>> we now resume our coverage of the hearings taking place on capitol hill concerning the affordable care act, also known as obamacare. we are bringing you these hearings live so that you can make the decision as to whether or not the website is a nightmare as the republicans want you to understand or simply technical glitches as the obama administration wants you to believe. we return now to the testimony that is taking place live on capitol hill. >> successfully completed and to end testing between ews and the cms data hub prior to that date. we did not anticipate any sort of problems with our connection and have not experienced any.

>> we, too were ready to process on 10-1, had done extensive internal testing of our processes and systems, and our first awareness of difficulties with the hub was 10-1, or the portal, i'm sorry, on 10-1, when we attempted to do key entry. >> so you didn't test it prior to october 1? >> no. ness. no sir. >> as we evaluate the problems with this website, i think it's important that we focus on the facts. my republican colleagues have been predicting that health care reform would be a disaster for three years now and every time they've been wrong, they said insurance rates would skyrocket, in fact, they're lower than predicted. they said health care costs would sore, in fact have grown at a record low rate. they said medicare would be

undermind, in fact, it's stronger than ever and seen years are saving billions of dollars on prescription drugs. what we need to do is separate the facts for us to reach a determination here. some have said that fixing the website would take six months to a year. others have said there are 5 million lines of code to rewrite. some have urged headlight and human services to pull down the entire system and start from scratch. miss campbell, i hope you can help us put these dire predictions in perspective. does c.g.i. expect to take six months to a year to get the process working smoothly? >> we do not. we anticipate that the system as we have seen is improving day over day, and that we anticipate that people will be able to enroll in the time frame allotted, that's necessary for them to have insurance for the

january 1 time frame. >> that means what date? don't they have to have an application in by december 15 for it to be effective january 1? >> that's correct, sir. >> so you anticipate by that date, the system will be working. >> the system will continue to improve, from our perspective as painful as it sounds, i know that the experience that been a difficult experience, the system is working. people are enrolling, but people will be able to enroll at a faster pace, the experience will be improved as they go forward and people will be able to enroll by the december 15 time frame. >> does 5 million lines of code need to be rewritten? >>ness. i can tell you that 300 plus employees back in the office with i think they'd all walk out if i told them they had to rewrite that many lines of code. >> do you believe it's going to be necessary to scrap the entire

healthcare.gov system and start from scratch. >> i do not, sir. >> you think the website will be fixed in time to assure americans who want coverage for next year, that it will be available to them. >> i do, sir. >> ok. >> why are you so confident? can you explain that these problems are going to be fixed in time? because as i said, we're seeing improvements day over day. we're continuing to run queries against our database. we're running reviewing system logs, fine funning our servers. we are analyzing the code for amomlies. every day, we're seeing where we're finding challenges in the system and making corrections, suddenly with any system that will go live. when a system goes into production, these are the things you would typically find after production, maybe not to the level of detail that's happened in this experience, but when a system goes live, these are the

things you typically do. you continue to provide system builds and put performance tuning to the application to make sure that it continues to improve time over time. >> thank you. mr. slavitt, your company has been involved in trouble shooting and fixing the problems. do you have any reason to believe the problems being experienced at this launch will prevent americans from getting insurance for the coming year? >> congressman, i'm confident that the data services hub that qssi developed and the edim registration tool are working well today and will continue to work well. >> you had problems with your part early on but fixed them. >> for the first seven days, correct. >> so problems can be fixed. >> we doubled the capacity of that registration tool within seven days. >> ms. campbell, did c.g.i. system pass its test before the system went live?

>> yes, it did. >> my understanding, you felt the system was ready to go on october 1, is that right no. >> that is correct. >> neither you nor anyone else at the table thought or made a recommendation not to go forward on october 1 because you didn't think the system was ready, is that a correct statement? >> that's a correct statement. >> mr. slavitt. >> i refer back to my earlier answer. we did not make a recommendation. we simply made everyone aware of the risks we saw. >> no, we did not make a recommendation. >> we did not, either. >> thank you, thank you mr. chairman. >> chair recognizes the vice chair of the full committee. >> thank you all for your testimony. i would like each of you to submit in writing for me how much you have been paid to date and how much you are being paid on retainer or either to clear up. so full submit that to us ford,

that would be wonderful. pipps compliance. were you all trained in it before you got your contract? >> yes. >> yes, we do extensive hip practice training. traininging. >> did you meet with h.h.s. before you started the process? anyone? did your companion meet together with h.h.s.? >> go ahead. >> the security people from h.h.s. and serco and others. >> let me ask each of you a question. how many people in each of your companies have physical access to the database servers storing the enrolling information?

>> we have zero access to the database. >> zero. ok. >> i believe the answer is also zero. >> for the verification? >> we have no access to c.m.s.'s servers. >> 2,000 people. >> 2,000 people have access to the database? >> through the key entry of the applications. >> ok. you know, under hip hipaa regs witness no one is supposed to have access to that database. how many separate servers or virtual servers in the cloud are being used to store data for healthcare.gov. mr. slavitt and ms. campbell, that's primarily to you. >> i don't have the exact number. we have anywhere from 80 to 100

servers. >> so you have 80 to 100 different servers that are holding information. >> that are passing information through our system. >> ok. mr. slavitt. >> i don't have the answer to that question specifically to how many servers. we can follow that up. we don't store any data, however, any personal consumer data in any of our systems. >> ok. then ms. campbell, the application information, is that being stored separately from the patient database information? ms. campbell. >> can you repeat the question again? >> the applicant serve he was and database servers, are you holding this information on your patients and on the data tase

separately. >> we are not holding any information. >> you are not holding any. ok. >> we are provided only with limited information, social security numbers, names, and date of birth, which we use to match against our system. >> ok. mr. l.a.o., you mentioned that you all are working through the paper entry, and then the date that entry from the paper applications. >> that's correct, yes. >> so where are you physically storing the data that is checked and given to you? >> when the paper culls in, it's scanned and converted to almostic images, then the paper destroyed once the image has been verified. the electronic image is put into a database and kept only until the information's key entered, and then it's put in archive and will be retained no more than 30 days. >> retain it no more than 30 days. ok.

let me ask each of you, does your current system keep detailed error logs that can be referenced with the ditchies that are surrounding healthcare.gov no miss campbell, i'll begin with you. >> yes, we have error logs. >> ok. >> yes, we do keep error logs for our products and tools. >> ok. >> yes, we keep error logs. >> all righty. >> we keep track of successful or unsuccessful application. >> ok. do you want to submit these error logs to us? >> i will have to confer back to c.m.s. as to what documents we can and cannot provide. >> ok. you know, it would be interesting to see those error logs, because i think it would give us an idea of how many people are actually accessing this system and then the problems that you've had with

scalability on this. i think we'd like to see what is causing the systems to crash and where the security flaws may be in this, also, and with that, i'll yield back. >> mr. dingle. >> we are having some questions before us, which are very important. i note the problems are not surprising, given the facts that there's been considerable obstruction to the program going forward. i received a letter from a constituent recently. she said i only make $12 an hour and i can barely afford insurance so i need to purchase through an exchange and will be eligible for a subsidy, making health care affordable at last. this is what the debate is all

about. there are problems, but we have time to fix it. let's work together to get this matter resolved to people do not suffer. these questions are for cheryl campbell. one, these are yes or no, if you please. is c.g.i. responsible for developing the software for federally facilitated marketplace, yes or no. >> yes, sir. >> did c.g.i. obtain this process through a competitive bidding process? >> yes. >> do you have experience for providing other technology services to the federal government. >> yes. >> did c.g. icon duct testing for the software prior to october 1 when the launching took place, yes or no. >> yes. >> was c.g.i. responsible for testing the function of the entirety of healthcare.gov? >> no. >> no.

if not, who was? >> c.m.s. >> ok. do you believe that it is unusual for such a large project to experience some problems after it launches, yes or no. >> no. >> despite the initial problems with the website, have consumers still been able to enroll in the health insurance plans, yes or no? >> yes. >> do you believe that the progress has been made getting the website to run as intended since launch three weeks ago, yes or no. >> yes. >> these questions are for mr. lao of serco. is serco responsible for handling and processing paper applications for health insurance in the marketplace? >> yes, sir. >> with all the problems with the website, many consumers are now turning to paper applications. does serco have the capability to handle a larger amount of

paper applications than was originally expected, yes, or? >> yes. >> do you all commit to working with c.m.s., congress, and all the stake holders until the website is fixed and functioning as intended, yes or no? >> yes. >> sir? >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> now, i would appreciate it very much if you would each submit ford a summary of actions that you have taken to fix the website after the october 1 launch. could you please do that? >> yes. >> all right, now, i would also ask that you submittals for the record suggestions for there to be changes and improvements in the way the matter is being dealt with by the federal government and any changes that

you might deem would be useful in seeing to it that the matter goes forward as it can and should. could you do that for me, please? >> yes. >> ok. that question, i hope you understand is to all of you so full all please assist. i want to thank you all. it's clear that we have plenty to do in the coming weeks. i hope and pray you will be up to the task. this is a time when we can work together on something good. maybe we didn't agree with the program or with the legislation, but we do now have a duty to see that it that it works for the benefit of the american people, and we achieve the benefits, which we hope we can achieve. i would note that this legislation originated under the hand and pen of my door friend, bob dole, and of john chafee and

is therefore subject to the charge that it has some bipartisan ship even though little could be found during the process of it. i yield the balance of my time. >> thank you. i want to put slide number two back up. right there. now that's unfortunately, that blue highlighted thing is hard to read, so i'm going to read it again. this is the part of the sign up that is hidden, the applicant does not see this, but it is in the source code. what that blue highlighted area circled in red says is you have no reasonable expectation of privacy rewarding any communication or data transiting stored on this information system.

you all both said that you were hipaa. >> you're listening to live hearings about the affordable care act. right now, the person testifying is cheryl campbell, the head of c.g.i. the pertinent information she says is the 500 million lines of code will not have to be rewritten. she also says it is not necessary to scrap the entire system. she says that if she were to go back to her 300 plus employees asking them to rewrite the code, they would simply quit. we are going to take a break right now and continue our coverage of the problem-plagued

federal health care website known as the affordable care act, healthcare.gov. we will be right back.

>> welcome back to our live continuing coverage of the hears on capitol hill concerning the affordable care act. right now, the congressman from texas is asking those gathered whether or not hipaa, which are the federal guidelines concerning privacy of health records has been compromised in any way, shape or form. >> >> was it the director of c.m.s., who generically generally made decisions at the

policy level that your company interfaced with? give me that person's name. >> there are many decisions made under this program over this last two, two and a half years. >> so is this another example of where things just go into a cloud? i mean, all you are is a contractor that spent 300, $400 million, it goes to some cloud and comes back from down on high? who wrote that. >> i am not clear as to who wrote that. >> let me ask it this way. do you think that should be in there? do you think that should be a requirement to sign up for obamacare, that you give up any reasonable expectation of privacy. >> sir, that is not my jurisdiction. >> you're a u.s. citizen. >> i can't make a statement one way or the other. >> well i'll answer, i don't think it should be.

i don't think it should be. my time's about to expire. miss campbell, did you all do a pilot program on this before it was rolled out? >> no, there was no pilot program. >> ok. and you said that it was complicated and big, but it was meeting your expectation. do you think it's right that 99% of the people that tried to go through the system get rejected, can't even complete the application? is that a system that you're proud of? >> sir, this is a system that we are working every day to make improvements. >> well, it's in my -- if we have a system that almost no one can successfully navigate, then we have to go to the paper system that this gentlemen's company down here, that is a system that has failed. with that, i yield back. >> thank you.

>> i started out in my opening statement saying there was no legitimacy to this hearing and the last line of the questioning certainly confirms that. hipaa only applies when there's health information being provided. that's not in play here today. no health information is required in the application process, and why is that? because preexisting conditions don't matter. so once again, here we have my republican colleagues trying to scare everybody. >> will the gentlemen yield? >> no i will not yield to this monkey court. >> this is not a monkey court. >> do whatever you want, i am not yielding. >> protecting american citizens. >> no preexisting conditions. the preexisting conditions don't matter, hipaa doesn't apply. there is no health information in the process. you are asked your address, date of birth, not health information, so why are we going down this path?

you are trying to scare people so they don't apply and so therefore, the legislation gets delayed or the affordable care act gets defunded or it's repealed. that's all it is, hoping people won't apply. the fact is there are over 20 million people going on this site and they are going to apply and they are ultimately going to be able to enroll. in fact, many of them already have. i think my republican colleagues forget that a lot of people are enrolling through state exchanges rather than the federal exchange. if it wasn't for the fact that many republican governors, including my own from new jersey had agreed to set up state exchanges, we wouldn't be putting so much burden on the federal system. i just want to give you some examples. in new york and washington, 30,000 people have eninvolved. in oregon, over 50,000 people ever enrolled. california, over 100,000 ever started applications. in tuck it go, nearly 16,000 people have enrolled. this website, this federal

website is not the only way that you apply. in fact, you can go to your community health area, the 1800 number, there are many ways for people to enroll, and all we talk about here is the website, because you're trying to make a case that people should not enroll. i want to ask two questions. am i correct that c.g.i. is doing work in self states in addition to their work on healthcare.gov and would you comment on that, please in these states. >> that is correct. we are supporting a number of states, and those states, we are a prime contractor in colorado, in hawaii, a prime contractor in massachusetts, a prime contractor in vermont. we are a subcontractor in california, a subcontractor in kentucky, and a subcontractor in new mexico. >> that appears to be going well, obviously, a lot of people have enrolled as i set fort

previously. i know when mr. waxman asked a question, you said you had confidence that whatever problems exist in the federal data system or website that they would be fixed by december 15 and you expect that the millions of uninsured people and others who are trying to enroll would be able to by then so their insurance would be effective january 1. was that my understanding? >> that's correct. >> the data hub that your company set up is working well to connect to the federal data when residents of those states apply. what i'm asking is if i go through new york or california or some of the other states that have responsible governors that have set up these state exchanges, unlike mine in new jersey, that if you do that or you go through the 1800 number or you go through the other means that you can to apply in

person, that they can access the hub, is that correct no. >> that is correct. >> ok. i'm just trying to point out to my colleagues the success of all the state exchanges and again, a lot of people are being able to enroll. i think the figures show when state governors work to expand medicaid and work to make sure their own citizens get coverage, they can make a big difference. they also show how short sighted it is of republican governors to refuse to expand the medicaid programs in their states, because that's another big factor to the affordable care act that really isn't being discussed today. again, i never cease to be amazed by the gop uses tactics to try to scare people and that's what's again happening here today. i was hoping that this hearing wouldn't end up accomplishing that goal and i would just ask the public, please, you know, try to find means to enroll, there are a lot of things other

than the federal website, and don't be scared by my gop colleagues into thinking that somehow you're going to lose your privacy. there's no health information provided as part of this exercise. thanks, gentlemen. >> mr. hall. >> thank you. this hearings entitled p.p.a.c.p.a. implementation failures, didn't know or didn't disclose. i guess this hearing really is to set us in a little better shape to deal with miss sebelius. she's going to be here next week. president obama often attempts to paint republicans as being out of order, out right, down right crazy in their criticism of the health care allow. i want to talk about that for a minute. i hear from my district and from americans across the country that the craziest part of the last few weeks is seeing the top

health official laugh on john stewart's program. i have a teacher in my hometown where she has to face premiums that will consume nearly a quarter of her monthly in come, another constituent trying to comply but not yet received information claiming i'm concerned we will not be in compliance and face fines. they are calling for the repeal of the individual mandate and most of them are calling for that. yet another who's been advised that their current coverage will end december 31, 2013. so much for keeping what you have. it's concerned the dysfunction of health care government will expose me to a liability if i can't actions to the website.

the founding fathers in 1776 declared their independence. the next year, they wrote a constitution that was 4500 words. this wording in here, the regulations not voted on by congress contains a massive 11,588,000,000 words. i don't know how anybody could answer these things. i want to is it you in an environment where people are worried about having a job, if we go on, there will be no employers a year from now, they now have to navigate a flawed law. my question to each of you is c.m.s. has had three years and most of you had over a year to insure that this law could work. what do you want me to tell the americans who are terrified of really facing i.r.s. fines for not being able to access

coverage they actually can't afford? we start with you, ms. campbell. you weren't allowed or chose not to use your opinion or make suggestions, but are you in a position to give me some words that i could give to these people to give them any hope that their government, that we're doing our job here in congress, that you've done your job that you were hired out to do? is there hope? >> if i understand the question you're asking, is the system going to be there for them to sign up? >> i beg your pardon? >> can you repeat the question? >> yeah, just give me something to tell these people that i've related to you that are real people, honest people that have to live with what you all have created, you set up, you run the website for people to sign up, or exchange.

>> and we're continuing -- >> you must know a whole lot more than i know to know what to tell these people. i'm asking you to give me some help along that line. if you can't express your. s to the people you report to, you sure can express them to me. >> this is our live continuing coverage of the affordable care hearings taking place now. in about three minutes, the president is expected to come out and talk about another issue, a contentious issue, immigration reform. the only moments you might have missed were fireworks concerning whether or not the hearings taking place on capitol hill were a monkey court, the words of new jersey congressman, the chairman saying these hearings were needed. we'll be back in about 90 seconds.

millions who need assistance now. we appreciate you spending time with us tonight. up next is the golden age of hollywood going golden but elsewhere. why l.a.'s mayor has declared a state of emergency for the entertainment industry there. next.

>> continuinging our coverage of the hearings taking place on capitol hill now concerning the affordable care act. the republicans refer to it as obamacare, specifically the glitches in the system. the head of c.g.i. said that the 500 million lines of code do not have to be rewritten, saying it's also not necessary to scrap the system in its entirety. the only fireworks coming when the new jersey congressman referred to these particular hearings as a monkey court, the chair of the committee disagreeing. in just about a minute, the president is expected to take to the podium to address the issue of immigration reform.

as you can see, we're keeping an eye on both. we return you now to capitol hill. >> i find this very hard to follow. this is the 21st century, it's 2013. there are thousands of websites that handle concurrent volumes, far larger than what healthcare.gov was faced with. you keep speaking about unexpected volumes, miss campbell. that really sticks in my craw, i have to tell you that, because i said, there are thousands of websites that carry far more traffic, so i think that's really kind of a lame excuse. amazon and ebay don't crash the week before christmas and pro flowers doesn't crash on value 10 tines day. in the testing of this, between

c.g.i. and qssi, can you describe exactly what kind of testing you did? there's external and internal testing. are you saying that you didn't test, that the tests worked very well both inside and out, or that you turned it all over to c.m.s.? anybody want to answer? i mean, what's happening? do you have an answer? >> are you asking me that question? >> i'm asking both of you, and you're using up a lot of my time by your silence. if you don't have an answer, just say that you don't, but

maybe we can take something in writing, but the beta testing and inside testing, i think is clearly the main contractor's job, and you're essentially saying that everything was all right. it's not all right. >> there was testing done throughout the process. c.m.s. did the end to end testing, but each component did their separate testing. wet independent contractors testing our system, as well. >> and what was the net result of that, what you just described? >> that our portion of the system that c.g.i. was responsible for, the function at worked. >> and it didn't. >> yes. >> it did not in the end outwhen it came part of an integrated end to end system. >> you knew it was going to be integrated. that wasn't a surprise. do you have something to say about the testing? >> let me be clear about our testing. our work, the data services hub was tested, tested well and

tested adequately. additional, we played a role as one of many independent contractors testing the code developed by other contractors. we tested every piece of code we received timely. we returned a full report of any bugs we found to c.m.s. promptly, and made everyone fully aware of all the potential risks and concerns that were made available to us. >> well, i'm now over my time, but i think that what we'd like to hear from you is when you're going to fulfill your contracts to the taxpayers of the country, so that we can go on and have people insured. taxpayers have paid you a lot of money and you're essentially saying to us everything is all right when it's not. so i'll submit some questions in writing, as well and with that yield back. >> thank you.

>> i'm going to try to go fast. i'm going to follow up on the comments. we would like the names of the personnel at c.m.s. who you provided the risk that you identified in your analysis of other contractors code. can you do that? >> let me follow up on that. >> that's fine, ford. i'm going to encourage my colleagues to ask for name, because c.m.s., there are people there. i'm going to venture to guess that the regular bureaucrats did their job, the political appointees manipulated the system to hide data they didn't want the public to know and we're going to find out who that is, because that's the crux of this problem. i've got a letter from a constituent who basically says we have never been without health insurance, however the affordable care act may force us into the position of going

without it. this whole battle is about whether americans can have affordable health care and this system is not helping in this debate. i was ranking member when this bill got passed and signed into law. after it got signed into law, we had 13 subcommittee hearings on things like smokeless tobacco, health care pricing, national all scheduled electronic reporting authorization. each one of those i asked for a hearing on the health care law. it's in the congressional record, statements like on april 28, 2010, we must hold hearings on the new health reform act. may six, 2010. we should also call secretary sebelius to testify. june 9, 2010. we need a hearing on the new health care law.

june, 2010, shouldn't the committee hold hearings and take immediate action? my friend, mr. chasm man sends us letters i want to do this, i want to do that. we sent countless letters to the majority at the time asking for hearings on the recently passed health care law, guess what? no hearings. when speaker pelosi said we've got to pass a bill before we know what's in it, we're finding out, flawed tech system that's a mockery. now let's talk about this. i accept the premise that you tested your individual section, but we're getting to the point of the integrated system, when was the integrated system tested, go, starting with miss campbell down in the table. when was the integrated system tested? >> during the last two weeks in september. >> what was the result of that? >> i don't have the results.

you'd have to get that from c.m.s. >> who would i go to to get that information? who was your point of contact at c.m.s. >> there are a number of people. >> give me a name. >> henry chow. >> give me another name. >> michelle snyder. >> you have another one? >> peter o. >> mr. slavitt. >> here's what we saw -- >> isn't that a beta test? >> here's what we saw. we didn't see the full integrated end to end system testing that you're talking about -- >> why not -- >> until a couple of days leading up to the launch. >> shouldn't you have that? >> ideally, yes. >> wouldn't any other system corporate entity rolling out something would test to see if it worked before it went to the field? >> yes. >> mr. slavitt, do you have names of people you talked to?

>> i don't have them with me. >> would you provide them. >> >> we'll be happy to follow up. >> we tested. >> i know you testified, beta testing end to end, when did it happen? >> the information only comes to us after the application is completed, so we were testing up to the time that the system went live, and as far as we were concerned, everything that came to us, we were able to process. >> our systems are not in greated with the main system. >> i'd like the names by tomorrow morning, if you can do that. >> finally, back to ms. campbell. first feature that was changed on the website, who told you to do that? >> can you repeat that? >> the see first plans, the website failed, part of the problem is people don't know what the costs of the plans are, you all made a change to say see plans first, just reported

yesterday, by i think c.b.s. who made that decision. >> i don't know who made. >> can you give us the names. >> we can get you a name. >> who made the decision that if you are younger than 50, you would be quoted a 25-year-old health policy no. >> i don't have an answer for you, sir. >> can you get us a name? >> i can try to go back to my team and see if they have a name. >> who made the decision if you're older than 50, you get quoted a 50-year-old policy. >> the same, i'd have to go back to my team. >> gentleman from new york, mr. engle. >> the republicans are so concerned about the act, they tried to kill it, defund it, shut down the government because of it. do you think this is a little politics here? perhaps they should work with us to improve the affordable care act instead of playing got you politics and trying to scare people into not enrolling into

the affordable care act. there will be plenty of time to figure out who's responsible for the various problems facing the exchanges. what's more important to me is that americans will be able to access the numerous benefits found in the plans offered through the exchanges. let me ask, i know it's been answered before, but i want to ask a specific answer. how soon will it take to correct these glitches so people can have unfettered access to the website. i know things are improving, how how soon will it be do you think so that the average american can do healthcare.gov and get right in without any glitches, ms. campbell? >> i can tell you that i have a team of people working around the clock trying to quickly get this resolved. as i said, there's improvement day over day. i cannot give you an exact date as to when it will be completely to satisfaction. >> how about a guess? >> i would prefer not doing

this. i don't like to raise expectations. >> mr. slavitt? >> we don't happen to control the pieces of the website that i believe you're referring to. we are committed to continuing to maintain the capabilities that we've built so far and committed to helping resolve any new challenges that arise anywhere in the project that we can ask to do so. >> i hope it's as soon as possible. i think there are numerous benefits in this law and i want to see the american people utilize this law. i happen to think it's good law. i'm proud that it came out of this commit yo and that we had many, many months of deliberation before we passed it. new york state, my home state, has also been experiencing some technical and capacity-related issues since october 1, but i think in new york, it's a good example of what's possible when the federal government has a willing and enthusiastic partner in implementation. as of october 23, 174,000 new

yorkers -- >> we're going to take a break from our coverage right now of the hearings on capitol hill concerning the affordable care act to bring you president obama addressing the issue of immigration reform. >> thank you very much. well, please ever a seat, everybody. good morning, welcome to can the white house. today i'm here with leaders from business, from labor, from faith communities, who are united around one goal, finishing the job of fixing a broken immigration system. this is not just an idea who's time has come, it's atime whose idea has been around for years now. leaders have worked together with republicans and democrats in this town in good faith for

years to try and get this done and this is the moment when we should be finally able to get the job done. it's no secret that the american people haven't seen much out of washington that they like these days. the shutdown and the threat of the first default in more than 200 years inflicted real pain on our businesses and on families across the country and it was a completely unnecessary self-inflicted wound with real costs to real people and it can never happen again, but even with the shutdown over and the threat of default eliminated, democrats and republicans still of some really big disagreements. there are some just fundamentally different views about how we should move forward on certain issues. on the other hand, as i said the day after the shutdown ended, that's no reason that we shouldn't be able to work together on the things that we

do agree on. we should be able to work together on a responsible budget that invests in the things that we need to grow our economy and create jobs, even while we maintain fiscal discipline. we should pass a farm bill protecting vulnerable americans in hard times, and we should pass immigration reform. [ applause ] >> we should pass immigration reform. it's good for our economy, it's good for our national security, it's good for our people, and we should do it this year. everybody knows that our current immigration system is broken, across the political spectrum, people understand this. we've known it for years. it's not smart to have it some of the brightest minds from

around the world to study here and then not let them start businesses here. we send them back to their home countries to start businesses and create jobs and in vent new products someplace else. it's not fair to businesses and middle class families who play by the rules when we allow companies that are trying to undercut the rules work in the shadow economy to hire folks at lower wages or no benefits, no overtime, so that somehow they get a competitive edge for breaking the rules. that doesn't make sense. it doesn't make sense to have 11 million people who are in this country illegally without any incentive or any way for them to come out of the shadows, get right with the law, meet

their responsibilities, and permit their families then to move ahead. it's not smart. it's not fair. it doesn't make sense. we have kicked this particular can down the road for too long. now the good news is this year, the senate has already passed an immigration reform bill by a wide bipartisan majority that addressed all of these issues. it's a bill that would continue to strengthen our borders. it would level the playing field by holding unscrupulous employers accountable if they hire knowing undocumented workers. it would modernize our system as we train americans for jobs of the future we attract highly skilled entrepreneurs from beyond borders to join with us here in the united states. it would make sure everybody plays by the same rules by

providing a pathway to earn citizenship, one that includes passing a background check, learning english, taking taxes, paying a penalty, getting in line behind everyone who is trying to come here the right way. it had all the component parts. it didn't have everything that i wanted, it didn't have everything that anyone wanted but addressed the core challenges of how we create an immigration testimony that is fair, that's just, that is true to our traditions as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. that's passed the nat by a partisan majority. [ applause ] >> here's what we also know, that the bill would grow the economy and shrink our deficits. independent economists have shown that if the senate bill

became law over the next two decades, our economy would grow by $1.4 trillion more than it would if we don't pass the law. it would reduce our deficits by nearly a trillion dollars. this isn't just the right thing to do, it's the smart thing to do. securing our borders, modernizing our legal immigration system, providing a pathway to earn legalized citizenship, growing our economy, strengthening our middle class, reducing our deficits, that's what common sense immigration reform will do. now, obviously, just because something is smart and fair and good for the economy and fiscally responsible and supported by business and labor and the evangelical community and many departments and many republicans, that does not mean that it will actually get done. this is washington, after all,

so everything tends to be viewed through a political prism and everybody's been looking at the politics of this. i know there are some folks in this town primed to think if obama's for it, then i'm against it, but i'd remind everybody that my republican predecessor was also for it when he proposed reforms like this almost a decade ago, and i joined with 23 senate republicans back then to support that reform. i'd remind you that this reform won more than a dozen republican votes in the senate in june. i'm not running for office again. i just believe that it's the right thing to do. [ applause ] >> i just believe it's the right thing to do. [ applause ]

>> i also believe that good policy is good politics in this instance, and if folks are really that consumed with the policy of fixing our immigration system, they should take a closer look at the polls, because the american people support this. it's not something they reject, they support it. everybody wins here if we work together to get this done. in fact, if there's a good reason not to pass this common sense reform, i haven't heard it. anyone still standing in the way of this bipartisan reform should at least have to explain why. a clear majority of the american people think it's the right thing to do. now, how do we move forward, democratic leaders have introduced a bill in the house that is similar to the bipartisan senate bill. now it's up to republicans in the house to decide whether reform becomeles a reality or

not. i do know and this is good news that many of them agreed that we need to fix our broken immigration system across these areas that we've just discussed, and what i've said to them and i'll repeat today is if house republicans have new and different additional ideas for how we should move forward, then we want to hear them. i'll be listening. i know that democrats and republicans in the senate, those who voted for immigration reform already are eager to hear those additional ideas. what we can't do is just sweep the problem yo under the rug one more time, leave it for somebody else to solve sometime in the future. rather than create problems, let's prove to the american people that washington can actually solve some had problems. this reform comes as close to anything we've got to a law that

will benefit everybody now and far into the future. let's see if we can get this done. let's see if we can get it done this year. [ applause ] >> we've got the time to do it. rips in the house, including the speaker have said we should act. let's not wait. it doesn't get easier to just put it off. let's do it now. let's not delay. let's get this done and let's do it in a bipartisan fashion. for those of you who are here today, i want to just say one last thing and that is thank you. i want to thank you for your persistence, for your activism. i want to thank you for your passion and your heart when it

comes to this issue. i want to tell you you've got to keep it up, keep putting the pressure on all of us to get this done. there are going to be moments and there are always moments like this in big efforts at reform, where you meet resistance, and the press will declare something dead. it's not going to happen, but that can be overcome. i have to say, joe as i look out at this room, these don't look like people who are easily deterred. >> i don't think so. >> they don't look like folks who are going to give up. you look fired up to make the next push and whether you're a republican or a democratic or an independent, i want you to keep working and i'm going to be right next to you to make sure we get immigration reform done. it is the time, let's go get it done. thank you very much, everybody.

>> you are listening to live coverage right now of president obama's speech concerning the issue of immigration reform, saying now is the time to get it done, pointing out the fact that there are 11 million illegal immigrants living in this country, many not paying taxes and simply hiding in the shadows of the nation. mike viqueira in washington, the vice president flanking the president on this particular issue. in this case, he is speaking even as there are contentious issues hearings taking place taking plagues right now on the affordable care act. >> forgive me if i'm a little cynical and pessimistic about this. until proven otherwise, you got to think it's business as usual. this is going to be a test, this comprehensive immigration reform just to fill people in. the penalty said it passed the senate rather easily.

not only does it provide the pathway to citizenship called amnesty but directs billions of dollars for border security, it was put in there to secure republican votes. it languishes now in the house of representatives. the president wants it done this year. in many respects it's going to be a test of john boehner, his willingness to defy the tea party which has led his larger republican party to virtual political ruin, at least the lowest standings in the poms in the history of a couple of polls we've seen recently. it's going to be a test of whether president obama has the political capitol coming off last weeks victory in the shutdown showdown as well and another test of whether this debacle, basically an indefensible snafus in this website, and it's fallen flat on its face, whether that's going to get any traction on capitol hill and