it's difficult to measure whether it consistently honing in on the same behavior will -- in fact that is why you see a great der ration. we saw an average of 0 to 26 referral per month on average. >> first of all thank you for your service. let me ask you did any other referrals by our officers result

in arrests that indicated a terrorist plot or something of that nature? >> 0 not to my knowledge. they were for other criminal oarch -- ovens. whether it's drug trafficking money trafficking, being in the country illegally. to my knowledge just for context, there's not been a single attempted terrorist to enter a u.s. airport aircraft since 9/11. >> any human trafficking? >> yes. there was an instan, for example, last year in miami where there were two men -- young women and the situation and intercededded in arrest of the two individuals. and then whether rescued that woman from human trafficking or what? at least for the immediate time. >> let me ask you another question. before i ask a question, i want to say thank you for your leadership, and when i talk about leadership, it's sometimes

the leadership is when you go down a path and you realize it's not working. that it may not have been the best decision to reverse it. that's the hard part of leadership. so thank you for your decision with denies and all of those things. my question would be can you find a place within your agency to better spend $200 plus million a year than on this spot program? >> thank you. i have given that question a lot of thought. given the concerns it's been raised both by gao and the i think. we are smaller agency today than a year ago. i believe that trend will continue primarily through attrition. it's not that we are letting people off. my concern with that is that if we remove one whole layer of security, that being the who are

the least invasive and looking for intent rather than item. it gives us an exposure to potential terrorists that we don't currently have. the risk reward equation is difficult at gao and ig have pointed out given my experience in law enforcement and national security, i know how it works and so i'm a strong advocate because i don't want to take away a security that may identify the next punitive terrorists who may decide they want to get to an airport in the u.s. to do something bad. >> well i would love to have at least a statement or analysis on our return of investment on the $200 plus million. let me just say this in my final few minutes. because -- few seconds. because i know that we've made a lot of statements about the

incident at la x and you and i talked on the phone. when we talk about response time and when we talk about what could have been done to do things circhtly -- differently and prevent loss of life. i think the other side my colleague on the other side all the time remind us we can't be everything to everybody. we don't have the money to pay for it. it's unfortune this happened at the check point. it happened within the airport. but if we just take a moment to think if it happened in the parking garage, we wouldn't be there. if it happened curb side we may be there. so at some point, we have to thank the people that put their lives on the line and do it knowing they're putting their lives on the line. but also that we just don't have the capability, and we don't have the resources to make sure we're on every street

corner every parking garage and every place else. with that in mind, thank you for being very thoughtful and meth call where we place people. there are lessons to be learned from this incident and communications and all the things we need to do better. but we have to look at other things besides what happens when somebody is holding a gun to prevent them from having it in the first place or that rage to to do things. thank you for what you do. it's not a shot at my colleagues on the other side. but we as society have to work more on the underlying factors. because we just can't be everywhere. thank you. >> i thank the gentleman. the chair recognizes the averaging minority member from the full committee from mississippi mr. thompson, for any questions he may have. >> thank you very much. administrator can tso and la x

communicate with the los angeles police department? -- and airport by radio? >> yes. >> so there is communication? >> yes. >> i want to -- at some point provide you information that says that is not the case. and i want to make sure that we are on the same wavelength for that. by communicate -- i talk about radio not telephone not panic button. >> yes. >> but radio. >> yes. let me go through the court nation center for tsa with the police as pot-friendly -- a opposed to an officer around the corner they direct contact to. maybe we can clarify that.

do tso have radio? >> the macker yes. was there a supervisor or manager on duty? >> yes. >> did the supervisor or manager call on the radio? >> no. the supervisor picked up the dedicated line as lirmly red phone to call in and as they were getting ready to speak. in watching the video she drops the phone and runs because the shooter is coming up the escalator having fired additional rounds and so she didn't stay. >> the radio was not -- >> no. >> okay. doctor this validation report -- you referenced. are you comfortable with the result of that contract --

>> we looked at the validation of study. we believe the findings are nine times greater the detection is important. when i say nine time it is means 900% better. that is an important statistic. >> you standby the validation report? was your analysis -- >> unfortunately i'll have to respectfully disagree. and the fact i think it's important to look at the report itself. it was couched as an initial first step that made several recommendations going forward to improve validity, reliability and the technical advisory committee report that was associated with it raised some similar concerns. it was useful. we provided some insight. we don't think it should be used

to -- if i can give an example. the indicators even though we had concerns about the reliability of the data. but replicated the results. we found some negative associations. it means they are honing on some more behavior associated with low-risk passengers. we were concerned that was included in the report. so it appeared they perhaps were highlighting the positive and not accentuating the negative. >> in essence, as you said, you disagree with this report? >> yeah. i don't think it can be used to conclude. it's nines more effective than random. >> mr. edwards can you speak about how training and evaluation of b -- o is important, and i have a concern

that we have a number of people who are bdo who never made a single refeferl. i would assume they are considered successful employees. can you explain how people don't do referrals or anything for the committee? >> well, thank you sir. they have taken a number of steps including collective reliable data. -- five years after the program came in to existence, you know they started it. and out of the folks that we had interviewed, you know, out of the 88 people that we interviewed. a number of them are 713 out of the 2800 were ready for the training in two years. and the other problem is this training held in a classroom and the bdo are not able to practice

what they learn in class until they come back to the airport. and not having this consistent training az cro the board -- not everybody is referring what they need to refer. because the varying level of training one has gotten and not gotten. >> thank you. i yield back mr. chairman. >> thank you mr. comp thompson. the chairman recognize other members for the committee they may wish to ask the witness in accordance with the committee rule and practice. at this time the chair will recognize the gentlelady from indiana for any questions. >> thank you mr. chairman. thank you for holding this hearing in such a timely way. i want to just speak to administrator pete and offer my condolences to your officer and to those who were injured and to the entire work force.

and i applaud the fact you reminded us since nieflt we haven't had an incident -- a terrorist incident at an airport or on any of our aircraft in large part not there haven't been attempts occasionally on-air craft. but tsa has been doing what it was founded to do. i was u.s. attorney at the time tsa was started. and i want to talk with you and a couple of panelists about behavior detection, which is the heart of law enforcement. whether you're a local law enforcement officer, or whether you are -- had which is tsa is about. is it not about behavior detection. whether they are coming through check point whether they are informing airport police officers. and with your fbi background prior to tsa, can you talk a bit more about behavior detection

and its importance not only for bdo but what are the tsa officer and the supervisorrers, you know, if we were to -- it's i believe it's hard to study because i believe it's something -- the heart of what these officers and are trained to do. and, you know -- but yet how officers learn over time. and based on the time they are there, can you just talk about behavior dpe -- detections specifically in law enforcement and in the role of tsa which are not specifically law enforcement. >> thank you, congresswoman brooks. and thank you your kind words.. sure. some is frankly common sense that it's just human nature. what people do every day and

assaying others. i ask given a number of about dote. just the notion that we have taken that basic training looked at what the israelis did continue to do in term of their assessment of people through behavioral detection officers and say how with we apply it in the airport environment and trained again within our budget to say here's is what we do to equip our officers on those frontlines for making that noninvasive nonintrusive

assessment that can either help identify somebody who may be high-risk such as human traffickers. not that they're terrorists. but what we're doing now under risk-based security is making the other side of the equation -- identifying low-risk individuals. so where i mentioned earlier 80,000 passengers on monday alone went through expedited screening that's because behavior detection officers did not detect suspicious behavior. how do you quantify that? a return on investment. you ask the people i appreciate the bdo making a judgment about me. but i got through expedited. basically tsa precheck. it's one of the things and didn't have a chance to address that. because that is a new -- that's an evolution of our -- different manifestation. it really is one of those key enablers for us as we trants suggestion from one size fits all to and how can we employ all

the tools available for so the concern is if you think of a measure web or something why will we take one of those layers of security off wouldn't it allow possible terrorists to get through if they have either an underwear bomb or you know there's been dozen in the past about surgically u implanted devices that technology probably won't pick up. we rely on the bdo to make assessment about people who may manifest on suspicious behavior. utilize involved in assistanting those agencies with developing their behavior detection tools and techniques? >> we have a number of ongoing initiatives with both it and primarily custom and border. none of them, to any knowledge, are directly related to the

behavioral -- we are -- we go where we're asked by our partners and so it's that is an area we want to get in. we assist with that. >> time expired. and the entire community and to thank the law enforcement community of that area for the most passionate and dignified tribute to him. and enormously heart warming to see the law enforcement community both at the airport and the surrounding area come

together. i hope it concludes any comment that tso are not first responder or dealing with the security of the nation and put to rest the qualified privatization as a substitute for a professional federal work force. so let me thank you again for that. hopefully it was a productive meeting and you continue to do so vigorously. i am toward the continental airport and secret police and other law enforcement walking through our airport after this tragic incident and looking at the tsa areas security areas and

at least for our terminal there. we'll continue the dialogue with them. one of the issues that is important to the chairman is the idea or concept of reimbursement for added security in the perimeter area. as a frequent traveler i view the perimeter area in meeting the external and ticketing areas as a concern leading up to the secured area where our tso are. my question to you is what proposition could you put before with respect to funding on reimbursement to both law enforcement or enhanced security that many of the tso -- all of them -- have a chance to speak to have

suggested should occur? >> well thank you first congresswoman for your gesture of condolence and your call for appreciate that and pass that on, obviously, to mrs. hernandez. what you address is one of the things the working group we establish internally and in discussing with the aviation security advisory counsel and the broader community what would those cost look like. i don't have it right now. if we for example reduce the response time from five minutes to three minutes. or how much additional it would cost? how much should be born by the federal government in term of leo reimbursement agreement. and how much would be worn by the local airport. how can we buy down the risk?

and part of the discussion we had last week armed officers at and through check point that may be doing other things. there's a number of things i have to get back with you on that. >> let me make formal request the inquiry be made. but put in place. it's no doubt that the presence and the quicker response of armed law enforcement is part of the solution. certainly the slowings is not armed tso officers in the small area they have to deal with innocent traveling passengers. let me quickly ask gao did you detect any racial profiling in the work of the bdo? and -- improve it? are you suggesting there should be other improvement and are you

also suggesting that the program should be slimmed down? i think he makes a point onleyering. but i would be aplayed and in great opposition if there was racial profiling. i think one of the issue of the bdo the overall impact is not immediately detectable because it is sort of a floating -- floating issue, if you will. of whether or not there's safety. so could you answer that? then the enhanced training, would that have an improvement -- i would be willing to look at enhanced training slimming down the program to get where gao thinks it needs to be to be able to have it as a complimentary layering of security at airports . >> happen to let her answer that. even though her time is expired. >> i thank the chair for the generosity.

the allegations involving boston and found in the study there was no evidence racial profiling. they believed they interviewed avior detection officers on site. although they did note which was is one interesting thing, they did note that some cases there was what they termed appearance profiling. i'm not sure to what extent that overlaps with racial profiling or define it. it was one notable finding perhaps mr. edwards can respond. in term of limiting funding and our recommendation. we obviously, as i said in my opening remarking, i believe there is value and focusing resources on screening for potential bad actor at the airport for behavioral detection technique. the question is how do you go about it? and i think as part of the review a spot we believe is very complicated scoring process. we believe it could be streamlined, simplified, perhaps focus more on passengers deemed

high-risk. some passengers come to the airport are already preselectived for secondary screening and the tsa is developing on the new risk methodologies to supplement them. perhaps it might be a way to do it rather than trying to do it on the has standoff surveillance basis which is very difficult. as a report notes each passenger on average is screened for 30 second or less. that's difficult to do that to every single person coming in to the airport without interacting with them. so we think there is a way to make it more interactive. more risk-based and more simplified and that's essentially what we're referring to in our report. thank you. >> i thank the gentleman and the gentlelady for the question. the chair recognize the gentleman from south carolina for any questions you may have. >> yes sir. i appreciate the testimony of each of you.

gordon the retired general wrote a book a long time entitled "hope was not -- it seems to me when i look at the fundamental of the spot program it seems to be a cart out before the horse. indeed you have it before validation of effectivenesses. and the whole idea of spending a billion dollar and having 3000 folks employed in the endeavor from a statistical standpoint the results are 50/50 seem to be a good use of taxpayer money. but i want to zero in on what my associate was touching on a moment ago. thing is a real with the component to what is going on here. i tell my boys all the time guys, have the wisdom to know what you don't know. and mr. ridgeman was touching on the notion of how do you get inside somebody's head.

a moment ago. indicate stress fear, or deception. i would ask you mr. pistol, you know, if you were a young kid the baby got off the track at the earlier age you served some time. but you paid your price to society. but you have a criminal record. would you believe you exhibit stress or fear? >> it depends on the individual, yes, sir probablily. >> what if you were a staunch right-wing spiritter with strong anti-government leaning. you forecast things you probably weren't supposed to post on the internet. now you have law enforcement probing asking you questions. would you exhibit stress or fear? >> again, it depend on the individual. potentially, sure.

>> if you're an immigrant whose dad and mom come here illegally. would you exhibit stress or fear if asking -- >> it's situational again. >> say you're a wife whose husband has been beaten and try to get on an airplane and get out of town. would you exhibit stress or fear if somebody was doing entire gracious? >> situational. >> i think raises question that the report has broughten and testified which is again entirely situation but the question is. in this instance, the different with a front line officer who is there on the street you fowm a car you don't know what they got in the car. you don't know who they are. you have to nothing to -- you better be give those are the

tests that have been made with regard to, you know this person is do you in addition have to go through a screening process based on somebody's interpretation of what they think might be inside your brain? >> yeah. i mean you raise good point congressman. let me address a couple of things. i would love to have the -- in the airport and christmas day in 2009 to see how the 24-year-old with the underwear bomb would have appeared. we don't have it on cc tv. and most notably. >> what if it was a cool customer and -- that is exactly. you wouldn't know. and that's -- but it gives us another opportunity. there's no perfect size or article -- >> to your point how many underwear bombs have been detected with these 3,000 officers? >> store row. -- zero. they deserved as a deterrent. i know we have classified

briefing next week we can talk detail. what we do in the u.s. >> we have to look at cost-effectiveness. we have screened by observation over 4 billion passenger it comes out to less than 50. in some sense 25 cent per passenger is a cost for bdo is reserved. >> my time is coming to an end. and i think we can could argue that point. i think there is a bigger civil liberty point which is whether there has ore hasn't been deterrence. a flip of a coin. on the opposite side of the equation in addition to possible redeployment of the 3,000 folks

and the taxpayer costs associated with that. there's a big civil liberty question to get on an airport. does it require more than in essence undressing and having all of your equipment checked but now a second level of screening based on somebody's interpretation of what they think ised in your head? >> gentleman's time is expired. it you want to briefly respond. >> thank you, chairman. so there's only a small percentage of people who are referred by additional screening. that's one point. another is that the whole impetus of the risk-based security. dod, 12 and under. all of those are designed to address the concerns about the invasiveness and intrusiveness of the one-size-fit-all-approach. how can we work collaboratively to have multiple layer of security and expedite and have greater confidence. the notion about profiling. i agree strongly with the

ranking men. we will not tolerate if we find any person or employee profiling or race ethnicity. or any of the things will take appropriate action. >> i have run out of time. i think he raise the question of type of profiling that does occur. and the guy in the business suit generally isn't going to be the most suspicious looking guy. >> we'll do a second round of questions. but i would like to move on to other members. at this point i recognize the gentleman from nevada. >> thank you very much, chairman. and to the ranking member, mr. richmond. the ranking member of the full committee. for alog me to participate in this hearing today. thank you to our panelist. i just want to associate my self-with the comments of the ranking members and the other panelists who talked about the need to both protect our national security while preserving americans' right to privates in our civil liberty.

and the prior representative who asked you know what is the return on investment for a billion dollars and to somehow suggest from the gao report there is not profiling. i think it deserves some more analysis. and review. administrator i also extend my personal condolences to the tsa officer mr. hernandez, and to his family for giving his life in the protection of the american public. the tsa form the front line of our nation's aviation security and their work is not only critical but also appreciated. and i think in light of the recent tragic events at the los angeles airport, airport security is once again in the

-- and based on the review that we've received on your agency conducted. it's my understanding the shooter entered through the exit lane of that airport. and so i'm concerned that the actions and policies adopt bid the tsa may have some unintended consequences particularly because they are being made without the input of stakeholders who may have particular expertise on the topic. i recently offered an amendment to ranking member thompson participates act which will form the aviation security advisory committee and my amendment out of the issue of exit lane security to the scope of the advisory committee's responsibility. and this was done prior to the tragic events at the los angeles airport. so administrator, isn't it true

your plan to transfer responsibility of exit lane from the tsa to local airport authorities has been met with near universal resist tens from local airports? >> first congressman, thank you for your kind word earlier. so the context for the exit lane are that airport current flit u.s. provide exit lane staffing in two-thirds of all the airports in the u.s. or tsa has presence. we're only talking about one-third of the airport. there's 155 approximately u airport that tsa provides some type of staffing. we do it as it relates to screening of law enforcement officer no crewmembers pilots, flight attendant. we'll do the screening function. the issue with the exit lanes is on access control which access control is just the exit lane is one of dozens of access control

point around the airport that tsa doesn't provide an airport functioning. in shifting this responsibility i understand the concerns that airports have expressed because of the cost associated with this. on the security screening functions as opposed to access control. >> yeah. and i respect that. however it can't be done in a vacuum. we have to do it with the input of your stakeholders and congress, which signed legislation putting the responsibility under the tsa. we haven't changed that from policy standpoint and to have the tsa take this up without direction from congress i also think may be inappropriate from a regulatory standpoint.

one of the other issues i have with the tsa procurement procedure for vendor and airport. they assume tremendous risk when they begin the process of adopting new technologies the airport closest to my district recently won approval for tsa for tk solution to the problem of exit lane monitoring for which i'm very excited. but my question is how does tsa expect airports to take the risk of designing purchasing, and installing these technologies within the time frame presented and without tsa preapriewfl of that technology. >> gentleman's time is expired. ly allow the administrator to respond, if he would like. >> thank you mr. chairman. we're not dictating how they do the exit lane security. if they want to staff somebody. put a person there as tsa has. that's fine. we ask the airport authority to work with the local security

directer to have the solution. from a technology solution. that's great. we ask we be given insight to what it is. we will view and presumably approve if it meets standards. but we're not in the business of dictating saying this is what we will do. we are out of the business. >> can i just -- clarify. can you approve and preapproved qualified vendor list. so once they are selected they know that the project can go through u -- >> we have not taken that approach for various reasons. which i can get in more detail later. we have not done that. >> we will do a second round if the committee so chooses or desires. now recognize the gentleman from california. >> thank you mr. chairman. and welcome to our witnesses and administrator i first want to thank you for engaging with me and members on this committee

during the knives on planes discussion. i appreciate you working with the asac on that and continuing to engage with me. i appreciate the policy revisions that were made. i also want to express to you administrator how deeply sorry i am about the shooting at la x. i want to pass along my donl enses to the family -- i am to the son of a police officer and the brother of a retired -- son of retired police officer and brother of a police officer who serves today on a wish well the transportation security officers who were shot. expwreams and tony as well as passenger -- and as far as the federal workers go. the tao in the federal work force -- security officers they are some of the newest employees we have in our federal agencies. and, you know, they have been

around now since right after 9/11. i think it's easy to forget they are relatively new compared to how many federal employees we have. and still learning their job and growing in their job. we shouldn't take that for granted. they are among the last line of defense between a person who wishes to coharm and passengers and crew on an airport. and many ways mr. hernandez and others are shocked her res but not too often on some. unfortunately i think too many people and i have seen this in this congress continually attack and denigrate the work at the tsa. recently in 2012, the republican national republican committee platform called for federalizing -- or defederallizing the tsa and privatizing the tsa. i think we need take a step back

in our comments about the tsa and just a tax in general on the federal work force. these folks are doing a public service. they're doing oftentimes at much less money than they received in the private sector. again, they are the last line of defense. and i don't think our comments are well served. ic they can create a culture of hate toward people working in a stressful environment dealing with passengers. myself included not always on our best behavior as we are rushed trying to make our plane. it's a difficult job. and i hope we can be mindful of the job. and in light of that the administrator, i want to talk about ranking member thompson have some concerns with his questioning about radio communication capability between tso and law enforcement personnel particularly armed law enforcement. my question to clarify at la x and most of the airports across

the country is there radio communication can that can take place between tso and law enforcement personnel is it only phone communication that can take place? >> yes. thank you for your kind comments congressman. so airport by airport. out of 450 airport. i don't have the figure in front of me. which i will get. most of the communication would be with between the tsa employees and a coordination center which may be jointly staffed and which airport between tsa and the airport police or tsa or the coordination center. i'm not aware of ones where the direct link in to a radio contact in to the police but i'm sure there's some i'm not aware of. >> do you think that could have helped with what happened to la x and future scenario you could in-- envision or train. do you think it would be better

if we had it where the police and tsa were on the same channel. >> as aware at you were at la x and called 9-1-1. it doesn't go to the -- >> right. >> so that goes elsewhere. you have to dial 7-9-1-1 to get to the airport police. there's some quirks in there that go beyond tsa and law enforcement. it comes down airport by airport. >> okay. thank you. and also, as far as behavioral -- behavior detection. what have you learned from what happened at lax and you know the behavior detection officers. is there anything that they could have detected? i know you're still investigating. but, you know clearly this was a situation that happened and unfolded rapidly and behavior detection officer was one of the officers that was shot is it something you believe under

priefm circumstance that behavior detection team scrolled detected their person earlier? >> the time is expired. i'll let the witness to answer. >> thank you. possibly given the configuration at lax with the document checker on the lower level and layers up to where the check point is. there are two tsa employees there. and so there are no bdo that observe with the shooter, again from the time dropped off to the curb to the time he walked literally. i walked walked in tuesday walked a few steps and took out assault rifle and opened fire. it's adjust matter of second. it's possible that a bdo obviously would have seen something. you actually see on the video an airport employee pointing at the gunman. you don't see the gunman in the video. but you see the person pointing and then the shots are fired.

so somebody could have and somebody did given the con configuration there are no present at the point. >> thank you. i yield back my time. thank you for the extra time. >> the gentleman from new jersey for any questions. >> i first like to acknowledge our donl enses to your organization. and just want to bring that right a few things i'm sure being last i'm possibly going to ask something that is already been asked. but i feel it's important, you know, the gao report released yesterday cite an incident where bdo manager and north liberty

international airport, which is my home -- regarding profiling of passengers and made racial comments. it's my understanding that bdo has been fired. it's also been brought to my attention that the bdo have been promoted based on the number of referral they have made which have encouraged bdo to racially profile to increase their referral rate. so what degree of confidence do you have that other bdo managers are encouraging or directing racial profiling through the spot program? >> thank you, congressman. so our clear instruction -- one of the lessons learned from these multiple review that have been done we could have done a better job inerm it of training and retraining and ensuring that there's no notion of profiling taking place. in fact it's part of our

retraining we have done since the report have been done is to require every to take a pledge against profiling. which i have chair with the subcommittee. to ensure every bdo and those out on extended leave or something have taken that pledge to ensure they understand that it has no place in bdo's work. it's not good law enforcement. it's not good security work from our perspective. and it's unconstitutional. so anybody who has founded -- the profiling will be investigated and dealt with appropriately. i put the message out clearly. i can talk about the newark situation in detail if you would like. that being said any time there's an allegation. that's what happened in boston last year. the allegationses came in to us. i take them very seriously. i asked the inspector general to conduct investigation rather than tsa because this was national "new york times." they conducted the review and

heard from mr. edwards in term of the finding. there was no discrimination found or profiling. we take it very seriously. i know, from my background that it's unacceptable. and so any violation of somebody's civil rights or civil liberty is a significant, significant issue for us. being from a state where my uncle is the author of the racial profiling bill in new jersey, we've had many instances where this problem is just out of proportion. so to sigh this here it harkins back to issue we have been dealing with in new jersey. now this at newark airport is

troubling. to his point, you know there needs to maybe be more analysis of whether or not this is going on. what steps has tsa taken to begin collecting racial information on passengers in order to be able to measure quantityively whether racial profiling has occurred. >> thank you. that's been a challenging issue for us. we collected the information does it then promote the actual or appearance of profiling? that's not necessarily passed back to us. so that is part of our challenge. is it the appearance of somebody? of course that's imperfect art of defining somebody. those are some of the challenges we work for or working through. i'm sensitive to the point

you're making. >> yeah. and, you know, the point of bdo being promoted on based on number of referral. >> yes. i went a school with the population was changing and people were resist toant it. they had somebody that worked for the board of education that go to homes to make sure people actually live there had and subsequently i found out years later is that every person prove didn't live there he was paid by so you know these referrals kind of harkin to that type of thing. so i'm very concerned about that. >> gentleman's time is expired. >> chairman, may i respond? >> sure. >> from the standpoint i think there's a perception among some bdo. i believe the inspector general found this in the review of boston that bdo may be promoted more readily if they made higher

number of referral. it's not the case but there are perceptions. we have gone back to retrain and clarify it's not the case. so we don't want people referring -- we don't want bdo referring because they think they will be more readily promoted. >> thank you for that answer. at this point. we'll start a second round. i have one question. i'm not taking my entire five minutes. maybe we can get through the round quickly. i appreciate the the indulgence of the witnesses here. my question is for mr. -- in my testimony -- protection programs. in fact i've visited the airport myself and seen firsthand how they implement that program. my question to both of you are or anyone wants to respond is there a body of scientific studies that support effectness of some of these foreign programs and if so how can the

information be better lerchled and used as we exam what we do here? >> i guess i can start. typically here in the israeli operate as similar system. ic it's important to know there's as many dissimilarity and similarity in the system. first you are allowed racial profile in the system as mr. pistol explained as prohinted under our system. and they also the system is much smaller in scale. and, you know one major international hub number of aircraft that is less than 100 international fleet. and they essential will take the time and interview ere single passenger getting on an aircraft. we can't do it under the system of 1.8 million passenger a day. the -- screeching to a halt. i think you have to be careful about drawing parallel with the valleys. also in our report we cited another country report. we're not allowed to disclose the name of the country. it's considered sensitive

security information. but the phase one of the study found some error in the use of behavior indicators. but they did another followup study same country same process faced there was no changed the conclusion and concluded there was not really effective use of the resources. so there is other countries studies throughout. i think you have to be careful about citing them as evidence to support to use of behavior tenth annual -- bedetection. i would agree with respect to israel. they rely ton heavily. t a difference in scale. certainly not something we want to engage in here. on the other hand, when i went us central ya. i thought their program was robust. we walked what i call the last 200 meters, if you will from the time somebody goes through passport and then goes through and gets the luggage and checks

out. they have a robust system. the one thing i did not see in comparing it to ours was the same sort of checklist scoring of the indicators. but but you know, they rely ton heavily. they think it works. i would like to say that evidence that many indicators we have within the tsa methodologies on spot have been validated through department of defense work for example person born ied. and they looked at it and came up in one of the studies that 24 indicators have been identified in tsa overlap with what was in this department of defense sponsor study. and like wise there was a recent workshop, well, some reason 2011 with federal local law enforcement the d.o.e.

private sector in which they found 32 of the indicators were overlapping. there's work ongoing to try to better understand the questions that surround behavioral science and try to get better tat. and the one thing about the program i think is really interesting is that even most of what we do when we talk screening is based on capabilities. in other words can i x-ray it and determine is there an explosive or do i put somebody to a mag mom territorial-type or the aig machine? spotters is really the premiere program for trying to get at this question of behavioral issues and can you identify people who are in stressful situations and therefore should be brought aside for secondary screening. and i would add that's a low risk outcome. that be secondarily screened. thank you. >> i appreciate that. >> at this point i recognize the

gentleman from california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. administrator yesterday the committee received a letter from a behavior detection officer -- actually officers at boston's logan airport expressing concerns about retaliation for exposing profiling to followup on the gentleman from new jersey's question. can you assure our committee that employees who come forward and report any wrongdoing suspicious of wrongdoing in the behavior detection program whether it's profiling or otherwise they would be protected against retaliation. >> absolutely. >> great. thank you. >> and i yield back. >> would the gentleman yield? >> i yield to -- if it's okay. the gentleman from nevada. >> without objection. >> thank you. >> i'll defer to the gentlelady -- i just had some additional questions. but -- >> i'm happy to get to the

gentleman in order. the gentlelady is next. i'm happy to recognize you for five minutes. >> that's fine. >> i recognize the gentlelady from texas. >> thank you. i thank the gentleman from nevada for his courtesy. i want to pursue the line of questioning that goes to whether we keep or do not keep the spot program. so let me first go to this issue on the floor that you indicated in your past report -- ly not tholed as the final answer. you saw no racial profiling that we've just heard of concerns from boston. but you saw the idea of attire. i guess what do you mean by that and how is that not effectively racial profiling as someone wearing a head res someone reading braids or hair natural. how does that not fall in to the

category of profiling? >> thank you ma'am. look at the logan international airport and part of the investigation he asked he to look in to. and be interviewed and interviewed bdo supervisor being interviewed. some passengers not to go on a fishing expedition but we interviewed some passengers as well. and what we found there was not racial profiling but in the interviews, some of the bdo allege -- >> right. my question is you found what does if mean and how do we fix that? how do we improve that? i think it's connected. >> so in general terms appearance profiling, you know exhibiting certain type of characteristic that may be

different general population. i can comment a nonpublic setting and explain to you my understanding of what this appearance profiling is. just uncomfortable elaborating in the public setting. >> all right. you find any form of discriminate assessment being made by -- >> first of all. we started our review. we coordinate with the ig since they were lookinged at these racial profiling allegations in boston we deferred to them on this issue. but as part of our work we since we started the work. we interviewed 25 behavior detection officers across four airports. 20 of the 25 said that i had not personally witnessed any racial profiling.

that's a small number over 3000 behavior detection officers. we try to substantiate it looking at dat. how we do our work. and at the time the tsa didn't have the data system that i would allow us substantiate that. as he noted have a pilot of feasibility study underway. >> thank you. >> think about better ways to do that. >> thank you. let me conclude with you please. there have been several i think, point being made at the hearing. would you go back and look at this program this service as it may be better refined through streamlining through looking at the at risk concept i think you adhere to. through the -- i even looked the idea because of the la x tragedy expanding in the outer area in an area surrounding the parameter.

so as passengers enter might be an appropriate executive fix. are you willing to go back and look at the program constructively? >> yes. congresswoman. that's part of our review. clearly we want to make sure we are deploying bbdo and the highest risk. most return on investment places time and situations. so that's clearly what we're doing as part of the bdo program. we look at refining the number of indicators. it is a confusing. how can we streamline to your point. how can we simplify the whole process to get the greatest return on invest glment if i may put a question on the record. thank you for the hearing. i would offer a thought based upon mr. edwards' comment and more poignant questions i would like to ask we have a classified briefing on the bdo pursuant to or in light of lax and a lot of

our concerns about the exdoor your -- when i say exterror your there's people driving up. t one issue. i'm talking about the lead up to the tsa area. the ticketing area people walking up which is where the gentleman. so he had to walk somewhere. and the question was was there some air force other than law enforcement who deals with the activity of violence or activity but someone watching that area? so den no determinations here. no commitments here prefer not in open setting. but i would like to have the opportunity if we could to have that discussion. >> i'm happy to work with you on that. >> thank you. mr. chairman. thank you. thank you very much for your service. thank the gentleman from nevada. >> i will recognize the gentleman from nevada for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. i would like that ask the administrator if he could go ahead and answer the question about the tsa not being able to

have it preapproved venn or it list. what the challenges are to implementing a process. well we looked in to a qualified product list to say we would recommend or we would accept if you bought these particular pieces of technology from these manufacturing. but we're trying to be open to all -- all venders and providers. it's not like we are preselecting you must go through this. they have contact with an offender who has one solution. lax may have contact with another vendor with a different solution. we try not to be prescriptive in that the regard. we try to be completely open to whatever vendor and solutions they provide. so what we've done is provide a template to say here are some recommended solutions and then if you work within those parameters just make sure you coordinate with the local

federal security director. more likely than not would be approved opposed to say from a qualified product list. here is the exact product so you to use. >>. >> i would like to ask if i can followup with you and someone your office to make sure the process is clear to the local airport. >> sure. >> directors. thank you. also administrator in fiscal year 2014 tsa reduced the number of airports for where the spot program operates from 176 airport down to 121. reduction of 55 airports. so that the agency did this despite your own analysis that said you needed to increase the number of behavior detection officers. so first my question are the airports with the spot program has been removed less secure today because they don't have the bdo and if not why not? >> yeah. it goes back to actually a x ao

a 2010 report that recommended we assess our deployment of bdo across the risk landscape. my words. and so under a risk-based security approach. what we have done is look at the 175 and made a judgment that our return on investment in term of being able to see and observe the number ever passengers in the highest airport would be better suited byes be simplifiedest airport around the country. we will observe over 90% of all passengers so we gate better and sew there is aningment to be

made that those airports have less security. but as you know the budget -- i have to make a risk-based decision based on our budget response that's why we with the recommendation. so on that exit lane issue which i raised earlier with you and your point was you can't afford it. you shift that burden to local airports. local airports have budget constraints too. again, all i would ask is that you not make the decisions in a vacuum. you involve the local stakeholders so they can help you inform how to best maintain security. we can't make the federal budget problems local and state problems -- i was a former state senator before coming to congress, and so shifting the burden down isn't a solution either. so i would just ask that you don't get their input.

can i ask one financial question? maybe mr. edwards -- is there any data of the passengers who have been screened of their race, ethnicity religious -- any information like that captured? >> yeah there is some but it wasn't systemic or sufficient for us to do a good analysis. for example and make the law remple that ultimately goes to the law enforcement officer. the law enforcement community does -- in some cases keep that deep graphic but variesly airport. it's spotty but there is some data. >> that's something we need to follow up on. it's done more effective willly in law enforcement outside of airport and if we're going to continue to have these type of

profiling strategies we need make sure that it is not disproportionately impacting you know based on race, ethnicity. you don't know it unless you select the data. >> they are sensitive to that. they have a project underway to help answer that question. >> i thank the gentleman and the witnesses for their testimony. and the member's questions today. and member of the subcommittee may have additional questions they want to submit in writing. we ask the witnesses you respond to these. without objection subcommittee stand adjourned. [inaudible conversations] this weekend on c-span the white house 1202016

president obama announced thursday because of the new health care law. house speaker john boehner reacting to the announcement saying the "has absolutely no credibility on his promise. true to form it appears it's little more than a political response designed to shift blame rather than solve the problem. here are some of president obama's remarks.

from their insurers they may be losing the plans often because they no longer meet the requirements to cover particularly after insurance assurances they heard from me if they had a plan they liked they could keep it. an to those americans, i hear you loud and clear. i said that i will do everything we can to fix this problem. today i'm offering an idea that will help do it. already, people who have plans that predate the affordable care act can keep those plans if they haven't changed. that was already in the law. that's what is called a grandfather clause included the law. today we extend the principle both to people whose plans have

changed since the law took effect and plans that were bought since the law took effect. state insurance commissioners have the power to to decide what plans can and can't be sold in the state. insurers can extend current plans that otherwise be canceled in to 2014 and americans whose plans have been canceled can choose to reenroll in the same kind of plan. we're also requiring insurance to extent current plans to inform their customers about two things. one, that protections -- what protections these renewed plans don't include. number two that the marketplace offers new options but better coverage and tax credits that might help you bring down the cost. so if you received one of these letters, i would encourage you to take a look at the marketplace. even if the website isn't working as smoothly as it should be for everybody yet the plan comparison tool that lets you

browse is working just fine. this fix won't solve every problem for every person. it's going help a lot of people doing more will require work with congress. this is an example of what i was talking about. we can always make the law work better. republicans in the senate also doesed health care today. a number of senators came to the familiar to talk about it. we also hear senate democrats. that's next on c-span2. the president is great we

have the opportunity come to the floor today to talk about what our constituents are telling up. we don't do it enough. last night i had a town hall meeting. we about 25000 ohio citizens. we do a poll asking the most important issue. and of the town hall we have done which is one month. every time it's been jobs and the economy. until last night. there's a night it was health care. that's because most of the questions i got because of health care coverage and people concerned about losing it. let me read a letter of one of my constituents. this is from dean. he lives in ohio. ever since i lost my job in 2009 i've been purchasing my own health care insurance. last month i received a letter in the mail stating my plan is being canceled due to the aca. i was told to look at plans on the exchange, which i did. and i found a plan that is over twice the cost i have now. in addition it's over half of

my monthly pension. i simply can't afford this. i've all been a responsible hard working person now due to the action of our government for the first time in my life i will not have any health insurance coverage. i'm 59 years old. and i need this coverage. i'm outraged to say the least. how can our government do this to us? i will remember this come election time. please get rid of this insane law. this is unacceptable. to dean and my other constituents, i agree with you. it's unacceptable. we should repeal the law. it doesn't make sense and replace it with reform that reduce the cost of health care and keep the promise the president made. which is people can keep their health care they have. >> senator from indiana. >> mr. president.

the president has publicly promised all americans that the election plans you can keep. it if you like the doctor you can keep the doctor. all the changes he said you'll -- the citizens from new albany who are not supposed to be citizen effected by this obamacare. she received a letter telling that she and her husband no longer could keep their medicare advantage plan. it was terminated. so they found another plan. much higher cost. much higher premium, much higher deductible. i'm a self-employed and purchase health care privately. i'm a single parent with a mortgage payment. and a child in high school. i was given estimate -- my plan was canceled and i was given an estimate for a replacement plan almost double of what i'm paying today. mr. president you have not kept your promises for seniors.

so you not kept your promise to single working mothers you have not kept your promise to families. you have not kept your promise to the people that i represent. .. takeover will work if you can't keep your promises to the american people? a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from north dakota. h.o.v. in north dakotamr. hoeven: in north dakota we've got a lot of farmers and ranchers. theythey run a small business and they're being hit very hard by obamacare, like other small businesses across this country. a rancher contacted us. his name is wayne and he ranches there. it is an area where we have a lot of cowboys a tremendous rodeo. they compete nationally and they have great livestock herds there. but he writes, and he says, quks i'm not one to get too upset

about things but this really has my mad. we go to a letter a few weeks ago that said they were dropping our policy. i i have paid my own insurance for years and years. when i got that letter, it just hit me because somebody in washington decided i was too stupid to figure it out if my policy was right for me or not. i don't pay a lot of attention to politics, but usually what gets decided in washington doesn't slap you in the face like this law has with me," he says. l "i've gone on healthcare.gov and used the estimatorhey >> i have gone on health care.gov, and i had used the estimators that they have directed you to do. and this includes something between $10,000 and $12,000. the way that it looks to me. and this is going to cost me a

lot more for something that i don't even want. >> i talked to a gentleman from grand forks about a marriage penalty that obamacare creates. he said that we are told our current coverage under the guidelines of the affordable care act will cost us another $400 more a month, and are deductible will increase from $2000 up to $12000. and because we are married we cannot choose individual plans which would be a lower deductible and in essence we are being punished for being married. we are looking at paying more than $1500 a month in health care because we are only 61

years old and not eligible for medicare for another four years. $18,000 per year for health care and we were told that part of the problem is the provisions of the law and it requires us to choose a plan that has maternity benefits. how does this make sense for seniors to be forced to buy coverage that does not apply to them? we agreed that benefits should not be denied to people, but it's not fair to be forced to buy coverage that doesn't even apply. >> mr. president. >> senator from nebraska? >> mr. president, i rise today to do country and speak on behalf of 3000 nebraskans have contacted my office with their concerns about obamacare. their stories are unfortunate skyrocketing premiums comic cancellation of plans that they

promise that they would keep. kirk from lincoln said that he has seen his blue cross and blue shield premium rising shocking 300%. in this includes a total increase of $16,000 per year for his families coverage $16000. and another constituent will see his family's deductible more than double next year. he asked how is this the affordable care act. an apology won't help the hard-working nebraskans who will soon lose their current coverage and one constituent wrote that folks should not we need a second mortgage to pay for obamacare and i agree with that. i yield the floor.

>> a senator from wyoming. >> the senator from wyoming. i get told every weekend that for veterans day i rented a small business owner in a small electrics company and there's people that work with him and he's a former patient of mine and he told me that he was one of those 4 million americans who have gone that gotten that letter that he had lost his insurance and he said the president promised that this would be easier to use than amazon.com. and it would be cheaper than your cell phone bill. and he said if you like what you have, you can keep it. and that's clearly not the case. so what is wrong? how can we fix it? i got another letter from a rancher from newcastle wyoming. saying that we are creatures who by her own health insurance and we pay $650 per month for an

80-20 policy, and we don't have maternity insurance because we have completed our family. she said i'm 45 years old and i have had a hysterectomy. she said that called my insurance agent out of fear that our policy would be canceled and he said that it would be canceled at renewal time. and she said that he told me that their policies didn't meet obama's requirement and they would have to choose a policy from the exchanges and she has had a hysterectomy and doesn't need or want and will never use maternity coverage. in this includes comparable policy of 1300 to $1600 per month and they are now paying $650 per month. and they also said that they could take a bronze policy with much less coverage for $900,

still $250 per month than they'd have to pay higher but the out-of-pocket was much higher and difficult for the family and they said that we are being forced out of a good policy which the paper with hard-earned money in which they choose to because with less coverage, proud unsustainability onto what we consider the welfare rolls by meeting a government subsidy by affording a planet we don't want or need and to say that we are angry is an understatement and why can obama force me into this. we feel helpless and what can we do, mr. president, this is not for the president of the united states promised the american people and promised the american people the american people

deserve better from a doctor that they choose at lower costs and none of that has come true under this health care law and i yield the floor. >> thank you. the senator from mississippi. >> we're talking about the administration's so-called affordable care act and the more it becomes clear that major changes should be considered. i recently heard from a constituent who had learned from the enrollment website that the plan at the lowest cost available to him has a 7000-dollar yearly deductible with a 12000-dollar out-of-pocket maximum and a premium of a little over $2400 per month. nearly twice as much as he and his wife currently pay.

and this family is one example of millions of americans who are suffering sticker shock because of the cost of insurance plans in the president's health insurance exchanges. and it is made worse for those who are being rejected by the plans that they were told that they could keep but now cannot. it is clear that we need to go back to the drawing board and we should get together here in the senate and find common ground that makes better sense. better sense for the american people. i thank you. >> the senator from south carolina. >> thank you, mr. president. for the last three years president obama and our friends on the west promised no guarantees that obamacare will make health insurance more affordable, but day after day we

have seen costs going up for hard-working families all across our country. not just the 1% that the middle class americans and last week i heard from natalie geiser, a wife and a mother of three whose health insurance costs are seeing double-digit increases. and mr. president, these are the faces of real people impacted by obamacare. they don't get waivers and they are taxpayers, middle income taxpayers and obama is forcing me to choose between saving for college for these three little kids and paying for health care. they shouldn't have to choose an obamacare and health care.gov or words that we now know are synonymous with failure.

i yield the floor. >> mr. president come in the senator from arkansas. >> i would like to tell you the story of an individual who goes through the same thing that thousands go through. here's what he had said after receiving his cancellation notice. i recently received from blue cross blue shield that my individual health insurance policy will not be renewed after 2014 due to obamacare. although i am happy with this policy, i am being forced out of it after 2014. this is not very affordable and the closest alternative will increase my deductible 25% and increase my monthly premiums 300% from $285 a month to $850 per month. he goes on to note that this

current plan is blue cross and is described as not a bad apple and that he will be required to pay for the entire cost of this new plan out-of-pocket and these are very serious problems and certainly mark is not alone. >> the senator from north carolina. >> i recently received a letter who will need to describe your experience with the affordable care act and i would like to read her leather and trent leather. she said i recently received a notice from blue cross blue shield of north carolina that my health insurance policy will be canceled effective january 1 2014, because it does not meet the mandates under obamacare and my current is $1400 per month and will cost $920 per month and

this includes an increase and i don't qualify for subsidies. i have had continuous coverage with blue cross and blue shield for many years. i like my current plan. i'm a 62-year-old woman. i will not benefit from the mandatory additions to my plan such as maternity coverage and newborn and pediatric care. in the past having a continuous coverage provided a sense of security that my rates cannot be raised based upon a change in my health status and i experienced such a change in 2012 when i was diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent seven months with treatment. now my rates are more than doubling. not because of the change in health but because of obamacare and president obama was selling the horrible character the american people and he promised that if you liked her health care plan come he can keep it.

i am writing to you today to tell you that i do like my plan. and i want to keep it. i'm asking for myself and them millions of other americans who have had their plan taken away by obamacare. mr. president how i answer kathleen's letter? i yield the floor. >> the senator from idaho. >> anyone of us can stand up here and tell thousands of stories. mine would come from a small business owner who received notice that he wasn't grandfathered he was being canceled after the first of the year. the premiums were 220 to $1200 in the deductible amount from $5000 to $12,700. he said he can't afford it and he tried to save some money for

future medical expenses and he is going to stay canceled as long as he possibly can. i did not get a lot of letters from poor people. where it came from was a middle-class americans, which is what this country is. we are a middle-class country by and large and some people are deserving of a help at the other end who are primarily affected by this by the middle class of america. my good friends tried to say they are the party that represent part of america. i don't know if they are getting the same ones that we are, but if they are, they have done something horrible and the republican party has always helped them with. but what they have done is a social experiment that is collectivism and socialism at it's worst and honestly a

failure and the things don't work and the american people over 200 years build up a successful insurance system in health care system in america and in three years this thing has been distorted and there's 44 days left to make this thing work and if this isn't done right, there is going to be a collapse from january 1 and the american people are going to know exactly what caused it and i thank you, mr. president. >> thank you. >> the senator from florida. >> one of the things that hasn't been discussed is the impact that obamacare is having on medicare beneficiaries. in particular, people that are under something called medicare advantage is which is where seniors get to choose the type of coverage they want for this. i would like to read the letter

from a constituent of mine who lives in northwest florida and the letter she received regarding existing doctors and one for providers as well that talks about the changes here is a copy of the letter as well. and this includes through aarp and the united health care. i have multiple conditions that require consultation through several situations. this includes two autoimmune conditions at sacred heart. i am also legally blind and so transport to another doctor out of town is difficult to arrange and also expensive. it will allow me to keep my doctor and the annual

out-of-pocket is significantly higher as well as the copayment and deductible for inpatient care. and my choice has been reduced to finding different doctors which will cost more and i want some to be aware that we have negative consequences as well. and since that time, by the way after this experience, she has been able to find a plan that helps to avoid the primary condition and this new plan is going from the 4500-dollar range and it was a tough decision to make. but she decided to pay more money for the doctors that have been treating her for the past 46 years and this includes out-of-pocket costs are going up because of obamacare. it is wrong and it should not

stand. i yield the floor. >> mr. president? >> the senator from new hampshire. >> thank you. i came to the floor yesterday to share so many stories that i am receiving from my constituents about receiving cancellations and higher premiums under the slot and each story is very sad and i feel badly for the people of my state across this country that are suffering under the law. my constituents are pleading for relief. this includes an individual who voted for president obama twice and told me that her family has and household income of $50000 in total health insurance will now cost over $19,000 for the year which is more than their mortgage in the local hospital isn't even on the exchange because we only have one in sure on exchange and 10 of our 26

hospitals have been excluded from that exchange. this individual roads means that we are frustrated and afraid and angry beyond words and i urge if the filming of the affordable care act including that life should not be that this hard. mr. president, citizens from across new hampshire in this country are crying out and i hope that the president will listen to them and call a timeout on this loss of it we can come together and pass a partisan law for a bipartisan option. thank you. >> thank you. mr. president, it is hard to know the best way to tell and they are all bad and terrible stories. many are struggling under the

passage of the affordable care act. the problems that americans are facing today is really the crux and the underlying basis for the provisions of the affordable care act. this is not just a computer problem. it is which be a formal care act was used. he writes to tell me that we were notified that are premiums on our own small business plans were to increase 24% in the coverage mandated starting in 2014. we have struggled to find affordable health care for years.

and this includes a well-known carrier and we each had a 5000-dollar deductible and no coverage for maternity that we didn't need and contraceptives we didn't need, but it covered the things that we wanted and we did need. but this will put this in the unutterable range again. and i have not been able to get on health care.god. as a business owner with employees and responsibilities the time i have to spend messing around with a slow or nonresponsive website is limited and expensive and mr. president our constituents need help in the affordable care act is what they need help from. i yield the floor. >> the senator from kentucky. >> at is something that the president promised, they had an

individual policy that they were happy with. and they paid $300 per month and they are now going to be asked to pay $900 per month for things that they don't want and think that they did not choose to have. this isn't really just about health care, but this is about freedom of choice. this is about whether or not can choose what type of insurance that you would like to have been the question is what is next and what choices will be taken. i'm going to be signing up for obamacare. i tried yesterday 15 times and every time i do this, nothing happens. this is a real album. 5 million people without insurance the president said you can keep your insurance needs be allowed to. you should be allowed to keep

your doctor and something has to be done because this family will have to pay three times as much for an insurance policy they don't want them taking their freedom of choice away and i have said that enough is enough let's get rid of this and give back to kentucky families and in kentucky, 10 times more families have been canceled and have actually gone on and something has to give come forward and tell us why we can't keep our doctor. thank you very much. >> go ahead. [inaudible conversations] >> as your president. millions across this country are losing their health care and

their doctors because of obamacare. in texas this past week a statesman reported that the largest provider in austin, texas, a cancer treatment, will not participate in the health insurance plans set up by the affordable care act. obamacare look like sunshine on the horizon and nowadays a tornado. said one individual who is a breast cancer survivor who is being treated at texas oncology. in an upcoming issue, texas medicine references a survey by the medical group management association that says uncertainty has 40% of practices across the country pondering their participation in market paid content marketplace based insurance plans and by reducing their risk texas oncology is

passing a burden on to some already stressed families. including this man's wife was being treated in oncology for breast cancer. it is an unwelcome burden and could affect thousands of families who deal with cancer in our community. if they're forced to pay out of network rates, the family will have to make tough decisions. we will make the financial sacrifice necessary to purchase the best care that we can afford, and we hope that that is enough. but he had nothing positive to say about the people that provide care from texas oncology, but he also said expanding health care coverage to people who don't have it is a very noble goal, but the impact that that has on those of us who do have it remains to be seen. so folks in the individual market do not really know what's in store for them. mr. president, president obama promised the american people

that if you like your health care plan you can keep it as we now know that that promise was not true. obamacare it's time to start over. >> thank you. >> the senator from arizona. >> mr. president, i think all of us have heard from hundreds of our constituents in the past couple of weeks who have had their insurance policies canceled order they have been made unaffordable by the affordable care act. i would like to talk about greg and linda who live a couple doors down from me. they know at this stage in life what kind of policy they need and they know what they don't need. and they had a premium of about $400 under your old policy and the new plan that they have been

able to find matches is closely with what they have after the other policy was canceled just over a thousand dollars. and how is that affordable? if you like your plan you can keep it. him or her and that has not been the case. president needs to explain hundreds of thousands that are losing their health care coverage and how it is that they said that they could keep it in a now can't. >> the senator from utah. >> the president promised to you like your plan, you can keep it and we now know that simply wasn't true. so many of us have been saying this for years.

yet many americans are realizing the president's false statement and my company just dropped the insurance plan that we have had for years due to obamacare in the affordable care act is costing you more money and i am barely able to keep my family out of poverty and a health health care will cost me even more. please do something to change this. marcy says marcie says we own a small business in utah and we will be force to go on obamacare. we can start over to fix our health care system. we should take those lessons and we should build around the concept with patient centered health care systems, one that can power individual americans to choose their own needs and

their own preferences. >> the senator from south carolina. >> to two stories that i will share with the body from south carolina. we have scott from creek. we have opened a moment. thirty-five years old, vegetarian, we have this and i have noticed the following policy. in addition, my actual policy changed in my deductible tripled from $250 to $750. and i'm sure that there are other changes that i have not noticed. and after this, we received a

phone call from a north carolina resident who informed him that when he signed onto health care.gov, he received all of the personal information and this is beginning to be a very famous case. 572 people have been enrolled in obamacare in the state of south carolina and obamacare is not working and i fear that it will never work in the best way to fix it is to repeal it and replace it with something that will work and i yield the floor. >> mr. president, i have received letters from those who are scared and angry and confused about the changes under obamacare. i have heard countless stories from utah and being forced into more extensive plans. one came from kathy and salt

lake city. kathy told me how she was notified by mail their existing health health care was no longer going to be offered and instead she was presented with a compliant policy will increase your deductible from $3000 to $5000 in her co-pay doctor visits for prescription drugs for as much as 50% and as a result of the changes, her expenses will exceed your income. and they claim that only sub standard policies were canceled and the plan i was on was on a good policy. and she does not trust the new health care.gov website and feels that there is not adequate security to protect personal information and she said i wouldn't touch the exchange with a 10-foot pole and she's not alone in feeling this way.

mr. president, i yield the floor. >> thank you very much. the time has expired. >> mr. president? >> the senator from california. >> mr. president, we have seen an array of my republican colleagues come to the floor which is their right and i'm glad that the government is open so that they have staff to help them prepare speeches. i have to say that this is typical when it comes to health care and all they do is criticize and not one have one new idea of how to make sure our citizens are protected with the insurance that they have or how to ensure the 48 million uninsured americans this is the

way the republican party has been for years. and let's talk about medicare 50% of house republicans in 1965. we cannot stand by with an ill-conceived adventure in government. the end of which no one can see and from which the patient is certain to be that supper. this is typical of republicans through the generation every time we have tried to expand health care. they have opposed it and they have tried to derail it. this includes a republican

because i understand about effective legislation and what it has on our economy and our private insurance system and that is what they have said about medicare. and they read horror stories about it. and this is what the republicans are saying. and this includes the health care law, which is that people who want to keep a substandard plan are having trouble keeping their substandard plan. president obama said he's going to fix that. and we will fix it. but that is not good enough for the republican friends. they just want to tear this down, just like they wanted to tear down medicare. and they wanted to tear down more recently as well. so this is ancient history, will let's be clear that in 1995 the republican house majority leader

said that medicare is a program i would have no part of in the free world. and this is the public sentiment being offered to the people including raising premiums and this includes medicare and now we have tea partiers standing there, saying hands off my medicare. okay that's how out of touch the republicans are. bob dole bragged in 1996 and i was there voting against medicare. because we wouldn't work. so let's be clear that when you see almost the republican entire caucus tried to repeat it turned

repeal the affordable care act this includes the websites and we have to fix about people losing the plants they want to keep in how to help them fix it. and this includes the good that the portal characters doing for millions of people. because of this, 3 million young adults are now insured and yet they want to repeal the affordable care act and what will happen to those 3 million young adults. this includes checkups, birth control, immunization 70 million kids with pre-existing condition like asthma and diabetes can no longer be denied coverage. and so they want to talk about people who are having a problem

and we are going to fix it and we think it is about 5% of the people, but even if it is not, we should fix it. yesterday we learned about the open moment period look at massachusetts and mr. president, i am sure you are aware of this being in new jersey coast of massachusetts only 0.2% sign up for coverage and out of the 36,000 who ultimately signed up in the first year. so let's be clear that we wanted to see bigger numbers of informal care act is four times better than what massachusetts did in its first month if you talk to people in massachusetts, they love the her health care plan and this is place content based on a republican plant.

and i'm going to go shopping and buy a new plan. i'm taking my time because i have time and want to discuss it with my husband. i'm going to sign up and i think it was the secretary that said that is not like buying a toaster. and you have to take your time. and so don't do that without having to put anything in place and focus on the problem that the president said he needs to fix. i want to play the great news about california. just in the first few weeks, enrollment has doubled. and our story is a really good one. there's a huge amount of interesting people and people

are enrolling and we do have a good website and that is important. and that the end of the day, i believe the california experience will be repeated across the country for the benefit of all the families. let me break down the numbers from california. we have the largest state in the union and this includes during the month of october, 370 californians began the process of signing up for private coverage of medicaid health insurance marketplaces in this includes covert california. of those over 30000 californians enrolled and over 72,000 apply for medicaid. let me just say that we are off to an excellent start in

california. in october there were more than 2.4 unique visits to covert california and in other words this doesn't count people going back and back. more than 249,000 were made and they got it down to just a couple of minutes of wait time. more than 17000 county workers and others have been certified to offer in person assistance. but you have heard the stories from over there. having a problem, we're going to fix the problem. let me quote to you what californians are saying. benign golden line on monday. the website trouble? it took me about 15 minutes. i will be saving $620 per month

after january 3. explanation point on quote. a very short read on wait on the phone, helpful person to talk to. this online application is very easy and i think you and another, the insurance package i'm getting is more comprehensive and way cheaper than the one i have had for the last nine years. thank you for creating the marketplace and making the information more accessible and understandable. and i find this to be amazing compared to what was out there before, many of the plans are cheaper than anything that i have seen before and the one that i chose has zero deductible. and another simple intuitive review. this has made it unexpectedly easy to enroll and i thank you. so what we have heard is there a

group of people that are going to help that have set the standard plans that they don't meet the standards of the affordable care act and sometimes they are called junk plans from a little bit better than junk and many of them are not there. not when we need them. and to come down here and echoed that sentiment without saying that the good things have been done. >> without objection. >> we now know the history. we know because i shared with you the history of the republican party. they opposed medicare what we intend and they tried to tear down they are still trying to tear down in the budget and they come down here and talk about a problem and they never said the

president is going to fix it. but we are ahead of where massachusetts was at this time. so let me close by saying that she was able to get insurance with her 7-year-old daughter who was born with an autoimmune disorder and affordable care act before it was passed she applied to a different companies and none were affordable. she was able to get insurance and then a procedure done treat a problem that could have resulted in paralysis and this would be someone that would be bankrupt and she wouldn't have gotten health care that she needs. obama saved my family from

financial ruin, sent another constituent. so let's be fair. come down to the floor one after the other and shed light on one problem and fixed something the president said that he will fix. just like your predecessor is that medicare is a terrible idea and that is what this is about. we are going to make history here. we were going to fix the problem and there will be more of that. because that is what happens. .. our children will have a brighter future. and i'm just here to say i stand with those who want progress. i'm not going to tear something down like they want to do and go right back to where we were before with parents like these having to choose between feeding their families and