>> guest: thanks. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> coming up next, two speeches from this past weekend's conference of the faith and freedom coalition featuring former u.n. ambassador john bolton and e.w. jackson, the republican nominee for virginia lieutenant governor. after that we'll be live with an energy conference with a keynote address by energy secretary ernest moniz. and later the senate returns at 2 p.m. eastern with general speeches followed with district court nomination votes and more debate on the immigration bill. >> former u.s. ambassador to the united nations john bolton was one of the speakers at this past weekend's conference of the faith and freedom coalition. this is ten minutes.

[cheers and applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you very much. well, it's a great honor to be here with you this morning, and i'm very grateful to ralph for inviting me and very grateful for all of you for being here. i wanted to spend a few minutes this morning talking about the challenges that the united states faces around the world today. because while our focus is understandably on domestic issues and priorities, you know, our adversaries are not gracious enough to wait for us to get our domestic house in order. indeed, they take advantage of our lack of attention, or certainly the lack of attention of the current administration. but it's very important for the united states not to forget how important it is to have a strong american presence around the world. we have a critical role for ourselves and for others. it's something that our country

has recognized from its inception. you know, the pilgrims referred to their settlements in america as the new jerusalem. john winthrop, the first governor of the plymouth bay colony, said we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill, quoting scripture. and ronald reagan, who's about the only person i know who can amend scripture and make it better, used to call america a shining city on a hill. [laughter] it's for us, but it's for others as well by example of how we, how we perform. and reagan, perhaps better than any other president in contemporary times, understood that to achieve the great objective of peace in the world and peace for america so that we could go about our lives in this country that you had to achieve that through what he called peace through strength.

that it is the capability that america has to dissuade or deter its opponents from challenging us and our friends around the world. that that's what keeps the peace and that what's provocative is when america displays weakness or inattention. [applause] this is, this is something i think is well understood around the world. margaret thatcher, who just recently passed away, understood it. that's why they called her the iron lady and not code pink. [laughter] [applause] and the threats we face around the world are real. they're very real. we face nuclear, chemical and biological weapons being developed by the likes of the ayatollahs in iran, by north korea. we see russia and china expanding and modernizing their conventional and nuclear weapons forces. the threat from terrorism remains very real. we are not on the road to the

end of the war on terror. it's a long road, and we've got a long way to go. it's been going on far before the first 9/11, but i think that tragedy really brought it to center stage for americans. there was no way to avoid it anymore. but it hasn't disappeared. we've had successes, we've made ourselves safer in some cases, but the threat remains. and we've seen it just in the past months. we saw the second 9/11 in benghazi last year. four americans killed. and since then, nine months later, what has happened? no retribution, no revenge. these people are victims of international terrorism, and the administration has done nothing. we saw it, we saw it two months ago today, the anniversary of the bombing at the boston marathon here in this country. we've seen it in pictures from london and paris, cold-blooded murders on their streets with

knives and meat cleavers. the war against terrorism is not a war we sought, it's a war that's being waged against us, and we have to understand and respond to it. so the question is, how? how? the president, and i'm sorry to say some republicans, seem to think you can tote it like a haunter -- treat it like a law enforcement matter. like a kind of jumped-up bank robbery. but the fact is the global war on terrorism is just that. and the risk that the terrorists and their state sponsors will one day achieve their long-sought objective and get chemical, biological or nuclear weapons has to be something that remains at the very top of our priority list. you cannot address nuclear weapons with after-the-fact prosecutions or retaliations. the goal has to be to prevent the attack from happening in the first place.

now, there are two ways to do that, and earlier this week you heard some thoughts about two critical issues we face right now that i'd like to address. the first way to prevent this kind of attack is to find out about it before it takes place. now, you've all seen the controversy over edward snowden, the leaks about the nsa programs. some democrats and even some republicans call him a hero. but what is he doing today? where is edward snowden today? he's in hong kong. he's revealing facts or at least his version of facts about american espionage against china. that is one of the worst violaters of international -- of religious freedom anywhere in the world. now, in revealing these secrets to china, this has nothing to do with americans' privacy. he's telling the chinese critical facts about what we're doing to protect ourselves against them.

there are two possibilities here. either snowden is lying, which will tell you something about his character, or he's betraying his country's secrets to a rival which tells you even more about his character. the fact is that snowden with what he has revealed has betrayed his country. and i will tell you this, any american politician who tells you that he is a hero is not fit to be entrusted with our country's national security. [applause] now, secondly, when you face the kind of horrific threat of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, you face as well the difficult question whether in order to prevent an attack a country must strike preemptively. it's a very difficult decision to make. but we've got that decision right in front of us now with

iran and its nuclear weapons program. the president says for america all options are on the table, but nobody believes that. the focus right now is on israel which twice before has attacked nuclear weapons programs in hostile states and which may well decide to attack iran's. this would be the old jerusalem coming to the defense of the new jerusalem, and i think it's very important that we all understand that if israel makes that very, very difficult decision to prevent iran from getting nuclear weapons and the use military force to do it, that this will be a legitimate exercise of israel's right to self-defense. [applause] that, that's why democracies act preemptively, to protect their innocent civilians. now, looking ahead here, there are many, many more threats that we're going to face that i can

deal with in a brief period of time, but let me just remind everybody what mac relate thatcher said -- margaret thatcher said to george h.w. bush right after saddam hussein invaded kuwait. she said, now, george, this is no time to go all wobbly. [laughter] obama and some republicans think that america's strength is provocative, that we're the problem in the world. their answer is american decline and weakness. this is the contemporary version of george mcgovern's 1972 theme come home, america. in fact, it's american weakness that's provocative. and, sadly, we now have one of the most provocative presidents we've ever had. [applause] let's not elect another one. our goal is peace for america, and we can achieve that peace through strength and determination. our founders understood this, and that's why in the declaration of independence they pledged their lives, fortunes

and sacred honor. this generation has to be prepared to carry on that legacy. because there's no turning away from a hostile world. thank you very much. [applause] >> also addressing the faith and freedom coalition conference was e.w. jackson. he's the republican party's nominee for lieutenant governor in this year's virginia election. mr. jackson is also a former marine, the pastor and founder of the exodus faith ministries and the author of the book "ten commandments to an extraordinary life." his remarks are ten minutes. [cheers and applause] ♪ ♪? thank you so much! thank you, thank you, thank you.

i am so thankful to be at the faith and freedom coalition meeting and so proud to know that ralph reid and other leaders have pulled us all together because, folks, there is no freedom without faith. [applause] that's how our founders designed this nation. and our faith and our freedom are under attack like never before in the history of this country. freedom is the ability to fulfill one's god given gifts and talents and to allow them to take you to the highest place that you can go without irrational discrimination and without the government unduly interfering and hindering your ability to make progress. but we are now witnessing an effort to redefine freedom. folks, freedom and liberty are not license.

our founding fathers didn't create a nation in which freedom meant just do whatever you want to do, just do it. because whatever you want to do is okay. no, they created a nation in which the pursuit of happiness meant the pursuit of one's very best, the pursuit of character, the pursuit of integrity, the pursuit of decency and honor. and now we're being told that freedom is licensed. no, it is not because the more you engage in license, the less freedom you ultimately have. [applause] and the more you encroach on your neighbor's freedom, no, freedom means we ought to be the very best people we can be. and that's who we are as americans, and that's what we're going to continue to strive for. and by the way, freedom is also not dependence. freedom is not dependence. when i was practicing law, i

once represented a family who was being told by the department of social services that taking their children to church was a form of abuse. that's where we're headed in this nation right now. but i am so glad to know that we are a nation who is going to stand up for the principle that parents know best how to raise their children, not the government. [cheers and applause] but i think we need to go back to what older generations used to say. if you live in my house and you eat my food -- [laughter] and you're under my roof, you will obey me and my rules. [cheers and applause] and we're not going to let the government tell us any different. as for me and my house, we will serve the lord. [applause] and there is no freedom without god.

we hold these triewpts to be self--- truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. created, not evolved. [laughter] [applause] and endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights and among these are life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. folks, god is the one who made us free. and that freedom that has come from him that is inherent in who we are as human beings was not given to us by the government. it was not even given to us by the constitution, and we are not going to let anybody in washington or anywhere else ever take it away from us. [cheers and applause] ronald reagan said freedom is never more than one generation from extinction. we do not pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. it must be fought for, protected and passed on to them to do the

same, or we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children about the united states of america where men were once free. no, freedom is not license. freedom is dignity and honor and the ability to go to the very best place that your talent can take you. freedom is not dependence. freedom is the ability to have a job and the ability to work to support your family and the ability to instill in your children the dream of all that america offers and the ability to know that their lives will be better than your life, not worse. and, yes, freedom is the ability to worship god as we see fit and not be persecuted for it! [cheers and applause] i do not apologize for being a believer in jesus christ, and i do not apologize for believe anything the bible -- believing in the bible because that faith and that bible form the foundations of this nation, and

we're not going to let those foundations be destroyed! [cheers and applause] so i've said it before and i'll say it again, my country tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee i sing. land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrims' pride. from every mountainside, let freedom ring. and i love that last verse because it's a prayer, our father's god to thee. author of liberty. to thee we sing, long may our land be bright with freedom's holy light. protect us by thy might, great god, our king. here in virginia i am running for lieutenant governor because virginia is where the foundations of our nation were laid, and virginia is where those foundations must be restored. we are going to turn up the light of liberty so brightly in virginia that americans can see it from sea to shining sea --

[cheers and applause] and we're going to remind them, we're going to remind them that those of us who stood in the military offices across this nation and took an oath to the constitution of the united states understand that it was not an oath to a man, it was not an oath to a government, it was an oath to that constitution, and we're going to uphold it and protect it and defend it until we breathe our last breath. [cheers and applause] and remind every american that we are still a shining city on a hill, that we are still the last best hope on earth and, yes, that we are still the land of the free and the home of the brave and that we will continue to pursue the vision that we recite every time we take the pledge of allegiance, that we are one nation under god,

indivisible with liberty and justice for all. [cheers and applause] god bless you, god bless the the faith coalition and god bless the united states of america! [cheers and applause] >> lee accepted getties berg as a defeat -- gettysburg as a defeat. clearly, he couldn't accept it as anything else. but be he also reckoned that the logistical outcome of the campaign had been very good from a confederate perspective. as for the honger-term impact -- longer-term impact, he argued that the heavy losses at gettysburg did not exceed, quote, what it would have been from the series of battles i would have been compelled to fight had i remained in virginia. >> the 150th anniversary of the battle of gettysburg, live all day sunday, june 30th on

american history tv on c-span3. >> live pictures this morning from the u.s. energy information administration conference today in washington. we are awaiting remarks from energy secretary ernest moniz. he's expected to discuss the administration's strategy for, quote, all of the above approach to the tapping into energy sources. we do expect it to get under way in just a couple of minutes. live coverage here on c-span2. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> again, live this morning from the u.s. energy information administration conference here in washington, waiting remarks from energy secretary ernest moniz. we will have his comments live this morning here on c-span2 when they get under way. looks like it could be a couple minutes, so while we wait, we will go back to coverage of this year's faith and freedom coalition conference with remarks from former presidential candidate herman cain. [cheers and applause] >> thank you, thank you, thank you. thank you very much. but more importantly, thank you for being here. and as usual, ralph never gives me enough time.

[laughter] so i'm just going to take what i need, and then he can, he can scold me later! [laughter] you've heard a lot of great presentations. you've heard a lot of, you've received a lot of information. i want to use as the topic for my remarks winning in 2014. because i'm sick of people who are talking about giving up. we need to stop making excuses about the losses we had in 2012 and talk about what we're going to do to win in 2014. prison -- [applause] that's what we ought to be focusing on. so i'm not going to recount all of the reasons as to why we lost. there's a whole list of them. but one of the biggest reasons that i believe that we did is the number of conservatives that stayed home because they were

not enthusiastic. now look what we have. as a result of that. fifty years ago dr. martin luther king jr. was quoted as saying the following -- probably not one of the quotes that you hear a lot. fifty years ago dr. martin luther king jr. said: there is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance or conscientious stupidity. [laughter] now, to put it into 2013 vernacular, some people rig narnt and don't know it -- rig narnt and don't know it, and some people work at being stupid. [laughter] [applause] they work at it. now, i don't mean to cast the

broad net, but a lot of those people helped to create the current situation that we're in. and the current situation we are in because of all of the reasons that i'm sure you have heard as to why we had the magnitude of the defeats that we had, the current situation that we are in today reminds me of george orwell's classic book "1984." you know, he published that book in 1949. he was looking at a 30-year horizon. where he talked about big brother controlling everything. even people's thoughts. the only thing that george orwell missed was the time frame. it was 60 years instead of 30 years that has given us what we

have today. i know you don't want to hear this, but big brother is already here. big brother wants to control everything. they control our retirement, social security if we don't have supplemental. they control our health care that we're not able to kill this terrible legislation. they control much of our money through the tax code. and one of the fundamental principles that big brother operated under which allowed it to be successful was the principle of ignorance is stress. if you're big brother. big brother was able to do what it was able to do in george

orwell's "1984" because they intentionally kept people ignorant. john fund commented on that in the his remarks, and he's exactly right. and what we are seeing in today's environment is if you don't agree, they must try to find ways to silence you. we've got the irs abuse, sec intimidation, epa discrimination, doj intimidation nsa corruption. and it goes on and on and on in terms of the abuse and the corruption in the government that wants to control all the power lines. and that's why you're here, and

that's why i'm here. because we're not going to be ignorant to the truth. we're not going to be ignorant to the facts. because i know everybody in this room believe and feel as i do. we're going to take our government back. [applause] after i dropped out of the presidential race because of the viciousness of the media, they thought i was going to be quiet. [laughter] that's not going to happen. [applause] that's not going to happen. here's how we take our government back. before you stop a train, you have to slow it down.

too many people are discouraged because they think that this is a sprint. it's a marathon. this train is running full speed down the tracks toward socialism and toward communism. yes, i said it. [applause] that's where we're headed. before we stop it and reverse it, we've got to slow it down. that's what we do in 2014, we focus on slowing it down. now, i respect all of the speculation about who might run for president in 2016, but there are things we can do in 2014 that we should not overlook. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> welcome, everybody, to this 2013 eia energy conference where we intend to delve deeply into

critical energy issues that face us today. one housekeeping note before we get started, you will have the opportunity to ask questions of our keynote be speakers. at your table there are several notecards. if you have a question, please write it down, hold up the card. a staff member will collect them from you and bring them up to the table. the mic is not working? too loud? not loud enough? [inaudible conversations] >> okay. sounds really loud up here to me. we will follow the same practice at our panel discussions later today and tomorrow with the notecards. so this morning i have the pleasure of introducing dr. ernest moniz, secretary of energy, as the opening keynote speaker of the 2013 eia

conference. when nominating dr. moniz, president obama said he was proud to nominate a brilliant scientist who already knows his way around the department of energy. dr. moniz has proven that he not only knows his way around doe, but that he is an expert in a range of energy subjects. he has a proven record of collaborating with the best thinkers and innovators to advance new energy solutions. immediately before his appointment, dr. moniz was professor of physics and engineering systems at the massachusetts institute of technology and was the founding director of the mit energy initiative. before that dr. moniz was undersecretary of the department of energy, and he was responsible for overseeing the department's science and energy programs. his impressive resumé includes serving as an associate director for science in the office of science and technology policy at the white house. two years ago dr. moniz concluded our discussion at the

2011 eia conference as the final keynote speaker. his presentation on global energy game changers stimulated our interest in potential technological advancements in the future of energy innovation. today we are honored to have dr. moniz leading the department of energy towards these new energy solutions and technologies. we are happy, indeed, to welcome here to begin our discussion at the 2013 eia conference, dr. moniz. [applause] >> well, thank you, adam, for the introduction. in fact, adam referred to my last go round at the department, and i would just note that at that time when adam was in the private sector, we benefited from his advice and observations

about how energy markets were developing, and now we get to draw upon that advice in a more regular fashion. he also mentioned that two years ago with his predecessor, richard newell, i had the opportunity to address this conference. what he didn't say was that this started out to be a panel, but, of course, when people heard i was on it, they all withdrew. so a panel became by de facto a keynote address. richard is laughing because he knows it's true. [laughter] anyway, it is a pleasure to be here. the, speaking of the second tour of duty, and aye said this a number of -- i've said this a number of times, many have questioned the judgment of one returning to the department. i then invoke samuel johnson on second marriage, the triumph of hope over experience. but in reality actually, i thought i had a very good experience at the department of energy, so i come back with a lot of hope that we will, in

fact, be able to move the ball forward on a number of important issues in the department. energy, of course, as well as other issues like nuclear security that fall under the department's responsibilities. a little bit of a theme i want to etch size is that -- emphasize is that we have a funny kind of asymmetry in how we look at the past and the future. i think, you know, we kind of look back, and we see that, we see enormous changes that have happened in many spheres of our activity over short time although we rapidly forget what it's like to live in that world without some of the new technologies, etc., etc. and then looking forward, we tend to just project the same. and i think the theme is to, first, i'll start out with some reminders of how things have changed including in the energy sector and expect in ways that we do not know that we will see far more change, i think, than we tend to anticipate, much of

it technology driven but, hopefully, with synergistic policies as well. so, you know, if i just go back to when i left government service january 20th, 2001, you know, there are various, you know, little factoids, you know, brokaw, rather, jennings anchored the evening news. well, today it's not about the evening news. there is still evening news, but it's ant a much more -- about a much more bottom-up approach with an enormous number of news channels to reach us. my favorite happens to be the daily beast given its role in my confirmation process, but that's probably an inside joke for many of you. apple got mixed reviews with something called an ipod. today all of -- well, at least i have to walk around with two iphones all the time, 24/7 work. mark zuckerberg was a high

school student no one had heard of. even i, an old guy, have a facebook page now. so, you know, the world has really changed, and our energy economy has similarly changed. if you go back again to that time ten years ago, oil production, of course, continued to fall in the united states, imports increasing dramatically. top business leaders and thinkers from lee raymond to alan greenspan be projected an enormous natural gas shortfall and, in fact, there were lots of investments for lng imports. today we talk about blend w5u8 problems. pv, distributed pv, $10 a watt. today we're talking about incredibly reduced costs. wind power up by a factor of 15 in that time period. so there really has been

tremendous change, in fact, even in the four years since president obama took office we've seen this. most especially, of course, we all know how unconventional gas and oil have been a game changer in this, in this country. we often think of the energy industry, the energy system as one of incredible inertia and very hard and resistant to change. and there are some, there is some truth in that, and there are some good reasons. capital intensity, all kinds of issues. on the other hand, we have seen just in less than a decade, as we say, a complete change not only of the ground truth of our situation with oil and gas, but i think in the society a really shift of attitude away from one in which we are thought of as major, as having major energy dependence to one, in fact, in

which we are a national and, of course, global major energy blare. player. and this has happened at the same time that renewables have doubled in the last four years and are expected to double again by 2020, and one in which the natural gas, the market-driven natural gas substitution for coal has been a major contributor for the united states being the only major industrial economy with lowering emissions, lowering co2 emissions over the last few years. so these all have, obviously, major implications for our economy, our environment, our national security. and the remainder of my remarks today i just want to make a few points in four areas that i would connect energy and our security. one is the continuing fact that, of course, most conventional resources in the world are

located, shall we say, away from demand centers. by the way, another comment that can be extended to things like critical elements for a whole bunch of energy technologies, rare earths and other elements. secondly, make the connection of climate change and security, and some observations there. third, to comment on nuclear energy and its relationship to certain national security concerns. and fourth, the issue of vulnerable infrastructures and what that means in terms of our security. so, again, i'll just make a few comments in each of these, and perhaps we'll have time for some, for m questions. i think when it comes to oil and gas resources, well, particularly oil to start with, as i've said and we all know that there's been, obviously, a major change. certainly four years of increasing production, although

it may not be a major milestone, nevertheless, an indicator only a couple weeks ago crude oil imports and exports essentially becoming equal, first time in a long time. however, this does not change the fact that we need to reduce our oil dependence, particularly in the, as a transportation fuel. there's lots of reasons for that. two of them, one is as we all know the global price of oil continues to impact gasoline price, let's say, in this country even though we are producing so much more oil. but then in the geopolitical side, we should recognize that the energy security problems of many of our closest allies is a national security issues -- national security issue for us in the sense that their problems are limit these freedoms in terms of foreign policy options.

so we have to, we still need to address -- we can't take our eye off the ball that we need to address this question of oil dependence and reduce its strategic value as a transportation fuel. president obama has noted that there's no quick fix for this, but that there are three directions that we need to, need to pursue in addition to supporting domestic production and lower imports. one is efficiency, and we'll come back to that. well, i'll say it right now. of course, we have the his to have toic agreement -- historic agreement in terms of major increases in our cafe standards to 2025 that happened in this administration. secondly, we can talk about turn fuels, biofuels, natural gas or natural gas-derived fuels, and, third, we can talk about,

roughly speaking, a new paradigm of electrify case of the transportation sector. electrification of the transportation sector. in the spirit of we sometimes forget how different things look today from just a few years ago. in 2009 the american automobile industry was thought on the brink of collapse. sales had plunged 40%, industry had lost 400,000 jobs, and the president, i think, made what was not a universeally-accepted decision to provide support to gm and chrysler on the condition that they, in fact, take steps necessary to fundamentally restructure their businesses. department of energy played a role in supporting innovative new technologies. doe provided, subsequently, a nearly $6 billion loan to ford to upgrade and modernize

factories across six states, to introduce new technologies, to raise the fuel efficiency of popular vehicles. on the other side of the equation away from the shall we say traditional internal combustion engines, also half, a nearly half a billion dollar loan went out to tesla allowing the company to reopen a manufacturing facility and produce battery packs and motors. today the industry, again, looks totally different from what we were seeing four years ago. the big three are all returned to profitability. manufacturing almost doubled since 2009. and many of you saw a few weeks ago tesla repaid the entire balance on its loan to the department of energy nine years earlier than required. and they are moving to export of vehicles in 2014. so i think, you know, if you

think back four years, the picture is totally different all the way from our traditional vehicles to laying the foundation for, again, a surprising future probably relative to today's expectations on what particularly the electric vehicle future will look like. so i think it's, again, it's a are important be change -- it's a very important be change, and we need to keep that in mind as we think of the future as being a simple extrapolation of the present. in fact, i should add that a with the tesla, i want you to remember that's a pretty high performance vehicle. and, in fact, consumer reports called the model s the best car we have ever tested. not the best electric vehicle, not the best vehicle in one year, but the best car they ever tested. last week the department

released a web site called e-gallon to look at the fuel costs for electric vehicles. gasoline prices we see at the corner station, but we don't see the electric, quote, fuel costs. there what we find is that the national average is about $1.14 a gallon equivalent. quite a bit of state-by-state variation, but much more stability in those, in those prices. now, obviously, the operating the fuel costs does not hide the fact that this is a large capital cost -- that there's a large capital cost difference currently. but even there the, again, if you take the tesla and public information, we have a nearly halving of the base cost of vehicles in a period of a few years. so here, obviously, getting things like battery costs down,

lightweighting of vehicles, etc., some of the technology directions that we are supporting at the department, i think, are absolutely critical because there are lots of attractions in that model but a ways to go, obviously, in terms of scaling because of lower, lower initial costs. we could go on and talk about other now fuel replacements. again, things like cellulosic biofuel costs clearly have come down more slow hi than was anticipated, but don't take our eye off the ball. they are coming down and are approaching interesting, interesting areas. natural gas as a vehicle fuel, we are clearly using that much less than other countries. but the steps forward, again can, look interesting. class 8 vehicles, station to station, infrastructure with lng

may very well have some legs. finally, i'll just note that the, on the natural gas side we all, again, we're not going to review the whole revolution if you like in the united states, but a couple of points. one is we till don't know, d we still don't know, of course, the event to which similar developments will occur in other parts of the world. if and when they do, that will have, again, a profound effect on our security issues even if we remain and are projected to remain the largest producer in the world, because it can change flows dramatically in our hemisphere, in europe and in the far, and in the far east. and secondly, there's obviously a major issue around our own lng

exports. as i've said in my first few weeks in, at the department, i have had a pretty thorough review of the processes, and we are getting to the point of getting to the specific evaluation of license applications which i have pledged to do as expeditiously as i can. turning to climate change, the, as many be of you know over the last years, many be military and former military leaders have all emphasized the implications of climate change, particularly its role as a potential threat multiplier in certain parking lots of the world -- parts of the world, unstable parking lots of the world -- unstable parts of the world. and i might say in addition to military leaders, religious leaders have also many come

forward. i personally signed a letter with scientists and priests, rabbis, ministers, dot, dot, dot, some years back in which the theme was fundamentally while there may or may not be disagreement on how we got here, there's agreement on what we need to do going forward in terms of taking care of our, of our planet and, again, i've said before and i'll sate -- say it again, in my view the underlying science is really not debatable in terms of the driver of a need to address climate change. there's clearly lots of room to debate on how we do it, what we do, how fast we do it but not on the underlying science. so the president has made it clear that we will have a strong push as best we can to address climate change. energy efficiency is certainly one of the major approaches.

we need to move towards lower carbon and zero carbon fuels, and we also need to emphasize things like carbon capture and sequestration as a, as an approach for the expected continued use of coal in this country and, of course, in the, in the world. again, given the time i'm not going to go through a lot of discussion about the zero carbon, quote, fuels if you like. one is, of course, i'll just mention, say solar. i already noted that costs have dropped dramatically. within, say, 25% solar module costs really are down into the dollar-per-watt region. this is getting very interesting. i will argue that i believe the scale and time frame of impact of solar technology following my earlier theme, i believe again

is underestimated, that there are many situations today when solar is, in fact, competitive. but clearly, there's more, there's more to do. we are aggressively pursuing this in many dimensions all the way from basic research to deployment. and, again, i think that's an example of something that we will look back on in ten years and be surprised at the scope of the change. another, of course, zero carbon technology is nuclear energy. nuclear energy has a, also, security implications in terms of some of our non-proliferation efforts. i'll just make two points. one is i will defer to tom fanning and his remarks, but i think what's going on in georgia and south carolina with new

nuclear plant construction is absolutely critical for the future of nuclear power in this country. basically, on-cost and on-schedule construction is, i think, one of the most important factors, probably the most important factor for the future of nuclear power. as you know, four plants have been announced for closure this year in the united states, and we have a comparable number now under construction. the second point is in terms of the future we remain, the d., very interested in -- the department, very interested in pursuing small modular reactors as a technology option for the future. we don't know at this stage what the cost is, but that's why we are helping to move some new technologies towards licensing and expect to have at least a first plant in operation by 2022. this could change a lot of dynamics around how nuclear power is deployed, particularly

in the financing structure. and finally on nuclear power, i would just mention the blue ribbon commission's work in terms of the management of nuclear waste. many of you know the blue ribbon commission recommended really a different approach. one, first of all, based upon consent, a consent-based approach, deciding of nuclear storage and disposal facilities. very importantly, emphasizing strong dual tracks of storage and disposal with a pilot storage plant to come on in less than a decade. and, third, a new organization to manage nuclear waste and spent fuel in an integrated fashion. the key being that such an organization have sufficient authorities and access to the funds to be successful.

the administration has endorsed those principles. there is draft legislation being developed in the congress right now supporting those principles, and i'm very hopeful that we will be able to move forward in that way which i believe is, in fact, the most promising approach to starting to move fuel away from reactors. in fact, the blue ribbon commission, the administration and the congress are all emphasizing that we'd like to see in particular starting to move fuel from shut down reactors and all of these changes will require statutory action, so we await the actions of the congress. the fourth area i'll just probably mention it because i think my time is about up is infrastructure, the whole issue of addressing energy infrastructure is clearly, again, a security issue as well as an economic issue and an

enabler for changes in the energy system. integrating renewables, for example, with gas and other sources. i'll just say a couple of things. one is it may not be well known, but the department of energy does have a specific responsibility as the lead agency in terms of emergency response working with dhs and other agencies, fema, in terms of major disruptions. sandy k hurricane sandy, of course, was such a case. department was heavily involved. but i think, you know, what's true is that we all learned a lot in that episode. we all learned how we need to be better prepared, for one thing, to respond. i think we also learned in realtime the incredible interdependencies of our

infrastructures; electricity, natural gas, information, fuels. in fact, a major problem was getting, was the fuel supply chain which was tremendously complicated by the failure of other infrastructures like electricity. there are also institutional issues. how do we get in place the appropriate waivers, for example, to allow private companies to participate collaboratively? so i just want to say we're all, the president is very much focused on this including principals meeting quite recently. and i wanted to say that the collaboration with industry, eei for the power sector, api in the fuel sector is really excellent, and we're all trying to work together to figure out the system of preparedness so that when we have further disasters, we can be much more efficient and effective in going after

them. but while at the same time -- and the doe and the office of electricity in particular -- thinking very hard about how do we get more robustness and resilience into our infrastructure, again, satisfying economic, environmental and security needs. the last comment i'll make is, and infrastructure is a good pivot because it will be a major part of what we are calling the quadrennial energy review. many of you may know the recommendation made by the president's council of advisers in science and technology late in 2010 to try to forge a new approach to how we put together an integrated energy policy. i'll not go into the arguments about whether or not we have one or not, just to say that i think there's clearly more we can do in terms of bringing to the table all the equities in energy

that so many parts of our administration have and so many committees in congress have. we label the department of energy, but the reality is there are strong equities all across the administration. so the key concept is that we need to combine the convening power of the white house to bring the multiple agencies to the table at high levels. we need to utilize the policy and analytical strength of the department of energy to underlie the process as sort of an executive secretary while bringing all the agencies together. a first installment was done two years ago called the quadrennial technology review, and that, in fact, going back to our earlier discussion called for an increased emphasis on the transportation technologies that

we discussed earlier. but that was, frankly, a baby step in the sense of it more or less involved only one department, the department of energy. now we need to go into the policy world and bring together all these threads of environment, security, commerce, agriculture, etc. so i think this will be an important focal point for us. the president endorsed the, this approach. and for the department of energy, it means building up our analytical capacity. i must say here the eia, of course, has major strengths in this regard that we can draw upon, clearly while always respecting their independence from the policy development but with considerable underlying, underlying analytical capacity. so those are the main points i wanted to make and, again, one of my high-level views at least

is that the, we should look back a little bit to inform ourselves how different it's likely to look in ten more years. technology driving a lot of it, cost reduction of alternative technologies, but also then synergistic policies of the type we'd like to develop in this quadrennial numbering review. thank you. [applause] quadrennial energy review. thank you. [applause] >> okay. thank you very much, secretary moniz. so i've got, like, 24 questions here, 25. [laughter] >> synthesize. [laughter] >> but this is like, this is not going to be as hard since the secretary only has time for a couple of questions, that's not going to be as hard as it sounds. there's one question on the loan program and federal r&d, and the

remaining 20 questions are all about lnng export -- lng exports and application. [laughter] >> key questions. >> so those are the two. of let me go through the first question, and that is, could it improve the management and transparency of the doe loan program to spin it out as its own entity? and let's add to that, are there some examples of successful or federal-sponsored energy r&d that you have seen? >> i can think of one. [laughter] >> the last question on successful r&d? >> yeah. successful r&d and how about the loan program itself, could we -- >> okay. well, so starting with the second one, i think there are many examples, for sure. in fact, i would point out to a national academy study about ten years ago that looked only at

the energy efficiency and fossil energy sectors, for example, that found a large multiplier in terms of federally-sponsored r&d. but to give a couple of specific examples, two different, in two different spheres, i would go back to the beginnings of the unconventional gas revolution. ..

more recently, i think many things, not just me, and many, many ways past apartment are indeed supported for example the advance of solar. and technology, i can go back to rails with an industry the foundation person film pv. i can skip forward and give it two months with, for example, loan guarantee that is supported largest solar thermal plant that just passed a milestone in the california desert. so that takes us to loans. i think that at least i have not in terms of spinning that out, there's a number of reasons. first of all, one of the major programs is in a stewardship

note at this time. other programs, advanced vehicles do still have authorities, but a need to be thought through in terms of new policy direction that might use those authorities. stuck in my msa in my own review and that of others like the allison report, frankly, the d.o.e. has built up a very professional organization that is getting very good marks in terms of its due diligence and the structuring of the long program. certainly in terms of much irks a failure, which are what people focus on, i would know project team for the current loan portfolio across all three programs, project it forward, we do not see the exceeding 10% of

the congressionally mandated loan loss reserve. so this looks like a healthy portfolio and i believe there's a number of success stories. >> for the remaining 18 questions, when will d.o.e. act on the next ballot she export problem? >> expeditiously. [laughter] >> thank you very much. [applause] >> i need to learn to do that. [laughter] all right. i want to welcome you all once again. thank you very much to secretary moniz appeared before i introduce our next speaker, tom fanning, i want a few minutes to

discuss some of the events at dia. i would like to provide a warm welcome to for former eia plotinus today. on the per client and jay hakes, guy caruso and richard newell. could you guys all stand up, please? [applause] and when i said i really wanted to give them a warm welcome, i actually went to school them a little, too. none of them told me how hard this job was going to be. i've been here a year now and i want to report that in the midst of sequestration and budget cuts, eia is not disappearing. we are actively bringing back some of the work products we had to drop in 2011, including the oil and gas reserves report and

the international energy outlook among some of the ones that i know you all like a lot. after i arrived last year, i announced several priorities. we had some progress since that. first, i said that we needed to transform our data operations. for a statistical agency, this goes to the core of what we do. we have nearly 70 major surveys at the heart of our nation that currently rely on a myriad of legacy. that means business processes and data systems. there's one survey we have that is still running down locust one, two, three. if that computer ever dies, we are in trouble. we need a fix that. modernizing and simplifying is essential to eia mission.

we're very near completion of a pilot project in a review that should allow us to decide how to move forward in updating our report systems. it will make it easier on our respondents feared mobile to do a lot of things on the web troublemaking easier on our own leaves because a lot of stuff still has to be entered by hand and checked by hand and we can do a lot of that electronically now we are really living on. we recently created a new state-of-the-art data center that has power consumption by 40% to 50% a year. that will reduce eia's rant would pay to the secretary by a million dollars over the next four years that supports federal consolidation and green i.t. initiatives, so that's really good. second, we need to increase our impact. in the past to return a number of things.

recuperated daily new york city gasoline survey following new hurricane cindy including validating the results. for those of you in the federal government, it usually takes -- ask more than nine people the same question. it's a survey that takes six months want to get that to the office of management and budget at omb. we got this done overnight when hurricane cindy had. remove these the northeastern electricity others and we had very cold weather in new york and new england during the intense cold snap in fast january provided reports to congress, including number on iran's role in the global energy market. within a month of kidding here, we've added north sea bright crude, and short-term energy outlook spirit we didn't drop we added global crude oil, selling

at different prices now than debbie to drive across texas. but a daily posting of key energy futures prices to the energy publication. that's a few things we've accomplished so far going forward. her face keeping up with rapid changes in the data that we need in modernizing our toolset that supports modeling analysis. read a balanced approach to ensure the forecasts are based on sound returnable models will addressing gaps and analytical capability so that eia can remain a leading-edge provider of relevant analysis. one idea for free resources to address these challenges would be to change the periodicity of our report. third, but to further modernize their website to improve bush information gathering experience for stakeholders, the data collecting who count on eia for

critical energy data and analysis. and the pastor launched a new state energy portal with interact with mapping capability. we created an application program interface, api for developers of web and mobile applications. we will be doing more of these. we launched the new electricity data browser to increase accessibility and utility of eia's expensive electricity database. we introduce radio new services to provide broadcast stories on eia analysis to stations across the country. one of my favorite things and i hope we do it again this year as we had a volunteer saturday session for boy scout or girl scout's tournament energy merit badge. very unusual for a federal agency to get involved or not, but i thought it was really

worthwhile. education is one of our prime directives. as you know, happy to say all 850 of you still here that we've reestablished the eia energy conference. upcoming initiatives include setting the costs and benefits of expanding form 14 natural gas production survey in five states up to 20 collecting oil production data on the same basis. with the comely money reflect on real shipments and products. next month we hope to launch a productivity index to help analysts and some of the key bases and states. finally, we are planning to do more with crosscutting -- as as of this risk in the synergies and expertise that exist within eia. today in energy, which richard newell started and i carried

forward appears at the top of our webpages great example of how close cooperation across our offices can produce excellent results. building on this success depends on fully developing connections within eia. i look forward to keeping you posted of the next year. so now, i would like to introduce our next speaker, thomas fanning, chairman, president and ceo of the southern company, with 4.4 million customers, more than 43,000 megawatts of generating capacity in atlanta based is the leading energy company serving the southeast. southern company owns electric utilities in four states is a growing competitive generation company as well as fiber optics and wireless communication businesses. tom became president in august

of 2010 and later assumed the additional responsibilities of ceo and chairman. he's worked for southern co. for more than 30 years and held 15 different positions in a different business units during that period. tom worked very closely with the former florida governor, jeb bush, to a state government energy policy in florida. he served on the governor's transition policy team and was appointed by governor bush, the cochaired the base realignment advisory committee. 's executive education is quite impressive and includes programs at the international institute for development in switzerland and at the university school of business. ladies and gentlemen, please give a warm welcome to tom fanning. [applause] >> thank you, sir. appreciate it. well, it is a delight being here. you've got to know out of a little bit.

he's a delightful guy and i know he'll do a great job running this organization. you want to grade work, great service for america and i want to thank you for that. it's an important role you played helps folks like us execute to serve the families in the southeast and all over the united states. it was so fascinating as they go through my remarks this morning, you will hear very consistent teams between what i have to say it was secretary moniz says. fascinating stuff, he and i., secretary moniz and i knew each other when he was vice chair and he was on the board as well. you will hear similar thing, a different take from time to time, but i think you'll be eliminated as he comes from policy level to a corporate level what he thinks about these issues. whenever i talk about energy

policy on a lot of the things facing us today, i always have to start with context. you know, what i think about what's going on around the globe today, i'm reminded of this line from billy joel who says the good old days for an always good in the future as bad as it seems. you know, when you look around the globe today, there's clearly an economic malaise and never challenges here in the united states. we have unacceptably high unemployment. we have a slow growing economy, but despite those challenges, the thing that really strikes me as some people are starting to talk about a new normal. and i i think as citizens, leaders of the enterprise, whether it's business or policy or politics, i think we owe it to the american citizenry to reject a new normal notion. what i am here to do is to tell

you today that energy provides us an opportunity to do just that. a lot of people are already working on it. so i'm vice chair of the atlanta federal reserve board and i think monetary policy of the federal reserve bank is doing everything they can do. you know, from a fiscal policy standpoint, a lot more work needs to be done. as i consider fiscal policy it wants you to consider something that i live with every day here but i consider the families we serve, 48% of these families make less than $40,000 a day. these families make tough kitchen table, economic decisions every day. and i think the question i put to you and anybody i deal with his wife can't wait?

i think we ought to america to address these tough issues and find a way to play offense and what is otherwise considered to be broadly challenged environment. i'm happy to say the energy complex broadly, oil, natural gas, coal, electricity, we can and i think it's exciting. something you haven't seen in your lifetime. so let me do context again. energy policy today is based on scarcity, that notion and in fact, despite a doubling of exports since 1990, we still remain in energy import and fact, eia yourselves still project that even by 2030 we will import 21% of our energy. what i have to tell you is working on a number of friends now, i believe we can be a net

energy exporter by 2020. we can become as a nation one of the largest producers of energy in the world by 2030 or 2035. some reversing that trend has such great advantages for america it gives us an unassailable advantage to restart the manufacturing economy in the united states and grow jobs and grow personal income and make american lives better. i think we can do that. some people try to quantify these benefits. citigroup has a series of analysts and they've estimated that if we get this done, but we cannot 2% to 3% to our gdp. there goes your new normal. and we can create somewhere between three to 4 million new jobs by 2020. further, i think that we should

consider the fact that by 2030, 2035, we can create economic value in the range of three to $5 trillion. now think what we might do in reducing the national debt to say. so let's think about energy as capital and the notion that energy is growing every year and particularly electricity, my and history is growing at a rate five times what any other energy sector is. what i want to do now is focused on electricity policy. i'm out there a lot. you can google it and you tube it. i'll give you the reader's digest version today. but it's pretty clear we need three things. the first is that i've been saying for some years all of the aeros president obama came out of that all of the above.

whatever you want to call it, america is blessed with vast natural resources. we need to take advantage of the full portfolio for americans benefit. secondly, we need to promote energy innovation is a national priority. thirdly, we need to restore america's financial integrity. so let's go through those three things. the first one was the full portfolio. as you've all probably owned stocks, you may have a favorite stock. i hope the southern company. even if it is coming when you just invest southern come anytime you have a full portfolio. the portfolio i want to speak specifically about today would include natural gas, renewables, energy efficiency, energy productivity is a better word, nuclear and 21st century goals. natural gas, that is an industry in the midst of a revolution based on technology innovation

and that should be a theme picking up on what secretary mineta said. it is really change the game by accessing or otherwise unavailable of natural gas, plentiful low-cost. southern company is a great big electric utility from an energy production standpoint, we produce about as much electricity, a little bit less, but about as much as the nation of australia. in the past five to six years, we have moved tremendously towards natural gas is our primary energy resource. in fact, something like five or six years ago really produced 16% for natural gas. this year 45%, 47% and we can take that base uncertain market conditions as high as 55%. we are now the third-largest consumer of natural gas in the united states. we used to be known as the coal

company. what's fascinating is that benefit a cruise to the families we serve. last year we were able to get the families in the south east $1 billion in fuel savings as a result of this shift. so we have made our big bad. i am all in a natural gas. what i want to tell you is that it is not a panacea. you cannot put all your eggs in that basket. i'm on record, i talk about this a lot. i'm going to move through quickly, but there's five reasons why you have to be cautious about natural gas as the primary fuel source. the first of the site is a fact result in environmental impacts. second would have to build out the infrastructure in america that includes pipelines. remixer brickbats from transportation available to those that needed the money to improve our storage capability.

thirdly, we've got to make some historic decisions about exporting natural gas. being parochial, you may be interested to know that i'm in favor of exporting natural gas. for us, this whole nation is going through an enormous shift when you consider manufacturing, potential for penetrating transportation. my own industry in 2011, the united states consumed about 67 tcf per day of natural gas. there's a lot of estimates out there that called for by 2020 somewhere between 80 to knock over 100 tcf consumption of natural gas per day. now what happens to price volatility? the final point is the élan patient at that point and that is counterparty credit risk. i know that sounds a bit

technical, but if companies like mine and the rest of industrial america make this big shift and we consume a lot more than we did, we are going to need to have healthy, viable producers of natural gas so that we can hatch volume in price long-term. that will be a requirement to produce volatility for the support resource in america. so let me move on from that the finish to save natural gas is a dominant solution, but it's not a panacea. it will continue for decades to come and it is an unassailable advantage for america. the second as renewables. renewable prices are coming down, the growth has been tremendous and we have participated lake others. in fact, just over the last 12 months, southern companies either procure or build, all,

around 1200 megawatts of renewables. we recently procured 650 megawatts of wind is going to be consumed in alabama and in georgia we are buying it from oklahoma and kansas. it's kind of interesting. we all in a joint venture with ted turner, solar resources in new mexico, nevada, california. we have the largest voluntary solar program in the state of georgia and we have built, owned and operated one of the worlds largest biomass facilities in texas. so we are doing a lot. if the benefits our customers, we will continue to do more. here is one thing i want you to think about renewables. there are three limitations that we've got to consider and thinking about its role in the energy complex going forward. number one is the fact that

where the great resources particularly for solar and wind power, very few people. so they need to build big, robust, long-haul transmission systems. number two, it is an intermittent resource. so when the wind doesn't blow, when the sun doesn't shine, we have to have a backup fuel source. that is most likely to be natural gas. you're doubling down your debt on natural gas. the third is an industry that gets a lot of federal tax subsidies, 100 times those of the industry and about 50 times afforded nuclear. i don't think that policy is sustainable in the long run. but i can assure you when i think about renewables, it is an important resource. remain important for the

southeast where we have 9.5% power on the average will probably be limited in his penetration and until maybe the end of this decade, 2018, 2020. but it is something we will consider in thinking about more innovative solutions and i'll talk about that in a minute. it could be a game changer. the third area is energy efficiency. other to call the energy productivity. it has enormous potential and in fact, we are already doing a lot here. southern company has avoided something like 4000 megawatts of capacity since 1990. that represents 11% of the generation would have to build to meet the needs of the customers we serve. from an energy standpoint, since 2010, we've avoided

1.6 billion-kilowatt hours. so what does that mean? at the annual consumption of energy at the city of birmingham and savanna taken together for a year. so that is a lot. we are doing a lot. one of the things i just want to talk about their come out when i think about energy efficiency and i consider what do we really mean about consumption for our customers, i think this line makes a lot of sense. we want to use less energy when we can, but we want to use more where we should. we turn again to the families we serve, 40% that make less than $40,000 a year. i want these families to live in a better place, to eat better, to get better medical care to educate kids better. as the human existence improves,

they will necessarily use more energy and that is good for everyone. before the area i want to talk about his nuclear. now, nuclear currently represents about 20% of the nation's energy supply. where they did the renaissance of nuclear in america by building the first new nuclear units in a generation of americans. in order to do that come they need to have three attributes. you need to have scale about $40 billion market cap company. the project rebuild in georgia by itself, $149 takes 10 years to construct. somebody on about 45.7%. when you undertake a project of that magnitude, you better have scale otherwise you are betting your company. the second hash of it is the better of the highest level of financial integrity.

if you start something that's going to take 10 years to build, something like a nuclear you cannot take a day of it we know the global american domestic financial market are variable. you've got to have the staying power through good markets and died to build those important projects. finally, the third attribute is this is no business for beginners. he better have an excellent level of credibility and operated in maintaining the nuclear fleet. i think we've got that. nuclear is a mission last. it must also be a dominant solution for america. the fifth and final segment is 21st century coal. the united states contains about 27% of the world's coal reserves, but for a lot of reasons call has gone out of favor as a few america. we are trying to find a way to keep coal viable and our generation mix.

i think that's important. southern company is the only company that has a robust research and development group that we been committed to finding solutions, not just giving rhetoric and thinking about the problems of the future. we've done a lot of work in a pass on environmental control equipment, generation technologies. one of the things we've done here is developed kalat. a generation technology it accuses coal, were building a mississippi 582 megawatts. read going to take native mississippi that of the race otherwise goes unused gasifier proprietary type allergy. as we create a synthesis gas will strip out 65% to 75% of the co2. will take the co2 that some people consider a wasted music eor, enhanced oil recovery.

.. >> but we can't forget the workhorses of nuclear and coal with new technology innovations that really have served us so well for so long. and when i think about that

portfolio, southern company is the only company in america today that invests in every one of those segments. we've committed $20 billion and in the process have created 250,000 jobs. we need to continue in this vein. the second big segment i talked about was energy innovation. now, look, we're already doing a lot. the first new nuclear units in a generation of america, the 21st century coal project in mississippi. we've deployed nearly four and a half million senator meters in the southeast -- smart meetest in the southeast, and they're working great. but i want to talk about distributed generation. remember i talked about one of the limitations of renewables for at least solar in this case with large central station, high-intensity solar projects require big transmission. well, here's the solution where maybe you don't. maybe what we could do is put a thin film, photovoltaic cell, on your rooftop.

no transmission required at all. and integrate that into our operation. there's a big issue though, and it's this: right now, remember, we sell power at about nine and a half cents. the price point is way far away. so i don't think in the southeast you're going to see much penetration of districted generation -- distributed penetration until, probably, the end of the decade. cost curves improve as secretary moniz says, if the transmix -- transmission continues to improve, maybe it's a game changer. here's one of the big issues we've got to consider though. the early adopters of distributed generation are likely to be affluent customers. and what we've got to do is make sure that we charge those customers fairly for their connection to the grid and their

requirement to have backup generation resources when the sun doesn't shine. failing to do that will create a subsidy less affluent people subsidizing early adopter affluent people. we've got to get the rate structure right. and if we do that and we build a business model that makes sense for our customers be, this could be a very exciting innovation development. when you think about the value that's being created in america from i.t. with ibm and google and microsoft and facebook and everything else, why can't we create that value in the energy space? i'm proud to be a leader of that in our industry. and i think we can do more from a federal standpoint to advance those causes. the third and final segment really goes to restoring america's financial integrity. well, why in the world do i care about that? well, my company spends about $5.5 billion a year in capex.

my industry spends about 90 billion a year in cap-x. when you think oil, natural gas, coal, these are some of the biggest capital-intensive industries in the world, and we need to access the capital markets that are going to be regular, predictable and sustainable in their nature. and so, therefore, we've got to get this restoration of america's financial integrity right. otherwise we can't advance these causes for which there is so much value. there's three things that will support restoring america's financial integrity. one just deals with energy policy, who should set that. my portfolio responsibility to my customers is to provide clean, safe, reliable and affordable energy. only congress, in my opinion, has the right lens to be able to balance those interests. so what we need to do is have congress step forward and weigh

in on implementing sensible national energy policy. the second is to fix america's balance sheet. we know we've got a debt crisis. in my opinion, it's one of the biggest and yet most avoidable challenges this nation has ever faced. now, we can do this. this is not a democrat issue, it's not a republican issue. this is, essentially, an american issue. and whether you want to cut costs -- i think we should -- whether you want to raise taxes -- i'm not in favor of that, i think that inhibits growth -- but i do think we need to reshape taxes. what we've got to do is be for growth. and i'm returning to the idea that energy is one of the greatest examples of growth capital today. if we fail to deal with this, we will inescapably leave our children and our grandchildren with higher interest rates and higher taxes and slower economic growth.

you're back to that new normal that i rejected. reject. the final issue on restoring america's financial integrity is a little technical, but it really just deals with tax policy. i talk a hot about that in the media. -- a lot about that in the media. we've been on world, southern company has been, we need to simplify the tax code. it's incredibly complex. and what we would be willing to do is to forgo all of our forward-looking tax preference items. now, let us keep what we've got. we made economic decisions on those. and let us keep something called normalization in place. it's a way to flow back taxes to our customers. but going forward, i would do without all tax benefits in exchange for a 25% fixed rate over time. the other thing that would do for us is allow us to get government out of picking winners and losers in the markets via tax preference items. we need to move in that

direction. so let me wrap up then. when i think about the exciting opportunities in front of us, facing the challenges that the globe and our nation faces through a north american energy security plan, i believe -- and dr. moniz almost said this -- energy security promotes national security and provides for economic security. the benefits of this are too great not to have the national will to pursue. and from an electricity policy standpoint, all the arrows in the qir, -- in the quiver, the full portfolio is a priority in restoring america's financial integrity. we all as citizens can do that. and as leader of one of america's largest electric utilities, we are proud to play a leadership role.

this will benefit the families we serve and the communities all across the united states. it is an honor to be here with you and to pitch that idea. thank you very much. [applause] >> thanks very much, tom. why don't you just stay right there, i think it's easier for everybody to see you. a number of questions. this kind of reminds me a little bit about the secretary. there's a couple on the nuclear loan guarantee with the doe, and then the rest of them are why do can you support lng exports? [laughter] >> fantastic. >> we could go through this. let's try the first one. could you give us an update on the agreement with doe on the vogel nuclear loan guarantee? >> sure. so let me, first, give you a little bit of math on vogel. it's pretty interesting.

when we first had vogel approved by the georgia public service commission, we had great support for nuclear in georgia. the governor, the legislature, the public service commission provides 5,000 jobs, 25,000 indirect, tremendous economic benefits. even's behind it. when we first had that -- everybody's behind it. when we first had that project improved, we thought we would have a 12% price increase associated with that nuclear plant. as it turns out now, we think the net price increase is going to be something like 6-8%. we've had over $2 billion of benefits accrue even though we slid the schedule a year and costs have gone up a little, the benefits have way overwhelmed the added costs. so when i think about the benefits, one of the benefits that we've considered has been these loan guarantees. and at one time we were moving pretty quickly to go ahead and get closure on that.

but i think the department of energy changed their stance on the requirements to finally close these, and we've had to very carefully weigh whether the new perspective on terms and conditions for the loan guarantees will ultimately inour to the benefit -- inure to the benefit of our customers. and unlike a lot of the loan guarantee program, the guarantor behind the loan guarantee is georgia power company which on its own would have a market cap of about $20 billion, a rated. one of the strongest companies in america. so what we have to do is weigh the new terms and conditions with the ultimate perceived economic benefit. and let me just tell you last year southern company in the aggregate sold $4.2 billion of debt with an 18-year average

life at 2.8%. so this is a great economic climate to build a nuclear plant. we've got to weigh carefully whether the loan guarantees give us the benefits we thought it did considering the new terms and conditions. lately we've had constructive progress. we're very hopeful, but we'll see. >> thank you. so this goes to the lng or natural gas exports idea with, you know, half of your generating capacity in natural gas, why is it from a business perspective that you're not as concerned about exports as some of the chemical companies, for example? >> right. yeah, yeah. we've had a lot of conversations with that. i know andrew livers of dow and i have had a chat at the business round table. it's pretty interesting. here's my perspective. what's good for america generally is good for my company. i'm good for economic growth.

and my sense is this idea of a north american energy security has a multiplier effect to the economy that will serve our families in the southeast, the broader national economy so well, so if it helps the economy, then i'm for it. the other point is i think natural gas prices will find their way whether we export or not. you may have some temporary dislocations and some temporary volatility. but if we give the producers an incentive to produce, then they will produce, and we will have, i think, plentiful supply at a price that's going to provide equilibrium to the market in a sensible way. whether you export or not, i think prices are go to that level. -- will go to that level. and so for the good of america, for the good of our economy,

pursuing north american energy security and using the blessing of these so-called tight gases to grow the economy is something we should do. >> secretary moniz talked about the need to move forward on climate, and this question asks for your opinion on things like carbon taxes, fees, regulatory limits on co2 and that kind of thing. how does southern company fit into that? >> sure. i think carbon taxes are bad for the economy. when i talk about the solutions that we've got to be for as a nation where you either cut costs or you redo taxes or -- but you should be for growth, see, energy is growth capital. when i think about again about the 48% of the families we serve, they have relatively inflexible demands for energy. and as their standard of living rises, their consumption of energy rises.

taxing growth capital is not a sensible approach in america. there's better ways to constrain or to incent less carbon-intensive technologies and fuels brought to bear in the future than a carbon tax. look, i mean, look at nuclear. look at the technology we're building in mississippi. that technology using coal has less of a carbon footprint than natural gas today. pretty interesting stuff. energy efficiency-dominant solution. renewables, good stuff. so there's better ways to do it. we don't need to create a new tax. >> the, i think it's kind of interesting, the project that you have that will sequester co2 could be one of the first commercial ventures -- >> right, right. so, in fact, southern company on behalf of doe, we've had a longstanding relationship with the department of energy, we run the nation's carbon capture research center in wilsonville,

alabama. we're also the only company doing wide scale research on ccs today. so the project in mississippi is ccs, but it's not just storage, it's enhanced oil recovery. it actually has value. it's indexed to the price of oil. that's on a precombustion basis, so we're stripping out the co2 before we come bust the fuel. at plant miller near mobile, alabama, we're doing some r&d on cap -- kapturing power postcombustion. we're capturing power there. and we're doing it in a variety of other places. i think there may be real potential value for the united states in linking together carbon as an effluent in enhanced oil recovery. that makes a lot of sense in my area of the united states. it has real value. it can help drive the economy, not just be a waste stream. >> we've had a couple of questions, actually, on the

demand side, demand side management. a little bit different maybe than efficiency, but could you go into that a little bit for us? >> well, sure. so when i gave you the statistics of what we've done in the last 20 years we've avoided 4,000 megawatts of capacity, roughly 11% of our capacity needs. and when we've avoided the energy, so 1.6 billion kilowatt hours since 2010. each of those are different ways to reference this kind of energy efficiency idea. demand avoidance enables you not to build as much and, in fact, when we do generation planning, we use energy efficiency. and i think i'd rather start using energy productivity, but whatever. we use that as an actual generation resource. in this case it's a negative resource in our expansion plans. and, in fact, our plan is

between 2010 and 2020 to commit another billion dollars to programs associated with energy efficiency to reduce capacity needs and reduce energy consumption. >> are the state regulatory agencies cooperating with you on demand side management issues? >> sure. so what you get out of the south, the southeast particularly, are people that really understand the confluence of interest between business and the economy and regulation. and i am often quoted in the press as saying we have constructive regulation. i think what that means is that the litmus test or almost every program we have or any generation we employ or any technology we develop is ultimately does it inure to the benefit of our customers from a clean, safe, reliable,

affordable standpoint? so when i think about energy efficiency programs, they've got to make sense and compete against our normal fleet of energy production. as well we don't have an rps, renewable portfolio standard, in any of our states. i guess florida has some programs. but what the regulators do is allow renewables to compete against the other forms of generation on a cost effective basis. so what we want is the best marriage of clean, safe, reliable, affordable for the benefit of our customers. that's what you get from our regulators. and it's worked quite well. prices below the national average, reliability statistics as high as they've been. i think we were number one in the american customer satisfaction index this year. so it's working pretty well. >> this next question is a bit of a follow up to that maybe

from a different angle. how does the, how does innovation -- which you talked about a lot in your remarks -- stack up against regulated states and cost controls within the regulatory -- >> well, that's a great, that's actually a great question because when i said we're the only company in our industry doing proprietary, robust research and development, everybody else got out of it because they wanted to cut costs. that's what happened. and r&d is always on the chopping block, right? for those types of things. what we've been able to demonstrate at southern company for so many years, for decades -- in fact, to commemorate, i forget now, we're nearing 40 years of big research and development in our country -- we just put out a book. "innovative solutions" is the name of it. really a hot seller, by the way. [laughter] but we've been able to demonstrate over the years and what we do is flow all these benefits, essentially, back to our customers in the form of.

so we developed our own scrubber technology, our own scr technology. and we've been able to deploy i think by the end of this year, $13 billion of environmental equipment on budget, on schedule with quality environmental removal capabilities better than anything else in the market. and we've developed some stuff, the largest fiberglass vessels in the world are part of our scrub canner technology. pretty interesting stuff. when we think about our ability to deploy gas generation that we did in the '90 that's allowed us to have this enormous swing capability to switch off of coal, on to gas, we've done that with the idea that we could deploy it over and over again kind of cookie cutter, scale helps, to where we've been able to deploy natural gas technology 10-20% cheap or than anywhere

else in the united states. on the average. on the average. so what we've been able to demonstrate with research and development are real solutions that inure to the benefit of our customers from price and reliability. now, what's fascinating is how we're shifting our research and development efforts to the future. see, in order to look around the corners of the future, you've got to have a little bit of vision and courage. and that's why we're kind of looking at distributed generation as a resource. innovative ways to use -- and i'm a particular fan of thin film photovoltaic. i think we can use those materials in our daily operations to the advantage of our customers. thinking about new ways to deploy smart meters. when the tornadoes came through tuscaloosa, alabama, a couple years ago, we could light up the entire system and find out who exactly was out and, therefore, we could deploy our restoration

efforts in a much more efficient way, and we got the lights back on with less cost and a much faster time frame. >> so do you know when power's off whether gasoline stations have power or not? i'd like to talk with you about that. >> we know everything. [laughter] >> that would be, actually, a really good one. hurricane sandy. last question, very specific one but it kind of follows up on the innovation and alternative energy theme. biomass plant in texas, is that up and running? where's that? >> okay. it runs great. there's a problem. the energy costs coming out of the biomass plant doesn't compete well against the wind energy there. now, what we expect is that its capacity factor will rise dramatically as you get into the peak season. and, in fact, some people are worried about shortages in texas. so it's just been during the

shoulder month, the off-peak month that the plant hasn't run. but the plant runs great, everything's super. thest the largest bubbling bed technology using biomass in the world. and it's the largest in north america period, 100 megawatts. cool stuff. and it looks like it's straight out of star wars. you ought to go see it sometime. straight stainless steel. really a beautiful looking plant. only a utility guy would say that, right? [laughter] >> tom, thank you so much. i'm surprised we didn't get too many people following up on your prescription for how to make things better here in washington, but maybe we could talk a little bit about that during the break. i've got just a quick announcement to make after but with, please, join me in thanking tom fanning. >> well, thank you. appreciate it. [applause] >> just a little more housekeeping. we're going to take a break in just a minute for coffee and

networking. remember that our first two panel sessions will start in roughly 30 minutes at 11 a.m. what i want to do now is just give you a little preview and advertising here for what we're going to do at the end of the day at 5:30. we'll be having a reception with refreshments along with demonstrations and discussions of eia's products and initiatives. that's going to take place in the foyer just outside these ballroom doors. there are going to be six stations or tables staffed by eia. we're going to show you how our new electricity data browser works if you're interested in that. you can see the new really cool multilayer mapping system with our state energy profiles. you can learn about eia's residential and commercial

building and energy consumption surveys, cbecs, rex and mention. that -- and mex. that took me a year to learn those acronyms. the cvex is going forward, that's the most expensive survey we do at eia, and we have managed so far to keep that on track. three more tables that will have, one that's going to be staffed by the people who have been working on our newly-released -- just last week -- global shale oil and natural gas resource assessment. that's the one that includes oil for the first time on a global basis. we will have folks to discuss how eia proposes to classify natural gas liquids. so one of the things i discovered when i got to eia is that nobody quite agrees either inside of eia, or didn't, and

outside of eia on exactly how to define those. this maybe budget quite as important as d budget quite as important as it was before but we are getting huge in places like eagle ford where also along with that and a number of the shale gas reservoirs getting a lot of liquids. and we're trying to come up with a definition that we think will clarify how all of that works. and then finally, you can chat with the people behind our award-winning today in energy articles and give them some ideas for future stories if you didn't get your question answered here today, try it out on our today in energy staff. and maybe you'll find your answer in print. so off to the networking break, and thank you very much for your participation so far this morning.

thanks a lot. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> well, both the house and senate are back today. the senate returns at 2 p.m. eastern for general speeches. at 5 they'll debate a pair of judicial nominations.

votes on those are expected at 5:30. later this afternoon lawmakers will continue work on the immigration bill with amendments being offered and debated throughout the rest of the day. majority leader harry reid has said he hopes to the finish the immigration bill by the july 4th recess. the house gavels in at noon eastern for speeches with legislative work beginning at 2. among the issues in the house this week, a bill banning abortions after 20 weeks and the farm bill which also includes nutrition programs. watch the house live on c-span, you can see the senate right here on c-span2. a quick reminder that the 2013 congressional directory is out now with information on the current congress. inside you'll find updated listings for each member of the house and senate along with their contact information. there are also district maps and member committee assignments. there's information about cabinet members, supreme court justices and the nation's governors. the directory is $12.95 plus shipping and handling, and you can order it online at c-span.org/shop. president obama is in northern ireland for the g8

economic summit meetings, and earlier today he spoke in belfast, ireland. we will have that speech for you later in our program schedules. he's also attending the plenary session. he has meetings scheduled with prime minister david cameron and russian president vladimir putin. ..qw@s@w@s

>> that's something that i think we're hopeful and we were going. we've already come more packages than we had ever before. then finally the question is, is it the governments role or the negotiation between content companies and distributors, my view is this is best served in, the business relationships, not in government, laws and mandates, but we are very respectful. it's important subject than one that we want to be part of that dialogue. >> a look at the cable industry and video marketplace with leaders of to the country's largest communication companies tonight at eight eastern on c-span2. >> in fact going as far back as abigail adams and martha washington, you find the first place played an active role in the white house and in the campaigned that it took to get there. to get adams was basically a campaign strategist for her husband. she helped advise him on who to in order to win election, who he

had to keep in his coalition. they would talk about the politics of the day and the legislation that need to be passed, which senators and congressmen you could count on and which ones you couldn't. what you need to do to win more support. >> as we continue our conversation on first place, john roberts, author of "rating the first ladies," takes a look at our nation's first ladies as political partners with husbands rather than wives and mothers. tonight at nine eastern on c-span. >> and next remarks and heads of the two tax writing committees in congress. senate finance committee chair max bockius and house was in means committee chairman dave camp last week "christian science monitor" breakfast. senator baucus said he sees the recent irs scandal spurring the need to overhaul the nation's tax code. the chairman say that will be traveling the country to get public input. this is in addition to

encouraging comments on the website, tax reform.gov and twitter handle simpler taxes. this is about an hour. >> thanks for coming everyone. i'm david cook from the "christian science monitor." our guests this morning and nonpartisan all the order our senate finance committee chairman max baucus and house ways and means committee chairman dave camp. representative campus our guest here two months ago. senator baucus his last appearance with the group was 14 years ago. i was in the moderator chair then so can be something i said but anyway a warm welcome to both of you. senator baucus grew up on 105,000-acre ranch in montana and earned his undergraduate and law degrees at stanford. after working in washington at the civil aeronautics board industry to exchange commission he returned to montana and at age 32, want a seat in the u.s. house. four years later he was elected to the senate. he served in the senate longer than anyone else for the state has been a member of the senate

finance committee longer than anyone else in history. chairman camp was born in midland, part of the district he now represents, earned his bachelor degree and his law degree from university of san diego. he served as an assistant attorney general in michigan, was a top congressional staffer, got elected to the michigan house in 1988, won a seat in congress in 1990 and has been on the ways and means committee since 1993. he became chairman of the panel in 2011. so much for biography. now on to monday mechanical matters. first of all my apologies for the sauna we are running here this morning. we will try to get the air-conditioning ramped up. we are on the record. please no live blogging or tweeting. in short, no filing of any kind while the breakfast is under way. this is especially important on a day where we have guests whose comments came as they say at number, move markets. there's no embargo when the breakfast is over except that

c-span has agreed not to use video of the session for at least one hour after the breakfast inns to give those of us in rome a chance to file. if you like to ask a question please do the traditional thing and send me a subtle nonthreatening signal and a public call on one and all in the time we have to. are just decide to skip opening remarks will go right to questions. i will longer a ceremony softball or two and then we will move around the table. why don't i start with a question about a relationship, this seems to be bipartisan we care of the monitor breakfast. earlier this week with senators bennett and flight talking about immigration. now we have chairman of the two most important financial committees in congress here on a bipartisan basis. do you want to give us a brief explanation of how all this happened? >> well, i'll start. i believe that relationships are so important to getting

legislation passed. a lot depends on trust and confidence. it's the glue when you can spend time working with each other. i set up a weekly meetings with chuck grassley, ma been doing that for about 10 years, and he's chairman, sometimes ranking member, about every week. the same with senator hatch. and i felt a good idea, i think we do this together, dave and i, that we just meet every week once a week and go over what our committees are doing, tax and trade. meetings last about an hour. more than that, you know, we are friends. we like each other. it's chemistry. i mean, to senators from the same state, does make a difference where the same party or different political parties, don't get along with each other, often they do get along with

each other. it just kind of happens that way. person of interest and so forth. i think it's a bit presumptuous, i think i can say for david anthony, together we have, it's great relationship. great friends, neither of us want to be president. we don't wear our egos on our sleeves. we just want to get the job done. we are pragmatic. things are working out very well. >> max is right. we want to get things done. i have to say i think he is the one that suggested it and i think part of it came about when we in 2010th of got thrown into negotiations on extenders. you really find, people come visit me. this is still a face-to-face, people to people business in washington. with all the technology and all the tools that we have, you still have to get to know one another. we've tried to do that and we are friends. we do get along an extra i look

forward to the meetings. if you have an ongoing dialogue every week, you actually can do with the issues as they come up. we are trying to find solutions and i think tax reform act's the big issue we're working on, but there are others. max mentioned trade and other things. there have been some really significant bipartisan victories on trade that we've been able to work through. and we hope to have more. >> let me ask you, chairman camp, you said earlier this week we have many chapters to go in passing copperheads attacks upon. can you and chairman baucus' sketch out briefly the next chapter is? >> i don't know if you want to get first argue a major, but i mean, obviously we are continuing to have, there's a formal side of it in terms of continued hearings in the committee. we just had a hearing on tax havens yesterday. and i thought what was interesting in that hearing, obviously there were three

witnesses, to sort of asked by the majority, one asked by the minority. all three of them said the same thing on many issues, affecting that posted. so we will continue that. there's been about, well over 20 in the house, continue to work in the bipartisan working groups. for example, in the house -- >> excuse me, 2014 approaches, do -- >> no i do prefer the reason is the debt limit looks like it's coming later but i think we have more time actually to do this. but for example, in the house we had an education bipartisan working group with represent diane black and danny davis and they're now working together to try to find a way to do with the 15 tax provisions to deal with saving for college education, and trying to find a way to simplify that so that people actually use it. it's 90 pages of instruction for the 15 provisions. so those two as a result of the working groups are trying to come together on an issue. ice is moving forward in that

way. also expect that we'll continue to do some average. i do know if you want to mention -- >> well, yeah. next chapter is days concluding his working groups. we have option papers, finance committee. we meet weekly, thursdays, 10, number nine was yesterday. so we are reaching a point where we've done a lot of talking, a lot of learning and the rubber will meet the road. we have to start making some proposals. so the next steps are more concrete, the nature of proposals which will be coming out fairly soon. in addition, we are going, dave and i going to travel around the country. we're going to go to different cities. we're going to talk to people. families, consumers, business

groups, to try to get, get a better idea what people think about tax reform all around the country. and we have the website, which is also helpful for each people, people can reach us more directly. so the next that are basically the working groups and papers, start coming up with some ideas. as dave said, pressure point is going to be increasing the debt limit. at that point i think we will find other next steps, not quite certain what they are yet but i think we will be there. >> last one from the end then will go to mark keller, others to start. on the subject of the tax-exempt groups that figure in the alleged targeting by the irs cincinnati office, conservative political groups you said there are organizations at both ends

of the spectrum, masquerading as social welfare groups in order to skirt the tax the. you continued them once the smoke clears, we need to examine the root of this issue and reform the nation's take tax laws pertain to this groups. do you see that reform coming as part of this overall tax package that you working on with chairman camp, or do you see it as being a standalone piece of legislation? >> i said as part of a more comprehensive package. and i think that the irs revelations are frankly helping to spur a new paper relies the need for reform. and then those, you know, those provisions are clearly dated. 1986 brought code up-to-date, and a lot happened since 1986. means the code now has to be brought up-to-date again, clean up the barnacles, make major changes. tax exempt, 501(c) three,

four, five consider are basically passed a long time ago but expect -- the major regulate it was about 50 years ago. since then life happened. citizens united, seeking a home. most federal home is donors don't have to be -- 501(c)(4) is not intended to be, my judgment, a depository of dollars that by large extent for political purposes. although the primary test. but to answer your question, and there are other developing events which show how the code is so dated. and once that is better realize i think it's going to be more impetus to help us get reform spent is your view of the same? >> you know, i can't really jump

to conclusions. i expect at the end of this we will have legislative proposals. we are still early on in the investigation, and i will say that we're working on this in a bipartisan way, both in the house and in the senate, together. so we've had both my camera and bipartisan meetings on this issue. was going to try to uncover the facts and just go wherever the facts lead. once we get that include i think yes, there will be legislation that will come with a. this is one of the issues that has been raised, but we still don't know a lot of things about this. for example, who, who directed this and coming, the extent of it. >> i might add, i just think a basic approach that works is that everything is on the table. then after a while we can decide which items we take off the table. but the very beginning let us start off on anything in the

gemini of tax reform should be on the table, let's just see what we can do. different pieces are somewhat interrelated, and, but start taking items off that other groups, justification for taking theirs off. i just don't want to be in a position. >> articular. >> -- art counter. >> now that you've had a lot of time to think maybe back on history and experience over the last maybe past reform, i wonder what lessons you draw from that? some things change, some things remain the same your what is different now, and what's the same? what lessons do you draw out of it? >> i'll go. basically, what's different, what's the same is, today, you know, the barnacles have built back up again. 15,000 changes to the code since 1986. 15,000.

each year goes by, as more provisions, exemptions, correlations, modifications and so forth. that different groups want, basically congress goes along, it's all built. that's the same. in addition, the public back then was quite upset with lots of sheltering of income. and today, i think the public is quite upset with something else. part of it is sheltering but a lot of it is lost income from overseas operations, especially the low tax jurisdictions and tax havens. that's a concern. not just populace, legitimate american concerned starting to build a. what's different. well, one, back then that president reagan was the primary force pushing tax reform on a very reluctant congress.

today, it's the congress, at least at this point the chairman of the committees who are pushing, starting the ball rolling on tax reform. but the administration isn't a poster is a willing participant and i think you'll find the president more directly engaged to move on. i don't stop there, but essentially the basic need for reform, get the economy going from women talked about that debt, but tax reform is going to help the american economy. help get jobs, and in this competitive world of ours we have to do everything we possibly can, legitimately unreasonably, to help american people, help american small business, help american multinational corporations, american company to compete better and have less red tape and be less high ballots so they

can be forecast -- so they can be focused more on jobs. i think will help spur the economy. >> i which is a tax code was broken in 86 and the tax code is broken and. actually i referenced history, the three witnesses come we had all presented the tax code is broken. and i would agree on everything max said agree on everything next september the thing of which is add to that is the world has changed and 86. the village invest around the world with the click of a mouse is so much the year. so have to look at what other countries have done as well, and that modernize their tax system. we haven't. sorely in international business side, and the other thing i think is, i think somewhat similar is you have to be very persistent. that reform would not have happened without continual persistence and effort. but as max said, the economy isn't as long as it needs to be. we need to get the kind of

growth and job creation and wage increases that we haven't been seeing. and i think that is making a case. code has been layered upon layer of change, and it's time to look at it again. so that's what we are trying to do. >> let me do a little bit of time keeping. tell you where we going next the we would go to kim dixon, alan, brian, jim, jonathan, kevin, lori, the gentlemen here whose name i'm liking on. having a senior moment on. david and jim. that should take care of us. >> chairman baucus, you said the robber will meet the road as soon. can you be a little more specific? will you be like chairman camp did and put out some specific things like international reform? >> well, my style, mo, is not

surprise my committee, but to work with my committee. i've had sessions, these are bipartisan. members only. they are terrific. working together, and one advantage, no major reforms of 86 is a lot of senators need to learn a lot more about the code, what's in it. what are these provisions. and that's an advantage. because as senators mitch would ask lots of questions that staff at these meetings, it brings us together. we're talking together in a non-adversarial manner. together jointly we will get it done. i have not done this yet but my idea, i'm going to speak with my committee soon come next week or we're going to go over office.

i have some ideas to present the ideas to the committee but i want to get somebody and if you will, bipartisan with the committee before i proceed. >> i thought when referring to the rubber will hit the road, we're going on road trips. are going to travel the country. we are going to talk to business owners and families and individuals, and really try to get a read from around the country. we've adopted a website, tax reform.com and together we had about 10,000 submissions on that website. we've got about 1000 homes on twitter, anybody wants to go to their ideas on tax reform in 140 characters or less, certainly welcome. that's what we're trying to do. the other thing we're also pointed is because it's a bipartisan lunches with, together with house and senate members. to begin these discussions that occur in both of are committed to meeting with every member of my committee individual. i received him with heavy working groups but we also

continue to do some of the outreach in order to continue to move this very important issue forward. >> [inaudible] >> sounds a little bit. i know it's a process. what can you tell us about -- [inaudible] >> stay tuned. it's coming. >> chairman camp alluded to the relationship between -- [inaudible]. it seems clear will be enacted before the august recess. what will the timetable be? do you think that that will be

able to -- what you see as the relationship between that and the tax reform marks. >> initially i look like we're going to hit the debt limit in august so i think that would've meant congressional action sometime in july. but given that revenues to the government are higher than anticipated and other factors, it looks as if we're not going to get the debt limit until october, maybe even mid-october. this is information treasure has. we are kind of estimating based on other things. as a result, in the house, we started talking about how do we address that issue. and i think given the fact that it's later, it's clearly now a post-august recess issue, but one of the items that certain has been suggested in our meeting has been, is there a process or is there some way to move forward on tax reform in connection with the debt limit?

some of suggested entitlement reform in relation to the debt limit. most of the time the debt limit is passed whether it's republican or democrat administration with some policy matters attached to it. so whether that's a go or other things. i think that's what people are exploring. i don't think you're going to see decisions made about that until after the august recess now because of the much later timing on that. spent i might add, they have seen every member of the committee. i am seeing every senator, privately, personally. both sides of now, asking their views, what do you think? what do you want? and in the sessions, we will learn more in our lunches as well. you learn a lot. you learn where some of the little interest might be, the little scenes that might develop. and had to begin to find potential solutions a century to

the question you asked. the big question which has not yet been asked, what of it going to do with all the revenue that is generated? as we address base erosion, overseas base erosion, fulltext jurisdiction of tax havens, what are we going to do with it rather? me say let's operate reduction the other say, great reductions out okay but we will need some revenue. and as we get to the point where we start have to increase the debt limit, first of all i want to make this clear, the president wants a clean debt limit. increase. i think that's good policy. we should have a clean debt limit increase. but i'm also in the guerrillas to know this is a big country. with 535 minutes of concord is a democracy. different members have different ideas on that subject to a we are, the congress after all.

and so as we make during these meetings i'm funny, gee, this senator on the other side of our, he can see a path towards more revenue, and i found that a couple, three times your. i believe there cannot be a compromise on that question. how much rate reduction, how much static new revenue. that's going to be finalized. there will have to be some agreement because each body -- if one goes in a direction as the together the the white house could have to be on board, too. that answer your question, by going around all these meeting you get real close and ideas and you know where they are, some the basic action from questions. and i think will make it close to d-day, whenever, september, october, we'll be in pretty good condition to know what works and

what doesn't work. >> brian. >> hurricane taken will there be temporary tax way for victims of hurricanes and the? if yes, when will it be, and if not, why not? >> i don't know. i can't answer that question that i have not focused on a. >> is not on the table? >> not on my table. not right now but you just put it on. >> isn't on your table, chairman camp? >> obviously unaware of the issue. i don't, i don't, i don't see any in media plans to move that, but that doesn't mean that will continue to be discussed. but there's no immediate plans to move anything on that in the ways and means committee. [inaudible] >> i am aware of it. >> [inaudible] >> welcome a lot of that was done administratively, and what we want to make sure it is, is there a need for legislative

action, and are the problems going to be able to be taken care of administrative it as they were in of hurricane type disasters. so that's what we are really trying to sort out. >> there with assistance. >> what we're learning about the failures at the irs led to the tea party affair, beyond poetry form, is the need for fundamental restructuring of the internal revenue service? >> dinner, i think there may be. well, this looks like at best a complete management failure, and at worst intentional. we don't know that yet and i do think before we can really conclude that can sing we really need to know all the facts. we are just when moving into the interview of witnesses. interviewed a few. there will be many more. we're just beginning i hope i in this week to get some of the

documents from the irs that we've been seeking. i think we're going to get a more clear picture. but at least in the initial hearings we've had, clearly the management was either intentionally not looking for i would say so and out of touch, almost rising to the level of wrongdoing. but again, i want to make sure i know exactly what happened. it's going to take some time to do that. >> i would agree. i would agree. our teams jointly interviewing irs employees. i got yesterday, basically concluding, hey, there are real problems here. they have touched on it. the cincinnati office is almost cut off from d.c., not entirely but are these different offices around the country. it seems to me, it's tough. you've got 90,000 employees.

it's tough to manage them all. but it's not managed well. there does need to be significant restructuring at the irs and whether that means congress has to think, i've nobody clearly within the agency itself is got to be some major accountability changes and make sure people are healthy, not just left in no direction spent we're going to get to the truth are going to hold people accountable to get to the to. >> we don't have all the information you. >> the only people outside of the artist have the power to get certain information are using that power and have you done anything through that? >> we are beginning to use them yes. we are. >> is the danger of -- [inaudible].

in a situation like island where a lot of u.s. corporate income finds itself, they seem to be willing to trade investment and job creation for income from taxation. meaning if we got, isn't there a chance that the rest of our competitors will take it one step lower i didn't? >> well, first i do think our non-rate, our top rate from a competitive perspective is too high, compared to other countries. there's no question it should be lower. and the code does encourage many u.s. companies to invest overseas, plants overseas and it does tend to cause jobs to be overseas. and i believe that there should be very specific and base broadening. that is, eliminate or dramatically pared back a lot of

the business tax expenditures. you know, there's a whole long list as you know. one of the most expensive is accelerated appreciation. there's a bunch of them. i believe in the president has stated several times, as contained in as corporate tax framework that corporate tax reform should be revenue neutral. and as revenue neutral, not a race to the bottom. because what you might lose with low rates you pick up with based on. that is by eliminating the tax expenditure. but i do think we need a system that is not a race to the bottom, but which helps americans competitiveness. but also one which addresses with base erosion overseas. and we not the only country

concerned about this. as you know, oecd countries are themselves worried about base erosion. that is, their own companies themselves are going to havens and low tax jurisdictions and tax havens. and so those countries themselves are losing corporate revenue because their code are not sufficiently dated. notice, about a month or two ago the cover story of the congress was on this very question. long, long article of this over how this is happening worldwide. it's going to be on the list at the g8 in ireland but i going to do about this. g8 countries. i do believe the issue must be addressed. corporate reforms including base erosion. that is stop companies from taking advantage of current tax laws. only way to do that is by changing laws and capturing that income that is now not captured

because some assets intend to be digitized assets, i.t. and so forth, in ireland or cayman islands or whatever. that's what's got to be addressed. >> mr. chairman? >> i agree. we do need to bring down our rate. i don't think you can sustain being the highest corporate rate in the world, but also what we need to address through corporate reform is the transference of intangibles or intellectual property and transfer price that has a good around the world to much of the test with god is if we can bring our rate down, and send for doing some of that goes away. we will make those -- base erosion as well. the other point is this about $1.7 trillion overseas that we want to try to invest back in the u.s., and our current laws we can do that unless it's double back. they don't bring back. we want to that continual investment in the united states as well. so were out of step, out of step

with the world. if we want to really rebuild our economy and create more jobs and get people back to work, increase their wages, we're going to have to dress this issue. and again, the president did put it in his budget, revenue neutral corporate reform. so we look forward to working with him on that. >> jonathan? >> chairman camp, at your first irs hearing you said that the irs scandal was the latest example of a cultural coverup in local intimidation of the said minister she. it's look like the truth is hidden just long enough to make to the next election. do you still believe that, given what happened, do you still tiee what happened in the irs as some broader culture of intimidation of this white house? second, i would like both of you to say, is there a single tax expenditure on the personal side

that you're willing right now to say i want to limit or i wanted a limited? >> well first of all, let me say the irs is part of the administration. and we've been trying for two years to address this issue. and so i was very angry and his comments about the lack of candor from high ranking officials at the irs when several letters had gone from me and the chairman of the oversight subcommittee, dr. boustany. we had a hearing just a couple of days on this issue in the subcommittee before lois lerner responded to a planted question. so there was, we are trying to get, and let me just say the evidence we have so far is that donors were targeted as quote gift taxes because of the conservative political beliefs. conservative groups that had confidential irs tax information leaked, as was the targeting of

hundreds of groups, and i don't know if you had a chance to see the witnessing we had, but it was pretty compelling what has been happening to americans. so i'm pretty angry about this and i'm not going to stop until i find out what the truth is. now, we know that two years ago high ranking officials at the irs knew about this and didn't disclose this to congress, even though we've been writing letters, and the senate had as well. and we know that treasury knew a year ago. and didn't, didn't let us know. that's not going to happen aga again. >> [inaudible] >> i do have those but i'm not going to reveal that today. >> we both agree. we're going to get the facts here. we are still in the middle of that right now. both of us are. as i said, talked to my office yesterday, update, uncovering

and there's a lot yet to go. >> a couple of it on jonathan's question. i going to ask about the irs. follow up on tax expenditures. can each of you state how you feel about the mortgage interest reduction, not by what percent but it's that one that is an obvious low-hanging fruit that needs to be addressed? and if i can ask another question, the irs as well, we are seven weeks roughly into this. we still don't know more than we did seven weeks ago. it seems rather unusual. how would you characterize what you are learning from the irs? lois lerner and your hearing was alleged to have told someone to rent for office to get out of the fcc. never run again. had he gone any further lois lerner? >> i will answer that one first.

as i said this is actually a painstaking process because much of this, to prove that you need the documents. and we are just beginning to get those. i hope at the end of this week. we have just begun the interviews. and so there's a lot more work to do. so yes, this is going to take time. having been involved in investigations as a lawyer, in a different type, this is actually more of a white-collar approach where you really have to get the documents and prove things. and that takes a long time. it's painstaking. again, i'm not going to try to jump to conclusions. with regard to the mortgage interest deduction, we often talk in shorthand and say there's a lot of loopholes we need to close. i consider that not a loophole that policy. but again, everything will be on the table. we will look at all of the items, and again, if there is consensus that an item is going to be reformed or is going to stay as is, that's going to

affect where the rate ends up being. that's the kind of trade-offs and discussion that i want to have, and i'm having with the members of my committee, and members opposite committee. i've been working with a whip, kevin mccarthy, a meeting with members in general as well off the committee. but that's the discussion we're going to have. and i think that's important discussion to have knowing that two-thirds of americans don't itemize, and what really should the role of that be as we go forward. and again, we are going to look at it all. is a plain sheet of paper and we are going to see what goes in. is not the current code to see what comes out. >> i agree. >> [inaudible] your colleague, senator grassley, his constituents in whatever trip, from whatever trip, first amendment rights which seemed even more egregious. any sense of how the policy of

trade -- >> we're in the middle of investigations. my staff of yesterday that there will be a few, not terribly impressive, people, frankly. and wants morning, more people to talk to, more questions asked, and we'll find out. my style is let's get the facts first. we will publicly state some conclusions. so i know what i'm talking about the sometimes i don't always get there but that's the goal. >> chairman baucus, you said a minute ago -- [inaudible] your realistic enough to know that perhaps it's what would be approved by the majority of the congress. my question is, do you agree with chairman camp that the debt limit is a good forcing mechanism for tax reform? and do you intend to move the debt limit bill either before or

after the august recess? >> yeah, well, don't know the date with which we will move the bill. i would like to the bill to committee. we in the committee had talked about it, gotten together, okay, what do you think. we actually brought jack lew up, and there was a very good session about increasing the debt limit and so forth. that's a question i'm going to have to determine, what makes the most sense as we proceed. don't know the timing it. had been in consultation with lots of didn't able to see what makes sense. i want to move it at the appropriate time. what was your other question? >> the debt limit presented -- >> i think it does, i think it does. you know in your business is run by deadlines. sometimes you need a deadline,

we don't congress, to force ourselves to do something. now, moving ahead tax reform independent of everything else. independent of debt limit, sequestration, of reform, et cetera just moving it. now, that make it likes, i had his team on its own. i don't. it may be part of something else. still moving ahead with tax reform but when it comes to the debt limit, this congress is going to have to make some decisions. >> mr. becker. >> there's been some chatter recently about a carbon tax as there is always i guess. could you say what how and with -- how and why and if there is in doubt in your build? >> everything is in the table. you know, look at that as well as some other alternative

measures. and, frankly, that's going to be on what we will be discussing in the committee next thursday. different sources of revenue that is nontraditional. that's one of them. but i want to take advantage of the can but it's interesting, there are some, more members of the senate now who hopefully halk about tg up a little bit. not, is that, rise to the level where it's very strong, serious provision? i don't know. we are not going to prejudge it. it's on the table. >> chairman camp? >> well, i try not to make many declarative statements about tax reform because we're trying to look at the whole thing as in its entirety. but i don't support a carbon tax. >> you might later. >> i don't think so.

[laughter] >> doyal? >> using the debt limit as forcing -- [inaudible] i found coverage of tax reform was a three-year process. wasn't some that get done in one session. you're talking about something you can do this fall. i presume you're talking of something small, narrow or corporate, broking up not cover his. that's the number one question. number two, have you talked between themselves among other ways you could help, or your process could tie in with deficit reduction? >> [inaudible] >> first of all, you're right, 86 took a little while. but we been on this for a while, too. we've had over 30 hearings on reform. this is not something, you know, last several weeks or months. dave and i and others have thought very seriously about reform, what reform should be

for a couple years, actually. we have had hearings for a good number of years. second, your assumption is tax reform has to be this session of this congress but maybe this session of this congress and it may not be this session. 86 was an election year. so it's possible. in addition, i think it's going to be difficult to match corporate only reform for some reasons. one, a majority of its income of majorities -- of american states is generated through -- if we have specific corporate reform by definition that is going to adversely affect unless we address it as well. individual income taxes. small business really cares about reform because most small business are not see courts.

-- c corporation. we can some thoughts to your last question, it's early. it's premature to know exactly how it's going to fit together. but what we do with base broadening revenant is still, is going to be a very specific question. and i probe without question every time we meet with senators. i find some significant gift with republican senators. now, it's private right now. it's not public, and it may not ever be public. or it might be public in a direction, i don't, but right now it's, the administration wants, the administration would like, and many democrats would like to review the sequester, or

dramatically modify. and want for the deficit reduction the everybody does. but even though the need for deficit reduction now is a little bless urgent than in the past. which is a blessing and curse, my judgment, frankly. but if we, when the rubber meets the road, the roads, then revenue will very much be discussed. there's a lot of ways to skin a cat. i've learned through life, there's almost always a solution to give got to keep looking for the them in that be any obvious the first take, keep probing, looking. maybe you will find a way. i'm looking for that way to find a compromise between them if you will, republicans and democrats and then have to deal with them,

without, we can get tax reform that's needed, and find a compromise so that tax reform is not stalled involved down because we haven't dealt with it. >> chairman camp? >> sorry i took so long. >> i would just say that i'm sort of that main point of your question is, i'm not trying to let that stop our discussions on the policy issues that would make it a tax reform bill. obviously, i said meeting with every democrat on my way. many would say they would like to see more revenue. i would say let's not go to work with. let's move forward on the policy and see what we get. 30, on our side we think that the revenue that was delivered at the end of last year was a significant amount of twisting the deficit, you know, score reduce. revenue is expected to double over the next decade. but again i do think it's productive to focus on where we disagree. but there are so many good

simplification policies that we agree on. one of the things that 80% of americans agree with his the code is too competent. i think the average person should be able to fill out their own taxes. small businesses, 90% of them have to hire preparers because they're afraid they're going to get audited, especially now. and i think we want to look at those issues. clearly, at some point we'll have to address that, but i think it's better to look at that in the context of what are the policies you're getting as opposed to that opening that. and this is something official mention, simpson-bowles has looked at. supercommittee, which we both served on both of those commissions, and we've had, in the house, 20 hearings. the first thing i had as chairman to a half years ago was a taxable. so you have both forward on this for a lot of years. there's been a lot of work in a lot of years and i would say that without a lot of you were the economy hasn't come back as

strong as it should. as i don't have a lot of time to wait. i think when you look at, you become a corner of the kids coming out of college can't find a job, the fact that there are record, highest level since the carter administration, people just stopped looking for. the and even if you have a job, you may not have had a wage increase in a while. so that is what's really driving me on this is jobs and economy issue but and also the complexity of the code with all the changes that max mentioned that have occurred. it really makes it come and think what really has been called into question, to come is sort of not only its integrity of the irs and the whole system, but does somebody get a better deal somewhere because they can figure out through some sharp lawyer or accountant how to lessen the tax burden but i'm the average guy and i will have to do that. i'm paying at the top. i think there is a fairness issue that we need to look at in the tax code as well, and that's

also driving this because there is, and other in terms of design we've already mentioned some of those. >> that are 42 definitions of small business in the code. 42. i might make another point here. i mean, if we don't, reform the code in this congress, we won't comment my judgment, until 2015, 16, so forth. beyond that it will be 17, 18. because if we don't in this congress, then went over presidential election season. and if it's going to be very difficult to pass tax reform in that context, which means 17 or 18, what not. think how much we would have lost by 10. >> we have about eight minutes left. jim. >> chairman camp, the online sales tax legislation, i'm wondering what your view is on the. and there was an interesting

breakdown on the republican side in the senate where the old republicans for the most part supported -- >> tenure are aged? >> in age. [laughter] and younger for the most part of those but i'm wondering if you've seen any signs of any generational split in your party on tax spending issues like transportation, farmville, that sort of thing? >> that particular issues one that is not in the ways and means committee. this is for our jurisdiction doesn't quite find it. it is in your jurisdiction but again, we don't have jurisdiction of state tax issues but that would be judiciary. i try not to doubt other chairman what to do. you know, i think the legislation has changed and i think we'll have to see what we actually got in the house. i've always felt a million is just a little too low in terms of the threshold for were yet to comply with the almost 10,000 different tax provisions. but again, i'm going to let the judiciary committee work that issued and we'll see what the

committee reports out and then i will take a position on it. >> do you see any signs of a split on outside of some these tax-and-spend issues, the farmer, transportation bill? do you see younger members looking at it differently and alderman? >> i haven't analyzed in that way. i just haven't, i guess i really can't answer that. >> chairman baucus can would you like to anger your older members and comment? >> i don't see any generational split, frankly. there are fewer of us, and we tend, i just don't see that. >> chairman, earlier this week senator coburn wrote an op-ed where he talked about, among other things, tax form.

[inaudible] what can the president do to make it happen? is he doing what he needs to do to help move this at this point i'm? >> well, i, t., i think he wisely is looking at tax reform the same ways he's approached immigration. that is, carefully. in this climate gets, might not be wise to be two up front too soon, too early. because it made, cause a bit of a storm. but he is very involved. i'm met with him on tax reform.

i need very frequently with his chief of staff who, by the way, i find is very good. he is going out of his way, coming up to fail talking to members of the house and senate, and engaging congress, very, very deep on lots of different issues. the president clearly cares about fiscal solutions. clearly cares, does care about tax reform. new revenue will only be generated in the context of tax reform. there is no other way really, can't do it further, domestic spending cuts. and entitlements is difficult but it's going to have to be some revenue somewhere. they know that in the white house. trying to figure how to deal with it. different personalities have different styles. president reagan has had his own approach to the presidency.

president obama has his, but i think he is wisely being careful to the degree to which he's raising his profile on the farm. >> well, and i will say that the president put in his budget revenue neutral corporate reform, which is quite a change from where he was two years ago, with just sort of a working paper. and i think that's a result of the discussion that's occurred. and we came and spoke to the republican conference he said, and i don't want to go in, but he basically said, i may not be where you were on the individual site, but i will work with you. i'm, i'm paraphrasing. and so if you look at the testimony that secretary lew gave, both in the senate and the house, they've not slam the door on this. and i think, i think at this particular stage it may be

appropriate to see what can the committees do. is this real or not? we are both committed to working very hard to make this a reality because i don't think we can afford to wait. i think the time is now, as i said in some of my other -- >> very briefly. still would like to see a congressional budget, budget coffers from so-called regular order. we don't want to get ahead of themselves of reform because they are hoping that maybe they'll be a budget coffers. i don't know there will be. i admire those who are trying so hard to get conference agreement, but there's -- still not there yet. >> about three minutes left. last question. >> for both of you. g8, to the corporate tax issues and discuss. one is beneficial ownership requiring companies to disclose their own ownership chain in order to stop tax evasion, tax

of which th which you and the os country by country tax reporting. so requiring multinationals to disclose their tax payments, all countries round the world. now, if the u.s. makes a commitment next week on some of these issues, do you support them and will they be able to pass legislation in congress? along those lines, whether separately or within tax reform. >> you know, those are two issues that we haven't really fully vetted in the ways and means committee. obviously, if the administration makes a statement on the we will ramp up and take a series look at the. some of that came up yesterday. i mean, they were mentioned sort of tangentially in our tax haven hearing yesterday. u..

[inaudible conversations]

feature remarks from energy secretary ernest. we will show you the speech later in the program schedules but here is a brief look. >> turning to climate change, as many of you know the last year's many military and former military leaders, our intelligence community have all emphasized the implications of climate change for our security, particularly its role as a potential threat multiplier in certain parts of the world, stable parts of the world, and i might say in addition to military leaders, religious leaders have all so many come forward. i personally signed a letter

with scientists and priests, rabbis, ministers some years back in which the fi most fundamentally while there may or may not be disagreement on how we got here there is agreement on what we need to do going forward in terms of taking care of our planet. and again, i've said before and i will say it again, in my view the underlining science is not a debatable in terms of the driver of the need to address climate change. there are clearly lots of room to the date on how we do it, what we do, how fast we do it, but not on the underlining science. so the president has made it clear that we will have a strong push as best we can to address climate change, energy efficiency is certainly one of the major approaches.

we need to move towards lower carbon and zero carbon fuels and we also need to emphasize things like carbon capture and sequestration as an approach for the expected continued use in this country and of course in the world. given the time, i'm not going to go through a lot of discussion about the zero carbon fuel if you liked. i will mention solar. i already noted the costs have dropped dramatically within say 25% of the modular costs are down to the dollar per what region. this is getting interesting. i will argue that i believe the scale and impact of solar technology in my earlier theme i began is underestimated.

there are many situations today when solar is in fact competitive. but clearly there's more to do. we are aggressively pursuing this in many dimensions of away from basic research to deployment. and again, i think that is an example of something we will look back on in ten years and be surprised at the scope of the change. >> we think it's critical that any regulation or lack thereof keeps in mind we need to be incentivized continuing toqw invest in the physical infrastructure that's the core of every product, if we are going to have the fastest speed, the most capable wi-fi access points it's key that the regulatory environment that we

operate actually foster's as opposed to and had its further investment in that plan. >> should we have more opportunity for consumers? that's something we are hopeful and we have worked on. we've already gotten more packages than we've had before. then finally the question is and my view is that this is best served in the business relationships, not in government laws and mandates. but we are very respectful. it's an important subject and one that we want to again be part of the dialogue. going as far back as abigail adams and martha washington, you find that the first ladies played an active role in the

white house and in the campaigns that it took to get there. abigail adams was already campaign strategist for her husband but she helped advise him on who to woo to win election. he had to keep in the collision. they talked incessantly about the politics of the day and the legislation that needed to be passed, which senators and congressmen he could count on it and couldn't and what he needed to do to win more support. >> as we continue our conversation on first ladies, john roberts come author of "raiding the first lady's the women who influenced the presidency," looks at political partners with their husbands rather than wives or mothers. tonight at nine eastern on c-span. while the senate continues its immigration debate come on the house side the judiciary committee is taking its own immigration legislation. on thursday, the committee looked up border security and

deportation, specifically hearing from local law enforcement from arizona and to parents whose kids were killed by illegal immigrants. house speaker john boehner is criticized the senate's bill for not going far enough on border security. this is about two and half hours >> successful immigration reform must address and interpol piece of the puzzle. it can't just be fixated on securing the border which undoubtedly is an issue of paramount concern. we must focus on interior enforcement or more precisely what to do with on lawful immigrants who make it past the border and legal immigrants who violate the terms of their visa and become on lawfully present in the united states. any real immigration reform effort must guaranty that bill walls or enforced following the legalization program. this is required to ensure that future generations do not have to deal with, once again,

legalizing millions more people. interior and was one of the immigration law is critical to the success of the immigration system. unfortunately, the senate bill weakens the enforcement in many areas or is simply in a factual. the senate bill aggregative felons to the mandatory detention to be released in the care of advocacy organizations. the senate bill provides an unworkable framework for deporting gang members and directs the dhs to ignore criminal convictions under the state law for crimes such as human smuggling, harboring, trafficking and gang crimes when ad adjudicating application for the legalization. today we turn to a chart to 78 the immigration enforcement bill introduced by the chairman of the subcommittee on immigration and border security. mr. gowdy strengthen enforcement. one reason our immigration system is broken today is because the present and past

administrations have largely ignored the enforcement of our immigration laws. if we want to avoid the mistakes of the past, we cannot allow the president to continue shutting down federal immigration enforcement efforts unilaterally the safe act will not permit that to happen. i remain concerned that whatever enforcement provisions congress passes will be subject to implementation by the current administration, which fails to enforce all already on the book. the dhs has released thousands of illegal and criminal immigrant in detainee's while providing ever-changing members to congress regarding the same. the dhs and it is forbidding i.c.e. officers from enforcing all they are a bound to withhold. they've already ruled the dhs actions are likely in violation of the federal law. dhs is placing class's of immigrants and enforcement free zones. the dhs claims to be removing more aliens than any other

administration, but has to generate bogus numbers in order to do so. ultimately, the american people have little trust that an administration that hasn't enforced the law in the past will do so in the future. that is why real immigration needs to have mechanisms to ensure that the president cannot simply turn off the switch on immigration enforcement. mr. gowdy contains such a mechanism not only does the bill strengthen immigration enforcement by giving the federal government the tools it needs to enforce our laws but where the federal government fails to act states can pick up the slack states and localities have specific authorization to insist in the enforcement of the federal immigration law. states and localities can also enact and enforce their own as long as they are consistent with

federal law. the act shows how to avoid the mistakes in the past without regard to immigration law enforcement especially the 1986 immigration law. the bill expands the type of serious collectivity for which we can remove manslaughter and failure to register as a sex offender. the bill ensures the individuals cannot to get advantage of our generous immigration walls and in addition to criminal provisions, the bills strengthen federal law to make it difficult for foreign terrorists and other nationals who oppose national security concerns to enter and remain in the united states. they threaten national security from receiving immigration benefits such as naturalization and discretionary relief from my mobile. such are particularly relevant following the boston bombings where naturalized aliens killed, maimed and injured americans.

under the bill no benefits can be provided to immigrants until all required background and security checks are completed. another item the senate bill fails to include. the senate bill authorizes the secretary to way of background checks. mr. gowdy improves the first line of defense the visa issuance progress and provides much needed assistance on customs enforcement officers enforcing federal immigration walls while keeping them safe. not only does the bill allows the officials already working in their communities to pitch in to enforce law but also strengthens national security and protect our communities from those that wish to cause us harm and pity and will maintain the integrity of the system for the long term. i look forward to hearing from all the witnesses today and i

think the chairman for introducing this game changing legislation. >> the chair will now recognize the gentle lady from california of the subcommittee. >> thank you. over the past six months this committee is engaged in a series of largely several discussions regarding immigration law with few exceptions have shown members of this committee recognize hour were system is broken and that it must be fixed for america's businesses and families. most have recognized at one time or another that deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants is not realistic and would care parents away from children come separate spouses, leaving gaping holes in the communities across the country. that's why today's hearing on a chart in 78 is so disappointing to read portions of the bill should be familiar to the committee because they draw heavily upon the bills we considered in the congress.

provisions in the bill for example would allow people to be detained indefinitely perhaps permanently as well as deport it on the discretionary decision of the secretary of homeland security without due process. i'm confident some of this wouldn't survive scrutiny. the bill troubles me more however because how similar it is to a bill we considered in the 109th congress h.r. 4437. the bill contains many provisions from that bill including provisions that essentially turn all undocumented immigrants in the country whether they cross the border or overstate the visa and that every day they stay in the u.s. they continue to commit a crime. under this bill every day and none documented father or mother stays in the country to feed and care for a child he or she would be committing a crime. under this bill their family members may be committing

criminal acts were living with them were driving them to the doctor. the bill then goes further than h.r. 3437 by unleashing the states to enact similar laws and by authorizing state and local officers across the country to enforce the immigration laws. every cop would have the opportunity to a fast and detain a person based on suspicion the person might be unlawful and they could put them in jail simply for being here. it's impossible to read the title without thinking of all lessons we've learned in recent years about what happens when local police officers are turned into agents. we now know that interesting local police the damage as community policing practices leaves communities less safe. because it breeds distrust from u.s. citizens, legal residents and undocumented persons alike. we've heard this from the police

foundation, the association of chiefs of police and major chiefs' association. salt lake city police chief testified at a hearing last year that placing local law enforcement officers in the position of immigration agent undermines the trust and cooperation to the successful community oriented policing. recently we heard from a survey of latinos themselves 44% of those surveyed said they are less likely to contact the police if they are the victim of a kind of fear officers would inquire about their immigration status with the immigration status of people they know read seven of the respondents who are undocumented said the same thing to read when victims of crime and people who witness crime or a free to contact the police crime still unsolved and when crimes go unsolved, communities lose faith in the ability of police to keep them safe to do rather than making the community

safer something the title purports to do this decrease public safety. we also know. placing authority in the hands of states and localities results in unconstitutional racial profiling and prolong the unlawful detentions. the poster child for this bad behavior is maricopa county sheriff's office the toughest sheriff in america. last month a judge ruled the office engaged in a pattern of an unconstitutional racial profiling in the unlawful detention while participating in the 287 agreement with the federal government and in for some of the arizona immigration laws and the pile is not alone. last year the justice prevent concluded that the county sheriff and the devotees of north carolina engaged in routine discrimination against latinos which included illegal stops and arrests without probable cause. the justice department also entered into settlement

agreements in connecticut following an investigation into widespread racial discrimination and abuse against latino residents. the case involved the federal criminal a rest on charges such as access it obstruction and come seriously. even immigration officers highly trained and with decades of experience in immigration law make mistakes leading to the detention and removal of citizens of imagine what will happen when we turn over to people who can't understand the complexities of immigration law such as the rules surrounding automatic acquisition of u.s. citizenship, derivative citizenship come extensions of state, withholding of removal of the list goes on to read this bill turns a blind eye to these problems and that is a gross understatement. we share the goal of ensuring that heuvel walls on and forced. surely we can do improvements

but the system is utterly broken and it can't be enforced without devastating our families and communities. the approach this bill makes is dangerous and it's long and i hope that today's hearing isn't a sign of the direction in which this committee is heading and i yield back. >> we thank the gentleman for her statements. all of the other statements will be made a part of the record and we now welcome our panel today. if you would rise i will begin by swearing you in. do you swear the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? what the record reflect in the affirmative.

some elected officials and chief enforcement officer of arizona. babeu serves as the arizona sheriffs' association and was named the national sherriff of the year in 2011 by the national sheriffs association. additionally, share at babeu serve his country in the national guard for 20 years. during that time he served in iraq as well as a deployment in arizona as part of operation jumpstart. in 2006 and 2007 he worked as the commander of task force supporting the united states border patrol. share of babeu and his master's in public administration from american international college, graduating summa cum laude. mr. chris crane serves as the president of the national immigration and customs enforcement council when the team, american federation of government employees. he has worked as an immigration enforcement agent for the u.s. immigration and customs enforcement at the u.s.

department of homeland security since 2003 prior to his service at i.c.e. chris served 11 years in the united states marine corps. he's testified before this committee before. thank you for returning again. share if sam page is an elected official in rockingham county north carolina. sheriff page serves as -- i'm sorry. i think i'm stealing the thunder of the jam line from north carolina. mr. coble who asked and i agreed and i forgot to recognize him for the purpose of acknowledging mr. page. >> mr. chairman, you may steal my thunder any time you like. [laughter] before i introduce share of page my friend from california referred earlier -- north carolina -- i think that is a litigation that hasn't been resolved at this point. the share of served his fourth term as high sheriff of rockingham county. in addition, he served on the

national sheriffs' association border and immigration committee since 2012. share give pages a veteran of the air force having served five years and air force. he's also a graduate of the national security institute. sam pages a law enforcement officer and i don't want to embarrass you by someone to compliment you carried a friend of mine asked me how well i knew sam and i said very well. my friend said he's a good sheriff, but more importantly he is a good man and i echo that and i'm honored to introduce him to two of my friends on the judiciary committee. it's good to have you and your colleagues with us today. >> i will simply add my welcome given by the distinguished gentleman from our carolina. mr. jamiel shaw is the father of a junior murdered by an alien a gang member. jamiel shaw jr. was an honors

student recorded by schools such as stanford and rutgers when his future was cut short by a gang member in the united states illegally. he has since campaigned for low wall to be enacted the would prevent los angeles from being a century city for illegal alien game members and it would implement stronger measures to prevent illegal immigration. it's my particular pleasure to enter does the honorable randy krant who serves as the attorney for bedford city virginia. a position he has held since 1995. he's the director for the bedford county violent response team as well as the legal advisor for the forensic nursing program. additionally, he's a member of the southern virginia internet crimes against children is task force and he earned his undergraduate degree from lynchburg college and his doctorate from the university of richmond as well as a degree from liberty university and

continued his education and my small firm many years ago more than 20. you are very welcome today. ms. sabine durden is the mother of dominick durden killed in a collision. he was a dispatcher for the riverside county sheriff's department in a licensed pilot killed when he was riding his motorcycle to work it by an illegal immigrant in a pickup truck who had too drunk driving convictions but wasn't in possession of a driver's license. this was her only child of. ms. karen tumlin as with the office of the national immigration center. she has been with nilc since 2005 and her focus has been of serving low-income immigrants. ms. tumlin also worked as a research associate at the urban institute before going to law school where she worked on

immigration issues. additionally, she spent a year as a loose scholar in thailand working on a study on child trafficking for the united nations international organization. sheeran a juris doctor and a master's degree in public policy for the university of california at berkeley. ms. clarissa martinez de castro is the director of civic engagement and immigration at the national council of la raza. ms. martinez overseas to advance the immigration priorities as well as efforts to expand latino policy advocacy participation. a naturalized united states citizen she's a graduate of occidental college and harvard kennedy school of government. welcome to each and every one of you. this is a large panel and i want to ensure you that in your written statement will be entered into the record in their

entirety and i ask each of you to summarize your testimony in five minutes or less. to help you stay in that time there is a light on your table. when the light switches from green to yellow you'll have one minute to conclude. when the light turns red signals the witnesses five minutes have expired. i want to also note that i have an amendment on the floor in the national defense authorization act coming up in a little bit and i will have to step out. chairman gowdy or others will fill the chair and we will keep the hearing going in a smooth fashion. i apologize for not being here for all of it but i will be here for almost all of it and all of your testimony is important to me. we will start with you, sharon of babeu. am i correct in vv cup announcing that correct? >> thank you. mr. chairman and members for allowing me to testify today. a little bit about my county.

we are larger geographically than the state of connecticut. we only have 15 counties in arizona and we are still a rural county to do we have 400,000 residents and we are a full-service law enforcement agency meaning we are primary responders to the majority of the residents of our county. we are not on the border in fact we are 70 miles north of the border yet the number one pass through county in the united states over 3,000 counties. how can that be? well, the teachers come the interstates naturally fall through the county on their way to natural phoenix and then other parts possibly to your district and people that you represent. according to a recent gao study it says 56% of the border is not under operational control and that is a term that has been used in the past by the border patrol. in my opinion and in their

opinion of most americans, 44% is a failing grade. america can support the border if we replicate the success of what's been accomplished in the sector. mr. chairman, you pointed out that i served as a commanding officer, as an army officer for a year-and-a-half in yuma and i can speak to that experience but essentially what happened is of the nine sectors in california to texas we indirect support of our heroes in the border patrol were able to bring a 97% reduction in illegal entries and drug smuggling in that sector so i reject anybody saying the border cannot be secured. three key elements in the mccain kyl plan, our former senator kyl from the i was proud to be one of the prime authors of that legislation. the three components of that was

6,000 armed soldiers which the senate bill does not have crapo of two years if you can get in sequence to the second step is built and complete a double barrier fence originally authored by representative, former representative from san diego and dumb and hunter and in fact president clinton to his great credit signed the bill. he wanted three barriers and he gave them. it's not just build a border fence for 2,000 miles. its 700 miles of the approximately 2,000-mile border and it's a predetermined area that high traffic areas where there are built up urban centers that are there and you have infrared cameras, lighting and sensors to detect incursions' as