producers, national pork producersounc turkey federation, the grains council and poultry and a council. in may 2012 the nonpartisan government watchdog solfeggio published a report that says seafood safety responsibility it should be not assigned usda but then the gao k mount with duplicative in wasteful programs. this program was the number one program they mentioned that should be repealed because it is a waste of taxpayer dollars. so repealing the duplicative catfish program is a common-sense approach to eliminate wasteful spending. this is an opportunity for us to demonstrate to the american people that we can work together to have

affected and rational policies that serve the best interest of the american taxpayer. mr. chairman i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment and i yield back. >> the gentlelady yield back the gentleman from arkansas is recognized for the real five minutes. >> don't start the clock get. [laughter] thank you, mr. chairman i would like to say if the gentlelady is concerned about duplicative of what she claims i have an amendment number 24 that will address that immediately. >> we went through discussion about the nature of the second amendment being ordered. thank you way to go.

[laughter] this has nothing to do with duplicative regulations are trade barriers but with the safety supplied to say it is duplicative is misleading it is being transferred from one agency to another that the usda cat fish inspection also misleads because to plan level playing field that if they want to sell like catfish they must abide by the same quality standards in the united states. but the refusal data alerts is showing that they and drugs and chemicals were discovered in fish imported from vietnam and china where most catfish comes from in our supply. that unapproved antibiotics and unsafe additives we 25 perce

samples from china and it's my good friend from the aquaculture department travel to vietnam to investigate conditions and said that half of those jack fisher hall made without any monitoring to limit the use of drugs and the vietnamese agriculture in 2009 corroborated by giving their difficulties to manage the water environment and fish products. and with the extremely polluted body of water. in with the need to switch over but the truth is it is not the 2009 that all of the imports have been that vietnam's and that of those

drugs were provided the states and washington d.c. alone with a 50% of the seafood we get from restaurant is mislabeled and if the fda cannot tell the difference between tilapia or the red snapper then how did they stop toxic cat fish from crossing our borders? and just a expect far raised catfish -- cattle they will inspect catfish in it will meet the same rigorous standards and we asked our own producers to re about duplication making and address that but my amendment is out of order unfortunately but we had a spirited debate earlier tonight about organic production and one of the recurring themes in the debate is our responsibility here to protect the american

agriculture. american agriculture. the gentle lady's amendment would dismantle the u.s. day -- usda catfish industry so i would urge my colleagues to recognize the effort to support the american industry not to penalize other countries but have displayed on a level playing field that is not duplicative and with that i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman's time is expired. you will strike the last word at 11:00 at night. >> i will be brief i would like to lend my support to the gentlelady amendment i think it makes perfect sense despite the anecdotal evidence that has been brought up usda is clearly labeled this as a low-risk food and i think we're in the operation to save money around this place with one

hand and 70 million that we don't need to spend and fda already inspects seafood if we want we can beat them up at a much lower cost to take care of the issue. gao has said again and again that this is another program that we do not need and it is duplicative we talk about eliminating duplicative programs. and let's respect that and do the right thing. >> the gentleman yields back >> i oppose this amendment and i want to remind this committee we oppose this not once but twice and was supported with the usda to carry out the public safety for catfish.

it makes sense as to why it is opposed by the seafood importers to read the opposition and i can understand that 80 percent of the seafood in this country was imported from 130 countries in said gao report and the fiscal year 2009 the fda has about zero point* 1% for drug residues and to this type of inspection on behalf of usda. i want to highlight that our government should not improve or finalize the inspection role they're actually telling usda to not even finalize the rules for

the cat fish inspection. i urge my colleagues to allow the safety system to be approved with a catch fish inspection program. i yield back. >> the gentlelady yells back. >> i promise it is just 20 seconds to say i do support the amendment and in the words of the gao report the usda catfish program it would reduce duplication and save at -- cost millions of dollars without enhancing the safety of catfish intended for human consumption it is bipartisan and it is time we save money for the bill. >> we will strike the last word and i speak out in

support of the gentlelady amendment common-sense pastoral as some point* it is an ugly fish but it is a fish and the fda regulates fish. so we can save money, and frankly i have been approached by a number of domestic or catfish producers they are concerned if the usda has jurisdiction the processing plant in knight -- decided not to process catfish they don't need to have another agency coming in a specially the usda so primarily for common sense and now i yield to my seatmate. >> i understand the reasons for the amendment however

licentiate my a collies member it -- commons to vote against the amendment. but the people of this committee this is of food safety issue and i will explain. you already heard about the gao report were only zero point* 1% of the seafood is inspected. 80 percent of the seafood is imported. we heard mr. crawford talk about the river and how polluted it is. shifting that catfish inspection simply makes sense the usda operates the beef and poultry system and i have that opportunity to work and processing plants and the expertise will help bolster the fact that americans have the safest and most secure food supply in the world and 2005 through 2010 fda inspected on average on the 84 board processing facilities we say

it is low risk but if you don't inspect he will not find it and out of an estimated 17,000 worldwide the fda inspection at home that operated over the last five years according to the in point reviews all data but crystal violet and floral quintile load are toxic drugs it affects the bone marrow of people with the low risk food but it if you're not looking for you will not find it so i urge everybody to vote to go to the usda for inspection and increase the safety of our food supply. the gentleman's votes to strike the last word.

>> i want to commend i went to offer my support and remind everyone that all seafood processing plants are currently inspected by the fda. we sat here for endless hours listening to people talk about saving money. i remind you that the usda estimates that the catfish program will cost $30 million and up to $170 million over the next 10 years. to just drive the public crazy. what you doing? of the fda is not doing a good enough job then get on them to make sure they do a better job but not have to agencies in their inspecting the same food-processing plant. it makes no sense for those

back home or to anything that i have heard all day from this committee. >> the gentleman yields. >> as a listen to this debate i need to announce i have been to vietnam i have inspected their catch fish delivery and processing and high watch the of boats come down through the river in the water flows through the boat's there only in the bow for a little while, a few hours and they bring them out a bail them out and they go right away into slaughter within 45 minutes and then are frozen within 45 minutes. >> i have been to vietnam to. i visited the fish processing plants in this country and in my district in particular it might surprise you to know that minnesota has the largest seafood processing plants in the world. and they are remarkably

impeccable with an incredible safety record. there is a reason why we should bring in another federal agency to duplicate. >> will yield? >> i yield back the balance of my time. [laughter] >> the chair strikes the last in yields to himself. ould simply observe i suspect there may not be a huge number of undecided mines left in the room. that said levy simply explain i am voting against an amendment i have sat through these hearings of the number of you who have been on this committee for a number of years and i consume catfish. i think about the comments focussed on organic agriculture with quality, quality, quality, q uantity. but if you eat catfish you once usda to inspect it let them.

if you don't care if you don't eat this stuff and don't worry about a. with that said i yield back and put the question to use the committee but all those in favor of amendment number 26 signify by saying aye all those opposed. >> the aye have it. it would appear that aye haven't. >> ask for a recorded vote. >> the clerk will call the roll on amendment number 26. [roll call]

[roll call] >> the voting is 31/15. >> amendment number 26 is adopted are there additional amendments? >> mr. chairman? the gentleman is recognized alibi to pick up number 73b

will istribute numer 73 b unanimous consent anddispense o. >> devil they my 62nd level best to deliver this amendment it was passed by voice last year and this is a verbatim amendment to address the flooding we have seen in the missouri river for we had 70,000 acres under water from hill to hill in mid june through mid september. it is the unmitigated disaster and the solution to provide the bill that i have drafted the we had to near-record the jurisdiction and can simply directs secretary of agriculture to operate within working within his jurisdiction to promote the interest for

farmers and producers in the missouri river basin and in the channels between the reservoirs'. the amendment is verbatim i urge this adoption and i yield back the balance of my time. >> i have a question. i can concur the flood disasters were very difficult in the part of the country but i am just not clear what jurisdiction the secretary of agriculture has over any of the flood ways operated by the army corps of the engineers are other entities within the u.s. government so that is my question. >> my experience was moderately vocal on this

issue when we were under water but from jurisdictional standpoint the voice is effective through the media media, persuasive, expertise on the impact but as far as direct authority to make these changes that he does not have. >> i supported this last time and there is a similar amendment that also directs the secretary of agriculture to do with flat -- letting so i just request we can move his bill. >> will the gentleman yield? >> i think the ranking member for that and have less similar amendment number 93 and my speak in favor of might colleague

from iowa for these issues that were from flooded it it directs the secretary to do everything in his power within the jurisdiction in for that reason that i appreciate the bipartisan part and i think the real key member for pointing that out. >> the gentlelady from the dakotas would like to be recognized for five minutes been adjusted couple of comments i also represent the states along the missouri river basin and just like a diamond from i know we share concerns of the flood basin after the floods from 2011 however it is the longest river in the country with the tmz and reservoirs it is complicated. this is best dealt with with the transportation committee that understands the complexity and does have jurisdiction and ability to make a difference in this

situation. i would urge for my colleagues not to support the amendment in deal with this or the expertise lies that has jurisdiction over the issue. >> anyone else seeking recognition? the chair reczef ng consideration the comments i would say we should go on amendment number 73 and immediately take up the amendment number 93 and dispose of it then members can vote to their conscience. with that the question is on the amendment from iowa of mr. king number 73. those in favor signal aye. oppose? the aye appear to have a. they have it. the amendment is adopted we now turn in the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york amendment number 93 and they gave a

wonderful explanation and to pass on . >> and would be happy to do that and thank you for the consideration. >> let's vote on number 93 from the gentleman from new york signify by saying aye. those opposed? that aye have it they do have said the amendment is adopted are there additional amendments to title 12 the miscellaneous title? >> thank you amendment number 45 but i will withdraw. >> but e if he will withdraw we will not distributed. the gentleman is recognized

there is no need to take a lot of time my intention is to withdraw we have reached a compromise rethink with the stakeholders on this issue. want to thank the chairman and the staff for working with me chairman scott from georgia, my subcommittee and south carolina who all worked hard to come up with an agreement that would resolve this issue that deals with where the department of agriculture should do the wildlife service and that should that include urban areas progress of two letters from william clay to present to the chairman which highlight the agreement that was reached and i ask for unanimous consent that they be entered into the record. >> by unanimous consent. >> without ever by to ask the chairman to commit to work west germans got to

make sure this infamous the bill as intended. >> i can think of nobody better to work with. >> with that i yield back. >> are there additional amendments to title 12? mr. scott of georgia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i strike the last word. >> and at this late hour i don't think we should hand this amendment out. >> explain your amendment. >> number 24 the committee's consideration repeals mandatory country of origin labeling all laws for chicken and beef import it is not my intention to have a discussion of regulations that has both negative and positive effects of weber i am sure most would agree possible retaliation from our export countries is something we should continue to take a close look at. with that said we have the assurance to take a closer

look at it with the committee with the country of origin labeling i withdraw the amendment mr. chairman and look for to further discussion and i yield back after 35 seconds. >> i just briefly like to take back the last word before i comment on his amendment. >> the gentleman moves to strike the last word. >> i just think the author has articulated the challenges with the program and the committee's willingness to take another look at this is warranted and i support those efforts. i yield back. >> the gentlelady from the dakotas is recognize strike the last word. >> i just want to say i have always supported the consumer having more information about the origin of their meat. there has been a few bumps along the road and we need to make sure it is done that insurers robust trade with

neighboring countries also cattle ranchers want to ensure they can continue exporting products without unnecessary barriers and for those who have been joined south dakota beef they want to continue purchasing our product so the wto has upheld the legitimacy of cool i look forward to the department of bag with the compliance of wto so without i will disagree with the gentleman at this time but i thank you for withdrawing as well. i yield back. >> all matters are withdrawn. are there additional amendments under the miscellaneous title? >> the gentlelady from new mexico is recognized. >> amendment number 82 is at the desk. the clerk will distribute to number 82 by unanimous consent we will dispense of the reading and the lady may explain her amendment when

she is ready. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. i am very excited and pleased the committee has expanded the socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers program to include veteran farmers and ranchers. if any group is worthy of the assistance of entrepreneurial efforts it is the veterans and it is a national disgrace that the unemployment rate post 9/11 veterans is nine-point to% and did raw numbers 199,000 were unemployed in march but as this important program expands the population of its scope of the funds are being cut so quite simply my amendment would restore the underlying spending from 10 million which is currently back at 70 million. this program provides services to strengthen participation of the starkly underserved farmers and ranchers of usda programs.

it is the essential support for a population due to the social barriers may lack knowledge of the available services and procedural requirements for obtaining those services and also assist farmers and ranchers to navigate the regulatory requirements increasing the economic viability of their farms. now to reach out to socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers it is critically important and i encourage my colleagues to support this amendment simic i yield back the balance of my time. >> and to strike the last word for five minutes. i appreciate my colleague to raise the important funding of reach for a out reach of socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers to provide funding for a variety of programs for fiscal restraint and i appreciate the gentlelady for insuring recognize the importance of this program. for our constituents and i

appreciate her withdrawing it and it is something we need to work on a that would be my humble request at this time. >> mr. chairman i would work with this committee to do all the weekend to support veterans and our socially disadvantaged ranchers. thank you. >> we appreciate your efforts greatly. >> are there any other amendments title 12 miscellaneous title? any other amendments? >> you are becoming one of my favorites. the gentleman from oregon and will offer eight amendments. >> might better neary colleague made me do with. >> i will speak to him afterwards. [laughter] in all honesty this is an amendment number 89 we have suggested. >> i would interrupt for just a moment to reserveed.

of i offer to withdraw any way but the point* that i need to raise for the committee is it is being threatened by the department said the day has decided veteran areas are no longer allowed to lew couldn't carry controlled substances with farm calls and that is problematic. we're able to participate and provide high quality and state veterinary care we need to have the opportunity to have these controlled substances in the reagan and euthanasia, minor surgery required these types of medications otherwise we're back to the bar wrist days of drawing horses down kicking and screaming and having problems and with that i will yield the remainder of my time to my colleague from florida. >> i think my colleague from the veterinary caucus and i want to tell the chairman i

support this bill it would change the way better dairy is practiced. . . by that agency as they conduct their war on drugs, they don't need to expand to include

veterinarians and need to sure that they're able to get farm and livestock can get their work done. >> pajama man withdraws his amendment. i will vacate my point of order. any other amendments to title 12 miscellaneous title? gentlelady from new mexico is recognized for a minute. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much. amendment number 83 now with dried food like to speak to distribute. >> no need to distribute. by unanimous consent, the reading of the amendment and the lady may procedure amendment. >> my amendment would prohibit the slaughter of horses for human consumption. for five years, congress has halted the funding for horse meat, effectively prohibiting the united states. the funding prohibition was allowed to expire in fiscal year

2012, allowing facilities to legally reopen and there's their significant food safety issues associated with horse made that is yet to be addressed. horses are not raised for human consumption i return the given substances the anti-inflammatory drug that the fda ban private industry should to animals destined for human consumption. earlier this year, europeans discovered several cases that doubled as these had mixed with horse meat. consumers are shocked and horrified. frozen burger sales in the u.k. dropped by 43% following the discovery of the horse meat. sales of ready made pasta dishes, frozen foods and meat sauces and italy dropped by 30%. the scandal of the e.u. has escalated about the toxicity of horse meat and integrity safety

protocols in european markets. in addition, it saddens me that thousands of horses, in a gesture picture could be methodically and humanely put to death. the process is inhumane and causes pain and distress to the animals. this is not so that we should allow in this country. in the fiscal year 2014 budget, the president asked the congress include language to prohibit the inspection of horse slaughter plants which would reinstate the ban on horse slaughter. the president recognize in this era of austerity we should allocate funding resources to inspect meat at usda to meet american consumers consume. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the gentlelady from the dakota sought recognition

prayers. >> thank you, mr. chairman. had just want to clarify something that i was not cosponsor of 20. ever it's been a sponsor and will stay that way. i did want to speak on this amendment is well regarded horse slaughter. i want to talk about the fact always been a proud hosts arner and marriage in south dakota we poured horses. my kids are involved in rodeo. we are a horse family and i love them. however, have opposed this amendment. the gao reported in 2011 restriction on horse slaughter resulted in increased that lead to an abandonment of horses and depressed tourist prices are lower to median price sources by 8% 21%. the gao report went on to explain at the same time increased to 660% and exports to canada increased 140%. while people may claim this amendment is the name of humane

horsetrading outcome of the facts don't back it up. horses are being start, abandoned and thousands of miles to canada and mexico anything but humane. my colleagues are concerned about the humane treatment of horses, i urge them to oppose this amendment. without i yield back. >> the gentlelady for the record is withdrawing the amendment, correct? >> correct. >> are there any other additional amendment to title 12, the miscellaneous question? i turned to my friend from california to strike the last word -- to offer an amendment. >> yes, i move to strike the last word and she briefly speak the underlying bill. we've had a lot of problems in recent years throughout the country on peace in america and

there are numerous sections referenced in the underlying bill the ranking member have included that i hope will allow us to address problems of maintaining a healthy bee population. it is so critical to so much american agriculture would have to continue to find ways to work on this in a commonsense fashion now to thank the chair and ranking member for their efforts. >> thank you. the gentleman yields back. are there additional amendments on title 12? additional amendments? additional amendments? god bless you, no additional amendments. title 12 of the miscellaneous title is now closed. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

the chair now recognizes the ranking member. >> chairman, i note that the bill, h.r. 1947 as amended the reported favorably to the house with a recommendation that it do past. >> see no debate, see no debate, see no debate. the question is on the motion to favorably report h.r. 1947 as amended. all in favor signify by saying trent reappeared all opposed, signify by saying no. the ayes appear to have it. the gentleman from texas asks for a recorded vote. the gentleman from texas for a recorded vote. the clerk will call the roll on the motion to favorably report h.r. 1947 as amended. [roll call]

[roll call] [roll call] [roll call]

[roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call]

[roll call] [roll call] >> the vote is 36 yeas 210 nays. >> i want to take discussion on my own and thank you in particular. this intervention has taken several years ago. it's taken two markets to get the point. we have an adventure ahead of us in june and the wonderful god of the minority and majority. ranking member. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> since the ayes has the less amended. as any member give notice of intent to file supplemental of that they'll consider today? without objection instructions are given staff such clarifying and confirming changes appropriate with changing the substantive legislation. the meeting is now adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> house agriculture committee met for nine hours just passing insertion of the farrm bill. earlier today gamache has two the $80 billion a year food stamp program and members voted 27 to 17 to keep an estimated $20 billion in savings from attrition programs over seven years. the senate at holter kameny passed its own bill yesterday. during a hearing on self driving cars, the auto safety regulators said his agency is getting closer to colin for automatic braking systems

>> both google and general motors have been testing technology to use non-mobiles. this is part of legal questions imacs at liability. at the national national highway safety administration, david

strickland testified on the topic before the senate commerce science and transportation committee. this hearing is an hour and 15 minutes. >> no apologies, sir. this is your forum. john thune was on time. eastern south dakota and they've got good values. evidently today a couple of passed me right by. i apologize. the story of modern america would be difficult to tell without the automobile. i resent the model t. rolled off the assembly -- should be assembly line? you can't lock off an assembly. the car and its drivers have shaped our hiss or he, our than imagination. it was the automobile after all the brought forth detroit's rise but good-natured manufacturing to give americans a independenc.

it changed quite that were their country's landscape in modern american culture. the automobile has been central to the story of america's innovation and public safety standards pc bell, brake lights come air bags have saved innumerable lives once needlessly lost. today the car's owner are safer than ever, but with a long long way to go. more than 30,000 lives are lost each year. i can remember when those 50,000, so that's good, but an awful lot of us lies. each year on our highways and roads, most crashes frankly are caused by driver error needs to be said. automakers, regulators, researchers must continue their pursuit of safer vehicles especially at the hands of driver distraction impairment or poor judgment.

in recent years have seen advances in vehicle technology to show great potential not only to save the lives of many more, but also to revolutionize how we've come to understand the relationship between the driver and his or her car. driver since technology has already found its way to today's cars. electronic connecticut to florida in due time. electronic stability control prevents rollover accidents and is now installed in all new cars come the saving hundreds lives per year. the latest sensors, cameras and software do more to assist drivers. they can warn the person behind the wheel of an imminent crash of favorite driver doesn't respond, the car will stop itself. they can warn drivers that the vehicle is drifting into another lane and can even not inadequate bring the car back to its proper place. another system is in the

driver's eyes wander off the road and can alert him or her back to the task at hand. so the power technology is dirty saving lives, but looking further down the road to future is even more credible. advanced technologies could radically challenge her notion of what it means to be behind the wheel. one of these technologies enables vehicles to communicate with each other and with the road, warning drivers of dangers that if they have no way to see. another other technologies when all of of us have heard about, the self driving car to take you from point a to point b. with no given involvement. is much to be excited about is these technologies develop, but there are risks as well as important questions we have to have some of them and discuss them. one technology raises concerns

for me and that is automakers seem to be engaged to see who can add more entertainment and communication devices and features into the car's dashboard. all in the name of allowing drivers to remain connected. i'm not convinced so many are necessary and i fear they only further distract drivers. we discussed that. even those technologies with great potential, safety benefitscome with risk as cars become more computerized in the industry make sure they are reliable and prevent failures. as our cars become more connected to the other not, wireless networks with each other and infrastructure, are they had a risk of catastrophic cyberattacks? in other words, could some 14-year-old and an initial figure out how to do this and shut the car downbecae wired upd

this is one of the results of the internet. you can extend his nephew could cause things to stop happening. that potentially will at some point include automobiles. as cars become more computerized electronic days, to the industry make sure they are reliable and prevent failures and as cars become connected. so we have so much change and not a mobiles in such a rapid clip like people are competing with each other to tantalize and missiles and works. this isn't a particular interest to anybody, but i am a great fan of johann sebastian bach and i listen to imagine after work and when i go home. i've got to push all kinds of

things. if you've noticed traffic recently in washington d.c., you do that for a second then you know the half lane over. he didn't mean to, but she had because you got to do this and that and, you know, that is a simple one. this is an overview of what the future holds and give us a foundation for future legislation and future industry oversight as we move forward. if they deliver promised technologies today revolutionize and bring about dramatic improvements in safety and a thank you in turn to my ranking member, senator thune. >> i will be watching for you listening to bach. [laughter] [inaudible] >> i do want to thank you, mr.

chairman. with the advanced water technologies now emerge in the marketplace at work in their way through the type line, these technologies include driver assistance systems from a vehicle to vehicle communication and autonomous self drive cars offer the promise of many future benefits. adaptive cruise control, collision avoidance and lane keeping systems appear to offer obvious safety benefits. these technologies developed domestically represent innovations that help drive the tech and manufacturing site is and benefit our economy. it's welcome news to hear traveling by vehicle is become safer in recent years. according to the agency fatality rates reached new lows in 2009 compared to 10 years ago. i hope we will improve in this area and encourage you to ologies that offer anyone safer driving experience. one is the intelligence transportation systemsrgm

better known as ats. in 1999 and allocated spec them could share the same 5.9 in the 5.9 gigahertz bands of vehicles consummate communicate with each other and with their spectrum expanding the five surroundings. disconnected vehicles technology gigahertz range is more important as others are make driving much safer. last year congress drove the extremely congested. administration information to study whether wireless devices wi-fi use than the fact that 91 or fear with i.t. of which could in turn endanger drivers. some people characterize this as two technologies against each other. i choose this as an opportunity to connected vehicle technology and wi-fi bandwidth was significant benefits for the public could obviously, the best possible public policy outcome is if engineers can find a way in the 5.9 gigahertz band. the ntia and sec are examining whether spectrum sharing can be accomplished and we should avoid setting heated rhetoric allayed

the findings of the technical experts. a car that could drive itself. anyone who's seen the youtube video of a plain man using google self driving car to perform his daily errands around the suburbs of morgan hill, california and is a potentially life-changing technologies may be. these cars offer a glimpse of the future could mr. chairman, next year and could take place at a test track in west virginia for south dakota so we can more directly ask where the vehicle technology of google and others which undoubtedly will build upon today's discussion. at least we are joined by administrator strickland is a federal agency within department of transportation responsible for traffic safety motor vehicle safety standards must part with industry to make the high-tech cars of the future reality. in the meets the reauthorization pass, commerce direct you to establish a council for emerging

technologies to improve agency's expertise in the areas discussed at today's hearing. while also ensuring innovation is not dental. potential benefits of advanced motor vehicle technologies are remarkable. they should enable safety features, information services energy efficiency and reduced insurance threads and provide a current market on our economy. with advancements, commerce, regulators and stakeholders must grapple with questions they shaped the motor vehicle technology landscape in the coming years. what changes if any are necessary to ensure automobile manufacturers can safely adapt -- adopt new technologies and bring to market. the motor vehicle technologies in the pipeline is on other lists including cybersecurity and privacy risk in our product

developers engineer meet again solutions. does this have the expertise to perform its area. the committee looks forward 200 witnesses witnesses on these issues and i watch a thank you for sharing your testimony and make a comic thank you for calling this hearing. >> thank you, senator thune. the honorable david strickland of the national highway traffic safety administration. we're glad you're here. you have a large job. there's a whole slew of issues, some of which we've mentioned and many of which we haven't. we'll be interested in your testimony that will question you about it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. faq introducing a deputy

administrator and the secretary sore this morning. >> he raised his right hand. >> thank you for the opportunity, mr. nelson, mr. johnson. this is an opportunity to talk about an exciting time in the automobile industry. with a focus on worthiness for over 40 years since we've been in the business since 1966 and these technologies you alluded to in your opening statement is the new northstar for the agency. as opposed to people from a crash after mckeith the opportunity to make a disruptive change and make sure we get well below 20,000, 10,000 lives in the future. we feel that the national highway illustration the future for the automobile is extremely bright.

increasingly, capabilities are determined more by electronics and mechanical linkages. this is the account's innovation and improve comfort, information and entertainment and most importantly advanced safety. according to early estimates, over 34,000 fatalities on america's roadways in 2012 and safety tech ologies we discussed today could produce numbers significantly. traditionally we've improved advancing the worthiness or technology such as seatbelts and airbags, occupants are more likely to survive than 20, 30 years ago. today we've exciting prospects for advancing safety through a tech ologies that could prevent a crash from occurring in the first place. vehicles with lasers and cameras and sensors enable unimaginable just a few years ago and has been evaluating these technologies. we have accelerated the

connected vehicle's program. vehicle to vehicle communications gave situational awareness to improve state decision-making on the road. the v to v program depends on short-range innovations or dsrc in the 5.9 gigahertz is uniquely capable of safety applications that require instantaneous information relay. since it was allocated, department has conducted research developing the concept, and worked with any fractures on v to v technology. the secretary safety pilot program. this safety pilot and was 3000 vehicles operating day-to-day driving, enabling us to click data that cannot be duplicated.

it represents the test ever of connected vehicle is in a real-world environment. this project will collect data to make the decision on how to proceed. as a transportation board noted, electronic systems have become critical to the modern automobile. nhtsa recognizes the challenge and has established a research division to focus on matters. this will oversee research focused on evaluating safety of electronic control systems in five key areas. one, functional safety design of the strategies of second, reliability, diagnostic notification strategies and human fact is consideration. we will examine lessons learned from other industries such as the aviation medical industries for the loss of life is the primary concern in the failures. recently traditional and nontraditional @

recently traditional and nontraditional companies have unveiled sculpture and cars. surprisingly people find this intriguing. automated driving is a frontier for the industry with identified three key areas for research. human factors research on the human vehicle interface, initial system performance requirement requirements electronic control the system. research on from the agency for policy decisions than overall set of standards for automated vehicles. the promise of advanced vehicles is very exciting. others certainly risk of any emerging technologies, a firmly believe when the risk is identified, understood and mitigated, it will minimize those risks and reap the potential benefits. lots of exciting innovations come and this is working hard and will continue to do so in a future to ensure the vehicles on the road race are they and reliable. thank you again for this

opportunity to testify and happy to take your questions at this time. >> thank you, administrator strickland, very much. three years ago, u.n. secretary lahood sat at the same table for a hearing examining some unintended acceleration and toyota vehicles and nhtsa's investigation into this incidence. at that time, i was concerned about capacity to investigate electronic issues. two years later the release studies demonstrating the same concerns and today we discussed the explosive growth of electronics and vehicles. my first question to you would be how well you prepare for this. her testimony was general, umbrella like it didn't dig

deep, which is what questions are for. i need to know how you realistically assess your self-interest of in terms of the numbers of people assuming the cars are going to do this, keep on adding things to make it more attractive so that safety will continue to be the main factor. >> mr. chairman, the secretary and i are satisfied with the staff on hand to do with this issue. our budget request has given us an opportunity for resources on hand and we have the talent on hand right now. as i mentioned, with an electronic sub is that in her vehicle team specifically focused on all issues regarding electronics. we have 12 full-time employees with engineering backgrounds and software background to do with the issues and add more every single day. in terms of our game plan come

all submit a more detailed answer for the record that the game plan for the research offices doing, but we have a very solid game plan on how we do with these issues, including a processing unit for electronics reliability from how vehicles feel safe and this particular measures in addition during the toyota investigation, we always leverage expertise and sister agencies across government such as nasa or federal aviation administration to assist us in this task. >> him all over my time, so i will yield to my superiors. i'm not satisfied with the answer. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i just want to follow up if i may then ask you about all this cutting-edge automotive technologies, i am curious to

hear what changes if any you think may be necessary to the federal motor vehicle safety standards to ensure we bring these technologies to market safely. >> at this point, the full policy analysis on the current federal motor vehicle safety standards. something this close you have to consider such as standards that deal with the position prison and that there is a driver constantly engaged in managing vehicles. those have to be addressed considering you may have driving scenarios that take allergy for the driver maybe not necessarily within a period of time. in addition to that, we are looking at preparing ourselves on working with the industry and research and development summit in the approach commercialization will be ready if needed to have safety standards on board to make sure we have the certainty for not introducing a tech ologies that

may pose a risk to safety. we are clearly in the research and policy phase in making this a valuations. through motor vehicle safety standards help shape the automotive design process and create incentives and disincentives to invest in a tech ologies which is especially true for those that have obvious safety benefits that may not conform to the existing standards. in your opinion, are the current standards flexible enough to foster new innovation while allowing vehicle safety mandate? >> at this point we have the flexibility and look at this with a very sharp pencil to tivo. the one thing you have to think about the standards are written over 30 years ago, but we believe -underscore flexibility to the safety systems is

involved and more application of technologies than you think about directional control and human machine interface. all these are captured by standards right now in the thing we want to make sure we do that we have the correct path way to encourage innovation in a safe way, whether the testing or development, the last thing is to chill innovation for compromise for safety. >> mr. chairman, i'm happy to yield to other colleagues. >> senator again, another a lump of the commerce committee makes good. welcome. the chairman in his opening comments made reference to the cave painting tanisha, suddenly

interfering. let's take that a step further. cybersecurity implications. tell us about that. >> well, there's several. the chairman made an excellent point looking at advances in conductivity and opportunity for mischief that goes well beyond that could mean an impact on something for their happiness. at this point right now, there is never been an unauthorized accessing a vehicle currently on the road today. from research at this point, a person with need physical access to a vehicle to get control of the vehicle function. recognizing various opportunities where there will be the chances for software linkages and for that we have a very rigorous program in terms of reliability, the proper

standards of encryption and how we deal with certificate packages and all those other issues that we don't want to be behind the eight ball and we rely upon not only the work we've been doing but other parts of the industry to look to help us gain a pathway forward as we think about the cybersecurity issues. >> does it involve an allocation of part of the spectrum that if you deny that specter on that you could help yourself from a cybersecurity attack? >> clearly, one of the issues involved with the vehicle to vehicle program is a protocol for dealing with this number can vary hired the manufacturers consortium on these issues of moving forward.

the question in regards to how much will be used to help have to get back to more detailed but it's part of our analysis is the agency decision. in any case, with individual manufacturers, their decisions on how controlled vehicle mechanisms use software, there's this possibility and manufacturers and i'm sure mr. train to contact specifically. we have to move forward to make sure there's proper standard for every vehicle of such an attack. >> have you ever requested assistance from nasa? >> absolutely, sir. but our best relationships since i've been in office and is a great model example of government is how the team help us in the toyota investigation. we recognize frankly we needed to have an outside verifier of the work done preliminarily on

electronics control. we felt having the ultimate expertise in dealing with software issues and spin testing and other things they do and feel their analysis we brought them in. they work shoulder to shoulder with the nhtsa engineers. the toyota camry had 300,000 lines of code in their expertise verified by nhtsa home alone on that there were no issues regarding software electronics reliability and an attendant acceleration issues peters the two titles identified by nhtsa. that could've been done without the assistance of nasa. >> final question. are you working on a technology that would not allow someone to text while driving? >> sir, that is frankly one of my most focus areas of emphasis.

the one thing we're interested in acting the committee support help on is the opportunity to pull together stakeholders across the industries involved in this space. not all the automakers en masse, but the suppliers and wireless communication companies because while we are very bullish on the program, we think the technical solution where you identify eight drivers on early passengers so come and unlock the drivers on the connect to vehicle frankly is the long-range shot to make sure we distract driving and i'm fixated on that. our hope is to pull stakeholders together in a public-private way to work on technology and the voluntary collaborative way and i think it's doable. to budget the support of the committee and that stakeholder group together to work on this. >> thank you, senator nelson. senator john said.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. i need is a committee in this issue, so i'll be asking pretty basic questions. he mentioned the highway safety act of 1970, so it's actually 40 years old? >> there's the original active 1966 in the update of 1970 for the national transportation safety board out to nhtsa in 1970. >> which improvements, how many of those are market driven, voluntary versus imposed by the heavy safety act? technologies d innovations begin within the automotive fleet by the manufacturers and as we learned over time following data and effectiveness, they evolved into regulatory standards. in terms of the once called fiscally by the safety act, there's a frontal crash

standards which were initially laid out. talking about things such as airbags and seatbelts part of the original act, but clearly evolved over time during the interlocutors, the original foundation and process said the agency to look at technologies which have promised to reduce injury and save lives in that foundation allowed us to pull these innovations into the regulatory regime of nhtsa. >> and maybe is driven by the auto companies? the liquid c andover time becomes the standard imposed? >> we are a data driven space agency on the set performance standards for vehicles. you may stifle an ovation and need for close and opportunity for safety in the future.

a classic example in terms of process is the mandate of the electronic stability control system, and innovation putting two vehicles in 1990 and as we got our data over time on the effectiveness of technologies, were able to approve the benefits for us to mature regulation, ultimately mandating every vehicle in 2012. that particular regulation if it does demised into effect and is a classic example of how you build upon data in science to make the ultimate decision you can show the costs and benefits of the action. >> have you ever done a study in terms of what has transformed over time from voluntary to mandatory per vehicle? >> in terms of every rule where of the guys and we can an over time to show the

movement of technologies voluntarily included into the packet that ultimately became regulations. the flipside of making a regulation across the fleet is to actually get warning, decrease costs and economies of scale which makes technologies more affordable, which ultimately are democratizing safety and that's the benefit of being able to build rules on sound data, sound science and effectiveness. >> is your agency undertaken a study whenever you might've conducted what the cost of the mandating safety requirements are? >> clearly in our proposed rulemaking is part of the proces benefits. >> i'm just asking in general. are we talking $5000 to all safety items? >> what we do in the overall cost, every decision we may add

the vehicle, but also finding the tipping point of particular benefits of whether you are pricing out particular segment of the public for mobility. we can do something more general to the history of rules and how they done this, but the wise decision-making over the years his cab individual mobility affordable at the same time as the margin of safety to the point where we decreased loss of life for 25% over the past decade or so. >> an inquiring mind like mine would want to note the total cost per vehicle would be. government impose standardized mileage standards, which at the same time that reduces vehicle weight. can you speak in terms that the offset is that it really what is -- what is the criteria? i've heard things like in a crash, 10% reduction in terms of

vehicle increases fatality by 10 times. is that the basic rule of thumb? >> senator johnson, i have a group of engineers that are new deputy administrator was one of his areas of expertise that his sole job. but this guy is giving more more detailed answer for the record. the one thing we did in finalizing rules for 2017 to 2025 in partnership with the pa was a want of the most aggressive sooner possible making sure we had benefits outweigh costs and make sure there's no impact on safety and the work we did for not only that will, but the book proceeding 2012, 2016 we accomplished. for more than happy to talk about impacts of slavery. we had a symposium earlier this week for two days talking about the midterm review.

our first priority is not going to compromise safety and were happy to have a safety neutral set of feel economy standards that the industry's focus on as well. what about you on those particular issues. >> thank you, mr. chairman. senator pryor. >> thank you, mr. chairman. administrator strickland, always good to be with you. you change subcommittees on me -- [inaudible] >> i sure did. then a follow-up on one of senator johnson's questions they are just in general people who talk about today's advanced technology vehicles. as i write now driven by the industry, the ottoman history or is it driven by your agency? >> the industry innovates and i have to say why we are part of the work we do at nhtsa, to

vehicle safety is frankly has driven. but the manufacturers still beset the floor of the motor vehicle standards that innovative go well beyond that. we actually create another incentive using the assessment program to the five star safety rating us a american incentive to go beyond the motor vehicle safety standards. the automakers innovated for braking systems, which we studied right now. the systems are adaptive cruise control, so it's been an ovation and will hopefully find a margin for those technologies that show promise they may be put throughout the entire fleet. >> in your opening remarks, you mentioned once fully implemented, vehicle to vehicle technology could potentially address 80% of crashes involving on impaired drivers.

so can you give us an estimate of the timeline on which he think this technology will be implemented on the mass scale? >> well, senator, the agency will be making a decision on how we proceed on vehicle to vehicle based upon the data we receive for the safety pilot another research were doing. i truly -underscore if the agency decides to go forward navona can posture to mandate, it will take time for the fleet to turnover and how the technology in every vehicle. the other parties after market so people can actually be speakers in every car and receive benefits immediately. turning over the fleet takes decades. bolivar 12 to 15 years. thinking about having the fleet turnover in our times to get every vehicle will take some time.

>> let me ask another question a little more specific about the five gigahertz band. the fcc has recently talked about unlicensed use of five figures bands, et cetera. can you tell us how you work with the sec to make sure everybody's on the same page here and understand what the future five gigahertz may be? >> we provided comments to ntia this week about the work in a test and evaluation of compatibility for sharing the spectrum. i will say the deputy secretary in a statement during a roundtablequestions we have at e department of transportation that the sec is initiating this proposed rulemaking before the ntia is that the opportunity to use the word. these processes should have

informed the process before it went forward and we made note of that in our comment. >> in other words, it may be concerned some of the new technology in vehicles may have interference issues with wi-fi and other things? >> the concern we have is far says allocating the use of this fact drum, it is incumbent upon any unlicensed users should not interfere with the 5.8 gigahertz. it's a safety function and has the opportunity to address 80% of crashes is on impaired drivers. the only thing is making sure the process does follow and the correct order, which is to get the tech over the tc whether or not there's an interference issue before the next process to issue a rule, which may possibly preclude the nation of the technology he. >> in the ntia do that where? >> that is the process right

now. i'm not sure about the timeline for ntia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator pryor. let me just put it bluntly. we are talking about making cars into virtual offices because they are connect it to everything, including through the internet to the world. i want you to explain to me and i don't want to sail center answer on that. i want you to explain as best he can what is the tipping point when distractions they have to do it, you know, my music or somebody's business of internet capacity are being wired up, all the things that have been when you fulfill modern dreams of what a car should be.

at a certain point, that begins to work absolutely adamant sort term against the interest of safety. it is an inevitable fact. i think you to give me a sense of where the tipping point could be your furyk said that concept. >> your job is safety. your job is not trinkets. >> absolutely right. there isn't a question of tipping point. it is an absolute first value. the first thing anyone should do behind the wheel of a car's drive. everything else is ancillary. frankly disposable. there is a point to the human factors research another research has given us the zone of safety what is an amount that can be handled behind the wheel? that informed our guidelines

released on a couple weeks ago, which is basically anything within the vehicle it handled within two seconds for an individual action or 12 seconds for back-and-forth continual action is safe. it's the equivalent of handling the radio, which received over the decades as a safe operation of additional task of the vehicle. in addition, take a hard look at additional things that can be dangerous such as a gps system that does not lock out when the vehicle is underway. you don't want people typing 2121 mcgillicuddy way doing 70 miles an hour down the road. we don't want social messaging to be underway. i should be locked out. frankly should be locked out of the vehicle is in park, not by moving at five miles an hour. we believe we have found the

correct safety for the interface and visual manual distraction, which is incredibly dangerous. i think we've driven -- on a bright line in the sand about what we think the son of safety are and the goal is now the automakers can innovate around his own safety. if they can do task to provide information and services, that's a space for innovation. if they can't come it should be in the vehicle. that's where the line is. >> i'm trying to parse your words to see which areas are told me. do you think -- first of all, i think it is a fact increasingly young people are not buying cars. >> that's true. >> in the southernmost of transportation. that has some benefits to me in terms of safety for the future because they want to be wired up

and they want to be connected to everything. explain to me why the concept of a wired up modern mobile, which can do any kind of transaction in the state has to be done in two seconds. i would question not because i remember we were talking a few years ago if you spend three or four seconds, and you're on an interstate highway, you've gone two or football fields and west virginia if you do that, you have crashed seven times because of the hilly territory. so, why do you have and accepting attitude if you do that were coming upon a time when cars will have the ability

of some office space? scares the heck out of me. >> well, sir, we're not accepting a cars and office space by uber berlin. some things are not current task within the zone of safety and were definitely happy to preview in more detail about the research we've done at nhtsa that you can complete task safely. we want to luck out anything that resembles you put in large small amounts of text. anything such as audio bread back to you, the ability to enter an address using the voice is an opportunity. they are safe, pitcher absolutely right, if you have people been able to surf the internet which is locked in a band or type large amounts of

tax cut anything of that nature should be out of the vehicle may encourage the automakers prohibit should be out of the vehicle may encourage the automakers prohibit that particular practice. .. people texting and tweeting and going back and forth and streaming a video. it's not appropriate for. you can't simply say to have a is a realistic one.

i think if we recognize those things that can be done safely and be very strict about it we encourage innovation, we encourage the opportunity for good information and service providers for the driver in support of the driver. we allow the opportunity for things we don't anticipate to develop. >> i want to say that if we did have the connectivity -- we could listen to -- in the car. [laughter] i want to thank you for something you helped our office with. the i want to say the bat mobile, for those it's a new vehicle technology. it's not a breath testing mobile. and getting one to the great plains region will be helpful and the mission we have in

improving public safety on the indian reservation and the state. thank you for your help with that. >> thank you. there's one area we are focused on is improving vehicle safety. and in need of reservation territory and lands. it's unfortunately, you know, native americans are over represented in a lot of very bad crash area. lower seat belt use, higher drunk driving use, higher crashes, horrible fatality numbers. anything we can do address the counter issue is something we are supportive of. >> appreciate that. thank you. senator pryor? thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. chairman for the opportunity. i appreciate it. >> thank you. mr. mitch who is president and

ceo of the alliance of automobile manufacturers here in washington. mr. jeffrey owens, executive vice president chief technology office. troy. dr. peter sweatman. director of transportation research substitute, and dr. john lee. member university of wisconsin at madison, wisconsin. why don't we start with you, sir? >> mr. chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity to be here today. to testify to extraordinary time for mobility. a decade ago they celebrated the reduction of traffic death as ten great public health achievement of the 20th century. since then death per mile traveled are down another 25%.

these gain results many factors included increase use of seat belt and decrease in drunk driving. going forward it will come from technology reducing driver error. given that more than 90% of crashes result from human mistake. the combination of emerging driver assist feature, connectivity, and vehicles offer the promise of safety, safer mobility as well as congestion, fueler, lower insurance cost, and higher productivity. we see a robust debate in the press. most engineers who agree with each other. about when self-driving cars will become a reality. that's the wrong question. it makes safety about magic moment in the future rather than recognizing that technology in the marketplace today already are provided important benefits as we set the foundation for

tomorrow. the premise of today's hearing said technology will yield highly material safety benefits from the driver. that inviting two questions. one, what is a barrier inhibiting the rate of life saving innovation. what can you do speed innovation in light of the barriers? ironically, technology is not the biggest obstacle to deploying innovation. three, connectivity, and four, fleet mix concern. our polling shows that consumer strongly e quit technology with safety. that's promptings. for now the same consumers are dubious about self-driving vehicles. putting 4-3 against the view that the vehicleses are a good idea. the driving experience is ingrained. change is scary. liability is a huge problem. especially when after -- who is responsible for something

fails? we see higher product cost, innovation, and probably reduction in manufacturing deployment. connectivity is a safety problem. investment in infrastructure are vital. without it long-term driver technologies can't realize their potential. finally, how will we handle fleet mix challenges? we only turn over the fleet in half the fleet in roughly a decade. on the road with crash mitigation and different cash prevention profile. we have some recommendations. i would make the five. first, protect the spectrum. the time since the recommendation to safety for the future is ensuring that the 5.9 radio frequency now dedicated

remains soully available. when two tons of metal are moving 100 feet-per-second communications must work instantly and accurately. the fcc is considering opening up a portion of the spectrum as we discussion. we're concerned that the ntia report is due after the fcc likely to reach a judgment. second invest in infrastructure. they require -- costly to communicate with vehicle. it's a garage l process because of the cost. third address consumer acceptance. we are to get ahead of concerns before we he employ. we need to tackle a range of questions. building consumer trust is imperative.

fourth maintain vehicle affordable. policies should keep vehicles as fordable as possible. the best technology in the world is nothing stuck in a show -- cars lasting longer and cost more than $30,000. we only replace about 6 percent of the u.s. car annually. any poll that flows from a placement cycle may comprise from the greater good. fifth, we must preserve technology and neutrality. we recognize the challenge of the driving. we talk about it in compete. the challenge has grown as connectivity found the way t cars. government policy calls for restrictions. without sponding limitations and portable divisions. the result is chilling innovation in the built in system and incentivizing the hand held use. they are looking for the map

guidance and can't plug it in the own? what do they do? pull out the iphone or android and look down below the dash, they plug in the address, they filgd with the keys, and potentially suffer the consequences. we can't wish the real world away. a policy that isn't comp hennive produces unintended consequences. to close the promise of future mobility has never been brighter or safer. we stand ready to work with the committee to maximize innovation and save lives and we thank you for the opportunity to testify. >> thank you, sir. and now mr. jeffrey. >> thank you. member on the senate committee on commerce, science and technology. i'm responsible for the innovation strategy as well as research and development focused on -- as a leading global supplier for automatic

commercial vehicle and other market segment they invest $1.6 billion annually in the global rd initiative. we employ about 5,000 people in the united. if i can leave you with one message. 11,000 lives can be saved annually without a technology mandate, regulatory requirements every thirty-second there's a vehicle-related death somewhere in the world. it equates to about 1.12 million people who die each other. it's a tragedy and can be prevented. world health organization projects traffic injuries to be the fifth leading cause of death by 2030. even more than aids or cancer. while vehicle deaths in the united have declined with wide spread adoption of seat belt and air bag. progress is stalled resulting in more than about 33,000 annually in the united and 200,000

serious injuries each engineer. -- year. we heard earlier over 90% of accidents are caused by driver error. passing safety technology like seat belt helped more people survive crash we think the next frontier of safety is prevent the accident before they occur. active safety technology are the key to reducing accident, injury, and death. government and industry group study the benefit of the technology for overa decade. a study by the insurance institute -- it's more than 11,000 lives saved per year with full deployment of active safety systems. i'm talking forward collision warning with collision imminent brake, departure warning, blind spot detection. the driving public wants vehicles improved features. technology is currently

available and it's difficult for consumers to understands their value. a key consumer awareness tool is the new car assessment program. which include the star rating system on all new vehicle window stickers. today it's not structured to accommodate active safety vehicle options. they are recommending to the committee that the u.s. amend it to require star ratings for active safety technology and incorporated to the window sticker on new cars in the future. we're talking about mature technology. been on the road since 1999. ready to deploy at high volume and result in fewer accident and deaths. many of the testimonyings are commercially available but relatively few vehicles are e qipted with them. at the current rate of acceptance they will not significantly impact crash statistics for about twenty years. we suggest they focus on proven technology such as collision and

braking and lane departure warning. there's no need to mandate measure or choose technology winners and losers here. the best path forward to provide consumers with information in a form they can use to which the market will respond. the sooner we increase consumer the awareness the sooner we can lower fatality rates. it is critical to allow safe connectivity and allow keeping drivers to keep their eyes open the road, the hands open the wheel, the mind on the mission. it's the mission of driving safely. technology like this industry first integrated radar and camera system -- similarly rare side dpe text system makes drivers aware of vehicles along the side of them. our act help keeps drivers

connected to the information they want while mitigating driver distractions. it helps ensure the vehicle is never distracted even if the driver is. conclusion, we're at the critical point in the automotive industry. consumers are demanding the connectivity and it impacts safety on american's roads every day. we believe the foundation for safer driving is the robust employment of act i have safety technology. thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. >> thank you, sir. and now, director of university of michigan transportation research institute. >> good afternoon, mr. chairman. ranking member, and member of the committee. i'm honored to speak with you about new technology in vehicles, and about truly safe and efficient roadway transportation system. this system -- citizens and economy of the united states. the university ever michigan

transportation research institute is currently overseeing a deployment in an arbor. we heard earlier. testing nearly 3,000 cars, buses, motorcycle. they are e qipted for license, communication enabling promises crash avoidance system. the work is sponsored by the u.s. d.o.t. and carried out in partnership with the intelligence transportation industry including automatictive manufacturer. i know, no other technology that could have the same impact over all on safety. it has a potential to volutionize the transportation system by drawing drive's attention to risks more immediately. pervasivively it will help us avoid crashes and utilize roadway and energy sources much more efficiently. as we move beyond the research

phase, the national strategy is needed to guide the deployment of the 5.9 gig georgia heart z platform. we need dedicated short range communication for all classes of vehicle and at key infrastructure locations. despiting growing spectrum demand for inlicensed uses it must be protected for exclusive use by vehicles and infrastructure. reliable and secure communication is nonnegotiable. cybersecurity is one of the leading issues about europe. a comprehensive strategy involving industry and government must be established and carried out. further fuel test of a new generation security system is needed to ensure that the platform remains secure while maintaining the privacy of all users. one the systems are developed,

we need automotive consumer to embrace them. we need attractive device widely deployed. clearly a further wave of technology called development will occur in vehicle automation then the benefit will reach will be on safety. the scale of the transportation is important. the united states is a opportunity to leap ahead in mobility technology supporting improved way of life, and new mobility industry. an industrial ecosystem with new jobs will be created by the amative and information technology industries. there will be many winners across different businesses and consumers. how do we prepare for and sustain the transformation? a critical requirement is for all vehicles manual or automated to be connected during a multidecade transition.

and connected vehicles connect can drivers. the need for human machine interface technology to focus the driver's attentions is crucial as we move forward vigilant attention caught your risky driving scenario. even so the driver will need to take over the situations. here are four additional things that must occur. to start the united states must take the lead in development and decide where mandatory safety standards are needs needed and open standards are needed for the nation's entrepresend volune standards need to be solidified for the connected vehicle platform, vehicle -- and control. third, we need to start now with connected infrastructure. the operation of the roadway infrastructure will change dramatically as more automated

vehicles deployed and coexist with conventional vehicles. automated cars, someday will be capable of operating in narrow lanes closer together and may find health without a driver. finally, national policy position needed on data own issue access and privacy so that traffic system managers maximize the connected vehicle data. obviously we'll face new risk with transportation with transportation systems. the reward are huge included an expanded 21st century mobility economy with minimal safety and sustainable energy use. testing and certification need to be taken to the next level and responsibility to safety needs to be redefined so that liability concerns don't stall deployment. in closing, the mobility technology in the future will

merge through crisis built around connected vehicles, automated vehicles, smart infrastructure, and improved driver interaction with the automobile. i do appreciate the opportunity very much and welcome your questions. thank you for your attention. >> is that it, sir? >> thank you very much. and dr. john lee. university of wisconsin. >> chairman rockefeller, ranking member thune, and the committee, thank you for letting me speak today. to put vehicle technology if context consider driving safety as an important health problem. approximately 34,000 americans died in motor vehicle crashes last year. the crashes are the most likely cause of death for those between 4 and 3 years of age and account

for more than 30% of teen deaths. the coming years will bring increasingly complex distractions and complex vehicles to drivers who may be unprepared for either. this technology can improve or degrade driving safety. vehicle technology affects driving safety because the car is essentially a computer. atm luxury car requires software, computer code. we think of car as mechanical system. they are rolling computers. these computers are changing what it means to drive. they enable cars to take over many important driving operation such as adaptive cruise control. braking entertainment system allow drivers to connect to social networking, hear text message, and hear sounds. a safety threat may emerge.

the technology automaticking driving much of the time, drivers have the freedom to focus on entertainment system. but the vehicle can unexpectly hand control back to the distracted driver. drivers are particularly air prone in such situation. changing technology may make it even more likely. this increase means that in fifteen years we are likely to be discussing whether people should be allowed to drive because the vehicle may be so much less air prone than people. until cars assume complete responsibility for driving the critical challenge to design vehicles so drivers understand what it can and can't go. it's particularly challenge because even small design changes can violate drivers expectations' and -- [inaudible] in this way automated cars a

like paper towel dispenner. it isn't con some use motion sensor and automatically roll out a towel when you waif a hand in front. others require you prez a button. fruitlessly waiving in a dispenser before you realize it requires a button press can be embarrassing. such confusion in a car can be deadly. like paper towel dispenser push button can be confusing. you need to push the button. when in motion you press and hold the button. the need to press and hold can confuse drivers when accelerating vehicle. much consuming

back to the road. over time can the car can help you appreciate and avoid risk open the road. the road ahead, as ab engineer i'm optimistic about the future of vehicle technology. i see substantial challenges. i he today to offer recommendations and so i draw upon the wisdom of the committee on electronic vehicle control and unintended acceleration. i paraphrase several recommendation. first, assess whether electronic interfaces such as push button delay responses in emergency situations.

second promote government and industry collaboration to create designs that communicate vehicle capability and stay stoss to drivers. third, identify with driver's expectations of vehicle awmghts thank you. >> i think it's important we ask questions. >> thank you. tell me how the technology is going to roll out. we have to do infrastructure building. is this is going to be one car. the whole fleet. can someone describe the cost of

infrastructure building? >> this is a profoundly tough question. even defining what it is can be tricky. maybe a simple way to break it down begins to introduce the complexity and evolution we're about to go through. so in today's world if a driver needs to brake, they make a choice to apply the brake. with driver assistance that are in the market right now, if the driver does not react in time, he may get a warning. they've got that. and the next way which is also in the market if you don't react in time the car will actively engage for you. the next step really is when big data goes beyond what the car can see. so far we have been operating with what the driver can see.

what the car can see with the sensors. connectivity is about seeing what we can't see and having every car within a mile radius or so benefiting from the probability of a challenge. big data informs everybody. still some fashion so it's actual. and i think as administrator strict land indicated getting to a point where we have a connected fleet is a very long time away. the average age of the car is 11 years old. t going to take forever to get to a point where this is extreme. but the value is enormous. unlike a situation like automatic high beams they innovate and respond that perhaps it should perm mate the fleet. the connected space is a joint

initiative whether it doesn't go anywhere. they come together to make it a real if i and the time and money is a function of how much you are willing to spend and when you're willing to spend it. >> let's back up. [inaudible] >> i hope you like the ford or it russ. we have product that is hopefully helping them. i do like it. i have two of them. >> good. >> is looking at the lane boundary with a vision system and determining when you cross or about to cross the boundary and then the automobile manufacturer will typically decide what do with the information give you alert. what is it looking at?

-- all that have looking at today's digital signal processers being as fast and portable as they are. it will define a lane brown drink for you and will the you know when you're approaching it at the speed you shouldn't be. >> professor, i live in wisconsin, and some of the sensors they break down. we get snow and slush so where does the system break down? what are the problems with that? >> a vision system will have trouble in the heavy wet or rain environment. the radar system sees through it. there are a variety of vol vol nermt to the testimony. >> are you thinking it's going to be minimal in term of actual highway infrastructure spending on this is going to be pretty much sensor with the vehicle? >> you had -- there are many

paths to get here. an infrastructure-based system is the compelling argument that get you the information you can possibly have to ensure a safe ride. you can do the individual car implementation as you have and gate lot of the way there without having any kind of infrastructure. so you have an individual machine that could operate a higher degree of safety. less fatality on the road today for sure. >> can you raise your hand there? >> thank you, senator. i think your question was kind of getting at the infrastructure side as well. if we i did employ throughout the infrastructure. if we think about intersection which is the main problem where traffic control systems were fitted with the communication and start to see a lower cost kind of solution.

we need a strategic approach with the infrastructure. an the vehicle side, vehicle connection that we talk about can do a lot. and the reason i can say this being -- i would like a quick point. that is the time constant the development in the different industry. if you take the iphone, for instance, the original iphone was just a declared vintage. what is a age of a vintage car? maybe sixty years. the difference between the fleet turnover and the automatic sector are with the cell phone

sector is dramatically different. what i would because of that is the influx of distractions may be overwhelming the ability to create vehicles that can counter act some of those effects and maintain safety. >> real quickly, mr. chairman, you're on a role, sir. you get all the time you want. [laughter] the strategic nature of the role is to key to this. because what you want to do is, again if you have infrastructure in place you can add the cost very every highway that make expensive as well as new technology. and is that how people are thinking this through? it's government now going to interview? that would be my biggest

problem. what concern you like government in that strategic role? >> i think the role through the infrastructure obviously that's going to be we need the capability to incorporate it at the lowest cost possible with systems being deployed. i think the industry that are reducing the traffic control signal intelligent transportation industry very aware of this and i think will be ingenious in a way we can incorporate it. if we can even tag spot. we know where the crash blank spot are in every state. we can do some targeting. again, what i'm looking for what is who talking to who. who has to talk. when have to talk to each other.

vehicle to vehicle is going to be infrastructure dependent. as fast as we can cooperate on the standard and get that unified among the industry that will be a pacing item for that. on the driver assistance system, product like you're experiencing there. the collision of breaking lane departure warning. i think the key i mentioned is make it visible to the consumers it's available. it's there. it worked well for the air bag rollout and substantial control. where the consumer saw that, saw the value of safety and brought it to the market faster than regulation required it. i think with i have the same opportunity here. let the market work. let the market create the higher -- make people aware. as yourself i would hope with your experience, with mine, i'll never have my wife or kids in

anything other than that if i have a choice. only if i know it's on the vehicle. you have to experience it to get the value of the technology. i think we can let the market work and it's system is a key ingredient to doing that. >> we need to be mindful of the cost. i can't afford the upgrade. not everybody can. you have to be careful in term of cost benefit calculation. >> there are two different. the driver said market driven and the cost will come down over time. the individual make the choice. when you get to a connected car government has to get involved and two responsibilities. make sure that the spectrum works. you can't have it flying down the 100 feet a second and have the communication go faulty and the second part of the infrastructure. dictated by government.

>> that one i'm skeptical of. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i'm very sad. [laughter] i'm kind of an old dog. i love it. your questions are great. >> let me ask a couple. we had a whole series of hearings in the last years having to do with television, and, you you know what i call the decision of content. and so the question was it wasn't just -- violence but also unhealthy things that kids were seeing as much as we're seeing. then we turned we great satisfaction to the ability of parents to monitor what was going on and to be able to use

the control that time available and allow their children not to see what they should not see. i think that's reasonable because basic television ad obviously the later in the night. it's a bad stuff on it. and it has consequences. that isn't my point. my point is i don't think we have ever really got a sense of confidence that the afternoon -- average parent whoever it would be. knew how to work the, you know, promoter, the machine that set parameter. if you can't have that, then everything else fails.

now just moving to what we're talking about, i will make a terrible confession. sin my colleagues are basically disappeared c-span has not. i have some trouble. i have a new garagetized car because i'm large and the car is large. it's a happy coincidence. but we just come out of -- [inaudible] and i discovered that the air-conditioning didn't seem to work. i did what i remembered previous interrations of automobiles what would happen to make the air-conditioning work. i had fallen, i think, thes class of american tradition of failing to read the manual. and i think americans will go to almost any length to avoid

manual including, you know, indict and the rest of them. we are just wonderful at avoiding thing we ought to read. then i discovered to my incredible embarrassment the little white button fairly low on the panel that was meant to look like a snow flake implying cool. i had -- there was no judgment i made. i was told to push it. all the sudden the air-condition came on. i think it's a very sad american story. which i'm the villain. but i just raised the question of how sophisticateed our people growing in technology, in automobile as they have to get and get to work to dentist or whatever it is. so several people use the car. who reads the manual?

our manual is read. our manual is red. i think there's substantial portion of the car i can't work. i don't need to. we're coming to a point where i may need to. if over the next ten years the variety of things as you indicated happen. i want to put that question to you, how reliable do you think drivers are these days understanding some of the new electronics? mr. chairman, we are testing 3,000 connected vehicles and secretary of transportation commented said you are testing these with ordinary people. in many cases the parent in the public school system.

there are no button. they are already getting information and in some cases warnings. when the need arises. we're finding that the reaction from our ordinary michigan people is incredibly positive. they thank us for the systems that we have deployed we haven't come across any of those kinds of issues to with confusion about the technology. so far with connected vehicle, there's a lot going on in the background but in the foreground , relatively little because the problems already occur infrequently. there's an extraordinary statement. i have to accept it coming from you. >> mr. chairman, i have a confession too. [laughter] i can't operate my tv very well. my kids make fun of me. but what i get in the car, i

have found that the driver assist technology are really intoo tiff, and i think that's the trick. one of the reasons why apple is so successful everything is intuitive. when you get in the car in the world today even the guy who can't operate the tv and program it can get in the car, drive it, and tbreft driver assist. it's simple. it basically does it for you. if i'm driving down the highway, this happens every morning, if i put my blinked spot chimes. there's something in the way. don't go. i don't have to do anything. i know it. if i'm going too fast it will alert me the distance between my car and the car in front of me is too close for the speed i'm going it will chime and said wake up, be careful. if i sit on adaptive cruise

control it manages the distance precisely. that's the trick. the engineeri function the technology are going that. >> you refer to the technology which means the ability to drive the car if you slip over to another lane to be forewarned about that. i look forward to that very, very much. what about the part that is entertainment? >> the information in the car has an upside and downside. the upside ultimately plays out in the context of connectivity there's a potential challenge. the challenge with the information is managing the car. and the discussion i thought with the administrator

strikeland was instructive. i think it miss admit of a point if i can take anute here. there are 5500 crashes in the country pretty much every year. 17% are distractions-related. that's about million of those. 2% of those happen as a consequence of using the internal built in integrated system of the car. it's 2% of the 5.5 million crashes. 2.of the million crashes. 98% are function of distractions from some other cause. the imidelines they issued deal with the 2% but do not touch the 98%. so i think what the administtodid today was really important in talk about the stakeholder briefing and meet where he brings together or propose bringing together manufacturers, software folk. obm. social media companies.

to deal with information how you manage it. if we're serious about dealing with distractions in the country. we have to focus where the real battle lies. i totally agree. i would like to go back to your original question and take bit of a different perspective for the optimistic panelists here. i think your experience is more common than not. i think there great potential for confusion with the new systems. i saw an article just the other day discussing a new vehicle that came out. it had a larger expanded glove box they were offering to accommodate the user manual. it was so large. the cars are complicated and there's good data suggests that drivers don't always understand what these systemso. adaptive crcontrol, r example. people think it has capability that may not actually have. another example, i think goes back to my towel dispenser.

a simple thing. you put a little computer behind it and becomes misters you. we have a car with 70 to 100 interconnected computers that is complicated. and in some cases mysterious. for my vehicle, for example, there's 165 different parameters that i can adjust all key to my key font. i get to the car and the car is a different car for me. my wife gets in, and 165 parameters change. it's a different car for her. what happens if i grab her key to be? now i'm driving her car which might be different than my car. those sort of con confusions, i think are new and didn't exist before the car became a computer. one more example going back to the confusion with the on/off switch. in the mast parting your car, stopping your car, you did it with a key. turn the key, off full out and

you couldn't pull it out before it was turned occupy. you can take your key to be, get out, close the door, walk away and it's still running. and it actually happened and poisoned with carbon dioxide the occupy pant of the house after they left the car in the garage running. thing is confusion. i don't want to be too negative. i think there huge potential for safety. there's a negative side and we have to approach that. i'll take both of your answer. i want to ask another question. what do you think it ought to be? i want each of do you answer that. i'm not sure of the swiftness of the younger generation whatever that means declining to buy

automobile because of the cost of the economy and, you know, driving in washington almost any time of day makes youment to take amtrak down 16th street. [laughter] and just boll over everything in site. it's frustrating. and now you have to get buses because you put more people on there and take a lot of cars off the road. and a lot of buses can't make turns without holding up traffic for ten or fifteen minute as they try to wiggle a turn. it's all very, very complicated. america is in love with automobiles. that will never cease. i'm in love with automobile. that will never crease. i don't want to die -- i'm not technologically gifted as at

staff behind me can very well tell you. i'm very serious about my work and that's why i come back to the mission of any any fact is a. the hearing is one of the future is going to be like. i get the impression i'm not sure that's correct. so the role of playing safety when you put your hand on a steering wheel it will raise your blood alcohol content. the saving of -- but so what. i think that it's very important to say to really crack down on carbon dioxide.

i don't think this country will survive unless we find a way to take 95% of the carbon dioxide out of coal that we have found but declined to use. those are problem. to me basic safety is important. i love up with of the reasons i like my new car is three years old is because it's big, and it's really fun. okay. when i get down it, the what i want to do is drive. i want to listen to my music. one that calm me down when i go to work and calm me down when i come back from work. i like dying. i like driving a lot. i'm not in to the gadget, but then again, i'm with another generation, so let me just typically block you off and say what do you think the role ought

to be? >> please. that's the 4eu6d ,000 question; right? that's what we're talking about. the industry, the automobile manufacturers and suppliers are going to work very hard to take what is already the most complicated piece of electronic you own, your car, and work to make it simpler or work to make it more intuitive or seamless. just as you have your desires, 25-year-olds and below have their disappears. they want to interface in that vehicle in an entirely different way. and yet the product has to service all the demographic. t our challenge to provide the technology that is less distracting that keep the driver in the loop and keeps the drive safer tomorrow than today. a lot of talk about vehicles today. and driver of the vehicle. i think it may happen at some point in the far future.

but for a lot less money and quicker application. i'm not talking ten years. akive safety technology can be implied today and have significant benefit to the statistic of both accident and fatality in the united. and i think the technology mature, i think they recognize it as mature enough to consider that. i think letting the marnght work here. no regulation required let the consumer let it be vizble to the consumer now immediately. safety does so. we have at love things to work on. there's no doubt about it. we're dedicated to solving those problems. we can get a lot of the benefit of the vehicle today in a semi antonymous mode in a couple of years. if we have the fortitude to stay with it. >> would you if it were a financial body would you apply

to the loss in recent years? >> i'm sorry, can you . >> in other words do you let the market work? are you going to get the hundreds of millions of dollar and spend it on mortgages and low-income housing or whatever. i'm making no comparison between that and automobiles. but, you know, i just worry about that. i worry about safety i don't want people to die. we have twisted roads in west virginia.

[no audio] for reasons of commitment to for reason that safety sells for reason of liability is producing today driver assist technology that will deal with the accident rate in west virginia. we are on the crust of the safety. the news is good news. the role is to do exactly what they do. it's about to be small agency of really surrounded, committed public servant who focus through data on safety issues. we work closely with them in a appropriate way. there no hide the ball. we share technology. we do many study together. the exercise on the connected car is a joint effort of suppliers, oem. it's a proper role about

defining brighter future for safety. the same thing with the in term of drunk driving. they engage with the industry properly. we engage with them. regulatory authority and a hammer which has been used. at time it's appropriate. we have the right relationship, it is we hope data driven. we are on course to a -- it's a good news hear, the safety if we make the right public policy choice. especially on the spectrum issue. >> it actually brings us in. in other words we have congressional oversight mostly on the intelligence committee. doesn't want to turn anything

over. they want to protect themselves. and i don't think car companies are necessarily that way. in fact when we had the so-called sudden unintended stop crisis. the other country -- companies the work was quite good, i thought. the resolve was good. people changed habits. they have culture of safety of a different sort of the developed. i'm not optimistic about the automobile industry. i want to to be certain. and i've kept you all too long. dr. lee, you look like you need to say something. [laughter] >> i don't know whether i need to say it but i will. i come from a different perspective so weigh it accordingly and you may want to discount it entirely. i think one of the thing we see in automatic industry is a dramatic change.

because computers underlie things clang is occurring in a exponential rate. and we project as people we project change linearly. we are thinking in ten years the smart cars will be ten times better but in fact in fifteen years they'll be a thousand times better. different than we might expect. i think change is happening extremely quickly. and this is a very different environment than they grew up in. cars turned over every six years. now you're working at the computer industry models are turning over every six months. ten times different. i think the vehicle and the car and how people treat cars is also changing dramatically. i think the generation that grew up with bruce springsteen and the map of the road and using the car to get away from the parent. it's changing. kids get away from the parent with phones app texting.

cars are a distractions to them. i think they may bivity shifting their pattern in a way that is also surprising. the role in the new environment i think there is an important role. i think i hesitate to offer strong recommendation from the report regarding the tie owe that unintended acceleration event that our can years ago. one of the things that came out of that that i thought was interesting, that is that a vehicle environment is changing qualityively. and the regulatory environment may need to change accordingly. they suggested looking at other agencies like the faa or fda as model for how they may want to adapt to the new environment. ..

>> understand what that was

about that is injurious to the government, the manufacturers, and worrying to the consumer. but i think we need is a better information infrastructure to help identify and understand the inevitable failures that will come out of the computerized vehicle. >> i want to end the hearing. if you went to say something it has to be so incredibly good. [laughter] >> not a problem. >> he has the incredibly important role because transportation has become a team sport and has a regulatory role and one of the very important issues is liability and responsibility for crashes because we will continue to have crashes for a very long time. is that shifting?

we said that is the driver's responsibility. is there some shift their? so that kind of question is something that needs to be convened and make some policy guidance as we move forward because that will become a very important issue. i hope i've lived up to expectations. [laughter] >> you did. in fact,, you all did. i don't see a lot of people sitting here but that doesn't matter it is a hearing. everything is reported and written down and there is some interesting and good ideas that have come of this and you are good witnesses. having said that i don't like to obeying the gavel in a looks superficial so i will declare the hearing adjourned. thing you. thank keogh.

>> this is a painting during the civil war the to causes that are important to her were veterans and soldiers and also orphans children that had been made orphans as a result and when people associated with those causes would come here to visit they would sit here in the formal parlor embassy wanted people to feel welcome so this is for they would sit and discuss the issues of the day. they would post a number of political figures for debtor including president taft and mckinley also general sherman and other local and national and political figures. her political partner was her husband in detaining these figures jews serve in the role of hostess which has been incredibly important.

>> good afternoon i just finished speaking with secretary to and senior officials at the treasury department to discuss the investigation into irs personnel when improperly screened groups applied for tax-exempt status and i looked forward to taking questions at tomorrow's press conference but today i wanted to get out to all of you some information about

we're doing in rigo from your. i have reviewed the treasury department watched our report the conduct is inexcusable it is inexcusable and americans have a right to be angry and i am angry about a. i will not tolerate this behavior in any agency but especially the irs and given the power that it has and their reach it has in all of our lives. and as i said earlier it should not matter what political stripe you are from but the fact of the matter is the irs has to operate with absolute integrity. the government generally has to conduct itself that is to the public trust and that is especially true for the irs. here is what we are going to do. first, hold the responsible parties accountable. yesterday i directed

secretary lew to follow up on negative call on the ig audit to see he was responsible to make sure we understand the facts. today's secretary louis requested and accepted the resignation of the acting commissioner of the irs because given the controversy surrounding this audit it is important to institute the leadership to help restore confidence going forward. second, we will put in place with safeguards to make sure this cannot happen again and i have directed secretary lew to make sure the irs begins implementing the ig recommendations run away. third, we will work with congress as it performs its oversight role and our administration has to make sure we're working hand in hand with congress to get this thing up next. congress, democrats and republicans owe it to people to treat that with the

responsibility it deserves to not speak of politics because the one thing you have seen across the board everybody believes what happened as reported in the ig report is an outrage but the good news is it is fixable and in everybody's good interest to work together. i will do everything in my power to make sure nothing like this happens again. by holding the responsible parties accountable by putting in place checks and safeguards coming forward to make sure though laws apply as it should be in a fair and impartial way to make sure the laws clear so that we have confidence that they are enforced in a fair and impartial way there is not too much ambiguity surrounding these laws. that is what i expect, that is what the american people deserve and that is what we will do. thank you very much.

>> this is the painting showing lucy attending to a wounded soldier to causes important war veterans and soldiers and also orphans of

children made orphans as a result of the civil war. when people associated would come here to visit, they would sit here in the formal parlor. lucy was a wonderful hostess she wanted people to feel welcome and this is where they would sit and discuss the issues of the day. they would have posted political figures for dinner including future president taft and mckinley also general sherman and as well as another national and political figures. as a political partner with her has been entertaining these political figures to serve as a role of hostas would have been incredibly important.

>> the meeting will come to order. i know a quorum is present in each member has copies of the material on the agenda today at their place at the roster. with i recognize myself for an opening statement. thank you for being here today. we're considering h.r. 1947 federal agriculture reform and risk management act of 2013. the product of more than three years of work and his work began in the countryside with field hearings led by collin peterson and all the criticisms of the

partisanship of congress and how it has been accomplished because folks can work together. this is not the case today we will march up a reform-minded farm bill developed with true bipartisanship and we will levant's with republican and democrat votes and achieve nearly $40 billion of savings by in eliminating outdated government programs and eliminating others. no other authorizing committee in congress has voluntarily cut money from its jurisdiction to reduce the size and scope of the federal government. the farm act reform stamp program for the first time since the well for -- welfare reform of 1986 it rains and the cost by enforcing asset income test ending recruitment activities of the increased enrollment in preventing states choose circumvent the law to receive greater funding ty and restrictions to prevent college students

and lottery winners from participating we also reform the farm program to eliminate direct payments which are paid regardless of conditions and many times to farmers no longer performing. the farm act reflects the belief of a true safety net something used when disaster hits such as aggressive whether or down markets. this is the best interest of all of us because it enables us to have a stable and affordable food supply. titled one cup a $23 billion which is a reduction of more than 30%. this cut is made about providing producers a new safety net that allows risk management choices. i have said many times that policy must work for all commodities in all regions and while i personally do not favor a evenue style program is in the farm act as a choice for producers because some of them believe

they can manage to risk better and the conservation title which is extremely important since my days of the subcommittee and is reform to reduce overlapping programs and streamline delivery. conservation programs have grown in number and in complications that can confuse producers and responded by eliminating or consolidating duplicative programs. the farm act eliminates 10 different programs to save more than $6 billion. we continue to fork -- focus on the working programs and we did not cut 1 penny from speeto i am also proud of the investments in the bill and our farmers continuously tell as crop insurance is the backbone of the safety net and the farm act only makes a stronger we provide new products such as a supplemental coverage option

to provide important gap coverage to those who cannot afford such coverage in the past. we may keeled improvements to address problems to decline history yields was multi-year disasters for all of these improvements help to mitigate risk but it is important to remember crop insurance does not protect against systematic multi-year price declines. that is the job of the commodity title and it is one that i am proud of. wrestle make important investments to help farmers and ranchers and provide enhanced risk-management tools by providing reduced premiums for these new farmers who are the future of agriculture. additionally remake an unprecedented level of investment in specialty crops in order culture and the research title and finally provide as astor assistance to livestock producers and as many of you know, it was enacted in

2008 farm bill expired in 2011 and leaving producers with no protection at a time when multi-year trout gripped the nation. in closing, let me say that no one on this committee will like everything in this bill. that is pretty obvious. that includes me but farmers and ranchers and the american taxpayer are counting on us to pass the farm bill let's give certainty to the industry that has been a bright spot of a dismal economy. let's give taxpayers billions of dollars of deficit reduction and join the ranking member and me and support this piece of legislation. with that, i now turn to the ranking member for his opening statement. >> i am glad to be here

today to consider reauthorization of the farm bill today is hopefully the beginning of the end of the process that has gone on far too long. many may not know including commodity title that will work for all producers with

continued support for the sugar program. with the investor of the 2008 farm bill from farmers' markets and local food systems. with probably have amendments to increase or decrease but we need to get past the ideology on this issue of the right and left to be realistic. my own view the categorical eligibility with of the changes to be brought into the system because of the 1996 reform act that clinton vetoed twice that came about because that was part of the price to sign the welfare bill but frankly i have talked to some of you, we should update the in, limits

and the asset limits and under federal law and that was an exchange but that will not happen and i will not hold the bill up over that. but i think it is wrong to have a situation like we have in minnesota where people in north dakota are getting snath benefits but the people in the same situation are not because north dakota has 200% in, and it's a and rigo by the federal 130. so that will be an issue and we will work through that. as i said at the last year's mark up there are responsible ways to reform this nutrition title and this is the first cup of the process. i am confident we can pass a good bill today and after we

get this bill out of the committee we get that commitment to move this bill on the floor. from everything i can see, i think that is happening. one of the reasons that i am optimistic that the speaker has started to lobby people on the dairy program and that tells me he is serious about this so that is a good thing. i had conversations with him and he told me he wants to get this done and the chairman is in touch with leadership and in whenever they put out that is on the agenda i am optimistic we can get this done in june on the floor to get the bill conference it would be nice to get this done before the august recess and we could do that if we get on track. i am looking forward to

working with you and hopefully we can get the bill out of here sooner rather than later. it would be nice to get it done by 3:00. [laughter] we will see what happens. [inudible] the committee may begin consideration of the bill before us we have a jar 1947 federal agricultural reform act of 2013 before consideration and without objection the first reading will be waived and we can open the amendment at any point* but i would like to remind members weld the majority of the measures are under rule number 10 jurisdiction of the committee of agriculture other provisions may be outside the scope therefore we will not be considering provisions outside of the committee's jurisdiction during the market it

prohibits her from approving or amending the provisions and no such vote can occur during the markup and other than to recommend amendments within the jurisdiction or to recommend the bill be passed or not passed or amended are not amended. in conclusion, members may not be voting on the entire bill but instead whether to report to the house with recommendations how the provisions that are in the bill in the committee's jurisdiction should be amended as developed during the market. although the bill is open i would encourage day are offered on the title by title basis. and we will close each title as we go through however at this time of a bite to offer the amendment sponsored by the ranking member and i and all officers were notified as to which filed amendments are included i call for the

unblocked amendment to be taken from the desk and i direct a clerk to distribute and i ask unanimous consent there reading of the amendment be waived. does any member seeks recognition to speak on the unblocked amendment now before the members? >> i move the hemlock amendment, mr. chairman. >> gentleman moves the unblock amendment. >> the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for five minutes. >> i wish to speak on amendment number 66 with the package offered along with my colleagues from california and florida. will offer this amendment before the committee in the

effort with a good member reforms as was included in this bill for closing the loopholes to eliminate state performance bonuses and accountability through lottery winners could thus steal from those who qualify for the program 3/4 contained the children are a good start for long-term reform with a bloated and rapidly growing program my colleagues and i recognize the work of this committee to trim over $20 billion of supplemental nutritious assist in the church assistance program and within a spare resubmit this amendment because we know while we are moving this bill for there is always room for improvement. i know i am not alone in my concern for snap and want to find ways to train at one negative trend even more i look forward to that debate on the floor and in conference we take a good first have to add additional reforms we called incentivizing pay for recruitment coordinator

space and individuals to apply for benefits we would mandate the stager for individuals using the electronic system to ensure snap recipients have not been previously disqualified to cheat the system and steel from the taxpayer and take money from those in need who deserve assistance. this provision will stop wasteful and fraudulent activities across all 50 states as a good steward of the taxpayers' dollars u.n. to make sure it is spent wisely and on those who need the help not criminals to take advantage of the system and i urge my colleague and i yield back. >> is anybody else seek recognition? >> on the same amendment will appreciate the recognition to be with the others on this amendment as well and it is important with a snap program work

well for those who are deserving or continue to have a program that is successful and viable so the types of reforms the incentive is nation of recruitment it does not pass the smell test and with the verification for the proper users that is what people intended long term to be successful for those who have a need. anything else is unacceptable with the budget constraints we face these are good reforms that go along way to accomplish some of the goals for a bit of the reform that we need for snaps i am proud to offer the amendment and i yield back. >> the chair would strike the last word of the approximately 100 amendments that have been offered, one quarter are in close to in the unblocked amendment because there were issues we essentially agreed to and

the ranking member and i both agreed to in the logic of putting them together in one vote and one set of discussions seemed straightforward. there is another one that will be discussed potentially not voted on that remain -- leaves the remaining half to be voted and disposed as background with that i recognize a gentlelady to discuss the unblocked amendment. >> certainly i had not intended to speak on this particular amendment but it will be a long day and i would hope we would not start calling the american public thieves and criminals. i yield back. >> weld noted. >> i move to strike the last word. thank you very much so to speak to amendment number six and i offered for decades to serve as a one-stop fiscal conduit for

resources federal state agencies to respond to wildfires bill is other for time and expenses and this is necessary because most states allow the legal authority to get authority through contacts between state legislatures is not feasible. normally the forest service provide state resources providing another state wild fire assistance to provide assistance for mobilization and tracking so if my state of washington puts out a fire in texas or california or vice versa when that happens this state where the incident ochers reimburses for the resources from the other states last year the office of general counsel rule even though they have the master fire agreement this authority was not clear in the federal statutes.

there is a need to you clarify within national coordinated response to what fire by providing access to immobilization infrastructure in this amendment would clarify this authority to provide much-needed 72 combat wildfires of what has already been an early start to the wildfire season i think the chairman for including the unblocked and i appreciate your support. . .