there has to be the role of the government, these demonstrations and testing. >> you mentioned the safety lunch and an arbor which i think is a good example. it is an excellent model in terms of engaging or facilitating the oem to mature ones, academics, other players behalf technologies. the telecommunication communities. it's an attempt to try to understand the technology. natalie wood as possible what is doable. end to understand some of the flaws, the benefits, and to understand that in the context of data that will help us assess what is truly visible en el

workable are those solutions. i mean, if you just step back from men think about this, any new technology for connected vehicle they put into the marketplace at best will go on 50, 60 million vehicles in the united states in 87 the million globally. here in the united states you have 303 million vehicles already in the car park and get you are only producing 15 fists or 16 million new vehicles each year. have the really making effective with it might take utility years for the technology to propagate throughout. so regulators need to understand that legislating something instantaneously does not mean you fix the problem. in fact of you may cause a bigger problem. and you may increase the cost of the technology. so it is much better in my mind

to try to work through and facility with the players to understand really what is possible. >> can you -- me, could you do that would be "the vehicle? kirsten looking at this and thinking, well, if by major auto maker can i introduce it in my vehicles by myself? it would not work across the board, but it might be the tip of the iceberg to start to get the technology out there or is this something that there is just no way, too dangerous. i come to an intersection and get a false alert, so you can't do. >> a very lonely discussion as you would have. that is right that the government has to regulate. again, consumers would actually determine if this technology woodworker not because if they find value in it than that incentive, but its technology into the cars, but you still have to have regulation around it. alice come back to these two

aspects, the consumer side plus technology. if the government can help to create innovation by mandating some of those aspects is proven that it can improve productivity that is doing to be the main motivation for a lot of these technologies, those two aspects of benefit office. any country in the world to will see more investment in their own infrastructure, we have to get better and smarter about using the existing infrastructure that we have which alone will motivate technologies. >> you need to extinguish drivers or self driving cars because in one kayseven infrastructure components. a real role in government. and we've alluded to but did not get into the specimen. and, you know, this is a tricky proposition. on the one hand we are faced with the opporunity to have a massive gains in fatality rates,

a major investment on the part of government, manufacturers, major embrace and a part of consumers, but it also requires a certain spectrum off. this is where the organization of government in the modern world is not fed. the dna the sec is that necessarily on the safety. it's wi-fi. it's an inch and a dna. a very, very different perspective on life. so this is a bit of a challenge for us. >> it is huge. it is a huge problem. it is a huge problem. quite honestly we expected that there would be some sort of announcement of spectrum in making sure that it was available, but the payoff if you look at it, reducing fatalities and injuries by 80 percent, does look a what you could do as far as reducing gasoline, as far as

reducing time that is wasted. it is incredible. the challenge is great. you look at it, and we talked of our members about a. the question is are you ready to make the investment. well, what is that investment to extending for 20 years? what does that mean? where is a liability? and that is where we can go back to the original question first. it was first raised for me in the 90's with then the administrator he said the technology is moving so fast we can't keep up with it. in the problem that the manufacturer hases they're wrong with the technology. if the regulation is something that is different, than what they have invested in, that is the exposure that they have. the way we have been dealing with this issue is by having very good communication with not only the ministers and others, we are regulated bumper-to-bumper.

spot back when there were created in the 60's it was like, we don't want to go as automakers. that has changed dramatically and had to change rest of the will to come out with a more cooperative arrangement so that we can solve the problem together because no one has all the answers. >> a quick start on the vehicle to vehicle and vehicle to infrastructure, the magnitude of lives that can be saved and the property damage that can be granted, i think it's clear, but to get to that point we have to get the consumer in the driver raised comfortable with the concept of a connected vehicle. where data will be shared and vehicles will talk to other vehicles. that is not a small task. it is no surprise that even today with all the technology, a

small share of cars are connected. we have to give the consumer base comfortable with the idea of a connected car, the benefits are, the value of fall we can jump to this. at think there are steps that we need to take before we get to that point. trying to get greater adoption of the connected car, tried to give begin service covered with the benefits of a connected car, and the greater adoption. greater reduction includes addressing things like privacy, but there are steps ahead of that. >> that is what his like. the question too often during these discussions, there is a gaining factor, and it is, we all think we're great drivers, but we're not. and we get this new technology in the car. oaks says so is that they gaining factor? do we have to retrain drivers like a b.s. brakes * a thousand in get them, you know, behind

the wheel of these vehicles? is incremental? >> is to piggyback on the last thought, we have to take steps. i just got a new car. it was -- every page said see your dvd. i don't really know how big it is, but there is an education process. as an industry we have to make these things intuitive. but i think especially with the next generation buyer they're not trying to needed. they will read it. they get it. as generations go by a think there is an expectation of connectedness. i think there is an understanding of technology at many of us about broke with. we have to start and we have to start now because we cannot just go straight and then up the world is a better place. >> at the same time it is interesting. we have to educate more consumers of those benefits that the state colleges are present, but consumers get that put the.

yeah, we just completed another study with consumers in the u.s. u.s. vehicle owners, and to be honest, described to them what it really represents. the infrastructure in communication. already today toward the% of u.s. consumers said want to get my next new vehicle because of the benefits. 25 percent is a huge number for technology. i think the consumers are willing to accept this because a lot of them are employers by how they use technology in other aspects of their life. the cell phones to metabolize the we'll use our influence in people with regards to what else technology to do for them. to explain and emphasize what that could mean, but at the same time consumers are opening up to this. that is one of the fundamental driving forces chief for these technologies. consumers are ready to embrace this. one more step, from the same study that we did as the consumers of those of driving cars.

that is a technology that most of us about experience. if he ever get his chance, do it because it's amazing. there is a rule. the first time you freak out. you like what's happening. fists that's comfortable. and then i personally had enough, but it winner two years ago or of a sudden someone was getting a soften the car really relaxed and reacted very smoothly. that moment i realized the machine can be better. the vehicle functionality in the next vehicle. >> you want to your first. >> go ahead. go ahead. >> you know what's interesting. we need to realize first of all

that we have the convergence of two very dynamic sets of issues. one is autonomy. the others connectivity. the connectivity sense of issues are being driven quite a bit by the smart farm and consumer electric devices that we all want to use and stay connected. of the other hand we have this desire to be autonomous because of will we have seen from the vehicle. but quite honestly, we have kind of been on a path here of automating generally mechanical functions of the vehicle for several years. but all the sudden these two very dynamic sets of issues of accelerated the pace. there are converging in the same place, on the vehicle. what has happened is that you have a lot of entities now say, all right, have to react to that

is not my traditional sort of scope. and so now there are challenges. hon deal with the spectrum issue, whether it is sec. temecula deal with for dot. the one thing that we realize in the automotive and istria's whenever we put on the vehicle we wanted to be safe. number one. it cannot fail. kanaka to the blue screen. it has to operate seamlessly, flawlessly. yet on the other and we want to be responsive to our old customers, the ultimate consumer is going to purchase those features and functions. all that is possible, we need to do it in such a late that is effective and affordable then truly can benefit from it.

we don't want to have our technologies legislative are mandated that travelers to a solution and ultimately don't pan out fax we wanted to be done right. secondly the industry needs the ability to continue to innovate said the league did proven solutions that work and invest in the ramifications. so on that pathway, but in the meantime we get the smart phone, the tablets. all of those days the present new challenges. >> it leads. we're talking about it right now. i would argue that a lot of regulatory uncertainty that exists right now is actually stifling innovation. as head of a maker probably not

a ploy to apply this technology in our vehicles right now of we don't have certain deep around the end result with the specter of discussion and debate right now. very different if we are forced to share the spectrum. our technology might look very different that we have the spectrum for our use and only our use. so there is uncertainty there, uncertainty about whether it will mended this technology or encourages technology or do nothing about this technology which is a different proposition for an oven manufacturer. it is mandated to locate. if it's not, we have to make a decision. are we going to the ploy of our own knowing that our toyota vehicles will communicate with toyota vehicles, hope that the technology stays the way that it is. so right now at think all of the companies are frozen until we have certainly from the sec,

certainty about what this landscape restored to look like going forward. >> this strikes me in europe, they a looking the vehicle to vehicle but getting impression that is further down the road. they're not there yet, but it also strikes me and talking with all the automakers, a handful of major automakers into a three decided to do it that would establish the defective standard whenever everyone says after that in terms of the percentages of of the new ones willing to do it. the somebody one-tenth of the? >> there has been an underlying talk before the show and during the show about who controls the

dashboard and what happens when you want to make those connections. in a lot of rumors about what companies may try to do. as a new company with a certain kind of fun is doing to make your desk or whatever and it did before. and that is really a great idea. there is also, why would i do that if i don't even know that the will be here in five years. it may be wickedly popular now, and i don't know helping you want to be about the discussion. that is just another issue as far as you're concerned. surf. >> it is interesting. and if you have read the steve job to have steve jobs book, there's a section in there about, you know, his strategy against gates strategy of open technology. in the book he talks about the one industry that still is ripe

for an opportunity to own the entire experience he has headed his industry. the one remaining is automotive where you can control that experience remains to end the seven open the door they describe the dashboard. they believe in the philosophy elected the success of controlling that ecosystem in to end, there's a strong argument. of also been successful. to the last question there will be applied when somebody gives up the-border deals to somebody that provides a great user interface to my kids asked me about it all the time. like you just pop it and run it. at some point it will be, but i think that would be first to a conscious strategy to move away.

my guess is that it will probably be somebody it needs the brand to lift to do that versus somebody that has gone to a brand parity. that is my sense. >> i look at this the only different. it is now so much about control but influence. it's really the customer, the connective driver. that's the last remaining puzzle that would allow the two to interact including when it mobile is sitting in your car, but i actually think that going for this relates to what given said committee that is the auto industry will come to the same level like smart phones and other devices, the coolest device. at the end of the day the car still does more than just provide you with information. as a physical mission getting

you for plated be. this was far can't do that. i doubt if they will have a feature that in the next in a 20 years. that is the duty of the vehicle was that no other device platform can match which is why i honestly believe the automotive industry, this dish is so important that the automotive industry into three product generation's love so much more innovative and exciting and evolving in cooler than anything else that eventually this whole idea of having it to companies of top, it's obviously a big situation, but the car is so much more realistic. since travelers sitting in the card. d'agata with myself and they would not know. much more of a captive audience. so much more fascinating than any in the device plan for the car will become the ultimate

device. >> nine of the top 20 companies in a recent oecd study, they did analysis of the most innovative companies in the world. about $100 billion. it is producing cars. they have it right on. i think this is kind of an undervalued understanding in our society that it really is rapid. the same time there is my steady up last week or retires with the pace of the sec. a steady it coastal eddy said. they talked about selling to

order and 30,000 south driving cars in the year to or 25. so it's a close-up driving cars like with there were here tomorrow, but is to order and 20,000 in the marketplace of about 100,000,002 years from now twenty years from now they said 11 of 12 million units in a larger pace. roughly a quarter of those in the u.s., a quarter of all cars sold in the u.s. and so at one level this pace of change is slowing dug gradual. another level it is immediate. this is the coolest factor. in today's gory she can buy a car this kind of like in this tv you have adjustable cruise control. fiske but i think i'll leave it

there. [laughter] >> good call. alan like to make one comment on this. i think first of all that what you just mention this way too conservative. you will see these technologies being deployed much faster. and secondly at think you can also see steps the precious to get there. the first-ever before they're truly autonomous or start driving. that means they can interpret what you do as a driver and what state your in elected the surroundings of what happens then put that all together, analyze it, do things automatically that will make easier for you to get their your life. at the the progression of innovation in the ottawa the space in particular will have way faster to be does it mean that all of us to take years to know of so driving cars we can drive those cars, they don't even have to go to the pressure

star, the stuff going to happen, but you would see steps in between the coming very close. is the sum was the technology but much more crushing culturally and from a legal perspective we love. ♪ to happen. is an interesting debate which whittaker up driving. the legal fray is is possible. the answer was right away the driver. a kind of shows you that those legal aspects are probably the biggest hurdle. >> see what is doing here. the dilemmas of how much control the driver will see is totally unknown. i mean, it sends great, but a number of wall members, including delphi has also been doing a lot of work on this. the question is, is still

suspect going to be willing to pay for it? the liability issues associated with it. the technology will happen quickly, but consumer acceptance stories are still very big issues that have to be dealt with some. >> if you review some of these cars now, you can do it. half tidbit. they get laid centering. adaptive cruise control. i take my hands of the wheel. and not doing anything. of course if i hit the next car it is, of course, my fault, but i think that's of wonder how much of this will come in incremental steps and then it would just be kind of a natural thing for people to move to that. allegis said rise is something else. question is, there is some backlash to this movement. in that back less than sit airline pilots and says, when the second families with cs systems automated flyby wire of

a drive by wire, look at what is starting to happen. pilots falsely but something happens in the airplane all the son we have problems. i don't know how you teach someone to drive their car basically had all of these things in it where we have to retrain them every week. is that something that people are looking at now? >> go back and looked at where we started with the regulatory side of things. the industry has a tremendous amount of experience of being regulated on the product. when it comes to regulating behavior it's another whole ballgame. i spent six years of mandatory safety belt use was. it took hundreds of millions of dollars in a concentrated effort for education plus of course. today i am less sure where that will come from. you're going to have to go through the consumer side of it. the big risk for the may facture is you do something about regulation you do something of

the customer does not want it read back to the interlock of safety belts in the 70's. people were cutting their safety belts out because the government mandated we had but the minute you could not search your car unless you had your safety belt on. this is of the uncharted area with of the financial risk associated with that the drug use for a more gradual reliance. the problem will be its technology is coming so fast that companies have a great deal of risk. this is with the suppliers and the regulators to try to get it right the first time with no guarantee. >> again, you also have -- i was talking about earlier, you have regulatory uncertainty. we talked ourselves of the last couple of years blue and the face about of the various policy obstacles and challenges that exist. we know what they are. reno there is the liability question. now with these look like these

questions get answered. now with the framework looks like that we will be living in there in the future, we will do anything. >> i just want to interject a couple of points. the comments have been around passing vehicles caesura. with the unforgettable commercial vehicles. some of those applications may be more straightforward and this is that commercial vehicles have professional drivers. and they have a very defined route beginning to end. it may be a better platform for initially establishing that only connectivity more broadly, but also automated operation. us not forget about that opportunity.

in the second comment i would like to make is the fact that we are looking at what is immediately in front of us and saying, all right, you know, i will be control this invasion of the center's back in the vehicle. the 20-step back and think about the broader issue. the broader issue is one of mobility. some call it e-mobility in the sense of being connected to this, but more broadly as our society becomes more urbanized. it changes the context by which we transport ourselves the vehicles above forbes which could become a great opportunity for autonomy as remove floridian time because if you look get less some of the prosecutors as saying the relative to where the

future of mobility is that it will we're going to be more robust. certainly there are sectors of the east and west coast, even in the midwest with the expectation is the bin between cleveland, detroit to lead chicago as an example will be more and more urbanized there is a day. ..

they concluded that project last year and it was successful but with respect to our own personal transporttransport ation, i mean we may be you know willing to accept a transport pod that comes to our comes to our home and picks us up and some stated time and takes us to our appointments and comes back and fix us up and then goes off wherever it needs to go. that's a different mode of mobility of transportation and certainly our young people, you know given their declining proclivity to want to drive with e. more receptive to those kinds of things. we need to think about what that future might mean in terms of what we regard today as transportation. it may be entirely different so while we are focused on dealing with the issues of connectivity and i'm not trying to minimize

it week as we still have vague issues here, as well as autonomy we need to keep looking to the future to say all right, how is this going to move from where we are and where we want to be into the future of tomorrow. >> i have only got a couple more minutes and we can catch people right after. we can catch them right after. i would like to let them keep going. in terms of that connectivity, part of the expense, the investment not all cars had the embedded modem now but looking forward it looks like that is exactly what's going to happen. is that part of the waiting to see whether there is a regulation and not willing to stretch margins etc. or is that just going to happen very quickly in the next couple of years anyway to get that

connectivity? >> i definitely believe consumers will be asking for it and actually it's one of the very few things car companies are differentiating these days because most consumers differentiate on classic engineering-based features isn't that easy to do anymore. if you're an enthusiast you can tell the difference between the suspension and the engine and the responsiveness of of the engine and so on but to the average consumer doesn't matter. the average consumer isn't interested in cars that much. this is not rigidity to reignite the fascination that comes along with the automobile but the mobility and most of us here in the audience the next generation has a different definition of mobility and the car has to fulfill that need as well going forward. there are weaker indications and to take that furthers you talked about this whole idea of urbanization that people come to the city because that is where

they work and play and have fun might be influenced by mobility as well. if i have a car that drives itself it doesn't really matter. i could actually live further away. there are some big implications of this vehicle that are here to stay. there's no question about this and i actually anticipate at the end of this decade 70 to 80% of all new vehicles will give you the option of being connected in the car because everybody wants to continue that lifestyle in the vehicle and not stop that because it's part of our lives. speech is coming back to the apple question but it's also a question about standards and again every manufacturer has a different interface in their car. you can touch some and you can't touch others. some are good with voice commands and some are terrible with voice commands. there is a lot of noise after the last five years of

standards. is that a nonstarter in the automotive business or will there be some coalescing around some kind of guidelines that could become mandatory in 2016? >> can i jump on that one since i was chairman of the technical standards board for the society of engineers and i know standards very well. i think the key is that in any standard and any guideline you don't want to legislate the technology. you don't want to say this is the way to do it very i think what we have learned and the industry knows how to work towards the key standards that are necessary to enable them the innovation in our industry. i think what we need to do is what we have always done and that is to collaborate and work together and find out what the real issues are, established the necessary standards and guidelines that allow us to drive the cost down but at the same time to facilitate

innovation because you get the best solutions when we are able to compete against one another and it also allows us to differentiate ourselves based on our brands. and so what is necessary in the area of connectivity is yes we need some guidelines and ultimately some standards but that is not something you dictate. that is something that i think we can work towards and we need to work towards and get some of those fundamental foundational established and that will help us move forward a bit faster. >> up we could differentiate between safety applications in a tivoli just for fun so if you are talking about where the speed is or how long you can adjust the dial or how you work voice and gestures, guidelines make the whole lot of sense, think performance-based guidelines is the way to go.

>> reacting in two seconds or something like that, that was great for us but it's not going to happen. >> just as a reminder for those of you who don't follow it, the industry as closely as we do, we say tell us what is it that you want us to do? don't give us a design standard. don't tell us how to do it. tell us what you want accomplished in that creates that flexibility and competition that become so important. the other thing is that the planning process on a new vehicle runs three to four years out into the future too and the other thing is we talk about this we always like to say if it's a regulation a we know what the regulation requires us to do it gives us the lead time that we can phase it in over cycles and production cycles and then finally that we have the

flexibility to compete with each other to accomplish the objective. >> and i would just add to that, rags when there heard usable and stable they serve a purpose so i wouldn't want it to be interpreted as anti-regulation. all that said regulations do take two to three years to produce and the rate of innovation is faster than that so if we want nimble, coherent policy that makes sense it does need to be guideline-based and it does need to be multisector base. auto carriers and software designers need to do stuff that makes sense for consumers. [inaudible] >> by the time and mike was around when it happened but by the time they impose regulations it was basically done in the marketplace. >> so was already accomplished.

>> remember the creation of the technology started years before and so there was a lot of learning that occurred before you got to that regulation and got to that standard and so you still need to anticipate that. there is one other factor and that is we are no longer just a nationally based industry. we are an international global interest-rate -- industry. all of the oems and suppliers are local organizations in so the one thing we cannot afford and the consumer cannot afford is having different standards, different guidelines in different regions of the world. that only serves to add cost. we want this to be affordable. we also -- it will also add complexity which means you have to have more complex designs which can add some challenging issues and so while we are focused towards north america we

need to do the same thing on a global basis to ensure that we have a set of guidelines and standards that work consistently across the globe. >> i am fine. >> we just have a few more issues -- minutes and there are few issues i want to touch on. i still drive the people who do not want to put seatbelts on. the texting one is the most obvious one. there is a 150-dollar fine and when i'm can down the street in manhattan i can count the people texting. and of every age. it's not a generational thing at all. is that something, doesn't matter what we do enforcement wise, it has to be controlling the drivers from doing certain things? >> this is the perfect example.

they want to still be able to communicate with other people. in my eyes we have to figure out a solution that will allow you to do something like this in a safer manner. saying that you can't do it period isn't going to happen and unfortunately they have to violate laws and put other people into danger. we need to study with consumers to help us predict what's going to happen in the future. we know 89% of all vehicle owners are concerned about distracted drivers in using the internet in their car or being on the phone. everybody has their own definition of what that means. that's the problem but that is where technology plays a big role. the guidelines, the laws say say you can't do we typically do inside of the vehicle. that is where the innovation is a mime of the car to be smart enough to differentiate between me driving on the highway and texting versus sitting at a stop

light where it can do all kinds of other things that the law says no, it's either/or not kind of black-and-white just doesn't work in this context. i think that is where innovation needs to set in. that's an interpretation of communication innovation. >> anybody else? >> i think that this goes back to the behavior issue we talked about earlier and i think technology is going to have to solve the issue. if you look at the young people today they are constantly in connection and they want to be connected. they are not going to differentiate between traveling down the highway at 68 miles per hour or stop the light in the to the whole enforcement issue. any of the laws are secondary enforcement which means the police can stop you for texting even if you are looking over and a policeman pulls up side-by-side and see you texting they can do anything. that's a real enforcement issue and it also says where is it on

the criteria of importance to the policeman and it's really down their low. so i think technology is going to assault it and it's wonderful that the technology is moving so quick and we have all this connectivity and everybody really enjoys it and now we have to make sure the technology takes care of it, plus education and responsibility for individual users. i don't think that is where the solution is going to be in the long run. >> i would close with what i started, texting is a perfect metaphor for the failure of government not because they are not trying but the innovation. the real issue here is texting. the second it relates to that is how you deal with it. you get the stakeholders in room like david suggested the beginning and instead of talking

about it we have to go and do it and find ways to use technology to combat a problem. we can't go through an exercise in prohibition that is going to fail. we have to find a way to channel it so it's done safe way. >> getting all of these policies together to coordinate iphones, tablets and cars and everything. it has gradually come together. i wanted to wrap things up and think thank you folks very much today. it was really helpful and i think it's always helpful because it's getting toward a common goal. i want to thank everybody for coming today and ces has a lot more days left. thanks very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

pro-life demonstrators met in shinki in today on the 41st anniversary of the u.s. supreme court's roe v. wade decision. one of the speakers was house majority speaker eric cantor. here's part of what he said. >> thank you, thank you very much for all being here today. thank you for braving these unbelievably cold temperatures. thank you for coming to give voice to our cause for protecting life. [applause] i especially want to welcome those from the commonwealth of virginia the southern district in particular. i believe that one day in the not-too-distant future our movement will be victorious because we will prevail in securing a culture of life in america. [applause]

i believe this for one very simple reason. the truth is there is an inalienable right to life and this right extends to the unborn this is not a lyrical truth subject to the whims of man. it is a moral truth and was written as one famous virginian noted by our creator. [applause] all attempts to rewrite or obscure this truth may prevail in the moment but will ultimately fail. you are a movements not so secret weapon. you are the strongest advocates

where those of us in public office are merely orchard to stand on your shoulders. i stand here today with colleagues, with others, with much hope. some of you have been marching for over 40 years and have endured many set backs including the recent expansion of abortion coverage in obamacare. but it is important more now than ever that we remain strong and stand together. we cannot allow the opponents of life to continually weakened the moral fabric of our country. they need to know and they need to understand that we will continue to march. we will continue to educate. we will continue to advocate and we will continue to fight for the unborn.

[applause] because it is the right and moral thing to do. now those of us in the house of representatives will be right there beside you. last year the house, for the first time, past the unborn child protection act. [applause] this bill is an utterly decent and moral proposal that would recognize the physical pain and abortion can cause an unborn child that would protect that child. this remains a top priority for me and for my colleagues. i'm also proud to announce that next week the house will vote once and for all to end taxpayer funding for abortions.

[applause] the no taxpayer funds for abortion act written by our good friend and colleague chris smith will respect the morals and compasses of millions of americans and ultimately will save lives. getting this bill through the senate however and signed by the president will be a much tougher task. i can make you this promise, that the peoples house will will stand for life. [applause] and we will do everything in our power to make sure that our values for the sanctity of life are reflected in the law of the land. thanks to you and the pro-life community around the country and with the help of leaders like my colleagues he were here with me today in congress, all of us

together working, i know we will continue to make progress so that one day every child in america will be protected i lost and welcomed to life. thank you all very, very much. [applause] president obama's commission election commission is recommending expanding early voting and investing in early voting technology.

>> did i feel prepared? yes. first of all i wasn't elected so did make that much difference. i did notice that the difference between being the vice president's wife and the presidents wife. it's huge because the vice president's wife can say anything. nobody cares. the minute you say one thing as

the presidents wife you have made the news so that was the lesson i had to learn. pretty quickly. president obama created a the commission on election administration last year to reduce voting problems at polling places. after the release of their report the commission met with the president. >> i just want to say thank you public they do all the wonderful people here who served on the presidential commission on election administration. i think all of us recall that in the last election in 2012 we had reports around the country of tremendously long lines for

people when they tried to vote. in some cases for hours. they were stuck and the day of the election i said we are going to need to do something about it i think all of us share the belief that regardless of party affiliation our democracy demands that our citizens can participate in a smooth and effective way. i called on congress to work with us but i also thought it was important for us to have a bipartisan, independent panel that could actually dig into the facts to try to determine what can we do to improve the situation? unlike a lot of countries we have a complex system. we vote a lot. we have local jurisdictions that run these elections and it makes things a little more complicated. i was confident that if we put some good minds to work they

could come up with recommendations. as a consequence we set up this commission. i asked my top attorney during my election campaign bob lauer to join with me at romney's top attorney in 2012 ben ginsburg to cochair this commission. i think it's fair to say that they may have voted for different candidates in 2012 at what they shared was a reputation for integrity, for smarts and a commitment to making sure that our democracy works the way it's supposed to and they have now in working with the rest of this commission put together an outstanding series of recommendations with an important goal which is that no american should have to wait more than half an hour to vote and they should be confident that their vote is properly counted and is secured.

they should be confident that their vote is being properly counted and is secured. a lot of the recommendations that they made our common sense. they are ones that can be embraced by all of us. importantly my understanding is a lot of the commission recommendations are responsible for elections so we intend to publicize this and to then reach out to stakeholders across the country to make sure that we can implement this in part to cut his one of the troubling aspects of the work that they did was hearing from local officials indicating the aspects that we could have more problems in the future but on at now. the good news is that the

recommendations that are contained in this commission report art -- so i just want to publicly again thank both bob and ben for taking on this largely hankla's job and i want to thank all of you for being so diligent and maintaining a sense of urgency. thank you very much everybody. thank you very much everybody. >> now our will hear from members of the presidential commission on election administration. the commission is recommending updating older voting machines, expanding early voting and making it easier for veterans to vote. this is an hour and 15 minutes. see let me start with a couple of thanks first to spencer and g. w. alumni law society for putting this together for us, which we very much appreciate and secondly, to thank but also

to tell you who they were. the commissioners and me personally our research director. as bob said we are fed -- and the other commissioners were made up of five election professionals and three members of the year and private industry. larry, chris thomas is the elections are for the state of michigan and anne ran in elections down in texas for 16 years. trey grayson was the secretary of state of kentucky for two years and is now the director of the institute of politics at harvard and tammy patrick is the federal compliance officer in maricopa county. nate personally who i mentioned is a professor of law par excellence. did i announce that right?

one of the honors and great things that i've done at stanford university. we also have three folks from the private sector with us, joe edge of their out was the ceo of deloitte north america. michelle coleman mays's currently the general concert in new york public library and allstate general counselor in another -- number of fortune 500 companies for a number of years and brian britten who when he started on the commission, and going to get the title slightly wrong but he was the guy who ran theme parks for disney because if you are going to mess around with lines you ought to have a guy from disney. i should say that brian's best line of the whole commission was after we were talking about long lines at the polling places he just kind of shakes his head and

goes you mean they don't even have a concession stand when you are done in? [laughter] so we sort of got to mix both professional expertise and a bit of humor in this. so where we came at the commission from is bob and i have a somewhat checkered history for a lot of years in beating each other about the head and shoulders from opposite sides of various political, political wars. not least among them recounts and recounts are particularly instructive to see that the election system has some real flaws in it beneath the veneer of what we would like to think of our elections as. and so being able to fix those fundamental flaws where you don't have to come at it from a democratic or republican perspective is what animated this commission. the whole agenda of what is

known as voting and voting rights is far broader than this commission is charged with doing but in sticking with our charts, i think we have been able to come up with a series of recommendations and best practices that is going to make the voting experience better for american voters on a bipartisan basis and both republicans and democrats at a rate that every legally qualified voter should be able to cast his or her ballot without undue obstacles. now we get into disagreements on some other things but on that core fundamental principle there is agreement and that is what animated us. bob mentioned the one size does not fit all which we take is a truism. the reality in looking at a report like this is that elections aren't ministered by a thousand separate jurisdictions around the country and that is

an overwhelming number of jurisdictions put on elections with volunteers who by and large have not received a whole lot of training and expect uniformity in elections. that is sort of a elting contradiction in what we do and how we do our elections. in light of the reports and recommendations and best practices are aimed at that. so let me go through a few of the lines and turn it over to nate for some others. one thing we saw across the political spectrum is that the people on the left and the right to leave that there should be accurate voter registration. from the right right-hand point of view it's important because that make sure that only legally qualified voters get to vote. go to the polling places. from the left's point of view it's important because it helps to find out who our potentially

registered voters are not registered. if you don't lines and polling places are less like the two occurred. there are a couple of specific recommendations to help with that. one is we urge the adoption in states that don't have it now of on line registration. it is a system that provides increased accuracy because the voters filling out the forms without having government clerk somewhere start key punching and information. it's a much more efficient system and tammy can tell you how much the state of arizona has saved by doing on line registration and its inefficiencies. it's much more accurate overall in terms of what the list ends up looking like so that is a laudable goal and recommendation that we adopt. secondly there are a couple of national programs out there and which some states are

participating to help clean up their voter lists and compare the lists between states. and so we do endorse the interstate voter crosscheck program as well as the electronic registration and information center. both of these groups allow the states to compare their lists so at their own initiative they can prepare better and more accurate lists. we do look at military and overseas voting, particularly military members serving overseas. there have been improvements in that area in the last few years but certainly more needs to be done. they're a number of recommendations about what states can do primarily with their web sites to reduce the barriers to voting for military and overseas voters and a lot of web site improvements and

reforms in gathering of this practices on that score. there are also some simple fixes with the federal registration forms that will make things more uniform and clearer to the states. another subject in which the commission felt the need to shine a really right spot light is the state of voting technology in this country. the reality is virtually all of the machines in the country were purchased in 2003 with half of money as a result of the florida recount i would add and those machines are about to wear out. simply put they are shelf life is about to expire and so there is not a 3 billion-dollar federal appropriaappropria tion on the horizon and we heard again and again from state and administrators that their

jurisdictions have not started budgeting to fill that gap so that is going to be a problem every bit as great as what we swore after florida was never going to happen again. it was just sort of an undiscussed subject so we hope that we can get that conversation going again. part of the voting technology crisis is that we did not meet a single administrator who said god, i love my voting machines. i only wish we could keep them forever. in fact we did not run into a state or local administrator who liked his or her voting machines and thought they were good. the reality is there's a huge gap and lack of development in new voting equipment. voting equipment has simply not kept up with the technology we have come to rely on in our everyday lives. there are any number of reasons for that but primary among them

is that the standards and certification process is completely broken down. they are using standard 2005 and 2007. that was before there were ipad so there's a bit of a gap. it's currently housed in the eac there is not a bright prospect for the eac to be resurrected anytime soon. we disagree some about the truism of that statement and the methods for it but in reality it has become a political quagmire not likely to be fixed. whenever political solution there is to fix the eac or get rid of the eac something has got to be done about the certification process and the standards process in the eac. those machines are going to wear out most likely before there is any solution to the more global question of the eac.

with that, i would like to turn it over to nate for some other highlights in the report. >> so as bob mentioned in the executive order one thing the executive order does is it doesn't just describe the problem but it also describes specific populations that are affect goodbye difficulties in voting. military and overseas voters, voters with disabilities and limited english speakers. we looked at the web sites of states and through research that was done by some out site groups to show the woeful state of the united states web sites getting information to military voters in order to assist them in voting. and there was a lot also want military voting with the respect hava and other pieces of legislation have not been complied with great secondly

with respect to voters with disabilities and limited english proficiency voters the commission endorses having advisory rubes form local jurisdictions in order to get these in the process early to help them meet the needs of those communities. as well as audits and polling places to make sure that they are accessible and the commission's report puts a primer on making sure that as part of voting process that is accessible. i should say based on the testimony we heard from voters with disabilities in both meetings we had we took the report and i'm not just singling out although there are special recommendations for voters with disabilities and limited english proficiency that the recommendations when they were talking about lines or technology we look at them from the perspective of the general population and also how it's going to affect specific populations.

take something like chairs at polling places so voters if they are waiting in line don't have to stand up that also has a particular effect on voters with disabilities. with regard to the specific populations one other aspect particular to voters with disabilities that has a greater effect nationwide is the disappearance of schools is polling places. and ben mentioned the crisis with respect to voter loopholes so this looming crisis with the decline of number of schools serving as voting places and that is because of the wake of the sandy hook massacre. there are school boards closing themselves off from outside voters. it has an effect on elections. schools are the most ubiquitous and successful polling places out there and if you lose schools you lose a huge number of doling places.

schools that are concerned about security issues we encourage states and localities to adopt in-service days for teachers on those days so there's not a east security election trade-off. finally the commission endorses expanded opportunities to vote before election day. whether that is absentee voting or in-person early voting. it was unanimous among those who testified whether democrat or republican that channeling all of the election into one day just magnifies the potential for administrative disaster. and so while there are good ways and bad ways to do early voting as well as absentee voting and there are questions in the report about things that local administrative staff to pay attention to it was clear regardless of party of alienation that the localities were endorsing early and absentee voting.

let me just conclude by saying that there is more than the report. as bob mentioned there these on line tools that we are publicizing. some of these are ones that will allow local officials to manage their resources to combat the problem of lines. others which were popularized by rock the vote our on line registration tools that are open source and downloadable so local and state officials can use them. there are 26 appendices on line that support the voter.gov and one of them is -- includes a survey of elected officials given to the commission of over 3000 election officials that we could see what their concerns were. so i'm fond of saying that this is more than just a report. it's a project. it will have a life beyond this commission and we look forward to going out into the field and advocating for it.

>> it think it might be helpful helpful -- where's spencer overton? commissioners this is obviously your form so he should do it as you wish perhaps an opportunity to comment on what we have have said and then open it up. do you have any and it -- additional thoughts you would like to offer? >> i guess just to say that this whole process has been such a privilege and an honor to serve with my colleagues on the commission and what was really critical to me was to make sure the voice of the local administrator was heard. in the context of how elections are ministered with those administrative decisions are has an impact on our voting population and one of the things that we talked about throughout the course of the last six months, although it seems much longer and much shorter than six months, was that when you have a

usable system that takes usability into account at all levels whether it's access to registration, the ability to obtain a ballot that you can understand, it really raises the tide and all boats rise with it. it was really important for us to make sure that we include, when you read this, some of it if you're not familiar with election administration is going to sound like we are so far far down in the weeds and we are but then there are also big picture ideas in here as well. we are just very hopeful as has been mentioned that some of these recommendations can be put in place. they are already in place in some areas of the country and so we know that they can work when applied correct way. >> i want to echo what tammy has said. almost everything we have here has been implemented somewhere and if it's in good working

order and has does the quick ability to other jurisdictions around the country. i'm on the commission that does believe there is more commonality than two princes between jurisdictions. election day is the report indicates we are down looking at a polling place and these -- is the voting machine and everything that goes along with that. this whole effort has been enhancing the experience of the voter and really that is where it begins as at that level. obviously there's a lot behind it. i very strongly enforce the professionalization of the election administration. it is a profession even though politicians, maybe those of we answer to, it is a profession that needs it to find its way into public administration in a formal sense. it's not just learning on the job but there is actually much that can be brought from the

academic community. so it's been a great experience. i've been around for a number of years. i've been the director of elections since 1981 in michigan and it's amazing, you learn so much when you go out and see what's going on around the country. at every hearing i learn something new so it's at rate field and there is lots there. >> thanks very much for having us today. i don't have too much to add really. i guess the one comment i would make is that this is not intended to be filed as a bilmus is fairly. it may result in legislation but it's really intended for voters to read as well so there are a lot of great ideas in here and we would hope that you would ask your election officials and hold them accountable to some of the inch marks that are in this report traitor hope that's helpful. >> it will conclude by saying a lot of times we have seen media reports and we here elected officials and politicians than i used to be one, and we fight a

lot about how our election should be run. to me one of the most important takeaways is we had a commission of 10 people who voted differently who have different ideological views but have found common ground on a bunch of ideas. i guarantee you we will make our voting system work a lot better if they are deployed in local and state jurisdictions. my biggest takeaways that this report doesn't gather dust and that its recommendations are adopted, that those who read it who care about elections, regular citizens as their elected officials and administrators to adopt these and let's stop fighting and political games and focus on making elections work better. this is a good manual to help do just that. >> before we turn it over i just want to conclude this segment by saying --

trey ended on a note about artisan ship. the public to is her guidance and expect nation of voters across the political spectrum is a likely keep our eye on as is the standard to continue to worry about but as ben said at the outset i don't think we have ever voted the same way. [laughter] >> before it came -- became wise. >> and you know we are going to go off and fight each other some more now. this is kind of what we do. we just fight each other all the time. you will recall no exit, no way out. we will be fighting continuously but we were able and i can't think ben enough as a cochair of this commission we were able to acknowledge disagreement where there was disagreement but keeping in mind the standards

that i think justly guided the report and having the extraordinary support of the commission and we were able to get something done. the work starts really now and that is why i see some members here of organizations and national organizations and secretaries of states and others that hosted us in providing extraordinary cooperation to us and information for discussion and bringing together stakeholders and we can't thank them enough either. with that i think spencer if we just open it up. >> we will just opened up her questions and discussion. >> you were talking about having recommendations for election officials to read and take to heart and implement. where necessary some of these things may involve legislative changes and i was wondering if there would any outreach to state legislatures and county

legislatures for the implementation of some of these recommendations and what form that outreach would take? >> and general everybody on this commission, we want to become evangelists for this project so in general we want to talk to people. we did go to the cso or some of us went to the cso. that is our goal going forward is to go to these same groups that gave us the information but are the decision-makers. when ces has the big meetings we would love to be on the agenda to talk about that in our respective states we want to engage your local legislatilegislati ve leaders. >> and as an example we have an invitation ben and i will be testifying on the set aside next month at the federal level there is an interest that we certainly would welcome all of the commissioners around issues like

the one that date mentioned which is occupy the fair amount of attention like the polling places in the role the schools play. a huge issue and very controversial in some respects that it needs to be thought through and i'd be happy to engage with the ultimate decision-makers. >> we will be visiting next month with the national association of secretaries of state and the national association of state directors when they have their washington meetings is another example of that. i thought people used to have meetings. apparently now they have convenings. >> i was wondering whether you found any of the problems that result from the fact that there are no commissioners of eac and did any of the problems resolved that? >> well i mean you can take the

first shot. >> locally to the situation around the eac and again the eac is certain functions. if you look at reporting take for example the best practices that euro it uses. we found it extraordinarily helpful. we went through them and we include them in their fantasies and recite them in our reports so eac has done some very good work. it also has a research function. the complex about which we are not as the commission expected to express an opinion that has left the eac without an ability to function. you have to take is a given one may look at something like machine technology so you can have a few that you want the eac to be retained in its current form or strengthen or abandon altogether but you have to accept as a given that in the meantime while the issue gets played out we are falling further and further behind of

the curve if you will and attending to the technology to administer elections. so, obviously the condition of the eac at any given point is going to set issues up and we address one of them but it doesn't mean that all of the share the same view and we don't all share the same view of whether or not the eac as the federal commission is properly structured or functioning successfully. we don't need to express a view to recognize an area of machine technology there's a question that simply has to be addressed recognizing their needs potentially could be significant alternatives for machine certification, standard-setting machine certification. >> i basically agree with that. it has become a problem and fixing the problem is beyond what we can do as a commission. for machines. and as i said before the machines are going to run out of time to operate as machines

before the eac gets to them i would guess and we would certainly fear so you have to do something else to move the technology forward in the short-run. >> what steps do you see in the short-term --. >> again the business of telling congress what it should or should not do is thankfully outside of our charge. obviously we gave them modifications and we hope they will answer and we will leave it there. >> as i said there were 8000 jurisdictions that administer elections and this is historically state and local function. most of what we are talking about, virtually everything we are talking about has to be done at the state and local level i

think. >> regarding that very point you think recommendations would help with long lines such as providing a polling place resource florida and since you are florida -- florida has 67 different counties and think you so much for your recommendations. the with the hopeful if they were all implemented at should they be implemented at the state level and would have a bigger impact? >> i'm a native floridian. >> native miami and elections are in my blood. so the way these formulas work and there are three different ones and we are not putting our finger on one in particular is that you have to assess how long

it takes to vote on a ballot. you have to have estimates of the number of machines you are placing in polling places in an idea of the number of people you can put there. those variables will, depends on the state but will often be contingent on the county so that the formula that they use really just depends on for example the voting technology are using so for the state to mandate one might end up being counterproductive because if it's not sensitive to the differences within counties. in other states where they have more uniform architecture for elections those types of formulas will work out any more uniform way. but one of the things as you play around with them on line you will see they do somewhat different things. you can, i incurred you to look at the third one on the tools

which will predict for you how long the lines will be if you only put two voting machines and three staff in a polling place and you expect this many people to come throughout the day. and it really does depend on a lot of those other aspects of the electro-ecosystem as to what's going to happen. we put these out there in order for them to be improved. you have had six months to do this in different states are going to take the open source software and try to improve upon it and that is their whole. we hope that florida would do that as well. >> is worthwhile repeating something that happened at one of our hearings. we did have hearings in miami in june if not january and fortunately. and we had the county officials in charge of voting and all the counties that had the major lines and one of them that had really long lines said to us you know i guess turnout --

guess turnout exact, and those of you can figure out what you turnout is going to be exact the on the nose have you end up having lines at your polling places? it wasn't just at the polling places. in fact the counties in florida where there were long lines was a small percentage, 1% -- less than 1% of the polling places the headlines. about 100% of the reporters but not 100 or send by any stretch. so that is a question of having individual polling places where the resources to do polling place are not allocated harper lee or not having a big enough facilities to handle things but if you are an election administrator on the county level you are the one who is going to be the closest to seeing how many registrations you have in the months before the election and figure out how you are going to alec your resources.

you have 100 machines in you sam going to put 10 in each polling place that's probably not as sound administrative decision because you will have different voters, different number of voters at each of those 10 places. i'm not sure that the state can manage that function. to do it right the granularity of details have to be folks on the ground in the location. >> i think back to the training i did when i was secretary and kentucky. if i were the secretary of state now and i have one of these tools that would want to train on these and expose the county clerks and election folks who all three of these. i remember one of my former county clerks came to our cincinnati -- and he was ecstatic to have this tool. he came up to me afterwards and said this is great. i'm going to use this in my next election. so as ben and nate said it wouldn't be hard to mandate.

the other part of this is for voters to know that these tools are out there readily accessible and not being used in your county to raise a stink to highlight maybe some of the those readers who aren't taking advantage of the resources that are out there to allocate limited resources that they do have. there is a advocate voter responsibilities well and that's another part of this. some things we mandated as a result of this but some will be through advocacy and some of these recommendations will be implemented in that way to map. >> i think it's crucial for this states through training and whatnot and not necessarily imposing one tool or another but if we are going to shoot for a 30 minute standard there's a lot of work that is going to have to be done to get there. as someone pointed out earlier today being around these places

it's always the other guy that's having a problem, not the person testifying so they are the sort that sense that people will accept what they are doing is okay and that is not always the case. so there's a state rule here but the bottom line is the local are the ones that will have to apply it and use it very in. >> one issue were efforts by certain states like arizona and kansas to have more stringent voter registration requirements because they are state they are stated as opposed to federal and i was wondering if that wasn't it should -- issue have looked at and if so if it was something else come to conclusions on. >> you are talking about the core issues in arizona? no, we did not. >> thank you for noting, for

having us all here in noting that the mbr eight is the least complied with voting rights act that my thanks also for recommending that the dmv seamlessly incorporate their voter registration into these other elements. i wonder, why did you stop from recognizing that public service agencies which of wars do such an important job transacting with possible eligible voters also seamlessly transition their information and also for example the federal aca under the medicaid exchanges that are also covered? ..

>> but nobody does that with regard to the. >> host: to adapt the eac and data em most of not doing their job applications are less than 50% and the that is doing it it would be

well above 50% for so that it's every population but inouye has diminished the public agency. >> you mentioned and to specific applications like military voters are english but have you found had any racial or social economic data and if you did to the target those populations? >> the context in which we discuss enforcement of these particular statutes, we have specific statutory requirements for the protection of the population of the voters to improve enforcement. beyond that, i think it is

fair to say that our argument is for the populations we talk about and others across the board that these recommendations would be highly beneficial parker betty is aware the presidential election year, you will find in jurisdictions with those that you referred to reside what we are proposing is he could make a difference to access. >> why did the commission not say anything about voter id? does that mean it is not recommended or is that not part of its? been back there are certain federal and state legislative matters that you know, are in active

litigation that we will not address also like the voting rights act and the first amendment we will my renter in opinion. a ceramic baking for doing this. to be an evangelist for this project does that mean you received anonymously advice from a demand as traders edgy way to look at the election and experience the four states to expand early voting opportunities scientist and you don't want to get into political advocacy but which he founded your report however was characterized can we count on you to pose or condemn those efforts? >>.

[laughter] the report does not get into the business of individual states of what they may choose or not choose to do. early voting is something is prevalent in the majority of states, 32 states plus the district of columbia have in person absentee voting and many of those have republicans and governors or secretary of state so it is bipartisan agreement in those states. another 32 states plus the district have early in person voting i am sorry there is no excuse of absentee voting. so early voting is something that is taking place in the country as a whole but it is

up to the individual states to decide the days and times and allocate resources as they see fit. >> with the scope of the recommendation is also setting standards and expectations that states have the all male or arrangement it is the voting process. our position is the tradition election day model starting at one time at night just like the presidential election and we can provide these additional opportunities to people expect them in a fake there will be significant accountability for politicians to provide them and we should push for word

that whatever form it may take but they should go before the traditional election day. >> one of the cautions we have is for jurisdiction is said to shift the population to the year earlier period period, but that they don't reduce services they make available on an election date to dramatically. you can reduce but not in such a fashion you create a bottleneck on election day with long lines during the early voting period. there is some cautionary tales our early voting is done and how it affects the poteen process on election day as well. >> was there any particular ideas you had not heard about one year ago that we

should hear about it today? something that the commission learned that you could expect to move across the country? em brodeur with a 2000 the fact we may be repeating some of the problems if you look at the 2012 election to look at ohio we could've had a similar one satisfied outcome. so what do you think you are recommending here we will not be in a similar position and 2024. that the karcher for commissions and others that have looked at this water we not getting to the you may get to you today? >> let's talk about what we learned first.

you start. [laughter] >> the extent of the technology crisis as something i appreciated gaffers. but it is a call from all groups involved that the process is broken in that there is a real risk of a simultaneous breakdown because so many of our aging reaching the end of their natural life. that was something i didn't quite get at the beginning. but i should take those points that if you're using machines a of losing polling places you have to expand the amount of time people have to vote to get them

through the process before election day. this is an honest assessment with the report the problem that people were paying attention to with the problems of the horizon it is possible unless we act upon them they will get worse, not better in these are examples of those situations where things are getting worse. then to think about the technology and the changes fetter possible we had a whole day of hearing in cincinnati looking at the voting machines that are possible so the condition when dash commission endorses that to facilitate the loading as long as you have a paper trail the reason you cannot go on the same type of technology that we use for everything else.

we are pushing in that direction in ways that we did not expect faugh slovak one of the things that is very exciting that experts with accessibility, a computer experts have been working on is shifting where the ballot is passed or marked. for instance you can download a ballot on to any smart phone device said it has your selections you go into the polling place you care and skin is a tip shows you have selected so you verify and you can cast the ballot by printing it which cuts down the amount of time people spend in the polling place. this type of technology can be used by military

overseas, at home by those who have their own software on their smart devices and across the board would shift some of the 14 but not the actual casting and counting. but will alleviate those security issues because they verify what is done before it is printed and accounted. so with the qr code usage if they have that second chance option so to be completely flush style but there is a lot of excitement. when you talk about the communities they don't want to shift everything and everyone has resources but when you look at the research the percentage of population that has some sort of smart devices in their pocket is what every yonder voters are demanding

of the santa i think we need to think about how we are working our balance having them counted over the next 10 years. that is very exciting. >> everything that was said i would agree with i think of the opportunity we have given the rise of technology also with the defense of commissions at the 2000 election with the database out of the first commission to unify that at the state level i assume everybody had that. it is striking a did not exist but with technology to do online voter registration

and to have the ipad there is a real opportunity because technology did not insist that we have now so that this is something my top hope is we can accelerate that. i thank you will experience two more states over the 2002 election. >> something i have little appreciation of as a political scientist was the lack of uniform data collection. you would think that what the be difficult to collect and i would have assumed you could have figured out in a uniform way what you need about counting ballots with that is not true at all.

so what we call for in the report is of more uniform way to gather data to assist the problems but it is said a disorganized state. >> the number of young people with every constituency with any of those recommendations did did deal with the question of how or where they get their ideas? the of their thing to pick up todd, with electronic database you look at the question as to eliminate election day problems? >> if the fed general modernization and is a long way to help all.

o one leave these heavily upon. part of the recent you see that because the data is so bad. their registered to vote but they are somewhere else. so even if they are registered they're not in the right spot. to the extent we can make that process work better that can help. but i think that will go a long way. but other than the context. >> that is part of that survey don't vote because as is the most mobile population and.

one-fourth of u.s. population we're the most mobile population in the road because we require registration the barrier of the process reflects some population is more than the others listened issue get that salt to merge with other databases to be sure it is as fluid as possible if the of mine environment of his sleeve with respect to other areas that leads to lower turnout that there is so large part to. >> a and we do have recommendations with regards for the jurisdictions that have the ability to recruit 5417 years old that has been

done in my home jurisdiction bearer of the age of voters during research to see if they are more likely to when they turn 18 and to do they put? into the frequency more earthman their counterparts and it is all very positive results. once they are a gauge stand understand the process then they continue to be recent and current voters. >> yes of a young girl voter who makes those nifty things so if i am in virginia i can still vote or there is too many concerns for people to leave their approach a hundred miles over the internet.

>> in april placed you take the cue are covered to swipe the driver's license. >> i take we touched on that but not that. [laughter] that is the next commission. [laughter] >> just to follow up of the early voting questions that the commission encourages those states that doesn't have any absentee voting so they should do it now? >> absolutely they should consider. >> it may not be no excuse but it could be enforced.

>> so we mentioned for those locations and expanding early voting options on three also include for the jurisdictions to make sure that voter can use the united states postal service tracking codes in addition to go into a polling place to drop off the ballot that there are common sense approaches for the voter also the administrators to know that you need to be at the close of your deadline to pick up every single eligible ballot at the last minute to take a back to your office. butted is way down in the weeds.

>> again working best for a variety of reasons to say they like the different conclusions but we say give the voters as many opportunities to vote. >> did pubic you identify feat fec with the goals that we said that out with the absence of a quarrel with eac. >> with the care caution and respect of the current and former commissioners in the audience. [laughter] you all did a wonderful job. [laughter]

>> at least the perception in was that if you look there may be areas that are underserved fez of populations impacted more than others. do you look forward to that at all? to you come down why certain areas of lager lines are impacted more than others? >> i did not fully answer the last five but looking at different reasons, no question and but that could have the impact has seidman june to fill out if you take

the recommendation is to lose significantly collapse to improve food the experience is busier brenda laurel location and. >> des think those that we talk about a generally good agree with that. >> you mentioned several times but do zealot go during a the concept convicts put with these recommendations moody's you'd what or do you feel so

there recommendations that you did not agree on? llord did you feel like you could get more to come up with better ideas? >> i don't think our focus is tarot there are still millions to cast a ballot in this country. i think we approach it a certain way and we can look at the best way to do things as the question you're asking is if i thought about all of those in the united states and of was entirely in charge of them you would be entertaining to budget i

don't think because we can't agree on everything that doesn't mean we would accomplish anything less let's go law laden to the idea that balance it is a traditional question how that is with the inadequacy and whole host of issues. but to suggest there are ted million voters in the united states five of them are bonterre than a half an hour flight and we tried to do something for those disabled voters and reduce the area jurisdictions so they're just running smoothly or

those that are crippled so i think we are committed i don't think it means the cannot solve every process of the bow of we are a defying that affects millions of voters we could find common ground. >> and would like to give credit with a lot of issues to address we probably could not agree rather than on the recommendations that can make a big difference for millions of voters. so that was great attraction but by defining it to end such a way we have a lot of detail to make a difference. >> but to assume the most

controversial issues are the most consequential. i thought these recommendations if you can crack the code, i correct that. obviously we have data but is simply that recommendation of what is actually happening at the polling places we get our real accurate picture of the problems going forward we can address alone the issues that we talked about of real concern. if you rate the importance how high it is out there these said the issues. >> i apologize billion did he manage of the answer fact

would about emergency planning acts and also with virginia and that fiasco. >> we looked at it carefully. in fact, what is actually already appeared does a good job to highlight that issue. it is all contained in the appendix national association and secretary of state has a good program. we did look at it and were impressed with the others had done before we did not need to add to that. >> the basically so for rescheduling the fed to you don't actually already have a an answer.

this limit the through the national association and taskforce that is specifically mentioned. >> many of us in that area the first responders come from all over the country and giving them the flexibility how their states back home allow them to vote absentee if there is no excuse stay and i seek that the commissions were not reliable. but people in ohio who came to help needed help as well. >> it is critical because many states already have in place pat weaver threw tear of was that moment when not only perhaps to have been but the infrastructure

deficit in this is play and -- a plan. >> even june earlier? >> . .