U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

51–795 PDF 2010

S. Hrg. 111–460 

NOMINATION OF MARTHA N. JOHNSON 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

OF THE

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

NOMINATION OF MARTHA N. JOHNSON TO BE ADMINISTRATOR, 

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

JUNE 3, 2009 

Available via http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

ROLAND W. BURRIS, Illinois 

MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

MICHAEL L. ALEXANDER, Staff Director 

KRISTINE V. LAM, Professional Staff Member 

BRANDON L. MILHORN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

JENNIFER L. TARR, Minority Counsel 

TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk 

PATRICIA R. HOGAN, Publications Clerk and GPO Detailee 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Hearing Clerk 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Lieberman ........................................................................................... 1 

Senator Collins ................................................................................................. 3 

Senator Tester .................................................................................................. 10 

Senator McCaskill ............................................................................................ 13 

Prepared statements: 

Senator Lieberman ........................................................................................... 17 

Senator Collins ................................................................................................. 19 

WITNESS 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 2009 

Martha N. Johnson to be Administrator, General Services Administration: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 

Biographical and financial information .......................................................... 23 

Responses to pre-hearing questions for the Record ....................................... 34 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 71 

Responses to post-hearing questions for the Record ..................................... 72 

(1) 

NOMINATION OF MARTHA N. JOHNSON 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 2009 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:18 a.m., in room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Lieberman, McCaskill, Tester, and Collins. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN LIEBERMAN 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Good morning, and welcome to this hearing to consider the nomination of Martha Johnson to be Administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA). We welcome 

you, Ms. Johnson, particularly. 

GSA is often called the Federal Government’s ‘‘landlord’’ because 

it provides workspace and office services for almost every Federal 

office and agency—from courthouses to ports of entry, with a lot in 

between. Managing 8,600 buildings and $500 billion in assets 

makes GSA one of the world’s largest property management organizations—maybe the largest. 

But GSA is far more than just a landlord. Its 12,000 employees 

are dispersed across the country in 11 district headquarters from 

which they guide Federal spending on everything from basic office 

equipment to the Federal fleet of more than 200,000 vehicles. 

GSA’s purchasing decisions have broad implications for the rest 

of the economy since, as we have seen, as an early acquirer of new 

technologies, including alternative fuel cars, the agency can help 

move those technologies through its purchasing power from innovation to the marketplace. 

GSA also has wide responsibilities for providing information 

technology and telecommunications services for Federal agencies. 

With its leadership, the agency can ensure that the Federal Government is using cutting-edge technology to lower costs, better engage with citizens, and detect and defend against cyber threats. 

These are very large and serious responsibilities which require 

strong leadership and great experience, and, Ms. Johnson, it looks 

to me like you bring that to this responsibility. 

Let me just lay out a few of the challenges that I think GSA has, 

as experienced in the oversight work of this Committee. In the area 

of procurement first, the contracts negotiated by GSA should leverage the vast buying power of the Federal Government so that agencies get more value for the taxpayer’s dollar. 

2 

Last year, Federal agencies bought approximately $37 billion of 

goods and services off GSA schedules, which cover everything from 

office supplies to human resource services to security equipment. 

Having GSA negotiate these procurement agreements lets its customer agencies stay focused on their core missions. But some agencies have lost confidence in the ability of GSA to provide the best 

products at the best prices and have begun to negotiate their own 

contracts that duplicate services offered by GSA. That defeats the 

purpose of GSA, which was created under President Truman in 

1949 with the specific intent of streamlining the Federal Government purchasing process. Today this agency and interagency contracting, including use of GSA contracts, is on the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) high-risk list, and that is something 

that should not continue, and we hope you will be able to change 

that, if confirmed. 

Similar problems exist in GSA’s property management activities 

with some agencies questioning whether GSA meets their needs in 

the most cost-effective manner. 

One problem of particular concern to our Committee is the 

amount of excess or underutilized property owned by the Federal 

Government. In the last Congress, the Office of Management and 

Budget reported to us that the Federal Government owns 21,000 

buildings worth about $18 billion that are underused or no longer 

needed, and GAO has put management of Federal property also on 

its high-risk list since 2003. I want to point out and stress that not 

all of these properties are under GSA’s control, but one of its jobs, 

I think, is to help and encourage and push other agencies, when 

necessary, to dispose of excess property, and we are going to need 

your leadership, Ms. Johnson, to resolve this problem. Another important role that GSA plays is as a promoter of green technologies, 

as I alluded to. 

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the stimulus bill, 

greatly added to the ability of GSA to ‘‘green the government’’ by 

providing $4.3 billion to make Federal buildings more energy efficient and $300 million more to buy additional fuel-efficient vehicles 

for the Federal fleet. 

It is very important to us, and I know to all of Congress, that 

GSA carry out those responsibilities as quickly and effectively as 

possible. So these are big challenges for a big part of the Federal 

Government, but I personally believe that President Obama has 

made a very wise choice in nominating you, Ms. Johnson, to be the 

GSA Administrator. You bring a wealth of administrative and financial experience in the private, nonprofit, and government sectors to this job, if confirmed. 

Ms. Johnson began her career at Cummins Engines Company 

and more recently served as Vice President at SRA-Touchstone 

Consulting and then at Computer Sciences Corporation. She has 

also worked in the nonprofit sector at the Council for Excellence in 

Government and is no stranger to GSA, having served as Chief of 

Staff there from 1996 to 2001. 

So we welcome you before the Committee. We look forward to 

your testimony, to the question-and-answer period, and then to 

working with you, if confirmed. Thank you. 

Senator Collins. 

3 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COLLINS 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As President Obama’s nominee to lead the General Services Administration, Martha Johnson comes to this Committee with significant experience in both the private sector and the Federal Government. 

The size and reach of GSA’s operations make meeting today’s 

challenges at the agency even more important than when Ms. 

Johnson last served there more than 8 years ago. GSA has more 

than 13,000 employees and an annual budget of approximately $16 

billion. It is charged with managing nearly $500 billion in Federal 

assets, including more than 8,600 government-owned or leased 

buildings and a fleet of more than 200,000 vehicles. GSA’s performance has a significant impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of 

government-wide operations, affecting almost $66 billion in financial transactions throughout the government. 

As the Chairman has indicated, GSA is our Nation’s landlord 

and the government’s primary acquisition agency. As such, the 

agency must apply the lessons that this Committee has drawn from 

its investigations into mismanagement of the Federal Government’s real property program and into numerous examples of 

waste, fraud, and abuse associated with Federal contracting practices. With total Federal purchases exceeding $500 billion a year, 

Federal procurement requires better stewardship of taxpayer dollars. Senator Lieberman and I have authored contracting reforms 

that are now law. In addition to helping to effectively implement 

those reforms, GSA must continue to press for additional improvements in the Federal procurement process. 

Another area that I would encourage the nominee to focus on is 

the crisis facing the overextended and underappreciated Federal 

acquisition workforce. The Federal Government must invest significantly in its acquisition workforce. The government entered the 

21st Century with 22 percent fewer Federal civilian acquisition 

personnel than it had at the start of the 1990s. Moreover, 50 percent of the entire Federal acquisition workforce will be eligible to 

retire as early as 2012. That means that as our contract spending 

has continued to increase dramatically, our contracting workforce 

continues to shrink. And this is not just a numbers game. In addition to having a sufficient number of personnel, the Federal Government must have the right mix of program managers, engineers, 

cost estimators, contracting officers, auditors, and technical experts. 

GSA must press forward on other challenges as well, including 

the sorely needed consolidation of the Department of Homeland Security offices at the St. Elizabeths Hospital complex and the management of billions of dollars to renovate and construct other Federal buildings. As the Chairman has indicated, I am particularly 

interested in the green building initiative, and I know that the 

Federal building in Bangor, Maine, which is long overdue for renovations, has been selected for one of those green projects. 

Of particular concern to border States like Maine is the role that 

GSA plays in enhancing our Nation’s border security by managing 

the planning, design, and construction of ports of entry for Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP). It is now estimated that a port of 

4 

1The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 21. 

entry takes more than 7 years to progress from planning to ribbon 

cutting. That is too long. 

In my home State of Maine, a new port of entry in Calais was 

seriously delayed by GSA’s failure to award the construction contract on time and to account for the presence of significant ledge— 

a common occurrence in Maine construction projects. These delays 

have real impacts. Although the new international bridge that connects Calais, Maine, to St. Stephen, New Brunswick, was completed last year, and the Canadians have been completely ready on 

their side of the border, we have lagged on our side of the border. 

The U.S. port of entry will not be completed until this fall, and I 

would note that is an improvement over the original prediction of 

the end of the year. 

These many and diverse issues attest to the great breadth and 

depth of responsibilities that the Administrator of GSA must handle, and I look forward to discussing these issues with Ms. Johnson 

this morning. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Collins. 

Martha Johnson has filed responses to a biographical and financial questionnaire, answered pre-hearing questions submitted by 

the Committee, and had her financial statements reviewed by the 

Office of Government Ethics. Without objection, this information 

will be made part of the hearing record, with the exception of the 

financial data, which are on file and available for public inspection 

in the Committee offices. 

Ms. Johnson, as I am sure you know, our Committee rules require that all witnesses at nomination hearings give their testimony under oath, so I would ask you at this time to please stand 

and raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you 

are about to give this Committee is the truth, the whole truth, and 

nothing but the truth, so help you, God? 

Ms. JOHNSON. I do. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much. Please be seated. 

We would welcome now any opening statement you would like to 

make and, if you wish, introduction of family or friends who are 

here with you. 

TESTIMONY OF MARTHA N. JOHNSON 1 TO BE 

ADMINISTRATOR, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much. I have a few brief comments. 

Mr. Chairman, Madam Ranking Member, and distinguished 

Members of the Homeland Security Committee, I am honored to 

come before you as President Obama’s nominee for the Administrator of the General Services Administration. 

I am delighted to be joined this morning by my husband, Steve 

Johnson, who supplies me with unending trust and encouragement. 

I also want to acknowledge many dear friends, fellow church members, and former colleagues who are here with me today. I am a 

fortunate woman. 

5 

I am deeply thrilled to be considered for the position of Administrator of the General Services Administration. ‘‘Thrilled’’ is actually 

a code word of sorts for me and for the agency. To begin, it would 

be thrilling to return to GSA where I served as Chief of Staff in 

the 1990s. The agency is a special place and offers a fascinating 

range of challenges. Where else do the Executive, Judicial, and 

Legislative Branches converge but in the complex task of designing, 

funding, and constructing courthouses? Where else is one expected 

to champion historic preservation on the one hand and edge innovative technologies on the other? 

But thrilling is not just about the importance, breadth, and intellectual challenge of GSA. It is also the concept that we used during 

the Clinton Administration when we spoke of our work with customers. GSA’s goals were more than efficiency and timely invoices. 

We were not just about customer satisfaction, which in many ways 

is simply a baseline idea. GSA was aiming for a full circle of service which included three things which are now classic parlance in 

the industry. They are operational efficiency, customer intimacy, 

and innovative solutions. With all three in our sights, we could aim 

to thrill—not just satisfy—a customer. 

And why would that be important? Isn’t good enough for the government worker good enough? 

No. Absolutely not. President Obama is challenging us to be a 

truly effective government, one that invites talent, performance, 

collaboration, energy, and innovation. One does not support such a 

workforce simply by ‘‘satisfying.’’ I believe GSA must reach deep to 

be the true service agency that will further the President’s agenda. 

I am seeking the opportunity to lead the people of GSA and shape 

its culture and performance to that end. 

GSA, however, is not just about its government clients. Its circle 

is bigger than that and therein lies a powerful strategic opportunity for GSA. If you will allow me a metaphor, I see GSA as the 

concierge for the government. It is through our Federal building 

lobbies that civil servants and citizens enter the places of government activity. It is through the electronic portals that civil servants 

and citizens can reach the information about the government. And 

it is through the contract vehicles and procurement schedules that 

industry can offer its services and products to the government. 

GSA is the concierge, introducing, shaping, structuring, and facilitating ways for government to interact with itself, with citizens, 

and with industry. 

If confirmed, I hope to be a steadfast and creative leader of this 

tremendous organization, deepening GSA’s impact, confidence, and 

reputation. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much for an excellent 

opening statement. Welcome to your family and friends who are 

here. 

I am going to start the questioning with the standard three questions we ask of all nominees. 

First, is there anything you are aware of in your background that 

might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to 

which you have been nominated? 

Ms. JOHNSON. No. 

6 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Do you know of anything, personal or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have 

been nominated? 

Ms. JOHNSON. No. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. And, finally, do you agree without reservation to respond to any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of Congress if you are 

confirmed? 

Ms. JOHNSON. I agree to. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much. We will start with 

a first round of questions of 7 minutes each. 

Let me ask you to focus a bit on this question of Federal property, the management of it, which has been on GAO’s high-risk list 

since 2003. And I stress again that there are other agencies besides 

GSA that own most of the Federal property, but GSA has a significant ownership role and, of course, a facilitating role. 

The major issues that GAO has identified are excess property 

and overreliance on costly leasing (as opposed to constructing), deteriorating facilities, and increased security needs. One major concern that I mentioned in my opening statement that has been a 

real focus for Senator Carper and Senator Coburn, Members of the 

Committee, has been the excess property held by the government. 

Again, not all the buildings are owned by GSA, but there is an important role for GSA to play here. 

In the last Congress, with leadership from Senators Carper and 

Coburn, our Committee reported out a bill to allow agencies to 

keep a portion of the proceeds of the sale of excess property, obviously as a way to create a motivating factor to get rid of some of 

the stuff we do not need anymore. I wonder if you could give us 

your opinion on that type of financial incentive and whether you 

think it would encourage agencies to act in the public interest and 

what other measures you would contemplate taking to improve 

overall the Federal property management function of GSA. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you. I am quite delighted, since leaving 

GSA, to learn that GSA has been given the authority to retain 

earnings when it has disposed of excess property. I believe that is 

a tremendous incentive, and I believe that our improvement on our 

excess and vacant property listings is a direct result of that. It is 

quite helpful to have that money flow into the Federal building 

fund and be able to be available for those purposes. 

And so I would be quite supportive and pleased to encourage any 

measures by which other agencies could retain profits, results, and 

funds from disposing of property. I think that incentive is very important, and I think it sends a strong signal to support agencies 

in that activity. 

Overall, I believe the management of the Federal real property 

inventory is quite a challenge. Aside from the vacancies and excess 

property, there is some substantial need for attention to repairs 

and alterations and to improvement in moving properties out of the 

bottom and middle tier to the upper tier in terms of the portfolio 

and how we would like the portfolio to be highly productive on a 

number of criteria, including return on investment, satisfaction to 

7 

the customer health and safety and security. These new demands 

of security are also costly. 

The American Recovery and Investment Act funds are going to 

be quite important in some respects on this. Investing in high-performance green buildings will be a long-term substantial help to 

the overall health of the inventory. So that funding will be critical. 

I believe from what I can tell—and I am sitting outside of GSA 

right now kind of looking at it through a bit of cellophane, if you 

will—that GSA is doing a terrific job within the constraints and 

within the protocols and the policies that it has to work with. Overall, the investment in the inventory is going to be one of the most 

critical factors for ultimately moving the entire portfolio into a 

more healthy status. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I am going to go on. Senator Collins mentioned the problem of the time it takes to construct infrastructure 

at ports of entry. I want to mention one specific matter and call 

it to your attention if it has not been. I know Senator Collins will 

probably have questions about the process overall. 

In advance of your hearing, I have had some input from people 

in the vicinity of the San Ysidro port of entry, which apparently is 

the largest port of entry we have, and there is construction going 

on and it has been going on for a long time. Congressman Filner, 

who represents this area in the House, is very interested in this 

and is attempting to add language to an appropriations bill for 

GSA on this question. 

Basically, the local community is apparently concerned about 

what it sees as GSA’s disregard about the reconfiguration of this 

facility that is going on now and how it would affect local commerce. And they have said to me that in the last 3 months, in some 

sense between administrations, they believe there has been a 

change in what was an initially agreed upon decision last year. 

So this is a complex issue. I do not pretend to understand it all, 

but I want you to know that there is a lot of concern about it, and 

I just wanted to draw it to your attention and say that I hope we 

can be in touch with it. I am sure Congressman Filner will be in 

touch with you as soon as you are confirmed. 

I do not know if you know anything about this at this point. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I do not know any details. I will say that the 

President has certainly extended the notion that we need to be 

quite collaborative and collegial with our community and our stakeholders in positioning and investing in communities for these kinds 

of structures. So that would be my intention and my set of values 

around it, and I would be delighted to learn more about it and to 

be in conversation about it with you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Excellent. Thank you. 

Give me your response to what seems to be, as I mentioned in 

my opening statement, a kind of creeping away by various Federal 

agencies from using GSA particularly for contracting, which undercuts the basic purpose of the agency, and whether you observe the 

same and what, if anything, you hope to do about it. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I have a rather broad view of that. As a result of 

the Clinger-Cohen Act and some of the changes that were made in 

the 1990s, GSA moved from being the mandated source for much 

of the supplies and services and is now in more of a one among 

8 

many non-mandated company store, if you will, as it was historically. 

The first rounds of response to those new authorities and possibilities on the part of other agencies meant that they wanted to establish their own contracting capacities, and I think that was a 

wave of response to long years of GSA being basically one of the 

few organizations that did that. 

I believe in that process, the acquisition workforce has now been 

dispersed much more broadly around the government, which is a 

very critical issue, and there is a lot of duplication, and there is a 

lot of overlapping and probably inefficiencies. I believe the competitive underscoring thinking behind this is appropriate. I do not believe having a sort of monolithic source for contracts is the exact 

right answer, but I am concerned about moving into a change in 

this because of the dispersion of the acquisition workforce. 

I also do believe this is a bit of a market gesture, if you will, 

around the performance of GSA. We would like to earn our customers through performance rather than through mandate, and 

that would be my attitude going forward and where I would put 

my energy. So performance is certainly the proper response, I believe. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Well, that is a good attitude to go forward 

with, and I think you are right, it is a market response. Obviously, 

we will count on you, as well as GAO, I suppose, to let us know 

if this dispersion is getting to a point where it is inefficient. I agree 

with you, there is something to be gained from the competition, but 

sometimes it can be a loss, too, and an inefficiency. Thank you. 

Senator Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me follow up on 

the two issues that you just raised. 

As I indicated to you, Ms. Johnson, I, too, am concerned about 

the explosive growth in government-wide acquisition contracts and 

multi-agency contracts because I believe the prevalence of those vehicles for purchasing demonstrates a lack of confidence in GSA, 

and it indicates to me that GSA is not meeting the needs of the 

client agencies. 

Do you have some specific recommendations in mind to try to 

deal with this explosive growth that cuts GSA out of the process 

and may lead to additional costs for the taxpayers? 

Ms. JOHNSON. I would go at it from a number of different angles. 

On the first one, I would work closely with the Office of Federal 

Procurement Policy. I believe they need to be strong leaders in 

thinking through and understanding where efficiencies and inefficiencies need to be managed. So I would believe GSA should be a 

good partner, and I think that is historically true, and I would 

want to continue that. 

Second, I believe that we do have a challenge around talent and 

the acquisition skills that are available, so in any kind of adjustments we are going to have to deal with the human-ware underneath all of this dilemma. 

The third, I believe, is about performance, and I will say that has 

something to do with leadership. If I am confirmed, I will be the 

fifth Administrator of GSA in 14 months, and I think it is time for 

GSA to have leadership settled, established, and then we can, I 

9 

think, have a more aggressive stance around productivity and performance, and that is a very important thing to me. 

I also believe we need to have some data around this, understanding really where the contracts are, what is going on, what is 

bumping into each other. I have not been able yet to get in under 

the hood and kick the tires and so on, and that will be something 

I need to understand and would be delighted and pleased to be 

sharing with all our stakeholders so we can gather the best answers, so it is a collaborative response as well. 

Senator COLLINS. I also want to follow up on the Chairman’s 

comments about community involvement when GSA is designing 

land ports of entry. GSA does a very good job of talking to the client agency, such as CBP or, in the case of a courthouse, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts for Federal courthouses. But it 

does not always do as much outreach to the community, and a lot 

of times that outreach can prevent problems down the road. 

To give you an example, there is now discussion underway on a 

new port of entry in Madawaska, Maine, and it is a very unusual 

situation, perhaps a unique situation, because there is a paper mill 

that straddles the border. The pulp is produced on the Canadian 

side, and the paper on the American side, or vice versa. And that 

is a very complicated situation. There are a lot of trucks going back 

and forth, and the current port of entry does not have sufficient 

room. 

I commend GSA for starting to involve the community in those 

discussions, but it is absolutely critical that it occurs in a way that 

does not create problems for the biggest employer of the area. 

So I just want to associate myself with the comments made by 

the Chairman and ask for you to commit to instructing GSA when 

it is designing and planning new construction, regardless of what 

it is, to reach out to the community for input. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I will do so. If confirmed, I would be quite pleased 

to. I believe thinking about the entire stakeholder map on any of 

these projects is important, and clearly the community is one of the 

critical ones. Having that healthy dialogue is important, and following up on it. 

Senator COLLINS. The Chairman also mentioned that GSA’s management of Federal real property is on the high-risk list, and several years ago, I chaired a hearing that looked at the deteriorating 

buildings that were owned by the Federal Government and the lost 

dollars and lost opportunities that are entailed by this mismanagement. 

There has been progress, but there is a long way to go. And I 

am interested in what you are going to do specifically to focus on 

excess and underutilized property, unreliable real property data, 

and reliance on costly leasing, in some cases despite the fact that 

the government owns suitable buildings or buildings that could be 

made suitable. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I would reference portfolio thinking, which I think 

is part of how the real property management work is done in the 

Public Buildings Service. I am keen to support that and to be sure 

that the decisions about any given situation are almost like a Russian doll. That decision has a number of stakeholders and concerns 

and criteria associated with it, but there is also the larger doll it 

10 

fits into, which is the overall portfolio, and this conversation is 

where GSA is the facilitator. They need to be thinking about and 

referencing the greater portfolio questions as well. 

With respect to leasing, I also appreciate that the leasing portion 

of the inventory is now exceeding the constructed portion, if I have 

my facts right, and that is a trend that has been steadily increasing. I am going to have to get a lot smarter about this, but when 

an agency or an organization is considering workspace, there is the 

decision to stay put, there is the decision to lease and use some 

flexibilities involved in that, or the decision to construct. And often, 

I believe, the decision to lease is the best of those three alternatives in that situation, which incrementally has increased the 

size of the leased space. It is an expensive alternative. I understand you are paying for the flexibility to some extent, but it is 

often better than staying put. 

So, relatively speaking, leasing has surfaced as an option, and I 

think that the issues around how to support the construction process and make it possible, make it streamlined, and fund it will be 

a way in which we can right-size. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks very much, Senator Collins. 

Senator Tester, good morning. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TESTER 

Senator TESTER. Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you being here, Martha Johnson. It is good to have you in 

front of the Committee, and I appreciate you putting yourself up 

for this job. I think it is a very important job, and I think you will 

do a good job—at least that is my hope. 

I want to continue the conversation we had in my office about 

GSA becoming the administrator of land ports of entry, a modernization program. As you well know, Congress appropriated to 

CBP $420 million to rebuild the land ports of entry and to GSA 

about $300 million for the same purpose. It is my understanding 

that GSA and the Army Corps of Engineers will be the agencies in 

charge of overseeing this money and the contracts that have been 

given out for this work. 

To state that I was disappointed to find out that these contracts 

went to a handful of large engineering firms who already had GSA 

schedule for large-scale work would be a huge understatement. 

There is no reason in the world why the work, and 100 percent of 

the work, could not be done by local contractors or at least given 

the opportunity to bid on it. I think it represents backwards, ‘‘business as usual’’ thinking to give the contracts away to the big boys, 

and I am one of those that do not think that bigger is better. I 

think that small business is critically important to this country, 

and we need to support them when the opportunity arises. I think 

this was an opportunity that we messed up on. 

You are not the Administrator yet, although, as I said, I hope 

you will be soon, so I will not hold you responsible for that decision. 

But I do hope that as you take the job, you can direct the GSA 

away from this business as usual, which recently has been characterized by non-competitive big contracts for big businesses. 

11 

Small businesses are the backbone of the economy. They are the 

ones that we are going to be riding to get out of this recession. And 

we need to make sure we have more opportunities, not fewer. Let 

me give you an example. 

Last week, a week ago tomorrow, I was in Havre, Montana, for 

a dedication of a Border Patrol new sector headquarters. Havre, 

Montana, is a town of 10,000, give or take a couple grand. That 

building was designed and built and even landscaped 100 percent 

by Montana companies. The architectural firm was a Montana 

firm. Every one of the companies that built that building was from 

that town of 10,000 people. That project was finished on budget, 

significantly ahead of schedule. These folks can compete, and they 

can do the work. 

So, with that in mind, a couple questions. I understand that you 

cannot tell prime contractors who have the contracts now who to 

use as subcontractors. But will you commit to working with me to 

make certain that local small businesses have every opportunity to 

learn about and compete for some of this work that is going to be 

going on along the northern border to rebuild these border stations? 

Ms. JOHNSON. I will work with you as closely as possible to support small businesses and their inclusion in this important business. The Recovery Act money, I understand, is—each of these 

projects is being assessed in part with respect to how much it is 

designating small business. So I am hoping to support that and 

continue with that, and as a small-town North Dakota girl, I understand how important small businesses are in these environments. 

Senator TESTER. Now that the contracts are in the hands of outof-State firms that are quite big—by Montana’s standard, they are 

huge—do you think there are going to be opportunities for subcontractors along that northern border where they could use some 

employment to be able to participate? 

Ms. JOHNSON. I am going to have to get back to you on that. I 

am not really sure I understand the process enough to go on record 

and say that now. 

Senator TESTER. I would appreciate that. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I would be happy to get back to you promptly. 

Senator TESTER. I would appreciate that. 

Would you be willing to come to Montana to host a workshop for 

interested small businesses to hear from GSA and CBP directly 

about how to pursue some of the work? 

Ms. JOHNSON. I would be delighted to come to Montana. I will 

have to learn about whether my schedule would fit the workshops, 

which I understand are being organized and I want to support. So 

let me work on calendar confirmation and get back to you. 

Senator TESTER. I appreciate that. This may not seem like a big 

deal to a lot of folks. But this is truly a big deal. And it not only 

applies to the ports, by the way. It applies to all the recovery 

money that is coming out, whether it is through the Forest Service 

or whatever. I do not want to cut any deals, I just want to make 

sure that there is an opportunity for these folks to compete because 

they will compete and they will get those bids, there is no doubt 

in my mind. 

12 

Finally, about rebuilding the ports—when I was in Havre, one of 

the gentlemen who is an economic developer up there gave me a 

letter that I passed along to the appropriate people, but it talked 

about the ports that are being rebuilt—we are talking about Montana ports now, with Alberta and Saskatchewan—that there is 

some concern that those ports, when they are rebuilt, will not be 

rebuilt with growth in mind, with opportunity to expand those 

ports potentially from an 8- to 10-hour to a 24-hour port. And I am 

not saying that is what is needed now, but if down the line there 

is a need for a 24-hour port where there is currently a port that 

is open 8 or 10 hours a day, I certainly do not want to be restricted 

by poor planning at this point in time. 

It is tough for you because you are not in the position yet so you 

do not know, and so I am not going to ask you the question. I 

would just ask that once you get confirmed, could you do your level 

best to make sure that we are looking into the future for potential 

increased traffic, more economic growth, and the opportunity to expand those ports, if needed, so that we do not have to start all over 

again and rebuild the port again? These ports are 50 years old now. 

They do need to be rebuilt. Our border is only as strong as the 

weakest link. This is going to help firm that border up, so I think 

it is a step in the right direction. 

But along the same lines, 10 years from now if we want to expand a port, for example, or a year from now if we want to expand 

a port, we need to keep those options open. And I would hope that 

as the planning process goes forth from this time forward that we 

keep our options open and do not limit ourselves by poor planning. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I would be delighted to work with you on that, and 

I would trust that the planning takes into account future scenarios 

that would be fairly rational or logical to anticipate. 

Senator TESTER. I would hope so, too, but sometimes logic is not 

necessarily the driving force in some of these decisions. I want to 

once again thank you for being here. I want to thank you for your 

willingness for a North Dakota girl to come out and really help 

small businesses. I think it is one of the things that we need to do 

across the line. 

Just an editorial comment, if I might, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Sure. 

Senator TESTER. We talk in other committees about banks being 

too big to fail. Well, if we continue to give advantages to the big 

guys, we are going to have a lot of businesses that are too big to 

fail. If we support the little guys, we will have good competition. 

The system we have of government will work better, and capitalism 

will work better, and the whole program will work better. Like I 

said, do not tilt the playing field. Let us just make sure it is level 

so people have opportunity. Thank you. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks, Senator Tester. I agree with you. 

I cannot resist saying that the nominee is not only a North Dakota 

girl, but she is a North Dakota girl with a Yale education. [Laughter.] 

Ms. JOHNSON. There you go. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. A little parochial—— 

Ms. JOHNSON. I was born in Connecticut. [Laughter.] 

13 

I will claim everything I can. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. You have got the best of all worlds. When 

President Kennedy got his honorary degree at Yale, because he had 

gone to Harvard, he said he now had the best of both worlds—a 

Harvard education and a Yale degree. [Laughter.] 

Senator McCaskill. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MCCASKILL 

Senator MCCASKILL. I wanted to start by saying that, clearly, 

Senator Tester is serious about this—either that, or he is trying to 

cure you of any habits you learned at Yale—because I have not 

seen him invite very many people to Montana in this Committee. 

So the fact that he invited you, I do not know whether to congratulate you or warn you. [Laughter.] 

I wanted to talk a little bit about post-award audits, and we visited about this briefly in my office when we talked. On the Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, Brian Miller and I talked a 

lot about post-award audits. Prior to 1997, GSA did post-award audits, and more often than not, they found millions of dollars of cost 

savings. And, obviously, this is an audit where you look at the information in the bid to make sure it is accurate as it relates to 

comparables and so forth in the bid itself. 

Recently, Network Appliance, Inc., a GSA contractor, agreed to pay $128 million for the fact that it failed to offer the government 

its best commercial pricing on information technology goods and 

services, and that was discovered through a private lawsuit. 

I think that these post-award audits make sense. I think the fact 

that you are doing them—you do not have to do them on every one. 

But the power of audits is that everyone knows it might happen 

to them, and it brings about a remarkable change in behavior. And 

if you have a major government contractor that knows they could 

be selected for a post-award audit, I think you are going to see 

measurable taxpayer savings just with the announcement that you 

are going back to having post-award audits. 

I would like your commitment, and on a timely basis, if possible, 

to let the Committee know, let me know, let my office know, let the 

Subcommittee on Contracting know whether or not you are willing 

to move back into a post-award audit position. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I believe I am going to, if confirmed, be receiving 

some reports from some commissions with respect to this, and I 

would like to be sure to honor that process, and once I receive 

those and review and understand what those recommendations are, 

I would be delighted to commit to being close in communication 

with you and to take it very seriously. 

It is a very important subject. I have the highest regard for 

Brian Miller and the Inspector General Office at GSA, and I am 

deeply interested in being sure that he is able to play his role in 

supporting us. A good IG allows an administrator to sleep at night, 

and I do not want to diminish that role in any way. 

Senator MCCASKILL. I heard the earlier testimony about how we 

had spread acquisitions out over many places in the government, 

and as always, the goal was that we were going to get it cheaper. 

It has not really turned out that way. It is not cheaper. What really 

has happened is that there are agencies that advertise their ability 

14 

to get you stuff, and then they get a hit on it, they get a cut, which 

is in their best interest to do. And then there is also shopping that 

has to do with ease of how quickly you can get around regulations 

and bureaucracy. And I get that. I mean, if you need something in 

government, you want to be able to buy it without having to spend 

16 months in some kind of bureaucratic bungling and the failure 

of getting anybody to make a decision and so forth. So I think we 

made it easier to buy stuff. I am just not sure that we paid enough 

attention to value in terms of the taxpayer getting the best value. 

I think it is time for us to take a broad look—and hopefully we 

can do this on the Subcommittee—at the various goals here. The 

first and foremost goal is to get a good value for taxpayers. That 

is more important—I have a famous story that I told many times. 

I went to Iraq looking at contracting. I had a general say to me, 

‘‘I did not care how much it cost. I wanted three kinds of ice cream 

in the mess yesterday.’’ OK? Well, I get that. And I appreciate his 

candor. And, frankly, most people in government would not be that 

candid. But that is part of the problem. It is three kinds of ice 

cream in the mess yesterday as opposed to do we have systems in 

place that are making sure we are competitive, making sure we are 

getting the best bang for the buck. And you know and I know, and 

I think everybody in this room knows, that we got away from that 

by diminishing our acquisition personnel and completely decentralizing purchasing to the point that the right hand does not know 

what the left hand is doing. 

So, I think that we will see a lot of your office as it relates to 

the contracting work we are going to try to do on the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight, and I would hope that you 

would help designate somebody on your staff to work with us on 

these issues of how we can get back to more accountability in contracting. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I would be delighted to, if confirmed. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Great. The last thing I really wanted to talk 

to you about was the issue of buildings that were under lease 

where bids had been let but, because of the credit market crisis, 

have stalled. And there is a silver lining to that dark cloud, and 

that is, if we have non-performing contractors that have received 

the bids because of the credit market that gives us an excuse to 

rebid. And right now construction costs are incredibly low. So there 

is no doubt whatever was bid 12 months ago, 18 months ago, if it 

was bid today, we would get a better value. 

So we have not been able to get information about a building in 

St. Louis County that is very important. It is a records center for 

the military. The contractor has been unable to perform, and we 

understand now, but not directly, that the reason that everyone is 

holding off is he is saying, ‘‘I am going to be able to get to the 

table,’’ but now we are hearing that the reason he is going to get 

to the table is he is going to the Missouri government for State financing on bonds to help him get there. 

So what started out as a certain value for the taxpayers is now 

going to be augmented, potentially, by additional taxpayer help, 

and to me that does not seem like that is the right way to go about 

it. 

15 

So I would appreciate your attention because if this is going on 

in one place, I bet it is going on in other places, where people who 

made bids on projects are not able to meet their obligations because they cannot get the credit right now, which is too bad. But 

we ought to make sure we are taking full advantage of that in 

terms of value that we might be able to receive on behalf of the 

taxpayers. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I completely agree with you about the silver lining, that we should be looking for the silver linings as the economy 

and the financial markets are shifting the terms on many of these 

projects and, indeed, both on the lease and the construct projects. 

I trust and I hope to understand that as well as we can and to take 

advantage of that for the government, yes. 

Senator MCCASKILL. And your office has not been able to get 

back to me. I specifically want to make sure that I understand that 

if this person who won this bid, if he is able to perform only with 

the assistance of State government help, I think we need to take 

a hard look at it. 

Ms. JOHNSON. If confirmed, I will commit to exploring that and 

understanding it and be in communication with you about it. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much, Senator McCaskill. 

Excellent questions. 

I just have two more questions I want to ask you, Ms. Johnson. 

First is the general area of cyber security. This has engaged the 

attention of this Committee. The Department of Homeland Security 

particularly has unique responsibility for cyber security for non-defense government sites and for interacting with the private sector. 

Obviously, the President announced a new cyber security policy 

featuring a new cyber security coordinator in the White House. 

As you well know—and we talked about this earlier—the Federal 

Government through its tremendous buying power can influence 

activities of the vendors, of the sellers. The last estimate I have 

seen says that we are spending $76 billion a year for information 

technology. And it seems to me that there is an opportunity here 

for GSA to acquire contractors in a way that may encourage the 

providers to keep in mind cyber security that may have broader implications than just for the Federal Government as a purchaser. 

And I wonder what you think of that, if you have thought about 

it, and what you have generally on the extent to which GSA can 

contribute to raising our cyber security. As you well know, we now 

know our sites and private sites are being attacked every day by 

the strange combination of hostile nations, non-state actors like 

terrorist groups, organized criminal groups, and just plain hackers. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I am certain that, if confirmed, I will be in a position to learn a lot more about this very complicated subject. I think 

that cyber security is baffling to the buyer, if you will. How do you 

know what you can trust in terms of the products? And GSA, I 

would think, could provide some useful information, useful perspectives in helping people sort through that. 

When you start thinking of anti-virus software and how do you 

have trusted access through the Internet and encryption, you start 

beginning to be swamped by this. And because of its complication, 

16 

we could, I think, be a much better concierge for people on making 

those decisions. 

Clearly, the buying power and the amount that we will be regularly consuming should alert us to thinking about what kind of opportunities we could provide, and I am interested in learning about 

this. I cannot tell you much more specifically right now, but as I 

learn, I would be happy to communicate about that. And I think 

GSA does play a role. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Good. Please do. I really just wanted to 

put that quite literally on your screen. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. The last question is one that is local for 

the Committee, which is the construction of the new headquarters 

for the Department of Homeland Security at St. Elizabeths. The 

legislation creating the Department came out of this Committee. 

We are both very proud of it and we push it hard to be better every 

day. It is very hard for it to operate across the 22 agencies that 

it does, spread out as it is, so this is really important to homeland 

security. 

I gather that construction of the Department of Homeland Security headquarters will be the largest construction project for the 

Federal Government in the Washington area since the building of 

the Pentagon. I do not know if anybody has briefed you on it yet, 

but large projects have a tendency of going awry and taking longer 

and costing more than they should. And I wanted to ask you to 

please give it your personal attention and make sure that it is 

being properly managed, and then also to ask that you keep us informed as to how it is going. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I will commit to working very closely with you on 

it. Clearly, this is very important both for the Department and for 

the District of Columbia, and we need to be excellent stewards in 

that process. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you. Do you have anything else 

you would like to say in your defense? 

Ms. JOHNSON. I am fine. Thank you. [Laughter.] 

I appreciate the opportunity, but no, I am fine. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Your testimony has been very helpful. 

Without objection, we are going to keep the record of this hearing 

open until 12 noon tomorrow for submission of any additional questions or statements. My hope is that we can move your nomination 

through the Committee and through the Senate as quickly as possible because GSA, the President, and the government need you to 

be at your desk. Thank you very much. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:14 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(17) 

A P P E N D I X 


51795.001
18 


51795.002
19 


51795.003
20 


51795.004
21 


51795.005
22 


51795.006
23 


51795.007
24 


51795.008
25 


51795.009
26 


51795.010
27 


51795.011
28 


51795.012
29 


51795.013
30 


51795.014
31 


51795.015
32 


51795.016
33 


51795.017
34 


51795.018
35 


51795.019
36 


51795.020
37 


51795.021
38 


51795.022
39 


51795.023
40 


51795.024
41 


51795.025
42 


51795.026
43 


51795.027
44 


51795.028
45 


51795.029
46 


51795.030
47 


51795.031
48 


51795.032
49 


51795.033
50 


51795.034
51 


51795.035
52 


51795.036
53 


51795.037
54 


51795.038
55 


51795.039
56 


51795.040
57 


51795.041
58 


51795.042
59 


51795.043
60 


51795.044
61 


51795.045
62 


51795.046
63 


51795.047
64 


51795.048
65 


51795.049
66 


51795.050
67 


51795.051
68 


51795.052
69 


51795.053
70 


51795.054
71 


51795.055
72 


51795.056
73 


51795.057
74 


51795.058
75 


51795.059
76 


51795.060
77 


51795.061
78 


51795.062
79 


51795.063
80 


51795.064
81 


51795.065
82 

Æ 


51795.066