and a good companion piece talks about what works and what doesn't and that event -- do you remember when that event is? is it wednesday or something? thursday? thursday? come back thursday. >> show up wherever you want. [laughter] >> in the front row over there, the gentleman with his hand up. >> i'm from the heritage foundation. i'd like to take you back to the biometric exit program and ask you to go just a little bit deeper you. describe this program that's neither cost-effective, nor actually necessary. i think stupid might be one of the terms you either applied to it or would have. and my question is, we have in congress representatives who are a lot of things but they're probably not stupid, most of them. so why is a requirement like this in the law in the first place? >> well, i think part -- that's part of a reflection of the

dysfunctional -- part of the reflection of the dysfunctional oversight so when you have a, you know, the department of defense you basically have oversight from the arms services committee in the house and the senate, a little bit with some other issues in terms of intel and nuclear issues but that's pretty much it. and then you have appropriators, right? in homeland security, virtually every major committee has an oversight authority and many of the subcommittees have oversight authority as well and so when you have a is you can have something which from your perspective seems just like commonsense if you're in the judiciary and you're responsible for immigration reforms and you have no real technical expertise in a whole range of issues there, the requirement may seem like perfect commonsense. but there's no check and balance on you and the one thing we know congress doesn't do well, right, is congress doesn't -- doesn't evaluate -- when they put

systems requirements in, they have no way of evaluating those systems requirements up front. think about that, right? so if they want -- if they want to say the cost of doing something they can go to cbo, right, congressional budget office, and they'll run you the numbers on the cost of implementing this law, right? but they can't tell you from a systemic standpoint, you know, how all this is going to work, what this is really going to add up to. they can't do systems analysis like that. and the government accountability office, right, they can look at programs that are in existence and they can tell you how well it's going. so after they pass the law, the gao can write all these reports how screwed up it is, right, but the gao can't tell you beforehand and said well, we did a systems analysis of this and, boy, this is really kind of a dumb idea, right? and, of course, there is no real -- there's no really no technical advisory thing in the department. so there's nobody really that would -- so you add all those things up, it really creates a

perfect storm of coming up with good ideas, right? and then only finding out it's not a good idea when you actually go out there to try to do it and then it actually becomes the true perfect storm because you create the requirement which forces the government to do something stupid. the government tries to do it and, of course, it does it stupidly so then you have a hearing about how stupid they are in doing this thing and you beat them up over it. and so you have this endless dulu and you reality more requirements to make them do the stupid thing more efficiently and the requirements you have later on make them be more inefficient and we have this endless dulu or for years. because it was your stupid idea to begin it you can't write the law that says i repeal my stupid law because that would make you look stupid. literally -- i mean, if you look at it 100% cargo scanning is irresponsible it was said this was a stupid idea because the only thing that we're really, really concerned about is the

smuggled nuclear weapon and if somebody was going to smuggle a nuclear weapon the last thing they would do is hide it in a shipping container and having said that we put this requirement in anyway, right? and here we are literally years later and the department has spent this money and they say this is simply not going to work. >> uh-huh. >> a forrest gump movement, stupid is, is stupid does. [laughter] >> it's bigger from the department of market capitalization standpoint having to run and being overseen by 108 different committees. >> that's right. >> right? >> that's the analogy. and yet public money so it's different. we want oversight but there can't be too much oversight because you reach that -- i guess the bend in the knee where we're overseeing so much that we actually lose sight of what's really important that needs to be overseen that allows us to actually make progress. >> but it's actually 108 committees that are subsets of a

board of directors that are 135 who actually control and design the budget for the country in the first place. >> right. >> that's a recipe for dysfunctionality. >> so folks at heritage.org, my last commercial of the day, read the report for yourselves. >> we've hit the noon hour and, unfortunately, we'll cut off the questions here. well, thank you very much for being here and please join me in giving a warm round of applause to our panelists. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> the martin luther king memorial opened to visitors today. today is district of columbia day as the week long opening celebration continues. the statute is 30 feet tall and it's taller than toifshgs and abraham lincoln. the memorial took about 25 years to complete and cost $120 million paid with donations. president obama is scheduled to speak at sunday's dedication on the mall and you can see coverage at 11:00 eastern on c-span. >> "washington journal" continues its week long look at medicare. today a discussion on medicare advantage, a privately run medicare program similar to hmos you can see live coverage each morning at 9:15 eastern on

c-span and, again, here on c-span2 each evening at 7:15. [bells ringing]

[background sounds] >> notice the color of the bourbon. that pretty amber color that you see is all coming from the char on the inside of the barrel. this char is where bourbon gets all of its color and a lot of its flavor. currently they discovered over 200 chemical flavors just in the oak and the char from the barre barrel. >> this weekend we highlight frankfort, kentucky, on booktv and american history tv. throughout the weekend, look for the history and literary life of kentucky state capital. on booktv on c-span2, vice, violation, corruption and urban renewal douglas boyd on frankfort's crawfish bottom. and kent masters brown on the life of ninth kentucky cavalry

soldier john porter. american history tv on c-span3, a visit to buffalo trace distillery one of only four distilleries in operation during prohibition for medicinal purposes of course. and the first two-state houses burned to the ground. stop by the third, the old state capital. booktv and american history tv in frankfort, kentucky, this weekend on c-span2 and 3. >> a white house national drug control policy official is urging congress to continue funding for drugs and veteran treatment courts. the senate judiciary committee is going through programs to determine which need to be cut. benjamin tucker with the national drug control policy office explains the cost-effectiveness of drug courts and how they reduce recidivism rates. this is about an hour 40 minutes.

[banging the gavel] >> the hearing will come to order. today's hearing we'll consider an important and growing component of our nation's criminal justice system. there are over 2500 drug courts in our country operating in every state and territory. many jurisdictions including my home state of rhode island also are developing veterans treatment courts. today's hearing we'll closely view these intervention courts and the role they can play with cost-effective solutions for protecting public safety and reducing recidivism. as many in the audience know a drug court is a specially designed calendar or docket that addresses the case of nonviolent drug offenders. the courts require participants to commit to intensive substance abuse treatment programs, generally for a year or more. drug courts hold participants accountable through frequent court appearances and regular random drug testing for drug use. individuals going through drug courts are rewarded for doing well but sanctioned if they do

not satisfy their obligations. they've worked in my home state of rhode island. as a rhode island attorney general i worked to establish our first drug court. we now have 10 drug courts operating in our state. drug courts take many forms but a consistent element in their success is the close cooperation of many players in the criminal justice system including judges, prosecutors, law enforcement, defense attorneys, probation or correction officers and the community at large including mentors, treatment organizations and counseling services. this cooperation and support is bipartisan. and it even reaches as far as capitol hill. i was pleased, for example, to join with senator thad cochran this morning and representative sheli burkely at an event in the warmer outside weather today. drug courts have been in operation in the united states for over 20 years. veterans courts are a more recent phenomenon first launched in 2008 in buffalo, new york.

like drug courts veterans treatment courts are special judicially supervised court dockets that provide directed services to a particular set of offenders. they respond to the fact that many veterans who have sacrificed so much for our country return from combat suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder or other trauma that can adversely affect their behavior. veterans courts work to identify and address the underlying causes of this behavior by referring veterans to treatment programs or providing other alternatives that can keep them out of jail while protecting public safety. whether functioning within a drug court system or based on a drug court model, these courts team with the va health system, volunteer mentors and veterans support organizations to assist veterans in resuming successful roles in our communities. there are at least now 50 veterans courts around the country with dozens more being planned. last month i had the great pleasure and privilege of

welcoming attorney general eric holder and assistant attorney general laurie robinson to rhode island for a round table discussion focused on the pilot program servicing veterans in the state. i came from the discussion from the hard work and thoughtful planning and the participation that has gone into that project. i'm glad that we'll later be welcoming chief judge defazio of rhode island's district court who is leading the veterans pilot program and will tell the senate about our state's important work in this area. as my colleagues know the budget constraints i don't care -- we have the resources we devote to our criminal justice system as effectively as possible. today's hearing will allow congress to consider the role of drug and veterans courts in such smart and cost-effective criminal justice systems. i thank the witnesses for joining us today and i look forward to working with senators on both sides of the aisle as we continue to support these cost-effective solutions that protect our communities.

i'm now delighted to welcome the distinguished junior senator from minnesota, who is a honorary member of this committee, subcommittee, to make a few opening remarks and to join the hearing. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman for calling this very important hearing and you're right. i'm not actually a member of the subcommittee but in the judiciary committee, every member of the committee is invited to attend each subcommittee's hearings. and i wanted to be here because this is the effectiveness of drug courts and the veterans courts is such a great new development. and i'm a strong supporter of these problem-solving courts and i believe we should be doing everything we can to promote these programs that are extremely fiscally responsible and as we have the debate over

our budget, i think it's very important that we understand how cost-effective these courts are. first, i wanted take a moment to recognize and welcome judge robert rancourt -- he's not testifying in this hearing today but he's attending and he's from shasago county, minnesota, and i just learned that he is the incoming chairman of the board of directors of the national association of drug court professionals and i want to congratulate judge rancourt and i'm very pleased that you're here joining us for today's hearing. in 2007, minnesota adopted statewide drug court standards with the goal of enhancing public safety, ensuring participant accountability and reducing costs to society. and i'm pleased to say that the adult treatment courts, family

dependency courts, juvenile courts, dwi courts and our first veterans court are all doing exactly that. helping to prevent future crime, getting participants in the treatment that they need and saving money, saving money in the long run. judge john hallahan who presides over the hennepin county adult drug courts submitted a statement on his program that i would like to submit for the record with your approval, maple. he writes that participants in his court are subject to intensive probation, breath and urine testing and counseling. they are also required to appear in his court every other week to update him on their progress. judge hallahan quotes a letter that he received from the parents of a graduate from his drug court who wrote, and i quote, thanks to you and the hennepin county court system, we

have our daughter back. and she is conquering her addiction to alcohol and drugs. she has attended every court session. and sees what happens if you screw up. without a program like yours, a lot of young adults would not get a second chance and would waste a lot of time in jail, unquote. i think this statement perfectly sums up how effective drug courts can be and i look forward to hearing more from our witnesses about how we can continue to improve and expand the success of these great programs. so thank you again, mr. chairman. >> you are welcome, senator franken. i'm delighted to welcome senator kohl to the hearing to the hearing and i'll take the hearing to introduce our first witness benjamin tucker is deputy director of the office of national drug control policy, overseeing ondcp's high inten

intensity drug trafficking areas. he's previously served in numerous positions in federal and local government including as deputy director for operations at the u.s. department of justice office of community-oriented policing services and with the new york city police department. he received his bf in criminal justice from the john j. college of criminal justice and the jd from the fordham university school of law and we are delighted to have mr. tucker with us today. mr. tucker, please proceed. your entire statement which if read would take considerably more than 5 minutes will be made a part of the record so that you can make a shorter statement orally here today. >> thank you very much, senator. chairman whitehouse, ranking member kyl and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to testify in the drug courts. as the director for office state

localal and tribal affairs it's my job to work with our communities in support of prevention of law enforcement initiatives through development of policy and programs. i understand how important it is to identify and support alternatives to incarceration. having walked the beat as a new york city police officers and worked in criminal justice for the past 35 years, it is clear we cannot arrest our way out of the nation's drug problem. the obama administration recognizes that addiction is a disease. and that prevention, treatment, recovery, innovative criminal justice strategies and law enforcement are all essential elements of a comprehensive strategy to reduce drug use. just last week, the administration released its 2011 national drug control strategy. it articulates a balanced approach to drug control while identifying and addressing issues of concern to specific populations confronting unique challenges relating to substance

abuse issues including active military service members, veterans, and military families, college students, women and children and those involved in the criminal justice system. i'm here today to discuss one of the administration's fundamental policy objectives, stopping the revolving door of arrests, incarceration, release, re-arrest through effective interventions and alternatives to incarceration. according to a 2007 justice department report, reflecting on the success of drug courts, we know that of the state prisoners who were dependent or abusing drugs, 53% had at least three prior sentences. these numbers have basically gone unchanged since 1997. drug courts have existed for more than 20 years as you indicated earlier, senator. and their effectiveness in reducing recidivism and lowering criminal justice costs is well documented. while over 2500 drug courts -- with over 2500 drug courts in

operation today, approximately 120,000 americans annually receive the help they need to break the cycle of addiction and crime. and the drug court movement continues to grow. they help participants recover from addiction and prevent future criminal activity while also reducing the burden and cost of repeatedly processing drug-involved offenders through the nation's courts, jails and prisons. drug court participants receive intensive treatment and other services for a minimum of one year. they are subjected to frequent court appearances and random drug testing with sanctions and incentives to encourage compliance and completion. but most important, graduating participants gain the necessary tools to rebuild their lives and re-enter society as productive, law-abiding tax-paying citizens. drug courts rely upon the daily communication and cooperation of judges, court personnel and other service providers from throughout the community. this successful collaboration

promotes the overarching goal of improving public health and public safety. in recent, the department of justice study drug court participants reported 25% less criminal activity and had 16% fewer arrests than comparable offenders not enrolled in drug courts. in times of serious budget cuts, the drug court model also offers state and local governments a cost-effective approach when developed and operated within long-standing proven standards. the success of drug courts have led to the development of other specialty courts like veterans treatment courts as was mentioned, family treatment courts, juvenile drug courts and tribal wellness courts. veterans treatment courts are a priority for this administration and as americans we must keep in mind the enduring debt we owe our country's active duty military and veterans. the serious challenges they face when returning home particularly substance use and psychological health problems often go untreated. sadly, these challenges can

sometimes lead to criminal and other destructive behaviors. according to a recent justice department survey of prison inmates, an estimated 60% of the 140,000 veterans in federal and state prisons were struggling with a substance use disorder while approximately 25% reported being under the influence of drugs at the time of their offense. there's now 75 operational veterans treatment courts nationwide and they are showing significant in successfully promoting sobriety and recovery and stability for our nation's veterans. consistent with drug courts, veterans treatment courts combine rigorous treatment and personal accountability with the goal of breaking the cycle of drug use and criminal behavior. however, in addition to the traditional partners in drug court, they incorporate the unique capabilities of federal and state veterans services. in doing so, they connect veterans, veterans courts participants to the treatment and support services they need such as treatment, medical

benefits, home loans and other services intended to help facilitate their reentry into the community. in conclusion, i'd like take a moment to acknowledge and commend our drug court professionals. our judges, our law enforcement officers, treatment providers and others who have dedicated their time and talent to helping others break the cycle of drug use and crime to become productive members of society. again, thank you, mr. chairman, for allowing me to testify here today. i look forward to working with you and this committee to address these challenges -- these challenging and important issues and i'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you, mr. tucker. first let me welcome mr. blumenthal to the committee. i appreciate he's taken the trouble to attend. everybody is very busy so people being here is a sign of very keen interest. let me ask you about the federal interest in drug courts.

in a later panel we'll hear from a witness the federal government shouldn't bother with this and that it should be left to the states to manage drug courts and without support from the government. you've been involved in this for a long time. make the case for the federal role in supporting drug courts around the country. >> certainly, senator. first, i'd just in terms of my experience as you indicated, i've been involved in this work for a long time and it seems -- in any number of programs that have been successful such as our drug court programs over the last 20 years, it seems that and very often the beginnings of those programs, the demonstration projects that give rise to these programs are usually funded in some cases by private dollars but very often through the interest of the federal government and providing funding, seed money, if you will, so that these programs can

get traction. that is what has happened with drug courts and while drug courts are primarily funded through state and local resources, it is definitely in the best interest of the federal government to continue to support through funding for technical assistance and operational support so that our drug courts can continue to thrive. we have in the country, based on what we know about the success of drug courts, the opportunity to change the paradigm. that is to say, continuing to arrest offenders who have drug problems is not going to be very cost-effective. the notion that we can divert these folks and get them out of the system, focus on public health and improved public safety at the same time we save funds for every dollar spent on drug courts, we yield $2 for in

savings for the criminal justice -- you know, for the criminal justice system. and so it makes sense financially it makes in terms of the comments made earlier about the fact that we have the opportunity to give people their lives back and so for all those reasons, the federal investment and the assistance to sustain the drug courts and to grow a model that we know has merit is the way to go. >> thank you, mr. tucker. let me just add that there is also in addition to your testimony from ondcp there's also a statement coming in from the united states department of justice which will be put into the record but it was not ready in time for this hearing, so the hearing record will remain open for seven days, not only for them but for anybody who would like to submit an additional statement. and on that i'll turn to my distinguished colleague, senator kohl. >> thank you very much, senator whitehouse for holding this hearing today. before getting to my questions i would like to say a few words

about the excellent work wisconsin is doing in this field. wisconsin has been a model for creating and using treatment courts to strike the right balance between holding nonviolent offenders accountable for their crime but also helping them to break the cycle in and out of the justice system. our adult and juvenile drug courts, dwi courts and veterans courts enjoy broad support back home from democrats and republicans, law enforcement and judges and local community. wisconsin's 41 treatment courts draw such broad support because they have proven successful at reducing recidivism while saving state and local governments millions of dollars every year. for example, the drug court in rural wood county saved taxpayers $400,000 since it began in 2007. wisconsin has always been a leader in the creation of treatment courts that focus on drunk drivers.

wabasha county has worked with people on their third dui. in addition to serving their sentence the judge and mental health counselors work with repeat offenders to stay sober and to get their lives back on track. the program's success has been a model for similar courts throughout the country and throughout most recently in dane county they are working to implementing the dwi court. finally i'm proud of our state's veterans court in 2008 the state public defender's office and the wisconsin department of veterans affairs led an initiative to bring veterans courts to wisconsin. now wisconsin has six veterans courts and most recently brown county is establishing its own veterans courts to serve the green bay area. these efforts ensure that our vets are treated for the unique challenges they face after honorably serving our nation and i applaud them.

mr. tucker, we know that treatment courts are highly effective at saving taxpayer dollars by helping low level offenders stay out of jail and overcome their addictions. state and local officials want to expand their treatment court programs and get new programs off the ground. in light of severe budget constraints, at the federal, state and local levels, how can we work together to maintain the courts we have and also start new ones? >> it's really critical that are the foundation of the drug courts to function and operate. and you're correct the tight budget times, i think, will test, i think, the meddle of our drug court officials in every respect. i think that the advantage, though, is because drug courts

and the model brings together law enforcement social services, veterans administrators, if it's veteran courts -- bring a number of people, probation officers all together to work on these issues. and i think having all these folks work together in a way that they -- where they can focus and keep sort of -- keep their own identity in terms of the work that they do but the fact that they can come together and collaborate for the purpose of expressly improving the public safety and the public health by keeping the drug courts vibrant, alive, and focused on keeping people out of the system as opposed to putting people in our criminal justice process will be very effective. it will no question be challenging, i think, my experience has been from law enforcement when money and dollars get tight, i think people figure out how to come

together when they know they have a program and a process that works. and they have to struggle to produce results. and so i think that's the challenge we face, no question that that exists. but we know that our treatment providers are going to be strained. nevertheless the need remains and we need to be focused in allowing that to continue. .. has been recognized as a

serious problem across the country. it fits, i think, neatly into the connection, the nexus with driving under the influence. and so we are doing a number of things to sort of move the bar on in the area of drunk driving in terms of educating drivers, in terms of working with organizations to get the word out, to be the bully pulpit and sort of work with law enforcement agencies, drug recognition enforcement agency offices to ensure that we put the resources where they should be on the roads and focused on individuals identifying individuals, who may be driving while under the influence. so we're providing resources to improve better ways to do roadside testing. we're providing resources to educate more police officers, both state law enforcement officers as well as local officers, to be aware of and

to be able to identify those who might be driving while under the influence, if not of whole, then be able to identify those who might be under the influence of some other controlled substance. >> thank you very much, mr. tucker. senator whitehouse. >> thank you, senator kohl. i'm delighted that the senior senator from minnesota, senator klobuchar joined us, and senator from delaware joined us, senator coons. the order from our side, senator franken, klobuchar and senator coons. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i notice that our former congressman, jim ramstead, i would like to recognize him too, for his leadership in mental health parity and parity for treatment of

addiction. minnesota's been a leader actually in addiction treatment and we're very proud of that. and minute in -- and in minnesota we've seen drug courts do pretty good, do very good things. when you talk to, talked about really return on investment, both in your opening statement and your response to senator kohl. and part of this is recidivism. we found in minnesota that participants in drug courts are less like, are less than half as likely to be arrested for another crime as offenders who are prosecuted in traditional courts. of course, i mean, this of course with equivalent kind of arrests, et cetera. and that's, so i want to know if you're seeing that nationwide, that trend nationwide in drug courts in

terms of recidivism? >> senator, with respect to recidivism, yes, we are seeing that nationwide. in fact, drug courts, one of the primary things that make them effective is their impact and on the participants and so 84% of graduates who have gone through the program remain drug-free, for example, after being graduated, after the first year of graduation. with respect to the two-year mark, two years out of having graduated, 73% of those participants have not, have not been rearrested or charged with any serious crimes. so this is true, consistently, with respect to the research and the data that we see. and so that's just another indicator of why this becomes so critical. the notion of, of sort of not just taking someone who's committed a crime and then getting them into treatment, trying to keep

them in recovery, giving them the opportunity to get the support they need to be, stay in recovery and to be more productive citizens is, you know, what we're after. and so, we, the data suggests that we have, we are in a position to have and repeat that success going forward. >> well, let's talk about the return on investment and where it comes from because to me if as we're in this budget crisis, this deficit crisis, and we all recognize that there is one, that we have to find ways in which to bring down costs to society and costs to the government. so if you're reducing recidivism, you're reducing the number of people who are in prison. you're also reducing the crime, the cost to society. you're changing lives. people now who might be in prison are, have jobs, are

paying taxes. i want to ask about one other thing which is families. because, to me, one of the huge, maybe overlooked aspect of addiction is the to on families and we have found a satisfying result from drug courts in minnesota that more families are staying together or being reunited. in fact in dakota county they found that children of drug court recipients are being placed in foster homes far less often than children of other offenders. so, to me that's a wonderful result. what impact do you think this has on families, both immediately and in the long term? >> well immediately i can

speak at it from, you know, personal experience with respect to the role that played when i was a police officer and it's no different today. i spent a lot of time going into people's homes who, there was domestic violence and a variety of other behavior that was detrimental to the core of the family. one of the things that i think the drug courts do, and we focus on through the national drug control strategy, is to as we treat this as a public health issue as well as a public safety issue is to focus on ways which we can give, provide the services and treatment that folks need. the challenges of someone who has a drug problem and who's an offender to the rest of the family we know is significant. i go to a lot of drug court graduations. i travel around and i went to a drug court graduation several months back in charlotte, virginia, and sat next to, coincidentally, sat

next to the wife, the mother of a sole graduate of that graduation and we struck up a conversation. she was clearly supportive of her son. she was clearly enamored that he was successful in meeting the conditions of being in the drug court and participating and to getting himself on the right track to being clean but at the same time you could see that she was apprehensive. she clearly had been through a lot. but it really makes a huge difference and if you haven't attended a graduation, a drug court graduation, i recommend that you do because you walk out feeling hopeful and renewed about the fact that the work that we do with drug courts really matters for sure. with respect to the costs, in terms of costs at the state and local level, when we compare traditional case processing in drug courts, we are alongwith, in regular

courts, processing with drug court processing, we are saving serious amount of money per individual, and because of some of the issues that you raise. for example, some of the research tells us for every drug court participant we have savings somewhere in the area of $1400. we have an additional savings that may range or approach $6700. so we're roughly in the area of just over $8,000 in savings for folks, participants who go through the program, who we remove from, from the criminal justice system and the associated outcomes for, the yield from the associated outcomes in all the other respects in terms of getting them back to work and making them productive really does have some financial benefit overall. >> mr. tucker, let me stop you there so we can go on to senator blumenthal. >> let me just say one last thing. i have to leave and go to energy so i won't be here

for the second round. you talk about the hope, these families feel. hope is, what is it fear that said its prayers? and these are inspiring things. this is not treatment. doesn't always work, doesn't always work but, i want to say that as we get past this current budget crisis now, this debt crisis, and we move on after that to start addressing our problems, and start addressing long-term debt problems in our society, this is a bipartisan thing. we've, i wrote, i read a letter to make sure we keep funding for this and i got bipartisan support. this is what's great about this is that this is something where we can address, there really is a return on investment on this and it saves money and it

also saves lives. i want to thank everybody involved in this and i have to go. >> senator blumenthal is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank senator whitehouse for having this hearing. i am going to be somewhat abbreviated in my questions because we do have another panel and other senators are waiting to ask questions. but not indicating any brevity or shortness in my interest in this area and i would like to follow up with you afterward on the very good work you're doing, not only on drug courts but most particularly on deference courts and as you know, many of the brave young men and women coming back from service service and sacrifice abroad in combat return with wound that are invisible, post-traumatic stress, traumatic brain injury, which in turn lead, in some ways predictably, to

alcohol and substance abuse, domestic violence, all kinds of very serious and sometimes physically harmful activities and for me, one of the most telling statistics as a member of the armed services committee that i have heard is, about 30% of those incidents of post-traumatic stress or, or traumatic brain injury, are undiagnosed. and so many of these young men and women go back into society and are candidates for the kind of violence that very recently was documented. you may have seen it in the "new york times" article over the weekend, by erica good about staff sergeant brad eifort and his struggle exactly with these problems and he was in a way in a sense rescued from suicide

by cop through a veterans court or at least treatment as a veteran. so my question to you is, where would we look for the best models of these veterans courts, whether they are separate courts or dockets or specific schedules or calendars for veterans issues? because i think the more we can do to spread the word, to spread the best practices, the better off states like connecticut will be and our country? >> yes, senator. i did see that article on the sergeant eifert and was actually going to reference it in my remarks as well. i think it is a classic example unfortunately that repeats itself over and over again. i think with respect to the, your question, i think we have to look at all the courts. i think, i think when we have the drug courts and how they function, i think each

one has something different to offer perhaps in terms of its success. i think the research, and you may hear some more about this from doug march low when he -- marlow, when he testifies but my sense is that we have to continuously evaluate and look at and examine those programs that are working, take from them, the best practices, support those and replicate those where we think it makes sense. it's also helpful as we look at these, we learn a lot about what doesn't work so well. but i think with respect to the examples thatism seen with respect to the veterans courts in particular, that the coming together of the court personnel, of the military services personnel, law enforcement personnel, the judges, and the veterans organizations, both at the state and federal level is the way to go. to the extent we can keep that model, keep everyone informed, then i think we can be, continue to be

effective in terms of the service provided. >> i appreciate your answer and what i'd like to do is, for you, if you would, to provide me with maybe five of the best practices, five of the, what you regard personally as the five best examples of how the veterans courts are working in the country. perhaps on a confidential basis, and maybe some of the best practices as well, so that we can perhaps use them as models in connecticut and elsewhere around the country. thank you. >> request for the record? >> yes. >> thank you. >> senator klobuchar. >> thank you very much, senator whitehouse for chairing this hearing and holding it today. thank you, mr. tucker, for being here. we had a great event this morning to celebrate the work of drug courts and i note there are a number of republican senators there and i think that just shows the bipartisan support for

moving forward with drug courts. i see my former congressman out there, jim ramstead, former congressman for the state of minnesota, republican. i note when patrick kennedy had, was splashed on the front page of the paper with his addiction problem, it was jim ramstead that went to stand by his side. shows us all with his mentor and his friend throughout his experience and throughout his experience in getting sober and going on to get married this last month, it shows again this isn't a democratic problem or a republican problem. it's all of our problem. and the numbers which my colleagues have mentioned are astounding. 75% of drug court graduates will not be arrested again. compare that to 30% of the people who go through the traditional system. i've seen this first-hand in my state. i was a prosecutor for eight years and in our biggest county, the first drug court in our state. we now have 30 drug courts

in our state and i think that we all know that dollars and cents and the money that can be saved but the reason so many people are here to support the concept of drug courts is not necessarily those numbers. it's the people we know. it is the teenager that that can get their live life back again. the family that can send their little kids out on the street corner without worrying about drug crimes and the addict that has a chance for another life so i want to thank you about the good work you're doing. i have a question about the dollars and cents because between the time we had this celebration and this hearing i went to a budget meeting. and i know a lot of my colleagues and i are very focused on that right now. and i think this actually can be a big part of it as we look how we can save money and do good at the same time. can you explain why drug courts save money and what do you think is the most accurate estimate of the actual or potential savings? >> first of all, senator, it

is good to see you again. >> took me a lot of words for you to get to that point but thank you. >> the, some of the, answer to your question is, relates to my earlier comment in response to senator blumenthal's question and that is, has to do with sort of what we see based on the research in terms of the general savings. obviously when we, when we take someone out of the system, just the fact that we incarcerate as we do in this country more people than anywhere else in the world and we have, maybe, of the seven million people in the system, five million are on probation or some sort of community supervision. but having those folks out there, rather than having them in the system saves us money. to the extent we can shut down their return to the system obviously also saves you money. so the figures i gave, 1400 per participant and the

$6700 in sort of outcomes, associated outcomes as a result of an individual not remaining in our jails or our prisons is where we see, we see the savings on a regular basis. >> one number i heard is cost of participation is less than $7,000. cost of incarceration, over 22,000. would that be per year? >> i'd have to get back to you. i'm not sure. >> i think it is. >> i think it is a range actually. >> yes. >> but i'm not sure whether it is annually. i suspect it would be in terms of how to measure it but i can get a response for you on that, get more specific. >> okay, thank you. i just had one question, one last question, just about synthetic drugs what you're seeing with those? we had a one man die in minnesota. ordered it off the internet. had a party. others almost died as well. senator schumer, grassley and i are working on number of bills to put these type

of substances on the list of illegal drugs. i can tell you in our state we've seen a number of kids, you never heard of these things before and they're at the emergency rooms, doubling, tripling what we've seen. >> yes. >> "new york times" reported just this weekend they had 3470 calls about bath salts in the first six months of 2011 to poison control centers, compared to 303 calls in 2010. >> we are seeing a dramatic rise in such stimulants like bath salts and incense, products sold that way. the drug enforcement administration as you may know is focused on that and has begun to regulate some of the ingredients of some of those products. the challenge in some cases is knowing what's there. but we are, as you know, from the drug policy perspective, at oncdp and with our strategy continuously trying to focus on the prevention side of this as much as we possibly can. >> i think the education,

and i know the senator needs to end the hearing, my part of it, but the education piece of it will be very important and i think these bills are coming up on the docket next week. so that will be good. thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >> thank you, senator whitehouse for convening this important hearing and i will simply briefly say that i'm from a state, delaware, that's had a successful drug courts since '94, statewide since '97. like senator blumenthal i'm very interested in the progress of our veterans court which our attorney general biden launched in the past year. i will ask for brief answer to the question what sort of construction tiff role in your view nationally has police participation in drug courts played, as veterans participation in as mentors in veterans courts helps state and local government? i'm happy to take a previous response. >> collaboration is the name. game, senator. and i can tell you we have

wide support from our national police groups when it comes to drug court participation. our probation departments as well. and so the notion that i think people have finally come to the realization that this model works. and so any way which we can support it is what i think people are choosing to do and it's been i think, one of the reasons it's been so successful. so law enforcement across the board. we work with the international association of chiefs of police and others. so we should just continue to do that. >> i just want to thank you for your recognition that addiction affects every family, every community across this country and we need to have a balanced approach, balancing law enforcement with treatment and with community engagement and i think the drug courts and your leadership have been critical to achieving that balance. thank you. >> thank you. >> mr. tucker, thank you very much for your service and for your testimony. we will excuse you now and take a minute or so recess while they change the table for the next panel.

again, thank you for your testimony, your participation in this hearing. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> we'll have more from this hearings on veterans in just a moment. want to let you know "washington journal" this week continues its look at medicare. today a discuss of medicare advantage, privately-run medicare insurance plans similar to hmos. you can see coverage of the conversation each morning at 9:15 eastern and also on c-span2 each evening at 7:15. following that at 8:00 p.m. eastern is "booktv" prime time. tonight, book parties we begin with ann coulter coulter and her book, demonic. at 9:10 eastern juan williams signing copies of his book, must he would. at 10:25 armstrong williams for his book, reawakening virtues. "booktv" will be live this afternoon as david graber,

his book about debt, the history of debt across the world. that is live on booktv.org at 7:30 eastern. >> dr. martin luther king was not a president of the united states. at no time in his life did he hold public office. he was not a hero of foreign wars. he never had much money. while he lived, he was reviled at least as much as he was celebrated. by his own account, he was a man frequently racked with doubt, a man not without flaws, a man who like moses before him, more than once questioned why he had been chosen for so arduous a task. the task of leading a people to freedom. the task of healing the festering wound of a nation's original sin.

>> watch this entire event, the groundbreaking of the martin luther king, jr. memorial at the c-span video library. now nearly five years later the memorial will be dedicated this washington, d.c., this sunday, live on c-span. during the week we'll have coverage of other events surrounding the dedication on the c-span networks. and now more from the senate judiciary subcommittee hearing on drug treatment for veterans. actor martin sheen called america's drug addicted population its quote, the greatest untapped resource. he was at the hearing to support drug and veterans treatment courts, for the funding of those courts. the courts allow nonviolent drug offenders to get treatment and supervision, rather than jail. this portion is about an hour. >> hearing will come back to order.

i'm delighted to welcome our second panel of witnesses and we'll just go right across the table. left to right from my side of the aisle here. our first witness is martin sheen, who has appeared in more than 60 feature films including a pock lips now, and martin scorsese's "the departed." has starred in numerous television shows. his performance on the west wing as president jed bartlett earned him six emmy nominations. mr. sheen has been a vocal supporter of drug courts for several years across the country and here in congress. we're delighted to that he took his time to come and offer his testimony here today. mr. sheen. >> thank you, chairman whitehouse and distinguished members of the subcommittee. it is a very rare privilege to be here today and advocate on behalf of drug courts. i would like to emphasize however that i am not a drug court professional nor am i

an addiction specialist. i make the distinction because we all know celebrity to a greater or lesser degree is so often confused for credibility. for instance, i am not a former president of the united states [laughing] though i played one on tv. my first exposure to drug court began nearly 20 years ago and opened my eyes to the incredible capacity of human beings to change. i've seen individuals mired in the depths of addiction, transformed by drug courts. i've seen families reunited after years of estrangement due to a loved one's substance abuse. while i preface my opening remarks confirming my amateur status regarding this critical issue i was however, directly responsible for helping create a drug court system in berkeley, california, in 1996, along with father bill o'donnell and dr. cody, an addiction specialist. we called it, options and our chief focus was the homeless and addicted street

population of berkeley. with the help of drug court judge and a berkeley police chief bobby miller we began a treatment center at one sober living house. today there are six sober living houses. they're all run by drug court graduates and nearly 6,000 people have gone through them and returned to their health, body, mind and spirit. these miracles happen every day in drug court and i believe that this country's greatest untapped resource is our addicted population. every year drug court helps save over 120,000 seriously addicted people, bringing them from darkness to light, and setting them on a course towards fulfillment, freedom and enviable joy but imagine for a moment the impact we could have if drug courts were available to all 1.2 million addicted individuals who would be best-served by drug courts if one were

available? imagine the impact of 1.2 million people making up for lost time in their community, and serving their families and their country. this is the purpose of drug courts and this is why it is a critical that congress funds drug courts at a cost of $88.7 million for fiscal year 2012. it is no secret that our current prison system provides little return on our investment. we spend over $70 billion on corrections and it has done little to stem the tide of drugs and crime. instead, addicted people cycle through the system at great expense to the public. drug court stops that cycle. in drug court we have a proven budget solution we can count on to cut drug abuse and crime. every citizen benefits when one addicted person gets clean and sober. i would like to take a moment now to talk about

drug courts serving veterans and the emergence of veterans treatment courts. i spent some valuable time yesterday with judge robert russell of buffalo, new york. this distinguished and reknowned jurist is among drug courts hall of fame. two years ago, judge russell created the first nation's veterans treatment center to restore the honor of these heroes. we ask so much of our men and women in uniform and they ask so little in return, in fact, they are often the last to ask for counseling or treatment. it is our duty to care for our veterans when they suffer as a direct result of their service to our country. today there are 80 veterans treatment kourpts with over 100 being planned - courts. drug courts and veterans treatment courts are on the front lines of insuring when our veterans suffer from substance abuse or mental health disorders and get in trouble with the law, they have the opportunity for treatment and restoration. by helping restore their health, we give honor to

their service. our criminal justice system has been transformed over the last two decades by dedicated drug court professionals who believe that a blend of accountability, and compassion can and should be the foundation for which we handle our addicted offended population. now these same professionals are forever changing the way this nation treats veterans when their invisible wounds of war lead them astray. frankly there is no better investment this congress can make than drug courts and veterans courts. the time has come to reap the staggering social economic benefits of expanding this proven budget solution. thank you for the honor of appearing before you today. i appreciate your time and your service to our country. >> thank you, mr. sheen. our next witness, comes as a personal favorite, the honorable jean lafazia, is

chief judge of our rhode island district court. prior to her appointment to the bench, chief judge lafazia was an active civil litigator in private practice and a leader in the rhode island community serving on the road island state parole board, the commission on judicial tenure and discipline, and serving as the rhode island chair for the international association of defense counsel. as chief judge of the rhode island district courts she's introduced the pilot program for the state's first veterans court and convened an extraordinary roundtable for attorney general holder on his recent visit to rhode island. chief judge lafazia graduated from boston university and suffolk law school and we welcome here here today. welcome, your honor. >> thank you, chairman whitehouse and other distinguished members of the this subcommittee. thank you for something i fell feel passionately about

the expansion of veterans courts in this country. i spent three years on the arraignment calendar in consent county. i noticed both veterans and active members of the military were appearing at increasing numbers. sometimes these individuals were immediately recognizeable by their stance and occasionly by uniform. other times they would actually hide their status and attempt to quickly resolve the charge without further attention. i was also hearing from victims in domestic matters who would tell me that this defendant's behavior would not have occurred prior to his or her deployment or prior to multiple tours of duty which is a phenomenon that we're seeing more of in this war than ever before. it became apparent that some of these men and women were returning to combat with injuries very real which were not visible to the naked eye . .battlefield, shoul

also be true on the home front? do we not owe our returning soldiers a similar duty when they come home injured or affected in a way that causes or -- that has altered who they are and what they do and especially of that injury pauses or fuels behavior that puts them in the criminal justice system. these men and women were not drafted. they volunteered for this service. they put on a uniform and they

followed the american flag into combat to fight and protect for the fundamental rights and privileges that we as americans enjoy every single day. most people agree that we do have a duluth but what does that mean? how does it translate to the criminal justice system and to the role of the judiciary in these cases? in response, the rhode island district court under a samhsa grand is a partner in the first jailed diversion program in rhode island for veterans. this grant allows rhode island to begin this important process but as beginning. let me emphasis what this program does not mean. it does not mean that anyone will not be held accountable for their actions simply because of military status or even medical diagnosis alone. this is not a free pass. what this duty does mean is that we need to increase our focus on these people we need to recognize them and implement programs that will address their unique challenges and which will provide them with tools and

insight needed to become whole again to reintegrate into society. veterans courts are problem-solving courts. rhode island is that unique position because it is a small state. we have tremendous collaboration with rhode island with law enforcement, community mental health providers and other state departments. the rhode island national guard has been actively involved and fully supportive. as we anticipate further drawdowns the number of personnel who will require these services will undoubtedly grow substantially. the expansion of this program will allow us to fully address these needs of these individuals and will allow to us include all individuals who enter the judicial system because of service-related injury. we are ready to and positioned. we have the resources to make it successful and sustainable, an important word today, i think. i hope we will see this in the relatively near future and we look to you our leaders in washington. i'm proud to have the rhode island district court playing a

leading role in this issue and i thank you for the opportunity to discuss this today. i will happily answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you, your honor. our next witness is douglas b. marlow who is the director of the division of the law and ethics research at the treatment research institute as well as an adjunct associate professor of psychiatry at the university of pennsylvania school of medicine. dr. marlow has published 80 different articles and chapters on the subject of drug and alcohol abuse and on the boards of the drug court review and criminal justice and behavior. he's a member of the board of directors of the national association of drug court professionals, serves as chair of the research committee and the drug policy reform committee and we're delighted to have him here for his testimony. mr. marlow. >> thank you, chairman whitehouse it's an honor to be here. i know you've been waiting for the martin sheen and the chief justice so you can hear from the scientists in the room about the -- [laughter]

>> facts and data related to drug courts but that is my job as the chief -- also chief of science and policy for the national association of drug court professionals is to stay on top of this -- excuse me, the scientific research which is no easy task because the last time i did a search on drug courts, i found well over 1,000 published studies of drug courts, drug courts have been studied more intensely than any other criminal justice program. in fact, there are people in this room taking medications for cancer, diabetes, and other medical conditions that have less evidence of success than drug courts. according to the leading national universities research organizations, on average, all else being equal, drug courts will reduce crime anywhere from 10 to 26%. that's on average. the best drug courts will cut crime rates in half, which is unheard of in the criminal justice system. on a matter of

cost-effectiveness on average all else being equal for every 1 dollar invested in drug court you will get 2.29 back from your investment. how many are getting a 221% return on your 401ks at the moment? drug drug courts are returning 3.36 for every dollar invested and the best drug courts are returning $27 for every $1 invested. the u.s. government accountability office in 2005 concluded that drug courts reduce crime but they wanted to know what else drug courts do besides reducing crime so they launched the multisite adult drug court evaluation. those findings have just been published in the last few days. the national study of drug courts every region in the country over 1200 participants in drug courts, 23 drug courts included. they found not only do drug courts reduce crime, drug courts reduce drug abuse, drug courts

reduce family conflict. they improve family functioning and those are associated with domestic violence and child abuse. they improve employment. they improve annual income. we now have as good as you're going to get research on the effects of drug courts. if anybody tells you they've looked at the research on drug courts and they don't accept it, then they must reach the same conclusion about every other criminal justice and substance abuse treatment program in existence because there is no other program that has equivalent evidence of success than drug courts. some people will say the drug court only have 5 to 7 randomized controlled studies. well, according to the fda, you need two randomized controlled studies for a medication to be considered an evidenced-based and a proven practice. drug courts have many times that degree of efficacy. it is a highly proven intervention. now, why a federal role?

most crime is intrastate. most crime is person on person. person on property, it occurs at a single point in time in a single place. drug courts are interstate commerce. everything that occurs in drug court, transportation, procurement, manufacturing, use, the effects of that are interstate if not international. that is why we launched the -- the federal government launched war on drugs roughly four decades ago and before that in the nixon administration, there was an increase in demand reduction efforts. it is a national event. it is a national impact and, therefore, it needs a national level response. veterans have always been a national priority and they are the biggest movement currently in the drug court movement is to treat veterans who as you've heard have 80% of veterans coming in contact with the

criminal justice system are addicted and/or mentally ill and that is what's driving their involvement in the criminal justice system. so i am happy to answer any questions. and i'm happy to provide you with the proof and the scientific evidence for any of the facts that i've asserted. thank you. >> thank you very much, dr. marlow. our final witness is david muhlhausen. he studies criminal justice programs in the heritage foundation, the center for data analysis. dr. muhlhausen joined heritage in 1999 after serving on the staff for this senate judiciary committee. welcome back, mr. muhlhausen. prior to that he was a manager at a juvenile correctional facility in baltimore. he holds a doctorate in public policy from the university of maryland baltimore county. and a bachelor's degree in political science and justice studies from frostburg state university. welcome, dr. muhlhausen. >> thank you. my name is david muhlhausen. i'm a research fellow and an empirical policy analysis in the center for data analysis at the

heritage foundation. i thank chairman whitehouse, ranking member kyl and the rest of the committee for the opportunity to testify on drug and veteran treatment courts. the views i expressed in my testimony are my own and should not be construed of representing any official position of the heritage foundation. my testimony will focus on three points. first, out of control spending and surging public debt threatening our nation's stability, increased federal spending on state and local courts should not be a priority. by the end of this fiscal year, the congressional budget office warns that the federal debt will reach roughly 70% of gross domestic product. this will be the highest percentage since shortly after world war ii. this is hardly a good time for congress to increase funding a grant program that subsidize the routine criminal justice operations of state and local governments. instead, congress should consider reforming the drug court discretionary grant

program to focus entirely on reimbursing drug courts of the costs for the returning combat veterans for substance abuse problems. this reform we get the federal government out of subsidizing routine operations and quite likely save taxpayer federal dollars as well. second, while a large number of drug court evaluations have been reformed, many of these studies have significant shortcomings and sign genetic rigor. before we can judge a drug court program to be effective, we first must understand the importance of selection. it can be astoundingly difficult to distinguish between what is working and what is not. and nowhere is this predicament truer than when it comes to the criminal justice system trying to change human behavior. for example, individuals volunteer be for a drug court program may be more motivated than individuals not seeking entry. such motivational factors are often invisible to those

assessing effectiveness. failure to account for these crucial factors can produce misleading association between drug court participation and outcomes. experimental evaluation, the gold standard of research designs are the most capable of handling the problem of selection. in my review of the scientific literature, i was only able to gain three experimental evaluations of drug courts. clearly, more experimental evaluations are needed. more experimental evaluations should transcend political party lines. both democrats and republicans should agree on this issue. third, while there's some circumstances in particular locations, drug courts may be more effective than traditional responses, congress should carefully review the claims of effectiveness coming from advocates of increased federal spending on drug courts. three experimental evaluations and a particularly good multisite quasi experimental evaluation reviewed in my written testimony provide a mixed bag of evidence about

effectiveness. obviously, some drug courts are effective while others are not. effective drug courts can produce cost saving and some may even produce more benefits than costs. however, this rule is not universal for all drug courts. a relevant example is the cost findings of the newly rereleased multisite adult drug court evaluation performed by the urban institute. after comparing 23 drug courts to six other types of court interventions, the quasi-experimental evaluation found drug courts produced an estimated average net benefit of over $2,000. however, this estimate is now statistically significant. in other words, policymakers cannot be sure that the drug courts participating in this evaluation produce more benefits than costs. the cost may actually outweigh the benefits. that's simply too inprecise to draw strong policy decisions. more results on this evaluation

and other evaluations in my testimony are available to you. thank you for inviting me. >> thank you, mr. muhlhausen. owner take up the other senators' time i will wait until the end and yield to senator blumenthal and whoever else is next. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you for bringing together this really very, very impressive panel. impressive not only for its star power but its intellectual and scientific and persuasive power. and i want to suggest that there is a danger here which is to conflate drug problems and to

see a drug court as also potential a veterans court. and i think what's so impressive about the work that you've done, judge lafazia, is that you have started with not only the invisible wounds of post-traumatic stress and the dramatic brain injury that can cause many of the addicted behaviors that result in criminal activity but also address the problems that are unique to veterans and they can become addictive but they also have other problems. and so i'd like to invite you and others on the panel to perhaps talk about why we need to address separately the issues that affect veterans as opposed to simply opening drug courts that may deal with veteran treatment issues?

>> i think there's certainly a lot of overlap. and that will involve both the cost factor of doing these programs. it will also -- there's a huge overlap on the successes that we are able to celebrate. that being said, i think that the veterans have a number of unique issues that need to be dealt with. and i think some of the standard counseling that we provide for substance abuse issues, alcohol issues and other issues are not always competent or able to address some of these underlying issues that veterans have to deal with. we've had tremendous elaboration in our project in rhode island. it's a small state. it lends itself to that. in addition to collaboration with law enforcement and our mental health providers and corrections and other state agencies, we've also had some

great support from our legislature and our governor this year. and we had a law signed into effect that allowed us for court-ordered counseling on dui cases and domestic violence counseling -- we now are able to do that counseling through the veterans association. and i think that makes a huge difference because they have a unique set of circumstances that most of us don't even have a point of reference for. and i think that you need to have people involved in these projects who have that background, have that insight, that understanding and know how to get to those specific issues. >> and making use of veterans themselves in providing that kind of counseling and aid? >> yes. and on two fronts. one of the other elements of veterans courts that i think is critical for success is the use of mentors in the review process. and we are -- we are in our infancy stages in rhode island. we're now developing our mentor

group but not only with the professional counselors with the military background and military insight i think you said the support you need a marine who can speak marine talk to a fellow marine, whatever the branch may be. you need to have the people who have been there walked the walk and talked the talked and come back and help you through it. >> i'd like to invite any members of the panel to do what i thought that the "new york times" did so well is to give a voice to the veterans issues, you know, specific instances of a veterans court working for a veteran. i think is very powerful. as the "new york times" beast was depicting how a specific docket or calendar or channel for providing justice to a veteran can help address these specific and unique problems that veterans may face.

>> can i take a stab at that? >> sure. >> it takes a tremendous amount of conditioning to get somebody ready for war. our natural inclination is not to put ourselves in danger. our natural inclination is not to harm other people. our natural inclination is not to follow rigid authority, our natural inclination is not to be constantly vigilant for threats everywhere we go. we have to be taught and conditioned to do that over months and months, if not years in the military. we've known that since the beginning of war. what we haven't known is that you then must be deconditioned or prepared not to be hyper vigilant, not to be overly obedient authority when they are undesirable traits and mix that with trauma and substance abuse you conflate those problems. so it is very much a new syndrome. it is not a drug court. it is not a mental health court.

it is a reentry program for people returning to civilian live to people who have been wounded and damaged. that is what veteran courts understand by using veteran peers, and veteran mentor, the veteran administration services, these are people who have been through that process and they either had difficulty and learned through their dysfunction or they have been trained and they come from that world and they understand. so it is a fundamentally different animal than these other programs. and i'm here to tell you, we've always seen huge numbers of homeless vets and vets in the criminal justice system after war. and we're seeing it now like we've seen it every time before and we have multiple wars so these veterans courts need to ramp up and be ready quickly for a large inflick. >> mr. sheen, i want to thank you for following in the footsteps of many former presidents in -- when they leave the oval office or leave the oval office set to pursue very

important causes. and i just wondered why you had many things that you could have pursued as your cause and why you chose drug courts? >> well, thank you, senator. i would just say, quite frankly, that it is an extension of my work with the peace and justice community, social justice is, i think, incumbent on all of us to participate in to bring healing where we can, to bring understanding. to bring some light in areas where there's great darkness. and this was just a natural progression in my work in the peace and justice era. you know, dr. marlow's description is quite extraordinary. it gets right to the point of what senator blumenthal was talking about. i read that "times" article yesterday and as i mentioned i was with judge russell yesterday who initiated that first court

and he's quoted in that article about that gentleman and the parameters surrounding that horrible situation where he was in the woods out in michigan with a gun and there were officers surrounding the area and felt they were being shot at. and their lives were in danger. and this veteran, this fellow is alive and is getting help now. and those officers have actually dropped all their charges as well. it's a extraordinary level of compassion and understanding what that guy alone in the woods alone was going through. he was back in iraq on three tours. he lived with that extraordinary anxiety, tension and adrenaline. we have no idea, no comprehension at all of what's that like in a combat zone and, you know, we're in three countries now where it's just every day normal life. and a lot of these men and women are serving multiple tours.

we have to be aware of that. and, you know, it's going to cost us. anything of great value is going to be costly; otherwise, you're left to question its value, you know? when i think of the work that drug court is doing i'm reminded of the old irish tale of the guy who came to the gates of heaven and asked to be let in and saint peter said, of course, just show us your scars and the guy says i have no scars. and st. peter said, what a pity. was there nothing worth fighting for? i can't think of anything in the social justice and peace era today more worth fighting for than drug court. it just goes to the central -- the center of this issue. and a deeply compassionate and understanding and humane way. and i think it's the only way out, frankly. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, senator. >> dr. marlow, do you want to

respond to things that dr. muhlhausen had pointed out when we look at this cost-effective issue as we're engaging in a process right now in washington where we have to bring our debt down and we're looking at smarter solutions in the criminal justice area? i've always found people can be surprised sometimes there's ways to spend less money that actually get better results and could you talk about that? >> the research on the cost-effectiveness of drug court is actually pretty powerful research. it's been conducted by independent organizations and they have found as i said earlier that for every dollar invested, the average -- if i don't know anything else about a drug court i just know it's a drug court if i have to guess how much i'm going to get back for my money for every dollar that i put in i'm going to get $2.21 back and if it's a particularly good drug court i may get 3, 5, 12, $27 back now, as for the multisite drug court evaluation that was just published, they found that the average net benefit for drug court was just short of $6,000

per participant. now, if drug courts are treating 120,000 participants, and they're turning an average return on investment of 6,000 per participant, you might need a calculator to figure out how much money we'd be saving and if we hit the 1.2 million people that we should be serving, i would definitely need a calculator to figure out how much money we're saving. the way we do it now we use incarceration as our primary response. it has no effect but at least it has a saving grace of being enormously expensive. we have drug courts which are about in some respects one-tenth of a cost of incarceration and many times better. i would suggest to you that it's pretty common that doing too much tends to make people worse and also tends to cost too much money. if you bring a sledgehammer to knock in a slum tack you're going to do more damage than you need to and picking a better hammer and a better tool and doing a more intelligent job

you're going to be a lot less expensive and it's going to save you money. these are not speculative cost saving. these cost-savings occur in the same budget year or the immediately ensuing budget. you get your money back within 24 months. that's money to the criminal justice system. i'm not talking about, you know, foster care savings, you know, children from losing their families. i'm not talking about all those distal costs. i'm talking about money back to the criminal justice system 'cause he's not in jail. the police aren't out argue him. i don't have to have ten violation of probation hearings. i don't have to waste all -- you know, having the prosecutor and the defense in the courtroom. i'm saving all of that money right away. that's why drug courts have expanded as much as they have. federal government sees a program. it's rare for the federal government to cede a program and the state and locality doesn't pick it up after the federal funding. it's a rare event when they don't pick it up. their not doing it out of inertia. they're not doing it out of the goodness out of their hearts,

they're doing it because they're saving an enormous amount of money. >> i just wanted to end on one more question when we come back to talk about the drug court graduation and i've been at a number of them. when we first started our drug court there was a lot of issues with the police not supporting it and we actually made some changes with taking some of the gun crimes out of there and some of the things where i believe prison was appropriate. and over the years, we gained the support of the police for that court and it made a big difference 'cause they realized there was actual follow-up as opposed to someone being lost in the system because they had what was perceived what was a minor kid but it wasn't minor for those kids trying to go to school and then get drug -- people on drugs getting in the way of their path and potentially getting them on drugs. and what happened was, that they started to see that with the drug court there was actual follow-up. they'd have to come in and they'd have to have the drug tests. there would be a stick at the end if they didn't comply. and it was interesting to see the evolution with law enforcement through that time

when i was county attorney. so thank you very much. >> there's one point about -- remember i said some drug courts cut crime rates in half? the best drug courts, those are the ones that have law enforcement on their team. that's one of the biggest findings is law enforcement on the team increases the outcomes multifold and i think for the reasons you've suggested. >> thank you. >> the dark cloud of budget and debt concerns that lies over washington right now is a very real thing and it's very important, but i would like to ask mr. sheen and judge lafazia who seem to have the most personal experience with these courts to talk a little bit about intangible and nonmonetary value that you see in what happens in a drug court and we

hope will also happen in a veterans court as the individual involved has to come to the difficult recognition and reconciliation of the wreckage that they've often made of their own lives, realize that a transformation is necessary and start the hard and courageous path of recovery. that is a rather special human accomplishment and i would like to you put that in the context of what you see every day in the drug courts. >> thank you, senator my own personal experience with drug court besides lobbying here in washington on occasion is confined to the state of california which is no small spot on the map. but i have been a participant in compton drug court south of los

angeles with judge deshazeir as well as the downtown drug court in los angeles and the bay area courts including judge steven who's here now -- i'm sorry. steven manley will never forgive me. i'm sorry, judge steven, i've been a great supporter of his court as well as the berkeley and the oakland situations. one i see so often are the drug courts have focused on low-incomed homeless fixed income, people on the short end of the ladder. very often they have public defenders.

the across-the-board rule is they're very rarely represented by a lawyer that they have to pay. they're generally all wards of the state at that point. so when they stand in front of a passionate understanding judge and they're offered a very fundamental choice, mr., i'm going to put you in the state penitentiary for three years or i'm going to give you an opportunity to turn your life around in treatment that you can start today, what is your choice? 99% of those defendants will say, give me the treatment. and when you see them come in -- i mean, they're right off their mug shots -- when they come dragging into courts they're still wearing the orange jumper and they're generally in chains, then you come back over a period of time of months and you witness this extraordinary change where a human being is

emerging from this chaos, this baggage that's been discarded and thrown away. where they had no -- no self-motivation where they were depending on the next shot or the next hit or the next drink. to see that development of a human being flower and reach its potential and then turn to the community after graduation of a year and very hard intense re-evaluation and 12-stepping and begin to stir those people coming out of the cages in the orange jumpers and in the shackles, it's that turn towards the brother, the sister that is just coming out of the cage and the look that they have with each other, it's like what veterans have that dr. marlow

was talking about. there is a jailhouse dialog. there is an understanding of street dialog. there is a drug culture. and when it's broken, that has a miraculous effect. you know, the old saying is all you need for an aa meeting are two trundrunks, a pot of coffee a lot of resentment. a lot hasn't changed. it's deep personal contact with one drug addict talking to another one that has come out of that same cell and that same uniform and the hope the possibility of returning to their humanity and then the service back to the community. the 12 step -- the last step in all 12-step programs is we reach out to those still out there. and it is said that the only way to keep anything of real value is to give it away with love.

and that is the basic fundamental work of drug court. >> judge lafazia, hold that thought and i'll come back to you and we'll go back to senator blumenthal, and we'll have our second round and that will be my question to you. >> i would like to follow up on some of the answers given especially the description of the training preparation that goes into preparing a warrior, go into particularly modern day battle where people come back from explosive situations that they might not have even survived and come back with wounds that are undiagnosed and untreated. i think we can see is how can

we prepare those who are dealing with those individuals who are in their jurisdiction and they may not fully understand? >> the armed services have training curricula and interventions specifically for this purpose, training law enforcement, training judges. first of all, how do you recognize an invisible wound? how do you recognize somebody who has post-traumatic stress disorder. what do you ask people to identify. all you have to do is ask the right questions and in 3 to 5 minutes you'll know but if you don't ask those questions, you absolutely will never know. >> and what are the right questions? >> asking somebody if they get startled. have you ever find that you get startled? anything make you, you know, all of a sudden you turn quickly.

if there's a slight movement in the courtroom, watch a veteran when there's movement to the back of the room because approximate they didn't turn to that movement in afghanistan and iraq they could very well be dead. in the courtroom what they very well may have done is set up an altercation or a negative situation. so you're looking for that startled response you're looking for that hypervigilance and you're looking for that -- the hollowness. when these people -- when you're that damaged, when you're that broken, when you feel that bad, you're not sure anybody can help you. in fact, you're pretty sure nobody can. you're pretty sure you're probably going to die and you're not entirely sure you care. looking for that broken empty thing in people, almost the apathy is sort of what happens, what happens kind of thing when you push on it, those are not hard to diagnosed. they're not hard to detect and we can train very reliably law enforcement, judges, police to do it but if they're not trained

they don't see it and they think the guy is being aggressive when he's really not. they think the guy is being a wise guy and not answering him when they are being obedient to a superior in uniform. they need to be trained and sens sensitized to it. i have a colleague who does it for the navy and i met somebody at the conference who does it for the air force. there's training curricula that we need to get it out to the judges in every state and every county and we can do that. >> you have anything to add? >> i don't want -- i don't want to repeat what he said, but in rhode island, our law enforcement for a couple of years now have been participating in something that we call a first responder program, which was originally initiated to allow them to address mental health issues right at the beginning of the scene. and they're trained to diffuse dangerous situations and we now have into that program we have put a component on recognizing veterans and the veterans issues

in order to de-escalate it at the very beginning. i think the training is critical for every stakeholder involved in this process but in addition to the training, i think that public education is also important. particularly, from a court's point of view on some of these cases. there is a ripeness for negative public perception. there is a -- an issue as for a potential for people to think this is a free pass for people to think that people are not being held accountable. and there's a safety aspect part of it. there was mentioned before to the duis which play a very big role in all of these, driving under the influence in rhode island. we call them duis. they are ripe for public scrutiny when you bring somebody through this and they get taken out of the criminal justice system or they get a lesser sentence. if that person reoffends and

that possibility is always there and god forbid somebody is injured that will come right back to us on the front of the paper so you need to have some public understanding as well as training for the stakeholders. >> and probably some training for the state legislators and congressmen as well? >> and that also, i suppose, yes. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. and i'd like to submit for the record later a copy of the "new york times" article that's been referenced a couple of times by dr. marlow and a previous witness if i may. >> without objection it will be included into the record and let me go back to judge lafazia, if you wanted to add anything to mr. sheen's remarks and let me also ask you how has it been dealing with the veterans administration in terms of the coordination with this particular means of serving veterans? >> the veterans administration has played a critical role in this project in rhode island from the beginning.

they have been supportive in every -- in every step of the process including confirming identification of veterans. if they get a call from police departments to the roles that they're playing in the court, the services that they are providing. they have been excellent on emergency care, on getting people in very, very quickly for assessments. so they have been a wonderful partner in this project. sorry. >> they get it. >> they get it. they absolutely get it. >> and they play well with others. >> and they do play well with others. and they have been cooperative and supportive and have had some good initiatives that they themselves have brought to the table for us. the one thing that i would add to what mr. sheen said is that when these -- when these veteran defendants are coming into the court, one of our biggest challenges has been to identify them because many of them do not want to be identified as military or veterans. there is a shame element that

accompanies them. and they have come from a background of rules and regulations and living and respecting those rules and regulations and now they found themselves in a very different situation. so that has been one of the challenges that we've had to deal with. they have, however, been very, very motivated. most of them have remembered what their family lives were like beforehand, what their lives in general were like beforehand and they have been very, very motivated to get into the programs. they've welcomed the treatment that's been given. there's nothing perhaps that motivates people like finding themselves in the criminal justice system. and when that option is given, it motivates and it works and i will be happy to celebrate any -- any provision and any success story that is there. >> senator klobuchar. >> very good. i just had one question and i wondered if any of you can answer it.

but we have significant native american populations in our extent and i wondered to what extent drug courts are serving the native american populations and if it's not high, how that could change? >> there's a number of what are called tribal healing to wellness courts. these are, you know, tribal courts so they're not part of the u.s. court system. they're a separate court system and they use what is called healing to wellness principles so it's a lot of community elders, a lot of community-based interventions, a lot of use of spirituality and, you know, our history and how, you know, what is happening to us in our history has contributed to our lot and to the devastation of our community. there's a lot of emphasis on giving back a lot of restitution. we do training for them. we do technical assistance. we have members from the tribal community on our board. they're at our conferences and they're very active part of the drug court world. now, do we need more of them?

absolutely. in the tribal community we're probably hitting 5 or 10% of the problem like we're hitting 5 or 10% of the problem everywhere. but we have -- we have the resources and the knowledge and the skills to do so. >> anyone else? all right. thank you. >> all right. let me call the hearing to a conclusion. i want to thank each of the witnesses for their testimony here today. and for their contribution to our common effort to pursue the types of efficiencies, to put it coldly and transformations to put it a little bit more enlivenly that the drug court mechanism can provide and to expand that mechanism of community support and finding alternatives to direct veterans back out of the criminal justice system in an effective way. so i really appreciate the testimony of everyone in the presence of so many people who

have worked so hard on this issue in the room as well. as i said earlier, the record of the hearing will stay open for an additional week. and if anybody wishes to add to it, they just simply need to send in their materials, but subject to that, the hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

>> c-span2 weekdays live coverage of the u.s. senate and weekends booktv, 48 hours of the latest nonfiction authors and books. connect with us on twitter, facebook and youtube and sign up for schedule alert emails at c-span.org. >> the "new york times" executive editor and its washington bureau chief recently discussed their operations in today's digital age and how newspapers and other traditional news organizations can adapt. this hour and 15-minute discussion hosted by george washington university is moderated by form network correspondent marvin kalb. ♪ >> from the national press club

in washington, d.c., this is the kalb report with marvin kalb. [applause] >> hello and welcome. welcome to the national press club and to another edition of the kalb report. i'm marvin kalb and our subject tonight all the news that's fit to print, behind the scenes at the "new york times." i don't know about you, but i am grateful for three things every day. one, that i get up in the morning. two, that i live in a free country. and three, that copies of two newspapers are dropped off in front of my house every day, seven days a week. more reliable i found than the u.s. postal service. for me, the newspaper is a morning miracle. imagine stories from all over the world, all over the country, science, sports, medicine, economics, finance, truly a

morning miracle essentially to the functioning of an open and free society. one of my morning newspapers is the "new york times" arguably the most respected newspaper in the united states and certainly one in the best of the world. we are delighted to welcome executive editor bill keller and jean to the national press club and to the kalb report. bill keller has been the executive editor since 2003. and he has been with the paper since 1984. been a reporter since 1970. he's been bureau chief in the soviet union and south africa. he won a pulitzer prize for his coverage of the soviet union and has also been a columnist and managing editor of the paper. dean has been with the "times" since 1990, though, he did take seven years off to be managing editor and editor of the "los

angeles times." he quit the "l.a. times" when he refused the corporate order to fire four journalists. he too has won a pulitzer prize. okay, bill and dean, i've called your newspapers a morning miracle and i mean it. i'm always amazed what i can find in the newspaper so how do you make a miracle? and bill i want to start with you with a couple of basic questions to sort of get the lay of land. you work in new york which is the headquarters of the "new york times." how many people work for the "times"? >> well, for the newsroom, not counting everything from the delivery trucks to the advertising department, actual journalists it's a little more than 1100. >> 1100. >> that includes reporters, editors, photographers, videographers, web producers, a whole panoply of clerks but about 1100, 1150. >> but of the 1100, how many are actually reporters who go out to

cover stories? >> roughly 400. >> roughly 400 of the 1100? and on a normal day, when do you get in? >> i usually get in about 8:30. >> about 8:30. and what is your first meeting, and who attends and why do you have it? >> well, we just changed our first meeting which for many years began at 10:30 and was mostly focused for getting ready for the next day's printed paper. we now start at 10:00 and we devote our time pretty much equally to things that are -- that we're thinking about for the printed newspaper and things that we're thinking about for the home page of the website. and that's a meeting where we look at -- what are the actual running news stories first and foremost, how are we going to approach them and what other editors at the table have thoughts that they can bring to it. >> who are the other editors who are there? >> the heads of all of the various news departments, the metro desk, the business desk

culture science and so on. >> how many? about a dozen? >> about a dozen. it ebbs and flows and for a while we didn't have an environment desk and we do have a environment desk and likewise we have a media editor that used to be under the business report but is now more independent. so it fluctuates. people do -- the head of the video unit comes, the head of graphics comes, the head of fundraiser comes. and, you know, particularly when we're talking about the website, we want to hear from them, what they've got planned to sort of keep the website feeling fresh and current through the day. >> how many -- how many of the meetings, formal meetings, aside from just bumping into somebody in the hallway do you have in the course of a day? >> well, there are two main meetings. that morning meeting and then there's a 4:00 meeting where we pick the stories that are going on the front page that day and we're talking what's going be on the home page first thing in the

morning. those are the two meetings that the day is kind of built around. that all the key players come to. i've got a lot of other meetings that i go to but those are the ones that really affect the journalism. >> and, dean, you're representing the washington bureau. are you part of all of these meetings? the two big ones? >> yeah, we're -- the bureau is on the phone for the meetings. we're on a speakerphone participating in a meeting and specifically just to amplify a little bit what bill described. each desk describes what it thinks are the best stories of the day for the home page and for the front page of the print paper and you sort of start the process of making a pitch for why you think your story gets the best play so it's the beginning of a competition of the day, too. >> i see. and what do you think is your major responsibility representing washington? >> i think my major responsibility is to shift through the sort of mix of real news of the day, phone news of the day if you will and try to

give bill a sense of the two or three really significant stories of the day in washington. >> and how many reporters work for you in washington? >> there are a total of about 45 people in the bureau, counting reporters, editors and others. and i guess probably about 28, 29 of them are reporters. >> does that make it the largest bureau outside of new york? >> yes, yes. >> so what in the course of a day do you yourself have a sharp field of what it is it's going to be the "new york times" the next day? >> it depends. i mean, on a week when there's, you know, just major breaking news when a country is in turmoil or you have a state of the union address or some major event that you're watching very closely, you kind of know early on in the day, it's one of the other pieces that you're thinking about. in a slow news period may not know until the page 1 meeting at

1:00 and considerably later than that. it will be looking around for something that's substantive enough. it's more art than a science putting together the stories for the front page but, you know, you want -- first and foremost you want the page to feel sort of urgent. and in the flow of events not to seem sort of optional or lightweight. >> but at the same time, there are days when the "new york times" does not have a hard lead for the newspaper and you're now prepared to go with something that would -- used to in the old days be described as a feature story. why do you do that? >> as a rule, i would rather put some piece of enterprising reporting that is not breaking news but something we discovered. i'd rather put that at the top of the front page than some kind of incremental development in a running story that people will look at and say, so what?

it's tempting to do that. the legislation passes the committee and the subcommittee and then it goes to the house and then it goes to the -- et cetera and you can take each of those moments as an occasion to write a big front page story. .. each of those moments as an occasion to write a big front-page story, but nothing much happened between step one and step two and step three. so we generally try to relegate the more incremental news to inside stories and put the stuff out front that feels more momentous. >> even if it's not an actual event that happened, something that we just ran across in the course of our reporting. >> i remember about 20 years ago, i did some research, on the front page of the "new york times," and went back 30 years ago, then 20, tintin and five and last year. and what i found was that you used to run many more stories on the front page.

you used to run many more hard news stories on the front page. you and many fewer photographs on the front page, and they were generally small. so the front page of the "new york times" today is quite different from what it was 15, 20 years ago. why the change? >> well, it's partly, it looks -- in the days when they would put 12 or 14 stories on the front page, most of them really didn't belong on the front page. it was just a day when the newspaper was regard as sort of a pesky, lots of little or not that were going on. and even the slogan all the news that fits to print i think park is back today when the game of the newspaper was to be comprehensive. will tell you may be only a little bit, but a little bit about everything. and i think, you know, that

slogan may be describes an aspiration, a kind of mindset. but now we tend to be more selective, try to give you more depth to tell you the stories that are not obvious, you know, in today's you're talking about we use to put the comings and goings of ships in the new york harbor on the front page. there aren't that many ships coming and going into new york harbor anymore, and mostly they don't matter all that much to your average reader. >> budget talk all the news that's fit to print, and you say that there was a time when the times was made comprehensive newspaper. are you saying that it isn't now the? >> yeah, i don't think there's anything as a comprehensive -- >> how would you describe the times today? >> i think we try to tell you what you need to know to be a well-informed citizen across the board, but that doesn't mean that every minor incremental development in a piece of legislation, that every inconclusive lawsuit that

everything, you know, that is news at some level is important enough to be in the paper. >> i accept that but why didn't somebody feature stories when there are, in fact, hard news stories that you could put on the front-page? >> what have you got against feature stories? [laughter] >> some of my favorite stories are featured stories. >> i am of the sort who believes that the newspaper, as it gets smaller, which is the times' fate in recent years, as it is the fate of other newspapers, too. nothing distinctive about the times. because you don't have that much more will now, you ought to level with the reader and give us the hard news of the day. do you really have the time to do the featured stories? >> evidently because we do a lot. [laughter] >> i know, but should you? >> you know, there are a lot of hard news stories that really do not justify the space.

and the a lot of featured stories that actually tell you quite a bit about -- when you see feature stories, it's an umbrella that comes -- covers a lot of different things. profiles interesting people on the news that you want to understand because they are actors, it may include snapshots of it like any committee that is affected by the economy, or by some people. those are features but they carry the values of the news. they help you understand what's going on in the world. the same way that the news of some foreign officials speech or a cabinet members ribbon-cutting would tell you. >> can i -- >> please do. >> i would make, back what bill said but -- >> that is not surprising. [laughter] >> but i would say something provocative. papers were never comprehensive. i think this grand image of the conference of newspaper 30 or 40

years ago, they were sort of a little bit a comprehensive. i think if you sat down with the editors, which i have come who ran papers during the era they would to the "new york times" and the "washington post" fronted the prime minister's speech, but ms. the rise in the other parts of the world that were much, much more significant. they might have fronted the fourth movement of a bill from a house subcommittee to another committee, but they missed until very late the dramatic shifts in the way women and are active in the workplace. >> but which were describing though his -- >> just to finish the thought. i would argue that had newspapers have the sensibility they have now, those would have been covered. and much more significant the announcement of the british prime ministers budget. and i would also argued that this probably would have been crafted as so-called feature

stories, but they would've captured something much, much more significant. .. >> the idea that we did not focus in the news business on women, children, health is simply a fact. but that does not change the point about whether you're dealing with hard news or whether you're making an effort at presenting what bill was saying, which is give the reader what that reader should know on any given day about the world. >> but i would counter, i guess i would counter, um, as somebody who worked at papers during some of that period, but also somebody that's looked back at papers that was, that that is hard news. if you ask gene roberts who's one of the legendary editors at the new york times, gene roberts was the national editor of "the

new york times", and before that he was a correspondent in the south during the civil rights movement. if you ask gene roberts what are the biggest stories that he missed as a journalist, which i have, none of them would have been the kinds of stories that you, that people would traditionally characterize as hard news. he would describe them as shifts in the south. he would describe them as the biggest stories newspapers missed while they were focusing on incremental news as being the kinds of stuff, you know, the movement of blacks from the south to the north, the changes in the workplace, the eventsn th that led up so that the case wouldn't have been so stunned. >> i have no argument with anything that you said. ve been and probably would have been a hard news story if 50,000 blacks moved from the small town in the south up to detroit. when they got to detroit and the effect it had on detroit, that was a news story. >> but it didn't happen that

way, not like an event in the way newspapers were trained. it oozed over years. >> when people talk about hard news, they tend to mean events. the president did something today, something concrete happened. there was an accident, a disaster of sorts. that's what people generally talk about when they mean hard news, but that doesn't cover a whole realm of enterprise investigative news that is not lying out there easily to be harvested by reporters. it requires time and digging, but i'm sure you agree it's some of the most worthwhile journalism that we do. >> i do. i completely agree. [laughter] what is your competition today? >> that is a good question and we ask ourselves that a lot. >> the "wall street journal, the

wild web, what is it? >> all of it in different ways. i still look at newspapers and newspaper websites, but even that category has extended beyond the sort of meet people that compete with us for circumstance laight on the ground in the u.s.. i read british websites, for example, the bbc, the guardian, the telegraph sometime, the "washington post" is still a competitor, the "wall street journal" is still a competitor because like the times, it's a national paper and not regional paper. i look at other places too like "politico," the "daily beast" or somebody tells me because i can't spend the whole day doing that. [laughter] >> what is your feeling about the major competition at the end of the day? what would bother you the best

most if the web had a story you didn't or the "wall street journal"? >> small margin the "wall street journal". i don't like to get beaten by anybody, and the fact that somebody beats us on a substantial website means it's going to be all over the place, so, you know, i regard them all the as competitors. by the way, not just for the stories, you know. there are competing "politico" and "washington post" compete with us for talent. they are actually hiring people. they are competing with us in the field of innovation. you know, i don't regard the "huffington post" as an aggressive competitor on international affairs, but the way they use social media is instructive, and we watch that. >> okay. we're describing and taking about a very competitive world

in journalism today. does this competition mean that you have set what some people call certain quotas for quarters that those who get more hits on a story that they've done on a website might be rewarded financially, better assignments? >> no. we have reporters who write four or five stories a year, and they tend to be big, truly ground breaking investigative stories, and there's people who write 400 stories a year. obviously, most people fall somewhere in between. there's the question of productivity that if someone is noel following the sometime aggressively and they get beaten, but no, we don't pay and

promote them accordingly. >> dean, your bureau of another newspaper and you've been around journalism awhile now. the assisting managing editor of the times say you live now in a new timeframe in which you work, no longer 24/7, but now he says it's 1440/7 means 1440 minutes a day and then 7 days a week. that describes a totally new psychology in jowmplism. journalism. how do you manage that in a major newspaper? >> it's tricky. a lot of what we do today with the balancing of the website and the print paper reminds me of the afternoon people started in new orleans where it was remarkably similar. if you -- when you came in in the morning, you had to come up with a way to move the ball for

the afternoon editions in covering the story from the morning people, so there's a similarity. it's tricky to manage. it requires a lot more decision making, faster off the mark decision making. i mean, i said when you asked earlier what do i see my role of the front page meaning, and i said i see the role as picking of two or three most important stories of the dayment i think that that shifts constantly through the day. you have to work harder to manage, fringe, a white house -- for instance, a white house reporter's time. a white house reporter now in the preweb era, a white house reporter could go to a press conference at 10:30 and go to lunch after. now the expectation -- >> no lunch. >> right. now the reasonable expectation is we have to figure out a way to file the story for the web

shortly after the press conference assuming it's an important enough press conference, and then we have to think about what are we gong to provide the reader for the print paper and maybe the reader for later in the day. it's trickier. >> one of the things in my mind is when congresswoman gabrielle give fords was shot, it was reported she was killed. you reported that because not somebody fed you that, but because cnn and npr said she was killed. in other words, you used other news organizations as your sources. now, i checked this. you did say news organization say that she was killed. technically, that's an accurate statement, but it was dead wrong, so how did you avoid in

the future that kind of blunder? >> well, there's no such thing as an okay mistake whether it's -- especially when it's one of that magnitude and the fact it was on the website for seven minutes before it was corrected does not justify getting that sort of thing wrong. the way you protect it is a number of ways. first of all, you send a clear message to reporters that it's nice to get it first, but it's most important to get it right. >> these were the editors who made that call, not the reporters. >> it was essentially a rewrite man that slipped past an editor. the second thing you do is not just having one but a couple editors who look at the stories before it goes on the website, and whose job is to challenge material that's not supported. the third thing you do is you teach people it's okay to be

explicit in the story about what you don't know, and all these are things we try to do. you know, i make no excuses for that particular blunder, and several people got a finger wagging over that, but the fact is, it doesn't happen all that often, and it's just kind of miraculous when you think about it. how do you put out a daily newspaper with all of the authority and of the "new york times" and my answer is almost every day we do it. >> is the editing process for the newspaper the same as the editing process for the web story? >> yes and no. i mean, no, well, the standards are the same, and in most cases it goes through the same layers of editing, but it does it at an

accelerated pace. it's like the editing that a story gets on a tight deadline, and even before the internet, you have stories that broke 30 minutes before deadline did not get the same editing attention as the story that broke in the morning. it just didn't. >> let me take a minute to website our website, television audiences that they're listening to the call -- kalb record and our guests are dean baquet and william keller. there should be a wall between the two, and "the news pages are laced with analytical and opinion pieces that work against the premise that the news is just the news." many conservatives criticize the

times as being a liberal, left-wing newspaper and that those views get into the news part of your newspaper, why do you allow this to happen? >> we don't allow it to happen. [laughter] >> but it happens almost every day. >> according to our brisbane or according to you? >> no, according to people who have read the "new york times" for many, many years. >> yeah. >> what i'm getting at here, bill, is there's more analysis stepping into commentary and the editorial side of reporting than a straight hard news story. >> i don't mind the news pages, and in fact, i encourage it every day. i think, you know, the discipline of objectivity or pash yalty -- partiality is driven into

reporters on the first day on the job. you have to be partisan, declare biases up front, and people can judge it accordingly. it's an aspiration, and reporters and editors bring their own beliefs to their jobs, and they are expected just as judges are supposed to set their prejudices aside in judging a case, reporters and editors are expected to lay their personal prejudices aside in assessing the facts of the news story. >> don't you believe -- >> and, no, i don't believe -- >> let me finish the question. don't you believe that there is more opinion, commentary, analysis today in the paper, however you choose to define it, then there was ten years ago, and if the answer is yes, tell me why. >> yes, a lot more analysis because i think that's what readers want and expect of the

people who have been out and witnessed events and gathered the information. the reporters who cover -- >> bill, aren't you making that assumption that that's what they want? how do you know that? maybe they just want a straight news story and not their opinion. >> maybe, and we give them a lot of that too. they don't get my opinion, but if, you know, if we're going to write a piece on a particular political figure, then supplying some context to his remarks or his activities is a service to readers i think. i don't think any reporter is justified in saying congressman x is wrong or he's a fool or he's unqualitied -- unqualified, but you are justified and expected to say here's where the views of his come from and what his constituency is, here's who he listens to. that's an analysis. it's a context without which the

bear facts are not of much use to readers. >> okay. >> there's always been a certain amount of opinion. i think there is a fine line, i think a pick line between opinion and analysis, but there's always been a certain amount of opinion in newspapers. book reviews are opinion. bitter contributics offer their -- critics offer their opinion. >> that's different than from covering the white house. >> what i argue is that you're not, the person in charge of covering the white house, you're not going to -- you would see, i would argue analysis coming from the white house. you will see -- it's an imperfect creature the newspaper is. i think there's an expectation today that the audience does not want us to any longer say barak obama gives a speech at a certain time of day, that barak obama said x yesterday.

i think there's an expectation, and i'm going to make the case again that newspapers may have failed and not doing that 25 years ago. there's an expectation that the writer puts some of that in some context. there's an expectation that the writer says reminding people that, you know, it's a president who is, you know, forced to make a comment on a foreign policy issue because the last foreign policy issues were struggles or whatever. >> absolutely. >> but i think that that's -- if you find us crossing a line further than that in the coverage of that speech, then i would say that's a mistake, but i don't think that's the common occurrence art or others might say it is. >> but you are both acknowledging there's more analysis in the paper today because your judgment is if the reader wants that rather than a recitation of the straight story? >> they want your -- >> you're

saying they want your analysis of what the president meant. it reminds me in the vietnam war there was five o'clock follies in saigon where reporters were told by the cornels what happened that day. does it need the analysis of the colonel to tell them, and i'm only raising the question, but you already answered it in a way, that maybe what people want is less analysis and less maybe there's studies on this and you concluded. >> just one thing that i think i may have stressed too much, when i say it's the readers' expectation, i'm not saying there's a readership sur vie and newspapers are saying to dictate the readership survey, by the

overall mission of the newspaper changed hardly at all. the overall mission which is to explain the most important events, describe, explain, and lay out the most important events of the day before in the jim roberts recessation as in an hour before, it had to change, but i mean, it had to change. that's not based on readership surveys, but if you have a core mission you're responsible for, it stands to reason you have to change it over the years. >> absolutely. let's talk about the new thing called a pay wall. i'm led to believe that that allows me to gain access to your website if i pay for that access. i'd like to project say a year or so into the future. what does that pay wall look like best you can estimate now? >> well, there are many

different varieties in this species of paid online news. the one that we are adopting later this year is what we call a metered model. it means you get a certain amount for free, and beyond that point, you're expected to subscribe. the most visitors, casual visitors to the website, will never encounter the little billboard that says we would like you to subscribe. the people who are home subscribers of the print paper will not encounter it either. they'll continue to get it for free. what we're saying is the people who use the new york times website as their newspaper, something they come back to over and over, spend a lot of time reading it, treasure it, should pay a little something for it. you know, we don't want to scare away readers, and we're prepared

to make adjustments along the way so we don't lose traffic to our website which advertisers particularly like and pay a tidy sum for. >> if i have a subscription to the times, which i do, i then have access to your website. >> yes. >> as you look into the future, # 245 kind of -- that kind of a business model will continue? >> i believe so. >> yeah, you're dealing mostly when we talk about the pay wall what is on the web, and i'm wondering whether as you make your calculations now between the printed newspaper and the web, what is more important to you? how many people show up in both worlds? do more people read the paper than read the web? >> they're different questions. the printed newspaper still supplies the overwhelming revenues that keep the company going, but many people come to

us on the website rather than print. there's roughly speaking a million subscriptions to the printed newspaper each day. we get by some estimates 50 million people. >> each month? >> each month. it's not apples to apples comparisons, but that's what we're provided. the numbers vary. there's a neilson rating and other ratings, but it's 50 million people worldwide, unique individuals come to the "new york times" every month, and that number of is growing. >> i'm sorry? >> that number is growing where the print is not. >> do you have a separate staff for the newspaper and then for the website? >> almost not anymore. when the website started out, it was a little kind of rump operation and was even in a

separate building. five or six years ago we decided that that was a big mistake that you didn't want to have and treat the website like an afterthought. you were cheating people who came to the newspaper online of this creative energy of this experienced news staff, and so we've been gradually remaking it into a single newsroom, and it's pretty much there. >> i got an old-fashioned question which always bugs me. the reporter today working for the times or cbs of the post works very hard, in a way much harder than we did 20, 30, 40 years ago, and that is because that reporter has to service so much. it's the paper, it's the website, and you find them on radio and television and it's a big deal. when does a reporter have a

chance just to think rather than produce? is there a moment to reflect on what it is that is going on in the world? >> that's a really good question, and it's one that's dobbed with all news organizations as we move into the digital realm. you don't want to turn them into hamsters on wheels constantly producing updates. >> right, right. >> we've done a number of things. we created a rewrite tank. you have to leave a certain amount of discretion in the hands of the reporters. if they need more time to report, think about this, you can provide that, and we do that. we will assign the web version of the story to somebody else, a bank of rewrite people or to another reporter. >> you don't get a deinert for that, do you? >> no, no. it is true that people have adapted, you know, i mean, reporters don't like to let go of their story to somebody else, and so more and more of them have come to think of filing for

the web as simply filing their first draft, and then they continue to revise over the course of the daying and at the end of the day they have the story about as good as it gets. >> bill, is it the report's first responsibility when he or she comes upon it, a fact or an up sight, to -- insight, to provide it to the web? >> if they can do it quickly, then we liberate to do additional reporting, dig down, add dimensions and analysis to the piece, then, yes. we try to keep it in the hand of the reporter as much as possible. i mean, we're not a wire service. i mean, i love wire services, but the premium is on speed. i think people come to the "new york times" for a kind of authority because they trust us to get it right and explain it

in a way that makes sense for them. >> yes, but i have a feeling you are operating, forgive me despite what you said, operating in a world that lives by state, by this 1440/7. now, that's different from 24/7. the psychology is different. >> it's true. >> you're asked to do something for the web the minute you have something, put it on the web. well if, you're going to write something decent, you want to sit down and write it. that takes time. >> that's true. >> what's the responsibility of the journalist now to adjust to the web at that point? alert dean in washington if there's a washington reporter doing this, and say, hey, i got something really good that i got to write it first for the web, and you allow him to do that? >> sure. we should differentiate between the way you described the sort

of factoid. the truth is i don't think people come to the "new york times" for the factoid. we're not talking about the big gigantic running story of the day where the factoid is something large. if a reporter wandered into my office with, you know, with a story about an unimportant appointment, and i had to balance that against a more important story, i'm going to say don't push the unimportant factoid on the web, and i think bill would agree. a classic example of a reporter who knows he's competing against the "washington post" or the "wall street journal" or somebody else on a story who is ready to write the story at two o'clock in the afternoon, i want to story up at two o'clock in the afternoon, and that's a judgment we make all the time. >> okay. let's talk about the wikileaks

phenomena for a bit. wikileaks as we know the leaking of secret government cables, many of them embarrassing, harmful to the united states. the times published many stories on this. bill, you wrote e qently on defending the time's decision. there are a couple questions flowing through my mind. wikileaks which seems to have a very specific anti-american flavor or impulse, is wikileaks a legitimate source for the "new york times"? >> well, wikileaks is a source. >> it is a source. >> and, you know, sources tend to come with agendas. they come with biases. sometimes they come with distasteful biases. it is true that wikileaks has a

kind of, to the extent to define an ideology, it's anarchist, anticonstitutions, antigovernment, antithe united states, but every source comes to you with some kind of an agenda. what you have to do is focus on the information that you get. is the information true? is it valid? is it newsworthy? in our relationship with wikileaks, we said at the outset, we knew at the outset the fair amount about the organization and their biases and their agenda, and we made it clear that we are going to treat them as a source and nothing more than that. that is we will take their information they offer us, bed it, supply context, sensor it which we did. we edited it out in material

that we reasonably put lives at risk. we did not consult wikileaks on what we would write about on any given subject. >> do you believe, bill, that wikileaks is a legitimate news organization? everything in the first amendment privileges # that the "new york times" enjoys? >> those are two questions. >> answer both. >> well, i will more or less answer them both in part because i'm not a lawyer. they should be humble about who should call themselves a journalist and who doesn't. wikileaks is not in my ballpark of journalism, they do not practice the kind of journalism we practice. they are an advocacy group or whatever. the question of whether they are

entitled to first amendment protections though is a somewhat different question. the first amendment questions are not only afforded to the press, and it's a very tricky question for lawyers to part, and i'm not a lawyer. what's the difference between somebody who takes a lot of raw material and publishes it on a website and somebody like us who vets it, massages it, shapes it into stories, and publishes it in a newspaper. >> in a way, bill, the "new york times" became the enabler of wikileaks by publishing a lot of stories based on the information that wikileaks provided. i'm not using the word enabler as a positive way. >> i think that's the wrong word. i think wikileaks and its leaders were entirely capable of publishing material on their own. >> wikileaks would have published it on their own?

>> absolutely, to a website available to anybody who wanted to look at it. the information would have circulated through the blogosphere in a day, and people would have been cherry picking out of the information that's most useful to them in interesting and alarming ways, but it would be published. the difference between daniel ellsburg is that he really needed something like the "new york times" unless he wanted to spend life in jail. >> keep in mind, daniel took the papers and went first to congress to try to get legal action against the war. >> right. >> then to harvard university, i don't know why. >> sure. >> in the end we hent to the times. >> he needed the times. >> exactly. the wikileaks needed the times also.

>> they didn't. >> no? >> we gave a lot more attention and currency more than at other news organizations wrote about it, but i think it came out in a much more, you know, publicly valuable way than posted on the website. >> not arguing that point at all. totally agree with you on that the question i'm getting at is this, if the "new york times" had not published all much those stories and it had been left to "the guardian" and other papers around the world, it would have been reported on 16 page of the "new york times". >> no, you're so wrong. [laughter] it would have been on the front page, the day after the guardian, versions of the story would have been on the front page of every newspaper, cnn, and everybody else. >> do you believe you broke many news stories? do you believe that wikileaks gave you one new thing that you

didn't know about afghanistan? >> yes, actually. >> like what? >> i thought i learned a lot from the reports. the fact that, you know, i realize one of the criticisms have been larched at the documents is they didn't tell us anything profoundly new about the world. most news does not tell you something profoundly new about the world. the news moves in inches and feet, in increments. wikileaks told us, for example, that the people who are running the war in afghanistan have grave misgivings about the role pakistan plays, our important ali in the region. >> i can point to 20 stories in the "new york times" that said the same thing. >> not one of them were based -- >> based on very good digging, talking to secretaries of state of defense and all that. one of the guys working for dean in washington knew that and reported that. >> except here's where i think you are wrong. first i actually think this is

doesn't go over big in washington is an unimportant argument. i think the debate over whether or not wikileaks had a dramatic new factoid, by that, you mean the dray malt tick -- dramatic new factoid that head of state took a bribe and we didn't know about, that's an odd argument. there's no question as somebody who has edited and been involved with a bunch of stories before wikileaks about afghanistan and the war in iraq, there's no question that wikileaks added tremendously to the understanding anybody who cares about those wars in the world have about those wars in the world. it's one thing to have sort of second third hand reporting that says the rulers of countries in the same region as iran were afraid to say it publicly are very nervous about the rise of iran and iran's nuclear capability. it's another thing to have it in

the words of the diplomats of talking with the people. sir, i argue those are rich documents, but what i flip back is put aside the debate over what wikileaks provided. isn't it unimaginable to anybody that the "new york times" would have had the arrogance to have this stuff and not publish it? to me, whenever the question's been raced to me -- raised to me was the new york times behaving in an arrogant way or flaunting its ability to publish the stuff, enabling wikileaks or working with wikileaks or whatever, to me, the most unimaginable thing the "new york times" could have done is have the stuff, look at it, say this is interesting, let's have an ethical debate, put it in the computer, and go have lunch. that to me would be shocking. >> you misread me. >> i'm not misreading you. i think i'm using this as an

opportunity to address other people. >> no, i do understand what you're doing. [laughter] please understand the thrust of my questions is based on a profound respect for the "new york times". >> i understand. >> and the position of the "new york times" in american journalism and global journalism so that when william keller makes a decision, he's making a decision not just for the times, but making decisions for american journalism too. now, that puts you in a very special position, and i think we have done that subject. i want to >> there's a bit of excitement. a 5.9 magnitude earthquake centered northwest of richmond, virginia, hasn't shaken much of washington. and has been felt as far north as rhode island, new york city

and martha's vineyard where president obama is vacation. the u.s. geological survey said the earthquake was half a mile deep, shaking was felt at the white house, all over the east coast as far south as chapel hill, north carolina. parts of the pentagon, the white house and the pentagon were evacuated as we were here in c-span. there were no reports of injury. congress is on its august break so not many congressional leaders are here in town. the president on vacation felt the shaking on his golf course on martha's vineyard. just as he was beginning a round. >> sunday marks the anniversary of marvin luther king jr.'s "i have a dream" speech at the march on washington. 48 years later the marvin luther king jr. memorial will be dedicated on the national mall and we will have live coverage beginning at 11 a.m. eastern on sunday. the 30-foot sculpture of dr. king stand alongside a 450-foot granite wall with more than a dozen of dr. king's quotes. will have live dedication of the

memorial on sunday, as weather permits. u.s. park service says the hurricane, hurricane irene could cause dangerous weather in washington on sunday which could postpone the ceremony. >> "washington journal" continues its weeklong look at medicare. today there's a discussion on medicare advantage privately run medicare insurance plan similar to hmos.

>> right now a dinner hosted by house about u.s. capitol historical society in honor of the committee. keynote speakers former chairman michael oxley, republican from ohio. during his remarks he said the american people have stopped trusting the financial markets because of the 2002 and 2008 financial crisis. this lasts about an hour. >> that is the first time in my life i've ever been compared to rainman. [laughter] >> and i am assured the judge walked it is indeed on at five. and i'm a very good driver. congratulations to everyone. what an incredible time in history of our country.

in 1776, americans were facing team george, and the mightiest army on the globe. and yet when he came to take our rights away, our founding fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors to defend the inalienable rights given to us by our creator. in 1835, texans in gonzales received an order from general santa anna to hand over their guns. and to hand over the canon that guarded their city. the texans responded with typical mild-mannered texas spirit. [laughter] they responded with a flag with a picture of the canon and a simple legend, come and take it. [applause]

that's the spirit of america. that's who we are. and we are seeing that same spirit today in 2010 and 2012. three years ago, the first red state gathering in atlanta. i remember it was kind of a small conference room, and cool, the air conditioning worked. [laughter] you know, it's a good problem that we have too many people for air-conditioning. [applause] but there were maybe 50, 75 of us, and a little hotel gathering, and nobody noticed. except the people in that hotel gathering got together to change this country. and today, my home state

governor rick perry and a couple of hours -- [applause] will be coming here to you to announce his campaign for president of the united states. [applause] this room knows two things. number one, barack obama is the most radical president this country has ever seen. [applause] you know, just a week ago, tragically, the united states debt was downgraded as a symbol of the failure and overspending of this president and this congress. and president obama had the audacity to blame that on others. you know, that's like charlie sheen blame it on the betty ford

clinic. [applause] but the president doesn't need to worry, because we are staging an intervention. [laughter] [applause] but there's a second thing this room knows, which is that republicans need to stand for principle. [applause] you know, this isn't something a team sport. the goal isn't about 51 people with ours behind the name and yet, we have more redshirts, we win. if we are not standing for principle, if we're not standing for freedom, if we're not standing for free markets and the u.s. constitution, we don't deserve to win.

and i have to say a lot of time the attitude of the republican leadership in a fight reminds me of an old ebay advertisement for a french army rifle. [laughter] advertise in pristine condition, never fired, dropped twice last night. [applause] [laughter] and we need leaders who don't yell ready, aim, surrender. we need leaders who are ready to stand up and fight. now, let me say something about my governor, rick perry, who will be coming here very soon. [applause]

i've known rick perry a lot of years. i've worked with them. i've been his lawyer in court. i'll tell you two things about rick perry. number one, he's a conservative. in his heart, in his gut, he knows what he believes. and number two, he is a fighter. in his dna, rick perry is a fighter. [applause] and i'll make a prediction to you right now. there are a lot of good people in the republican primary for president. i think in very short order it's going to come down to two principal candidates, mitt romney and rick perry. and my prediction is with perry will win the nomination, and in november 2012 he will defeat barack obama for the presidency. [applause]

now, let's talk about the u.s. senate. the senate is a central battlefield right now. you know, two and a half years ago center jim demint was a lonely man. [laughter] he was john the baptist. [laughter] of voice in the wilderness, i have asked him if he indeed ate honey and locus. but he was wandering alone in the wilderness. and along came the men and women in this room. and in 2010 we saw a tidal wave, where americans all over the country rejected establishment, business as usual republicans. and said we want strong principled conservatives like mike lee and rand paul and marco

rubio and pat toomey. [applause] and every one of the senate candidates when they launched, they were told they couldn't win. weber told the money in the establishment had decided somebody else needed to be in the senate. it was a boys club, and they didn't know the rules. the rules are, you go along with the democrats, and whatever happens, you keep growing the size, power and spending of the federal government. and in 2010, something remarkable happened. the american people rose up and said no, and we saw a tidal wave that changed the u.s. senate. now, we just had huge fight over the debt ceiling, and sadly, congress passed a lousy budget bill.

[applause] but, you know, those senators i just mentioned led the fight to cut, cap and passed a strong balanced budget amendment to the u.s. constitution. [applause] and we should take heart to two things. number one, we change the conversation. at least we are talking about cutting, instead of talking about getting yet another trillion dollar, that's a big shift. and number two, that small band of brothers didn't have the critical mass to win this fight in the u.s. senate right now. but i'll tell you, 2012 is the second half of 2010. [applause]

one of the most meaningful things in my campaign for u.s. senate is i've had the honor to be endorsed by center jim demint and senator mike lee and senator rand paul and senator pat toomey. because all four of them have said we need reinforcements to stand and fight and win. [applause] that's what this senate race is about. and like their races, it's a national race. there are a lot of texans here, and i'm grateful to see so many texans here. [applause] but there are a lot of people from all over the country, and we are building a national army of conservatives, because we need strong leadership in the u.s. senate. the heart of my campaign is based on a proven record. i spent five and a half years as the solicitor general of texas,

the chief lawyer for the state of texas in front of the u.s. supreme court. during that time, over and over again, texas stood up and let the nation defending conservative principles. we defended the 10 commandments monument on the state capitol grounds but we took it to the u.s. supreme court, and we won, 5-4. [cheers and applause] we defended the pledge of allegiance when a federal court struck it down because it included the words one nation under god. we brought together all 50 states. we went to the u.s. supreme court, and we won unanimously. [cheers and applause] we defended the second amendment, the right to keep and bear arms but we brought together 31 states. we went to the u.s. supreme court, and we won, 5-4.

[cheers and applause] and let me tell you about what i think was the most important right in my tenure. in a case called eddy versus texas, which begins with a really horrific crime where two teenage girls were again raped and murdered in houston, the world court which is the judicial arm of the united nations, the world court issued an order to the united states to reopen the conviction of 51 murderers across this land. for the first time in history of our country, a foreign court has tried to bind the u.s. justice system. my boss, attorney general greg abbott, the finest attorney general in all 50 states -- [applause] >> had no hesitancy we were going to fight. and our governor, rick perry, had no hesitancy we're going to fight.

[applause] i had the honor of arguing this case twice before the u.s. supreme court. on the other side work 94 in nations -- 94 nations, and also on the other side was the president of the united states. the president had signed a two paragraph order that attempted to order the state courts to obey the world court's. so texas stood up, we fought the world court. we thought the united nations. we fought 90, four nations and we fought the president of the united states. [applause] we defended u.s. sovereignty, and we won, 6-3. [cheers and applause]

you know, a lot of political candidates talk about american exceptionalism are the men and women in this room, american exceptionalism isn't something we learned in a textbook. it's something we know from our lives and our family. let me tell you a little bit about my family background. my dad is from cuba. he was born in cuba. he grew up in cuba, and as a teenager he began fighting in the cuban revolution. when he was 14 years old he began fighting in a war. he was thrown in prison and tortured when he turned 17. my grandfather got him out of prison and he fled cuba. he came to the united states to go to the university of texas. he arrived in austin, texas. he was 18 years old and he didn't speak a word of english. he had no possessions but he had

$100 sewn into his underwear. and he went and got a job as a dishwasher making 50 cents an hour. and he worked seven days a week and he paid his way through school and he got a job and he became a citizen and he started a small business. now, my dad has been my hero my entire life. but every one of us in this room has a story like that. that is the history of this country. every one of us has an ancestor who seeks freedom and opportunity. exactly. [applause] and i'll tell you, when i was a kid, my dad used to say to me all the time, when we faced oppression in cuba, i had a place to feed you. if we lose our freedom here, where do we go? and i'll tell you, there is no

question that better explain why it is i am running for u.s. senate than that question right there. everyone of us us is here because we are fighting to preserve our freedom. now, the race for u.s. senate in texas has been incredible. we have united, conservative anti-party activists and grassroots leaders across the state of texas, and nationally. my principal opponent is an incumbent, establishment republican multimillionaire. who, in all likelihood, will write a ginormous check. and that's a technical term. ginormous check. it's actually in the campaign code. [laughter] a ginormous check from his own bank account. but we have seen this fight before. we saw this fight in 2010. and i can promise you one thing, no candidate will be able to buy the u.s. senate seat in the

state of texas. [cheers and applause] >> but i need your help. we are organizing a conservative grass-roots army all across the state of texas, and all across the country. i would ask everyone of you to do five things. number one, come to our webpage, ted cruz.org and sign up now and join our team. number two, contribute. it's very simple. it is going to take money to fight the tide was on the other side. we have raised over $1.9 million. and we have raised that from 241 texas cities, and from 103 texas counties, and from all 50 states all over the country. but we've got a long way to go. if we raise the money we need,

we will win this race. and if we don't raise the money we need, we will lose this race. so go online, please come and contribute. in particular we have a program called the alamo circle. the alamo circle are people who sign up to contribute $25 a month on a recurring basis. which i like to tell college kids, 25 bucks is about the price of two pizzas. but the powerful thing about the math, as i understand, there are 550 people here. if 550 people signed up for the alamo circle at 25 bucks a month, this room would today generate $13,000. in between now and the primary in march, this room just by signing up in the alamo circle would generate $100,000. now, here's some really interesting math. if in addition to signing up in the alamo circle everyone of us in this room down nine of your friends to do the same, this

room of activists would raise $1 million in the next seven months. that's the power of the people. that's the power of individual activists reaching out to their friends. so sign up online, contribute, join us on facebook. we have over 62000 supporters on facebook, and post about our campaign on facebook, on twitter. and then blog about us. we have a widget that can be downloaded to any blog, and we are relying and depending upon the voice of the people. it's interesting, some reporters ask why is rick perry coming to a blogger's convention to announce his presidency? [laughter] because y'all are framed the discussion. because y'all are speaking the truth. he goes y'all say what you believe without a filter in place.

[applause] the men and women in this room have the ability to help us build a national team and raise the money we need to race to win. and if we do that, i'll make a commitment to you right now. if i go to the u.s. senate and i just about right 100% of the time, i will consider myself an abject failure. because what we desperately need right now is leadership. barack obama is incredibly effective in defending his vision of government control of the economy, and our lives. how many people right now inspire you and standing up and fighting for free market principles and the constitution and limited government? i make a commitment to each and every one of you. if i'm in the u.s. senate, if i am not standing in front,

helping lead the fight, if i don't have a rose up and down my torso -- [laughter] i won't be doing my job. and i want everyone of you to hold me accountable for that. and if there's one thing i know is that you will do it. [laughter] so in closing, i want to simply ask, a few questions. an apology to president barack obama. can we shrink the federal budget? >> yeah. >> yes, we can. [laughter] >> can we pass a balanced budget amendment? >> yes, we can. >> can we retire carey read? >> yes, we can. >> can we repeal every word of obamnicare? >> yes, we can.

>> and can we retire president barack obama? >> yes, we can. [applause] >> that, my friends, is change we can believe in. [laughter] so i've been admonished by my mother via text message. my mother says i should stop comparing you and mike lead to political rainman answer your water and a daniel webster's. [applause] now, the problem is my mother just figure out the text messaging and so there's a space between every letter so it comes over about five text messages to get to the point. so let's do some questions.

i'm going to apologize on his behalf. he has to fly back to texas as there are not a lot of flights between charleston and texas so he will not be around this afternoon. i want to make sure he gets questioned in from you guys. right here. >> nobody talks about the dodd-frank bill. that's got to be overturned as well. [applause] [inaudible] >> i absolutely agree. i'll tell you, on dodd-frank, the question was, we don't need just to repeal obamacare, we need to repeal dodd-frank and redo everything president obama has done. [applause] i absolutely agree. on dodd-frank him you don't need to get any further than the title of the bill.

[laughter] to realize just how bad it is. you had a follow-up? >> one of the disastrous side effects, something in the bill about not buying minerals from congo or whatever. and what's happening for people of the congo are losing their jobs. and, of course, the bad guys are good at ways around it. it's disturbing. >> dodd-frank and obamacare and cap-and-trade and the national labor relations board trying to shut down the boeing plans. every one of those is the exact same thing. there is a pattern behind this administration. president obama and his administration, they are true believers and they believe in government. they believe in government control of the economy and our lives. that's what dodd-frank is about. and what they want to do is empower politicians. let me take a wild guess here. is anyone here in this room read "atlas shrugged"?

[laughter] you know, atlas shrugged talks about the games politicians play, where they create arbitrary tribunals which then make the citizens come to them, for exemption. and what does that do? it empowers elite politicians to rule over the subject sheep. it's not accept 50% of the wares for obamnicare are nancy pelosi's district. because the regime they want, and dodd-frank was all about making the banks supplicants to the federal government. we need to get the federal government out of the business of controlling our economy, and we need to end the bailout across the board. [applause] >> by the door. >> yes, sir. given the problem that texas has with illegal aliens, i

apologize, but i e-mailed your campaign several times trying to get your stance on dealing with illegal immigration. and i've never got an answer. i need to know -- [inaudible] on the illegal situation. what do you call it? anchor babies, all that stuff. we need to do away with all that. we need to do away with the welfare and everything for the illegals. [applause] >> all the homes that are being built will stop being built. they will go by the homes -- [inaudible] we have 15 million unemployed americans. they will be able to go to work. if we get rid of the illegal

aliens, all of our schools, our hospitals, everything is going to go away, we can solve the whole cotton picking problem in this country by getting rid of them. that's all we've got to do. [applause] >> thank you for that question. let me tell you about -- [laughter] my views on immigration are simple. i strongly oppose illegal immigration. i categorically opposed amnesty. and i strongly support legal immigrants who come here and follow the rules to work towards the american dream. [applause] let's talk of a little bit more what exactly that means. on illegal immigration i approach it from the perspective of someone who has spent much of his adult life in law

enforcement. in a post 9/11 world, it makes utterly no sense that we don't know who is coming into this country. it is absolute madness that we don't know the criminal background of those coming into this country. the first thing any sovereign nation does is secure its borders. [applause] a and my view is we should secure the border by any and every means necessary. [applause] that includes fences. that includes walls. that includes technology. and most fundamentally, that includes boots on the ground, including tripling the size of the u.s. the border patrol. [applause]

>> next right here. >> you touched on the issue of international -- national issues. could you please discuss the concept of defining certain aspects of the nation's activity including in particular the middle east, their efforts to essentially put an agent of palestinian to kill it jews? >> look, the united nations is a travesty. [applause] >> any organization that creates a human rights council and puts us members of the cuba and libya -- [laughter] you know, "saturday night live" couldn't parity this. but it's out of i've got together and wanted to make fun of a human rights council, they would put cuba and libya on it.

and that's where the united nations is. now, i agree the united nations is regularly working against the interest of the united states in my view on u.s. foreign policy should be guided by one simple question. what is in the national security interest of the united states of america? [applause] i will tell you on the u.n. in the nadine case, that fight is just the tip of the iceberg. you know, one of the leading opponents of the state of texas was a dean of yale law school. a man named harold koh who twice filed briefs against the state of texas arguing that the u.s. supreme court should be totally subservient to the world court and the united nations. harold koh is now the chief legal adviser at the u.s.

department of state under barack obama. the most radical academic in the country for giving up our sovereignty is the number one lawyer at the u.s. state department. this is going to be a fight is going to continue for decades but it is a fight from the left that want to give up our sovereignty. the reason they want to give up our sovereignty is twofold. one, fundamentally they don't understand american exceptionalism, the unique miracle that is this country of freedom and liberty and individual responsibility. [applause] but number two, they understand their progressive leftist agenda is contrary to the guys and principles of the american people. and so the reason they want to give up our sovereignty is they want to go to these international bodies to get them to impose their enlightened leftist agenda on the rest of us.

and that is fundamentally wrong. i have fought with that with every ounce of breath in my soul, and i will continue to do so every day in the u.s. senate. [applause] >> a 5.9 magnitude earthquake centered in virginia forced evacuations of all the monuments on the national mall here in washington. it was felt from georgia to martha's vineyard. the massachusetts island where president obama is vacation. no injuries have been reported. the u.s. geological survey said the earthquake was a half-mile deep and centered 40 miles northwest of richmond, virginia. parts of the pentagon, white house and the capital were a factory. the senate was scheduled to a pro forma session at 2:30 p.m. at that was postponed. we understand they made meet outside the capital to have that session. >> and more now from the third annual red state gathering for remarks from nebraska state treasurer and u.s. senate

candidate don stenberg. >> thank you very much. and i am don stenberg, and next year i will replace ben nelson in the united states senate. [cheers and applause] and then nebraska will be represented by a genuine lifelong conservative in the united states senate. and as nebraska's next united states senator, i will vote to repeal obamacare. [applause] i will vote to secure our borders. [applause] i will vote to cut federal spending and balance the federal budget. [applause] and i will go to defend life, the second amendment, and religious freedoms. [applause] i am honored to have been

endorsed by red state and by mark levine. i'm honored to have the support of many, many tea partiers all across the state of nebraska. and i'm honored to be here today. you all are the salvation of our nation, and god bless you for all that you do for our country. [applause] america today is going in the wrong direction. we have a president who apologizes for our nation instead of leading it. we have a president of the united states thousand two -- bows to foreign dictators instead of standing up to them. we need a new direction. we need a new president, and we need to restore america. [applause] restoring america must begin with defending our freedom. our founding fathers understood

that big government threatens our freedom. the source of our freedom is not a benevolent government. know, our freedom is not a gift from our government here as thomas jefferson said, the god who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time. and our declaration of independence tells us that the source of our freedom is our creator. the declaration of independence says this. we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain untradable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. but to secure these blessings, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the government. and when any government becomes destructive of these ends it is

the right of the people to alter or to abolish it. ladies and gentlemen, -- [applause] , ladies and gentlemen, our own government has become destructive of our liberty. so the time has come to do with the declaration of independence tells us to do. we must alter that government. [applause] >> we can do that at the elections next year, and with god's help we will do that at the elections next year. [applause] next year we can throughout the washington politicians like ben nelson, who voted for a federal takeover of our health care. next year we can throw out the washington politicians who want to impose socialism on the united states of america. and next year we can throw out the washington politicians who

are leading our nation on the path to national bankruptcy. next year we will alter the government of the united states. [applause] there are two competing ideas about the american people. the idea of the leads is that most people are ignorant, uninformed haters who must be controlled by a central government and who are incapable of making good decisions for themselves or for their families. because of this belief, the elite impose national health care on us and tell us that it is for our own good. they want to be able to tell you what car you can drive, what food you must eat, and even what light bulbs you must use. and the elites will decide who gets medical care, and who does not. and the elites will touch you this is all for your own good.

my friends, this is not freedom. this is tyranny. [applause] so let the word go forward from this time and this place, that as a free people we will decide what's good for us, not the elites in washington. [applause] the other view of the american people is that they are intelligent, capable people who want the freedom to live and to work, and to raise their families without government interference. for those of us who see the american people in this light, we believe in less government, lower taxes, and more personal freedom. were as thomas jefferson said it, a wise and feudal government

which shall restrain men from injuring one another which shall lead them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. this is the sum of good government, unquote. that is the way thomas jefferson described good government. that is the government that we want for ourselves, for our children and for our children's children. like you here today i believe in the people. i believe in the goodness of our people and i believe in the greatness of our nation. and i believe that the united states of america is a nation that all americans should be proud of. in 1936 the olympic games were held in nazi terror me. adolf hitler was in power. and hitler attended the opening ceremonies of the olympic games. the olympic teams of each nation

were told that as they marched past hitler's reviewing stand, they should get their national flag as a sign of respect to the cure. and so one by one the nations of the world marched past adolf hitler. each one dipping their national flag. and then came the american team and the american flag. and the american team be laid that america and the american flag should never bought to a foreign dictator. [cheers and applause] and so they marched past adolf hitler with the american flag held high. hitler was furious, as dictators always our when three men -- free men and women will not bow

down to the. we need to restore the pride in america that are 1936 olympic team at. never again should a president of the united states bow to a foreign dictator. [applause] and never again should a president of the united states apologize for our great country. [cheers and applause] we need leaders who will defend our nation, not apologize for it. and what do we need to do to restore america's greatness? i believe that it begins with faith. the bible tells us what is needed to restore the nation. it's written in second chronicle 714, that if my people are called by my name will humble

themselves and pray and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then i will hear from heaven and i will forgive their sin, and heal their land. [cheers and applause] so restoring our nation must begin with earnest prayer. and when you go home tonight, i would urge you to pray for our nation. pray that god will heal our land. but it is not enough to pray. every story in the bible except creation involve men and women inspired by god, who did what they were called to do. so what else in addition to prayer do we need to do to restore america? ..

[applause] >> we must repeal obamacare. [cheers and applause] ben nelson of nebraska was the 60th vote to impose obamacare on our nation. and i will be very happy and proud to cast the 60th vote to repeal obamacare. [cheers and applause] there should be no more bailouts, no more earmarks and

no new tacks. no new taxes. we must develop our domestic energy resources. we cannot continue to allow the radical environmental is to block energy development in the united states of america. [applause] we must firmly reject socialism in the united states of america -- [applause] we must maintain a strong national defense, and we must stand firm this defense of the second amendment and defense of life and in defense of religious freedom. [applause] do these things and more, and we will restore america. i'm running for the united states senate because our country is going in the wrong direction. and senator ben nelson of nebraska is a big part of the reason why. we must defeat him.

we will defeat him if we can get the financial help that we need for our campaign. now, ben nelson was the deciding vote to impose obamacare on our nation. he made that vote in exchange for the cornhusker kickback. he voted to waste $787 billion on president obama's wasteful stimulus. he voted to table cut, cap and balance. ben nelson went to washington claiming to be a moderate, but he is clearly a big government democrat right now. the good news is that i'm leading him this polls 46% -- him in the polls 46% to 40%. [cheers and applause] the bad news -- [laughter] is that he's leading us by $3

million in campaign funds. thanks to his big government friends. we need some financial help to balance the scales. will you help us? and just in case you want to know, our web site is -- [laughter] stenbergforsenate.com. and we can make it as easy as possible for you to help our campaign, and we would appreciate that help. restoring america will require courage on the part of our elected officials. t.a.r.p. was passed because of threats of an economic depression if it didn't pass, but then most of the t.a.r.p. money wasn't even used for what they said it would be used for. the debt ceiling was raised as part of a bad and insufficient budget deal because of overblown threats of immediate economic collapse if debt ceiling wasn't raised by august 2nd. we need senators and members of congress who are not afraid to

vote against bad deals. we need men and be women of courage -- men and women of courage. i stand in awe of the courage of the signers of the declaration of independence. the declaration of independence was, in effect, a declaration of war against the military superpower of that day. a military expert of that time would have told you that the rag tag revolutionary army would be quickly defeated by overwhelming british force. signing the declaration of independence was an act of treason against the british could be. the penalty for treason was death. despite the enormous risks, their love of freedom was greater than any fear they must have felt, and so they courageously signed their names below these words: and for the support of this declaration with the firm reliance on the protection of divine providence,

we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor. because of their enormous courage, we are free today, and be i thank god that they had that courage. if our founding fathers had that much courage, surely we can find men and women today who aren't afraid to insist on the passage of a balanced budget amendment to the constitution of the united states. [applause] if congress had listened to the tea party, the credit rating of the united states would not have been cut last week. [cheers and applause] but it's not too late. we can restore america's aaa credit rating right now. we don't need to wait for the supercommittee. congress, go back to washington

and pass be cut, cap and balance right now! [cheers and applause] if we believe in freedom and if we believe in america -- and i know that you do -- then let us go forward boldly with courage asking god's help, loving freedom, remembering those who gave their lives for our freedom, loving our country and changing our government so that our posterity will say of us when the challenge came, we had the courage to defend our nation and restore our -- excuse me, to defend our freedom and to restore our nation. thank you. may good bless you, and may god bless the united states of america. [applause] >> [inaudible]

>> folks, i've gotta tell you, you know, normally when i endorse a candidate at redstate, i've gotten to know them somewhat. i endorsed don sight unseen, sight unseen on his record. [cheers and applause] it is that good of a record in nebraska. yeah, we've got to support a guy like this to get rid of a guy like knell soften. now, we'll open it up to questions. anybody want to -- right here. >> if you get elected to the senate, we've got a great young lions in the senate. how do we get rid of the, dare i say, mcconnell and the old boy system that seems to control -- >> yeah. the question was we elect some young lions, and i appreciate being put in that category. [laughter] you know, how do we overcome some of the good old boys. um, and i had, i had a

conversation with senator demint about that. and his view, which i share, is that we need to send reinforcements to the rand paul/jim demint/toomey/lee group. and it's amazing how much, what, five new seriously-committed, conservative republicans could do in the united states senate. if we send them another five or ten, if we could get that many, it's going to make a huge difference, and pretty soon the good old boys are going to to restore our nation, cut our spending and increase our freedom. [applause] >> yes, ma'am. >> now that you're headed to washington, what's your feel of term limits? >> i'm a supporter of term limits, and i acted on that.

the attorney general of the state of nebraska is not term limited by law or constitution. i served as the attorney general in the state of nebraska for 12 years. i was reelected twice with 68% of the vote both times, and i don't know there's any doubt i could have been reelected again had i chosen to do so, but i felt 12 years was enough, so i returned to the private sector for eight years and was just elected with 73 be % of the vote as nebraska's state treasurer last fall. i would support a constitutional amendment to the constitution of the united states to require term limits, and be i want to point out that as the attorney general of the state of nebraska, our state passed term limits for our senators and congressmen. the arkansas case went to the supreme court, the question of could states term limit their own senators and congressmen. as the attorney general of nebraska, i wrote the friend of the court brief in support of the right of the states to limit, limit the terms of their senators in congress. we were not successful in that

effort, but we were there leading the effort as friend of the court, and i would support a constitutional amendment to the constitution of the united states to impose term limits. [applause] >> a 5.9 magnitude earthquake centered in virginia forced evacuations of the u.s. capitol, the white house and parts of the pentagon. the district of columbia fire department spokesman said there are numerous injuries but so far no reports of serious injuries of deaths. numerous buildings have been damaged including the ec what dorian embassy and be a handful of schools. all memorials and monuments on the national mall have been evacuated and closed after the earthquake struck the capital today. bill lines says the memorials and monuments including the new martin luther king jr. memorial were evacuated immediately after the earthquake. he says he's not aware of any injuries to visitor or park

service staff or damage to properties. by the way, we are planning live coverage of the dedication ceremony this coming sunday on c-span starting at 11 a.m. eastern, and that is pending the threat of bad weather due to hurricane irene which is moving up the east coast. washington journal continues its weeklong look at medicare. today, a discussion on medicare advantage, privately-run medicare insurance plans similar to hmos. you can see live coverage of the conversation each morning at 9:15 eastern on c-span and again here on c-span2 each evening at 7:15. and following that at 8 p.m. it's booktv prime time. tonight book parties, and we'll begin with ann coulter and her book, "demonic." then michael moore at bookexpo america on his upcoming hem poi worry. at 9:10 eastern, juan williams on "muzzled," and armstrong williams on his book,

"reawakening virtues." booktv will be online this afternoon as david graeber talks about his book, "debt: the first 5,000 years." that'll be on booktv. finalists from are the 2011 explorer vision contest appeared before the house science committee recently for a hearing on science, technology, engineering and math education. explorer vision is a competition where teams of students research particular technology and predict uses for that technology in the future. this is about an hour and a half. [inaudible conversations] >> the committee on science, space and technology will come to order and say to you a very cheerful good morning. and you have the right to say good morning back if you want to.

[laughter] i want to welcome you to today's hearing. it's entitled "stem education in action: learning today, leading tomorrow." and by gosh, we have a lot of leaders in front of us. every one of us from my right to my left and all of us here are very proud of all of you. i'll recognize myself first for five minutes for an opening statement, and then we'll recognize mrs. johnson who is the leader of the democratic participants here to my right. and ms. johnson and i are not only close here physically, our districts are separated by a thin line. we work together, and i've known her for many, many years and always admired her. i'd like to welcome everyone here today for what's the first in a series of stem education in if action learnings. the purpose of these hearings will be to highlight various science, technology, engineering

and math -- that's the stem -- education activities across the nation, their role in inspiring and educating future generations and their contribution to our economic prosperity. federal government's investing several billions of dollars on stem education activities primarily at the department of education and the national science foundation, but also in every agency under the committee's jurisdiction. however, there are numerous companies, foundations, nonprofit organizations and other groups who are doing their own part and on their own dime to successfully promote stem education and inspire next generation of scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs and our leaders. today's hearing focuses on one of those successful and impressive initiatives that toshiba national science teachers' association, explorer vision competition. this competition is open to students in grades k-12.

students are is asked to research any science technology of their choice and explore what that technology will look like in 20 years. our witnesses today represent four of the eight winning teams who as a part of their prize received an expense-paid trip to washington, d.c., ask we welcome you here, and we're happy that you received that. i congratulate and all of us congratulate all of you, congratulations to all the of the teams for your extraordinary accomplishment of first or second place in the national science competition that attracted over 4,000 entries. all of you are an inspiration to students, teachers and parents all over and all around this country from one ocean to the other. from 12:30 to 2:30 today, all teams will have their projects on display downstairs in the rayburn foyer. i encourage all of my be colleagues to stop by and spend some time talking to these incredible students about their impressive, award-winning

projects. this nation's always been the leader in innovation, and our children and grandchildren like the ones in the front of us today are the key to our future success. i look forward to getting to know more about each of you, why you're moved to do the projects you chose and what all of a you students, parents and teachers learned by participating in this competition. at this time i recognize mrs. johnson for her opening statement. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, and good morning to all. i want to start by congratulating the students who are here today and welcoming you and your teachers, parents, mentors to the committee. i was reading about some of the winning science fair projects, and i must say that i'm truly impressed about this outstanding work that you've done, and be i know that you're proud. unfortunately, there are too

many students across the country who do not have the opportunities to participate in inspiring stem activities or to receive a quality stem education. the most recent national assessment of education progress, the naep study, found that less than half of our nation's students are demonstrating solid academic performance and proficiencies in the science. and this is a startling statistic when you consider that the many recent experts report warning that our competitive edge will be lost if we do not vastly improve our stem education in this country. no one entity can solve this problem alone. there is a role for all of the key shareholders and stakeholders including federal and state governments. local school districts, higher

education and formal education organizations and industry. i'm pleased to hear today about the work toshiba has done to support stem education through this explorer vision competition. and there are many other companies. my hometown company, texas instruments, is one of them. exxonmobil, a hometown. also at&t. so i know that there are many that help to participate. i also want to emphasize the importance and the unique role of the federal government in improving stem education. many federal stem programs including those supports by the national science foundation and the department of education, um, are really making a difference in our universities, our community colleges and k-12 schools across the nation. there are also many valuable programs being funded through other federal agencies such as

nasa, noaa, epa and the department of energy. these agencies are filled with thousands of scientists and engineers who make a difference in their own communities and for students across the country. as working stem professionals, the real-life work that they do using stem is so inspiring to our young people. but the federal role is more than that. the national science foundation is a premier stem research organization in the country, but nsf has been a leader in improving our collective understanding of how students learn and how we can develop the most effective and inspiring curriculum and train the most effective and inspiring teachers. this isn't about the federal government taking over curriculum or teacher certification. it is about researchers

contributing their deep expertise to making sure that our teachers are well prepared and our students are really learning. i would be interested in if hearing from the teachers on the panel today about your own training and how they have helped you to implement your best practices in teaching stem in your own class rooms. while today's hearing is about a nonfederal program, there was some discussion in the hearing charter about federal programs and the spending in stem. so i just wanted to make a couple of comments about that. i hope you're not too quick to judge based on numbers alone. the ostp in response to competes act is leading an effort to inventory current programs across the government to improve core nation and develop priorities going forward. many of the individual agencies

are also responding to recommendations from outside advisory groups and restructuring their education programs and be management. while this committee should continue to be vigilant in insuring that our limited stem education budgets are being used as wisely as possible as we have been for many years, i want to express my own confidence in the efforts currently underway. i believe we should let them play out for the next several months before we rush to judgment about what we should do or should not be spending on stem education. and finally, i hope the committee will have an opportunity to review the ostp report and other agency stem efforts in hearings with the administration officials. today, though, i look forward to hearing from these student winners about what initially sparked their interest in stem and what role their teachers, parents and other mentors have

played in helping them to reach their goals. this is an issue that i take seriously, and you can take my record. i've been interested in talking about it, working in it since 1974. this is an issue that is a serious one. we have an education crisis in this country, and there's a very real possibility that we will lose our competitive edge and that our children will no longer have the opportunities that we had if we do not remain committed to investing and improving stem education. so thank you again for being here today, and i look forward to this very interesting discussion. i yield back. >> gentlelady from texas yields back. if there are members who wish to submit additional opening statements, your statements will be added to the record at this point. i ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from texas and the yes han from michigan, mr. peters, be allowed to sit with us, with the committee and participate in

the hearing. is there objection? the chair hears none. at this time i'd like to introduce our panel of witnesses, and i yield two minutes to my good friend and fellow texan, mr. -in owe sew, to introduce our first team. >> thank you, mr. chairman. as the representative there the 15th congressional district of deep south texas, it's truly an honor for me to welcome the discovery month sorry school of edinburgh, text, to the house science, space and technology committee. as the ranking member of the subcommittee on higher education, we work closely with this committee on science and space and technology because together we hope that by 2020 we can be able to generate and accomplish a goal that was set out by the president, and that was to have an additional

100,000 engineers here in our country. i'm delighted to be here to congratulate all the students being recognized from throughout the country, but especially i congratulate the students, teachers, parents, coaches and administrators of the discovery montessori school for winning first place for grades k-233 of the -- k-3 of the 2011 toshiba explorer vision science competition. what an extraordinary accomplishment. their winning project, intelligent streets, reduces intersection accidents by using smart translucent film installed on windshields that receive signals from either traffic lights or satellites. this clearly demonstrates that students in the rio grande valley of south texas can become the scientists and the innovators of tomorrow. we in texas are extremely proud

of the discovery montessori's schools excellence and be for creating an environment that fosters the development of high-order thinking skills, scientific discovery, exploration and creativity. today we're fortunate to have three extraordinary individuals with us from that school. pablo marcelo vidal, soon to be a fourth grader. he is a resident of mcallen, texas. we also have the pleasure of saying that marcelo started school at the age of 3 at the discovery montessori school. he is extremely passionate about science and math and belongs to the swimming team. this impressive young man is a role model for his peers. we also have veronica martinez, the team's coach. she's a graduate of the university of texas at brownsville and serves as the

primary and lower elementary montessori teacher. ms. martinez has a profound love for teaching young children. pablo's mother serves as julia -- [inaudible] chair of the mechanical engineering department at the university of texas pan-american.çó the doctor earned a doctorate in mechanical engineering and material science from our nation's, one of our nation's best, rice university in houston, and has received numerous awards for her extensive research in exceptional teaching. rita caldwell from the national science foundation visited at ut pan-american and said -- and praised her as one of the best professors in the country. we welcome all of you today to today's hearing and thank you, mr. chairman be, for allowing me this opportunity. >> thank you, sir. and you yield back your time.

>> i yield back. >> i say to those out there who have mr. hinojosa as your congressman, you're very lucky. he represents his district well and, jack, we're pleased you brought your mother with you today, by golly. [laughter] actually, our second witness, mrs. brenda conwell and her son, jack, they're representing the first place national winning team for the fourth through sixth grade age group. their winning project, the heads-up helmet, is a military helmet designed to protect soldiers on the battlefield. joining jack and his mother are his teammates, abby porter and -- [inaudible] from talbert elementary school in sidney.

jack is home schooled and attends virginia virtual academy. we also welcome the team's coach from the academy, mrs. penny harrison. [inaudible] i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. peters, to introduce the third team of witnesses. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's my pleasure to be here today to introduce two of my constituents, claudia cooper and her coach and teacher, amy. claudia's an outstanding student at west hills middle school in west bloomfield, michigan, and is joining us today because she's part of a winning team in the explorer vision science competition. her teammate, samantha, is also here as well as teacher russ purdy, and i'd like to welcome them to this hearing as well. the explorer vision challenges students to envision new technologies that'll make our society healthier and safer.

claudia's team designed a surgically-implant bl disc called the enthrall trachea breathing system which will improve the quality of life for millions of americans who suffer from breathing problems and debilitating respiratory conditions. claudia's work demonstrates how the application of scientific concepts can improve the call of our -- quality of our life and meaningfully impact our society. in addition to her scientific pursuits and excellent academic achievements, claudia plays three sports and the oboe, participates in the theater and is devotes time to charitable pursuits such as working with children with special needs. amy is in her sixth year teaching seventh grade at west hills middle school, she holds a bs in elementary education from the university of michigan, dear born. she is committing to promoting very postural and morale within the school. she sponsors and mentors

students in the student leadership club which organizes community service projects and also leads the count me in club which teaches intervention strategies and self-esteem building. she serves as the grade level team leader and a is member of the school's budget, leadership and social committee. when i speak to school groups back home, i always try to stress the importance of her young people pursuing careers in the science and engineering fields. we should be doing all that we can to encourage our young people's interest in these careers. claudia and samantha are great role models for their peers, and i wish them the best in their future scientific endeavors. claudia and amy, thank you so much for testifying here today and thank you, chairman hall, ranking member johnson, and for my michigan colleague here, mr. clark, for allowing me to stop by the committee and welcome west hills middle school. thank you forking with here. i yield back. >> and i thank you for yielding back and thank you for that good

visit with these youngsters. i know you proud of them, and be i know they're proud of you. our fourth witness is mrs. ann manwell, accompanying her student, miss allison well, from stuyvesant high school in new york. they're representing the 10th-12th grade age group with their second place winning project, a kidney/bowel printer. we would also like to recognize allison's teammates, david and noreen chan. typically, i would now recognize our first witness, but before i do, i'd also like to take a moment to recognize the other four winning teams that are joining us today and who will also be showcasing their winning projects in the rayburn foyer following today's hearing. the solar team from countryside montessori charter school in land of lakes, florida, the

blind side team from plainview, beth paige middle school of plainview, new york. subway smart system team from horstman school in bronx, new york, and the prothesis team from hopewell valley central high school. you're all to be congratulated and commended for your hard work and impressive projects. we look forward to visiting more with you after the hearing, and before i ask unanimous consent that your names be made a part of the record, let me just tell you that you must be the cream of the crop, leaders. and it might be of some comfort to you to know that your chairman, i'm from texas, and we have every type leader here. mrs. johnson is a leader in the medical field, she's outstanding in the nursing field, we have all types of folks that have, that are skilled. but we look to you all to give us testimony to write our

testimony. to write our record. and what you say here will be recorded, and it'll be read 100 years from now to look back on this fine young group that came here. but it may give you some ease to be here to know that your chairman was such a bad student, in one semester i made four fs and a d, and my dad whipped me for spending too much time on one subject. [laughter] i ask unanimous consent that their names be made a part of the record, all of you, and spoken testimony is limited to five minutes. we won't just hold you to that. try to stay as much as you can. we're so honored to have you here, we'll go over, or if you want to give us back a little time, we'll accept it. after which the committee will have five minutes each to ask questions. and i now recognize the first

witness duo, dr. karen lausanne know. i know recognize mrs. brenda conwell dudley and master jack dudley. >> okay. thank you very much. thank you for the introduction, congressman hinojosa, thank you for the introduction. i guess as the congressman mentioned, i'm a professor at the university of texas pan-american and growing myself in a field that is underrepresented, you know, by females. i was the fifth woman to get a degree in 25 years that my university had existed at the time in the mechanical engineering, and when i went to rice, i also realized that i was only the fifth woman to get a doctoral degree, you know, in mechanical engineering. so i knew how engineering wasn't, you know, something that kids would look after.

so i started doing a lot of community service to try to encourage, you know, engineering with kids. so i was, um, very happy when, um, jessica vera, one of the former teachers, asked me to participate in explorer vision. and explorer vision is just very well prepared, you know, the guidelines and everything, you know, it's just an absolute, you know, program. just an amazing program. and the kids go from, um, you know, they learn teamwork, history, ethical issues, they learn technology, and it's amazing how when i sit with them and i said, okay, come up with ideas, you need to, you know, you need to think of something that, you know, will make the world better or will save people, you know, will help people end suffering, you know, they come up with just amazing ideas that, um, at our level as adults sometimes we don't think of, you know? we can find all kinds of

obstacles why that is not possible. so once they find an idea that they agree that is possible, then we move into, you know, okay, well, now let's study the present technology, let's study the history. and technology, you know, i explain to them concepts on how we think. sometimes i even think that it might not work with, you know? but we have to explain the technology behind that idea, you know, to them. and it's just amazing how they learn, like, you can ask him about the electromagnetic spectrum, you know, it's just amazing how they grasp the ideas and how the whole program, you know, helps them develop, you know, a desire or passion to pursue science and to learn about what's around them, you know? go around and just think what is it they can improve, how can they be, how can they develop a technology that will benefit society. so they're engineers, and i

guess we are all born engineers, you know, we all play with legos, but i have seen working with k-12 like how around fifth grade they start losing that, you know? the you get great ideas, and after fifth grade they kind of start tapering down, and it kind of goes down. and i have implemented explorer vision guidelines within my college classes, the senior level classes. and be i asked the tiewpts the same thing. i said, you're going to follow explorer vision guidelines, and this is your final project. and they have to come up with whatever class we're doing, if it's plastics or nanotechnology or whatever the topic of the class is, they have to come up with a project that is nonexistent and that could be here 20 years from now. and it's amazing out of the many, many, many projects that i have seen, the little ones, they still have brighter ideas, you know? my college students, of course, they do an awesome job explaining the technology, you know, in technical terms and all

of that, but as far as the idea, you know, i guess the younger the kids, you know, the ideas are, you know, far better. so we can't afford to lose that creativity. so within the school it's a good idea to give them that freedom to explore, you know? the give them that, you know, just maybe implement something like explorer vision, you know, within the classes with, you know, the teachers can implement something related to explorer vision because it allows the kids to, you know, innovate, it allows the kids to explore, and it keeps them edge gauged, you know, in the finding out. because once they learn they can look around and find something that could work better, you know, that's a process that they will keep on, you know, for the rest of their lives. one of the teams that i sponsor several years ago thousand the kids are going into high school, and all of them -- they were fourth graders, and all of them are going into the science area, you know, most of the kids.

so it really leaves, you know, a very good impression on themselves, and they want to keep doing next year, they're going to try again to do the explorer vision competition, the high school kids. so i think it's a great model, you know, that could be followed for science education. thank you. >> and i congratulate you. right on the dot, five minutes. [laughter] now, jack, is it okay with you if i recognize your mom? okay. brenda conwell dudley, we recognize you for five minutes. >> good morning, chairman hall, ranking member johnson, members of the committee and to all the finalists, teachers, mentors and organizers of the explorer vision national science competition. on behalf of our sponsoring school, the virginia virtual academy, our coach, mrs. penny harrison and our team, i'd like to thank the committee for inviting us to this hearing. this is my second year for the

fourth through sixth grade age group. i heard about explorer vision from a mother at one of my son's flag football practices about two years ago. her son joshua was critically allergic to many be foods and much of his surroundings. he had actually flatlined in the an emergency room that summer and been brought back to life using intiew base without anesthesia. he was 9 years old. he was being treated at the national institutes of health in bethesda for his condition, and joshua met another young boy named colby. colby is a member of the 2009 explorer vision second place national winning team, and he and his teammates designed an epi watch, a small, wearable computerized watch that contains microneedles that instantly deliver dose of allergy medicine. i was so impressed by what young children could invent that if

opportunity ever arose, i promised myself that i would encourage my son to participate. not more than a week later, his school posted a notice in the student newspaper that they would be sponsoring teams for the first time. i immediately asked my son about participating. he agreed and invited three of his friends from the fifth grade to join. his 2010 team designed a food poisoning detection device, and it was lightweight, portable and could be used to detect dangerous pathogens in food. now we'd like to present background and information on our team and our project for the committee. four students came to know each other through swimming. an important distinction with this year's team is our four students represent three different schools. jack was home schooled, abby porter and jovia attend fifth grade in lees burg, and sydney attends sixth grade. i'd like to thank virginia virtual academy for sponsoring

our team and for giving us an unparalleled opportunity to work together. male and female students, elementary and middle school students, home schooled and brick and mortar public school students. i think our team represents the best of the collaborative spirit, and as we all know, collaboration in the field of science is how society will find solutions to the complex and very serious problems that confront us as a nation. starting last september our team began meeting every week for two hours. the team read news articles and news magazines to become familiar with current events and advances in science and technology. the team brainstormed and discussed multiple ideas over several weeks. the team communicated with our coach, mrs. harrison, using illuminate live's web conferencing program. my son frequently uses the program for his online schooling, and it proved to be a great resource for our science team too. our team brainstormed several projects and then jack saw the picture of specialist robert warren in "the washington post". specialist warren is a soldier who suffered traumatic brain

injury while serving in kandahar, afghanistan, in may 2010. jack selected the idea of creating a helmet that would protect u.s. soldiers from traumatic brain injury due to roadside bombs. the team's design features overlapping polyearth lean plates, sophisticated heat and air pressure be sensors and a 360-degree neck collar that inflates to protect the brain and neck in case of a bomb blast. they decided to take the technology to the battlefield to help the growing number of concussions in the athletes with a device called the heads-up gear. our team has learned a lot about working on an interdisciplinary project. as a result, they have sharpened their communication skills. i am hopeful that participation in this competition will ignite an interest in the stem-related fields, but i know that they have at the very least developed a better understanding of the

world around them, and i'd like to thank the toshiba corporation for sponsoring the competition and the national science teachers' association for administering this event. thank you very much. >> thank you. you, too, are right on the dot. y'all might set a record here today. i now recognize amy and miss claudia cooper for five minutes. thank you. >> good morning, chairman hall and ranking member johnson as well as the other members of the science committee. i want to thank you for giving us, giving me this opportunity to share the amazing experiences that students at west hills middle school had the opportunity to take in, be a part of in the science classroom. the explorer vision program has become a tradition here at west hills. this is my sixth year being a sponsor, um, of the program, and every year it evolves, and it gets better and better. um, this year along with claudia cooper and samantha, we also in addition to the second place

title had nine honorable mention, um, teams as well. and back in 2008 i had the privilege and, um, honor of coming back to the explorer vision's weekend, and i was also the coach of a team back in 2008 who also took the second place national title. so the explorer vision program is near and dear to my heart. over time as i've carried out this program with the students, changes have been made the make it better, to increase the amount of science skills, math skills, engineering skills, and this year we really focused on the process of the program. we decided to create an interdisciplinary unit where myself as a science teacher along with russell purdy, the language arts teacher, decided to work in tandem with the students this year to make it more meaningful for the students to bridge their learning process between science education and the language arts class room. in science we focused on what is called the design cycle which is part of the international

baccalaureate program where the students had to investigate possible invention ideas. they then together as a team had to research the positives and negatives of their invention, and then they had to decide and reflect on which invention they wanted to choose to carry out for this project. in science they worked together as a team. in language arts theyxd worked together, um, as a team, but more at an independent level. in the language arts, the language arts teacher focused on teaching the research process as well as note taking, citing sources of information, and in science we focused on the collaboration and the communication, um, that needs to take place in order for a team to be successful. the unit question to get the ball rolling for students was how can my creativity impact society. we wanted this project to be meaningful for the students so they would have that personal buy-in, so they would be engaged in the topic at which they were researching. so we posed the question, what

technology do we currently have today? we looked at current technology, how it's changed and evolved over time, and we also looked at famous inventers and what they have contributed to our society that we still use and benefit from today, and these questions that the students had kind of set the structure and the framework for them to get the ball rolling this terms of what impact did they want to make, who did they want to improve, who was their audience going to be? so, again, we wanted this to be more about human ingenuity, their innovation, their creativity where the limit -- the possibilities were endless. there was no limit to their research as long as they were learning at the same time, and the process that they went through in terms of reflecting and going back and starting the process all over again, if they found that, you know what? my idea wasn't working or the technology isn't possible. so there our end, from a teacher's perspective, yes, the project was amazing, but it was more about the process. how did you get from point a to point b to build this wonderful,

um, innovative idea. in addition to the explorer vision program, we also offer other competitions, science competitions to spark stem education which involve the dupont science essay competition, the detroit science and engineering fair as well as the -- [inaudible] poster contest. from a teacher's perspective, we have homework that we can check, we know, we work with the parents for the support that they give the school district, and they help their children, but going through programs like the explorer vision and these other science competitions allow the community whether it be the local community or the global community to be able to see what is really taking place in the class room and all the wonderful things that students are now doing today. and it's a great way for them to showcase and highlight their own successes. explorer vision is a great venue for differentiation. it allows students to reach their maximum potential. the students that wanted to learn more about one area of

technology had that opportunity to do so. students became experts based on their own invention that they chose to do for this project, so we had multiple groups working in multiple directions. but at the end we were all able to come back and collaborate at the same time. along with the human ingenuity, our goal is to strive for lifelong learners. we want students to become inquirerrers. my goal as a teacher is to make students want to ask questions. i want them to ask me questions. i don't want to force feed them the information. it's more meaningful if they have that personal buy-in and engagement in science education, and through the explorer vision program and all of these other wonderful science competitions, we are moving in that direction. and as a teacher to see my students smile every day when they come in and say what are we doing today, i can't wait, what are we learning today, can we look at this, can we talk about this today, to me my job's easy. they are the ones who will

coming in with the inquisitive mindset of wanting to learn more about science. so i want to thank you for this opportunity to share my passion as a science teacher and the importance of enriching and engaging students in stem education to become lifelong learners and successful members of society today and 20 years from now. thank you. >> thank you. and you are just almost on time, by gosh. [laughter] it's you and jack's mom and dr. lozano really express yourself well, well, and it was interesting, everything you said, and we thank you for that. i'd now recognize ms. ann manuel to present testimony. >> good morning, committee members. i've been teaching at stuyvesant high school specialized new york city public high school for math, science and technology for 14 years. all the students at stuyvesant took a qualifying test to be offered a seat at the school,

and we have a very rich history of student research and success in student science competitions like intel science talent search, siemens competition and the international science and engineering fair. we can boast four nobel laureates among the many scientists, mathematicians, engineers and physicians who are alumni. the schools like stuyvesant and all the specialized high schools in your states do not operate in a vacuum. we need the farm teams that you heard about earlier today. i would like to take this opportunity to speak to you today about the role competitions like toshiba explorer vision play in developing the students with the skills necessary to participate in our programs. we at stuyvesant have found that engaging students in these competitions allows them to be creative, think broadly and critically of the world around them, work in teams, develop time management skills and take ownership of a project. no one now at stuyvesant

remembers when explorer vision became part of the tenth grade research chemistry curriculum, but it was probably very close to its 1992 launch. the current chemistry teacher is samantha and has continued to use explorer vision as a powerful motivating force to develop student skills and scientific thinking. as you've heard, the explorer vision competition requires teams of students to take a current technology and push it 20 years into the future. the team balanced ideas off of each other, brought in classmates from other sections, grilled parents, consulted online sources for their choice of current technology to develop. the three greenal team took an article found by allison's mother on bioprinting and combined it with what they knew about adult stem cells and signaling molecules and began to see into the future. critical at this stage of the

students' development, the stage divided the project into smaller tasks, established a timeline for completion of the various stages of their project. the three drenal team recognized their different skill sets setsd divided up the labor accordingly. allison was the artist, david provided overall organization, and maureen did background research. they knew that they could consult on various faculty members, especially research coordinator dr. jonathan gastell for leads on technical information or to clear up any questions they had. they finally put it all together and sent it off. on the day of -- the awards were made around school, around the computers at school there were clutches of tenth graders eagerly waiting to see the results. they did quite well. three drenal plays first in the northeast region, and the chemistry class had numerous honorable mentions, and there

were many honorable mentions in the regular chemistry class which were not assigned the toshiba project as required. the three drenal team and their classmates were pleased with the performance but really the difficult part had just begun. the team had just four weeks to create a web site to show off three drenal. they had won a toshiba computer loaded with web design software, but they had little experience using it. con still about thes were needed -- consultants were needed. an an alumni of our class of '67 helped with web design and a company headed by allison's father, david reid, was enlisted to help with 3-d imagery and orchestration. after many hours after school, um, on weekends, at school or the digital resources, the web site was completed and submitted. a few weeks later the three

drenal team were surprised at school by toshiba and nsta representatives announcing their second place national position in the senior division. they now had to build a prototype, a more detailed design had to be developed, materials had to be chosen, dimensions measured. scott thomas, the chemistry physics chair, volunteered to teach noreen enough so that she could program our very real 3-d printer to print parts of the print corners for the control in the future three drenal printer. finally, they had to fashion a clay kidney to represent three drenal's innovative product, a new kidney formed by the patient's own bone marrow stem cells stimulated by various molecules to develop into kidney-specific tissues and then have it assembled by the 3-d bioprinter. the three drenal had pushed

existing technology to future uses, they had to work as a team, they had to recruit experts to help them, they had to articulate their problem and innovate a solution clearly and accurately. they had to complete their project on time and had to deal with unfamiliar technology and tools. all these skills will serve them very well if they continue in any of the stem disciplines or, for that matter, in any discipline they choose to follow. i hope you have time in your busy schedules to see the prototypes and listen to these students talk about their ideas that they have brought the washington and for which you so graciously have provided a national venue. thank you. >> thank you for a good presentation, and be i thank all of you for your testimony and reminding members here that committee rules apply to us also, five minutes. and the chair at this time will open the round of questions, and

i yield myself five minutes. my first question will be to allison. allison, i think you're the senior member of all this group here, is that right? >> yes, i am. >> that means you're the oldest, is that right? [laughter] >> yes. >> well, if you feel good to know, i'm the oldest guy in the house or senate, so we have something in common. [laughter] >> great. >> and i picked you to start with. you're what they call a rising junior, does that mean you're going to be a junior next time? is. >> yes, i am. >> i think i was a junior three years. [laughter] to you and your teammates know what you really want to study in the college yet? is. >> um, i'm actually not sure what i want to do. i feel like i have many options and be pathways i can go down. um, i know that noreen is really interested in becoming a doctor. um, i think she definitely wants an overall liberal arts education, and she wants to

explore every possibility, and so does david. and david is very interested in becoming a writer. so -- >> well, i might ask you this, does winning this competition have any bearing on your decision or changed or hastened your decision? >> yes, it definitely has because we had so much fun, and it was so interesting to, um, research and develop our idea. and i think that getting more involved with, um, science this our project -- in if our project has really opened up that area to us and made it more available and more interesting. so i definitely really liked it. >> okay. well, we thank you. i'll ask all students this, and you can give me a loud yes or a no, and we'll kind of determine by the -- we have a noise tester up here. [laughter] did you like science and math before you started your project, yes or no? >> yes.

[laughter] >> this thing says yes wins by about 8-10. >> claudia says no. >> and another question, do you like it even more now? >> yes. >> that's yes goes again. all right. i have some time left, let me see what else i have. i might ask all of you students, anybody that wants to suggest an answer, what did you enjoy the most about your project, and what did you like the least? who wants to answer that? hold up your hand. jack, you want to answer that? i've been doing business with you ever since you've been here. all right, marcelo. >> be thank you. the prototype? [laughter] >> what do can you like the most. >> painting the prototype? >> yes. >> a yes. okay. does anybody else want to say?

yes, claudia? >> hi, my name's claudia cooper, i'm a seventh grader at west hills. i think the most enjoyable part about this whole project was when samantha and i, my partner, first started, we had no idea. honestly, it started as a required curriculum activity -- not activity, assignment that ms. attard proposed to us. and when we got our expiration to help people-- our inspiration to help people who are suffering from respiratory insufficiency, it really was, i guess, cool the know that we can help people and to see what our generation is capable of. um, and to know that there is possibility as long as someone out there has ideas in mind to think of them. so, yeah. >> okay. thank you. to all the adults, let me ask you this. everything is of you commented on how impressed you were with

the ability of your team to come up with novel ideas such as integral piece of this competition that you're in. .. >> they were relevant issues, current to today's ongoing problems. that was how we started. >> did you read anything about any of the current activities of any of us congressman?

>> of course. [laughter] >> anyone else care to -- yes. spent and after the kids come up with an idea, you have to ask them is it feasible, what do you know about it, where does it take you, what do you need to know in order to go forward. >> for 10 seconds, and i thank you all for the good answers you gave. at this time i recognize mrs. johnson for five minutes. >> thank you very much. it has been an informative to listen to the testimony. and mr. hall indicated earlier, we are both texans. and in texas we have around 1100 school districts. and because of that we pioneered some in distant learning, but i becoming more and more concerned

about the costs of the administration of all these school districts. and have wondered whether or not we could substitute some of the administration's with distance-learning. so i'm interested in trying to get information from you of how you feel that using distant learning and s.t.e.m. education could be successful. i wonder, because we have homeschooling involved here, and perhaps i can ask you, ms. conwell-dudley, about your experience in feeling that it could be successful. >> well, as i mentioned we used, we are sponsored by virginia virtual academy, and we use the online public school program this year for jack's sixth grade schooling. and we felt very fortunate that they were willing to sponsor a

team. and we used what's called a though many life, a web conferencing program to correspond with our coach who lives in colorado. is how we get our schools throughout the year and it's how we ran many of our science meetings. we would send things electronically. we sent attachments. we would upload our presentation. she to take a look at it in advance, then when we had our meetings we would share information that way. well, here we are. so it apparently worked very, very well for us. and it was a lot of fun. i felt like we were on the cutting edge of it. so i have to say there was little or no cost involved, and it was fantastic. >> now, were you home all the time with jack? >> yes, i was a. i was his parent coach. so this was a temporary option for us. jack will be in a brick-and-mortar school next year but we did this for some personal and academic reasons, and we are very thankful that we

could use their program. it's outstanding. >> thank you. now jack, how do you like going to school at home with a camera? >> it was fun, and i learned a lot. it was good having somebody actually there to work with you one on one. in this case, my mom, to help me with all my studies. and i think it was a great curriculum. >> have you compared that to being in a classroom with other students? >> well, we live in a neighborhood full of children to go to both public and private school. i would have to say i think my son's education was on par or perhaps even better in some respects. i'm a little biased. >> i'm not trying to criticize. i'm seeking information.

jack, did you miss having students sitting next to you, or you felt you got that through virtual experienced? >> i missed having students around me, but i just got a lot better learning experience because my mom can just work with me with nobody else asking questions. >> thank you. you have a wonderful, private teacher. dr. lozano, my time is running out quickly, but in your biography i read that you at first mexican-american woman in 70 years to receive a ph.d from rice. and the first to get a ph.d from rice's mechanical engineering and materials science department. that under representation of women is quite apparent.

in minority. and i wonder whether you are beginning to see any breakthrough, or whether you think it still takes a lot more outreach effort speak what you mean for girls in general? >> girls in general. >> girls somehow are taking over in college. most of the majors, where they were, you know, i you know, i don't know, like a lot of the girls are in a lot of business. there are now more girls than boys enrolled in college, or -- >> in college in general. >> in engineering is still no higher than 17%. so still in my class like 60 kids, i have like maybe five girls and 65 boys. so still i haven't seen any change since, you know, 10, 15 years ago. it's still girls make a lot less. it's a very severe cultural

stereotype, you know, when you ask people, even boys what does a mechanical engineer do, and ever will imagine a hat and oil and goods come a like a dirty type of profession. and in reality we take them into my lap i do a lot of, at least a thousand ships pass by my lap every year. they are surprised to see that though, so you actually deal with, you know, prosthetics for the knee and hip. that doesn't have anything to do with oil? mechanical engineer, we also do regeneration. for the cells to anchor and grow without falling down and the scaffold has to sustain the load. so they don't really know exactly what engineering is. said even the engineering is all around us, very small percentage of people know what is it. my son plays piano, and beautifully, and i say you could be the best piano player.

but it's the materials in the pan are not good, something wrong, not there, you will sound awful. and engineers are around all of that. but you don't really see them. you go to the doctor and you see the x-rays and mris and everything, you see a doctor but you don't see the engineer that was behind all that development. so we really never see what engineers do. and every time i went to barnes & noble and just went through books, and i found engineers are either, the ones that drive the trains over any kids books, you know. or there's this astronaut and right now there are two guys carrying a case, and it says engineers. man, the astronauts, you know. soberly the profession hasn't really been attractive, you know. so we still have to do a lot. and this is all engineering, you know, the creativity that comes

with experimentation. that's basically what engineering is. used science knowledge to develop knowledge so you can benefit society. >> thank you very much. and, unfortunately, i didn't promise the end. thank you. >> the ladies 10 minutes is up. [laughter] now i recognize, and thank you, that was a good answer. saying please start slowing down. but thank you for a good, long, good honorable answer. recognize mrs. fudge, the gentlelady -- mr. smith, lamar smith. the chairman from the judicial committee from the state of texas. >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. lozano, thank you for making the trip up from south texas. we don't need to be picking on you today but is probably no surprise that those of us from taxes are going to ask you questions first. i'd like to do so and then by

the other witnesses to comment if they would like to as we'll. i have sort of a general question with a specific question, component to it. and the general question is, well, maybe i should say you've provided part of the answer because i understand you have developed a science and magic show for k-12 grade. i wish you could have shown that to us today. that would've been fascinating i'm sure, but it seems to me that's one of the aspects of how do we attract young people to become interested in science and math. the figures that have been mentioned, but we have about half as many young adults majoring in science and math today as we did 20 years ago, and the trend is not good and other countries are picking up the slack and would like to see our own american students start majoring more often in those types of subjects. so the real question is, how do we inspire young people, how do we get them interested in the subjects? you've showed us a number of ways how that's possible. let me go on and ask a more

specific question that you might want to address as well as the general question, and that is to become one of the barriers we face is that cold stereotypes, that maybe children from broken homes or from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, or whose parents don't speak english well, or girls who are oftentimes thought not to be good in math. those are the types of false stereotypes that need to be broken down and that will allow these young people to achieve their potential, and give us millions of more young people who might measure in the sciences and math. and i think part of the answer is better mentors and frequent tutors, and inspirational and better teachers, more money dedicated to those subjects and so on. but do you want to answer the question generally as to what we can do beyond what you are to mention? and also how we can counter those false stereotypes.

>> that's a very hard question. i guess one of the things is to get, you know, leaders into the classroom, professors, science teachers, get them into the classrooms. and i think national science foundation doesn't offer -- top researcher markets and national science innovation, in order for you to get it you need have broader impacts and broader impacts have aptitude within. you need have a great science in order to be given a grant. but if you don't have that section, you know, you don't get it. and that forces everybody within the scientific community to outreach to k-12. and i think that's a beautiful model, you know, what nsf does. i think, you know, a lot of people going to high school and they have never, congressman was

mentioning, there have never been women. they have never been given the opportunity to see what's beyond. so when, for example, to his lap on the go to the classroom, they give you things, thank you letters, i wish i would have known you for years ago and i would've made very different decisions, you know, about my life. i think we just need to go back to the community and do a lot of that. there's no other way to get kids, you know -- >> hard work, dedication and commitment to always involve. ms. conwell-dudley, would you want to have any to add to that? >> yes, i would. thank you. we live and loud count and i can't really speak to the counties that the other schools represent or reside in, but, in fact, there is a lot of interest in science and technology. one of the things that paint me as a parent is, i will give you an example, i've been attending

open house for the academy of science, which is a program in loudoun county this open to all loudoun county high school students. and i have been for the last two years, and i've been amazed that every spot in the parking lot is full and have an open house. it's heartbreaking really. you get into the auditorium and is practically standing room only, and the really unfortunate aspect of this is the other on the 60-65 spots in this academy of science. and yet there hundreds of students are interested in going. i look at the auditorium, and these are not deserving dragged out of bed in the morning. these are kids were there with the parents interested in getting into this program. and yet they can't get in because the competition is so great and is only one program in loudoun county that addresses the sciences and math and a really advanced with. and it is the academy of science. when you look at the 15th middle schools that are feeding into that program, that's only

an opportunity for kids for school. >> the solution is more programs. >> more programs. joining up with business, partnering with businesses. look out loudoun county and other businesses in that area. aerospace corporation for one is one my husband works with, but boeing and northrop grumman, maybe i'm mr. king the names because they are merging so often i can keep up with them. but i'm sure there are engineers and businesses located within our areas who could part with the schools to bring science into the schools, to make it more readily of able. >> good idea. thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> the gentleman's time has expired. recognized mrs. fudge from ohio, ms. fudge for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank all of you for being here. let me first congratulate all of the contest winner. you should be extremely proud of your accomplishment and i'm very proud of you. i hope you all pursued some

career in a stanfield. we certainly dashed i'd also like to thank your chairman for holding this hearing which cody demonstrates the need for federal education reform and investment in s.t.e.m. education. the schools represented here are home to brilliant young students. however, they also each represent some form of privilege or lack of accessibility it's a private school in texas. virginia virtual academy well free to students living in carroll county virginia is a modern form of homeschooling and requires significant parental involvement of many of the struggling families and deny states are either single parent who cannot stay home with the students because they must work, or two pair to boast -- who bites both work. westfield middle school in michigan the public has less than 1% of students eligible for free or reduced school lunches. in my district, east cleveland,

that number is more than 85%. and, finally, the high school students to take a standardized test for admission. which means expensive test prep courses for the students who can afford them. putting low-income students at a severe disadvantage. as a new york city public school, only to go to present a students are african-americans. this number is incredibly low. especially considering that across all public schools cities in the city 32% are african-american and i was are more drastic when you look at hispanic students who represent 40% of the students in the new york city public schools but only 3% of the students inside. clearly this is not a level playing field and i believe that it is our job to ensure that all students in this country have access to quality education and the opportunity to win a contest. now to my question, which is for ms. conwell-dudley.

virginia virtual academy seems to be very effective in giving kids familiar with technology, and interested in science. do you think that there is some part of the curriculum would you use now in your home that could be transferred to students in a classroom setting that would have the same kind of an effect? >> absolutely. i think the eliminate live conferencing program could be used extensively in the schools. i don't see why it couldn't. to which is surely well for us not that sophisticated. i'm not that smart but it's far enough to know no know that it could have got to be a lot smarter. and so going to do everything i can. and everything this program and the web covers of program would be a great thing for schools to use. >> thank you. i want to again congratulate all of the brilliant young people sitting here today, young men and young ladies were the work you have done. you have accomplished a great deal. i hope that someday you'll be sitting on this committee.

talking to young people just like you. keep up the good work and to all of you who have assisted them in toward and thank you as well. a.q. i yield back. >> the gentlelady yields back her time. recognize mr. bartlett, the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you very much. i want use my pre-five minutes to emphasize to various. one is the importance of teachers, and the second, the need of the country to dramatically increase the number of our students in science math and engineering. it was a teacher who changed my life. i went to college in 1943, washington missionary college to become a medical missionary. my first degree was in theology which is certainly very well in congress by the way because i found to love the sinner and hate the sin. [laughter] i was going to be a medical missionary so i had to take some courses to go to medical school

and they had a really fantastic teacher, and i took all of his courses and enough other courses that when i finally graduate from college in 1947 that i had a major in biology and a minor in theology. i went on to get a doctorate in science, and i taught for 24 years. our youngest son of 10 children was a terrible student but he wouldn't pay any attention. we were going to lose him every year we went into -- and find the there was a teacher in a sixth grade, a science teacher in sixth grade that turned him on. now, ross graduated number one in a class of 140 some engineers. he is now, he has five children, he's returning to maryland. he works one of our big government labs. so here are two liza pink dramatically turned rabbi teaches, so thank you. thank you very much for what you

do. in listening to the news this morning i was reminded again of our priorities which i think are pretty darned distorted. vancouver team loss, i have no idea who they are because i to not sports because i think you're cut the the equivalent of gladiators of rome and we know what happened to rome. but, you know, their team lost to their upset. they're turning over police cars and breaking windows and the riot police are out trying to quiet them down. i watched the white house and the people that they invite their to slobber all of it and they're not scientists, mathematicians and engineers, not academic achievers. they are athletes and entertainers. this year the chinese will graduate seven times as many engineers as we graduate. and about half of our graduate engineers will be chinese students. by the way, they don't stay here

anymore because there are plenty of good jobs back in china. so they are going there. we represent less than 5% of the people in the world, and we have a fourth of all the good things in the world. and i have a huge concern that we're not going to be able to retain our decisions in premed economic and military power of the world, if we are turning out one-seventh as many sciences, engineers as our competitor is. what can we do as a country to change the culture? because you get a culture, a community, a society, we just don't appreciate our bright young kids in science, math and engineering. when i was indicated dashed when i was a kid they called me a square. what are you now, geeks and nerds? pretty girls won't date a bright boy, and a girl, a bright girl plays dumb to get a date.

this is a really sad reflection on our society. what do we need to do to capture the imagination of the american people and get more of our young people to go into careers of science, math and engineering. i know you will have an adequate answer to this in a minute and seven seconds we have remained. i would encourage you to please write for the record something that will help us to what we can do in this committee to do a better job turning on our people and getting our young people were influenced in science, math andengineering. please write down something. >> time has expired. do how many lawyers they are turning out over there? [laughter] >> actually i go into groups of young people and ask them what they will become, and you know, they will become lawyers and political scientist. we have enough of both of those. don't you think? [laughter] we just need to turn that

around. we just don't appreciate science, math and engineering. that's what makes the world, the wheels go round. if we don't, we aren't able to go around this, we're not going to be number one. >> your point is made. thank you, sir. we have about 18 votes in another 15 minutes. we're going to try to go onto. mr. clarke, the gentleman from michigan, recognize you for five minutes. five quick minutes spent thank you, mr. chairman. i am from the city of detroit and to represent metropolitan detroit. i'm on this committee at the recommendation of representative peter's was right here. who enjoy member of congress. i just want to thank west hills middle school for making us really proud. in michigan. just a personal story. claudie and samantha, you know,

when i was going up in elementary school i was one of the few kids that have has much. so i went back and visited some of his elementary schools now that i'm elected official. iron emir asking one class, anybody, raise your hand if you dashed half the class raised their hands. where i was raised, too, we had an in separate right near us a few blocks away, and we had plans to my dad used to work in a blanket a lot of people have breathing problems because of the contamination, because of pollution, because we smoked cigarettes and my dad smoked them without filters. before you realize it, it was a problem. this was a long time ago, so the fact that you have created a prototype of the way to provide people with oxygen who need it without having to carry those big tanks, that's going to really give people a lot of freedom because a lot of us, more and more people are growing

older and living longer. and we have to live with these chronic breathing problems. just, my questionto you and if i could, mr. chair, i would like to ask this to claudie and also his samantha. i know you're not sitting but after claudie response. what did you either enjoy the most on a developing this entry trachea device, enjoy, or learnt about it the most, or what you got out of it? >> just trees. here's the reason i'm asking this. because in your answer would probably be the actual value that other students would get that would probably encourage them to do this type of research that you're doing right now. if i can actually say peoples lies to your lease giving somebody better quality of life as they grow older. >> thank you, mr. clarke.

our inspiration came from my grandmother was actually independent for the last two months of her life as you were saying, it waste under freedom. this device hopefully will restore the freedom and let patients do what they want to. and i think if i can say that the sheer joy of knowing that there are possible is out there, like i said before, and our minds, our generation can do that. i think working with samantha was one of the most amazing parts of it because she's so funny. she's very, very bright, and we couldn't have done it without her. i think it just opening our minds, because neither of us were very into science before this competition, and when we first heard of it, it was just an assignment. it was not anything that we wanted to do necessarily, but once we started going, we saw

how incredible this competition can be, and how great it is. >> wonderful. and if possible, if samantha, you could just come up and share with me your experience about doing this research. >> what i would probably say most is that same thing as claudia because we did most things together. but i learned so much from this competition because before this i was really not into technology. and i was not -- yeah, and i learned so much from this and learned so much about things, and never like helping people. so that's probably it. >> this is wonderful. i'm going to give back my time. i think we got the answer. so all the students right now who are watching this, you don't even have to be into science or math and technology, but if you want to help somebody, you see some the you know has a problem that could be in your family, or a friend of yours, this is way to really help them, to help a