Conference, South Africa. Mr. Nulf. Yes, sir. Senator Coburn. You feel real comfortable that those two are necessary for you all to carry out your function and that the employees that took that did not take extra time off to use the Federal Government's airfare to go to South Africa or Hawaii? Mr. Nulf. Correct, sir. The Niederberg Wine Conference, one attendee was there from ITA, who was based in South Africa, sir. It cost the government approximately $378, and that is actually a reflection of that person's compensation during the course of the day. We have 378 employees primarily based at NOAA in Hawaii, sir, for the conferences that---- Senator Coburn. But this was not a NOAA--or I guess it would have been if it is land survey, satellite survey. Mr. Nulf. Yes, sir. Senator Coburn. OK. All right. Good answers. DHS, from what I can see, conferences at the Department of Homeland Security have doubled in terms of dollars and quadrupled in terms of numbers. Is that accurate? Mr. Schied. I do not necessarily think that would be accurate for the reason of, again, going back, some of the data we have reported in past years I think is spotty. I think some of the information, again, like I said in my testimony, for 2006 is also--we are having--still having a challenge getting together information, getting a common set of definitions across all our components so that, as you just pointed out, some of what we have reported is conferences where we go out and reach out to others. So sorting through that to try and get an apples-to-apples comparison is still challenging for us. Senator Coburn. Well, that is 2005 to 2006. That is 2.5 times, from 6.1 to 15.4, and from 600 conferences to 2,200 conferences. Mr. Schied. The data for 2005 did not include--I am pretty sure did not include the largest conference organization within DHS, which is the Coast Guard. We were unable in 2005 to get information from them. They are included in the 2006 information, and they are close to a third, if not a half of the information that we have provided to the Subcommittee for 2006. Senator Coburn. That is fair. I am going to be here 4 more years, so the idea that we do not have the data today, that does not work next year when we have another hearing. We have got to know. And I will say that to the staff that are here from the previous testifiers. We are going to get good numbers, and we are going to follow them, and you all are the chief financial people that manage that. And I am fine with that. That is a legitimate reason to have a difference that is explainable. It will not be next year, and it will not be the year after that, and it will not be all the way up to 2010. Why wouldn't the Coast Guard have provided how much money it spends on conferences? Mr. Schied. Sir, I do not know why it was not reported for 2005. For 2006, they were able to get it and it was reported. Senator Coburn. OK. Well, we will submit questions to you all. We would love to have quick turnaround. I am going to release to the press my summary that my staff has done for me on this last year. As a matter of fact, I will tell you what I will do. I will not release it to them yet. I will release to you first, and you straighten this out where we are wrong in terms of individuals, where you think we have made a wrong assumption, because we cannot know what you know. That is part of what this is. And then after that, then we will release to the press some areas of concern we have. We will not do that until you have had a chance to look at it and justify it. We will submit questions. Again, the question that has to be in your mind--and this is different. OPM is going the other way. The Department of Labor is going the other way. Think about the fact that we are spending money on conferences at twice the rate the Federal Government is growing, and that is something we cannot sustain. And I would also suggest in my--I have an accounting and production management degree and ran a good size business for a period of time. My experience is that if you put something that has to be accounted for on paper, people watch it. And I would suggest a line item on travel- related expenditures and conference expenditures in every Department of this Federal Government. Again, I am going to go back and say probably 85 percent of everything we are doing absolutely has to be done. I do not have any criticism of that. If we can save 15 percent everywhere in the Federal Government in everything that we do, we preserve the future for our kids. The other thing--and I did not get a chance to say it to the others--I want to thank you for your service. A lot of people will not step up and do what you do, will not take--we have this attitude. We have fantastic Federal employees in this country. The biggest problem is Congress will not let them manage, and we do not let information flow up from the actual people through the management to get the best value for our money. So it is not about you and it is not about being critical of individuals who are serving this government. It is about how do we all work together to make the best future we can for the next couple of generations? So I want to personally thank each of you for your service, as well as the other panel, and say I look forward to working with you. We are going to do this again next year, so bone up and send it out, and let's get it online. My hope eventually-- you all know that the Federal Financial Accountability Act passed. We are going to know every penny you spend everywhere, and it is going to be online starting in 2008 so that the American taxpayers are going to see how much you spend on conferences and with who and where, and it is all going to be out there. And when the blogosphere gets a hold of it, the justifications are going to get tough. And so the justifications had better be right before it gets out there. And that is what you all--you want good accountability. You want to walk home at night and say, ``We did a great job for the American people.'' And I believe you do, and I believe that is your intent. We have just got to get better at managing this financial crisis that is coming at us. And it is big. And if you think you do not have enough money to manage now, you wait until 2012 because that is when it is going to hit and everybody is going to get squeezed big time. Thank you all for your service and for being here and preparing for our Subcommittee hearing. Thank you. The hearing is adjourned. [Whereupon, at 4:03 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] A P P E N D I X ---------- [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] <all>