>> is its strong or is it a bench for democrats that is not particularly strong? >> i haven't spent a lot of time analyzing it. what i can tell you is we won't win in nevada and we are not going to spend any money there any money there'll as it changes dramatically. unless the bridge get shut down. they need some wad are, that's right. republican governors in nevada and new mexico are -- latinos. >> it's the exception to the rule in the governors association. >> hi. could you talk a little bit about legislatures where although as you say you are on the offense on the legislative level as terry mcauliffe has learned the hard way you can have a great victory for

governor but if you have a non-corporate of legislature is hard to get your agenda passed. >> you raise a good point. let's talk about how we got into this mess. haley barbour i believe when he was chair of the republican party made a decision that democrats didn't pay enough attention to which was in the best in electing legislatures, legislators and republican governors for a lot of reasons he wanted to do it but when reapportionment comes up we can bridge line in congress and have a bunch of people that believe what we believe which happens to be the tea party in haley barbour's case govern america or at least be obstructionist to american progress. they did it and they did pretty well 20 years ago. that is why we are in the mess we are in. one of the points that i made to

democrats is listen i'm just speculating here but one of the challenges to taking back congress might be that they gerrymandered these districts so effectively after they did that it's really tough to win and so if you elect democratic governors and democratic legislators going forward going towards reapportionment maybe we have an opportunity to at least make the districts there again. i do think democrats historically didn't look carefully enough in electing democratic governors who controlled governor and democratic legislative candidates. >> i want to conclude. let me first make an observation. the two, four, six rule. democrats are on the defensive. most of them were elected four years ago in a republican

landslide so republicans are on the defensive. senators were elected six years ago which was 2008 in the financial crisis. if the results of the election point in all different directions we are asked where the voters trying to say? i think the answer is landslides don't last as what they are trying to say. finally court ruling on money. is that creating a problem for democrats? >> which court ruling? >> the latest one. lifting limits on total campaign contributions. is that a problem for democrats and republicans? >> it's the icing on the cake to a bad decision which was citizens united and it's going to lead to more money in politics which i think is bad for democracy. >> is it worse for democrats than republicans? >> it's hard to tell. again not to sound like a broken

record but we do get outspent. we are an environment where we need to raise money so we compete but we have to spend our resources more wisely and when we do we win. that is why we won eight of the nine last races on focus on democratic governors did i believe it's going to make a difference for america and we understand we have to be smarter and have better candidates and implement the policies we promised to implement which is job creating creating opportunities for middle-class americans. >> thank you very much governor. we know you had other engagements. >> thanks so much.of a

joint hearing of two house subcommittees. this one hour and 45 minute

hearing begins with matt salmon of arizona. [inaudible conversations] >> we will start by recognizing myself in the ranking member, actually the ranking member is not here. so i will recognize a fellow who is cochairman. so we are pleased to have this hearing today without objection, the members of this subcommittee can submit for opening remarks of the record and i now yield mice elf as i present my opening statements and i want to start, first and foremost, by thanking my colleague, chairman duncan

hunter, chairman of the information subcommittee on coast guard. and this includes our strategy and regional partnerships. the u.n. issued a report naming latin america as the most violent regions in the world with 31 countries in the region listed among the top 20 worldwide. and the top six most murderous country's per capita are all right here in our own western hemisphere. narcotics trafficking organizations are becoming more sophisticated innovating law enforcement and as the u.n. report suggests, increasingly more violent. this along our border and near our shores poses a great threat to our national security and destabilizes our region.

this includes disrupting and dismantling drug cartels and latin america with success. and i can be in this to join down with military assets of being properly leverage to address this serious threat. in this fight we have seen the consequences of our country being forced to confront swindling financial resources and this includes our overall narcotics efforts. i am concerned what this means for overall narcotic strategy in the region. and i would assume at best a level budgetary environment going forward.

[inaudible conversations] excuse me. from before the policies and employment need to find ways to better engage our regional partners and help them to build capacity more effectively. ambassador, we spoke regally about important steps. we have now taken to work with our partners to have them to address the serious challenges of violent drug trafficking organizations i look forward to hearing more about the successes and challenges you raise in the overall strategy. where possible i would like to see replicas of some of the most successful programs that we have helped to implement in the region including this initiative in mexico. the success plan was only possible because of columbia having the political will and

leadership to win their country back. in mexico we have seen an increased commitment on the part of the mexican government to partner with the united states in this effort through other joint operations. this commitment has yielded very important successes and we continue to build upon them. it seems clear to me that no amount of taxpayer money will ever be enough without the buy-in and support of those in the central america and kurgan islands. i look forward to hearing the operations and i want to personally publicly congratulate all who who were involved in the two big cocaine seizures earlier this year.

so i think that this is a great example of what we can accomplish when we work together with our regional partners. i want to thank the coast guard and the southtown joined interagency task force for hosting my staff and my pleasure to have the bureau of narcotics and law enforcement law enforcement here to provide their insight on central american kirby and security programs in the hemisphere. i thank them for their willingness to work with my stuff on a daily basis to answer our question and i'm hopeful that this will be an important step towards a multi-agency strategy to protect our national security in our hemisphere. i now recognize a chairman for his opening remarks. >> good morning. the subcommittees are needed to review the federal government

efforts and i want to thank and commend the chairman and the house committee on foreign affairs for this important topic in a joint hearing. a illicit drug use remains a serious concern for the united states. not only putting strain on criminal justice systems for trade and are with these concerns. it affects millions are a country the country in the world. so the most notorious criminals are directly responsible for drug violence and crime and corruption that are destabilized and risking lives of american citizens here and abroad. and this includes american citizens. one individual was killed while leading a drug operation of the

coast of santa cruz. he is carrying out the mission on the high seas before they had a broken back these packages and it has unique military and law-enforcement authorities which are able to include arresting the crew and this includes intelligence targets. cuts to the military's budget and rapidly failing coast guard assets are undermining mission success and this will only interject roughly 20% of this bound for the united states in recent years. not because you don't know where the rest is the best half of the national target rate since 2009 they have only achieved the

cocaine interdiction remonstrated out today's hearing will to clarify the direction of renewed through tape to ensure that we have the resources we need and other critical omissions as well. and i said that's what this is the last time that the admirable appear before us. was it comes to something else later. i want to again commend you for your leadership and thank you for your service to our nation. this is interesting for one big reason for me. we are talking about opiates and heroine and cocaine, the main stuff brought up in the south here in the united states, things that kill our kids. so with that, let's just especially, if we could right now, talk about why we don't care about the other 80%. why are we not trying to hit our

target when it takes more assets to do so. so with that, i yield back my time. >> thank you. i recognized the gentleman. >> thank you. i'm going to shorten my statement here. the chairman, mr. hunter talked about all of this having to do with the coast guard budget and the effect of the budget and the lack of a good budget is having on the coast guard to do its work and quite possibly the reality that maybe we really don't care that much because we don't seem to be putting sufficient money into the effort. it appears as though the current situation would further diminish the coast guard's budget and its ability to do its job.

and so all too often we look at this problem from the point of view of america. and not often from the point of view of the countries and we need to look at the perspective. we need to look at this and the work that has been done there

and this includes the people that we are partners with in this problem. at some point, i know that we have this issue from that point of view. it was from the american point of view. perhaps the ambassador from mexico might want to give us their point of view of this or columbia or other countries that are the partners in this problem. and so i recommend that we listen to their point of view and how that will affect our strategies here. and this includes making sure that they are seriously hampered by sequestration.

making this even more difficult. >> thank you, gentlemen. i recognize mr. tremont. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> so thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. meeks.

>> this includes 17 and 22 nations which president obama includes in 2014. located in latin america or the caribbean. so this is just not an american problem but a hemispheric problem and one that we must tackle head-on and do it in multiple ways, not just one-way. as a frequent visitor to the region i have seen the effects of illicit drug trade personally . the horrendous violence and tragic poverty in some areas is a direct result of the drug trade.

in this includes those who have the drug transit. we must get to the root of this problem and this includes the widespread transit of drugs in the region and this includes the

same kind of assets that we have there and this includes those abroad with our friends and partners and i also believe illegal trade that legal trade is a powerful antidote to illicit drug trafficking. in this includes diversified economics that have not depended on drugs and i'm confident that local farmers and workers can find ways to live honorably and to give back to their country.

and i believe that the drug trafficking is a problem that hurts us all. i look forward to the day when america, once again, we can't do it now, but i look forward to extending our hands in friendship to our neighbors as a sincere effort to build new partnership. thank you so much and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you, without objection the record will remain open. the admiral is the 24th commandant of the united states

coast guard. and this includes the deputy chief at the u.s. embassy in panama. he holds a phd in economics and an m.a. in management from the university of wisconsin. general kelley is commander of the united states southern command, prior to his current position he served as a leader oteri system for the secretary of defense and reinforces reserve north.

and we understand that goes yellow about the time that we have about a minute left and then it's time to cut it off and you guys are just so distinguished and i'm not brave enough to probably cut you off. so with that, thank you. >> good morning again to chairman hunter and the ranking member and to all the members of the subcommittee. i want to thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning to thank you for your continued support of the coast guard and also to discuss the challenges that we face in confronting the illicit smuggling and its consequences for our country. i would be remiss if i didn't recognize some of our other partners in this fight. the department of justice and our partner agencies in the department of homeland security who have contributed greatly to the flow of illicit traffic into

the united states. and this includes and this includes bribery and violence in the economies of the western hemisphere and our partner nations. for instance, for the second consecutive year, honduras has the world's highest murder rates, including central america or the western caribbean sea and the eastern pacific oceans. and those drugs reach our shores and activities of those criminal networks that have an impact on america's streets as well in the form of gang violence and turf wars by urban drug dealers. this includes the lead federal agency in support of the administration in this includes

major cutters long and medium range aircraft, including airborne airborne use of helicopters and one forstmann detachments embarked on allied warship to stop drug traffickers before the drugs can approach our shores. and we have established more than 40 agreements with our international stakeholders including the venezuela area. this includes those that have continuously proven when employed in the transit zone. over the last five years ships and attachments operating in the offshore regions have removed more than 500 metric tons of cocaine with a wholesale value of nearly $17 billion.

this is more than two times the amount of cocaine and twice the purity seized by all other and this is where we get the very best all you then where we have our first best chance to address this problem. close to the source where the drugs are pure non-cut and their most workable old form divided into increasingly smaller loads making them ask potentially harder and more expensive to detect. chairman, in response to the other 80%, of course we care about the other 80%. but it's not just about the drugs. for every kitzman and transshipment, we gather information to movies by understanding the criminal networks that are prepared to combat other illicit enterprises come including human traffickers and international terrorist. our introductions remain a key

weapon to combat transnational criminal networks. in this includes a cycle of success behind this in the western hemisphere with the subsequent prosecutions providing actionable intelligence on future events producing seizures and other feedings of the cycle of success. and this includes the engine that drives the cycle and our success in more than half the designated priority drug targets extradited over the last 10 years are directly linked to coast guard interdictions. over 60 drug trafficking organizations have been dismantled because of our investigations originating or supported by this. the removal of these networks help countries like colombia restored citizen security and economic opportunity, contributing to a 14 billion-dollar increase of

the goods over the last four years. but despite her success far too many illicit drugs still reach our shores and the reduced numbers of ships can only stop a fraction of our intelligence tells us is moving. this is either through degraded intelligence or reduction in ships and aircraft and they decrease and prosecution will have a chronic negative impact on our department's mission to secure and manage our borders. and we don't need to look any further than recent news report to get a sense of how these networks are and we use chicago as a distribution by exploiting people to track their illicit goods. in this includes those that

continue to threaten our homeland. and this includes our prosperity as the department of defense or balances this and this coast guard continued to aid, i fear that this problem only get worse. sustaining the cycle of success by strengthening international partnerships and investing and leveraging interagency capabilities to keep addictive drugs off the streets and disrupt the networks and space

and security within the western hemisphere and safe flow of legitimate commerce and transport. so i want to thank you for the opportunity to become more well-versed on this important topic. >> thank you, admiral. >> good morning, chairman. if you are here, it really does make sense. >> the state department bureau of international narcotics and affairs leads the narcotics

efforts globally. we shape and deliver assistance for programs and nearly 80 countries to help nations build their capacity to fight crime and prosecute criminals under the law. this is no doubt an enormous responsibility. and we partner with the best and brightest to impart expertise in training and we also include corrections entities from a number of constituencies. this includes advancing common interests and a collection of our long-standing partnership with mexico and central america regional security initiative. and this constitutes our strategic approach to enhance and professionalized the court systems and corrections

capacities they can investigate and undermine the criminal groups and prosecute criminal offenders by their operations. the state department has no direct role in the interdiction effort but the governments that we have mentioned in this includes investigating crimes and incarcerate criminals and in other areas of the hemisphere, a regional partners like those in colombia, are working in ordination with our programs and this includes the military partners to pursue narcotic

traffickers. and this includes that i want to emphasize that it cannot make up for jobs in the region. me repeat that. it cannot make up for gaps in the u.s. interdiction in the region. we know that the caribbean is experiencing an increase with those occurring by maritime means. in 2011 the total was approximately 5% and this

includes the united states is implementing a comprehensive integrated approach to stem illegal trafficking. in this includes a trusted mechanism that works and this is something that has become more common and information sharing is happening in a real-time basis. this is a proven formula. these are all significant element they are not enough to curtail information. the engagement our law enforcement and military partners remains critical.

chairman salmon, chairman duncan, other distinguished members, thank you for this information. >> thank you, general kelly. >> i look forward to discussing this between u.s. southern command and inter- agencies and the department of homeland security. in those southern approaches are being assailed by dangerous criminal networks that are well resource and adapted and skilled at exploiting all avenues of approach. including those that threaten our country at every land, air, and sea border and challenges the sovereignty of those in latin america and the caribbean. this includes fighting against illicit trafficking and this is

under scrutiny. we have meditated this is the lead federal agency is that action and monitoring of those towards the united states. this includes the dhs along with the dea, fbi and others, we also build a capacity that helps latin america and the caribbean and together with foreign military law enforcement partners, we focus on combating illicit drug in trade and supporting interdiction as far as possible. so our support to interdiction efforts not only keeps drugs like cocaine and methamphetamine from violating this, but it puts international drug traffickers

until and leaves the approaches are very effective, although my component in her agency tax forces receives only 1.4% of the total u.s. government counter narcotics budget. 1.5%. and this is also key to our effectiveness, especially in our operation. 50% of the interactions will been possible without the contributions of our partners. they're sending supportive nations like colombia and even the corolla, not to mention canada, united kingdom and

france and the netherlands, it is what makes this a success. and with human rights, ladies and gentlemen, the first and foremost in all of our relationships with these countries, there is a lot that we can do for them. with maintenance and training packages, as well as providing intelligence support. since we are unlikely to get any additional assets due to other global priorities, right now our partners are the only hope that we have of putting a dent in the drug low coming to the united states. so i emphasize that this is our fight and not their fight. it is destruction of to their countries and agree loss of life is what we are fighting. helping us make a big dent of the time.

last year alone, 132 metric tons of cocaine were seized or disrupted thanks in part to the contributions to the operations. 132 tons. and unfortunately that number is just a small fraction of the cocaine and drug to reach our shores which we are unable to get out due to asset shortfalls. since 2012, southern command has faced limited and declining assets, required for detection and monitoring and enter game interdiction missions. we also receive less than 5% of our annual airborne requirements in these limitations mean less presence and deterrence and awareness of what is moving, be it drugs or weapons or cash are human beings, or something even more detrimental to our national security, like terrorist agents.

and i worry that smaller caribbean nations will soon be overwhelmed and i think they are included in networks as we have seen in some parts of latin america and it could change the positive direction in which he has taken. we are doing everything we can to at least partially mitigate the lack of assets and we are relying on the customs and border protection and other dhs asset, which now provide over 70% of the aircraft support this mission. over the next two years the department of defense and the u.s. coast guard are facing this in the availability of large service asset like high

endurance. in 2016 the inventory will go to zero and this makes a reliance on the u.s. coast guard alliance and the national security and planned situation all the more critical and i'm deeply concerned here that the u.s. coast guard is facing major budget cuts come as is the dod. in closing, sure the conviction that i look forward to discussing these issues with your. >> i thank the distinguished panel. and i yield myself five minutes to ask my question. my question would be for you, they are is a number of initiatives in the western

hemisphere that share the objective of improving citizen security, including this initiative in mexico and central america regional security initiative. in what ways have they applied this from the very submission terms. and i know there are different nuances, but i like your thoughts. and as i know, what you have different challenges with

different countries. different levels of development. what we do try to do is to take the lessons learned and i think the case of columbia, that's one case where they are such a success story and they have become our partners. so use them to train some of the forces in central america, with investigative techniques, polygraph management, interdiction techniques and we take this in one part of the country and then another. as we are about to establish a customs situation in panama. and this is where we were establishing this with funds of the department of homeland security. it is now going to become a regional training center where we will bring people from all over the hemisphere and guatemala and central america and other places so that they have the name approach and the

same type of techniques to control the borders. so depending on the circumstances when you think about our success in peru, the success we have had is because we have combined development along with eradication. so we are looking at that in seeing where he can transfer to other areas. we are beginning to see some potential plantings in other parts of true. >> i have said this before and i think most people that work with the colombian initiative have recognized that while the united states contributions to the process was substantial,, i think all the sentiments of them thing. there is no way that would've been accomplished without the political will coming from the leaders themselves in colombia.

and so i think that as we look to try to replicate some of those successes, i am heartened to know that you are using folks who are in the trenches in colombia to actually advise and consult and get their hands dirty with mexico perhaps other nations in latin america. and i think there's another reason for that. besides actually having the people that demonstrated this political will. i think they're using them, it's a little bit more influential because i wonder if we suggest that it might just be dead on arrival at us because we suggested it. why do you think we turned the

corner? was it his efforts, was it a combination of things? what are your thoughts and we have all been pleasantly surprised with the tenacity that they have approached this problem. so how can we better utilize some of the successes and what can we recommend going forward? general, i will start with you. >> mr. chairman, first i would say the the u.s. investment in colombia was substantial. significant or whatever the term was. is. you are right, except that is a very relative term. the united states, i think, four or five or 6 cents on the dollar

in terms of what was then, if you will, to turn colombia around. and this includes the discussion that is rotated or oriented around the fact that why would we allow them to go over the edge come there's no hope for it. and of course, here we are, 14 years later, 15 years later, in virtually a miracle, a heroic effort. why did they win? because they were losing so badly.

why do they turn it around? because they had no choice. but the good news is that as i say, we allow them and supported and encouraged them and we did unleash a small number of advisers and trainers and u.s. military experts. and it just happened to turn the place around. but they do that themselves because they were losing so badly, and especially working with them for past things in the 80s. the beauty of having colombia, and there are such good partners particularly in the military realm, when we asked them to go

somewhere else and train the mexicans and the hondurans in the guatemalans, they will do it almost without asking and on their own. they are so appreciative of what we did for them. and what we did for them is really encouraging them for 20 years and they have been such a magnificent job. that is why this is important and for them to go. because elise on the military's type timers or could working for so many of these countries because of limitations that are really based on past sins. >> thank you, sir. the money that gets put into general grants, throughout the united states, the question is what you get so little of that

and if you collect, and if you have that money, you can theoretically reduce their need for a job at all. when it comes to drug interdiction within the united states. so anything that is? they have better lobbyist than you do? that is my question. why is there less money going to you as opposed to all of these different agencies that the department of justice holds out for grants with these agencies and every local sheriff and police officer gets the standard drugs. and you don't. >> mr. chairman, that's a great grenade to jump on. [laughter] >> side and ask one of the questions. >> i don't know what the percentage is what they get domestically. but what i do know is that i where a number of hat. >> general kelly said 1.5%.

>> 1.5% goes to the coast guard interdiction efforts. so that leaves 90.5% for everyone else to i cannot confirm or verify on that figure. i want to go back and research that. but what i will say is that in this includes what reports that the director of the national drug control policy. and so i can't make a good judgment. and we have to have a balanced approach to that.

>> am trying to respond to your question, but i just don't know the figures in the percentages to give you an accurate enough response. >> this includes the monitoring into the drug flow. i would be guessing on your question about domestic funding. i guess because we tend to look at this issue is as the cancer that is within our country. and we be what it does to argue. and 40,000 americans die of drug overdoses every year. and you can even count the human misery, the people living under bridges, on their bodies for six and all this kind of thing in this includes the last case to

solve this problem here home. once this gets its way to mexico and the united states, it is impossible. there a million law-enforcement heroes, dea, local police, there's a million and a dead about 25 tons of cocaine. and that is where the fight is. the efficiency of the fight is before it gets increasingly into haiti and all of that. >> i was reading national geographic or the economist or

something last week. in a talked about this area in mexico, that they are not growing these poppies. but what is the big uptick in marijuana coming and? >> the surprise to me. i thought that they demanded to have it from other parts of the world. so he talked to the dea they will confirm this. basically all of the hair when it comes and feed the drug habit in the has grown now and produced throughout latin america poppies, virginia virtually all like him of it from a tiny bit may come down to canada afghanistan but not a lot. it's almost entirely part of this.

and the zone that i live in, the three most detrimental influences on our society, cocaine, which is a big moneymaker, and methamphetamines, it is all produced south of the border on this incredibly efficient criminal network on which anything can rise, drugs, human beings, terrorists, anything can write on this network. it is locally linked. it is an amazing thing to see. and it's virtually a wide entry into the united states and the middle east. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will start with general kelly. just so that i have an understanding of where the figures coming from. i saw someplace that you told the senate armed services committee that you only had 5%

of the assets that you need to perform these duties in the cribbing region. so i was wondering where that figure comes from. because i thought that the dod's budget was sitting over a billion dollars. so is only 5% that you have come i was just wondering how could that be. >> it's 5% of the airborne intelligence and reconnaissance. but i% of what i think of any trade what that means is that i get -- i only get 5% of this aircraft from the united states navy were from homeland security. we tend to fly those airplanes out of places like el salvador or honduras. but we only get 5%. and how you track this stuff is and was on the high seas, we have a very good idea when it

leaves ecuador or columbia. then as it moves either side, it is increasingly on towards puerto rico or the dominican republic. as we get human intel that is about to move, then we pick it up if we have them, which we generally don't. picking up this, carrying it anywhere between one and 4 tons of cocaine. and we pick that up and then that airplane is there until a helicopter can get close enough to it once they get close enough to basically stop and we seized things. so without that asked that, we use anything that we can get. i've had the 52 planes, with isr parts, the one bombers flying over the caribbean.

doing that mission. so as i say i will take any asset that i can get an of times, but we are not, it is their airplane. >> so there could be some negotiations within the dod? are you talking about the additional assets to go to them to give you what you think you need? >> sir, the national security the strategy of the united states to commit the pacific and to deal with wars in the middle east and to deter other countries and you know who they are. that is what the size of the u.s. military getting smaller, that leaves almost nothing. i'm not criticizing, but that reality of it. in this causes some $200 billion in cost and i think to a large

degree the biggest emotional sting in my mind, which is the human misery it causes. because the dead are dead, but the people who are struggling with this stuff and living under bridges and selling their bodies as thing that, to me, it keeps me awake at night. again, these are decisions made outside and i just define the problem. >> in your opening statement, you indicated that you are continuing to work with venezuela with reference to drug interdiction. can you tell us how? ..

the vessels are returned to venezuela. other times we can take them for prosecution, but we continue to have cooperation there. and going back to what the chairman answered, i have had a unique perspective on this because i have been not only down their driving ships around the caribbean trying to do interdictions, but back in '98 i had a chance to do a diplomatic mission going into venezuela and colombia. at the time venezuela was very friendly with us and accept this in there. when we pulled into columbia, quite a different situation. was one of the few towns you could go around in safely. i have had the chance to watch

how planned columbia has worked, the partnerships were developed with the colombians. in fact try have been down there dealing with their head of navy, and we are very proud of the way that they are taking on the regional lead. they are running very symposiums, bringing in other countries, and we continue to work with them and sustain an relationship. the key to that has been a continued commitment. i have to admit that as they see fewer and fewer resources devoted to the counter drug mission then began to get a little anxious because they perceive that as a as backing away from sharing the battle with them. >> one more question, mr. chairman. i would like to go to the ambassador now. i mentioned in my opening statement about this program i saw in haiti with the new york city police to prevent officers they're working with them, law-enforcement. this is, i think, good work on behalf of the state department. was wondering whether or not --

are there other partnerships like that where you find law enforcement from the united states working or on the ground in some of the caribbean islands that up with the traditional systems, police systems. that way we can also get information, and they can, in fact, locked apartment criminals of -- before they come to the united states and spread illicit drugs. so the cooperation with the state department working with, like the ag program, central america or the caribbean. >> indeed, and thank you for your question. this is a great question because it gives us a chance to highlight some of the partnerships we have developed with states all over the united states. we have a relationship with the corrections department in the mexico. we train corrections officers

jails in the region are meant to rehabilitate as opposed to make them worse criminals. we work with the attorneys general to teach about prosecution. we do this with a number of states. we work with -- in fact, it by mail would like to submit for the record a paper explaining all the partnerships. this is one of the on some aspects of the work that the united states is doing overseas. we are taking the expertise developed at various dates, for instance the miami-dade police department as a lot of training and counter narcotics. we also have a partnership with the port of miami and customs officers who come to miami to see how we handle port security. you talk about doing some prosecutions there. absolutely. that is exactly what we are trying to do. capacity on the investigation side and the courts because we

want to empower this government and country to apprehend criminals, to try them, and to incarcerate them and, you know, do the whole range of judicial process. money laundering, we are encouraging countries to pass assets for feature laws so that a lot of these agencies that have no resources can use that law to research their activities we have lots of partnerships. i think it's one of the best ones because it gives us the flexibility to provide different types of assistance.

>> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. admiral papp, during the last coast guard hearing you mentioned that drive weapon and human smuggling still remains a huge threat. budget cuts and of the coast guard ability to counter those dangers. they reduce the manpower and operating hours of the assets that the coast guard needs to combat the continuing threat. in your previous testimony you stated that sequestration fairly effective the coast guard drug interdiction efforts as evidenced by the 35% reduction in marijuana seizures in fiscal year 2012-2013 when sequestration began to take effect. this fairly obviously shows their is a direct correlation between the budget and operational capability and that this common theme around here

that we all need to be doing more with less is an impossible principle to constantly and here to. chief petty officer warren lived in my congressional district at the time of his death from one of these. i live a mile from where one of those boats made land on the peninsula recently. of course, in my area i am concerned about the potential effect that the next round of sequestration cuts could have on this danger and that especially if more evidence is showing that smugglers are increasingly using the southwest maritime route more and more. just met last week in my district office with admiral

schulz, the commander of the 11th district. i also met with the captain of the port of volos angeles and am excited. we also met with captain williams who will be the incoming captain of the port, the first woman to hold that position in the history of the coast guard. we are excited about that. i want to know what you can tell me how you are working with local and foreign partners to ensure that our major american ports along these popular drug smuggling routes such as l.a. and long beach are fully protected against this threat. maybe in your answer you can also tell us how important it is that the coast guard at least maintain its current funding levels in order to preserve its current capabilities. >> thank you. that is a great question. i thank you for your advocacy. once again, i will thank you for being out here for the memorial service with me and the

compassion you showed. while i am answering your question, if i could ask for the slide that i brought with me. if i could get that out there, or we could use the table drop. there we go. the challenge you are talking about is right here along the border. you are right. when we dropped our activities by 30 percent we showed a 35% reduction in cocaine seizures for fiscal year 13. we are back to -- we have restored our historic levels of operations. we have increased to new things we are doing. more frequently putting one of our major cutters in the area rather than just patrol boats because we can operate airborne use of force. one of our helicopters that stops the boats with trained marksman. that has been so successful that rather than tie up with better

we are now using and have cleared through the department of justice, lan-based use of force. putting our helicopters at a shore station and flying them under the direction of the sector. the other thing we're doing is like -- leveraging our partnerships. we have a command center where we began partners from customs and water protection, air and marine, the other federal partners and state and local law enforcement so that we can coordinate and effectively synchronize all of our activities and get the most of the resources. we do that throughout the country. each one of the captains of the port, and sector commanders have very broad authorities heading up maritime security committees, port safety committees and bring all the partners together. the only way we can get this system effectively is through

these partnerships that the coast guard is able to develop because of our broadbased authorities. having said that, we are still limited by the amount of resources we can get out there. this chart that i brought with me, reached -- we refer to these as threat factors, but they are vectors of prosperity. those are our trade routes that we have to maintain. the blue shaded areas surrounding both coasts of around alaska and the hawaiian islands and our territories have in the pacific is our exclusive economic zone, over 4 million square miles of exclusive economic zone, the largest exclusive economic zone of any country in the world, and we have to distribute our major covers over that entire area. it is a lot of ground cover, and we have to make reason and risk risk-based decisions.

we are able to provide for coast guard cutters. if we move one of their off of the baja we reduce into three. so it is like squeezing a balloon. you only have so much in it. if you have threats and other areas you have to move it around zero based right now and really hurting for resources. >> bernanke. i appreciate that. >> thank you. mr. john garamendi. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general kelly, your testimony indicates that you are basically pulling your assets out of the caribbean area. what percentage of your total budget is consumed by guantanamo ? >> you mean that detainee ops at guantanamo? >> yes.

>> it is a separate budget. it is a very separate mission. i own it, and we do it really well. it is a separate budget, but it is about -- we spent just for the detainee ops right at about 1,204,000,000. of course, as you know, we are tenants on the biggest donor. just by being there we don't have to buy electricity. $124 million is a good, round figure. >> our task is to make choices about how we spend our taxpayers' money. soak guantanamo and the continuation of it is expensive. that is money that might have been spent elsewhere. let's start about the deployment of uav for patrol. you mentioned to a coppers off the coast of california and

other places. what used -- what is the use or the potential of using uav to increase your patrol capacity? lets start. it. >> we will take maritime patrol aviation any way we can get it. there are three elements. intelligence. probably we are strongest out of the trifecta here are will talk about in intelligence. a lot of actionable information. it will we have is an absence of resources. the next key thing is your ability to have maritime patrol aviation, weatherman or uav. it does not matter whether we can have something out that that will detect. at the end of the the aftermath as surface asset that can interdict. that is where our shortfall is.

could we use more maritime aviation? yes. would it uav help? probably. any additional hours would be helpful, but at the end of the day you have to have surfaced assets. as i said earlier, we are down to four coast guard cutters. that yesterday. we have a fleet of 44 total. and we are building new cutters, but at the end of this project we will only have 33. they are going in the wrong direction. >> general kelly. >> i don't have any drone of any kind right now. certainly if i could get some, would love some. again, it is another form of isr the beauty of it is, they don't get tired.

when an airplane has to go and refuel, they can stay up a lot longer. that drone does not know that it is tired. >> i'm specifically thinking about the use of uav such as the global lock which can stay in the air 36 hours and provides -- can provide, i should think, significant information. the navy is coming up with its new trident which is a version of the global hawk specifically designed for maritime purposes. i would like cutie gentleman to get back to me about how you might deploy that asset for the benefit of the missions they you half. also, general kelly, i believe the earlier testimony in the house armed services committee he said what he needs, among others, is a platform on which to land helicopters.

could you expand on that, since you are -- your frigates are being removed. >> well, that's phase of the process is called interdiction. the monitoring, i do that to the very, very large degree, but it is an interagency process. we see this stuff which is virtually all of the aircraft movement of cocaine is coming out of venezuela, either making its way to the central american isthmus or increasingly of the west indies to the dominican republic, as an example, or pr. but the end came part is generally speaking to put a helicopter in the air affected over there by airborne isr. they see they go fast on that

helicopter is a marksman, united states coast guardsman. he has within his rules of engagement the authority to shoot, if necessary, the engine or engines out of that go-fast. that hardly ever happens because the go-fast as it cannot out from a helicopter, so they tend to stop after the electronics over the side and wait to be picked up. in my view what you really need is something that the helicopter and fly off of. you don't need an aircraft carrier, necessarily a big navy ship or coast guard cutter. in fact, six months last year we had their royal netherlands to my ticket was other coast guard buoy tender, but you could put the helicopter on it and it did great work for us so we are looking now at printing, if you

will, a merchant ship that would be able to take -- would be able to land, take off, you know, a coast guard or navy or marine corps, for that matter, with a coast guardsman on board a helicopter and also turning at merchant ship into a mother ship so that these other smaller countries that really do the yeoman work including places like nicaragua can go to see and have a mother ship or arrangements of the in good fuel, food, and help us in this fight. >> i will take another 30 seconds, if i'm right. it is clear we are in a tight budget situation and need to be creative. as you were talking, general kelly, the fleas that we have, is there any potential that we could use one or another of those ships with the modification? i like the idea of a mother

ship. it will have to be very creative can we figure out a way of doing this with different kinds of assets? >> i think general kelly is right. we will take whatever we can get . however, at the end of the they have responsibility for the safety of my people. in a complex, fast-based operation, landing helicopters at sea is not an easy thing with weather, watching in the middle of the night. i am reluctant to say that landing them on anything is a good thing. the other thing is that even when you stop the go-fast with your airborne use of force you have to have boats and a boarding team to take custody, sees the people and the drops, and you have to launch that. we have used other things did we have great partnerships with great britain, with the dutch

and the canadians and the french and make use of their platforms or we can. they are professional. we put our law enforcement detachments on board and make use of them as much as we can, but those countries are facing budget shortfalls as well. >> which brings us back to austerity budget. think you very much, gentlemen. >> think you. the gentleman from florida. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i apologize for coming here on latin time. our subcommittee on the middle east and north africa was meeting at the same time. i am still over there and here. thanks you. a delight to be here. recently we heard the startling claim the latin america has surpassed africa as the world's most violent region, accounting for about one-third of all global homicide.

we must recognize this as one of the many alarming symptoms of a booming transnational directory that is the enemy of security to market governance, and democratic principles. this is a particularly pernicious issue in central america and the caribbean. an example of a pro-active approach to the rise in drug-trafficking activity in the caribbean is the partnership that we have established of i in el and port miami, and major hub for travel and trade in the region for this initiative port miami personal provide training in anti-crime and port security matters to the caribbean counterparts, but this is just the beginning. it the administration has put more resources and a similarly targeted programs insurers that it is serious about combating the illicit drug trade by doing so.

the administration problem in latin america is its failure to address the immediate needs of the region which affect national security interest. general kelly, your written testimony states insufficient maritime service vessels and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms impair our primary mission to detect these threats and defend the southern approaches to the u.s. homeland. that is why last year i offered an amendment to rectify this impediment and fix this issue. i intend to offer a similar amendment this year because we should not abandon the western hemisphere, and the engagement is the key with democratic allies. with that in mind, what some -- setbacks have we suffered due to the fact that our engagement with honduras has been limited to to obstacles from the senate? as the positive progress of the operation evaporated due to the

lapse of counter narcotics efforts? and general kelly, you also mentioned in your written testimony that legislative restrictions such as the prohibitions of f and f funding with the guatemalans limits our engagement. it is my understanding that there is also a department of defense policy that prevents south, from utilizing to the maximum extent possible our assets for counter narcotics operation has this policy hinder our ability to make a larger dent in efforts to fight drug-trafficking? these efforts are critical not only because they threaten our security and that have paralyzed but also because illegal drug trade in this hemisphere impact on our national security interest throughout the world. foreign terrorists organizations such as hezbollah engages in these illicit activities and fun their operations in advance the

dangerous ambitions of regimes. it tracks equals terrorism financing. lastly, i would like toish -- reason issue with the coast guard. my office has received information that our coast guard with the help of the state department travel to cuba and is seeking to reach an understanding with the state-sponsored terrorism on counter narcotics efforts. think it is appalling our coastguard wishes to have closer ties with the cuban regime. the same tyranny that actually gives refuge and harbors drug-traffickers, jails american citizens, supports terrorism, and was caught red handed trying to smuggle military equipment to north korea through the panama canal. we think panama for stopping it and provides to this day safe haven to american fugitives.

i share your concern. doing business with the cuban regime is not the solution. they are actually part of the problem. >> it is dismissed by some, but as the person who lost her homeland to communism, i was born in cuba, came here as a refugee, represent thousands of people in similar ways. we don't have a romanticized view of the communist tyranny in cuba. >> we keep a line of

communication open. first of all, to protect our people. as you know, the freedom flotilla and other activities, we have lost people and try to make sure we have some line of communication open so that we can prevent any mistakes from happening and putting people in jeopardy. we also did good information on other illegal activities. they will take a review of this and make a report back to you. >> i would greatly appreciate it . i think the chairman and waking. >> i think the gentle lady from florida. we will go through one more round. one more question about what mr. john garamendi was talking about. admiral, when you talk about the assets in the system, the in-the -parks acquisition programs and congress warning of

that, at the same time if you get a platform to put it in visual terms waterworld, dennis hopper on the big tanker, waterworld, the movie, kevin costner. it was a great movie. the big tanker. why could you not use the ready reserve fleet? floating platforms? defectors guard feels it is dangerous, why not man in with contractors? it is like an icebreaker. why can't we think outside the box? you have the office of naval research and a lot of other groups with ships that can use for interdiction. they use them for testing in san diego and more folk. there are interdiction assets out there, platforms out there, tons of them on which you could land a helicopter and take off

from. that is what is holding his back it cannot always be a blend of sequestration. why not go outside the box and start -- if you have everything down, one not to the interdiction part 50 years ago if you had this problem you would have given this to somebody, given them $5 million, and they would interdict. instead we have this system, and if we don't get enough of our ships that will require by nature of our requirements and the ship building fleet building those particular ships then we will not do it because we don't have the right ship to do it. why not think outside the box like mr. john garamendi was talking about? merchant mariners, people that we pay to be ready to go. >> the innovative things that we

have done, we look for anything passing through the area. are not related to a western hemisphere approaches, for instance admiral la clear in pacific command's when he has ships transiting to the west bank, we are putting coast guard law-enforcement detachments on them. the blue areas in the pacific around our trust territories and partner nations, we are sending them through there doing fisheries law enforcement to protect the tuna fleet, things like that. we look for those opportunities. as i said, we have had british or less, dutch or others, anything that we can get that will be in the caribbean or eastern pacific that we know is going through we take advantage of. we work with fleet forces command in norfolk to make sure that people are doing training deployments, whenever. the canadian vessels that we have had, that is, once again, i

result of talking to maritime forces pacific, atlantic, canadian command. and they have ships that have to go on workups they're sending them down to the caribbean or eastern pacific. so we make use of anything that we know about. we will investigate and see what else is out there. like anything else, if he would get our ready reserve fleet under way someone has to pay for that. we have reserved fleets, but i have seen the challenges that are faced when we have to work the month to get him ready. the one ship we sent over to work with syrian karakuls, getting the mariners and money, it's a challenge. granted, i will take a coast guard cutter or u.s. navy ship any time i can because i know when i put a coast guard helicopter out there there is standardization of protocols for

lending, recovery, hot refueling, and everything else because it is dangerous business. so my only caution when i was talking with mr. john garamendi is it is easy to say, let's put up large out there, a tanker out there. mike coast guard pilots can land on anything in an emergency. is it an effective platform for prosecuting go-fast vessels and be able to go back and hot refuel and carry ammunition and everything else? i don't know. >> i would argue that it is better than nothing which is where you have now. >> if i could add, we are already doing it. within the next couple of months -- i have pulsed the system. we have found the money and half of 350-foot ship manned u.s. merchant seamen, and we will use

that as a proof of concept. it is not codify to a large and recover helicopters. as we move to the next that ben do that, of course, we will have the right kind of training and procedures and gear and equipment. that ship will be working for me within the next six or eight weeks. while we are doing that it will be working close in to belize, honduras, guatemala. we already have u.s. special forces guys and gals or u.s. marines working with those partner nations on operations close and. this shift will give them an opportunity to go further out. to be able to go further out because it will be again station

we are doing everything you just described already in the next six to eight weeks, and i will let you know what goes. >> do you have to be -- does it have to be coast guard snipers? because they have the unique law-enforcement military side, or can it be anybody? >> it is the law enforcement aspect. the department of defense as it can do everything but the law enforcement part of it. the shooter has to be because card or someone in law enforcement, fbi, dea. >> as long as they go through the training. very difficult and challenging. yet to take it to the department of justice. and in need to be able to get there support to defend our shooters if something happens. who the shooter is as long as we

take them through the course and get them certified -- and we have used other than coast guard. we have used navy marksman. it is just a matter of taking them through the process. >> that is all i have. i will deal now. great to see you this last time, admiral. >> thank you. working with you, i want to pursue thinking of the box and how we might be able to pursue the discussion and quite possibly the utilization as we were just talking. did believe that for the future and carry that on. i do want to -- i have been mass by one of our friends from the foreign affairs committee to raise the issue with general kelly about the expulsion of 20 u.s. defense department

employees that were attached to the u.s. embassy. i believe this happened of the last couple of weeks. could you briefly brief us on that, what it was about and why it happened? >> at the those actions are in line with kind of a general loss of u.s. influence in this part of the world, and america, for a lot of different reasons. in ecuador in particular my folks that were there, and they were my folks, not all military, by the way. a lot of misinformation, but at the end of the day ecuador has thrown its lot in with countries like venezuela, russia, china. that is where they see the future of latin america, so they made that move. the people that were in their working with them with full knowledge for years and years,

working with him on the counter drug effort which is a real problem. they have been helpful, but they have decided to throw their lot in with other countries. >> geopolitical issue. >> and it is a great way to snub there nose at the united states. >> and this is a question from representative ankle to you, mr. papp. i will briefly go over it. the defense, an interview you stated that since you have lost naval ships in the pacific and caribbean for drug interdiction that coast guard would publish a western hemisphere strategy and how to fill these gaps. that is five months ago. he wants to know when the report will be do and what is the status of it. >> we have been trying to come up with a strategy for the

specific areas involving missions boom. we have been working on the western hemisphere strategy. my feeling is with the assets going toward the pacific we still have responsibilities, but the primary responsibilities are along the threat vector's ever shown in the chart. how do we conduct that and use that for support and lay out what our doctrine is for the service is important. we are close. i have read through the draft. we have a new, not coming in in 30 days. rather than make it look like iamb signing off from the western hemisphere strategy as they go out the door, there should be by an. >> thank-you very much, have no. i think that is exactly the

right thing to do. i am sure you will be building off of yours. i see our chairman has returned. >> i yield to our colleague from california. >> thank you, chairman. i want to go on the record. it is heartening for me to hear about the incredible cuts that we have imposed on our coast guard. continuing to ask them to do more with less. the united states coast guard talking about contracting out. it is unfortunate. i wish we could restore the cuts we made and not impose the next round of sequestration. it is unfortunate that we add this state. and just want to go on record as saying i'm the lead in your mission and feel like we are shortchanging your department

and the american people ambassador, one of the primary missions behind the bureau of international narcotics and law enforcement affairs is to build partnerships with state and local law-enforcement agencies here at home in order to allow these agencies to provide their unique expertise to foreign agencies and governments that desperately needed in order to incentivize state and local agencies to provide this expertise. the state department reimburses agencies of the costs incurred which strengthens overall international security and bolsters our relationships with our foreign partners while simultaneously creating a merchant in these here at home. i would like for you to talk about your agency's work with our los angeles county sheriff's department and the california department of corrections and explain how their expertise and training has been critical in

preventing violence in foreign countries, particularly mexico. >> thank you very much. the california department of corrections rehabilitation has the training to mexican and salvadorean corrections officers. the type of training they receive is to deal with some of the very hard court issues that these institutions face in their own countries, for instance right, the protection of the facilities, and many times we think of facilities as keeping people from going out, but a lot of times some of the challenges they face is people trying to come in. we have a whole range of programs trying to provide those kinds of things. i will owe you an answer on the question half the los angeles sheriff's department. i do not have that with me right now, but i will certainly provided. we have many other opportunities the superior court of arizona

has provided for in the training to custer rica for judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys. the new york police department provided training in haiti. the brouwer county sheriff has trained the police and other agencies on gender based violence. the miami-dade police department as trained haitian police. i mean, the list goes on. for us it is quite a pleasure to have this partnership. another example is, for example, the washington state criminal justice training commission posted a steady by the mexican police academy managers. the california department of corrections. i think i mentioned an already. we have a long list that is growing. of course we have to be careful not to stretch ourselves to then in applying the advantages that

these institutions bring to the table. >> thank you. i just want to ask you one last question. one of the things you mentioned during the year was that you think we need to address in this war on drugs is demand along with supply . and wondering if this trend in the united states, colorado, washington, probably california next in legalizing marijuana, do you think that this is going to have a long-term impact or effect in stemming the u.s. to grant for illegal drugs? analyze what this will mean in this drug trade. >> i don't think we have enough time. a disgusted at the last principals meeting of the interdiction committee. across the board for most agencies, and including the homeland security agencies, dea,

the justice department, fbi, no. come, southcom, and others. the anecdotal information coming back for most of the partners are that they are confused by this signals that the legalization sense. they wonder about our commitment to continuing the fight. and they are investing so much both in resources and plot, they have to question that. they want to know about our commitment. they see fewer and fewer u.s. resources coming down to join them. they reassure them and tell them what the law is and our continued commitment, but it cannot help but create some doubt. other anecdotal information is because of changes in the market with legalization and homegrown marijuana which is causing some people to switch to heroin production, increasing heroin on

the streets. is a complex, multi variable equation which i don't think we have a good handle on. i want to give him my thanks for your advocacy and comments before you turn to the other question. don't want to leave anyone with the impression that i am unwilling to look at of the things. we're trying to look at what resources are available up there. my job is to advocate for what i think, my best military advice is for the country. i advocate for coast guard cutters because they are unknown entity. we have qualified, trend custard people, boarding parties, people it can launch and recover helicopters safely and if some other incident, whether a mass migration or fisheries patrol, i can send them to do those a activities as well, whereas a barge second land a helicopter is pretty much a single mission

thing that i cannot use for anything else. while it might be valuable and give us something more, my job is to give you the optimal solution. yours is to decide whether we can afford it or not, but thank you. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i think the gentle lady. the last question just made me think of, who is in charge of saying we're not going to go after we eat any more? do you do that when it comes to targeting? tons of bales of marijuana coming in and heroin and cocaine. we will prioritize those. who makes those decisions? >> there is no question that it is illegal and the continued to target it and will stop it to the best of our ability. >> what i'm saying is the opposite of that. if you're going to have in the next ten years 20 states legalize marijuana, decriminalized, which it

basically is now anyway, especially in the western side of the country will keep going after something that has been approved by the states? i'm asking, who makes the decision. stop going after the marijuana loves. who makes that decision? >> at least in my round, congressman, i focus -- we don't see a lot of marijuana moving from latin america into -- if you don't count mexico -- moving into the united states. my understanding, most marijuana consumed in the united states is grown in the country domestically. it is grown in cellars in manhattan, national forests in colorado. but to what the commandants said about dealing with our partners, we have -- our drug problem has caused many countries in latin america, the los violent places on earth, honduras being the

most violent place on the planet much of that, almost all of it is due to our drug problem, the drug traffic. the police the route most of the region are either entirely corrupt or so intimidated that they will do their jobs because they are so intimidated because of the violence. courts and judges and all the same thing. so to give you an example, when cholera and washington legalized marijuana i was queried by a lot of partners. it's my understanding the word hypocrite comes into the conversation as everyone at this table, certainly trying to convince his kansas and the fight, the fight against george, we seemingly air not caring much

about drugs and in more. i find it pretty hard and am pretty close to a lot of ministers of defense, presidents , people like that. and, you know, they are pretty non diplomatic with me as i am to them. they wonder what the hell we're doing. you see an increasing number start talking to the president of columbia, they stopped what they are doing in terms of our dread fight. we are really screwed. they took 200 tons of cocaine off the market last year. the eradicated 30,000 acres before it was baked. they found and destroyed 1500 cocaine labs. if they stopped doing that because they see less of a commitment in our country and a move toward legalization we might as well, you know, -- >> or would you tie in the legalization of marijuana with

heroin and cocaine? >> they see a general lack of enforcement and getting into some of these other drugs. as everyone this table pointed out, the solution to a large degree went, before it gets to mexico and the united states and there's almost no commitment to do that based on what they see in spite of the fact that we do work with them and give a certain amount of money and half , like today, three navy ships and for coast guard cutters they don't see the commitment. >> that's all i have. i don't think there are any other members to ask questions. with that, the subcommittee is adjourned.

[inaudible conversations]it is .

>> the consolidated case. mr. stewart. >> mr. chief justice, and may it please the court, in promulgating the transport rule epa sought to protect the public health and strike a fair balance between the competing interest. the epa analysis proceeded in three basic steps. epa perform a screening analysis to determine which states would be covered by the transport will. in order to do that they first identified that downwind receptors that were in a state of non attainment or add maintenance difficulties and then determine to which states were linked to those receptors. in order to be linked the upwind state had to contribute

1 percent for more of the relevant national ambient air quality standards to that downwind receptor. in the state it did not contribute at least 1% to any of the relevant downwind receptors was determined not to contribute significantly to non attainment at that area. second, once the states that work to be covered by the transport rule had been identified epa said the state commission's budget for each state, and to do that it performed computer modeling to determine in addition to whatever in mission control leverages already going on what additional emission reductions could be achieved by implementation of control measures available at various cost threshold's. and that thresholds' ultimately selected were $500 per ton, group one states and the level of $2,300 per ton, group to was

500 per ton. he had deal was, let's see what the nation's savings we can achieve if additional control measures are implemented up to those costs thresholds'. >> those savings would not be evenly distributed. so some upwind states that able to make those efficient changes will be carrying more than their burden of reducing the emissions that affect downwind states, right? >> there were two bases. the first, in terms of the $500 per ton threshold for the group to states versus the $2,300 per ton, but the way in which states were divided into categories is that the states that were linked to that downwind receptors that had the most severe pollution problems are treated as group one states and were required to

make greater pollution control efforts because they have some responsibility for the more serious problems. no, i guess the point of your question would go to the fact that even among states that were operating under constant cost control threshold's, i state that had faugh already implemented cost measures up to that limit might have to do less in a sense because it wouldn't already taken the steps that were required, at least as compared to an air quality on the threshold. >> i don't mind the state doing less. i think north carolina showed that you can use those cost figures to do less. that is not challenged here. but what the application of the cost factor means is that some states that can more efficiently make the changes will be requiro