working to secure additional funding and resources to assist the a court and its heavy caseload. the morning of theth shooting, e was in line toin speak to congresswoman giffords who was a also a friend about his efforts to have the ninth circuit declared judicial emergency and the district of arizona. he died doing what he did each and every day, working toor guarantee the federal courts and our state who are capable of handling the growing caseload while ensuring swift justice for all. judge roll exemplify the qualities all president should seeking candidates for the federal bench. intelligence, humility, integrity, and fidelity to the law.ol he embodied all these qualities and many more.ad additionally he was known as the kind neighbor, dedicated father and husband and a loyal friend. he will now be known also as the

he wrote. the arizona daily star reported on january 20, 2011 and i quote, surveillance footage of the january 8 shooting campaign in s tucson showed the judge roll used his body as a shield to cover the wounded ron harper. bl roll took a bullet to the back and lost his life in the process. the judge is a hero in the county sheriff spiro of cheap -r the article states this as suspected gunman shot barbour, congresswoman giffords district director, almost simultaneouslyo roll moved barbour toward the ground and both crawled beneath thend table castor garr said, rl then got on top oftaga barbour. ..

life, castagar said. mr. barber told the "arizona daily star," that just gives me more admiration for the judge than i ever had. john roll was a dear, deman. mr. barber and judge roll had been friends for many years, dating back to their days as college students at the university of arizona. most recently they worked together with the arizona congressional delegation to secure funding for a new federal courthouse in yuma, arizona, to alleviate the congestion at the tucson federal courthouse. in fact, judge roll had just reviewed the architectural reviewed the architectural >> he told my office he was very pleaseed with the design. it's the hope of myself and senator kyl, and every member of the arizona delegation, that the architectural designs will soon include the name of chief judge

john roll prominently on the building. it's the same ease steamed jurist, friend, and hero deserves this honor and much more. our state lost a good man, a true and able advocate for justice for all and a great arizonaian. for this reason i ask the fellow senators in joining me to pass this legislation to allow the federal courthouse to be proudly known as the john m. roll united states courthouse. >> you can see the snowfalling on the capitol. the snow is in recess due to the call of the chair. the senators are expected to be back in shortly to talk about the schedule tomorrowment we'll have that live for you when that begins. right now, we're hear more about the resolution talked about today regarding the shooting in tucson. >> mr. president, yesterday i

spoke about the events on january 8 in tucson, arizona, specificically referencing the people -- specifically honoring the people we are talking about in the resolution. we can agent as a body as democrats and republicans from all parts of the country to recognize the people that were injured, families of those who were killed, and, orveg, the he -- of course, the heros of the tragic shooting. gab giffords arrived as a conference to meet with constituents which is something she enjoyed doing very much, and this was the first event of the year. she had hosted others previously, and joined by members of her staff including pam simon and daniel hernandez,

an intern. they stood alongside as she greeted constituents who wanted to speak with her. one of the individuals was judge john roll. he attended mass, then he decided to stop by the safeway to thank the congresswoman for her assistance in dealing with the court's overwhelming case load. also attending the event was christine that taylor greene who like congresswoman giffords won an office. she won student counsel at her elementary school. dorothy morris and her husband, george, a retired airline pilot, were attending the event. another was a grandmother who spent the summers in new jersey

but winter in arizona were there too. they were all waiting to speak to the congresswoman as the gunman approached and shot the congresswoman in the head and then turning his gun to the others in line. gabrielle zimmerman, judge roll, christina taylor greene, dorothy morris, and dennis were all killed. george, morris, pam, ron barr beer and the congresswoman were injured along with eight others. those killed, had much more to offer in their lives. she gave the congresswoman's outreach was 30 years old, engaged to be married. according to news reports, he was killed while rushing to assist others. he worked closely with my tucson staff. judge roll was not only a very

distinguished and respected jurist, but was known most of all in the tucson community for his kind pness and kurt -- kindness and curtesy. he was killed trying to protect ron barr beer who was shot moments before. christina taylor was 9 years old, a 3rd grader. dorothy morris was married for 50 years to george, and he was injured trying to protect his wife. they have two daughters and i met one of them in the facility in which he's recooperating where i was last friday. phyllis like others in the group was a volunteer at her church and known as a cook. he too, was shot as he dove to the ground to cover his wife who escaped with wounds to her legs. i visited with her again on friday as well. as we know, the gunman was prepared to take more lives.

his plans for more bloodshed for dodged by brave citizens. these stories have been documented in the media in the last few weeks. after a bullet grazed his head, a retired army kernel in good shape got up and helped hold the gunman down until the police arrived. anna was shopping that morning at safeway and leaving the store, the shooting began. according to reports, she rushed to the aide of mr. barber after a bullet hit an artery in his leg. anna is the mother of two u.s. marines who were deployed to iraq and afghanistan several times, and visiting him in the hospital holding anna's hand repeating over and over again how she saved his life. such are the multiple acts of bravery and kindness.

daniel hernandez in the gallery of the state of the union speech last night is a 21-year-old internal for congresswoman. he rushed to the aide and applied pressure to her wounds which prevented her from bleeding more than she did. he stayed with her when emergency services arrived. the others grabbed the additional magazine that the gunmanmented to reload in his weapon. steve rail and former emergencies room helped sub sue the gunman and helped care for the injured. as the gunman was trying to reload his weapon, he was wrestled down and joseph ran from a nearby store when he heard the shots being fired and helped subdue the gunman. we're obviously grateful for

these acts of bravery. we're proud of the people mentioned, but also all the emergency worker who is quickly arrived on the scene giving safety to the people after the crucial moments after the attack. i have to mention the incredible team of professionals, the surgeons and other highly scaled personnel at the university medical center. we're proud of that facility in southern arizona, and they showed their competence in dealing with all of the wounded and some who died. it's now been more than two weeks since the tragedy, and the families who lost loved ones are obviously still grieving. we all pray they find comfort in the days ahead, and we hope and pray the wounded make full recoveries. in recent days, we received good news in that regard as those who

were wounded are beginning to recover and leave the hospital, and our friend and colleague, gabby giffords, though in serious condition, we are hearing positive reports from her doctors, and we wish her the very best in beginning her recovery in houston. mr. president, the tragedy in tucson was a shock to us all. it's difficult to comprehend such horror can be committed. we see how it brought out the best in good people, so in honor of the victims and heros of this tragic event, senator mckaine and i -- senator mccain and i ask to pass resolution 14. we can do little to those who lost loved one, but can affirm this body is united in the grief for the fallen, its add mir rigs for the -- admiration for the heros and

prayers for the injured. >> a live look at the capitol. we expect them to return shortly to talk about the schedule tomorrow. we've been hearing debate on a resolution that the senate voted on today honoring the lives of six people killed in the shooting in tucson, arizona on january 8. here's republican leaders mitch mcconnell talking about that. >> mr. president, first, i want to express my strong support for the resolution on the floor honoring the victims and the heros of the tucson shooting, and i thank senators kyl and mccain for introducing it. let me take this opportunity to express my sympathy to the families of those who lost their lives that morning and join with all of those persevering in prayer for the injured including congresswoman giffords. her condition, thankfully, still apierres to be -- appears to be improving day by day. we will never forget the heros of those who sacrificed their

own safety that morning in tucson for the good of those around them. no other dedication of those who attended to the wounded immediately after the shooting both at the scene and hospital rooms in the days that followed. we thank all of them for giving us in the midst of had event some reason for hope and a powerful example of service to follow. it's my hope that today's resolution will help in some way to preserve the memory of the dead, the injured, and the heros of tucson. hopefully out of this terrible national tragedy, the rest of us can draw strength and inspiration, grow in concern for those around us, and deepen our sense of purpose about the work we do here every day. >> so the senate went on to pass

that resolution honoring the people killed in tucson, arizona, six people including u.s. district judge john roll, a 9-year-old girl, and representative gabrielle giffords who was injured in the shooting. that happened january 8. right now, switching it up a little bit taking you to mitch mcconnell talking about the state of the union from last night. >> now, mr. president, on another matter, for two years, i've insisted again and again that the two parties can and should work together on legislation that would spur the economy, create an environment for good, private sector jobs, and put our nation on a stronger footing for the future. last night, the president did the same. this morning, i'd like to accept the president's offer to work

together just as i did after last year's state of the union. i agree with the president that we can and should work together to increase without federal mandates production of more domestic sources of energy including nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. on strengthening and protecting our borders and enforcing immigration laws, on increasing u.s. exports with south korea, but also panama and columbia on medical reliability form to rain in frivolous lawsuits and strengthen social security for future generations of america, on finishing the job in iraq and afghanistan, in on simplifying the individual tax code and reducing our corporate tax rates making it harder and harder for u.s. companies to compete around the world. working together in the areas

encourage the creation of private sector jobs, improves security, and helps us keep commitments to our children and parents. i take the president at his word when he says he's eager to cooperate with us on doing ology -- all of it. achieving these things should be an end into itself. it cannot be con mr. conrad:-- contingent where one side agrees to energy cooperation when the other cripples the question. where one side agrees to fight terror and other has timelines and preordained withdrawal dates. in other words, a bargain where the parties have no intention of working to the at all. too often, this is the approach the party has taken over the

last two years. take health care. for more than a year, we offered to work with the white house and democrats on a bill to incorporate the best thinking on both sides. they refused every step of the way, and in the end, they got the bill they wanted, a massive government-driven system creating an unknowable number of new bureaucratic entities and two massive new government entitlements which is already leading people to lose the care they like, which nearly two-thirds of doctors surveyed leads to worse care, and causing already struggling businesses to struggle more with a mountain, a mountain of new mandates and fees. it's only after this disastrous bill has become law, that the president now says he's interesting in making it better even as he belittles the legislative concerns so many americans continue to have about it. he's taken the same approach to spending and debt. two years ago, the president came to congress and told the country we needed to invest in

the future through a $1 trillion stimulus that was supposed to be a model of transparency and efficiently. within a year, this bill which was sold to us at the answer of our nation's economic woes had become a national punchline, a tragic waste of money, and two years after that investment in our future was signed into law, what do we have? nearly $3.5 trillion more in debt and nearly 3 million more americans out of work. these out of work americans don't want to sit around and wait for the vision of the future to appear, complements of the experts in washington. they are not moved by a vision of what america could look like 40 year from now. they want a job. they want washington to stop trying to help them and let them

help themselves. the president talks a good game, but call us skeptical because when the speeches are through, the debt is higher, more and more wasteful spending, jobs stifling regulations come to life, and millions of americans are still asking the same, simple question. mr. president, where are the jobs? mr. president, he made good suggestions on areas where we could work together, and we stand ready to do so just as we have in the past, but we've now seen enough to know what the president says and what the president does are two very different things. he's called for investments in energy before, and we got the stimulus. he called for working with us on trade, we're still waiting. he said before we get serious about the debt even as it reached dizzying new heights as a result of his policies, he

speaks like one who recognizes that spending is out of control, and yet his response is to propose we lock in spending levels. we already know they are completely unsustainable. mr. president, this isn't progress. this is an admission of defeat. americans don't want to spend at an unsustainable level. they want cuts, dramatic cuts, and i hope the president works with us on achieving them soon. to put it simply, the president still sounds like he's trying to have it both ways. his tone may be changing, but based on past performance, we will be skeptical until we see results. . we will work to lower debt, get government out of the way for economic growth, and work to repeal the health care bill.

even as we replace that bill with the kind of common sense reforms people actually want, the president has shown he's willing to talk about some of these things. let's hope he surprises us by showing a new willingness to do more than that. to actually working with us on achieving real results. mr. president, i yield the floor. >> the senate is taking a break in recess subject to the call of the chair. we do expect to hear from senators again tonight though. we'll have live coverage here on c-span2 as always. you can see the snowfalling on washington. in the meantime, david cameron atepidded the british house of commons today to take part in prim minister's question time talking mostly about the domestic economy among other issues. we'll watch this until the senate coming back in.

>> questions for the prime minister in mr. gregory campbell . >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i'm sure the whole house wants to join me in sending deepest con doll lenses by the appalling terrorist attacks in moscow on monday. our thoughts are with the families of those killed and injured, but the family of gordon from the united kingdom. i spoke with the president and offered him our complete support that the terrorists should never be allowed to win. mr. speaker, this morning, i had meetings with colleagues and others, and i should have further meetings later today. >> gregory, campbell. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i wish to join in the tributes that he paid and also wish to send best wishes to an injured soldier in afghanistan from northern ireland injured last week. mr. speaker, every week there is

600 million times flowing into the treasury from motorists and each week sense he says it was a sensible, balanced policy that protects family from big increases and the oil prices. he's promised a stabilizer, answered questions on it, when will we see it? >> well, i don't believe in making tax changes outside of budget. that's the proper way to do things in this country. i do think that there is a very strong case of looking at the area because i want to see a situation where oil prices rise, we share the burden with them. the honorable gentleman reminded me of things i've said that i could remind you of things he said. in his manifesto he said to bring back public spending and

the key must be reducing debt. i agree with that. >> mr. speaker, i'm delighted that the prize allowance will be announced in my home area on wednesday. prime minister, is it not initiatives like this to spark enterprises and start businesses in the some of the most needed parts of the country? >> my friend is right, and i hope others opposite encourage people to start up businesses and get enterprise going because it's a private sector led recovery that we need this this country, but we should give special help to areas like hers and i visited it recently to make sure we do everything to help growth emerge and improve the prospect of the atlantic gaitway which is exciting for her area and everybody who lives there. >> mr. speaker, can i join the prime minister in sending deepest con doll lenses to the

families. there was a fiance family and friends of gordon. mr. speaker, can the prime minister explain to the house what in his view is the cause of yesterday's disappointing growth figures? >> first of all -- >> we're leaving this to go back live to the senate. majority leader harry reed is speaking. waiving the reading of the amendment, which is at the desk; s. res. 8, senator harkin, s. res. 10 and s. res. 12, that there be eight hours of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees with the person debating these resolutions concurrently upon

the use or yielding bask tiernlg the senate, amendment to s. res. 10 be agreed to. the senate proceed to vote in relation to the resolutions in the order listed above with no intervening action or debate, following the resolutions be subject to a 60-vote threshold for adoptions:wyden resolution and udall of colorado resolution. the following resolution be subject to a threshold of two-thirds, s. res. 10, s. res. 8, and s. res. 21. if a resolution fails to achieve the listed leash hold for a dorntion we return to its previous status. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: madam president, i have had a number of conversations this evening with my counterpart, the republican leader. we on this side have a

conference scheduled, caucus tomorrow, at 12:30, so do the republicans. these votes are all going to occur after we finish our caucuses anyway. so there's not going to be no votes in the morning much the debate will start in the morning. we're going to come in at 10:00. there will be no morning business. it's been suggested we come in at 10:30 because of the inclement weather. that's fine. there will be no morning business in the morning. we'll go immediately to these malts set forth in this order that's now before the senate. the weather reports are that it's going to be -- there will be sun shining tomorrow. it will be cold. the streets will be bad but as i've indicated, we're not going to have the votes until tomorrow after noon. we hope it'll all work out. senator mcconnell and i will visit this again if anything untoward comes. we know that it would be better

if we didn't have this bad weather, but we're not all fortunate enough to live in southern nevada. sometimes bad weather does come. and that being the case, madam president, we have been out of session now for several weeks. we have this organizational stuff that we have to get out of the way so we can start having matters reported out of our committees. so as inconvenient as it is forren be, we need to move forward. -- for everyone, we need to move forward. as if in executive session, i ask consent that the injunction of secrecy be removed from the following the prayer and pledging treaty transmitted on gang 266 this year by president obama: protocol amending tax convention with swiss confederation which is document number 112-1. i further ask that the treaty be considered as having been read the first tiernlg referred with accompanying papers to the

committee on foreign relationed in order to be print and the president's message be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 10:30 a.m. tomorrow morning, january 27, following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time forked two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and the senate proceed to consideration of the rules change resolutions as provided for under the previous order. finally, i ask that the senate recess from 12 thirty until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the caucus meetings that i've already indicated are going to take place. officer sphir without objection. pried reid -- mr. reid: if all the time sued, the senators should expect a certificates of roll call votes tomorrow night, about 7:00. we hope that a lot of this time can be yielded back, but we'll just have to wait an see. those votes will be in relation to the series of resolutions to change the senate rules that we've talked about earlier this evening. if ther there's no further birki ask that the senate adjourn

under the previous order. and as a further marveg respect for the victims and heroes of the tragedy in tucson, arizona. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until thursday, january 27, at 10:30 a.m. and pursuant to senate resolution 14, does so as a further mark of respect to the victims of the tucson tac.

>> ladies and gentlemen, before i have to go, i'll introduce president. please stand up as a sign of soily darety -- solidarity in honor of the victims that happened in your country two days ago. please give yourself a minute of silence. >> thank you.

mr. president, it's a very special honor particularly given the terrible tragedy in moscow to welcome you here in davos, and i should say to welcome you back to davos. many of us remember so vividly when you made your impressive speech which, by the way, was called modern russia in 2007. after a decade of fuss over economic and political turmoil, russia has reasserted itself as the leading global player, as a member of the g8, as a member of the g20, and as a so-called

brick country. under your leadership, russia has successfully overcome the consequences of the global financial crisis and has undertaken significant steps towards ensuring long term economic stability, actively pursuing a modernization plan to diversifying the economy, develop small and medium sized enterprises, and investing in human capital, science and technology, and also at one thing of importance, social sector reforms in housing, health care, and education. since your election, mr. president, you have capitalized two innovation revolutions in your country.

major up vestments have been -- investments have been made by many of us in the room to develop a high-tech research and production hub that will become russia's silicon valley. this which you championed personally, we create pathways to bring technologies and industry high-tech and facilitate regional innovation ecosystems. mr.mr. president, in addition, to promoting and accelerating russia's further integration into the global business and economic communities, you also have overseen major evolutions in russia's foreign policy. with great progress made and

particular relations with the united states, we see u.s. has delivered a number of successful outcomes including the establishment of a new star treaty of nuclear weapons. president, we are all eager to hear from you russia's reason of the new reality and your plans for addressing the world's biggest challenges and risks, terrorism being foremost among them. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome sir president of russia.

[applause] >> translator: thank you. ladies and gentlemen, indeed the day before yesterday in moscow at international airport, the terrorist act was committed that took lives of dozens of innocent people. citizens of various countries fell victim to terrorist act, citizens of russia, united kingdom, ukraine, germany, austria, kerr stan, and more

than 100 persons were injured and they are now at hospitals. that tragedy, indeed, shook the entire russian society, although our country even in the past was subjected to serious attacks. that act caused indignations throughout the civilized world. i received numerous messages, telegrams, telephone calls from the leaders of foreign states, leaders of international organizations e pressing their con and i'm grateful for the words that i've just heard from you and from other participants in the forum. together we mourn the loss of

life. the pain from the loss of human lives, of course, will stay in our hearts for long, but what has happened only strengthened our resolve to find a protection of terrorists. those who committed that heinous act by aiming their decisions at various countries expected that their act would bring russia to its knees would force us to be defensive. they expected and hoped that the president of russia will not come here to atepid the forum among other things, of course. this is the country tier ya -- criteria you choose the time and

place of committing that act of terrorism, by they miscalculate. russia is aware of its place in the world. russia is aware of its speedometers to its -- responsibilities to the citizens and will comply to them and the responsibilities to the world community. this is the reason why on this day i am speaking from here. terrorism, the most important thing, the valor of human life it tramples upon any rights and freedoms no matter ideological generates fear and hatred. it is an obstacle to prove in

our world. the situation is also dramatic in that the terrorist acts in the cardinal way disrupted the normal current of life and such acts very often force us to take very tough decisions. those terrorist acts radically changed the way of thinking not those who fall victims, but also the way of those who live on the planet. unfortunately, no states are free from terrorism. terrorists affects like the one that has just happened in russia unfortunately for the first time can happen at any time in any place of the world. no one is immune to that today. there are no universal recipes to combat that evil, but one

thing can be said in a definitive way. our success depends on our solidarity and concerted action particularly during a period when globalization made our world much more interdependent than it was some time ago, and we have to build upon our efforts in the joint struggle against terrorism. we have to do all we can to protect the social and -- poverty, ill lit illiteracy, and parentlessness and ensure that this is stable, just, and fair and safe. thank you for your feelings. our forum is conducted during

the time when many tend to speak of the end of the world of the financial crisis, but at the same time, it's quite obvious it's not all that simple. the period for extra rapid development has resulted in many people to become euphoric, but the prices have sobberred up everyone, but we have trouble with only one prize who will be victims of the crisis, and so far they are modeled for growth and economic development so far is slower than we'd like it to be. at the same time, we have learned serious lessons not only from the economic experience, but civilization, technology is well-developed at least compared with what it was like 100 years ago, but one natural disaster or

technology mistake would be not for entire reasons to be brought to the brink of environmental catastrophe and cut off from each other as in previous centuries #. the eruption of the volcano in iceland, the gulf of mexico, and the heat in russia last year, catastrophic floods and snowfalls that have been happening in various corners of the world, all these things make us think once again about the fragility of hiewm power on -- human power on earth. i believe that further procrastination would be dangerous, and the thing is not only we have two complete climate talks, although that must be done by all means, but

what is at issue is also the establishment of the system for the environment and the facilities and the common system for early warning and alleviation of emergencies. russia has advanced initiatives, and i hope our partners, too, will agree that this question is -- today we need very much new ideas of people changing the world for the better. our ideas would require the force of requirements to practical policy and would be a standard for states for the business, for public development and relations between countries. speaking of security, russia sometime ago expressed a specific proposals for including a new treaty on european security, and i believe that such tokens can be discussed

everywhere that would be useful including at the economic forum. today, the politicians, international relations, and the principles of settlement are lagging behind evermore, lagging behind the technology developments. at the same time, some politicians, some people continue to lead by the cold war, terrorist attacks of the cold war, and carry it away by forced admissions, but during this particular time, great demazy

>> sometimes they serve as extreatments who fuel religious hatred. they serve as an instrument for traffickers and drugs and terrorists. these problems are getting

worse, and we cannot fail to notice that. at the same time, the general interconnection should become a major boost for economic growth, and it tends to cut off those ties, for example, it tends to limit the freedom of interpret or this threat of innovation. i believe everyone would unthat would result in stag in addition for the world. -- stagnation for the world. russia would not support initiatives that threaten the freedom of the internet. of course, freedom which is based on the requirements of moral laws and legislation. our task is to use all the possibilities in order to make our new world, a for fair and just world to lead the citizens of our country, a world where

success is determined much more by talent and work rather than by the place of birth or their circumstance, a world where villains are not anymore, a world with people are not rejecting authorities, and international relations are free from double standards and hypocrisy, a world where it is much better and much more efficient to work together, to work jointly. in many countries where new generation lives that have come to power, a new generation that came into being after the end of the cold war, and i'm referring to russia, can discuss and implement our dreams together. we are prepared and willing to do that. all that should compel us to move ahead towards a greater level of transparency.

i believe that the positive trends as referred to are a good example of new principles and approaches in international politics. by the way i'd like to remind you that yesterday, our parliament verified the threatty on strategic call defensive arms. in order to build such a world, we have to build upon a number of well-known principles. some of them we sometimes forget about. there are a number of such principles, and i will list them. first, it's a strategic long-term approach to addressing the problems. simple and easy solutions in 90 cases out of 100 are wrong, proved to be wrong or perhaps to

be worst out of all the possible options. a vid case in -- vivid case in point is we should all try to resolve economic problems from the organization including the nationalization of financial institutions. in the period of financial crisis, many states paused to think about it, and many states took that option including states with well-developed economies. our economy is not developed well enough i'm afraid, but we have exercisers trained, and we didn't resort to that option, and i believe we were right in doing that. i believe that in most cases, crisis can be resolved through their private sectors, and in long term perspectives, this is

the most affective way of dealing with things. secondly, it's willingness to live according to one's means. during the crisis, many bubbles were ruptured not just financial bubbles, but also the bubble of complacency, and i believe that everyone understands that we are not, we have no instruments against the emergence of new such bubbles. the right of risk is part of the free economy, # but that right should be balanced by relevant responsibility. the right is something that we should have, citizens should have, and no doubt scientists should have that right within reason of limits, of course, but states cannot have that sort of right or the world as a whole, the right to excessive race.

present day realities in many develops countries is such that they pay the problems of sench debt, budget deficits, and despite all of that, unwillingness to cut the expenditures. such a situation is fought with new economic and political crisis for the world. by the way, very indicative in that regard is the annual address by the president of the united states addressed to the nation. he spoke of the previous five year freeze on budget expenditures. this is a serious measure. thirdly, in referring to global participation and the right to organizing, no matter how difficult it is to renown the practice or narrow group interest debt, it is something that needs to be done. the establishment of the g20, and i'm frank in thinking that, is a major huge step forward.

on the one hand, the great number of countries sitting around the round table, the more difficult it is to reach on census and more time is required, but on the other hand, the more, the better decisions are that are being taken, and the experience of our work within g20 has demonstrated that. we are prepared to use all the instruments we have, but the efficiency of working in the g20 should be ahead. from the general discussions if interested in one, we should move to specific tasks. there are many such tasks ahead of us, and we already achieved many successes that determines the waste to develop financial institutions, but there's many things we have not done yet, and there's one topic i want to refer to right now.

it's as follows: i'm sure the present principles are not working, the principles for regulation, particularly for internet, and that is thought of the collapse for the entire intellectual rights property system, and at the next g20 meeting, that should be on the agenda and offer new solutions to the world community solutions that should be formulated. russia will advance these proposals. statement, we should development new alliances of leader. it is important that the breakthrough as modeled by economists has acquired huge credibility and organizing the operation. we, in turn, expand our work, and this year, south africa is joining and brits, and these are

countries that stand every chance to be the leaders for gobble development and shoulder responsibility for that process. i believe that one of such of these could be implemented in very short -- that is to include the currencies of which countries, and fourthly, it is diversity, the fact that various economic models in this market are going to make this in the world. it is rather an advantage than a disadvantage. they demonstrated that the models that were not perfect were shaken and suffered major losses. therefore, one formless world no matter what the format is -- it mounted that the world is capable of compensating and provides a opportunity to dammit

to new challenges. a few words about russia. russia is very often criticized. sometimes the criticism is well-deserved, sometimes absolutely not. russia is rebuked for the lack of democracy or tollal tearian or lack of judiciary systems. today, we are the way we are, and let me tell you that russia, indeed, faces many difficulties in building the rule of law, in creating -- russia in the highest degree has been confronted with the evil of terrorism. russia has many social problems

to cope with although in recent years we succeeded in resolving many of them. finally, russia, all the decision makers in russia are not immune to no ordinary mistakes, but one obvious things should be understood indeed major changes are taking place in public life in our society. we are indeed developing, and we are moving ahead in particular in fighting corruption, in modernizing the judiciary, and law enforcement fears even though have not yet scored tremendous successes in that area. those are realistic attempts to improve investments in our country and improve the quality of life in russia. indeed, we have not yet reached outstanding results in our

efforts, but we are full of resolve to continue to persevere. we are learning ourselves and we are willing to receive friendly advice, but what we don't need is lek -- lecturing. we should be working together. the feelings of people of their social self-esteem is perhaps the most important indicator of how successful the country is developing. the condition of the citizens they live in a democratic state and honest dialogue between the law enforcement and citizens are key signs of democracy, direct democracy. the key of success of democracy depends not only on political procedures in this institution, but also on whether people are prepared to listen and heed. it is not enough to have one's own freedom.

you have to respect the freedoms of others. this is the principle which is true for relations between democratic states. i'm also convinced that democracy will continue developing thanks to economic modernization, primitive of materials that cannot ensure the improvement of the equality of life, and therefore it is not capable in ensuring the ability of our democracy, in order to avoid the threat of pop pewism. democracy should have a safe base as well-developed society, as a society of interdependence, and independently minded people. dear friends, since the formation of russia and the proof that i've indicated are in full accord on what has been said. today, i will dwell on new opportunities provided by modernization for successful

business on russia despite all the difficulties. i'll be brief and e enumerate ten points. first, sometime ago i initiated an unprecedented program in recent years, program for prieftizing state assets. the number of tray teggic -- strategic enterprises has been reduced by 500 percent. in the next three years, stocks and shares will be privatized for companies. it's not an end of itself which is important, but what is also important is to increase the competitiveness of pay senior

companies and -- major companies and improve the environment for business communities and therefore producing engaging in the events, we involve the leading world banks, and also set up special funds for sharing the risk through joint investment in modernization projects in our economy. ..

the possibility for financial institutions. this is the objective and a major international not only become a financial system but also cabelas for the development of financial market for the post-soviet era and eastern europe. first, initial practical steps and i hope starting this year foreign companies will be in a position to track the market. this would be part of the integration and the economy. we are taking measures to enhance the efficiency to follow the judiciary system for financial companies that will be

working. fourth, we are setting up a major markets with uniform regulation rules to make them attractive for investors. russia has since long been prepared and i hope this process will be completed this year. all of our partners have promised that to me. i offer that we -- russia will join. finally, we are working to establish a common economic era with of the european union based on the principles on individual security freedom of movement of people and based on uniform technical standards. recently we established the customs union. we are also now building

economic space. over this process [inaudible] major will supplementary. in other merits, move towards a single market to the pacific and its major markets where everyone will have advantages. fifth, we have established to create new possibilities for innovative venture investment. i've suggested adopted the right to put up intellectual property rights. this year venture financing will be made even more because legislation will be approving force. this year major project of the innovation center will start

operating. a major and a great number of enterprises will be part of the project that work in various parts of russia and they receive preferential treatment and i expect, hopeful the brands emerging in russia in the next few years to come. and foreign business will make it even greater. small business or being created by large-scale program to ensure energy sufficiency. the specific targets and being implemented in various parts of the countries. projects comply and such standards have been already established. no less importance for russia in

particular for the energy sector to become a major boost for innovation. this is why the innovation will be chaired out from global partnership on equities. furthermore, such partnerships will be chief in ensuring energy security, something that we spoke about. that was some time ago in other forums we find major deals and concepts during this year in this sector and i hope that new lines being built is a transfer in the direction. seventh, we will take every issue of the transfer technology transfer mechanism.

the technology sharing is a very important for all sectors including the defense sector. the technology transfers will help create a new level of security and mutual trust in the world. that's why we welcome the establishment of building [inaudible] eighth we are implementing programs to spread the broadband internet and we prepared to provide the opportunity for any business to use these opportunities. most important project implemented by a project that i am also dealing with is the integration of banking and public services based on

universal and payment for people for citizens inconveniencing for businesses and also the tremendous pressure [inaudible] russia is a combination of tens of millions of personal success stories from citizens and hundreds of thousands of success series in the entire world. in the present day and to lead in the world economy are clever, smart, well-educated persons who have been acknowledged and decide to work regretfully. in the next ten years to counter my belief thousands of experts, bureaucrats will obtain the master of 5,000 in the

universities of the world and the leader on hope they will take positions and the state of the fenestration. to turn russia into more attractive place for the best minds of the world. i believe this is a realistic task scientists and engineers to work. the flow of foreign ethnicity needed to learn the best practices and create good environments. this is the reason why we are willing to unilaterally, automatically recognize diplomacy and scientific degrees obtained and the leading universities of the world proving the migration of regime for highly skilled experts

coming to the country. the business representatives said we need to do that and i have done that. tenth, we have launched the implementation of large-scale infrastructure projects including having obtained the right to host a major international sports events and not just people who like sports this is a realistic chance for us to modernize the infrastructure. this is the reason we did that, to make that infrastructure convenient for businesses and trade. those projects will be based on private public partnership, and of course projects a way to develop individual regions of russia and accordingly the possibility for people from various parts of the world to come and see russia and to

understand the long last that russia is by all its difficulties a country which has become part of the world community. i hope very much these ten areas haven't bored you, but tomorrow perhaps those areas can be discussed in greater detail with the involvement of members of our government to the russian presence here in this room. to conclude, i cannot fail to what i said at the beginning. all of our efforts to restore and further develop the world economy would be futile if we

fail to overcome intolerance. if we fail to unite the evil forever, the evil that is of the greatest danger of mankind, and let me stress once again our success on this cannot be ensured by efforts and states alone. what we need is a broad ranging dialogue with the various structures of a single society expert communities. they are in a position to play a major role in the education of advancing the ideals of tolerance among various social groups. regrettably, i am compelled to

cut short my state at the forum, and tonight right after this session i go back to moscow. thank you for your understanding. [applause] >> mr. president, let me first you for explaining to us your ideas and achievements i have to add related to a model forward-looking, cooperative cooperative russia. i would also like to use this

opportunity to thank some members of your government. we have an extraordinary group of leaders from your government here to follow up some of the issues you raised and you raised in a statement like minow. i would say mr. president, you may recall you were here four years ago and made your speech which was very highly appreciated. i said at the end we heard the speech of the future statesmen. now four years later i can say we heard the speech of real statesmen. before we arranged the session and agreement with president

medvedev and we made a call on knowing the investment for social media and ask the public what question should we ask you and we got thousands of loads and responses, but i have to say most of the answers you have already given but nonetheless i would like to maybe take up three or four questions to read they reflect similar scenes and the first question would it be given the latest developments in to to nisha how do you think the government should react to such calls for openness. you committed yourselves to the openness of the implement, but

what is your feeling of what has happened last week which is so much in our mind as the events in tunisia? >> what happened in to nisha i think it's quite a substantial lesson to learn for any authorities. the authorities must not simply fate in their chairs but the development together with the society. no matter what country we are talking about beat europe, africa, latin america, when the authorities don't catch up with the the front of the society,

don't meet the aspirations of the people the outcome is very sad the organization will be faced and this is the problem of the authorities themselves. also, for the response of devotee of the authority even if much which has been suggested to the fi authority is unacceptable to them. the authorities should engage in dialect the folks otherwise they will lose ground the should follow any recommendations given to the authorities, but they should listen to what people have to say. therefore i believe this is a lesson of to africa and the arab world and to any authorities as it were. having said that, this is a test

for resilience, an account and what the situation in tunisia and will not make its necessity of the entire situation in the arab world has just visited palestinian autonomy and jordan, and naturally i understand how difficult the problems at hand in palestine are and what needs to be done by all of us so that the bill was demand the peace would drain the accord with the nearest neighbor to been a big and a difficult problem. having said that, we need to remember that in several cases stemming from the results of the vote some authorities might edolphus which will not enjoy looking the part of the world community but you have to take them into account as well.

once again, this is a lesson. the same time this is a test for to nisha and a possibility to undertake a more serious analysis in this region as a whole. >> you have already addressed the issue but there was a lot of questions related to the recent events which have raised concerns about adequate legal protection for those wishing to do business in russia and of course also corruption mentioned often. would you like to mention something to you mentioned earlier before? >> certainly. perhaps i need to talk in greater detail concerning this

very important problem. russia is not the only country in the world facing corruption around the legal system. however we have to take responsibility concerning hour own country not fearing to others saying they don't have less corruption than we do we should address our own problems. how to do that thanks to the systemic counter to these corruption pressures which include a whole set of components first. it's a real investigation of the corruption crimes so that any bureaucrats perpetrating such would realize in the tradition

of a modern civilized accounting procedure. not so long ago in our country i introduced that mandatory declaration of income civil servants. it's not an easy process, not everybody is ready to do that. you have to digest it and nevertheless, it has become part and parcel of our life which is important. third, that is of course improvement of the work of the judiciary system over the course and then aware of all the problems existing in this area. at the same time i would like to point out as in recent years for the first time in the whole history of the country we have adopted this anti-corruption legislation which is a step forward. now we have to learn to use it

properly. law enforcement agencies are not free from public trends in this society. this means to be changed and need to be changed and this is the main has a leader of the relevant structures and the commander in chief of the armed forces. finally, the court to itself should be on the one hand absolutely in abandoned. on the other hand, the court should feel its responsibility for before the society, before people, it shouldn't be behind thick walls hiding in its cooperation anybody who would tend to believe that there are some problems that i believe it is necessary for us to improve legislation pertaining to the monitoring of the status of our

judiciary system as such all of that is being done. i cherished no illusions we will be in position to do all that within one or two years but i'm glad we have embarked on that path and positive will be able to defeat corruption. >> you mentioned to stop and how do you see the next stage of developments to the global nuclear-free world and in this respect how do you avoid the relationship of your country with iran? >> i'm also glad that we have completed this negotiation process. our treaty to its logical conclusion almost finalized it.

when i come back sometime later there will be a text of the treaty on my table. i had a word more recently with a president obama and we agreed even how we can carry out exchange of these documents, but we should go further from here. i believe this was a very optimistic moment in the most recent history even that many impediments still on the part of russia and we have finalized this process and i hope that it is easier for breeding of many people residing in this planet simply because we have been able to agree on things which is of paramount importance. i believe we should continue our

efforts in the strategic weapons and other subject matter related to it that is missile defense. today in europe the have been deploying the european defense system. russia considers itself part and parcel of europe and nobody challenges that anywhere and would like to see to that that we too would defend ourselves as a secure because the missile defense might be turned into a strategic nuclear potential. we have put forward proposals in oregon for cooperation and would like to see to it than ten years' time the future leaders of russia and the u.s. and european countries would not have any concept about it but would concert agreements which is important for the future. we should follow closely the

outlook of the entire world missile nuclear weapons situation. you have not mentioned iran. iran happens to be our partner and neighbor but at the same time several questions posed by the community before iran, and iran must answer those questions. the initial community so far has not bought information to the fact that iran is in the process of building a clear weapons. on top of that, iran is a part of the non-proliferation treaty. this is precisely why iran must evaporate all the doubts on the part of the european community concerning its nuclear program. it is a peaceful nuclear program. russia has a long term who like

to use all possibilities there so these difficult progress be concluded with success. not so long ago i gave a call to president ahmadinejad and mentioned to him precisely that in this conversation and he told me he agrees with such precision. >> you were very generous with your time and let me just end this discussion with asking maybe one or two more general questions. one which came out of the survey on the web and one of the questions may be quite provocative was if someone would come out on wikileaks about russia, what would it be? [laughter]

>> good question. thank you. i believe just speaking here i partially supported wikileaks when i said that today 1 billion people in the world are interlinked with this invisible network of communication nor other very serious secret can be guaranteed and immune from being disclosed today. at the end of the day i believe this wikileaks story should make the spirit of international relations of the year even if in itself this is an illegal activity in the understanding of

several states. but the impact of the story i think for international relations is quite positive. with regards let's say what basically is being leaked has been i believe some people might be of interest and to others who would be no secret at all just from my perspective. from what i read concerning russia from the material which found their way to the leak there has been nothing new to me. i got a sense that most assessments which found their way to the wikileaks concerning russia were taken from the

general politics side of internet. perhaps it concerns some but not us, we are tough guys. [applause] >> two last questions, mr. president. listening to you, i am sure that many had to correct some of the perceptions they had of russia you showed us a modern open in russia. what is you the perception which you encounter very often in your discussion about russia which makes you most upset? long perception. what do you feel is the biggest consumption of all in russia?

>> i would think that any stereotype to perceptions can really be distrustful, and i wouldn't think that there is just one thing in this regard which would make me feel extremely upset and emotional fear. sometimes it is unpleasant to read certain things, and what struck me in this regard in the morning when an open internet, let's stay through this

well-known gadget would read some reaction regarding russia, the russian government and me personally i can tell you it is waking up on the other hand get to promptly respond to some of those reactions to give a call to the president's administration to dispel wrong perceptions been on what shelf this gadget because no need to hurry to act in a clear-cut manner with all of the precaution taken. they will always find its way.

>> when you look now i know it is a question which you have answered to a certain extent but what is for you personally and what is your force as you also don't sleep and what drives you? >> i think the answer is very simple. my look it's very interesting. those who think otherwise differently probably are deceiving themselves.

the work which makes you model wiest for 24 hours a day responsibility which you feel day and night responsibility before your own country before the people who have elected you while in this case you can always find some strength in new even if you are very tired if you suffer from jet lag or even some unpleasant things happening the most important thing for any person including presidents and therefore my work is very interesting and important to me.

>> all the best wishes. we hope you will continue to have explained and we wish you the best success. thank you very much for coming. >> thank you. [applause]

the co-chairman of the president's commission on the bp deepwater horizon oil spill testified to today on capitol hill. the commission's final report released this month calls for sweeping changes in how the petroleum industry operates. this hearing of the house natural resources committee is three hours.

>> [inaudible] any oral opening statements at hearings are limited to the chairman and the ranking minority members. this will allow us to hear from our witnesses sooner and help keep members on the schedules and others can be included in the hearing record under unanimous consent. i ask unanimous consent all records opening statements be made part of the hearing record if they are submitted to the chief clerk by 5 p.m. today. hearing no objection so ordered. >> we have two witnesses today and i will make a formal

introduction after our opening statements, but i am very pleased that they are here. they're spending all day on the hill. the first start was spent on the other side of the capitol and now we are here and i will welcome them formally in a moment it's been nine months since the explosion and oil spill in the gulf of mexico the resulted in the death of 11 men and the burning and sinking of the deepwater horizon raid. since then, 5 million barrels of oil spilled into the gulf resulting in the economic displacement of tens of thousands of fishermen, workers and people connected to the offshore industry. the oil spill was a terrible tragedy and the effects are still being felt today. this committee proceeds with its oversight duties, we must be mindful of how we respond because that response could significantly impact american energy policy in the future the response to this event could be

the difference between making offshore drilling the safest in the world or locking up our resources putting more americans out of work and from the relying on foreign countries for energy needs. it is because of these serious implications that i have stressed from day one the need to have all the facts and information surrounding the cause of the incident before there is a rush to judgment or rush to legislate. when president obama announced he was personally appointed in the commission many in congress and around the country were deeply concerned with both the makeup and the mandate of the commission. there were concerns the president's commission didn't have enough experts and engineering with experience in the oil and gas industry and that it was comprised of individuals who had dedicated a significant portion of their career to opposing oil and gas drilling. while understanding these concerns, i kept and in keeping

an open mind of the recommendation of the president's commission this is why this is the first scheduled committee hearing in this congress, and i am anxious to hear from the co-chairs. this report provides further insight whether it will be a factor in the congress discussions. however, even with the commission's report, we still don't know precisely what caused the explosion or wife of low wall preventer field to work. there will be additional reports in the coast guard marine hearings in the chemical safety board hearings and hopefully they will provide answers to these lingering questions among others. through this on certainty what i do know for sure is that america needs american made energy. we need to keep and create american jobs and mitigate america's dependence on foreign energy that threatens potentially the national

security. the oil spill was a terrible tragedy but it shouldn't be used as an excuse to further reduce america's access to the energy resources. some in congress view this bill as an opportunity to shut down offshore drilling. to me that is not a solution, that is giving up. this legislation aimed at this was introduced last year and will predictably be proposed again in this congress. this, despite the strong support among american people for continued offshore energy production. republicans want to make offshore energy drilling of the safest in the world. we believe in the need to make smart, effective reforms that are centered on improving safety, putting people back to work, and allowing responsible drilling to move forward. the right response to this bill is to focus on making the ruling

safe, not in possible. the importance of this committee's future work cannot be understated. gas prices are steadily rising. iran has assumed the presidency of opec and the rigs are leaving the goal for foreign countries like cuba, brazil and mexico taking american jobs with them. this isn't speculation. it's happening. my colleagues from the gulf can attest to the economic pain felt by people and businesses do to this administration struggling moratorium. production in the gulf of mexico has already fallen by more than 200,000 barrels per day and is predicted by the energy information administration to fall by more than 500,000 barrels per day by 2012 to date every barrel we don't produce from the gulf means more lost revenue to the federal government, more lost jobs in additional transfer of american wealth to hostile nations.

i believe in american ingenuity, and i know that we can get this right. the answer is to address what went wrong and make smart reforms and allowing drilling to resume. the stakes are too high to give up. our economic competitiveness, american jobs and national security our online. with that i recommend is believed to recognize the distinguished member. >> i thank you very much and on behalf of the democratic members of the committee, please accept our sincere congratulations on your appointment as chairman. on this side of the ogle we look forward to a productive working relationship with you and the majority occasionally punctuated by knock down drag out fights over issues we care about deeply. while i applaud the chairman for

holding this hearing today, i am also deeply saddened that this neighbor is necessary. industry and federal regulators assure the american public that a disaster like bp deepwater horizon spill could not happen. the event of last april and the subsequent investigations have demonstrated that those assurances were worthless. the american people are left to come the economic and environmental costs and even families are left without their loved ones. is vital to the nation's energy future that we examine the causes of this tragedy with eyes, ss the lessons to be heard with open minds and commit ourselves to fundamental reform with firm resolve. in the testimony submitted for this hearing, the commission co-chairman, and we thank you

both so much for your service to our country point out that, quote, the united states has the highest reported rate of fatalities for the and hours worked and offshore oil and gas drilling among the international peers. mr. chairman, that shocking statistic does not mean that bp or transocean or halliburton operate on safely. it means the entire american offshore and oil and gas industry operates safely compared it to its international peers. the quote from the witnesses again, the central lessons to be drawn from the capacity is that no less than an overhaul of both current industry practices and government oversight is now required. mr. chairman, this is not a time for half measures or tinkering around the edges. this is a time for both reforms.

the lives lost and the damage done as a result of this tragedy required nothing short of fundamental change in the way we conduct the business of offshore oil and gas development and production. i am proud that democrats in the house took a major step toward such an overhaul by passing the consolidated land, energy and aquatic resources act in the last congress known as the clear fact included many recommendations contained in the report. while michael leaves on the republican side may not have liked all that was in that legislation, it is my hope that now that the commission has made many of the same recommendations that we can work together in a bipartisan effort to craft new legislation's. to that end, have joined with ranking members waxman and

rahall, miller and johnson along with energy ranking member rush told and others to introduce new legislation combining the best elements of the act with recommendations from the commission. we welcome though review of that legislation by the commission and by our colleagues on both sides of the aisle. if we are shortsighted and complacent, today's hearing will be an end. if we are visionary and engaged, today's hearing is only the beginning of having america have to the most productive oil and natural gas industry. that should be our goal, and that is the goal which i think every american should be aiming to achieve in any legislation we pass. in closing, again, offer my sincere gratitude to senator gramm, you come administrator reilly, and all of the

commission members and staff for their hercules efforts and willingness to take on this investigation and the dedication to completing its in such a short period of time and such thoroughness. this committee and the american people are in your debt and i think you for your efforts and the chairman for extending me those few extra seconds to beat >> thank the gentleman for his opening comments. ra too look forward to working with you and i want to welcome the witness is here today. i know that since this event happened and the appointment of the commission there was a lot of work done by both of you. the honorable bill riley is an administrator of the epa and of course on the hill people do remember florida senator bob graham and former governor if

i'm not mistaken in the state of florida, so certainly there is an expertise. with that, i would remind you that under the committee's rules, you have five minutes for your oral testimony, however condor record and statement will appear in the record. over here we have these little boxes that have green lights, yellow lights, red lights. when the red light comes on you know you're at five minutes. when the green light is on you were up to four minutes and have four and a half minutes. we will open up to questions to a committee that once to talk. with the bible first introduce mr. reilly. kuran. >> lynndie member markey, members of the committee, it is a privilege and honor for us to appear before you as it has been to serve on this commission particularly to me to serve with

my distinguished friend and longtime friend and colleague bob graham. i will make a brief statement and ask that my testimony be included in the record. i want to begin by saying that with respect to oil and gas we need a resource. it's vital to the economy, in itself, a way of life and a contributor to productivity, jobs, the gdp, and avoiding even more necessity to important international oil markets. this commission believes we can develop offshore oil and gas resources safely. we can do it in the deep water and i could signal that deep water is where it is. that is where the industry has

been going and will be going in and even more significant way in the years to come up the country's confidence in offshore oil and gas development has been shattered to read the commission determined that the government and industry both were characterized by complacency. that has attracted a good deal of attention and some criticism. i would just say very briefly that when you have, as i learned from tony heyward, the ceo of bp the week after it took office as the co-chairmen when you learn from him there is effectively no subsea containment technology capability, when you look at response plans to talk about protecting walruses in the gulf of mexico, when you see the inadequate technology that is in default since i oversaw 20 years before in prince william sound, and when you see that there has

been 79 instances of loss of well control between 1996 and 2009 in the gulf and as was mentioned a fatality rate is five times that of the north sea and punishing and firemen and finally that you have present contractors which are deeply implicated in the bad decisions that contributed to the high risk that we uncovered. you have to conclude both of the other was an order of complacency and so many leaders as i said i didn't think this is possible, we didn't think this could happen, but also contractors who have supplied faulty cement to a bp riggins or failed to detect gas rising in the drill pipe on the bp rig it is unconceivable given a wheel and gas doherty to let

inconceivable to us this would be confined to one company which was my own promise starting out so we did conclude this is a systemic problem that has been characterized by an atmosphere of complacency. i want to signal one more thing and that is the history of the budget of the government regulatory agency on which we are quite hard and critical of its effectiveness, capability, professionalism to carry out the assignment the law gives. the budget for the mms has gone down 20% since 1984 while offshore oil and gas production has tripled. so to address these issues we have three principal proposals. first is for a safety authority within the interior department and entirely walled off from political interference with a

director appointed for a term which like the fbi director and adequately resource to and budgeted. we recommend the industry establishes safety institute, high-risk industries that have had catastrophes have learned from them, the chemical industry after responsible care, the nuclear industry after three mile island with the incident from the nuclear power operations, those should be focused on best practices and bring up the game of everybody and allow the companies to have some means of ensuring that one company, one bad performer doesn't bring everybody down and cause all of the rigs to be shot down in the gulf as was the case last summer. i want to signal the dimensions of the issue if you get a map of the gulf mexico the united states has sovereign jurisdiction over far less than all of it. we now know mexico intends to go into deep water in two years, cuba, the next year or two and

we need some kind of international understanding or treaty with respect to the standards that will apply to those activities. we also needed in the arctic where russia is intending to go into its arctic waters with bp and canada denmark is already begun and greenland last summer. we need the same kind of attention on the department to ensure the arctic waters are given the kind of special protection that the desert. we make a number of recommendations particularly relevant to science and the science that is needed to pursue wheel and gas development in those very different waters with all of the high risks the special storm action falcon and the cold in tale. >> welcome those are some of the principal recommendations of wanted to cover, mr. chairman, and i would only say that they are relatively modest in my view in terms of both money,

certainly in terms of bureaucracy and disruption to reorganize the department will not take much in the way of money to budget adequately the boemre. it's relatively small and the cost of the accident we just experienced and the overall revenue that the united states received from offshore oil and gas development and loyalty. i think it's money that would be well invested and we look forward to your questions and recognize the commission. over to you. >> thank you. >> i appreciate very much your testimony. senator gramm, you are on. >> [inaudible] other members of the committee. i know many of you -- >> press the microphone, senator gramm. >> i know many of you are commencing your service in congress and let me extend my

congratulations. you are beginning a journey which will have immense gratification and personal pleasure. i congratulate you and wish you well in your service. mr. chairman, our commission was established in may of last year. we were given three responsibilities. first is to determine the cause of the deepwater horizon explosion second coming evaluate the response to that disaster and third, advise the nation about future energy exploration particularly in the offshore environment. january 11th we submitted our report called deep water, the future of -- the gulf disaster and the future of offshore drilling. we've been subject to some criticism.

one was we've lacked independence in the course of our investigation we were able to make just about everybody mad at us. from time to time the industry was mad, the white house was mad, maybe this committee escapes that. we established the fact that we were looking at this from this perspective of the american people's interest and none other. second, there was criticism that we were not confident to carry out this task. but the modest to try to defend or competency. i would submit the report, its findings and recommendations and you can evaluate whether you think that we had the skills both among the seven commissioners and an excellent staff led by mr. richard lazarus who gave tremendous support throughout this endeavor.

i've like to make one general comment before i turn to the two areas i am going to particularly discuss, and that is that there is a difference in the offshore gulf from what we know which is the onshore oil and gas production. onshore oil and gas production is a combination of drilling on privately owned land and public land. all of the drilling in the gulf of mexico is on publicly owned land which belongs to the people of the united states of america. the way to look at this is not just as a regulator, a government regulating private enterprise going about its private business. we also are in the role of a landlord. we have an obligation to protect this asset that belongs to all the people of america and to the table to continue to draw upon it for a variety of purposes.

yes, energy, but all sorts of seafood and it is one of our major tourist areas just to mention three of the benefits that we derive from the gulf. so are we fulfilling our responsibility to be a prudent plan for? i am going to discuss the area of response and containment and then the issue of where do we go from here in terms of restoration of the gulf. my good friend bill reilly has already mentioned that the response to this event was to say the least very disappointing although there were some respondents detective quickly, so heroically, the commission concluded that neither bp nor the federal government was prepared to conduct an effective

response. there was a failure to plan in advance for such agent, failure to coordinate particularly between federal agencies and state and local officials. in addition neither the industry or the federal government at invested in their research to understand in a participatory way what we would be facing if we had such an event as the macondo blowout. much of the technology we were able to bring to the problem was the same technology that had been used 20 years earlier in the exxon valdez, which is to say there was almost no technological wide stance taken as a result of the experience of exxon valdez. we have made a number of recommendations on the response and containment including at the department of interior in consultation with other agencies should develop a more rigorous

set of requirements for industry response plans. .. the second area is restoration. the data for this event is april night, 2010. if we define our goal has been to restore the goal of the condition it was not april 19, we have missed an enormous opportunity. frankly, the g-golf on april 19

with a degraded area. it had suffered for decades of misuse and most romantically shown by the marshes of louisiana, which has been receiving at a rate of over one football field every 30 minutes. we felt that this was a chance to begin a major process of restoring this very important part of our nation. we have recommended that 80% of the fines and penalties that we anticipate will be assessed under the clean water act the direct did at gulf restoration. that will require your approval. only congress can make that commitment of those fines and penalties. but we believe it would be money well spent. we recognize that it will

require a significant amount of time, probably an average of 20 to 30 years to complete restoration. we believe these funds would be the basis of a major down payment towards that objective. i'd like to conclude my remarks. i got the signal, mr. chairman. that truly is inherently risky. we can never reduce it to zero, but we believe the steps we recommended will substantially reduce the probability of other repeat of macondo and should that happen, will significantly enhance our capacity to restrain its consequences. mr. chairman, i will submit my full report and they appreciate my willingness to receive it. i look forward to responding to your questions.

>> i think the both of you. for the record, and it would not be the query of my throat that you responded to. nevertheless, i appreciate that. and i did allow -- it did want both of you to finish your remarks and they allowed that to which you want to stay as close as we can. i just have an observation and a question that i want to ask right from the get go. when the event happens and i was asked to respond, i sort of been on the order, number one, we need to stop the leak. number two, winning two of epa accountable and number three, we need to make sure that the restoration can get that part of the country back to normalcy however you describe it. and i've been saying that right from absolutely say one. you spent a great deal of time on the report. most of your testimony talked

about what should be done in the future. and i alluded to this in my opening statement that the key both to respond to it. we still don't know what caused the explosion unless we miss some rain. by the vop would cost the case. if there may be a time in the future when are going to answer that or we wait for other reports to come in before we draw conclusions? whoever wants to go first, i'd like both of you to respond to that. >> will cover what we know is the event occurred and we know a great deal about why the event occurred. we've identified in our report nine instances, nine human decisions that were made in the hours before the macondo explosion, which we think was the precipitating cause of this

immediate event. it is true that no one at this point have had the benefit of the full forensic examination of the ball preventer. it has had a massive facility in new orleans being closely examined. what we do know is that it didn't perform as it should have. if it had been able to perform ad hoc to my model, it's questionable whether that would have avoided the explosion because gas and dirty cotton beyond the ball preventer at the time that it would have gone into effect. so i believe that i report that adequately, accurately and comprehensively addresses both the immediate cause in the context in which that occurred and which was a long period in which government had done a very

inadequate job of regulation, which the industry had on into this culture of complacency and what the consequences have been an enormous economic and environmental cost of the people of the united states. >> i would just add, mr. chairman, we know enough. we know what happened. we know that in the negative pressure tests, which was supposed to determine whether cementing had sealed off well, we note inconsistent inconsistent information came from the kill line and the drill pipe. in the good news was except to what the conflicting information was rechecked it in the drill pipe itself, indicating there had not been a sealed. the cementing had failed. we know that. we know the disgusted rise in the drill pipe, it was not noticed although we have

documentation of the instrumentation, the record that should've been recognized by a professional monitoring that instrumentation to indicate gas was coming up the race here. it was not recognized until it was too late. so we know those things. those are a couple of examples. a number of decisions are made by people who are not alive and we cannot speculate on how they came to make some of those decisions were to miss some of the information that they did have. and if you look at page 125 of our report, with less about nine decisions, seven of which had a corollary benefit of saving time. no doubt they were identified as more efficient ways to proceed with the two alternatives to most of them and they were chosen. so these were -- the immediate proximate cause was a series of bad decisions, very hard to understand decision on the day

of april 20th and leading up to with respect to halliburton supply of cement, which failed three of its own test and i'm subjected to by our commission by chevron's laboratory for testing demand. so we do know those things. and i'm quite confident we've established the facts here. >> attend is running out. i would just this observation against which you've alluded to both of you as somewhere along the line is something wasn't right. we heard that in testimony from the industry when they were here shortly after. they said we don't know what happened, but we suspect that this is going to be the case and that you have confirmed. but we still don't know what mechanically or whatever else the town. i thank you for responding to that. mr. martin. >> thank you, mr. chairman very much. thank you for this report. this report is a blistering, scalding indictment of pratt says engaged in by the industry

and by regulators that created the conditions that made this accident possible. my question to you is if your recommendations are not a top did or provisions similar to those which you recommend, do you think we run the risk of repeating that catastrophe once again in the waters of the night states? >> yes. as i said, even if all the recommendations for a top did, no one could issue an insurance policy that there would be no repetition. what i could issue an insurance policy that the likelihood of the repetition and the consequence of the repetition will be significantly less if these recommendations are a top bid. one of the things they care

erases these recommendations is they are not from outer space. most of them are from the north sea, a place which has a more punishing environment in the gulf of mexico, yet has a dramatically different record in terms of fatalities. we believe that some of the experience they are, ironically the same companies that are operating in the polls are operating under those standards in the north sea. so it is not a mystery or a new set of standards to those companies themselves. and as i said in my report, i am learned that if we do not, if were cameras and if we have an enhanced likelihood of an event similar to the macondo, that we are all going to be pointed out as to why we were unable to recognize why we were unwilling

to act in the public interest. >> do you agree? >> i do agree. i would add this is a very dynamic industry, which has transformed over the last 25 years estimate from shallow buttered deepwater which is a much more high-risk environment. it has not adapted its own to either prevent or respond to a problem of this support. i'll play one of the things -- well, it is free assuring that the rle adam hasner restrict good regulations to govern a lot of the things in the future. frankly speaking, we don't consider that agency as it is now staffed, formed, trained and adequate to the tasks that they have. if it's not strengthened, i suspect we will see an incongruity between the sophistication of the industry

and the dynamism and the failures of inspectors to understand some of the basic technologies to stand top of it. >> was a follow-up on that then. good demonstrations that can be implemented administratively by the obama administration. their other recommendations here that really need congressional action and so we change the laws. do you think it would be wise for us to not act legislatively to give that authority to the government so they can change business as usual? would be running the risk if we did not pass legislation? >> i think you'd be running a big risk. there's true crucial moves i believe the congress has to take. one is to reorganize the interior department, simply to ensure that leasing revenue concerns that the sort that animated the agency over several administrations and three mms directors testified to before a commission, that those no longer

in effect safety and environment regulation. the way to do that is statutorily on any kind of sustainable basis by creating a luff regulator within the department of the interior, the term apartment for the director. the second requirement in the first of the cost anything. second requirement is to adequately fund the omr we to carry out the responsibilities that it has. >> just a note here, bp has 760 osha fines versus one for exxon mobil. so we can understand there's something fundamentally wrong that they were allowed to continue to operate. senator graham, your recommendation on legislation? >> i would agree with those two points and then the third is the one i made relative to restoration. only congress can designate a portion of the fines and penalties for the specific purpose of restoration, which we

think in terms of the national interest in this region of america, the fact that many of the problems that have led to the degradation of the gulf of mexico at the federal government at least as a part or if not the primary indicted figure. >> just very quickly, some people say it's just bp and the other is an play a role, including the government, the other companies didn't play a role. >> in the area of response, it was not just repeat. at the same thing at happen on virtually any of the riffs in the gulf, would have had the same response because we would've had inadequate, unplanned capabilities that meet this such a unnecessarily significant impact on the

economy and the environment in the gulf of mexico. >> i thank the gentleman. mr. alaska. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think the witnesses. mr. chairman, i reviewed the report and i've also reviewed the members of the commission. and i have statements from every one of the members of the commission that do not support offshore drilling, including the two witnesses in divorce. and that concerns me because i can't figure out how this can be a report that was supposed to look for the cause is now trying to pass legislation when their basic goal is against offshore development. in your statements, you said you know the importance. one gentleman said we can establish 75 years of the goal for independence. to meet that goal we have to reduce reduction, not reduce it.

in the sincerity of really seeking a solution to a needed commodity, which is oil. i personally have another question because this administration. from either one of you, from a technical perspective, what makes deepwater drilling so significant and are these conditions typical of the u.s. ocs? what is different between the gulf and alaska? >> the difference between the gulf and alaska, 5000 -- a >> that i know and i appreciate your answer. i appreciate your answer. as they reach a report from your position on arctic drilling with the president is we have stepped forward with caution. we have to make sure it can't be done to rapidly et cetera et cetera. but it's 150 versus 200 some odd

feet -- 18,000 feet. and i worried about this country. we're going to spend about $400 again to buy our oil. in this commission are all against the development of offshore drilling. and i'm sure, by the way. some of the commission against opening in animal order. we are facing bankruptcy because we have not been able to develop our fossil fuels. and yet the commission, the majority, in fact all of them, our intent is not to a fossil fuels. and i think that's inappropriate. lastly, if i can suggest one thing, mr. chairman, we have drilled in the polls about 42,000 wells including about oil wells.

and nowhere do you report in your report or suggest why that was successful. we have one big spokesman hanna-barbera. now, how do we as a lack? was there any credit given for was done before and for those who did it? question, answer? >> to refer to sunday masses of oil and well. many contributed to the accident in several two fatalities. that's the record we have for the gold. deny, and he spills? >> i don't know how many spills were associated with those, but if you look at the list in the report that they were exposed to were near misses and close calls and enough to kill people. >> driver down the street, slipping on the ice. >> say it again. >> it's like driving down the street, slipping on the ice. there is no failsafe way to do anything. it can be done better as senator graham said. you cannot eliminate us.

you can reduce it significantly. i would point out to you, mr. young, the first of all when you what we really believe, what we really believe is in this report. we have a lot of authority and documentation behind the recommendations and findings in here. so i actually would suggest a method of interpreting comments made by commissioners perhaps in an earlier time without this mission, you look at this as the definitive record of where we really stand and we are for offshore oil and development. we think it can be done safely we also specifically recommend moratoria and alaska. >> that means you want us to go forth? >> what you express that in your report? >> this commission believes we can go forward to drill in the offshore and sees, but it recommends a series of scientific analyses of coast guard search and rescue movement, of the range of activities that will have to be

supplied either by government or the industry to ensure over the long-term it would be done safely. but we don't recommend that you specifically say that would not be a barrier to moving forward. >> it does say you're supporting arctic drilling in the report? >> yes, sir. you setting your remarks you recommend it be done with caution and that is certainly true. the distinctive set of challenges represented there. >> that's what happens. for 40 years we've been drilling in the arctic, we've been drilling or when we had the path for her. we have the two line operation. we been doing the drilling and we've done the study. we've done the work. and all the sudden we have the moratorium and place by someone who doesn't believe in fossil fuels. you heard them last night on the floor. he doesn't believe in fossil fuels. and i think i want all forms of

power, but all of a sudden we've got a commission report i don't believe that really suggests we can do it with delay, but will send money overseas. mr. chairman, my time is up. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. stallone from new jersey. >> thank you, chairman hastings and ranking member marquee for having the hearing today. the report in front of us today is cleared, in my opinion, that we cannot kill safely off our shores under the current system and our coastal communities the production from untrustworthy big oil. on the big oil would claim that we control faithfully and expand drilling in the wake of our country's worst environmental disaster and the fighting of the systematic failures. as the deepwater rising disaster, the president has reversed course and thankfully taken drilling in the atlantic off the table at least for the

next five years and i commend him for that action and believe he must make the policy permanent. only than 20 feet from the greed of the oil industry. also, house democrats passed a clear tube oppose the legislation, saying we need to wait for the commission's report. now that we have it, it's time to take action to prevent pickler from wreaking havoc on our environment and that's why introduce the new new drilling to prevent the expansion of usher drilling, which i believe must be the policy at least until we can be certain another deepwater rising incident will not happen again. i represent a drastic along the jersey shore. i live along the jersey shore as well, have all my life. and one of the things i want to ask the two members, the two members of the panel, as i believe very strongly that the further you go out in the deeper you were, the more dangerous it becomes. and arguing against the need for reform can't oil and gas industry likes to make the

argument that the bp spill was like an outlier and they point to long history of drilling in the gulf. in reality, is that to the vast majority of the oil gas and issues in the gulf has been shallow water? were drilling is much less complicated than an ultra deepwater with a deepwater rising was operating. it's a basically as we go further out and certainly my understanding is the authentic is strictly deepwater, not shallow water, that the danger is greater and that's even one more reason why what your recommendations that she put forth are crucial. i'd ask either of you could answer that question. >> the answer is clearly there's a relationship between danger and risk the deeper you go. and it is also true that up until about 1890, virtually all of the drilling that is ever taken place in the gulf of mexico within waters of less than 1000 feet, which is the

definition of shallow drilling. the circumstances have dramatically changed. and at the same time that the industry was developing a tech policy that can frankly only be analogized to detect knowledge he and his sophistication, there was an enormous burst of the offensive capability to drill in deeper areas. there was not a commensurate increase in the defensive capability to respond should there be an accident and to create the safety environment that would reduce the prospects, not 20, but to the degree possible, that there would not be access in the materials that have been distributed, there is a chart, which is called mms budget and gulf of mexico crude oil production 1984 to 2009. it's on page 74 of our report.

you can see the degree to which the production in the gulf of mexico has gone from being shallow water production now not only to deepwater, but the greatest increase has been in what described as ultra deepwater, where the risks are even more significant. >> mr. riley coming did you want to respond? >> now, i think just to reinforce what senator graham said, that the formations are deeper in the deepwater. that is they are well under even very often certainly the case of macondo they were 18,000 feet which is 13,000 feet below the month level. the formations are under much greater pressure, something up in the range of 30,000 pounds per square inch, which means all sorts of things in terms of the complexity of dealing with a

well situation that also involves of course robots come which are the only way you can monitor and maintain and improve a repair technology down at that level. so for all these reasons, it's a much more challenging enterprise and that's why the industry in our view needs to improve its capacity, recognize they are in a different era from the one the character a shadow what are drilling and establish the kind of safety and institute would recommend. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> ima to thank both of the distinguished witnesses for being here today giving your testimony. you said earlier that you do not know why the love preventer did not work. contemporary concerns that you didn't even wait until a cute new what the cause of it not working was before issuing your

report. why did she wait until we knew why the blowout preventer didn't work? is a key element in this whole chain of events. >> as was clear from the start of the president created up with the mexican border created a timetable of six-month period we made clear to them we didn't expect the blowout preventer to be before they bachus would it was taken up and still hasn't been frantically analyzed. so it was always understood the blowout preventer would not be part of our report. we did not have access to it and make any judgments about it. the failure of the blowout preventer to work himself known as to specifically why it didn't work. it remains to be seen. i think i'll are there aspects of the bill were subject to investigatory analysis and we were able to make the judgments they give us confidence, but we know would have been. wow, thanks for the answer, but i think you are the president

should have had the patience to know why it didn't work and the report would've been much more significant had we had that information. >> as commissioners, we didn't have that option. >> okay. secondly, "the wall street journal" editorial from two weeks ago, takes on a single member of your commission is a drilling engineer for expert in oil exploration technology or practices. don't you think the commission would've been improved had you had people with that kind of expert background on your board? >> frankly i think i was a relevant question to ask in the summer of 2010. today we've submitted an almost 400 page report. we would like our confidence to be judged on this report. and if there are areas that you think demonstrate a lack of capacity to make the judgments that we did, we would be pleased

to know what those are and we would attempt to provide a response or an admission of our naïveté. i would say that i believe even if you took the most extreme explanation of why the blowout preventer failed to function, that doesn't trump the other 95 yours that we've identified, that were contributing causes to this. so while i'm curious to know what the gop did, i don't think you would change the findings of the recommendations we have made. we certainly would not withdraw our recommendation that the oil and gas industry should adopt the nuclear power industry has some form of internal capability

to assess safety. we would not change our position that we need to have an effective, competent, federal agency that could oversee the industry. we would not change our recommendation that the agency should be protected by independence within the department of interior. those are our key safety recommendations and i don't think there's any evidence that's going to come from the forensic examination that's currently going on in a facility in new orleans at the blowout preventer that would enable those. >> okay, i'll move on to my next question here. in its undertaking of the investigation of the deepwater horizon and today, the national academy of engineering and the national research council announced that they would not be issuing their final report until it has been peer-reviewed, which is their standard practice for reports issued by the national

academies. has your report been submitted for peer review to any other kind of body or experts? >> is a public document. so it's not just submitted two peers. it submitted to the american people for their comments and evaluation. >> i would -- i would just say that it's been pretty well reviewed and pretty well received and commented on by experts in the field. and i also want to note that we say in our formal testimony that a senior technology and science advisors on this enterprise was richard sears who is 33 years of experience, senior experience with shell oil. he was present throughout our deliberations on technology. i'd also like to acknowledge publicly we have strong cooperation from industry, three companies that spent several hours with us. chevron, shell and exxon mobil and cooperation obviously from the department of the government , for mr. bromwich and secretary salazar.

widowed for range of inputs and plenty of opportunity on the scientific agencies, noah, coast guard, to ensure that what we say is grounded in good science and respectable technology. and i don't think so far. i must say we've become a little impatient, bob and i with the criticisms of our confidence or criticism of our commissioner, which maybe was okay to raise six months ago. but the proof is here. is there something wrong or if there are people who have objections to the findings are think they are wrong, we would be very happy to debate on that point. but it seems to me now a little churlish to refer back to them without power there related to the advocacy for their park from which no one seems to be doing. >> thank you.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. john amend, the offshore policies is based on some similar assumptions as i understand it. one was the blowout preventer's actually work. that was an assumption. the assumption was the industry have the ability to contain spills. the assumptions were that spills offshore won't ever hit onshore. there was an assumption based at our rate operated as safe as possible. and as they read through your report, that brought into question those assumptions. and so as a result and just for both of you gentlemen, don't we have two be right our offshore policy based on the fact that we don't have assumptions we can make right now? senator? >> well, i think some of the assumptions are that drilling in

the offshore is going to be a continuing and increasing part of america's energy supply. number two, that its acceptability to the american people will be closely aligned with the safety. you may recall that when three-mile island blue almost 25% of america's electricity was coming from nuclear power and there was an expectation that the percentage was going to grow, and maybe even to where frances, which is over 70%. but that one can vent so show the public towards a nuclear power that we had effect of lake a 30 year hiatus of any expansion and therefore the percentage of the tri-city from nuclear power is dramatically less than it was 30 years ago. now whether to continue to do these in the gulf, macondo could

have more effect as an island as a nuclear power industry, we can all speculate. but i think it's in everybody's interest that we can do this industry to the high standards. would anyone answer the question why should drilling for offshore oil in the gulf of mexico p. at a lower standard for safety and environmental protection than it is in the north he? is there some explanation as a matter of public policy by we should accept a lower standard, then i think we could have a very -- a very good debate. no one has come forward with making that assertion. >> the other point i think you called the liability cap arbitrary of the report, the question is lifting the cap

entirely as a means to assure that the tax payer doesn't get stuck with any bill beyond the cap. and two, as incentive to meet the highest standards of the senator just mentioned for drilling. any reaction to no cap at all on my abilities? >> would have recommended that the cap be lifted and we did not go beyond that. clearly the $75 million cap, which is now 21 years old, just the sheer change in the value of money as a result of inflation over 21 years would cause you to believe the 75 million was not adequate. i can, as bill pointed out, when that cap was established, virtually all of our offshore drilling was known comparatively safe, low pressure areas and

today the larger share of our jelly is in much riskier, deeper water. i am now going beyond what the commission recommended and just saying own feeling is that if we have liability caps, the rationale is to maintain a competitive marketplace in the gulf of mexico, that we don't want only the largest oil companies in the world to be able to drill. but we also don't want to have financially incapable company of causing enormous consequences. so that would lead me to feel that the congress might be able to fashion a policy built around liability limits in relationship to risk. it's one thing to have liability limit for 100 feet of water than 18,000 feet of water. today the law applies to the same standard to both of those two cases.

>> that which is that if i that, congressman, that the establishment of some kind of liability caps at both ensures a continuing capacity of independent to operate in the gulf, that doesn't just restrict to leasing for getting to a future majors, but also protects the public against being handed a bill for major damages caused is something that is going to take more time than we had in the six-month and probably more involvement of the insurance industry said i assume an insurance consortium of some sort would be necessary to address this. and i also would note that the liability cap in canada's $35 million. if he gets 50 million pounds in britain and it does strike me with respect to those resources, such as a goal for me are sick or other countries activities are also involved, there may be some merit in working at a uniform system of liability which applies systematically to

all oil and gas development in these areas. >> mr. fleming from louisiana. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you, panel members, for being here today and your service. there is no question about it this was a disaster. and like any disaster, even though we don't own the precise cause of the blowout, we know that some things have been better typical of disasters. because this is a high-risk operation, much like many other things we do, travel in space, flying in airplanes, rarely is one thing the cause of the disaster. it's usually a number of different situations and make occurrence in bad situations that align themselves from which probably over time have occurred, but because some of

backup redundancy the disaster was prevented and that can sometimes be a bad thing because what happens is we become, in your words, complacent. if i make a mistake as a backup system that will solve that problem for me. and obviously that is something on the industry side in the government side mini to bear in mind going forward. it was a disaster to louisiana, my home state in two ways. one comments were ecology, no question about it. but maybe even worse and longer term and jobs. louisiana has now left tens of thousands of jobs because these rates are so expensive, they have left our shores in some cases and more will calm to go to brazil and africa and other places. what is interesting as they are going to other parts of the world that have less standards than we do. so i think that's a real issue we need to look at. now, the president lifted the

moratorium. and i've been researching this. i can't find one single permit for deepwater drilling that's been issued since the lifting of the moratorium. but we don't know when they ever will. so what i'm concerned about and i would like to have your reaction to this as i see recommendations for more legislation, but i think we need to be careful about just moving the chairs on the deck. for one thing, we're asking noaa to sign off on things and that's a good thing, but is that going to make the permit process for difficult and slower? i'd love to have the reaction from both of you gentlemen. is this really going to get us where we need to be and how is this going to affect the job which are so desperately needed and finally the price of gasoline and oil that going up because of the lawson supplied. >> i would say two things. i would agree with you

completely to the degree that we restrict our own domestic production. we are essentially given our demand on supply, intending to get more oil and gas from risky places like the delta or venezuela. that's a given. that's an international perspective and recognize that in those places counts to the delta, some 25 accidents over the last 10 years. so that's a perfectly fair point. i think it's one that ought to underlie our approach many of these questions. with respect to the moratorium of, senator graham and i were specific early on. we did not understand it. but it was excessive in considered a more selective approach that did not penalize those companies with good records come particularly once they have been -- after they had once been a did as they all were in the weeks following the trend

for disaster. once those few infractions that were found were directed for, it struck us that it would've been reasonable to resume drilling at that time. but that is not happened. i would say going forward to the decree that we continue to fund her staff, underprepared, under form, underfinanced the regulatory agency, we are probably going to find that it is more like it to issue permits, less confident about finding the name to a permit unless able to get us back into business. >> do you have a response? >> i would just add to what bill said he had happens to be the position of the major petroleum companies in great britain, that they actually affirmatively support a strong well-financed competent regulator as a key

part of their ability to do their business. i believe they are right and i hope that we will calm to the same conclusion as to the industry here in the united states. >> can i get a commitment from you and mr. reilly yesterday suggested that the president not only lifted the official moratorium but allow permits, do away with what we have now which is a de facto moratorium. would you vote for the president should move forward and allow the issuance of permits? >> as i understand it and in fact there is a new story today that the orla vista primary reason for the delay in issuing permits for those rigs that has met the individual standard, rick by rick contessa industry has not demonstrated that it has the capability to respond and

contain or if it does, those standards have not yet been incorporated in the permit applications. if that the case, that actually, in my judgment, is a positive signal that were now down to essentially one issue and there also is some indication that the ability to meet that standard of adequate response and containment is near at hand. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you on mr. chairman. i want to thank members of the commission for being here today and for your work. thank you: mr. reilly, senator graham. as mentioned earlier there were some questions about the qualification of the commission i want to say i have a high regard for the members of the commission. senator graham -- chairman graham of the intelligence committee and my father were chaired the intelligence committee about the same time

that we have a warm regard for you in your work. so i want to thank you for your service. i want to touch on a couple of things that were coming in now, in this book do we have here before us. i think the vast majority of the recommendations, actually a lot of the industry would say they don't really have a problem with. and you know, you're listening to someone who is a big supporter of the oil and gas industry coming from oklahoma. but some of meant that burbridge, sometimes even just the word -- just to pick out of the report again about some concerns about. one was the use of the term systemic, that there are these systemic problems in the industry. and if you look at the 30 year history, you know, over the last 30 years, the history of offshore oil and gas reduction, there have been demint, but i think a major incident is very

rare. if you compare with the airline industry for the commuter train industry or any other industry, the oil and gas industry has done quite a good job. the last few years we have seen documentaries like gas land on hydraulic fracturing. a lot of lists about there is driven by emotion. it really is driven by fax or science. and so i'm really concerned to read your comment even the state of the human life and about the oil and gas companies are making all this money, was through smart tags on them. there's a lot of good quality jobs created in states like oklahoma, louisiana, all across this country. and they want to do the right thing. i want to do the right thing for the environment as do most americans. a couple of questions, really one question i do have about the clear act regulation legislation brought out earlier about the cap on liability.

i've got independent oil and gas producers in oklahoma that have this question. we've been talking quite a bit about this, but given such liability requirements, did your staff for the commission asked the insurance industry of any independent operators would be able to obtain an insurance policy under such guidelines or circumstances? the reason why asked the question is i'm worried any kind of touched on this earlier with mr. grijalva, if we only have one or two u.s. companies that do the drilling, the chinese are going to be the only folks that can drill these wells, i'd like to see -- i'm not talking about a mom-and-pop company. i'm talking about devin energy is a huge company in oklahoma, you know, but it's not as large as some of the big majors. these are thousands of employees covered very well capitalized. these are types of companies that could do this drilling without any problem.

are you worried about that? in the shootout to the insurance industry about whether or not these smaller companies could in fact do this? >> we are worried about it and that's what we did not elect a member with respect to an increase. we said it be increased or we didn't say how much. we do what was required insurance company consultation and advice and help you didn't think we have time to get it. so we did not meet with the insurance industry on the liability cap. but for all the reasons you mention and our own sense that use a valued contribution that independent operators make to the economy, to the culture, industry and the gulf, we did not want to make the irresponsible choice without adequate should not take inhibitor dignities or possibly even cause them to move to other jurisdictions for the liability cap is lower even than it is in the united states.

>> i would agree with that statement. we try to operate within our areas of competence. and so the specific recommendations we made, we are prepared to defend them, weren't issue without sight of what we thought was a regional competence, such as the role of insurance come to me in determining the liability caps and how the role of -- of the role of insurance come any night you means of giving some assurance that we would not be limited to just a handful of companies. we didn't feel competent to comment on that. we did feel that on its face the $75 million liability cap across the board for activities that are disproportionately risky and shallow in ultradeep fodder needed to be lifted in re-examined. we also were aware that the

congress is going to make that ultimate decision and we did not feel that we had anything -- in the corporation for secure. i know your district son. i served on the board of an oil company who half of which used to be based headquartered in cartersville. senior executives they are -- >> are stunned by the use of the term systemic. and it perfectly willing to acknowledge they didn't see this coming, were prepared for, didn't think it could have been and how to response plan which the chairman acknowledged was embarrassing to him because it had the same characteristics as the other response plan. so i would just say we do not by any means intend to disparage safety or environmental

standards of some of her leading iconic oil and gas companies, whether the majors with the independent. but the facts i think speak for themselves with respect to this particular disaster in the latest report what we did. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. mcclintock, california. >> tournament coming thank you for being here today. -- failed catastrophically. the rogers administration was impaneled with particular experts. it painstakingly recovered the wreckage from underneath the ocean it determined. a reassembled by package and then determine the precise cause of the disaster and then recommended changes so that the space program could move forward. the one thing we know for sure in this or was that the blowout

preventer failed. let me ask you quite directly. she determined by the blowout preventer failed? >> the answer is no further reason that we gave you. >> did you like -- >> can i finish answering the question. >> it's a yes or no question. it's nighttime, senator. if i'm at it, so please. did you even look at the blowout preventer? >> no. >> most of the time or where it would've taken a robot to take us down and get there. >> let me read you "the wall street journal" particular part for ideological bias, and lack of expertise, credibility, lack of thoroughness. and this is what they said. unable to name were called the well fill your results to a hodgepodge of speculations. adding to the confusion, it acknowledges he could find no evidence of bp's contractors and shows the risk of alternative and so forth.

the commission didn't even wait to get not topsy of the field will preventer and again coming from "wall street journal," which is resting on the louisiana talk. why should we take your report seriously if you've not even made that modicum of effort to determine the actual cause of the disaster? >> well, as mr. reilly said to an earlier question, we had a presidential six months charter. we knew early on that charter was going to run out before the forensic examination -- >> did you ask for an extension of your deadline? >> we did not. >> cu participated in a rush to judgment without even looking at the cause of the failure they created this entire disaster? >> well, i would just direct your attention to page 125 of our report, which lists the nine

steps that we assessed that contributed. >> again, don't you understand how good the rogers commission issuing a report without looking the record. >> is cementing failed at this matchup failed to contain the well free from hydrocarbons. we said that. >> when i look at the question of ideological bias. this is also an engagement in "the wall street journal" editorial. they said the conclusion to report were quote all too predictable given the political history of commission members. former democratic senator bob graham fought drilling off florida. william reilly cited the anti-drilling world wildlife fund and francis mckeever in the natural resources defense council, which is supposed to carbon fuels. not a single member with a drilling engineer or expert in oil exploration type knowledge your practices.

>> congressman, i would say the use of the word predictable as surprising to me because what was predictable in a few of "the wall street journal" when they wrote their first critical editorial was that we would recommend against future offshore oil and gas development, which we very definitively did not. >> you are recommending a whole new level of iraq or see top of an obviously already failed to perceive that the obvious aim and indefinitely delaying of the production of our nation energy reserves. how much -- what is the economic damage caused by this disaster? do we have a figure on that? >> we know it's in the tens of billions. >> i have an estimate here of worst-case and base case analysis of the economic damage caused by the moratorium and it runs from 279 billion on the way

up to $341 billion. billion? >> alien i believe. i haven't seen those numbers. i would only say with respect to the bureaucracy question, he made clear my opening statement that the report and the detail on every organization of the interior department should be cause that we do want to segregate the functions from the environment safety regulation. that's a matter straightforward reorganization. second light, the degree to which we add the ending is intended to provide more capability, more expertise, more professionalism and agencies. and i would fully expect based on my own environmental protection agency of facilitating