way. they have not spending to the ask q for agency action. they mean there is no administrative framework in place 0 to regulate drones in the skies. as currently been mentioned they operate ten drones in the united states. the dhs inspector general recently assessed. several of the colleagues have made efforts to address some of the privacy threats to drone. we believe those efforts are not

suffer. there are simple steps that we believe can protect privacy as use of drones increase in the sky. first congress should pass targetedded legislation initial step would be the passage of the bill to limit drone surveillance in the united states in cases where a warrant has been not obtained. however a fully address the invasive nature of drones new legislation must prohibit nonspecific untargetted drone surveillance, limit the use of drone surveillance data collected, transmitted, stored or shared and require knows notice of the politician. the law should provide for independent. second should expressly require drone operators including dh sb and the implement regulation subject to public notice and comments that address the privacy implication. and finally, i think congress should clarify the circumstance in which they purchased by them in the pursuit of the mission may be deployed for other

purposes. the failure to make clear the circumstance on federal and state agencies may deploy dproans for aerial surveillance has raised significant concerns about the program. once again, i thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i'll be pleased to answer your question. >> thank you. we start first with you mr. dillingham. you mentioned tsa identified the potential terrorist threat through the use of these uav systems, you know, the in colombia and talk about hezbollah, and then of course the concerns came to in last september when it was reported by the associated press to blow up pentagon and u.s. capital is arrested and it was a drone he was going use to do that. >> yes, sir. >> the united states capital and the pentagon, the very targets of 9/11, and yet the department, as you recommended through the

gao, the department has a role in this. to provide a security assessment in a national policy. the department apparently disagrees with you. and disagrees with me as a chairman. and refused to provide testimony before the committee here today. i find it in re henceble. i think they should become before the committee. we had capital of the united states and the pentagon, if they don't see it as role of the department of homeland security to come up with a policy and a security assessment to monitor the threat that these domestic drones can pose to the american people. do you have any idea with their rational is? >> mr. chairman, we specifically followed up in preparation for the hearing, but before that they had the policy

once we issue a recommendation we do periodic followups because of the agencies are not only responsible forgao they we followed up repeatedly and asked the tsa again about the position had their positioned change? they indicatorred the position had no changed. they added -- their added comments were they were doing -- they were taking actions that they thought were sufficient to address the issue. and as you know, one of the central tenets of tsa security are risk analysis, or risk assessment so they know where they would best deploy their resources. we asked for some evidence of risk assessment that was done with regard to uav or uaf we were not able to obtain that from dhs.

so that we still think that our recommendation is valid and needed to be addressed. for balance, though, let me say that dhs is participating with the joint planning and develop office as part of the cross government-wide development for plans. in terms of what the nature and scope is position beyond being members of the particular group. we were not able to ascertain at this point. we continue to work that issue for our full report. >> i can't ascertain it either. if they won't come before the committee to describe what they're doing, how can we no? they are taking certain precautions, yet they will not come before the committee to tell us what brie cautions they're taking. >> yes, sir. and they have defied not only you but the committee and the america people. i'm not pleased, obviously. let me go to chief mcdaniel. you receive homeland security

grants to purchase these drones. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> they have no role. >>s no sir. i hope you're saying that. you believe there needs to be federal oversight by the department of homeland security. >> yes, sir, there is a difference between the aviation aspect of that certainly the faa is entitled to as experts in that environment, but they do not have the understanding the expertise that i believe an agency such as the dhs would have in understanding the operational roles and missions that in our case, law enforcement would have in the need we would have. >> i tend to agree with you. i think faa provides the safety or the routes but not security. tell me just very briefly the legitimate law enforcement purposes. i believe there is legitimate law enforcement purpose for the use of these domestically can

you expand on that? >> well, we have periodic needs for our s.w.a.t. team to be called out and respond to critical incidents involving barricade suspected, high-risk warrants, and this is an asset that provides that incident commander with a situational of awareness to see everything that is going on within that incident so that he can better manage that incident and bring it to a safe conclusion. >> i agree. i think it should be limited to specific instance or within a legitimate law enforcement purpose. i think what most american people do not want to see are thousand of these drones being ice of the sky, sort of spying on the american people. i think it takes me to you. when it comes to the priseres sei issues, i think which are a legitimate concern. i think people can accept if this is being used for manhunt

as we use law enforcement helicopters are used in the sky for various legitimate law enforcement purpose balance we they don't want to see is sort of spying with emission involvedded in the plan. there is no policy. the department of homeland security has an office of privacy. don't you believe they should be involved in working with people like yourself and people like the sheriff and the gao to develop a privacy policy? >> i think they believe that. i think a great first step they have the most robust privacy office. they didn't done a privacy impact seas assessment on the own drone program which is one of the most robust and the most public sized. they have not gone in to determine what impact the drones will have on the american public as they use them. we think it would be a great first step. after that has been completed to

go in and monitor these and determine what they can be used for and what they cannot be used for. >> let me conclude by saying that you may not agree on all of the issues, one thing you agree on, is that dhs has a role to play whether it's providing a security analysis working working with state and locals and with privacy. and i hope this hearing gets their attention, i hope your testimony gets their attention, the step forward step up to the plate and do something about this. with that, i recognize ranking member. >> thank you, mr. chairman. chief mcdaniel. i'm not saying by any stretch of the imagination you would do this. a question for you, if there was a law enforcement person chief or other official who wanted to replace the rubber bull lits with real bullets. do you know of my any state rule stopping anyone from doing

that? >> i'm not aware within the state of texas that would prevent that, no sir. >> i would suggest that's probably it'll typically for all states. do you think we should be looking at it both federal and state ?refl. >>? certainly i can understand it as being a concern. the twawlty of that ever occurring is slim and none in my view based upon the platform, the accuracy required, all of those things that go into it lethal or less than lethal situation, i don't believe the uav are appropriate for that type of weapon platform. >> thank you. the question for -- i apologize. i can envision probably in the more extreme example the press or someone else, you know, how they invade someone's privacy right now, abusing these vehicles, and is there any way

even besides criminal law and other lawsuit, is there a way we can trace is someone is photographing or doing some video cam work on people in the private lives out in the backyard or in front of the pool or whatever. is there a way we can trace that so there can be civil action. perhaps do you think there is available civil action in that respect that could be brought forward? >> on the state there could be. so you to look to the peeping tom laws. some are specific. and they require the motivation to catch person in the state of undress. other than that, there is no legislation that would address those circumstances. and right now, can the opaque process for licensing the drones to be used and the fact that hobby yis can gain control of a drone and use it no matter without getting a license at all, there is additional barriers to it. especially the press using these. >> in addition to homeland

security the faa should be involved in set these kinds of regulations? >> i believe the faa has a role, i don't believe that they are set out to go the full distance the department of homeland security can go. they are licensing authority. within the authority they have the ability to request description of what a drone is going to be licensed for what they will be used for and hold the licensee at task to that purpose. we don't believe that is taking place right now. we think it would be an appropriate function of the faa. >> okay. conclude by commenting that i agree with the chair as well. is there some need of some kind of oversight because the privacy rights are in danger. there's potential for terrorist activities that are involved. and misuse that way there should be some kind of, you know, control other than good common sense of law enforcement as to how it is used as well. so we're hopeful that we can follow up the hearing with that kind of input from homeland security and perhaps faa.

thank you. >> ranking member for the congresses, thank you. we recognize mr. duncan from south carolina. >> thank you for holding this hearing. i want to follow up. i think we need a hearing with faa to bring them questions about what they're doing to implement permitting and certificates in the country with the flying of unmanned air ideal systems because we have a lo rough bust civilian aviation population in this country. and if you have visual flight rules and you have a civilian avenueuateer that goes up on the 172 he's not on following a flight plane. he currently probably not looking to see if there's a certificate are whether the sheriff is flying a drone in the area. they're not looking for other aircraft in the air space. they're looking down at whatever their surveilling. thing is a real threat to civilian aviation with unmanned aerial systems.

especially if we see dramatic increase projected based on the information provided. we need talk to faa with regard to civilian aviation and flight rules. the gist of my concern about drones and unmanned aerial systems is the privacy issue. it's a real issue, real concern to the constituents that i represent, real concerns to american across the land great land on what the government is surveilling. we had recently an episode in nebraska farmers were upset that the epa was flying aircraft and possibly uav to check their fencing. and whether their callets cattle were getting in streams are they going to use that for that going forward? i'm a cosponsor of austin scott's bill which is an important piece of legislation. when i think about privacy issues i think about what we

have done on the war on terror and surveillance of people we suspect are involved in terrorism. in order to listen in their phone conversation cell phone or landline, it defies the courts involved. are they going to be involved unmanned aerial systems surveying american citizens on the country in whether their activities are whether it's terrorist or narcotic activities. where is the right of privacy? and where does a court such as this get involved in this? i think these are legitimate questions we need to ask. we have a office of privacy within the homeland security the chairman mentioned earlier, that office of privacy is there for a reason. it's to make sure that department homeland security is involved in making sure that the privacy rights of the united states citizens aren't violated as we try to protect the great country. is that office of privacy involved with the department of home land security with regard to unmanned aerial system? it's a vailed question for us to

ask. i want to thank amie for being here. what methods do you feel are best to cooperate with the growth in uafst? >> we thing the best principal to look at transparency and accountability. we are looking at again, proceeds at faa to make sure that drone operators aren't allowed to utilize their drones for purposes outside of what they have initially been licensed for. we want to see dhs implement regulations protecting privacy and ensuring they cannot been used for jenizes surveillance. we think that is not in line with constitutional principals and should not be used. we would like to see as we proposed in longer statement, legislation that is geared towarding protecting these rights. we think it's important do this now as previous witnesses have stated. violations have no occurred yet. if we wait for the drones to go in the air, before we ask i think we're going regret it. >> thank you for protecting

civil liberties in the country and what you're doing. i come from south carolina we're on the coast. there's a threat of hurricanes. i can see and understand certificate issues for weather epa or homeland security or some organization to fly the coastline prior to a hurricane coming in to assess changes in the environment take real time actual aerial photographs that can be used. i can understand a certificate being issued for custom and border patrol if they know terrorist an area of the border being exploited one sometime certificate. i can understand the need for some sort of privacy committee to issue those certificates. i can understand a one-time certificate or temporary certificate being issued to a sheriff if you had a prison break or a lot of drug activity. these are isolated incidents. they aren't carte blanche of

flyg unmanned air row systems across the system. i want to ask mr. dilling hamming why has the department of homeland be so slow to develop the use of drones? >> that's a good question sir. we have not, able to get an answer from dhs or tsa why they have not followed our recommendation. we have been told by many state holders that it's better to act on these potential issues before we have a crisis or before some of these things occur. oftentimes, not only does it take regulation two or three years to be enacted, but often times when regulations are acted enacted in a crisis situation, sometimes they aren't the best work that the agencies do. so we have been -- we continue to follow up with dhs and point out we think that have a role in

the uav situation as well as both in terms of privacy as well as security. >> all right. i don't want to wait for a crisis situation. i know, the chairman as well as i think i know him. i think we'll have department of homeland security sitting where you are to ask questions. i yield back. >> thank you. let my say not been slow, they have completely disregarded mr. dillingham and the gao and defied the committee by indicating that no role whatsoever in the domestic use of uav. i recognize mr. clark. >> thank thank you very much, mr. chairman. let me add to my voice of that of my colleagues about concern with respect to dhs and their response to this committee.

clearly this is an emerging threat. and it is certainly within the jurisdiction of dhs to respond this committee about subcommittee and the request to know where they stand with regard to this, and it's not acceptable to not participate to not share with us their thinking. when you think about the implications of these devices, dr. dillingham, you note in your testimony that currently no federal agency has specific statutory responsibility to regulate privacy matters related to uaf. do you agree with that the responsible agency should be dhs and in your opinion, which agency is best positioned to take this on, and why?

>> i think i'll answer at this point, we're probably not in a position to say who should be responsible, but we think the process that is joshedway now firms of the potential agency incoming justice homeland security, faa, should be working together as to figure out who in fact is going to take the lead in the particular areas. because it's no one's mission at this point because uaf didn't exist in the domestic area before not too long ago. we think it is something for collaboration and cooperation but definitelying definitely something that needs to be attended to now rather than later. >> do you agree with that? >> we do agree. we grow as other agencies implement drones in the united states, we think that those agencies should also take on a role in regulating and protecting privacy of the people

who may be coming under cor vai lens because of the operation. >> madam, the organization representing uav manufacturers and operator recently release and industry code of conduct. it included some privacy safe guards. more over compliance with the guidelines of both voluntary and un enforceable. although the attempt to address the concerns can you explain official action with enforcement is necessary? >> i'm holding the voluntary code of conduct right hire. it's one page front and back. all they say on privacy is we will respect the privacy of individuals. as you mention both voluntary and nonenforceable. we believe without official action if everything is left down to one line privacy will be not sufficiently protected. >> is there a particular down study for the manufacturer in

not providing a more robust code of conduct? >> many privacy experts including rhode island yab former professor of stanford has said that people in the united states will be very he substantiate to accept the adoption of this technology if they are not put into place. prior to the adoption of it. so we believe that if we don't address this now, there will actually be a viz really a reaction from the american public and that we will not be able to comply with the spirit of the faa act which requires that drones be allowed into this united states national air space. >> from a commercial use standpoint or a local law enforcement standpoint, is it within the best interest of manufacturers to strengthen their code of conduct? >> we believe it's not only in the best interest for them to strengthen the code of conduct,

it is also in the best interest to support large scale legislation and regulation related to privacy. >> thank you very, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> i thank the gentle lady. we recognize the chairman from missouri. >> thank you, mr. chairman i guess for my in you to answer, can you define a drone for me? is there a certain size or altitude that it nighs out? what substitutes what we're trying to deal with? >> i guess i'll try and start. it varies, sir. it varies from hand held model airplane types to ones we're most familiar with in terms of predatory and the global hawks that are used mostly in the war theater. what we're talking about here for the most part, are what's called a small uav which is what faa is trying develop a rule

for. and that is, i think, less than 55 pounds, and relatively small in size. >> okay. to fly and -- are you familiar with that? >> i've heard that phrase before. it could be the size of flying trash can. or it could be the size of a humming bird. >> i thought you said 55 pounds. >> right. i'm saying it varies in size. the small uav rule that's being worked refers to that size the 55 and down. >> 55 and down, sir. >> okay. i know that the flying trash cans originally when they were developed, i think part of their thought process was to use them for police work, if you're in a neighborhood you're chasing a suspect through several buildings or whatever they can fly that over at fairly low

altitude, but just had a question on that. and to answer mr. deng can, the question a part of it maybe not answer. i think the transportation infrastructure committee has tried to tackle the problem of getting in general air space and aviation and faa air space. ic that is a separate maybe issue that's hopefully we're trying to handled on that angle. anything that can be seen by anyone driving down the street flying a helicopter, i guess i would say. you're f you're driving down the street and a guy is sitting on his lawn smoking marijuana. you have a right to arrest him. >> right. >> if he's in the backyard and has a privacy fence you're not allowed to put a ladder up or

not? because it's not available to people? >> the norm is to be able to view it from what the public can see. >> okay. that's kind of where i was -- my hill billy way of getting there, i guess. 30,000 feet or whatever these -- we always think about of the predatory drones that are armed and have been successful in a lot of military operation. my constituents and i think a lot are concerned that type of surveillance will be at the not armed you can't see them or hear them. but is that a whole different level than what we were talking about a second ago being able to see what you can normally see? >> certainly. the utilization of the uav over an area would open it up to view

from law enforcement or any other governmental entity. >> these small ones we're talking about today the 55 pounds and belows with the flying trash can. i have seen them. i think they would be fairly apparent to people, i'm not saying operate. i've seen it on the shelf. where they develop them. as far as the sound they put out, things like that, are those that most of those are they going people going to be acknowledge there is something flying over their farm or house or looking to see if you're shooting up. >> that's an excellent point. the uav that public safety agencies law enforcement ftd are using are looking do to scare -- utilize are not the global hawk or the predatory in $30 million a copy. they are small in stat chiewr. the maximum time allot of on our

shadow hawk is two hours and twenty minutes. >> at what altitude? >> no more than 400 feet aboveground level. >> people are going to be able to privacy will be alleviated aassume with that type of. >> absolutely. a that altitude and the type of engine it has, it sounds like a very powerful weed eater, and you'll be able to notice that it's above. >> maybe you could make a weed eater out of one. it would be handy. mr. chairman,, the department of homeland security will not testify before the subcommittee and the department of homeland security. is that correct? i rest my case. thanks for the point. i'll close on it as well. chair recognizes for the third time during the hearing from

texas. >> it's refreshing to hear my good republican to talk about civil liberties. thank you. appreciate that. but what one more thing out epa story by foxx. they took it back. it was not uav. it was aircraft they have been flying for the ten years both under democrat and republican. ..

>> the supreme court has already interpreted different cases. for example, talking about aircraft. keep in mind that the supreme court has argued talked about using cameras on aircraft. this time it is a uav. it just just make sure that we all understand the supreme court aspect. there is a expectation of privacy when it is inside the house, it is a different type of privacy. the business has less expectations and inside the

supreme court or the springford has talked about the doctrine and you are familiar with the dow chemical company versus the united states. also familiar with the doctrine of california versus serrano case. the supreme court said that the police did not have to obtain a search warrant on a [inaudible] is that correct? also -- the court also defines aerial searches in florida and chief tommy mentioned the 400 feet. they did not need a search warrant when buying a helicopter above 400 feet. in this case, a different type of platform. if you are flying about 400 feet, no search warrant.

but if you are flying below 400 feet, and i believe most of the law enforcement and those uavs will be a 400 below. therefore, if it is -- if you are flying at 400 feet in altitude, at that time you would need a search warrant whether using helicopter or a uav, probably not an airplane, but a unit. the supreme court has already laid out the law and what it is. i do agree with my colleagues here that we probably need to look at some legislation. but as we draft the legislation. we have to keep in mind that the supreme court has already defined open doctrine expectations. is that correct? >> yes, sir, that is absolutely correct. as far as case law goes, there is no difference between

establishing a separate type of case law for uavs. the manned aircraft component is nothing more, compared to a uav that has them on the ground. they are the aircraft assets. >> the dow chemical company versus united states, airborne use of thermal imaging. here is another case where technology is being used. i'm fascinated by it, but i do understand there are concerns and that the doctor had just testified -- i looked at his recommendations. they are good recommendations. i think we need to look at those recommendations. all i am saying is that members -- there already is case law on a straight the supreme court has ruled on us. if we do any legislation, i

would say let's look at the legislation of the supreme court. let's use common sense and applying some of this. and put trust in our law enforcement, which i appreciate and having three brothers and one is a quarter share. i appreciate the work they do. thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> i thank you, gentlemen. i would like to thank the witnesses for being here. as a former federal prosecutor, i understand -- is there some i missed? >> yes. >> oh, my goodness. mr. davis. i sincerely apologize red. [talking over each other] [talking over each other] >> you really have a lot to ask him about when he asked it. you talk about using instruments

-- that that could become a problem. you mentioned that. can you mentioned a little bit more? >> yes, sir. one of the emerging issues that we have identified is the potential that the controls of these uavs in flight, again, we are talking about the small ones as opposed to the encrypted vod type. they could, in fact, be jammed in great command and control. linked with uav. meaning that the uav could go off course. not necessarily or could include being taken control over, but clearly breaking that commanding controlling the appropriate persons or organizations that we are controlling. it is something that needs to be

addressed now before we have these potentially serious kinds of incidents. >> thank you very much. let me ask you and chief mcdaniel. the davis act is collective. could you describe what kind of data it is. what it is used for and how long is it chats. with the individuals have any idea that this data may be collected that involves them? >> the only data that we are collecting off of our shadowhawk is color video. we can convert that to both still photographs or video. depending upon the situation, we would obviously store that video

for criminal purposes. i.e. if our swat team is going in on an individual or it it is a high-risk warrant, we would also have that video or photographs preserved as evidence. it does have a system, a forward-looking infrared camera system. however, the idea behind that was more for searching for lost persons in our national forests to be able to identify them. >> let's say you have a tip that a farmer was using some of his or her acreage, and they had a plot of marijuana growing. and you wanted to check that out with one of these vehicles.

would there be a way to do that without requiring a search warrant, or would you be within limits? how would you handle a situation like that? >> as indicated earlier, the supreme court in 1924 established 1924 doctrine that allow those things to be observed that the majority of the public could see. in responding to the example that you present, the reality is, and this is based upon law enforcement, investigation techniques and etc. -- utilizing this drone to observe a marijuana field would not be appropriate. it would not be a good investigative tool because of

the constraint that the faa puts on the use of uavs by law-enforcement agencies. find no higher than 400 feet atl. and because of the noise in the sight of it. if we are trying to investigate whether there is a marijuana field to continue with their investigation and ultimately arrested suspects, the uav is not it. >> sir, are you comfortable that enough attention is being given to the individual rights and civil liberties of citizens, given the use of this type of surveillance? >> i'm not sure that comfortable would be the right term. we do respect the fact that law enforcement is not at this time and use drones for broad and untargeted access. with verse that to supreme court

precedent, it allows for aerial surveillance in open fields. however, recently the supreme court did investigate a case in u.s. versus jones of police using gps without a warrant to track a suspect. drones allow for the same type of pervasive and intensive surveillance that the gps allows for. and in that case, justice scalia wrote in circumstances involving dramatic change for the best resolution to privacy concerns must be privacy regulator. we represent a jump in technology with drones with normal tracking of an individual with policemen and a police car come as drones represent to aerial tracking in a helicopter airplane. >> thank you very much, and thank you mr. chairman for the very interesting information. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. davis. i apologize again for my

oversight. >> speaking of oversight, this has been a very productive and insightful hearing. let me just close by saying that as a former federal prosecutor, i recognize the value -- the legitimate law enforcement value of technology. i think the balance is privacy and security. obviously the fourth amendment applies here. the case law is that were set forth -- it is there. i have stated my prior career. this is an evolving field. there are thousands of the things that can be deployed in the skies. in the next couple of years, we may see more than a couple thousand, maybe 10,000 of these things. i think it is incumbent upon the department of homeland security to come up with a policy. to come up with a security analysis. i think one thing that we can all agree on, on both sides of

the aisle of this committee, both republican and democrat, and i think all three of the witnesses -- they agree on one thing. that is that dhs has a role. i think mr. billingham -- local law enforcement does the backend. and ma'am come as a expert of privacy, she should be involved in this issue. we cannot walk away with that as a common goal and understanding. i hope that this week that the department. withoutcome i do want to thank the witnesses. i think the members for their questions. thank you so much. this hearing is now adjourned.

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> you're after watching c-span 2 at politics and public affairs teacher live coverage of the u.s. senate. on weeknights watch key public policy events in the latest nonfiction authors and books on booktv. you can see past programs and get our schedules on her website and you can join in the conversation on social media

sites. >> in a few moments, republican senator tom coburn on the antitax pledge that has been signed by many members of congress. and in 45 minutes, a hearing on college tuition costs. and then we reenter the hearing on domestic drones. >> russia and china vetoed a u.n. security council resolution proposing sanctions on syria. on tomorrow's "washington journal", we will talk about what is ahead for u.s. policy towards syria with former defense secretary. census bureau director robert gross joins us with new numbers on manufacturing, trade, personal income and homeownership. also, former federal election commissioner brad smith talks about why he opposes the

independent campaign groups that disclose where they get their money. "washington journal" is live on c-span every morning at seven eastern. >> oklahoma senator tom coburn wrote in "the new york times" about the antitax pledge that has been signed to many republican members of congress and he talked about the issue on "washington journal" for 45 minutes. >> now joining us on "washington journal" is senator tom coburn and a member of the finance committee. senator, in the last couple of days, there has been an op-ed in "the new york times" and back-and-forth on the issues of taxes and spending. would you like to take this chance to clarify your position on that? >> i think we ought to have the lowest taxes that we can. but we ought to pay our taxes and not ask our children and grandchildren to do so. that is what the democrats and the republicans, no matter who

is in control, have been doing for years. i frankly what it means your for our kids, my kids, which are about your age, and my grandchildren there living is going to be remarkably lower unless someone stands up. this idea that you can't have increased revenue and that you have to trim the government. i agree with that principle. the federal government is twice the size it was 11 years ago. our deficit is your will be bigger than the federal government was 15 years ago. there is a real reason to challenge the growth of the federal government. but to put a line in the sand and say that we will not do this with revenue, the realistic aspects of getting 60 thomas coburn's in the senate to

believe that? i think there are zero. i think the future is worth more than that. you see inside the senate and house. the problem in front of our nation is big. the problems are impending. they are coming soon. to not act we have not acted this year in the senate on anything of consequence to fix the problems of the country for political reasons, it is criminal. i think america would be better off with all of us thrown out and some other people up here. because of the leadership phase in washington, including the president. >> politically speaking, part of the political argument in whether or not texas can or should be raised on those making $250,000 and more. >> it is all a political argument. the top 1% pay 30% of all the taxes right now.

the top 10% pay 70%. the idea that they're not paying their way -- let me tell you what is not fair. what is not fair to people and systems that keep them down. that is what is not fair. what is not fair is creating 75,000 new people under ssd i probably only create super thousand jobs. that is what is not fair. what is not fair is wildly still the future of her kids. that is what is not fair. what we know has worked in the past is reforming the tax code by taking away tons of credits and deductions and when reagan and the democrats did that in the 80s, we saw 4.9% true gdp growth on average for four years in a row. why don't we go back and look at

what has worked. what worked was a compromise. that is what i have pushed. out of 535 members of congress, i have the highest rating from the most conservative when it comes to taxes. i am willing to do what is necessary to fix our country. and put us on a path to creating a different future. right now come in the future is a deadlock. >> you wrote in your most recent book that america is already bankrupt. your book, "the debt bomb." we may not fill the full effects, but we are effectively bankrupt. our debt is the size of our entire economy. our payments are not our obligations. our unfunded liabilities exceed our income as far as the ipc. no amount of attainable growth or tax revenue will be enough. >> no. unless you change -- unless you change entitlements and modify medicare. unless you modify social security.

unless you modify medicaid and a lot of little long-term commitments that career politicians have promised with no revenue source to pay for but to get reelected, unless you modify that, we are belly up. what happens if we look at the lack of leadership and integrity in washington today? what will happen? they won't do anything. what you will see is infliction in currency, which is the worst tax of all because you never get to vote on that one. that is what we are going to see. what does that mean in the short-term? if you graduate this year, won in two of you don't get a permanent job. if you have a 401k and your 45 years old and you think you are set to be able to retire in 20 years or 15 years, i have a thought for you. the fact is we are decreasing

the purchasing power of the dollar and you won't be able to retire. the lack of integrity about what the options are from the politicians in washington is sickening. because they won't tell the truth. the only way you get out of debt with spending money or earn more money. we somehow think we can have this magic potion in washington that we don't have to sacrifice. here's my last observation. i will be quiet for a moment. this country has lived the last 30 years off of the next 30 years. we don't want it. we don't like somebody to say that. we are all going to have to sacrifice now because we have a lollipop before we had our green beans. the fact is that we are going to have to sacrifice. that means everybody.

everyone will have to do so if they want the country to survive. senator coburn, this article in "roll call." it says the senate may grind to a halt. i want to show our viewers what happened on the floor yesterday with leaders harry reid and mitch mcconnell and get your reaction. >> i would say to my good friend, the majority leader, quit blaming everyone else. not the house, not the senate, not the perceived. why don't we operate like we used to under leaders of both parties. and we understood that amendments we don't like are part of the process. because everybody does not agree on everything we met we have simply not been able to get to this. mr. president, i don't think it calls for my being interrupted

here. virtually everything has been held up [inaudible] >> it just shows you where politics are in regards to policy. why is there no budget? he has been instructed not to -- why? they want to vote on the amendments associated with the budget. there are hundreds of votes on the budget. the reason that harry reid didn't bring things to the floor and he doesn't bring them in regular order is he does not want his members to have to make votes that will reflect in the election. when politics trumps this, and

when the excuse come the real reason for doing that -- what that tell you is that people that are in the senate that agree with that have no business being in the senate. because the votes you can take in the senate that you shouldn't -- they want to defend and be able to defend. one of the most conservative editors, i voted for him. i had to do a lot of explaining why i voted for chirac in oklahoma. i think it is exactly the right vote for the country's best interest. it was terrible for me politically. but what majority leader harry reid is doing -- number one, he is ruining his tradition. and he's keeping senators from

being who they should be. which is men and women who are willing to stand up and take a position and then defend it. what you have going on in the senate is nothing. i outlined this in my book and what we talked about this morning. nothing to address that has happened in the u.s. senate. the reason for that is not because democrats want to solve that problem it is because the number one policy goal of you reread is to bring it back. the games that are being played in politics is killing our country. >> very quickly before we go to the cost, and if you look at some of the efforts you have been involved in, the extra party -- super committee. it has been a year or so.

how do you see those efforts? >> i have seen the partisans in both parties. they're the very people that don't want those of us who want to solve the problem to succeed. the problem with politicians in washington, and i call it career is some. some males who called something else. we are always waiting for the next election to make the hard choices. we need real leadership. we need authentic leadership we had an exit interview with a real authentic leader. i applauded president obama but he is leaving government. effectiveness happened. if you want to pass by the senate is not working, it is

called harry reid. incompetent and incapable of carrying on the tradition. >> doctor groves will be on the program to take your call. we have valerie from dulles, virginia. democrat. >> caller: good morning, everyone. i have a question. the democrats plan to keep in place the tax cuts for incomes for those who make up 250,000 unless would also benefit those who make more than 250,000. but it would just be 250,000. america is making 250,000 or less with benefits, and americans making more than that -- they will see the tax cut on their first 250,000. my question is, why is that not an acceptable compromise. >> and is not a compromise on the real problem. the problems aren't taxes. the problems by the government

is twice the size it was in the taxes have not kept up with it. and we see the problem is until you solve the entitlement problem, well, i have actually seen them -- i am happy to eliminate large numbers of deductions but i am not willing to tax the american people want some more to make that broad and duplication that we truly need to do -- we won't even be able to buy the money in five years from the world economy. we truly put social security on a sustainable path and until we fix the cost overruns and medicaid that are occurring every year. the grand bargain is accommodation of both of those. ask yourself who on the other side of the aisle that i would recommend has offered a

solution. you are going to get $60 billion over the plans they are putting forward now as they political gains. if you ask the very wealthy in this country, they have no problem paying more taxes. they are willing to do it. they are patriotic americans, too. but none of it is going to go to grow the the government. and we saw the medicare problem and until you solve the entitlement problem, you're not going to solve the problem. we can't tax our way out of this and we can't borrow our way out of it -- we have to cut our spending on the bed. and we have to slow the growth. the baby boomers are going to go bankrupt. the average couple now pays him 100 30,000 dollars in medicare taxes in their entire lives. they take out $350,000 in

medicare. you put that on top of the swelling numbers of my generation. the second point is that people who are on social security today will take out $21 trillion more than they put into social security. why or both of those things happening? because the career politician promises you one thing, but never promise as a way to pay for it, which is exactly opposite and what thomas jefferson warned would happen to us. there should never be a program set up with which there is not a tax that is levied to pay for it. career politicians of both parties have done that. there is not going to be a bargain on taxes until there is a bargain on the whole thing on fixing up the country. >> senator coburn has term limited himself.

>> i have six grandchildren and a seventh on the way. i can't wait to spend time with them. >> actually believe in our founders. they all have a lot to say about it and nobody ever turned away from it. george washington is very well revered. somebody of the economy and experience ought to come to washington and then go home. what we have is a large number of people in washington, lovely people -- who have zero common sense making decisions for our country. it is not because they intend to. they have no real world experience other than politics. >> this is senator coburn's second book. it is "the debt bomb." it came out in april. here's the cover. here is a tweaked for you. shame on you, mr. chairman.

we know that the gop hasn't stalled all the recovery efforts. >> i'm one of the most conservative senators, -- [inaudible] >> the next call is diane on the republican line from kentucky. >> caller: hello, senator. i've been watching you and i have your book and i just finished it. my question is about your comments on social security and medicare and medicaid. you are a baby boomer i am a baby boomer. i am concerned about the fiscal cliff and here is my question. there are several articles in

c-span, which had gone yesterday, adel to talk about her new book. the whole idea my parent is dying, here's what happened, but i do it better. [inaudible name] had an article where he calls himself his father's own [inaudible] where do you see that aggravation that that is, and that the baby boomers are stressing out. >> that is a complicated question. i am actually a three-time cancer survivor. this last year in terms of prostate cancer.

i think this ties into her problems in health care. one of the things is one dollar out of every $5 expended towards it. there was a piece in the reuters about estimating $150 billion a year. but things ought to get well and people can't get sick. both of it is because most of the health care that is purchased in this country -- we all think someone else is paying the bill. i mean, i assume you have a health insurance policy. i have a health insurance policy. other people do as well. once we have our deductible done, that's it. the day before the end of the year is the busiest day for doctor's office. it has to do with the deductible being met.

it is about that second or third or fourth of january -- that is less busy time. end-of-life issues, my experience with that, i think there is weakness on the part of physicians to stand up for their patients. as we go to this accountable care organization, hospital owned doctors, unless you have consistent relationships with patients, you will have doctors that will come in and -- my experience with patients, i knew my patients while. end-of-life, elderly or advanced age and had an irretrievable condition. and a lot of family members said we don't want to do anymore. if you want it done coming you are going to have to fire me and find another doctor to do it because my promise, and here is his advance directive, my promise was that in my opinion, it came to that moment and i was

not going to hurt them. i was going to let nature take its course. 75% of the time, he would calm down and think about what their father really wanted. that happened four or five times, they would fire me and i get something else. how we are aligning things now with this new infrastructure, this captivated care, it will result in more cost red you have less relationship with physicians and patient. fixing toward threats will help, but then it's not a role for the federal government at the federal level because we don't have the ability to tell the courts that. i think it is a hard issue. it is one of the things that seniors could do right now to really help us. they need to make sure that they have an advanced directive and speak to their children, you know, i'm coming back to haunt

you if you do it for you and not really for me. don't put me on the machine when it's my time. don't do this. of course, that is where we spent a lot of medicare dollars. by the way, that does not count in this $850 billion of waste that does not help anybody. she asks a great question. my daughters are on their own. if i'm near death, let nature take its course. i will come back and get you if you haven't. >> the next call comes from lafayette, louisiana. dam, you are on the line. >> caller: yes, good morning. first of all i would like to talk about some of the dialogue i was given. the both parties can't agree.

they do agree on something such as the patriot act and security for the american citizens. i think it is a big dog and pony show, tweedledee and tweedledum, that's what we desperately need in this country is a third-party developer the president i have two choices. i have a man that represents the wealthy corporate america and the man that says -- he's taking on all of our privacy act. we now have drones flying all over the place. it is time for this corporate own political system to end. and we desperately need, and before we vote again, we need a third-party candidate and i'm looking at the green party right now. i think everybody should wake up and shut down this two-party

system. >> all right, we have a point, senator coburn? >> just remember that career politicians in washington have engineered equipment very difficult for third-party to really get up and going, but one way you're going to get a third-party that the republicans win in november and don't fix the country. you won't get a third-party. because they won't exist anymore. >> would you consider joining a third-party? >> -- i don't know if -- i don't have a lot of frustrations with my party. i have frustrations with those who don't honor what they believe in. >> what are good examples? if you believe the government is outside the bounds of being

constitutional and we have grown that way -- why would you continue to do so? we really believe, we should not have a $1.2 trillion deficit. why did you vote for this? >> in other words, what we say and what we do, i can learn a lot more from you about what i have seen you do weather than what i hear you say. everybody says oh, vote for this -- well, no. we are going to have a government shutdown sooner or later because the rest of the world isn't not going to finance our government. i would tell you that america needs to wake up. this government has grown way beyond its bounds, we have actually demonstrated that you have read in the book of the programs hundreds of billions of dollars on ways the programs do

the same thing and nobody holds them accountable. there is not a magic on them. actually had an incident where we were doing what was going on in the federal government, and they had no idea they were. in talking about competency level, this is not hard to solve. what is hard to solve his parochialism by crew membe of congress that say i don't want to change anything because it might cause me to lose a motorhome. washington will never fix our problems until the pain of not fixing it becomes greater than the pain of the problems that we have. that is a sad state of affairs. what that says that there is no real leadership in our country

anymore. it is people in the system. unfortunately, that is too often true. it is about the politicians and not about the well-being of the country. >> we have a call from chicago. thank you for holding. >> caller: good morning, how are you doing. senator coburn, i want to say that i have become disappointed with republicans. i think that they have lost their ability to be objective. i want to speak to what you said about taxes. it is true that the wealthy does pay -- this is the other saturday. david stockton talks about this. he has talked for 30 years that most of america's prosperity has gone to the 10%. that means for 30 years where we

sit down at the dinner table, 10% get a meal and the other 90% is eating a salad. that is the inequity that has created a lot of these problems. it is just the truth. i don't see anyone saying that this is a problem. pro-growth, it didn't work. it is flawed. i would like your response, please. >> first of all, in the 1980s and worked well and you saw the average middle-class gaining in terms of their standard of living. i would say that there are very few who don't agree with you that the wealthy should be paying more. i would tell you that many of the wealthy absolutely agree with that. but they are not willing to do,

and i think rightly so, is to make those payments so they can have more bureaucracies and programs other than make those payments to lower the debt and the deficit. the real reason is that there hasn't been upward mobility in our country. it is because the government is taking too large of a share. we are almost at 40% in terms of gdp. the reason that we did better than everybody else in the world for such a long time is because the government wasn't taking 40%. we are on track for them to take 60% if they needed to. you can't tax or when your way now. we will solve the tax problem. there will be a larger percentage chunk -- you know, i put up the subsidies for the rich and famous, which outlined

between 20 and $30 billion per year that they benefit from the nobody else did. i want to get rid of all that. that will cause them to pay more taxes. but my question, i believe the web, is your answer as to how the government redistribute fat, and how has that worked in the rest of the world? what we are trying to do right now is that europe is failing. that would be the mistake that we made. if we really go back to free enterprise and we really lessen the role of federal government other than in terms of regulatory, what you're going to see is upward mobility. i will give you a statistic. since president obama has been president come we have added 75,000 people a month to the disability levels and we have created 62,000 jobs. now, i don't know whether all those people who are disabled or not, but what i can tell you is when we create dependence, when

we learn dependence, what we are actually doing is taking away the potential of those individuals and we are limiting their god-given ability and we are making people dependent when they otherwise would not be. >> two articles in the paper this morning. editor cockburn, that he'll end politico. so kuester is a big job speller. that is the defense industry testimony on the hill. and what are your thoughts on sequestration? >> i did not vote for that and the reason i did not is because it is stupid to do it across the board cut. at this programs for the work and you're going to cut the programs that are totally ineffective. i agree that cutting the defense department will cut some jobs.

but the mercator center also put out a study that showed that they will not be as older ones are. there is a plan right now to raise levels by the defense industry is to have others will be on jobs and hoping to scare movement. the fact is the pentagon has taken some heads. they are going to. so kuester is a stupid idea, but the total my money is not a stupid idea. how do we do it better. but the scare tactics of our jobs -- there needs to be some decreased jobs from the defense department. we have a brand-new aircraft carrier that we are building material for, $800 million over cost, estimates right now. when you ask yourself, how confident are we? how confident are we. we are halfway through building

a ship and we are already $800 billion over cost? where is the grown-ups in the pentagon better managing our kids dollars. because we are willing an aircraft carrier with money from china. if anything happens on interest rates, and it will, here is what happens to us. our historical interest costs are about 5.8%. and we are paying less than 2% now. if all of a sudden we go back to the historical interest range, you are talking about adding $750 million a year to the budget just to pay interest. for one year. on what we owe right now. why would we do that to her kids? >> i will tell you, my frustration is there are very big problems in front of this country. they are all solvable. i put some solutions at the end

of the book. but the fact that we are not addressing what the admiral says is the most wrister country, the fact that we are not addressing not says we don't deserve to be in washington. >> the book is "the debt bomb." it came out in april. it is senator coburn we beat second book. a couple of tweet mail. 800 alien dollars a year on defense spending. how much is in that program? >> 10 to 15%. easy. i can show it to you. >> and so can everybody else who works for the military. if you ask them, in your area of responsibility -- could you find

whether it is a corporal all the way down the line with general. >> felix sends a tweet. thank you for your services. is simpson-bowles the solution? >> i think some variant might be. the problem with simpson-bowles -- look, i voted for simpson-bowles because i thought we needed something to get action to the floor. the problem with simpson-bowles is that it didn't fix medicare. that is why they got no house republicans to vote for it. it had nothing to do with increased taxes, it had to do what was in the package. and it had to do with not axing medicare. >> the next coffer senator coburn. we have about seven minutes left. john, republican line, go ahead.

>> caller: yes, senator, i want to thank you for your service and time today. my question is, is there nothing that the rest of the senate can do -- with senator reid, to pass the budget, too, you know, to do exactly what they are supposed to do and also, i understand that there are several bills, 15 to 30, roughly what i heard that is sitting on the shelf that he will not allow the senate to even vote on, you know? to me, i don't think that is right and what do i think it is fair. that, you know, that he is not allowing the senate to vote on just to help obama or just to help -- like he had said earlier, to help the other senators not take a vote when

they are coming up for reelection. >> i don't know the exact number. there is somewhere between 26 and 30 the options for us -- the senate was designed to protect the minority. that minority rights were always heard on every bell. when it first started it had to have 100% agreement to move a bill. in other words, what our founders said is we want to force compromise. we don't want to just be a reaction to popular demand, but we want the senate to force compromise. the way they do that is to let the senate, whose history in the last 60 or 70 years other than the last three -- we need to let them work there well. which means i can come down and offer a stupid amendment that is not even related to the bill, but there is a cost to me for doing that because other

senators lose respect. when asking how they help me do something that is legitimate, they say you cannot do that. i think you kind of abuse your power and i will pass. what harry reid does -- number one which is regular order, [inaudible] his office or this a political machine, and then there are no amendments on it and he tells the truth. his running for the senate has combined all the rest of the senate combined in the history of the senate. to me it is shameful. and that is not partisan. i actually love the senate first two years because i actually thought, you know, here is a real debate and where things can really happen. you actually get a chance on the floor of the senate to put forward your idea and explain

why it is a good thing. you might get beat down or say i don't think i want to take advantage of the courtesies they have given me to force a turbo, but at least you have to have a debate. if nothing is getting debated were passed and the american people aren't hearing that, all they are hearing is the political spin that fox or msnbc runs, which even this one on the right, you end up going to the middle to find out where the truth is. i mean, it's a disaster for our country. >> marion, ohio. please go ahead with your question or comment for senator coburn. >> caller: yes, hello. [inaudible] one thing i don't agree with as i did things about going back on medicaid and medicare. what we are doing is going to

back out on the people that truly use these benefits and have hard times. when we have these entertainers and government people in politics and whatnot -- making a hundred thousand dollars, 1 million a month. [inaudible] how much can they do? on top of that some did tax breaks, so they don't have to pay any taxes. and they talk about how they they want to have their freedom and run the country. he chose poorly on them, not on uscome into force them to live like that. a lot of them come over in our country, and anyone to fall back on the people that are already struggling. when you have all these other people that are not part of this either. >> i think we got a lot on the

table. let's get a response from the senator. >> nobody is talking about cutting back. what they are talking about is reforming medicare. if you want to pay medicare payments to people that don't deserve to get it, but continue to do that. i can tell you that your children and grandchildren can't afford that. everything in every program, without some economies or scale or smartness -- let's continue to do it. all it means is what we care about is more about us than our kids and grandkids. the fact is that too many for politicians have promised things that we can't afford, and now that the bill is new, we cannot get another credit card, and the hard decisions -- we are going to raise taxes, the very wealthy will pay more taxes in this country. everybody knows that's going to

happen even though they are any the top 10% and 70% of all the taxes. that is going to happen. we we're going to have a more progressive tax cut. but you can't fix medicare. security is an easy one to fix, but it's going to require some slight adjustments in the tax rates for the wealthy, but it will also require additional advancement and age when you are eligible. it will also require a total revamp of of social security disability. 170 people in this country are not disabled, but that is what we are paying in terms of visibility right now. they are not. 30%, lots of people no social security people. they are plenty capable. which violates the intent and purpose of law. if you tell me that you don't want us to fix any of those things, then you have to have an explanation for your children why we are so selfish in our generation, and i'm talking -- i'm not talking to very poor and those that are totally dependent on a safety net. i am talking about those that

are above that level but have decided they would rather say the heck with our kids. that is the choice. whether the politicians do it -- the fact is that international financiers, because we put ourselves in such a hole with the debt that we have, the choices are either going to be on her hands to determine our future were the people who loan us money. i would rather that dick durbin and i negotiate a compromise between democrats and republicans on what is best for the country in the future than to have the leader of the chinese treasury department department tell us what we are going to do. that is where we are. you may not like to hear that story, the fact is that we lived the last 30 years. the bill is going to be placed on the next 30 years. what that means is you are stealing the future from our children and i'm willing to do my part and pay more taxes. i am owing to make sacrifices

for my kids and grandkids. i think most other americans are, too. .. we are doing nothing of real significance in the senate and we haven't all summer. my wife can tell i'm depressed every monday morning, getting up early and find back here.

to apply the effort to do something that's not solving problems is not encouraging. i think you'll see political games played the whole time. political games played on all the republicans. there will be a cr. you know, we've been at record level of quorum calls in the senate this year. we offer -- we have boats and nobody wants to go. as the political games played. i would say that about 30s, don't believe anything. study yourself. look what the past history is done. see our politicians are hurting the country today rather than helping it. see what happens after the election because quite frankly nothing is going to happen other than political gamesmanship between now and the election. >> host: here is the but, senator coburn's most recent

look. our guests for the last 45 minutes. thank you, mr. chairman. >> guest: pleasure to see you.

>> the senate education committee heard from college presidents today about ways to control tuition costs. educators are michigan, iowa, and indiana and florida test event for almost two hours.

>> senate committee on health education labor and pensions will come to order. as we approach the start of the academic year, millions of students are struggling to pay the estimated cost of college. during these difficult economic times, tuition intrigue in real incomes are making college less and less affordable. over the past decade can the state and local funding for students dropped by 25% while tuition and fees at four-year public schools increased by 72%. student debt crossed the $1 trillion mark and surpassed credit card debt for the first time ever. the news media are rife with stories of questioning student debt including graduates with $120,000 debt, making $225 a week working two jobs.

her mind to tell people the strength of the american dream on hold or out of reach. a national survey of reach graduates this past spring it delayed making a major purchase like a home or a car because of the college debt. about a quarter decided to put off continuing education are moved in with relatives to save money. americans age 25 to 34 make up a little more than a quarter of all home buyers, the lowest share in the past decade. well, there's no need to save more grim statistics and stories today, but the message is clear. college is increasingly out of reach for students from working families in lower income families. our nation is losing ground and having well-educated workforce that can compete in the global economy. what are my top priorities history of the committees to address the college affordability crisis and try to find ways to curb the ever-growing financial barriers to colleagues.

this is the second health committee hearing focusing on college affordability as with a estimate beyond merely providing severity of the problem. our focus will be on institution that are breaking with business as usual to implement promising strategies and practices, innovations in initiatives to prove college affordability. today's spin on this as a separate through successful for college's student is well in previous student access and student success. these innovations can help inform committee's work in the same federal policy and replicated in scattered throughout the america regain and retain its global leadership. also your expert insight into how tuition pricing and financially policies can promote

affordability. how do some school is take an aspirin look at operations to find efficiencies so savings can be translated to minimal or no tuition increases and more effective student supports? schools work in the students of them is to make sure they make sense financial decision and accessing of the eight available them. our innovative leaders in academia realigning and reinventing operations? howrah sun schools realizing gains in retention and can be shimla bringing down the cost per student? how do some schools maximize financial aid resources by targeting aid to students with the most financial need? in short, how can colleges and universities make it a priority to string and postsecondary access and the success of students are lower and middle in some families in the face of state has come at growing cost and increasing costs were better responsibility and outcomes.

i look forward to working with our distinguished ranking members come the senator and begin my colleagues on both sides to ensure that a college education remains affordable regardless of background. but that i am a senator and see for. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm glad we're having this hearing and they appreciate the outstanding panel. i appreciate the extensive testimony provided and while i regret you will have to kind of reduced benefit we can stay within the timeframe for the last time for questions, but which you provided already is extremely helpful and not only do we have this distinguished panel, but of course with the former president at the university of tennessee serving on this committee and he's been suggesting ways for a long time that colleges could solve some problems and that we could quit

blaming burdens on the colleges. i thank you for having this hearing as we discussed on the cost of higher education, colleges become too expensive and shows no signs of getting cheaper anytime soon. but the trend does not change obeah list of possible to achieve the president's challenge to become first in the world in college attainment. many would say it lies at best, but no progress will be made that institutions don't still for sleep finding ways to cut costs and fees students money. i know this is possible because today's witnesses are doing just that. in recent years come each individual is then faced the challenge of doing more with less as funding for state appropriations has fallen in demand for higher education has increased. each educator has responded through thoughtful budgeting and cost cutting that has enabled institutions to continue successfully serving students without sacrificing educational quality.

i hope we are today will be heard by others and serve as a model for how it traditions of higher education can start making changes now. put this in mind, i recognize congress also has a responsibility to help over the last three years dramatic changes have been made to increase access to federal student aid and help mitigate cost of college for lower-income students. these changes while well intentioned have led to persistent funding problems in the poker programs, including $6 billion funding gap now projected for fiscal year 2014. the funding gaps of them regularly address to a series of ad hoc changes to the federal aid programs annual appropriations bill rebought changes successfully generated sufficient savings to maintain the pell grant and the short term, short term, they come at the expense of lower middle income students that do nothing to avoid future spending gaps. therefore i urge the committee to begin addressing long-term

sustainability of palestine are rather than later. as we learned earlier this year with respect to interest rates, waiting will only result in yet another costly last-minute short-term solution. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator enzi. for now but our panel of witnesses. we have an exceptional panels witnesses today. i want to thank you off for being here and sharing your expertise. i'll go down and introduce our panel and then we'll start with dr. heller and work through. our first witness, dr. don heller at michigan state university since january. previously totten served as direct your center for a higher education at penn state university and also the faculty appointment at university of michigan. his well-known effects are in higher finance and economics and especially financial aid and tuition pricing widely published in scholarly journals and work

frequently reported on by the media. next we hear from dr. stephen lee at iowa state university. to arrange in january coming to north carolina for a spent many years as a faculty member, research program later in north carolina system and north carolina state university. he currently serves in the iowa stem advisory council is a member of the greater des moines committee o. krauser's implementation committee. i know the entire isu community is excited about dr. leath's arrival and shows great sense for doing great names in the state of iowa and since he spent so much his life in north carolina i would like to yield to my good friend and center for north carolina also for purposes of recognition.

>> mr. chairman, stephanie take one of the chairman witnesses and asked to recognize and introduce them. let me say to my colleagues, steve leath has a remarkable record within the north carolina university system. not only has he served in numerous capacities in his field of agriculture. steve led an effort by the university system and a public-private partnership to create the largest research campus in the world for the study of human nutrition. it is truly a model of success for public private partnerships, not limited to the university system. it has six academic campuses on the research campus part. it has equipment that only -- it is the only facility in the world that has some of the equipment they currently have. says steve has had an unbelievable history of

increasing the grants and research programs within the university system, which is let the north carolina university system to be one of the most impressive research organizations in the country. he's also pioneered what i believe is one of the most important public-private partnerships will be a model for others to try to replicate around the world. mr. chairman, he was a graduate of pennsylvania state university and the masters at the university of delaware and doctrine in pathology from university of illinois. i can't think of a better person of your esteemed. thank you. >> thank you very much, senator byrd. next after 10 murdaugh. it's been over 20 years working in law enforcement and criminal justice center's 30 years united states air force reserve.

elected to the board of the florida association of college and university symbol chair for the upcoming school year. next, live from thomas jay snyder, president of ivy tech college in indiana. mr. snyder came in 2007 after a successful career as a business executive including time at general motors and most recently as president and ceo of delco ran the international critics in a theater in advance when of advancement effectuating, they participated in the hybrid drive. the chronicle of higher education is one of the president's making a difference nationwide. a final witness, president and ceo for academic transformation. dr. two twigg is effectively transform teaching and higher

education. prior to founding and cat in 1999 she was the vice president of edgy calm and dedicated to effectively using technology. she's served for learning technologies from university of new york and assault many administrative positions at suny empire state college. as i said we have a very, very distinguished group panel today. are your testimony is made part of the record in their entirety. bold start with dr. heller and go through. you could just you sum up your testimony and five for seven minutes or so. decoy little bit over i won't worry too much. i know a lot of senators want to get engaged in the colloquy with all of you. summarize your testimony had appreciated most ever do, dr. heller. please proceed.

>> chairman harkin, senator enzi and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to address the critical issue affecting animation. akamai been convicted tuition and access for over 15 years sonatas a representative for michigan state university. mr. were tuition prices in colleges and universities have skyrocketed. over the last two decades prices have grown more than three times faster than inflation and more importantly three times faster than median family income in our country. the purpose of my chest when he today is not to examine the reason behind rising prices by to discuss what governments in colleges and universities can do to ensure college remain successful for all students. remarks are focused some of what we can do to promote success for students from low and moderate income families because it is these statements on the margins of attending college and he is winning to focus on if we are to achieve, senator harkin

mentioned president of him school of return in the united states to leadership in educational attainment. for poor students come in the sticker of the posted price of college is what drives their perception of what it cost to attend. and the world of perfect information about prices and financially, students would be able to accurately calculate the true net price they face. this fantasy world does not exist. the higher education finance is a mysterious place for these demands. by the department of education in some higher education institutions have taken important steps to disseminate, there is still much that has to be done. the hundreds if not thousands of studies conducted on financial aid potala so we need to do to insure college participation for students with financial need. because they base their college decisions on sticker prices, financial aid programs need to be simple, easily accessible and provide information early in student life so they can make

good decisions about preparing for college academically and financially. we also know grants and much more effective in promoting college participation in student loans. poor students have been shown right for some of the piers and instead will often choose to enroll only part-time and work more hours, behaviors and/or detrimental to completing a bachelor's degree program. 30% of grants awarded by states and 55% of institutional grants are awarded without any form of means testing. we need to encourage states and universities to focus on students with financial need. higher education institutions need to ensure they are doing all they can to keep tuition prices in check and i know my colleagues on the panel will be talking about that. some observers have argued financially is little purpose and provide incentives for institutions to raise prices in cash at that age, but there's no credible evidence to support the proposition .

during the administration of george w. bush, the department of education published a highly respected study and price increases and that caused them. they found the primary driver of tuition price increase in public institutions were three quarters of undergraduate students attend college is the change in state funding as states invest less money in higher education institutions respond by raising prices. the sun the relationship between the availability of federal and state grant and the ensuing tuition price increases in either public or private not-for-profit institutions. institutions raise prices by an application to ensure they increase their own financially programs to hold harmless media students. for example, last year our state cut michigan state university's appropriation by 15% and our board raise tuition 6.9% to compensate in part for these

cuts. but the board also increased our own institutional grant aid a 10%, with 83% of grant dollars going to students with financial need. this is an example of what institutions need to do with their own financially programs. while pell grants received bipartisan support from congress, one problem with the program is that its maximum or is not kept pace of increase increase in tuition prices. i would encourage you to restore purchasing power of the program. the second problem is most students are not aware of the grants until late in their senior year of high school. they receive financial aid offer from institution and only then they know what kind of grants the receive. it's too late to help students decided early in their lives if they can afford to attend college. to address the problem, is strongly encourage you to find a small provision in the higher education opportunity act called the early federal pell grant commitment demonstration

program. this innovative program to test efficacy of awarding pell grants to eligible students in the eighth grade by awarding grants to students in middle-school they would have at least four years of high school to prepare academically, socially and financially to attend college. the demonstration program is mounted on the state of indiana's 21st century scholars program would provide a guarantee to middle-school students on free or reduced lunch at the state will pay all of their tuition at any public institution in indiana. this demonstration program that was authorized by the higher education act did not get funded to be a modest effort and i encourage you to find that implemented so we may learn how we can make pell grants even more effective than they are ready are today. i will close by thinking he was again for the opportunity to address the committee and would be happy to take your question after the remaining witnesses have testified. thank you. >> thank you for much, that are

heller. dr. leath, please proceed. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> imi was publicly public land grant university. manage university. manage in manage in this because in washington and throughout the nation we celebrate the 150th anniversary of the moral act that created the great universities in the first thing. these land great universities created to make higher education accessible for the working classes, which is relevant to the topic we discussed today. that is rapidly rising cost of attending college in many of the debt loads and people carry whether they graduate or not. i like many of you had to work to pay for my education. i attended three public universities in pursuit 90 degrees. i work two jobs or college so i can graduate without debt. it was the best investment i ever made them with that in mind

i want to make the opening statement i hope we can all agree on that higher education is a good investment for this nation. our nation's place in the world economically with humanitarian issues depends on having a highly educated work force and citizenry. in a knowledge driven economy, jobs are increasingly lengthy in the marketplace and for individualscan make it in well-paying secure job is highly dependent upon continuing education beyond high school. not only are earning higher beyond high school, but unemployment rate is significantly lower. this means we must continue to make higher education accessible to all who wish to pursue it had been accessible means being affordable without being burdened and manageable debt load commotion foreshadows the case for many students today. this is especially important issue for us at iowa state because the state of iowa has the third-highest average student debt load in the nation.

for working to lessen the tablet for students by using aggressive four-part approach. i'd like to talk about that briefly. the first part is holding down costs. we have a responsibility as presidents of universities to do everything we can to reduce overhead for education we provide them everything from tribune to administrative support. due to state budget passed a responsibility to drive costs lower picolinate at of positions and gave substantial efficiency by combining and consolidating colleges, reorganizing administrative offices, merging major administrative computing systems if any more cost effective ways of providing services such as student e-mail. we now see tens of millions of dollars annually thanks to these measures are more proud or tuition is now the lowest of all universities in our peer group. the second part of our approach is to provide better financially counseling and financing options for students at families.

our financial word that is for students now include prominently their current indebtedness and how much the payments will be after graduation based on borrowing trends. the notice also emphasize loans are optional and encourage effective method to pay for education. we also help students make their financial decisions. i was state is one of only five major universities with full-service financial counseling clinic. the third part of our effort is to be more creative in helping students find alternative and lower cost pathways to college degree. the key to this approach is working with community colleges. one fit for any students or transfer from trinity college is an increasing number of high school students come having rd earned college credits. these are mostly from community colleges. both give the overall cost to reduce debt loads. at iowa state now we have established articulation

agreements at everett community college in the state of iowa. we also offer of partnership program which community college students plan to continue education in every state can do will enroll at the university. the fourth part of our effort is maximizing revenue streams other than tuition to support our academic mission. the precipitous decline across nation really needs to stop. 1881 in iowa can a city preparations covers 75% of the cost of the resident students tuition and education. last year that dropped to 36%, less than half of what it was in 1981. for sure that a modest increase for the coming year or so were optimists admit downward trend may have slowed or stopped. the federal government has an important role to play. poker and have long been an important part of student education, especially lower cost students were affordability fund to access.

progress keep pace with inflation and applaud the recent efforts to the 2013, 2014 academic year. holding that interest interest rates on federal student loans is critical to making that were critical and i pledge her recent efforts in doing so. we at institutions have to do more to provide funding to help students pay for education. i was state completed a major campaign that brought in about $167 million in pledges and commitments and gifts. a quarter of that $236 million was for student scholarships. most funding goes into endowments. to put them in perspective a land-grant like i receive increased annual scholarship dollars for students from $9 million in 2004 and $221 million last year. soon will be allowing new fundraising campaign to be focused on new scholarships. thanks you has to show up for his site is in federal programs, scholarships and grants

increased nationally by 10%. as a result, total firing by students and parents is 10.4% less than it was a decade ago. so these are good trends. the data still unmanageable for many. we didn't get into this dilemma overnight. it's taken decades of cost increases for state decreases in funding by students to reach this critical at that level and we will get out of this overnight come either. it's going to take a long-term multifaceted approach with all the stakeholders working together, stays can a federal government, colleges and students can make real progress to make college more affordable. thank you very much in at the end of a happyo answer any questions. >> thank you, dr. leath. dr. murdaugh, please proceed. >> chairman harkin, members of

the committee coming thank you for inviting me. i represent a comprehensive community college in florida serving over 15,000 students and i appreciate the opportunity to share it to the actions that are college to maintain affordability of access to the american dream. let me begin by saying we are an example of the fact that college can be affordable without reducing quality. this year following the florida legislatures decision to fund colleges that continuation model which has dual tuition constant despite being the authority to increase tuition by up to 5%. our decision to allow tuition the same level of flasher is a strong statement of where tracy and college leadership value. the value access to higher education and we believe access is only real for those who can afford it. keeping our tuition for a full year college at $2304 we are one of the most affordable institutions of higher education in the country.

in fact in 2010, 2011 including fees, our net price is 36% lower than the national average for two-year public institutions. within the state of florida were the most affordable of that community state colleges and tuition fees are roughly half those at state universities for the first two years of college. our low tuition is not negatively impact air quality or productivity. the top 100 associate degree producers listing for 2012. tcc brings forth nationally among two-year institutions in awarding eight degrees. for associate degrees awarded to african-american students, were probably ranks sixth nationally. for us about the state average in retention and completion rates and we have a significantly higher percentage of student who transfer to four-year institutions than the state average of colleges in

florida. but i'll colleges are for strategies to keep tcc affordable by keeping efficiencies and keep costs low and i certainly don't want to minimize that as those other representatives appear was the tibet issue. but one thing i would like to talk about is where you believe we great promise in an area of deficiency in academic planning and execution. it helps students enter, remain and complete college. and i believe that holds perhaps as much promise in keeping college affordable as our efforts in the administrative efficiencies, but there's still much to learn. this help students avoid paying for unnecessary courses and improves likelihood of persistence which avoids wasting tuition dollars and provides them with degrees and credentials the least a job that provided an appropriate return on that investment.

we make extensive use of acceleration mechanisms such as dual enrollment for students to read a tcc to save money and expedite time to completion. nearly one quarter of students who come to our college arrive at dover 20 college credits earned at no cost to them while they were still in haskell. this saves them money and tuition and expedite their time to complete the associate degree. we create individualized of airplanes that are sure they take the right course is to achieve career and academic goals. another 600 -- and then followed 201,115 college credits they had a complete plan and 90% and career interests. we engage in course redesign to improve success rates and help students through college. we focus on the top 10 highest enrollment classes and get recourse is to achieve the greatest impact on student

success. we believe the result of our efforts in terms of academic efficiencies is that our students earn their degrees in a relatively timely manner. among two-year public institutions nationwide, our graduation rates within three years is 10% higher than the national average. i provided much more information in a written testimony on a number of these and other initiatives. mr. chairman, ranking member and established members of the committee, i look forward to any questions you might have. >> thank you very much, dr. murdaugh. now we turn to dr. snyder. welcome and please proceed. >> mr. chairman, ranking member -- mr. chairman, ranking member ncn distinguished committee members, ivy tech is a statewide community college serving 200,000 students, 23 campuses. i'd like to start by thanking the committee for leadership in

maintaining low student loan interest rates. the militants of community college students who attend institutions appreciate continuation of love interest rates for the coming year. i also want to thank members of the committee and especially you, mr. chairman for support of pell grants. many colleges they do have a strong partnership with the federal government and input on pell grants is there particularly critical to the students attending our institutions. pollen grains and low interest rates are parts of the college cost concerns that our students and families. we must have low cost high quality options for individual students, the economy and nations can headedness as a whole. as a former industry executive, who watch a company skin chairs of businesses by providing high-quality products at low cost. i witnessed the emergence of toyota and japanese industry. the hyundai and korean car industry and now china were the most popular cars surprisingly a

buick. this is a business model highly competitive outcome and value driven focus and relentless pursuit of lower costs. what i found in higher education is something quite different. large grants, state subsidies with reteamed increase intuitions. if revenue model outpaced inflation by a significant amount with little focus on actual costs. when i joined ivy tech ed 2007, higher education did not look like a sustainable business model. because of that would make quality and efficiency pillars in our strategic plan and started to reduce internal costs and improve outcomes. let me share some examples. we instituted single bookstores for all campuses comic had a number of textbooks required for both online and press courses. one unified huckster with greater purchasing power has translated into fewer and less costly textbooks for students. a centralized purchasing system led by a single executive seaway

contract scenarios that computers can i.t. networks, furniture, copiers and health care. this he rejoined the state of indiana to have a single prescription management program for all state employees including higher education. we are simplified and registration of financial process for students. perhaps a good experience with integrated six or seven offices to enroll in school, we're building a one-stop system that allows students. city money for ivy tech and time for students. on the academic site relaunched an accelerated program called asap. students get a two-year transferable degree in one year come attending five days a week for 11 consecutive months. initial completion rates are 75%, three times the national average for committee colleges. we created one of the largest online offerings in the country, reaching almost half of our

students. 80,000 students taking an online course during the year. we are credential he unwisely across indiana. to all students that receive 25,000 students even more than 12 mind dollars in tuition costs because the tape courses in high school. but also for the state legislature to ensure credits that are transfer and look at florida as he will go to which we hope to emulate. we have more work to do in this area. let me close by giving you these facts. in the past few years with the savings would generate a, the actual cost for full-time student at ivy tech has dropped in real dollars since 2008. affordability is today's most important question. the cost of the statement of society has sidestepped not only inflation but the income of most americans. the concern for my home state is a sad fact that the four year

registration for half of the hoosier families cannot community college's response affordability crisis we have focused in the past on low cost and open access. we need to now shift to a completion agenda while maintaining low cost. we the community college have become a critical part of the affordability solution at ivy tech is committed to that goal. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. snyder. dr. twigg, welcome. >> thank yu for inviting me to testify. i'm president and ceo of the national center for academic transformation from an independent nonprofit organization founded in 1993. the centers mission is to demonstrate how effective use of information technology can both improve student learning outcomes and reduce instructional costs. we focus on undergraduate higher education. everyone seems to agree that

both higher education are too high. as dr. heller has pointed out the primary driver of tuition price increases in public institution has changed in state appropriations. the fact is regardless of who pays what proportion, the states, federal governments are students and family, the overall cost of higher education has risen well beyond reason. the improvements in overall product to be of higher education cover these costs and associated prices will continue to rise. unlike other industries for information technology has been used to change the way we do business to reduce costs while increasing quality service, higher education by and large has not been able to do so and i say this can be done in higher education as well. for the past 13 years our center has worked in partnership with more than 200 colleges and universities demonstrating how course redesign using technology

can change the way they do business to achieve quality improvements as well as dramatic reductions in cost. altogether we produce more than 150 large-scale redesigns, which impact literally hundreds of thousands of students each year. one of the results we've achieved thus far. this course redesign to reduce instructional costs by 37% on average. savings ranging from the love 9% to a high of 77%. collectively these redesign courses produces savings of $15 million a year. reducing instructional costs by 37% and higher education is by itself a significant achievement , especially when everyone in high you read this it can't be done. what about quality? each of the participating organizations has conducted a rigorous valuation of student learning, comparing outcomes from traditional ways of teaching to the redesign

teaching methods. the results of those evaluations show the student learning outcomes have been proved and 72% of the redesigns, with the remaining 20% showing burning equivalent to traditional format. other positive outcomes include increased course completion rates, improve retention and increase student satisfaction with the new mode of instruction i wanted to say a bit more about these redesigns. most of these projects focus on large enrollment intranet report says. why did we choose such a focus? welcome at the brazenness undergraduate enrollment in the united states are concentrated heavily and only a few academic areas. in fact, just 25 courses generate 50% of all in rome colleges in the same 25 courses generate 35% of enrollment at four-year institutions. which translates to 42% of all undergraduate enrollments.

consequently these 25 courses consume a substantial amount of institutional resources. in addition, completion of courses is critical towards a degree. failure rates in courses range from 15% at research universities to 30% to 40% to comprehend of institutions and are as high as 50% at community colleges can be attributed heavily to overall institutional dropouts between the first and second year. making improvements in key critical forces has a direct impact on student retention and on-time degree completion. we have worked with all types of institutions, research universities, comprehensive community colleges and private institutions and all of the areas to demonstrate these techniques can be used across the board in higher education. but also worked in all undergraduate discipline to

demonstrate the redesign is applicable to all disciplines. my written testimony discusses detail of the techniques we use to achieve accomplishments. i wanted to emphasize three key ideas in our redesign methodology. first is the redesigns that students from a passive learning stands from listening to a lecture, which is the norm in most freshmen courses and also the cause of high failure rates come at a much more active engagement in learning. the second is each of these redesigns uses high-quality anorak of instructional software, where appropriate in the learning place. subtasks faculty members are uploading the software to deal with more students and more directly with students. finally, the redesign process methodology encourages faculty and administrators to think outside the box if you will come in to sit down and examine who

does what and why and decide where they can make changes that lead to improve student learning and reduce instructional costs. i'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much, dr. twigg. i sat through a lot of those lectures. >> did you give any? >> thank you all very much. talk to heller, we'll start with you. your testimony explains a better way to encourage access and completion is focus on the taste a. two days ago "the new york times" reported students receiving merit aid grew so rapidly from 1985 to 2008 that by 2008 is equal to percentage of students receiving the taste. they also even public universities despite state budget cuts continued to offer merit aid to attract high

achieving students without considering financial need. again, can you describe what we do to limit resources on more need-based aid and why it's important to do so. you mentioned in your testimony 30% of grants by state, 55% i institutions have no means testing. so why is it important what we do to encourage them to focus more need-based? >> senator harkin, for going to checchi president obama's goal. there's many organizations. its established a club trying to achieve postsecondary for the nation. we have to focus on the students on the margins are going to college and this is predominately low and moderate income students. students from upper-income families know from the data they're going to college, generally successful once they're there and they frankly don't need assistance from the federal government in the form

of merit based games. folks in the financially from a particularly grand is going to have the biggest bang for the buck, whether we talk about federal latecomer stater institutionally to accomplish the goals of increasing attainder rates can simply subsidizing students who would've gone to college anyway isn't going to give college graduates for the nation. this is where the emphasis in financial means testing is so critical of "the new york times" article is absolutely right. if you go back to the 1980s to less than 10% of state grants and maybe a third of institutional grants were awarded based on merit without means testing and now over half of the institutional. [inaudible] >> a big reason is competitiveness among institutions in it for less if they use financial aid not to ensure poor students make it to college, but instead to attract high achieving academic students, which unfortunately in this country come predominantly

from upper-income families because of the relationship of social class and performance on the kinds of tests used to award merit grants, whether it's an s.a.t. or ect or even just high school grades. because of that relationship, you're going to get more money to higher income students and that's been a big driver for why you see institutions get into enrollment management business of grants rather than college access for financially needy students. >> thank you. dr. leath, getting to dynamos, i've been in "the des moines register" you have surveyed your students, found that one in eight overlays eight overlays theo student loans, while two and five don't realize how much they owe. so this is great to get this data. i suspect this is pervasive on campuses throughout the nation. how do we explain misunderstanding and misinformation? what do we need to do to reverse this trend?

dr. murdaugh -- let's see, he mentioned that tallahassee at the studio borrows $13,000, they don't get new awards until they sit down with financial counseling or something like that. so is this something we need to do? >> we found we definitely need to do with it. the fact that 40% of our students didn't know but they owed and they've had no financial literacy before they got to school, their parents hauled off financing for them. they did not see numbers in front of them about their obligation would be when they finish. a couple of things we've done is to give them those numbers at every tuition bills that they know how indebted they are, what their interests will be and how much they'll let me finish. we partner closely with the student body and the university president for the students is on board to push this financial literacy program.

it's the only handful in the country well received. it's making a huge difference in student art responsive. we can get rid of them in the college career. >> iowa state is only one of five full-time financial counseling clinics. is that having some effect? >> is related to that clinic were teaching a course similar to the one we teach on alcohol awareness to incoming freshmen. when they adjust to college life in being away from home, there's a number of things they need to be educated on in terms of personal responsibility, whether it's alcohol or financial responsibility and it's a huge responsibility. >> i yield to senator and see. >> .or leath, you mentioned

president snyder find as many kids working today as in school. >> i think there's a tendency right now when parents give their children and they tend to not be work opportunities. for blast and i will have a large number of students come from farm families for their work to great work ethic and that's one of the reasons for placing 90% of black students to graduate. if we can tie financial aid, were better off because we have student not fit. it's a bigger problem in every state, but it's a problem everywhere. >> dr. murdaugh. >> yes, senator. it's different across community colleges, were a significant percentage of our students are in fact working and coming to

school part-time. in general it's a very distinct difference between community college demographics. >> to find that too, dr. snyder? >> yes, stan jones who testified earlier on the hill about the traditional student is not traditional anymore. it's 75% of our students. they do with young high school graduates. they sign a pledge not to work for the first year of the kind that has a huge boost in completion rates. it's really a matter of family access to cost and what they can really afford. >> each of you three presidents mentioned the importance of the poker program and you're wearing number of changes have been made to pay programs over the last three years to preserve the maximum pell grant. how do these changes impact

institutions and how they impact student completion? >> well, for community colleges but we see going forward is if powell is roughly equivalent to free and reduced lunches for her. a 50% is pell eligible and that's the case it's not sustainable without rethinking it and we believe that. community colleges in this group want to help you have a seat at the table in a true that, where they've been around the edges and perhaps that hurts our students because were a bit more at the edges than other institutions. going forward we recognize we have to clearly think about this affair going to obtain levels in canada. >> dr. murdaugh. >> yes, we've seen a dramatic increase in the percentage.

i would share comment that there's a sustainability that the model needs to be reviewed. i must tell you that is changing people's lives. while we at the institutional level can control tuition price in collaboration with legislatures hope only. at the end of the day, you are making a real difference in real people's lives through the funding of pell. >> and four-year institutions? >> we had 26% on pell grants and they've been extremely helpful and will continue to be as far as affordability has been. we've had quite a bit of pushback and lack of understanding of why students could participate in the summer like they used to in quite a bit of pushback in an agrarian state like iowa that professionals don't think that mary student. so we understand some of the realities of the money and funding.

but some liberalization would certainly be helpful for students. >> thank you. dr. twigg, could you go into more how this redesign works. you gave the result of the technology works. >> certainly. what happens in the redesign process quakes is that the course taught at soho this redesign by a group of faculty members. let's say alice to offers for sections of college algebra. their work as a source as a whole has start to say every professor has to do the same thing. stand up and develop a syllabus could teach the problems,, grade the tests, et cetera, et cetera. there's some things that technology could be better. curley on the market are a lot of sophisticated instructional software programs, particularly in mathematics and sciences and in essence present material to students and give examples and

quizzes and show them what they're doing wrong, and were they need to remediate so they can work on this offering can help were needed to intervene where professors would be doing one by one. a helper and their meaning when necessary. the professors need to do individually by the software. think about grading, for example. it allows the professor to handle twice as many students while still not working harder. it's an application of technology in the teaching process. does that make sense? >> it does. thank you. also to dunbar and have questions for all of you and the big question we all have is how federal regulations affecting which are doing. but i suspect that senator alexander will cover his little bit of that in this opportunity.

>> senator bingaman. >> let me just thank you also your testimony and follow up this issue on the redesign of the course is that dr. twigg has been talking about. it's allowed us to put in place a redesign of the first-year psychology course which has been very successful and students are better than they ever did. they are enjoying it. the obvious questions that occurs to me instead knowledge she has changed a lot of things and it seems to me were just now beginning to see the impact of technology in higher education. if you have a group of faculty

from wherever, get together and design a course in introductory psychology or any other subject, why isn't that course appropriate to be offered online everywhere in the country at that point? i mean, why should university tennessee to a version of that coming university of mexico to a different version and university of iowa? i mean, if they want a change at a red nose and whistles, fine. but why aren't all of the schools in the country that are offering an introductory psychology using the basic redesigned cores. >> cannot surprise you to know i get asked that question quite frequently. just to give you an idea of diversity in general psychology, there were 72 general psychology textbooks on the market today.

now that's a pretty big number for a subject most of us who think is quite similar. but there are differences within general psychology and what people want to emphasize, with the level of students are. there's reasons for the diversity. however, one of the big contributions of instructional software, which is becoming much more prevalent through publishers are creating software is as well as individual companies as they create materials that are much more able to be used widely. they're not as specific as textbooks. a community college can use the same piece of software at the university of new mexico can use. so that's a major contribution. once you have software playing such a big part, these are being replicated. you also have to have individual and start terrorists where they are to keep them on task and

mentor them, et cetera appeared on that development work that goes on is a waste of time and many individual courses can be mitigated. >> you've indicated 25 courses that account for 25% of the instruction that goes on with universities. it would seem that schuett has the best design course that they come up with for each of these 25 and have bad available to be used by any institution in the country. >> there's a part that's really critical because people are talking about courses that will solve the problem. what is also important is the way in which the materials are used. in other words, you can have one set of course materials and if the faculty member says to the students, will go study and i hope you do well and pays no

attention, chances are the student is not going to do well. ..

>> a student can sign up online and get counseling from any teacher in this state. but there has to be preparatory. we have smarter measure that we've made quite the available and as a student can you navigate the online system? we are a big partner with western governors and it is forward thinking and to although we are the zero largest provider in the country.

>> mr. chairman, i want to think senator harkin for the hearing a constructive way it has been conducted. what is it more difficult being a university president or a member of fed cabinet? you obviously have not been president. [laughter] i understand what you are doing. edge change of state funding is responsible for the rise of tuition. in 1981, 75% of decisions cost was paid for going to i

was state. that was true in tennessee. 70/30. if we increase tuition by 2% real increase state funding by 2%. today it is just reversed. i heard in the end of view say void is the principal reason why states have failed to fund higher education today rather than 30 years ago? anyone? >> i have written about this a lot. why are states does investing? we could all talk about the benefits. the prairie reason is

politics. which is the jews and discovered -- students have discovered it is one of the few sectors that have the ability to raise sufficient revenue on their own with the exception of 12 rose there may few have that ability. we have smart legislators and governors who realized if they cut appropriations universities don't shut down, maintain quality by raising tuition. >> any other ideas? >> i have a slightly different view. indiana kept plunging the system through 2008 until the state board -- budgets and force them. now remove two performance

funding based on the outcome not just enrollment. then the handful of states have started to move in that direction. fifth -- community colleges because of their network kept tuition increases quite a low and it can deliver the first two years transferable anywhere between five and $10,000. the actual book cost could be based on the community college anything above that is institutional cost that does not relate. >> i have one minute left. i have my own view of the

real reason. it did not start with full bomb alert flush left medicaid. 30 years ago state budgets were 8% medicaid. today it is 25%. if you get down to the edge of the process the courts run, but many, higher education or medicaid. as long as the federal government requires states to fund medicaid public education will be seriously damaged. this is a longer discussion that may be a comeback and despite the innovative

things you can do with two or three or one year degree use it seems a less we unleash the state's from federal medicaid requirements, our comprehensive universities and community colleges will continue to be underfunded and tuition and the loans will go up. that increase of the state budget is the principal reason. thank you. >> dire floodlight to add, numerous town meetings i have had over the last 20 years funding for higher education has come up. people say they put the money into iowa's state and

i was up. we educate but they go to texas a california we do not see the benefit. the topic of to town meetings for a long time. how much of that debt is seeps through with the legislative thinking? >> one force scholarships like the hope scholarship gives every student who makes it a owe or the go to the tennessee institution hoping they will stay there. that was the ballad gold and it makes a difference but it is interesting observations. >> . >> i apologize senator frank

did was next. >> i withdraw my thank you. >> i will take it. dr. you have testified about some of the information that iowa state university includes on the award letters the students indebtedness the amount of the loan repayment after school. kid you explain why you feel it is so important to include this information in the award of letters? >> a couple of reasons. retry a two educate students beyond the classroom. it is hard to get to love fall of personal responsibility if they are

not well informed. those kids to not understand personal financial commitments or obligations. we fecit can have a significant role with indebtedness. those that go through the program to see the numbers tend to borrow less. >> not every school moves to include this information on their own or letters. some do not even distinguish between grants and loans. some i have seen a stafford loan is a coda. does not look like a loan.

with the of or a letter. usually don't put interest on that. i introduced a bill for universities to use a universal or letter that includes the information you use and this would help students with accurate information on the true cost of college. reduce the value for other schools to do what you have done so low since can judge apples to apples? >> absolutely. we have seen results but those who take the financial literacy program are confused comparing obligations to other schools because everybody doesn't

use the same terms. it is unfortunate we have to legislate but it would be valuable. >> president snyder, a whinney education is critical. more would want to go to college if they had good job. kid you talk about aligning college and the work force did what government can do to support with industry and is for this? >> community colleges as a unique partner of education, medpartners with the employers. virtually every community college program has said it

is virtually the pattern riches unique. there are local leaders that are a part of that. restarted a program that mimics the technology center that is the best example budget have the end in mind mitt -- which really take one year. community college test of one years certificate. partnership, rethinking of making it more responsive and and others being focused

on our in training and with to recall something different in india them with it is different. you have to demand community colleges to it. we tend to be underfunded and keep the cost loper fro but there is that spirit to keep doing this. >> there is of a tendency around the country -- country. if in minnesota and i would like to say to the chairmen and ranking member it is very timely in terms to coordinate between industry

industry, the workforce boards and the colleges and two-year colleges. think you mr. chairman. i have to go back to do judiciary. >> i see a lot of young folks attending the hearing today. raise your hand if you have college debt and if that affects your future? wow!. i feel i was fortunate to to have minimal loans. my parents did not want to made to work the first year but i worked of what the following three years. many students have to drop

out. my staff talked about a family member had to drop about to get the money for the tuition community college. it is hard to save the money. then of what of people do not make it back to fill their vision and potential. mr. heller talk about the demonstration program with the pell grant is a message you can afford college to use the high-school experience productively. you talk about than need to fund this. has it been funded as a model or it is sufficient in the? >> it has not. it was included with the

reauthorization i don't think if mr. shoulda has included it biggest its request. >> philanthropists have talked to kids of low income areas to say we will find your college. first graders know that is a possibility. my parents said we will figure out. that is not in the mind of many students. it is worth exploring. talking about financial literacy, i pushed to make that course part of required high school education. when i got out of graduate school and came to washington d.c. i was turned down for credit cards i had

nowhere to experience. now my dog and children get to applications. payday loans, entitle loans loans, school scholarships and it basically you are on the hook. do we need to have more financial literacy it preparation to go into college and into life to manage finances effectively? >> when we started these programs it was remedial you would expect the students to be at a higher level of knowledge. if they came better prepared we would be delighted.

>> it is worth continuing the conversation talk about the free courses public radio had a conversation last week reversed city's work together with free online courses and someone that was involved haskins left to start free online courses. although it is an opportunity they aeronautics obtain credits. should that be explored clerics rehab the use budget should they be excepted as a source of education? >> fare continuing education

courses not using the class is toward a degree. they are videotaped lectures being put up on the internet. amass online courses and one professor did this had students primarily from other countries. it remains to be seeing if this there is so much more of apply to risk. one thing that deeply disturbs me with your the first generation of parents whose children are getting less education than we've

got. the first time in history that we are better educated than the counterparts have indifference of a bachelor's degree. this is a terrible cystic and mikasa is a huge part of the problem. think you as we ponder how to take on this problem. >> chairmen -- thank you, mr. chairman. even though mr. leath represents iowa state prior to their he was vice president for the u.s. system comprising 16 universities across the state. i was happy to see they are neck and neck with the

lowest tuition and fees for and a graduate students. we have a long history of education affordable prices. the unc system continues to be a great value to provide a quality education compared to many others across the country. and 2006 our former president established the president's advisory committee tasked to have a comprehensive review of all the schools to make recommendations but also the principles promoting the implementation of the practices move feign forward.

and then we have the campus wide initiative. through carolina accounts we have identified $50 million of permanent administrative savings to help implement of budget reductions going forward. there are positive things i am concerned about it. senator merkley talk about financial literacy. with courses on end personal

finance as the strong proponent and we need to be doing so much more what it means how to use a credit card. not all debt his bad if used for investment purposes. and unapt purchase offense had dramatically increased bonanza this state is of very small part of a larger class. i am inclined to think each

and every sudan should take a course like this. >> reconsider making it mandatory pro career of 283% with the student body and they are more receptive retaining its permission because the peers think it is important. because of they push this that it is worthwhile it would be more meaningful. we would consider making it mandatory. >> you have to make it mandatory.

with that involvement unfortunately we would support making it mandatory. >> we are achieve being bad dream initiative and looking at the students to make it the mandate if you are in a remedial course you must take a success scores that do cover financial literacy. students get lost between the first and second year. >>

>> it is to all aspects of student life. it is manage jane courses making sure you understand the advisory system. student aid and community colleges goes beyond tuition is less than the program to. behalf to know how to use that money so you don't have to borrow here in florida if you have the pell grant a. that is what we've tried to avoid. >> i think it should be mandatory. you cannot get by eight and

our country without understanding credit. of our schools to outdo a good job in middle school and high school. i am concerned. this one effective way to reduce cost you have shared your work to maintain increase quality but also save money. what are some practical purposes schools should consider? >> they tried to do a number of different things. many at the administrative level with procurement programs and that is important but to what is not