house panel investigates racial disparities in the military justice system to be here for military legal officials and the president of protected offenders during this house armed services subcommittee hearing. [inaudible conversations] like to thank you for joining our remote hearing. in ott [inaudible] establishing and maintaining a quorum or dissipating in the proceedings and voting could members participating remotely must continue to use software platforms video function while attending the proceedings and other technical problems that render the member unable to fully participate on on camera today for members participating remotely experience as technical difficulties sees contact to the committee staff get assistance they will help you get reconnected them recognize video from a we participation will be broadcast in the room in via the television internet feed their members participate in remotely are asked to mute their microphones when they are not speaking. doing so will help to ensure the remote technology works properly could members participating remotely will be recognized normally for asking questions but if they want to speak at another time they must seek recognition verbally. member should be aware there's a slight lag of a few seconds between the time you start speaking and the camera shot switching to you. to account for this please do a quote preamble whatever that means unquote and your remarks before you get to your actual question. members who are participate in remotely are reminded to keep the video function on the entire time they attend a proceeding for those members may leave and rejoin the proceedings and of the members depart for a short time for reasons other than joining a different proceeding they should leave the video function on spread as members of the asked to join an different proceeding they should exit the software platform entirely and then rejoin if they return. members art buys that i've designated the committee staff member if necessary unrecognized members mike a front to cancel inadvertent background noise that may disrupt proceedings. members may use the software platform chat feature to communicate with staff regarding technical support issues. finally remotely producing member should see a five minute countdown clock on the software platform displayed but if necessary i will gently remind members and their time is up. welcome everyone. today we will be focusing on racial disparity in the military justice system. we are here to discuss the inequalities and injustices that people of color experience in military justice systems including those in criminal investigations, court-martials and non-judicial punishment. the fact that we live in a country with an ingrained racial bias in no way excuses or justifies the perpetuation of racism and the united states military. our servicemembers commit their lives to protect our country. we must commit ourselves to ensure that the military treat servicemembers of color equally and justly. we will not solve this problem by hiding it or denying it. we will not solve this problem pretending that it is solely the result of uncontrollable societal problems by pretending that her actions to not contribute to the continuation of injustice by refusing to seek change because we are so comfortable and confident and quote in the way things abari's been done and unquote to the way things have always been done is wrong. the result are repugnant. i hope that all of our military leaders in the room are prepared to acknowledge the need for a reckoning and prepared further to institute old measures to fix the inherent bias in the military justice system in america. gao's most recent report found black servicemembers are more likely to be the subject of recorded investigations and more likely to be tried in general and a special court-martial than their white counterparts. partly gao found results were statistically significant. facial data on non-judicial punishment was not uniformly collected. protect our defenders in their best edition found black airmen were twice as likely to face non-judicial punishment than white airmen. as history provides us some solace for the military that the wind integrating our black servicemembers long before schools or lunch counters were integrated. 1940 president truman signed executive order 9981 directing equal treatment for black servicemembers in the military. subsequently the army-navy air force and marine corps complied. 19 fernandez air force issued a quote l. of rights for black airmen of the navy proposed a recruiting program for enlisting black sailors. integration did not equal acceptance. racism and discrimination both personal and institutional continued to people of color who wished to make a career in our military have raised uphill fight and we done too little to assist them through 72 years after integration the fight for equality and justice continues. we still struggle to carve out an equal place for people of color struggle to ensure they have the same opportunities to serve in advance -- an advance in their current struggle to ensure they have equal justice. we have to look no further than the military leaders of this country almost exclusively white men. it was heartening to note that general charles brown has become to air force chief of staff just this week. 70 years but i would like to hear from the first panel would need to change in the system and ensure accountability for every commander who uses the military justice system and a biased and discriminatory manner. for the second panel i would like to hear how is the senior military lawyer for each service you can educate leaders at all levels to recognize bias in the military justice system and what you can do to ensure that justice is dispensed fairly and -- before i introduce my -- our panel that may give officer kelly a chance. thank you for holding this hearing at such a fitting time greatest americans of all backgrounds are struggling to better understand racial disparity across society at large and to take substantive actions that could make a difference this is a fitting time to this hearing that i want to welcome both of our panels. we appreciate your attention and commitment to remedy a great problem that if left unchecked can underline the readiness of our armed forces. racial disparity is a very real societal problem and across various criminal justice as we see lopsided rights prosecution and incarceration that should concern every american but this country a is struggle to confront and fixed the problem for decades and we continue to do so but as the event over the past couple weeks of weeks demonstrate we have a lot more to go but his former district attorney and city prosecutor i've seen my share of it and something neither i nor any of us should ever shy away from or get complacent about the d'souza probably all collectively need to confront head-on. where'd i think we can and must make a real difference is in our military. i've served in the military for over 33 years in the brigade level may note the very real bond our young warriors share regardless of background that is very proud to weeks ago when 371 soldiers or mississippi in the 155 armored brigade combat team all volunteers answered the call and deployed to washington for the civil unrest on three hours notice. they were a very diverse group with 43% either african-american or minority backgrounds. they trained together, they do play together and did their duty as a team together which is what makes our military so great. answer the call did what they were asked to do and they did it with honor and integrity. they and all servicemembers place there's trust in their leaders and that is why are military is so formidable. this is in context plays a bit of the foundation for what makes the disparity in military justice so troubling for me. leaders need to do the right thing always betrayed every soldier, sailor or airman and marine with dignity and respect and protect that trust that binds warriors together. racial disparity persists it always has a negative impact on recruiting readiness and the call to her military. understand the statistics, the effects of what we need to understand is the call to fashion the right remedies into a quickly. section 5401 of the nba a in confrontation duguid at the colleges of racial ethnic and gender disparities in the military justice system and to take steps to remedy disparities but images and hearing from our witnesses on any ideas for rooting out the cause of this problem and potential solutions and where the department is in their valuation of causes and remedies for the understand they are forces initiating an inspector general desiccation with panels of experts to explore the problem more holistically but images and hearing from all the services about any similar or complementary initiatives. i do know that the space force is not here today and is a new force that think they have a chance to get it right from the start. they conveyed groundbreaking and ground setting because they start from zero. madam chairwoman i think it's a great start and i look forward to the day's discussion. i want to thank the witnesses for attending today's hearing and share the collective expertise with us. senate thank you mr. kelly. each witness will have the opportunity to present their testimony to member will have an opportunity to question the witness for five minutes. we respect laos witnesses to summarize their testimony in five minutes. your written comments will be made part of the hearing record. i ask unanimous consent the non-subsidy members be allowed to stay and ask questions after all the subcommittee members have had the opportunity to ask questions. without objection, so ordered. but we welcome our first panel. retired colonel don christensen is up or take their defenders and brenda farrell management team of the u.s. government accountability office. ms. farrell is joining us via webex. welcome. let us begin with colonel christensen. see mature woman speier distinguished members of the subcommittee thank you for the opportunity to appear before he took salmon the issue of racial disparities in the military justice system provider country the military has a long history of mistreating racial minorities. black servicemembers have continued to be prosecuted and punished a much greater rate than white counterparts are moreover they suffer from lower promotion rates and are vastly up were representative in after the court specially hit the general and flag officer ranks produced part of the defender's ongoing effort to improve the fairness of the military justice system 2016 we sought information request to each service on racial disparities in the military justice process. the data provided to us in rates per thousand after eventually seeing the data we released a study of our findings from june of 2017 that showed widespread racial disparities and all of the services. we examined a total of 32 years of data and in every single year black servicemembers were punished at a significantly higher rate than white servicemembers. based on her by the congress mandated the government accountability office review of disparities which was completed in march of 2019. the gao found significant racial disparities that shockingly the gao found none of the services had done anything to find causes or solutions for disparities. as part of the answer to our 2016 foia request the air force data created quote a cross team led by diversity can -- inclusion expert to recommend policy changes, process modifications for additional study is appropriate. in july of 2017 we sought the attendees and the qualifications of team members as well as the team's finding and recommendations in addition to other information. this was the start after grueling three-year long struggle to force the air force to meet its foia obligations. thankfully we were representative by the veterans legal services clinic which enabled us to file suit in federal court. despite numerous efforts by the air force to conceal its findings and recommendations of the team the federal judge eventually ordered the air force to disclose request documents under the threat of sanctions. the documents were received were startling or the panel of follow-up studies by the air force found racial disparities were quote consistently persistent in getting worse. the air force admitted the numbers were quote concerning and imports of having quote at what went consistent disciplinary processes. these findings were made in 2016 and despite concluding that the air force quote must clearly address the disparities some white quote" the air force appeared to act on the recommendations and address the issue. another disturbing finding from our review the documents is the air force legal committee's efforts to discredit the data showing their own data showing significant racial disparities. despite the strong conclusions that since day one j. has attempted to discredit the importance of the data specifically in the background the ja created in 2016 they claim the disparity between lax and whites that are punished can be the result of a small number of additional actions are lieutenant general rockwood air force adds to kid general reinforced this message in a briefing to the air force four-star we he told unquote even a few additional disciplinary actions have a far greater impact on the rate per thousand due to their smaller numbers the general rockwell illustrated his point using a racial 10-1 of white airman to black humans rather than the rate of 5-130 ideas decade-long disparities can be explained a few additional disciplinary actions. ja needs to stop this line of argument that the disparity in non-judicial punishment since calendar year 19 in the air force alone represents an additional 520 article xv for black airman not an additional few as implied by the legal world. in other words black airman received approximately 1105 article 15/year. if they replenished at the same proportional rate as white airman they would have only received 585. the impact of racial disparities across all the services in the last 10 years would easily be in excess of 10,000 additional extra punishments meted out against black airman or black servicemembers not a few additional. the air force need to focus on finding solutions and not discrediting its own data. we released a report in may of 26 of this year and it had an immediate impact at a credit chief wright in the general for acting quickly by ordering an investigation by the wet mosque to not as the action initiated by the air force last week to investigate disparities would not have occurred if they had been successful in keeping this information from being disclosed. this hearing today would not have been held but for the fact we were willing to force the air force to disclose information that it wished to keep hidden priebus as is a reminder of the importance of transparency by the military must faithfully meet its foia obligations. how much further could the air force be in addressing racial disparities if that they have had to put the energy in trying a solution 2016 rather than seeking to cover up its embarrassing failures but i look forward to any questions you have. [inaudible [inaudible] >> all right, now we are going to hear from ms. brenda farrell from the gao that is recently provided the report. ms. farrell. some may think you madam chairwoman ranking member kelly and members of the subcommittee pray thank you for the opportunity to discuss yells findings recommendations about racial disparities in the military justice system. uniform code of military justice the usm day was established for fight the statutory framework of the military justice system contains articles that punish traditional crimes such as unlawful drug use as well as unique military assistance including diversion but every servicemember of the army and navy the marine corps the air force and the coast guard are subject to ucmj with more than 258,000 individuals disciplined from fiscal years 2013 through 2017. a key principle of the ucmj is a fair and just system of military law in a highly disciplined force. my statement is based on a report issued in may of 2019 on the military services capability to assess racial disparities among other matters prevent me briefly summarize my statement. my statement is divided into three parts. the first part addresses the collection of ethnic groups information and the military services investigation military justice and personnel database but among our findings we found that the services did not correct information about race and ethnic groups in these databases. bus they were limited in their ability to identify disparities which are instances in which racial or ethnic groups were overrepresented. specifically the number of individual responses from ethnic groups were from the 15 databases across the services ranging from five to 32 officers or ranks in two to 25 options for -- which can complicate cross service assessment. to address these and consistency we made recommendations with dod and dhs and the coast guard took collect maintain race and ethnic information the best data from personal databases using the same category recently established in the uniform standards for the military justice database. dod and dhs concerned -- concurred with this recommendations for the second part of my statement covers the extent of racial disparities in investigations disciplinary actions and outcomes. since the services did not collect race and ethnic group data consistently we analyzed access to initiate and record and investigations military justice and personnel data between physical years 2013 to 2017. to help ensure we had consistent profiles of servicemembers we merged records using unique identifiers such as social security numbers that were common among the military services database. we used owen b. standards to consolidate the various raids of ethnic values through a conducted multivariate regression analyses to test the association between a servicemember characteristic such as raised and they military justice section. by using available data we found a association of disparity of the military justice process. the findings are in conclusive regarding other states. for example we found black servicemembers were more likely than white servicemembers to be subjects of recorded investigations in the military criminal investigative database. further black servicemembers were more likely than white servicemembers to be tried in general and social articles in the army or navy record and air force. data from the coast guard's unavailable. the last investigates the causes of disparities. we found dod has not comfortably a guy with the causes of racial disparity in the military justice system. we recommended that they do so to better position than to identify disparities. dod conferred. in conclusion we believe for military law to be recognized as fair just by servicemembers and the american public dod and dhs need to take actions to implement the recommendations in our may 2019 report that concludes my statement i will be pleased to take questions that you or others may have. .. brenda: to be charged for nonjudicial punishment ability. our core modules rated their army was 61 percent in the navy it was 40 percent more likely and in the marine corps it was 32 percent more likely. so clearly the air force, the gross is outlier although they all appeared to have statistics to a high degree of bias. it appears to me that you had to work very hard to get that request. how much time did it take for you to actually get that information from the air force. >> is a great question. there were two. the first one was just for the raw data. we got up fairly quickly. within a month i believe. just raw data. and within the first request of the talked about establishing the disparity panel part of that great, they're going to look at this. and when we did the follow-up, it has been three years since we file that request we still have not gotten all of the documents we requested. i have no idea what the qualifications of the single person on the panel work. we had to go to federal court, we filed suit in december of 2017. we did not get a final judgment from the judge until march of this year. so it was a task and we were very fortunate to have a great group of yellow law students and professors who are air going to find it. but the average person cannot get that kind of support. >> suis over a year and three months that you got this. >> is only three years. three years. the first request took about six months for everybody to get the information to us but when he came to the disparity panel and its findings and recommendations, that was a three year struggle . >> so after your report out with the spinning statistics pretty did you hear from the air force >> i have never heard from the air force . i've never heard from any of the services. none of them reached out to us to talk about the report or findings. speech of what you think the military should do to show that it is taking the disparities seriously. don: i think the first thing we need to realize is this is information that another air force has tracked for decades. back to at least the 80s. nothing was ever done. so there's a long track history of doing that. and when the first report came out in 2017, that was an opportunity to put into the public . media coverage and congress was concerned about it. that was opportunity that they would show something about it and they have not read and think they took the first step by ordering the investigation but the thing to remember about that investigation, that's an internal air force investigation. what they need to be looking out the outside sources to come in and talk to them about this. and people understand what the causes are. i think one of the things they have to accept, because of what we have seen through the limited degree that they have looked at it, they tried to look at it exclusively on unconscious bias. they have to accept that there's a possible, actually people prejudiced serving in the military. i don't think is most predict i don't know if his many but we do have that. there was a naval officer he was just accidentally disclosed his racist beliefs on facebook by live streaming. in a conversation between he and his wife that was horrifically racist. he was a retired captain. we have to except that this is just not unconscious bias there are people who do not like minority people don't want them here. leadership needs to stand up in 2016 and need to stand up in 2017 and need to stand up and 2019. and to show that they really care about this. jackie: what would you want us to make sure that the department of defense does moving forward. >> thank you madame. as i noted in my statement, i think the recommendations in our report by roadmap right now. the final chapter being the causes and disparities in taking steps to make corrections. they continued oversight in this area is necessary. especially my culligan the panel who has noted these disparities have been lingering for some time. now we have hard reliable data to pinpoint when there are descendents of the dod can target where to start looking for the causes of these. so they continued oversight is necessary. we noted that that national act has provisions that on the recommendations. some deadlines have been set in terms of when they must begin. in the causes of disparity. i think it was it was needed more data was needed and this is going to be very complex review in order to make sure that that report is completed, i think congressional oversight will be very important. >> thank you and first the cause of racial disparity is elusive except for those who are blatantly racist. there are those in every organization including the military. what recommendations if any do you have that would be helpful to the department and getting after the causation . and of remedies and under stand the causation that allah does is intentional. this cultural or whatever disparities are caused by that predict what remedies would you'll have. >> thank you ranking member kelly. i think that the general goldstein stick in the first good stuff on this by actually getting input from the rank-and-file in the services. we've heard from the defenders, and the first report and the second report, a lot of members talking about what they're experiencing. i think the air force in particular, is incredibly, the finer pilots communities is less than 3 percent blackberry decide think there's a lack of understanding what the black servicemembers and other minority servicemembers are facing. and the difficulties that they face. the lack in membership. in 2015, and forced an article about promotion failures for black servicemembers didn't get the promotions and get into the pme. so getting these servicemembers at the top to understand there are issues and knowing that blocks progress throughout the military and how others minorities progress as well predict. >> and focusing on this analysis, as i recall the report, you included that in the analysis for the air force data but not the other services. because it closely correlated with mine. are we looking at generally a problem focusing on the younger members and if so how's does the data compare to national trends. thank you for that question. we did do an analysis where we were looking for certain certain characteristics such as ranks in each service model was a little bit different. we look very closely with the services in order to understand what was going on with their particular service. as far as a comparison between older and younger, we did not about that particular analysis to target. we are aware of some studies that are done in the private sector. but we did not try to make any kind of comparisons on what is going on in the military justice system. in the civil justice system. i hope that answers your question. >> it doesn't back to col. christiansen, i want to go back in my career when he first got in, 30 something years ago. i think i had the first african american first sergeant in the national guard. so you rarely saw, i can name on one hand, the senior oh five and oh six level officers who were african-american, and 40 percent on african americans. now, i cannot count. in many of those of my soldiers who i mentor to. i personally made a difference to her sergeant majors in first class. who are first sergeants. the last three brigade commanders that followed me, all african-american. not because there were african-american but because they were the best we got. the absolute best. so now it is there. so you show us the data that we collected from 2010 to 2014 for use earned in with the cheese legal roles in the air force produce what did you see and what did you do and out with the sprint you have now, what would you do now different to change the outcome of what happens in the air force. >> is a great question. and i agree, in the army actually is further ahead. the air force lags behind the rest. what i see. i never prosecuted some of that i thought was innocent. of course i don't make the prosecution decision someone else does as you know. i don't think it was necessarily case that innocent people to be brought to trial. what that the problem was is that others getting the benefit of the doubt. based upon whether it was a relationship, explicit fight whatever it was they were getting the benefit of the doubt. for example, two years ago the air force decided to prosecuted black mco for me six minutes late for work, literally 60 minutes late to a meeting. he got a court-martial. they should not have been made. what did i do. one thing i was very concerned about and race in this issue was a lack of blackjacks. we do not have enough. we have one of the great ones behind me. but when i retired, we had 124 kernels who were african-american. so i encouraged african-americans to work for me but, to try and make a career out of it. i sent out excuse me, on a son selection morning settlement. encourage the people on the election board to focus on finding good african-americans to come to this jag for sprint because i think part of that experience that they would bring in would be important not biased. women incense. obviously filing this report, is important to me and i use it, it has troubled me throughout my career. i never saw leadership and i thought it was very important to bring it forward. thank you mr. kelly. were white mco that were six minutes late, were they court-martialed. >> i had never somebody get court marshaled for being six minutes late other than the african-american. >> that is stunning. >> thank you madam chair. thank you for joining us. first off, can you talk without maybe getting into the weeds too much. talk a little bit about how you gathered your statistical information. i wanted to get a sense of this analysis. was it different from his ferrules . and then i will ask ms. farrell about it. whether you think the information was concealed and what is your level of confidence i guess with the analysis and whether it reveals, but really what you're trying to get out. how to do that. >> for the initial request, we requested from each service tenures of data showing their rate per thousand court-martial an article 15. for african americans whites and other minorities. we received that data from everyone except the navy only give us two years of data. in the coast guard never responded. the data we got from the air force was the best. i knew the process would track it well. very confident with the data they provided is accurate. and that what we saw on that data was historical disparity of racial where blacks were prosecuted in article 15 and a much greater rate and that it was getting worse, not better. and that's what we saw across all of the services. the army did not track, nonjudicial punishment sprint the marine corps, only tracked conventions. so we don't know how many cases were charged. on the convictions. marine corps was interesting, the more severe the punishment, the greater disparity. for example, by the time we got to the court-martialed marine corps, the disparity was almost 2.6 grapefruit blocks and it was whites. the issue, the cover-up was was about the racial discrepancy. >> ms. farrell, could you respond to that. other differences are areas that you feel you were able to get the information and really have some sort of lack of confidence in some of that data. >> i will be happy to expand upon our technology. our methodology was for different time periods the don's pretty is much longer article on the fiscal year of 2013 - 2017. that the latest available data. we experienced, very good cooperation read this was a rigorous analysis. we obtained in the record is, all of the records in the period between fiscal year 2013 - 2017. and three categories of 15 databases. there were some places where data was incomplete. that is the reason why we say that we found disparities that were statistically significant at certain stages of the military justice cause. and other stages, the findings are inconclusive. it's usually inconclusive for two reasons. one, incomplete data . on the any of the services did not provide the data but it was incomplete. such as nonjudicial punishment. it was incomplete for the army and the navy as well as the coast guard. it was very inconclusive. but we are seeing very good cooperations in the analysis that gao did, and graphin gathes information, takes time. it is not something the dod could do routinely an efficient matter. that is why it is so important for them to carry out the recommendations to staff their personnel and their investigative databases to have the same uniform standards as the military justice. so that going forward, especially the causes of disparities are identified. steps were taken to remedy those. to make sure you have good data in place. >> thank you. i hope in our next discussion we will get into those problems. going back to you very quickly, in your analysis, it is important to look at that trained military prosecutors. we would probably always agree that there is a bias in the judicial area . honey think that is different. col. don: in the military could be different . >> i think rather than laying on the commander that military legally trained prosecutors. do they think they would bring a different bias to their positions. as well as in the military and the society as a whole. do you see that, you see a different and why would that recommendation be there pretty. col. don: i agree there's always bias no matter what. and that is unfortunate. the reason we talk about that is the bias that the command decision with the commander who has the power to make the decision, he knows the accused pretty awesome of this person he chose not to prosecute. whereas a prosecutor, i never knew anybody until he walked into the court. so i couldn't not have a bias against them one way or another. so that is where i think the key is. there is an inherent bias in the chain of command when they know the people involved. and have an established same kind of relationships that they have in terms of the blacks and the whites who work for them. i think it will have a negative impact. >> and you feel that the prosecutors would not bring that kind bias. what are the biases with the bring rain. >> actually ms. davis, your over a minute 51. >> okay thank you. >> thank you so much. many thanks mark and was buried it is really interesting that you mentioned the coast guard. i just recently read a report for the coast guard which is under the department of homeland security not the deity. the report on the inspector general found that incidents of racial harassment there were no consequences for cadets the used racial slurs against their fellow cadets. absolutely no consequences. there was a history of this unit so think one of the things that we are going to need to do is really kind of take a look at really brought it sense including whether folks are punished in using racial slurs etc. i know we will get into this more next channel. but as we are talking about the positive factors. what would you say just based on the research you have done. what are the positive factors in these disparities. in the research that you have found. that is an excellent question. because beyond my expertise. as it data that shows us there's a problem. that's what we were hoping that each service would do once the problem was brought to light . and we are limited in what axis we have on that. at the military justice role concerning, i do think that the racial makeup especially in the leadership in the air force, without a doubt has some impact on the disparities that we have. general when he testified, when he became the vice chair, when he became the vice chair, said that basically the issue of race was behind the military. when he looked at the service, he was colorblind. that is the problem. there are two four-star african-american generals in the entire unity pretty we really need to focus on the inclusion of all races and understanding issues that a young blac black servicemembers are facing. >> thank you so much. ms. farrell, your thoughts and does anything come to mind as you are conducting research. >> one of our objectives was to determine what steps were being taken to determine positive disparities. what we found was steps and reviews, climate surveys and information on prospective service members. but going back to the 70s and the 80s and 90s, there has not been a focus on the military justice system in the causes. we again think that our report went into certain stages of the military process can help prioritize what is not working on those causes. and that's a recommendation that the dod has agreed with but also in the national authorization act for 2020. there are provisions consistent with that. i believe it's this month of the dod will proceed with such a study or commencement. thank you . >> i'm quickly running out of time. i just wanted to make note about something with my colleagues and with the chairwoman. we have been talking about this issue for the last year and a half. it really is important in terms of not just african american service members by latinos, and also, very curious about the impact on immigrants in our services especially when we have a commander-in-chief. and the treatment as well. but one of the things that we found at the highest level of authority, within the military it is even less diverse. and it may be because of the adverse judicial system encounters that you all have pointed out. the may be one of th underlying causes. thank you both for your work and i yelled back. >> thank you. you're now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you and i want to thank the staff for joining us today. we would highlight something, but showing that justices not colorblind. having served myself in the military, having been a commanding officer, and mj people. i was in the command. i think that understanding with the lack of data that is been collected in the lack of the requirements that existed. i think that is very useful for us to understand the scope of the problem in get accurate and a true core issue of why the despairs disparity could exist. and the comments were mentioned a couple of minutes ago that the command climate survey data as well. but think it could be, as part of the bigger picture because we don't necessarily have accurate data. in all parts of the military justices rated could you elaborate on how the climate data could help us regarding the previous questions. is there a way that we could try to incorporate that into the analysis. and taken regularly and people who are not involved themselves personally in activation or a nonjudicial process pretty could you elaborate on that. maybe a peaceful data we could analyze. >> i would be happy to elaborate. they are required to have surveys. they have gotten much better in the past few years. making sure they be administered with a little help from congress. they are designed to have help in an incoming commander of understanding. and what issues he or she may need to focus on. there's usually a standard set of questions that are answered and with the incoming commander can ask additional questions. the surveys have been very beneficial to obtain from sections of servicemembers . and some are looking at tasting as well as other sexual assault issues. so i think the surveys could be reviewed in order to see if there is something that could be gained. we do have to be careful about survey fatigue. we hear about that all of the time. but this comes down to work is the issue of racial and ethnic disparity and give these priorities. so the surveys could have some issues. status forces is another survey. some are from the active-duty. that is another one, there are standard questions but often the questions change. when the issues are emerging us, we can use the surveys to ask a set of questions over a period of two years to try to dig a little deeper to try to see what is going on. there are survey instruments already in view that could be used to obtain more information about this particular issue. >> thank you for that. i think as we look at how we try to collect data to assess the information or situations to try to find the root causes. there might be additional data about the types of things that happened. i do think it could also be somewhat difficult. actually have to be very clear on how we collected the data. some phases in the processes, some may never reach the office hours are something like that in that process. military instruction and other things and i think there is a process that would be with the discipline and in attempt to have due processes. and to improve the performance with things such as military and things that are clearly required to address specifically the issue at hand. in are not viewed as punishment are viewed as ways to improve their performance. make them better soldiers. i think it's definitely collected the data is very important. i appreciate your work in researching this. and we can do more to understand the problem hard to get at the root causes. and i think the training could help. and then specifically, and then there is not really anything that i recall that address specifically looking at racial disparities or uniform application of the justice system. thank you again. i look forward to the next panel as well. >> thank you. thank you madame chairwoman and i want to thank our panelists for being here today. col. christiansen, i'm a product of what used to be the '90s program, opportunity and selection training. is farnam enlisted personnel, for people of color. to help prepare them for college. it was part of the navy's process to get more people of color into the office ranked pretty as you stated, 70 percent are military officers are white. and even lower for asians and african-americans. and we talked about the impact of the last representation in the office ranked and how it has disparities in our military justice system. and you've also mentioned about the lack of when you were in the air force, lack of diversity. but what would do we need to do as far as recruiting goes just to bring these numbers up. and really while recruiting more diverse officer corps, really help solve this problem in the criminal justice system and in the military. the disparities. col. don: i think prioritizing, definitely as we talked about an opportunity to go from young enlisted service member to become an officer. how do we encourage the process. what are we doing to make sure that these officers have mentorship treated sop. how hard do you grasp in jaguar or the other parts of the service, and depends on who you have for mentors. since we have people looking for those young black officers. in making sure that they can progress. i think giving the opportunities for the professional military education residence which is key to getting promoted. and then making sure that they are operating in a good environment. storage is probably this weekend, about the racial problems at west point. in that that cadets there, the african-american guinness, 25 percent of them have been subjected to racial abuse. so we got to make sure that the institution that are giving our future leaders that the people serving in trying to get that commission are treated with respect. >> they recommended that the army may because guards collect data such as race ethnicity and gender, and nonjudicial punishment pretty can you elaborate on the importance of this data . nothing the committee on the service of the progress of that. >> this is the area when the data was inconclusive because those services, those three services had incomplete data to determine the extent of disparity in a nonjudicial way. what happens in collecting the dingbat in data and reliability checks. in the court of appeals for the services and their rick records from the 2013 - 2017. we compared those numbers with the numbers and the services in the military justice database as well as there other databases. we found that for the army, roughly 65 percent of the recorded cases were not in their databases. in those recorded cases were in the report to go to congress and the secretary of defense. about 80 percent of the cases that were reported were not in the navy's database. about 82 percent of the cases where the coast guard's were reported out but not in their databases. so made a recommendation that these three services have complete information on non- judiciary punishments and have discussions with them. there was some concerns about how we would do that. the recommendations can determine the benefits and drawbacks of having complete on judiciary punishment data. speedo we know that the army in the navy have moved forward and decided that they want to have this information and perhaps you can learn more about that. the coast guard plans to make a decision about the feasibility in collecting such data in september of this year. >> thank you. >> ms. holland, your recognizer five minutes predict. >> gentlemen i don't have any questions at this time for this panel. but i will be here for next panel. thank you. >> thank you. your recognizer five minutes . >> thank you manager. i would just put life bias out there. i don't necessarily believe it takes years to change. i do believe that happens within especially when we have a strong culture and strong leadership. it's something we pride ourselves in. so being said, i just asked the question to col. christiansen and ms. sparrow. do you believe authority that the current process increases the risk of unconscious or universe bias within our military justice pretty know just in my second question. if you believe that convening authority were transferred to a separate department it could decrease the disparity. col. don: while that is a core principle of mine is at the military become part of the 21st century and prosecutors, make the prosecution decisions versus the convening authority pretty think that commands, as for the military justice, they talk about before, no the people involved. it will cause a bias no matter how good the commander's work how desired they are of not having a bias. they will not have a bias week. they know the people love and lunch committed crime. i think that mice will carryover from the process because of the way the chain of command works. if you have convening authority system. weigh very heavily on abuse of the commander who knows people. left many of the crimes. a prosecutor base, which is not perfect. no system is. buthe first time i laid eyes on the accused is when i came to court. i did not know who they were pretty race was not an issue unless for some reason it was some corn issue is part of the investigation. so i think it eliminates, while it and reduces the chance the ratio bias is really impacted the decision made by the person whether they should go to trial or not. your second question. >> i think col. christiansen answered it. if you believe that the convening authority was transferred to a separate entity, what take care the racial disparity and maybe another follow-up. >> go right ahead. >> i would say to answer your question, we need to see the evaluation of the causes of disparity that these different stages in order to pinpoint exactly what needs to be done in terms of correction along the lines that you are talking about. >> so the commander today, calling convening authority, are they receiving training on these issues pretty army outbreak done with this to recognize racial disparities. so they may address them appropriately. col. don: is probably good question for the other panel to answer. my understanding is the air force and said they are now doing that. i don't know. but as the report found in may come in 2019, it doesn't seem like anything had been done but that solutions. >> thank you all. i yield back. >> thank you madame chair and thank you for allowing me to weigh in on this panel. i will have a longer statement to make so i will just jump into some questions before panelists for col. christiansen and ms. farrell. thank you for being here . i guess this is the concern i have looking at what we did in the mba, and past geo to put into the dod to come back with an assessment of what the causes are. and here's the concern i have. so need some help. col. christiansen, you said that you witness a case where a black man was six minutes late for formation pretty was court-martialed. you never saw that with a white servicemember. when you talk about implicit bias, and typically come in that case if you will drop the commander, hate look, just sent a court-martial, a black guy and in the last month you have treated white guys, six or seven men certain is like and you didn't do it. often with implicit bias, that commander might say, while you are right. let me take a look. it's often benign or unknown when brought to the attention of the offender if you will. they are willing to make corrective action. from everything mr. christian, that you said, but your efforts to get information from dod, the unwillingness to explore the causes of this racial impact. i'm concerned that in the gao study, we put into the dod too much responsibility to come up with guidelines on how to address disparities. and discover our research the causes of disparity and develop a uniform of demographic, criteria so that we can better understand it. here's my question. what can congress do today to ensure that dod is doing these things and that reports and he is beyond the resistance that you and your organization. what are some specific things that we should be doing. col. don: that a great start is what we are doing right now. it will put dod on notice that this is something congress is concerned about. i think the congress may send a message to the various services that they do not expect this is going to be a quick solution. for example, my understanding is the air force aig wants to have investigation wrapped up by the end of july. this is decades long problem. he won't find solutions by then. in two months. in the second thing is that the congress needs to make clear the deity that they expect them to be reaching out to outside entities to help with a solution. true experts on disparity and on what causes racial bias, true experts on finding racial discrimination and then, i won't be required that they continue to report back to congress with the same vigor they do with the sexual assault report is really here. has has to have the same payment detail and depth to it. >> a pick up where christian left off. that is one of the recommendations that in terms of the deity is expected to include because they 2020 authorization act, include demographic information in the annual reports going forward. that will help with the transparency. this still is quite a ways off. i think the congressional oversight periodic congressional oversight will be necessary. i agree that they will do an evaluation of the cause. this is something that can be done in just a few months. having to prioritize where the dod will look at the stages in order to get behind and also bring in consultants will be very important. the md aa, requires study for evaluating causes, there again it will be very important i think mark the services committees specifically this subcommittee and others to have dod or have another hearing. to understand what progress they are making towards that final report on the causes. >> thank you. i yield back. [background sounds]. [inaudible]. >> remained about the same for black and white servicemembers. yet significantly more luck servicemembers are brought to court-martial. that appears to show two things. one that court-martial are not connecting because of race, but evidence pretty into, the commanders are preferring charges are more luck servicemembers for reasons other than the strong weight of evidence against them. i guess finally let me ask you, is that a fair statement. col. don: i do think that is a fair statement. i honestly believe are court members try to do the right thing. i don't believe i never saw a single panel where i thought that they were racially driven in the verdict. i do worry that the decision really what we are talking about is the white servicemember gets the benefit of the doubt. and at their case doesn't go forward. it is handled in a different level than what the black service members are. >> thank you. >> i did not hear all of that question. i think you were asking questions related to what gao identified at the beginning of the military justice process and what we see at the end. and there is quite a difference. as we discussed, actions, are more likely to be identified at the very beginning of the judicial process when service member is under investigation when we look at outcomes and the convictions and punishment. for convictions, we found that there was no significant difference among races in terms of convictions. in similar results for punishments, though specifically significant difference except for black service members in the navy work less likely to be dismissed or discharged after conviction. so they are at opposite ends of what we see in terms of the differences at the beginning or end up at the end pretty. >> thank you. much. take a short recess so that we can bring our second panel to the table and hear from them. [background sounds]. [background sounds]. [background sounds]. [background sounds]. [background sounds]. [background sounds]. welcome back everyone. we will bring this hearing to order once again. it is my pleasure now to introduce our next panel. we will start with lt. general charles. united states army followed by vice general of the u.s. navy. lt. jeffrey, rockwell. for the niceties air force. finally major general daniel, the staff judge advocate for the commandant of the marine corps. general pretty deeply will begin with you. >> thank you for this opportunity. >> i'm sorry general, could you move that microphone a little closer to you. >> present. members of the committee thank you for this opportunity. we meet on a topic of vital importance to our army into our nation. ensuring that every soldier who swears to defend our constitution is guaranteed is foundational promise. equal justice under the law. this has been my charter across 32 years of service. and is the commitment of the general course. in the army leadership. these recent events make clear that promise remains unfilled for too many in our nation. just two days ago in our army celebrated its 245th birthday. because of the service and sacrifice of many, i believe that today, our army represents our country's best ideals more than ever. yet i also believe that like the countries we serve, there is still much more that must be done. our hearing today reminds us of the origins of her uniform code of military justice. it was born out of a concern for fundamental fairness. for those suspected of a crime. and goes through, zealous defense, impartial judges and robust review for its cornerstone. and over the years, thanks to the work of many on this committee, the code is been reformed and approved. while in central purposes have been preserved. promoting justice while ensuring discipline. these are pillars upon which combat effectiveness rests in there and the reasons why our army is the best in the world. but as good as our justice system is we can never take for granted his health or its fairness. it requires constant care. by well-trained law enforcement and educated commanders and qualified attorneys. working together with the congress, we have broader justice system much closer to the realization of equal justice for all. but close is never good enough. in may of 2019, the racial disparities were found in our justice system bring up and reached no conclusion of the causes of these disparities. this report raises difficult questions pretty questions that demand answers. sitting here today, we do not have those answers. so our task is to ask the right questions and find the answers. i am joined by my partner in this effort, major general of the army's marshal general, my partner, and general supervisor military police, and our criminal investigators in our criminal laboratory. based on the gao findings, the upper duke examiner system is a shared responsibility. with us, and with our commanders. as we assess this system from commanding decisions, to the disposition phase, we must do so with a common framework in the right mind. that effort must start with seeing ourselves. this began last year when we began met recommending and working with other services to execute these parts prevent out visionary statute directs us to identify and investigate and result in injustice. finally continue to improve our internal data sharing. we established a link between his law-enforcement database and our justice database allowing a degree of interoperability and transparency never existed before. his efforts began before the recent tragic events in the national conversation that followed our nation follow the consternation and within our formations. that conversation demonstrates data alone, cannot tell the full story. we must look beyond the data and ask the difficult questions . we need to look hard at ourselves. with commanders, we must look at the causes. and we must understand the preconception and present prejudice can affect the investigation disposition of misconduct. while my experience tells me we have an extraordinary healthy system of justice, i'm also recognizably similar do not know what we do not know. it is our job to discover what needs fixing and fix it. to do this, i have directed a comprehensive assessment with the published marshal general to get left of the allegation and disposition decision. find out why the justice system is more likely to investigate certain soldiers and what our investigations and command decisions tell us about this issue. finally we know that each of us shape our own backgrounds and experiences as a secretary, and chief in her major recently reminded us which i echoed in my own message to my core, leaders of all ranks must listen with compassion and humility. i believe our justice system is one of the best in the world. i also note it is not perfect. the justice system must be both just for and seem to be just with much to learn and more work to do. we look forward to working with this committee to understand it the problem and to address its creative thank you. >> thank you for the invitation to testify on the issue of racial disparity in military justice. the department of navy guidance emphasizes several things about equal opportunity. the first is that sailors and marines are our most precious resource. second that unlawful discrimination undermines that the ability to function effectively. and cannot be tolerated. and third that we must overcome any bias or any stereotype that diminishes cohesiveness, camaraderie or morale. in recent message to the fleet, blue have commented on this pretty he said, in the navy we talk a lot about treating people with dignity and respect. in fact we demand it. it is one of the things that makes us a great navy. and then observing recent events in our nation, it was added, can't be entering a illusion that the fact that racism is alive and well in our country. ... ... of honor and courage and commitment. it's to our service members to support and defend the constitution. and to help protect the rights afforded to all americans. the military justice system must operate without discrimination, without racism, all sailors must have confidence in the fairness of the system. report has disparities with race and ethnicity. to summarize those, that were identified for the navy, black sailors more than likely than white tailors were subject of investigation and the database used by then criminal services and other elements. the same for hispanic service members. black sailors were also more likely than white sailors to be tried by a general or special court-martial. so were hispanic sailors. when it came to assessing the results of a court-martial, there is no significant difference between the conviction rates for black, hispanic or white sailors. and the witness on noted on the last panel for those found guilty, black sailors were less likely than white sailors to receive the punishment of discharge or dismissal. the gao was correct that there may be disparities in different points in the system. we appreciate the recommendations they made to help. when those are combined with the requirements of section 540 i call my my hope is that will result an approved data collection. a process to determine when that data should be reviewed and the valuation to identify the causes of the disparities. now regarding data collection, the navy and marine corps management system has been updated to collect the race, ethnicity and gender for each accused for each general and court-martial bird i've more work to do into areas. the first relates to summary courts-martial. because the navy prosecution offices often are not directly involved in the summary courts-martial. we are reviewing procedures needed to collect the associated data. as a gao witness observe the second nonjudicial punishment, they recommended the navy consider how we might maintain nonjudicial punishment information in the database and how to implement this data remains under review. the navy has also taken steps to prevent racial bias through training. this is not a panacea, but we cannot let up. the naval leadership and ethics centers has training on unconscious bias for executive officers and other leaders. the naval criminal investigative search engine service trains unconscious bias in cross-cultural communications. to prevent racial profiling and investigation. we also provide training on unconscious bias of the inclusion and diversity within the judge advocate community prayed the navy is committed to ensure the military justice system is fair for everyone. i look forward to working with you to improve our data collection and to identify, understand and address these disparities. thank you. >> thank you. so madam chair thank you member kelly thank you so much for the opportunity to address the importance of eradicating disparity to ensure fairness inclusion and diversity for all air and space professionals of the department of the air force. an inclusive and diverse force is absolutely necessary to defend a diverse and inclusive nation. like many of our civilian counterparts we collect data on race in the military justice process. our data shows that black mail airmen below the rank of v5 and with less than five years time in service are almost two times more likely to receive nonjudicial punishment and article 15. or face court-martial. while we review specific cases to ensure there is not disparate treatment based on protective class, we don't have clear answers or underlying reasons as to why the disparity exists. like all difficult issues the nation faces, solutions to address that disparity will require whole of government and societal approaches. we are committed to working with you to be part of that solution. throughout our history we've defended the nation, fought and won our wars because of four simple yet key components. first the best people, second the best training, third the best equipment and forth the most important element that binds us together. discipline. discipline lies at the heart of what the nation expects of its military in the execution of our national defense missions. discipline must be developed from day one. discipline must also be earned by the military establishment, by treating all of our members with dignity and a suspect when equal opportunity to meet and exceed standards. we try to do that through inclusion, feedback, mentoring, along with the administration of progressive discipline when airmen make mistakes before you become a disciplinarian statistic. as a secretary and chief recently stated, our diversity strengthens us as much as our common mission unifies us for the department of air force drives to foster a culture of inclusion and respect for every airmen and space professional is valued for the talents he or she brings to the department regardless of race, color, or creed. our struggle against racism and other forms of discrimination cannot be viewed as finite battles. rather our approach must be infinite, a constant struggle for betterments. when president truman signed executive order 9981 in 1948 he set in motion racial integration of our armed forces. twenty-five years later in 1972 task force found intentional and systemic discrimination in the military justice system. many of the proposals identified then were adopted. today what we believe we no longer have intentional discrimination in our processes, the fact is that rachel disparity in the aggregate process. this demonstrates the complex and challenging nature of the issue. symptomatic or indicative of one of many symptoms. a daunting problem column that one that should not stop us from exploring what we can do in the disciplinary process to service part of the solution set. addressing it requires a holistic approach. every day across the continuum of discipline, we are committed to finding new solutions and approaches. every air and space professional, military and civilian, from the most senior to the most junior, is responsible for fostering and reinforcing a culture of inclusion, dignity and respect. like everything we do in the military, this requires a team effort. especially to get to the root causes of this difficult problem. we can frame an approach to asking ourselves for juxtaposing questions. first, while easy to say our data merely reflects or is perhaps better than the society from where we come. what can we do in the armed services? second, while easy to say the specific cases show no actual disparate treatment and the decision made, are we really including a mentoring and administering progressive discipline equally to all before they become an article 15 or a court-martial? third, while easy to say justice was colorblind in each of the cases, are there administrative and substandard new processes which are discriminatory in treatment or impact? and forth, finally, while easy to say the data shows that the aggregate disparity disappears after the first five years in the force, what can we do to eradicate that disparity earlier? and altogether. we look forward to working with the subcommittee on this very -- on this most important issue. so thank you general rockwell. >> madam chair, ranking member kelly, members of the military subcommittee think if your invitation to represent the marine corps on the issue of racial disparity within the military justice system. the marine corps is dedicated to ensuring the quality throughout its ranks of the most junior marine to our senior leadership. although we have come a long way, we recognize much must be done. several months ago the commandant saw the way to remove the confederate battle flag from the reading jamboree core installation because of its divisiveness in association with hate and discrimination. three weeks ago, there marine corps issued specific direction to remove the confederate battle flag from all marine corps installations across the globe. in his message to the marine corps, regarding the confederate battle flag removal to comment out stated only as a unified force free of discrimination, racial inequality and prejudice can be fully demonstrate our core values. and serve as the elite war fighting organization america requires and expects us to be. too that end, the commandant is committed to implementing the findings of the gao report. disparities the gao highlighted and our administration of the justice system in the marine corps requires immediate scrutiny and demands action. the implicit trust marines placing one another makes elimination of racial inequality and imperative. as the commandant stated any form of racial inequality, whether it be direct, indirect, intentional or unintentional, threatens the cohesion of marine corps and must be addressed head on. the gao published two recommendations specifically addressed to the department of the navy. first, they recommended the highlighted need for our personnel investigation into military justice databases to standardize data due to race, ethnicity and gender. second and similarly, focus on saturday's data collection for nonjudicial punishment and summary courts-martial. my written statement provides greater detail the marine corps specific actions and intentions stemming from the ga's recommendation. improve data collection brought about by changing from the last year, will help us to collectively and comparatively assess data to identify racial and ethnic disparities. but we will not wait for better data to fight inequality now. how we train, educate and foster marines within our force is paramount to ensure the quality across her fighting force and within the military justice system. training and education serve as a fundamental component of eliminating racial bias. to this end the marine corps is pursuing inclusion of unconscious training curriculum at every level of professional development. prospective commanders and senior enlisted leaders receive trainings on bias awareness of the marine corps university. genome marines receive comparable training from small leadership or even our military justice have undergone similar training with unconscious within the past year. such training and decisive senior leader action, such as the confederate battle flags removal, may not resolve the disparities overnight. but our commitment to ensure the quality among that range marines remain steadfast and enduring pre-thank you and i look forward to working with you on this important issue. >> thank you in general. thank you all for your testimony. i'd like to start by asking a simple question on transparency. we work for the public. and the facts that general rockwell, you fought the request from different protector defenders for over three years is deeply troubling to me. especially when it was said by the judge that this was at the aftermath of the air force manpower found that racial disparities are consistent, persistent, and getting worse. and the judge then said when they attempted to get information about what you were doing about that, and you refuse, the judge said this was an exercise which went nowhere. so, tell me and the american people what was -- who was benefited by not being forthright in complying with the foyer request? >> madam chair, as you know and you know the exemptions under foia and in this case which foia exemption was invoked. it was the deliberative process predecisional. >> but that is always use some people don't want to comply with foia. so yes, ma'am, we looked at the underlying root causes, and of course the data was released. the data showed exactly what you explained the underlying reason the root causes of the 11 or 12 people of the working group there were 11 or 12 different answers as to what that root caught was. that truly, mam did fall into why we protected that. so except you did not do anything about it that is the problem. you stand up this air force manpower to do this evaluation. they come back with a pretty compelling statement, consistent, persistent and getting worse. and then you do nothing about it. so yes, ma'am. >> how is that deliberative? >> it is consistent and has been since we been collecting the data since 72. it is persistent because it is consistent. as far as it getting worse and has pretty much stayed the same at least in the air force across this time. but one thing that we do know in the air force is to create this zone of innovation, this creative problem-solving, these creative solutions, you have to give people, mam, the ability to just relate look at this issue in different ways. >> i agree with you i'm going to move on. thank you. so yes, ma'am. >> admiral, the request for four yeah i think it was from 2,062,015, you provided information and data from 2014 and 2015. why did you not provide the entire request? >> adam chair i will have to take that question for the record i know we switched case management systems and about 2014 and i think likely think that was dealing with the data in the amount of good data we could deliver but i will get back to you on the final answer prayed. >> alright protector defenders when they came out with the report found that the air force was 71% more likely to have black airmen face court-martial than whites. the army was 61% navy was 40% marine corps was 32%. did any of you reach out to protect our defenders to find out more about their study, or how they could be helpful to you in dealing with this problem? general. >> ma'am, i can't say today that i know specifically what communications we had with pod during that time. i can get that answer back to you but i cannot say right now. so have any intention of working with them moving forward? >> ma'am we have talked with pod, digested their materials and use it to inform us. i think we also spent a fair amount of time, an extensive amount of time with jal and the data request as well. we have a lot of people asking us for information. so we provide as best we can and certainly in accordance with the rules. what we should provide to not only private organizations, but certainly government. so think i'm running out of time. admiral haner did you reach out to pod to learn more about their process or how they might be helpful? >> madame chair i did not. but i don't know is if anyone from our organization did. but i wish i had acted earlier. >> thank you. >> general rockwell. so no ma'am. we are very much looking forward though, to seeing what the field thanks about this. and this is what's behind our eye g independent review of this. we were able to talk to the very same people in the field that pod has been talking to with a multidisciplinary team to get this type of feedback of what exactly is going on and what are those root causes. so general so madam chair i did not and i think that's an area we can do better we will work on that. >> to any of you think that someone should be court-martialed for being six minutes late to a formation meeting? >> no ma'am. >> general? so madam chair, i mean it would depend on the circumstances. if it was in combat, absolutely. i think of it was late for a meeting here in the pentagon or in this chamber, the answer would be no ma'am. >> my time has expired, ranking member kelly. >> i think we have to be real dangerous about using partial facts and partial figures. six minutes late is not a big deal unless it is six minutes late delivering an ordinance that saves thousands of troops. six minutes late is not a big deal if it is to a meeting with a subordinate. it's extremely important if your meeting with the president of the united states of the secretary of defense. six minutes late if it is one time is not a big deal. six minute-if it's a pattern. so not knowing all the circumstances weather is 16 minute thing or another i think be very dangerous. i think colonel christiansen was very dangerous when he said lawyers are less culturally biased than commanders. that is a very dangerous assumption. and he also said only one in ten jags are african-american, so were lesser representative in the jag core but we are culturally superior to the rest of these commanders. i think that is a very dangerous assumption to make. i think we have to be real here. here is what we know. we know each five's, people with five years and below are treated differently if they are african-american when they are in the armed services. we know that. so we know what we have got to get after. we know that it seems the referral rates when they are tried to the conclusion are the same. so that doesn't necessarily mean that people are being referred that shouldn't. it may actually mean the opposite, but we don't know. so what we've got to do is number one, figure out how do we quit being discriminatory, racially discriminatory to e fives below with people with five years of service. why do we need to remedy that situation? number two is we know we don't have african-american fighter pilots. we know the promotion rate sometimes are slower to general officer or don't make general officer with african-americans or minorities. we know some of the reasons. and so we've got to get after them. anthony brown has the elite act which she's talking about. if you're not a fighter pilot you're probably not going to make general. if you're not a submariner service shift guy erred aviator you're not going to make admiral. you might, there may be some jag core, some signal that you could do if you are in the army if you're not a tanker, infantry, combat arms guy you're probably not as likely to make general. we know this. so what are we doing to get african-american kids into those branches or reno promotions happen? where you get the best schools because of the jobs you do? what do we do to encourage them? what are we doing as services to go after and make sure we have aviators that fly in the navy? you come up the decks of those carriers. what are we doing to make sure we've got african-american pilots who want to bf 35 pilots which is more likely a quicker track to being promoted to general than anything else. what are we doing to make sure that african-american soldiers at the e1 35 level are getting in the right mos where the right branches where promotions exist? that's what we've got to do. and i don't need to pretreat with got to get the root of this stuff pretty got to stop talking about some of these things that may be or might be. but we've got to do if you want to stamp out the problem you've got to figure out what the problem is pretty got to figure out what the root cause is part of think right now we are failing horribly at that. so right now i want you to tell me what you are doing in your service to figure out what the cause is therefore we can make a change in a difference? >> congressman kelly thank you. i think him a recruiting and promotion perspective i think there is an intense focus right now and there has been the chief of staff secretary instituted a talent system last year end that in part is designed to get after natural talent and talent that implicit bias might prevent from advancing. so i think there is a fair, not just a fair amount of emphasis there is significant emphasis. as i mentioned in my statement i have directed with the general a look at a very deliberate assessment trying to get left of the allegation. what that means is if we have an overrepresentation coming into the investigative system, how do we get in front of that allegation to figure out what is happening when a soldier gets to the units such that they get in with let's say the wrong crowd. early start using drugs. or they start misbehaving. what is going on there? or perhaps just to the left of the disposition decision to send someone to trial. is there something going on there? so we are looking hard at implicit bias. i take some comfort in this. when we started looking at implicit bias and the arena of sexual assault about ten years ago, it is now replete through our training. not only commanders, but judge advocates throughout. and in my assessment, my professional assessment has had a significant impact on the understanding of counterintuitive behavior and sexual assaults. we know training, education and implicit bias works. so can you guys answer really quickly like and 15 seconds of what you can do to change that? because i am out of time. >> thank you ranking member kelly. first and foremost i think we need to us in the jag core fit into the navy's overall effort of excellence its signature behaviors gaining respect you talked with. second thing is we have focused on diversity recruiting. we have a dedicated diversity liaison program, 18 officers closely affiliated with 13 educational organizations to try to keep connections so we keep that recording pipeline open. and then, like general petey talked about, focusing on unconscious bias. the reason i think it works is because i remember the first time i took unconscious bias training in 2014. it was only later when i realized i hadn't unconscious bias against unconscious bias training. i think it can be effective and i think we need to keep at it and keep moving it through the force. so very quickly please. >> thank you ranking member kelly we do exactly the way you said. you expand the discipline continuum from just courts and article 15 and you go left. when you expand that zone and you look at that, how you discipline someone, highest counsel someone's how you include somebody, how do you give them feedback as a holistic approach we have to take. >> thank you very quickly this has to be top-down driven predict, dot has done that with this recent action. everybody has to get it and it starts from the top or he's driven that down. we've also done it with our pack order with contact order that gets after discrimination. that's put on the books for three years and it involves equal opportunity advisor to the commander it is a commanders program. >> thank you. >> ms. davis you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you madam chair and to all of you we appreciate your joining us today. i am glad my colleague, mr. kelly talked about some of the issues you have already identified. one of them was about the five years. i think that's very important. what i would like to know is about the early warning signs. is there an understanding that we really need to look at that and some of that information should be collected as well. are there counseling sessions? are there concerns about retribution how do we begin to really understand it better on how is it used? the other thing that i think we are all talking about right now, is the element of white privilege. i wonder to what extent is that an area of discussion that really can be broadened in the military as well? how is that talks about? because as we well know if you look at the data, there are plenty of ways of seeing and suggesting and really being open about how that affects us all frankly. and i think we all have her own experience those examples and how it might have been different if our son or our daughter was black or brown. what does that mean? i think that is an important discussion to have in the services as well. and then finally, i just wonder, once we identify implicit bias what we do about it? if we are to go back and looking at the progression of circumstances for someone and the outcome, what is it about that? how do we identify? and when we do let's talk about that a little bit as well. thank you. >> tuna start general? >> madame congresswoman, again i believe it starts from the top. and i believe it starts with these honest and candid conversations in a safe environment. you can do this in the military. we believe in the marine corps this is commander driven and commander owned. but you have to begin with those. you have to view diversity within the force as a strength. that begins with the commandant all the way down to the most junior. you have to accept that as a strength. because at the end of the day that is with the marine corps is about. it's about fighting as a team, everybody on the team regardless of gender ethnicity or race is very important. what is the bottom line. as my colleague stated here pathways and mentorship to young people at look at the military in the marine corps is a pass for them. we have work to do there but we can do that. these are steps that are given now. thank you. >> ma'am, when i look at the numbers we have right now, and i see those numbers it makes you realize the numbers are good data at least from an article 15 and a court standpoint. it's not evidence, it's not evidence to get to the root cause of the problem. so the last part of your question how do we train unbiased? you look at the way attorneys look at things. you look to weed out bias to get the weight relevance and credibility of actual evidence. i think one of the approaches we must take is to develop more data left of article 15 we don't have that data. be kind of know that's where the problem is. what we don't know and we can't answer for sure is, our weight mentoring everybody the same? we all feel that we probably are not based on those biases. but we do not have the specific data to show that. once you get that data of course she move on to the training he move onto the speaking of bias you move onto the training of that. you move on to weeding that out. that all creates an atmosphere of inclusion. you create that atmosphere of inclusion, you've just created diversity. so okay thank you. admiral, ms. davis has about 15 seconds but we will extend 15 seconds each of you to finish your comments. >> the only additional comment i would have is i think the value of unconscious bias training and other decision-making training is that you put your self in the position where you can take different perspectives and you bring other people on your decision-making team as well. that is very protective for the final decision-maker and everybody on the team. >> general pd. >> thank you and i think you should know as well the army not always focus at the squad level in the squad level courting tour sgt major it's all about the team building it's all about inclusion it's all about bringing people onto one team so they all feel like they belong. that gives you a better ability to diagnose are people going left, rights, and center. that focus by army leadership at every echelon all the way down is clay to getting after this especially when it comes to unconscious bias. >> alright thank you. >> you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you madame chair and thank you ranking member kelly for holding this hearing. thank you panelist for being here. this is a significant problem that we absolutely need to fix. we must ensure the systems be utilized to administer discipline are fair and just for everyone. and the 60s my father served in the marine corps and experience firsthand the service into a fully integrated force along with the racial tensions that flared up during that time. we have progressed since then but we can all agree we still have a long way to go. it was disheartening to learn that despite the data presented in the 2017 protect our defenders report and the 2019 ja over report. they respond with a little more than unconscious bias trading to address wide spread racial disparities. meanwhile, black service members continue to receive nonjudicial punishment and disproportionately high rates compared to white service members. and i have to believe this is a contributing factor to why we don't see service members of colors achieve higher ranks. this is an issue the committee has consistently raised and ranking member kelly so eloquently articulated just a few minutes ago. general rockwell is three years with time and energy refuting the report preventing the data from being available at time and the resources could have been spent excepting there's a major problem in tackling it head on. it's system it's more of a cyst spared a that meant for days to try to resolve it. so one of my questions, i have a few. would this include improving -- will all of the work that you mentioned earlier about addressing these long-term issues, will this include the collection data on race and ethnicity to make it more uniform across the services so it is easier to identify problems? >> yes member will we are making a conscious effort to again move that left of article 15 and court-martial on the continuum and collected data, collect meaningful data with inclusion, feedback and mentoring. i think that is critical to getting to the root cause of the issue here. >> thank you. what is the timeline for actions to be taken if you could just reiterate that, general rockwell. >> we are doing it now ma'am. right now the projected timeline with the group that has been put together with our manpower and reserve affairs personnel, we are a part of his calendar year 20. >> thank you so much the last question or may be the last question, general depending on my time, how will the progress be measured? >> i think ultimately you measure progress by eliminating that racial disparity. you get to where we are right now in the air force at the ee five level with five levels in weather is no disparity. that has to be the ultimate goal of where we get to. >> thank you so much. i have a little bit of time so i will ask this next question but i understand the inspector general will be leading a review on racial disparity in causal factors like culture and policy buried the scope and demographic makeup of this review panel can certainly make a difference in its effectiveness and what its recommendations look like. can you describe the makeup of the panel? >> i don't have the full details. we have three members on that panel. it is fundamentally a large panel. it has general officers on it, who are black and african-american. it has chiefs audit, senior enlisted who are african-american. and it is multidisciplinary and multi diverse. again the idea is to get left of article 15. and to get to that there are so many different factors that need to be looked at. i think what is going to be key is reaching down into what people feel on the ground. that is really the focus of what they are trying to get to. >> thank you so much. madam chair, i yield. >> you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you madame chair and i thank you all for being here today. we have a problem in this country was sentencing a civilian with the civilian law enforcement system. people of color tend to get longer sentences than white individuals do. is this something were looking at in the military as well? we know we have a problem with t5's and below going to court-martial or receiving njp more than white service members do. are we looking at the sentencing are they being sentence more harshly than their white counterparts? smacks are i will go first. as i looked at this issue with regard to the gao report, as a matter fact, black airmen are sentenced a less severely than whites. i think -- that is both with article 15 punishments and court-martial sentences. i think all that really tells us is this issue is much more complex than we can really wrap our -- >> admiral, correct me if i'm wrong but that was for more senior members above each of right? i'm talking about the more junior rank. >> no, sir, even the e1 to e5 ranks for you see the racial disparity when you break it down further, white airmen are punished in more severely than black urban. >> provision when yield? to act in the gao report, it said that black and mail service members are more likely than white female to be tried in summary courts-martial and to be subject of nonjudicial punishment in the air force and marine corps. how does that square with what you said general? >> yes man that is an venue selection they go to that venue or court-martial. but at the end of it if they are convicted and punished, their sentences are less in the air force. and again, ma'am, i don't know what that means. it's just as you pull apart the data and analyze it, that's what we see in the air force. i don't know if that's the case and the other services. >> you know, if i could, for the other services if i could take those answers for the record. i have another question regarding the collection of data in regards to njp and the other commanding officers part as we are doing the njp and collecting the data, are we collecting individual data for these commanding officers and looking at their records? and are we trying to find these racial disparities and how they're dishing out punishment? and if so, if were starting to see these racial disparities in the punishment that they are issuing, are they being counseled it all? and anybody can take that question part and like to hear from everybody if i could. >> congressman, this is general petey from the army. he think the short answer is, if he looked at her data collection today we do not track that. stomach i can't hear anything right now. my mike is activated. >> okay here now. >> 's are this is general petey from the army. sitting here today we do not track a particular commander's by race. i think in terms of our reflections on how we get after the notion of potential bias, whether unconscious or deliberate, that is part of, i think our assessment. we talk about how law enforcement reacts at a scene or a commander disposes of nonjudicial punishment, i think this is one of the areas that we look at. i would tell you though and practice, as a practicing judge advocate in the field for 32 years, those indicators are evident to any judge advocate or other leader whether it is a brigade commander or division commander. they see things in their formation, especially particular commanders who are doing things it appeared to them audit or suspicious or curious. i myself, only have had one occasion in 32 years that have had such a commander in such a circumstance as you suggest but it's worth looking at. i think we have tuna think it is the responsible thing to do in our assessment. thank you, sir. >> with that, madame chairwoman, you'll back my time. but i would like to hear response on the record from the other judge advocate generals. thank you. >> okay we will ask that you prepare a response for the record. thank you, mr. hanh is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. thank you madam chair. and encase it wasn't clear before, i do want to say, for the record, that i'm grateful for the leadership of chairwoman spear and the military subcommittee because back in 2012 when addressing sexual assault and harassment reporting, i think it led to substantive changes in the dod culture. but it comes to equality and injustice, we are an impatient nation. i'm going to ask the same question that i asked before in terms of convening authority. if you believe convening authority should be left to commanders or do you think the current process increases the risk of unconscious or even overt bias within our military justice system? >> can you return to the video portion? we don't see you. >> oh i'm sorry. i'm sorry. could he see me now? >> we see you now. [laughter] >> thank you. >> ma'am, this is general petey from the army. you've probably heard me say this before, but i have complete confidence in our commanders to administer justice fairly and dispassionately. especially at the senior levels. it's not that i don't have faith in lawyers. i love my core, i love the judge advocates we recruit, train and educate endnote nurture and culture. but there is no monopoly on bias or unbiased. there is no monopoly on wisdom and your legal branches. i look to the federal estate sector, and i'm not trying to throw anybody under the bus. with that as a lawyer -controlled system. and by any measure whether it is the sentencing project or d.o.j. bureau of this statistics, the racial disparities in those systems are wellin excess of what you find in the military services. that's not my way of excuse, but that is a lawyer controlled system. so i don't believe the answer is lawyers. i believe the answer is a set of cross checks and balances between law enforcement, commanders, and lawyers looking at each other in the system and keeping each other on us. thank you, ma'am. so anyone else want to comment on that? or does anyone have a different view? >> okay. too i'm going to my question. given that i am sure you're all looking inward with a lot of urgency. one of the gao's findings was that while black males were more likely than white servicemen and women to be tried in general and special court marshals across the services. race was not a statistically significant factor in the likelihood of conviction. and so i am wondering what do you believe that data says about the military justice system? could it indicate the bias is more prevalent among our junior leadership ranks who are recommending service members for njp? or court-martial amongst the senior leaders who are ultimately sentencing them? >> congresswoman, i think this goes back to the first question and you can really dovetail the answer to the first question of what you just asked. when you look at what a commander does of setting the tone, and then the commander setting that command climate, and you look at this issue and we think we know where the answer is where the targets are were the targets of opportunity are that is left of 15. we now then, that where this has to happen. where the unconscious bias needs to be eliminated. where the mentoring and inclusion happens is that first-line t5 supervisor over those e4 and below airmen. when you look at setting that command climate, knowing the commander has to do that and letting that supervisor do that, that is where we need to focus the help, the training, the data and everything me to it collect. >> does anybody else want to add anything to general walk on john rockwell's comments? >> well, i think, adam congresswoman, i think from the marine corps perspective there are two pieces. the gao report was pretty clear with the racial bias in the data could not conclude unlawful because we don't fully understand the data. so number one, to general petey's point, we have to get left of the problem and figure out with this data exactly means. but seconds and more importantly, something the commandant has made clear is the commander has to get after this and setting the tone, training and educating their subordinate personnel about the importance of this equality and diversity in the force and how that makes us stronger. i think that is something the commandant himself has really gotten after. and that has been taken very seriously in the marine corps. so welcome appreciate all of that. certainly you want to backup the data with the root cause analysis along all of those sort of staged. and i understand the air force is going to be completing an anonymous survey. general rockwell, will those findings of the surveys with a be public? >> yes, congressman, i imagine they will be. i will deferred all that to the ig who is running it. so we do get an independent look at this. but yes, i can't believe those results will not be open and transparent. >> alright, your time is expired thank you. >> thank you. >> we will now go to mr. brown for five minutes. >> thank you madame chair. again i want to thank you and ranking member, represent of kelly for allowing me to it weigh on this afternoon. i want to think is of the panelist for testifying today, owing to thank you to our service to our nation and in the armed forces and for your stated commitment to end racial disparities in our military justice system. we are at a difficult time in our nations history. a time and racial injustice is seen in the violence against black americans by local law enforcement. a time when persistent racial disparities are illuminated by the stark contrast we are witnessing in the disproportionate prevalence of covid-19 death and infection among black and brown americans. a time when almost every racial disparity experience in this nation and our educational systems are criminal systems, the workforce are compounded by this pernicious pandemic. and today we are at a difficult time in america's military. an institution that led this nation and racial integration almost 75 years ago is now confronted with white nationalism and our ranks. an institution that saw the first african-american at west point 40 years ago now retired army general vincent brooks. it took until last week before we could confirm our first african-american service chief, general brown of the air force and we still have a military who 61 four-star flag officers only include two african-american officers among them. an institution that benefited from the courageous service of nearly 1000 pilots during world war ii who completed the training program. yet today there were only 446 fighter pilots and navigators pilots and the arm force. lesson 2% of our pilots are african-american. an institution that after world war ii in 1951 began to operate under that uc mj, which in many ways has been way ahead of the changes, the positive changes in the civilian criminal justice system and the terms of the rights of the accused and defendants. yet today it grapples with racial disparities in the disciplinary treatment of men women in uniform. that is where we are today. in our nation, and our military and it cannot be where we are tomorrow. we have work to do and we need to do it now. gentlemen i take a lot of stock in the work of the gao. they came back with what i thought was a thoughtful list of recommendations on how we can get better. my question is, what more do you need from congress in order to complete your evaluation of the causes of any disparities in the military justice system? and, are you consulting any outside resources as expertise in this area in order to complete this evaluation? >> we can start with the army will go down to the air force and navy. >> congressman thank you so much for the question. as to what we need from congress think i mentioned in my statement the care and attention desire passion you believed to these issues to help us help ourselves to see ourselves as critical so i think that will continue i know it will. i want to know personally i welcome minnesota's the army leadership. with respect to the outside resources, with respect to causality we are in the early stages of figuring out what can cause this. we are developing a framework this very week and last week to figure that out. i fully expect that will include outside assistance. thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> sir, i think section 540 i have the nda was an excellent roadmap. i think that point was emphasized from that witness from the gao. i think the focus on data collection and then solid assessment, understanding and then what to do about the disparity is the right way ahead. i agreed with general petey on outside assistance. i think it's going to be important that it be deliberate that it be thoughtful, and it's not going to be over quick. we are going to have to continue separate and that's why think the outside resources can be incredibly helpful. >> general rockwell. >> sir, i have a lot of faith and what our ig independent review is going to do. i have a lot of faith that they are going to look at this internally and holistically. i also have a lot of faith in our manpower and reserve and a1 team who is leading the effort. i asked the question about what kind of outside help are weakening? that manpower and personnel team is getting a lot of outside help. i have quite a bit of faith in that to see what else we can do to get to this elusive solutions here. >> mr. congressman i don't believe at this time we need any help from congress by appreciate the opportunity to testify here. we just have a lot of work to do. we have to get after this. we realize we are at the beginning we are looking at data we are trying to understand the data. there's a lot of hard work that has to be done. the commandant is my boss i keep mentioning him because he has made this an important plank and his competency he is driving at a think that is what we need throughout every echelon of the marine corps commanders need to drive this they need to make an important and i think that starts these candid and open conversations about how to get after this. that is with the marine corps is doing. >> thank you madam chair. >> thank you mr. brown. mr. kelly give any final words? >> art generals and admirals thank you summit for your participation today and for your commitment to the rule of law. it may just end with a few comments. 540 i was not put in at your request. but it congress' request. while you are relying on that now to recognize there is work to be done, it would have been a whole lot better if it had come from you. general lecture you've set a number of times, starts at the top and you are right. and i hope you convey to all of your chiefs of staff, how critical this is to the congress of the united states. general petey, you said much like sexual assault and sexual harassment in the military, we have to focus on this with the same laser focus that we have provided for that issue, and i agree with you. we are at a transformational point in this country. civilian and military wise. and i think that there is a lot of work to do. there is a lot of data that has to be collected. but we have to make sure it is consistent across all of the services. and that there is transparency. i hope that we don't have too have another hearing where we have outside groups coming to us and saying we can't get the information. gao, and a number of circumstances that she couldn't get the information. we have to be forthcoming to the american people. we intend to continue this work. we will have you back to see how you are doing in hopes you are going to be making great strides in dealing with the antiracism that we have now have to review in society generally. and with that, we stand adjourned. [background noises] [background noises] [background noises] [background noises] [background noises] [background noises] [background noises] >> bench watch book tv this summer. every saturday evening at 8:00 p.m. easter settle in and watch several hours of your favorite authors. saturday we are featuring "new york times" best-selling author of a dozen books including a once in a great city, a detroit story, barack obama the story and is most recent good american family. and watch saturday june 27 as we feature pulitzer prize winning author david mccullough. ben watch tv all summer on cspan2. ♪ ♪ >> c-span is unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court : : the dc office of ronald reagan our guest today thank joining us.for >> we like to be a part of any event the reagan institute house. >> no good deed goes

Related Keywords

Laos , Minnesota , United States , Netherlands , Washington , Mississippi , Westpoint , Americans , America , Holland , American , John Rockwell , Anthony Brown , Charles Brown , Brenda Farrell ,