that's from william in kentucky. i'm surprised you don't have more support when you are 100% correct but if 100 men in agreement can't find a way to pay for a program they may never pay for anything. our deficit has got to stop and now as always is the best time to start. thank you for standing up for us. for being willing to say "no" to extended benefits that no one knows how to pay for or who will foot the bill. it takes a very special individual to stand firm when everyone around you seems to be

caving in." and that's from debbie from somerset, kentucky. these are just a few. there's more. but there are a lot of really good people in the commonwealth of kentucky, 4.2 million that want their senators, their members of the house to stand up for themselves. and i appreciate hearing from each and every one of them. i thank them for their support and i reserve the balance of my time. mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the assistant majority leader. mr. durbin: mr. president, i also received some e-mail and letters from kentuckians. it's a great state, the ancestral home of many durbins, one hailed from sunfish, kentucky, which is a pretty tiny

town i'm told, came up north to illinois. so i think it's a beautiful state, and i've enjoyed visiting there many times. a lady named joy from florence, kentucky, contacted me and said i'm 50 years old. i got let go a year and a half ago from my job because i was getting older and they could pay less for younger workers. most places i applied to won't hire by experience. they want a college degree. i have an elderly mother and a handicapped child. i'm behind in all my bills. and if there is not another extension, i'll not be able to pay my bills. aoeup hoping -- i'm hoping you'll put through another extension. hopefully things will improve come spring. another one from j.r., said he's from kentucky. i won't read some portions of this letter but i will read this part: "i would like to say i'm unemployed and unemployment insurance has allowed me to keep

my home. there still are no jobs that will allow me to live on. i have cut back to just the basic needs and have to give up the internet next. then i'll start selling my belongings to get by. i sit and wonder if everyone on unemployment gets cut off. do the senate and congress realize the war here in the united states will be worse than the one overseas. there will be so much stealing and no telling what else just for people to try to survive and feed their families. god help us all." that is a letter of desperation. it is an unimaginable scene that we would reach in any community here in this country, in any state. but i think it reflects the fact that some people who write and say "cut them off and so what" are pretty fortunate people. they probably have a job. they probably have a home. and they may not be worried where the next meal's coming

from. but for millions of americans, that's not the story. and i understand the senator from kentucky and i just see this differently. but i think the issue of health insurance is an example. if you have ever had the experience as a parent of having a sick chimed and having no -- sick child and having no health insurance, it's something you'll never forget as long as you live. it happened to me when i was a law student. my wife and i were newly married and we had no health insurance and a baby with a medical problem. i try to imagine what it would be like -- ours was a temporary experience -- but what it would be like if that's what you had to face day in, day out, week in, week out, month and month, year after year. that's what these folks are up against. the only chance they have to hang on to health insurance is this cobra program. the cobra program, let me add parenthetically, that was created through reconciliation, this process that has been condemned by some created the

cobra program and said we're going to provide health insurance for the unemployed people in america. and the president's stimulus package said we'll help them pay for the premiums. and the objection of the senator from kentucky cut off those cobra payments for thousands of people across america. i don't know what's going to happen now. i don't know if some of them lost their health insurance and tried to get it back, whether they're going to be denied coverage because of a preexisting condition. i hope that doesn't happen. but it will mean this just wasn't another political debate for them. it will mean that they've lost coverage, which all of us want to have for all of our families. cobra coverage consumes merely 84% of unemployment checks if you don't get a helping hand from the government. in illinois, monthly unemployment benefits are just over $1,300. the average monthly family cobra health insurance premium is over

$1,100. you can see it's impossible for a family with $1,300 a month to pay a $1,100 premium. that program was stopped because of the objection by the senator from kentucky. he said we should have faced his filibuster head on and taken all the time it took to resolve our way through it. and each hour of each day that we did that, more and more people would fall out of coverage of health insurance. we don't here -- we have as members of congress, a pretty generous health insurance plan. we share it with all the other federal employees, 8 million of us and our families. it gives us the very best coverage with the government picking up about two-thirds or three-fourths of the cost. we don't have to worry about gaps in coverage. as we receive our checks, we're going to be able to protect our families. but for the folks who are unemployed, that isn't the case. the senator from kentucky's

objection also affected, as i mentioned, transportation across the united states. federal rekpwrurplt to states for -- reimbursement to states are stopped because of senator bunning's objection, forcing halts in construction work and layoffs of construction workers in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the great depression. taotd the -- today the secretary of state of transportation ray lahood called to tell me the need for urgent response to get these people back to work so that they can inspect projects and folks working for contractors and working across america can get back to work. they're stopped cold dead in their tracks because of the objection by the senator from kentucky. now he wants to let this go on a little further. amend this bill and send it over to the house. let's see if they accept it. maybe they won't. maybe there will be a conference. maybe in a few days or few weeks

we can get it done. it's a 30-day extension, and it defeats its purpose if we accept this amendment and delay it because of those possibilities. he can no more guarantee that it won't happen than i can guarantee that it will. but why do we want to create that uncertainty for people who have been facing this uncertainty? the senator from kentucky's objection also stopped small business administration assistants to small businesses in illinois and kentucky as well. the s.b.a. has an outstanding loan waiting list totaling $140 million. because of the senator from bunning's objection, 3,000 small businesses this month will be denied access to loans they need to run their businesses, to pay their employees and to create new jobs in the middle of a reserbgs can we think of -- recession, can we think of a worse thing to do than to cut off small businesses? it didn't have to happen. if senator bunning would have taken the offer that he had last

week from the majority leader, and offered this amendment last week, we could have avoided all this. a week later he's decided, all right, i'll take the offer. a lot of people have paid the price in the meantime. we will not stop until we provided the assistance that unemployed americans need and families in illinois and kentucky and across america tkes participantly -- desperately want us to bring. eventually we will prevail and we'll care for those who are struggling. in the meantime, i urge my colleagues, please, do minority support the amendment of -- do not support the amendment of the senator from kentucky. it is unfortunately a way to delay even further this

end with this. again, mr. chairman, i thank

you for the opportunity to -- for the opportunity to appear. >> thank you. when the american consumers and regulators for not a serious issue like the sudden acceleration issue, toyota executives in america did not seem to have any authority to take action on their own. it all has to go back to japan. that might be a matter of corporate or japanese culture, but it is the fact. it was pretty obvious what the president of toyota north america, mr. jim lentz, said he did not have the power to order recalls in the united states, only japan did. he told the committee that inside toyota, "information only goes one way." this seems to have been a problem in nhtsa's

investigations, too. toyota has not been responsive to their inquiries and does not seemç to take consumer protectn as a mission for nhtsa seriously. that is our impression been talking to your people. secretary lahood, last week, you yourself testified that toyota cannot respond to concerns until you personally called akio toyoda. i assume that is correct >> that is correct. >> it is also true that we had to fly to japan to try to get toyota to take these issues seriously. to get them to take it seriously. in my opinion, stan needs to be i]çsomeone in the united states that can be held responsible when american consumers are

injured or killed due to safety problems in toyota pickles. -- toyota vehicles. . . i think this type of decision making structure would help foreign companies be more responsive to safety issues in the united states.

what do you think? >> i agree with you. mr. secretary, more than 2000 consumers have told nhtsa they are experiencing a sudden, unintended acceleration in their toyota and lexus vehicles. they have reported at least 34 deaths caused by sudden acceleration. that is correct, isn't it? >> yes, sir. >> if we areñi being honest, we still do not totally understand why this is happening. over the last few years, toyota has offered several explanations. first they said it was the floor vents, and more recently they have blamed it on sticky accelerator pedals. until recently, nhtsa accepted these explanations. but here is a problem. there are still many cases were toyota -- where toyota

discovered drivers had accelerated rapidly and the recalled mats are not involved. so there is still a problem, and we do not know what is causing the problem, but there does seem to be an easy way to get drivers to regain control of the vehicles, and that is called a break override system. it means that the brake always beats the accelerator. it could be going forward, but the brake stops a cold. this override feature would help toyota owners control their vehicles during a sudden acceleration episode, would it not? >> yes, it would. >> and if toyota decides to add this feature to its new vehicles, it is true that other

manufacturers adopted it years ago, correct? >> yes. >> it is also my understanding but there are a lot of older toyota -- that there are a lot of older models that are not given this brake override system, correct? >> the testimony said they were going to try to install the system in as many cars as they can. i do not know if it reflects the cars your mentioning, mr. chairman. >> it would have to reflect the early ones. >> it sounded like it would be in as many cars as it possibly could do. >> the question is, does it need to be all of them, and i think that it does. and my understanding is that the brake override feature is not a costly mechanical fix. it is instructions that program into a car parts computer, correct? >> yes. >> so why doesn't the government

make toyota install this feature into vehicles? why didn't they do it years ago? couldn't it have prevented some of the injuries reported over the past few years? why don't we require every manufacturers selling cars in the united states to install this feature? in that it does not only affect toyota vehicles. >> we are looking at the possibility of recommending the system in all manufactured automobiles. >> mr. secretary, my time has run out, and i call now on drinking member of the committee -- ranking member of the committee. oh, he is gone. ok, then order of questions will be in order of arrival. senator udall.

>> thank you, chairman rockefeller. i am wondering about the chart published in the "new york times." in 2004, you had this huge spike in what are being reported as crashes and complaints. 126 toyota drivers experienced a crash and later filed eight complaints -- a complaint. all other manufacturers were on the chart, either flat or going down in terms of complaints. it took us five years to actually do something significant in this case. and you had another spike in 2007, and here you can see this very, very dramatic spike in 2009. so my question to both

secretary lahood and administrator strickland is when you look at this problem, and secretary lahood, you have some independence from this because you are new to it, when you looked in your testimony and mention all of these complaints that come in, it seems to me you should have something in your database that when you get a spike like this, i mean, this just stands out, it alerts people that there is something wrong here, something going on, and immediately and activity started that would have gotten to the bottom of this a lot longer. mr. strickland, let me ask you, you know, there is one big watchdog out there, and that is nhtsa, and you are administrator. the other watchdog is this committee, the commerce committee, and you have served

many years in the commerce committee. so all of your experience going back, what do you see? what is the thing that happened here that we need to get to the bottom of to make sure that this does not ever happen again? please. >> senator, first of all, let me just say, we have contacted the "new york times." that article is inaccurate. it did not mention that nhtsa found no safety defect in early camry models. they claim now that they will post on their website the accurate information, which they left all -- out of the story, which is unfortunate. people read these things and believe what they read. but we did take it seriously and to interview the owners and we looked at these model vehicles -- we interviewed a owners and

looked at these model vehicles -- >> you say it reveals toyota had more complaints involving crashes than any other car maker. >> i will let our administrator comment, but i want you to know that the story was not accurate when it reflected we did not have investigations. we opened two investigations, as a matter of fact. and the website will have the report. i do not know what that means, in fact. >> this chart is revealing in terms of the spikes and what it took to get action. >> that article actually reflects the experience that nhtsa had at the time. since 2000, there have been can open investigations dealing with sudden acceleration its -- tan open investigations dealing with

sudden acceleration -- 10 open investigations dealing with sudden acceleration. if you look at the entire market size of toyota, they were the largest fleet during that period, as well. while they had more sudden acceleration incidents, the comparison to the rest of the fleet was on a remarkable -- unremarkable. they just had more issues because they have more cars. in terms of nhtsa's reaction, that was absolutely appropriate. we opened investigations. >> my time is almost up. chairman rockefeller, i just want to say to you, you have taken this committee in at the

-- in the consumer protection agency a number of times as chairman. i applaud you doing this, and i hope you continue, because i think the american public knows when they see these articles that there are big consumer protection issues out there, and i look forward to staying in fault with you in the oversight of those issues. -- involve with you in the oversight of those issues. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. this afternoon, we are sorry to hear from toyota, but this is about the agency. -- we are going to hear from toyota, but this is about the agency. others will take the seats at some point in the future. i want to ask about the agency. not who is sitting in the seat at the moment, the agency and the credibility of the agency. because my understanding is

that nhtsa has a budget of about $145 million compared to $875 million for security for the embassy in iraq. the security for one embassy in one country exceeds by multiples the amount of money we spend in nhtsa evaluating safety and related issues. now i have a seat here, and i want to refer to something that senator boxer said, because i want to ask whether you have investigated this. you just responded to senator udall by saying that investigations had been made and no evidence was found, and i made that list in july of 2003, an investigation in 2004, with no did in 2005, 2006 -- no data to support in 2004, 2005, 2006.

senator boxer said that it's something that made me wonder. mr. santucci, whose job was to conduct investigations, he went to work with toyota. that was immediately thereafter. the two have negotiated with former nhtsa colleagues to limit probes in toyota surging out of control. internal documents obtained by cbs used the term negotiated. here's the question. if somebody left nhtsa to go to work for the company, that limited the investigations that results in no data to support

further investigations, had you gone back and investigated inside the agency what has happened here? is this a case where for several years, the investigation happened, knowing that fatalities were occurring, and they did investigate, and there was no data to support? have you done an internal investigation to find out what this agency has done, what it should have done on behalf of the american people? >> yes, we looked at that employee -- those employees, and they can work for a company, but they cannot report to the department about issues they were responsible for. and everything we can tell at this point is they did work for toyota, but not in an area where they are responsible did they report to dot.

we looked at that, and some people believe that is not accurate. >> to you are saying it is just the appearance? >> i am saying that our review of it does not appear to show that they were engaged in activities that were prohibited by law from their engaging in. i said to another committee that i think this lot needs to be tightened up. i do. i work for an administration that sets the highest ethical standards for its people. they need to be tightened up, but we found no violations for these employees. >> if you take a look at the question of when information was given to nhtsa, and then investigations begun, no data, no data, and then recalling 50,000 vehicles because the floor mats. then you come down further again

and again and again, people are dying. it seems to just -- i am not sure anybody understands yet what is the problem. >> yes, sir. we know from our investigations that the format is a problem, and that is why these cars are up to ♪ -- for a recall. we know from what people have told us that perhaps electronics could be the problem, also, and we are going to do a review of that. if we thought the problem was in the trunk because the manufacturers said you have to put the floor mats in the trunk, then we will look. but they are a problem. the sticky pedal is a problem. could there be another problem? some people believe there is,

and it is our obligation to check it out. >> if the brakes override the a solider -- the accelerator, why is he recalled that requiring to have that fixed in -- why is the recall not requiring that be fixed? >> we believe that the electronics are involved, and we will have a complete review of that. >> this did not happen on your watch. but i think there are a real credibility problems. i think they have raised questions of credibility with nhtsa going back, and i know that what you want to do is fix all of that and run an agency people can be proud of, in which people can have some trust. >> on my watch, when people think there is a problem, we are

going to address it. we are not to take a back seat to anybody involving safety. everything has to do with safety. it is what we have to do. it is what people expect of us. when people say that there is an electronics problem, i am going to pay attention to that, and we are paying attention to that now. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, i know you are looking at it now. but the point is, we set in place legislation that became law years ago as a result of the firestone tire recall issue. putting in place the investigative methods that are so essential in order for nhtsa to do its job. i do not know on what basis you can rule out electronics. we are urging it, but it is not

about us urging it. you cannot rule it out, because you do not know. even toyota does not know, based on their public statements last week that were, as i said earlier, conflicting. one said he could not rule it out, and the other said they are confident. how do we know? i would be interested to know. you have to look at those investigations to find out exactly what went wrong, based on that there was a trend in acceleration. six people died that year, in 2004. so did nhtsa look at it as a trend? what did they do? did they based it on information they got from toyota? do we subscribe to toyota's explanation of what went wrong in 2004 and 2007?

>> and mr., our domestic dissent a letter asking for all of the possible information -- senator, we sent a letter asking for all of the possible information from toyota to make sure they gave us everything they were supposed to give us to begin with. that request has been made. i agree with you, we need to look back and make sure we had everything based on what we had at the time. we felt the remedies were the right remedies. but when we look back and find that there was an additional informational component, we would have found a different conclusion. >> did they get the proprietary data to make a difference? the point is, we do not know. you cannot conclude one way or the other. >> i cannot conclude we received everything until we receive the request we just sent to toyota.

>> these previous investigations in 2004 and 2007, were they relying on toyota's investigations? >> what we have to rely on, senator, our complaints we get from people, what information we get from the industry, what information we get from the manufacturers. >> the independent investigation did not occur, is that correct? >> our people do these investigations. we have people on our staff. >> we have been told you do not have a software expert. looking at it in totality, what is independently verified? that is the issue, if you're -- hear -- that is the issue here. this is on the heels of firestone. we have to figure out what went wrong. we have got to know. >> we agree with you. >> we have to get resources,

then come forward with contract and out. isn't there a way of solving this? we have to get independent reputation. i am not clear we got all of the information from toyota. >> i am not sure, either. that is why we made a huge, voluminous request for information. >> back in 2004, -- they concluded after four months. who is information did they use to make that decision? -- whose information did they use to make that decision? >> we look at all of the information, we make a judgment call is to recall needs to be made, and if the manufacturer decides needs to do it, if they

do not, we required them to do it. >> what if the information comes from insurance companies like state farm? >> we work closely with all insurance companies and regard their information as very valuable. >> it is amazing to me that there is no continuity. this is a matter of life and death. obviously, that memory was not ensconced in this at the time. it was a title recall issue. then you have these debts. if you look at the death curve, at least submitted to nhtsa, 2004, six deaths, 2007, more deaths attributed to unintended acceleration. i do not see that independent analysis was done.

that is what is concerning me. yes, we're looking at it now, but where were they then? we have to look at exactly what happened then to make sure it does not repeat itself. these are all reasons to do a very aggressive investigation. >> senator, on my watch, i guarantee you that it will be done to early, as independently as possible with every piece of information we can get. we will not rest until these cars are safe. >> is it unusual for nhtsa officials to go to japan? >> yes, absolutely. i believe that toyota, the toyota business model is broken. i told mr. toyoda at that. when they have good, expert, professional people in north america making recommendations and they do not listen to them, their business model is broken. i think mr. toyota got that message, not only from me, but

from others. i think you will see some changes in the way that they do business. >> thank you. >> i am also told that mr. medford and his team were treated dismissively. actually, they used stronger language than that. so these are not common experiences. senator wicker, i call on you. >> thank you very much. senator boxer is under a time schedule, so i promise to be brief. let me ask you, mr. secretary, about these two studies, the exponent study commission in 2009 by toyota, and the study done by professor gilbert of

southern illinois university. as i understand it, exponent is an organization is that is widely known in this field, concerning analyses of defects. nhtsa has used them in the past. they conducted an analysis of the electronic throttle system. toyota received a report confirming their contention that the defense cannot be caused by the etc system because there are fail-safes that prevent it. i want to ask your opinion about that study as compared to the gilbert study. this study was commissioned by persons who are interested in

bringing a lawsuit with regard to these incidents. and professor gilbert determined that toyota -- that the system did not properly detect electronic malfunctions. he was able to induce unintended accelerations vehicles that did not trigger the failsafe mode. toyota, on the other hand, contended that in his tests, he manipulated the system that cannot ever occur under driving conditions. so i would just like to ask, at this time, realizing that their analyses are ongoing, if you have some advice to the committee or can't comment on these contrasting studies.

>> we are going to look at the studies that were done by the professor at southern illinois university in carbondale, but the organization hired by toyota -- by the organization hired by toyota. there is a committee member whose toyota experienced unexplained acceleration. we have purchased that vehicle, and we are going to examine it. what we are going to do is a thorough review of studies that have been done by the professor at siu and other groups. we are going to do our own study. we are going to do a review, we are going to look at the automobiles with unexplained acceleration and figure out if electronics were a part of this. >> so at this time, you do not feel comfortable doing a preliminary criticism or opinion as to either one of these. >> no, sir, not at all.

>> and a study done by your department would be a completely separate and exhaustive -- >> absolutely. looking at the cars that have acceleration which is not explained, trying to figure out if the electronics are the problem. >> can you tell us at this point what you know about this firm, exponent? >> all i know is what i heard at the hearing. we are going to get a copy of their reports and look at them. >> i would appreciate it if you could get back to the committee on the record and tell us whether in fact the department and nhtsa have used exponent. >> yes, on different occasions throughout the years, exponent had a different name, but nhtsa had used them before. in terms of this report, we are reviewing that report, and it will be involved in our work. but there also will be a significant piece of the work that is independent, where we

are going to pull experts from around the country, which various -- from academic and engineering, a science panel. but dr. gilbert's work, we are examining it now. >> if you could stay on the record the number of times your agency has actually used and relied on exponent. and just to be brief, you stated last week that it would be beneficial in terms of foreign country's information -- foreign countries' information, it would be useful to receive information from there. what types of information do you not currently received that would be beneficial? >> we certainly receive information on complaints, but

why don't i tell you specifically what we received and the areas where i think we are deficient? >> ok, i appreciate that. i know that in past instances, previous leadership in nhtsa have said, do not intimidate us with data. it has to be distilled, or else it will be counterproductive and bog down the system. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator boxer. >> i am trying to connect the dots as to who knew what, what happened, why did it happen. i do not hold you responsible for what happened in 2004 or 2007. i am talking about going forward. when we look at an ethics rule or any law, there is the letter

of the law, and the spirit. you might be totally right that this fellow, santucci, who left nhtsa and went to toyota, and according to the cbs news story, he convinced nhtsa -- he was part of a team that convince them to focus only on the burst of acceleration, ruling out the long-duration events that lead to accidents and deaths. he himself admitted, he used the word negotiate. so he was involved. now maybe if you look at the letter of the law, maybe he never worked on sudden burst acceleration. maybe he worked on something else, safety belts, or airbags. the spirit was broken. i agree with the comments to cbs

where it was pointed out that it is cozy, cozy. i really applaud the senators. they have written a letter to the inspector general, and i want to put that in the record, and one of the issues raised this issue. going forward, without waiting -- because it just seems to me on its face, remember, the outcome of this was put by toyota in their own document, and i want to place it in the record, their own document talks about the fact they saved so much money on this. this is the car that killed my constituent.

this is the car that spun out of control, and that highway patrolman died because, i believe, there was pressure put on nhtsa from people had too cozy a relationship. i think it is part of the problem. could i prove it? maybe, if i had a lot of time, i could. but it does not look good. it smells bad, it is not right, and they applauded their victories. . is. look at this. this is their presentation. it says, a toyota safety group. fmvss110cir, labeling recall. no penalties, save money on buybacks. negotiate recall on camry es,

saved $100 million with no defects found. this is an outrage. so would you work with us now on tightening up this law? >> absolutely. >> i think that is key. as i understand it, toyota is now installing brake override technology. imagine. you are driving your car, you step on the break, and nothing happens. the car goes faster, faster, faster. so toyota is installing a brake overwrite technology as a fix. do you think we should use that in all new vehicles? should it be involved with more vehicles? >> we are looking at that, senator, and particularly given the fact that mr. lentz has said

they will put that in all cars, we are looking at it. it is a good safety device, and we are trying to figure out if we should be recommending that. >> the 2006 camry model is not on the current recall list. why are there models such as the 2006 camry, which have been involved in deadly accidents, not included in the current recall? >> i will get back to you on the record, if i can, senator. >> ok, because i do not think the recall was comprehensive enough, based on what i am reading. but i turn to you, because i trust your gut and on this. >> thank you, senator boxer. >> the way i look at it, investigations were opened six times, close without action, 34 people died. i think we can do better.

in 1980, there were 119 people in enforcement. today, there are 57. in 30 years since 1980, we have doubled the number of cars on the road, from 146 million vehicles in 1980 to 246 million vehicles today. has this diminished staffing level made a difference? >> more positions for nhtsa are recommended in the 2011 budget. we applaud the president for recognizing that we need more resources. >> do you think that would be helpful here? >> absolutely. >> secondly, regulatory or statutory reform, as i understand it, manufacturers can voluntarily initiate recalls without waiting for nhtsa to order a recall, were nhtsa can order a recall initiated, but to do that you have to go through public hearings and investigations, giving the

manufacturer time, defending the recall in court. it goes on and on. what, if anything, can be done to speed up the process? >> well, we do have to do investigations before we can require a recall. but the manufacturers have been cooperative. a recall was just announced today on some automobiles, and i guess what i would say, senator, is that we will look at that. for now, what i am saying is for the most part, manufacturers are cooperative on this. >> but we have an issue where they were showing off for saving $100 million, saying it was the floor mats. you can assess fines for this kind of behavior, but those penalties can be as high as $16 million for a related series of violations. it sounds like a lot of money, but when toyota is bragging about save $100 million by negotiating a resolution to a safety defect that is not a

recall, is that enough money? should there be more vulnerability to assess fines? would this be a useful tool? >> i think so, and i would also say because of our insistence and going to japan, talking to mr. toyoda, we cut short their ability to stall this out by them recognize and have a safety problem -- in talking to mr. toyota, we cut short their ability to stall this out by them recognizing they have a safety problem. >> regulators complaint, and you do not get an answer. i liken it to a hockey puck going back and forth on the ice. i know you just pursued this with senator boxer. do you have statistics or information on the number of former nhtsa staff who now works

for car manufacturers? >> we can get back on the record. >> and he suggested there might be ways to tighten the rules to bring back that public trust. what are your ideas? >> i think we should have the highest standard possible, nhtsa which, nhtsa employees -- which would prohibit nhtsa employees from working with auto manufacturers for a limited amount of time. for this administration, it is two years for a cabinet secretary. i think it probably should be longer. >> so you are saying that they can work with the agency on a specific issue, it just not with the regulators. that sounds like a good idea. i know when you get these complaints, you scan your databases to figure out if there is a match or you have seen a number.

we do not want to get in the fight about what the "new york times" said or not, but nhtsa stands its own databases. who scans corp. databases? >> we work with that, and we try to go through all of the data we can. >> toyota has a statutory requirement to report to our early-warning system. so we receive their peaceful reports, technical service bulletins. all of that -- we receive their full reports and technical service bulletins. >> the guy i mentioned, i talked to him directly, and he felt like he was being told he was not telling the truth. he has never driven a car, she is afraid to drive it. and we have another woman, a nurse, the same thing happened.

she barely survive. she was able to put it in neutral finally and stop it from accelerating. the problem from a trust standpoint with government is that these people all came forward and went to the agency had filed complaints, and all of these other complaints were going on. these details were somehow in the computer system. i truly believe that employees are trying to do the right thing, to figure out what tools we can give you so there is no chance of this happening again. when my constituents file complaints, at least there is some feeling that they were not going crazy when this happens to them, and they did the right thing reporting it, and they are part of the solution. >> thank you for your leadership, senator. we appreciate it. >> thank you, senator. ñi>> i have a packet to hand ou,

if that is ok. administrator strickland, i hate to see the secretary have all the fun, so i'm going to ask a few questions, if you do not mind. first, i want to ask about the resource issue. we have had a few senators today suggest that you need more resources, and i know that is in the president's budget, but have you made decisions on how you were going to fill those spots? it sounds like you might need more expertise in the software electronics area. do you know whatçó you are going to do? >> we have six positions provided for in the budget, if it is approved. in terms of expertise, we have several pipelines. we have five electrical engineers, 125 in two years total. we also have a vehicle research