i believe this is a profound constitutional question: can a single warrant be applied to millions of americans' phone records, e-mails, credit cards? the government says, and i'm telling you the truth, this is what your government maintains, they say you don't own your records, that your visa statement does not belong to you. i disagree. the fourth amendment is very clear, warrants should be issued by a judge. warrants must be specific to the individual. a single warrant for millions of american phone records hardly sounds specific to the individual. warrants are supposed to be based on evidence of probable cause, that an individual's committed a crime. ..

and let the right to be treated both? will we be like rushing to the comfort of big brother is crushing embrace or will we stand up like men and women of character and say we are free

and no men no matter how well-intentioned the take our freedom from us. [applause] daniel webster anticipated our modern-day saviors who wish to save us from having too much freedom. he wrote good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. it's hardly too strong to say that the constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. how will history remember barack obama? [laughter] to those that hope to president obama would be a champion of civil liberties, larger walters might ask did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts?

did they get you to exchange a walk on part in the war for the lead role in a cage effect i don't question president obama's noted that history will record his timid defensive liberty. when congress passed legislation, allowing for the indefinite detention of an american citizen without a trial, he shamefully signed it while promising not to use such a power. a great president would have risen to the occasion instead of merely suggesting that he wouldn't use this power, a great president would have taken the pen in hand and vetoed this abomination. [applause]

a great president would have loudly proclaimed that congress cannot and must not overturn the right to a trial by jury. a great president would have protected us from the nsa. a great president would have proclaimed i will not abide. the constitution will not abide. [applause] our forefathers fought for the right to trial by jury said that not one innocent man would be wrongly imprisoned. remember richard jewell? everybody thought he was the olympic bomber convicted on television with no jury, no trial. the only problem was he didn't

do it. had he been a black man in the south in 1920, he might not have lived to prove his innocence. anyone with a memory of the times in history when we didn't adequately defend everyone's rights, when we didn't adequately offend everyone's right to a fair and impartial trial should stand now and be heard. we must defend our rights. [applause] justice cannot occur in the trial. it could be clear to any group that has ever been persecuted you could be a minority by the color of your skin or the shade of your ideology. anyone that has ever paddled up the stream, anyone that has ever

been a minority of thought or religion on anyone that ever taught her children at home or sought to pray to god without permission should be alarmed that any government might presume to be in prison without a trial. [applause] whether you are black or brown or white, man or woman, you should fear a government that maintains the authority to imprison without trial without a jury. we wouldn't need the constitution to protect us if the government were comprised of angels.

it isn't so much with president obamwhat presidentobama has dons done a lot. it's not what he's done with the power as much as it is the president that has set up the lawlessness. if the executive branch can initiate if the branch can detain citizens without trial, if it can amend legislation. if we could declare the congress is in recess and government and retrained by the law becomes nothing short of tierney. montesquieu recognized this with the executive branch it usurps

the legislative authority on the president says i can write the law. watch me. he doesn't care what the law is. the tierney book into and we must stop the president from treading the constitution [applause] isn't just the harm this president is causing. it's the future harm he allows by destroying the checks and balances that once we strained each of the branches of government. progressives by their own assertion don't want to be bound by any original intent of the constitution or its offers mac.

-- authors. baby leave whatever the majority says it is. progressives believe that the majority may separate you from your rights. jim crow, the japanese internment, today's indefinite detention without trial only occur when we allow our god-given rights to be a bridge by the majority vote. our rights are inherent. they are inseparable from our person. [applause] >> our rights come from our creator and no government can take them away from us. [applause] the constitution merely codifies what exists before all times.

mr. president, we won't like you. we will not let you run russia out of our rights. we will challenge even the courts. we will battle you at the ballot box. mr. president, we will not let you shred our constitution. [applause] our future king things in the balance. we can debate the recovery and event of the bothersome and abusive regulatory state but know this you can't have prosperity without freedom. it isn't a message of the haves and have-nots and virtue versus poor. it is a message for anyone who wishes to own their own destiny.

america's greatness will not flickr if we believe in ourselves and our founding documents. documents. belief that all men are created equal and everyone can succeed. that brings freedom, brings its not only with it greater prosperity, but extraordinary generosity. anybody that thinks it is great to be poor in cuba. america is the most generation on -- generous nation on earth. america's greatness and exceptional character. it's not in our dna but it's in the republican founding documents for the first time in history if we weren't all individuals regardless of the birth or gender or ethnic city. if we strained the government, not the individual.

your task isn't to minimize the loss of freedom. your job is to maximize your liberty. let's do it together. let's take a stand. when the president refused to rule out the citizen i took a stand. i filibustered. [applause] some things are worth fighting for. when i discovered they were collecting every american amerin citizens records i took the stand. i sued the president. [applause]

it is decidedly not a time for the faint of heart. it is a time for boldness and action. the time is now. stand with me. let us stand together in liberty. god bless america. ♪ ♪ news from the associated press about the medicare program the obama administration says it's ending its push for changing the medicare prescription program after it ran into strong opposition on capitol hill. the proposal would have removed the three classes of drugs from the list that guarantees seniors accesaccess antidepressants, antipsychotics and drugs that suppress the immune system to prevent the rejection of a

transplanted organ. on capitol hill the senate is in the late later then usual 4:00 eastern working on a nomination for the tenth circuit court of appeals. a vote on that nomination if i:30 and a second vote today on military sexual assault. if more than one entity manages the key identifiers of the internet, then by nature the internet will no longer be one

net. at the heart of the system is the root server system and very few people appreciated that in order to resolve the names on the internet there is an actual system that makes that work for the entire planet. in the root all names are resolve to ensure that when you type www.c-span.org for example or any other website name, you go to the exact site c-span wants you to go to all the time every time for the last two plus decades. >> the head of the internet corporation for assigned names and numbers on the role it plays in deciding internet domain names on the communicator that eight eastern due to the special senate session. >> obama administration officials from the state department, usaid and the treasurtreasury department said recently before the house foreign affairs committee about russia's actions in ukraine. this hearing is just under an

hour and a half. to call the committee to order we ask all the members if they can come in and take their seats for this hearing. let me begin by pointing out that ukraine is facing not one crisis, but a number of them. it's a new government is f not confronting an economic and financial crisis brought on right years of mismanagement an corruption by the previous of government officials.nage and it isme doing this while unr military invasion and economic milicion by neighboring russia. the world has been speaking up cocion b and sending a clear message andb that message is that moscow'smea

actions over the past week are out of bounds. pa the new government cannot succeed without strong and rapid support by the international d r community.port working in close cooperation with our european allies, thel . u.s. is crafting and immediate e assistance package.fting but this help must be but accompanied by fundamental economic reforms if ukraine is to stabilize its economy. ukrain only ukraine can help us help them. i will also mention that later this month, prior to the elections in ukraine i will be r leading a code to the country be because they must also help to ensure that the elections scheduled for may will be fair s and free and reflect the voice the of the ukrainian people in all d regions of the country. the country that is becoming

ukrainian peop increasingly divided. and i think that our oversight a cotryagement leof their rights now is very important. a successful election is a sensual to the ability to and engagent is imny issues that it got on its plate and to advance towards democracy and security t and long-term prosperity. addressing ukraine's energy security must be part of our response. and russia has used the supply of ey natural gas to pressure craned economically and politically and has announced that it willpeatey significantly increase its costr in the deliberate effort toifice squeeze ukraine. in a fortunately, we have an option help counter this threat. we he namely, reducing the current a impediments to exports of american gasre to ukraine. ame administration has it within itser power to do this by removg its wer tnt bureaucratic obstacles that only in power

putin.putin. the com mittee is working to provide appropriate assistance to all ukrainian people, butmits also to pressure russia to withdraw its forces and sees itw efforts immediately following the hearing we will market a resolution the ranking member and i have introduced that condemns russia's aggression and outlines the steps. i strongly encourage the administration to increase efforts to isolate russia diplomatically. there is much that should be done, such as introducing a resolution at the un security council that condemns russian aggression. the international community would support such a resolution. moscow alone would veto it but it would increase the pressure. the treasury department should also make it clear that the u.s. is on the lookout for russian banks that are involved in

illicit activities such as the transfer of stolen assets. especially the banks that are primarily owned by the government or by the oligarchs. we'll so in our resolution layout other steps that should be taken such as the limitation on tribal. many of us have been calling for action and last evening the administration called me to indicate that it was going to take steps on precisely these issues, the visa and the asset bands. so we will look forward to that statement from the administration i think to further elaborate the executive order announced earlier this morning. but we must remember that the purpose of the pressure on russia is in simply to punish

aggression and certainly not to escalate the confrontation, but instead to move towards a resolution that protects the territorial integrity of ukraine. that is our ambition here and as we look forward and to answer the questions from the members regarding the current situation in ukraine and the administration's ongoing efforts to provide assistance to kiev and to pressure russia. the ranking member will be here shortly. and while he is in route, i will also take this opportunity to introduce the witnesses. we have limited time this morning. so, before i introduce the witnesses, we are honored to have with us today the ambassador from the embassy of ukraine. mr. ambassador, we know that it is a very difficult time for

your country and we want to extend a very warm welcome to you as you can see ukraine has many friends on the committee. this morning we are pleased to be joined by their representatives in the department odepartment of state. agency for international development and the department of the treasury. the foreign service officer mr. eric rubin served as the deputy chief of mission at the u.s. embassy in moscow from 2008 until 2011. before assuming his duties as the deputy assistant secretary in the bureau of european affairs. with over 20 years of experience working in international development in the region, ms. paige alexander is the administrator for europe and eurasia at the agency for international development. mr. daleep singh is that the u.s. department of the treasury and advises the senior economic leadership at the department of treasurthe treasury and in the e house on global markets.

without objection, the witnesses for prepared statements are going to be part of the record and i'm going to encourage you all to summarize and use your time to the present your viewpoints and afterwards the members will have five calendar days to submit statements and any materials for the record. as the officers were notified last night in light of the time constraint, we are suggesting the limit of three minutes per member to help maximize participation of all of the members this morning. and if i could now go through the ranking member mr. engel his family iwhose family is originam ukraine, from new york. >> thank you very much mr. chairman and deputy assistant and mr. alexander, deputy assistant mr. secretary singh thank you for appearing before the committee today and for your efforts over the last few months in support of ukraine

and let me think the chairman for calling this issue is at the forefront of all of our mind right now. since 1991 the u.s. strongly supported a democratic prosperous soccer in ukraine and keeping with its commitmen comme support a peaceful resolution of the recent crisis. it's hundreds of thousands of ukrainian citizen came out in the streets of kiev to express their desire for the state. the recent selection of the interim government signaled ukraine was back on the path toward stability and political and economi economic health andp welcoming this event as is the case in the u.s. and europe president putin has reacted in a disturbing manner so that me be clear the aggressive military actions violate ukraine sovereignty and territorial integrity and violated international law. they are deeply stabilizing and have the serious implications and security in europe all of us

should be profoundly concerned about this. and furthermore as a justification to this aggression is completely unsupported by the facts are there no persecution of russians were russian speakers in ukraine and all credible observers agree on this point so i believe this is a critical moment of the u.s. and european allies must stand up for the ukraine unity and territorial integrity. russia has deep historical and cultural ties with ukraine and should enjoy good and close relations. president putin must respect the sovereignty and the right of its people before we make their own choices and their own future. russia must also understand that there are consequences with aggression. i think we should consider a range of sanctions including the bands, freezing assets and banking sanctions or the president putin understands this will not be business as usual. i call on the allies and other members of the international community to take similar

measures. i also support the administration's initiative and the international observers to monitor the situation in crimea and other parts of ukraine. russia should mention to welcome such a mission and come fly with its commitments. commitments. after other immediate priorities should be able to help the interim government to deal with the formidable challenges that it faces. the secretary was just in kiev and this is the right way to show our support. given the dire economic situation we and our allies should be ready to provide a robust assistance pledged. i strongly support the administration initiative to provide loan guarantees to ukraine and i am very pleased that house will pass legislation authorizing these guarantees later today. i also welcome the announcement that would also provide very sufficient loans and credit and of course we must also support the efforts to reach an agreement to implement reforms

to address the struck gold weaknesses. we shall also provide additional assistance in areas of urgent need of such us to help ukraine recover assets, combat corruption, conduct free and fair elections and counter the trade actions by russia with regards to the last point i also believe that we must steadfastly support other nations facing similar pressure such as moldova and georgia. as ukraine leaders restore stability and order in the country, i would urge them to reach out to all of the groups and work together to build a tolerant pluralistic society. the government and the ukrainian government must protect the rights wyoming or in the populations make it clear that it represents all of the citizens would've me take this opportunity to say a word about anti-semitism which has been mentioned as another justification for the russian military aggression. i recognize there is a concern the respected entity recently

stated, and i quote while there has been isolated incidents in eastern ukraine since the protests began in november there hasn't been a pattern of violence against the jewish population. finally, let me thank the witnesses and the administration for its efforts over the past several months to support the democracy in ukraine. as the people come from and the many challenges ahead, they should note the united states will stand with them, we will support the sovereignty and territorial integrity and we will support the aspirations to build a more democratic, prosperous and just future for their country. thank you mr. chairman. >> we are going to go to mr. rubin. >> thank you chairman, ranking members d. 11 and members of the committee i'm grateful for the opportunity to speak today on u.s. policy towards ukraine and i would express appreciation for the ambassador joining us today. we very much appreciate the

presence. let me begin by thanking the committee for its deep engagement on this issue in our efforts to back the aspirations of the ukrainian people we've been heartened by the bipartisan support we have received from the committee and from the congress more broadly. house resolution 447 introduced and passed by the house on february 10% a powerful message the american people stand unequivocally with the people of ukraine in their hour of need. you notified us you are marking up a resolution today and we welcome your leadership. you've been in contact every step of this situation. united efforts demonstrated to the people of ukraine and the community the united states as resolute in its support of the democratic peaceful and prosperous future. i would like to address two areas. i will begin by discussing the political situation in ukraine and i will talk about regional stability. the military intervention in ukraine and response to the united states and international community. i've submitted a more detailed

written testimony for the wreck her and i underscored the situation in the region is extremely fluid and changing by the hour. we continue to adapt and i would like to underscore the situation has changed as recently as this morning and we've taken an additional actions as recently as this morning which i am prepared to discuss in further detail. let me also add a few words about my deep commitment to ukraine and its future. first work to support the ukrainian people and aspirations for freedom in 1989 when i was the politics nationalities affairs on the soviet desk in the state department of health opened relations with ukraine in 1991 and my wife and i worked and lived from 1994 to 1996 in the early days of the independents. i speak ukrainian. over the tumultuous events of the past several months i've watched as ukrainians were cut down by snipers in the heart of kiev but i've been inspired by the people with their determination, courage and insistence on the possibility

for the better future for themselves and their country. i would like to emphasize the democratic transition that has occurred is an expression of the will of the people. it isn't about the united states and it isn't about russia. the people have made a decision about the future but rather the country's democratically elected parliament has taken the steps of creating a transitional government following the former president yanukovych's abdication. they fulfilled their obligations with people preparing to tackle rising economic and political issues facing the country until the presidential elections can be held. these decisions have been supported by overwhelming majorities including the members of president yanukovych's party. the united states welcomed the government and is working with the leadership to ensure the protection of all ukrainians including all of the members at the international community looks for ways to help ukraine it will focus to build a strong sovereign and democratic country reflecting the will of the people of ukraine. the decision of the people regarding the government needs

to be respected. russia's military intervention has endangered the promise of the democratic transition and as the secretary said in kiev the contrast couldn't be clearer. the hermit and ukrainians with strength of unity and the administration of excuses hiding behind falsehoods, intimidation and provocations the united states fully and unambiguously condemns the military intervention in the territory. we've indicated russia's actions and crimea re: violation of the integrity in half then a breach of international law including obligations of the un charter and the 1997 treaty of ukraine. as well as russia's base agreement of 1997 with ukraine. russia agreed to invest treaty to respect the sovereignty and not interfere in the internal affairs. this is also an affront to the 1994 budapest memorandum. we've already taken action consistent with the

unacceptability of russia's military intervention shoulder to shoulder with our counterparts we have suspended participation in the g8 preparations. we suspended all talks with russia on any future trade or investment. we suspended military to military contact and have issued a statement with unanimous approval of the members of the north atlantic council condemning the russian military escalation and crimea. crimea. they were stepping up efforts to increase the air policing mission and we are working on ways to strengthen the cooperation with poland. we are considering other measures to provide reassurance to the allies and today the united states has a full package of measures aimed at demonstrating the force of the resulresolve in the face of unprovoked military aggression, intervention and direct pursuant to the presiden president's guie state department is putting in place restrictions on a number of individuals reflecting the policy decision to the '90s is responsible for or complicit in threatening the sovereignty and territorial integrity of ukraine. in addition the president signed an executive order that authorizes the sanctions on the

entities responsible for activities undermining the processes or institutions in ukraine threatening the peace, security, stability, sovereignty or territory and contributing to the misappropriation of state assets and purporting to assert governmental authority over any part of ukraine without authorization from the ukrainian government. you have made it clear to russia and others the steps to undermine the democracy and integrity will result in further political and economic isolation should they continue on the path. mr. chairman and the focus remains on the de-escalation of tensions and we continue to explore the possibility that could lead to the relaxation in ukraine. if they are willing to take it. we support the talks between the ukrainian and russian governments. secretary kerry met yesterday separatelterry met yesterdaysepn minister of ukraine and russia as well as counterparts to get such talks going. the united nations or in the procesare in theprocess of depln the country including crimea and eastern ukraine. they will provide transparency about the activity of military

and paramilitary forces and the reduced tensions between the groups. groups. a long with senior delegations in the allies to the region offer objectives on the ground in the information to counteract the propaganda campaign. let me be clear on this point there are no confirmed reports that no confirmed reports of the massive movement of ethnic russian refugees. no threat to the naval base. the ukrainian government is a body that represents the will of the ukrainian people and it's not an extremist cabal. the insurgents are nothing more than they used to justify the military action. i would also like to state for the committee the united states is closely monitoring the reports of anti-somatic acts and we take this issue very seriously. it's an issue i worked on 20 years personally and i would like to concur with the statement that you made indicating that we have no such information indicating that widespread anti-semitic incidents. we've been in touch with all of the major jewish groups in ukraine and we believe that the accusation is again used to

justify the unjustifiable military intervention. >> thanintervention. >> thank you very much. now, we have five minutes for opening statements. if you could summarize that's for the best. >> thank you for inviting me here today for the package. >> go ahead and put the microphone -- >> the recent events for ukraine and the response to the united states government is critical to the region's future. the u.s. is working with international partners especially the international monetary fund to provide the needed support to the people and the economy as they face the current crisis. our approach is to support the goals and aspirations of all of the people in ukraine for peace, prosperity, freedom and human dignity. the very same things that people have been on for the last three months. explaining their concerns. as a con as the chairman

mentioned an upcoming elections coming usaid and the partners are moving forward with programs in the five specific areas to help and sure they are free, fair, transparent and inclusive. we will work to improve the framework to strengthen elections administration, support civic oversight of the electoral process through the observation is missions by international monitors, encourage the civil society coalition stood advocate for the reform, promote a more balanced, open and diverse information environment throughout the country, and support a robust yet fair political competition and informing the public fo furr support for the public opinion polls and ensure the training for the party watchers. we also recognize the more inclusive and accountable governments will not be established with one presidential election. over the mid-to long-term range we will pursue the multifaceted approach to strengthen ukraine's democratic institutions and processes. years of economic mismanagement

have left ukraine for the heavy debt burden. with regulatory oversight and financial institutions and the uncompetitive business climate. the ongoing economic instability has led to the heightened uncertainty in the financial sector prompting the national bank of ukraine to impose capital control and depositors become weary of the soundness of domestic banks. recognizing the potential for the banks to usaid will work to provide the banking supervision for public confidence. we realize that ukraine and efficient and import energy sector continues to be a significant drain on the financial resources. into this needs to be addressed as well. the u.s. technical assistance will be provided to the government of ukraine as it makes important policy reforms and combat the widespread corruption that is prevented ukraine from reaching its economic potential. we need to revitalize the support for the private sector which is staggered and a recent years under an increasing and

even playing field in the official harassment. usaid is working with other agencies to develop plans to improve the financial sector transparency, reform the energy sector and improve the environment for private sector businesses. mr. chairman, disturb engel and members thank you for the opportunity to justify all the issues of importance not only for ukraine but for the united states. this is a critical moment for an opportunity for ukraine and usaid is well-positioned to meet some of the most pressing challenges. as my colleagues have noted it will be crucial to this effort. this concludes my testimony and i am prepared for questions. >> we will move immediately to mr. singh. >> chairman, ranking member and members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i visited kiev to meet with government officials and express our solidarity during this difficult moment.

the secretary has spoken several times with the prime minister who has assured us the government is prepared to take the necessary steps to build a secure economic foundation including the implementation of the urgently needed reforms to restore financial stability, unleash economic potential and promote the economic aspirations of the ukrainian people. the fragility of the financial condition_is the urgency of the government committing to an imf reform program and securing the financing it needs while difficult adjustments are made. the fragile economic situation stems from many years of lack of reform and corruption under the previous government. as well as a negative consequence from russia as the five actions and crimea. ukraine's leadership has declared publicly indicated privately its willingness to undertake the necessary steps to secure assistance from the imf and others and of the united

states has made it clear that ukraine implement reforms we will work with our partners to support the people and restore the country's economic and political stability. as part of the international effort the united states developed a package of bilateral assistance primarily by the loan guarantee that is focused on ukraine's most pressing needs. they will complement what must be the centerpiece of the effort and imf program. only the imf has the capacity to provide the necessary resources and expertise to the design and agenda. the program also sends the strongest signal of confidence to the markets, businesses and households at the time the sentiment remains volatile. more specifically, the imf has the expertise to develop in consultation with the ukrainian authorities and economic adjustment program that eliminates unsustainable economic imbalances, removes costly and poorly targeted

government subsidies and improve the business climate and competitiveness. the central role of the imf and the assistance effort is an illustration of why the imf is vital to the u.s. economic political interest. it's the worlds first and most active responder in the economic crisis by providing financial support and hands-on policy advice. it helps keep our allies and partners strong and prevents economic dissatisfaction from spiraling into political instability. this makes the role critical to the nation's economic well-being. with instability abroad it washes up and delivers u.s. growth resulting in fewer jobs and citizens savings are heard through financial markets. for the united states to continue it helps ukraine was the most significant steps we can take right now is to pass the 2010 imf quota. why is this so important? first the united states is the only major economy that hasn't passed the 2010 reforms.

the inability to act has led other countries to worry the united states is retreating from its position of leadership at the imf at the time its role is so pivotal to the future of ukraine. second, the reforms would support of the capacity to lend additional resources to ukraine if it meets the financing and a larger package. we should be in favor of providing as much flexibility and resources as possible in support of ukraine's financial stability. there exists broad support in the american business community for the reforms. the chamber of commerce and financial service roundtable securities industr industry and financial market associations, financial service and business roundtable all agree that changes are necessary and in the best interest for the american businesses and global economy. part of the reason why the business community supports the reforms is a safe and smart investment for the united states. the legislation will not add one new dollar to the commitment of

the imf. the imf has a balance sheet with liquid reserves and gold holdings that exceed all of the credit outstanding. it's never defaulted on any reserve claims since the inception seven years ago. if we fail to pass the quota reforms they are made to diminish to bolster the fund resources and economies may turn away from the imf towards the regionalism, bilateral arrangements and new institutions which means the united states will lose the leverage and influence which is built up over decades a decadese time the leadership of the global stage is so critical. chairman, ranking member engel, members can be ukraine asked for our support during the difficult time and the united states alone but its partners should be ready to answer the call. thank you. .. newer members of this committee to ask any questions and get

information they need, i'm going to forgo my time and pass to mr. engel of new york. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm going to only ask one question to give more people an opportunity to ask questions. i think i'm going to ask it to you, mr. rubin. russia's exerted intense pressure, especially economically, on ukraine in the past, and my fear is ukraine can expect more pressure in the months ahead. how can we and our european allies help ukraine and other countries such as moldova and georgia, which are attempting to build democratic states, resist this pressure? one of the things that worried me about leaning to this crisis is that putin in trying to lure these countries into its customs union offers them all kinds of goods, bonuses, gas, money, and the european union says, well, we'd lyou and then if you jump through them ad land on your feet, we'll consider you. i really think that we have not -- the playing field has not been leveled, be we create

obstacles to having these countries join with us to look westward rath aer than eastward. they all complain to me when they come into my office, and what can we do to change this? >> thank you. i would like to, first, talk about the economic aspects of your question, and i think i can point to some recent action both on the part of the your year -- european union and the united states to address the very concerns you're talking about, congressman. i think most importantly i would like to talk about the emergency assistance that we've announced, that the european union has announced which is tied in with the key reforms that the ukrainian government needs to make to get its economy back on its feet. the e.u. announced a major package this week, and secretary kerry announced we are starting to put together a package that will include a $3 billion loan guarantee that we've already been consulting with members on the hill about, including this committee.

and i think it's very important to recognize the perilous to financial situation that ukraine finds itself in under russian pressure, but also previous mismanagement and bad economic policy. the new government has taken a very encouraging and promising set of steps, and we believe that the new government is very serious about moving quickly to get ukraine back on its feet. we need support, we are committed to providing that support stating with not just the loan -- starting with not just the loan guarantee, but other forms of aid. and most importantly, working together with our allies and partners so it is the international community that's supporting the ukraine as the united states as the leading part of that effort. moldova and georgia are very vulnerable as well, no question, and we've been working closely with their governments. we had the prime minister of georgia here two weeks ago meeting with president obama, vice president biden, the prime minister of moldova left monday, also meeting with president, the vice president, the secretary of state. we're doing everything we can to help them financially, but also

to provide the critical public and political support for the democratic choices of their people. and we'll be doing that in the months ahead, but i think it's very important to, basically, underline the point that this is a critical moment to give them that support now when you have governments that are making the right choices. we recognize that, we will be doing that. >> eric, you're a little too close to that mic. just move it back a little bit. i'll yang that ros-lehtinen of florida. >> thank you sop, mr. chairman, for calling this hearing and for your excellent bill. the list, that's what i wanted to ask about, denying and revoking visas of russian regime national u.s.es who are connected to belligerent transactions in ukraine are moves in the right direction, but now we must name and and shame these persons, add them and other putin officials responsible for human rights abuses not just in the ukraine,

but in russia as well to the mag miskey list which imposes similar sanctions. adding the names would make these sanctions permanent rather than an executive order that the president can rescind. i've already submitted many names to the obama administration to add to that list since we passed the act, and there are many names here, names, position, examples and evidence of gross human rights violations. i will send a new letter to the administration asking for more names of human rights violaters to be added to the mag in its key list, and i hope that my colleagues will join me in that letter. and the president must take similar actions in venezuela where maduro continues his suppression of the people who seek freedom and democracy. and the executive order of the president, he talks about actions or policies that undermine democratic process or institutions in ukraine. well, moduro and his officials

are also responsible for actions that undermine democratic institutions in venezuela. and now is the time to act. 16 of my colleagues sent a letter to the president asking for those similar powers under the international emergency economic powers act. so, mr. rubin, my question to you is, is the administration considering adding more names of russian officials guilty of human rights violations to the list? is it simply a historical document for act dem you cans to ponder? -- academics to ponder? are we just going to stay with those few names we have put on the list and have not added many since then? >> thank you, congresswoman ros-lehtinen. we are actively considering adding new names, the answer to your question is, absolutely. we take the legislation very seriously, and i do not have any new information for you this morning, but that is something that is under active consideration. >> thank you, sir. >> gregory meeks of new york. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

let me see if i can do a real quick question. first, mr. singh, i know that the treasury department is working closely with the department of state and the white house on a loan guarantee package for the ukraine. and you talked about it briefly in your opening statement. but i was wondering if you can discuss in more detail how we in congress can support and improve the capacity of the imf to provide guaranteed, a guaranteed loan package? >> thank you for your question, congressman. so the imf in any assistance package for ukraine that's going to be credible needs to play a central role. and the best thing we can do right now is to maintain our leading voice at the institution, the imf, that is going to be at the heart of the assistance effort. if we don't meet our basic commitments to fund the imf and pass the coda reforms, our voice

may diminish. now, there's a second reason. passing the coda reform provides the imf with more financing flexibility, particularly in the case where ukraine could need a bridge, a short-term assistance package, as a means to get to a larger agreement with the imf. now, the imf's on the ground, they're looking at the data. we don't know yet whether that flexibility will be needed, but it's a good idea to have it. >> thank you. and, ms. alexander, as you prepare for the long-termen gaugement -- long term engagement and development in the ukraine, are you confident that the interim ukrainian government is a stable partner for usaid? >> thank you, congressman meeks. the benefit of the people that we've worked with in ukraine is one of the development assets ukraine has is also its vibrant, multifaceted civil society. so we not only work with the ukrainian government, we work

directly with civil society. but we've been very impressed with what we've seen in the ukrainian government thus far, we've been impressed with their restraint, and we consider them good partners. so we're confident our money will be well spent. >> and finally, mr. rue bun, i'm a firm -- rubin, i'm a firm believer in multilateralism and a multilateral way, and i think it's vitally important for the united states to do that, to have this unified voice towards russia for their action in ukraine. how can the united states, and i think this is something i just want you to elaborate a little bit more, better engage our allies in europe to insure that we have the same strategic goals and long-term planning for a continued development and prosperity of the u.s./european relationship? it would seem there have been some cracks recently? >> well, thank you, congressman. we have actually made this a very high priority, and and secretary kerry has spent the past two days in europe, in rome and paris following his visit to kiev, working preis icily on

that, working with our allies and other interested governments to try to craft a united international community approach to supporting ukraine, to ending this conflict, to convincing russia to withdraw its troops and restore its recognition of ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. we agree that this needs to be a collective international approach. it needs to be a diplomatic approach. we believe that the calls of the international community for this to be settled through dialogue, for russia and ukraine to immediately begin talking about this can only happen if the international community is united in supporting this, and that is precisely what the secretary is in europe doing right now. >> crust smith of new jersey. -- chris smith of new jersey. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. rubin, how do you assess the risk of escalation by miscalculation? with so many ak-47s pointing at each other, only one troop or one soldier has to fire, and things could get out of hand. you mentioned the osce monitors. they've been stopped, as you

know, they can't get in. i visited monitors in georgia and crow croatia and elsewhere r the years, they have such limited capabilities to mitt gate a fire fight -- mitigate a fire fight or any kind of hostility. secondly, i was in georgia a few days after the russians rolled into south to set ya. they several times put their tanks on road only to turn around. you'll recall that. their objective strategically was south osettia. what is the object i of the russians now? is it just crimea, or are other regions and cities in ukraine, particularly on the east coast or east area, i should say, in the crosshairs? and mr. singh, if you could, sergei -- [inaudible] has said that russia will abandon the u.s. dollar as a reserve currency if the u.s. initiates sanctions against russia.

how seriously do we take that threat? sanctions now have been levied, as they ought to be. and the eurasia economic union, a meeting this week with belarus and kazakh zahn and putin talking about that union that comes into force in 2015. how does that play into all of this? ing about that union that comes into force in 2015. how does that play into all of this? >> thank you, congressman. the question of international observers and monitors is absolutely critical. as you stated. we believe the best way to deescalate this conflict, to ensure there are no accidental incidents that lead to escalati escalation, is to have an international presence, eyes and ears, on the ground. that is what we've been supporting. that is what we've been supporting. that is what the special envoy is there for. we believe that they need access to all areas of ukraine. they have access to all areas except crimea. the government has been

supportive in encouraging monitors to come in to address any allegations of abuses, to address any concerns about minority rights. and that is the way to address these concerns, is through eyes and ears on the ground that can provide an objective assessment of what's going on and also be there as witnesses to what's going on. we find the fact that the monitors have had extreme difficulty in getting into crimea, to perform their activities in crimea, is something we consider unacceptable and we believe all the authorities involved, including the local authorities, have an absolute obligation to allow that to happen. we will be pushing to expand the monitoring. we will be pushing to expand the scope of the monitoring. and without that, we fear it will be very hard to actually know what's goggin. to answer your questions as to what the russian's objectives are, i have to say, i wish we all knew the answer to that question. we've seen that clearly one objective is to militarily occupy and control the territory

of the autonomous region of crimea. we have condemned that. we considered unacceptable. we consider the russian forces must return to their barracks under their treaty obligations in the basing treaty with ukraine. we condemn any further use of russian military force or aggression on the territory of ukraine. we hope we will see no further use and we can return to a diplomatic dialogue to end this very, very unfortunate situation. with that, help turn to mr. singh. >> the reserve currency portion of it, mr. singh. >> yes, congressman, let me give you a simple answer. russia doesn't get to decide the world reserve currencies or the united states level of interest rates. that's determined by our economic outlook and our monetary policy. we have the most deep and liquid capital markets. we have the most attractive investment environment. this is not -- we control our own destiny in this regard, not russia. >> we'll go to albio siris from

new jersey. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you the members here today. i believe we should have strongs sanctions. i don't think putin understands anything else. but how can we get strong sanctions when europe over the last few years has become more and more dependent on energy from russia? for example, germany didn't jump right away because obviously, i think it's something like 40% of the gas from russia. how can we get a consensus to come up with strong sanctions against russia, when they are so dependent? so -- and the other question that i have is russia threatening if strong sanction, start to infect our economy, they're going to go after the assets in russia that are american assets. what are they prepared to do? if they go after those companies and american assets in russia? >> thank you, congressman. let me address, first, the question of coordinating the

policy. the european council of the european union yesterday issued very comprehensive framework for imposing sanctions and the leaders of the european union are meeting today to consider that. we believe that what our allies and partners have done understand the seriousness of this. we have been working very closely with them including secretary kerry meetings in the past two days. we agree with you there needs to be a coordinated international approach to make clear to the russian federation there will be serious consequences for russia, for the russian economy, for russia's standing in the world, if russia continues its current course of action. this is not intended as a threat. this not intended as any form of economic coercion on anyone's part. this is intended to say the international community is based on a set of principles, the set of laws. the united nations charter, the helsinki final act. members hav toward each other. it must be followed.

that's the basic foundation of the international system and the postwar settlement in europe. this is simply a clear message to russia that russia has to return to respecting those normts, foez commitments, those laws. we believe that there will be coordinated international action, that it will not be just the united states imposing sanctions and other forms in response to russia's actions. we believe we will see that very shortly, and we will work very hard to ensure that this is a coordinated international front. i would adjust to say that we will very strongly support the rights of our economies, our investors and the basic principles of international law and all the other obligations the countries have toward foreign investors. we take that obligation very seriously. >> mr. singh, can you address the issue of russia? >> sure. congressman, mr. ruben is right. we're working very closely with our european counterparts, but the reality is russia is a very

large economy, a $2 trillion economy, eighth largest in the world. sbr enter connections on the trade front, the financial front, the market front. it's important that we're proportionate in our response depending on russia's actions. with respect to the energy question in particular, i would observe there's a co-dependence. yes, europe relies roughly a third of their energy imports come from russia, but so, too, does russia depend on those earnings, on those export earnings to europe. so they also need to be careful. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> we go to mr. steve shab bot of ohio. >> thank you, mr. chairman. president putin's recent explanationtion for his aggressive actions in crimea don't pass the laugh test. he suggested he's obligated to protect his fellow russians in ukraine when crimea was last part of the old soviet union back in 1956 when i was 3 years

old, when it became part of ukraine and remained so after the fall of soviet union and add vesht of an independent ukraine in 1991. his arguments are weak and his actions are clearly in violation of international law. unfortunately there is the perception at least that there's a growing power vacuum around the world and various bad actors are filling it, from the middle east to the south china sea, now ukraine. in the last few weeks we have heard from the white house about consequences and all options on the table and so forth. it wasn't that long ago my colleagues will remember that we were hearing about drawing a line in the sand. frankly, i fear that there may be a growing perception among our friends and allies in the international community that the united states at least in the area of foreign policy lax resolve. i hope our witnesses this morning will be able to alleviate some of those concerns. a couple of questions, where are we in regards to our cooperative efforts with our european partners?

i've heard vague comments about consequences from european officials. how serious are they? who are the players in the region that are working closest with us and where are the weak links? it's been suggest thad some of our allies in europe would never agree to strong sanctions on russia because of the fear that their sources of energy supplies would be cut off. well, here is an idea. perhaps our friends in europe would be able to avoid that fate if they, in fact, produced more of their own energy which is present but untapped because of their own domestic energy policies which we encourage. or even better, the obama administration could reverse its anti-production policies, approve the keystone pipeline, for example, open up anwar, encourage the development of our shale export program, and the europeans could buy their energy from us while increasing american manufacturing jobs.

just a thought. i've given you a lot to think about. any comments? >> congressman, thank you. let me say that in terms of ensuring that we have unity of purpose and action with our allies and partners in europe, this is our highest priority. again, this has been the main objective of secretary kerry's work in the past several days in europe. we believe we've seen clear statements that the leaders of european union, of the european union's member states and countries in europe that are not members of the european union are very serious about the threat that this set of developments poses, will take action, and we're working very hard to coordinate our action with them so we're presenting a strong coordinated front on this. let me also say that we've seen action taken by countries not in the european union and countries in the european union already to impose sanctions, to freeze accounts, take other steps, visa bans, to make clear there will be consequences for violation of

the international order. additionally, let me say it is our highest proi or the to ensure the solemn commitment wes have under the north atlantic treaty to our allies in europe are upheld. we take that obligation with the utmost seriousness. we have worked within nato in the past several days to ensure that we are prepared within the alliance to support all its members. we've taken action to expand. we'll be working very closely with them in coming days and weeks to ensure that the alliance stands strong and united on this. the last point you mentioned, i would just like to say that energy diversification has been at the heart of our policy toward europe for the past 25 years under every administration, and it remains at the heart of that. obviously there's still a long way to go. we strongly believe that diverse sources of energy, lack of reliance on a single supplier is very important for europe's security and future development.

thank you. >> we go now to mr. brian higgins of new york, or did you have a point you wanted to make, mr. singh? >> i was going to make the point that it's clearly important to collaborate closely on sanctions. we should acknowledge a very welcome announcement by europe in terms of their assistance to the ukrainian people. what's important right now is we all come together as an international community and meet ukraine's financing needs as it makes the reforms it needs to achieve economic stability which will pave the path to an independent future. >> mr. higgins? >> thank you, mr. chairman. russia has violated all kinds of international law including the treaty they signed with ukraine guaranteeing its borders in return for which ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons. russia's occupation of ukraine is a direct and clear violation of ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. president putin has acted like

an international street thug. in 1994 when russia was included into the g8, it was in recognition that the post soviet russia was behaving like an honorable member of the international community and not a rogue state. if russia's behavior has changed, then it would seem to me that russia's status as a member of the g8 should change a little bit more aggressively than simply a suspension. their membership should be revoked. it should be revoked. number two, nato, which is 28 countries including the united states and canada and 26 european countries was essentially established to safeguard freedom and security through political and military means. it was a vehicle through which democratic principles could be promoted. any thoughts about the idea of

permanently kicking russia out of the g8 and offering membership to ukraine in nato? >> thank you, congressman. as the white house announcement stated this morning, we have suspended all preparations for attending the g8 summit in sochi. as we've said previously it's hard to imagine the president would go under current circumstances. the larger question you ask, obviously is something the president will need to consider. i think this gets to the bigger picture question which is russia's role in the world, how russia participates as a member of the international community. under the structures and laws and obligations that all members of the international community have toward each other. so i think the larger question is very clear. we, as i mentioned, take the north atlantic alliance and its obligations solemnly, seriously and we are looking actively to consider how we can do more as

an alliance to respond to this set of developments. but i would also add that we've said all along that the alliance is based on a set of values and commitments and principles, what kind of societies have come together. in this case we have stated publicly, for example, that georgia will be a member. that was stated twice by the alliance and remains our position. we believe all societies should have the right, all countries based on the will of their people to choose their alliances, their friendships and the organizations they wish to join. that's just a basic set of principles. that's something each country should be free to decide for itself. that's the most important principle. >> we go to mr. mike mccall of texas. >> i recently went to russia and got the sense that mr. putin is going back to a cold war mentality. this is more of a philosophical

question. do you believe russia is intend on reconstituting its empire? >> i think, as i said earlier, i don't really want to speculate about why rush is doing what it's doing. honestly we don't know. i think what we have to judge is simply what is russia doing. what we see russia doing is what has caused so much concern and that is intervention on the territory of another sovereign state through military source. >> my time is limited. which they have done prior. i think we learned from history they invaded georgia and then they continued to occupy georgia. i think that's very instructive as to the ukraine experience. today, in fact, crimea just voted to join russia. it was announced today. and i'm concerned the same thing that happened in russia will now happen in -- that happened in georgia will happen in ukraine. and i don't know if these sanctions will stop that.

that's my biggest concern. when one nation invades a sovereignty of another, definitions are important. we usually define that as an act of war. does this administration believe that the russian invasion of ukraine is an act of war? >> congressman, we've said very clearly that we know what we have seen which is military aggression, intervention in the affairs of a sovereign country, violation of legal commitments, violation of international law. that is what we see. i'm not an international lawyer so i wouldn't want to get into the terminology. it's clear, also, russia continues to occupy territory of the republic of georgia, something we've been clear in condemning. it is also clear that their commitments that all countries have to each other to settle disputes peacefully. that's certainly not what we're seeing here. >> i think we should call it what it is. you said it's very clear it's a violation of international law.

i believe it's also very clear that this is an act of war against another nation. when we look at nato, i think mr. putin feels very threatened by the european union and nato. poland called for an emergency meeting of nato to discuss concerns about this russian aggression. what are we doing to ensure that poland and our other nato allies are protected? >> one of the things we're doing is increasing our aviation detachment deployment. we are also working to ensure that the baltic states have the support they need to defend their territory, that's why we've increased our commitments to the baltic air policing mission with additional planes and refueling. we're working in brussels at nato to address any other concerns that the allies have. as i said, we take these obligations extremely seriously and we will do our utmost to ensure the alliance stands together. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

>> if i could make a quick announcement. our strategy will be to recess -- i think our witnesses know how congress operates. we've got amendments up on the floor to the energy bill. there's about six of these amendments, two-minute votes. so we will recess until we get to the recommittal debate. that will give us time to come back and finish some of the questioning. with that, let's turn to karen bass. >> thank you, mr. chair. i believe my question is brief. it's for mr. singh. on page three of your testimony you talk about the imf and what is needed is an economic adjustment program that eliminates unsustainable economic imbalances and poorly targeted government subsidies. i was wondering if you could be more specific as to what those subsidies are, what needs to be changed and also, is the imf support contingent on that. >> thank you, congresswoman. that's precisely how the imf

works. its sis assistance is contingent upon reforms being made. the three core forms that i referenced, number one, there has been an unsustainable build up in physical spending over the years in ukraine. that needs to be addressed. number two, there are truly massive energy subsidies that have been a part -- >> subsidies to companies or to the population? >> to the population, to tariffs paid for heating and gas and so forth. that's led to coop assumption of energy that's among the highest in the region. >> would you be concerned that some of the reforms might cause problems, dissent if subsidies are cut off? >> that's why our notion on the loan guarantee is to try to direct the proceeds of that issuance that we have in mind and direct those to ukrainian

society so those reforms are easier to implement and they don't fall on those who can least afford to bear them. the third piece, apart from moving on the energy subsidy problem which i mention has led to overconsumption and reliance on russian gas, i should say. is on their exchange rate. it's overvalued, caused them to have a real problem in terms of exports. it's made their economy uncompetitive. one last thing is, i should say it's very good news in terms of the political will that we're oeshing on the ground that we're already seeing movement on these reforms. the currency in ukraine has weakened quite a bit and become much more flexible. it's becoming much more driven by market forces. that's a condition of the imf and the leadership of ukraine has shown a willingness already to move in that direction. that's a positive sign. >> i know elections are supposed to be scheduled for may. do you think there's the

leadership there with the current person that's in power just running for election? and that's to anybody and then thank you, mr. chair. >> congresswoman, the elections have been set for may for the presidential elections in ukraine. candidates have not yet been formally announced, nor has anyone formally submitted their candidacy. we're not sure. the current prime minister indicated he would not be a candidate and would be running the interim government. we do believe it's absolutely critical there will be a fully free, fair election in ukraine to choose its new president. we'll go to mr. bill keating of massachusetts. would you like to have the last question before we recess? >> thank you, mr. chairman. a couple of quick questions. number one, nato secretary general rasmussen has said the alliance plans to intensify its cooperation with ukraine. can you give us a more detailed description in terms of nato's plans. if the ukrainian government were

to request member ship action plan, would the administration consider that, possibly support it? that's question number one. the other one deals with imf reform. would that improve that to make sure our dollars are more effective live used and we don't have squandered money, important taxpayer money for the u.s. and money from our european allies. will that provide more ability to maximize the use of that? those are the two questions. mr. singh can take the second. mr. rubin, if you want to take the first. >> certainly, congressman. the question of nato cooperation, ukraine has been a member of the partnership for peace for two decades. we have very extensive positive experience working together with ukraine on training, on improving the readiness, on all sorts of questions that relate to building a modern military,

civilian military control. that is something that we certainly hope to continue and ukraine has a mission to nato. we have regular meetings of the nato ukraine council in which that can be discussed. as a matter of fact, we just held a session in light of current events at ukraine's request. we have a very strong partnership through the partnership for peace, through the nato ukraine council. we do want to continue to develop that with the new government and in the future with the new president. >> specifically, with the membership action plan, i can't see in the very near future i can see the need to address this issue frankly because our options are limited now. if ukraine is interested and wants to pursue this, will we entertain those discussions and be supportive? >> we've said from the beginning that countries need to be free to choose their memberships, their alliances, commitments to

other countries, this is basic principle of sovereignty and, therefore, as a matter of basic principle, nato is an open alliance. i think in terms of what the people of ukraine want and what the government of ukraine wants will be up to them to decide will be very interested in having that conversation based on what they tell us. >> on imf quota reform. >> congressman, the answer is absolutely. this imf quota reform wouldn't require a single extra dollar of u.s. financing to the imf but would preserve our lead role as the world's preeminent responder, the first responder to national crisis. it preserves our voice and influence at the institution that would be at the very center of the assistance in ukraine. by the way, it also increases the imf's flexibility to respond to the situation on the ground in the event of a node for bridge financing to a larger package. it should be a slam dunk. >> thank you. mr. deutsche, you a minute. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i just have -- i want to focus the discussion in a different way. in addition to targeting individuals responsible for undermining the democratic process and threatening the territorial integrity of ukraine, are you considering additional robust sanctions that would have a more significant impact on the russian regime? for example, will you look to impose sanctions, mr. singh, my question to you, will you look to impose sanctions discussed previously for those providing the funding and equipment necessary for the syrian regime to kill and terrorize its own people? that it seems is a way to really strike at russia in a way that is significant and appropriate. >> congressman, let me just say, we have not listed specific individuals or entities today. this is broad authority that we'll use as appropriate given the situation on the ground. >> is it appropriate to impose sanctions on those individuals who -- in russia who are assists the assad regime in slaughtering its own people?

>> congressman, i can only say this specific tool is designed to allow us to sanction those who are most directly involved in destabilizing ukraine, including the military intervention in crimea. it doesn't preclude further steps to be taken. i can't comment specifically on your question. >> it does not provide the opportunity. do you understand the opportunity to impose sanctions in a significant way that would impact the russian regime and the decisions they make by going after those who are responsible for aiding assad? that's the question. >> i'll have to come back with a fuller response. >> we stand in recess. >> this is c-span3, with politics and public affairs programming throughout the week and every weekend 48 hours of people and events telling the american story on american history tv. get our schedules and see past programs at our web site, and

you can join in the conversation on social media sites. [inaudible conversations] >> this hearing is reconvened, and we're going to go to mr. cicilline of rhode island. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you for convening this hearing. thank you to our witnesses. i think we all understand the urgency of the moment and the necessity of joining our international -- joining in an international response to the clear act of russian aggression. and i presume that many standard

reviews and procedures are likely to be expedited or maybe even waived. so i'd like to just ask you to speak to the long-term obligations of the united states that we're contemplating. typically, the united states requires that u.s. credits in volatile countries are administered by an independent facility, administered under u.s. supervision. will that be the case here? who will administer ukraine's payment of interest on the bonds and repayment of principal? will the u.s. have effective oversight? how will that occur? and what do you assess the prospects for successful repayment, and what happens if that does not occur? and finally, in in addition to the loan guarantee, what sorts of aid is the administration considering for the ukraine? gu sorts of aide is the administration considering? i assume mr. singh, you would be the best to answer. >> thank you. the way the u.s. loan works is

the u.s. government guarantees the repayment of the principle and interest on a bond that would be issued by the ukraine government. okay, so the cost to the u.s., the way that it is calculated is that there's an assessment of the possibility that the ukraine government cannot repay the interest and principle, in which case the u.s. government would be responsible. and that is how it's designed. now the way we can mitigate the risk is twofold. ch one is we make the loan guarantee conditional upon the existence of an imf program, which increases the probability of repayment. and number two, we can use the proceeds from the loan guarantee to lessen the impact of those reforms on the most vulnerable segments of the ukrainian society. and therefore, that makes reforming, the success of it more likely.

>> and what is the administration considering and what other things can with doe to support that? >> thank you for your question, mr. congressman. the reality is we've had a bilateral support program with ukraine since 1992. and we spent a lot of money and we've worked with the government and we've worked with civil society very effectively. as we look at the fiscal year of '15, questions we've made, obviously that was drawn up as well as the '14 requests before we knew what the actual needs were going to be. as my colleague was talking about what the imf team was looking at, they will go in and look at the various elements of technical assistance needed to support that. whether it's banking supervision, energy, subsidies as we were talking about, but most importantly and immediate, i think we have the elections in front of us, and those are something that i think is going to provide a lot of emphasis for the ukrainian people to recognize their true ambitions and where they want to go. and so we want to make sure those are as free, fair and

transparent as possible. >> thank you very much. i yield back, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to the witnesses. and i appreciate your testimony earlier. i'm sorry for the brief break. mr. singh, i wanted to build off a little bit of what my colleagues said earlier. russia is starting to not use the dollar and reserve currency. they have also threatened to not pay back outstanding loans to the u.s. and other outstanding european nations. can you assess the validity of the threat? what the outcome may be? >> congressman, thank you for your question. i don't think it would be prudent for me to speculate about the various scenarios that could unfold. what i would say again, though, is that russia does not get to decide whether the u.s. dollars or reserve currency, and that we control our destiny in that regard. >> and i appreciate that, sir, but with regards to outstanding loans or can you just give me some idea as to the volume of loans outstanding that they have, if that is a threat, are

we talking about single billions, tens of billions, kind of order of magnitude where we're at. >> we have some initial data on the amount of claims that reside in in the u.s. financial system to russia. our exposure is somewhat lower than that of europe. and as it relates to our system in particular, it's well under 1%. >> thank you. >> and then perhaps mr. reuben or for any of you, i understand from the materials that were provided this morning, the imf is currently doing an assessment of the ukrainian economy at this point. there's been some issues with transparency. and i've seen between 25 and $30 billion over the course of the next year or so. how long until the full assessment is done, and to with any degree of certainty, are you confident that figure in there again is accurate?

is there a potential for what is needed to actually shore up the finances for the ukraine to be quite a bit larger? >> congressman, thank you for your question. on the actual figures, i'll refer to mr. singh. we've been saying now for years that ukraine needed to address the very serious deficiencies, not just in the economic policymaking, but in the entire way the economy was structured. we said all along the way to do that was to engage in a serious dialogue dw the monetary fund. bring in the people who know how to do the assessments and then have a serious negotiation. the previous government did not do that, and as a result, did not get the help and the advice it needed. we're very encouraged by the government's readiness to engage, to engage with the fund, to welcome the advice, and to begin making the difficult reforms. we believe that the package that includes imf support, that includes imf quota reform that

will give us the support to ukraine and other countries that find themselves in this situation, it's a critical part of the the package. and the bilateral assistance that we are committed to providing together with an imf package that the european union has now committed to providing can get ukraine through this difficult period but also launch it on a healthy path back towards prosperity and economic stability. let me just ask if mr. singh wants to add anything to that. >> sure. ful i'll say there are a a wide range of market estimates out there in terms of ukraine's needs. i don't want to speculate without having the facts. that's why the imf is there, as you suggested. they're going to provide the transparency in terms of the needs of ukraine. in their estimate of what ukraine needs, much will depend on the willingness of ukrainian authorities, and every indication we have is that they're willing to make the tough decisions. i should add the imf and

international community have more than enough resources to meet ukraine's needs so long as it will make the commitment to reform. >> any idea when we'll see that report? is that weeks away? or days away? it depends on the speed for the way the relevant data is handed over and analyzed. >> i appreciate it. >> let me ask a question just about the brutality against reporters there. this is one of the concerns i have about the ability to get the free flow of information around ukraine. we had radio liberty and the voice of america targeted by security forces there. pro yanukovych security forces. we had two radio free reporters who were badly beaten and detained in january. a prominent distributor was forced to leave the ukraine due to death threats in mid-january.

and in voa, we had a ukrainian tv service reporter who faced repeated intimidation following his coverage of the motorcade protest. so in the runup to the next elections, in ukraine, it seems to me that uncensored information, sort of surrogate radio to give realsometime information about what is actually happening on tp ground and to discredit misinformation. it's going to be very important. what steps are being taken to increase messaging to the ukrainian people and specifically one of my concerns is how do you focus that, target that to eastern ukraine? and maybe people in crimea to make sure they have the real case of what's going on. >> thank you, chairman. we have been working very effectively with the public

deployment arm of the embassy to do exactly that. f as you saw the white house fact sheet came out about the top ten myths being portrayed out there. the independent media has been a really bright spot that we've seen throughout ukraine over the years. just today the ukrainian crisis media stood up by yew krukraini activists themselves. they're doing it themselves. however, we are trying to give a bit of a bully pulpit and trying to amplify the messages that they're putting out. i think you're right. in the leadup to the elections that will be one of the most important elements, is to make sure that this information is out there and we've been training journalists and working effectively with a lot of virgining stations that have been trying to get the message out. >> i do think, and i've talked to croatian journalists and others, years ago i tried to start a radio-free yugoslavia. that was the one country we

never forecasted in during the war. and i had a number of reporters tell me you saw the way the czech republic and slovakia handled this without a loss of life. they told me if there was a surrogate radio broadcast into the country, it wouldn't have been possible with hate radio for each of these ethnic groups to whip up the types of hatred that were created. that's why i think having this kind of capability going in before the election, while ensuring russian speaking ukrainians, that the ukrainian government is going to respect all lapg wajs. but these broadcast have to be not in ukrainian but in russian. i'm going to follow up with you on that. but at this moment we're going to have adjourn in order to get to the floor for the final vote. thank you very much for your testimony here today.

>> and the u.s. senate gavels in today in about 25 minutes, 4:00 eastern time, after votes on an appeals court nomination and a bill dealing with military six yule assault, democratic senators will spend the night discussing global climate change. jay carney talked about the plan with appropriators telling them the administration supports the attention to climate change. here's some of the briefing. >> jay, two topics. climate change. senate democrats are having an all-nighter to talk of the issue. does the white house support this, think it's a good idea to get folks talking about an important issue you want on the radar, but number two, is there some expectation at the end of talk there'll be some sort of an action on climate change this year. >> >> we absolutely support the action taken to focus attention on the challenges posed by

climate change and the impacts that climate change is having on our environment and on our emergency, you know, our ability to respond to emergencies. and so we commend those who are participating, because it's a very important subject that the president, as you know, is concerned about and has a climate action plan dedicated to addressing. and he has taken steps in his first term and his second term and will continue to take steps to both reduce our carbon emissions and to make sure that we're more prepared for the effects and impacts of severe weather, for example, which is a by-product of the climate change that we've seen. >> we'll have live coverage of the senate starting at 4:00 eastern time and through the the night here on c-span2. >> if more than one entity

manages the key identifiers of internet, then by nature the internet will no longer be one net. at the heart, for example, of the domain name system is the root services system, and very few people appreciate that in order to resolve names on the internet, there is an actual root system that makes that work for the entire planet. in the root all names are resolved to unsure that when you type www.c-span.org, for example, or any other web site name, you go to the exact site that c-span wants you to go to all the time, every time for the last two-plus decades. >> the head of the internet corporation for assigned names and numbers on the role icann plays in assigning new internet doe main names on "the communicators" at 8 eastern tonight only on c-span3 due to

the special senate session. >> the original plan when they built the new 22-story capitol in the 1970s was to tear down the historic capitol. but a fight ensued, basically, between politicians and the people of florida. and there was a save the old capitol campaign. when the call came out that the architect had planned to demolish the husband to havic structure, but the citizen campaign to save the old capitol had prevailed, and the two buildings were going to coexist in one capitol complex. but how exactly the historic capitol would be restored to was then the debate. it wasn't whether we save it or not, it was what time period should we restore it to. and the 1902 version offered great benefits, because all three branches of government were in this one building. and the goal of the department of state was to turn it into a museum and use it as a teaching

tool for florida school children. so being able to come to this one site and see the supreme court, the governor's office and the house and senate chambers and understand the three branches of government and how thaw worked together really was a benefit. >> this weekend booktv and american history tv take a look at the history and literary life of florida's state capital, tallahassee. saturday at noon eastern on c-span2 and sunday at 2 on c-span3. >> nra president wayne la pierre spoke to the crowds gathered at cpac last week calling for voters to take action against president obama and the democratic agenda. during his speech he warned about restrictions on gun rights and said fear is driving americanss to buy more guns today. the annual cpac conference is hosted by the american conservative union, and mr. la pierre's comments are about 20 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome wayne la pierre, nra

vice president and chief executive officer. ♪ ♪ >> thank you very much. thank you very much. thank you. [cheers and applause] it's great to be here with you today, and thanks to all of you for having me. i really appreciate that warm welcome. hey, i'll tell you, there must be some nra members out there. [cheers and applause] you know, to each of you, i really would, i'd like to thank you for being here today with me, and i'd like to thank you for your support and your vigilance in defending our freedom. it's really made a difference. you and nra members all over the country have made a real difference in this nation in making our freedom safer, so thank you very much. [applause] you know, a little over a year

ago the nra offered a simple, honest and effective proposal to make our schools safer. the political and media elites responded by calling me just about every nasty name in the book. you remember. but americans responded differently. in city after county after school board after statehouse, teachers, parents, legislators, police agreed with us and put armed security safeguards in place. [applause] history has proven again, that president obama and anti-freedom activists everywhere with deny and try to suppress. the truth: firearms in the hands of good people save lives. [applause] the political elite, they can't

escape, and the darlings of the national media can't change the god given right of good people to protect themselves. [applause] for that fundamental human right, the nra stands unflinching and unapologetic and in defense of our freedom. nra's five million members and america's 100 million gun owners will not back down, not now, not ever! i assure you that. [applause] you know, freedom has never needed our defense more than now. almost everywhere you look, something has gone wrong. you feel it in your heart. you know it in your gut.

something in our country has gone wrong. the or core values that -- the core values that we believe in, the things we care about most in our lives are changing, e erode ing; our right to speak, our right to gather, our right to privacy, the freedom to work, to practice our religion and raise and protect our families the way we see fit. those aren't old values, they aren't new values, they are core freedoms. the core freedoms that have always defined us as a nation. we feel them. as we are here this after, we feel them -- this afternoon, we feel them slipping away. all across america everywhere i go people come up to me, and they say, wayne, i've never been

worried about this country until now. and they say it not with anger, but they say it with sadness in their eyes. i've never been worried about this country until now. we're worried about the economic crisis choking our budgets and shrinking our retirement. we're worried about providing decent health care and a college education for our own children. we fear for the safety of our families. it's why neighborhood streets that were once filled with bicycles and soughtboards -- skateboards and laughter in the air now sit empty and silent. in virtually every way for the things we care about most, we feel profound loss. we're sad. not because we fear manager is

going wrong -- something is going wrong, but because we know something already has gone wrong. that's why more and more americans are buying firearms and ammunition. not to cause trouble, but because that america is already in trouble. we know that sooner or later reckless government actions and policies have consequences. when government corruption breaks faith with the american people, the entire fabric of society, everything we believe in and count on, is then in jeopardy. political dishonesty and media dishonesty have linked together. they've joined forces to misinform and deceive the american public. let's be straight about it right here this afternoon. the political and media elite

are lying to us. you know they are. [applause] they lie bills into law, they pass legislation they haven't even read, and yet eagerly go on and defend them on televisionment -- television. health care policies, economic policies, foreign affairs all seem repeatedly reckless. the irs is now a weapon. a weapon to punish anyone who disagrees with them. and that means every one of you. they try to regulate our religion. they collect our cell phone and e-mail data. they give us solyndra, benghazi, fast and furious, obamacare,

massive unemployment, a debt that will choke our grandchildren and one executive order after another right on top of each other. and hoarse the deal -- and here's the deal, rather than expose government dishonesty and scandal like they used to, the media elite whitewash it all. move on, they tell us. there's nothing to see here. don't worry about it. move on. one of america's greatest threats is the national news media that fails to provide a level playing field for the truth. [applause] now it's all entertainment, ratings, personal celebrities, the next sensational story and the deliberate spinning and purposeful use of words and language, truth be with damned,

to advance -- truth be damned, to advance their own agenda. you see it every day many this country. and here's how you know the media's lying, they still call himselfs journalists. [laughter] i'll tell you, they've never been honest about the nra. they hate us. just for saying out loud and sticking up for what we believe as if we had no right. so they try to ridicule us into oblivion or shame us into submission. but it should be directed right into their own makeup mirrors. the media's intentional corruption of the truth is an abomination, and nra members will never -- and i mean never -- submit or surrender to the national media. [applause]

people in our country have become so weary of all the government and media dishonesty, the all-too-common place corruption, the lying that most americans have simply stopped listening in this country. it's why the president's state of the union address was largely ignoreed by the public. it's why, according to a recent poll, 90% of americans disapprove of washington. it's why a majority of americans in poll after a poll regardless of who takes it don't trust the white house, don't trust congress and don't much trust either national political party. and sure as heck don't trust the national media. we don't trust government

because government itself has proven unworthy of our trust. we trust ourselves. and we trust what we know in our hearts to be right. we trust our freedom. in this uncertain world surrounded by lies and corruption everywhere you look, there is no greater freedom than the right to survive and protect our families with all the rifles, shotguns and handguns we want. [cheers and applause] we know in the world that surrounds us there are terrorists and there are home invaders, drug cartel, carjackers, knockout gamers and rapers and haters and campus killers, airport killers, shopping mall killers and killers who scheme to destroy

our country with massive storms of violence against our power grid or vicious ways through chemicals or disease that could collapse our society that sustains us all. so i ask you, all of you here today, do you trust this government to protect you? >> no! >> we are on our own. that is a certainty. no less certain than the absolute truth, a fact the powerful political and media elites continue to deny just as sure as they would deny our right to save our very lives. the life or death truth that when you're on your own, the surest way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. [applause]

now, what i've just said will be sneered at and ridiculed as feverish fear mongering. by the very same people who produce the television shows and movies that graphically depict and glamorize every evil act i just mentioned. [applause] so let 'em sneer. they can't change the truth. thaw can't change the fact -- they can't change the fact that all over america there are more than 100 million good guys and good gals too, good americans with guns, and a bunch of us are here right now. we, we are good with -- good americans. we all love our country, and we are not about to stand idly by as the dishonest political and media elites try to strip our

values away. the nra, all we believe in and fight for, it's really become a metaphor for the core american freedoms that all of us want preserved. standing with the nra is a massive declaration of individual rights, an unwavering determination to secure the survival of everything that we cherish; our struggle is noble as like-minded people coming together to protect and defend what makes us free. we are exactly what our founding fathers were and envisioned us to always be. so i'll put it to you. do you believe that declaration of individual liberty? come on, let me hear you. do you believe it? [cheers and applause] are you willing to stand and fight for your rights?

>> yeah! [applause] >> then there are two things that i need you to do. first, i want you to two to the nra booth -- go to the nra's booth right here at cpac and sign your name to a declaration of individual rights. sign that declaration today and add your name to millions of other patriotic americans like you all over this great country. and second, i want you to stand behind your declaration and back it up by joining the national rifle association. [applause] america needs you. as part of a larger, stronger and tougher and growing nra. it's how you resist. it's how you tell the world that you're going to fight, and you're going to protect everything that you care about. trust, dignity, honor, suvic

duty -- civic duty, courtesy, kindness, liberty to live and believe as we choose, to be as accepted as we are accepting of others. the freedom that only comes through the second amendment and the bill of rights to the u.s. constitution. ms. . [applause] to live without fear and tyranny as responsible, good people who exercise our individual right to keep and bear arms, to defend our families, our communities and our nation. the nra proudly stands for the america with all want where we can speak and is gather as we choose, unashamed of our patriotism, unflinching in defense of one unifying

principle; individual freedom for all. [applause] our second amendment in this country separates us from every other country on earth. it makes us stronger than other countries, it makes us better than other countries. [applause] to save all of our freedoms, there is no nobler cause than saving the second amendment. so this is your moment in history. your national movement. it's your time to join us and stand and fight. our opponents are shrewd and skilled at spinning webs of deceit. their coffers -- and i know you know this -- their coffers are full, their sights are set squarely on this fall's

election. as this election, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise, it's going to be a bare snuck l street fight t -- knuckle street fight. they're going after every house seat, every senate seat, every governor's chair, every statehouse they can get their hands on, and they're laying the groundwork to put another clubton back in the -- clinton back in the white house. >> no! >> they fully intend to finish the job, to full pill their -- fulfill their commitment, their dream of fundamentally transforming america. into an america that i guarantee you won't recognize. but mark my words, the nra will not go quietly into the night. [cheers and applause] we will fight! i promise you that! [applause]

with millions and millions of americans just like you all over this country. that are going to come together. [applause] this election's going to be won or lost on every street, in every corner, in every coffee shop, in every store, in every church in america where every mra member -- nra lives and works and volunteers and campaigns. those nra members, those great americans, they are the real muscle of nra's clout. i ask all of you and everyone watching this out on tv, become one of them. join us and together we will stand and fight and win back and take back our country. so stand up right now and you

tell me, do you want to save this country and all that is good and right about america? [cheers and applause] come on. they need to hear ya all the way to the green rooms of msnbc and all the way over to the white house. [cheers and applause] will you stand with us and defend your freedom with all your heart? are you proud of your individual liberty and ready to fight like hell to keep it this fall? [applause] join the nra booth to reclaim our mission and restore our core american values. never, ever back down and always with all your heart together as americans, let's stand and fight for freedom. thank you very much! [cheers and applause] thank you! thank you. >> and heading now to the senate about to gavel in, they'll begin the day with general speeches and then move this afternoon at

5:00 eastern to a appeals court nomination, that's for the tenth circuit. a vote on that at 5:30, and then a second vote this afternoon to move forward on claire mccat sill's bill on military sexual assaults. and after that what's expected to be an all-night session by democratic senates delivering speeches on climate change. you can watch it all right here on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, who has watched o.e.f. our going out and coming in, strengthen our senators in

their labors. give them the higher vision and the larger perspective, making them aware of their accountability to you and history. bless and keep them and their loved ones, enabling them to find joy in your presence. help us all to remember that your ways are true and righteous and will empower us to reach the destination of abundant living. today, lift the light of your countenance upon us and give us your peace.

we pray in your great name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. mr. reid: mr. president? the president pro tempore: the majority leader. mr. reid: i move to proceed to calendar number 309, the child care and development block grant reauthorization. the president pro tempore: the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to s. 1086, a bill to reauthorize and improve the child care and development block grant act of 1990 and for other purposes. mr. reid: mr. president, following the leader's remarks, there will be a period of

morning business until 5:00 p.m. today. senators during that period of time will be able to speak for up to ten minutes each. at 5 checkbook p.m., the senate proceed to -- at 5:00 p.m., the senate will proceed to consider the nomination of carolyn mchugh to be a united states circuit judge for the tenth circuit with the time until 5:30 equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. at 5:30 there will be two roll call votes, the motion to invoke cloture on mchugh and passage of s. 1917, the victims protection act of 2014. mr. president, there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading. the president pro tempore: the clerk will readed titles of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 2097, a bill to provide for the extension of certain unemployment benefits and for other purposes. h.r. 4118, an act to amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to delay the implementation of the

penalty for failure to comply with the individual health insurance mandate. mr. reid: i would to be any further proceedings with respect to these two matters. the president pro tempore: objection is heard. the bills will be placed on the calendar. mr. reid: would the chair announce the business of the day. the president pro tempore: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. and under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business until 5 -- until 5:00 p.m. with senators permitted to speak up to ten minutes. mr. reid: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the president pro tempore: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. sessions: madam president, skilled that the quorum call be dispensed with. officer sphe wowctthe presidingt objection. mr. sessions: it has been reported that a number of our colleagues in the democratic majority in the senate intend to speak on the senate floor tonight on the question of climate change. sometimes they'll say the "global warming." i guess that's ceasing to be the number-one phrase now. but an article in "usa today" said this -- quote -- "effort is cause for some confusion because the senators are calling for action in a chamber they control

but without any specific legislation to offer up for a vote." no legislation. this is indeed confusing. why wouldn't the majority leader bring a bill to the floor of the senate to expressly approve president obama's climate agenda or to approve his rigorous regulations that constrict american entities? why not? well, the answer is, it wouldn't pass. the american people do not support this. neither does the united states congress. and a lot of his democratic colleagues, i would suggest, don't want to vote on it, and it just raises a lot of questions about what the deal is here and what we need to do as a nation to handle pollution, carbon

dioxide, and climate change. and how we need to deal with it and how we should think about it. there was an article in today' s washington times by mr. triplet that points out a few weeks ago in february billionaire and major democratic national committee donor tom steyer held a dinner at his pall la palacion francisco home for 70 of his closest democratic friends. former vice president al gore was the headliner and four other democratic senators were present. and he has pledged to give $50 million to a campaign to defeat mainly, i guess, republicans because they don't agree with his global warming agenda. mr. triplet says, "what has

everyone's attention is the number -- ped $100 million. mr. steyer has announced that he intends to put $50 million of his money into campaigns in 2015 and has challenged his liberals to match it with an additional $50 million of their own. his issue is climate change." so, we've got to talk after this conference, i guess -- we'll have a lot of talk about this question. and with regard to congress, i'll just try to be as brief as i can. in 1970, congress passed the clean air act, before global warming had ever been discussed. in fact, there was some discussion of global cooling in 1970. it passed. carbon di dioxide is an owed an,

tasteless gas that plants take in. people breathe in and letous carbon dioxide. it is a nonharmful, odorless gas. and it became contended -- it was contended that this gas was causing global warming, and it made some sense to me. co2 apparently is a -- some sort of a global warming gas and creates the blanket effect and could increase the temperatures, and who knows. that was the argument that seemed to make some sense. however, john dingell, the democrat of michigan who was there at the time of the clean air act and one of its authors said i think the supreme court came up with a very much erroneous decision on whether clean air act covers greenhouse gases, close quote. so what happened was the supreme court by a 5-4 ruling after it

was contended through the international panel on climate change that co2 could be causing climate change, they ruled that this was a pollutant, like particulates, like nox and sox, sulfur dioxide, and therefore under the 1970 law which never mentioned co2, the environmental protection agency was required to regulate it. and it gave these unelected bureaucrats, people in that agency the power to regulate an individual american's barbeque grill, their lawnmower and every major business in america the amount of co2 that they emit from their business and their plants. it's a remarkable development from a pure constitutional question, and if the issue were

brought up today, it would not pass. however, they have not sufficient votes apparently to overturn it, but there is not -- there would never have been enough votes to pass legislation to do what the supreme court said. now, we're not looking at cost and benefits when we deal with this issue. we're talking about billions of dollars in costs, and what kind of benefit do we get for that, even if we were to reduce our co2 emissions in the united states by 80% by the year 2050 in line with what the president says our goals should be, there would be virtually no reductions in predicted global temperatures if you take the models that the

experts utilize. even in 100 years, 90 years from today, 2100. so it's not improper for us to raise questions about this, and as to how much power we should be giving to the environmental protection agency, how much costs can be pushed down onto the american people to pay for this agenda when there are some interesting facts that keep coming out. in january of 2014, in "the scientific american" magazine, which has been a staunch supporter of global warming legislation, it contained an article entitled -- quote -- " the long, slow rise of solar and wind, which explains sop of the reasons for the slow pace of energy transition."

and it explains -- quote -- "each widespread transition from one dominant fuel to another has taken 50-60 years, and there is no technical or financial reason, they say, to believe that renewables will rise any quicker." it just takes time to transition, and even if we can make this happen, we can't make it as fast as a lot of people would like it to see. they say that from 1990-2012, the world's energy from fossil fuels barely changed at all, down from 88% to 87%. so we remain on the same path even though we have been working on this for 22 years. it concludes -- quote -- "energy transitions take a long time." it just does.

then we have the problem of exaggeration to the point where exaggeration is really not a fair word to describe it, in my opinion. it becomes more than an exaggeration but a deliberate misrepresentation. on november 14, 2012, president obama said -- quote -- "the temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted even ten years ago." increasing faster than even ten years ago it was predicted to increase. so i wrote former e.p.a. director/administrator lisa jackson, asking her to provide the best available data that e.p.a. had and that they would rely upon to support the president's statement. send us the data to support that. december of 2012, and a few months later, in february of

2013, gina mccarthy, then assistant administrator of e.p.a., wrote me a response but she did not provide any of the requested data relating to the average global temperature of so-called increases. then in april, three months later, she was nominated to be head of e.p.a., miss mccarthy was, and i asked her -- and she said she would provide additional follow-up information to support the president's statement that the claimant is increasing faster than was predicted. -- that the climate is increasing faster than was predicted. on april 30, she responded in writing to me -- i'm on the e.p.w. environment committee. she responded, but not with any requested analysis of the chart that i asked for that would show official predictions versus actual global temperatures. she simply stated -- quote -- "e.p.a. has not produced its own analysis, but we expect a

definitive comparison in the forthcoming ipcc fifth assessment report." close quote. then on may 29, president obama did it again. he claimed -- quote -- "we also know that the climate is warming faster than anybody anticipated five or ten years ago." close quote. this is the president's statement. i challenged the at the same time at the committee to his top environmental and public works person. she could not produce any information to back this up. and he repeats it again. and this is very disturbing to me. so on june 24, i was joined by all e.p.w. republicans. we wrote a letter to her, miss mccarthy, to provide data supporting the president's claims, and she didn't provide

any data. why? there is no such data. the climate is not warming faster than was predicted by the experts several -- five to ten years ago. nothing close. let's look at this chart. this chart, the red line is a projection compiled of 102 predictive computer models. these models are -- are experts in various universities and think tanks around the globe that try to predict what's going to happen. they believe with co2 and other global warming gases, the temperatures will increase, and we have to take extraordinary steps, they say, to avoid this because it can be damaging to

us. and this is what the average of those models predicted. going up substantially from almost a -- almost a degree by 2020. that's one degree, 20-some odd years, that's noticeable. that's an impact if it were to happen. however, these two lines are actual temperature measurements, starting in 1980 through the current date right here, and the temperatures haven't gone up. it's been an extraordinary thing. the computer models have been wrong virtually every year, and experts are admitting, even ipcc admits this is a problem for

them. they don't know why the temperature hasn't been increasing. co2 has been going up. why isn't the temperature increasing like they predicted? and yet the president continues to say the temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted even ten years ago. it's hardly increasing at all in the last 17 years. so we have got to have some truth, and i hope if our colleagues talk about this issue that they will ask e.p.a. administrator mccarthy what information she has that would justify such a statement, and i hope they don't make that same statement. actually, i asked her it would be nice if she would tell the president to quit saying it. i will say he hasn't said it since last year, again because

the facts as i have supported them here that show a flat temperature, those effects are pretty much undisputed. now we -- we have this allegation that, well, extreme weather, the problem from co2 and greenhouse gases are causing extreme weather. you've all heard that. when hurricane sandy hit the northeast -- we don't normally have one hit the northeast. it hit the northeast. it was a fairly strong but not exceedingly powerful hurricane and did a lot of damage. peep have been living on the water and weren't prepared for it and it did a lot of damage. al gore -- former vice president al gore recently asserted all weather events are now well affected by global warming pollution, close quote. senator barbara boxer, chairman

of our committee, the e.p.w. committee, said last year super superstorm sandy is -- quote -- evidence of climate change mounting around us, close quote. but in january before the senate e.p.w. committee, the administration's top wildlife official dan ash -- now, this was in january. he cited, quote -- he declared that there were -- quote -- more frequent and severe storms, flooding, droughts and wildfires , close quote. this is a man, the chief top person in the wildlife department. we've got more frequent and severe storms, flooding droughts and wildfires, close quote. and he therefore supported president obama's policies and his action plan, his climate action plan. so i wrote him and asked him to provide any data he had personally evaluated that would support his claim.

he testified before a united states senate committee. i asked him does he have any data to back it up. and of course he didn't. mr. holgren, the top science advisor in the country also declared that the president will talk about the connection between the increasing frequency and intensity of droughts and climate change when he speaks tomorrow. he has actually repeatedly talked about the connection between climate change and extreme weather. well, what do we know about that? we have had experts before our committee to discuss that very subject. dr. roger pealty, who is a climate impacts expert and agrees with the view that global warming is partly caused by human emissions, testified in

the e.p.w. committee last year, so he talked to us. he talked about this very issue, extreme weather, and this is what he said -- it is misleading and just plain incorrect to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have increased on climate time scales either in the united states or globally. so it is not true. it's misleading. it's false. dr. roy spencer of the university of alabama-huntsville also testified before our committee last year, saying -- quote -- "there is little or no observational evidence that severe weather of any type has worsened over the last 30, 50 or 100 years." close quote. the american enterprise institute looked at the data on

this question, and this is what they found -- quote -- "in brief, tornado, hurricane and cyclone activity are at historically low levels. wildfires are in a long-term decline, except in government forests. there is no trend in sea levels related to increases in greenhouse gases concentrations. the record of the arctic ice cover is ambiguous. there is no drought trend since 1895, and the same is true for flooding over the past 85-127 years. when asking dr. holdron about this, he responlds, "the first few people you quoted are not representative of the mainstream scientific opinion on this point.